Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDGEIS Vol IDraft Generic Environmental Impact Statement I I I I SOUTHOLD COMPREHENSIVE IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, NewYork 11971 Volume I of II MAY 2003 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I DRAFT GENERIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SOUTHOLD COMPREHENSIVE IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY Town of Southold Suffolk County, New York Town Board of the Town of Southold (SEQRA Lead Agency) Supervisor, Hon. Joshua Horton Justice Louisa P. Evans Councilman Craig Richter Councilman Thomas Wickham Councilman William D. Moore Councilman John M. Romanelli Town Board of the Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Contact: Hon. Joshua Horton, Supervisor (631) 765-1889 Town Clerk: Elizabeth Neville (631) 765-1800 Town of Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Support Staff John Sepenoski, Data Processing/GIS Mark Terry, Sr. Environmental Planner Scott Hughes, Sr. Environmental Planner Carol Kalin, Planning Board Secretary Town of Southold Supporting Departments Scott Russell, Sole Assessor Michael Verrity, Building Department James Richter, Town Engineer James McMahon, Community Dev. & Parks James Bunchuck, Solid Waste/Landfill Prepared by: Moratorium Planning Team Greg Yakaboski, Esq., Town Attorney Valerie Scopaz, AICP, Town Planner Melissa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator Charles J. Voorhis, CEP, AICP, Consultant Patrick Cleary, AICP, PP Consultant Lisa Kombrink, Esq. Consulting Attorney James Gesualdi, Esq., AICP, Consulting Attorney Melissa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator Nelson, Pope & Voorhis, LLC Nelson & Pope, Engineers & Surveyors 572 Walt Whitman Road Melville, New York 11747 Contact: Charles J. Voorhis, CEP, AICP (631) 427-5665 Cleary Consulting 529 Asharoken Avenue Northport, NY 11768 Contact: Patrick Cleary, AICP, PP (631) 754-3085 May 2003 Pagei I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS TABLE OF CONTENTS COVER SHEET TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF ACRONYMS SUMMARY Introduction Background, Need and Benefits of the Proposed Action Location of the Proposed Action Description of the Proposed Action Additional Action Thresholds and Permits & Approvals Required Significant Environmental Impacts Mitigation Measures Alternatives 1.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION 1.1 Background, Need and Benefits of the Proposed Action 1.1.1 Background and History 1.1.2 Public Need and Municipality Objectives 1.I.3 Benefits of the Proposed Action 1.2 Location of the Proposed Action 1.3 Description of the Proposed Action 1.3.1 Strategy Overview 1.3.2 Planning Process, Zoning and Zoning Code Mechanisms 1.3.3 Education/Enforcement Mechanisms 1.3.4 Capital Improvements/Expenditures 1.3.5 Direct Town Management 1.3.6 Inter-Agency/Quasi-Agency Initiatives Mechanics of Implementation Additional Action Thresholds and Permits & Approvals Required 1.4 1.5 2.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS 2.1 Geological Resources 2.1.1 Topography 2.1.2 Surface Soils 2.1.3 Subsurface Conditions 2.2 Water Resources 2.2.1 Groundwater 2.2.2 Surface Water and Wetlands 2.3 Ecological Resources 2.3.1 Vegetation and Habitats 2.3.2 Wildlife Page ii A-1 S-1 S-1 S-1 S-3 S-3 S-Il S-13 S-18 S-22 1-1 1-3 1-3 1-7 1-8 1-9 1-10 1-10 1-20 1-36 1-42 1-43 1-48 1-51 1-54 2-1 2-1 2-1 2-2 2-3 2-5 2-5 2-14 2-17 2-17 2-21 Page ii I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 2.3.3 Critical Habitats and Special Concern, Threatened or Endangered Species 2.4 Transportation Resources 2.4.1 SummaryofStudies 2.4.2 Description of Roadway Conditions and Congestion 2.4.3 Public Transit 2.4.4 Town Roadway Improvement Plans 2.4.5 Pedestrian and Bicycle Patterns 2.5 Air Resources 2.5.1 Climate and Meteorology 2.5.2 Air Quality Standards and Regulations 2.5.3 Air Quality 2.6 Land Use, Zoning and Plans 2.6.1 Land Use Patterns 2.6.2 Zoning Patterns 2.6.3 Land Use Plans & Recommendations 2.7 Demographic Conditions 2.7.1 Population 2.7.2 Household Characteristics 2.7.3 Age Distribution & Race 2.7.4 Income 2.8 Community Services 2.8.1 Public Schools 2.8.2 Police Protection 2.8.3 Fire Protection 2.8.4 Recreation Facilities 2.9 Infrastructure 2.9.1 Solid Waste Handling and Recycling 2.9.2 Water Supply 2.9.3 Drainage 2.9.4 Wastewater Treatment 2.9.5 Electricity 2.9.6 Natural Gas 2.10 Community Character 2.10.1 Community Growth and Development 2.10.2 Existing Community Character 2.10.3 Hamlets 2.11 Cultural Resources 2.11.1 Historic &Prehistoric Resources 2.11.2 Museums 2.11.3 Theaters & Galleries 2.11.4 Libraries 2.11.5 Vineyards and Farmstands 2.12 Economic/Fiscal Conditions 2.12.1 Tax Generation and Allocation 2-24 2-26 2-26 2-27 2-29 2-30 2-30 2-31 2-31 2-32 2-33 2-35 2-35 2-41 2-43 2-48 2-48 2-49 2-50 2-50 2-51 2-51 2-53 2-53 2-54 2-59 2-59 2-60 2-61 2-6l 2-62 2-63 2-64 2-64 2-64 2-68 2-71 2-71 2-74 2-75 2-75 2-76 2-77 2-77 Page iii I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 2.12.2 Economic Characteristics 2-78 POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 3.1 Future Conditions without the Proposed Action 3.1.1 Build-Out Analysis 3.1.2 Regional Impact Assessment for Build-Out Conditions 3.1.3 Land Preservation Efforts and Future Development Trends 3.2 Potential Impacts of the Proposed Action 3.2.1 Potential Adverse Impacts of Implementation Tools 3.2.2 Regional Impact Assessment for Proposed Action 3.2.3 Resource Impact Analysis 3.3 Cumulative, Secondary and Long-Term Impacts 3-1 3-1 3-1 3-6 3-15 3-21 3-21 3-48 3-51 3-58 MITIGATION MEASURES 4.1 Mitigation of Impacts to Resources 4.1.1 Geological Resources 4.1.2 Water Resources 4.1.3 Ecological Resources 4.1.4 Transportation Resources 4.1.5 Air Resources 4.1.6 Land Use, Zoning and Plans 4.1.7 Demographic Conditions 4.1.8 Community Services 4.1.9 Infrastructure 4.1.10 Community Character 4.1.11 Cultural Resources 4.1.12 Economic/Fiscal Conditions 4.2 Mitigation of Impacts from Implementation Tools 4-1 4-1 4-1 4-1 4-1 4-4 4-4 4-4 4-5 4-5 4-5 4-5 4-5 4-6 4-6 ADVERSE IMPACTS THAT CANNOT BE AVOIDED 5-1 IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES 6-1 GROWTH-INDUCING ASPECTS 7-1 ALTERNATIVES 8.1 No Action 8.1.1 Description of Alternative 8.1.2 Compliance with Town Goals 8.1.3 Impacts oftheAlternative 8.2 Consider Changing Target Landmass for 80% Preservation & 60% Density Reduction To One Zone (Create An Agricultural And Open Space District 8.2.1 Description of Alternative 8.2.2 Compliance with Town Goals 8-1 8-1 8-I 8-1 8-2 8-2 8-2 8-3 Page iv I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! i I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 8.2.3 Impacts of the Alternative 8.3 Consider Applying 80% Open Space, 60% Density Reduction To All Zoning Districts 8.3.1 Description of Alternative 8.3.2 Compliance with Town Goals 8.3.3 Impacts oftheAltemative 8.4 Creation Of Tax Incentives For Landowners To Preserve Their Open Space And Agricultural Uses 8.4.1 Description of Alternative 8.4.2 Compliance with Town Goals 8.4.3 Impacts of theAltemative 8.5 Remove All Other Uses Other Than Agriculture From Allowable Uses Within The AC District 8.5.1 Description of Altemativc 8.5.2 Compliance with Town Goals 8.5.3 Impacts of thc Alternative 8.6 Consider Upzoning To A Minimum Lot Size For Yield Purposes Larger Than Five Acres 8.6.1 Description of Alternative 8.6.2 Compliance with Town Goals 8.6.3 Impacts oftheAltemative 8.7 Consider 5-acre Upzoning Of A Larger Area Than Proposed 8.7.1 Description of Alternative 8.7.2 Compliance with Town Goals 8.7.3 Impacts oftheAltemative 8.8 Consider Creation Of An R-60 Zoning District To Apply To R40 Lands 8.8.1 Description of Alternative 8.8.2 Compliance with Town Goals 8.8.3 Impacts of the Alternative 8.9 Consider 5-acre Upzoning To A Smaller Geographic Area Than Proposed 8.9.1 Description of Alternative 8.9.2 Compliance with Town Goals 8.9.3 Impacts oftheAltemative 8.10 Consider Mandatory Clustering That Would Limit the Minimum Lot Size to 1 acre 8.10.1 Description of Alternative 8.10.2 Compliance with Town Goals 8.10.3 Impacts of the Alternative 8.11 Consideration Of An Affordable Housing Overlay District 8.11.1 Description o f Alternative 8.11.2 Compliance with Town Goals 8.11.3 Impacts of the Alternative 8-3 8~4 8-4 8-6 8-6 8-7 8-7 8-7 8-7 8-8 8-8 8-9 8-10 8-10 8-10 8-11 8-12 8-14 8-14 8-14 8-15 8-16 8-16 8-16 8-17 8-17 8-17 8-17 8-18 8-18 8-18 8-19 8-20 8-20 8-20 8-21 8-21 Page v I I I I I I I I i i I I i ! I I I I i Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 9.0 8.12 Consider Allowing Farm Labor Housing Only On Farms Through Incentives 8.12.1 Description of Alternative 8.12.2 Compliance with Town Goals 8.12.3 Impacts of the Alternative 8.13 Zoning That Ensnres Permanent Preservation Of Open Space 8.13.1 Description of Alternative 8.13.2 Compliance with Town Goals 8.13.3 Impacts of the Alternative 8.14 Modification To The Cooperative And Assured Protection Plan 8.14.1 Description of Alternative 8.14.2 Compliance with Town Goals 8.14.3 Impacts of the Alternative 8. 15 Allow Regional Government/Utility To Establish Watershed Protection Zone 8.15.1 Description o f Alternative 8.15.2 Compliance with Town Goals 8.15.3 Impacts of the Alternative REFERENCES 8-22 8-22 8-22 8-23 8-24 8 -24 8-24 8-24 8-25 8-25 8-25 8-25 8-26 8-26 8-27 8-28 9-1 APPENDICES: A B SEQRA-RELATED DOCUMENTS A-1 Prior Plans, Key Goals and Implementation Tools A-2 Prior Plans and Key Goals & Conflicts, Tools and GIS Uses A-3 Key Goals & Conflicts, Tools and GIS Uses A-4 Summary of Implementation Tools & Key Goals A-5 Positive Declaration, Southold Town Board, January 7, 2003 A-6 Acceptance of Final Scope, Southold Town Board, April 8, 2003 A-7 Housing Needs Assessment, Town of Southold, May 2003 A-8 Hamlet Boundary Designation Methodology FIGURES B-1 Regional Setting B-2 Adjacent Towns B-3 School District Boundaries B-4 Fire Districts B-5 Zoning B-6 1999 Farmland Inventory and Zoning B-7 R-80 Analysis B-8 Watershed Protection Zones B-9 Steep Slopes B-10 Soil Associations B-11 Prime Farmlands Page vi I I i I I I I I I I ! I I I I I C D E F G Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS B-12 High Groundwater Areas B-13 Water Table Elevations B-14 Primary Watershed Areas B-15 Special Groundwater Protection Areas B-16 Pesticide Impacted Areas B-17 Suffolk County Water Authority Infrastructure B-18 Freshwater & Tidal Wetlands - Town B-19 Freshwater Wetlands- NYSDEC B-20 Flood Zones B-21 Woodlands B-22 Land Use B-23 Agricultural District Parcels B-24 Community Preservation Project Plan B-25 Protected Lands B-26 Community Facilities B-27 Archaeologically Sensitive Areas B-28 Cultural Resources ECOLOGY-RELATED DOCUMENTS C-1 Biotic Communities C-2 Plant Species Lists C-3 Wildlife Species Lists C-4 NPV Wildlife Species Model C-5 Breeding Bird Survey C-6 NYS List of Endangered Species AIR RESOURCES-RELATED DOCUMENTATION D-1 NYS and USEPA Air Quality Standards D-2 Additional Air Quality Monitoring Data, Nassau & Suffolk Counties D-3 Air Quality Index Brochure, USEPA COMMUNITY CHARACTER & HAMLET PHOTOGRAPHS BUILD-OUT & IMPACT ANALYSIS-RELATED DOCUMENTATION F-1 Build-Out Analysis and Notes (Theoretical Build-Out Potential) F-2a Regional Impact Assessment Model Results - Full Build-Out (less Fishers Island) F-2b Regional Impact Assessment Model Results - Full Build-Out (Fishers Island) F~3 Tracking and Statistics for Years 1997-8/15/02 (Start of Subdivision Moratorium) F-4 Regional Impact Assessment Model Results - Proposed Action (80% Farmland Preservation & 60% Density Reduction) Transfer of Development Rights Standards, SCDHS, Division of Environmental Quality, September 30, 1995 I I I Page vii I I i I I I I I i i I I ! I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS Tables 1-1 Implementation Tools and Key Goals 2-1 Volume of Fresh Water Available - by Watershed Area 2-2 Annual Pumpage Rates for SCWA Southold Well Fields 2-3 FEMA Flood Zones 2-4 Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) 2-5 Wind Direction 2-6a Wind Speed (1979-1988) 2-6b Gustiness (1979-1988) 2-7 1999 Air Monitoring Data 2-8a Land Use - LIRPB 2-8b LandUse- TownofSouthold 2-9 Protected Lands 2-10 Town Zoning Districts 2-11 Density and Minimum Lot Size Schedule for Residential Districts 2-12 Density and Minimum Lot Size Schedule for Nonresidential Districts 2-13 Town Population Changes - 1990-2002 2-14 Residential Structure Types 2-15 Year Structure Built 2-16 Community Facilities 2-17 Town of Southold Schools 2-18 Southold Police Department Personnel 2-19 Town Beaches and Parks 2-20 Town Boat Launch Ramp Facilities 2-21 Tax Revenue/Distribution 2-22 Employees in New York State Fishing Industries 2-23 Retail Establishments and Sales by Major Retail Category 2-24 Southold Shopping Centers 2-25 Southold Central Business Districts 2-26 Southold Vacancy Rates 3-1 Build-Out Analysis (Theoretical Build-Out Potential) 3-2 Build-Out Analysis - Summary (Existing Conditions) 3-3 Implementation Tools - Preliminary Impact/Mitigation Matrix 3-4 Build-Out Analysis - Summary (80% Farmland Preservation & 60% Density Reduction) 3-5 Build Conditions vs. Proposed Action 4-1 Summary of Mitigative Features 4-2 Implementation Tools - Mitigation Matrix Page 1-6 2-11 2-13 2-16 2-27 2-32 2-32 2-32 2-34 2-35 2-36 2-40 2-41 2-42 2-43 2-48 2-49 2 -49 2-51 2-52 2-53 2-54 2-55 2-77 2-80 2-83 2-83 2-84 2-84 3-3 3-11 3-22 3-49 3-50 4-2 4-7 Page viii I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I ! I ! Southold Comprehensive implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS LIST OF ACRONYMS btg/1 - micrograms per liter 6 NYCRR - Title 6, New York Code of Rules and Regulations AADT - Average Annual Daily Traffic A-C - Agricultural-Conservation AHD - Affordable Housing District AOD - Agricultural Overlay District ARB - Architectural Review Board asl - above sea level B&B - bed and breakfast BNL - Brookhaven National Laboratory bsl - below sea level CAA - Clean Air Act CBD - Central Business District CEQ - Council on Environmental Quality CO - carbon monoxide CPPP - Community Preservation Project Plan CR - County Route DAR - Department of Air Resources dbh - diameter at breast height DEIS - Draft Environmental Impact Statement DGEIS - Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement ECL - Environmental Conservation Law EIS - Environmental Impact Statement EPA - Environmental Protection Agency FEMA - Federal Emergency Management Agency FGEIS - Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement FIDCO - Fishers Island Development Corporation GEIS - Generic Environmental Impact Statement GIS - Geographic Information System gpd - gallons per day HB - Hamlet Business HD - Hamlet Density LB - Limited Business LBG - Leggette, Brashears & Graham LIPA - Long Island Power Authority LIRR - Long Island Rail Road LITP - Long Island Transportation Plan LP - liquefied propane LWRP - Local Waterfront Revitalization Program MCL - Maximum Contaminant Level MGD - million gallons per day Page A-I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I i ! I I I Southold Comprehensive implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS mg/1 - milligrams per liter MGY - million gallons per year mph - miles per hour msl - mean sea level MSW - municipal solid waste NAAQS - National Ambient Air Quality Standards NO2 - nitrogen dioxide NYS - New York State NYSDEC - New York State Department of Environmental Conservation NYSDOS - New York State Department of State NYSDOT - New York State Department of Transportation 03 - ozone Pb - lead PDD - Planned Development District PDR - Purchase of Development Rights PM - particulate matter ppb - parts per billion ppm - parts per million RIAM - Regional Impact Assessment Model RID - Rural Incentive District RO - Residential Office RR - Resort Residential SCCWRMP - Suffolk County Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan SCDHS - Suffolk County Department of Health Services SCDPW - Suffolk County Department of Public Works SCSC - Suffolk County Sanitary Code SCWA - Suffolk County Water Authority SEEDS - Sustainable East End Development Strategies SEQRA - State Environmental Quality Review Act SGPA - Special Groundwater Protection Area SI~ - State Implementation Plan SO2 - sulfur dioxide SPDES - State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System STP - sewage treatment plant SWAP ~ Source Water Assessment Program TDR - Transfer of Development Rights USFWS - United States Fish and Wildlife Service USGS - United States Geological Survey VOC - volatile organic compound WPZ - Watershed Protection Zone WSM&WPS - Water Supply Management & Watershed Protection Strategy ZBA - Zoning Board of Appeals Page A-2 I ! I I I ! I I I I I I I i i I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS SUMMARY SUMMARY Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Introduction This document is a Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement (DGEIS) prepared for and accepted by the Southold Town Board as lead agency, to analyze the potential impacts of a set of amendments to the Southold Town Code and various Town regulations, procedures, policies, planning and management initiatives being considered by the Town Board (the "proposed action"). Specifically, the proposed action considers implementation of relevant and important planning and program tools and mechanisms described and recommended in the numerous planning studies undertaken within the Town over the past 20 years. These studies, plans and recommendations have been reviewed in terms of current needs and Town goals, in order to achieve the Town's vision as articulated in those plans. Review of the plans and studies found that many newer documents reiterated prior recommendations, resulting in much consistency between studies and the goals of the Town over the years. It should be emphasized that the proposed action involves primarily legislative changes, with no specific physical changes proposed. This DGEIS describes and discusses the existing zoning regulations which govern land use and development within the Town, the proposed recommendations and the potential impacts of their implementation (including the impacts of development conducted in conformance with them). This document also discusses the features of these recommendations that would tend to mitigate those impacts and includes other pertinent sections required in a DGEIS. This document is part of the official record under the NYS Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) process outlined in Title 6 of the New York Code of Rules and Regulations (6 NYCRR) Part 617, with statutory authority and enabling legislation under Article 8 of the NYS Environmental Conservation Law (ECL). Thus, this GEIS will be subject to the full procedures of Part 617, providing a proper and complete forum for interagency review and public comment on the proposed action. Background, Need and Benefits of the Proposed Action The Town of Southold has long enjoyed an abundance of natural and cultural resources. However, as time has passed and the Town has grown, it has come to the attention of responsible citizens (both within and outside of Town government) that this growth is approaching a point where these natural and cultural resources may soon become stressed beyond their capacity to recover; growth may reach a point where it jeopardizes the very character that makes Southold unique. Such stress upon the Town's natural and cultural resources may not enable the Town to be consistent with its stated goals or maintain its vision. As awareness of these land use problems grew, the Town government, private groups and concerned citizens came together in an effort to address these issues before it became too late to save the Town's natural resources and valuable and unique character. To this end, the Town Page S-I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS Board enacted a moratorium on residential subdivisions and multi-family developments requiring site plan approval, so that the Town would have sufficient time to determine the extent of these problems and to develop and implement a plan to protect these resources and qualities. The purpose of the moratorium specifically states that several inter-related planning initiatives should be considered, noted as follows: the recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Commission and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP), and concerns in regard to affordable housing availability and public infrastructure usage. The Town Board formed a working group/moratorium team for the express purpose of determining a legally defensible, cost-effective, efficient and effective implementation strategy to achieve the Town's goals. During four intensive sessions held during September 2002, the group examined the Town's needs, resoumes and database. This review indicated a need to translate the various studies, recommendations, Committee input, Commission reports, staff efforts and Town Board initiatives into a cohesive plan (a package of legislation and procedures to implement the Town's vision). The group concluded that the basic goals of the Town remain sound and should be built upon. The inter-relationship of existing and proposed programs should be reinfomed so that revised procedures and legislation result in more consistent and better decisions by Town boards and departments. The Town Board was advised of the preliminary Findings and Recommendations of the working group and, as a result, formally authorized the Town Planner, Town Attorney, Land Preservation Coordinator, two planning consultants and two consulting land use attorneys to advance this Implementation Strategy. Team members and support staff participating in this DGEIS and Implementation Strategy are listed on the inside front cover page of this document. The issues to be addressed herein have been categorized by the moratorium team as being primarily either environmental or socio-economic in character. Environmental issues result from the pace and methods by which land is being converted from open or farmland into residential or commercial use. Excessive development has a detrimental impact on the character of the Town, on traffic, and on the Town's natural resources (e.g., groundwater, marine waters, wetlands, farmlands and open space). The moratorium team is finding that some of the existing Town policies, regulations and procedures (which determine where and how new development may be built) may not adequately protect the Town's character and natural resources. The socio-economic issues largely center around the need for affordable housing and a stable tax base, and stem largely from the fact that Southold's economy is primarily a seasonal one based on agriculture, marine industries and tourism/second and retirement homes. Town businesses, including agricultural enterprises, face certain challenges that must be recognized. Also, many people who live and work in Southold on a year-round basis cannot compete for housing with seasonal or year-round second homeowners due to the disparity in income levels. As the Town's popularity as a resort area increases, this situation may become a source of friction between long time residents and newcomers or visitors to the community. Further, the Town's demographic composition is a skewed one-with more than a third of its Page S-2 I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS population aged 55 years or older. As this percentage continues to grow, the Town must find ways to provide services, with a shrinking proportion of the service population. The proposed action considers implementing the planning and program tools and measures recommended in the planning studies undertaken within the Town over the past 20 years. These studies, plans and recommendations were reviewed in terms of current Town needs and goals. As noted, review of the plans and studies found that many newer documents reiterated prior recommendations, resulting in much consistency between studies and the goals of the Town over the years. These recommendations (totaling 43 in number) are being considered by the Town Board for implementation, in the form of amendments to the Town Code and in various Town regulations, to modification of Town procedures, and other policy and management initiatives; these changes would be provided to better implement the Town's Comprehensive Plan. As noted previously, the proposed action involves legislative changes, with no specific physical changes within the Town proposed. The comprehensiveness of the proposed action places the Town Board's ultimate decisions on a level playing field where the consequences of these decisions can be fairly and appropriately considered. Implementing the action will set in place a framework that interrelates land use, socio- economics, the environment, the transportation network, infrastructure with the mechanics of a regulatory structure so that the Town's vision for the future can in fact be achieved. Location of the Proposed Action In its totality, the proposed action will apply to the entire Town, though individual recommendations may apply to only specific areas or zoning districts. A number of additional districts important within the Town provide an overview of the Towns geography. The Town is comprised of a number of hamlets, which are focused on as part of this study. The hamlets are part of the historical growth pattern of the Town and represent much of the community character and charm of the Town of Southold. Description of the Proposed Action Strategy Overview The proposed project involves a series of actions that implement the comprehensive plan of the Town as it was established over the past 20 years in order to ensure that Southold's growth conforms to established goals. The series of actions has been designed to achieve these goals through legislative means, educational and public awareness, capital improvements and expenditures, direct Town management and inter-agency/quasi-agency initiatives. During the course of the project, the goals and intent were further refined through a series of policy Page S-3 Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS discussions held with the Town Board at public work sessions. These discussions provided clear guidance in terms of factors that the Board would like considered in the Comprehensive Implementation Strategy, which is subject to a SEQRA public review process. The Town's goals that will be addressed in this strategy are as follows: · To preserve land including farmland, open space and recreational landscapes · To preserve the rural, cultural and historic character of the hamlets and surrounding countryside. · To preserve the Town's remaining natural environment; to prevent further deterioration of the Town's natural resources and to restore the Town's degraded natural resources back to their previous quality. · To preserve and promote a range of housing and business opportunities that support a socio- economically diverse community. · To increase transportation efficiency and to create attractive alternatives to automobile travel, while preserving the scenic and historic attributes of roadways in the Town. The following paragraphs state each goal, the general context of each goal, and the specific strategy proposed to achieve each goal. The Comprehensive Implementation Strategy is outlined as follows: The Goal - To preserve land including farmland, open space and recreational landscapes General Context - This goal reflects the Town's interest in protecting a defining characteristic of the Town's landscape. Open spaces are prized by residents and visitors alike. Land preservation encompasses preserving working landscapes and open space. Working landscapes include farmed land and recreational land. Open space includes natural, vacant and undeveloped land for primarily passive uses. A balance needs to be achieved between protecting this resource and accommodating population growth. Agriculture is recognized as a fundamental element of the Town's landscape and can include farmland in crops, permanent vegetation (i.e. orchards/vineyards) and other recognized agricultural uses. Farmland can include crop-related structures (i.e. irrigation pumps/equipment, fences, barns, farm equipment and greenhouses, as well as storage processing and retail sale of farm grown goods. Agricultural has shaped the character and quality of life in the Town, as well as that of its inhabitants. The open, undeveloped nature of much of the Town's working landscape is a significant component of its highly valued open space character. Future development of a permanent nature that strips soil of its aghcultural value will conflict with the immediate goal of preserving land for farming purposes. Specific Strategies - Farmland targeted for preservation refers to unprotected land in the Town's agricultural inventory, primarily but not all within the A-C zoning district; such lands are also generally (though not always) coincident with prime farm soils. Open space is also a significant factor in establishing the rural qualities of the Town. Open space refers to unprotected, undeveloped lands, other than farmland, primarily in the R-80 zoning district. Page S-4 Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS The R-80 zone represents a large amount of acreage in the Town. Parcels in this zone include important open space resources as well as land with environmental constraints. The Comprehensive Implementation Strategy has resulted in the collection of facts and information to assist the Town in reaching appropriate decisions with regard to land preservation and how development in the Town will unfold under various scenarios. A major product is a Build Out analysis, supported by Geographic Information System (GIS) data and maps. The establishment of methodologies, data resources, maps, and relevant facts and figures is a benefit of the program that will have long-term utilization or value to the Town's future planning and implementation efforts. This information has been used to direct efforts toward land use initiatives that implement the Town goals during the planning process. In addition, the GIS system allows for a better understanding of the consequences of land use decision-making in terms of Build Out analysis, tracking of projects and data management, and analysis of the effects of various land use initiatives with respect to farmland, open space and other resources. Land preservation will be achieved by a number of techniques that will ensure that farmland, open space, and recreational landscapes will be preserved. Key areas of emphasis include the A-C and R-80 zoning districts due to agricultural use and unique environmental character and sensitivity with respect to open space, wetlands, steep slopes and woodlands. Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) will remain a key program for farmland preservation as landowners can be compensated for the development potential of the land, and maintain the residual land and base value for agricultural use and equity. The Rural Incentive District (RID) can have beneficial results with respect to land preservation. The RID provides the landowner a guarantee that development rights will be purchased based on a current 80,000 square foot zoning equivalent, in exchange for maintaining the land in agricultural use. The RID also provides the Town with time to purchase development rights or work with the landowner to structure an equitable compensation package that ensures permanent agricultural use. Thus, the RID in effect "buys time" for the Town to structure methods to finance continued purchase of development rights, and also "buys time" for the property owner who financially is not ready to preserve the land. Public monies are used to prevent farmland from being lost to development. Protected farmland is intended to remain in use as farmland. However, it is understood that the business of farming necessarily requires that some farmland be used for support structures and uses integral to the business. Many past studies and recommendations have called for density reduction as a means to ensure that land resources are not over-burdened and the Town maintains its rural character. Upzoning achieves the goal of density reduction and is considered as part of this Strategy. The RID is intended to ensure that landowners maintain equity while development rights are purchased and conservation subdivision planning is conducted, thereby assisting the Town in achieving its goal of preserving prime farm soil and aghcultural resources. Upzoning was conceived to reduce the number of dwellings in concentrated farming and environmentally sensitive areas, and would provide an incentive for farm owners to enter the Rural Incentive Page S-5 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS District. The RID provides the long-term safeguard necessary for land preservation, offering farm families the opportunity to sell their development rights. The Strategy also recognizes that development pressure could further increase, and not every property owner is interesting in preserving their land. Where land preservation does not take place, it is critical to ensure that compatible land uses are established in those areas adjacent to preserved lands. Many special permit uses currently permitted in the A-C district must be critically reviewed, and modified where they conflict with or prevent Town goals from being realized. Uses such as a life care community are not appropriate in certain zoning districts where protection of farmland, open space and natural resources are a priority. Where residential subdivisions are appropriate, various methods are recommended to assure proper development in cases where subdivision is appropriate. The Conservation Subdivision method would use several techniques to achieve 80% land preservation and in some cases density reduction. This method, together with clearer guidance measures for land use projects, improvements in the cluster provisions, and more concise zoning code and subdivision regulations will achieve this end. Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) is an appropriate tool for preservation of farmland and open space and envisions shifting density to appropriate areas, thereby providing a means for land protection without the resulting cost of purchasing the development rights. Lands that are not fanned, and land in the R-80 zone (including woodland, wetlands and/or steep slope areas), are primary candidates as sending areas, as are the Community Preservation Project Plan (CPPP) parcels that are not established in agricultural use. Receiving areas can include limited density increases in subdivisions located outside of the A-C and R-80 districts in areas referred to as Hamlet Locus (HALO) zones, mixed use opportunities in hamlet center areas and, where appropriate, diverse housing opportunities on larger parcels with sewage treatment potential. Proper incentives are proposed to ensure that equity is maintained. In addition, the Town's TDR program will be consistent with the Suffolk County TDR policy, which recognizes that groundwater protection needs are served when open space is protected in a sending area, and controlled increase in density is permitted at a receiving site. The County policy has been reviewed and is incorporated into this Strategy. A Planned Development District (PDD) local law is also proposed to provide zoning and land use flexibility for well-designed projects that provide special public benefits such as affordable housing, redemption of transferred development rights and other creative land use benefits. The Town's recreational msoarces will be enhanced and maintained through expanded waterfront access opportunities in keeping with the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan (LWRP), purchase of key parcels under the CPPP, creation of a park in Mattituck, better recognition and utilization of trails and bikeways, and an update of the park inventory and management plan. Page S-6 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS The Goal - To preserve the rural, cultural and historic character of the hamlets and surrounding countryside. General Context - The Town's Vision for itself incorporates the idea of maintaining distinct boundaries between urbanized areas of settlement and open and farmed lands. This Vision calls for reinforcing the notion of a small town environment by preventing unrestrained sprawl of residential and commercial development along major roads and strengthening hamlet centers. Maintaining the Town's heritage through historic architectural resoumes and traditional use opportunities is paramount to this vision. Specific Strategies - The Town is a long, narrow peninsula. Its two major arterials are generally oriented in an east-west direction, parallel to its shoreline, with Main Road (NYS Route 25) on the south part of the Town and Sound Avenue, CR 48 on the north side of the Town. Main Road passes through most of the recognized hamlet areas of the Town, and CR 48 generally provides a north by-pass to the hamlets. The hamlets are anchored by small central business districts with a variety of local businesses and services, as well as community facilities such as churches, libraries, museums, historical societies and other cultural institutions. Hamlets still reflect the early settlement patterns and often include an abundance of historical homes and structures that create charm and character within these communities. Outside of the hamlets, one-acre residential zoning is prevalent, transitioning to low-density residential and agricultural land. Surrounding the hamlets along Main Road are areas of limited and mixed business and residential uses, transitioning to residential and open space areas. Along CR 48, a more rural quality is present which includes farmland in the primary agricultural area of the Town, as well as open space and lower density residential lands. This is interspersed with pockets of business and industrial use and some residential communities. The Town has been described as a series of concentric circles with hamlets in the center, transitional residential and mixed use zones in the outer ring, and farmland and open space between the circles in remainder of the Town. This simplified graphic visualization is effective, and the concept of maintaining the character and integrity of the hamlets, transitional areas and surrounding countryside remains an emphasis. The Comprehensive Implementation Strategy has resulted in a better definition of the hamlets and the important function and character that they provide to the Town. Planning parameters have been developed for the hamlet centers and surrounding HALO zones to ensure the long term stability of these areas by providing proper infrastructure, recognition and enhancement of important attributes, and incentives for proper development using land use tools such as PDD and TDR for density location and management with community benefit. Hamlets provide an opportunity for affordable housing and mixed use development, creating a rich cultural environment that is central, pedestrian friendly and intemonnected. Rural, cultural and historic character will be preserved by protecting farmland and open space, inventory and recognition of current attributes, maintaining scenic by-ways, cultural and historic resource management, historic preservation efforts and incentives architectural and scenic advisory review, tree preservation and land use review. Page S-7 I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS The Goal - To preserve the Town's remaining natural environment; to prevent further deterioration of the Town's natural resources and to restore the Town's degraded natural resources back to their previous quality. General Context - The Town enjoys abundant natural resources that are an inherent part of the community's character and attraction. Current levels of development have already placed these resources in jeopardy. Direct action is required today to ensure that these resources will remain viable and healthy for the enjoyment of future generations. Specific Strategies - The Town's natural environment includes the land based resources that can be addressed and protected through planning review and land use controls. These resources include: · Tidal Wetlands adjacent areas · Freshwater Wetlands adjacent areas · Steep Slope Areas (15%) and slope buffers · Beaches, bluffs and dune areas and buffers · Natural Open Space including Woodlands · High Groundwater Areas (<10 feet to water) · Other unique habitats and natural features The protection of land based resources will protect aquatic resources including the finfish, shellfish and waterfowl resources of the bays and estuaries, as well as ground and surface water quality. A number of beneficial products have resulted from the Comprehensive Implementation Strategy including: a Town wetlands map, and a Town woodlands map, steep slope mapping, and other resource maps important to environmental assessment and planning. These products provide a factual and graphic basis for understanding Towns unique natural environment. Protection of the natural environment will be achieved through appropriate restrictions and review procedures, acquisition and public education. A Critical Environmental Lands local law is proposed that will recognize and control land use that may impact wetlands, steep slopes, beaches, bluffs and dunes, high groundwater areas, and other unique features. There are currently no tree clearing restrictions in the Town, and as a result, Tree Preservation mechanisms have been carefully designed to ensure property owners rights while providing a means to avoid inappropriate clear-cutting and tree removal, thereby protecting habitat as well as the trees. Improved land use review and guidance, and site specific enviroumental review will provide protection of unique resources during early planning stages. Use of Conservation Subdivisions, clustering, outright acquisition of important natural and recreational parcels under the CPPP, and transfer of development rights from appropriate environmentally sensitive sending areas, will provide further protection measures. The Town's water resources are limited and must be protected. The CIS does not deal directly with water use policies of the Town, but acknowledges past studies, constraints and Page S-8 I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS limitations. For the purpose of planning, it is assumed that potable water supply will be available to existing and future residents of the Town, as it is the SCWA's charter to provide drinking water and the Town's responsibility to provide a safe environment for its residents. The SCWA has issued a GEIS on water supply that addresses water supply options, and ways to provide potable water supply to the Town and its residents. This may promote growth, and as a result, proper planning must be in place. Under this Strategy, the Town proposes to actively work with SCWA to ensure that safe drinking water is available to the Town and it's residents, and that proper planning measures are in place to ensure that the development of the Town is orderly and in keeping with the Town's comprehensive plan. Currently, development densities of greater than half-acre are permitted only when public water and sewage treatment facilities are present. For this reason, most such projects are located within or adjacent to the Village of Greenport, which has an STP. However, recent technological advances point to the packaging of sewage treatment plants, thereby opening the door to these types of projects being located throughout Southold Town. The Goal - To preserve and promote a range of housing and business opportunities that support a socio-economically diverse community. General Context - The topic of affordable housing is a controversial issue in the Town. There is a need to provide a diversity of housing stock for Town residents. The viability and range of business opportunities, and particularly those traditional uses such as farming, fishing and tourism, need to be enhanced. Agriculture is recognized as a fundamental element of the Town's landscape. It has shaped the character and quality of life in the Town, as well as that of its inhabitants. The working landscape is a significant component of the Town's rural character. The business of agriculture also is one of the Town's prime economic sectors. Specific Strategies - The ability of Town residents to afford housing in their own Town is of critical concern and importance. This Strategy builds on the 1993 Affordable Housing Policies and Programs of the Town, and provides updated demographic information and needs assessments. The demographic analysis conducted as part of this DGEIS confirms the housing needs identified 10 years ago. It is clear that housing opportunities must be expanded for a variety of income level families, and that affordable housing opportunities must be located geographically throughout the Town. The Town renews its commitment to providing diverse affordable housing opportunities through the Town. Policy considerations have been researched and prepared as part of the CIS and are part of the SEQRA process that will allow for Board acceptance and public review. Housing diversity can be achieved by providing both ownership and rental opportunities. In addition, housing opportunities can be expanded through incentives directed toward private development, as well as greater levels of agency/quasi-agency involvement. Legislatively, ownership and rental opportunities will be expanded by: · Amending current affordable housing requirements and creating new incentives in connection with new subdivisions and changes of zone, Page S-9 I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS · Amending zoning to allow diversified housing stock including small- to moderate-sized units in condominium and apartment styles, · Permitting mixed use development within or adjacent to existing hamlets, · Identifying appropriate parcels where PDD could be used to target public funds and/or TDR credits for the purpose of increasing density for affordable housing purposes, · Enabling PDD uses that provide an array of special public benefits, including affordable housing, and · Consider density bonus for additional units that are provided as affordable housing. In addition to techniques noted above, rental opportunities can be provided by simplifying and expanding the potential for accessory apartments, an effort that is currently being contemplated by the Town Board. Measures other than legislation involve housing financial assistance in cooperation with the North Fork Housing Alliance (NFHA) as well as subsidized housing programs. Coordination with the will be expanded, with direct measures such as new housing projects, purchase and re-sale of homes to qualified candidates, and increased rental opportunities, as measures to increase housing diversity. The Town will also seek to work with privately funded Community Land Trusts, as well as soliciting private development companies specializing in providing affordable housing through the use of tax credits, to explore opportunities in Southold. Other subsidies to be explored include Community Development Block Grants and other private funding sources for publicly sponsored affordable housing initiatives. Resources to subsidize land and/or construction costs such as NYS subsidies through the Division of Housing and Community Renewal and the Affordable Housing Corporation will also be examined. The combination of these efforts provides a potential for increased affordable housing opportunities for a variety of income levels throughout the Town. The Town's business environment is generally stable with tourism and local services dominating the business climate. Businesses will be created or will be expanded as private markets develop, thereby utilizing commercial/industrial zoned lands. That will, in turn increase tax revenue and job opportunities. Housing and supporting services will be necessary to serve new growth. This pattern of development will occur but is expected to be limited due to the Town's geographic location and it's unique environment. However, it is necessary to ensure that proper zoning and controls are in place to accommodate (and shape) development as it occurs. Eco-tourism, and expanded tourist activity within the Town is expected to increase in significance and volume, as areas outside of Southold continue to be developed. Southold remains an attractive destination due to the farmland, open spaces and natural resources that are appreciated by Town residents and visitors alike. This makes it all the more important to have adequate infrastructure, transportation and appropriate land use controls in place, to ensure adequate protection and sustainability of the Town's resources. Strengthening of the hamlets, preservation of open space and natural resources, coupled with transportation management and an economic development plan, all ensure that a socio- economically diverse community will be sustained within the capacity of the environment. Page S-10 I I I I I ! I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS The Goal - To increase transportation efficiency and to create attractive alternatives to automobile travel, while preserving the scenic and historic attributes of roadways in the Town. General Context - Increased development is creating congestion on the Town's roadways, particularly CR 48 and Main Road. This increased congestion is degrading the quality of life in the Town's communities and creating public safety concems. The Town should encourage intermodal forms of transportation. Specific Strategies - Transportation is a critical issue nearly everywhere and Southold is no different. Southold is fortunate to have alternative road systems that assist in distributing traffic; however, during peak seasons of tourist activity, and in the popular hamlet areas, traffic congestion and delays are apparent. Transportation management includes increasing pedestrian friendly areas, and situating growth toward hamlets where service needs are more likely to be met on foot, thus reducing vehicle trips. Density reduction and growth management are important aspects of land use that are accomplished through zoning. Other site planning techniques to be implemented by the Town include ensuring adequate off street parking for commercial, residential and farmstand sites, and inter-linking parking in downtown areas to maintain vehicle trips off of arterial roads. As hamlets evolve, there is a need for traffic calming measures to slow traffic to safe speeds and provide a safe pedestrian environment. Traffic calming in Southold will be accomplished through inter-agency cooperation with the NYS Department of Transportation and the Suffolk County Department of Public Works. Hamlets also provide additional public transportation possibilities since a core ridership exists in a central area. Additional bus routes will result from future riders' needs, and the concept of hubs for public transportation centered within the hamlets will become more feasible. Education and inter-agency coordination are important short-term actions for ensuring that alternative methods of transportation are encouraged with the understanding of community needs and limitations. Southold is participating in the Sustainable East End Development Study (SEEDS) which will examine east end traffic issues and pose solutions that will be supported by the stakeholders or participants including Town, County and State government as well as community and neighborhood members. Therefore, in addition to zoning, there are educational, direct improvements, Town management opportunities and inter-agency cooperative initiatives available. Additional Action Thresholds and Permits & Approvals Required This document is intended to comply with the SEQRA requirements as administered by the Town Board of the Town of Southold. This DGEIS is intended to provide the Southold Town Board with information that will assist in rendering a decision on the proposed action. Once accepted, the document will be the subject of a public comment period and hearing. If no significant adverse impacts are identified, a Negative Declaration may be issued following the Page S-I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS DGEIS comment period. Should significant impacts be identified, and/or substantive comments be received, a Final GEIS (FGEIS) would be prepared, to address these significant impacts, and/or respond to substantive comments on the DGEIS. Upon its determination that the FGEIS acceptable addresses the issues in the FGEIS, the Town Board will be responsible for the preparation of a Statement of Findings, which will form the basis for its final decision on the proposed action, for which an affirmative vote is required for adoption. The Town Board will consider the GEIS record and Statement of Findings prior to any decisions on legislative changes, policy or Town management implementation. The Town Board is the primary and, in effect, the only board that has approval authority to implement key elements of this Comprehensive Implementation Strategy. The Board will direct preparation of legislation by the Town Attorney and follow proper heating, notice and filing requirements prior to enacting legislation. Future decisions that are consistent with the Findings will need no further SEQRA review. Actions which may differ from those considered in the GEIS will require review to determine if changes may result in significant adverse environmental impacts. Actions which will not result in impacts will be documented as such to support a Finding of No Further Review. Actions that may have a significant adverse impact will require further review with possible preparation of a Supplement to the GEIS. Assuming that the proposed action is approved (that is, the various parts of the Town Code are amended), reviews of all subsequent development applications, for which the revised Code applies, will be conducted in conformance with these revised regulations. Following is a listing of the additional approvals that may be required prior to development of a specific land use proposal: · Town Board - Change of Zone approvals · Town Planning Board - Site Plan review · Town Planning Board - Change of Zone recommendation to Town Board · Town Planning Board - Subdivision approval · Town Planning Board - Town Freshwater Wetlands permit · Town Planning Board - Architectural Review · Town ZBA - Variances (area & setback) · Town ZBA - Special Exception permits · Town ZBA - Special permits · Town Dept. of Buildings - Building Permit · Town Highway Dept. - Roadwork permits · Suffolk County Planning Commission - Change of Zone recommendation to Town Board · Suffolk County Department of Public Works (SCDPW) - Roadwork permits · SCDHS - Article 6 (Sanitary System design review) · SCDHS - Article 4 (Water Supply System design review) · SCDHS - State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) permits · SCWA - Water Supply Connection · NYS Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) - Well permits · NYSDEC - Freshwater and Tidal Wetlands Permits · NYSDOS - Coastal Consistency review Page S-I 2 Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS · NYS Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) - Roadwork permits · US Army Corps of Engineers - Part 404 permits Additional review and approvals may become necessary should certain new legislative changes be enacted based on this Comprehensive Implementation Strategy. Significant Environmental Impacts This section briefly discusses the difference in potential impacts between development conforming to the proposed action and development without the proposed action, for each category of resource. Geological Resources A reduction in available residential lots resulting from density reduction measures is expected to significantly decrease in the amount of land cleared and graded for development. In addition, it should be noted that the geographic distribution of clearing associated with development of this reduced number of units would be concentrated in areas where such impacts could be tolerated due to the presence of existing disturbance and development, and on soils having less value relative to farming potential. These considerations would reduce the potential for impact to geological resources. Water Resources Due to the 35% reduction in residential units, there would be a correspondingly significant reduction in groundwater pumpage; specifically, the lower number of units will require less water for in-home consumption and less water for lawn irrigation. As a consequence of the overall reduction and relocation of development, the potential for adverse impact to groundwater supplies and quality would be significantly reduced, as growth would be directed towards areas already served by public water suppliers, where adequate water supply and infrastructure already exist. As development would occur in areas distant from agricultural use, the potential for impact to irrigation water would be reduced. Additionally, there will be a reduced potential for impact to groundwater quality, as the volume of sanitary sewage will be reduced, and the reduced acreage of lawns will reduce the potential for impacts from lawn chemicals, particularly due to nitrogen loading. Density reduction and control, retention of natural vegetation, limitations on fertilizer dependent vegetation, and reduction in irrigation needs are all components of the implementation tools that will tend to benefit the Peconic Bay and Long Island Sound estuaries. Ecological Resources Impacts to ecological resources are typically a direct result of clearing of natural vegetation, the resulting loss and fragmentation of ecosystems and hence of wildlife habitat, and the increase in Page S-13 Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS human activity. Additionally, it is noted that secondary or indirect impacts can also be significant, as well as cumulative impacts depending on site and area conditions. The proposed Town Code amendments would result in a decrease in the amount of developed areas within the Town. Therefore, an additional pementage of individual parcels would be preserved as compared to the current zoning regulations. As a result of the proposed amendments, greater portions of land would be preserved. As the amount of land subject to development proposals is increasing, initiation of these regulations would allow for an overall significantly greater portion of the Town to be preserved. Therefore, ecological impacts are not expected as a result of the proposed actions. Additionally, few impacts to the Town's wetland resources are expected, as all future development will continue to be required to obtain both Town and State wetland permits, requiring conformance with current regulations. Further protection would be given to sensitive beach, bluff and dune environments, reducing future development and disturbance of these ecologically sensitive areas. Potentially larger buffers .areas could be expected adjacent to sensitive site features (wetlands, bluffs, dunes, etc.) due to an tncrease in the amount of required preserved area. Transportation Resources There would be a decrease of 1,710 vehicle trips associated with this scenario, as compared to full Build-Out, because of the 35% reduction in the number of residences. As this reduced number of trips would be generated in areas where existing development, infrastructure and alternative forms of transportation are present, the potential for impact to such resoumes would be reduced. It is noted that hamlets currently experience traffic congestion, traffic safety problems and speeding. Hamlets are generally situated along NYS Route 25; Southold is fortunate to have alternative east-west arterial roads (NYS Route 25 and C.R. 48), and many north-south local roads to inter-connect the road system. As a result, access to hamlets is generally good, but congestion in hamlets and at destination locations taxes transportation resources. In addition, Southold is unique in that there is a ferry service that connects the east end to New England, thus causing trips through the Town with no destination within the Town. Ferry service is a source of traffic; however, internal trip generation, seasonal uses that increase traffic volumes, and destination locations within the Town for agri-tourism, visitation to quaint hamlets, dining experiences and general tourism are all traffic generation factors that affect transportation patterns in Southold. In many cases, it is the attraction of hamlets for shopping, dining and a destination experience that creates this congestion. Reduction in vehicle trips by reducing ultimate development density is one direct measure that has quantifiable results. This alone is not sufficient to ameliorate the traffic congestion that the Town may experience as a result of other influences noted above. The Town will need to pursue traffic calming measures in coordination with State and County agencies. In addition, a transportation management plan and outgrowth of efforts identified in the SEEDS project will assist in public education and promoting alternative forms of transportation. Management and redirection of growth, reduction in ultimate density, coordination with State and County Page S-14 Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS transportation agencies, promotion of intermodat transportation, and continuing monitoring efforts with further transportation management are intended to control transportation resources. Air Resources The significant reduction in development in this scenario would result in a significant decrease in the potential for and amount of dust raised during construction operations (from truck movements on unpaved surfaces and land clearing and grading activities) than that for full Build- Out. In addition, the amount of vehicle emissions produced by vehicles (both during construction and post-construction) would be reduced. As the geographic distribution of this growth would be directed primarily to areas which are already developed, the potential for impact to rural areas of the Town from dust and vehicle exhausts would be reduced; for areas where development is to occur, emissions associated with this amount of growth are not anticipated to be sufficient to significantly impact air quality. Land Use, Zoning and Plans Growth would result in an increase in development in the Town, though this growth would be directed primarily to hamlets rather than be distributed throughout the Town. As the number of residential units would be substantially less in this scenario than in full Build-Ont, there will be a commensurate reduction in the potential for adverse impacts to land use patterns, particularly as development would preferentially be directed into hamlets, whereas development in the flail Build-Out case would be distributed throughout the Town. It is not anticipated that this growth would impact the pattern of zoning in the Town, as all development is assumed to occur in accordance with the zoning of each site. As this scenario is intended to implement the recommendations of the numerous Town plans and studies, and the zoning of these sites would be changed where appropriate to reflect these recommendations, it may be assumed that this growth would not impact these plans. Demographic Conditions The increases in total Town population, as well as in the school-age child and senior citizen cohorts, would be less in this scenario than for full Build-Out (10,121 vs. 15,451 for total population; 2,684 vs. 4,249 school-age children; and 4,074 vs. 5,934 for senior citizens). As a result of this reduction, the potential demographic impacts (population increases, increases in age cohorts with special needs and considerations) would be reduced, and impacts associated with demographic characteristics (e.g., school district enrollments and associated budgets and facility planning, government-funded and operated social services, private medical services and public emergency services) would also be reduced. As the growth associated with this scenario would be directed primarily to the existing hamlet centers, the demographic impacts would also be Page S-15 I i I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS concentrated in these areas, with correspondingly reduced potential for such impacts in the rural portions of the Town. With regard to specific school district impacts, there is a projected reduction in the number of students of 37 percent or 1,565 students. As the total number of students in all of the Southold districts is 3,340, the Build-Out scenario represents a 127 percent increase in students above current enrollments, while the proposed action would increase total enrollments by 80 percent. Each district must evaluate growth potential within their service area in relation to capacity in order to formulate long-range plans to accommodate the anticipated student population. School districts must proposed budgets, provide bonding and ensure that adequate educational services are available as growth occurs within their districts. Community Services As mentioned above, the comparative decrease in development and associated populations on a Town-wide scale (with locations of these impacts directed toward the hamlet areas) would represent a decrease in the impacts on community services. Additionally, as the geographic distribution of these impacts will be limited primarily to hamlet areas, the needs for and costs of expansions and improvements will also be limited to these areas and associated services providers. Infrastructure Solid Waste Handling and Recycling - The amount of development represents a decreased amount of residential solid waste generated than that associated with full Build-Out. While there would be a shift in the geographical distribution of solid waste generation toward the hamlet areas, this would not be significant as all wastes would be handled in the same facility regardless of where the they originate. Water Supply - The amount of residential development would significantly decrease the number of residential units in the Town in comparison to full Build-Out, resulting in a significant decrease in the potential increase in water demand. In addition, as this new growth would be distributed preferentially to the hamlets, the pattern of increased water demand will likewise be unevenly distributed, but toward areas already served by adequate supplies of groundwater. Drainage - The new development associated with this scenario would have to provide on-site stormwater retention facilities, in conformance with Town and/or County regulations. Wastewater Treatment - As was the case for full Build-Out, the volume of sanitary wastewater generated will increase, though to a significantly lesser degree than that of full Build-Out; the pattern of this generation will likewise change, to be directed toward the hamlets. This may have the result of increasing the number of on-site septic systems or, if economic and density factors prove sufficient, the establishment or extension of existing community sewer systems. However, Page S-16 Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS as the number of new residences is substantially less than that for full Build-Om, there will be correspondingly lesser potential for this to occur, as well as a reduced potential for adverse impacts from this scenario. Electricity - In comparison to full Build-Out, the decreased amount of residential development would decrease the demand for expanded electrical services within the Town. Also to be considered is the change in the pattern of this demand; as development would be concentrated toward the existing hamlets, the pattern of demand (and pattern of associated electrical service system growth) will be changed. Natural Gas - Similar to that for electrical services, the demand for and pattern of demand for natural gas services will be decreased by the new development. Community Character Reducing the level and geographic distribution of new residential development in comparison to the full Build-Out scenario would have the effect of reducing the potential for adverse impacts to the rural quality and character of the entire Town (by maintaining and preserving the breadth and depth of viewsheds and the character of the land and land uses within those viewsheds). In addition, the "small town" character of the individual hamlets would be protected, by locating appropriate residential uses in proximity to these areas. Cultural Resources The decreased amount of development (in comparison to full Build-Out) would reduce the potential for adverse impacts on existing and undiscovered cultural resoumes, and would also reduce the potential for impact on such resources as have already been determined, by locating development in hamlet areas and away from rural areas. Economic/Fiscal Conditions The demand for services would be less under the proposed project action. This is evidenced by the decrease in the impact on school districts, specifically related to a lower number of school- aged children, thereby reducing the cost to educate children. Though the full Build-Out results in more units and greater tax revenue, the demand for services creates a greater deficit. The reduced density scenario reduces this deficit, and in combination with other planning efforts provides for greater efficiency. More specifically, reduced density lowers tax burden overall, and this combined with more compact density in hamlets results in greater efficiencies of public infrastructure, which translates into lower cost of maintenance and services. Further reduction in the number of school-aged children may affect the actual ratio of tax dollars to demand for services. Seasonal homes, which do not require education of children, decreasing household size, and other measures to reduce density would be expected to further reduce the potential Page S-17 Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS deficit. It is noted that Build-Oat, even to a reduced density, occurs on a long-term basis, allowing school districts to evaluate needs, tax resources and other factors needed to ensure adequate education facilities. Use and Conservation of Energy Resources In comparison to full Build-Out, development represents a decrease in the demand for energy (electrical and natural gas) services in the Town. As use of energy-efficient building materials and mechanical systems, and passive energy-conserving site and building layouts are expected, the amount of energy resources required to serve this growth would be minimized. Use of such energy-conserving measures is not only required by New York State, but is a sensible business practice for developers, particularly in light of the increasing cost of energy resources. It is expected that the affected public utilities in the Town (LIPA, etc.) will be able to meet this reduced increase in demand, in consideration of the reliable revenue from the customer base generated by this growth. However, it should be noted that growth that could occur in the Town would be significantly greater in terms of quantity, and redistributed in terms of location, than if development were not implemented. Such a level of development would have significant Town-wide implications for energy demand and consumption. Thus, this reduced-yield scenario represents a significant reduction in potential impacts on energy resoumes, in comparison to that which would occur if the proposed action were not implemented. Cumulative, Secondary and Long-Term Impacts As the proposed action is applicable within the entire Town of Southold, this Draft Generic EIS is required to analyze the potential impacts of the proposed action within the entire Town. As such, the individual impact analyses presented and discussed in this document assume and include development of all developable lands in the Town. Therefore, as cumulative development is already included in the analyses presented throughout this document, the associated impacts from such development do not need to be explicitly discussed here. Mitigation Measures In general, environmental impacts associated with development conforming to the proposed action would result in a significantly reduced level of adverse impacts for two reasons: 1) the significant reduction in overall development, and 2) the relocation of this development primarily towards hamlets, where development would be more appropriate. Thus, the nature of the proposed action is in itself a significant mitigation measure for the various Town resources analyzed in this document. Page S-18 Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Geological Resources Mitigation of potential impacts to geological resource is inherent in the proposed action, as it would reduce development on agricultural land and on lands that are presently vegetated (which may also be areas of valuable steep slopes, wetlands, bluffs, etc.). The substantial reduction in total residential units, in conjunction with the relocation of this reduced development into hamlet areas (and away from the above-noted geological resources) would be a significant mode of protection, due to the reduced amount of clearing and grading of valuable lands. Use of erosion control techniques during construction operations will further reduce the potential for adverse impacts to the Town's geological resources. Water Resources Implementation of the proposed action would provide substantial mitigation, in comparison to what would otherwise be experienced by water resources in the Town. The 35% reduction in residential units resulting from the proposed action would result in a corresponding reduction in groundwater usage, as fewer units would consume less water. In addition, this lesser amount of development would also mean a reduced potential for adverse impact to groundwater quality from sanitary wastewater recharge and lawn chemical usage. Use of water-saving plumbing fixtures would further reduce potential impacts to groundwater supplies. Ecological Resources As a consequence of the proposed action, the potential for impacts to ecological resources would be significantly mitigated, in comparison to conditions if the action were not implemented. This is due to the reduced amount of development and guidelines/limitations with respect to development in farm and naturally vegetated areas of the Town, which would tend to retain and preserve vegetation and habitats for wildlife. In addition, the proposed Town Code amendments regarding setbacks, buffers, etc. would preserve greater percentages of land on sites that are to be developed. Transportation Resources Because of the substantial reduction in development associated with the proposed action (in comparison to conditions absent the proposal), there would be a substantial reduction in the potential for impacts to the Town's transportation resources. This in itself is a significant mitigation measure. In addition, the pattern of development and impacts would be changed, to the vicinities of the hamlets and the roadways linking them, and away from the more rural portions of the Town. Nevertheless, the Town may choose to implement traffic-calming measures, and provide further active and/or passive transportation improvements as provided in its ongoing transportation planning efforts. Page S-19 ! I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS Air Resources Reduction in development from what would otherwise occur absent this proposed action represents a mitigation measure for air resources. Development conducted in accordance with this proposal would be directly primarily to existing hamlet areas, thereby mitigating potential impacts to more rural portions of Town. In addition, development in the hamlets is not anticipated to be sufficient or of a character as to significantly impact air resoumes due to vehicle emissions. Land Use, Zoning and Plans Mitigation of potential impacts to land use, zoning and land use plans is inherent in the proposed action, as follows: While the proposal would change the pattern of land use in the Town, the goal is to achieve a level of protection for valuable aesthetic and environmental, social and other characteristics and resources that would otherwise not be achievable absent the proposed action. This would be achieved by a substantial reduction in potential development in the Town, and an associated relocation of this growth toward the hamlets and away from the areas where these resources are found. The proposed action would conform to the zoning pattern in the Town (in order to achieve the specific land preservations and development concentrations inherent in the proposal), and this development would be in conformance with the applicable elements of the Town Zoning Code. The proposed action has been formulated specifically to implement a number of the recommendations contained in numerous Town land use plans and studies prepared over the past 20-4- years, and therefore is consistent with the Town's comprehensive plan, including preservation of farmland, community character and addressing housing needs. Demographic Conditions Because of the reduction and relocation of development associated with the proposed action, the numbers of residents, school-age children and senior citizens generated would likewise be reduced and relocated. As a result, the impacts to the Town's demographic characteristics would be reduced. This represents a significant mitigation measure arising from the proposed action. The project has the potential to increase affordable housing opportunities by virtue of expanded diversified housing opportunities and through understanding of housing needs and development of affordable housing policies. Community Services Due to the anticipated reduction and relocation of future development in the Town (and in associated populations), the need for and usages of the various community services needed to serve Page S-20 ! ! Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS this growth would be reduced and relocated as well. This represents a significant mitigation measures of the proposed action, as the usage of existing services would not be increased to the same level or at the same rate absent the proposal, and the relocation of growth would tend to decrease the need for (and costs to) services providers to expand/upgrade existing systems and/or services. In addition, the proposed action will reduce the impact with regard to the cost of education, through reduction of the potential number of school-aged children. Infrastructure The reduction and relocation of future development in the Town away from primarily rural and agricultural areas and toward the existing hamlets (where infrastructure systems such as solid waste handling and disposal, water supply, wastewater treatment, and energy are established) would minimize impacts on these systems due to reduced demands on the capacity of these systems to provide services. Community Character The proposed action contains its own mitigation of impacts to community character, as the development resulting from this action would tend to enhance the vitality and small-town character of the hamlets, while preserving the rural aesthetics of the adjacent open spaces and farmlands. Cultural Resources Potential impacts to cultural resources would be mitigated by the proposed action by its preservation of undeveloped and aghcultural lands (under which as-yet undiscovered cultural resources may lie undisturbed), and as a result of the reduced level of development in these areas reducing potential for impacts on established cultural resources. Economic/Fiscal Conditions As a result of the reduced amount of development in the proposed action as compared to full build- out, potential impacts on the Town's economic/fiscal conditions would be reduced as well. While the amount of taxes generated by development under the Implementation Strategy would be less than that generated by the full build-out scenario, the demand on services (and the costs to provide them) would also be reduced proportionately. As illustrated in the RIAM model, the overall balance of costs and services would be substantially more beneficial under the proposed action conditions. Page S-21 Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Alternatives This section of the DGEIS presents alternatives to the proposed action. SEQRA calls for a description and evaluation of the range of reasonable alternatives to the action that are feasible, considering the objectives of the project sponsor. 1. No Action 2. Consider changing target landmass for 80% preservation and 60% density reduction to one zone (create an agriculture and open space district). 3. Consider applying 80% open space, 60% density reduction to all zoning districts. 4. Creation of tax incentives for landowners to preserve their open space and agricultural use. 5. Remove all uses other than agriculture from allowable uses within the A-C district. 6. Consider upzoning to a minimum lot size for yield purposes larger than 5 acre. 7. Consider S-acre upzoning ora larger area than proposed. 8. Consider creation o£an R-60 zoning district to apply to R-40 zoned lands. 9. Consider 5-acre upzoning a smaller geographical area than proposed. 10. Consider mandatory clustering that would limit the maximum lot size to 1 acre. 11. Consider creation of an affordable housing overlay district. 12. Consider allowing farm labor housing only on farms through incentive zoning which ensures permanent preservation of open space. 13. Modifications to the Cooperative and Assured Preservation Plan. 14. Allow regional govemmenffutility to establish watershed protection zone. 15. Combination regulatory/voluntary program for farmland and open space preservation. Page S-22 Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS SECTION 1.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I ! I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 1.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION This document is a Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement (DGEIS) prepared for and accepted by the Southold Town Board as lead agency, to analyze the potential impacts of a set of amendments to the Southold Town Code and various Town regulations, procedures, policies, planning and management initiatives being considered by the Town Board (the "proposed action"). Specifically, the proposed action considers implementation of relevant and important planning and program tools and mechanisms described and recommended in the numerous planning studies undertaken within the Town over the past 20 years. These studies, plans and recommendations have been reviewed in terms of current needs and Town goals, in order to achieve the Town's vision as articulated in those plans. Review of the plans and studies found that many newer documents reiterated prior recommendations, resulting in much consistency between studies and the goals of the Town over the years. It should be emphasized that the proposed action involves primarily legislative changes, with no specific physical changes proposed. This DGEIS describes and discusses the existing zoning regulations which govem land use and development within the Town, the proposed recommendations and the potential impacts of their implementation (including the impacts of development conducted in conformance with them). This document also discusses the features of these recommendations that would tend to mitigate those impacts and includes other pertinent sections required in a DGEIS. This document is part of the official record under the NYS Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) process outlined in Title 6 of the New York Code of Rules and Regulations (6 NYCRR) Part 617, with statutory authority and enabling legislation under Article 8 of the NYS Environmental Conservation Law (ECL). It was determined that the Town's proposed action would be appropriate for the preparation ofa GEIS. For such a document, SEQRA Part 617.10 (a) states the following: (a) Generic EIS's may be broader, and more general than site or project specific EIS's and should discuss the logic and rationale for the choices advanced. They may also include an assessment of specific impacts if such details are available. They may be based on conceptual information in some cases. They may identify the important elements of the natural resource base as well as the existing and projected cultural features, patterns and character. They may discuss in general terms the conslraints and consequences of any narrowing of future options. They may present and analyze in general terms a few hypothetical scenarios that could and are likely to occur. A generic ElS may be used to assess the environmental impacts of: (4) an entire program or plan having wide application or restricting the range of future alternative policies or projects, including new or significant changes to existing land use plans, development plans, zoning regulations or agency comprehensive resource management plans. SEQRA mandates that a GEIS is the correct method of evaluating the significance of these proposed amendments. As noted under Part 617.10 (c), Page 1-1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Generic EIS's and their findings should set forth specific conditions or criteria under which future actions will be undertaken or approved, including requirements for any subsequent SEQR compliance. They may include thresholds and criteria for supplemental EIS's to reflect specific significant impacts, such as site-specific impacts, that were not adequately addressed or analyzed in the generic EIS. With respect to subsequent S EQRA procedures, Part 617.10 (d) states: (d) When a final genetic EIS has been filed under this part: (1) No further SEQR compliance is required if a subsequent proposed action will be carried out in conformance with the conditions and thresholds established for such actions in the generic EIS or its findings statement; (2) (3) (4) An amended findings statement must be prepared if the subsequent proposed action was adequately addressed in the generic EIS but was not addressed or was not adequately addressed in the findings statement of the genetic EIS; A negative declaration must be prepared if a subsequent proposed action was not addressed or was not adequately addressed in the generic EIS and the subsequent action will not result in any significant environmental impacts; A supplement to the final generic EIS must be prepared if the subsequent proposed action was not addressed or was not adequately addressed in the genetic EIS and the subsequent action may have one or more significant adverse environmental impacts. Thus, this GEIS will be subject to the full procedures of Part 617, providing a proper and complete forum for interagency review and public comment on the proposed action. Page 1-2 i I ! I i I ! I I I I I I I ! I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 1.1 Background, Need and Benefits of the Proposed Action 1.1.1 Background and History The Town of Southold has long enjoyed an abundance of natural and cultural resources. However, as time has passed and the Town has grown, it has come to the attention of responsible citizens (both within and outside of Town government) that this growth is approaching a point where these natural and cultural resources may soon become stressed beyond their capacity to recover; growth may reach a point where it jeopardizes the very character that makes Southold unique. Such stress upon the Town's natural and cultural resources may not enable the Town to be consistent with its stated goals or maintain its vision. As awareness of these land use problems grew, the Town government, private groups and concerned citizens came together in an effort to address these issues before it became too late to save the Town's natural resources and valuable and unique character. To this end, the Town Board enacted a moratorium on residential subdivisions and multi-family developments requiring site plan approval, so that the Town would have sufficient time to determine the extent of these problems and to develop and implement a plan to protect these resources and qualities. The purpose of the moratorium specifically states that several inter-related planning initiatives should be considered, noted as follows: the recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Commission and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP), and concems in regard to affordable housing availability and public infrastructure usage. The Town Board formed a working group/moratorium team for the express purpose of determining a legally defensible, cost-effective, efficient and effective implementation strategy to achieve the Town's goals. During four intensive sessions held during September 2002, the group examined the Town's needs, resources and database. This review indicated a need to translate the various studies, recommendations, Committee input, Commission reports, staff efforts and Town Board initiatives into a cohesive plan (a package of legislation and procedures to implement the Town's vision). The group concluded that the basic goals of the Town remain sound and should be built upon. The inter-relationship of existing and proposed programs should be reinforced so that revised procedures and legislation result in more consistent and better decisions by Town boards and departments. The Town Board was advised of the preliminary Findings and Recommendations of the working group and, as a result, formally authorized the Town Planner, Town Attorney, Land Preservation Coordinator, two planning consultants and two consulting land use attorneys to advance this Implementation Strategy. Team members and support staff participating in this DGEIS and Implementation Strategy are listed on the inside front cover page of this document. The issues to be addressed herein have been categorized by the moratorium team as being primarily either environmental or socio-economic in character. Page 1-3 i I I I i I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS Environmental issues result from the pace and methods by which land is being converted from open or farmland into residential or commercial use. Excessive development has a detrimental impact on the character of the Town, on traffic, and on the Town's natural resources (e.g., groundwater, marine waters, wetlands, farmlands and open space). The moratorium team is finding that some of the existing Town policies, regulations and procedures (which determine where and how new development may be built) may not adequately protect the Town's character and natural resources. The socio-economic issues largely center around the need for affordable housing and a stable tax base, and stem largely from the fact that Southold's economy is primarily a seasonal one based on agriculture, marine industries and tourism/second and retirement homes. Town businesses, including agricultural enterprises, face certain challenges that must be recognized. Also, many people who live and work in Southold on a year-round basis cannot compete for housing with seasonal or year-round second homeowners due to the disparity in income levels. As the Town's popularity as a resort area increases, this situation may become a source of friction between long time residents and newcomers or visitors to the community. Further, the Town's demographic composition is a skewed one-with more than a third of its population aged 55 years or older. As this percentage continues to grow, the Town must find ways to provide services, with a shrinking proportion of the service population. The proposed action considers implementing the planning and program tools and measures recommended in the planning studies undertaken within the Town over the past 20 years. These studies, plans and recommendations were reviewed in terms of current Town needs and goals. As noted, review of the plans and studies found that many newer documents reiterated prior recommendations, resulting in much consistency between studies and the goals of the Town over the years. The following is a list of the plans for which recommendations were reviewed and considered, along with the year in which each was completed: · Parks, Recreation & Open Space Survey (1982) · Town Master Plan Update (1985) · Fishers Island GrowthPlan (1987-1994) · US/UK Countryside Stewardship Exchange Team Report (1991) · Long Island Comprehensive Special Groundwater Protection Area Plan (1992) · Town Affordable Housing policies and program (1993) · Southold Town Stewardship Task Force Study (1994) · Seaview Trails of the North Fork (1995) · Peconic Estuary Program (1995) · Economic Development Plan, Town of Southold (1997) · Community Preservation Project Plan (1998) · Southold Township: 2000 Planning Initiatives (1999) · County Route 48 Corridor Land Use Study (1999) · Farm and Farmland Protechon Strategy (2000) · Town Water Supply Management & Watershed Protection Strategy (2000) · Scenic Southold Corridor Management Plan (2001) · North Fork Travel Needs Assessment (2002) · Blue Ribbon Commission for a Rural Southold, Final Report (2002) · Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (2003) Page 1-4 I I I i I ! I I ! I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS A series of matrices has been prepared to review and understand the recommendations of prior planning studies, document the origin of recommendations, and determine if conflicts exist between plans while recording needed definition updates, implementation mechanisms and areas where application of the Town's Geographic Information System (GIS) and data gathering will be important. Additional background and a brief description of each study are included in Section 2.6.3, Land Use Plans & Recommendations. Appendix A-1 contains a detailed listing of the recommendations of each of the 19 above- referenced studies; these recommendations have been analyzed in relation to the resource goals the Town intends to address by the proposed action. Appendix Ao2 refines Appendix A-l, by indicating the conflicts, definitions, implementation tools and GIS needs associated with the recommendations for each of the goals related to each of the 19 studies. Appendix A-3 then collates and summarizes the 19 sets of conflicts, tools, etc. listed in Appendix A-2. Finally, Appendix A-4 combines and collates the recommendations listed in Appendix A-1. The Moratorium Team synthesized a total of forty-three (43) different recommendations from these four (4) tables. These recommendations (consolidated and summarized in Table 1-1) are being considered by the Town Board for implementation, in the form of amendments to the Town Code and in various Town regulations, to modification of Town procedures, and other policy and management initiatives; these changes would be provided to better implement the Town's Comprehensive Plan. As noted previously, the proposed action involves legislative changes, with no specific physical changes within the Town proposed. The Town Board intends to initially consider all currently relevant prior recommendations with an emphasis on those that protect farmland and open space, promote affordable housing, and preserve natural resources. The Board may prioritize, narrow down or select implementation tools that best achieve the goals of the Town. The basic goals of the above-referenced plans and studies include: · To preserve land, including farmland, open space and recreational landscapes. · To preserve the rural, cultural and historic character of the hamlets and surrounding countryside. · To preserve the Town's remaining natural environment; to prevent further deterioration of the Town's natural resources and to restore the Town's degraded natural resources back to their previous quality. · To preserve and promote a range of housing and business opportunities that support a socio- economically diverse community. · To increase transportation efficiency and to create attractive alternatives to automobile travel, while preserving the scenic and historic attributes of roadways in the Town. The Town's objectives in focusing on these goals are twofold: 1) to maintain the unique cultural and historic sense of place found within Southold's communities, and 2) to maintain the high quality of the Town's environmental resources. The proposed action will provide a means to ensure that these Town goals will be achieved through a comprehensive, well-established and well-considered land use decision-making framework that will be able to be implemented. A full overview and description of the project is provided in Section 1.3. Page 1-5 I I I I I I I I I I ! I ! I I I I ! I $outhold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS TABLE 1-1 IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS AND KEY GOALS This table consolidates the recorcamndations of Town planning reports and studies prepared over the past 20 years. Some measures may apply to more than one sub-category; thc most applicable subcetegory was chosen, as tools/mechanisms are listed only once. If each of these mechanisms/tools were implemented, the Town go vernmental/eduentional/social framework would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as defined by past initiatives and recommendations, thus implementing these planning reports and studies. The current need for certain measures and their urgency based on current conditions must still be determined, and policy decisions concerning implementation must still be made. and Zoning Code 1. A-C District Use/Dhmu~ional P~u~lers (mechanics of zone; now es~nfia!ly same as other residential zones) Rural Incentive District (based on incentive zoning; exchange of benefits, i.e. rm{nt.i, open space/farm use for per/od of time in exchange of PDR at appropriate yield/density) , Disiricl/A.C Zoning Review (geographic defini6nn and goals) 5-Acre or ~ 5. Review fi ~ (Winery-Vineyard; adequate fannstend pargdnE) Re,new of Zoning Cods (rmmdatory clnstermg, recreationul reqmremems, revt~ Sign Ordinance; review R-0, LB di~xiet; water dependent uses; ae~seory apmtr~nts, AHD st~dsrd8 home occupations, discourage stxip shopping centers & fast food in FIB, flag lots~ e~courage ~ driveways; change of use r~qul~rn~nts) 7. Review Zoning Map (Maltituek Cr~ek, indnslrial on Route 25 west o f Crreenpurt, HD in Gre~nport; water depondent uses, AHD. repeal or expand) 8. Review Subdivision Ragulations (read requi~u~out~, dreinage; lJ£hfng; infrastnmtxtre) 9. Review Highway Specifications (road r~luh~ats drainag,~; li~htln~o' infl'a~tUOtUre) 10. C°nzervatiua Subdivision Program (define and implernont 75 -80% land preservation through land nsc tools and density redection) 11. Planning Process & Encourage Coa~nh~;e/Ageacy Perticipution (foemali~e pre-submission ~onforen~e, review deparln~ntal or~oaniTut~on; 12. Transfer of Development Rights (mecha~sm fol app*ui.,tinte dsn~ityr~loeation/r~-~m~nt) 13. Planned Develo~ii~s~t Distr/et Local Law (provide for flexible developmontJyield in exchange of special public benefits, i.e. affordable housing, in~'a~4vuctum, dedication, etc.) 14. Trce Preservation Local Law (limit removal of trees unless through subdivision/site plan review; de fmc tren size uad applienble acreage) 15. Critieal En*~om~ntal Lands Local Law (steep stoles and e~uaspnents, shallow grouadwater, wetlands. Waterway; dsfine fol' ~ield purposes) Review/Revision (Type I List; possibly add Scenic-Byways; Critical Environmontal Areas) 17. Sennie By-Ways Overlay Deval~,lassmt[ Controls (RoRte 48125~ define ca~ridtw 1000'/500'; recaneile falan sttllctllre8; setbacks, lO. ass, architectllre; comnUttee review, SEQRA de~i~afon) Review/Education (Agriculture and Markets Law; encourage partic~,~., malm.i, exi~6.g participants) 19, Create G-choral Gu/dance Doualmnts 0)esi~n Manual, tramportation m,m%oe, ment/treffic mlmlng; devalop illnmlnatlou standards; BMPs; cross aceess a[~reemems; side road access) 20. Natural Envi~ uma~ntal Education (ensure good quality sur faen/geouad sut face waters; BMPs; IPM; coastal erosion control; beach width mualtoring) (~i~ge. educational distribution materials, link with land use controls) "Use o f Public Transportalion (relate to Transportation Managemant plua; create hubs; ferr/iin k a~ s; winery s h..1 e s) 23. ' · ..... Tra~portahon Management Plan (Transportataon Con'nmssmn; encourage tnmspor tat mn/pedestnua tmpmvements and public mmsit; create hamlet hubs; ferry linkages, winery shuttles, signage; "best route to"; work with LIRR) 24. Economic DeveloFih. iii Plan (manage tomqnm; coiliil~ruiul fishlng~ rec~eatinnal boating; nnlmmllens of aghcaltm'e; 25. Enforcement (illagal conversion of agrlcultural lmfldinge; use expa. nirm controls; ehu.~ of use requirements) obtain/maintain; inventor/Town land and improve) 27. Administer Parks of Town-wide Sigulficuac~ (inventory Town land, conform to park plan; public beach quality irrrprovemants) 28. Prioritize and Supplemant CPPP (addlti~a! acxtuishions; scenic by-ways .oq-i~flions; sensitive land; prioritize) 29. Create a Centralized Year-Round Recreation Complex {det~mlne need, implement if necessasy) 30. Affordable Honsing Policy (geogeaphic/tyl~ diversity, targets and new development, review evofy' 2-5 years; provide inenntives; acc~seory apl& finsneial assistance; Housing Authority) 31. Concentrate Deveh.¥sx~m m Hamlets (define hamlets; enmwe ~ppmtmate mf:rastmctu~; affordable housing; link with land use mechani.~/teuls; capitol hi~,iovemant 32. Park District/School District Boundaries © ,,.~ ,,,,,;ly (det~ ~.;.~ need and reconc/le districts) .v and Man. client Plan (101~or 1980 study needs u~:~latin[~; input into OIS; rrt~n%oe recreational resources) 34. Create a P~rl~ and Recreation Dopertment (rmmge l~xks, recreational resources, non-church cemeteries) 35. Scenic By-Ways Managen~ut Pro[~xn ~Route 4g/Route 25 mux*mtly dssilpmted; storage, link with Overlay for standards/bmidslin~wland use controls) e/Bikewa~ {T~tion Com,'-i~6on exists, dste~mi.~ appropriate committee; inventor),, input into GIS, m.n~g% t~ilh.~d directional infomtian in kiosks} Inventory and Manage Cultural Resources (archaeologically sensitive areas; Historic District deai~o~aiiOll; plaques; la.d-~k desi[~nation; input into GIS, Architectural Review Board and Desi~ p.,.~.~eters (detern~le need; a~tshlinh bod~ generate guidance; integeate into land us~ review process) S'mni¢ Advisory Board (determine need for new Cuunxliien; rm.%o~ scenic corridors, town-wide scenic resources) I4nn~mg Fmanctal Asststance Program (North Fork Honsinl~ ?,lllanee; review other opportunities based on 1993 report and Updated Affordable Housing Policy) 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. Develop Water Supply Master plan (Town involvement. SCWA prepsr/ng; ma.. g,~ infrastructure with other agencies) 42. , drought msn%vement; ensure adequate emergency services (police, tiro, ambulance); flocd hazard rdt/$ation plan; erosion) 43. Social Services Programs (semor eiti?en care, adequate c. ........... ;ty facilities, day care; meals o12 wheels, churches, libmrien) Note: Status column indicates programs exist (E) and will he reviewed and improved/enhanced; or, are proposed to be created (p). X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Page 1-6 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS By late 2002, the Town Board determined that its formulation of the proposed action had evolved to a point where it was appropriate to initiate formalized public and agency review. Therefore, in consideration of the definition of "action" under SEQRA, [see 6 NYCRR Part 617.2(b)(2), (3) and (4)], the Southold Town Board indicated its determination that this proposed action may have significant impacts, and issued a Positive Declaration on its action, thereby initiating the SEQRA process (see Appendix A-5). As provided for in 6 NYCRR Part 617.8 (b), if scoping is conducted, the project sponsor must submit to the lead agency a draft scope that contains the items identified below. The lead agency must provide a written final scope to the project sponsor, all involved agencies and any individual that has expressed an interest in writing to the lead agency within 60 days of its receipt of a draft scope. If the lead agency fails to provide a final scope within this period, the project sponsor may prepare and submit an EIS based on the draft final scope. The final written scope should include: 1. A brief description of the proposed action; 2. The potentially significant adverse impacts identified both in the positive declaration and as a result of consultation with the other involved agencies and the public, including an identification of those particular aspect(s) of the environmental setting that may be impacted; 3. The extent and quality of information needed for the preparer to adequately address each impact, including an identification of relevant existing information, and required new information, including the required methodology(ies) for obtaining new information; 4. An initial identification of mitigation measures; 5. The reasonable alternatives to be considered; 6. An identification of the information that should be included in an appendix rather than the body of the DEIS; and 7. Those prominent issues that were raised during scoping and determined to be not relevant or not environmentally significant or that have been adequately addressed in a prior environmental review. The draft scope for this GEIS was prepared by the project sponsor and submitted consistent with SEQRA procedures. Subsequently, a public scoping meeting was held on January 29, 2003, and written comments were accepted by the lead agency until February 10, 2003. A revised draft scope which addresses the valid comments and issues raised during the entire public comment period (as determined by the lead agency) was prepared, and the lead agency issued its Final Scope on April 8, 2003 (see Appendix A-6). Accordingly, this document has been prepared consistent with this Final Scope. 1.1.2 Public Need and Municipality Objectives Through a series of varied planning initiatives, the Town of Southold has advanced a broadly defined program aimed at maintaining the character of the community. This effort, which covered the better part of two decades, involved the preparation of numerous planning studies. For various reasons, a good many of these planning studies have never been fully realized due to a failure to implement their recommendations. Page 1-7 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS Development pressures have reached a point where the Town Board found it necessary to take the aggressive step of imposing a moratorium on most development activity. This moratorium provides a pause in the processing and consideration of new development applications, so that the Town Board could consider how best to meet the Town's goals. During this interval it was determined that the most appropriate method available that would allow the Town to m-explore all relevant past planning studies, and advance the best recommendations, was to rely on SEQRA and a GEIS. This process affords a unique venue within which the residents of the community can directly participate in the public dialogue and debate that will drive this process. Upon careful consideration, the need for this process becomes quite clear. First, relying on past studies allows for all of the good ideas previously developed to be reevaluated in the context of current trends and conditions. Second, the process avoids the need to conduct more studies that may not produce any new ideas or results. Perhaps most importantly, this process establishes a direct public participation component that encourages a thorough evaluation of all relevant issues while making the ultimate decision-making process transparent and publicly accountable. The action therefore, fulfills the public need of advancing the goals of the Town in a cooperative, interactive fashion that moves ahead toward implementation without unnecessarily revisiting old ground. The action achieves the objectives of the municipality through creating the vehicle through which the Town's goals, as articulated in 20 years of past planning studies, can be realized. 1.1.3 Benefits of the Proposed Action Implementing the proposed action in a coordinated fashion will assure that the five Town goals are achieved in a way that not only comprehensively moves the Town ahead, but does so without suffering the adverse effects of ill-conceived implementation, disjointed or reactionary planning, or unintended consequences. The DGEIS and the SEQRA process provide the additional substantial benefit of allowing the public to actively participate in the decision making process and, importantly, the exploration of alternatives to the proposed action. Adopting SEQRA "Findings" provides the Town Board with a thorough evaluation and the requisite "hard look" at the potential impacts of implementing a full range of planning tools that, if considered separately, might obscure the true consequences of the action. The comprehensiveness of the proposed action places the Town Board's ultimate decisions on a level playing field where the consequences of these decisions can be fairly and appropriately considered. Implementing the action will set in place a framework that interrelates land use, socio- economics, the environment, the transportation network, infrastructure with the mechanics of a regulatory structure so that the Town's vision for the future can in fact be achieved. Page 1-8 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 1.2 Location of the Proposed Action In its totality, the proposed action will apply to the entire Town, though individual recommendations may apply to only specific areas or zoning districts. The location of the Town of Southold, in relation to the regional setting and neighboring Long Island Towns is provided in Appendix B, Figures B-1 and B~2. A number of additional districts important within the Town are noted below to provide an overview of the Towns geography. Specific report sections will reference special districts and maps as appropriate as part of Section 2.0, Existing Environmental Conditions. The Town is comprised of a number of hamlets, which are focused on as part of this study. The hamlets are part of the historical growth pattern of the Town and represent much of the community character and charm of the Town of Southold. Figure B-2 illustrates the Town; hamlets within the Town include: · Laurel · Southold · Mattituck · Greenport · Cutchogue · East Marion · New Suffolk · Orient · Peconic There are six (6) Union Free School Districts (UFSD) within the Town of Southold. These are listed as follows and illustrated in Appendix B; Figure B-3. · Mattituck-Cutchogue UFSD, · Greenport UFSD, · New Suffolk UFSD, · Oysterponds UFSD, and · Southold UFSD, · East Fishers Island UFSD. There are also six (6) Fire Districts within Southold; these are listed as follows and illustrated in Appendix B; Figure B-4. · Mattituck Fire District, · Cutchogue Fire District, · Southold Fire District, · Greenport Fire District, · East Marion Fire District, and · Orient Fire District. There are a number of zoning districts in the Town of Southold that are considered under the Comprehensive Implementation Strategy. The zoning districts of the Town of Southold are illustrated in Appendix B; Figure B-5 and are listed as follows: Residential/Mixed Use Districts Commercial/Industrial and Mixed Districts A-C Agriculture-Conservation LB Limited Business R-40 Residential Low-Density (1 acre) HB Hamlet Business R-80 Residential Low-Density (2 acre) B General Business R-120 Residential Low-Density (3 acre) M-I Marine I R-200 Residential Low-Density (5 acre) M-II Marine II R-400 Residential Low-Density (10 acre) LIO Light Industrial Park/Planned Office Park HD Hamlet Density Residential LI Light Industrial RR Resort Residential RO Residential Office AHD Affordable Housing District Page 1-9 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 1.3 Description of the Proposed Action 1.3.1 Strategy Overview The proposed project involves a series of actions that implement the comprehensive plan of the Town as it was established over the past 20 years in order to ensure that Southold's growth conforms to established goals. The series of actions has been designed to achieve these goals through legislative means, educational and public awareness, capital improvements and expenditures, direct Town management and inter-agency/quasi-agency initiatives. During the course of the project, the goals and intent were further refined through a series of policy discussions held with the Town Board at public work sessions. These discussions provided clear guidance in terms of factors that the Board would like considered in the Comprehensive Implementation Strategy, which is subject to a SEQRA public review process. The Town's goals that will be addressed in this strategy are as follows: · To preserve land including farmland, open space and recreational landscapes · To preserve the rural, cultural and historic character of the hamlets and surrounding countryside. · To preserve the Town's remaining natural environment; to prevent further deterioration of the Town's natural resources and to restore the Town's degraded natural resources back to their previous quality. · To preserve and promote a range of housing and business opportunities that support a socio- economically diverse community. · To increase transportation efficiency and to create attractive alternatives to automobile travel, while preserving the scenic and historic attributes of roadways in the Town. The following paragraphs state each goal, the general context of each goal, and the specific strategy proposed to achieve each goal. The Comprehensive Implementation Strategy is outlined as follows: The Goal - To preserve land including farmland, open space and recreational landscapes General Context - This goal reflects the Town's interest in protecting a defining characteristic of the Town's landscape. Open spaces are prized by residents and visitors alike. Land preservation encompasses preserving working landscapes and open space. Working landscapes include farmed land and recreational land. Open space includes natural, vacant and undeveloped land for primarily passive uses. A balance needs to be achieved between protecting this resource and accommodating population growth. Agriculture is recognized as a fundamental element of the Town's landscape and can include farmland in crops, permanent vegetation (i.e. orchards/vineyards) and other recognized agricultural uses. Farmland can include crop-related structures (i.e. irrigation pumps/equipment, fences, barns, farm equipment and greenhouses, as well as storage Page 1-10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS processing and retail sale of farm grown goods. Agricultural has shaped the character and quality of life in the Town, as well as that of its inhabitants. The open, undeveloped nature of much of the Town's working landscape is a significant component of its highly valued open space character. Future development of a permanent nature that strips soil of its agricultural value will conflict with the immediate goal of preserving land for farming purposes. Specific Strategies - Farmland targeted for preservation refers to unprotected land in the Town's agricultural inventory, primarily but not all within the A-C zoning district; such lands are also generally (though not always) coincident with prime farm soils. Open space is also a significant factor in establishing the rural qualities of the Town. Open space refers to unprotected, undeveloped lands, other than farmland, primarily in the R-80 zoning district. The R-80 zone represents a large amount of acreage in the Town. Pamels in this zone include important open space resources as well as land with environmental constraints. The Comprehensive Implementation Strategy has resulted in the collection of facts and information to assist the Town in reaching appropriate decisions with regard to land preservation and how development in the Town will unfold under various scenarios. A major product is a Build Out analysis, supported by Geographic Information System (GIS) data and maps. The establishment of methodologies, data resources, maps, and relevant facts and figures is a benefit of the program that will have long-term utilization or value to the Town's future planning and implementation efforts. This information has been used to direct efforts toward land use initiatives that implement the Town goals during the planning process. In addition, the GIS system allows for a better understanding of the consequences of land use decision-making in terms of Build Out analysis, tracking of projects and data management, and analysis of the effects of various land use initiatives with respect to farmland, open space and other resources. Land preservation will be achieved by a number of techniques that will ensure that farmland, open space, and recreational landscapes will be preserved. Key areas of emphasis include the A-C and Ro80 zoning districts due to agricultural use and unique environmental character and sensitivity with respect to open space, wetlands, steep slopes and woodlands. Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) will remain a key program for farmland preservation as landowners can be compensated for the development potential of the land, and maintain the residual land and base value for agricultural use and equity. The Rural Incentive District (RID) can have beneficial results with respect to land preservation. The RID provides the landowner a guarantee that development rights will be purchased based on a current 80,000 square foot zoning equivalent, in exchange for maintaining the land in agricultural use. The RID also provides the Town with time to purchase development rights or work with the landowner to structure an equitable compensation package that ensures permanent agricultural use. Thus, the RID in effect "buys time" for the Town to structure methods to finance continued purchase of development rights, and also "buys time" for the property owner who financially is not ready to preserve the land. Page 1-11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Public monies are used to prevent farmland from being lost to development. Protected farmland is intended to remain in use as farmland. However, it is understood that the business of farming necessarily requires that some farmland be used for support structures and uses integral to the business. Many past studies and recommendations have called for density reduction as a means to ensure that land resources are not over-burdened and the Town maintains its rural character. Upzoning achieves the goal of density reduction and is considered as part of this Strategy. The RID is intended to ensure that landowners maintain equity while development rights are purchased and conservation subdivision planning is conducted, thereby assisting the Town in achieving its goal of preserving prime farm soil and agricultural resources. Upzoning was conceived to reduce the number of dwellings in concentrated farming and environmentally sensitive areas, and would provide an incentive for farm owners to enter the Rural Incentive District. The RID provides the long-term safeguard necessary for land preservation, offering farm families the opportunity to sell their development rights. The Strategy also recognizes that development pressure could further increase, and not every property owner is interesting in preserving their land. Where land preservation does not take place, it is critical to ensure that compatible land uses are established in those areas adjacent to preserved lands. Many special permit uses currently permitted in the A-C district must be critically reviewed, and modified where they conflict with or prevent Town goals from being realized. Uses such as a life care community are not appropriate in certain zoning districts where protection of farmland, open space and natural resources are a priority. Where residential subdivisions are appropriate, various methods are recommended to assure proper development in cases where subdivision is appropriate. The Conservation Subdivision method would use several techniques to achieve 80% land preservation and in some cases density reduction. This method, together with clearer guidance measures for land use projects, improvements in the cluster provisions, and more concise zoning code and subdivision regulations will achieve this end. Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) is an appropriate tool for preservation of farmland and open space and envisions shifting density to appropriate areas, thereby providing a means for land protection without the resulting cost of purchasing the development rights. Lands that are not farmed, and land in the R-80 zone (including woodland, wetlands and/or steep slope areas), are primary candidates as sending areas, as are the Community Preservation Project Plan (CPPP) parcels that are not established in agricultural use. Receiving areas can include limited density increases in subdivisions located outside of the A-C and R-80 districts in areas referred to as Hamlet Locus (HALO) zones, mixed use opportunities in hamlet center areas and, where appropriate, diverse housing opportunities on larger parcels with sewage treatment potential. Proper incentives are proposed to ensure that equity is maintained. In addition, the Town's TDR program will be consistent with the Suffolk County TDR policy, which recognizes that groundwater protection needs are served Page 1-12 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS when open space is protected in a sending area, and controlled increase in density is permitted at a receiving site. The County policy has been reviewed and is incorporated into this Strategy. A Planned Development District (PDD) local law is also proposed to provide zoning and land use flexibility for well-designed projects that provide special public benefits such as affordable housing, redemption of transferred development rights and other creative land use benefits. The Town's recreational resources will be enhanced and maintained through expanded waterfront access opportunities in keeping with the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan (LWRP), purchase of key parcels under the CPPP, creation of a park in Mattituck, better recognition and utilization of trails and bikeways, and an update of the park inventory and management plan. The individual tools that address land preservation goals are noted below: Planning Process, Zoning and Zoning Code · Rural Incentive District [proposed] · Agricultural Overlay Districl/A-C Zoning Review [proposed] · A-C District Use/Dimensional Parameters [existing] · 5-Acre Upzoning [proposed] · Review of Zoning Code [existing] · Conservation Subdivision Program [proposed] · Transfer of Development Rights [proposed] · Planned Development District Local Law [proposed] · Tree Preservation Local Law [proposed] · Scenic By-Ways Overlay Development Controls [proposed] Education/Enforcement · Agricultural District Review/Education [existing] · Watershed Protection Zone/SGPA's [existing] Capital Improvements/Expenditures · Improve Waterfront Access [existing] · Prioritize and Supplement CPPP [existing] · Create a Centralized Year-Round Recreational Complex [proposed] Direct Town Management · Park District/School District Boundaries Conformity [existing] · Update Park Inventory and Management Plan [existing] · Create a Parks and Recreation Department [proposed] · Scenic By-Ways Management Program [proposed] · Trail Inventory/Trail Committee/Bikeways [proposed] Page 1-13 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS The Goal - To preserve the rural, cultural and historic character of the hamlets and surrounding countryside. General Context - The Town's Vision for itself incorporates the idea of maintaining distinct boundaries between urbanized areas of settlement and open and farmed lands. This Vision calls for reinfoming the notion of a small town environment by preventing unrestrained sprawl of residential and commercial development along major roads and strengthening hamlet centers. Maintaining the Town's heritage through historic architectural resources and traditional use opporttmities is paramount to this vision. Specific Strategies - The Town is a long, narrow peninsula. Its two major arterials are generally oriented in an east-west direction, parallel to its shoreline, with Main Road (NYS Route 25) on the south part of the Town and Sound Avenue, CR 48 on the north side of the Town. Main Road passes through most of the recognized hamlet areas of the Town, and CR 48 generally provides a north by-pass to the hamlets. The hamlets are anchored by small central business districts with a variety of local businesses and services, as well as community facilities such as churches, libraries, museums, historical societies and other cultural institutions. Hamlets still reflect the early settlement patterns and often include an abundance of historical homes and structures that create charm and character within these communities. Outside of the hamlets, one-acre residential zoning is prevalent, transitioning to low-density residential and agricultural land. Surrounding the hamlets along Main Road are areas of limited and mixed business and residential uses, transitioning to residential and open space areas. Along CR 48, a more rural quality is present which includes farmland in the primary agricultural area of the Town, as well as open space and lower density residential lands. This is interspersed with pockets of business and industrial use and some residential communities. The Town has been described as a series of concentric circles with hamlets in the center, transitional residential and mixed use zones in the outer ring, and farmland and open space between the circles in remainder of the Town. This simplified graphic visualization is effective, and the concept of maintaining the character and integrity of the hamlets, transitional areas and surrounding countryside remains an emphasis. The Comprehensive Implementation Strategy has resulted in a better definition of the hamlets and the important function and character that they provide to the Town. Planning parameters have been developed for the hamlet centers and surrounding HALO zones to ensure the long term stability of these areas by providing proper infrastructure, recognition and enhancement of important attributes, and incentives for proper development using land use tools such as PDD and TDR for density location and management with community benefit. Hamlets provide an opportunity for affordable housing and mixed use development, creating a rich cultural environment that is central, pedestrian friendly and interconnected. Rural, cultural and historic character will be preserved by protecting farmland and open space, inventory and recognition of current attributes, maintaining scenic by-ways, cultural and historic resource management, historic preservation efforts and incentives, architectural and scenic advisory review, tree preservation and land use review. Page 1-14 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS The following lists the tools noted above as well as others that relate to maintaining the character of hamlets and surrounding areas: Planning Process, Zoning and Zoning Code · Rural Incentive District [proposed] 5-Acre Upzoning [proposed] · Transfer of Development Rights [proposed] · Planned Development District Local Law [proposed] · Tree Preservation Local Law [proposed] · Scenic By-Ways Overlay Development Controls [proposed] Education/Enforcement · Create General Guidance Documents [proposed] · Watershed Protection ZoneJSGPA's [existing] · Enforcement [existing] Direct Town Management · Concentrate Development in Hamlets [existing] · Scenic By-Ways Management Program [proposed] · Inventory and Manage Cultaral Resources [existing] · Architectural Review Board and Design Parameters [existing] The Goal - To preserve the Town's remaining natural environment; to prevent further deterioration of the Town's natural resources and to restore the Town's degraded natural resources back to their previous quality. General Context - The Town enjoys abundant mural resources that are an inherent part of the community's character and attraction. Current levels of development have already placed these resources in jeopardy. Direct action is required today to ensure that these resources will remain viable and healthy for the enjoyment of future generations. Specific Strategies - The Town's natural environmem includes the land based resources that can be addressed and protected through planning review and land use controls. These resources include: · Tidal Wetlands adjacent areas · Freshwater Wetlands adjacent areas · Steep Slope Areas (15%) and slope buffers · Beaches, bluffs and dune areas and buffers · Natural Open Space including Woodlands · High Groundwater Areas (<10 feet to water) · Other unique habitats and natural features Psge 1-15 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS The protection of land based resources will protect aquatic resources including the finfish, shellfish and waterfowl resources of the bays and estuaries, as well as ground and surface water quality. A number of beneficial products have resulted from the Comprehensive Implementation Strategy including: a Town wetlands map, and a Town woodlands map, steep slope mapping, and other resource maps important to environmental assessment and planning. These products provide a factual and graphic basis for understanding Towns unique natural environment. Protection of the natural environment will be achieved through appropriate restrictions and review procedures, acquisition and public education. A Critical Environmental Lands local law is proposed that will recognize and control land use that may impact wetlands, steep slopes, beaches, bluffs and danes, high groundwater areas, and other unique features. There are currently no tree clearing restrictions in the Town, and as a result, Tree Preservation mechanisms have been carefully designed to ensure property owners rights while providing a means to avoid inappropriate clear-cutting and tree removal, thereby protecting habitat as well as the trees. Improved land use review and guidance, and site specific environmental review will provide protection of unique resources during early planning stages. Use of Conservation Subdivisions, clustering, outright acquisition of important natural and recreational parcels under the CPPP, and transfer of development rights fi'om appropriate environmentally sensitive sending areas, will provide further protection measures. The Town's water resources are limited and must be protected. The CIS does not deal directly with water use policies of the Town, but acknowledges past studies, constraints and limitations. For the purpose of planning, it is assumed that potable water supply will be available to existing and future residents of the Town, as it is the SCWA's charter to provide drinking water and the Town's responsibility to provide a safe environment for its residents. The SCWA has issued a GEIS on water supply that addresses water supply options, and ways to provide potable water supply to the Town and its residents. This may promote growth, and as a result, proper planning must be in place. Under this Strategy, the Town proposes to actively work with SCWA to ensure that safe drinking water is available to the Town and it's residents, and that proper planning measures are in place to ensure that the development of the Town is orderly and in keeping with the Town's comprehensive plan. Currently, development densities of greater than half-acre are permitted only when public water and sewage treatment facilities are present. For this reason, most such projects are located within or adjacent to the Village of Greenport, which has an STP. However, recent technological advances point to the packaging of sewage treatment plants, thereby opening the door to these types of projects being located throughout Southold Town. The following lists those tools that assist in implementing this goal: Planning Process, Zoning and Zoning Code · Rural Incentive District [proposed] · 5-Acre Upzoning [proposed] Page 1-16 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS · Review of Zoning Code [existing] · Review Zoning Map [existing] · Conservation Subdivision Program [proposed] · Transfer of Development Rights [proposed] · Tree Preservation Local Law [proposed] · Critical Environmental Lands Local Law [proposed] Education/Enforcement · Cr~t¢ General Gnidancc Documents [proposed] · Natural Environmental Education [existing] · Watershed Protection Zonc/SGPA's [existing] · Economic Development Plan [proposed] Capital Improvements/Expenditures · Administer Parks of Town-wide Significance [existing] Direct Town Management · Concentrate Dcvelopm. cnt in Hamlets [existing] · Scenic Advisory Board [proposed] Inter-Agency/Quasi-Agency Initiatives · Develop Water Supply Master Plan [proposed] The Goal - To preserve and promote a range of housing and business opportunities that support a socio-economicaHy diverse community. General Context - The topic of affordable housing is a controversial issue in the Town. There is a need to provide a diversity of housing stock for Town residents. Thc viability and range of business opportunities, and particularly those traditional uses such as farming, fishing and tourism, need to be enhanced. Agriculture is recognized as a fundamental element of thc Town's landscape. It has shaped the character and quality of life in the Town, as well as that of its inhabitants. The working landscape is a significant component of the Town's rural character. The business of agriculture also is one of the Town's prime economic sectors. Specific Strategies - The ability of Town residents to afford housing in their own Town is of critical concern and importance. This Strategy builds on the 1993 Affordable Housing Policies and Programs of the Town, and provides updated demographic information and needs assessments. The demographic analysis conducted as part of this DGEIS confirms the housing needs identified 10 years ago. It is clear that housing opportunities must be expanded for a variety of income level families, and that affordable housing opportunities must be located geographically throughout the Town. The Town renews its commitment to providing diverse affordable housing opportunities through the Town. Policy considerations have been researched and prepared as part of the CIS and are part of the SEQRA process that will allow for Board acceptance and public review. Housing diversity can be achieved by providing both ownership and rental opportunities. In addition, housing opportunities can be expanded through incentives directed toward private Page 1-17 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS development, as well as greater levels of agency/quasi-agency involvement. Legislatively, ownership and rental opportunities will be expanded by: · Amending current affordable housing requirements and creating new incentives in connection with new subdivisions and changes of zone, · Amending zoning to allow diversified housing stock including small- to moderate-sized units in condominium and apartment styles, · Permitting mixed use development within or adjacent to existing hamlets, · Identifying appropriate pamels where PDD could be used to target public funds and/or TDR credits for the purpose of increasing density for affordable housing purposes, · Enabling PDD uses that provide an array of special public benefits, including affordable housing, and · Consider density bonus for additional units that are provided as affordable housing. In addition to techniques noted above, rental opportunities can be provided by simplifying and expanding the potential for accessory apartments, an effort that is currently being contemplated by the Town Board. Measures other than legislation involve housing financial assistance in cooperation with the North Fork Housing Alliance (NFHA) as well as subsidized housing programs. Coordination with the will be expanded, with direct measures such as new housing projects, pumhase and re-sale of homes to qualified candidates, and increased rental opportunities, as measures to increase housing diversity. The Town will also seek to work with privately funded Community Land Trusts, as well as soliciting private development companies specializing in providing affordable housing through the use of tax credits, to explore opportunities in Southold. Other subsidies to be explored include Community Development Block Grants and other private funding soumes for publicly sponsored affordable housing initiatives. Resources to subsidize land and/or construction costs such as NYS subsidies through the Division of Housing and Community Renewal and the Affordable Housing Corporation will also be examined. The combination of these efforts provides a potential for increased affordable housing opportunities for a variety of income levels throughout the Town. The Town's business environment is generally stable with tourism and local services dominating the business climate. Businesses will be created or will be expanded as private markets develop, thereby utilizing commercial/industrial zoned lands. That will, in turn increase tax revenue and job opportunities. Housing and supporting services will be necessary to serve new growth. This pattern of development will occur but is expected to be limited due to the Town's geographic location and it's unique environment. However, it is necessary to ensure that proper zoning and controls are in place to accommodate (and shape) development as it occurs. Eeo-tourism, and expanded tourist activity within the Town is expected to increase in significance and volume, as areas outside of Southold continue to be developed. Southold remains an attractive destination due to the farmland, open spaces and natural resources that are appreciated by Town residents and visitors alike. This makes it all the more important to have adequate infrastructure, transportation and appropriate land use controls in place, to ensure adequate protection and sustainability of the Town's resources. Strengthening of the hamlets, preservation of open space and natural resoumes, coupled with transportation management and an economic development plan, all ensure that a socio- economically diverse community will be sustained within the capacity of the environment. Page 1-18 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Implementation tools that inter-relate with housing and business planning are listed as follows: Planning Process, Zoning and Zoning Code · Agricultural Overlay District/A-C Zoning Review [proposed] · A-C District Use/Dimensional Parameters [existing] · Review Special Exception Provisions [existing] · Review of Zoning Code [existing] · Review Zoning Map [existing] · Transfer of Development Rights [proposed] · Planned Development Distxict Local Law [proposed] Education/Enforcement · Agricultm'al District Review/Education [existing] · Create General Guidance Documents [proposed] · Econorrdc Development Plan [proposed] Direct Town Management · Affordable HoEing Policy [proposed] · Concentrate Development in Hamlets [existing] Inter-Agency/Quasi-Agency Initiatives · HoEing Financial Assistance Program [existing] · Social Services Prograrm [existing] The Goal - To increase transportation efficiency and to create attractive alternatives to automobile travel, while preserving the scenic and historic attributes of roadways in the Town. General Context - Increased development is creating congestion on the Town's roadways, particularly CR 48 and Main Road. This increased congestion is degrading the quality of life in the Town's communities and creating public safety concerns. The Town should encourage intermodal forms of transportation. Specific Strategies - Transportation is a critical issue nearly everywhere and Southold is no different. Southold is fortunate to have alternative road systems that assist in distributing traffic; however, during peak seasons of tourist activity, and in the popular hamlet areas, traffic congestion and delays are apparent. Transportation management includes increasing pedestrian friendly areas, and situating growth toward hamlets where service needs are more likely to be met on foot, thus reducing vehicle trips. Density reduction and growth management are important aspects of land use that are accomplished through zoning. Other site planning techniques to be implemented by the Town include ensuring adequate off street parking for commercial, residential and farmstand sites, and inter-linking parking in downtown areas to maintain vehicle trips off of arterial roads. Page 1-19 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS As hamlets evolve, there is a need for traffic calming measures to slow traffic to safe speeds and provide a safe pedestrian environment. Traffic calming in Southold will be accomplished through inter-agency cooperation with the NYS Department of Transportation and the Suffolk County Department of Public Works. Hamlets also provide additional public transportation possibilities since a core ridership exists in a central area. Additional bus routes will result from future riders' needs, and the concept of hubs for public transportation centered within the hamlets will become more feasible. Education and inter-agency coordination are important short-term actions for ensuring that alternative methods of transportation are encouraged with the understanding of community needs and limitations. Southold is participating in the Sustainable East End Development Study (SEEDS) which will examine east end traffic issues and pose solutions that will be supported by the stakeholders or participants including Town, County and State government as well as community and neighborhood members. Therefore, in addition to zoning, there am educational, direct improvements, Town management opportunities and inter-agency cooperative initiatives available. Tools identified as part of this CIS that relate to transportation planning are listed as follows: Planning Process, Zoning and Zoning Code · Review of Zoning Code [existing] · Review Subdivision Regulations [existing] · Review Highway Specifications [existing] · Planning Process & Encourage Committee/Agency Participation [existing] · SEQRA Local Law Review/Revision [existing[ Education/Enforcement · Create General Guidance Documents [proposed] · Encourage Use of Public Transportation [existing] · Transportation Management Plan [proposed] Direct Town Management · Concentrate Development in Hamlets [existing] · Scenic By-Ways Management Program [proposed] · Trail Inventory/Trail Committee/Bikeways [proposed] Inter-Agency/Quasi-Agency Initiatives · Emergency Preparedness [existing] 1.3.2 Planning Process, Zoning and Zoning Code Mechanisms 1. A-C District Use/Dimensional Parameters The A-C zoning district, as it is currently configured, is identical in substance (e.g. allowed land uses) to the R-80 district. In addition, a number of separate Special Exception uses are permitted. These include: 1. Two-family dwellings 2. Places of worship Page 1-20 I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 3. Private elementary or high schools, colleges or other educational institutions 4. Nursery schools 5. Philanthropic, eleemosynary or religious institutions, health care, continuing care and life facilities 6. Beach clubs, tennis clubs, country clubs, golf clubs and annual membership clubs 7. Children's recreational camps 8. Veterinarian's offices and animal hospitals 9. Cemeteries 10. Bed-and-breakfasts 11. Historical society The A-C zone, as originally envisioned, was intended as a distinctly separate zone that would allow for the business of agriculture to take place, while preventing incompatible residential development on prime agricultural soils. These uses are considered inappropriate in an area recognized as unique due to prime agricultural soils and a dominance of active farmland. Maintaining or introducing these uses in the A-C zone could potentially give rise to conflicts or incompatibility with the preferred use of this land as farmland. Implementing this tool calls for retuming to the original intent of the A-C zone by removing non- agricultural uses and by crafting specific use and dimensional criteria designed exclusively to support agriculture. Larger scale residential development, such as multi-lot subdivision or assisted care facilities, without a clear nexus to agriculture, would be prohibited. Residential use that is clearly supportive of agriculture (e.g. dwellings for farmers and farm workem) would be permitted. Setback, area, height and bulk controls, including those for farm structures, would be revisited to establish appropriate controls that would protect the aesthetic character of the Town while simultaneously allowing for the business of agriculture to proceed unencumbered. 2. Rural Incentive District One of the options under consideration is the creation of a Rural Incentive District (RID) under Section 261-b of the New York State Town Law. The RID would provide a mechanism whereby owners of qualified properties could apply for a rezoning of their land. If a rezoning took place, the landowner would agree that his land would remain as farmland or open space for a minimum number of years (at least 10). As an incentive for the public benefit of continued use of the land as farmland or open space, the Town would offer specific zoning incentives or bonuses such as increased density, area, height, or use. The property owner would also maintain the underlying zoning in place at the time of the rezoning. The form of the agreement between the Town and the landowner would be an easement, which would last at least 10 years, but which could be extended in perpetuity. The Town can use the easement period to leverage monies from a variety of sources, and increase its buying capacity for the benefit of all Town residents. While the easement remains in effect, the landowner and the Town could consider a number of conservation tools, either Page 1-21 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS separately or in combination: purchase of development rights, transfer of development rights, and use of a conservation subdivision on all or a portion of the property, or outright acquisition. A landowner may not wish to sell development rights to the Town, or negotiations may be unsuccessful. Under these scenarios, the program would provide the mechanisms for termination of the easement and return of the property to whatever zoning is in place at the time. If the GEIS process recommends the adoption of a RID, a public hearing would be held on the proposed legislation, with opportunity for public comment. 3. Agricultural Overlay District/A-C Zoning Review An Agricultural Overlay District (AOD) can assist in further identifying, protecting, and providing land use guidelines for farmland. The Town of Southold does not currently have an AOD. To date, the A-C district has acted as the primary means of identifying those areas with prime soils for farming. An AOD can provide a geographic delineation of primary blocks of farmland and can be used to provide further guidance for appropriate land use. The AOD was proposed to include all A-C zoned land with evaluation of other prime farm soil areas for inclusion such that it would geographically encircle the prime farm soil and prime farmland areas of the Town. Figure B-6 illustrates the area of the Town most suited for this district designation. An AOD would be a section added to Chapter 100, the Town's Zoning Code. 4. 5-Acre Upzoning The concept of 5-acre upzoning involves increasing the minimum allowable lot size per dwelling unit (for yield purposes) within certain districts or a geographic area of the Town. Based on review of past plans (see Section 2.6.3), the primary purpose of 5-acre upzoning is to reduce the ultimate density of development, in this case single-family residences. The effort would be coupled with mandatory clustering with improved guidance for design and location of limited housing within the rural areas of the Town (see Tool #6). The primary target area involves the rural areas of the Town where agricultural use, farmland, open space and groundwater recharge exist. Lands exhibiting these qualities are found primarily in the Agricultural-Conservation (A- C) and R-80 districts. As the name of the district implies, the A-C district was conceived for agriculture conservation; however, as stated in Chapter 100-30 and 31, permitted and special exception uses are the same as for other low-density residential zones (R-80, R-200 and R-400) and the dimensional requirements are the same as R-80. This seems to conflict with the Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy and the background studies and recommendations of the Town 1985 Master Plan in that it does not recognize the unique nature of agricultural land, and the incompatibility of active farmland with residential land uses. As per past proposals, an effective means of achieving 5-acre density, involves distinguishing the A-C district fi.om other low density residential zones through a more focused legislative intent, appropriate dimensional requirements and different permitted/special exception uses. In order to Page 1-22 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS accomplish this, the density requirements in the A-C zone would be changed to a minimum of 5- acres (200,000 square feet). The Cluster Development provisions contained in Chapter 100-181 of the Zoning Code of the Town requires clustering where lots often (10) acres or more in the A-C, R-40, R-80, R-120, R- 200 and R-400 residential districts are proposed to be subdivided, subject to certain minimum lot size provisions and subject to a yield map that conforms to all requirements of the Zoning Code and Subdivision Regulations. Clustering is recommended to ensure protection of resources, maximization of contiguous farmland and ensuring compatibility between different land uses. The Cluster Development section of the Zoning Code can be designed to provide better guidance in the use of clustering for both farmland and natural resource protection. Other lands that have been identified as appropriate for upzoning include certain lands that are either in active farm use or contain sensitive environmental resources. These lands are identified in B-7, which depicts all R-80 zoned land with an overlay of farmland, steep slopes, prime farm soils and wetlands. 5. Revise Special Exception Provisions The Zoning Code permits an array of uses that are designated as Special Permit Uses. It is important to recognize that these uses are considered permitted, subject to compliance with the applicable special exception standards. A thorough review of the special permit standards to determine if these controls are adequate to protect the character and integrity of the community, while simultaneously facilitating the continued operation of traditional uses was undertaken. Standards that have been singled out as requiring close review are those for life care community, greenhouses, farm stands, and uses that are ancillary to the agricultural industry such as value added food processing. In some cases, such as life care, the uses are not appropriate in certain zoning districts. In others, the criteria under which the use would be permitted are too lax or missing altogether. 6. Review of Zoning Code A number of provisions were identified in past studies as possible revisions to the existing Zoning Code to further advance the goals of the Town, provide more streamlined government, clarify requirements, remove discrepancies, and generally improve the Code to reflect current planning policy and practice. These are: Clustering - The concept of mandatory clustering is required under the Zoning Code where the lot to be subdivided is 10 acres or larger. However, the Code does not provide parameters or guidance to the Planning Board as to the goals clustering is to achieve. For instance, a clustered layout designed to conserve land for farming purposes may look very different from a clustered layout designed to provide optimum road design and open space around residential lots. The goals and objectives of a cluster layout have to be determined for the following types of situations: Page 1-23 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS · Farm subdivisions · Residential subdivisions where habitat protection is of paramount importance · Industrial subdivisions Concepts for farm subdivisions include the following: · Prime agricultural soils should be conserved by locating the clustered lots on the less productive soils. · Existing drainage swales and watershed land should be maintained instead of altered or eliminated. Habitat protection would be achieved by preservation of woodland, buffers, wooded edge, and other unique habitat features of a site, to be evaluated and incorporated into project design on a case-by-case basis. Industrial subdivisions may be designed in campus-style, thematic styles and incorporate other techniques to coordinate architecture, landscaping and inter-relationship of buildings. Industrial subdivisions may consider design parameters to achieve full yield, with cluster provisions for coordinated entrances, boulevards, focal points, walking trails, sitting areas, shared parking, parking aesthetics, and other features of creative design. Such parameters may be initially identified in guidance documents to be refined and later codified (see also Implementation Mechanism #19). Recreational Requirements - The Town currently requires payment of cash ($5,000) for every new vacant building lot that is created by a subdivision. This fee is called a Park & Playground Fee. The Town used to accept land in lieu of a fee but this practice resulted in unusable properties for recreational requirements. The Town's standards for recreational open space should be revised to reflect the eeo-tourism sector of the Town's economy. The Town's need for recreational land must reflect for both the year-round needs of its residents as well as those of visitors. Situations where land may be desirable, e.g., for greenbelt or trail purposes, should be defined. Sign Ordinance - The Town's Sign Ordinance does not provide specific lighting standards that would prevent light pollution. Light pollution prevents enjoyment of the night sky, is wasteful of expensive electrical energy, and can pose hazards to night drivers and degrade thc rural streetscape. Amendments have been suggested to minimize or prohibit lighting of signs in all zoning districts, as well as to limit the size, location, type of mounting and character of signage. Some controls exist and must be enforced and improved, specifically noted as follows: · The installation and/or use of dusk to dawn lighting fixtures, whether located on or off premises and used to illuminate the subject parcel, is not permitted without prior review and approval by the Planning Board, but enforcement is lacking. · While the lighting on the buildings must be shielded and all outdoor lighting must project downward and light sources shall not be visible to adjacent properties or roadways, the Code lacks quantified standards and the Town lacks ways to measure the intensity of light. Page 1-24 Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I RO and LB District Review - The Residential Office (RO) and Limited Business (LB) districts provide a transition zone between purely residential and other commercial districts within each hamlet or business center of Southold Town. The hamlet context is extremely important, and past experience shows that if limited commercial use in transitional districts is not sufficiently controlled, sprawl can result along main road corridors to the detriment of the hamlet business centers. The intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Code was to permit limited commercial uses within these two districts that would be compatible with residential uses particularly with regard to the level of traffic and the physical appearance of the properties. The current Code fails to do this, because it does not establish appropriate parameters to ensure the integrity of the hamlet centers. Further, the concept of the RO district has been undermined by a permissive Home Occupancy law that allows homeowners in residential districts to enjoy many of the benefits of hosting a business in a residential area with less of the restrictions of the RO district. The LB District was intended to provide another form of transition between an intensely developed hamlet and general business area and agricultural land. The uses intended for this district were to be in keeping with a rural character in terms of level of traffic and physical appearance. The current Code fails to do this. Promotion of Water Dependent Uses - The Town has completed a final draf~ LWRP. This is a Coastal Zone Management document in which the Town outlines a program for best uses and practice in the coastal zone, consistent with the applicable policies of the State. Central tenets of the program include promoting water dependent uses, increasing public accessibility of coastal resources, revitalization of coastal zone areas, and protection of coastal zone natural and cultural resources. The LWRP has outlined measures to improve public access to the water and to modify the Town code to promote water dependent uses. The LWRP has received a negative declaration under SEQRA; therefore, this Strategy recognizes the LWRP as a supporting program toward implementation of strategies to improve planning and environmental protection in the Town. Accessory Apartments - The Town of Southold has adopted amendments to portions of the Town Zoning Code to promote the construction of accessory apartments and other housing in the Hamlet Business (HB) and B Zoning Districts. The amendments are described in brief below. The amendments authorize as-of-right the construction of up to three accessory apartments within an existing principal structure as a permitted accessory use in the HB and B Zoning Districts. Previously, this use required a special exception by the ZBA and site plan approval by the Planning Board. The amendments also relax some of the requirements for accessory apartments. An accessory apartment permit will be required from the Building Department and no site plan approval is necessary unless the foundation of the principal structure increases as a result of the renovation. The amendments to the HB District code also added the following to the list of permitted uses: · one-family detached dwelling not to exceed one dwelling on each lot; · two-family detached dwelling not to exceed one dwelling on each lot (which must be occupied by the owner of the property); · buildings, structures and uses owned or operated by the Town of Southold school districts, park districts and fire districts; and · multiple dwellings. Page 1-25 I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS Single family and multiple dwellings previously required Special Exception approval by the ZBA. The amendments to the General Business (B) District code also added the following to the list of permitted uses and will not require site plan approval by the Planning Board for these uses: one-family detached dwelling not to exceed one dwelling on each lot; and, two-family dwelling not to exceed one dwelling on each lot (which must be occupied by the owner of the property). In addition, the density and minimum lot size requirements were amended to require larger minimum lot size for residential use. The code previously required Special Exception approval by the ZBA for one-family detached dwellings and did not explicitly permit two-family dwellings. These code amendments indirectly may also allow the addition of apartments as accessory uses in the RO District, which currently allows apartments over businesses and professional offices by Special Exception. As a result, the legislation would make such apartments a permitted use in the specified zoning districts, presumably providing an incentive for their construction. Such apartments would still have to meet Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS) density requirements for combined commercial and residential uses, which may limit the number of potential units. This measure has been adopted as a part of the Town's overall commitment to addressing affordable housing issues, an important Town goal and part of the Town's comprehensive plan. The adoption of these changes did recognize that improvements can be considered in the future in connection with transfer of development rights under a regional TDR plan reviewed by the Town under SEQRA (see Tool #12), and possible provisions to ensure that apartments are affordable. AHD District Review - The Affordable Housing District (AHD) does not create a permanent supply of affordable dwelling units. Rather, it craatcs a tentative supply of mid-cost housing that can bc bought and later sold on thc open market for whatever thc market will bear. As a result, the Town is constantly faced with thc nccd to find developers willing to usc funds from Federal, State and other programs to offset thc rising cost of new land. Incentives for thc rehabilitation of existing housing and the creation of rentals must be provided, as well as for new construction. The target population for AHD must be more carefully defined because currently it docs not provide housing for low income residents. Further, thc ordinance needs to incorporate alternative approaches such as Community Land Trusts. Finally, thc affordability parameters and scale must be amended to reflect changing economic conditions and relate to an appropriate sliding index. Bed-and-Breakfast Establishments - Bed-and-Breakfast's, or B&B's, are popular for overnight accommodations. B&B's typically involve the conversion or construction of up to five bedrooms within a home for guest usage. Homes can be located in any setting, while larger, older homes in historic settings or with unique architectural features have been converted to B&B's. In recent years, several new B&B's have been constructed specifically for this purpose. As the name implies, a fcc is paid to the proprietor for overnight lodging and breakfast the next morning. Distinctive B&B's provide an attractive small town alternative to larger commercial motels. A B&B can also provide revenue and employment to the homeowner, thus offsetting high housing costs and real estate taxes. However, B&B's increase the level of activity on a site above that of a Page 1-26 Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS I I I I I single-family home. Such activity may include additional cars, parking spaces, number of trips and general use intensity. As a result, care must be taken to ensure that a neighborhood does not experience an inordinate number of B&B conversions that might be to the detriment of a community. Overall, B&B's can be an asset to an area; Southold currently recognizes this, and allows B&B's as a Special Exception use by the ZBA in the Resort Residential (RR), RO, HD, R- 80, R-120, R-200 and R400 residential districts without site plan approval, and in the HB, LB and B districts with site plan approval. Given parking needs, access points, adjacent uses, landscaping, drainage, and other related issues, the Town should consider also requiring site plan approval for B&B's in the B and HD zones. In all but the B and HB districts, there are several other required safety conditions and Building Inspector approval is given for a period of one (1) year at a time. There are currently no standards for the ZBA to use as for guidance for approval of B&B's. Typical standards that should be considered include size of the home, the size of the property, the distance between B&B's, overall density limitations on the number of B&B's, and land use buffers. I t l I I I I l I I I I Review of Home Occupancy Restrictions - The types of home occupations that are permitted allow for a great deal of abuse in that it is difficult to police when a home occupation morphs into a small business more appropriately located within a business district. Where an RO district is designed to provide for this type of use, the Home Occupation Law should not permit the range of uses currently allowed. The Home Occupation law should simply permit the running ora single- person business out of the home where there is no retail, wholesale or customer traffic to and from the home. As an example, medical office, tradesmen and contractor uses have resulted in complaints. Discouragement of Strip Shopping Centers/Fast Food - Southold has a provision in the zoning code to effectively discourage strip malls by restricting the building width in commercial zones so that no more than 60 feet of building may run parallel to the road. Exemptions to this have been granted by the ZBA, mostly for winery operations. The code requires that large buildings be broken up into smaller buildings grouped in complexes rather than one large store. These provisions have been fairly effective and are recognized as important to maintain community character, with no major deficiencies requiring modification other than the addition of criteria to guide thc ZBA. Fast food establishments are referred to as take-out or formula restaurants in the Town Code. They are permitted only in the General Business (B) district and a Special Exception from the ZBA is required for such uses, subject to certain conditions. Drive-up windows are not permitted, and controls for traffic, signage, and architectural features are incorporated into these sections. These controls allow the Town to maintain the qualities and character that are important to the community. Flag Lots - Flag lots are currently not defined or recognized in the Town Zoning Code. Flag lots involve providing a narrow "flagpole" access to an existing improved road to access a larger width portion of a developable lot. Flag lots are a common way to reduce impermeable road surface area, thereby, reducing runoff, pavement, and improving overall environmental design and aesthetics. However, flag lots can also cause concern with regard to homesite construction, particularly with regard to privacy related to house orientation. In addition, Unjustified proliferation of flag lots is a potential problem with respect to emergency services (police, fire, ambulance) when private driveways are long and not properly maintained. Lot sizes must be adequate, and setback requirements must be appropriate to allow for the use of this tool, which can be beneficial when used properly. In order to provide adequate access and lot configuration, Page 1-27 Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I a minimum 20-foot frontage width should be provided to an existing road. For smaller, potentially dividable parcels where no new roads are created, use of a flag lot may be appropriate to allow a land division. Some Towns have used a formula where the lot created must be 1.5 times the minimum lot size in the zoning district, excluding the flagpole portion of the lot. The lot is subject to setback requirements of the respective zoning districts. Flag lots can also be incorporated into subdivision design, particularly through clustering, in order to reduce road extensions and provide a quality subdivision design. Use of Common Driveways - Common driveways provide a single curb cut whereby two or more residential properties gain access to a Town road. A common driveway typically will be located on a common property linc, extend from thc road along thc boundary of two lots and branch to each side to access individual dwellings. Typically an casement or fight of usc agreement is recorded with thc deed of each home. A common driveway can serve more than two (2) lots; however, for much more than two lots such an access would bc considered more of a private road and would typically require thc establishment of a road fight-of-way. Common driveways arc a way of reducing the number of curb cuts onto the road system, and of reducing thc amount of impervious surface and resulting stormwater. However, they also can bc an inconvenience as two or more homeowners must sham thc responsibilities of maintaining thc access, which could potentially be problematic if neighbors arc at odds with each other. Common driveways should bc encouraged where appropriate. Such circumstances might involve avoidance of steep topography; reduction of curb cuts onto an arterial road; areas of historic, ansthctic or visual importance, and other such unique situations. Thc Town Code docs not include a definition or recognition of common driveways at present. Change of Use Triggers for Site Plan Review - Effective enforcement of this Code involves monitoring of the type of use allowed within a commercial building. The Planning Board approves a site plan with knowledge of a certain use that will occupy the building. Parking requirements, sanitary requirements and intensity of activity on a site are all a function of the type of use. It is common for Zoning Codes to have a provision for the Planning Board to perform a preliminary review of a use change, and based on that review, determine if an amended site plan is needed to revisit such issues as parking, drainage, landscaping, access, circulation or other issues. The Town Code requires such review but does not specify a waiver procedure associated with minor changes that do not raise site plan issues. Country Inns - A Country Inn would involve a limited-size facility that provides overnight accommodations with limited gathering/meeting opportunities in a larger, but characteristically residential-type structure. The Country Inn must gain aesthetic quality and charm from the agricultural land use or open space attributes on the balance of the property. Limitations on maximum number of rooms, other accessory uses, size of the building, setbacks, parking accommodations, and sanitary disposal would keep the impacts of this use in conformance with SCDHS density requirements. The goal is to preserve a significant area of farmland and open space, while providing an economic value to the landowner, in a setting that is harmonious and supportive of continued farm or open space use, all in a manner that does not burden natural or human resources. There are a variety of ways in which to achieve a Country Inn use in connection with an agricultural or open space setting. It is expected that a Country Inn will involve overnight accommodations and amenities, food service, parking, meeting/gathering facilities, outdoor recreation, etc., and therefore is more characteristic of a commercial use than a residential use. For this reason, the yield (possibly expressed as number of rooms per acre), and the size of the Page 1-28 I ! ! I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Inn must be carefully considered, in order to ensure that the scale is consistent with the planning goals of the Town. Conditions could include providing one (1) room per 2-5 acres of land preserved, up to a maximum of 15-20 rooms, as well as a restriction that Country Inns not be permitted within 1-2 miles of an existing Country Inn in order to limit the ultimate number possible. A procedural possibility is to have a Country Inn use be permitted by either Town Board Special Exception or as a change of zone to a Planned Development District (PDD) with preservation of farmland or open space providing special public benefit. The Country Inn would be allowed on any parcel zoned A-C, R-200 or R-80 District as a presumptively compatible use, provided it conforms to the established standards and conditions. The Country Inn site would be subject to full site plan review, with consideration of the overall acreage for the purpose of determining yield, and siting the Country Inn parcel. The Country Inn use would be subject to SEQRA as an Unlisted Action unless it is designated a Type I action pursuant to the SEQRA Type I list. The use of Country Inns provides the Town and its residents the opportunity for a number of benefits including: land preservation; economic value to the landowner; and creation of uses that serve an existing tourist base providing regional economic benefit. The establishment of Country Inns must be monitored to ensure that the overall planning goals of the Town continue to be served by the program. The LWRP also deals with a number aspects of review of the Zoning Code; this Comprehensive Implementation Strategy recognizes that the LWRP has been in preparation for a long period of time, has received preliminary New York State Department of State (NYSDOS) review and has been issued a Negative Declaration under SEQRA. Therefore, these initiatives complement the Comprehensive Implementation Strategy, and further advance the goals of the Town. 7. Review Zoning Map The Town's zoning map provides the legal structure around which the land use pattern of the community is constructed. Maintaining a viable zoning framework is essential to assuring the future vision of Southold. Past studies have shown that the existing zoning in several areas of the Town may require review and modification. These areas include: · Change the business zones along County Route 48 to A-C. · Reduce and consolidate the industrial zones on the Main Road west of Greenport. · Review AHD zones in accordance with a new affordable housing plan. · Review viability, dimensional controls and location of RO district. · Review viability, dimensional controls and location of LB district. · Rezone appropriate parcels along Mattituck Creek to MI or MII. · Create Watershed Protection Zone (WPZ). · Coordinate existing zoning within hamlets with newly delineated hamlet boundaries. Of all these initiatives, the Town has taken action only on the first. In 1998 and 1999, several business properties on CR 48 were rezoned to a more restrictive business or residential district. 8. Review Subdivision Regulations The subdivision regulations of the Town of Southold require review and update. Subdivision Regulation review is being performed by Town Planning staff and the Town Engineer with Page 1-29 I I 1 I I I I I I I I i I I I I 1 I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS consulting and other assistance as necessary. The Subdivision Regulation review seeks to codify policy items that are currently implemented as part of the normal subdivision review and approval process. In addition, Subdivision Regulations are being reviewed for definitions that should be consistent with the Zoning Code. The review incorporates appropriate park and recreation requirements, road specifications, access requirements, drainage calculations and road design and other essential items appropriate under municipal subdivision regulations. 9. Review Highway Specifications Highway Specifications determine the type of road that will be constructed to access new building lots. Road Specifications were revised in 1993 to reinfome subdivision regulations. The Highway Specifications currently include provisions that are more appropriate to Subdivision Regulations. They need to be revised in order to consider the Town's natural environment and rural qualities. This should include minimizing pavement where possible, and reducing structural road improvements while still maintaining safe roads within the Town that can be properly accessed, used and maintained. Drainage designs need to be revised in order to utilize natural topography, maintain existing vegetation and reduce structural drainage improvements where possible, while still ensuring that runoff is controlled so roads will remain safe and accessible. The Town Engineer has prepared a list of Highway Specifications necessary to meet the needs of his Department for review and approval of projects. 10. Conservation Opportunities Planning (COP) Process Conservation Opportunities Planning was first suggested in the Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy, and later echoed in the Blue Ribbon Commission recommendations. The COP is a valuable tool for encouraging landownem to participate in conservation planning. It not only provides landowners with a better understanding of their land and their options, it assists the Town in identifying those portions on 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 for a property, the Town should provide 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. A component of the COP noted in the Blue Ribbon Commission report includes a 60% density reduction in connection with Conservation Subdivisions, which would be achieved through PDR. Expediting for both the development fight acquisition process and the approval process for limited development plans would provide greater incentives to landowners to voluntarily protect significant portions of their land, all of which would enhance the credibility of land protection options. Optimum use of the COP requires use of computer-generated mapping capabilities, which the Town now possesses. In order to make maximum use of this resource; however, the Town should continue to enhance the capabilities of its Geographic Information System through the addition of staff, continued training, updated software and expanded database development. Page 1-30 I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 11. Planning Process The planning process as it pertains to residential subdivisions and residential site plans requires intensive coordination between various levels of government and the applicant. Applications involving reduced density and a preservation component require additional staff time and effort, particularly where the Town is attempting to leverage its funds with money fi.om other governmental or private entities. In addition, a Pre-Application process that is less formal than the subdivision review process is being considered in order to give an applicant guidance and input before final designs are submitted for review. The Pre-Application process would provide a forum for staff input, Planning Board input, Land Preservation Coordinator input, Town Department input, select/focus Town Committee input, Fire Department and outside agency input, into the initial planning of a project. Town Committees with interest in a focus area (i.e. architecture, trees, trails, land preservation, etc.) would have the ability to comment, as well as the Town Engineer, Fire Marshal, and other entities listed above. This will improve the review process by soliciting comments and referrals early in the process. The process would be mandatory as a precursor to a formal application, but would not require an Environmental Assessment Form or completion of a Determination of Significance, as it is not an approval or a final action of the Board. Planning Staff would receive applications and subdivision plans, determine completeness, circulate to a set list of referrals, schedule a heating, compile input and prepare a Pre-Application Report for adoption by the Planning Board. The process would be limited in scope, time and cost. The Pre- Application Report would document items to be incorporated into the next step, a subdivision or land preservation process, and would be subject to a time limit. The report provides a forum for initial input to benefit an applicant and save processing expense and time, and familiarizes the Planning Board and staff with an application. Consideration will also be given to shifting the Special Exception review process from the Zoning Board to the Planning Board where site plan approval is required, and providing more guidance within the criteria for Special Exceptions. 12. Transfer of Development Rights Transfer of Development Rights is defined in the New York Town Law as "...the process by which development rights are transferred from one lot, parcel, or area of land in a sending district to another lot, parcel, or area of land in one or more receiving districts." This planning tool is used to protect open spaces, agricultural land or ecologically sensitive areas, and to preserve the aesthetic appeal and natural resources of an area. TDR is a well-established, progressive land use tool that has been utilized nationwide in order to preserve one or more significant environmental characteristics of a property for the benefit of an entire community, while at the same time protecting the value of landowners' property by enabling the development potential of that land to be realized elsewhere in the community, in a location more appropriate for development. Page 1-31 I l I I I I l l I I ii I ! I I I I ! Sonthold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS TDR must be encouraged by providing an adequate, achievable, attractive incentive package to draw landowner interest. Successful TDR programs generally involve the following components: 1. Encouraging TDR Sales - Successful TDR programs encourage TDR sales by reducing the development potential of the sending sites through zoning restrictions, environmental regulations, farmland protection measures, and ordinances that require adequate public facilities before development can occur. Just as sending site owners need to be encouraged to sell their development rights, receiving site developers must be motivated to buy TDRs. Developers will only buy TDRs if they can make a greater profit from a project that uses TDRs. A most important concept is that a seller must be encouraged to sell, and a buyer must be encouraged to buy. 2. Selecting Receiving Sites - The approach proposed by Southold is to designate village or hamlet areas where more concentrated development will be encouraged. TDRs can then be used to obtain the higher densities. 3. Facilitating Use ofTDRs -TDR credits must be recorded in a simple program that facilitates their use. Southold will examine administrative recordation, use of TDRs as a commodity, establishing a "TDR bank", and will seek to provide ongoing information to the general public, as well as staff support and instructional materials to assist TDR buyers and sellers. 4. Building Public Support - A successful TDR program will mean more intense development at receiving sites. The community as a whole needs to understand and accept that this will occur. Thus, TDR is an important component of the overall comprehensive implementation strategy, as the concept of hamlets, hamlet transition zones and protection of rural qualities and character have been central to Southold Planning over an extended period of time. An effective TDR program can add optimism to the planning process by offering a way for compensation to be provided affected property owners without the use of tax dollars. This optimism can encourage the public to establish stronger land use protection goals. A Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program permits the transfer of density, which would retain landowners' equity in their land. Credits can be marketed to either the Town or private developers. The Town can determine in advance how transferred credits or density may be used. For instance, transferred credits can be targeted for use as affordable units or other uses that may benefit communities and strengthen hamlet areas. In order for a TDR program to work, the Town must identify sending and receiving areas for reduction and corresponding increase in development. The program must be consistent with SCDHS TDR provisions and must provide an overall community benefit to preserve open space, improve groundwater recharge in sending areas, and promote "smart growth" and other community benefit in receiving areas. Sending areas should be those areas the Town wants to protect such as environmentally sensitive parcels, critical woodlands, and groundwater recharge areas. Receiving areas must be identified in zoning districts where a small incremental increase in density may be permitted without serious environmental or other detrimental impacts; these areas might include the Hamlet Locus zones. Other receiving opportunities could involve special land use projects that provide mixed-uses or that otherwise advance planning goals of the Town. A TDR program can be designed to work Page 1-32 I ! I I I ! I I I I I I I I ! I ! Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS with incentive zoning provisions through a PDD and can be used to promote affordable housing. In any case, a receiving area must have one or more of the following characteristics: Proximity to hamlet centers; · Lack of environmental sensitivity; · Suitable road access; · Available public water; and Ability to handle sewage or access to a sewage treatment plant (STP). In Southold, a TDR program will have to assume a number of basic parameters to guide the program and provide consistency with the SCDHS TDR policy, specifically as follows: · Transfers should be generally within the same school district, · Transfers must occur within the same Groundwater Management Zone as defined by the SCDHS, · Density must be determined based on underlying single family residential zoning (by accepted yield factors), with the intent that a formula for providing additional density for less-intensive units (multiple family and senior citizen units) will be established as an incentive to shifting and creating appropriate development in receiving locations, · Sending parcels must be appropriately encumbered through dedication to a public or recognized non-profit entity or covenants restricting future development, and should be registered by an appropriate tracking method through the Town, · Receiving parcels should be within areas serviced by public water, · Receiving parcels should not exceed twice the density allowed under the Suffolk County Sanitary Code (SCSC) unless an appropriate form of sewage treatment is available, · Receiving parcels should be subject to fertilized area restrictions, clearing restrictions and site plan or subdivision review, · Receiving parcels should be subject to further design standards and/or special exception criteria as may be determined through further review and analysis; such standards may include design parameters, development guidelines, buffering, clearing restrictions, fertilized area restrictions, setbacks, infrastructure installation and measures to improve community compatibility. Because of Southold's unique environmental constraints, a TDR program would have to discourage/eliminate inappropriate development on sensitive and important lands and promote appropriate development on parcels where such development can be sustained. 13. Planned Development District Local Law As noted above, the Town could implement a PDD Local Law consistent with Incentive Zoning as provided for under NYS Town Law {}261-b so that, for those hamlet-area properties which are to be developed, a single use or a combination of complementary uses could be located on a single site. The PDD law allows a property to be mapped and designated as a PDD, so that all development within it would be planned, distributed and designed as a single unit, with regulations and standards for setbacks, building heights, etc. specifically designated for this zone. The PDD concept includes a requirement for "special public benefits", which would be provided over and above other requirements that normally apply to the application. Special Public Page 1-33 I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS Benefits could include: use of TDR, provision of affordable housing, community facilities, community infrastructure, or other creative incentives. In this way, development would occur on a well-planned basis with minimal opportunity for adverse impacts on infrastructure and services, as public benefits would be accrued to the community and all infrastructure requirements and amenities necessary would be included from the onset of the project. 14. Tree Preservation Local Law Trees, forested, wooded and natural areas, and specimen trees of local and historical importance exist within the Town of Southold. Trees and woodlands are valuable as aesthetic and visual features, wildlife habitat and linkages, wetland buffers, erosion control features and stormwater storage/dissipation features, windbreaks and neighborhood/community features. The Town currently has no restrictions on the removal of trees on residential lands within the Town, and as a result, uncontrolled tree cleating can and has occurred. The Town's Tree Committee has recommended that tree cleating restrictions be enacted. The Town Board is considering adoption of a tree cleating local law, to restrict clearing of trees and vegetation on properties of 1 acre or more in size, unless approval of a tree clearing permit, site plan or subdivision has been received from the Planning Board. Trees and vegetation would be defined as any plant more than two (2) inches in size, diameter at breast height (dbh). 15. Critical Environmental Lands Local Law The Town of Southold has high quality but fragile environmental resources that warrant protection not only for their ecological value, but also for their importance to the local economy and their high aesthetic beauty. At present, the potential negative impacts of development to these resources are evaluated on a case-by-case basis as projects are proposed. Through this review, appropriate mitigation measures are either incorporated into project design, or required through the environmental review process. This process is time consuming and unnecessarily contentious. It has been suggested that the Town adopt a Local Law that specifically recognizes those lands of the Town of Southold that are environmentally sensitive, and provides clear guidelines for developers and landowners. The primary critical environmental lands of the Town include the following: · Freshwater wetlands and adjacent areas · Tidal wetlands and adjacent areas · Lands with natural slopes in excess of 15% · Lands with a depth to groundwater less than 10 feet The protection of these wetlands as biofilters, retention areas and recharge zones is important for groundwater protection. Preventing erosion potential and loss of soil on steep slope areas is important for ground and surface water protection as well. Areas with shallow groundwater are susceptible to groundwater degradation due rapid infiltration of contaminants and difficulty in maintaining properly functioning sanitary systems. In order to protect these resources, it is recommended that very limited development occur within these critical environmental lands. For instance, for the purpose of project yield, surface Page 1-34 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS water wetlands and areas with greater than 15% slopes should be subtracted from the gross acreage of the property to determine "developable land". Furthermore, these critical environmental lands should not be permitted to contribute toward the minimum lot size of subdivision lots. Cluster provisions could then be used to ensure expanded buffers and maximum preservation of these resources. This approach would be consistent with the Town's current subdivision review procedures and the definition ofbuildable land. There may be circumstances where controlled development within 100 feet of wetlands, within areas having slopes of more 15%, or within areas with groundwater depth of less than 10 feet, may be appropriate. The Town may wish to consider empowering the Planning Board to vary these requirements when no other alternative exists and specific and effective mitigation measures can be used and enforced. This provision could be provided for in the Local Law. The Critical Environmental Lands local law would apply to sensitive land within all zoning districts within the Town of Southold. The nature and value of these resources are not related to jurisdictional boundaries and warrant maximum preservation by virtue of their occurrence within the Town. 16. SEQRA Local Law Review/Revision In 1978, the Town adopted an Environmental Quality Review Law, now codified as Chapter 44 of the Town Code. This local law used the initial NYS SEQRA law as a model. Since that time, the NYS SEQRA law has been revised and further, the record of case law that shapes the way local environmental quality review laws are implemented has been significantly refined. As a result, the Town's existing Environmental Quality Review Law is in need of updating. The law should be reconstructed to assure that it is fully consistent with current SEQRA regulations as well as with the practical application of the statute. In addition to rectifying the provisions of the law, it has been recommended that the Town adopt a specific Type I list that would identify actions that are likely to have a significant impact on the environment. Suggested Type I actions include: Critical Environmental Areas Actions within Scenic Byways · Projects that remove significant acreage from agriculture use · Conventional subdivisions exceeding a specified number of lots. · Actions involving a minimum threshold percentage of a significant natural feature, such as wetlands, steep slopes, beach, watershed protection areas, woodland, etc. · Actions that generate more than a certain minimum threshold number of vehicle trips. The value to the Town of adopting a Type I list is early notification of applicants and involved agencies of the Town's interest in protection of significant local features, a more intensive review process, and better control over lead agency through local designation of Type I actions. Page 1-35 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 17. Scenic By-Ways Overlay Development Controls NYS Route 25 and CR 48 were designated "Scenic By-Ways" by the state in 2002. Designating Routes 25 & 48 as scenic by-ways is the logical first step in preserving the visual integrity of the important public con'idors in the Town. Designation alone, however, does nothing to assure that the visual and aesthetic characteristics of the corridors are in fact, permanently preserved. It has been recommended that a series of specific development controls be adopted that shape the use, nature and characteristics of the Town's designated scenic by-ways. Specific recommendations include the following: · Reviewing all zoning controls in all districts fronting on the scenic by-ways. If necessary, adjustments should be made to assure consistency in allowable setbacks, height, bulk and density provisions. Consistency also can be achieved via the adoption of an overlay of modified zoning provisions, e.g., a by-ways corridor management district. · Develop standards and guidelines that address building siting and architecture, viewsheds, open space, tree preservation and other landscaping. · Develop standards that reduce the number of required curb cuts and encourage shared use of driveways, where appropriate. · Require off-street parking areas to be located behind buildings. · Explore expanding the role of the Architectural Review Board (ARB). · Designate all actions within a scenic by-way as Type I actions under SEQRA. · Implement a roadway beautification or "adopt-a-road" program, whereby civic-minded citizens and businesses can help protect the scenic corridor. · Coordinate agency reviews to assure compliance with scenic by-way goals 1.3.3 Education/Enforcement Mechanisms 18. Agricultural District Review/Education It is a policy of the Town of Southold that agricultural land and the business of farming shall be preserved and encouraged to the maximum extent. To that end, the Town supports the establishment of Agricultural Districts, and the inclusion of farmland within such districts, as provided for under Article 25AA of the New York State Agriculture and Markets Law. Land within an Agricultural District qualifies for preferential land assessments, which is a method to assist in the preservation of agriculture within the Town. This implementation tool should be highlighted by greater promotion of the benefits of inclusion in Agricultural Districts through more interaction and education with large landowners. This will encourage farmers not currently included within an Agricultural District, to sign up for this program. 19. Create General Guidance Documents Guidance documents are useful as public education and information tools to assist with land use, environmental protection and best management practices. They can be specific enough to assist property owners and contractors in daily decisions about land use, and land management practices. Guidance Documents are needed in the following areas: Page 1-36 I ! I I I I I !1 ! I I I ! ! I ! I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS · Erosion and sediment control, Stormwater and non-point source management (stormwater detention, landscape techniques, pet waste management), · Tree clearing, · Environmental restoration/enhancement techniques; · Wetlands protection, · Land preservation techniques for purchase of development rights (PDR), TDR, conservation subdivision), · Architectural and historical preservation manuals, · Physical Design and Lighting manuals (for sites and subdivisions), · Land management (clustering, development guidelines), and · Household chemical disposal. 20. Natural Environmental Education An important part of promoting understanding, appreciation and protection of the Town's unique natural, environmental and cultural resources involves education of the public about the value of these resources. Southold's groundwater is a fragile resource that must be protected through water conservation, proper lawn maintenance and proper disposal of household and lawn chemicals. The Town's abundant but threatened coastal resources, including finfish, shellfish, marine wetlands, embayments and estuaries can be better protected through public education, understanding and appreciation. Freshwater wetlands and natural woodlands are fragile ecosystems in interior areas of the Town, and these areas support wildlife, water recharge areas and contribute to the rural character of the Town. Rural qualities and character, including historical resources, agriculture and farmland, and open space further contribute to the Town's unique quality. There are many avenues for education. These include: · Environmental guidance documents, · Newsletters, · Websites, and · Town offices and departments The Town's LWRP provides for ongoing education, and grants have been sought and one has been received to develop and support continued environmental education about the Town's natural environmental resources. However, these efforts need to be stepped up in response to increased development. 21. Watershed Protection Zone/SGPA's Southold has a significant and legitimate concern regarding its surface and groundwaters, sufficient to warrant their statutory protection. These resources were studied and analyzed in the Water Supply Management & Watershed Protection Strategy (WSM&WPS, 1999). That plan recommended protecting this critical Town resource: Page 1-37 I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS A significant finding of the WSM&WPS is that the central part of the Town of Southold, between Mattituck Creek and the Hamlet of Southold, and the area west of Mattituck Creek in the vicinity of Laurel Lake are significant areas in terms of the following key elements: · The areas are comprised of large lot holdings; · The areas are currently predominantly in agricultural use; ,, The areas are the largest contiguous block of agricultural use in the Town; · The areas lie substantially above the five foot groundwater contour and therefore am significant recharge areas; · The areas contribute significantly to the rural character of the Town; and · The areas coincide with the Southold Special Groundwater Protection Areas (SGPA's) of the Town. These significant blocks of land clearly warrant additional protection measures to ensure that the above-noted features are maintained. First and foremost is the designation of the geographic areas for legislative purposes. It is often difficult to translate key environmental elements to a geographic boundary location. The designation of such areas heightens public awareness and provides a first step for additional planning measures. The primary area for protection is the area above the five-foot groundwater contour. However, the use of such a boundary would bisect private parcels and would not fully address the need to protect and preserve agricultural lands and rural quality. For this reason the designation of WPZ's are expanded to contain within them logical blocks of contiguous predominantly agricultural land. The West WPZ is therefore defined generally coincident with the area above the 5-foot contour within which is the SGPA area, in the vicinity of Laurel Lake between Sound Avenue and Main Road, east of the Town Line to Mattituck. The East WPZ is defined generally as the area extending from Long Island Sound on the north, to Route 25 on the south, between the area immediately east of Mattituck Creek, to the Hamlet of Southold. With the creation of the Southold WPZ's, it is important to establish the legislative goals and intent of the designation of such an area. Also with the creation of such districts it is important to establish development parameters that achieve the goals and objectives as stated by the Town. In order to effectively manage the WPZ's, the Town needs to reduce development density to maintain the existing landscape to the maximum extent practicable. Therefore, any development, which does occur, should be greatly restricted. For the purpose of the Southold WPZ's these areas are considered to be Restricted Growth Areas. As such, the standards and guidelines proposed are the minimum management tools to be considered, leaving open the possibility of additional control measures to be considered in a subsequent section of this strategy. A summary list of standards and guidelines is provided below. · Control or reduce development density to limit nitrogen loading; · Eliminate the construction of new sewage treatment plants in the WPZ's; · Restrict the storage and use of toxic and hazardous materials in the WPZ's; · Maximize open space and reduce development density near public water supply sources; · Protect wetlands and adjacent areas; · Provide environmentally compatible stormwater recharge systems; Page 1-38 I I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS · Preserve existing vegetation, specimen trees and wooded edges wherever possible; · Align contiguous areas of undeveloped open space and farmland through development design; · Minimize areas established in fertilizer dependent vegetation; · With the exception of agricultural use, revegetate permanent buffer areas with plantings having a low fertilizer and irrigation dependency; · Identify and protect species in communities of special concern; · Provide a mechanism for the management/enhancement of Town open space lands; and · Restrict commercial and industrial development to protect quality of groundwater recharge and rural character. Certain guidelines may also be appropriate to apply to development proposals in the restricted growth areas. These guidelines are considered advisory, and are intended to be used at the discretion of the Town in project review, depending on the significance of the action and the sensitivity of the resource. Recommended guidelines are summarized as follows: · Seek to achieve a concentration of total nitrogen in recharge of 2.5 milligrams per liter (mg/1) or less; · Provide more stringent well head protection for water supply properties based on a scientific understanding of hydrologic resources; · Apply stricter setback requirements from wetlands and surface waters; · Provide creative stormwater detention areas for recharge and storage of stormwater based on natural topography and functional pond creation; · Provide mechanisms for prevention of soil erosion during construction; · Avoid construction in areas with slopes greater than ten percent; · Review agricultural and horticultural projects for conformance with best management practices; · Consider cultural resources, scenic byways and viewsheds, and recreational resources as part of project review. The standards and guidelines recommended as part of the Southold WPZ's will ensure that consideration is given to natural and human resources in project review. It is recommended that, where possible, clustering and other techniques be utilized to reduce or withdraw any development activity from the central parts of the WPZ's. The area of the proposed WPZ is illustrated in Figure B-8 of this report. 22. Encourage Use of Public Transportation The Town's geography and rural character and its vision of restoring its small town character physically limits the nature and extent of physical improvements that might be built to alleviate traffic congestion on existing roadways. The only viable long-range alternative will be an increased use of alternative modes of transportation, including public transportation. An aggressive, long term program of public education is the foundation upon which the success of such an effort must be built. Efforts should focus on the benefits of utilizing public and alternative transportation as well as that of pro-active measures such as better design of road systems, creative development siting and increasing intermodal opportunities, directing Page 1-39 I I ! I I I I I I I i ! I I I I I I ! Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS development to transportation hubs and areas with appropriate infrastructure. It is recommended that this tool be implemented along with the public transportation and transit agencies and integrated into a Transportation Management Plan as outlined below. 23. Transportation Management Plan A Transportation Management Plan is a long-range program designed to provide viable alternatives to passenger cars, as well as measures to reduce use of automobiles. Elements of a Transportation Management Plan for Southold have been set forth in various planning studies, and include: · Creation or enhancement of transportation hubs in: o Mattituck o Southold o Greenport · Create/enhance pedestrian walkways within and between business areas as well as off-road and scenic trails. · Enhance waterborne access including water taxis. · Enhance bicycle linkages within and between business areas as well as off-road and scenic trails. · Coordinate with LIRR on long range projects such as a "scoot" service, wine country trains, shuttles, etc. In addition, a Transportation Management Plan might include other elements, such as: · Alternative work hours at major employers or employment centers. · Financial incentives to employees to encourage the use of transit, carpooling, bicycling and walking to work. · Preferential parking for carpoolers. · Bike parking and bike service facilities. · The provision of equitable travel allowances for all modes. · Guaranteed ride home programs. · Creation of a Transportation Coordinator. · On-site transit ticket sales. · Loop shuttle. · Telecommuting. · Orienting building entrances to encourage pedestrian/transit activity. Other transportation issues such as cross sound ferry traffic and Hampton-bound traffic using the Shelter Island Ferries to avoid South Fork congestion should be addressed, as well as traffic congestion due to agri-tourism, special events (fairs and group events). Town transportation planning and coordination with NYSDOT and SCDPW, along with east end planning under the SEEDS study will help to address some of these issues. Page 1-40 I I ! I I i I I I ! I I i I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 24. Economic Development Plan The lack of an economic development plan means that the Town is not positioned to either pursue or encourage specific types of new development, uses, market niches or industries that would benefit the residents of the Town. The Town can pursue and encourage specific types of new development that would improve the quality of life, and improve the tax base, without damaging the natural resources that are so important to the Town. In general, an economic development plan can be designed to provide three things: a clear set of guidelines about the environmental and historical resoumes that must be respected; a set of incentives for respecting the constraints that these resources may pose; and a set of incentives for ensuring that the traditional industries can survive and thrive. Past planning studies were reviewed and have determined that the foundation of Southold's economy is rooted in three traditional sectors: Agriculture; Commercial fishing; and Tourism/recreation. Consistent with past studies, an economic development plan should focus on these three core sectors, but should also acknowledge the emergence of the service sector, which has developed in response to the Town's changing demographics. An economic development plan should include incentives to encourage and facilitate the growth and expansion of the targeted sectors. The underlying zoning and land use controls must also support such a plan. To that end, implementing effective tools that preserve agricultural lands and strengthen hamlets is essential. Target sectors for emphasis in the economic development plan include the following traditional, as well as more contemporary economic engines of the Town: Agriculture · Wineries · Specialty crops Maritime s Expand & upgrade existing facilities Commercial fishing support services · Aqua/mari-culture · Boat repair/service · Traditional maritime trades Tourism Introduce Country Inns · Upgrade & diversify existing motels (conference centers, restaurants, health clubs, spas, recreational facilities) · Transportation services (bike rentals, water taxis) Other: · Health care facilities · Recreational facilities An economic development plan should capitalize on the Town's unique historic character and encourage the preservation, rehabilitation and reuse of those resources. Page 1-41 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 25. Enforcement Enforcement of regulations signals a Town's commitment to reaching its goals. Effective enforcement requires personnel, financial resources and commitment. While aggressive enforcement can improve conformance with the Town code (thereby facilitating public purposes and goals) it cannot be achieved in the absence of an enforceable code. The Town's enforcement program requires a thorough programmatic evaluation and re- prioritization of objectives by the Building Department, Fire Marshal, Director of Code Enforcement, Bay Constable, Police Department and Town Attorney's Office. Where necessary, the code must be revised to eliminate inconsistencies. The cost of enhanced enforcement vigilance can then be evaluated by the Town Board, Planning Board and Trustees to determine how best to implement this recommendation. 1.3.4 Capital Improvements/Expenditures 26. Improve Waterfront Access The Town of Southold is characterized and geographically defined by its coastal location; bounded by the Long Island Sound and Peconic Bay. A number of waterfront recreational facilities and access opportunities do exist; however, given the significance of the waterfront to the future of the community, more could be done to improve and enhance public access. The Town is poised to finalize its LWRP, a primary element of which is the improvement of public access. The LWRP calls for exploring new waterfront use and access opportunities, such as~ · Scenic overlooks · Bird watching posts · Trails · Improved beach access (via road ends, etc.) · Interpretive centers · Sheltered kayak access points · Creation of a public marina A significant component in improving public access to the waterfront is to utilize the opportunities available under the Community Preservation Project Plan (CPPP) to secure the right of direct public access. 27. Administer Parks of Town-Wide Significance Currently, there are 4 Park Districts located within the Town: · Mattituck · Cutchogue-New Suffolk · Soathold · East Marion-Orient Page 1-42 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS These Park Districts do not encompass the entire Town and areas such as Peconic, Greenport and Fishers Island do not host Park Districts. These Park Districts are supported by tax levies, and the use of their respective facilities is restricted to residents of each district. It has been recommended in past studies that park facilities of Town-wide significance should be administered for the benefit of all residents of the community, and not only those residents that reside within a particular Park District. Implementing this policy first requires the establishment of a Town-wide Parks & Recreation Plan and Capital Program. 28. Prioritize and Supplement CPPP The CPPP, originally approved in July of 1998, is a tool whereby certain land transfers are taxed. The funds generated by this tax are used to purchase land, development rights and easements. It is periodically updated and re-prioritized to address shifting ownership pattems and land use trends. The Town has established a database of parcels targeted for acquisition, and will pursue appropriate protection measures in connection with Land Preservation, Planning Board review and pro-active negotiations for preservation of key parcels. The CPPP parcels will be reviewed and categorized by significance for a more targeted list of acquisition parcels. 29. Create a Centralized Year-Round Recreational Complex Past studies have highlighted the lack of a centralized, year-round recreation complex to meet the varied needs of the Town's residents. The current recreation center is limited and in need of improvements and expansion. Recreation needs and cost assessment will be required as the first step in implementing this project. 1.3.5 Direct Town Management 30. Affordable Housing Policy By all accounts, the Town continues to face an affordable housing crisis. Past planning studies point to a need to develop a comprehensive affordable housing policy to avert this crisis. The Town currently has an Affordable Housing Committee that is advising the Town Supervisor on housing issues. The work of this Committee can be used as a starting point for the development of a detailed policy. The following elements have been defined in previous studies as desirable components of a comprehensive affordable housing policy: Conduct a Housing Needs Assessment to identify the scope of the affordable housing problem. · Consider allowing increasing density in order to lower housing costs. · Consider infill, mixed-use projects and diverse housing opportunities in or near hamlet centers. · Address issue of initial housing affordability and the concept of affordability in perpetuity. Page 1-43 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS · Develop income ranges, residency or employment criteria for entry into an affordable housing program. · Use grants to seed revolving loan funds. · Explore the provision of mandatory affordable housing units in new subdivision and multi- family housing projects of a certain size. · Develop an affordable housing management structure. · Consider modification to existing zoning controls (such as accessory apartments) that are impediments to the provision of affordable housing units. · Broaden housing options within the Town. · Consider the creation of a Community Land Trust. · Consider the expertise of the North Fork Housing Alliance. · Work cooperatively within public-private partnerships. · Public education about the availability of affordable housing and the affordable housing program. · Consider the creation of a Housing Authority. This Strategy has resulted in an update of the Town's Housing Needs Assessment. This Assessment, which is included as Appendix A-7, is discussed in more detail in the context of housing characteristics and land use in Section 2.0. Further understanding of the housing needs assists in targeting goals, areas and populations to be served. Housing diversity can be achieved by providing both ownership and rental opportunities as was described above in Section 1.3.2. 31. Concentrate Development in Hamlets This implementation tool reflects a policy that has been articulated in various planning studies over many years. The hamlets, as they are informally understood today, are by their very nature, areas of higher density development than the surrounding countrysides. Continuing and reinfoming this traditional pattern of land use is a critically important element in the successful evolution of the Town. Limiting density within agricultural and open space areas will result in a renewed focus on the hamlets as the prime areas to absorb new growth. The policy of concentrating development within the hamlets requires the design and adoption of clear hamlet plans to ensure that adequate public infrastructure is available to accommodate this growth. Ideally, hamlet plans would address the following issues: · Establish and delineate hamlet boundaries o Laurel o Mattituck o Cutchogue o New Suffolk o Peconic o Southold o East Marion o Orient · Identify development/growth opportunities. · Expand and improve infrastructure (e.g., water, sewage, roads), as required, to accommodate new growth. · Re-evaluate existing land use and zoning controls. Page 1-44 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS · Adopt an affbrdable housing plan. · Define off-street & on street parking needs, and locate suitable sites for municipal trails. · Evaluate traffic volumes and level-of-service status, implement mitigation/traffic calming measures or new streets, as required. · Coordinate public transit, including off road walkways and trails. · Assure adequate public park/open spaces and street furniture/amenities. · Establish guidelines and controls to reinforce aesthetic character of the hamlet. · Plan for evolving market trends. It is important to recognize that the traditionally recognized hamlets may have to be rehabilitated, infilled and possibly expanded to accommodate the level of growth projected for the future, particularly growth transferred from outlying agricultural and open space areas. In addition to the hamlets themselves, surrounding "transition zones" should be identified as a logical bridge between the heavily developed hamlets and the more rural agricultural and open space regions. Once the main hamlet areas have been established and reinfomed, the surrounding transition areas can be defined; the term used to describe these areas is Hamlet Locus Zones, or HALO zones. These transition areas could play a role in accepting transferred- in residential density, but not at the expense of prime agricultural lands, open space, important environmental features or community character. A Hamlet Boundary Designation Methodology has been prepared to direct further work to define hamlets and Halo zones and provide a basis for hamlet enhancement. The Methodology is found in Appendix A-8, and includes aerial photograph mapping to illustrate the Towns hamlet areas. 32. Park District/School District Boundaries Conformity Re-delineating and conforming the boundaries of the Town's park districts and school districts was identified in past studies as a viable policy in order to provide better access by local residents to recreational facilities located within these respective districts. While all residents are located within a school district, not all are located within a park district. Park districts are autonomous in nature. While simplifying the confusing tangle of various boundaries, borders and jurisdictions is clearly beneficial, an evaluation of the fiscal and taxing implications of such an action would be a necessary first step. If determined to be a useful exercise, the Town Board, the Park Districts and the School Boards must coordinate their efforts to implement this recommendation. 33. Update Park Inventory and Management Plan The last time the Town prepared a park plan (Ward Associates) for Town-owned parks was over 20 years ago. Recreation is likely to be important to Southold's future, and as eco-tourism increases in popularity, it is imperative that the Town takes stock of all available recreational facilities owned by the Town, park districts, the state and the county. A Park Management Plan would include a recreational needs assessment and would provide a sound basis for advancing a broad range of recreation plans, policies and programs, including land acquisition, donation and development. This type of plan would also legally justify recreation land and fee requirements that are required by the residential subdivision process. Page 1-45 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 34. Create a Parks and Recreation Department The creation of a Parks & Recreation Department to manage Town-owned properties (not park districts) was recommended in past planning studies. While worthy on serious consideration, it is recommended that this tool be more fully evaluated and considered in the Park Management Plan. 35. Scenic By-Ways Management Program Pursuant to the Scenic Southold Comdor Management Plan, the Town designated Routes 25 and 48 as "Scenic-By-Ways." This designation alone will not serve to protect the unique qualities of these corridors. Implementing a Scenic By-Ways Management Program is necessary to assure the permanent, long-term protection of the corridors. This tool which represents a more holistic management approach, can be considered in conjunction with No. 17 above, which provides measures more oriented toward development controls and codified standards Elements of a management plan would include: "Adopt-A-Road" program Beautification programs Improved signage o Directional/safety o Informational o Advertising o Municipal Coordinate scenic by-way management with CPPP acquisitions Utilize acquisitions, easements, covenants and restrictions, PDR, TDR, rezonings, etc. outside of the CPPP program. Creation of a scenic overlay district Development of design guidelines for new construction Incentive programs Architectural reviews Modification to existing zoning Transportation management o Traffic calming o Improvements to Routes 25 & 48 o Manage traffic Tourism Sustaining the management plan o Partnerships (public-private) o Regional relationships o Scenic By-Ways committee 36. Trail Inventory/Trail Committee/Bikeways Past planning studies have identified the value and significance of a Town-wide trail system. This system can serve as a valuable recreational resource while simultaneously providing a Page 1.46 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS critical link in a Transportation Management Plan, linking the hamlets together without necessitating the continued reliance on passenger vehicles. The Transportation Commission of the Town recognizes and is seeking to promote and enhance trail resources in the Town; however, adequate resources and commitment must be provided to allow a commission or committee to complete an effective trail and bikeway enhancement program. Implementing this recommendation as a planning tool requires first designating resoumes to an appropriate body to oversee this task, such as the Transportation Commission, or a new trail committee. Second, a thorough inventory would be conducted, and all existing and potential trails, trail heads, vehicle access points, rest areas and support facilities would be mapped on the Town's GIS system. The third step would be to develop appropriate design criteria and standards for the construction of new trails and support facilities where and when needed. 37. Inventory and Manage Cultural Resources The Town's rich historic heritage is reflected in the designation of historic sites, landmarks and districts, including two National Historic Districts, in Orient and Southold. Important archaeological sites and landmark trees are also an element of this heritage. These resources have been identified and imported into the Town's GIS system. However, this inventory should be updated regularly, to maintain the currency of this program. The Town should consider adoption of stronger historic landmarks legislation to protect these resources fi.om neglect and demolition by providing incentives and appropriate controls where practical. Finally, education and assistance should play a role in ensuring that historic districts and landmarks are appreciated and managed in a manner that will preserve the Town's cultural heritage. 38. Architectural Review Board and Design Parameters Past planning studies have continually emphasized the values and importance of the scenic and aesthetic quality and character of the Town to its residents and to its economy. The Town currently has an Architectural Review Committee, which is advisory to the Planning Board on site design of commercial projects. Consideration could be given to elevating the status of this group to an ARB and strengthening their input and insight into the broader land use, site plan and building permit process. This can play an important role in assuring that new or rehabilitated buildings are sensitively designed and properly reflect the architectural heritage and character of the community. Finally, past studies strongly recommend the adoption of design guidelines to support the decision-making role of the ARB, and to offer guidance for individuals seeking to construct new or rehabilitate existing structures. 39. Scenic Advisory Board As recommended in the Scenic Southold Con'idor Management Plan, a Scenic Advisory Body would serve to manage and oversee the Scenic By-Ways Management Program. It has been recommended that a fully empowered ARB be created to assure the visual and aesthetic character of the scenic by-ways corridors of Route 25 and CR48. Page 1-47 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 1.3.6 Inter-Agency/Quasi-Agency Initiatives 40. Housing Financial Assistance Program This recommendation should be incorporated into the Affordable Housing Policy described above. 41. Develop a Water Supply Master Plan The Town has a number of limitations with regard to water supply. The Town's water pumped from underground aquifers that are dependent upon recharge of suitable quality. Recharge is limited to those areas of the Town where the elevation of groundwater permits adequate vertical flow and hydraulic head to sustain a reservoir of freshwater underlying the Town's land mass. Due to the difference in density between underlying saline waters and freshwater recharged from precipitation, the elevation of fresh water above sea level relates to the depth of the freshwater lens based on the Ghyben-Herzberg principal which indicates approximately 40 feet of freshwater depth for every one foot of elevation above sea level. As a result, coastal areas with lower elevations of freshwater above sea level will experience saltwater upconing, whereby saline waters get drawn up by drinking water wells. In addition, during dry seasons and drought years, the fresh-saltwater interface may migrate landward, further stressing water supply availability in coastal areas. Use of agricultural chemicals on some farmlands has caused elevated concentrations of pesticides and fertilizers in groundwater. Where the water supply is contaminated, it is difficult to obtain potable water. This problem affects both private wells and water company production wells. In order to provide potable water for all of the Town's residents, it is necessary to plan for future growth. The only current water supply plan is the North Fork Water Supply Plan prepared in 1989. Water resoume management is conducted by the Suffolk County Water Authority (SCWA), the primary public water purveyor, and the SCDHS. SCWA is seeking assistance in wellhead protection, extension of water mains to areas of existing development in need of water supply, growth and development controls, and water supply infrastructure, and is currently in a review period on a Generic Environmental Impact Statement for water supply options in the Town of Southold. SCDHS is currently engaged in a Source Water Assessment Program (SWAP), which involves water quality monitoring and groundwater modeling in Suffolk County, including Southold Town. Water conservation is an important aspect of water supply planning, particularly in Southold Town where water supply resources are fragile and limited. Water conservation measures should be part of any water supply plan. Such measures may include but are not limited to: irrigation restrictions, turf and irrigation dependent landscape limitations, use of drought tolerant indigenous species, water saving fixtures, reuse of gray water, channelization of runoff for reuse potential and other measures. Page 1-48 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS The Town of Southold is in communication with SCWA and SCDHS, and planners will seek to coordinate best management practices that address wellhead protection, water supply infrastructure installation, planning for drought conditions, groundwater supply assessment, land use practices and controls, and growth and development regulations. The Town will maintain contact with these entities, and (provided fiscal resources permit), Southold will assist, participate, and maintain a lead role in ensuring adequate water supply resources for the Towns residents. This may include development ora water supply master plan. 42. Emergency Preparedness Prior Town planning documents identified the need to be prepared for emergencies that may occur within the Town. Emergency services include highway, police, fire and ambulance services. The Town has its own police department. Additional backup and support is available from Suffolk County Police Department and New York State troopers on an emergency basis. Volunteer fire departments and ambulance districts serve the citizens of the Town with quality services supported by district commitment to emergency preparedness. These districts are supported by real estate tax revenue. Fire Department personnel are well prepared for typical emergency situations, and undergo intensive training while maintaining the necessary equipment to provide emergency coverage. This DGEIS includes flood mapping which will make such resources available and identify those areas that require planning and special attention. Erosion and flooding in coastal areas and particularly along Long Island Sound presents a challenge to emergency preparedness since they often occur during storm conditions. Residences in areas prone to erosion and flooding may require evacuation and other support from police and fire/ambulance departments. Significant Town resources are available for emergency planning under the direction of the Town Supervisor as Director of Emergency Management. This includes routine activities such as snow removal by the Town Highway Department, to response to emergency incidents. Direct responses and planning are engaged in by local districts as well as Town and County agencies and will continue such that the needs of the residents are served. Drought conditions could pose an emergency within the Town due to the Town's limited water supply availability. Extension of public water, with possible installation of transmission mains from areas that have more abundant, less fragile water supply would provide protection from drought conditions. Private well locations and coastal areas will need particular oversight during a drought emergency. There is an interrelationship between emergency preparedness and judicious planning practices. Flood prone and otherwise constrained areas of the Town should not be intensely developed. Likewise, areas subject to erosion must be protected from land uses that would intensify erosion. These can be avoided through careful planning. Water supply needs must be met so that residents of the Town receive potable water. Adequate tax revenue must be provided through tax ratables and proper land use planning. Overall, Town population must be controlled such that Page 1-49 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS the available resources can sustain the population and projected growth that would ensue. This Comprehensive Implementation Strategy allows the Town to understand build-out conditions and put in place proper plans to protect its natural resources, maintain the character and quality that makes the Town unique, and prepare for emergencies commensurate with the Town's growth and resources. 43. Social Services Programs The Town effectively manages social service programs through the Human Services Department. The tool identified in past studies involves a coordinated social service program including elements such as: · Senior citizen care · Community facilities · Day care · Meals on Wheels · Social & cultural elements The Town in connection with the Human Services Department will review current policy and practice and seek improvements and coordination to ensure a comprehensive social service program, consistent with the recommendations of prior studies. Page 1-50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 1.4 Mechanics of Implementation The Town has outlined facets of an implementation strategy that is current with today's needs and responsive to the goals of the Town. This DGEIS will provide a means to determine the impacts of these facets on overall implementation strategy, and place them in the public forum for input, comments and responses in order for the lead agency to take a "hard look" at the program, and roach a decision with complete information. The decision to implement an action must incorporate internal administrative and procedural changes, to ensure that the legislation had the desired impact. These internal administrative and procedural changes are noted and discussed below. Data Processing - The Town's data processing and information systems including GIS, and necessary hardware, software and supporting personnel must be maintained, staffed and supported at higher levels than it currently is. A GIS is a powerful computer software tool that records data in a manner that allows spatial mapping, permanent data recordation and rapid data access and management. The Town's GIS is being reviewed and updated as part of the Comprehensive Implementation Strategy because it provides useful data access for planning purposes. The Town of Southold is building an effective database of internally created and externally available data. The power of this tool is the ability to perform analysis functions to understand and retrieve data in a spatially related manner. The Town Planning office has effectively used GIS to display maps and determine acreages of use and zoning within the Town. There are additional functions that GIS could better serve many branches of Town government and the public. The Town of Southold would benefit from additional efforts to expand GIS capabilities. Benefits could include: · Access to reliable, repeatable and updated geographically related information. · Permanent recordation of data with expanded capabilities for analysis. · Planning functions to create overlay maps of important site information for Board of Trustees, Town Board, Planning Board, ZBA and Building Department review. · Inter-connectivity of data for common use by various departments. · Better service to Town residents and municipal officials as a result of data access. · Less duplication of Town efforts as a result of permanent recordation. Offices within the Town that would benefit from expanded GIS opportunities include but are not limited to the Planning office and Planning Board, Land Preservation Coordinator, Building Department, Town Engineer, Highway Department, Town Trustees, Town Board, Zoning Board of Appeals, Town Attorney and the Town Clerk. Land Preservation - Land preservation applications are expected to increase as incentives to sell farmland development rights and to reduce density through conservation subdivisions increase. The workload for the Land Preservation Coordinator and support staff will therefore increase. Through the analyses prepared for this DGEIS, it is evident that tracking and monitoring of preservation efforts requires accurate and consistent data collection and entry. The Land Preservation office must be properly directed, staffed, and supported in terms of computer software and training, to ensure that applications are promptly reviewed and processed. Page 1-51 I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS Planning Board - The Planning Board office and Planning Board are expected to experience increasing workloads once thc moratorium expires and land usc applications arc submitted for review. In addition, many land preservation applications have a component of subdivision, which requires Planning Board review. Other legislative amendments and initiatives proposed under this Comprehensive Implementation Strategy may also increase thc Planning Board workload. Thc support staff and GIS capabilities must bc in place to ensure that this department and Board function effectively. Town Engineer - The Town Engineer will need to keep pace with project review and special projects that may be required of that office. Adequate definition of job functions, additional staffing and computer support will be necessary to allow the Town Engineer to provide input during the planning process, while still maintaining the necessary level of other functions performed by the Engineer during the development process. The Town Engineer will need staff assistance in order to review drainage and grading plans on individual residential lots. Building Department - The Building Department should seek to update data entry methods so that spatial mapping and GIS integration can be used more effectively. The Department must be funded, staffed and supported to allow for permit review and construction follow-up as needed to keep pace with the increased workload that results from increased development pressure. The Building Department also will need training on new Code changes as they are intended to be implemented. Community Development and Parks - Community Development activities may increase as affordable housing initiatives and focus on hamlet center incentives are put in place. A Parks Department has been recommended, and will become necessary in the future. Oversight of a park plan, and parks management must also continue. Proper management, staffing and computer assistance will be required to keep pace with service needs. Committees - The Town has a number of volunteer advisory committees to advise the Supervisor, Town Board and other Boards as appropriate based on areas of interest. As more formalized procedures are implemented, Committee charges should be reviewed to ensure that they remain viable and effective, and if necessary, restructured. Tax Assessor - The Tax Assessor's office functions well commensurate with the Town's level of services needs. This office has coordinated with Data Processing to maintain up-to-date records in keeping with State mandated programs, and GIS is integrated into this system. Continued integration and coordination is needed. Where possible and while still maintaining conformance to State mandated format, the Town should seek to integrate planning data entry with tax records to serve as great a benefit as possible. Town Attorney - The Town Attorney's office serves a multitude of functions including advising the Town Board, Planning Board, and ZBA and in some cases the Town Trustees. A central, well-managed, well-staffed Town Attorney's office is key to serving these functions. The Town Attorney's office will become more critical as legal implications of land use initiatives are expanded. Regular counsel representation at Zoning and Planning Board meetings, research, review and interpretation of code, review of legal instruments and response to inquiries is not available at this time, but is needed. Page 1-52 I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Other departments and Boards such as the Town Clerk, ZBA, Town Trustees and the Highway office are also related to land management and may be affected to varying degrees by the efforts of the Town Board through this Comprehensive Implementation Strategy. It is important that planning functions be integrated with these offices and Boards as well. It should be noted that Southold could benefit from certain re-organizational considerations. A number of Long Island towns have created an overarching Department of Land Management, Planning, Environment and Development in order to internally coordinate planning, data processing/information systems, building departments, economic development, transportation management and land preservation efforts. Currently, these departments function somewhat independently, and only through personal inter-relationships and common knowledge is there coordination. An overall department responsible for the combination of these functions may become desirable and/or necessary at some point in the future in order to better coordinate these functions and provide a more appropriate management framework for the Town. As a result, top management, division management, staffing, budgets and support are necessary to ensure the success of such a department. Page 1-53 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 1.5 Additional Action Thresholds and Permits & Approvals Required This document is intended to comply with the SEQRA requirements as administered by the Town Board of the Town of Southold. This DGEIS is intended to provide the Southold Town Board with information that will assist in rendering a decision on the proposed action. Once accepted, the document will be the subject of a public comment period and heating. If no significant adverse impacts are identified, a Negative Declaration may be issued following the DGEIS comment period. Should significant impacts be identified, and/or substantive comments be received, a Final GEIS (FGEIS) would be prepared, to address these significant impacts, and/or respond to substantive comments on the DGEIS. Upon its determination that the FGEIS acceptable addresses the issues in the FGEIS, the Town Board will be responsible for the preparation of a Statement of Findings, which will form the basis for its final decision on the proposed action, for which an affirmative vote is required for adoption. The Town Board will consider the GEIS record and Statement of Findings prior to any decisions on legislative changes, policy or Town management implementation. The Town Board is the primary and, in effect, the only board that has approval authority to implement key elements of this Comprehensive Implementation Strategy. The Board will direct preparation of legislation by the Town Attorney and follow proper hearing, notice and filing requirements prior to enacting legislation. Future decisions that are consistent with the Findings will need no further SEQRA review. Actions which may differ from those considered in the GEIS will require review to determine if changes may result in significant adverse environmental impacts. Actions which will not result in impacts will be documented as such to support a Finding of No Further Review. Actions that may have a significant adverse impact will require further review with possible preparation of a Supplement to the GEIS. Assuming that the proposed action is approved (that is, the various parts of the Town Code are amended), reviews of all subsequent development applications, for which the revised Code applies, will be conducted in conformance with these revised regulations. Following is a listing of the additional approvals that may be required prior to development of a specific land use proposal: · Town Board - Change of Zone approvals · Town Planning Board - Site Plan review · Town Planning Board - Change of Zone recommendation to Town Board · Town Planning Board - Subdivision approval · Town Planning Board - Town Freshwater Wetlands permit · Town Planning Board - Architectural Review · Town ZBA - Variances (area & setback) · Town ZBA - Special Exception permits · Town ZBA - Special permits · Town Dept. of Buildings - Building Permit · Town Highway Dept. - Roadwork permits Page 1-54 I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I ! I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS · Suffolk County Planning Commission - Change of Zone recommendation to Town Board · Suffolk County Department of Public Works (SCDPW) - Roadwork permits · SCDHS - Article 6 (Sanitary System design review) · SCDHS - Article 4 (Water Supply System design review) · SCDHS - State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) permits · SCWA - Water Supply Connection · NYS Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) - Well permits · NYSDEC - Freshwater and Tidal Wetlands Permits · NYSDOS - Coastal Consistency review · NYS Department of Transportahon (NYSDOT) - Roadwork permits · US Army Corps of Engineers - Part 404 permits Additional review and approvals may become necessary should certain new legislative changes be enacted based on this Comprehensive ImPlementation Strategy. Page 1-55 I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I i I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS SECTION 2.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 2.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS This section provides a discussion of the existing enviromnental conditions of the Town of Southold. The documentation of the existing natural and human resource environment provides a baseline of data for use in assessing the potential impacts associated with the Comprehensive Implementation Strategy. The changes to the existing environment will be assessed in the following Section 3.0, both under existing future conditions, and conditions with implementation of the CIS. The Town of Southold maintains a Geographic Information System (GIS), which is a useful mapping and analysis software framework. This tool is invaluable for data collection, data retrieval and spatial data analysis, and is used extensively for planning and Town record keeping. The Town Data Processing department has been instrumental in gaining and recording data and assisting with analysis of these data. The Town has been inventoried to determine the number of acres of land that is zoned for various uses under the various Town zoning districts. A total of 29,081.53 acres are currently identified as all land in the Town that has received parcel level zoning as of January, 2003, exclusive of Fishers Island. Fishers Island adds an additional 2,506.89 acres of parcel level zoned land to the inventory, for a total Townwide zoned acreage of 31,588.42. The GIS database has been used to prepare maps of available data coverages, and from those maps determine the number of acres of land established in a variety of resource and zoning districts and uses. Maps used for analysis and generation of certain acreages are contained in Appendix B, and the source of information, date of information, and date of map printing are identified on each map. Where possible, certain sections of the Existing Environmental Conditions of the Town will reference relevant acreages as appropriate to achieve an understanding of the Town's overall character and resources. The following sections document the Town's Geology, Water Resources, Ecological Resources, Transportation Resources, Air Resources, Land Use/Zoning/Land Use Plans, Demographic Conditions, Community Services, Infrastructure, Community Character, Cultural Resources, and Economic/Fiscal Conditions, for a full picture of the Town's existing environment. 2.1 Geological Resources 2.1.1 Topography The North Fork region of the Town of Southold is naturally divided by salt-water ponds, marshes and inlets into six distinct island-like areas surrounded by water to the north, east and south (Crandell, 1963). The topography of the region generally slopes downward from the north to the south, and is characterized by two predominant features: the Harbor Hill end moraine and a glacial outwash plain. The Harbor Hill end moraine consists of a prominent ridge that extends Page 2-1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS towards the northeast along the shore of Long Island Sound and exhibits a maximum elevation of approximately 150 feet above mean sea level (asl). This feature was formed approximately 22,000 years ago in the latter part of the Wisconsin Stage of the Pleistocene Epoch and marks the maximum advance of the Laurentide Ice Sheet (Sirkin, 1995). The moraine has since been eroded by a rising sea level and tidal dynamics and is present as an escarpment of a bluff in most shoreline areas of the Town. The glacial outwash plain extends from the ridge to the south at a slope of approximately 20 to 30 feet per mile and consists of gently rolling topography with numerous shallow depressions throughout. The outwash plain was formed during the recession of the Laurentide Ice Sheet as erosional processes resulting from glacial melt water carried sediments away from the moraines and distributed them throughout the region. The land surface across the Town consists generally of a var/ed topography characterized by rolling hills, kettle holes, drainage swales, beaches and glacial end moraines. Areas with steep slopes should be avoided when considering land use that may alter topography such as development projects and clear cutting of land. Generally, slopes in excess of 15 pement are considered steep and subject to potential erosion and related environmental impacts. The Town excludes areas with slopes of more than 15 pement from the definition ofbuildable land in the current zoning code. For planning and resoume evaluation purposes, areas with slopes in excess of 15 pement were mapped as part of this study. GIS functions and the digital elevation model (USGS) were used to compute the areas of the Town with slopes in excess of 15 percent for Southold exclusive of Fishers Island. Fishers Island was analyzed manually using USGS Quadrangles for topographic contours. The total Townwide area of slopes in excess of 15 pement is 893 acres; Figure B-9 depicts the general location of these steep slope areas. 2.1.2 Surface Soils The Soil Survey of Suffolk County, New York (Warner et al., 1975) provides a complete categorization, mapping and description of soil types found in the county. Soils are classified by similar characteristics and depositional history into soil series, which are in turn grouped into associations. A soil association is a landscape that has a distinctive proportional pattern of soils. It normally consists of one or more major and at least one minor soil series. For the purpose of this study, knowledge of the soil associations that are present in the Town of Southold is useful as a general guide in maintaining prime agricultural soils, managing the watersheds and planning projects. An examination of the individual soil types present in the Town is not included in this discussion, since it is not possible to make regional decisions based on the extensive and random distribution of individual soil series across the Town. However, constrained soils that support wetlands are evident as a result of their support of wetland species. Of pr/me importance are agricultural uses that require key agricultural soils. Soil associations are discussed in more detail in the following paragraphs. The soil survey identifies the Town of Southold as lying within an area characterized by Carver- Plymouth-Riverhead, Haven-Riverhead, and Duneland-Tidal Marsh-Beach Association soils. The areal extent of each of these soils can be found in Figure B-10. Page 2-2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Carver-Plymouth-Riverhead Association soils are characterized as deep, rolling, excessively drained and well-drained, coarse to moderately textured soils on moraines. In the Town of Southold these soils are found predominantly along the north shore along Long Island Sound. Carver-Plymouth-Riverhead soils are also found on the south shore along Peconic Bay in the areas of Great Hog Neck and Little Hog Neck and within an area that extends through the hamlet of Mattituck along Mattituck Creek from the north shore to the south shore of the North Fork. The rolling landscapes, wooded areas and proximity to the water make soils in this association desirable as prime homesites. The sand texture and steep slopes make the soils in much of this association poorly suited for farming and the slopes are the dominant limitation to use of these soils for building sites. Duneland-Tidal Marsh-Beaches Association soils are comprised primarily of sand dunes, tidal marshes and barrier beaches. These soils are found as a small sand spit along the south shore of Orient Point. Due to its limited extent, barren nature, and coastal location, this area is not considered to have a significant influence on water within the Town of Southold. Haven-Riverhead Association soils are characterized by deep, nearly level to gently sloping, well-drained, medium-textured and moderately coarse textured soils on outwash plains. These soils are the predominant soil type found within the North Fork area of Southold. Due to the gently sloping to nearly level topography and good drainage, these soils are utilized primarily for farming purposes but are also suited for the development of residential housing. A dominant soil series within this association consists of the Haven loam. Figure B-Il depicts the location of prime farm soils within the Town. The estimated 12,144 acres of this soil in the Town are comprised of deep, well-drained, medium-textured material that formed in a loamy or silty mantle over stratified coarse sand and gravel. This soil is found on outwash plains and have a high to moderate available moisture capacity, a naturally low fertility and good internal drainage. This soils permeability is moderate in the surface layer and subsoil and rapid or very rapid in the substratum. This soil is used extensively for crops, and is well suited to all crops grown on the North Fork. Identification of these soils may be helpful to identify areas to target as open space or agricultural land. Other areas not designated as prime farm soils may contain soils suitable for aghculture. The farmland inventory (Figure B-6) depicts areas farm and fallow farm areas as recorded in 1999. 2.1.3 Subsurface Conditions The geology underlying the Town of Southold was described by (Crandell, 1963) and is comprised of four geologic units. The first and deepest is comprised of crystalline bedrock which is found at a depth of approximately 600 to 1,000 feet below sea level (bsl). Above this bedrock lie the sedimentary deposits which form the three major water bearing units which underlie the Town of Southold. Lying immediately atop the bedrock is the Raritan formation, which is comprised of the Lloyd Sand member and an overlying clay layer. The Lloyd Sand lies at an elevation of approximately Page 2-3 I I I I I ! I I I i I I ! I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 500 to 800 feet bsl, indicating a thickness of approximately 100 to 200 feet. These Lloyd deposits are comprised of coarse quartz sand, gravel and sandy clay with isolated layers of clay dispersed throughout. The overlying clay layer is encountered at an elevation of 350 to 675 feet bsl indicating a thickness of 125 to 150 feet and consists of a gray clay to silty clay with some sandy layers. Directly above the Raritan formation lies the Magothy formation. The Magothy has been observed beneath the Town of Southold at an elevation of 250 to 400 feet bsl, indicating a thickness of 100 to 275 feet. The Magothy formation is comprised of fine to medium sand mixed with silt and clay and some beds of coarse sand and gravel. The Magothy is present under a majority of the North Fork, however it appears to be absent from the areas of Orient Point, East Marion and eastern Greenport. The uppermost unit underlying Southold consists of the surficial deposits that comprise the Upper Glacial formation. The Upper Glacial is encountered at surface elevation ranging from 100 feet asl at the bluffs along the north shore to approximately 10 feet bsl in isolated depressions encountered throughout the North Fork. The thickness of the Upper Glacial ranges from 240 to 500 feet. These deposits consist primarily of stratified and unstratified sand and gravel interspersed with clay and isolated beds of clay. Geologic studies (Bohn-Buxton, et al, 1980) have also identified an extensive clay layer within the Upper Glacial formation which extends from Riverhead to the area in the vicinity of Dam Pond located just west of Orient Point and may be related to the Smithtown Clay found in west-central Suffolk County (Koppelman, et al, 1992). This clay layer is encountered at a depth of approximately 50 feet bsl to 100 feet bsl across the North Fork and ranges in thickness from 20 to 90 feet. Page 2-4 I I I I I I I I I i I I i I I i I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 2.2 Water Resources 2.2.1 Groundwater Hydrogeology Groundwater on the North Fork is derived from precipitation. Precipitation entering the soils in the form of recharge passes through the unsaturated zone to a level below which all strata are saturated. This level is referred to as the water table, which assumes a parabolic shape from north to south below land surface. In general, the groundwater table coincides with sea level on the north and south shores of the North Fork, and rises in elevation towards the center of the North Fork. The high point of this mound-like shape is referred to as the groundwater divide. Differences in groundwater elevation create a hydraulic gradient, which causes groundwater to flow perpendicular to the contours of equal elevation, or generally toward the north and south shores from the middle of the North Fork (Freeze and Cherry, 1979). Near the shore, water entering the system tends to flow horizontally along a shallow flow system and is discharged from the subsurface into streams or marine surface waters as subsurface outflow. Water that enters the system farther inland generally flows vertically to deeper aquifers before flowing toward the shores (Krulikas, 1983). The maximum elevation of the water table is within an approximate range of 5 feet in the central portions of the Town. The elevation of the water table within the Town ranges from 6 feet asl in areas of higher elevation to mean sea level in the coastal and surface water areas throughout Southold. This results in water table depths which range from approximately 240 feet to 0 feet bsl, based on the Ghyben-Herzberg principal, explained in more detail below. There is a significant area of the Town that exhibits shallow groundwater conditions located primarily along the southern coastline and in the vicinity of interior wetland areas. Figure B-12 illustrates the areas of the Town where the depths to groundwater are likely to be less than 10 feet below land surface. This figure was prepared for planning and illustrative purposes only, using functions available in GIS software. Figure B-13 illustrates the water table conditions in the Town of Southold. The major water- bearing units beneath the North Fork include the Upper Glacial aquifer, the Magothy aquifer, and the Lloyd aquifer and are contained within the same geologic formations discussed in Section 2.1.3 (Jensen and Soren, 1974; Koszalka, 1983). Within the North Fork water for supply purposes is derived principally from groundwater contained under the water table conditions of the Upper Glacial aquifer. Groundwaters contained within the Magothy and Lloyd aquifers have been determined to be primarily saline and are not suitable for consumption or irrigation (Shubert, 1998). The fresh waters of the Upper Glacial aquifer underlying the North Fork occur in a series of irregular shaped lenses or mounds that are bounded both laterally and at depth by glacial deposits with salty groundwater. This chain is broken down into discrete watersheds that are separated fi'om one another by salt-water marshes and inlets that are also underlain by salt-water (Crandell, 1963). The reader should be aware that these watershed areas have been defined differently in various studies. The actual boundaries of the watersheds are not as important as an understanding of the hydrologic dynamics taking place within specific geographic areas. The areas described below provide a useful overall description of the watershed areas for the Page 2-5 I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS purposes of this strategy. Figure B-14 illustrates the primary watershed areas of the Town of Southold. Western Southoid area - A seven square mile area that extends approximately from the Town of Southold border to Mattituck Creek and is approximately three miles wide across the North Fork. Mattituck-Cutchogue-Southold area - A twenty five square mile area bounded on the west by Mattituck Creek extending east to Hashamomuck Pond and ranges from 1.5 to 4 miles in width. · Greenport-East Marion area - A seven square mile area which extends eastward from Hashamomuck Pond to Dam Pond with a width of 1 to 1.5 miles. · Orient Point - A five square mile area extending east from Dam Pond to the end of Orient Point and is approximately I to 1.5 miles wide. · Little Hog Neck - A 0.75 of a mile area which comprises Little Hog Neck. · Great Hog Neck - An approximately 2.5 square mile area comprised of Great Hog Neck. In each of these watershed areas, fresh water has filled the glacial deposits until it encounters the salt water interface. Since the specific gravity of the fresh water is less than that of the underlying salt water, the fresh water tends to "float" on the salt water within the boundaries of each watershed area. Due to this difference in specific gravity a ratio develops which generally results in fresh water extending 40 feet bsl for each foot it extends above sea level. This is referred to as the Ghyben-Herzberg relationship. The upper surfaces of the watershed areas are marked by a chain of groundwater mounds aligned along the axis of the North Fork. A groundwater divide passes along this axis and generally follows the northeast trend of the North Fork. From the vicinity of this divide, groundwater moves vertically and horizontally in directions towards the salt-water bodies that surround each watershed area resulting in groundwater flowing radially outward from the inland water table mounds. The horizontal groundwater velocity within the North Fork ranges from 0.5 to 1 feet per day (Koppelman, et al, 1992). The direction of groundwater flow in each of the watershed areas is generally perpendicular to the lines of equal elevation of groundwater or the groundwater contours. The water table elevation map of the Town of Southold illustrates these groundwater reserve areas (see Figure B-13). As noted in that figure, groundwater flows radially and generally toward the nearby marine surface waters. The figure also illustrates the largest of the groundwater reserve areas noted as the Mattituck-Cutchogue-Southold Area, comprising approximately 25 square miles. A large portion of this area has groundwater at elevations of 5 feet asl or greater, indicating freshwater depths of more than 200 feet as determined by the Ghyben-Herzberg relationship. This is the largest groundwater reserve area in the Town and is considered an important resource for protection. The primary recharge area for this reservoir is in areas where groundwater is above the 5-foot elevation, as the elevation provides a hydraulic gradient that induces vertical recharge. The designation of important recharge areas as SGPA's is discussed in the next section, dealing with water quality. Page 2-6 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS The water budget (i.e. the movement of water between the atmosphere and land masses) for an area is expressed in the hydrologic budget equation, which states that recharge equals precipitation minus evapotranspiration plus overland runoff. This indicates that not all rain falling on the land is recharged. Loss in recharge is represented by the sum of evapotranspiration and overland runoff. The equation for this concept is expressed as follows: R=P-(E+Q) where: R = recharge P = precipitation E = evapotranspiration Q -- overland runoff The calculation of the water balance for a water budget area is partly dependent on the type of land coverage within an area. The natural water budget of an area is changed by the manner in which the land is used. The quantity of recharge will be determined by the degree to which the site is covered by impervious surfaces. Construction of impervious surfaces results in the reduction of vegetation. Vegetation reduces the amount of water available for recharge as a result of evapotranspiration. Reduction of vegetation (increasing the impervious surface area) at a site will result in an increase in the catchment, channelization and recharge of stormwater runoff to the ground, with a concomitant reduction in evapotranspiration. While this increases the quantity of water available for recharge within an area; of concern is the quality of this recharge and the quality will be determined by the type of land uses that are being created. With regard to annual recharge, approximately 50 percent of the total annual precipitation (45.32 inches/yr) is available for recharge (Peterson, 1987). This is due to atmospheric loss of water from plant transpiration as well as evaporation, resulting in the term evapotranspiration. Water Quality Water quality within the Town of Southold has been affected primarily by the historical agricultural land use and residential development patterns within the Town. These land uses have resulted application of fertilizers and pesticides as well as the discharge of sanitary wastes that eventually pemolate into the underlying water table. These land use has lead to elevated concentrations of pesticides, herbicides and nitrogen in groundwater resources underlying the Town. As outlined in the document, SouthoM Demonstration Site, New York State Fertilizer and Pesticide Demonstration Project Report (Trautmann, Porter and Hughes, 1983) there are a number of groundwater quality issues which were noted at the time of the study publication which include the following: Fourteen percent of the test wells within Southold have average nitrate concentrations higher that the 10 parts per million (ppm) drinking water standard and 43% of these wells have had at least one sample exceed the 10 ppm standard. Page 2-7 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS · Sixteen pement of wells within the Town tested by the SCDHS exceeded the 7 parts per billion (ppb) drinking water guideline for the pesticide aldicarb and 13% of the wells exhibited concentrations below this guideline. · The pesticide carbofuran was found in 30% of the wells sampled with 6% of the results exceeding the 15 ppb drinking water guideline. · Trace organic compounds were detected in 15% of the Town's observation wells. · Leachate from the Southold landfill has resulted in the presence of selenium, manganese and iron that exceed their respective groundwater standards in downgradient wells. · Saltwater intrusion and upconing has become a problem in some shoreline areas due to excessive groundwater withdrawals. The Town of Southold has two SGPA's as defined by New York State Law. The Long Island SGPA Plan (Koppelman, et al, 1992) was prepared by the Long Island Regional Planning Board in 1992 in order to study land use and to protect groundwater quality within several SGPA's throughout Long Island. Approximately 4,031 acres of the Town are located within the two SGPA's. Figure B-15 illustrates the location of these water recharge areas. The western part of Southold Town partially includes the Northeast Sector of the Central Suffolk SGPA. This SGPA is located in the area of Mattituck west of Mattituck Creek, surrounding the Laurel Lake area. The overall SGPA extends to Riverhead as well as part of the South Fork, and farther west as far as Coram in central Brookhaven Township. The portion in Southold Town comprises only a fraction of the overall SGPA. In general, agricultural contamination is documented in several areas of the SGPA including the Southold portion. The Southold SGPA is entirely within Southold Town, and is a central watershed feature According to the SGPA Plan, the primary groundwater quality issue within the Southold SGPA consists of contamination primarily from pesticides used for agricultural purposes. Pesticides have contaminated groundwater throughout much of the horizontal and vertical extent below the Southold SGPA (Koppelman, et al, 1992). Pesticides such as aldicarb, carbofuran and dichloropropane have also been detected in wells across the subject SGPA and are very unreactive and mobile. The use of some of these chemicals has since been banned in Suffolk County. Concentrations of these pesticides may be found to decrease due to mechanical mechanisms of natural attenuation; however, the total mass of the contamination is not reduced by biological degradation or absorption. Approximately 10 percent of the private wells sampled each year are found to exceed the 7 ppb drinking water standard for aldicarb and concentrations have hovered near this standard in some public supply wells within the North Fork area (Koppelman, et al, 1992). However, given the relatively short time that aldicarb had been used on the North Fork, the subsequent ban on its use and the reduction in concentration that has occurred due to dispersion, it is probable that much of the groundwater on the North Fork will be suitable for consumption without treatment within the next 20 years. In June of 1999 the SCDHS published a report entitled Water Quality Monitoring Program to Detect Pesticide Contamination in Groundwaters of Nassau and Suffolk Counties, NY to provide a comprehensive examination of pesticide impacts on Long Island groundwaters. Primarily, five Page 2-8 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS pesticide types were analyzed, these include: chlorinated pesticides, methyl carbonate pesticides, semi-volatile pesticides, chlorinated acids and dacthal metabolites. In addition to pesticides, samples were also analyzed for several other compounds to develop a broader profile of groundwater quality and include metals, volatile organic compounds and micro extractables. Within Southold, 445 samples were collected from various monitoring, private, domestic and supply wells. Of these 445 samples, 227 contained concentrations of 1 or more pesticides, of which 185 detections were above their respective Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs), which are equivalent to the New York State Drinking Water Standards. Figure B-16 illustrates groundwater impacted areas of the Town. Nitrate concentrations in agricultural areas frequently exceed the 10 ppm NYS drinking water standard, and are occasionally found as high as 20 to 30 ppm. Elevated chloride and sulfate concentrations are usually found with elevated nitrates but are often not found above their respective drinking water standard of 250 ppm. With regard to nitrates, a reduction in concentration is dependent on future land use and agricultural practices (Koppelman, et al, 1992). Fertilizer contaminants can be found throughout the vertical extent of the aquifer system. Another factor affecting the concentration of nitrogen in groundwater is varying population densities within the Town; this is due primarily to the uneven distribution of sanitary waste discharge and disposal, and the application of fertilizers to lawn and landscaped areas. As noted in the Suffolk County Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan (SCDHS, 1987) which references the 208 Areawide Waste Treatment Management Study (Koppelman, 1978), an empirical relationship between population density and the average median nitrogen concentration in water supply wells in unsewered areas was derived. Results of the study indicate that an increase of 5 persons per acre generally correlates to an increase in groundwater nitrogen concentrations of 3 ppm. Results of these studies were further confirmed by the Water Resource Program Center for Environmental Research at Comell University, which published a study investigating the impact of land use on groundwater quality within the Long Island Pine Barrens (Hughes and Porter, 1983). The study also evaluated the impact of residential density on groundwater nitrogen concentrations; the results of the study indicated that groundwater nitrogen concentrations demonstrate an overall increase with an increase in housing density per acre. Areas containing a density of 1 home per 5 acres generally exhibited a groundwater nitrogen concentration of approximately 5.2 ppm, while areas with housing densities of approximately 4 homes per acre exhibit a nitrogen concentration of 10.9 ppm. Results of this study correlate with the conclusions and results presented by the SCCWRMP and the 208 Study presented above. Based on this, the study supports 5-acre zoning in critical watershed areas of the Pine Barrens. The Comell Study further documented the statistical chance of exceeding the 10 ppm nitrogen standard, finding that a concentration of 3 ppm was needed to achieve a greater than 99 percent chance of not exceeding 10 ppm (Hughes and Porter, 1983). This further supports limiting residential densities in areas where water supply is important and groundwater outflow can impact important surface waters. The Suffolk County Department of Health Services has established density limitations on residential development for watershed management and implementation of the 208 Study recommendations. The requirements are codified in Article 6 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Page 2-9 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS Code (SCSC), and applies to all subdivisions occurring after 1981, the year of adoption of Article 6. Southold contains one (1) Groundwater Management Zone (Zone IV), which is defined generally as a shallow flow zone which contributes to Long Island Sound and Peconic Bay, and has limited local water supply potential and areas of compromised water quality. The discharge limitation for Groundwater Management Zone IV is 600 gallons per day per acre in areas where public water is available, and 300 gallons per day per acre in areas where public water is not available. Sewage treatment is needed where the sanitary flow exceeds these flow factors. A single family home discharges 300 gallons per day, therefore, 2 or 1 dwelling unit per acre can be achieved based on the above flow rates, depending on availability of public water. For commercial uses, there is a design flow factor applied to building square footage to determine total flow, which is then compared to allowable flow. In general, and particularly with regard to residential density, Town zoning requires larger lots than Article 6 of the SCSC. It is noted that only the HB district would permit a unit equivalent on a lot less than the 20,000 square feet allowed without sewage treatment, in this case a 10,000 square foot lot. The existing flow limitations must be reconciled with the Comell Study findings referenced above, to achieve overall water resource management objectives of sustainable groundwater and bay water quality conditions. It is clear that lower residential densities decrease groundwater nitrogen concentration, and provide an improved statistical chance of not exceeding the 10 ppm drinking water standard for total nitrogen. As noted earlier, the North Fork is surrounded on three sides by salt water and is separated into four island-like areas by salt water inlets and marshes. As a result, saltwater encroachment into the aquifer underlying the North Pork has impacted groundwater quality along the Southold shorelines and within the Village of Greenport. The degree of saltwater encroachment is governed by the Ghyben-Herzberg relationship discussed above. Saltwater encroachment occurs naturally due to tidal fluctuations. Pumping of large amounts of freshwater for irrigation or public supply in coastal areas may increase the inland extent of saltwater encroachment. Since freshwater sits as a lens upon the denser saltwater, the effects of regional pumping results in the increase in vertical as well as lateral encroachment of salt water. This vertical component is commonly known as "upconing" and occurs more rapidly than lateral encroachment, which must displace a volume of freshwater greater than that displaced by upconing (Heath, 1998). It should be recognized that the impact of saltwater encroachment may be minimized through proper pumping management and well placement strategies. In addition, the extensive clay layer present in the Upper Glacial aquifer in a majority of the North Fork may help prevent the upconing of saline groundwaters (SCWA, 1992). The Town of Southold landfill located along Middle Road in Cutchogue has resulted in impacts to groundwater underlying and surrounding the facility. Leachate from the landfill has introduced a variety of contaminants resulting in a plume comprised of volatile organic compounds and metals traveling in groundwater to the north of the site. Analytical results obtained during a June, 1996 sampling event detected the presence of the volatile organic contaminants above applicable regulatory standards including xylenes, vinyl chloride, 1,1- dichloroethene, 1,2-dichloroethene, cis- 1,3-dichloropropane, trans- 1,3-dichloropropene, methylene chloride and toluene. Metal compounds detected above their applicable regulatory Page 2-10 I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS standards consisted of antimony, iron, magnesium, manganese, selenium, sodium, thallium, beryllium, calcium, cadmium, lead and zinc (Dvirka & Bartilucci, 2001). Water Supply The saturated deposits underlying the North Fork are estimated to contain approximately 938,636 million gallons of fresh water. However, approximately only 22 percent of this total volume can be withdrawn for consumption due to capillary forces that restrict the movement of groundwater (Crandell, 1963). The approximate volume of water available for removal each watershed area is presented in Table 2-1. Groundwater on the North Fork is used primarily for public consumption and for agricultural purposes. The portions of the Town that have public water supply receive water from the SCWA's well fields that are distributed across the North Fork. The SCWA became involved in providing water services in the Town of Southold in the late 1980's, via the acquisition of existing water supply entities. The Town first requested that the SCWA purchase a failing water company providing services to the Captain Kidd Estates in western Mattituck. Since that time the SCWA has expanded its activities, most notably through the acquisition of the Village of Greenport Water Utility Company. The Greenport company dates back to 1887, and was formed to provide safe drinking water to residents within the Village. The company was purchased by the Village of Greenport in 1899, which then expanded the water service area beyond the boundaries of the incorporated Village. The Draft LWRP prepared by the Town of Southold (Town of Southold, 1999; draft manuscript), summarizes the current status of the SCWA as follows. The SCWA now owns about 196 acres of land within the Town: on which are located 13 well fields and pumping stations, plus one under construction. There are a total of 19 active wells and 5 inactive wells. TABLE 2-1 VOLUME OF FRESH WATER AVAILABLE by Watershed Area Watershed Estimated Volume Area (million gallons) Western Southold 46,000 Mattituck-Cutchogue~Southold 134,000 Greenport-East Marion 10,400 Orient Point 10,400 Little Hol~ Neck 1,000 Great Hog Neck 4,700 Total 206,500 Source: Geology and Ground-Water Resources of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, USGS; USGS Water Supply Paper 1619-GG Page 2-11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS The total annual pumpage from these wells is approximately 400 million gallons per year (MGY). A listing of these wells and their annual pumpage volumes from 1998 is presented in Table 2-2. This list is arranged geographically by well field site from west to east. Most of the water pumped for public supply is eventually returned to the water table, mainly through cesspool and septic systems. It has been estimated (McClymonds and Franke, 1972) that in unsewered areas on Long Island, approximately 85 percent of the total public supply pumpage is returned to the groundwater system. On the north fork, a larger portion of this may be subject to evaporation due to farm irrigation. A review of the SCWA Distribution Maps reveals that while the water authority does provide water supply service to the Southold there are still many areas within the Town that are not serviced by a municipal water purveyor. Homes within these areas depend on private domestic wells for potable water supply. The SCWA Water Service Area Map in included in Figure B- 17. Water supply for agricultural irrigation is provided through the use of private wells maintained at each farming location and this use is the largest consumer of water on the North Fork (SCWA, 1992). Information on the mount of irrigation water that is derived from private wells generally is not known. However, an average irrigation rate has been calculated to be 140,000 gallons per day (gpd) per acre per year (SCDHS, 1983). This rate has been determined from the irrigation rates required for each type of crop grown on the North Fork as well as estimates of the total acreage devoted to each crop type. The total volume of water required for irrigation during 1980 was determined to be approximately 2,800 MGY. Based on estimated land use projections it was estimated in the North Fork Water Supply Plan (1983) that by the year 2000 the annual water use for irrigation would be reduced by 500 MGY to 2,300 MGY. This projected decline was predicted to result from an anticipated reduction in agricultural activity on the North Fork with replacement by other land use types. In fact, agriculture still remains a dominant land use. Further, because there have been major shifts in the type of agricultural crops in production over the past 20 years, it may be useful to re-evaluate the agricultural irrigation component. In 1992 Leggette, Brashears & Graham (LBG) prepared a report for the SCWA regarding public water supply for the Town of Southold. The report identified potential water supply well fields for public water expansion in the Town and determined that the daily sustained capacity of the well-field network was approximately 3.2 million gallons per day (MGD). The report estimated that this additional yield could supply a population of approximately 30,000 people within the Town of Southold. Seasonal population stresses and compromised water quality due to past land use increase consumption and reduce water availability. In its master plan for enhancing the public water supply for Southold, LBG recommended that the placement of well fields be based on the consideration of several factors which are provided below: Page 2-12 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS TABLE 2-2 ANNUAL PUMPAGE RATES FOR SCWA SOUTHOLD WELL FIELDS Well Field Location 1998 Pumpage (gallons) Bergen Avenue Not presently in service Laurel Lake 18,300,000 Sunset Drive 3,417,200 Inlet Drive 23,051,000 Mill Road 7,514,000 North Road Not presently in service Ackerly Pond Lane 39,063,800 Kennys Road 123,996,900 Middle Road 110,507,000 North Road 32,275,000 Geyer (North Road) Not presently in service Brecknock Hall 35,247,000 Island End Not presently in service Long Way Not presently in service Main-Bayview 1,400,300 Rocky Point Road Not presently in service Browns Hills Road 5,088,750 Total 399,860,950 Placement of well fields should occur along the central spine of the North Fork, which consists of the Harbor Hill terminal moraine. This will provide an area with the greatest aquifer thickness and will mitigate the possibility of vertical salt-water encroachment. In addition, the presence of the clay layer within the Upper Glacial aquifer will reduce the potential of upconing of saline water. Well fields should be placed in reasonably close proximity to population centers to avoid excessive water main length, which can result in pressure losses through the transmission pipes. · Storage tanks must have an overflow elevation of 185 feet asl. The tallest tanks that can be constructed are 150 feet, which means that they must be located at 35 feet asl. Well locations should be placed in the area of the fresh water mound centered beneath Cutchogue Station, between Mattituck Creek and Richmond Creek. This area would provide groundwater that is downgradient of the groundwater divide, sufficiently distant from tidal water, within a relatively thick fresh-water lens, reasonable close to population centers and in areas where property may be readily available. Based on these factors, six potential locations for well fields were recommended. The SCWA continues to evaluate potential sites for public water supply well fields and water main distribution based on water quality and public needs, though the LBG report generally concluded that implementation of the above-described water supply plan would adequately serve the Page 2-13 I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Town's future population. The SCWA continues to find that producing water supply is difficult due to compromised water quality in many areas of the Town. The Town has previously recognized the WPZ's of the Town. These areas contain higher groundwater areas, larger sized lots, open space (including farm and non-farm open space), and a lower intensity of development (with limited localized exceptions) than other locations of the Town. As a result, WPZ's present an opportunity for watershed management and protection. The total area included within two (2) WPZ's as identified in the Town Water Supply Management & Watershed Protection Strategy is 9,825 acres; Figure B-8 depicts the location of the previously recommended WPZ's. 2.2.2 Surface Water and Wetlands As previously noted the North Fork is naturally divided by salt and fresh water ponds, marshes and inlets. These surface water bodies are scattered throughout the North Fork and contain fresh water and tidal wetlands. Due to its maritime setting, the Town harbors a variety of marine and inland water bodies. The most prominent of the marine waterways consist of the Long Island Sound to the north as well as Great Peconic Bay, Little Peconic Bay, Gardiners Bays, Cutchogue Harbor, Hog Neck Bay, Southold Bay and Orient Harbor to the south. The most prominent fresh water bodies within the Town consist of Mattituck Creek, Laurel Lake, Maratooka Pond, Great Pond and Hashamomuck Pond. In addition, to the water bodies presented above, there are several additional minor tidal and freshwater wetland dispersed throughout the Town. During the course of this study, the Town of Southold utilized consultant and staff resources to map the Town's tidal and freshwater wetlands. Wetlands were identified using aerial photography, soil maps, topographic maps and groundwater maps. These areas initially mapped and subject to spot ground-verification to refine actual mapping and improve interpretation of the available information. Tidal wetlands were mapped separate fi.om freshwater wetlands. Freshwater wetlands mapping also used NYSDEC Freshwater Wetlands maps, and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS), National Wetlands Inventory for initial identification of wetlands. The tidal and freshwater wetlands of the Town are presented in Figure B-18, and it should be noted that this is a resource map and does not assume any regulatory authority. The map was generated to reflect wetlands of Townwide importance and is based generally upon determination of tidal and freshwater wetlands as performed by the Town Trustees, NYSD£C and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (3 parameter approach for freshwater wetlands). The map is useful as a screening tool to identify areas where wetlands are expected to occur, and will be subject to site-specific field confirmation in connection with land use or wetlands applications as necessary. The tidal and freshwater wetland resources of the Town are described below, and acreages referenced were calculated using GIS area functions for the wetlands mapped as described above. In total, 5,700 acres of tidal and freshwater wetlands were mapped within the Town. Page 2-14 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Tidal Wetlands The tidal wetlands are located principally along the exterior coastline regions of the North Fork and are comprised of coastal fresh marshes, intertidal marshes, coastal shoals, bars, flats, littoral zones, high marshes, salt meadows and formerly connected tidal wetlands. These estimated 3,664 acres contain saline waters that originate from the ocean fed surface waters surrounding the North Fork. These features are formed by coastal processes and, with the exception of formerly connected tidal wetlands, are subject to tidal influence. These areas are not only vital to the ecological systems to which they serve but also function to control storm surges during flood and major storm events which may impact sensitive watershed areas. Due to the sensitive nature and ecological importance of these areas they are limited in their compatibility to development and land use. As a result the NYSDEC has enacted the Tidal wetlands Land Use Regulations, 6 NYCRR Part 661 in accordance to Article 25 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law whose purpose is to protect and regulate their use and development. The NYSDEC maintains a series of tidal wetlands maps which document the location and type of tidal wetlands within New York state and includes a complete inventory for the area of Southold within the North Fork. All tidal wetland systems must be field checked and delineated by NYSDEC for regulatory purposes. State jurisdiction may extend landward as far as 300 feet. As with freshwater wetlands, the Town Trustees regulate activities within 100 feet of tidal wetland boundaries. Freshwater Wetlands The approximately 2,036 acres of freshwater wetlands in the Town are located primarily within the inland portions of the North Fork and are comprised of lakes, ponds, streams and marshes. These features were formed during the retreat of the Laurentide Ice Sheet when fresh melt water collected in the kettle holes and depressions formed during the glacial advance. These areas are of critical importance to the watershed underlying the North Fork since they are major conduits of groundwater recharge in the region and represent ecologically sensitive resources. Activities within 100 feet of State designated freshwater wetlands are regulated by the NYSDEC Freshwater Wetlands Permit Requirements Regulations 6 NYCRR Part 663 in accordance with Article 24 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law. In addition, Southold through the Town Trustees also regulates activities within 100 feet of Town designated wetlands under Chapter 97. These requirements were enacted to preserve, protect and conserve freshwater wetlands and regulate their use and development to secure the natural benefits that they provide. NYS mapped freshwater wetlands are illustrated in Figure B-19, and Town-mapped freshwater wetlands were shown in Figure B-18. In summary, freshwater wetlands are dispersed throughout the inland areas of the North Fork. Unique to this area is the fact that tidal wetlands can extend inland and be found within close proximity to freshwater wetlands. Both are influential in the recharge and maintenance of sensitive watershed areas and are sensitive to certain types of land use and development. Both of these areas are regulated by the Town and are inventoried and catalogued by the NYSDEC who have imposed regulations related to land use and development in these areas. Page 2-15 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Flood Zones The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which administers the National Flood Insurance Program, provides insurance coverage to those individuals whose property is damaged as a result of naturally occurring floods. FEMA has classified portions of the Town as within Flood Zones AE and VE (see Figure B-20). These zones are classified as Special Flood Hazard Areas, which are areas susceptible to inundation by a 100-year flood. Within either zone, base flood elevations have been established by FEMA, which indicate the elevations asl above which flood damage relief becomes available. The flood prone areas of the Town that are not subject to direct storm surge are classified as within Flood Zone AE. A total of 8,027 acres of the Town lie within this zone (see Table 2-3). Flood Zone VE is described as an area similar in character as the AE zone, but with the additional potential for velocity hazard (i.e., damage due to wave action). The VE zone totals approximately 5,147 acres, and is found in the exposed coastal areas of the Town. TABLE 2-3 FEMA FLOOD ZONES I FEMA Flood Zone Acreage 8,027 5,147 13,174 Page 2-16 I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 2.3 Ecological Resources The LWRP, as well as many other Town planning documents, investigated the natural resources to varying degrees and documented the wide range of diversity among habitats and species within the Town of Southold. As stated in the LWRP, the Town of Southold is rich in habitats that support diverse and often large wildlife populations, many of which have commercial and/or recreational value. The diverse habitats within the Town range from fresh and tidal wetland habitats and large open surface water bodies associated with the Peconic Estuary, Gardiners Bay and Long Island and Block Island Sound to mature woodlands, a variety of successional habitats, and extensive agricultural fields. This variety in habitats enables species such as fish, crustaceans, mollusks, birds, mammals, amphibians, and reptiles to inhabit the Town of Southold. The following sections provide an overview and brief description of the vegetation types and wildlife species that occur within the Town. 2.3.1 Vegetation and Habitats There are a multitude of distinct biotic communities within the Town, which can generally be classified into several broad categories including marine waters, estuarine waters, tidal wetlands, freshwater wetlands, open uplands, forested woodlands, and man-created habitat types. Each distinct biotic community within these general broad categories has been classified according to a classification system development by the NYSDEC. Ecological Communities of New York State prepared by Reschke (1990) classifies and describes these ecological communities within New York State. As defined by Reschke, "an ecological community is a variable assemblage of interacting plant and animal populations that share a common environment." Ecological communities form a unique assemblage of interacting plant and animal populations, which in turn often modify the habitat, and form a complex mosaic in the landscape as they change in time and are intergraded spatially and temporally (Reschke, 1990). Reschke (1990) classifies community types into seven (7) classification systems, which consist of the following: Marine Open ocean, associated coastline, shallow, saline coastal bays Estuarine Deepwater tidal habitats and adjacent tidal wetlands that are usually semi-enclosed but have open, partially obstructed, or sporadic access to open ocean or tidal fresh waters, and in which ocean water is at least occasionally diluted by freshwater runoff. Riverine Aquatic communities of flowing, non-tidal waters that lack persistent emergent vegetation but may include areas with submerged or floating-leaved aquatic vegetation. Lacustrine Waters situated in topographic depressions or dammed river channels, lacing persistent emergent vegetation, but including areas with submerged or floating-leaved aquatic vegetation. Palustrine Non-tidal perennial wetlands characterized by emergent vegetation. Terrestrial Upland habitats. Subterranean Both aquatic and non-aquatic habitats beneath the ears surface, including air-filled cavities with openings to the surface, water-filled cavities and aquifers, and interstitial habitats in small crevices. ! ! I I I ! I Page 2-17 I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS At least several distinct biotic communities from each of these seven general classification systems can be found throughout the Town of Southold, however only the first six listed above will be generally discussed herein. The complexity of these biotic community types within the Town requires site-specific analysis, and for purposes of this report, community types will be grouped into the general categories that are discussed further below. Freshwater wetlands and tidal wetlands have been mapped and were briefly discussed in Section 2.2.2 above. Further ecological aspects of these communities are discussed herein. Broad community types are also discussed in the Town's LWRP as well as other Town planning documents. A more specific discussion of many of the biotic communities found within each of these broad classification systems are located in Appendix C-1 and are derived in part from the Ecological Communities of New York State (Reschke, 1990). Further, Appendix C-2 contains a list of plant species typical of these general habitat classification systems. As stated above, in order to provide detailed representations of a particular site(s) within the Town, site evaluations on a parcel by parcel basis must be performed and specific biotic communities should be identified. Optimal field investigation times for noting the vegetative communities would occur during the growing season, primarily from May/June through September/October. The Town was also inventoried for areas that contain a predominance of wooded land. The Town's woodlands are important due to habitat value, wind and weather breaks, linkages between open and wooded areas, aesthetic qualities and their contribution to the Town's rural character. The Town's woodlands were delineated by Town Planning staff using 2001 aerial photograph, local knowledge and intermittent ground check for accuracy and interpretation. Woodlands were delineated separately for natural woodlands and wooded areas that may include some residences. These areas are color coded in Figure B-21, which illustrates the overall Town wooded areas of the Town; the resulting acreage of Town woodlands is 7,333 acres. It should be noted that the NSYDEC classification system also defines several man-made habitats (i.e., landfill, structure, moved lawn, paved road, etc.) that can also be found throughout the Town; however these classifications will not be discussed as comparatively less ecological value is placed on many of these habitat types. However, several maintained habitats provide suitable shelter, ample food and water resources, as well as potential breeding sites for many wildlife species. More specifically, habitats such as agricultural land may provide an abundance of food for wildlife, which can be particularly critical during migration. As indicated above, there are a variety of community types within the Town of Southold, ranging from open tidal waters, beaches, and tidal and freshwater wetland habitats to successional habitats, upland forests and large expansions of agricultural lands. Each biotic community within these generally consists of a unique assemblage of vegetation (as demonstrated in Appendix C-2) with each broad community classification discussed in general terms below. Marine Waters Marine waters within the Town of Southold support commercial and recreational fisheries and support a variety of fish, crustacean and mollusk species, as well as provide economical, aesthetic, recreational and educational values. Estuary environments within the Town are vital Page 2-18 I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS habitat for numerous marine species due to their abundance of food and relatively protected environment. Many species from fish, shellfish and bird species rely, at least in part, on estuary environments. Estuaries can function to filter sediment and pollution, removal of excess nutrients, decrease effects of flooding and storm surges (potentially saving billions of dollars), support boating, tourism, and commercial and recreational fishing, and often have historical and cultural significance (EPA, undated). Marine waters are located along the entire northem, eastern and southern perimeters of the Town of Southold, which offer large expanses of irreplaceable habitat of vital importance to the Town. Freshwater and Tidal Wetlands Wetlands are areas that are periodically or seasonally inundated by surface or groundwater and support vegetation adapted to saturated soils conditions. Wetlands are important ecological communities. These habitats are generally more productive than upland habitats, and are typically high in both plant and animal diversity. Wetlands are also vital in controlling floodwaters and filtering pollutants, and are valuable as recreation areas and as refugia for rare species. As the intrinsic value of wetlands has become recognized, they have received increasing protection from Federal, State, and local regulations and are often prioritized for public acquisition and preservation. Wetland boundaries are generally defined by the presence of significant numbers of indicator plant species that are typical of flooded or waterlogged soils. This approach may be somewhat arbitrary and is open to individual interpretation, particularly in areas with shallow slopes and broad transition zones. Wetlands can either be 'perched' above the water table due to relatively impervious silt subsoils or are hydrologically connected to other nearby surface waters and/or the underlying groundwater. Wetlands can be evaluated in terms of supporting recreational and economic values, open space and aesthetic values, groundwater recharge values, water quality improvement values, nutrient recycling values, wildlife habitat values, erosion protection and natural flood control values. Activities located within and adjacent to tidal wetland habitats are regulated by the NYSDEC under Article 25 of the ECL and by the Town Trustees under Chapter 97 of the Town of Southold Town Code. As defined by ECL Article 25-0103, tidal wetlands are "those areas which border on or lie beneath tidal waters, such as, but not limited to, banks, bots, salt marsh, swamps. meadows, fiats or other low lands subject to tidal action, including those areas now or formerly connected to tidal waters...." To summarize from the intent of Article 25 and the Town Code, tidal wetlands are extremely vital and productive and contain intrinsic values with respect to marine food production, wildlife habitat, flood and storm and hurricane control, recreation, cleansing ecosystems, sedimentation control, education and research, and open space and aesthetic appreciation. The NYSDEC, under Article 25 of the Tidal Wetland Act, has defined six ecological classifications for tidal wetlands, and based on their intrinsic value, has created allowable uses which are deemed compatible with particular wetland classifications. These tidal wetland ecological classifications include intertidal marsh, coastal fresh marsh, high marsh or salt meadow, coastal shoals, bars and mu. dflats, littoral zone wetlands, and formerly connected tidal wetlands. More detailed descriptions of these classifications may be found in the tidal wetlands land use regulations Section 661.4(hh), as well as the Town LWRP and other planning documents. Large areas of these critical habitats are found along the shores of the Town. Protection of these habitats within the Town of Southold is vital. Freshwater wetlands are equally important ecological communities scattered throughout the Town. As summarized in the Master Plan Update (RPPW, 1984), freshwater wetlands can play a major role in flood control, acting as storage basins and reducing flood crests and erosive capacities; wetlands are vital to the hydrologic cycle in that they help to recharge groundwater Page 2-19 I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS and also act as natural pollution control systems by filtering out may potentially harmful materials and freshwater wetlands are important components of the ecological cycle, supporting a diversity of flora and fauna. Open Uplands Open uplands generally consist of grasslands, meadows, and shrublands. Coverage by trees and shrubs within grasslands is less than 50% whereas shrublands must contain 50% shrubs and have less than 40% tree coverage in the canopy. Successional old field and successional shrubland habitats generally occur following clearing/disturbance of an area, which is then left to revert back to a natural community. Generally, herbaceous species are the first to colonize such areas due to wide seed dispersal, which are then replaced by woody shrubs and saplings. As time progresses, trees begin to dominate, reducing light penetration, eventually resulting in a forested community. Additional shrub and grassland habitats may be found along the coast and are classified as maritime communities, specifically maritime shrublands and maritime grasslands. Also included in this generally community type includes maritime beaches and maritime dunes. Beaches are sparsely vegetated communities that occur on unstable sand above mean high tide, whereas intertidal beaches are marine communities such to high energy waters and high fluctuations in salinity and moisture (Reschke, 1990). Maritime dunes are extremely sensitive environmental features typically dominated by grasses. The composition and structure of the vegetation is variable depending on the stability of the dunes, amounts of sand deposition and erosion, and the distance from the ocean (Reschke, 1990). Dune habitats are highly restrictive and severe biologically, thereby containing flora (and fauna) possessing highly specialized adaptations (Council on Environmental Quality, CEQ, undated). These areas are subject to extreme conditions (such salt spray, lack of organic soils, etc) and are highly sensitive environments. While the north and south shore of the Town of Southold contain extensive beaches and intertidal beaches, each shoreline is unique in terms of environmental sensitivity. The north shore beaches tend to consist of gravel and stone while beaches along the south shore consist mainly of sand. Bluffs are a common sensitive environmental coastal feature along the north shore and are subject to high erosion rates whereas extensive dune systems can be found in many areas along the south shore of the Town of Southold. Beaches, dunes and bluffs are extremely sensitive, constantly changing environmental features that must be preserved in the natural state. Forested Woodlands Moist woodland habitats are generally more mature as compared to the Pine Barrens vegetation that characterizes most of Long Island (and to a lesser degree within the Town of Southold) due to the minimal disturbance by fire. Deciduous oak forest was the predominant native habitat on the moraines of Long Island's north shore prior to colonization. Much of this vegetation was cleared for cultivation, timber and firewood, but areas of the native oak forest are present as remnants or in areas that have been allowed to undergo succession, reestablishing a new climax community. As briefly described in the 1984 Master Plan Update, woodlands along the northern portion of the Town commonly consist of red oak, white oak, black oak, yellow poplar, red maple, and black cherry with common understory species consisting of huckleberry, sassafras, dogwood and mountain laurel. In the southern portion of the Town and on the outwash plains, woodland species typically consist of white oak, hickory, white aspen, scarlet oak, with scrub oak and pitch pine located in sandier areas; common understory species include huckleberry, greenbrier, sumac, grasses and poison ivy. Approximately 7,333 acres of forested woodland exist within the Town of Southold. Pine oak forests, dry oak forests and moist forests can be found throughout the Town; the approximate location of these areas is depicted in Figure B-21, previously referenced. While pine oak forests are generally found within or near more typical pine barrens habitats, dry Page 2-20 I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS oak forests typically offer comparatively more productive habitats in terms of the availability of more succulent vegetation and a more diverse understory. Moist oak forests typically occur on soils with a greater water retention capacity. The canopy species within a moist oak forest is diverse and the combination of increased moisture, increased shading and richer soils allows for a greater diversity of vertebrate species (CEQ, undated). Early successional woodland habitats occupy areas that have undergone many years of succession and are typically associated with smaller diameter trees, some of which may be non-native to the area, and often remain dominated by shrubs in the understory. The Town of Southold contains a significant number of large diameter trees. "The Trees of Southold" (Kassner, et al, 2000) contains a register of the largest trees of all species reported growing in the Town, with the largest tree in Town having a circumference of 18 feet. Man-Created Habitat Types These terrestrial cultural habitats are communities that are either created and maintained by human activities, or are modified by human influence to such a degree that the physical conformation of the substrate, or the biological composition of the resident community is substantially different fi.om the character of the substrate as it existed prior to human influence (Resehke, 1990). Comparatively, less ecological value is placed on many of these habitat types, such as a mown lawn; however, several maintained habitats provide suitable shelter, ample food and water, and potential breeding sites for a variety of species. More specifically, habitat such as active aghcultural land provides an abundance of food for wildlife, which can be particularly critical for several species during migration. Both large and small tracts of agricultural land exist within the Town, further increasing habitat diversity. Approximately 10,202 acres of agricultural land exist within the Town of Southold (Tables 2-8). Agricultural land uses are dominant features within the Town of Southold. 2.3.2 Wildlife The Town of Southold contains a diversity of habitat types, which in turn provide habitat for a variety of wildlife species. The wide range of community types within the Town provides suitable seasonal and permanent habitats and contains an assortment of cover types, as well as ample food, shelter and water resources. Typically, as the range and diversity of habitat types increases, species diversity also increases. Habitat diversity is an important factor in terms of species distribution, and within individual habitats, structural diversity can also be utilized to determine the range and quality of habitats on an individual species basis. Several large blocks of contiguous habitats are found within the Town, which can provide critical habitat for an abundance of wildlife species, particularly those species that are more sensitive to human encroachment. Preservation of large portions of these areas, in addition to the Town's wetland and agricultural areas would be expected to help maintain the currently level of habitat diversity found throughout the Town. Conservation of the variety and range of species within the Town is the key element in maintaining biological diversity. Many wildlife species adjust well to haman activity, although many are very sensitive to human encroachment and habitat fragmentation. Spatial configurations of habitat may have more of an effect on population dynamics than the total amount of habitat available and for may species, vegetation structure is just as important as vegetation composition (Treweck, 1999). The home range size of a particular species can depend on habitat quality and quantity as well as can vary Page 2-21 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS on a variety of other factors (such as food abundance, season, etc.). The Town of Southold is home to several wildlife species subject to rarity, wildlife species that have economical value, migrant species, as well as non-native wildlife species. Although many areas in the Town of Southold remain natural, the majority is expected to have been altered to some degree by human activity. Plant communities within many of these areas however remain diverse and form communities of appreciable habitat quality. Additionally, many other areas of the Town provide unique habitat for wildlife, as will further be discussed below. The overall ecological function within the Town is expected to be comparatively high due to the size and quality of many of the existing habitats that remain undeveloped. Species composition within the Town has likely changed over time, with an expected increase in those species that favor edge and suburban habitat types and those adapt readily to human influences. Reduction in the size and quality of habitat limits the available food and shelter resources, but may also establish barriers to animal movements and migration. The presence of suitable corridors in and between habitats needs to be preserved as these features are important in order to provide linkages between habitats (and potentially habitats of different quality). Generally, the Town of Southold is expected to be species rich, representing high diversity and density of most species populations, particularly as compared to other western Long Island towns. Protection of these resources is essential in the Town's ability to sustain wildlife populations. Included herein is a brief description of some of the types of wildlife species expected within the Town. Appendix C-3 provides a modified copy of the New York State Checklist of Amphibians, Reptiles, Birds and Mammals (NYSDEC, 2001) indicating species that may be found within Southold along with their respective Federal and State protective status. This appendix presents a computer generated list of species that could be expected given a particular habitat type. This list is provided as a supplemental tool and also includes basic information on the biological needs of each species site; however, site-specific field inspections are necessary to provide a detailed representation concerning the wildlife inhabiting a particularly location. Nelson, Pope & Voorhis, LLC developed the model as a tool to supplement site specific inventory; the model is described more fully in the introductory statements contained in Appendix C-4. The Town of Southold is home to an abundance of avian species. Avian species typically found within the Town include a variety of woodpeckers, wrens, titmice, nuthatches, kinglets, thrushes, creepers, flycatchers, swallows, warblers, corvids, thrashers, orioles and blackbirds, doves, starling, grosbeaks, finches, towhees, juncos, and sparrows. Game birds, such as the ring-necked pheasant, ruffed grouse, bobwhite and waterfowl are also abundant as the Town contains large areas of the preferred habitat for these species. Owls and raptors, as well as a variety of shorebirds, are also abundant within the Town. Large colonies of shorebirds may be observed nesting near and feeding in the productive waters within the Town of Southold. Due to the diversity of requirements of these individual species, site specific information is necessary to determine the ability of individual areas to sustain permanent populations. In order to provide a more detailed representation of the avian species inhabiting the Town, the NYSDEC was contacted to obtain data from the 1987 Breeding Bird Survey for the census Page 2-22 I I I I ! I I I I I I l ! I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS blocks encompassing the Town of Southold (Appendix C-5). This study surveyed the entire State by 25 km2 census blocks over a five year period (1980 to 1985) to determine the bird species which breed within the State. An update to the breeding bird survey is currently underway; this update began in January 2000 and will continue through 2004. A variety of small and large mammals are also abundant throughout the Town. The Virginia possum and raccoon are found throughout a variety of habitats and are abundant. The masked shrew also makes use of nearly any habitat found within the Town, while the short tailed shrew appears to be more selective. The eastern mole is also expected to be common within a variety of the Town's upland habitats, while the star nosed mole is documented as being relatively rare on Long Island. Several bat species, such as the silver-haired bat, little brown bat, Keen's bat, big brown bat, red bat and hoary bat, may also be found within the Town. Both the Eastern cottontail and gray squirrel are abundant in the Town and may be found within numerous habitat types. The eastern chipmunk and flying squirrel may also be present; however, populations of these species are not expected to be overly abundant. As stated in the Town Master Plan Update (RPPW, 1984), the woodchuck, muskrat, mink and striped skunk have become increasingly rare or non-existent over the decades. Species of mice present within the Town include the white- footed mouse, meadow mouse, pine mouse, house mouse, Norway rat and meadow jumping mouse. The red fox is expected to be fairly abundant near areas of preferred habitat. Reptiles and amphibians are found throughout the Town, with those associated with aquatic habitats expected to be more abundant. The snapping turtle, eastern box turtle, spotted turtle, painted turtle, mud turtle, diamondback terrapin, and musk turtle have all been documented within the Town, with varying degrees of distribution (RPPW, 1984). Additionally, marine species such as the loggerhead sea turtle, Atlantic ridley sea turtle, and green sea turtle have also been documented along the eastern shores of the Town of Southold. Limited distribution of the brown snake, northern water snake, ribbon snake, milk snake, black racer, eastern hognose snake and ring neck snake have been documented in the Town, and the common garter snake appears to maintain a relatively wide distribution. The most abundant frog and toad species within the Town appear to be the Fowler's Toad, the green frog, bull frog and spring peeper. Species such as the northern gray treefrog, wood frog, pickerel frog and the eastern spadefoot toad appear to have a limited distribution throughout the Town. The spotted salamander appears to have the most widespread distribution of the salamander species within the Town, with limited recent reporting of the redback salamander and limited populations of the tiger salamander are documented. Of these species, the eastern garter snake, painted turtle, diamondback terrapin, and ribbon snake are species that are listed as introduced species. Many invertebrates, crustaceans, mollusks and fish inhabit the offshore waters and estuaries within the Town of Southold. Many of these species provide commercial and recreational value. Shellfish found within the Town include hard clams, soft clams, oysters, bay scallops, and mussels and conchs, and several snail species can be found as well. The horseshoe crab, spider crab, green crab, fiddler crab, lobster and other crab species are often identified within these marine waters. Some of the finfish known from the surrounding marine waters include flounder, fluke, blackfish (tautog), bluefish, porgies (scup), weakfish, black sea bass, mackerel, pollock, and striped bass. There are several groups of invertebrate species that are important in the salt Page 2-23 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS marsh system. Types of organisms which are expected in the marsh and adjacent marine waters include small and microscopic forms such as copepods, small crustaceans, polychaete worms, nematodes, diatoms, bacteria, foraminifera, unicelled algae and protozoans, as well as larval forms of larger species. These species play an important role in the marine system as a food source for both macroinvertebrate and vertebrate species and in the recycling of nutrients from decaying plants and animals. 2.3.3 Critical Habitats and Special Concern, Threatened or Endangered Species The Peconic Estuary and its watershed are located within a Critical Natural Resource Area as defined in the Peconic Estuary Program Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan. As stated in the Town's LWRP, the Peconic Estuary and its watershed contain a larger percentage of undisturbed habitats and a greater diversity of natural communities, on a per trait basis, than anywhere else in the coastal zone of New York State. Included within this designation are the open waters from Orient Harbor to Plum Island, Hashamomuck Pond and the Arshamomuck wetland complex, the open waters off Cedar Beach, Robins Island and its surrounding open waters and the numerous creeks. The Peconic watershed provides quality habitat for spawning, breeding, feeding and wintering for shellfish, finfish, waterfowl, shorebirds, and anadromous fish, as well as rare plant, animal and natural communities. Several Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats as designated by the USFWS have been identified within the Town of Southold. Two areas, the North Fork Beach Complex and the Orient Point-Islands Complex, are regionally significant ecological complexes. The North Fork Beach Complex includes a narrow, linear complex of beaches, salt marshes, tidal creeks and near shore bay waters extending along the Peconic Bay shoreline from Jamesport to the Village of Greenport. The Orient Point-Islands Complex is a diverse complex of land and turbulent passages of water and islands extending from Orient Harbor to the western end of Fishers Island. More detailed descriptions of these significant habitats are found within the Town's LWRP. The Town's LWRP also recognizes eighteen (18) areas within the Town that have been designated as locally Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats. These are as follows: Mattituck Inlet Wetland (Reach 1), Orient Harbor, Long Beach Bay and Plum Gut (Reach 5), Hashamomuck Pond, Conkling Point, Port of Egypt Island (Reach 6); Jockey Creek Spoil Area, Cedar Beach Point, Corey Creek, Richmond Creek and Beach (Reach 7), Little Creek and Beach, Cutchogne Harbor Wetlands, Robins Island (Reach 8), Downs Creek (Reach 9), The Race, Fishers Island Beaches and Pine Islands (Reach 10). The NYS Natural Heritage Program (ECL 9-1503) was contacted to determine if there is any record of rare plants or wildlife within the Town. The Heritage Program indicated that there are both recent and historical records of known occurrences of rare or state-listed plants, beetles, amphibians, reptiles, and bird species, as well as significant natural communities within the Town of Southold (Appendix C-5). Additionally, a list of the New York States Endangered, Threatened and Special Concern Fish and Wildlife Species is also included in Appendix C-6. Page 2-24 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southoid Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS In addition, "exploitably vulnerable" plant species are located within the Town of Southold. Many of these species are listed in the vegetation lists associated with habitat types provided in Appendix C-2 and are denoted with a [p]. "Exploitably vulnerable" plants are species which are not currently threatened or endangered, but which are commonly collected for flower arrangements or other uses. Regardless, under ECL 1503.3, no person may "knowingly pick, pluck, sever, damage by the application of herbicides or defoliants or carry, without the consent of the owner thereof protected plants" (NYSDEC, 1975). Page 2-25 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 2.4 Transportation Resources 2,4.1 Summary of Studies The Town of Southold is a rural agricultural community with growing tourist attractions. The vehicular traffic is a mixture of local traffic, tourist traffic, and through traffic using the ferry services to New London, Connecticut and the Town of Shelter Island. The Town of Southold has a network of 195 miles of Town, County and State roadways. Eastbound and westbound traffic flows are served by two major arterials: NYS Route 25 and Suffolk County Route (CR) 48. Relevant transportation related studies have been reviewed and pertinent conclusions or recommendations regarding traffic, public transportation and future transportation system improvements are summarized below: Sustainable East End Development Strategies (SEEDS, 2003) This collaborative effort involving the five east End Towns and Villages is currently underway. The areas of concern include transportation and land use. Ultimately alternative solutions will be modeled to assist the agencies in developing local and regional planning efforts. LITP2000 - North Fork Recreational Travel Needs Assessment (2002) This Report includes the results of an extensive highway data collection effort, a safety assessment, trip making characteristics for two types of agricultural land uses for public transportation services. The North Fork Recreational Travel Needs Assessment was prepared as part of the Long Island Transportation Plan to Manage Congestion (LITP2000) addressing the special transportation needs of the North Fork of Long Island. Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (2003) This comprehensive study of the Town's designated waterfront recognizes that the Town as a whole is a water-oriented community, and therefore includes a concise summary of the existing transportation facilities and services throughout the Town. The study also incorporates other study recommendations and conclusions including a scenic by way, bike trails, travel demand management policies, and improved public access to the waterfront. Long Island Rail Road East End Transportation Study (2000) The purpose of this report is to examine the opportunities to improve and integrate transportation services to the East End of Long Island. Recognizing the growing demands placed on the roadway services in the area, the LIRR commissioned this study to collect data regarding public transportation services and to solicit input from concerned government agencies, transportation providers and local interest groups. Traffic Study of a Roundabout at Middle Road (CR 48) and Main Street {NYS Route 25), Southold, New York (2000) This report studies the feasibility of constructing a roundabout at this intersection using several different growth factors. The report concludes that the construction of a roundabout, with its extensive right of way requirement does not have any significant advantage over the construction of a traffic signal at the intersection. Page 2-26 I I I I ! I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Traffic Impact Study for Proposed Cross Sound Ferry Parking Lot Expansion (1999) This report was prepared on behalf of the Cross Sound Ferry Services, Inc. to determine the traffic impact of the proposed 155 car parking area at the Orient Point ferry terminal. The report includes traffic data on NYS Route 25 between Greenport and Orient. Study of Railroad Usage bv Residents of Multi-Unit Housing Complexes Near Railroad Stations (1999) This study considers the use of the railroad for commutation by residents living nearby in multi- family residential dwelling. This report contains some useful travel mode distribution data. 2.4.2 Description of Roadway Conditions and Congestion The 24 miles of NYS Route 25 within the Town consists mostly of two lanes with some turning lanes provided at selected locations. The latest available Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) indicate that the most heavily traveled segment is located west of Sound Avenue, at 15,532 vehicles per day (NYSDOT, 2001). Route 25 transverses the hamlets of Mattituck, Cutchogue, Peconic, Southold, East Mofiches and Orient as well as the Village of Greenport CR 48 is a two and four lane highway beginning west of Cox Neck Road in Mattituck and ending at NYS Route 25 near Sound Road in Stifling. CR 48 bypasses the hamlet business centers, while NYS Route 25 passes through these areas. The AADT on the heaviest traveled section west of Young's Avenue was recorded at 13,423 vehicles per day for the year 2002 (SCDPW, 2003). Collector roads within the Town mn in a north-south direction, providing access to the two east- west arterials noted above. Traffic volumes on the arterials in the Town are most heavily traveled from June through September, reflecting activity of both tourists and summer residents. There are several counting stations on the two arterials within the Town at which traffic volume data is periodically collected. The data collected between 1990 and 2002 indicates there has been an increase in the traffic volumes. Table 2-4 summarizes these AADT values. TABLE 2-4 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY TRAFFIC (AADT) CR 48 (Middle Road) West of Cox East of Elijah's West of West of East of Neck Road Lane Peconic Lane Young's Lane Young's Lane 8,562 ('90) 10,249 ('90) 10,145 ('90) 9,595 ('90) 9,260 ('90) 9,785 ('95) 9,207 ('93) 11,923 ('94) 10,101 ('95) 10,536 ('96) 9,823 ('98) 11,123 ('96) 11,032 ('98) 10,591 ('98) 11,382 ('99) 10,090 ('01) 10,957 ('99) 11,770 ('01) 12,263 ('01) 11,273 ('02) 12,438 ('02) 13,423 ('02) I I I Page 2-27 ! ! Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS NYS Route 25 (Main Road) West of Sound I West of Route West of Avenue 114 West of CR45 Narrow River West of Orient Point Road 11,500 ('90) 6,900 ('90) 5,850 ('90) 5,300 ('91) 2,450 ('92) 12,700 ('91) 6,800 ('93) 4,700 ('93) 4,150 ('95) 2,650 ('95) 12,700 ('95) 8,050 ('96) 7,400 ('97) 4,950 ('98) 3,550 ('98) 13,300 ('96) 7,450 ('98) 7,695 ('00) 7,453 ('01) 2,806 ('01) 14,700 ('98) 8,183 ('01) 15,532 ('01) l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The CR 48 cotmt data was obtained fi.om the SCDPW. All counts shown were collected during the month of July or August. The count data fi.om 1992 through 2002 has been axle data and was seasonally adjusted by the NYSDOT using their factor groups. The NYS Route 25 data was obtained from the NYSDOT. The month of the data counts are not available. All counts have been axle and seasonally adjusted. Although the data represents the AADT rather than the peak volumes experienced during the summer season, it is apparent that the traffic volumes have been increasing since 1990 by a higher factor than experienced in western Suffolk County. Basic capacity of an arterial is 1,700 vehicles per lane per hour. This value is reduced by many factors including traffic control devices that assign right of way, parking maneuvers, bus stops, pedestrian activity, and tuming volumes. Many of the intersections on the arterials operate at poor levels of service during the summer season Saturday peak hours. Congestion results fi.om the same factors that reduce roadway capacity: turning movements, traffic control devices, parking maneuvers, pedestrian activity and bus stops along with free flow impediments. The lack of availability of parking at many of the farm stands and in the hamlet business centers results in significant congestion in these areas, particularly during times of peak use and seasonal tourist-related activity. Level of service on the two-lane roadways, which include NYS Route 25 and the easterly and westerly sections of CR 48 can be described based on the flee flow speeds. The speed data included in the North Fork Recreational Travel Needs Assessment indicates that NYS Route 25 operates at levels of service C to D and that CR 48 operates at level of service B during those hours of the peak season when free flow conditions exist. At other times, the levels of service for the intersection and segments can only be determined by highway capacity analyses, including individual turning movement counts at specific intersections. The peak traffic volumes occur between the hours of 11:00 AM and 3:00 PM on Saturdays during the month of July. Saturdays in October represent the second busiest times in the year due to the increased popularity and patronage of the vineyards and farm stands in the region. Traffic congestion in the hamlet business centers and along the more rural sections of the arterials results fi.om the high parking demand especially in areas without formal on-street and off-street parking facilities (North Fork Recreational Travel Needs Assessment, 2002). Page 2-28 I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Trip generation is difficult to estimate except by analysis of specific use characteristics. For blended land use types, vehicle trips are relevant for the A.M. peak hour when the most concentrated trips occur as a result of the morning journey to work. During the A.M. peak hour the number of entrances and exits for residential trip generation ranges from 0.51 trips per unit for an apartment, to 0.77 trips per unit for a single family home, with condominium/coop/townhouse type units generating approximately 0.7 trips. Commercial trip generation ranges from 0.43 trips/1000 square feet for a hamlet business use, to 1.03 trips/1000 square feet for a general business use, with limited business and light industry/industry-office generating 0.45-0.48 trips/1000 square feet (ITE, 1994). 2.4.3 Public Transit Public transportation by rail is provided by the LIRR. The Ronkonkoma Branch operates three weekday and two Saturday and two Sunday round trips between Ronkonkoma and Greenport during the summer season. Ridership is low; the LIRR reports that there were 18 daily westbound passengers boarding at the four North Fork Stations of Greenport, Southold, Mattituck and Riverhead (LIRR, 2000). The three stations in the Town provide a total of 202 parking spaces. There are 71 at Mattituck, 20 at Southold, and 111 at Greenport. There is a public bus service within walking distance of each of the three railroad stations in the Town. Bus service is provided by the Suffolk County Transit Route S92. This daily route runs from Orient to East Hampton by way of Riverhead. There is no nighttime service with the Town. The S92 bus travels along NYS Route 25. Other ground transportation services include shuttle bus and bikeway systems. The Sunrise Coach Line provides a daily commuter bus to and from New York City. This is a reservation only express service. The frequency of service varies with the demand. There is a designated bikeway to which extends from Greenport to Orient. The orientation of the bikeway generally utilizes NYS Route 25. There are four ferry operations within the Town. The Cross Sound Ferry Services, Inc. provides year round vehicle and passenger service to New London Connecticut. The Plum Island Ferry serves the U.S. Department of Agriculture facility on Plum Island. The North Ferry Company provides year round vehicle and passenger service between Greenport and Shelter Island. The Fisher's Island Ferry Company provides vehicle and passenger service between Fisher's Island and New London Connecticut. Mattituck Airbase, Charles Rose Air Field and Elizabeth Field are the three airport facilities serving the Town. None of these facilities provide scheduled commercial flights. Page 2-29 I ! I I ! ! ! ! I ! II ! ! I ! I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Drnft Generic ElS 2.4.4 Town Roadway Improvement Plans There is one major highway improvement project ongoing within the Town of Southold (NYS Nassau/Suffolk Transportation Improvement Plan, 2002). NYS Route 25 in the Village of Greenport is being restored and repaired. The project includes pedestrian safety enhancements and other traffic safety improvements 2.4.5 Pedestrian and Bicycle Patterns Pedestrian activity primarily occurs in the hamlet centers in areas near schools, parks and local services. There are presently six designated on-road bicycle routes and one off-road bike path, either operational or planned. The major on-road bikeway is located along NYS Route 25 extending between the westerly Town line and Main Street in Stifling (NYSDOT, 1999). Page 2-30 I I ! I I ! I I ! I I 1 l I I i I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 2.5 Air Resources Air resources are a part of the local environment. The various aspects of existing air resources, including existing conditions, regulatory framework, and analysis procedures are outlined in this section. Appendix D contains supporting information and modeling results related to Long Island and Southold air quality. 2.5.1 Climate and Meteorology Long Island lies within the humid continental climatic region, and is characterized by four seasons with precipitation occurring throughout the year. Winter temperatures tend to be relatively severe with the average temperature during the coldest month at 32 degrees Fahrenheit or below. Summer tends to be long and hot with temperatures above 72 degrees Fahrenheit. Winters on Long Island tend to be warmer than on the surrounding mainlands due to the moderating effect of the Atlantic Ocean (because of its mass, the temperature of the water is very slow to change). Summers tend to be cooler, which is due to the moderating effect of seabreezes and the presence of the ocean. Because air pollutants are carried and dispersed by wind, local air quality is directly affected by the local wind speed and direction. The prevailing ground level winds on Long Island are from the southwest in the summer, northwest in the winter, and close to equal distribution from these two directions during the spring and fall. Table 2-5 provides the frequency of wind from various directions on an annual basis for the years 1979 to 1988. Wind speed and gustiness are effective indicators of Long Island meteorological conditions. The nearest data monitoring station is located at Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) in Upton, approximately 16.5 miles west of Southold. Table 2-6a provides the wind speed for the period 1979-88, as well as an indication of wind gustiness/stability, based upon the percent of time wind occurred within each specified range. Wind speed monitoring conducted at BNL finds that wind speed is between 5 and 16 miles per hour (mph) 63.95 percent of the time, with peak wind speeds of 1~12 mph 96.47 percent of the time and 3-9 mph 77.26 percent of the time. It is important to note the rare occurrences of wind speeds less than 1 mph (1.17%). Table 2-6b provides a record of wind stability for the period 1979-1988 as recorded at BNL. Unstable wind conditions were recorded 54.22 percent of the time indicating a high potential for atmospheric mixing. Page 2-31 I l I I 1 I l I I l I i I I I I l I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS TABLE 2-5 WIND DIRECTION Wind Annual Wind t Annual Direction Frequency (%) DirectionI Frequency (%) N 5.95 S 4.59 NNE 5.16 SSW 10.36 NE 5.01 SW 10.67 ENE 4.01 WSW 6.68 E 3.15 W 6.95 ESE 2.95 WNW 10.13 SE 2.98 ~ 9.61 SSE 3.45 NNW 8.35 TABLE 2-6 A and B WIND SPEED AND GUSTINESS Table 2-6a Wind Speet 1979-1988) Wind Speed! Frequency (mph) (in %) <1 1.17 1-3 10.20 3-5 24.44 5-7 31.86 7-9 20.96 9-12 9.01 12-16 2.12 >16 0.23 Notes: Table 2-6b Gustiness (1979-1988) Gustiness Frequency (in %) Very Unstable 11.16 (BNL GC: A and B:) Unstable 43.06 (BNL GC: BI) Neutral Instability 13.04 (BNL GC: C) Stable 32.72 (BNL GC: D) Robert Brown, BNL Meteorologist Revision Date 2-21-91 Height of wind vane changed from 355 feet to 290 feet in May 1981. BNL GC is the acronym for Brookhaven National Lab Gustiness Classification (A and B2 represent the very unstable case; B1, the typical daytime unstable case; C, the strong wind-speed neutral stability case; and D, the nighttime stable case). 2.5.2 Air Quality Standards and Regulations The 1970 Clean Air Act (CAA) required the EPA to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for six principal pollutants; carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), ozone (O3), lead (Pb), particulate matter (PM), and sulfur dioxide (SO2). Page 2-32 I I I i ! I ! ! I II ! II ! ! 1 I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS Under the requirements of the CAA, the individual States are required to ensure that air quality levels do not exceed the NAAQS. Areas that exceed the NAAQS for any of the six criteria pollutants are designated nonattainment areas. Currently, Suffolk County (along with most of the eastern seaboard) is a nonattainment area for ozone. Accordingly, New York State has a State Implementation Plan (SIP) that describes plans for attaining and maintaining compliance with the NAAQS for ozone. It should be noted that a SIP is not a static document; but is subject to review and update. In addition to actual implementation plans, a SIP contains related correspondence between the State and EPA and other air quality documentation. The SIP essentially provides descriptions of emission control strategies, inventories of stationary and mobile sources, and predictions of future air quality based on the trends in air quality and expected results of the various improvement programs. 2.5.3 Air Quality The NYSDEC operates continuous and manual ambient air monitoring systems throughout the State to establish ambient air quality levels. Air quality is compared to the NAAQS and New York State standards. State and federal ambient air quality standards are included in Appendix D-1. Air quality monitoring data is published by the NYSDEC Division of Air Resources (DAR). The most recent available written report was published in 1998 and contains air quality monitoring data through 1997. The DAR recently posted the 1999 data tables in draft format on the NYSDEC website (http://www.dec.state.ny. us/website/dar/reports/99am~t/99data.pdO. The nearest air quality monitoring station to the Town of Southold is located in Riverhead where ozone is monitored continually during the "ozone season" (typically May through September). Another facility located in Suffolk County is the Babylon facility, which monitors sulfur dioxide and ozone. Table 2-7 provides the most recent reported annual air quality monitoring data for these stations (NYSDEC, 2001). Yearly averages and additional monitoring data from Suffolk and Nassau Counties are provided in Appendix D-2 of this document. These data indicate generally excellent air quality in the vicinity of the Town. Where monitoring is conducted, there is a general trend of improvement in air quality for the period 1990-2000 since nearly all average annual contaminant concentrations are low and within air quality standards. The single exception is ozone, which has varied from year to year. Page 2-33 l ! ! I I ! ! I I I ! I l ! I I ! I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS TABLE 2-7 1999 AIR MONITORING DATA RIVERHEAD STATION Pollutant Standard Value High values for 2000 Ozone: l-hour average 0.124 ppm 0.134 ppm # of days w/l-hour avg. > 0.124 ppm 2.2 days expected I day BABYLON STATION Pollutant Standard Value High values for 2000 Sulfur Dioxide (SO2): Annual Arithmetic Mean 0.030 ppm 0.010 ppm 24-hour average 0.140 ppm 0.026 ppm 3-hour average 0.500 ppm 0.047 ppm Ozone: l-hour average O. 124 ppm O. 145 ppm # of days w/l-hour avg. >.124 ppm 3.3 days expected I day Ground-level ozone is considered a secondary pollutant, since it is formed through a photochemical reaction between nitrogen oxides and volatile organic hydrocarbons (VOCs) in the presence of elevated temperatures and ultraviolet light. The sources of the primary pollutants that form ozone include automobiles, trucks and buses, large combustion sources such as utilities, fuel stations, print shops, paints and cleaners, and engines (including construction and lawn equipment; www.epa.gov/aimow/consumer.html). Ozone level concentrations that exceed the NAAQS usually occur on hot sunny summer days with little to no wind. Implementation of more stringent emission controls and vehicle inspection requirements are strategies included in the SIP, which are expected to contribute to the reduction of ozone concentrations. In summary, present air quality in the Town is expected to be excellent for the majority of the year, with the exception of a few days in summer when ozone levels are higher than normal. Page 2-34 ! ! ! I i ! ! I ! I ! ! ! ! I ! I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 2.6 Land Use, Zoning and Plans 2.6.1 Land Use Patterns Southold's pattern of land use is a direct reflection of the community's historical development (see Figure B-22). Since its earliest days, the Town's land was used to support agriculture. Productive soils, abundant rainfall, and a temperate climate produced ideal conditions for agriculture to thrive. The Town's proximity to markets to the west and a convenient land-based and water-borne transportation network allowed traditional agriculture to expand beyond mere subsistence into one of the most important elements of the local economy. Agriculture defines the character of the community, it is the basis of the local economy, and it represents a pattern of continuous land use that is unique to the Town. As the Town's population grew, agricultural activities gravitated to the most productive soils and new development, such as residences, business and support facilities moved to the fringes of the farmland and along the waterfront. Over time, this type of development produced the Town's unique land use pattern that is today characterized by a series of independent hamlets (Laurel, Mattituck, Cutchogue, New Suffolk, Peconic, Southold, Greenport, East Marion, and Orient), surrounded by less intense developed areas, agricultural lands and open space. Recognizing that the Town is held together by a roadway network comprised primarily of two major east-west arterial roadways (Route 25 and Route 48), it is remarkable to note that sprawling corridor development, which is quite characteristic west of the Town, has not been prevalent in Southold. In its most basic form, Southold's 34,692 acres are comprised of six generalized land use categories (see Tables 2-8). By far, residential and agricultural uses are the most prevalent land uses in the community, with each accounting for nearly 1/3 of the Town's total acreage. TABLE 2-8 GENERALIZED LAND USE DISTRIBUTION Table 2-8a Land Use - LIRPB Land Use Type Acreage Number of % of Total Parcels Acreage Residential 10, 361 12,706 30 Al~ricultural 10,202 549 29 Commercial 710 539 2 Public Use 4,861 --- 14 Recreation & Open Space 3,711 362 11 Vacant 4,848 3,302 14 Total 34,687 --- 100 Source: Town of Southold GIS, 2003; please note that this total may includes road area, Build Out totals (Section 3.0) do not include roads. Page 2-35 I I 1 I ! I I ! I I I I I I I 1 I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS Table 2-8b Land Use - Town of Southold Land Use Type Acreage Low Density Residential 5,405 Medium Density Residential 4,605 High Density Residential 351 Commercial 710 Industrial 221 Institutional 1,268 Recreation & Open Space 3,711 Agriculture 10,202 Vacant 4,848 Transportation 2,410 Utilities 220 Waste Handling 120 Surface Waters 2,177 Total 36,248 Source: Town of Southold GIS, 2003; please note that this total may includes road area, Build Out totals (Section 3.0) do not include roads. Residential Use The Town's housing stock is almost exclusively (greater than 90%) comprised of detached single-family dwellings. The 2000 Census recorded 12,450 dwellings in this category. These data show that 7,096 (57%) of those dwellings are in areas of low density (fewer than one dwelling unit per acre), covering approximately 5,405 acres. In addition, 4,980 (40%) are located in medium density areas covering 4,605 acres, while only about 373 dwellings (3%) are located in high-density areas (more than 10 units per acre) covering approximately 351 acres. Townwide (including the Incorporated Village of Greenport), the Town's residential density varies from less than one unit per acre in some of the agricultural areas to over ten units per acre in some of the older seasonal communities. The majority of the residences are located within the Incorporated Village of Greenport, within the Town's hamlet areas, and in the vicinity of many of the creeks and inlets found along the Peconic estuary shoreline, such as the peninsulas of Little Hogs Neck, Great Hogs Neck, and Nassau Point. This residential land use pattern is characteristic of historical development trends, but is quite uncommon and rather unique in an area facing such intense pressure to accommodate an expanding population. This characteristic residential land use pattern exists because very little tract development occurred within the community. Residential development occurred on a parcel-by-parcel basis as additional homes were created on family farmsteads to accommodate subsequent generations, as summer homes were built along the waterfront, or as the hamlets slowly grew. This traditional growth fostered a wide range of amhitectural styles and building types that today help to define the Town's rural character. It was not until the later part of the last century when the Town saw its first typical suburban tract-type subdivision. These developments were generally limited to areas on the perimeter of the hamlets. Page 2-36 ! I I I I ! I ! I ! ! ! ! I ! I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Patterns of residential land use continue to evolve within the Town. The 2000 Census indicated that over 30 percent of the housing units within the Town are vacant for a portion of the year. This vacancy rate includes second homes, seasonal, recreational and occasional use homes. Most analysts agree that the census figure undercounts the actual number of second homes in the region. An accurate gauge of the circumstances surrounding second homes in the Town is important. Many second homes were smaller summer cottages and beachfront bungalows. Over the years, these dwellings, often located on substandard lots, have been enlarged and expanded. In additional to these traditional second homes, new second home construction is typified by very large dwellings, often in excess of 8,000-10,000 square feet in size. The impacts of these second homes, their associated site improvements such as swimming pools and tennis courts, combined with the trend to occupy these second homes much longer than the traditional summer season (Memorial Day to Labor Day) has a distinct and evolving impact on the residential character of the Town. This trend has also affected the Town's infrastructure network. Issues concerning additional demands on groundwater resources, increased levels of septic wastes, Health Department regulatory limitations are further factors that shape the character of the residential land use pattern in the Town. According to the 1990 Census, the Town supports 13,769 housing units. Nearly half of these dwellings were created before 1960 (48%). The period between 1940 and 1960 saw the most home construction with 3,120 units built (22.7%). The pace of new home construction remained relatively consistent with just under 2,000 units constructed during the decades of the 1960's, 70's and 80's. This pace slowed somewhat during the 1990's with about 1,400 units constructed. As previously noted, the overwhelming majority of residents live in detached single-family homes. The remainder live in attached units or in multi-family units of various sizes. Less than 100 individuals live in mobile homes and 4 residents recorded their place of residence as a boat or RV. The median value of a home in the Town in the 2000 Census was $218,400. The majority of the Town's residents live in houses valued between $200,000 - $299,000 (32.6%) followed by 30 percent living in homes valued between $150,000 - $199,000. Fifteen (15) residents live in homes valued below $50,000 while 93 residents indicated that their homes have a value greater than $1,000,000. In an effort to gain an in-depth understanding of the real estate market in Southold, data compiled by an independent company "New York Data" were reviewed for all home sales in Town during 2001-2002. Data collected from individual deeds filed in the Suffolk County Clerk's Office revealed that during that 24-month period, 902 homes were sold for $335,966,639. The average sale price in Southold was $390,493. This "actual" sales data is significantly higher than the 2000 Census data, which was collected in April of 2000, and is consistent with the market trends. Additional information is included in the Housing Needs Assessment included in Appendix A-7. Commercial Use The Town supports 539 parcels of commercial land use covering 710 acres. 121 businesses utilizing 260,000 square feet of floor area are present in nine shopping centers and an additional 222 businesses occupying 370,000 square feet of floor area are located in central business Page 2-37 ! 1 ! I ! I ! ! I ! ! ! I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS districts in hamlet centers (Shopping Centers and Central Business Districts, Suffolk County, New York, Suffolk County Department of Planning, 2001). In total, the Town supports 343 retail businesses occupying 630,000 square feet of gross floor area (Retail Commercial Development, Suffolk County, New York, Suffolk County Planning Commission, 1997). These business uses developed in support of the Town's agricultural population and other needs, and provided goods and services to the residents. Eventually, the hamlet business districts evolved to support the growing residential population, as well as other traditional industries such as fishing and new uses such as tourism and recreation. Based on a conservative estimate, approximately 2 percent of the Town is devoted to commercial land uses. Most of the Town's agricultural activity takes place on residentially zoned lands, specifically the A-C zoning district which allows a yield of one dwelling unit on 80,000 square feet. While farming is certainly characteristic of a commercial enterprise, it is not factored into the commercial land use total. Additionally, the figure does not reflect permitted home-based businesses. Most of the business-owned properties are located within or adjacent to the hamlets, although many businesses are located outside of these traditional business districts, particularly along Route 48. In addition to the commercial land, approximately 221 acres are devoted to industrial use. This industrial land is much less centrally located and can be found around the Town's landfill and between Southold and Greenport. Approximately 55 pement of the industrially zoned land is undeveloped, owing in large measure to the characteristics of the local economy as well as the existing environmental limitations of these particular lands. Another major element in Southold's commemial economy is the fishing industry. The Town of Southold has a long tradition of commemial fishing, and eastern Long Island is the center of New York State's marine fishing industry. The Long Island Sound and the shallower waters of the Peconic Estuary are the industry's prime harvesting areas. While the commercial fishing industry is obviously a waterborne activity, land based support areas and facilities are an important element in the Town's pattern of commercial land use. The industries primary land based facilities are the Village of Greenport, Mattituck Inlet, and Orient- by-the-Sea. A more difficult component to quantify, but nonetheless an important component of the commercial land use landscape, is tourism. Obvious facilities such as hotels and restaurants are readily identifiable and are reflected on the land use map. Less obvious activities, such as weekend guests that might come to the Town and stay within an existing residence, certainly contribute to the local economy, but may not be reflected in a land use study. A residence that serves as a de facto inn/hotel may actually have a distinct land use impact. Once again, the commemial land use pattern represents a conservative estimate of actual conditions, and may not include all of the subtleties of the Town's true commemial land use character. Page 2-38 I 1 I I ! I I I I I I I ! I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Agricultural Use Southold developed as, and remains today, an agricultural community. Agriculture dominates the landscape and defines the character of the Town. Nearly one-third of the Town, approximately 10,207 acres, is devoted to active agriculture use (Town of Southoid GIS, 2003). For generations, Southold's sandy but fertile soils were almost exclusively used to produce potatoes. During the 1970s, a number of factors combined which brought about an end to the era of these traditional farms: · Bans and limitations on the use of fertilizers and pesticides. · Increased fuel costs (for farm machinery as well as petroleum-based fertilizers). · Increase in land values for conversion to non-agricultural purposes. · Change in market preferences for agriculture products. Coincident with the decline of the potato farms was the rise of the diversification of the Town's agricultural industry, led by the creation of a new sector - vineyards. Today, the Town's agricultural base is divided among the following crops (arranged according to decreasing acreage devoted to each crop; Town of Soothold Farmland Protection Strategy, 1999). · Vineyards · Vegetables · Grain · Potatoes · Sod and nursery · Feed corn · Fruit · Greenhouses · Horses · Christmas trees Areas in agricultural use have been established in the Town of Southold whereby owners of eligible properties voluntarily apply for "Agricultural District" status, which provides tax relief. At present, there are 6,581 acres in the Town devoted to Agricultural Districts. These parcels are illustrated in Figure Bo23. Public Uses Public uses can be generally characterized as the uses necessary to support the population of the community, both physically and socially. Government buildings, churches, libraries, cemeteries, utility facilities and public infrastructure are all examples of public uses. Other than the Plum Island facility, most of the public uses in the Town are individually small. Collectively however, roughly 4,881 acres or 14 percent of the Town is devoted to public uses. Vacant Land Approximately 4,848 acres, or 14 percent of the Town remains vacant. As illustrated in Figure B-22, it is clear that the pattem of vacant land duplicates the residential land use pattern. Generally, the Town's stock of vacant land can be found in the residential districts, interspersed with existing residences. While the vacant land is randomly located throughout all of the Page 2-39 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS residential areas, it is useful to note that very little vacant land remains along the waterfront. The remaining vacant land is generally land that was by-passed for development earlier due to on-site constraints, environmental limitations, lack of utilities, inconvenient or non-existent access, etc. Therefore, it can be concluded that not all of the remaining vacant land is suitable for development. In conjunction with Figures B-24 and B-25, Table 2-9 presents the acreage of land in the Town devoted to those uses defined as being protected. Protected lands are defined as those lands with a permanent or nearly permanent level of protection such that future development is extremely unlikely or not possible. The types of land fitting this category are presented in Table 2-9 and include: land from which the development rights have been acquired, Town, County and State parks, Greenport Village owned property constrained from development, park districts and permanent open space, permanent open space set aside as part of subdivisions/site plans, land trust lands (Peconic Land Trust and Nature Conservancy), underwater land, and land with easements intended to provide permanent protection. TABLE 2-9 PROTECTED LANDS Protection Mechanism Acreage Town Development Rights 1,360 Town Open Space 222 Town Park 66 Town Underwater Land 2,001 Count,/Development Rights 1,482 County Open Space 322 County Park 186 County Underwater Land 12 State Open Space 465 State Park 363 State Underwater Land 35 Village Property 271 Private Open Space 71 Park District (Cutchogue-New Suffolk) 30 Park District (Mattituck) 71 Park District (Orient-East Marion) 50 Park District (Southold) 17 Peconic Land Trust 68 Peconic Land Trust Easement 174 Subdivision/Site Plan Open Space 548 Subdivision/Park 28 The Nature Conservancy (TNC) 72 TNC Easement 455 Town/County Open Space 86 Total 8,455 Source: Town ofSouthold GIS, 2003. Page 2-40 i I I I I I I I I ! I ! I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 2.6.2 Zoning Patterns Thc Town's roughly 54 square miles are distributed among ten residential and seven non- residential zoning districts as shown in Figure B-5 and detailed in Table 2-10: TABLE 2-10 TOWN ZONING DISTRICTS Zoning Name Acreage Classification Residential Districts A-C A~riculture-Conservafion 10,828 R-40 Residential Low-Density (1 acre) 8,928 R-80 Residential Low-Density (2 acre) 8,356 R-120 Residential Low-Density (3 acre) 1,773 R-200 Residential Low-Density (5 acre) 985 R-400 Residential Low-Density ( 10 acre) 1,071 HD Hamlet Density Residential 250 RR Resort Residential 170 RO Residential Office 109 AHD Affordable Housing District 106 Non-Residential Districts LB Limited Business 164 HB Hamlet Business 209 B General Business 216 M-I Marine I 33 M-II Marine II 246 LIO Light Industrial Park/Planned Office Park 203 LI Light Industrial 273 Total --- 33,920 Source: Town of Southold GIS, 2003; please note that this total ma includes road area, Build Out totals (Section 3.0) do not include roads; includes Fishers Island. The ten residential districts range in density fi.om the R-400 zone, which requires a minimum of ten acres (400,000 sq. ft.) for each dwelling unit to the HD District where ¼ acre (I0,000 sq. ft.) is necessary for each dwelling unit (under certain conditions). Table 2-11 presents the dimensional requirements for these residential districts. Generally, the A-C and R-80 Zoning Districts arc located north of Route 25, primarily in the central and eastern portion of the Town. The R-40 District covers the older, developed portions of the Town and tends to surround the hamlets and follow the shorelines and creeks. While the minimum lot area in the R-40 Zoning District is one acre, a large number of the properties within the zone are less than the minimum lot size. These non-conformities reflect the traditional pattern of development that took place during the last century. Page 2-41 I ! I I ! I I I I I I ! I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS The R-120 Disthct is limited to Fisher's Island while the R-400 is limited to Robin's Island and a portion of Long Beach in Orient. The R-200 District is present in the eastern portion of the Town around the Hamlet of Orient, surrounding Long Beach Bay. The H-D Hamlet Density Zoning Districts can be found, as the name suggests, in the Town's hamlet areas. The RR Resort Residential zone is generally located along the Town's waterfront. The RO Residential Office District and the AHD District are located within or adjacent to the Town's hamlets. TABLE 2-11 DENSITY AND MINIMUM LOT SIZE SCHEDULE FOR RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS The non-residential districts similarly correspond to the land use character of the community. Table 2-12 provides the dimensional requirements of the Town's non-residential zoning districts. The HB Hamlet Business and the B General Business Districts are typically located with the hamlet areas. The LB Limited Business District is also often associated with the hamlets, but can also be found along the Route 25 and Route 48 corridors. The LI Light Industrial and the LIO Light Industrial Park/Planned Office Park Districts are generally limited to the area north of Mattituck and Southold and along Route 25 west of Greenport. The MI and MII Marine Districts are limited to areas along the Peconic Bay waterfront and along the inland creek areas. Page 2-42 I ! I I i I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS he Town s Zoning Ordinance establishes an array of uses that are permitted, as of right, within the 17 zoning districts. Certain uses require a more thorough review and are permitted as Special Exception Uses. Uses not specifically permitted are deemed prohibited. TABLE 2-12 DENSITY AND MINIMUM LOT SIZE SCHEDULE FOR NONRESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS ! ! I I I ! I ! I ! I I I 2.6.3 Land Use Plans & Recommendations The Town of Southold does not have a current, adopted Master or Comprehensive land use plan that specifically articulates the future vision of the community. The Master Plan dates back to 1985, and there have been a number of changes in the regional and Town planning environment that are addressed in a series of important studies. A major Town study, the LWRP is currently awaiting NYS Dept. of State approval. These studies, together with the zoning law, building zone map and the record of decisions on land use projects by the various Town Board's, constitutes the direction of the Town in terms of a comprehensive plan. The background plans, studies and reports, are generally complementary, and provide an extraordinary body of planning information, history and recommendations. These studies were reviewed in a detailed series of matrices referenced in Section 1.1.1, as part of the Background and History of this Strategy, and as important information that assisted in defining the action. This Comprehensive Implementation Strategy utilizes these reports as a basis for refreshed goals, updated policy, and recommendations in terms of ensuring that the Town achieves it's vision as expressed in the comprehensive plan. Reports and studies used under this strategy are briefly described below: Parks, Recreation & Open Space Survey (1982) This included a survey and mapping of Town parks existing in 1982 and the recreational facilities they provided to the residents of the Town. Page 2-43 I I I I i I I ! ! i i I I I I i I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS Town Master Plan Update (1985) The Town Master Plan Update provides a listing and discussion of the Town's goals in terms of overall planning, and Town resources and characteristics such as: housing/residential development, economic development, its waterfront, agricultural preservation, the Town's physical environment, the Town's cultural environment, community facilities/utilities and transportation. The Update includes a description of Town resources and characteristics, as a basis for discussions and analyses of potential impacts to such resources and characteristics by growth/development scenarios presented in the Town Master Plan. Fishers Island Growth Plan (1987-1994) This study pertains specifically to Fishers Island and while important to Fishers Island, is not as relevant to the overall Comprehensive Implementation Strategy. The plan is recognizes, and where relevant and appropriate, specific mention is made of Fishers Island within this CIS. US/UK Counttwside Stewardship Exchange Team (1991) Through this team study, the Town sought creative ways to implement policy and procedures to achieve goals; beginning with four main goal areas: farmland and agriculture; open space and recreation; rural, cultural, historic character; and the natural environment. The study sought to maintain diversity in the community and provided 36 recommendations. This was a very important plan and provided a foundation and planning direction for the next decade and beyond. Long Island Comprehensive Special Groundwater Protection Area Plan (1992) The SGPA Plan provides a detailed blueprint for groundwater and environmental protection for the lands in each of the nine SGPA's established on Long Island. The Plan makes recommendations for watershed management to preserve and enhance groundwater quality within the SGPA's. Town Affordable Housing Policies and Program (1993) Provides recommendations to implement various planning goals regarding provision of affordable housing in appropriate locations in the Town. This study is extremely valuable and frames out the basic need for affordable housing (which is relevant and can be updated) as well as zoning tools, incentive tools, Town pro-active techniques, and cooperative techniques for providing affordable housing. The study acknowledges the work of the North Fork Housing Alliance, and documents then current affordable housing projects. Southold Town Stewardship Task Force Study (1994) Provides general and specific recommendations to achieve the numerous land use and resource protection goals (including affordable housing and hamlet center strategies) presented in the various prior studies and plans applicable in the Town. Seaview Trails of the North Fork (1995) This was a Transportation Committee/Commission report that identified primarily bicycle and kayaking trails and routes to identify scenic corridors (including off-road trails) within the Town. Page 2-44 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Peconic Estuary Program (1995) This is a Plan to improve environmental conditions and water quality within the Nationally significant Peconic Estuary. Program included: environmental resources documentation and analysis, environmental monitoring, watershed analysis, land use/water quality correlation, best management practice recommendations, land use and water quality improvement recommendations. Economic Development Plan, Town of Southold (I 997) A plan for Southold's economic health recognizing agriculture and fishing as important economic stimulus in the Town, as well as hamlet centers, tourism and eeo-tourism. The study recognized the importance of an economic development plan to manage tourism, encourage bed and breakfasts, provide visitor information, and maintain and enhance the unique agricultural, mariculture and commercial fishing aspects of the Town's economy. Community Preservation Project Plan (1998) Prepared in response to the enactment of the Peconic Bay Region Community Preservation Act, which authorized the creation ora fund for land acquisition financed by revenues generated by a newly established 2 percent real estate transfer tax. The legislation required the preparation of the CPPP to guide the acquisition of properties with the above-noted funds. Southold Township: 2000 Planning Initiatives (1999) This was a step past the Stewardship Task Force to fill in gaps in the Town's Comprehensive Plan and promote sound, long-term planning consistent with the original goals. This Initiative provided the basic commitment for starting and maintaining the Town's Geographic Information System. County Route 48 Corridor, Land Use Study (1999) Provides recommendations to the Town Board regarding appropriate land use and zoning in the corridor. This report resulted in upzonings to maintain the integrity of the corridor in the context of Town-wide planning, removing some of the business zoned lands that could have promoted sprawl, inappropriate or incompatible development along this multi-use corridor. Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy (1999) Provides a number of recommendations to preserve and protect both farmland and the business of farming in the Town. This report provided a full inventory of the acreage and type of farm and crop use present in the Town around 1999, and remains an important resource for understanding and promoting the Town's agricultural land use base. Town Water Supply Management and Watershed Protection Strategy (2000) Provides the Town of Southold with a strategy to ensure the protection of a sufficient quality and quantity of groundwater for present and projected future uses and needs, and to ensure that both the rural character of the Town and its agricultural uses are maintained. The report recognized the balance that must be struck between maintaining agricultural use and watershed protection Page 2-45 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS area, and outlined a number of land use techniques and recommended zoning initiatives to achieve water protection goals within the Town. Scenic Southold Corridor Management Plan (2001) This was a study completed for the Town's two highway corridors: County Road 48 and NYS Route 25. The qualities of these corridors was recognized, and measures outlined to protect these corridors for the character they provide to the Town of Southold. Techniques such as setbacks, scenic easements, signage parameters and other measures were outlined for use and consideration by the Town. North Fork Travel Needs Assessment (2002) This Report includes the results of an extensive highway data collection effort, a safety assessment, trip making characteristics for two types of agricultural land uses for public transportation services. The North Fork Recreational Travel Needs Assessment was prepared as part of the Long Island Transportation Plan to Manage Congestion (LITP2000) addressing the special transportation needs of the North Fork of Long Island. This and other reports specifically related to Transportation Resoumes are included in Section 2.4. Blue Ribbon Commission for a Rural Southold, Final Report (July 14, 2002) This report provides recommendations designed to preserve farmland, open space and the rural aesthetics associated with agriculture and open space preservation in the Town. The report established goals for preservation of 80 percent of the remaining farmland and open space, with a density reduction of 60 percent. This report outlined the initial provisions for a Rural Incentive District and recognized conservation subdivision, continuation of PDR and TDR as primary land use tools to achieve the stated goals. Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (2003) Provides planning and environmental information and data that may be utilized to formulate development strategies to encourage and protect the waterfront areas of the Town of Southold. Emphasizes Town-wide importance of coastal zone and traditional maritime use in terms of commercial and recreational qualities of the Town. Recommends waterfront access, water- dependent/water-enhanced uses, and provides a compendium of information relating to the coastal and Town-wide resources of the Town. In addition to the specific recommendations of these plans listed, described and updated for this purpose of this Strategy in Table 1-1, Implementation Tools and Key Goals, these studies provide consistency in defining the Town's main goals. The basic goals that have been previously identified and are included as the primary basis for this Comprehensive Implementation Strategy are reiterated as follows: Page 2-46 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS · To preserve land, including farmland, open space and recreational landscapes. · To preserve the rural, cultural and historic character of the hamlets and surrounding countryside. · To preserve the Town's remaining natural environment; to prevent further deterioration of the Town's natural resources and to restore the Town's degraded natural resources back to their previous quality. · To preserve and promote a range of housing and business opportunities that support a socio- economically diverse community. · To increase transportation efficiency and to create attractive alternatives to automobile travel, while preserving the scenic and historic attributes of roadways in the Town. Other beneficial products of these studies that are particularly relevant to this Strategy include: use and update of the Town's GIS system, the farmland inventory and a list of Community Preservation Project Plan parcels. CPPP parcels are illustrated in Figure B-24 and constitute 11,502 acres of land within the Town. Page 2-47 I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 2.7 Demographic Conditions 2.7.1 Population As shown in Table 2-13, the population of the Town of Southold as estimated for the year 2002 was 21,015 people (LIPA, 2003). This estimate represents a 0.86 pement population increase from the 2001 estimate of 20,835. The Town of Southold includes the Village of Greenport and ten designated places or hamlets which include: Cutchogue, East Marion, Fishers Island, Greenport West, Laurel, Mattituck, New Suffolk, Orient, Peconic and Southold. The Village of Greenport population estimate in 2002 was 2,052 a decrease from the U.S. Census recorded 2,070 in 1990. The designated places had a population estimated at 18,963 in 2002, a 1,197- person increase since the 1990 population survey recorded by the U.S. Census. The U.S. Census Bureau documented the highest percent change in the Town's population in 1970 with a population increase of 3,509 people (26.4% increase). Since 1990, the population of the Town of Southold has reflected a slower, but steady rate of increase. In the year 2001, 180 persons were added to the Town's population. Southold's population increases reflected the trends experienced throughout Suffolk County. By the year 2002, Suffolk County's population was estimated to be 1,440,870 persons, with all of the County's 10 town's recording population gains. TABLE 2-13 TOWN POPULATION CHANGES - 1990-2002 Hamlet Census April 1, Census, April 1, Estimate Jan. Estimate Jan. 1990 2000 1, 2001 1, 2002 Cutchogue 2,627 2,849 2,862 2,864 East Marion 717 756 765 779 Fishers Island 329 289 289 293 Greenport West 1,6 l 4 1,679 1,717 1,755 Laurel 1,094 1,188 1,225 1,243 Mattituck 3,902 4,198 4,229 4,271 New Suffolk 374 337 339 341 Orient 817 709 726 732 Peconic 1,100 1,081 1,091 1,096 Southold 5,192 5,465 5,541 5,589 Total Hamlets 17,766 18,551 18,784 18,963 Village of Greenport 2,070 2,048 2,051 2,052 Total Town 19,836 20,599 20,835 21,015 I I I I I I I Source: LIPA, 2002. Page 2-48 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 2.7.2 Household Characteristics The Town of Southold supports an estimated total of 8,636 year-round households. The estimated household size in 2002 was 2.4 people. A family household has at least two people; the householder and someone who is related by blood, marriage or adoption. Non-family households include people who live alone, unmarried couples and roommates. As noted, the average residential home size in Southold is 2.4 capita/dwelling. Smaller units, apartments and townhouses may conservatively range from 2.0 to 2.2 capita/unit. Owner-occupied households accounted for 6,824 or 80.7 percent of the total households in 2000 in the Town of Southold, while renter-occupied housing units accounted for 1,637 or 19.3 percent. Approximately 68.6 pement of the total households were family households and 56.8 pement were married-couple families. Non-family households made up 31.4 percent recorded by 2000 U.S. Census. The Town of Southold, in the year 2000, contained 13,769 total housing units. Of this housing stock, 8,461 or 61.4 percent were occupied and 5,308 were unoccupied. Seasonal, recreational, or occasional households totaled 4,689 or 34.1 percent. This group represents an increasingly important segment of the Town's population. Table 2-14 below represents the Total Housing Units that exist in the Town. TABLE 2-14 RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE TYPES Total 1-unit Units detached 13,769 12,450 1-unit attached 252 2 units 356 3or4 units 160 5to9 units 335 10 to 20 or 19 more units units 80 51 Mobile Boat, RF, Home Van, etc. 81 4 Source: U.S. Census Bureau. The age of the Town's housing stock ranges from before the 1930's to the present time. Table 2-15 indicates that over 50 percent of the above-discussed structures were built before 1959. TABLE 2-15 YEAR STRUCTURE BUILT Total Units 13,769 1999- 1995~ 1990- 1980- 2000 1998 1994 1989 240 600 616 1,875 Source: U.S. Census Bureau. 1970- 1979 1960- 1969 1940- 1959 1939 or earlier 1,849 1,945 3,120 3,524 Page 2-49 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS The census further reports that only 1.5 percent of the housing units, or 126 units, were overcrowded. Housing units identified as overcrowded are those that contain 1.01 or more persons per room. Housing characteristics are discussed further in the Housing Needs Assessment included in Appendix A-7. 2.7.3 Age Distribution & Race The majority of the Town of Southold residents are between the ages of 35 to 54 years, comprising 29 percent of the population. The lowest percentage is the 20 to 24 year olds with 3.4 percent and 85 years and over with 3.3 percent. The median age in 2000 was 44. Another noteworthy trend in the Town of Southold relates to the distribution of sexes. 9,945 of the Town's 20,599 are male (48.3%), while 10,654 (51.7%) are female. The 2000 Census indicates that the Town did not support an ethnically diverse population. The white population in the year 2000 was 19,266 persons out of the total 20,599 people residing in the Town, or 94 percent. The Hispanic or Latino population was 982 (5%), African American population was 600 (3%), the Native Americans totaled 14, the Asian population consisted of 92 and others totaled 14 persons, all of which were under 1 percent of the total. Others consisted of Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander. 1.5 percent included persons of two or more races. 2.7.4 Income In 1999, the median household income was $49,898. Approximately 18.3 percent of the Town households were earning between $50,000 and $74,999, while 3.1 percent of the Town was earning over $150,000 and only 3.0 percent of families were earning less than $10,000. However, 240 families in 1999 were below poverty level. The high median income is due to the high percentage of the Town's employment status. In 1999 only 2.5 percent of the Town's population was unemployed. The Census reported that the Town's work force consisted of management, professional, and related occupations accounting for 37 percent, sales and office occupations with 26.2 percent. Industrial occupations include educational, health and social services with 21.3 percent, construction with 10.2 percent, retail trade with 11.8 and agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining accounting for 2.4 percent. Page 2-50 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 2.8 Community Services Table 2-16 below lists the various types and acreages of publicly-owned lands in the Town that are associated with or devoted to community services (see also Figure B-26). The following discussions of each community service provide detailed information on the current status of each such service. TABLE 2-16 COMMUNITY FACILITIES Community Facility Type Acreage Cemeteries 142 Churches 82 Fire Districts 20 Libraries 4 Museums/Historic Societies 34 Schools 182 Transportation 2,287 Utilities/Communication 53 Water Utilities 212 Water Utilities/Underwater Land 59 County Municipal 4 County Recharge Basin 34 Federal 933 State Recharge Basins 12 Town Municipal 99 Town Recharge Basins 38 Town Surplus 6 Total 4,201 Source: TownofSoutholdGIS, 2003. 2.8.1 Public Schools There are ten public schools that exist in the Town of Southold and one private, parochial school. The school districts of the Town provide the school-age children in each community with education, recreation services, youth activities and intra-mural and team sports. Figure B-3 illustrates the location of school districts within the Town of Southold. School districts include: Mattituck-Cutchogue Union Free School District (UFSD), New Suffolk UFSD, Southold UFSD, Greenport UFSD, Oysterponds UFSD, and Fishers Island UFSD. Table 2-17 lists the schools located in the Town. Page 2-51 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS TABLE 2-17 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SCHOOLS School G fades Location Greenport Public School K-12 Greenport Laurel Common School K-6 Laurel Mattituck High School 7-12 Mattituck Cutchogue East Elementary 5-6 Cutchogue Cutchogue West Elementary K-1 Cutchogue Mattituck Elementary 2-4 Mattituck New Suffolk Public School K-6 New Suffolk Oysterponds Public School K-6 Orient Southold Elementary K-6 Southold Southold Jr./Sr. High Schools 7-12 Southold Peconic Lane Primary School 1-3 Peconic Our Lady of Mercy Catholic School Pre K-6 Cutchogue Souxce: School Districts, 2003. Greenport Public Schools are located at 720 Front Street in Greenport. The school has two gymnasiums to support both the elementary and junior/high school students. The school recreational area is comprised of several baseball fields, softball fields, a soccer field, one football field, a field hockey area and a track. Mattituck-Cutchogue Elementary School is located at 34900 Main Road in Cutchogue and Mattituck Junior and Senior High School is located at 15125 Main Road in Mattituck. Both the elementary school and the junior/senior high school have a gymnasium. Athletic fields at the schools are overlapped during the diverse sport seasons. In the fall the athletic fields are used for sports such as soccer and in the spring they are used for other team sports such as baseball. New Suffolk Public School is located on 5th Street in New Suffolk. The school population for 2003 is 7 students. The school building consists of two classrooms and a room that supports alternate activities including: gym, art, music and lunch. New Suffolk has a complete basketball court and playground. The school utilizes an adjacent baseball field that the Town of Southold also uses. Oysterponds Union Free School is located at 23405 Main Road in Orient. The school is equipped with a one gymnasium, as well as outdoor recreational areas including: a tennis court, two soccer fields, two baseball fields and a basketball court. The school also possesses two playground structures with a jungle gym, monkey bars and swings and two swing sets. In Spring 2003 construction will begin on the East Marion Property, which will be called Old School House Park. The Park plans include a basketball court, tennis court, baseball field, soccer field and a playground. Page 2-52 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Southold Elementary and Southold Junior and Senior High School are located at 420 Oaklawn Avenue in Southold. The primary recreational areas are found at the middle school/high school. The school is equipped with tennis courts, baseball, soccer and football fields, a basketball court and a complete playground. The school also has an indoor gymnasium for recreational and educational purposes. Our Lady of Mercy is a private parochial school located on Main Road in Cutchogue. 2.8.2 Police Protection The Town of Southold Police Department is located at 41404 Route 25 in Peconic. The Department is currently composed of 42 personnel including lieutenants, sergeants and police officers. The Town Chief is Chief Carlisle E. Cochran, Jr. Table 2-18 below lists the personnel of the Town of Southold Police Department. The Police Department has six sectors within Southold Town. These sectors cover the Village of Greenport and the ten hamlets of Southold which include: Cutchogue, East Marion, Fishers Island, Greenport West, Laurel, Mattituck, New Suffolk, Orient, Peconic and Southold. The Police Department employs eighteen (18) civilian personnel and has eleven (11) radio dispatchers. TABLE 2-18 SOUTHOLD POLICE DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL Personnel Number Chief 1 Captains 0 Lieutenants 1 Sergeants 8 Police Officers 32 Source: Southold Police Department. 2.8.3 Fire Protection Fire protection in the Town of Southold is provided by six volunteer Fire Departments. The largest is the Greenport Fire Department, which has 180 volunteer firefighters manning 5 separate fire companies in 2 firehouses. The Fire Departments are listed below: · Cutchogue Fire Department, 260 New Suffolk Road, Cutchogue · East Marion Fire Department, Route 25, East Marion · Greenport Fire Department, Third Street, Greenport · Mattituck Fire Department, Box 666, Mattituck · Orient Fire Department, Box 130, Orient · Southold Fire Department, Main Road, Southold Page 2-53 I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 2.8.4 Recreation Facilities The Town of Southold supports a wide array of recreational facilities. Some of the most notable recreational facilities are the Town beaches and Park District Beaches, due in large measure to their unique coastal location. These beaches provide and make available services for Southold residents and summer visitors. Recreational opportunities include: swimming, boating, fishing, playgrounds, ball fields and tennis courts. Town Beaches and Parks Southold Beaches and Parks are under the jurisdiction of the Town of Southold. These facilities are managed and maintained by the Town, unlike the Park District Beaches, which are independently managed. Table 2-19 shows the Town Beaches and Parks that lie under Southold Town's jurisdiction. TABLE 2-19 TOWN BEACHES AND PARKS Beach/Park I Location Recreational Uses Robert Tasker Park Peconic Playground, baseball fields, tennis courts Jean Cochran Park Peconic Roller hockey rink, softball field, football field, V2 mile track, tennis courts, T-ball fields Southold Recreation Center Peconic Recreation center building Laurel Lake Park Laurel Playground, baseball fields, parking for fishing New Suffolk Beach New Suffolk Boat launching, lifeguards, beach attendant Goldsmith Inlet* Peconic Scenic Goose Creek Southold Playground, lifeguards Kenny's Beach Southold Scenic, lifeguards McCabe's Beach Southold Scenic lifeguards Town Beach Southold Playground, picnic area, lifeguards, beach attendants Skipper Homer Park Greenport Information center, picnic area Norman E. Klipp Park (Gull Greenport Scenic, playground, lifeguards, boat launching, beach Pond Beach) attendant I I I I I I I I I I denotes no lifeguards on duty. All Southold Town Beaches and Parks charge attendance fees. All beaches with beach attendants including Town Beach, New Suffolk Beach and Norman E. Klipp/Gull Pond Park, grant day parking passes. Resident and non-resident beaches and parks have a permit cost, either daily or seasonally. Town Boat Launch Ramp Facilities In addition to the beaches and parks identified above, the Town operates a number of improved boat launch ramps. This list (see Table 2-20) does not include facilities in the Village of Greenport: Page 2-54 I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS TABLE 2-20 TOWN BOAT LAUNCH RAMP FACILITIES Boat Launch Ramp Location Waterbody New Suffolk Boat Ramp Jackson S~reet Peconic Bay Parkers Landing Boat Ramp Peconic Richmond Creek Cedar Beach Boat Ramp Southold Peconic Bay Pine Neck Boat Ramp Southold Jockey Creek Narrow River Road Boat Ramp Orient Hallocks Bay MaCtRuck Creek Boat Ramp Route 48 Mattituck Creek Gagen's Landing Road Boat Ramp Southold Goose Creek NYSDEC Boat Launch Route 25, East Marion Long Island Sound Southold Recreation Department Programs & Activities Each season, the Town of Southold Recreation Department offers a wide variety of programs and activities. The following list provides an illustrative sample of the type of programs and activities offered in 2002: Spring: · Arts &Crafts · Introduction to Communication Design · Story & Craft · Bronx Zoo Bus Trip · Macy's 4t~ of July Extravaganza · Dance Lessons for Youth · Earth Day Clean-Up · Easter Egg Hunt · Food for Thought · Creating Children's Pop-Up Books · Stargazing 101 · Body Sculpting Aerobics · Boys & Girls Youth Basketball · Baton Twirling · Boating & Seamanship Course · Cardio Conditioning · Beginning Computer · Dog Obedience · Deeps Roots, A Community Farm · Defensive Driving East End Environmental Camp · Personal Financial Management Workshop · International Folk Dancing · Guitar Lessons · Navigating with GPS · Golf Lessons Page 2-55 I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS · Horseback Riding Camp · Roller Hockey · Deck Hockey · Weight Training · Creative Scrapbooking · Tennis Lessons · Co-Ed Volleyball Night · Yoga Summer: · Art 4 You Workshop · Splish Splash · Mets Game Bus Trip · Yankees Game Bus Trip · Playground Program · Farmer for a Week at Krupskis Farm · Robotics · 55 Alive Mature Driving · Getting Ready to Baby Sit · CPR · Developmental Disabilities Program · East End Kids · Ice Cream Making · Senior Exercise and Line Dancing · Spanish · Swimming Lessons Fall · Halloween Party · Lifeguard Certification Program · Computers · Radio City Christmas Spectacular Bus Trip · Halloween Bones · Bridge for Beginners · Introduction to Drawing · Our Home Earth · Santa's Mailbox Winter · New York State Boaters Course · Islander Hockey Game Bus Trip · Culinary Institute of America · Meditation & Relaxation Park District Beaches The Town of Southold includes four park districts. They are Cutchogue-New Suffolk Park District, Mattituck Park District, Orient-East Marion Park District and Southold Park District. These park districts are not under the jurisdiction of the Town of Southold. Page 2-56 I I I i I I I i I I I I I I I i I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS Cutchogue-New Suffolk Park District is bounded on the west by Mattituck Park District and east of Peconic Hamlet. The District consists of Nassau Point Beach and Pequash Avenue Beach (Fleets Neck Beach). These beaches are private property of the community that resides within the Park District. Uses of these facilities are free to the residents. Nassau Point Beach is a 19-'/2 acre beach that overlooks Little Peconic Bay and encompasses wetland areas to the west into Broadwater Cove. The beach is equipped with picnic ureas, a basketball court, supervised swimming areas and barbeque grills and playgrounds. Permits are checked at the entrance of the Park. Pequash Avenue Beach is a one-acre facility that overlooks Cutchogue Harbor. The beach is equipped with playgrounds, picnic areas, a basketball court, supervised swimming areas and barbeque grills. Permits are checked at the entrance of the Purk. Mattituck Park District beaches are private property of the community that resides within the Park District. Uses of these facilities are free to the residents. The following parks are under the jurisdiction of the Mattituck Park District: Aldrich Lane Park, Bailie's Beach Park, Breakwater Beach Park, Marratooka Lake, Bay Avenue Park, Wolf Pit Lake, Mattituck Creek Boat Launching Park, Mattituck Park District "Yacht Club Property" and Veteran's Memorial Park and Beach: Aldrich Lane Park is a six acre park that is adjacent to the Laurel School. It is equipped with soccer fields and lighted softball fields for evening activities. Bailie's Beach Park is a twenty-two plus acre site located on the east side of Mattituck Inlet jetty. A Boy Scout Cabin is located on-site. Mattituck Park District permit is required for parking. Breakwater Beach Purk is a seventeen plus acre site located on the west side of Mattituck Inlet. The Park is equipped with restroom facilities. Mattituck Park District permit is required for parking. Marratooka Lake is a four-acre park in Mattituck that includes a freshwater pond. The scenic preservation provides winter recreational activities such as ice-skating. Bay Avenue Park is a four-acre site equipped with a Little League baseball field and two tennis courts. A small wetland area exists adjacent to James Creek Wolf Pit Lake is a three-acre site with a small intermittent pond. The pond can be used in wintertime for activities such as ice-skating. The area is equipped with lights for night skating. Mattituck Creek Boat Launching Park is a one-acre Purk located along North Road at the end of Mattituck Creek. Permits are necessary for Mattituck Park District Residents. Mattituck Park District Beach "Yacht Club Property" is a five plus acre park located along Peconic Bay Boulevard. The site is equipped with a softball field with night lighting, parking and a beach. The adjacent property is a Yacht Club. Page 2-57 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS Veteran's Memorial Park and Beach is a five-acre park/beach located at the end of Bay Avenue. The site is equipped with parking, picnic areas, pavilion buildings, a playground, and bocce and shuffleboard courts. Lifeguards are on duty seasonally. Orient-East Marion Park District beaches and parks are private property of the community that resides within the Park District. Usage of these facilities is free to the residents. The following park is under the jurisdiction of the Orient-East Marion Park District: · Truman's Beach is an eight-acre site that is located on Route 25. This park is utilized by Orient-East Marion residents and provides no services such as lifeguards or restrooms. Southold Park District was established in 1907 and consists of the hamlet of Southold and the Village Fire District, excluding the Peconic and Bayview areas. The parks and beaches are private property of residents who reside within the Southold Park District. The following beaches/parks are under the jurisdiction of the Park District: Triangle Park, Emerson Park, Founders Landing, Horton's Point Lighthouse Park, South Harbor Park, Sofsky Memorial Park and Young's Avenue: Triangle Park is a one plus acre site located on the north side of Route 25 in the hamlet of Southold. The park is open to the general public for picnics, scenic views and the Southold War Memorial. Emerson Park is located at the end of South Harbor Road. The park has picnic areas, sandy beaches and a scenic view of the Peconic Bay. There are no lifeguards on duty at the beach. Founders Landing is a one and three quarter acre site equipped with picnic tables, swimming, swings and restroom facilities. It is located at the end of Hobart Road overlooking the Southold Bay. Horton's Point Lighthouse is an eight and three quarter site located at the end of Lighthouse Road. The lighthouse site was converted into a museum and is maintained by the Southold Historical Society. The site is equipped with picnic tables and provides a scenic view of the Long Island Sound. · South Harbor Park is a four-acre park located at the end of South Harbor Road. It has no beach or waterfront and is privately owned. · Sofsky Memorial Park is another war memorial square and is located in front of the Legion Hall on Main Road. · Young's Avenue Park is a less than one-acre site located on Town Creek. The area is equipped with picnic tables and a dock for mooring boats. Page 2-58 I I I ! I I I I ! I I i I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 2.9 Infrastructure This section discusses the various infrastructure related items in the Town of Southold. The majority of information presented in this subsection has been excerpted from the Draft LWRP document prepared by the Town Planning Department. Excerpts are provided for the convenience of the reader, so that the information is presented in a concise manner within this document as related to the Comprehensive Implementation Strategy. Supplemental information is provided where appropriate to provide the reader with complete information. 2.9.1 Solid Waste Handling and Recycling An understanding of the solid waste related conditions in the Town is provided as follows: The Town of Southold currently owns and operates a municipal solid waste disposal facility encompassing approximately 60 acres of land. It is located on the north side of Route 48 in Cutehogue. Most of the residential municipal solid waste (MSW) generated within the Town is handled at the facility, while most of the Town' s commercial waste is taken to out of town facilities by private caners. Operations at the solid waste facility consist of the following: · An unlined landfill, now closed, which ceased operations on October 8, 1993, · A solid waste and recyclables transfer station that accommodates both commemial and residential users, · A permanent household hazardous waste storage facility, · A yard waste composting operation, · A construction and demolition debris holding and transfer station, · A holding area for household appliances and tires awaiting transfer to processing facilities outside of Southold Town, · A reuse center for the free exchange of items otherwise destined for the waste stream. It is estimated that a total of approximately 94 tons of municipal solid waste was generated per day in the entire Town in 1994. This amount represents a reduction in solid waste generation of nearly 40 tons per day from 1989, primarily due to the establishment of a volume-based pricing system for household garbage on the mainland (Fishers Island does not use a volume-based system). This volume is based on 1994 scale house data from the mainland solid waste complex indicating an average of 90 tons per day, and using an estimated average generation rate of 4 tons per day for Fishers Island. Future waste stream projections (including Fishers Island), based on the 1994 data and weighted population estimates, show an average generation rate of 103 tons per day in 2000, 113 tons per day in 2005 and 126 tons per day in 2010. The Town Solid Waste Coordinator estimates the residential component waste generation rate to be in the range of 7.3 pounds per capita per day. Page 2-59 I I I I i I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 2.9.2 Water Supply As a supplement to the discussion included in Sections 2.2.1 and 2.9.2, the following excerpts are provided from the LWRP, to provide a complete understanding of water supply from the standpoint of water resources and infrastructure: The Town of Southold depends exclusively on groundwater for its potable water supply. Referred to as a sole source aquifer, this groundwater source is part of Groundwater Management Zone IV. Zone IV also includes Shelter Island and the northern and eastern portions of the South Fork in addition to the eastern portion of Riverhead. In Southold, a large part of this aquifer has been contaminated by nitrates and organic chemicals. The large extent of sandy soils allows certain chemical compounds to percolate quickly through the topsoil down to the water table. Salt water intrusion along portions of the developed shoreline is another issue, particularly where summer cottages were converted to year-round residences or during times of drought. The preponderance of residents in the Town of Southold rely on private wells. A much smaller percentage of Town residents (an estimated 35%) obtain their water from community wells or public water supplies. The development of public water had a significant impact on population density in the areas where it was first established. The SCWA has been a presence within the Town since the late 1980s. Since that time, the Authority has expanded operations and purchased land for wellfields. The SCWA now owns about 232 acres of land within the Town: on which are located 14 well fields and pumping stations. Three additional well fields are under construction. There are a total of 21 active wells, 3 inactive wells, and 7 under construction. There are 79 miles of water main in service with an additional 26 miles planned in the near future. The Authority services 4,925 customers, 820 of which are within the Village of Greenport. The water supply, treatment, distribution and storage facilities for Fishers Island are owned and operated by the Fishers Island Waterworks, a subsidiary of the Fishers Island Development Corporation (FIDCO), which owns most of the island. The FIDCO water supply system, originally constructed in the early 1900's, services approximately 600 customers, using 22 miles of water mains, an equalization reservoir, a surface water treatment plant, a groundwater treatment facility, a well field and three surface water reservoirs: Barlow Pond, Middle Farm Pond and Treasure Pond. Water use factors are available from design flow statistics used by SCDHS for water/treatment system design. Typical residential water uses are 300 gpd for single-family homes and 225 gpd for smaller units or townhomes. Commercial and industrial uses range from 0.04 to 0.06 gpd/SF for floor space. Page 2-60 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 2.9.3 Drainage The general characteristics of drainage in the Town of Southold are stated in the LWRP, with relevant excerpts provided below for the purpose of this Comprehensive Implementation Strategy: In general, stormwater runoff generated on impervious surfaces within the Town of Southold is concentrated and recharged to groundwater in recharge basins, subsurface leaching pools and/or leaching catchbasins. For runoff originating on or directed to the drainage facilities serving public roadways, capacity of these systems are becoming severely overburdened as a result of development. That is, as development increases, the area of impervious surfaces increases, with corresponding increases in the volume of runoff that must be recharged. This means that the capacities of these drainage systems must remain sufficient to handle these increasing volumes. For commercial development, the Town Code requires that review of site plan applications include review specifically for drainage systems; however, not all residential site plan applications receive this scrutiny. That is, applications for individual homesites, driveways, parking lots, etc. are not subject to Planning Board review, and therefore do not receive drainage system review. As a result, the volume of runoff directed to public drainage systems is increased, without the corresponding continual, coordinated review needed for the affected drainage systems. The Town Engineer's Office has requested that this situation be addressed, by amending the Town Code to require that all development require installation of adequate drainage structures. In addition, the planning office has requested that existing water courses (i.e., creeks, streams, etc.) passing through private property be protected from alteration, so that properties off-site not already impacted would remain unimpacted. 2.9.4 Wastewater Treatment Sections 2.2.1 and 2.9.4 discussed the parameters under which sewage treatment is required as based on Article 6 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code. The only regional sewer system in Southold Town is the Grcenport STP, which primarily services the Village of Greenport, but has limited service and land area outside the Village and within the Town. The LWRP describes wastewater treatment conditions in the Town as follows: The Town of Southold is largely unsewered. A very small number of developments within the Town are connected to the Village of Greenport STP. This facility was built around 1938, and was upgraded in June 1992; it currently has permits to treat 0.65 MGD of wastewater. The plant currently is operating at about 70% of capacity. The plant delivers secondary treatment of wastewater, which is discharged about 500 feet offshore through an outfall pipe at Clark' s Beach. Engineering studies envisioned the plant operating at capacities of 0.8 and 1.2 MGD. However, in order to meet operating criteria associated with these capacities, the current STP would have to be enlarged and probably upgraded to tertiary treatment standards. Before the Village pursued Page 2-61 I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS this course of action an evaluation of the costs involved would have to be undertaken. No further expansion of the plant is anticipated at this time. The majority of Town residents, including most Fishers Island residents, dispose of their sanitary wastes through the use of subsurface septic disposal systems, such as leaching pools/cesspools, and septic tanks. In areas of shallow depth to groundwater (e.g. most of the Town's coastline), the treatment of sanitary waste through the use of subsurface septic disposal systems is an environmental concern. Because there is relatively little separation between the bottom of the leaching pooI and groundwater, there may be inadequate treatment of the sanitary waste due to the lack of unsaturated soil to filter the effluent before it enters the ground or surface water. Once sanitary waste constituents enter the groundwater they may rapidly migrate seaward, entering surface waters. This inflow could be a serious problem for surface water quality and is one of the many issues that is currently being analyzed by the SCDHS as part of the Brown Tide Study and the Peconic Estuary Program. Scavenger wastes, the material pumped out of cesspools and septic tanks, are highly concentrated wastes that can pose a threat to groundwater quality. Until 1986, the standard practice within Sonthold, not including Fishers Island, was to allow private cesspool carters to dump this waste, untreated, into unlined lagoons at the landfill. In June 1986, the Town began requiring scavenger waste be taken to a treatment facility that was designed to use biological and chemical processes to de-toxify the wastes. The facility was built by the Town, and was financed almost entirely with Federal and State funds; it is located within the Village of Greenport adjacent to its sewage treatment plant. Initially, treated wastes were pumped from the scavenger facility into the sewage treatment plant. In April of 1996, this practice was stopped for a number of operational and financial reasons. Today the waste material is no longer treated. Rather, it is held, then shipped to another sewage treatment plant that is owned by the County of Suffolk and located at Bergen Point, Babylon. The scavenger waste facility has a total holding capacity of approximately 140,000 gallons. Similar to water use, sanitary wastewater generation flows range from 225 to 300 gpd for residences and 0.04 to 0.06 gpd/SF for commercial/industrial space. 2.9.5 Electricity As noted in the LWRP, electrical service is provided by LIPA, and is discussed in greater detail in the excerpts provided below: Electricity is supplied to mainland Southold primarily by the Long Island Power Authority (LIPA). The power is delivered from the western part of Long Island via overhead high-tension power lines which mn across the landscape from the Riverhead Town line noah of Laurel Lake and CR 48 to a point just east of Hashamomuck Pond. LIPA has proposed to upgrade its overland high-tension power lines in Southold purportedly in order to improve its capacity in Southampton and East Hampton. There is no underground electrical service within the Town except within new subdivisions when new roads are constructed. For the last decade, the Planning Board has required all utility lines Page 2-62 I I ! ! i I I I I I I I I I I I i I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS on new roads to be placed underground, even if the roads are to remain in private ownership. This requirement arises out of the fact that the high winds experienced during typical fall/winter weather of northeasters, gales and hurricanes frequently cause power lines to be snapped or downed, thus disrupting essential electrical services as well as aesthetic considerations. LIPA has no program of placing existing street-side power lines underground within Southold Town. Although the Town is supplied by LIPA, the Village of Greenport enjoys access to a cheaper source of electric power. In 1887, the Greenport Light & Power Company was formed for the purpose of furnishing electricity to Greenport and vicinity. It was purchased by the Village of Greenport in 1899. In 1922, the Village began supplying power to Shelter Island via underground cable. Greenport continued this service until 1964, when Shelter Island opted for direct service from upstate power sources. By 1979 the Village had supplanted its oil-fired generation capability with hydroelectric power from the New York Power Authority. Electric rates in the Village are approximately one-third that of the rest of the Town. The Village is able to obtain cheaper hydroelectrically-generated power from upstate or Canadian suppliers because of an obscure legislative provision that allows municipalities which had generated their own power to continue to operate independently of the regional electric utility company. Fishers Island receives power from Groton, Connecticut, through an undersea cable. In the event of an emergency, Fishers Island possesses auxiliary, oil-fired generators, which can provide power to all of the year-round residents. 2.9.6 Natural Gas There is limited natural gas service in the Town of Southold; excerpts from the LWRP describe these conditions in greater detail as follows: LIPA provides natural gas via underground pipelines to the Town of Southold, but on a rather limited basis. Gas service is available to homes along the main road (NYS Route 25) from the Riverhead Town Line through to the Cross Sound Ferry terminal at Orient. Due to the limited capacity of its single pipeline, LIPA has had a moratorium on providing new service or expanding existing service for several years. Because of the high cost of electricity and the limited availability of natural gas service, most residents must opt for furnaces fired by either oil or liquid propane (LP) from tanks on their property. Many people use LP for their clothes dryers, water heaters and stoves. There is one major LP supplier within Southold: Van Duzer Gas Company. This company brings in LP overland and delivers it by truck as needed to its residential or commercial customers. There are other small suppliers of propane for portable tanks. Other property owners use oil-fired furnaces to heat their homes. Fuel oil typically is stored in tanks. Although regulations require that fuel storage tanks be placed within containment structures, there are many older tanks that remain buried below ground. There is sufficient concem about the potential for groundwater contamination from leaking fuel oil tanks, particularly given the preponderance of private wells throughout the Town. An oil spill, however, small, has the potential to affect the drinking water of many property owners. Page 2-63 i I t I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 2.10 Community Character 2.10.1 Community Growth and Development In 1640, Southold was founded by a group of English Puritans from the New Haven Colony, led by Reverend John Youngs. The initial colonial habitation centered on the Hamlet of Southold but soon spread both to the east and to the west. Subsistence agriculture defined the early character of the community. The Town's abundant natural resources combined with the ability to trade and transport goods by water contributed to the evolution of the Town's early character. Market crops such as flax, tobacco, vegetables, and cattle were produced for export. Rich clay deposits fostered a pottery and brick making industry. Shipbuilding, eventually centering in the Village of Greenport, became a significant industry. Whaling and a thriving local fishery also defined the Town's early character. In 1844, the Long Island Railroad reached Southold, bringing with it an influx of new residents that were not beholding to the Town's traditional industries. Second home development began to emerge, as did a new tourist industry that created new hotels and boarding houses that accommodated guests seeking to enjoy Southold's natural beauty. The core of the community remained agricultural while the perimeters, along the waterfront, gradually gave way to increased residential development. During this period, the hamlets solidified as centers of trade, commerce, and public life, supporting churches, schools, and other community facilities. Since that time, Southold's essential character has remained unchanged. Agriculture remains at the heart of the community. Population pressures have continually increased, expanding dramatically in the latter half of the 20th Century. These pressures are today threatening the traditional community character in a way that has not been experienced in the past. The economic pressure on local farmers to sell their land for residential development is intense. The Town's proactive approach toward preserving the agricultural open space character of the community is a major reason why the Town remains a beautiful and charming community with a unique character that would be almost as familiar to a resident living today, as it would to a resident living a hundred years ago. 2.10.2 Existing Community Character Appendix E contains a series of photographs illustrating the various community types discussed in this section as comprising the character of the Town of Southold. Agriculture Agriculture is perhaps the most evident element in the expression of the community's character. Most people gain a sense of the community by traveling along its main thoroughfares, such as Route 25 and Route 48. For most of their length through the Town, these roadways are surrounded by extensive agricultural areas. Row crops, vegetables, potatoes, sod farms, vineyards, nursery stock and Christmas trees are all apparent as one travel through Town. Open farmed vistas created by these agricultural operations create a unique sense of place. Farm Page 2-64 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS stands, greenhouses and wineries, among other structures and features create public connections with the agricultural areas which have, through the years, created a proprietary sense that the agricultural areas are a real and tangible part of the community, and not an isolated district located on the outskirts of Town. Open Space The Town of Southold enjoys a definite sense of abundant open space. This is due in part to the fact that about 1/2 of the land area in the Town is devoted to agriculture, open space/recreational uses or remains vacant. Today approximately 3,711 acres of open space exist Town-wide. This open space includes lands owned by various governmental jurisdictions at the Federal, State, County and local levels. It also includes lands privately owned and preserved through the efforts of organizations such as the Peconic Land Trust and The Nature Conservancy. As illustrated in Figures B-22 to B-25, the open space is distributed throughout the Town, and is not confined to any particular district or location. Woodlands A woodland inventory was conducted as part of the Comprehensive Implementation Strategy effort. In total, approximately 7,333 acres of woodland resources are present in the Town (Figure B-21). As more fully described in Section 2.3, the Town hosts pine oak forests, dry oak forests as well as moist forests and wetlands. The northem portion of the Town commonly supports species such as red oak, white oak, black oak, yellow poplar, red maple, and black cherry with common understory species consisting of huckleberry, sassafras, dogwood and mountain laurel. In the southem portion of the Town and on the outwash plains, woodland species typically consist of white oak, hickory, white aspen, scarlet oak, with scrub oak and pitch pine located in sandier areas; common understory species include huckleberry, greenbrier, sumac, grasses and poison ivy. Given the extent of land previously devoted to agricultural use, successional woodland habitats are common throughout the Town. These areas are typically associated with smaller diameter trees, some of which may be non-native to the area, and often remain dominated by shrubs in the nnderstory. An aspect of the Town's woodland, cultural resources that certainly adds to the unique character of the Town are the presence of a significant number of large diameter trees. Many majestic trees serve as community focal points, and help to delineate neighborhoods and districts. There presence is most distinctly felt within the hamlet centers. "The Trees of Southold" (Kassner et al, 2000) reported that the Town's largest tree has a circumference of 18 feet (and growing!) In general, the Town's woodland resources provide buffers between the agricultural areas and the developed portions of the Town, provide vital habitat for resident and migratory species and help to define the aesthetic appeal of the community. Wetlands Wetlands are defined as areas that are periodically or seasonally inundated by surface or groundwater and support vegetation adapted to saturated soil conditions. Perhaps more than any other ecological community, the Town's wetland habitats are generally more productive than Page 2-65 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS upland habitats, and are typically high in both plant and animal diversity. Wetlands are also vital in controlling floodwaters and filtering pollutants, and are valuable as recreation areas and as refuge for rare species. No less important than their ecological and hydrological value, the intrinsic values of wetland resoumes are an important element in defining the character of the community. Approximately 3,664 acres of tidal and 2,036 acres of freshwater wetlands, totaling 5,700 acres are located within the Town. These natural; features serve to uniquely define the character of the community, particularly its waterfront. Tidal wetlands ring the Bay and the Sound. Beyond the obvious ecological benefits offered by this valuable natural resource, the tidal wetlands provide a dramatically beautiful and softening interface between the developed shoreline and the water. In locations where the shoreline has been hardened, the natural buffer between the developed upland and the actively used water resource is removed. Tidal wetlands serve to physically and perceptually separate the area of human activity fi.om the water. Upland freshwater wetland areas less dramatically interface with the developed portions of the Town, but nevertheless, provide a distinct buffer between developed areas. Freshwater wetlands take many forms, from heavily wooded wetland systems that are quite similar to the wooded areas of the Town, to systems that are more hydrologically dependent and support large areas of standing water. The Town's tidal and freshwater ecology enriches the Town's environment and provide yet another unique feature that serves to define the communities sense of place. Waterfront With the exception of its common boundary with the Town of Riverhead, the Town of Southold is surrounded by water, and includes 160 miles of shoreline. Long and narrow, the Town is approximately 4 miles across at its widest point. The waterfront is never far in the Town of Southold. Because of its desirability as valuable real estate, the vast majority of the waterfront area has been developed. Residences, including substantial summer homes, occupy a majority of the Town's waterfront. With the exception of a few areas, such as the Village of Greenport and New Suffolk, most of the commercial areas of the Town are located inland, near some of the creeks and inlets. Most of the waterfront is fairly rugged, with extensive bluffs, dunes and cliffs surrounding and protecting the majority of the community. Broad, sandy beaches are the exception, but can be found in certain locations on the Bay as well as the Sound side. While the Town is increasing public access opportunities to the waterfront, generally, the majority of the land along the waterfront is privately owned and access to the waterfront through these properties is restricted. Due to the fact that waterfront access is limited, most individuals gain their perspective of the Town's waterfront from the waterside. Boating in and around the Peconic Bay and Long Island Sound is a popular activity in Southold. The waters of the Town serve its residents and also serve as a destination for boaters from outside of the area. The long regular stretches of Page 2-66 I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I ! I I I I Soothold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS shoreline on the Sound side offer a distinct contrast to the numerous inlets, creeks and variations on the Bay side. Together, the shoreline offers a spectacular waterfront experience. Hamlets The Town of Southold is uniquely defined by a series of nine hamlets, including: Laurel, Mattituck, Cutchogue, New Suffolk, Peconic, Southold, Greenport, East Marion and Orient. These hamlets support the commercial and public uses of the community and exist as physically and historically well-defined commercial districts. The hamlets punctuate the Town's open space and agricultural areas and are focal points for future growth and development. The hamlets are more fully described in Section 2.10.3. Residential Development The Town's residential development is traditionally centered on the waterfi-ont, the Town's creeks and inlets and the hamlet areas. The Town's housing stock is overwhelmingly single family residential. Most of the lots supporting these single-family residences are one-acre in size or above, although a fair amount of pre-existing non-conforming smaller lot sizes do exist in the R-40 zoning district. These homes tend to be older, with many constructed in the first half of the last century. Unlike many communities, residential development in the Town of Southold is not a defining characteristic. The Town's open space and agricultural uses tend to define the community in a much more obvious and perceptible fashion. This is true for a number of reasons, but notably because the Town's major east/west thoroughfares run through major portions of the agricultural and open spaces. As noted previously, most of the residences are located away from these agricultural and open space areas that are more commonly apparent to the casual passer-by. The larger residential areas are a bit offthe beaten path. The residential areas represent the Town's eclectic architectural history. Very little tract residential development occurred in the Town. As a result, most residences were constructed individually. This individuality is represented in a variety of designs and housing styles. Small, one-room summer bungalows can be found in close proximity to gracious, large and expansive waterfront summer homes that include all the amenities (i.e. tennis courts, pools, private docks etc.). Over the years, this residential architectural diversity has produced a comfortable blend of styles and housing types that seems well suited to the community. Tourism has fairly recently emerged as an important element in the Town's economy, and contributes to the definition of the Town's character. Interestingly however, this tourism has not taken the form of rampant commercialization driven by outside companies. Rather, the tourism that takes place in the community is more traditional, based in the agricultural landscape, the Town's culture, maritime and natural resources. Traditional tourism has the added benefit of reinforcing and supporting the Town's two other main economic components; agriculture and the maritime industry. Tourists that travel to Southold in the Fall to buy pumpkins or apple cider at a farm stand, or who travel to a winery to sample some of the local vintages are spending tourist dollars which reinforce the agriculture industry. Boaters plying the waters of the Peconic Bay Page 2-67 I I I I I I I ! I I I I ! I ! I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS will purchase goods and supplies, will eat at local restaurants and will moor and service their boats at local marinas, thereby supporting the maritime trades. Bed and breakfasts within the Town have developed as premier destinations for those wishing to escape the hustle and bustle of western Long Island and the New York metropolitan area. The tourism industry within Southold reflects the sensibilities and character of the community and relies on the beauty and abundance of the Town's natural resources and unique location. The recent successes of the tourism industry are in some ways a double-edged sword. As tourism increases, so do associated impacts such as congestion and pollution. The natural beauty and peaceful tranquility so valued in the Town could be degraded by overuse created by tourism. The threat exists that at some point, the Town could fall victim to its own successes. Commercial Fishing Areas such as Orient, Port of Egypt, Greenport and Mattituck provide port facilities for the Town's commercial fishing fleet. These areas have a distinct character that contributes significantly to the maritime appeal of the community. Unlike other areas, the commercial fishing industry in Southold is of a scale that does not overwhelm the upland uses in the community. Instead, a pleasant harmony exists between this proud and historic industry and the surrounding community. The commercial fishing industry reinforces the historical maritime heritage of the community, and is an ongoing force that continues to drive the local economy. 2.10.3 Hamlets Laurel Laurel is the westernmost, and smallest functional hamlet within the Town of Southold. Known locally as the Middle District because it was situated halfway between Aquahogue and Mattituck, Laurel was known as Franklinville until 1890. The hamlet center, which is comprised of only about a half dozen businesses, is located along Old Main Road, which was bypassed when Route 25 was realigned many years ago. While the hamlet center is small, the hamlet itself supports a relatively large population of 1,243 individuals. Mattituck Mattituck is one of the largest hamlets in the community and supports a well-defined hamlet center around Love Lane and the Mattituck train station. The Mattituck commercial area begins at the LIRR overpass just past Laurel Lake Park. Commercial uses along both sides of Route 25, are characterized by boat sales and service businesses, the McDonald's restaurant, the North Fork Bank Operations Center, which is the only large office campus in the Town, the Mattituck Plaza shopping center, bowling alley, and other commercial uses that support the community. The hamlet center itself is a well-defined area centered on Love Lane, stretching back to Mattituck Creek and Old Sound Avenue, east to Wickham Avenue and past the train station to the west. Its eastern terminus is defined by the Mattituck/Cutchogue public library. Since Page 2-68 I I i I I ! I I I I I I I I ! I I I ! Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Mattituck's hamlet center is not along Route 25 (which is the main State highway in the area), the character and sense of place is particularly well defined. Love Lane is a relatively narrow roadway and the commercial buildings are set shoulder to shoulder in a traditional setting. Only Greenport offers a similar traditional "downtown" feeling. The hamlet of Mattituck supports the second largest population in the Town. LIPA's 2002 population estimate for the hamlet was 4,271 individuals. Cutchogue Cutchogue's hamlet center is located along Route 25. A traffic light is located in the approximate center of the hamlet center. Antique shops, an ice cream store, delicatessen and retail stores, and restaurants characterize the hamlet centers businesses. West of the hamlet center, the "Cutchogue House" historic site and the Village Green across the street from the Cutchogue Library, reinforces the historical legacy of the community, and serves to demonstrate that the Town's link to the past is both perceptual and enduring. The eastern edge of the hamlet center gives way to scattered commercial uses along Route 25. East of the Cutchogue hamlet center lies another fairly well defined commercial area. This area has no formal name designation. The King Kullen shopping center lies in the center of this area. Generally, all of the commercial nodes in the Town lie within or adjacent to traditional hamlet centers. This area is the only exception to that role. Practically, the area does provide commercial support services to the surrounding community. New Suffolk The hamlet of New Suffolk, originally known as Booths Neck, supports the smallest population of any of the Town's hamlets (341 individuals). It also lies the farthest offthe beaten path. The New Suffolk hamlet center sits at the end of New Suffolk Avenue, adjacent to Cutchogue harbor. The hamlet supports restaurants/eating establishments, but is primarily characterized by boat yard and support facilities. Throughout the nineteenth century, New Suffolk was a thriving and busy port. Peconic Once called Hermitage for an elderly recluse who lived there in a shanty, Peconic grew as early settlers were forced out of Southold due to overcrowding. The name Peconic is derived from the Native American word for "nut trees." The hamlet of Peconic lies today in the heart of vineyard country. Its rich and fertile soil attracted Irish sharecroppers in the 1850's, and Polish immigrants fifty years later. The hamlet is centered around the Post Office located on Peconic Lane and includes a number of commercial operations to the north. South of the historic hamlet center, new public recreational uses, such as the Cochran and Tasker Parks and the Recreation Center are creating a new lively element in the hamlet. The population of the Peconic hamlet was 1,096 in 2002. Southold The hamlet of Southold supports the seat of Town Government, and is the oldest developed portion of the community. Southold is the largest hamlet geographically in the Town and Page 2-69 I I I ! I I i I ! I I I ! I i I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS supports the largest segment of the population, estimated to be 5,589 individuals in 2002. Southold's hamlet center is very linear, and parallels Route 25. West of the hamlet center, commercial uses extend along the Route 25 corridor for some distance. The Southold Historic District marks the edge of the hamlet center itself. The hamlet center supports a mix of uses including retail stores, offices, restaurants, service establishments, community facilities, residences, and park areas. North of the hamlet center, industrial uses surround the railroad tracks and higher density residential areas can be found, such as Founders Village. Due east of the Incorporated Village of Greenport, the hamlet of Greenport supports approximately 1,755 residents. The commercial area runs along Route 25 and includes a substantial amount of industrially zoned land, although not many industrial uses are present. East Marion In 1836, the community of Oysterponds Upper Neck (named for the abundant shellfish fotmd in local waters) was renamed East Marion to honor General Francis Marion, the Swamp Fox of Revolutionary War fame. Today, the hamlet center is comprised of its post office, Fire Department and a church. This very compact hamlet is located along Route 25 and supports a population of 779. Orient Orient (Oysterponds Lower Neck) became prosperous due to farming, fishing and its harbor. The hamlet is a unique area defined as much by the beautifully maintained historic residences in the hamlet center as by its commercial uses. The post office defines the heart of the hamlet center, and several other small businesses complete the district. Puoqutuck Hall is also a defining feature of the hamlet. Orient's population was estimated to be 732 in 2002. Page 2-70 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 2.11 Cultural Resources Southold's remarkable historic and prehistoric heritage has defined the communities past, and continues to shape its future. Southold is the oldest English-speaking colony in New York State, dating back over 360 years. The Town supports many remnants from its historic and prehistoric past that are recognized and preserved in various ways. 2.11.1 Historic & Prehistoric Resources State & Federal Register of Historic Places and Landmarks The State and Federal Registers of Historic Places are the official listings of the buildings, structures, districts, objects and sites that are significant to the history, architecture, archaeology and culture of New York and the Nation. Eight sites recorded on the Registers are located within Southold. There are: · Horton Point Lighthouse, Southold · Terry-Mulford House, Orient · Orient Historic District, Orient · Southold Historic District, Southold · The Old House, Cutchogue · Fort Cutchogue, Cutchogue · Gildersleeve Octagonal Building, Mattituck · Richard Cox House, Mattitack In addition, the New York State Office of Parks and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) maintains a list of all properties that may be suitable for inclusion on the Registers. Over 600 sites in Southold are of potentially significant historic or archaeological value and may be eligible for consideration for listing on the State or National Register of Historic Places. The general location of these sites, provides an indicator of the archaeological sensitivity of areas of the Town within I mile of documented archaeological sites. Figure B-27 also depicts the areas within proximity to known sites as depicted on the OPRHP "Circles & Squares" map for Southold. In addition, to sites listed on the State and Federal Registers, and in proximity to known archaeological sites, there are currently four additional sites are eligible for listing on the National Register, these include: · Little Gull Island Light Station · Plum Island Light Station · Southold Library · Race Rock Light Station The combined information contained in the Registers and map sources is useful for planning purposes to identify culturally sensitive areas. Society for the Preservation of Long Island Antiquities (SPLIA) SPLIA is a private non-profit organization that has been advocating historic preservation on Long island since 1948. In 1988, SPLIA, prepared a Comprehensive Survey of Historic Page 2-71 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Resources in $outhold and Fishers Island. This study evaluated over 1,500 structures to determine their historic significance. This inventory provides the basis for Southold's historic resource inventory. The properties located on the SPLIA inventory are indicated on Figure B- 28. Local Historic Resources In 1983, Southold adopted a Landmarks Preservation Law (Chapter 56, Town Code), which established a Landmarks Preservation Commission. This law established a register of designated local historic landmarks. Applications for building permits to reconstruct, alter, or add to these landmarks are referred by the Building Inspector to the Landmarks Preservation Commission for comment and recommendation. The Commission has designated more than 50 buildings and structures are locally significant historic landmarks. Locally designated historic landmarks are identified below: · Cleaves-Kuester House, Franklinville Road (Old SR 25) Mattituck · Wells-Lyons House, Main Road (SR 25) · Reeve-Pim House, Reeve Avenue · Reeve-Wickham House, New Suffolk Avenue Cutchogue · "The Old Place", New Suffolk Road · Honeymoon Cottage, Village Green · Wickham Farmhouse, Village Green · David Tuthill Farmstead-Wickharn House, New Suffolk Road · Moore-Lizewski House &Bam, Main Road · Early Colonist's House, Main Road · Independent Congregational Church, Main Road · Hamid House, Main Road · Buckingham-Case-Richmond House, Main Road · Richard Hallock House, Skunk Lane · The Cutchogue Diner, Main Road · Hurricane Hall, Skunk Lane · Einstein House, West Cove Road · The Old House, Village Green · The Commoners Preserve, Little Creek and at confluence of Broadwaters, Mud and East creeks New Suffolk · Old Harbor House, Harbor Lane · Methodist Mission & New Suffolk School, King Street Peconic · Isaac Overton House, Middle Island Road · The Castle Old Castle, Main Road Page 2-72 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS SouthoM · Town Doctor's House, Ackerly Pond Road · Joseph Reeve House, Lower Road · Abijah Corey House, Main Bayview Road · Hayles-Tuthill-Young House, Main Road · Joseph Horton House, Main Road · John Booth House, Oaklawn Avenue · Deacon James Horton House, Main Bayview Road · The First Universal Church of Southold, Main Road · The Prince Building, Main Road · Col. John Youngs House, Youngs Avenue · Thomas Moore House, Main Road · The First Presbyterian Church, Main Road · The Cleveland-Glover, Frank Gagen Blacksmith Shop, Main Road · The Hallock Currie-Bell House, Main Road · The Pine Neck Barn, Main Road · The Downs Carriage House, Main Road · The Bayville School House, Main Road · The Treasure Exchange, Main Road · Horton Point Lighthouse, Lighthouse Road Orient · Shaw House/Revolutionary Cottage, Village Lane · Terry-Mulford House, Kings Highway · "Terrywold", Kings Highway · Village House, Village Lane · Webb House, Poquatuck Park · High-Thiel House, Kings Highway · Gideon Youngs House, Village Lane · The Nathan B. Seidman Residence, Main Road · Benjamin Franklin Mile Markers, SR 25 and CR 48 In addition to the local landmarks identified above, the Town supports a number of unique maritime landmarks that have a significant local historic value. These sites are: · Horton Point Lighthouse, built 1857, recommissioned in 1990 · Orient Point Lighthouse, built 1899, renovated in 1973 and 1999 · Plum Island Lighthouse, built 1827, rebuilt 1869, discontinued in 1978 · Little Gull Island Light Station, built 1806, rebuilt in 1868 · Bug Light at Long Beach Bar, built 1870, discontinued in 1945, burned in 1963, rebuilt and relit in 1990 · North Dumpling Light built 1849, rebuilt in 1871 and 1980 · Race Rock Light, built 1878 There are five active historical societies in the Town, listed as follows: Page 2-73 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS · Oysterponds Historical Society · Southold Historical Society · Cutchogue-New Suffolk Historical Council · Mattituck Historical Society · Henry Ferguson Museum, Fishers Island These societies are independently mn non-profit organizations that specialize in local historic preservation. Some of these organizations own and manage historical properties of their own. 2.11.2 Museums The Town's historical heritage has been preserved in a wide range of museums. Some of these museums present traditional historical displays, others exhibit the Town's environmental and natural resources, while still others are unique interactive facilities. The following list presents the museums facilities within the Town. Mattituck · Mattitock Historical Society Mattituck Historical Museum and Schoolhouse, and early 19th century home housing antique furniture and local history exhibits. Also on the property are a milk house, barn, and an 1864 schoolhouse. · Husing Pond Preserve (The Nature Conservancy) A wooded 21-acre preserve with a variety of wildlife. · Marratooka Lake Preserve (The Nature Conservancy) An 11 acre preserve centered on an undisturbed kettlehole pond. Cutchogue · Village Green Historical Complex (Cutchogue-New Suffolk Historical Council) Complex features three structures, The Old House built in 1649, the Old Schoolhouse built in 1840, and the William Wickham House built in 1740. The Old House is a National historic landmark and one of the oldest surviving houses in New York State. · Meadow Beach Preserve (The Nature Conservancy) A 12-acre salt marsh preserve with a variety of shorebirds and marine life. · Mud Creek Preserve (The Nature Conservancy) A 6 acres salt meadow preserve that is home to a large variety of bird life. Southold · Southold Historical Museum Complex (Southold Historical Society) The main house of this museum houses an art gallery, local history exhibits and period fumiture. Also on the property are a pre-revolutionary house, barn, carriage house, blacksmith shop, buttery and a one-room schoolhouse. · Custer Institute An astronomical observatory with a number of telescopes, a library and a museum. · First Presbyterian Church of Southold This church was founded in 1640 and is the oldest English church in New York State. The building was built in 1803 and a small historical exhibit can be seen inside. · Horton Point Lighthouse Page 2-74 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS This restored lighthouse was built in 1856 and today houses thc Historical Society's marine museum. Howell Meadow Preserve (The Nature Conservancy) A 5-acre preserve consisting of woods and a tidal marsh. · Old Burying Ground This graveyard dates to 1640 and is believed to be the oldest English burying ground in New York State. · Southold Indian Museum This museum houses a large collection of Algonquin Indian artifacts relating to the Native Americans. · Whitaker Historical Collection, Southold Free Library This local history contains a large collection of genealogies of local families. Peconic · Goldsmiths Inlet County Park (Suffolk County) A 34-acre nature park on Long Island Sound, and home to a variety of wildlife. Orient Oysterponds Historical Society Museum A collection of historical buildings including the 1790 Village House, the 1720 Webb House, two 19th century schoolhouses, an 1891 cookhouse and dormitory and an old barn. Most of the buildings contain exhibits and period furnishings. · Margolin Marsh Preserve (The Nature Conservancy) A 25-acre salt marsh preserve. · Slave Burying Ground The graves of about 20 slaves and their owners Seth and Maria Tuthill are found here · Whitcom Marsh Preserve (The Nature Conservancy) A 17-acre freshwater preserve that is home to osprey and other bird life. 2.11.3 Theaters & Galleries Southold's beautiful natural setting has provided inspiration for a number of artists. Arts in Southold Town or The Old Town Arts and Crafts Guild can be contacted for a full list of available exhibits, galleries and cultural activities. Mattituck Cinemas in the Mattituck Plaza provides a number of movie screens for first nm movies. The North Fork Community Theater in Mattituck provides a venue for periodic live performances throughout the year. 2.11.4 Libraries Southold supports four libraries that provide a wide range of services to the community: · Cutchogue Free Library · Southold Free Library Page 2-75 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I · Mattituck-Laurel Library · Fishers Island Library Association Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 2.11.5 Vineyards & Farmstands While not traditionally considered a cultural resource, the proliferation of vineyards in the Town have brought with them a diverse array of activities and attractions that contribute to the cultural offerings and diversity of the community. Similarly farmstands have developed diverse activities and offerings. The following is a brief compendium of these facilities within the Town: Vineyards · Castello di Borghese Hargrave Vineyard, Route 48, Cutchogue · Corey Creek Vineyards, Main Road, Southold · Bedel Cellars, Main Road, Cutchogue · Osprey's Dominion Winery, Main Road, Peconic · Galluccio Estate Vineyards, Gristina Winery, Main Road, Cutchogue · Laurel Lake Vineyards, Main Road, Laurel · Lenz Winery, Main Road, Peconic · Lieb Family Cellars, Cox Neck Road, Mattituck · Macari Vineyards, Bergen Ave., Mattituck · Peconic Bay Winery, Main Road, Cutchogue · Pellegrini Vineyards, Main Road, Cutchogue · Pindar Vineyards, Main Road, Peconic · Pugliese Vineyards, Main Road, Cutchogue Fartnstands · Harbes Farm, Mattituck · Hallock Farms, Mattituck · Greenland Family Farms, Cutchogue · Harvest Time Farms, Cutchogue · Wichams Fruit Farm, Cutchogue · Krupskis, Peconic · Punkinville USA, Peconic · Latham Farmstand, Orient · Terrys Farm, Orient · Seps Farm, Orient Page 2-76 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 2.12 Economic/Fiscal Conditions 2.12.1 Tax Generation and Allocation A portion of the taxes generated within the Town are distributed to the various community service agencies and jurisdictions operating within the Town. These entities include the seven school districts, Suffolk County tax, Town Police Department and fire districts (including ambulance districts), sewer districts (where applicable), and the Town for operation of govemment services (including a solid waste tax). In general, school district taxes represent the greatest single component of the tax bill, at approximately 64 percent. It should be noted that the amount of school district taxes paid by residential development are generally not sufficient to fully offset the cost to the school district to educate the students generated by that development. Tax ratables within each district (commercial and industrial uses) and NYS aid are generally required to provide revenue necessary to meet service demands associated with school districts. Town tax bills were reviewed for each school district within the Town. Some consistency was noted between the Southold, Mattituck and New Suffolk districts, with Greenport, Oysterponds and Fishers Island having unique tax revenue and allocation characteristics. The generalized tax revenue/distribution figures for Southold are included in Table 2-21: TABLE 2-21 TAX REVENUE/DISTRIBUTION Parameter Factors Percent of Total SC Tax 17.309 2% NYS Prop. Tax 4.967 1% Town Tax 167.527 20% School Tax 528.787 64% Library 42.769 5% Fire District 44.452 5% Police Tax 6.69 1% Solid Waste 8.115 1% Total 820.616 100% Source: Tax Bills; 2002-2003. The cost to educate school-aged children is an important factor in determining economic impacts and tax revenue consequences as a function of land use. Similar to tax revenue allocation, similarities in the cost to education school aged children are noted in the Southold, Mattituck and New Suffolk districts, with Greenport, Oysterponds and Fishers Island having varying characteristics. The generalized cost of education of a school aged child is in the range of $13,263, of which the average NYS aid to Southold school districts is in the range of 15 percent. Page 2-77 I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS I I I I I I I I I I I I I The number of school aged children associated with different unit types is important to understand fiscal impacts relating to tax generation and the cost to educate school aged children. Western Suffolk BOCES has established multipliers for school aged children; for generalized unit types within the Town of Southold, the following multipliers appear to best characterize the expected number of school aged children: 3-bedroom home - 0.705 children per unit; 2- bedroom townhouse - 0.168 children per unit; 1-bedroom townhouse - 0.033 children per unit; 2-bedroom apartment - 0.288 children per unit; and 1-bedroom apartment - 0.023 children per unit. Tax revenue expected in connection with various uses has been provided by the Town of Southold Sole Assessor (based on 2003-2003 tax rates), recognizing that these are average or blended rates, and may not reflect actual tax revenue for specific uses. Once established, generalized tax revenue rates can be used to determine expected tax revenue from various uses for planning purposes, again recognizing that such factors provide good relative revenue figures, but may not reflect actual conditions. Residential tax revenue (for 2002-2003) for single family homes generally ranges from $7,310-$13,600 depending upon the size of the home. Smaller residential units, townhomes or apartments generally range from $4,400-$5,750 per unit, with affordable housing district tax revenue averaging $2,730 per unit. Commemial tax revenue is generally in the range of $2.90 per square foot, with industrial tax revenue ranging from $2.10- $2.40 per square foot of space. 2.12.2 Economic Characteristics The Town has long recognized that agricultural and marine-related land uses provide major soumes of not only revenues in the Town, but also the land use aesthetics which underlie the economic basis for tourism and the rural atmosphere which are sources of business activity in the Town. In short, farming and marine activities are more important to the Town's economic base than just farm produce and fish sales. This relates to economic stimulus and "ripple effect", including jobs, sales tax and synergistic interrelationships of these traditional uses. The Town has been aware of this fact for a long period of time, and has undertaken significant efforts to study, preserve and protect these resources while it is still possible to do so in consideration of the factors that drive development pressure (see Section 1.1.1). There are presently numerous aghcultural-related uses to which agricultural land is presently put besides crops, including vineyards, orchards, etc. This diversity of agriculturally-related uses suggests a level of economic security for agricultural landowners. I I I The Town is experiencing an increase in development pressure. Past land use trends have, in large part, been curtailed by lack of available water supply. Water supply management by the local utility, and the desire and commitment of the SCWA and the Town to serve the needs of existing residents, may increase water availability, thereby increasing development potential. As a result, in the future, the potential for additional development in the Town may increase, particularly during a period of regional or national economic growth. In such a case, this growth pressure may threaten those open space and natural resources, rural character, and socio- economic conditions which have not been protected under the above-discussed measures. I I Page 2-78 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic Development of, or encroachment upon the Town's agricultural lands, could jeopardize the essence of Southold's character. Maintaining a strong agricultural belt is critical to the Town's heritage and future stability, given the important role of this resource in the Town's economy. Similarly, ensuring water access, continued traditional maritime uses, open space character, and enhancement of historic and cultural resources, is also crucial. Loss of the Town's unique character and resources as defined in Section 2.10 could have serious economic repercussions on the Town's resources and character. The Town's leadership recognizes this potential and is seeking to preclude this possibility through proper planning efforts. The Long Island economy (including both Nassau and Suffolk Counties) is the second largest in New York State after New York City with over 1.2 million jobs recorded in 2000. This extraordinary economy has traditionally been driven by the service, retail, and technology sectors. Southold is a major contributor to the economy of Long Island, however the town contributes in its own unique way. Southold's economy is not defined by the typical economic sectors that are so vital to the majority of Long Island. Rather, Southold's economy is based on a traditional economic base including agriculture and the maritime industries, and on the relatively recent emergence of the tourism/recreation industry. Agriculture Traditional agriculture in Southold, like in so many other areas, is under siege. Pressure to convert agricultural land to other uses, particularly to support new housing, is intense and persistent. In 1964, New York State supported 66,510 farms covering over 12,275,308 acres. By 1997, a period of 33 years, more than half these farms disappeared. The 1997 Agricultural Census reported only 31,757 farms operating on 7,254,470 acres. Over 5,000,000 acres of farmland were lost during this period, Statewide. In 1950, Suffolk County supported approximately 123,000 acres of farmland. By 1997, that figure dropped to 29,691 acres distributed among 606 farms. By some estimates, farmland is currently being lost in the County at a rate of approximately 1,000 acres per year. The agricultural industry has clearly undergone dramatic change over the past 50+ years, but it remains a vital element to many local economies. In Suffolk County, over 10,000 people are employed in agriculture, accounting for over $1 billion in annual revenue. Over 10,000 acres of land are currently devoted to agricultural use within the Town of Southold. According to the Suffolk County Planning Department, the Town supported 11,920 acres of farmland in 1968. Since that time (35 years), 16 percent of the Town's farmland resource was lost. The loss of farms and farmland has the potential to devastate the local economy. Fortunately, just as the pace of the loss of agricultural land was increasing, a shift began to take place from low value crops such as potatoes to higher value crops such as grapes, nursery stock, and greenhouse products. This timely shift has helped to maintain the stability of the agricultural sector. Page 2-79 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Mar/time Industries The Town of Southold is bordered to the north by Long Island Sound, to the south by the Peconic Estuary, and to the east by the Atlantic Ocean. The presence of these waters, and more than 160 miles of associated coastline, long ago logically gave rise to a thriving maritime industry within the Town. Today, Southold's maritime industry includes the traditional businesses of commercial fishing and shellfish harvesting, boat construction, repair, and maintenance, wholesaling, as well as the related newer businesses catering to recreational boating and fishing. The maritime industry is a potent element in the region's economy. Commercial Fishing - In 1999, the seafood industry in New York contributed more than $7.9 billion to the economy accounting for over 96,000 jobs. To place the economic contribution of commercial fishing in perspective, in 1999 the value of fish and shellfish landings ranked fourth in raw food products produced in the State. Milk was first followed by apples, then meat (beef, lamb, and pork). Long Island is the center of New York State's commercial fishing industry. Of the Island's six major fishing ports, two are located within the Town of Southold: · Freeport · Islip · Hampton Bays/Shinnecock · Montauk · Greenport · Mattituck According to the National Marine Fisheries Service, in 2000, 41.3 million pounds of fish and shellfish were landed in New York with a dockside value of $59.6 million. Studies have estimated that the total contribution of commercial fishing landings to the local economy is two to four times the reported dockside value. Most fishermen make their living digging shellfish. Year 2000 statistics obtained from the NYSDEC license issuances and the New York State Sea Grant indicated the following distribution of commercial fishing characteristics (Table 2-22): TABLE 2-22 EMPLOYEES IN NEW YORK STATE FISHING INDUSTRIES Type of Permit Number of Number of Estimated Number of permits Employees/Permit Employees Shellfish Di[~ger 2,451 1 2,450 Food fish 1,355 3.7 5,000 Lobster 746 1.85 1,400 Crab 724 1,85 1,350 Surf clam 125 1.5 200 Menhaden 35 3.0 100 Total 5,436 --- 10,500 Source: NYSDEC, New York State Sea Grant. Page 2-80 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Commercial fishery landings have decreased in recent years due to fisheries management regulations, and the lobster mortalities in Long Island Sound. In the year 2000, the 41.3 million pounds of fish and shellfish landings were primarily composed of squid, lobster, hard clams, surf clams, whiting, and flounder. Approximately 72% of the total catch was finfish and squid with almost ~ of this catch harvested in federal waters 3-200 miles from shore. Only 28% of the total commercial harvest was bi-valve and crustacean shellfish. Three species comprised over 90% of the shellfish harvest including surf clams (48%), lobsters (26%), and hard clams (20%). According to the National Marine Fishery Service, 95% of the commercial harvest of these three species occurred in state waters 0-3 miles from shore. In addition to the benefits to the local economy derived from commercial fishing, the industry also drives a major segment of the wholesale and distribution sector of the economy. The National Marine Fishery Service estimated that in 1999, there were 355 seafood wholesale plants in New York employing over 2,748 individuals. Businesses such as the Fulton Fish Market in New York City, which is the largest seafood market in the U.S., foreign trade and seafood exports, processing, retail markets, supermarkets, and restaurants are all directly linked to the fishing industry centered in and around the Town of Southold. Marinas and Recreational Boating - Southold supports docking facilities for an estimated 3,370- 3,530 watercraft in the Town's waters. This includes all types of docking facilities ranging from commercial marinas to individual docks to in-water moorings. This figure represents a significant number of recreational vessels. The use, sale, maintenance, and storage of these boats represents yet another element of the Town's maritime industry's economy. Businesses that sell and repair pleasure craft, service hulls and decks and equipment, maintain boats, provide boat launches and haul-out facilities, pump-out facilities, sailmaking and repairs, and sell the endless array of boating equipment and supplies, all contribute significantly to Southold's economy. Tourism Tourism continues to emerge as a significant and growing force in Southold's economy. As tourism grows, an awareness of the opportunities created within the industry continues to expand. Southold's wine industry originated as an agricultural use. Today, nearly all of these facilities include wineries, tasting rooms, gift shops, and provide for special events and functions. Emerging trends will continue to support the evolution of the area's tourism industry. In 2000, tourism-related industries employed almost 122,000 persons on Long Island, and generated payrolls of $2.5 billion. The New York State Labor Department includes the following employment areas within the tourism industry: · Airlines · Tour operators and travel agencies · Gas service stations · Eating and drinking places · Gift shops Page 2-81 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS · Hotels and motels · Motion picture theaters · Theatrical productions · Commercial sports · Amusement and recreational services According to the Long Island Association, most tourism workers live locally and spend their earnings nearby. Each dollar earned in one of the tourism-related industries creates almost 92¢ in additional earnings throughout the local economy. Each job in the tourism industry supports an additional 0.63 jobs in the region. Recognizing these factors, tourism supports over 77,000 jobs and generates nearly $4.48 billion in earnings yearly throughout Long Island. According to the U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis, the overall U.S. tourism industry continues to rebound from its post-September 11 decline. While large-scale national tourism-related facilities and trips remain somewhat underutilized, local facilities and sectors of the market such as those offered in the Town of Southold, continue to remain strong and grow. As noted previously, tourism in Southold is successful because of the areas natural beauty and rural character. A balance must be struck between expanding the industry and preserving the character and quality of the region. Tourism must not expand to a point where it spoils the very attributes that attract tourists in the first place. Other Economic Sectors In addition to agriculture, the maritime industry and tourism, the Town supports several other types of businesses. According to the draft Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan, business income tax filing data indicates that the Town supports the following types of businesses: · Manufacturing · Agricultural services · Wholesale · Transportation · Finance · Construction · Retail · Service In 1996, the service industry was the largest sector of the local economy based on business tax records, accounting for 30 percent of the total. Retail businesses constituted the next largest segment at 27 percent, followed by the construction trades at 18 percent. The remaining sectors accounted for smaller portions of the Town's economic activity. Finance represented 7 percent, transportation 5 percent, wholesale 5 percent, manufacturing 4 percent and agricultural services 4 percent. While the retail segment of the local economy is not regarded as one of the three primary elements, its influence on the local economy cannot be overlooked. In 1997, the last Census of Retail Trade indicated that Suffolk County supported 6,393 retail stores, which generated 13.5 billion in sales. Table 2-23 presents a breakdown of sales by retail category. Page 2-82 I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS TABLE 2-23 RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS AND SALES BY MAJOR RETAIL CATEGORY Category Sales % of Number of % of (million $) Total Stores Total Motor Vehicle Parts & Dealers 3,431 25.4 566 8.9 Food & Beverage Stores 2,425 17.9 1,132 17.7 Buildinl~ Materials & Garden Supplies Stores 1,557 11.5 552 8.6 General Merchandise Stores 1,481 11.0 95 1.5 Clothinl~ & Accessory Stores 877 6.5 856 13.4 Health & Personal Care Stores 815 6.0 483 7.6 Gasoline Stations 768 5.7 539 8.4 Non-store Retailers 502 3.7 410 6.4 Electronics & Appliance Stores 436 3.2 229 3.6 Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book & Music Stores 427 3.2 408 6.4 Miscellaneous Retail Stores 420 3.1 791 12.4 Furniture & Home Furnishing Stores 372 2.8 332 5.2 County Total 13,510 100 6,393 I0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1997 Census of Retai! Trade. Table 2-24 lists the square footages and numbers of the differing types of retail centers in the Town; it notes that there are no "Regional"-size (750,000 SF or larger) shopping centers, and only one "Community"-size center (between 100,000 and 750,000 SF) is present. TABLE 2-24 SOUTHOLD SHOPPING CENTERS Community Neighborhood Strip Shopping ShoppinR Center Shopping Center I Center ~ SF Stores # SF Stores # SF Stores 122,000 29 2 67,000 26 6 71,000 66 Source: Suffolk County Department of Planning. All Shopping Centers # SF Stores 9 260,000 121 The face of retailing in the region is changing dramatically. New construction along Route 58 in the Town of Riverhead presents some tangible evidence of these new trends. Larger stores and big box retailers are a phenomenon that has securely taken hold throughout the region. While no such businesses exist in Southold, an awareness of this encroaching trend is necessary. Riverhead also demonstrates the increasing popularity of outlet centers. The Tanger Outlet center has grown to over 770,000 square feet in floor area, making it a major regional shopping center. Outlet centers are often found in tourist destinations, and the allure of Southold may influence retail marketers. The Intemet is also changing the face of retailing. While vastly Page 2-83 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS improving convenience and perhaps cost, intemet retailing will not replace traditional stores, particularly those providing goods that are in immediate demand, such as supermarkets, pharmacies, butcher shops, liquor stores, delicatessens, pizzerias, ice cream parlors, bagel shops and video stores. These are all uses commonly fom~d in central business districts. As illustrated in Table 2-25 below, Southold supports 343 retail businesses within 630,000 square feet of commercial floor area; as for the Town as a whole, there are no "Regional"-sized central business districts in the Town. TABLE 2-25 SOUTHOLD CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICTS ' Community CBD's Neighborhood CBD's Strip CBD's 1~ # SF Stores # J SF Stores # SF Stores 4 / 370,000 222 4 370,000 222 Source: Suffolk County Department of Planning AII CBD's SF Stores 630,000 343 While somewhat variable, vacancy rates have periodically reached fairly high rates, as displayed in Table 2-26 below. TABLE 2-26 SOUTHOLD VACANCY RATES Type of Retail Area Shopping Centers Central Business Districts 1978 10.7% 13.2% 1982 1989 1996 2000 31.3% 6.1% 30.6% 26.2% 3.7% 12.7% 10.6% 7.7% The 1998 Scenic Byway Corridor Management Report indicated that in 1997, $550 million in economic activity was generated within the Town of Southold by 700 - 800 businesses. This figure included $70 million in municipal spending. Page 2-84 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS SECTION 3.0 POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 3.0 POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS This section provides a comparison of the proposed project, with the existing environmental conditions in order to analyze the impacts of the proposed action. Since the proposed action is a Comprehensive Implementation Strategy, involving 43 tools intended to bring the Town more closely in line with its comprehensive plan and land use goals, this section will be devoted to various methods of analysis to determine the potentially significant environmental impacts of the planning initiative. The first form of analysis involves a review of the future conditions of the Town if the project were not implemented. A "Build-Out" analysis has been prepared to determine the character the Town would assume if land use proceeds in a manner strictly according to the zoning of the land, considering only permanent protection measures and legal mechanisms that would restrict growth. In addition, a complete review of the tracking and statistics of the Towns land use project history has been prepared, to document the Town's success using voluntary methods for density reduction and open space protection. This is evaluated in terms of future trends and the adequacy of protection measures to understand how these historical trends may be affected by other influences. Analysis is included to evaluate the beneficial and adverse impacts to each specific implementation tool, as well as to review potential mitigation that may be employed to reduce impacts (mitigation is also discussed in greater detail in Section 4.0). Finally, there is an assessment of the potential impact upon natural and human resoume categories in the Town, under both the "Build-Out" scenario, and under the quantifiable aspects of the proposed action if implemented. 3.1 Future Conditions Without the Proposed Action 3.1.1 Build-Out Analysis A "build-out" analysis is a planning exercise used to determine the amount of development that can occur under existing zoning and land use controls. The basis for Southold's build-out analysis is its 9 residential zoning districts and its 8 non-residential zoning districts noted as follows: AC - Agricultural Conservation District R-80 - Residential Low Density District R40 - Residential Low Density District R-120 - Residential Low Density District R- 200 - Residential Low Density District R- 400 - Residential Low Density District HD - Hamlet Density Residence District AHD - Affordable Housing District ILR - Resort Residential District RO - Residential Office District HB ~ Hamlet Business Dislxict LB - Limited Business District B - General Business District MI - Marine I District MI1 - Marine II District LIO - Light Ind. Park/Planned Office Park LI - Light Industrial District Page 3-1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Build-Out Methodology The Build-Out analysis was compiled using the Town's Geographic Information System (GIS). Using GIS, a theoretical projection of how much development could occur on a given parcel in a particular zone was produced. The analysis is comprised of six basic steps: 1. The land area in each zoning district was established, by parcel. 2. All existing development was accounted for. 3. Lands that are already protected were deducted. 4. Environmentally constrained lands were deducted. 5. A yield (residential) or coverage (commercial) factor was applied. 6. The build-out was calculated. The final build-out results are presented in a spreadsheet format, by zoning district. Appendix F-1 provides the results of the full Build-Out analysis based on existing zoning regulations for the Town; the analysis was completed for the Town excluding Fishers Island, and Fishers Island separately. Table 3-1 is provided on the following page for convenience in reviewing the Build- Out matrix for the Town exclusive of Fishers Island (see Appendix F-1 for Fishers Island and all of the notes related to derivation of the Build-Out scenario for complete information). It must be understood that the Build-Out Analysis is a "theoretical" one, based on the potential acreage and number of units that could be built on land that is not in some way permanently protected. This assumes that all unprotected land is developed to its full potential and would occur over an extended period of time. This theoretical full Build-Out is useful as a reference point to determine the nature of development that could be achieved if full build conditions remain in effect, as compared with modifications of those conditions. Development as described by this Build-Out analysis might never be achieved, and if it were approached, it would take place over an extended period of time. The net difference between full Build-Out and Build-Out under modified conditions provides a basis to understand the magnitude of change and therefore impacts from a proposed project or alternative. The Build-Out Matrix The total acreage of land in each zoning district appears in the left column, and deductions occur for developed, protected and other parameters from left to right. The right columns in the spreadsheet are used to determine the net sub-dividable or net developable land, and then yield and coverage factors are applied to project a theoretical build-out based on zoning. The following provides a description of each of the columns and the computations that occur within the spreadsheet: Colunm 1 - Zoning District Column 1 identifies each of the Town's Zoning Districts. Columns 2 & 3 - Lot Size Columns 2 & 3 indicate the minimum lot size permitted in each zone (in acres and square feet). Page 3-2 TABLE 3-1 BUILD OUT ANALYSIS (THEORETICAL BUILD OUT POTENTIAL) Town of Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy It must be understood that the Build Out analysis is a "Theoret cai Build Out ', derived based on the potential acreage and number o furors that could be built on land that Is not in some way permanently protected. 12.15 99.t2 Totals LOW Wa Wa ] n/a wa 129081.53 6.663.09I 717.05 121,701.39[ 8,392.33 112,00200[ 3,30906 High n/a ufa n/a rr/a ufa /va tva fda 8,375.15 11,924.00 13,326.24 2,676,063 Page 3-3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS Column 4 - Yield Factor Column 4 represents a yield factor, which is applied to the minimum lot area to account for roads, utilities, drainage, etc. The yield factor used was originally developed by the LI Regional Planning Board for the "208 Study" Column 5 - Commercial Coverage Column 5 presents a commercial coverage factor, which calculates the amount of commercial square footage that can be developed on a parcel. The factor is based on a review of actual site plan approvals by the Planning Board over the past 5 years. Column 6 - Land Area by Zoning Column 6 presents the total land within each zoning district as identified on tax records for each parcel. This total excludes most roads and Trustees land. Column 7 - Protected Lands Column 7 presents all lands permanently protected including publicly owned land, park districts, publicly owned development rights (Town and County), private open space (including site plans and subdivisions), conservation organization open space and covenants, restrictions and easements. Column 8 - Community Facilities All community facilities that have little or no potential of being developed are presented in column 8. These lands include Town/County and State land other than parks, churches, museums, libraries, schools, water utilities, municipal facilities, transportation uses and other utilities. Column 9 ~ Sub-Totals The sub-total columns (columns 9, 12, 15 & 19) present the sum of the reduced acreages based on the deductions found on the left of the column. Columns 10 & 11 - Developed Non-Subdividable Developed non-subdividable land is land that the Assessor has coded as developed, and is less than two times the minimum lot area in the applicable zoning district. Column 10 presents acreages; column 11 presents number of parcels. Column 12 ~ Sub-Total SUB - TOTAL Columns 13 & 14- VacantNon-Subdividable Vacant non-subdividable land is land that the Assessor has coded as vacant, and is less than two times the minimum lot area in the applicable zoning district. Column 10 presents acreages; column 11 presents number of parcels. Column 15 ~ Sub-Total SUB - TOTAL Columns 16 & 17 - Developed Subdividable Developed subdividable land is land that the Assessor coded as developed, that is more than two times the minimum lot area in the applicable zoning district indicating additional subdivision and Page 3-4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS development potential. Land recorded as developed by the Assessor in the commercial zones was assumed to be fully developed. Column 18 - Developed Part of Subdividable Column 18 records the balance of land remaining after the minimum lot area in a given zoning district is deducted from the parcel size. This deduction accounts for the existing development already on the parcel. Column 19 - Sub-Total SUB - TOTAL Column 20 - Tidal/Freshwater Wetlands Column 20 presents the area of tidal and freshwater wetlands on each parcel in the various zoning districts. This area was subtracted from the reduced acreages based on the deductions to the left. Column 21 - 90%o Wet Vacant Non Subdividable ~ Column 21 presents the number of separate parcels that are less than two-times the minimum lot area of the applicable zoning district (not further subdividable) that are also more than 90% constrained by tidal or freshwater wetlands (not developable). Column 22 - Beach & Bluff Beach & bluff areas, that are not developable, are deducted in Column 22. Column 23 - > 15%Slope Slopes greater than 15%, which prevent development, are deducted in Column 23. Column 24 - Net Subdividable Available to Develop Column 24 presents the remaining developable land after ali of the columns to the left are deducted. Southold has over 8,945 acres of developable land! Column 25 ~ Existing Development Column 25 represents the number existing dwelling units and commercial square footage, as calculated using the build-out methodology. Column 26 - Development Potential Column 26 presents the number of potential dwelling units and commercial square footage, that could be created given existing zoning and land use controls, as calculated using the build-out methodology. An example is provided to illustrate the computations which are included in the spreadsheet: R-80 District Example: Total Land by Zoning = 7,321.72 acres MINUS Protected Lands (1,487. 63 acres) Page 3-5 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS MINUS Community Facilities (215.60 acres) SUBTOTAL = 5, 618. 49 acres MINUS Developed Non Subdividable (1,472. 34 acres) SUBTOTAL ~ 4,146.15 acres MINUS Vacant Non Subdividab le (532.07 acres) SUBTOTAL = 3,614.08 acres MINUS Developed Part of Subdividable (250.24 acres) SUBTOTAL = 3,363.84 acres MINUS Wetlands (501.40 acres) MINUS Beach & Bluff(136.90 acres) MINUS >15% Slopes (59.22) EQUALS Net Subdividable Available to Develop ~ 2,666.32 CALCULATE Net Subdividable Available to Develop x Yield Factor 2,666.32 X O. 40 = 1,066.5 units MINUS 90% Wet Vacant Non Subdividable (23 Units) = 1,045.5 PL US Vacant Non Subdividable (336 Units) = 1,380 Units Can be Developed in the R-80 Zone Based on the theoretical Build-Out, if fully developed, another 6,335 dwellings and over 2V2 million square feet of commemial and industrial space could be constructed in the Town of Southold. 3.1.2 Regional Impact Assessment for Build-Out Conditions RIAM Methodology The impact of Build-Out conditions can be assessed by determining the demand on Town resources that will occur as a result of the increased number of residential traits and Page 3-6 I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I i Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS commercial/industrial square footage projected through the Build-Out analysis. This analysis, referred to as the Regional Impact Assessment Model (RIAM), has been completed for the following resource categories: General Use Parameters (number of units/square footage, density, yield, use allocation) · Water Resource Analysis (water use and concentration of nitrogen in recharge) · Demographic Analysis (total population, school age children and senior citizen population) · Tax Revenue Analysis (total taxes, tax revenue for each jurisdiction including schools) · School Tax Analysis (school tax revenue compared with cost of educating students) · Solid Waste Analysis (tonnage of solid waste produced by residential, commercial/industrial) · Trip Generation Analysis (A.M. Peak Trips or traffic generated by residential, commercial/industrial) Appendix F-2a contains the results of the RIAM model rtms performed based on zoning categories, yields and associated environmental impacts for the Town exclusive of Fishers Island. For Fishers Island, the Build-Out matrix provides sufficient information to gauge development potential, particularly since Fishers Island does not share the same magnitude of potential development by virtue of it's limited zoning, and isolated setting as compared with the transportation and open space issues confronting the remainder of Southold; however, a RIAM model run was also performed and is included in Appendix F-2b. The model was established using the assumption that the Town's existing zoning and development controls remain in effect, resulting in a Build-Out of the developable land within the Town (see Table 3-1 and Appendices F-1 and F-2). It is recognized that the Build-Out and RIAM are approximate and speculative estimations of the density derived impacts that would occur under a full build scenario for several reasons: 1. The Town contains some number of seasonal homes that are not occupied on a year-rotmd basis. 2. The Town is expected to continue to purchase development rights for land preservation programs. 3. The Town contains a number of undocumented illegal apartments (estimated to range from 1,500 to 3,000 units). The number of seasonal homes in the Town has been estimated at approximately 34.1 percent; however, work in progress for the Sustainable East End Development Study indicates that this percentage may be higher. This impact of seasonal homes is difficult to assess. On a seasonal basis many forms of impact are speculated to be greater than for single family homes, due often to a larger number of occupants for vacation activities and a higher intensity of use during several days during the week with an overall general increase in summer activity. During the off-season, the activity, and related impacts associated with these homes is less. For a general assessment of impacts, and in order to create a baseline for impact comparison with various scenarios, year-round mulitipliers were used for this analysis. It should be noted, that while there may be increased seasonal impacts, particularly with respect to traffic congestion, the taxes paid remains the same, and the demand for many year round services would still be based conservatively on year-round occupancy. With respect to solid waste and sanitary flow, impacts may be greater during the summer; however, on an annualized basis, the use of year-round factors may be the best approximation available. Page 3-7 I I I ! i I I I I I 1 I i I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS As noted above, traffic is a unique consideration. Traditional occupancy of homes and traffic generation numbers are based on year-round occupancy with trip generation statistics for peak hours which is the time of the journey to and from work, again tied to permanent residency. Seasonal homes can alter this dramatically, with less trips during peak hours, but far greater trips during off-peak and particularly weekend time periods. As a result, significant congestion may be experienced that is difficult to quantify and model, as it deviates from traditional traffic generation and capacity analyses which consider peak time intervals. Again, for the purpose of the RIAM, annualized figures which determine peak A.M. traffic (typically the highest peak period), are used to create a baseline for comparison purposes. Several additional factors support the use of year-round residency factors for the purpose of the RIAM. The Build-Out analysis on which the RIAM is based, determined the potential number of units exclusive of those lands which have permanent protection or preservation methods. As a result, year-round factors were used for the following additional reasons: I. Seasonal homes could become occupied on a full time basis at any time. 2. The number of seasonal homes can not be regulated under any code or law. 3. An assumption regarding the number of year-round vs. seasonal homes is not a permanent protection measure. In addition, the relative comparison of impacts remains the same between alternatives, providing informative data on the net difference between impacts in resource categories. An additional variable that could affect the Build-Out results is the purchase of development rights. The Town has had a history ofpumhasing development rights for land preservation. The availability of funds, from Town, County, State and Federal sources for such purposes is not known or guaranteed. Therefore, the projection of full build conditions does not factor in such efforts. However, additional analyses are provided in Section 3.2.2, to determine the relative change in impacts under conditions where 80 pement of unprotected open space is preserved, in combination with a 60 percent density reduction, consistent with several goals established by the Town. The Regional Impact Assessment Model includes a Data Input Sheet, data results for each individual zoning district, an imbedded microcomputer model referred as the Simulation of Nitrogen in Recharge (SONIR), and a Summary sheet. The Data Input Sheet lists each zoning district, and provides a location to insert assumptions for impact assessment multipliers for each resource category. The model employs the data described in Section 2.0 of this DGEIS for coverage, water resources, demographic analysis, tax revenue analysis, school tax analysis, solid waste analysis and trip generation analysis. The model is based on the following sources of information: · Lots/Acre is based on 208 Study, population estimate methodology (Koppelman, 1978). · Coverage is based on survey of Town Planning Board approved site plans in past 5 years. · Water/Sanitary is based on SCDHS design flow factors. · Demographic population based on US 2000 Census average Town of Southold household population. · Children per Unit is based on Suffolk BOCES. Page 3-8 I I I ! i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS · Jobs/1000 SF is based on Suffolk BOCES, Nonresidential employees by land use type. · Tax Revenue is based on Town of Southold Assessors, average estimates by land use type. · Solid Waste is based on 7.3 lbs/capita provided by Town of Southold solid waste management. · lbs./1000 SF provided by Califomia Integrated Waste Management Board. · Trip Generation is based on Nelson & Pope transportation dept., average estimates by land use type. · School Education Cost does not include NYS Aid; Analysis factors this in averaged at 15%. The model draws from the Data Input Sheet to generate impact analysis data for each zoning district, based on the number of acres available for development. There is an individual sheet for each zoning district, which displays resulting computations for each resource category. Water resoume impacts, and specifically nitrogen in recharge, are determined by the SON1R model which utilizes accepted hydrologic and mass-balance formulas and principles to determine recharge available as a dilution factor for the mass of nitrogen expected from sanitary discharge, fertilizer and other sources. This results in a determination of the milligrams per liter (mg/1) of nitrogen in recharge. The model has been used extensively in resource management and has been calibrated using other similar models (WALRUS, BURBS), and compared with empirical data. The results indicate that SONIR is reliable in predicting the concentration of nitrogen in recharge and is slightly more conservative than empirical results. The data Summary sheet displays the results for each resoume category by zoning, and lists total figures for those parameters that are appropriate for summation. The high and low numbers presented in the model are based on the same logic as the Build-Out analysis, whereby certain districts allow a greater density of development dependent upon the availability of public water and/or sewage treatment. RIAM Results The results of the RIAM runs indicate that significant impacts to the Town's physical and aesthetic environments will result if the remaining buildable land in the Town were developed in conformance with existing zoning and applicable land use plans. Brief discussions of anticipated impacts are presented later in this section; however, in general the following conclusions are evident: · The current amounts of farmland and open space will be removed for residential development, with consequent increases in population; · School district enrollments and expenses will be increased, which may require tax increases; · Reductions in the amount and quality of the rural character of the Town which are so important to the Town's economy and aesthetic value; · The amount of traffic will be increased, with associated increases in congestion, and costs for roadway maintenance/expansion/improvements as well as reductions in quality of the communities affected; · There will be increases in groundwater withdrawals to serve the increased development, with impacts to groundwater supplies and quality (from lawn chemicals), and impacts to the public water supplier (for increased need/costs for system expansion/maintenance); Page 3-9 I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I ! Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS · Clearing of natural vegetation for this amount of development will reduce the acreage of natural habitat for many species of wildlife, which also contribute to the overall reduction in the Town's rural aesthetics; · The geographic distribution of this development may not contribute to Ihe strengthening of the hamlet centers (in terms of economic support for businesses located therein, or to the rural residential aesthetic of these centers); · Remaining agricultural lands protected from development may be insufficient in bulk to support a viable agricultural-support service industry; and · Increased development will require expansions of the various infrastructure and community services that serve this growth, with resulting needs for maintenance/expansion and increased taxes to pay for these increased services. In summary, even if the Town's remaining developable land is developed in conformance with existing zoning and applicable land use plans and development controls, there will be potentially significant adverse impacts to all the environmental and aesthetic parameters of the Town. These impacts arise from not only the amount of development, but from its distribution as well. Table 3-2 lists the amount (in terms of either units for residential zones, or square footage for commercial and industrial zones) of development which can occur on developable land in the Town, as well as corresponding environmental and planning characteristics such as nitrate concentration in recharge, population (total, school-age children, senior citizens and employees), taxes, school district costs, solid waste generation and trip generation. Following are brief discussions of the anticipated impacts on various impact categories due to Full Build-Out. Specific values associated with resource impacts and changes as a function of each zoning district are provided in Table 3-2, and the RIAM data sheets included in Appendix F-2. Geological Resources Land clearing and grading activities associated with full Build-Out of the Town would have significant impacts on geological resources, as the potential for erosion while bare soil is exposed to the elements, or on steep or unprotected slopes, is increased. Not all development occurs simultaneously, and site specific factors will be reviewed by the Planning Board as part of individual applications. Water Resources The increased amount of development associated with full Build Out will result in an increase in groundwater pumpage, to supply this growth with water for sanitary, cooking, drinking and irrigation purposes. There is a potential for increased saltwater encroachment in such a case, as the withdrawals may lower the water table. In addition, impacts to the quality of groundwater will be increased due to the use of lawn chemicals and sanitary systems (including nitrogen loading), particularly in areas beneath new development including higher density residential zones and industrial/commercial zones. Southold lies between the Long Island Sound and Peconic Estuaries, and management of the watersheds contributing to these estuaries is critical. Page 3-10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Genetic EIS TABLE 3-2 BUILD OUT ANALYSIS - SUMMARY (Existing Conditions) AC 2,321 1.65 5,571 1,637 1,944 $18,895,915 -$6,273,753 20.3 1,807 5,196 696,409 0 467.6 467.6 103.9 191.8 38.4 831.3 R-40 2,211 6.09 5,306 1,559 1,85'~----~~ 19.--'--~~~-]-- 663,19~ ~ 50.--'~-~ 50.--~-~'-~11.2 152.2 30.4 89.7 176 R-80 1,380 1.98 3,311 973 1,15~ $11,241,77~ ~ 12.~ 1,06~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2~.~ 53.~ ~ 22.~ ~ ~ R-120 ~ 0.00 0~~~~~~~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~ R-20~ 3~ 1.7~ 9~ ~ 2~ $378,1~ ~ 0.~ 2~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1.~ ~ 0.~ ~ 4~ AHD ~ 0.0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ H~ 9~ 3.9~ ~ 1~ 7~ ~ $169,58~ 0.~ ~ 5~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1.~ 3.~ ~ ~ 2~ HD*~ 15~ 5.1~ 35~~~ $701,75~~ 1.~ 11~~ 47,84~~~ 5.~ 1.~~~ 2~ ~ 8~ 4.1~ ~ 1~ 6~ ~ $150,41~ 0.~ ~ 4~ ~ ~ 4.~ 4.~ 1.~ ~ 0.9 11.4 23 R~ 17 3.8~ 4~~ 1~~ -$54,75~ 0.~~ 1~ 5,07~ ~ ~~ 0.~ 0.~ ~~~ H~ 12~ 4.1~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0.~ 9~ ~ 27,49~ ~ ~ 6.~ 1 .~ ~ 1 .~ 16.~ ~ HB~ 28~ 5.0~ 61~ ~~ $2,053,89~ $791,3~~~ 10~~~~~~~ 24.~~ H~ W~ 5.9~~~~ $1,685,38~~ 726.~ 25~~~ 581,16~~~ 241,14~ I~~ 1~~ M~~ 1.1~~~~ ~ $8,13~ ~~ 2.3~~~~~ ~ 0.~~~ ~ MI~ 6~ 1.1~ 15~ ~ ~ ~ $195,25~ 0.~ 5~ ~ ~ ~ 5.~ ~ ~ 1.~ 0.~ ~ 2~ Mil* 15~ 1.2~ 33~~~ $863,6~ $272,03~~~~ ~ ~ 7.~~ 1.~ 4.~~~ 3~ MII*~ 27~ 1.1~ 60~ ~ ~ ~ $673,20~ 2.~ ~ ~ 81,99~ ~ 8.~ 8.~ ~ 7.~ ~ 23.~ ~ L~ W~ 4.2~~~~ $313,53~ $202,03~~,~ 1~ 4,32~~~ 108,11~ 54,05~~~,~ ~ ~ W~ 4.9~ 0 ~~ $771,45~ $497,10~~' 27~-- 2~~ 266,01~~ 220,76~ 110,38~~~~ ~ LI~ ~ 5.8~~~~ $1,929,67~~ 2,41~ 36~~~ 804,03~ ~~ 402,01~ 1~~~~ L~ W~ 5.4~~~~ $1,642,69~ $1,058,51~~ 35~ 6~~ 782,23~~ 579,43~ 289,71~~~ 1~ ~ Hi~ Page 3-11 I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Ecological Resources Natural vegetation cleared or disturbed by clearing for development will reduce the amount of natural vegetation, with associated reduced acreage of habitat for wildlife use. No tree clearing restrictions currently exist, and loss of habitat, clear cutting, removal of buffers and other ecological impacts could occur as a result. Transportation Resources The amounts of development envisioned in the case of full Build Out would result in significant increases in the numbers of vehicle trips generated in the Town, particularly in the commercial zones, and to a lesser extent where there is a higher potential of residential units. Single family residential units generate a high number of trips during the morning peak hour primarily for the journey to work. Residential development if spread across the Towns geography would be less likely to utilize alternative/intermodal forms of transportation. As a result, the projected number of vehicle trips would add to congestion, and create new areas of congestion dependent upon location specific conditions. Air Resources The level of new growth in the Town would result in increases in the potential for and amount of dust raised during construction operations (from truck movements on unpaved surfaces and land clearing and grading activities), though it is recognized that construction will not occur simultaneously but will occur over an extend period of time. Air impacts also result from vehicle emissions and as a result of building heating system exhausts. Dispersion is generally good in east end communities, reducing the significance of air emissions with the exception of localized areas with unique conditions. Land Use, Zoning and Plans Growth identified in Tables 3-1 and 3-2 would result in an increase in development throughout the Town, with consequent increases in impacts; it is recognized that these impacts would also be distributed throughout the Town. Development would take place in conformance with the existing zoning of each site; however, this pattern of development would not achieve the stated goals of the Town. A major basis for this Comprehensive Implementation Strategy is therefore to ensure that the Town's existing zoning and the resulting land use pattern will achieve the goals of the Town. In addition, review of past land use plans and studies finds that many sound recommendations for land use and development have not as of yet been implemented, thereby jeopardizing consistency with these plans and conformance to Town goals. The purpose of analysis of build-out conditions is to evaluate the resulting land use pattern and character of the Town based on the ultimate development pattern. Page 3-12 I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I i I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Demographic Conditions As shown in Table 3-2, a significant increase in total Town population would result from full Build-Out. This increase would include significant growth in two important age cohorts: school- age children and senior citizens. A large increase in children aged 5-17 would have significant implications for school district enrollments and associated budgets and facility planning, while an increase in the senior citizen population has important implications for government-funded and -operated social services, school district budgeting, private medical services and public emergency services. Build-out under current Town zoning would result in a 76% population increase. Community Services Continued population growth due to new development on a Town-wide scale will result in an increase in the need for community services. This means an increased potential for increases in taxes for the public to pay for these increased services and capabilities. It is noted that tax revenue distribution will assist in offsetting some of the demand for services with a budget to address future needs; however, school district related impacts are significant as discussed below. Infrastructure Solid Waste Handling and Recycling - The amount of development envisioned by the Build- Out Analysis would significantly increase the amount of residential and commercial solid waste generated within the Town, with associated increases in public costs to pay for handling and disposal. Water Supply - As the amount of development indicated by the Build-Out Analysis would significantly increase the number of residential units and commercial space in the Town, there would be corresponding increases in the amount of potable water required to properly serve these increased users, with potential increases in rates and fees to pay for these services. In addition, as this new growth would be distributed unevenly throughout the Town, the pattem of increased water demand will likewise be unevenly distributed. Drainage - In general, development requires installation of drainage systems to properly handle and recharge runoff generated on impervious surfaces. While the volume of runoff generated in the Town will be increased by this new development, it is anticipated that conformance to design requirements will continue to be adequate to maintain proper drainage control. Wastewater Treatment - As a consequence of the above-noted increases in water demand and the pattern of these demands, the volume of sanitary wastewater generated will increase, and the pattern of this generation will likewise change. This will have the result of increasing the number of on-site septic systems or, if economic and density factors allow for it, the establishment or extension of existing community sewer systems. Ultimately, density must conform to Article 6 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code; however, the sensitive nature of water supply and surface water recharges in Southold, including drinking water and resources of the Peconic Estuary, makes it important to reduce overall nitrogen loading. Page 3-13 I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Electricity - The increased amount of residential and commemial development will increase the demand for electrical services within the Town. Also to be considered is the pattern of increased demand; as development would occur under current zoning in a pattern that would tend to spread development across the Town. This may reduce the potential for underground placement of utility lines, as less compact development would obtain electricity from the traditional grid. In addition, LIPA has indicated that without upgrade of the two dated transmission lines, the utility is close to "peak" capacity. As a result, the pattern of demand (and pattern of associated electrical service system growth) will be unchanged and would occur in accordance with current zoning. Natural Gas - Similar to that for electrical services, the demand for and pattern of demand for natural gas services will occur based on current zoning patterns. Community Character Full Build-Out of the Town's remaining vacant or otherwise developable land will significantly increase the potential for adverse impacts to the character of not only the individual hamlets, but of the rural quality and character of the entire Town. Such growth, should it occur without comprehensive planning and a basis of land use limitations and controls, would reduce and narrow viewsheds and change the character of the land and land uses within those viewsheds, but could also reduce the "small-town" character of the hamlets. Planning review would assist in reducing impacts on a site-by-site basis; however, ultimately, growth under build-out conditions would affect community character. Cultural Resources The increased growth projected by build-out conditions could increase noise and impact visual resources, two cultural resource categories of importance. Cultural resources also includes historic and pre-historic resources. The integrity of historic resource depends much upon preserving the extant historic structures that add to the character of the community. Prehistoric resources protection depends upon the identification and recovery of cultural information, or preservation efforts if warranted by individual sites. Extensive growth could stress visual and historic resources in the Town, while other forms of cultural resources would likely be controlled by site review. Economic/Fiscal Conditions While the Town would realize some significant short-term economic benefits (by increased construction employment and sales for materials suppliers), as well as increased long-term economic benefits (from commercial and industrial employment and property taxes to the various taxing entities), these benefits will be at least partially offset by increased costs to community services providers (see above). Thus, while portions of the Town's economy would benefit from full Build-Out, other portions may not benefit, and may even be adversely impacted to a significant degree. There is a potential for adverse impacts to the Town's economy relating Page 3-14 I ! I ! I ! I I ! ! I I I ! I I ! I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS to tourism and traditional forms of economic stability including agriculture, fisheries and sectors dependent upon the Town's natural resources, should rural character and these mainstays of the Town's economy be degraded by general growth in the Town. In review of Table 3-2, it is evident that a full build-out scenario would also lead to tax revenue difficulties as there is a substantial tax deficit relating to school districts due to the number of and cost to educate school aged children that would result from a more intense pattern of single family residential development. The more prominent single family development would also continue to exacerbate issues regarding cost of housing, by not providing alternative and diverse housing options which could be realized through programs to reduce conventional single family development. In addition to housing costs, taxes tend to be higher for single family residential development, increasing the degree to which housing is not affordable from the standpoint of yearly tax payments. This situation occurs with a resulting increased demand for services. Use and Conservation of Energy Resources The increased amount of development accruing from full Build-Out, both residential and commercial, will increase the demand for energy (electrical and natural gas) services in the Town. There is a desire for new electrical utilities to be placed underground, which could be accommodated under build out conditions but may be more efficient with a more consolidated development pattern. Recent trends have also contributed to more efficient building methods which would offset a portion of the increased demand for services in connection with the Build- Out. It is expected that the affected public utilities will be able to meet the expected heightened demand, in consideration of the increased and reliable revenue from the increased customer base generated by this growth. However, it should be recognized that this growth would be significant in terms of quantity and geographic distribution, with significant Town-wide implications for energy demand, consumption and service facilities/systems. 3.1.3 Land Preservation Efforts and Future Development Trends Tracking and Statistics for Years 1997-8/15/02 The full Build-Out scenario is useful and is an important method of analysis for planning purposes, as the lands which are considered developable have no permanent preservation mechanisms in place. As a result, land could be sold, and an owner could expect to achieve a yield and development consistent with the zoning on the land at any time. Southold Town has been aggressive in pursuing voluntary preservation methods to reduce density and achieve farmland and open space preservation. The Planning Board office and Land Preservation office are available to assist landowners, and actively participate with owners to structure creative projects that reduce density and preserve land. The use of PDR is a common land preservation/density reduction tool. In addition, groups such as the Peconic Land Trust are active in working with farm and landowners to achieve adequate limited development, compensation/equity and tax relief, in connection with permanent land use and preservation. Page 3-15 I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS It is important to review the past history of land use projects to document the success of land preservation efforts to date. The Land Preservation office, in consult with the Planning Board office and the Moratorium team has compiled data for the years 1997 to August 15, 2002; these data illustrate positive results based on these efforts. Data analyzed in this section was collected for the following types of projects: · Completed land preservation efforts during this time frame including Town, County, Peconic Land Trust, The Nature Conservancy acquisitions and gifts to any of these entities; and · Completed Planning Board applications for residential site plans, major subdivision and minor subdivisions. It is noted that these data did not track individual building permits for new residences. Such activity can occur without land preservation or Planning Board involvement, by only obtaining a building permit for an existing vacant parcel. Building permit activity is presented in Section 2.7.2. Appendix F-3 contains the Tracking and Statistics spreadsheet, as well as the notes which explain the rows and columns and how data was derived. The spreadsheets included in Appendix F-3 provide tracking and statistics in a number of forms and the reader is directed to the explanation of row headings included in the Appendix. These data present a number of points that assist in understanding the tracking and statistics associated with land preservation and subdivision projects that occurred during the period 1997 to August, 2002. While compiling the data, it was discovered that there was one project, Peconic Landing, which was approved within the tracking timeframe, that was an unusual project and has a modifying effect on the results. It was determined that the figures should be presented both with and without Peconic Landing. It should be noted that Peconic Landing, which is located within current Hamlet Density zone is a real project, and that a similar project could again be approved, and could be approved within the existing A-C, R-200, R-400 and R-80 zoning district as a Special Exception. The data and different forms of presentation illustrate the dramatic effect that one project of this type can have in the statistics. The following describes the results presented in each row of the spreadsheet provided in Appendix F-3: Row A shows all projects within the tracking database and includes both preservation and Planning Board projects (including Peconic Landing). The calculations also show that when reviewing all of the projects within the tracking data base, there is an overall density of 1 residential lot to 3.85 acres, a density reduction of 54.35 %, and a preservation %age of 66.76%. Row B shows how the numbers differ when Peconic Landing is excluded. The overall density in this row is I residential lot to 9.6 acres, the density reduction is 74.59%, and the preservation component is 71.18%. Several calculations of statistics by zoning district are also informative. Row C presents projects within the R-80 and A-C districts only and includes both land preservation and Planning Board projects. It does not specify these prOjects as being open space or farmland, but sorts the projects by the existing zone, which is either R-80 or A-C. The overall density for this classification is 1 residential lot to 15.94 acres, the density reduction is 83.6%, and the preservation component is 73.39 percent. Page 3-16 i I I ! I I I ! I I I I i I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS Row D illustrates projects within zones other than R-80 and A-C. There were projects within the tracking database in zones such as R-40, HD, M-II, and othem, and for this analysis, these were grouped together and presented collectively in this row. Again, this subset includes both preservation projects and Planning Board projects as well as Peconic Landing. Row E is an additional presentation of the figures without Peconic Landing. The overall density for this classification is 1 residential lot to 0.77 acres, the density reduction is 16.34%, and the preservation component is 28.64 percent. Without Peconic Landing, the overall density for this classification is 1 residential lot to 2.04 acres, the density reduction is 25.89%, and the preservation component is 49.31 percent. Row F shows the tracking data for projects that were not 100% preservation and includes preservation projects with reserved areas and Planning Board projects. This row eliminates all projects where 100% of the original parcel was acquired and preserved. In other words, it eliminates projects where the total lot was acquired. Peconic Landing was excluded from this subset. The overall density for this classification is 1 residential lot to 7.85 acres, the density reduction is 69.05%, and the preservation component is 63.94 %. Row G is similar to Row F, but for the A-C and R-80 zones only. This row includes preservation projects with reserved areas and Planning Board projects, and excludes projects where the total lot was acquired. The overall density for this classification is 1 residential lot to 12.91 acres, the density reduction is 79.79%, and the preservation component is 66.48 %. Row H shows the tracking data for projects reviewed by only the Planning Board. This subset excludes projects which were 100% preservation, or had some type of preservation with a reserved area and the landowner chose not to go before the Planning Board to separate the reserved area from the preserved area. Peconic Landing was excluded from this subset. The overall density for this classification is 1 residential lot to 5.63 acres, the density reduction is 59.33%, and the preservation component is 56.85 %. Row I presents the tracking data for projects reviewed by the Planning Board only, and within the A-C and R-80 zones only. This subset excludes projects which were 100% preservation, or had some type of preservation with a reserved area and where the landowner chose not to go before the Planning Board to separate the reserved area from the preserved area. The overall density for this classification is 1 residential lot to 9.49 acres, the density reduction is 72.84%, and the preservation component is 60.53 %. In reviewing this information it is important to keep in mind that the computations for density and the computations for preservation cannot be viewed as "mirror" statistics for each parcel. This is a critical point that must not be ignored lest misleading conclusions be drawn from the data. This point is particularly relevant where the property owner retained from the original parcel an area that has further development potential. This area was left out of the density calculations. The reason for doing this was to recognize the uncertainty that remains as to the future use of the retained land since potential or intended land use decisions on the remainder of the land are an unknown quantity. As a result, the density portion of the tracking system provides precise picture of the number and percentage of new developable lots that were created exclusive of the retained area. Review of these data shows that based on voluntary efforts to date, the Town is preserving land and reducing density. Page3-17 I I I ! I ! I ! ! I I ! I ! I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS It is noted that these data do not include projects that were approved prior to 1997, or projects that were pending at the time the Moratorium was enacted, but were not approved. Likewise, these data only represent the history of approvals during the period of record, and should not be interpreted as indicative of future trends particularly if economic or infrastructure conditions change that could affect land use decisions. As a result, additional information has been provided in the next subsection, to review factors and influences that could affect future trends in development pressure and land acquisition that may be encountered in the coming years. Future Trends The tracking and statistics analysis includes only the projects which were approved by the Planning Board and Land Preservation offices over the five years prior to August, 2002. All land preservation efforts to date have been voluntary on the part of land and farmowners. It is noted that those that who choose to participate in conservation subdivision planning, are generally those that respect and value the land and open space, and in many cases include historical farm families and long-term landowners. The spreadsheet also includes applications reviewed by the Planning Board under more conventional designs which have been refined through cooperative preservation efforts. There is no guarantee that this trend will continue, particularly in consideration of specific factors which warrant discussion here due to the influence they have on development pressure. These factors are: · A limited amount of land remains available for development in Towns to the west, though there is a trend toward increased development pressure due to build-out and land costs to the west, increased housing needs and the desirability of the North Fork. · Availability and declining costs in computer hardware and software, electronic mail, digital communication formats and remote offices, with a consequent increase in telecommuting, can result in people choosing to live at a greater distance from the workplace; the North Fork is a prime area for this increase in housing demand due to the rural qualities valued by residents and visitors alike. · There has been a distinct lack of available public water, a necessity for subdivision and building approvals. Development is increasing in Brookhaven and Riverhead Towns to the west, leading to a quest for available land in the eastern Towns. There remains a significant demand for housing of all types, evident in the number of new homes to the west with no evidence of decline in this real estate market. The Moratorium and basis for the Comprehensive Implementation Strategy recognize that development pressure could further increase, and that not every property owner is interesting in preserving their land. As a result, it is important to ensure that proper planning is in place before development pressure changes important qualities of the Town that ensure its stability. Land preservation has occurred over time in Southold Town, and in recent years, efforts have increased toward purchase of development rights and acquisition of key open space parcels. The availability of Town bonding, continuation of the 2 percent real estate tax fund, and State and Federal grants are by no means guaranteed. The 2 percent funds will continue through 2020; Page 3-18 I I I I I I I I ! ! I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS however, the amount available per year is based on outside, regional economic factors. Furthermore, inflation does not necessarily keep pace with changes in real estate values. While there is optimism for continuance of a successful program, budget constraints, budget passage, bond votes, and State-wide as well as Federal economic pressures could change, resulting in a potential decrease in available funding. In addition, recently the cost of land has escalated as evidenced by the increase in appraisal values for land and development fights acquisition, offers made to landowners interested in selling, and accepted offers/closings on purchased land. Therefore the amount of land that can be preserved annually is not a certainty. Land preservation has occurred as a result of the Moratorium, whereby, landowners seeking relief from the moratorium are designing projects that meet the exemption criteria. This is occurring however, during a time when the Suffolk County Water Authority is not providing public water outside of those priority areas defined by the SCWA and Town. In addition, many private water supply areas of the Town have impacted water quality due to past land use practices, and therefore, private water sources are not readily available. Given these factors, caution with regard to the stewardship of Town resources crucial to economic stability and quality of life is important. The lack of available water supply for new projects has been a significant deterrent in development over the past few years. The period from 1997 to August, 2002 was coincident with water supply limitations leading to the SCWA's adoption of a moratorium (adopted on May 21, 2002) on new water connections to the public supply system. The SCWA Moratorium expired on November 21, 2002; however, new connections are only being allowed consistent with a water map adopted by both the Town and County for public water supply service to areas that currently have access to public water mains, and several limited areas for water main extension. This coupled with lack of private water supply opportunities due to contaminated areas and salt-water intrusion/upcoming, has created a significant constraint on development. During 2003, the SCWA began the process of completing a Generic Environmental Impact Statement which is intended to result in a strategy for increasing the supply of water within the Town. Alternatives being considered include: purchase of water fi'om the Town of Riverhead Water District, transmission of water from the west through the Town of Riverhead in newly constructed water mains, reliance on existing wellfields within the Town of Southold through extensive water treatment programs, developing new well fields, constructing desalinization plants, mandatory water conservation programs and a no action alternative. The SCWA is charged with providing public water. Some of the restrictions on the extension of the water mains, which have been in effect up to this point in time, may disappear in a few years. The promise of full development that expanded public water service offers is likely to prove tempting to those property owners seeking to maximize their financial investment in the land - as opposed to those owners seeking open space for its own sake. As public water becomes more readily available, any past tracking history is liable to be invalidated as a barometer of future land preservation trends. Page 3-19 I I I I I ! I I ! I I I i I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS The Town and County both maintain a policy of providing safe drinking water to all residents. This will necessitate measures to expand water supply resources. It is expected that water supply will become more readily available through the efforts of the SCWA as the water purveyor, and the Town in its desire to safely serve its residents. As a result, the Town must have a plan in place for orderly growth that will ensure conformance with the overriding goals of the Town. In considering these trends, three facts are apparent: increasing development pressure can be expected due to decreased land availability to the west, coupled with a strong demand for housing; the Town and other governmental jurisdictions do not control, and may not be able to ensure continued, voluntary preservation at current levels; and, the lack of available public water may not always be an impediment to development. The tracking and statistics compiled in connection with the Town's preservation efforts are laudable and informative; however, diligence must be exercised for proper zoning, planning and preservation efforts if the Town is to grow in a manner consistent with it's goals. Page 3-20 i I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 3.2 Potential Impacts of the Proposed Action The proposed action involves the implementation of a series of tools to improve the framework for growth and development in the Town, in harmony with the Town's five established goals. Section 1.3.1 clearly lists those implementation tools that assist in achieving specific Town goals. The advancement of this Comprehensive Implementation Strategy represents a major step forward for the Town in planning its destiny, in conformance with, and in consideration of, past plans and studies, policies, goals, land use decisions, and the comprehensive plan of the Town. The analysis of potential impacts of the project have been approached in several ways. First, is an assessment of the impact of each individual implementation tool. A summary assessment is provided, with a more detailed discussion of key impacts that may occur as a result of the implementation of each individual implementation tool identified as possibly having a significant adverse impact. Second, is an assessment of the potential impact on the resources of the Town, as predicted by the Regional Impact Assessment Model. This provides a framework for comparison of those initiatives that may have a direct affect on the resource categories assessed in the model. 3.2.1 Potential Adverse Impacts of Implementation Tools Given the number of implementation tools involved in the Comprehensive Implementation Strategy, a screening method was devised to assist in identifying tools which may result in potential adverse impacts. In developing this screening method, a number of beneficial impacts became apparent in connection with the proposed project. As a result, a matrix (Table 3-3) has been compiled which identifies the following information: · Implementation Tools; · Beneficial Primary Impacts and Implications; · Adverse Impacts and Implications; · Preliminary Discussion/Analysis; and · Mitigation Measures to Minimize Impact. This format provides a wealth of useful information in assessing impacts. For example, some tools are identified as having no adverse impact and only beneficial impact, and others are identified as probable Type II actions, thus requiring no SEQRA review. Others, which may have potential adverse impacts, are identified for screening purposes, and preliminary discussion is provided to direct further analysis. Overall, the proposed action is identified overwhelmingly as having substantial beneficial impacts to the Town in relation to conformance with land use plans, the pattern of land use and zoning and land use compatibility, the need to address affordable housing issues, improved land use requirements, review and procedures, and an overall improvement in the protection of Town resources in conformance with the five goals of the Town. More specifically, the Town is expected to benefit from: preservation of farmland and open space; decreased intensity of land use; less burden on resources; maintenance of rural character; strengthening of cultural features including hamlets and historic resources; expanded housing opportunities including affordable housing; responsiveness to Page 3-21 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Sonthold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS TABLE 3-3 IMI~LEMF~TATION TOOLS - Preliminary Impact/Mitigation Matrix Implemuntation Tanla J Benefleinl l~imary lmpants and Implienflons J Adveres Primar~ Impacts and lmplieatiuns ]~l~lim I. J~ ])ia!, ,~t../Analy~l~ ~llfiga~on ]vl.~?es to Mtnimi~ Impant Planning Prueeas, Zonin~ and Zoning Code 1. A-C District Use/Dimenalunul Parameters (mechanics of Reduces potent/al development in agricultural areas provides greater consistency Reduces number/type of non-agricultural uses Land retains value and other use options; special Other land use options such as PDR, TDR and RID of zone; now essentially same as other residential zones) with legislative intent; removes potentially incompatible uses from farmland areas, in farmland areas, exception uses could be incompatible, available. 2. Rural incentive District (based on incentive zoning; I Voluntary program that retains landowner's equity in land while retaining land in No guarantee that development fights will Funding efforts will continue; alternative equity measures are available (PDP~ conservation Town commitment to PDR; involvement of exchange ofbensfits, i.e. maintain open space/fasm use I farming; gives Town & landowners '~breathing space" while preservation efforts ultimately be purchased; no guarantee that all or /agricultural easement, land gift for tax benefit, Peconic Land Trust, TDR; Country Inns; creative for period of tirm in exchange of PDR at appropriate ~ continue; maintains rural quality of Town; enables Town to perrmmanfly attain long- most landowners wilt enter the RID; guarantees voluntary yield reduetiun, TDR, alternative land use planning techniques available through this term goal of 80% farmland/opon space preservation/60% density reduction; provides right to develop if development fights are not economically viable uses (country hms), and/ur any implementation strategy; incentives to join RID. yield/density) "incentive" zomng with special pubhc benefit to Iown and to the landowners, purchased, combination of the above. 3. Agricultural Overlay District/A-C Zomg Review Provides greater control of development in agricultural areas; provides for unproved Additional governmental requirements; Agricultural lands are key to Town character and Other land use options such as PDR, TDR and RID (geographic definition and goals) site design where development occurs; designates importance of unique geographic potential reduction of farmland development economic vitality, available. moa/re sunrce of Town. yield. Mandatory regulation that reduces potential development in farmland areas; allows for "transfer" of development rights to be redirected to areas with suitable inftastrnature; addresses tung-term regional development pressure; improves Perceived reduction in land value afler SCDHS Article 6 density limitation is equal to 5- acre zoning for agricultural areas with 80% farm 4. 5-AcreUpzoning(A-CDistrietTown-wideorspeeifia compatibility between agricultural and residential use by redueing number of upzoning; rmy complicate PDR program; preservntion;priurplanssopportS-aerezoningfor RID provides primary mitigation to eneure i area) residences in agricultural areas; maintains rural quality of Tov~a; enables Tow-a to reduces number of development rights that a continuation ofPDR progrsr~ permanently attain long-term goal of 80% farmland/open space preservation/60% landowner can sell. groundwater protection; land retains density reduction; consistent with SGPA, WSM&WPS and Comell study farm/developmentvelnent5-acredensity. recorra'nendetions. 5. Revise Special Exception Provisions (to ensure special permit standards are adequate to preserve character of Enables better control of land use types and patterns in farmlands throughout Town. Additional regulation of farm/aceeasory Proper control methods are responsibility of To,~. Town while protecting agriculture, etc.) operations. 6. Review of Zoning Code (mandatory cluetefing, recreational requirements, revise Sign Ordinance; review Enables better control of land use types and land use patterns throughout Town; Potential additional accessory apartment units in Proper control methods are responsibility of Town; Site/use specific SEQRA and land use review; R-O, LB district; water dependent uses; accessory provides alternative compatible land uses; provides for Lroproved site design; Town with associated residents and school accessory apartrnents will be limited due to sanitary Town/County coordination to ensure complance apartments, Al-ID standards (expkations), B&B's, home provides applicants with better understanding of Town requirements; provides better children; country inn~ could increase local use occupations, discourage strip shopping centers & fast definition of hamlets; provides potential affordable housing; provides consistency intensity; developers may not be interested in flow restrictions; country inns to be reviewed case- with SCDHS Article 6. food in HB, flag lots, encourage common driveways; with gouls and prior studies; improves enforcement, buildingpermanenflyaffordablehoneing, by-case. change of nsc requirements, country inns) 7. Review Zoning Map {Mattituek Creek, industrial on Site-specific SEQRA and land me review; Route 25 wast of Crreeopo~, HD in Crcceoport; water Provides for better innd use pattern in sensitive and important areas of Town; Changes land use designation on privately Proper land use pattern is responsibiilty of Town. additional marine zomng on Mattituck Creek nmy owned land. dependent uses, Al-ID - repeal or expand process) have negative impacts. 8. ReviewSubdivisiunRegnlstions(roadmqulrements; Enables better cuntml of site development; provides applicants with better Probable SEQRA Type II action, continuing drainage; lighting; in.fi'astmeture; reduced density, understanding of Town requirements; clarifies review procedures; potential deerense More expensive design process; reduced yield, agency admiuistrstion; change will provide None necessary. subdivision, clustering, yield calculations) in infrastructure cost; provides greater compatibility with rural character/quality, improved guidance and review procedures. Enables better control of site development; provides applicants with boiler Probable SEQRA Type II action, continuing 9. Review Highway Specillcations (road requirements; understanding of Town reqnirements; clarifies review procedures; potential decrease drainage; lighting; infrastrunture) in infinstmctnse cost; provides greater compatibility with rural character/qeslity and More expensive design process; reduced yield, agency administration; change will provide None necessary. greater environmental protection, improved guidance and review prcecdures. 10. Conservation Opportunities Planning (COP)Process Provides greater contrul of development in agricultural and environmentally (defme and /mplement 75-80% land preservation sensitive areas; enables Town to permanently attain long-term goal of 80% Par~ieipation in program ia voluntary on the part Land retains volue and other nse options. Other land ase options sueh as PDR, TDRandRiD through land use tools and densityreduelion) famaland/open space preservation; provides landowner with the option to sell of tho landowner, available. development fights and still obtain limited yield. 11. Planning Procese (fomlalize pre-submission Enables more efficient & effective development review & planning processes; conference, review departmental organization; review pmvidos forum fur eommittne input./nivolvement; provides applicants with better Forces departments to review applications Improved coordination of land use input early in process will ~esult in benefit to development i None necessary. coii~Rnes; emergency service provider input) understanding of Town requlremente; elari fles review procediLres, withill a more sa'untured time flame, co ........ nit7. 12. Transfer of Developrnent Rights (a~leehanlsnl for Enables relocation of development to areas appropriate and suitable for such growth, New program; eliminates on-site development Program is optional, but is an available tool; Conformance to SCDHS TDR guidelines; sits/asa appropriate denaltyrelocation/management) preservation of valuable ~d/open space; reduces acquisition cost of on owners land; inet'ease in density and impacts redi~cts growth to appropriate locations, specific land use review. farmland/open space preservation, at receimg sites. 13. Planned Development District Local Law (grovide for flexible development/yield in exchange of special Enables better development patterns and infi'astrueture, to areas appropriate for such; Potentially lengthens & adds to application Incentive zoning is valuable tool for flexible land public benefits, i.e. affordable housing, infrastructure, provides oppon'amity for special pubic benefit; provides land use flex~ility for review process; cost of "special public benefits" use opportunities; special public benefits required. Site/use specific land use review. dedication, etc.) beneficial projects, to be borne by public or developer? 14. Tree tS'eservation Local Law (limit removal of trees unless through subdivision/site plan review; define tree Establishes protection of trees and site assthaties; benefits habilat/ecology, visual Additional Fenult process increases time and Tree preservation is necessary, clearenRing impacts size and applicable acreage) resources, cost of review; additional governmental rural eham~er, habitat, erosion, visual, eta. Reasonable permits would be granted. controls. Page 3-22 I I I I I I I I Implementation Tools 15. Critical Environmental Lands Local Low (steep slopes end escarpments, shallow groundwater, wetlands, waterways; define for yield puipoass} 16. SEQRA Local Law Review/Revisiun (Type I List; possibly add Scenic-Byways; CEA's) 17. Scenic By-Ways Overlay Development Centrals (Route 48/25; define corridor 1000'/~00'; reconcile farm structures; setbacks, mass, architecture; Couizilttee review, SEQKA designation) TABLE 3-3 IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS - Preliminary Impact/Mitigation Matrix (cont'd) Beneficial Primar~ Impacts and Implleations Provides protection of valuable natural resources of Town; provides applicants with better understanding of Town requirements; elarifias review procedures. Enables better control of lend uso patterns & analysis of potential environmental anpacts. Provides pmservation/protectien of valuable Town aesthetic character and visual resources; provides applicants with bat'ier understanding of Town requirements; clarifies review procedures. Adv~r~ Prlma~t lmp~ts and Imp~emlons May reduce yield or reduce bufldsble area. lmreltminary I)t~nasinn/Alraly~ Adds clarity to definition of buildable land now in Code; recoginzes/prntects natural resources. Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Additional permit process inexeaass time and sost of review; additional governmental controls. Identiftes projects thai n~y have en impact end are more likely te require enEIS up front. Code would assist with protection of hews/rural character for large # of viewem; early input/clarity. Mitigation Measures to Mhdmi~ Impact Project spacific review will still be conducted to determine imt~s. Design Manual provides cleor and concise guidelines for architects and engineers. Educafion/Enfornement 18. Agricultural Dis~ct Review/Edueatiun (Agficaltore end Merkats Law; encourage participation; maintain existing l~rtieipants) 19. Create Crenerel Guidance Decuments (Design Manual, transportation menagement/traffic c~lmln.% develop ill--on standards; Birds; cross access a~racments; side road access) 20. Natural Environmental Education (ensure good quality surface/ground surface waters; BMPs; IPM; coastal erosion contrel~ beach width monitorin$) 21. WatershcdProtection ZOne/SGP^'s (signage, educational materials, link with lend use controls) 22. Encunrage Use of Public Transportation (relate to Transportation Management Plan; create hubs; fen'y linkages; winery shuttles) 23. Transportation Management Plan (Transportation Commission; encourage transport ation/pede strien improvements; encourage public tmusportatinn, create hamlet hubs; ferry linkages, winery shuffles, signage "best route to"; work with LIER) 24. Economic Development Plan (to: manage tourism; protect coramereinl fishing; enhance recreational boating; emphasize uniqueness of agrinultural opportunities and mneiculntre; included in capital improvement program; support B&B's and network of visitor centers; capitalize on historic character and rehabilitation & reuse of thase resources) 25. Enforcement (fflegal conversion o f ageicultoral buildings; use expansion controls; change of naa requi~ments) Provides awareness; encourages farmowner participation; preserves farmland, ecoaomy and benefits; maintains rural/farmland character; gives tangible tax benefits to fatmowners. Provides for improved development control and design; streamlines review process; benefits msoumes that are topics of guidance documents (stormwnter, gmendwater, intermodal transportation); protects environment, prevents expense of repairing dama[~ to environment, saves developers tin~. Provides improved public awareness of natural enviromnental resources of Town; mereases pmtactiun of such resources. Provides L,p~oved public awareness of natural environmenlal resources of Town; mcreases protection of such resources. Decreases use of private autos, with associated reductions in emissions, trips, congestion; increases use of public transit; reduces needs for transpo~ation m~prevements, extensions end infi'astmctum; adds off-rend frails, etc. for public use. Decreases use of private autos, with associated reductions in emissions, trips, congestion; increases use of public transit; reduces needs for transpor~tinn tmprovements, extensions and infrastruature; inareases efficiency of transportation system operations; increases walkabilit y of hamlet centers; protects rural cbaraeter. Improves economic health & efficiency of Town's commercial uses; increases overall vitality of To'~a's economy end public perception as an attractive tourism/recreation dsstination; clirects public infi'astruetore in a cost-effective manner; helps entrepreneurs establish/revitalize businesses; preserves cultusal end aesthetics resources. Reduces ille gal/h~,a uper/unsa fe lend uses; ensures that Town goals will be n~t. None identified. None identified. None identified. May require key invesm~nts; may require site design modifications to promote use of transit. May require pubhc investment; may require changes in site design and ways of doing business. May r~quire public investments. Enforcemant of existing laws not en impact. Probable SEQRA Type H action; no sige/fieant adverse impaats identified. Probable SEQRA Type H action; no signifieunt adverse in, acts identified. Probable SEQRA Type H action; no signifie, ant adverse impacts identified. Designation/contrel of watershed area is important for mena~ment, protection & edneation~ Probable SEQRA Type H action; no siginfieant averse impacts identified. intent is to promote intemxxtal end alternative trenspertation to reduce congestion; no significant adverse impact identifted. Intent is to ia~ot,~ve s~cio-econoroic aspects of Town; no siginficaut adverse impact identified. Probable SEQRA Type II action. None necessary. None necessary. Capital Impr ovements/E xpondituzes 26. Improve Waterfront Aaceas (acquisitions; obtain/maintain; inventory Town land end improve) 27. Administer Pafl~ of Town-wide Significunce (for banetit of all Town residents} 28. Prioritize end Supplement CPPP (additional acquisitions; scenic by-ways aequisitiuns; sensitive land; prioritize) 29. Create a Centralized Year-Round Recreational Complex Direet Town Management lnareasas public access to waterfront & Town control of waterfront uses; impreves quality of life; enm adequate access; promotes lneal economy and eco.tonelsm increases Town control of and qunlity of public parks; better services nad facilities for resid~ts. Continues & expends valuable Town-wide open space preservation program; increases Town-wide recreation facilities; better services and facilities for residents. increased short-term cost to Town and potentially to residents. Inareased cost to Town end potent/ally to residents through taxation. Consistent with LWRP and best managermnt of scarce coastal land resources for Townwide benefit. Parks are important aspect of recreational/social setting and Townwids needs. Bond issue would have Town endorsement; 2% sales tax not a direct burden to local taxpayem. Town responsible to provide coauL~mity facilities to meet required service derarmd. Grmat funding often available to offset cost of acqdisition, planning and development; Town will prioritize and use open space fimds or bond with referendum support. Orant fimding often available; Town will assess need and meet required service damaud. Grant funding often available; Town will prioritize and m open space funds or bond with referendum support. Use ofpmek funds; advance budgeting. 30. Affordable Housing Policy (geogrephiedtype diversity, targets and new development, review every, 24 years; provide incentives, accessory apts., financial assistance; Housing Authority) Addresses critical demographic need for affordable housing at various low-moderate income levels; beneficial socio-economic impact; enables Town to incxease haralet development & identity with associated benefits (stimulates economic activity, reduced congestinn, mixed housing opportunities), If uncontrolled, can concentrate development in hamlets to unnmnageable levels; inerease in aacessory apartments; increased cost to Town. l Density only increased through PDD with Town accepts responsibility to provide incentives/I overriding Special Public Benefits; site/use specific mandates necessary, to meet affordable housing SEQRA end lend use review; Town/County needs, coordination to enmtre compliance with SCDHS Atiiale 6. I P~e3~3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS TABLE 3-3 IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS - Preliminary Impact/Mitigation Matrix (cont'd) In~ple~e~tntion TooLs Benefleiul Primary Tmp~et~ end lmplta.flflnt Adverse Primtr~ hnpeeta end [mplieoflflnt PF~limtnn~ Di~ns~n/Analy~sis Miti~.ofifm Md.ne~ea to Minimi~ IRlpiet 31. Concenttate Development in Hamlets (define bamlets; faareases Town control of development in hamlets while reducing development Smart growth principals direct growth to hamlet Density only increased through PDD with ensure appropriate infrastructure; affordable housing; elsewhere; increases economic & social health & vitality of hamlets; increases Intensifies land use in hamlets and potential centers proximate to services to /reprove social overriding Special Public Benefits; site/use specific link with land use meehanlsms/toois; capital hamlet "sense of place"; enables Town to increase hamlet development 8: identity associated impacts on character and setting and reduce external traffic; strengthens SEQRA and land use review; Town/County improvement program; traffic calming) with associated benefits (stLrnalates eoanomic activity, reduced congestion, mixed enviranment, hamlet and businesses; assist with need for coordination to ensure compliance with SCDHS housing opportunities), affordable,/ alternate housing. Article 6. 32. Park Di~hi;L/School District Boundaries Cunformliy Enables improved coerdlna~iun of planning between school and perk districts and Probable SEQRA Type I1 action; no significant Infoml cooperation Instead of formal cooperation. (determine need and reconcile district s) recreational facilities of both; larovides perk access to entire Town. None identified, adveree im~ act iclent~fied, 33. Update Perk Inventory and Management Plan (prior Facilitates assessment of need and corresponding kt~tovements; enables improved 1980 study needs updating; input into GIS; manage management of park and public recxeational facilities; provides improved plan for Probable SEQRA Type II action; no significant None necessary. recreationalresouraes) expenditure of perk funds; enables Town to budget for capital and opereting Nuneidentified. adverse impact identified. expenses. 34. Create a Perks and Recreation D~pat hz~ant (manage Town properties, recreational resources, nun-church Enables improved tmnsgement & operation of park and public reci~ratiunal facilities. Increased cost to Town. Town to evaluate need for new department. Use of park funds; advance budgeting. cemeteries) 35. Scenic By-Ways Manag~m~at Program (CR 48/NYS 25earrentlydesignated;signage, linkwithseanicBy. Enables improved control of transportation resources and simultaneous ScenlcBy-WaysareofTownwideimportanceund Ways Overlay for stendards/gnidelines/innd use preservation/protaction of valuable Town aesthetic character. Additional govermmental controls, observed by many viewers. controls) 36. Trail Inventory/rrail Cosshi,;aee/Bikeways Crransponation Connnission exists, detannine Provides for significant Town-wide recreational, aesthetic and environmental Probable SEQRA Type II action; no significant None necessary. appropriate committee, inventory, input Into OlS to resources and use thereof by public; promotes alternative transportation; provides None identified, adverse impact identified. rmnage~ tmilhead directional information in kiosks) public recreational opportunities supportive of rural character.. 37. Inventory and Manage Cu.ltuml Resoumes (archaeologically sensitive areas; Historic District l:Yovides for improved preservation, restoration, management & beneficial use of Probable SEQRA Type fi action; cultural resources I designation; plaques; landmark designation; input into Town-wide cultural resources; maintain historiedeulterul Town character; confomas Additional governmental controls. GIS, manage) with Historic Preservation Act. are pan of Town's heritage and character. 38. Arehiteetural Review Board and Design Parameters (determine need for and establish ARB; generate Provides hi~oved control & regulation of development, with associated guidance documents and integrate into land use review unprovement In aesthetics of Town; maintain consistent cultural Town character; Additional govermmntal controls. Architactuml qualities are important due to i proc*ss) ~mvides scoio-eeunomie benefit. Southold's Umque cultuml/raral character. 39. Scenic Advisory Boerd (determine need for SAB, to Provides for /reproved Town control & preservation of valuable characteristiea Scenic by-ways and resources are of Townwide manage ScealeBy-Ways Program) which contributes signifieanfiy to Town aesthetics, and thereby its value as Additional governmental controls. reeraationa]/tourlst det~ination; eeonnrnle asset protection. /mpommce and observed by many viewers. Inter-Ak~.lley/Qnasi-Ageney Initiative~ Addresses eritiual demographic need for affordable housing at various low-mod~rate 40. Housing Financial Assistance Program (Noffil Fork raceme levels; beneficial eocfa-economic impact; enables To~l to increase hamlet Public-private partnerships beneficial to Housing Alliance; review other opportunities b~ssd on development & identity with associated benefits (stimulates economic activity, None identified, create/stimulate necessary affordable housing Site/use specific SEQRA and land use review. 1993 report and Updated Affordable HousIng Policy) reduced congestion, mixed hol/~ing opportanities); benefits accrue as a result of opportunitias. pabli~private pertnemhipe and less expend!rare of Town funds. 41. Develop Water Supply Master Plan (Town Provides potable water to Town residenta; provides improved & cost-effective Town residents need, reqaire and deserve a involvement, SCWA prepering; manage Infrastm~cture method of Town control of futura development by detarmining where infra~tracture dependable sour~ ofpetabis water for daily needs; Not a direct Town initiative; project specific with other agencies) (and thereby growth) should be located; inter-aguney coordination provides greater Nolle identified, water resources are limited and require SEQRA review. benefit. 42. Emergency ~epm~inass (groundwater contamination, rr~nn~r~nt' drought management; emure adequate emergency Protects Town residents by pre-planning and Inter-agency coordinated respond; servicee (police, fire, ambulance); flood hazard establishes Town procedures & plans In case of emergency, thereby minimizing None identified. Probable Type II; Town residents need, require and None necessary. mitigation plan; erosion) damage costs and safety problems, deserve proper emergency preparation and services. 43. Social Services Programs (senior citizen care, adequate Establishes inter-~gency coordinated Town-wide prograra to meet the resident needs; Probable Type II; Town residents need, require and community faci]itias, day c~te, meals on wheels, socio-economic benefits to residents In need of key services; slrengthans overall None identified. churches, libraries) commnn!ty and social intemetiun, daserve proper social ~ervinas; no unpeet identified. None neeco.ry. I I I I Page 3-24 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS recreational and social needs; and, protection of natural resources with resulting benefits to marine fisheries, wildlife habitat and the qualities that make the Town unique. The following are brief discussions of the anticipated adverse primary impacts for each of the 43 Implementation Tools. If no adverse impacts are expected, then this is noted along with the basis for this conclusion. If adverse impacts are expected, then a more detailed discussion and assessment of those impacts is provided. As noted, refer to Table 3-3 for a graphic listing of these tools and corresponding anticipated impacts. 1. A-C District Use/Dimensional Parameters Revisions of the A-C District's use and dimensional parameters would reduce the number and type of non-agricultural uses that could be located in this zone, which may have the effect of eliminating or otherwise restricting the land use opportunities of landowners or developers which are presently possible. Special exception uses that are inappropriate in this district and may compromise the legislative intent of the district should not be permitted, particularly when the A- C zone, as the name implies, is an agricultural conservation zone, which permits low residential use. As a result, this tool is not anticipated to significantly impact landowners, as land use options are maintained despite the reduction in the range of uses, and the range of uses being eliminated are inappropriate and may conflict with maintaining the integrity of the farm thereby providing greater consistency with Town goals and the comprehensive plan. 2. Rural Incentive District The RID addresses landowner concerns enabling a means for landowners to provide Town-wide benefit by continuation of agricultural or open space use, while providing the Town a time period during which to purchase development rights. The program would be voluntary, but would be encouraged and of benefit to landowners in order to gain consideration of development rights acquisition at the original zoning density. Should the Town not be able to purchase the development rights or structure a conservation subdivision within the term of RID participation, the original zoning is restored in the event an upzoning occurs during the period of participation. This tool will be implemented solely on a voluntary basis. This tool is not expected to result in significant adverse impacts, as it is voluntary and it is intended to maintain equity in land. 3. Agricultural Overlay District/A-C Zoning Review This is a common tool which provides guidelines for use in a special district with common characteristics. Implementation of this tool would incrementally increase the amount and complexity, cost, and length of time of the review process for developers, landowners and the Town alike, with resulting benefit by providing guidance within areas that warrant special protection. Overlay districts are a common zoning tool, which may place additional restrictions on land use, but provides Town-wide benefit and informs landowners, reviewers and the public Page 3-25 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS of the need to consider the parcel in the context of a district and not in isolation. As a result, no significant adverse impacts are expected. 4. 5-Acre Upzoning Basis for Discussion - The potential benefits of this tool combined with mandatory clustering have been identified in the summary table and other parts of this document. In terms of potential adverse impacts, there is a concern among owners of open space and farmland that upzoning, as it increases the minimum lot size, and hence reduces the number of lots/units which can be developed on a property, consequently reduces the value of that land and hence its value if sold for development or if development rights are sold. The overriding principle of the Town, is how best to achieve the goal of 60 percent density reduction, while ensuring that the value of farmland, as related to the business of fanning and farmowners ability to continue as a viable economic land use in the Town of Southold, is maintained. SEQRA Context - Further discussion is provided with regard to the potential impact of 5-acre upzoning; however, the context of these discussions must be established in consideration of this Draft GEIS and the New York State governing regulations that drive this review process. In regard to the appropriateness of economic analysis on business operations, SEQRA is quite clear. As stated in The SEQR Handbook (NYSI)EC, November 1992, pg. 60), such an analysis is not appropriate for analysis in an environmental impact statement: Are there economic or social factors that are inappropriate for inclusion in an EIS? The potential effects that a proposed project may have in drawing customers and profits away from established enterprises or in reducing property values in a community may not be considered under SEQR. Potential economic disadvantage caused by competition or speculative economic losses are not environmental factors. As a result, it is neither intended nor required that a GEIS address the potential impact of the proposed action on the operations and/or economics of any businesses (including agricultural business) in the vicinity, on what would be considered competition between businesses, on values (market or assessed) of existing or potential housing stock or properties, or on taxes derived from such properties. Therefore, in order for a socio-economic impact to result, rezoning would have to devalue the land to such an extent that it would affect a farmers ability to continue to conduct business, leading to failure of such uses thereby altering the socio-economic character of the Town. Discussion and analysis is provided to address concerns of landowners, and to ensure that SEQRA requirements are satisfied by considering potential socio-economic consequences. Comprehensive Plan and Achievement of Goals - The impact of 5-acre upzoning should be considered in the context of the overall Town. The integrity of farms in Southold Town is a mainstay of the Town's economy, rural character and traditional land use. In addition, a key policy of the Town is to retain agricultural soils, a natural resource which coincides primarily with the A-C zone, but is also found in R-80, R-200 and R-400 zones. Minimizing residential Page 3-26 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS development potential in this area is consistent with the goals of maintaining the integrity of large blocks of farmland and preserving a unique natural resource, prime farm soils. In addition, the reduction in potential residential land use in primary agricultural areas of the Town, better enables the Town to achieve the goal of preservation of 80 percent of the farmland with a reduction of 60 percent of density potential. Discussions concerning the perpetuation of fanning have indicated that residential use often conflicts with farming due to the dust, odors and activity associated with agricultural production. At the very least, careful planning, proper buffering and alignment of contiguous farmland is required in land use planning. From a planning perspective, a reduced number of residential units within primarily agricultural areas is consistent with best land use compatibility practice, and would tend to benefit farming overall due to a decreased number of land use conflicts. Upzoning is a land use tool for density reduction, which has been used and upheld in other parts of the country that are experiencing the need to preserve land and protect resources as this tool provides a clear and permanent method of managing growth. The Towns ultimate land use decisions must be based on achieving Town goals for overall public benefit. This tool, coupled with part of Tool #6 (mandatory clustering) ensures conformance with the Town goals of 80 percent land preservation, and 60 percent density reduction. In general terms, if density is reduced from a 2-acre to a 5-acre yield, and 80 percent of a given parcel remains in agricultural production, up to 16 homes (rather than 40) could be built on 20 acres of a 100 acre parcel, thereby preserving the target 80 percent and reducing density by 60 percent. It is noted that SCDHS density standards for development further support a reduced land use density, if the Town's goal of preserving farmland, farm soils and farm use is to be met. In other words, under Article 6 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code, land that is farmed is not permitted to be counted toward yield, as the application of fertilizer and land use intensity is considered to be coincident with density allowance on a given parcel. As a result, if farmland is to be set aside, residential yield must be reduced in order to preserve farmland. Socio-Economic Factors - As noted previously, discussion and analysis is provided to address concerns of landowners, and to ensure that SEQRA requirements are satisfied by considering potential socio-economic consequences. In this context, rezoning would have to result in an alteration of the socio-economic character of the Town through impact upon farm use. There are a number of factors relating to agricultural business, land equity and the viability of fanning, that would tend to stabilize any major socio-economic change. These are summarized as follows: · Traditional farming opportunities are maintained by those long term landowners and farm businesses that have established successful farming methods; taking advantage of proximity to market, agri-tourism, and the unique resources and advantages that are offered by the integrity of agriculture in the Town of Southold. · Should farmland need to change ownership, trends in agricultural use toward grape vineyards, horse farms and other forms of agriculture tend to maintain and in some cases increase the agricultural value of land. · The limited number of lots that can be used for residential purposes introduces a supply and demand factor that will tend to increase the value of residential land. · The need for clean drinking water, and Suffolk County Department of Health Services residential density limitations on combined farming and residential use due to nitxogen Page 3-27 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS loading, often do not allow full residential development densities if the Towns farmland preservation goals are to be met. The Town and regional government agencies, continue to purchase development rights and are committed to continue to do so in order to maintain the development rights value of farmland. Not all farms will be proposed for alternative or combined residential uses at one time, as the market dynamics do not support this saturation, and not all landowners are intent on reverting to non-agricultural uses. As a result, land values will tend to stabilize over time, providing in effect a phased or gradual change in real estate conditions. With regard to equity, escalating land values have substantially increased the equity farmowners have in the land. A simple review of comparable sales, land listings, PDR offers and PDR contracts, bears out the conclusion that land values have eclipsed the potential diminution of value which may result from a density reduction of 60 percent. The increase in land value is both due to the use associated with potential residential development, as well as the agricultural value of the land. Review of historical development rights acquisition data finds that the value of land alone has been approximately 40 percent of the overall land value, indicating that the development fights accounted for around 60 percent of the land value. Real estate values have been escalating, and the value of farmland has likewise been increasing due to inherent value in the land, agricultural business supported by tourism and successful traditional farming businesses, higher yielding crops and contemporary as well as lucrative agricultural uses. The A-C district, as stated in its purpose (Chapter 100 § 100-30) states that farmland preservation is intended, though the permitted uses within that district allow residential use. Trends indicate that both agricultural and residential use represent viable land use options for A-C zoned land in Southold Town. Therefore, a reduction in allowable density from a 2-acre to a 5-acre yield, may affect the value of ¼ to ¼ of the land. This fact was presented by an appraiser to the Blue Ribbon Commission, at which time it was indicated that a study of land values and upzoning in Brookhaven Town concluded that there was only a 25 percent diminution of value in a zoning change from 2-acre to 5-acre, and this any loss would be of only short-term duration. In assessing this condition in Southold Town, it was stated that given Southold's unique conditions, the impact would be even less. Other parts of the country have documented successful use of upzoning to maintain farmland, farming and rural character; these include several counties in Maryland (Baltimore, 50-acre zoning; Talbot, 20-acre zoning; and Montgomery, 5-acre zoning), as well as Napa Valley, California (40-acre zoning). In these cases, there has been no documented negative or adverse impact on the business of farming, and land values stabilized over a relatively short period of time. As the integrity of the Town's farmed land is maintained, and traditional as well as contemporary forms of agricultural production become established, agricultural related use will ensure that value is maintained in the land, further supported by the remaining residential yield potential. A potential impact with regard to equity in the land, is the continued ability of farmowners to borrow money necessary to improve equipment, expand operations, purchase more land and fund other related farm business needs. Farm lenders have indicated that the primary consideration is the farmowners ability to repay a loan, and to a lesser extent the land equity. Research has found that this is supported by a report to the State of Maryland Planning office entitled, "The Effects Page 3-28 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS of Agricultural Zoning on the Value of Farmland", prepared by Resource Management Consultants, Inc. (Egerton, Robert E. Jr., 1991). Several key experiences that relate to land equity for borrowing, are noted as follows: "The most significant aspect of farmland preservation to a lender would be use restrictions that would affect the value of collateral. The sale of development rights is just such a program. Farm credit has had experience for several years financing land in Connecticut, Massachusetts, Long Island and Pennsylvania where development rights have been sold. In Lancaster County, PA, approximately 25% of the land mortgaged too Farm Credit has some type of use restriction. Based upon our experience, I can offer the following: Borrowing against land with restrictions on use is very common and, in fact, encouraged as a voluntary program. As a lender we would be very concerned about the confiscation of rights without due compensation. With a use restriction, the maximum loan will be reduced commensurate with the reduced value for agricultural use only. This is not a problem, however, because loans are made in relation to the earnings capacity to repay the loan. On agricultural land with high values resulting from alternative demand, the size of the loan will be limited by the earnings generated from the land long before the total value is reached. Lower land values, based upon agricultural use only, would result in smaller loans with no offsetting effect on the earnings potential of that land This would likely enhance the farmers' repayment ability." This report also concludes with following: Based on our findings we can conclude that zoning ordinances that restrict the amount of non- farm development on agricultural land do not lower land prices or otherwise negatively affect farm equity. Fluctuations in farmland prices are more influenced by general economic trends, such as interest rates and prices for agricultural products. In addition, lending institutions do not make or deny loans on the basis of a parcel's development potential, but rather on the ability of the farm enterprise to repay its loans. This is logical since a lender does not enter into a loan with the intent of acquiring farmland through default on a loan; the lender seeks supporting information on the solvency of a business to ensure that monthly payments can be made and that loan default will not occur. Therefore, loans are based on much more on the agricultural business demonstrating a sound financial track record, thereby de-emphasizing the significance of actual land value. It is fully expected that a successful farm use could apply for and receive a loan even if all of the development rights are pumhased, leaving no residential value in the land. PDR is routinely used to ensure continued farming, and no adverse consequence to loan potential has been indicated as a result of the PDR program as evidenced by continued participation and stability of the industry. Of course, this is different for purchase of land if land is intended to be converted to a non-agricultural use. In such cases, the value of the land for non-fanning uses would be considered, and loan potential would have to reflect this evaluation. It is also noted that such conversions are not consistent with the Towns goals and comprehensive planning efforts. The RID, if enacted, is intended to protect farmowners that wish to farm and maintain agricultural use on the land by ensuring the development rights are purchased at pre-existing zoning densities. An additional issue, is the potential affect of upzoning on the purchase of development rights. PDR is an ongoing program that represents a large commitment toward preservation on the part Page 3-29 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS of the Town, and is an additional tool that is in place and assists in achieving Town goals. The program is expected to continue through 2020; however, the level of funding can not be predicted with certainty. PDR has been based on appraisals which reflect comparable sales which are intended to reflect the market value of land. Provided funding continues, Town and County entities will continue to pursue purchase of development rights with willing sellers based on appraised land values. There is the option to institute a Points-Based Appraisal methodology for PDR land values that will more closely reflect the balance of agricultural and residential value in the land, providing the incentive for farmowners to maintain successful agricultural businesses to maximize land value for PDR purposes. This is a worthy pursuit as it would provide incentives for successful agricultural use that would increase values and better enable the Town to meet preservation goals. In either case, it is expected that land values will stabilize and remain high, thus allowing the PDR program to continue. PDR results in density reduction, to the extent that funding is available and lands are purchased, and has been the primary preservation and density reduction tool of the Town to date. Upzoning to 5-acre, provides an additional mechanism to achieve the 60 percent density reduction goal of the Town in those districts that currently allow one dwelling unit per 2-acres. Further protection is provided through the RID if enacted; the relevance of this tool with regard to 5-acre upzoning is discussed in the following paragraph. Should the Town adopt the RID (see Mitigation Considerations), there would essentially be no loss in equity, as the landowner would be compensated with the density incentive of a 2-acre equivalent yield, in exchange for continued maintenance of the land in open space or farm use. Finally, whether considered during the appraisal process or not, the reality is that mandatory clustering can now be used to retain farmland, and retention of farmland eliminates that acreage from residential yield. As noted above, if 80 percent farmland open space is achieved through clustering, the resulting density is decreased by 60 percent in order to conform with SCDHS Article 6 density requirements. Therefore, in order to conform to the stated and widely accepted goals of the Town, there is a de facto yield reduction. As a result, there is essentially no change in ultimate yield (and no change in equity) to be expected from an upzoning that would bring the Town zoning into conformance with SCDHS density limitations. Upzoning of R-80 Lands - In addition to the A-C zone, 5-acre upzoning is also considered for R- 80 zoned lands. These lands are typically more natural, less intensely developed, and based on the R-80 analysis map, are identified as containing vast areas of natural resources including steep slopes, geological features, wetlands, woodland and other natural qualities. It is important to ensure that these lands are not overdeveloped, such that resources would be adversely affected, or the character of the Town would change. A rezoning would allow reasonable use of the land, albeit at a lower density of development. The potential for upzoning of R-80 lands was conceived under a premise that a lower intensity of use is commensurate with the need to protect the resources and contiguity of acreage that contains a greater natural resoume value than other zoning districts. With regard to R-80 zoned lands, there is a greater potential for use of transfer of development rights to provide a further equity option and create an incentive for properly located growth in hamlets and outside of environmentally sensitive areas. This also reduces the cost of acquisition, the number of development rights needed for protection (See discussion for Tool #12), and increases options to landowners for a variety of equity compensation measures. Page 3-30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Mitigation Considerations - As a further measure to ensure equity, the Town is considering a Rural Incentive District which would allow farmowners to maintain the pre-existing yield potential as an incentive to maintain land as open space or farm use. This measure further bolsters the economic benefit to landowners. It is recognized that it is not an essential mitigation measure given the foregoing facts. The responsibility rests with the Town to ensure proper zoning for the long-term stability in the interest of the populace in general, while still providing a means of reasonable use and return on land. Summary - Under this implementation tool, conformance with the goals of 80 percent open space retention and 60 percent density reduction would be achieved through zoning alone. Without such measures an owner or investor could expect to achieve full density, assuming public water were available. If vacant land surrounded by farm uses in the A-C district is converted to non- farm use, such a consequence could have a dramatic adverse affect on remaining farm use, development patterns, infrastructure installation, and land use incompatibility. Given potential future trends with regard to water availability, uncertainty with regard to public funds for acquisition, landowner intentions, housing needs, and the desirability of the North Fork for housing, investment and development, this tool has merit as a means to directly achieve the Towns goal of density reduction and farmland preservation through mandatory clustering. The Town must balance preservation and growth management for the interests of the overall Town, including landowners and farm businesses. The Town can achieve preservation (80% through mandatory clustering on 1-acre lots), in connection with a 60 percent density reduction by upzoning from a 2-acre to a 5-acre equivalent yield. Such an action would bring the Town more into conformance with its comprehensive plan, and would achieve key goals/policies of the Town. The Town's rural quality, traditional agricultural use, open space, vistas and historic character make Southold a unique place that is enjoyed by residents and visitors alike. This translates to both community pride and character, and economic stability and must be considered in the context of balancing preservation and growth management. It is interesting to review the purpose of the A-C zone, which is currently combined with other low density zoning districts in the Town Code: The purpose of the Agricultural-Conservation (A-C) District and the Low-Density Residential R- 80, R-120, R-200 and R-400 Districts is to reasonably control and, to the extent possible, prevent the unnecessary loss of those currently open lands within the town containing large and contiguous areas of prime agricultural soils which are the basis for a significant portion of the town's economy and those areas with sensitive environmental features, including aquifer recharge areas and bluffs. In addition, these areas provide the open rural environment so highly valued by year-round residents and those persons who support the Town of Southold's recreation, resort and second-home economy. The economic, social and aesthetic benefits which can be obtained for all citizens by limiting loss of such areas are well documented and have inspired a host of governmental programs designed, with varying degrees of success, to achieve this result. For its part, the town is expending large sums of money to protect existing farm acreage At the same time, the town has an obligation to exercise its authority to reasonably regulate the subdivision and development of this land to further the same purposes while honoring the legitimate interests of farmers and other farmland ownem. [EMPASIS ADDED] Page 3-31 i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Consideration has been given to voluntary programs and tracking and statistics recorded in Section 3.1.3. In review of tracking and statistics data presented in Section 3.1.3, past efforts have resulted in successful density reduction and open space protection. The Future Trends portion of Section 3.1.3 identifies influences not controlled by the Town that could alter this pattern, further noting that there is no guarantee of achieving the Towns goals under a voluntary program. It is important that options be available for land use such that equity in land is maintained, and the goals of the Town are met. Any upzoning considered, should be coupled with clear direction for clustering of remaining density, continuation of pumhase of development rights to compensate farmowners, fee title acquisition of critical non-farm parcels, alternatives such as transfer of development rights consistent with SCDHS policy, and continued efforts of land preservation groups in structuring equitable methods to retain farm use and open space. The consideration of a RiD is a complementary tool that would provide further protection in terms of equity. Other improvements and initiatives in this Comprehensive Implementation Strategy mn parallel with land preservation needs, such as improved planning procedures, a clear and diverse affordable housing policy to meet the housing needs of the Town, strengthening of hamlets improved development patterns and beneficial mixed-use development options. In summary, the potential socio-economic impacts to the Town of an upzoning are not anticipated to be significant. In addition, solely economic impacts are not required to be addressed under SEQRA and any land use initiative must consider the general good of the Town. Upzoning has been documented as a valid growth management/density reduction tool that has been widely used throughout the country. The actual impact on value is expected to be minimal given increasing land values, the fact that reported densities of recent projects are consistent with the proposed increase in minimum lot size, other areas subject to rezoning have not experienced significant diminution of value, and agricultural land value will remain intact. Given the consideration of this issue as documented herein, no significant socio-economic impacts are expected as a result of this action; however, economic benefits accrue to the Town and residents as follows: · Maintain sustainable density that is economically viable and does not increase the cost of providing services; · Maintain rural character and historic farm use that is part of the economic vitality of the Town; · Provide a means to reduce the land use review and approval process that will benefit landowners; and · Provide a means to conform to the Towns stated goals of preserving 80% farmland and open space of at-risk lands, while reducing density by 60%. 5. Revise Special Exception Provisions Implementation of this tool would provide more clarity, better guidance and less confusion with regard to special permit uses in certain zoning districts. Revisions would critically review the current uses allowed by special exception, with the intent of removing those that are Page 3-32 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS inappropriate. The revisions are intended to have the benefit of better directing growth and better identifying the standards to be set and appropriate locations for certain special exception uses. This is more of a fine-tuning of appropriate special exception uses and standards that would not significantly affect the general use of land for its intended purpose; as a result, no significant adverse impact is expected. 6. ReviewofZoning Code General Revisions - Upgrades in the Zoning Code have been identified as necessary to implement policy that is now exercised in planning review, to correct known deficiencies and to better direct applicants and reviewers in the implementation of Town zoning. This tool would provide a variety of options for land use in appropriate locations. The tool could be construed as additional regulatory layers. Accessory Apartments - One effort involves relaxing accessory apartment standards; this has been evaluated and it was found that the ability to create such apartments currently exists, and given the limited zoning districts in which it applies, coupled with SCDHS density standards, significant growth is not expected. Such apartments generate a low number of school-aged children as compared with single family dwellings, and the effort clearly addresses a component of affordable housing needs, to be bolstered by a more comprehensive Town program. More specifically, the Town Board found it desirable to move forward with the code change in consideration of a number of factors evaluated that clearly indicated that there would not be a significant adverse environmental affect associated with those code changes; some of these reasons are indicated below: the proposed code changes are consistent with the Town comprehensive plan in providing diversified housing, housing for local families and those in the work force and creating opportunities for affordable housing; the proposed code changes are consistent with "smart growth" planning to strengthen hamlets, provide mixed-use housing and encourage pedestrian activity to utilize good and services offered in hamlet settings; · the amount of land in the Town that is subject to the potential for new housing under the code changes represents on the order of one percent of the total land available in the Town, and this area coincides with locations where infi'astmcture, utilities, and services currently exists · accessory apartments are currently permitted through Special Exception provisions already existing in the zoning districts of the code being modified (B and HB zoning), with recognition that the code changes would reduce the number of regulatory steps for legal accessory apartments, and would permit a greater potential number of accessory apartments; · there are a number of illegal accessory apartments in the Town that have been created by necessity to serve the housing needs of residents, and that such code changes may allow a number of these to become legalized, and as a result safer and properly regulated; ,~ it was anticipated that some level of enforcement will be used to monitor, enforce and ensure that accessory apartments are properly created and maintained in the Town, thereby potentially reducing the number of illegal and inappropriate apartments; · the Town has considered that the Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS) will review all accessory apartments that occur on commercial property and in connection Page 3-33 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS with commercial uses, and will therefore limit the potential number of accessory apartments based on sanitary flow and density limitations to ensure that not more than 600 gallons per day per acre of sanitary waste is discharged on a parcel that is able to connect to public water; large families do not occupy accessory apartment housing and that the number of school aged children associated with apartments is 0.023 children per unit as compared with 0.705 children per unit for a 3-bedroom single family home; enactment of these changes to the zoning code for accessory apartments does not guarantee that units will be affordable; however, the market will determine the rates and new and/or legal units will provide an alternative housing type to single family homes that will be lower in renffcost, diverse in type, and are anticipated to be affordable; and after enactment of accessory apartment provisions, further code changes can be considered if found to be needed to refine the adopted code changes. Considerations may include: rental rate requirements; modification of the districts in which accessory apartments are encouraged; examination of potential density transfer to permit additional units. These refinements can be made with information derived from further analysis and/or trends in permits issued once code changes are enacted. As a result, accessory apartment code changes provide more diverse housing opportunities and have been found to not cause a significant adverse environmental impact in the Town. Refinements to this program are considered in the context of the overall affordable housing initiatives that the Town is contemplating, and is addressed in Tool #30. Other Measures - Opportunities such as bed and breakfasts and country inns increase land use opportunities, provide support to the local economy and can be coupled with preservation efforts. Significant adveme impacts are not expected as many of these initiatives are achieved through site planning and individual project review, and further project specific review would occur under SEQRA. 7. Review Zoning Map The Town LWRP is in progress as a separate action on which environmental review has been completed, and this effort is reviewing appropriate zoning patterns as related to the coastal zone, creek and waterway areas, promotion of water dependent uses and other similar efforts. The land use pattern in the Town established and has been described as hamlet centers, hamlet locus zones and rural areas. This pattern will be reviewed and strengthened, and measures to limit sprawl will be implemented. The zoning map will be reviewed to ensure that the current zoning reflects the Towns long standing intent to maintain agricultural use in large contiguous blocks, protect open space and natural resources, maintain and enhance hamlet locus zones and strengthen hamlet centers. Town initiated changes may result from this review and could include: zoning of farmland that is not currently zoned A-C, larger lot zoning where sensitive environmental resources are present, hamlet business and hamlet density zone changes which strengthen hamlet centers and promote affordable housing, and critical review of Halo zones with regard to residence office, limited business and business zones to ensure that sprawl is controlled. The Town has a responsibility to provide for provide for orderly growth, and implement changes that are necessary for the general good of the Town. Changes in the zoning map affect individual properties and will be reviewed for consistency with comprehensive planning efforts and the overall needs of the Town. Given the comprehensive nature of this Page 3-34 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS initiative, and the well grounded support in prior studies as well as analysis contained in this Strategy, no significant adverse impacts are expected. 8. Review Subdivision Regulations Simplification and improvement in subdivision regulations is a beneficial tool for review and participation in the land use development review process. This tool could be construed as having an effect of making the review process more expensive and/or increasing the length of time needed to process the application. It is more likely that better direction and improved guidelines will benefit the overall process. Such continuing agency administration could be considered a Type II action under SEQRA. 9. Review Highway Specifications Bringing Highway Specifications in line with planning goals and review process efforts likewise provides better guidance for Town reviewers, engineers and designers. An intent is to ensure rural qualities remain options in highway design. This tool could also be construed as having an effect of making the review process more expensive and/or increasing the length of time needed to process the application, but is a needed improvement in written guidelines and would also be considered a Type II action under SEQRA as continuing agency administration. 10. Conservation Opportunities Planning (COP) Process As a voluntary program for cooperative land use design, this program would permit the Town to work creatively with applicants to meet the needs of both the Town and landowners. If a landowner chooses a COP, the intent is to preserve on the order of 75-80 percent of the land as open space and/or farmland. The program is labor intensive on the part of Town planning and land preservation staff, even with assistance from groups such as the Peconic Land Trust. Typically, a combination of tools including clustering, PDR, and voluntary yield reduction are used to structure a reasonable land use that reduces density and preserves the necessary open space component. Ultimately, the Town would hope to achieve the final outcome of Conservation Opportunities Planning; however, additional measures are considered in the context of a more comprehensive program to directly reduce density potential as considered in upzoning, and reduce the cost of PDR through transfer of development rights. The COP process creates the opportunity to allow the Town to achieve its goals; however, it should be noted that this program is not mandatory and as a result, the public goals of this tool might not be fully attained. As this is a voluntary program, no significant adverse impact is expected. 11. Planning Process As this tool would require Town departments to review and process applications within a more structured time frame, this may, especially during periods when many applications have been submitted, overtax such departments (particularly if understaffed). It is important to ensure adequate staffing, while providing a review process that quickly and efficiently provides direction to applicant. The overall impact would be beneficial as clear direction would be provided for both planning staff/board, and applicants, earlier in the land use review process. As Page 3-35 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS primarily beneficial impacts are identified, and the action is primarily a routine agency administrative measure, no significant adverse impacts are expected. 12. Transfer of Development Rights The Town would benefit from a sound TDR program in a number of ways, noted as follows: · Preservation of open space and watershed recharge areas associated with sending sites. · Ability to redirect growth to areas suitable from such growth considering environmental resources and infrastructure. · Ability to transfer density credits from outside to inside hamlet centers in a manner that promotes creation of affordable housing. · Ability to promote mixed use, multifamily residential use and diverse housing opportunities including affordable housing through density incentives and transfer. · Reduction in the number of development rights and/or fee title purchases that would need to be made to achieve the Towns open space preservation goals. These measures are discussed in Section 1.0 and are analyzed in more detail below to provide the fi'amework for an effective TDR program. The program would not be expected to result in groundwater impacts, provided it is consistent with the Suffolk County Department of Health Services Transfer of Development Rights Standards, issued September 30, 1995 (Appendix G). These standards recognize that groundwater protection needs are served when open space is protected in a sending area, and controlled increase in density is permitted at a receiving site and are therefore incorporated into the Town of Southold TDR program and are reflected in the description of the program outlined in Section 1.0. In general, Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) is an appropriate tool for preservation and open space (and to a lesser extent farmland, due to SCDHS TDR requirements), that envisions shifting density to appropriate areas, thereby providing a means for land protection without the resulting cost of purchasing the development rights. Lands that are not farmed, and land in the R-80 zone (including woodland, wetlands and/or steep slope areas), are primary candidates as sending areas, as are the Community Preservation Project Plan (CPPP) parcels that are not established in agricultural use. Receiving areas can include limited density increases in subdivisions located outside of the A-C and R-80 districts in areas referred to as Hamlet Locus (HALO) zones, mixed use opportunities in hamlet center areas and, where appropriate, diverse housing opportunities including affordable housing on larger parcels with sewage treatment potential. A Planned Development District (PDD) local law is also proposed to provide zoning and land use flexibility for well-designed projects that provide special public benefits which could include redemption of transferred development fights. A sound TDR program depends on adequate incentives to ensure program success. The Pine Barrens Preservation Act allowed Towns to adopt Pine Barrens local laws consistent with the pine barrens plan; some Towns elected to provide incentives such that one development right in a sending area, would be credited with 2 multiple family units or 3 planned retirement community units at the receiving location. This is logical since, multiple family units are generally smaller, and therefore have less sewage flow (within certain size limitations), lower Page 3-36 I i I I I I I I I I I [ I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS solid waste generation, less school aged children, less traffic trip generation, and generally cause less impact than a single family dwelling. The reduction of impacts is even greater for retirement units. Such receiving site opportunities would be provided by special land use projects that provide mixed-uses or that otherwise advance planning goals of the Town. This form of the TDR program would be designed to work with incentive zoning provisions through a PDD (see Tool #13). In addition, transferred units remove density from those districts where preservation is desired, to those areas where infrastructure is present. As a result, density increases would be expected where bus routes and public transportation opportunities are enhanced, and in hamlet center areas where walkability and local services are provided. Very minor density increases may be permitted in areas that are currently experiencing growth in accordance with zoning. Under this portion of the program, receiving areas would be provided in zoning districts where a small incremental increase in density may be permitted without serious environmental or other detrimental impacts; these areas might include the Hamlet Locus (HALO) zones. An additional potentially beneficial aspect of the TDR program, is the ability of the Town to use acquired parcels for redirection of growth to appropriate locations or for appropriate programs which would specifically include providing diverse and affordable housing. NYS Town Law 261-(a) requires that "the town shall evaluate the impact of transfer of development rights upon the potential development of low or moderate income housing lost in the sending districts and gamed in receiving districts and shall find either there is approximate equivalence between Iow and moderate housing units lost in the sending district and gained in the receiving district or that the town has or will take reasonable action to compensate for any negative impact upon the availability or potential development of low or moderate income housing caused by the transfer of development rights." The proposed TDR program has given strong consideration to ensuring that the program will not negatively affect the availability of affordable housing, and in fact provides significant benefit in terms of providing diverse housing opportunities including affordable housing. The 2000 Census data provides relevant information with regard to TDR and affordable housing, including: demographics, income levels, housing characteristics and values. The data is presented in the Housing Needs Assessment included in Appendix A-7, and clearly indicates a distinct lack of affordable housing throughout the hamlets of Southold Town. Based on the cost of homes as noted in the Census and Home Sales data, there are few if any housing affordable housing opportunities, particularly in the environmentally sensitive (as well as scenic and desirable areas of the Town) coinciding with R-80 and some A-C lands that would become the sending locations under this TDR program. In addition, there are virtually no new multifamily unit opportunities in the Town and there is a greater demand for housing than supply. The designation of sending parcels, and identification of receiving site opportunities which include multifamily housing, mixed housing, and smaller unit development, as well as a density incentive for the creation of new housing opportunities at receiving sites, significantly increases the potential for affordable housing in the Town of Southold. Therefore, a Town TDR program would conform with NYS Town Law 261-(a), as it would provide opportunities for affordable Page 3-37 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS housing that currently do not exist, and no affordable housing would be removed by the program. Further, there is little likelihood of developing new affordable units in the sending sites, as the necessary infrastructure is not present or sufficient to service such development, and the locations of sending sites is such that natural resources would have made such development unlikely. Further with regard to affordable housing, the Town is considering the potential to use land acquired subsequent to the completion of the Build-Out analysis, for transfer of development credits for affordable housing. This would involve selling a development credit for each acre of land preserved, to a private development company and/or home/land owner that uses that credit to create a unit or an accessory apartment available for affordable housing in perpetuity. The credits would sell at a reduced rate (perhaps 75% of the average of development rights purchased under PDR) for those projects that conform with the program by providing permanent affordable housing opportunities in appropriate locations. This program has the added benefit of supplementing funding for open space acquisition. As envisioned, this program would work in tandem with the PDD or could be used for accessory apartments or addition of affordable housing to other existing Town zones where density credits are needed and would conform to the SCDHS TDR sanitary flow restrictions. With regard to Transfer of Development Rights, it is noted that wastewater impacts are not expected to be significant, as the Regional Impact Assessment Model predicted the full Build- Out concentration of nitrogen in recharge for each zoning district, and found that the highest potential concentration was 6.09 mg/1 in the R-40 zoning district. Only very limited increases would be permitted in the R-40 district, and only in conformance with SCDHS TDR standards. Other hamlet zoning districts (HD, HB, AHD and others) all were 5 mg/l or less, unless full density is achieved at the maximum allowed by the zoning district (if public water is available). This comes with the added benefit that natural recharge areas would be preserved in sending locations and the overall density would be reduced as the Town achieves success in meeting density reduction goals through voluntary PDR, upzoning or both. As this tool will comply with SCDHS and Town planning initiatives, and site specific review of any proposal would occur, no significant adverse impacts are expected. 13. Planned Development District Local Law This tool provides the potential to provide for development of a higher quality and more imaginative design and amenities, in addition to the "special public benefits" which might not otherwise be achieved. The PDD would be available to private applicants to pursue more creative land use applications that provide affordable housing, redemption of transfer credits, or other public benefits. The PDD would also be available to the Town Board to study and/or designate parcels that are appropriate for creative development opportunities. The program is beneficial in providing diversified housing and mixed land use potential, as well as design flexibility. Protection of environmental resources would be achieved through review of the individual site and individual land use proposal for a PDD, which could only occur under the program that establishes standards for locations, types of uses, and public benefits in Page 3-38 I I I I i I I I I I i I I I I I I I I $outhold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS connection with such a program. Each proposal would be subject to site/use specific SEQRA review, to ensure that there is no significant adverse impact on environmental resources and the overall goals of the Town are met. 14. Tree Preservation Local Law This tool would provide for protection of significant individual or groupings of trees, which would protect and enhance not only the aesthetics of the Town, but of new development which would benefit from retention of such trees. There are currently not restrictions on clear cutting or loss of valuable trees; as a result, there is substantial benefit due to the value of trees as open space, buffer, habitat, visual appreciation and the overall environment. This CIS has resulted in the mapping of the Town's woodland, a resource that warrants protection. The local law does not indicate that tree clearing can not occur, it just must occur with a permit. The permit review process will allow for fair consideration of applications submitted. There will be an increased level of effort needed on the part of applicants as well as the additional efforts on the part of the Town to review and process such an application. The Town will address this as part of continuing agency administration needed to achieve the Towns goals including open space and natural resource protection. As a result of the significant benefits expected, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 15. Critical Environmental Lands Local law This tool, if implemented, would have the beneficial impact of protecting sensitive resources associated with the Town's rural character, though it may have the adverse impact of reducing yields of affected sites and/or reducing the amount of building square footage that could be developed. It is noted that at present, wetlands and slopes in excess of 15 percent are reduced from yield through Town planning review, therefore the net affect of this local law would be minimal if any at all. The law would however, more clearly define the resoumes and protection measures thereby assisting staff and applicants with the understanding of valuable resoumes and protection considerations. This local law would directly address the Towns goal toward natural resource protection, and given its consistency with environmental protection measures, no significant adverse impacts are expected. 16. SEQRA Local Law Review/Revision As the intent of this tool is to identify those projects that may have an impact (and are therefore more likely to require an EIS) at as early a point in the review process as possible, there are no adverse impacts associated with this action. 17. Scenic By-Ways Overlay Development Controls While this tool would increase the time and cost to conduct the permit application review process, and would do so by adding to the existing level of governmental controls, it would also increase the level of protection and quality of the scenic roadways which are a significant Page 3-39 I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS component of the Town's rural character. As a result, no significant adverse environmental impacts are expected. 18. Agricultural District Review/Education As this tool includes performing public outreach and educational efforts in regard to agriculture and the agricultural industry in the Town, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 19. Create General Guidance Documents As this tool includes preparing documents to guide applicants through the various review processes, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 20. Natural Environmental Education This tool would provide for documents and programs to educate the public and interested civic organizations in regard to the Town's natural environment; as such, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 21. Watershed Protection Zone/SGPA's This tool would provide additional public amenities (signage, etc.) and education in regard to watershed protection efforts and regulations. As a result, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 22. Encourage Use of Public Transportation As this tool would be based upon Town efforts to encourage use of public transit in conformance with the Transportation Management Plan, by promotional campaigns, encouragement to form transportation hubs and ferry linkages, etc. and shuttle operations to specific destinations (e.g., wineries, ferries, etc.), no adverse impacts would be anticipated. 23. Transportation Management Plan Implementing recommendations stated in the Town's Transportation Management Plan would reduce overall traffic volumes, alleviate existing traffic congestion and improve aesthetics associated with transportation, to the benefit of overall Town rural character. However, such an action may require public investment, with associated budget impacts to the Town. It also might make revisions to Town design standards necessary, with resulting changes in Town review and site plan processing procedures. In all, the Town has a responsibility to work with State and regional agencies in achieving solutions for traffic congestion with opportunities for inter-modal transportation. The Towns participation in the SEEDS program will further assist in transportation management, and solutions and recommendations from that program can be evaluated in the context of Town transportation management. Coordination between agencies, and Town efforts to promote intermodal transportation and traffic management are activities that are not expected to have a significant adverse environmental impact. Page 3-40 I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 24. Economic Development Plan Preparation and implementation of a Townwide Economic Development Plan would be undertaken to maintain and enhance the vitality of the various components of the Town's business sector. While such an action may require some level of public investment, the majority of effects anticipated would be positive in~ nature, as such, no adverse impacts would be expected. 25. Enforcement As this tool addresses continued enforcement of existing Town laws, inspections and regulations, no adverse impacts would be expected. 26. Improve Waterfront Access Implementing this tool could involve acquisition of waterfront land, maintenance of existing waterfront sites, and preparation of an inventory of public waterfront lands. Such activities would require public funding, with potential budgetary impacts which may be passed on to taxpayers. However, this tool would also provide for improved public waterfront properties, in terms of number, location, quality and expense. The concept of improving waterfront access is consistent with State-wide coastal zone management, and is consistent with and a part of the Towns LWRP which has been issued a negative declaration under SEQRA and is an important part of long-range planning to ensure the continued awareness and appreciation, as well as protection and revitalization, of coastal resources. This concept is widely accepted for coastal zone planning, and therefore, no significant adverse impacts are expected. 27. Administer Parks of Town-Wide Significance This tool would provide for Town administration of parks having Town-wide significance. The Town will seek to update its park inventory, and Town-wide parks are being pursued to meet the needs of Town residents. Such actions support recreational opportunities in conformance with Town goals, and therefore, no adverse impacts would be anticipated. 28. Prioritize and Supplement CPPP This tool involves continuation of the selection of acquisition parcels, under a prioritized and well-funded program using fees on real estate transfers and bond issues; as such, there would be no significant impact upon taxpayers, and no adverse impacts are anticipated. 29. Create a Centralized Year-Round Recreational Complex This tool would provide for a significant new, needed public recreational facility for the benefit of all Town residents. An offsetting consideration is that this tool will require park funds, general funds, or some form of capital expenditure on the part of the Town. There are a number of sources for such funding, thereby minimizing potential fiscal impacts; however, the Town Page 3-41 I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS must act responsibly in budgeting for and meeting the needs of its residents. As this tool is primarily an agency administrative action, no significant impacts are expected. 30. Affordable Housing Policy Need - This Comprehensive Implementation Strategy includes an update to the affordable housing needs assessment of 1993; it is evident that there is a critical need for (and lack of) affordable housing in nearly every geographic location of the Town, and with nearly every sector of the Towns population with the obvious exception of high income residents. The needs assessment supplements and updates demographic information contained in the Existing Environmental Conditions section of this DGEIS, to better understand the dynamics of housing costs and needs, thereby assisting with the development of an effective program. The data presented in the assessment leads to several interesting findings with regard to housing dynamics: · Due to the "demand for housing, the Town cannot provide a sufficient housing supply to affect the price of housing to such a degree as to make housing prices affordable for the target group(s). · This further leads to an unfortunate reality that it may be difficult if not impossible to house all of those individuals comprising various income levels that would like to reside in the Town. · There are several aspects of "affordability". If housing were provided at affordable levels, this addresses one aspect, the price to purchase a home. The second aspect is the cost to maintain and pay real estate taxes. Both require attention, but this further illustrates the limitations of planned affordable housing. A diverse program is needed to address Town of Southold affordable housing needs. It is important for such a program to recognize the boundaries and limitations in view of the quality of life, desirability of east end residence, and the unique cultural and natural amenities that Southold enjoys, that also contribute to the higher cost of housing. Program - The Town will seek to further refine the affordable housing policy, in order to meet a critical demand for housing diversity within the Town. There is no one solution to this problem, but a need for a comprehensive and multi-faceted effort to increase the availability of affordable housing. This implementation strategy advances a number of legislative pieces and policy initiatives; many of these initiatives have been evaluated separately as part of other implementation tools. The program consists of a number of measures, summarized as follows: · Identifying appropriate parcels where PDD could be used to target public funds and/or TDR credits for the purpose of increasing density for affordable housing purposes, · Encouraging mixed use development within or adjacent to existing hamlets making use of the SCDHS TDR sanitary flow credits where necessary (see Tool #12), · Enabling PDD uses that provide an array of special public benefits, including affordable housing, · Amending current affordable housing requirements and creating new incentives in connection with new subdivisions and changes of zone, Page 3-42 I I I I I ! I i i I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS · Amending zoning to allow diversified housing stock including small- to moderate-sized units in condominium and apartment styles, · The Town has the ability to and should consider affordable housing opportunities in connection with change of zone petitions submitted to the Town; this allows creative land use opportunities within the flexibility of requested zoning districts, and may lead to consideration of PDD's that achieve multiple goals. · Consider density bonus for additional units that are provided as affordable housing. · Use of development rights acquired by the Town to re-direct growth from non-farm parcels to project sites where density can be increased through the re-sale of credits consistent with Town goals to provide affordable housing and strengthen hamlet centers; this could include accessory apartments, hamlet density and hamlet business zones, as well as PDD's and other appropriate zoning districts. In addition to techniques noted above, rental opportunities can be provided by simplifying and expanding the potential for accessory apartments, an effort recently advanced by the Town Board and discussed in more detail below. Measures other than legislation involve housing financial assistance in cooperation with the North Fork Housing Alliance (NFHA) as well as subsidized housing programs. Coordination with NFHA will be expanded, with direct measures such as new housing projects, purchase and re-sale of homes to qualified candidates, and increased rental opportunities, as measures to increase housing diversity. The Town will also seek to work with privately funded Community Land Trusts, as well as soliciting private development companies specializing in providing affordable housing through the use of tax credits, to explore opportunities in Southold. Other subsidies to be explored include Community Development Block Grants and other private funding soumes for publicly sponsored affordable housing initiatives. Resources to subsidize land and/or construction costs such as NYS subsidies through the Division of Housing and Community Renewal and the Affordable Housing Corporation will also be examined. The combination of these efforts provides a potential for increased affordable housing opportunities for a variety of income levels throughout the Town. Accessory Apartments - The Town has taken measures to ease restrictions on accessory apartments, a measure which is not expected to cause significant impacts if considered alone, particularly since SCDHS density limitations significantly limit the potential for new units. However, through comprehensive planning, additional opportunities are available that would expand the potential benefits of accessory apartments. The Town has the ability to combine this with transfer of development rights to achieve densities above the normal on-site density limitations established by SCDHS, with the resulting benefit of protecting open space and watershed recharge at other locations. In addition, the Town is exploring the use of development credits obtained through land acquisition of non-farm parcels, to promote and redirect affordable housing opportunities and/or accessory apartments. Under the program, as long as the Town has considered the regional benefits of watershed protection, and meets the requirements of SCDHS TDR standards, such transfers would be permitted at the County staff level without the need for the extended and potentially unsuccessful Board of Review process. The program would involve selling a development credit for each acre of land preserved, to a private development company or land/home owner, that uses that credit to create a unit or accessory apartment available for affordable housing in perpetuity. The credits would sell at a reduced rate (perhaps 75% of the average of development rights purchased under PDR) for those projects that conform with the Page 3-43 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS program by providing permanent affordable housing opportunities in appropriate locations. This program has the added benefit of supplementing funding for open space acquisition. As envisioned, this program would work in tandem with the PDD. Potential Impacts - Development of affordable housing sites in hamlet areas, even if conducted in conformance with the tools proposed, could reach unmanageable levels if not conducted in conformance with a Town plan or policy in this regard. If such a plan is not available to control the amount and pattern of such growth, adverse impacts on hamlet character, traffic and transportation, utilities, aesthetics, demography, community services, economics and businesses may occur. An additional potential impact is that expanding affordable housing opportunities may increase families with children, with a resultant increase in demand for services and may result in increases in the cost of services. This can be balanced by reduction or transfer of density by upzoning, PDR and/or TDR through other tools described in this CIS, so that the number of single family homes which generate a larger number of school aged children, demand and cost of services, is reduced. In addition, it should be noted that affordable housing is needed in the Town and region, and locating it in existing hamlet areas is supported by planning principles, provides geographic diversity, and is an effective way to provide greater consistency with an important Town goal. Impact Discussion - The Town has the ability to modify code to provide incentives for affordable housing. Code revisions include creation of a Planned Development District, incentives for a transfer of development rights program, and the potential for density increases in connection with affordable housing. PDD and TDR are considered under more detailed assessments included in this section. Review of the AHD zoning district with improvements to ensure affordability over a longer or permanent period of time are other options available to the Town. Many of these options are ministerial or probable Type II actions, or would result in minimal environmental consequences. Other actions which would have minimal impact or are probable Type II actions include the following: · housing financial assistance in cooperation with the North Fork Housing Alliance (NFHA) as well as subsidized housing programs; · working with privately funded Community Land Trusts, as well as soliciting private development companies specializing in providing affordable housing through the use of tax credits; · exploring Community Development Block Grants and other private funding sources for publicly sponsored affordable housing initiatives; · obtaining resources to subsidize land and/or construction costs such as NYS subsidies through the Division of Housing and Community Renewal and the Affordable Housing Corporation. Such programs can be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, but generally involve funding and leveraging to create affordable housing projects and initiatives in cooperation with non-profit and agency community development and housing programs. Page 3-44 I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Accessory apartments was given consideration above, and is not expected to have a significant adverse impact on its own; as part of a more comprehensive program, the Town can use TDR as a density incentive to provide affordable housing in a manner that reduces development density in undesirable areas, places it in more appropriate locations in a form that has less overall impact, proves the needed housing, and reduces the cost of land or development rights purchase. The impacts of the overall program are reduced due to the ability of the Town to ensure that growth is controlled and managed in accordance with comprehensive planning, multiple Town goals are achieved, and individual project specific review is conducted. The redirection of development to hamlets, and/or providing affordable housing in hamlet centers achieves many goals simultaneously. In-fill and strengthening of hamlets is encouraged while density is reduced in other areas. Impacts tend to be less due to readily available and often walkable service areas, and by the nature of mixed housing types that tend to have less impact than single family dwellings. Hamlets are dispersed throughout the Town, thereby providing diverse housing over a wide geographic area. Finally, there is the direct benefit of addressing the significant need for affordable housing. Summary - Comprehensive planning is important in addressing affordable housing needs. The "['own is seeking to preserve natural resources, farmland and open space, but must consider the consequence of protection efforts on affordable housing. Providing simultaneous measures that promote affordable housing, and linking such opportunities to land preservation, addresses several goals at once. The relationship of PDR and TDR in land preservation, and enabling controlled redirected residential units to be used to strengthen hamlets and provide affordable housing through accessory apartments, PDD's and density incentives is a perfect example of how a comprehensive program will achieve a greater level of success. 31. Concentrate Development in l-lamlets Hamlets are relatively well defined in Southold Town; however, through this implementation strategy, additional measures are being advanced to better understand, support and strengthen the unique character of Southold's hamlets. It is recognized that there is existing strip development in the Town, which may blur the hamlet zones. As a result, it is necessary to provide definition of hamlets and hamlet locus zones so that a clear distinction of this desired land use pattern can be identified and further advanced. The Hamlet Boundary Designation, contained in the Appendix A-8 assists in advancing this planning initiative. As noted in the discussion of Tool #30 above, development of affordable housing in hamlet centers can, if excessive and/or uncontrolled, have the potential to result in adverse impacts on a number of environmental and human resources of these areas. However, affordable housing in hamlets is needed, justified and appropriate, and can be implemented with minimal adverse impacts to hamlet resources if a proper balance between the amount of such housing and the capacity of each hamlet to accommodate such growth can be attained. The plan has further considered Hamlet locus zones where infrastructure currently exists and infill as well as appropriate development can occur in a manner that further supports the hamlet centers and appropriate growth zones of the Town, with concurrent reduction of density in agricultural and environmentally sensitive areas. Overall, no significant adverse impacts are expected provided Page 3-45 I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I i I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS other specified measures which potentially increase development in the hamlets are carded out such that development is controlled and appropriate, density transfer conforms to SCDHS TDR policies, creative mixed use projects provide "special public benefits" (including affordable housing and redemption of development credits), and site specific impacts are considered under SEQRA. 32. Park District/School District Boundaries Conformity Implementing this tool would provide for more efficient and effective administration of public properties and planning efforts to address recreational needs of all Town residents. As implementing this tool would involves administrative decisions, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 33. Update Park Inventory and Management Plan This tool involves an update of the Town's parkland inventory and maintenance needs, in order to provide improved and effective recreational services; as such, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 34. Create a Parks and Recreation Department Creation of a Town-wide Recreational Department would provide for more effective recreational services and improved facilities, though at the cost of potential use of tax dollars to establish and fund such an entity. A recreation department may be an eventual outcome of agency progress, and would be justified and supported by need and demand for services and programs, and funded through Town budget evaluation. As such, no significant impacts are expected. 35. Scenic By-Ways Management Program Establishment of a Scenic By-Ways Management Program would incrementally increase the costs to the Town to fund the various amenities associated with such a program (signage, additional reviews, inspections, etc.). However, the increased quality of roadway aesthetics provided by such a program would raise the overall quality of the Town's roads. Given the scenic and visual benefits of this program, no significant adverse impacts are expected. 36. Trail Inventory/Trail Committee/Bikeways Implementation of this tool involves coordination of trail planning and maintenance efforts within existing Town entities; as such, no significant adverse impacts are expected. 37. Inventory and Manage Cultural Resources This tool would result in closer and more effective coordination of Town planning efforts with respect to cultural resource protection and incorporation into the fabric of the community, by use of plaques, signage, landmark status, etc. As this involves administrative changes and minimal public expenditure, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated. Page 3-46 I I I I I ! ! I I I I ! I I I I i I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 38. Architectural Review Board and Design Parameters Strengthening Architectural Review Board (with associated standards, guidance documents and review procedures) would increase the level of Town oversight of the application review process, with associated increases in the length, cost and complexity of the process. However, the outcome of this tool would be an increase in the aesthetic quality of construction and visual character of the Town, and in particular in the character and distinctiveness of the hamlets where development would occur. As a result, no significant adverse impacts are expected. 39. Scenic Advisory Board Establishment of a Scenic Advisory Board would incrementally increase the level of complexity, cost and time to review and process pertinent applications. As this involves administrative changes and minimal public expenditure, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated. 40. Housing Financial Assistance Program This tool would enable better coordination between the various existing public and private funding entities addressing the need for affordable, low to moderate income housing, at little if any cost to the taxpayers. As such, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated. 41. Develop a Water Supply Master Plan This tool would provide a Master Plan for future water supply facilities in the Town; it would be a joint effort by Suffolk County entities including the SCWA and SCDHS, with Town input, insight and involvement to meet the needs of Town residents. The Town must be involved with serving the needs of residents and taxpayers, and as a result will seek to provide water supply of good quality in cooperation with the water purveyor and regulatory agencies. This should occur in a manner that also does not lead to growth potential that is not sustainable by the Town. In addition, providing for appropriate growth must consider appropriate densities and the location of growth areas that will ensure that wastewater is either treated, or discharged at flows consistent with Article 6 and the SCDHS TDR guidelines established under the sanitary code. A major contribution to water supply planning that the Town can provide is to establish zoning and land use requirements that limit turfed area on non-farm parcels to limit the need for irrigation. SCWA is in the process of completing a 5-year water supply plan and GEIS for the Town of Southold, and has indicated that control of irrigation is a major factor in water supply planning. Such measures can be incorporated into tree preservation and critical environmental lands local laws and other code additions and revisions. The Town has been instrumental in ensuring that priority water supply areas are addressed, while not extending water supply to those non-priority areas where future growth is not expected to occur, or where it is inappropriate. This overall Comprehensive Implementation Strategy addresses the need to have appropriate zoning in place, as water supply needs are met and public water availability is less of a limitation on project approvals. The Town will continue to play an important role in water supply and Town-wide planning, in cooperation with SCWA and SCDHS. As a result, no significant adverse impacts are expected from this specific tool, as Page 3-47 I i I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS overall comprehensive efforts are being evaluated factoring in water supply and infrastructure planning. 42. Emergency Preparedness Implementing this tool would provide for continuation of coordinated, efficient and effective administration of public emergency planning, administration and service delivery efforts; an action which the Town is currently engaged in to meet the needs of its residents in consideration of emergency situations. This tool is part of the agencies continuing administration and is therefore a Type II action. 43. Social Services Programs This tool is intended to foster better and more effective coordination among the various existing social services providers. Since this tool would not result in any new social services entities, and would require minimal (if any) additional Town expense, no significant adverse impacts would be expected. 3.2.2 Regional Impact Assessment for Proposed Action As noted, the proposed action includes a series of tools to better direct growth in the Town and serve the needs of its citizenry. A number of the implementation tools to not directly affect density derived impacts or coverage/preservation parameters, therefore, this form of analysis can only assess the potential impact of certain tools, specifically noted below. Many of the tools included in this Strategy are related to Code changes, direct Town management and working with other agencies; such tools are generally not quantifiable in terms of impact analysis. The Regional Impact Assessment Model provides a means to assess and compare impacts from those tools that would have quantifiable changes, and therefore only pertains to a limited number of Town-wide initiatives. The RIAM was therefore run assuming implementation of quantifiable tools such as those that protect open space, including Tool #6 (mandatory clustering) and Tool # 10 (conservation opportunities process), which would preserve 80 percent of farmland, and those that reduce density, such as Tool g4 (5-acre upzoning), which would simultaneously reduce density by 60 percent. Appendix F-4 contains RIAM computer model results and Table 3--4 summarizes these data in a form similar to Table 3-2. The table and analysis results provide information on the change in impacts relative to the full build-out of the Town if these measures were not implemented. Further discussion regarding these potential impacts is provided in the succeeding paragraphs. Table 3-5 quantifies the differences between the impacts anticipated from the proposed action (Table 34) and full Build-Out (Table 3-2). This table enables the reader to understand the change in potential impacts with the full Build-Out as the reference point, recording the change in resource categories relative to full build. Page 3-48 I I I I I I I ! I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS TABLE 3-4 BUILD-OUT ANALYSIS - SUMMARY (80% Famaland Preservation & 60% Density Reduction) AC 929 0.67 2,512 655 877 $7,558,361 -$2,509,501 8.8 715 5,196 621,079,995 0 467.6 467.6 103.9 76.7 15.3 166.3 3,898 R-40 2,211 6.73 5,980 1,559 2,087 $16,159,837 -$7,156,859 20.9 1,702 561 663,194 0 50.5 50.5 11.2 152.2 30.4 89.7 176 R-80 552 0.99 1,493 389 521 $4,496,709 -$1,488,133 5.2 425 2,666 165,543 2,133.1 48.0 48.0 10.7 45.6 9.1 85.3 287 R-120 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 R-200 34 1.88 92 24 32 $378,164 -$27,093 0.3 26 82 10,221 0 7.4 7.4 1.6 2.8 0.6 13.1 49 R-400 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 300 0 0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 AHD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HD 94 3.92 554 16 71 $538,384 $169,588 1.2 72 59 28,090 0 5.3 5.3 1.2 3.4 1.0 14.0 28 HD** 159 5.41 346 27 121 $701,752 $150,128 0.6 112 59 47,847 0 5.3 5.3 1.2 5.9 1.8 14.2 25 RR 83 4.08 180 14 63 $477,526 $150,418 0.2 64 48 24,914 0 4.3 4.3 1.0 3.1 0.9 11.4 23 RO 17 4.16 46 12 16 $123,627 -$54,752 0.9 14 12 5,074 0 1.1 1.1 0.2 0.8 0.2 3.0 6 HB 122 4.20 265 21 92 $702,558 $221,302 2.1 94 67 27,491 0 6.0 6.0 1.3 4.5 1.3 16.1 32 HB* 281 5.07 609 47 213 $2,053,898 $791,340 0.7 216 101 84,291 0 9.1 9.1 2.0 7.7 2.3 24.2 46 HB n/a 5.91 0 0 1,685 $1,685,384 $1,086,025 0.0 250 55 29,058 581,167 1,106,870 482,296 241,148 13 25 11 6 MI 3 1.14 6 0 2 $21,111 $8,134 0.5 2 2.36 866 0 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.6 1 Mil 69 1.14 150 12 52 $506,788 $195,259 1.1 53 56.66 20,798 0 5.1 5.1 l.l 1.9 0.6 13.6 29 MII* 150 1.20 326 25 114 $863,604 $272,030 1.9 116 80.12 45,058 0 7.2 7.2 1.6 4.1 1.2 19.2 39 MIl** 273 1.19 556 9 194 $1,202,520 $673,203 0.1 191 99.00 81,990 0 8.9 8.9 2.0 7.5 2.3 23.8 46 LB n/a 4.29 0 0 205 $313,536 $202,036 0.3 52 12 4,325 108,116 270,290 108,116 54,058 2 6 2 1 B n/a 4.97 0 0 732 $771,453 $497,107 2 274 25 10~641 266,018 506,649 220~762 110,381 6 12 5 3 LIO n/a 5.89 0 0 1,688 $1,929,673 $1,243,439 2.0 362 92 48,242 804,030 2,010,076 804,030 402,015 18 46 18 9 LI n/a 5.43 0 0 1,252 $1,642,698 $1,058,519 352 67 31,289 782,237 1,245,786 579,435 289,718 18 29 13 7 Totals Low 4,113 n/a 11,278 2,700 n/a $35,620,426 -$7,490,537 46 4,207 9,001.2 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a High 4,542 n/a 11,819 2,736 n/a $37,830,866 -$6,462,014 0.7 4,507 9,077.4 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a ! I I I I I I Page 3-49 Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS TABLE 3-5 BUILD CONDITIONS VS. PROPOSED ACTION Zoning Lots Coverage Water DemoRra ~hy Tax School Costs Solid Trip (percent) (m8/l) Total Children Seniors/ Revenue Waste Gnrtn Employees (tons/day) AC -1,392 -2.2 -1.10 -3,768 -982 -1,315 -$11,337,542 $3,764,252 -13.2 -1,072 R-40 0 0 0.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 R-80 -828 -2.6 -1.14 -2,239 -584 -781 -$6,745,064 $2,232,199 -7.8 -637 R-120 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 R-200 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 R-400 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 AHD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HD** 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 RR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 RO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HB* n/a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I-lB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MIl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MII* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MII** 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LB n/a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B n/a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LIO n/a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LI n/a 0 0 0 [. 0 0 0 0 0 0 Totals Low [-~22I n/a I n/a-5,656-1,565I n/a -$18,082,606 $5996,451 -21 -1,684 High -~1221 n/a n/a -6,007 ] -1,565 n/a I -$18,082,606 $5,996,451 I -21 1-1,662 Note: Low and High totals reflect residential use in HI3, FIB and MH dist~ets under two seenm with community water and/or community sewers. * with eorntmmity wa~.r ** with eormatmity water and sewers. Page 3-$0 I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 3.2.3 Resource Impact Analysis This section discusses each of the resource categories, and the change in potential impacts to that resource based on the RIAM model mn associated with the quantifiable aspects of the proposed project. Geological Resources A reduction in available residential lots resulting from density reduction measures is expected to significantly decrease in the amount of land cleared and graded for development. In addition, it should be noted that the geographic distribution of cleating associated with development of this reduced number of units would be concentrated in areas where such impacts could be tolerated due to the presence of existing disturbance and development, and on soils having less value relative to farming potential. These considerations would reduce the potential for impact to geological resources. Water Resources Due to the 35% reduction in residential units, there would be a correspondingly significant reduction in groundwater pumpage; specifically, the lower number of units will require less water for in-home consumption and less water for lawn irrigation. As a consequence of the overall reduction and relocation of development, the potential for adverse impact to groundwater supplies and quality would be significantly reduced, as growth would be directed towards areas already served by public water suppliers, where adequate water supply and infrastructure already exist. As development would occur in areas distant from agricultural use, the potential for impact to irrigation water would be reduced. Additionally, there will be a reduced potential for impact to groundwater quality, as the volume of sanitary sewage will be reduced, and the reduced acreage of lawns will reduce the potential for impacts from lawn chemicals, particularly due to nitrogen loading. Density reduction and control, retention of natural vegetation, limitations on fertilizer dependent vegetation, and reduction in irrigation needs are all components of the implementation tools that will tend to benefit the Peconic Bay and Long Island Sound estuaries. Ecological Resources Impacts to ecological resources are typically a direct result of cleating of natural vegetation, the resulting loss and fragmentation of ecosystems and hence of wildlife habitat, and the increase in human activity. Additionally, it is noted that secondary or indirect impacts can also be significant, as well as cumulative impacts depending on site and area conditions. The following list provides broad examples of ecological impacts including direct impacts, indirect impacts and cumulative impacts (Treweek, 1999): Direct Impacts: · Habitat loss or destruction · Altered abiotic/site factors · Mortality of individuals Page 3-51 I I I I I ! I I I I i I ! I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS · Loss of individuals through emigration · Habitat Fragmentation · Disturbance (i.e., construction, traffic, people) Indirect Impacts: Cumulative Impacts: · Reduced carrying capacity · Reduced population viability due to reductions in habitat area or quality · Altered abiotic/site factors · Mortality of individuals · Loss of individuals through emigration · Habitat Fragmentation · Disturbance (i.e., construction, traffic, people) · Habitat isolation caused by a variety of development types, resulting in increased edge effects and sometimes loss of diversity · Reduced breeding success possibly resulting in reduced population viability · Delayed effects (i.e., altered predator-prey relationships) · Progressive loss and fragmentation throughout an area · Reduced habitat diversity · Ongoing habitat toss or fragmentation over time, resulting in progressive isolation and reduced gene flow (reduced genetic diversity can result in loss of resilience to environmental change and increased risk of extinction · Irreversible loss of biological diversity · Exceedence of viability thresholds The negative effects of clearing and development have been well documented on ecological resources. The effects of clearing are cumulative and need to be taken into regional planning consideration. Developments typically result in habitat reduction, habitat fragmentation, degradation of existing habitats, loss of corridors, increase in edge effects, and likely changes in species composition among other impacts. Development projects typically favor those species that are tolerant of human activity, with more sensitive species typically abandoning areas altogether. Habitat fragmentation may result in a decline in species numbers as habitat patches are reduced, loss of characteristic species and concomitant invasion by edge species, changes in community composition and altered parasitic, symbiotic and predator-prey relationships, altered relationships, and altered population dynamics (Treweek, 1999). In addition to habitat fragmentation, development may create additional barriers to the area reducing and impacting wildlife movement. It is noted that several barriers to wildlife exist currently, causing localized stresses to wildlife populations. The effects of disturbance tend to trigger displacement may also vary depending on life-cycle stage or season resulting in higher densities within receptor sites, more individuals forced to use suboptimal feeding or breeding habitat, and direct mortality of no alternative habitat can be found (Treweek, 1999). Additionally, species composition is often altered as a result of direct changes in habitat following post development conditions. Page 3-52 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS The proposed Town Code amendments would result in a decrease in the amount of developed areas within the Town. Therefore, an additional percentage of individual parcels would be preserved as compared to the current zoning regulations. As a result of the proposed amendments, greater portions of land would be preserved. As the amount of land subject to development proposals is increasing, initiation of these regulations would allow for an overall significantly greater portion of the Town to be preserved. Therefore, ecological impacts are not expected as a result of the proposed actions. Additionally, few impacts to the Town's wetland resources are expected, as all future development will continue to be required to obtain both Town and State wetland permits, requiring conformance with current regulations. Further protection would be given to sensitive beach, bluff and dune environments, reducing future development and disturbance of these ecologically sensitive areas. Potentially larger buffers areas could be expected adjacent to sensitive site features (wetlands, bluffs, dunes, etc.) due to an increase in the amount of required preserved area. Transportation Resources There would be a decrease of 1,710 vehicle trips associated with this scenario, as compared to full Build-Out, because of the 35% reduction in the number of residences. As this reduced number of trips would be generated in areas where existing development, infrastructure and alternative forms of transportation are present, the potential for impact to such resources would be reduced. It is noted that hamlets currently experience traffic congestion, traffic safety problems and speeding. Hamlets are generally situated along NYS Route 25; Southold is fortunate to have alternative east-west arterial roads (NYS Route 25 and C.R. 48), and many north-south local roads to inter-connect the road system. As a result, access to hamlets is generally good, but congestion in hamlets and at destination locations taxes transportation resources. In addition, Southold is unique in that there is a ferry service that connects the east end to New England, thus causing trips through the Town with no destination within the Town. Ferry service is a source of traffic; however, internal trip generation, seasonal uses that increase traffic volumes, and destination locations within the Town for agri-tourism, visitation to quaint hamlets, dining experiences and general tourism are all traffic generation factors that affect transportation patterns in Southold. In many cases, it is the attraction of hamlets for shopping, dining and a destination experience that creates this congestion. Reduction in vehicle trips by reducing ultimate development density is one direct measure that has quantifiable results. This alone is not sufficient to ameliorate the traffic congestion that the Town may experience as a result of other influences noted above. The Town will need to pursue traffic calming measures in coordination with State and County agencies. In addition, a transportation management plan and outgrowth of efforts identified in the SEEDS project will assist in public education and promoting alternative forms of transportation. Management and redirection of growth, reduction in ultimate density, coordination with State and County transportation agencies, promotion of intermodal transportation, and continuing monitoring efforts with further transportation management are intended to control transportation resources. Page 3-53 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Air Resources The significant reduction in development in this scenario would result in a significant decrease in the potential for and amount of dust raised during construction operations (from truck movements on unpaved surfaces and land clearing and grading activities) than that for full Build- Out. In addition, the amount of vehicle emissions produced by vehicles (both during construction and post-construction) would be reduced. As the geographic distribution of this growth would be directed primarily to areas which are already developed, the potential for impact to rural areas of the Town from dust and vehicle exhausts would be reduced; for areas where development is to occur, emissions associated with this amount of growth are not anticipated to be sufficient to significantly impact air quality. 1 .and Use, Zoning and Plans Growth identified in Table 3-4 would result in an increase in development in the Town, though this growth would be directed primarily to hamlets rather than be distributed throughout the Town. As the number of residential units would be substantially less in this scenario than in full Build-Out, there will be a commensurate reduction in the potential for adverse impacts to land use patterns, particularly as development would preferentially be directed into hamlets, whereas development in the full Build-Out case would he distributed throughout the Town. It is not anticipated that this growth would impact the pattern of zoning in the Town, as all development is assumed to occur in accordance with the zoning of each site or through programs to promote more desirable growth such as strengthening of hamlets, and projects which provide special public benefits including affordable housing. As this scenario is intended to implement the recommendations of the numerous Town plans and studies, and the zoning of these sites would be changed where appropriate to reflect these recommendations, it may be assumed that this growth would not impact these plans. Furthermore, implementation of the recommendations of relevant studies will allow the Town to more closely conform with goals such as protecting open space, agdcultnral, rural character and resources, as well as providing housing diversity and a reasonable pattern of growth and development consistent with the comprehensive plan. Demographic Conditions As shown in Table 3-4, the increases in total Town population, as well as in the school-age child and senior citizen cohorts, would be less in this scenario than for full Build-Out (10,121 vs. 15,451 for total population; 2,684 vs. 4,249 school-age children; and 4,074 vs. 5,934 for senior citizens). As a result of this reduction, the potential demographic impacts (population increases, increases in age cohorts with special needs and considerations) would be reduced, and impacts associated with demographic characteristics (e.g., school district enrollments and associated budgets and facility planning, government-funded and operated social services, private medical services and public emergency services) would also be reduced. As the growth associated with this scenario would be directed primarily to the existing hamlet centers, the demographic impacts Page 3-54 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS would also be concentrated in these areas, with correspondingly reduced potential for such impacts in the rural portions of the Town. With regard to specific school district impacts, the six (6) Union Free School Districts (UFSD) within the Town of Southold, and their enrollment numbers are noted as follows: Mattituck- Cutchogue (1,526), New Suffolk (12), Southold (964), Greenport (658), Oysterponds (115) and Fishers Island (65). Townwide, there is a projected reduction in the number of students of 37 percent or 1,565 students. As the total number of students in all of the Southold districts is 3,340, the Build-Out scenario represents a 127 percent increase in students above current enrollments, while the proposed action would increase total enrollments by 80 percent. Each district must evaluate growth potential within their service area in relation to capacity in order to formulate long-range plans to accommodate the anticipated student population. School districts must propose budgets, provide bonding and ensure that adequate educational services are available as growth occurs within their districts. The implementation of affordable housing programs, and use of TDR and PDD to promote affordable housing, special public benefits and enhancement of hamlets will provide improved conditions for demographic segments of the Town. Community Services As mentioned above, the comparative decrease in development and associated populations on a Town-wide scale (with locations of these impacts directed toward the hamlet areas) would represent a decrease in the impacts on community services. Additionally, as the geographic distribution of these impacts will be limited primarily to hamlet areas, the needs for and costs of expansions and improvements will also be limited to these areas and associated services providers. Infrastructure Solid Waste Handling and Recycling - The amount of development envisioned in Table 3-4 represents a decreased amount of residential solid waste generated than that associated with full Build-Out. While there would be a shift in the geographical distribution of solid waste generation toward the hamlet areas, this would not be significant as all wastes would be handled in the same facility regardless of where the they originate. Water Supply - The amount of residential development indicated by Table 3-4 would significantly decrease the number of residential units in the Town in comparison to full Build-Out, resulting in a significant decrease in the potential increase in water demand. In addition, as this new growth would be distributed preferentially to the hamlets, the pattern of increased water demand will likewise be unevenly distributed, but toward areas already served by adequate supplies of groundwater. Drainage - The new development associated with this scenario would have to provide on- site stormwater retention facilities, in conformance with Town and/or County regulations. Page 3-55 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Wastewater Treatment - As was the case for full Build-Out, the volume of sanitary wastewater generated will increase, though to a significantly lesser degree than that of full Build-Out; the pattern of this generation will likewise change, to be directed toward the hamlets. This may have the result of increasing the number of on-site septic systems or, if economic and density factors prove sufficient, the establishment or extension of existing community sewer systems. However, as the number of new residences is substantially less than that for full Build-Out, there will be correspondingly lesser potential for this to occur, as well as a reduced potential for adverse impacts from this scenario. Electricity - In comparison to full Build-Out, the decreased amount of residential development would decrease the demand for expanded electrical services within the Town. Also to be considered is the change in the pattern of this demand; as development would be concentrated toward the existing hamlets, the pattern of demand (and pattern of associated electrical service system growth) will be changed. Natural Gas - Similar to that for electrical services, the demand for and pattern of demand for natural gas services will be decreased by the development pattem as described in Table 3-4. Community Character Reducing the level and geographic distribution of new residential development in comparison to the full Build-Out scenario would have the effect of reducing the potential for adverse impacts to the rural quality and character of the entire Town (by maintaining and preserving the breadth and depth of viewsheds and the character of the land and land uses within those viewsheds). In addition, the "small town" character of the individual hamlets would be protected, by locating appropriate residential uses in proximity to these areas. Cultural Resources The decreased amount of development (in comparison to full Build-Out) would reduce the potential for adverse impacts on existing and undiscovered cultural resources, and would also reduce the potential for impact on such resources as have already been determined, by locating development in hamlet areas and away from rural areas. Economic/Fiscal Conditions The demand for services would be less under the proposed project scenario identified in Table 3- 4. This is evidenced by the decrease in the impact on school districts (Table 3-5), specifically related to a lower number of school-aged children, thereby reducing the cost to educate children. Though the full Build-Out results in more units and greater tax revenue, the demand for services creates a greater deficit. The reduced density scenario reduces this deficit, and in combination with other planning efforts provides for greater efficiency. More specifically, reduced density lowers tax burden overall, and this combined with more compact density in hamlets results in greater efficiencies of public inl~astmcture, which translates into lower cost of maintenance and Page 3-56 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS services. Further reduction in the number of school-aged children may affect the actual ratio of tax dollars to demand for services. Seasonal homes, which do not require education of children, decreasing household size, and other measures to reduce density would be expected to further reduce the potential deficit. It is noted that Build-Out, even to a reduced density, occurs on a long-term basis, allowing school districts to evaluate needs, tax resources and other factors needed to ensure adequate education facilities. Other economic, specifically socio-economic issues are considered in Section 3.2.1, specifically with regard to 5-acre upzoning. Use and Conservation of Energy Resources In comparison to full Build-Out, development described in Table 3-4 represents a decrease in the demand for energy (electrical and natural gas) services in the Town. As use of energy-efficient building materials and mechanical systems, and passive energy-conserving site and building layouts are expected, the amount of energy resources required to serve this growth would be minimized. Use of such energy-conserving measures is not only required by New York State, but is a sensible business practice for developers, particularly in light of the increasing cost of energy resources. It is expected that the affected public utilities in the Town (LIPA, etc.) will be able to meet this reduced increase in demand, in consideration of the reliable revenue from the customer base generated by this growth. However, it should be noted that growth that could occur in the Town would be significantly greater in terms of quantity, and redistributed in terms of location, than if development assumed in Table 3-4 were not implemented. Such a level of development would have significant Town- wide implications for energy demand and consumption. Thus, this reduced-yield scenario represents a significant reduction in potential impacts on energy resoumes, in comparison to that which would occur if the proposed action were not implemented. Page 3-57 I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 3.3 Cumulative, Secondary and Long-Term Impacts As the proposed action is applicable within the entire Town of Southold, this Draft Generic EIS is required to analyze the potential impacts of the proposed action within the entire Town. As such, the individual impact analyses presented and discussed in this document assume and include development of all developable lands in the Town. Therefore, as cumulative development is already included in the analyses presented throughout this document, the associated impacts from such development do not need to be explicitly discussed here. Page 3-58 I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS SECTION 4.0 MITIGATION MEASURES I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 4.0 MITIGATION MEASURES This section discusses how implementation of the 43 tools comprising the proposed action would mitigate the adverse impacts described in Section 3.1.2. A summary of these mitigative features is included in Table 4-1. In general, environmental impacts associated with development conforming to the proposed action (discussed in Section 3.2.3) would result in a significantly reduced level of adverse impacts for two reasons: 1) the significant reduction in overall development, and 2) the relocation of this development primarily towards hamlets, where development would be more appropriate. Thus, the nature of the proposed action is in itself a significant mitigation measure for the various Town resources analyzed in this document. In addition, an assessment of possible mitigation measures relating to the impacts of implementation of the tools themselves is provided in Section 4.2. 4.1 Mitigation of Impacts to Resources 4.1.1 Geological Resources Mitigation of potential impacts to geological resource is inherent in the proposed action, as it would reduce development on agricultural land and on lands that are presently vegetated (which may also be areas of valuable steep slopes, wetlands, bluffs, etc.). The substantial reduction in total residential units, in conjunction with the relocation of this reduced development into hamlet areas (and away from the above-noted geological resources) would be a significant mode of protection, due to the reduced mount of clearing and grading of valuable lands. Use of erosion control techniques during construction operations will further reduce the potential for adverse impacts to the Town's geological resources. 4.1.2 Water Resources Implementation of the proposed action would provide substantial mitigation, in comparison to what would otherwise be experienced by water resources in the Town. The 35% reduction in residential units resulting from the proposed action would result in a corresponding reduction in groundwater usage, as fewer units would consume less water. In addition, this lesser amount of development would also mean a reduced potential for adverse impact to groundwater quality from sanitary wastewater recharge and lawn chemical usage. Use of water-saving plumbing fixtures would further reduce potential impacts to groundwater supplies. 4.1.3 Ecological Resources As a consequence of the proposed action, the potential for impacts to ecological resources would be significantly mitigated, in comparison to conditions if the action were not implemented. This is due to the reduced amount of development and guidelines/limitations with respect to development in farm and naturally vegetated areas of the Town, which would tend to retain and preserve vegetation and habitats for wildlife. In addition, the proposed Town Code amendments regarding setbacks, buffers, etc. would preserve greater percentages of land on sites that are to be developed. Page 4-1 Implementation Tools Planning Process, Zoning and Zoning Code TABLE 4-1 SUMMARY OF MITIGATIVE FEATURES Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Feature(s) of Tool which Mitigate Impacts 1. A-C District Use/Dimensional Parameters 2. Rural Incentive District 3. Agricultural Overlay District/A-C Zoning Review 4. 5-Acre Upzoning 5. Revise Special Exception Provisions 6. Review of Zoning Code 7. Review Zoning Map 8. Review Subdivision Regulations 9. Review Highway Specifications 10. Conservation Opportunities Planning (COP) Process 1. Planning Process 12. Transfer of Development Rights 13. Planned Development District Local Law 14. Tree Preservation Local Law 15. Critical Environmental Lands Local Law 16. SEQRA Local Law Review/Revision 17. Scenic By-Ways Overlay Development Controls Education/Enforcement 18. Agricultural District Review/Education 19. Create General Guidance Documents 20. Natural Environmental Education 21. Watershed Protection Zone/SGPA's 22. Encourage Use of Public Transportation 23. Transportation Management Plan 24. Economic Development Plan 25. Enforcement Capital Improvements/Expenditures 26. Improve Waterfront Access 28. Prioritize and Supplement CPPP Would I~rotect natural resources on those sites that are developed; will also limit the types of uses to those that are more appropriate to these areas. Maintains agricultural uses on these sites for a long time period while PDR or conservation easement is investigated. Provides protection for valuable environmental characteristic(s) of a property. Reduces yield ora property, with reduction in potential adverse impacts to environment. Enables improved, more effective review and processing of apphcations affecting farming and farmland sites. Enables better implementation of Town policy in regard to land use and zoning. Provides for improved protection of land and land use pattern in Town, with associated protection of environment, aesthetics and economics. Simplification and improvement of these regulations will benefit review and processing of applications. Simplification and improvement of these regulations will benefit review and processing of applications, and protect rural qualities of roadway corridors. Flexibility of this program gives landowner and Town opportunity to reduce yield of a site and protect/preserve agricultural land or open space. Would result in more efficient, effective review and processing of applications. Would preserve open space and recharge areas, and direct growth to areas appropriate for it. Would provide for more attractive development, with "special public benefits", than would otherwise occur. Would preserve and protect trees and their habitat/aasthetic functions. Would protect valuable environmental resources of sites to be developed. Would provide for more effective & efficient review of applications, under SEQRA law. Regulations would preserve & protect aesthetic value of corridors. Programs would enhance public awareness of value of agricultural use for entire Town economy and character. Would make development review process more understandable and simpler for applicants. Programs would make value of Town's environment more obvious and understandable for all Town residents. Would provide for amenities along roadways, as well as public education regarding watershed protection efforts. Would reduce level of congastion in Town, and enhance use of public transit, with inherent improvement in aesthetics. Would make transportation in Town more efficient, with associated improvements in aesthetics and economics. Would enhance Town's economy and business environment, with improvements in aesthetics. Would improve land use pattern and efficiency of Town operations. Would increase and enhance public access to waterfront properties, and improve existing facilities. Would improve such parks' operations, facilities and programs, to the benefit of all park patrons. Will continue to designate sites for public acquisition. 27. Administer Parks of Town-Wide Significance 29. Create a Centralized Year-Round Recreational Complex Would provide for a significant public recreational amenity. Page 4-2 Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Direct Town Mana. Rg~ment TABLE 4-1 SUMMARY OF MITIGATIVE FEATURES (cont'd) 30. Affordable Housi~ 3 I. Concentrate Development in Hamlets 32. Park District/School District Boundaries Conformity~ 33.~e Park lnventor~ement Plan 34. Create a Parks and Recreation Department 35, Scenic B -Wa Mana ement Pro ram 36. Trail lnventory/TraiI Committee/Bikewa sync__ 37. lnvento~ry and Manage Cultural Resources 38. Architectural Review Board and De_~_n Parameters -- 39, Scenic Advisor~Board lnter-A eric /Qnasi-A enc Initiatives infrastructure is.p~.sent and available, thus minimiz~nL~g~.dverse impacts on environmental resources and aesthetics, etc. ~de for more efficient and effective administration ~nies and recreational~ams. Would result in im~oved recreational ro ams and ark facilit maintenance. ~ide for more effective and efficiant~tions, facilities and recreational~ms. Would result in more attractive road~orcidors, enhancing Town aesthetics. ~de for more attractive and effective Town hikin and bikin trails, a si nificant recreational amenitE.- Would rovidefor ro am to address need for affordable housin ,~benefitcriticals.~g_mentsofTown~!~pulace. Would provide for preservation of open space and agricultural land and operations, while locating growth in areas where ~ovide for more efficient and effective Town cultural resources o~_erations a~ms. -- Will increase Town overS~Kht ofreview~ocess, with increase in aesthetic ualit ofdevelo ment, es eciall in hamlets~- Would increase level of Town review ora I~ions, with increased ~f aesthetics. 40. ~nancial Assistance Proeram ']' Enables im ~on of fundin bodies to address housine needs of critical se ments ~~ore effective and effic .... ~,__ .._ ___ c tl.cal s.e ments of Town~_2lLulatlon. · ~~slon oI water supply for new develo ment. · rogr~ d~ thereof. Page 4-3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 4.1.4 Transportation Resources Because of the substantial reduction in development associated with the proposed action (in comparison to conditions absent the proposal), there would be a substantial reduction in the potential for impacts to the Town's transportation resources. This in itself is a significant mitigation measure. In addition, the pattern of development and impacts would be changed, to the vicinities of the hamlets and the roadways linking them, and away from the more rural portions of the Town. Nevertheless, the Town may choose to implement traffic-calming measures, and provide further active and/or passive transportation improvements as provided in its ongoing transportation planning efforts. 4.1.5 Air Resources Reduction in development from what would otherwise occur absent this proposed action represents a mitigation measure for air resources. Development conducted in accordance with this proposal would be directly primarily to existing hamlet areas, thereby mitigating potential impacts to more rural portions of Town. In addition, development in the hamlets is not anticipated to be sufficient or of a character as to significantly impact air resources due to vehicle emissions. 4.1.6 Land Use, Zoning and Plans Mitigation of potential impacts to land use, zoning and land use plans is inherent in the proposed action, as follows: While the proposal would change the pattern of land use in the Town, the goal is to achieve a level of protection for valuable aesthetic and environmental, social and other characteristics and resources that would otherwise not be achievable absent the proposed action. This would be achieved by a substantial reduction in potential development in the Town, and an associated relocation of this growth toward the hamlets and away from the areas where these resources are found. The proposed action would conform to the zoning pattern in the Town (in order to achieve the specific land preservations and development concentrations inherent in the proposal), and this development would be in conformance with the applicable elements of the Town Zoning Code. The proposed action has been formulated specifically to implement a number of the recommendations contained in numerous Town land use plans and studies prepared over the past 20~ years, and therefore is consistent with the Town's comprehensive plan, including preservation of farmland, community character and addressing housing needs. Page 4-4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 4.1.7 Demographic Conditions Because of the reduction and relocation of development associated with the proposed action, the numbers of residents, school-age children and senior citizens generated would likewise be reduced and relocated. As a result, the impacts to the Town's demographic characteristics would be reduced. This represents a significant mitigation measure arising from the proposed action. The project has the potential to increase affordable housing opportunities by virtue of expanded diversified housing opportunities and through understanding of housing needs and development of affordable housing policies. 4.1.8 Community Services Due to the anticipated reduction and relocation of future development in the Town (and in associated populations), the need for and usages of the various community services needed to serve this growth would be reduced and relocated as well. This represents a significant mitigation measures of the proposed action, as the usage of existing services would not be increased to the same level or at the same rate absent the proposal, and the relocation of growth would tend to decrease the need for (and costs to) services providers to expand/upgrade existing systems and/or services. In addition, the proposed action will reduce the impact with regard to the cost of education, through reduction of the potential number of school aged children. 4.1.9 Infrastructure The reduction and relocation of future development in the Town away from primarily rural and agricultural areas and toward the existing hamlets (where infrastructure systems such as solid waste handling and disposal, water supply, wastewater treatment, and energy are established) would minimize impacts on these systems due to reduced demands on the capacity of these systems to provide services. 4.1.10 Community Character The proposed action contains its own mitigation of impacts to community character, as the development resulting from this action would tend to enhance the vitality and small-town character of the hamlets, while preserving the rural aesthetics of the adjacent open spaces and farmlands. 4.1.11 Cultural Resources Potential impacts to cultural resources would be mitigated by the proposed action by its preservation of undeveloped and agricultural lands (under which as-yet undiscovered cultural resources may lie undisturbed), and as a result of the reduced level of development in these areas reducing potential for impacts on established cultural resources. Page 4-5 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 4.1.12 Economic/Fiscal Conditions As a result of the reduced amount of development in the proposed action as compared to full build-out, potential impacts on the Town's economic/fiscal conditions would be reduced as well. While the amount of taxes generated by development under the Implementation Strategy would be less than that generated by the full build-out scenario, the demand on services (and the costs to provide them) would also be reduced proportionately. As illustrated in the RIAM model, the overall balance of costs and services would be substantially more beneficial under the proposed action conditions. 4.2 Mitigation of Impacts from Implementation of Tools The potential need for mitigation with respect to the implementation tools has been assessed to determine if mitigation measures are necessary or appropriate with respect to the implementation tools proposed. Table 3-3 provided an initial screening of mitigation with respect to each of the tools, and in consideration of the potential for adverse impacts. For many actions there were no adverse impacts, and therefore, no mitigation was necessary. A number of contemplated actions would be classified as Type II actions under SEQRA and therefore would not require any environmental review. Several actions were identified to have potential impacts; however, these impacts when analyzed in Section 3.2.3, turned out to not be significant or adverse. Overall, there were major beneficial impacts to be derived from the project as indicated in Table 3-3. Table 4-2 has been prepared to summary the findings with regard to mitigation as initially determined in Section 3.2.3. Page 4-6 I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS I I I I I I I I TABLE 4-2 IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS - Mitigation Matrix I Mitigation Measures to Minimize Implementation Tools impact Planning Process, Zoning and Zoning Code 1. A-C District Use/Dimensional Parameters (mechanics of of zone; now essentially same Other land use options such as PDR, as other residential zones) TDR and RID available. Town commitment to PDR; involvement of Peconic Land Trust, 2. Rural Incentive District (based on incentive zoning; exchange of benefits, i.e. maintain TDR; Country Inns; creative land use open space/farm use for period of time in exchange of PDR at appropriate yield/density) planning techniques available through this implementation strategy; incentives to join RID. 3. Agricultural Overlay District/A-C Zoning Review Other land use options such as PDR, (geographic definition and goals) TDR and RID available. RID provides primary mitigation to 4. 5-Acre Upzoning (A-C District Town-wide or specific area) ensure continuation of PDR pro,ram. 5. Revise Special Exception Provisions (to ensure special permit standards are adequate to None necessary. preserve character of Town while protecting a~riculture, etc.) 6. Review of Zoning Code (mandatory clustering, recreational requirements, revise Sign Site/use specific SEQRA and land use Ordinance; review R-O, LB district; water dependent uses; accessory apartments, AHD review; Towe,/County coordination to standards (expirations), B&B's, home occupations, discourage strip shopping centers & fast ensure compliance with SCDHS A~ticle food in HB, flag lots, encourage common driveways; change of use requirements, country 6. inns) Site-specific SEQRA and land use 7. Review Zoning Map (Mat~ituck Creek, industrial on Route 25 west of Greenport, HD in review; additional marine zoning on Greenport; water dependent uses, AHD - repeal or expand process) Mattituck Creek may have negative impacts. 8. Review Subdivision Regulations (road requirements; drainage; lighting; infrastructure; reduced density, subdivision, clustering, yield None necessary. calculations) 9. Review Highway Specifications (road requirements; None necessary. drainage; lighting; infrastructure) 10. Conservation Opportunities Planning (COP) Process (define and implement 75-80% Other land use options such as PDR, land preservation through land use tools and density reduction) TDR and RID available. I I. Planning Process (formalize pre-submission conference, review departmental organization; review committees; emergency service None necessary. provider input) Conformance to SCDHS TDR 12. Transfer of Development Rights (mechanism for appropriate density guidelines; site/use specific land use relocation/management) review. 13. planned Development District Local Law (provide for flexible developmenffyield in exchange of special public benefits, i.e. affordable housing, infrastructure, dedication, Site/use specific land use review. etc.) 1,~. Tree Preservation Local Law (limit removal oftreas unless through subdivision/site plan review; define tree Reasonable permits would be granted. size and applicable acreage) 15. Critical Environmental Lands Local Law (steep slopes and escarpments, shallow groundwater, wetlands, waterways; define for yield purposes) 16. SEQRA Local Law Review/Revision (Type I List; Project specific review will still be possibly add Scenic-Byways; CEA's) conducted to determine impacts. 17. Scenic By-Ways Overlay Development Controls (Route 48/25; define corridor Design Manual provides clear and 1000'/500'; reconcile concise guidelines for architects and farm structures; setbacks, mass, architecture; engineers. Committee review, SEQRA dasi~ation) ! ! I I I I I I I Page 4-7 I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS TABLE 4-2 IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS - Mitigation Matrix (con't) t Mitigation Measures to Implementation Tools Minimize Impact Education/Enforcement 18. Agricultural District Review/Education (Agriculture and Markets Law; encourage participation; maintain None necessary. existing participants) 19. Create General Guidance Documents (Design Manual, transportation management/traffic None necessary. calming, develop illumination standards; BMPs; cross access a~reements; side road access) 20. Natural Environmental Education (ensure good quality surface/ground surface waters; BMPs; IPM; coastal None necessary. erosion control; beach width monitoring) 21. Watershed Protection Zone/SGPA's (signage, educational materials, link with land use controls) 22. Encourage Use of Public Transportation (relate to Transportation Management Plan; create hubs; ferry None necessary. linkal~es; winery shuttles) 23. Transportation Management Plan (Transportation Commission; encourage transportation/pedestrian improvements; encourage public transportation, create None necessary. hamlet hubs; ferry linkages, winery shuttles, signage "best route to"; work with LIRR) 24. Economic Development Plan (to: manage tourism; protect commercial fishing; enhance recreational boating; emphasize uniqueness of agricultural opportunities and mariculture; included in capital improvement program; support B&B's and network of None necessary. visitor centers; capitalize on historic character and rehabilitation & reuse &these resources) 25. Enforcement (illegal conversion ofagricultaral buildings; use expansion controls; change of use None necessary requirements) Capital Improvements/Expenditures Grant funding olden available to offset cost of acquisifion, 26. Improve Waterfront Access (acquisitions; planning and development; obtain/maintain; inventory Town land and improve) Town will prioritize and use open space funds or bond with referendum support. Grant funding often available; 27. Administer Parks &Town-wide Significance Town will assess need and meet (for benefit of all Town residents) required service demand. Grant funding often available; 28. Prioritize and Supplement CPPP (additional Town will prioritize and use acquisitions; scenic by-ways acquisitions; sensitive open space funds or bond with land; prioritize) referendum support. Use of park funds; advance 29. Create a Centralized Year-Round Recreational Complex budgeting. Direct Town Management Density only increased through PDD with overriding Special Public Benefits; site/use 30. Affordable Housing Policy (geographic/type diversity, targets and new development, specific SEQRA and land use review every, 2-5 years; provide incentives, accessory apts., financial assistance; review; Town/County Housing Authority) coordination to ensure compliance with SCDHS Article 6. I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I Page 4-8 I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS TABLE 4-2 IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS- Mitigation Matrix (con't) Mitigation Measures to Implementation Tools Minimize Impact Density only increased through PDD with ovemding Special 31. Concentrate Development in Hamlets (define hamlets; Public Benefits; site/use ensure appropriate infrastructure; affordable housing; specific SEQRA and land use link with land use mechanisms/tools; capital review; Town/County improvement program; traffic calming) coordination to ensure compliance with SCDHS Article 6. 32. Park Distr~ct/School District Boundaries Conformity Informal cooperation instead of (determine need and reconcile districts) formal cooperation. 33. Update Park Inventory and Management Plan (prior 1980 study needs updating; input into GIS; manage None necessary. recreational resources) 34. Create a Parks and Recreation Department (manage Town properties, recreational Use of park funds; advance resources, non-church cemeteries) bud~efin~. 35. Scenic By-Ways Management Program (CR 48/NYS 25 currently designated; signage, link with Scenic By-Ways Overlay for standards/$uidclines/land use controls) 36. Trail Inventory/Trail Committee/Bikeways (Transportation Commission exists, determine appropriate committee, inventory, input into GIS to None necessary. manage, trailhead directional information in kiosks) 37. Inventory and Manage Cultural Resources (archaeologically sensitive areas; Historic District designation; plaques; landmark designation; input into GIS, manage) 38. Architectural Review Board and Design Parameters (determine need for and establish ARB; generate guidance documents and integrate into land use review process) 39. Scenic Advisory Board (determine need for SAB, to manage Scenic By-Ways Pro,'am) Inter-Agency/Quasi-Agency Initiatives 40. Housing Financial Assistance Program (No~h Fork Site/use specific SEQRA and Housing Alliance; review other opportunities based on land use review. 1993 report and Updated Affordable Housin~ Policy) 41. Develop Water Supply Master Plan (Town Not a direct Town initiative; involvement, SCWA preparing; manage infrastructure project specific SEQRA with other a~encies) review. 42. Emergency Preparedness (groundwater contamination, drought management; ensure adequate emergency services (police, fire, ambulance); flood hazard None necessary. mitigation plan; erosion) 43. Social Services Programs (senior citizen care, adequate community facilities, day care, meals on wheels, None necessary. churches, libraries) I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Page 4-9 I I I I i i I l I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS SECTION 5.0 ADVERSE IMPACTS THAT CANNOT BE AVOIDED I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 5.0 ADVERSE IMPACTS THAT CANNOT BE AVOIDED Section 2.0 of this document summarizes the character and environmental resources of the Town, and Section 3.0 assesses the potential for adverse impacts to those conditions resulting from the proposed action. Then, Section 4.0 analyzes those features of the proposed action that would mitigate the above-discussed impacts on those resources. It is acknowledged that some impacts may still exist for which no mitigation is available, however, these impacts are primarily related to site specific land use, and not the implementation of a comprehensive implementation strategy that allows the Town to conform more closely with the Town's goals. However, it should be remembered that these impacts will occur, and to a somewhat greater degree, if the proposed action is not implemented. This is because the existing Town Code regulations regarding development would allow for a greater number of residential units to be developed in the Town, with a different development pattern and density. Such impacts are noted below: · During the construction period for each site, there will be temporary increases in truck traffic and potential fugitive dust and noise generation, particularly during grading operations. · Clearing for individual sites will still occur, with possible reductions in vegetation and habitats for sites possessing such resources. · There will be an increase in the amount of potable water required from the public water supply. · There will be an increase in the concentration of nitrogen in recharge as compared to current site conditions. · There will be increases in vehicle trips generated by development. · There will be increases in various demographic parameters, including school-age children and senior citizens. · There will be increases in the need for and use of the various community services and upon infrastructure resources. In summary, the affected resources of the Town have been characterized, and the potential impacts of the proposed action on those resources have been assessed. Some impacts may still exist for which no mitigation is available. Where possible, the impacts have been quantitatively and qualitatively discussed in previous sections of this document. The impacts of the proposed action are minimal as discussed in Section 3.0, and site specific development impacts will be minimized where possible by conformance to applicable development standards and regulations. Page 5-1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i i I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS SECTION 6.0 IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES I I I I I ! I I I i I I I I I I I I I 6.0 Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES This section is intended to identify those natural and human resources discussed in Section 2.0, (Environmental Setting) which will be consumed, converted or made unavailable for future use as a result of this proposed action. Implementation of the proposed action will result in the !rreversible and irretrievable commitment ora portion of those resources. However, as described ~n Sections 3.0 and 4.0 (Significant Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures, respectively), the importance of these commitments is not anticipated to be significant, due to the fact that these losses do not involve any resources that are in short supply, semi-precious or precious to the communities, Town or region, or are otherwise substantial, and the fact that the actual action is the implementation of a plan. Therefore, as with adverse impacts that can not be avoided, commitment of resources will occur as a result of site specific development, and it is expected that this commitment of resources would in fact be less under the proposed action as compared with the theoretical build-out of the Town. It is difficult if not impossible to quantify the exact commitment of these resoumes; however, if the action is implemented, the following irreversible losses of irretrievable resources are expected: Material used for construction, including but not limited to: wood, asphalt, stone and concrete, fiberglass, steel, aluminum, etc. The mount of these resources represents a significant reduction in comparison to the amount that would be consumed if the proposed action were not implemented. Energy and resources consumed during construction as well as in the long-term operation and maintenance of this development, including fossil fuels, electricity and water. The proposed aetien is intended to significantly reduce the amount of future development Town-wide in comparison to what would occur if the action were not implemented, as well as to shift such growth to appropriate areas efficiently and economically served by infrastructure. Consequently, the proposed action represents a significant reduction in future consumption o£ energy resources in comparison to what would be expected if the proposed action were not implemented. The quality of various rural and marine/coastal viewsheds. It should be noted that this reduction in aesthetics is anticipated to be significantly less in intensity and areal extent than would occur absent the proposed action, and will establish a permanent "upper limit" of such impacts Town-wide. The quantity and quality of groundwater resources. However, as all growth is required to conform to standards and guidelines established specifically to protect and conserve groundwater resources, will be reviewed in detail by professionals employed in public agencies, and represents a reduced amount of development Town-wide than what would otherwise occur, the potential significance of such an increase (and associated impacts) is also reduced. Page 6-1 I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Natural vegetation and open space. It must be noted that, if the proposed action is not implemented, the amount of clearing resulting from future growth (occurring at an increased level and in more of the Town than that associated with the proposed action) would be significantly greater in extent and more impactive to ecological and wildlife resources than that associated with the proposed action. Infrastructure and human resources. It should be remembered that the reduced level of development associated with thc proposed action would reduce the increase in Town population than would take place if thc proposed action were not implemented. As a result, thc potential for increase in need (and costs) for expanded and/or entirely new infrastructure and community services would likewise bc reduced. Town and community character. A major goal of the proposed action is to provide broad guidelines and mechanisms that will regulate future growth in such a way as to enable that growth to be realized while maintaining the existing rural quality of the Town and protecting its working landscapes. It is of prime importance to note that the proposed action will achieve this goal while minimizing potential impacts on legitimate businesses and landowners' rights. I I I Page 6-2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS SECTION 7.0 GROWTH-INDUCING ASPECTS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 7.0 Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS GROWTH-INDUCING ASPECTS Growth-inducing aspects are those characteristics of an action which would cause or promote further development, either due directly to the proposal or indirectly, as a result of a change in the population or development conditions of that community or its market. An action's growth- inducing aspects may be analyzed in conjunction with those of other similar or complementary applications in the vicinity, or of its potential for promoting such applications. It should be noted that this proposed action does not propose any development, construction or growth; it has been formulated specifically to control the amount and pattern of future growth expected in the Town. In this sense, the prospect that the Town will grow is implicitly acknowledged by the Town Board. The proposed action is simply intended to channel this expected growth into appropriate areas while reducing the amount of this growth in areas which the Town Board, based upon numerous prior plans and studies, proposes to preserve and protect, and to minimize the potential impacts of this growth on the environment. Obviously, relocation of growth to hamlets and commercial centers will increase the amount of and need for infrastructure improvements in these areas, if such are not already present or prove inadequate. These improvements include sanitary, water supply and drainage systems, roadway improvements, increased community services capacities (schools, solid waste handling, energy supply, public transportation, parking, etc.). In addition, increased populations may increase the potential for changes in need for and types of commercial businesses, particularly if these population changes include shifts in age and/or income distribution. For that portion of future growth which would occur in agricultural areas, infrastructure improvements are expected to be similar in nature to those in hamlets, though to a lesser degree, as lesser growth in expected in these areas. The proposed Town Board action would provide an increased level of protection for agricultural land and open space and the rural qualities of the Town associated with these uses, while maintaining the capability of these privately-held properties to provide a reasonable economic return. Residential units would be available for development as transferred development rights or credits, to be used in designated receiving areas. It is also possible that credits can be retired, ifpumhased by the Town or other agency. While the total number of development credits would be reduced by the proposed action if upzonings are implemented (thereby reducing the number of units which could be built), it is not anticipated that the proposed amendments will change the overall potential for growth in the Town, but rather would reduce potential growth. As a result, the action would reduce the impacts of this growth, by reducing the amount of it and relocating it to areas where it would he more effectively supported by existing infrastructure. In consideration of the foregoing, it may be concluded that the proposed action is not expected to result in a significant adverse change in the growth potential in the Town. Page 7-1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SECTION 8.0 ALTERNATIVES Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 8.0 ALTERNATIVES This section of the DGEIS presents alternatives to the proposed action. SEQRA calls for a description and evaluation of the range of reasonable alternatives to the action that are feasible, considering the objectives of the project sponsor. The Town's "objectives" in this case, are the previously stated Town goals: · To preserve land including farmland, open space and recreational landscapes · To preserve the rural, cultural and historic character of the hamlets and surrounding countryside. · To preserve the Town's remaining natural environment; to prevent further deterioration of the Town's natural resources and to restore the Town's degraded natural resources back to their previous quality. · To preserve and promote a range of housing and business opportunities that support a soeio- economically diverse community. · To increase transportation efficiency and to create attractive alternatives to automobile travel, while preserving the scenic and historic attributes of roadways in the Town. 8.1 No Action 8.1.1 Description of Alternative The no action alternative assumes that no portion of the proposed "Action" will take place, and the status quo will prevail. Under this alternative, it can be projected that full build-out might be realized (20,532 dwelling units) and saturation population reached (31,656). Existing land preservation programs will continue, but not indefinitely, and with no certainty as to the level of funding to individual property owners willingness to participate in preservation efforts. 8.1.2 Compliance with Town Goals This alternative does not meet the Town's goal of preserving farmland and open space. Existing zoning and land use controls allow as-of-right development to occur throughout the Town's most important open space and agricultural areas. Either the build-out of the Town under current zoning would continue, or PDR and land acquisition would be pursued. If build-out continues with minimal land preservation, the Town's goals would not be met, and extensive services would be needed to serve populations, without the tax revenue needed to cover the cost of such services (resulting in potential increase in tax rates), as predicted in the RIAM model run for Build-Out conditions. Current land preservation efforts might prevent the loss of some of these areas; however, no mechanism would be in place to permanently prevent the destruction of these resources resulting from development. Reliance on existing pumhase of development rights and acquisition programs would result in long-term cost to taxpayers and/or continuation of the 2 percent sales tax funding for an extended period of time. Page 8-1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 8.0 ALTERNATIVES This section of the DGEIS presents alternatives to the proposed action. SEQRA calls for a description and evaluation of the range of reasonable alternatives to the action that are feasible, considering the objectives of the project sponsor. The Town's "objectives" in this case, are the previously stated Town goals: · To preserve land including farmland, open space and recreational landscapes · To preserve the rural, cultural and historic character of the hamlets and surrounding countryside. · To preserve the Town's remaining natural environment; to prevent further deterioration of the Town's natural resources and to restore the Town's degraded natural resources back to their previous quality. · To preserve and promote a range of housing and business opportunities that support a socio- economically diverse community. · To increase transportation efficiency and to create attractive alternatives to automobile travel, while preserving the scenic and historic attributes of roadways in the Town. 8.1 No Action 8.1.1 Description of Alternative The no action alternative assumes that no portion of the proposed "Action" will take place, and the status quo will prevail. Under this alternative, it can be projected that full build-out might be realized (20,532 dwelling units) and saturation population reached (31,656). Existing land preservation programs will continue, but not indefinitely, and with no certainty as to the level of funding to individual property owners willingness to participate in preservation efforts. 8.1.2 Compliance with Town Goals This alternative does not meet the Town's goal of preserving farmland and open space. Existing zoning and land use controls allow as-of-right development to occur throughout the Town's most important open space and agricultural areas. Either the build-out of the Town under current zoning would continue, or PDR and land acquisition would be pursued. If build-out continues with minimal land preservation, the Town's goals would not he met, and extensive services would be needed to serve populations, without the tax revenue needed to cover the cost of such services (resulting in potential increase in tax rates), as predicted in the RIAM model run for Build-Out conditions. Current land preservation efforts might prevent the loss of some of these areas; however, no mechanism would be in place to permanently prevent the destruction of these resoumes resulting from development. Reliance on existing purchase of development rights and acquisition programs would result in long-term cost to taxpayers and/or continuation of the 2 percent sales tax funding for an extended period of time. Page 8-1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Also with respect to goals, if left unchecked, development can, and is likely to take place in areas where such development would significantly alter the character of the community. This type of unrestricted development would clearly be incompatible with the goal of preserving the Town's rural character. Development, particularly the development of over 6,000 new dwellings and several million square feet of commercial space will, without question, seriously adversely impact the Town's fragile natural resources. Current zoning and land use controls provide no effective prohibition to prevent large-scale destruction of natural resources. As a result it is clear that the Town's goal of preserving natural resources is not met by this alternative. The Town's goal of providing a range of housing opportunities would, to a certain degree, be met by the no-action alternative. Substantial new residential development would, by virtue of its sheer magnitude, provide for additional housing opportunities. Existing zoning and land use controls, as well as experience with the nature of development that has taken place within Town, suggests that the type of new development that would take place would not necessarily expand the diversity of the housing stock or the range of housing opportunities. It is anticipated that the type of new housing constructed under this altemative would be typical high-end, detached single-family residences. This type of housing only serves a portion of the housing market, and a limited number of Southold residents. In this sense, the no-action altemative does not comply with the spirit of this goal. Finally, traditional single-family residences do not support the Town's goal of increasing transportation efficiency. Additional single-family homes will generate additional automobile trips. The RIAM model detailed in Section 3.1.2 indicates that the additional units created at full build-out will generate an additional 6,170 vehicle trips. This volume of additional traffic clearly impedes any opportunities to enhance transportation efficiency. 8.1.3 Impacts of the Alternative The impacts of the no-action alternative are addressed in the discussion of Future Conditions without the Proposed Action (Section 3.1). In general, this alternative would result in the greatest amount of significant adverse environmental impacts of any alternative discussed in the DGEIS, as well as compared to the proposed "Action" itself. 8.2 Consider Changing Target Landmass For 80% Preservation & 60% Density Reduction To One Zone (Create An Agricultural And Open Space District) 8.2.1 Description of Alternative The proposed action calls for applying land preservation and growth management goals to a broad geographic area of the Town that stretches across a number of hamlets and several zoning districts. This alternative calls for the creation of a single, geographically defined district within Page 8-2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS which the Town's preservation goals would apply. In concept, this alternative would involve the creation of a new Agricultural & Open Space zoning district. This alternative is somewhat different from some of the other alternatives that deal with modifying the "Action." This alternative, which incorporates elements of both alternatives 8.4 and 8.5, is broader and more encompassing. No specific tools or mechanisms are specified as the preferred method to reach the 80%/60% goals. Rather, this alternative anticipates that a range of tools, will be employed within a newly established agricultural and open space district to achieve its purpose. 8.2.2 Compliance with Town Goals Because this altemative offers flexibility in the way the 80%/60% goal is achieved, it can be concluded that this alternative is consistent with the Town's first three goals of preserving farmland and open space; of preserving rural character and preserving and maintaining the Town's natural environment. Unlike many of the planning tools that limit residential development generally, this alternative would specifically target areas of the Town where preservation is appropriate and necessary. Convemely, those areas of the Town where preservation is not required would be eligible for additional new development, including new housing opportunities. This alternative therefore supports the Town's 4th goal of promoting housing opportunities. This alternative is also consistent with the Town's goal of enhancing transportation efficiency. Formally identifying the geographic extent of the agricultural and open space district leaves no ambiguity about the opportunities available elsewhere. New, more concentrated development can take place in the areas outside the agricultural and open space district, (such as in the hamlets) which would afford opportunities to substantially enhance transportation efficiencies. 8.2.3 Impacts of the Alternative Achieving the 80%/60% goal in a specifically defined geographic area will certainly meet the land preservation goal, the community character preservation goal and the natural resource preservation goal. Carefully delineated, an agricultural and open space district could incorporate all of the Town's agricultural lands, open spaces and environmentally sensitive lands. The application of various tools to achieve the 80%/60% goals (tools that may include an upzoning) would preserve important resources, leaving development to occur outside of this new district. Development would be directed to areas that are not environmentally sensitive, and therefore more suitable to support new development. Similarly, impacts to transportation resources, community services, infrastructure etc., are negligible given the fact that the most sensitive core aghcultural and open space areas will achieve the 80%/60% goal. Development would be channeled to appropriate areas in and around the hamlets where the impact of development can be accommodated without serious negative consequences. Page 8-3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 8.3 Consider Applying 80% Open Space, 60% Density Reduction To All Zoning Districts 8.3.1 Description of Alternative Through the work of the Blue Ribbon Commission (BRC), the Town has established a goal of the preservation of 80% of its remaining unprotected agricultural land in the Towns farmland inventory (identified by BRC as approximately 6,900 acres), and 80% of the remaining unprotected open space (identified by BRC as approximately 3,900 acres), combined with a 60% reduction in residential density. The "Action" described in this GEIS describes various methods to achieve the 80/60% reductions. This analysis assumes that the 80/60% reductions explored in the "Action" are limited to the farmland inventory (most, but not all in the A-C zone) and the R- 80 Zoning District. This alternative expands the applicability of the 80/60% reductions and applies them to all of the zoning districts, Town wide. The Town supports nine residential zoning districts and eight non-residential zoning districts as noted below. · A-C - Agricultural Conservation District · R-80 - Residential Low Density District · R40 - Residential Low Density District · R-120 - Residential Low Density District · R-200 - Residential Low Density District · R-400 - Residential Low Density District · HD - Hamlet Density Residence District · AHD - Affordable Housing District · RR - Resort Residential District · RO - Residential Office District · HB ~ Hamlet Business District · LB - Limited Business District · B - General Business District · MI - Marine I District · MII- Marine II District · LIO - Light Industrial Park/Planned Office Park · LI - Light Industrial District Residential Districts Of the nine residential zoning districts, three zoning districts support very low densities. The R- 120 District requires minimum three-acre lots, the R-120 requires minimum five-acre lots, and the R-400 District requires minimum ten-acre lots. The R-120 Zoning District is limited to property located on Fisher's Island. Given the nature of the control of land on Fisher's Island by the Fisher's Island Development Corporation, it is unlikely that extensive unanticipated development pressures will threaten the character of the island. It is determined that the 80/60% reduction is not necessary within the R-120 District. The R-200 District applies to lands in Orient surrounding Long Beach Bay. Most of these lands are environmentally sensitive, supporting a combination of tidal and freshwater wetlands. Based on the presence of these environmental constraints, it is clear that very little development potential exists within the R- 200 Zoning District. The R-400 Zoning District, while a designated zoning classification, only Page 8-4 I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS comprises 1,065 acres of which 245 acres is on Fishers Island. In addition, this is a large lot, low impact zoning district within the Town. Therefore, applying the 80/60% reductions to the R-200 and R-400 zones is unnecessary. As a result, applying the 80/60% reduction is not necessary. Robins Island is zoned R-400. Most of its 435 acres are preserved via an easement with The Nature Conservancy. Three special residential zoning districts exist in Town. The HD Hamlet Density Residence District was designed to provide a mix of housing types and a level of residential density appropriate to the areas in and around the major hamlet centers, particularly Mattituck, Cutchogue, Southold, Orient, and the Village of Greenport. Reducing density by 60% within the HD Zone is contrary to the intention of the district. Furthermore, the 80% land preservation target would also conflict with the goals of the HD Zone. In fact, lands that have been zoned HD were determined to be appropriate for development. Therefore, applying the 80/60% reductions to the HD Zone would be inappropriate. The AHD Affordable Housing District is the second special residential zoning district in the Town. The Affordable Housing District was designed to provide opportunities within certain areas of the Town for higher density housing for families of moderate income. As with the HD Zone described above, the density and land preservation goals would be inappropriately applied in the AHD District. The third special residential zoning district is the Resort Residential District, RR. The purpose of this district was to provide opportunities for resort development in waterfront areas where, because of the availability of water or sewers, more intense development may be appropriate. Given the unique nature of the purpose of the Resort Residential District and the requirement that it be serviced by infrastractural improvements, the 80/60% reductions in this district, which is very limited in its geographic scope, are not necessary. There are some properties that are inappropriately zoned RR, but that is a separate issue to be examined at another time. Recognizing that the proposed action anticipates applying the 80/60% reductions to the A-C and R-80 Zoning Districts, the only remaining zoning district for consideration would be the R-40 Residence District. The R-40 District requires a minimum lot area of 40,000 square feet, or one acre. Approximately 7,819 acres orR-40 land exist in the Town. The R-40 Zone can be found throughout Southold. R-40 is commonly found in the areas surrounding the hamlets, along the Town's creeks and waterways, and in large areas south of the main roads such as Hogs Neck and Nassau Point, and New Suffolk. Clearly, the R-40 Zoning District is the most diverse zoning district in the Town. Portions of R-40 are actively farmed while others are intensively developed. The 80/60% reductions would be appropriate in certain areas zoned R-40, while they would be inappropriate in others, particularly those where additional development is being encouraged, such as in the proposed HALO zones surrounding the hamlet centers. Non-Residential Districts Open space and density reductions in the Town's eight non-residential zoning districts are unnecessary. By and large, very little, if any residential development opportunities exist in these Page I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS districts and open space preservation is not a primary concern in commercial areas. As a result, this alternative would apply to certain areas in the R-40 District as described below. 8.3.2 Compliance with Town Goals The 80/60% reductions in the R-40 zone would clearly serve to achieve the goals of preserving land, open space and farmland. These reductions would result in a preservation of the rural character of the Town and the surrounding countryside. Density reductions and the preservation of open space would also preserve and maintain the Town's natural resources and environment. Density reductions, particularly in the R-40 Zoning District, would serve to limit the range of housing opportunities and socioeconomic diversity called for by Town goals. The R-40 District represents one of the significant opportunities for achieving a diversification of housing opportunities for the community and for the creation of affordable housing. It is critically important that those areas of the R-40 Zoning District that might appropriately benefit from maintaining densities or even increasing densities not be subjected to the 80/60% reductions. If they were, this goal would not be achieved. In a similar fashion, applying the 80/60% reductions to certain areas, particularly those around the hamlets, would not serve to meet the Town's goals of increasing transportation efficiency. 8.3.3 Impacts of the Alternative The 80/60% reductions in the less intensely developed and open/farmland portions of the R-40 District would clearly achieve the goals of maintaining and preserving the Town's natural resources, land, air, and waters. Density reductions in these areas appropriately minimize land use conflicts between new residences and existing uses such as agriculture, and serve to preserve the integrity of the character of the open land area land use pattern. Density reductions result in fewer residents, which equates to fewer community service impacts. Should the 80/60% be applied to those areas where development is appropriate, such as the areas surrounding the hamlet centers recommended as HALO zones, potential negative impacts would result. Most notably, by making development more costly or difficult in these areas, the incentive to locate appropriate development in the hamlet areas would be lost. Development in the hamlet areas where the infrastructure and services exist to support increased populations suggests that the 80/60% reductions should be generally avoided in these areas. The method to mitigate the potential to create negative impacts by applying the 80/60% reductions to the areas surrounding the hamlets would be to distinguish those areas of the R-40 Zone where the 80/60% reductions are appropriate and those areas of the R-40 Zone where the 80/60% reductions would be considered inappropriate. The simplest method to achieve this would be to rely on the HALO zone standards established for the Town's hamlets. If a property were eligible for inclusion within the HALO overlay zone, then the 80/60% reductions should not apply. All other properties within the R-40 Zoning District would be subject to the 80/60% Page 8-6 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS reductions. Employing this technique assures that those areas of the R-40 Zoning District that are integral to the Town's agriculture and open space character are preserved by mandating that the 80/60% reduction goals are achieved. These lands are no less important to achieving these goals than those lands located within the A-C and R-80 Zoning Districts. However, by separating those lands from those portions of the R-40 Zone that are devoted to reinfoming the hamlet centers and accommodating additional population growth through increased densities or appropriately scaled new development, these areas are not hindered or burdened by the 80/60% reductions, which do not appear to have been intended to affect these lands. The broad extent and location of the R-40 Zoning District requires this segmented approach to preservation/development. 8.4 Creation Of Tax Incentives For Landowners To Preserve Their Open Space And Agricultural Uses 8.4.1 Description of Alternative Currently, State law and the Federal tax code provide various methods through which tax benefits for land preservation can be derived. Tax exempt installment sales, like-kind exchanges, limited family partnerships, charitable remainder trusts are examples of tax benefits that can be used in land preservation efforts. This alternative goes beyond these already existing techniques to provide a local tax incentive. The Town can adopt favorable property assessments resulting in lower real property taxes for agricultural and open space lands. 8.4.2 Compliance with Town Goals Property tax incentives provided to landowners to preserve agricultural lands and open spaces represents a beneficial method of encouraging preservation. Facilitating preservation certainly meets the Town's land preservation, rural character preservation and natural resoume preservation goals. 8.4.3 Impacts oftheAlternative Local tax incentives devoted to a particular class of local property owners represents a shift in the local tax burden. Unless offset by some other means, if the owners of agricultural and open space lands pay a proportionally smaller share of local taxes, then the owners of the other lands would pay a proportionally larger share. This shift in the tax burden represents a potentially adverse impact to those who do not own agricultural lands or open spaces. No other adverse impacts have been identified. Page 8-7 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 8.5 Remove All Other Uses Other Than Agriculture From Allowable Uses Within The AC District 8.5.1 Description of Alternative Pursuant to the recommendations of the Town's Master Plan consultant, a new agricultural conservation (A-C) Zoning District was created in 1989. This zoning district, along with the R- 80, R-120, R-200, and R-400 Districts was intended to: Reasonably control and, to the extent possible, prevent the unnecessary loss of those currently open lands within the Town containing large and contiguous areas of prime agricultural soils which are the basis for a significant portion of the Town's economy and those areas with sensitive environmental features, including aquifer recharge areas and bluffs. In addition, these areas provide the rural open environment so highly valued by year-round residents and those persons who support the Town of Southold's recreation, resort, and second home economy. The economic, social, and aesthetic benefits which can be obtained for all citizens by limiting loss of such areas are well documented and have inspired a host of governmental programs designed, with varying degrees of success, to achieve this result. For its part, the Town is expending large sums of money to protect existing farm acreage. At the same time, the Town has an obligation to exercise its authority to reasonably regulate subdivision and development of this land to further the same purposes while honoring the legitimate interests of farmers and other farmland owners. The initial planning concept behind the A-C District involved the creation of a strictly agricultural district, where subdivision and subsequent residential development would be prohibited. When the A-C District was created and adopted, the prohibition of other non- agricultural uses was abandoned. Today, the A-C Zone is essentially identical to the R-80 Residential Low Density District. This alternative calls for retuming to the original planning concept behind the A-C District. Uses that are not related to agricultural activity would be prohibited. An "agricultural residence" or farmhouse would be permitted, but creating residential subdivisions would be prohibited. This alternative would modify the A-C District so that only the following principal uses would be permitted: Agricultural residence (defined as a single-family dwelling located on a single tax parcel in the AC District, or a group of contiguous parcels in the AC District held in related ownership that comprise an agricultural enterprise, such as a farm or vineyard) The following agricultural operations and accessory uses thereto, including irrigation, provided that there shall be no storage of manure, fertilizer or other odor or dust-producing substance or use, except spraying and dusting to protect vegetation, within 150 feet of any lot line. o The raising of field and garden crops, vineyard and orchard farming, the maintenance of nurseries, and the seasonal sale of products grown on the premises. The keeping, breeding, raising, and training of horses, domestic animals, and fowl (except ducks) on lots of I0 acres or more. Page 8-8 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS o Barn storage buildings, greenhouses (including plastic-covered), and other related structures, provided that such buildings shall conform to the yard requirements for principal buildings. · Building structures or uses owned or operated by the Town of Southold, school districts, park districts, and fire districts. · Wineries. · Public utility rights-of-way as well as structures and other installations necessary to serve areas within the Town. · Farm labor camps. · Stables and riding academies. · One accessory apartment in an existing agricultural residence. The following existing uses currently permitted in the AC District would be eliminated: · One-family detached dwelling. · Two-family dwelling. · Place of worship. · Private schools, colleges, and educational institutions. · Nursery schools. · Philanthropic eleemosynary or religious institutions, healthcare, continuing care, and life care facilities. · Beach clubs, tennis clubs, country clubs, golf clubs, public golf courses. · Children's recreation camps. · Veterinarian's offices. · Cemeteries. · Bed and breakfasts. · Historical society. The accessory uses currently set forth in Section 100-31C 1-11 would remain unchanged. 8.5.2 Compliance with Town Goals This alternative would result in a significant reduction in the number of new residential lots that could be created through subdivision in the geographic area defined by the A-C District. Such a reduction in density will serve to directly meet the goals of preserving farmland, rural character, and the protection of the natural environment. This alternative may serve to hinder achieving the fourth goal of providing a range of housing opportunities simply because some of the opportunities for creating residential development would be foreclosed and while large-lot, market- rate, single-family residences certainly do not increase the Town's housing diversity, nor help meet the need for affordable housing, new houses in any form would help to meet a housing need for at least some segment of the population. This altemative would not have a measurable impact on the fifth goal of enhancing transportation efficiency. Page 8-9 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 8.5.3 Impacts of the Alternative Currently, more than 5,195.9t acres of land could support new residential dwellings within the A-C Zone. That acreage translates into 2,321 new residences. If this alternative were to be implemented, and the opportunity to subdivide to create new residential subdivisions were eliminated, only 342 new "agricultural residences" could be constructed. In fact, given the proposed definition of an "agricultural residence", only one single dwelling would be permitted on parcels of related ownership used as a farm. Therefore, the actual number of new residences would likely be notably less than 342 units. This altemative would result in a dramatic reduction in the number of residences that could be created in the A-C District. This alternative would also eliminate uses such as schools and churches within the A-C District. These uses are generally situated to support surrounding residential populations. Recognizing that the opportunity to create new large-scale residential development would be eliminated in this alternative, the necessity to provide supporting facilities, such as schools, would be correspondingly reduced. No negative adverse impact would be anticipated. This alternative would not result in any adverse impact to land, air, water or other natural resources or the ecology of the Town. This alternative might result in positive impacts to items related to serving increased populations. In other words, absent this alternative, if full development were to occur, the Town would be burdened by the cost of providing additional municipal services. This alternative would prevent this circumstance from occurring. Similarly, traffic impacts and congestion that might otherwise result would not come about. Some potential adverse impacts would relate to foregone opportunities. An example would be the elimination of the possible tax revenue that would be created by new residential development. While this may be viewed as a positive result of new development, the associated municipal service costs required by that new development cannot be ignored. The actual significance of this potentially adverse impact is therefore, minimal. 8.6 Consider Upzoning To A Minimum Lot Size For Yield Purposes Larger Than Five Acres 8.6.1 Description of Alternative A component of the "Action" described in this DGEIS is an upzoning to five acres. This alternative presents a similar upzoning concept, with the minimum lot area increased to ten acres. This 10 acre upzoning would be applied to the A-C and R-80 zoning districts, as well as other parcels that are, and have been, devoted to agricultural use, that should be rezoned to A-C. The principal objective of an upzoning is to decrease the maximum allowable density. The primary concern associated with upzoning is the loss of equity. As described more fully in Section 3.0, this DGEIS is not the forum to address speculative economics, profits or loss. This Page 8-10 I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS analysis is designed to determine if this altemative meets the Town's goals better (or worse) than the proposed action. Much of the analytical evaluation concerning upzoning was presented in Section 3.2.1, as part of the discussion of the five-acre upzoning. This alternative addresses the difference between a five-acre and a ten-acre upzoning. 8.6.2 Compliance with Town Goals A ten-acre upzoning would allow the Town to more rapidly achieve its land preservation goals of 80% of the remaining farmland and a 60% density reduction. The ten-acre upzoning would most directly support the density reduction component of this goal. To utilize the example set forth for the discussion of five-acre zoning in Section 3.0, if a 100-acre parcel were to be subdivided, the following would occur: Lot Yield Comparison Min. Lot Area Yield % Density Reduction 2 acres 40 lots 0 5 acres 16 tots 60% 10 acres 8 lots 80% It is generally understood that the Town's 60% density reduction goal is intended to apply Town wide and not on a parcel-by-parcel basis. Therefore, the ten-acre upzoning would achieve the density reduction goal 20% more quickly than the five-acre upzoning. The ten-acre upzoning would support the goal of preserving the rural character of the community. An increased reduction in density would serve to maintain the essential elements that make the Town unique; its land resource. The ten-acre upzoning would support the preservation of the natural environment. Once again, the proportional increase in density reduction between two to five to ten-acre minimum lots would result in the corresponding preservation of endangered natural resources. The ten-acre upzoning does not fully support the goal of promoting a range of housing opportunities and enhancing the socioeconomic diversity of the Town. Reduced densities result in fewer homes. Given the well-established reliance on external real estate market forces to dictate the character, and more importantly the price of homes, fewer homes means more expensive homes. This is particularly true in an attractive community like Southold where real estate market prices continue to escalate rapidly, where the supply of homes is certainly not unlimited, and where the population continues to expand. Less density means fewer opportunities to create new homes, which will limit or foreclose opportunities for creativity in the housing market. Builders will be forced economically to maximize their profit on fewer homes. Voluntary efforts to encourage better design and lower prices would become less viable Page 8-11 I I I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS as builder's opportunities to "recover" costs elsewhere on other projects is reduced or eliminated. While these circumstances might limit the ability to fully realize this goal, it must be recognized that most developers are niche builders. They produce a particular product for a well-defined market segment. While upzoning may limit opportunities to construct high-end, market rate housing, it will not necessarily impact those builders concentrating on the other side of the housing market, where affordability is emphasized. Further decreasing density by upzoning from five to ten acres will mean fewer potential trips, but will not result in improved transportation efficiency. Nor will it serve to create useful alternatives to automobile use. The difference between the five-acre and ten-acre upzoning will not have a material effect on compliance with this goal. 8.6.3 Impacts of the Alternative An increase in the density reduction from five acres to ten acres will have a beneficial impact on the Town's land, air, water, and natural resources. Fewer new homes means less land clearing, tree removal, grading, and construction. Upzoning to ten acres permanently removes threats to wildlife habitats and migratory pattems. This is particularly true in the R-80 Zoning District which includes most of the Town's environmentally sensitive lands. A density reduction means fewer homes resulting in a corresponding reduction in automobile trip generation. Each new single-family home adds almost one morning peak hour vehicle trip and approximately two evening peak hour trips to the local roadway network. New home construction results in construction-related traffic and deliveries. Once completed, homes require services and deliveries, all of which result in additional traffic. Reducing the number of homes eliminates these potential traffic volumes from arriving. Additionally, more homes means more road construction and the expansion of the local roadway network. Recent road construction patterns have favored individual cul-de-sacs and isolated roadways that do not interconnect into the existing roadway network. Reducing the number of new homes that could be constructed will reduce the necessity to expand the existing roadway network. Reducing the number of homes that could be constructed reduces the land use conflicts that often arise between residential uses and surrounding non-residential uses, particularly agricultural uses. Reducing the number of homes that could be built would result in a reduction in these types of land use conflicts. Obviously, fewer homes results in fewer residents. Current estimates, based on existing zoning, indicates that the Town's saturation population would be 31,656. A great deal of this population growth would occur in the lands currently zoned AC and R-80. If an upzoning to ten acres were to take place on these lands, it is estimated that the saturation population would be reduced to less than 25,000. An upzoning to ten acres would result in a reduction in the amount and nature of community services and infrastructure that would otherwise be required under the five-acre upzoning Page 8-12 I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS scenario or under existing conditions. Fewer homes equates to fewer school-age children, less demand for police and fire protection services, fewer telephone poles, fewer miles of new roadways to plow, etc. A density reduction has the potential to decrease land values. The lands in the A-C and R-80 zones are considered by most appraisers to produce their highest and best value as residential lots. Reducing the number of residential tots would potentially reduce the value of land. While a value reduction may be experienced, it is important to note several factors that may reduce the significance of this change. First, a review of historical development rights sale data reveals that the value of land alone accounts for approximately 40% of the overall land value, indicating that the development rights of a given parcel account for approximately 60% of the total land value. The upzoning to ten acres would not remove the 60% value, rather it would be, in some measure, reduced. As presented in Section 3.0, work by the Blue Ribbon Commission, as well as research in other parts of the country reveal that the reduction in land value resulting from upzoning, even significantly larger upzonings than the ten-acre upzoning discussed herein (such as 20 to 50- acre minimum lot areas) results in some negative land value impacts which tend to rebound in relatively short periods of time. Given that research on land value impacts, including an evaluation of neighboring communities, such as Southampton and Brookhaven, as well as other areas where much larger upzonings were considered, it is reasonable to conclude that the difference in the impact to land values between an upzoning to five acres and an upzoning to ten acres is relatively similar, particularly in view of the increasing value of land. If a percentage decrease in land value could be placed on a two to five-acre upzoning (which is beyond the scope of a genetic ELS), the difference between a five to ten-acre upzoning would be negligible. Evidence suggests that it is the act of upzoning that has an initial impact to land values, an impact that stabilizes and diminishes over time as overall land values continue to rise. As described more fully in Section 3.0, a farmer's equity is not eliminated when land is upzoned. Borrowing, using land as collateral and based on the economic viability of the agricultural business itself, will still take place. An upzoning in this sense would have little impact on a farmer's ability to continue fanning. A ten-acre upzoning would serve to more permanently preserve sensitive environmental areas and vulnerable land, air, and water natural resources than the proposed five-acre upzoning or certainly beyond existing conditions. This would occur at less expense to taxpayers in terms of taxation if build-out occurs under current zoning. Also while purchase of development rights would still be expected, the Town would not have to solely rely on PDR as a means of density reduction/land preservation. This would reduce the cost of development tights acquisition, also reducing the cost of bonding and commensurate taxpayer investment. Fewer homes means fewer people and all of the associated impacts generated by larger populations, such as traffic, noise, .congestion, and a reduction in the quality of life. Land equity impacts, while beyond the scope of this DGEIS, have been generally evaluated and it can be concluded that while an adverse impact to property owners may result, the impact is likely modest and short-term. Page 8-13 I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I i Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS An upzoning will result in permanently sacrificing tax revenues that might otherwise flow to the Town, which would be considered an adverse municipal impact, however the benefits of achieving the Town's land preservation and open space goals are clear. In addition, taxes are levied in order to fund the services required by the additional units that would be built. Less units involves less demand for services and therefore, less tax revenue is needed. Finally, tax revenue from single-family residential use generally does not cover the cost of educational services required by new units. Studies have shown that agricultural land requires only one third of the every dollar it contributes in tax revenues per acre, while suburban residential tends to require a third more than it contributes in tax revenues per acre. Further, if the agricultural land and open spaces are essential to the ecotourism sector of the local economy, the loss of this land reduces the potential of that sector of the economy to stay viable The ten-acre upzoning may have an adverse impact on increasing the diversity and range of housing opportunities and socioeconomic conditions of the community. Fewer homes equates to less opportunities, most notably for high-end, market rate housing. This is an adverse impact that must be mitigated. It is expected that this impact will be negligible on affordable housing opportunities. This alternative will not likely impact the hamlet areas, which is where affordable housing is targeted. 8.7 Consider 5-acre Upzoning Of A Larger Area Than Proposed 8.7.1 Description of Alternative The "action" calls for consideration of an upzoning to 5 acres that would apply to the A-C and R- 80 zoning districts. Together, these districts comprise 17,722 acres or over 60% of the Town's land area. The theory behind the upzoning described as the "Action" suggests that the upzoning would apply to the Town's farmland and open space areas. While it is true that the A-C and R-80 districts account for the vast majority of the Town's agriculture and open space lands, they do not include all of it. This alternative involves expanding the 5-acre upzoning to additional lands, primarily portions of the R~40 district that have historically and continue to be used for agriculture or as open space. 8.7.2 Compliance with Town Goals Including the additional R-40 lands that might achieve the intended purpose of the 5-acre upzoning represents a logical expansion of the upzoning concept. The R-40 lands addressed in this alternative are those lands that have historically been farmed, are vacant or are considered to be open space. Generally, these parcels of land are large and characteristically very similar physically to the lands zoned A-C and R-80. The overriding objective of the Town's various goals is to preserve the Town's intrinsic character, which is not always accurately defined by the zoning district boundary delineations. Page 8-14 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Including additional land to the 5-acre upzoning would proportionally increase the opportunity to reduce residential density, and therefore preserve land, complying with the Town's first goal. Expanding the area where density reductions take place will certainly serve to further support the Town's goal of preserving the rural character of the countryside. A conflict may result however, if the upzoning of R-40 lands were to include any of the land eligible for inclusion within the proposed HALO zone. The newly proposed HALO zone is an overlay district where additional growth has been determined to be acceptable, and is encouraged. Decreasing the applicable density regulations within these particular areas would limit new development, and as such, would be inconsistent with the goal of supporting the hamlets. The Town's third goal of preserving natural resources would be reinforced by expanding the areas considered for upzoning. Reducing density means less building and associated environmental destruction. As previously noted, expanding the upzoning to those areas of the R-40 district surrounding the hamlets (proposed to be included within the new HALO zone) would be clearly inconsistent with the goal of providing a range of housing opportunities and supporting the Town's socio- economic diversity. These areas are seen as key opportunities to expand housing opportunities with diverse new housing options. This alternative has the potential to eliminate these opportunities. Given the relatively limited extent of this alternative, it is unlikely that it would have a significant impact on the Town's 5~h goal of improving transportation efficiency. 8.7.3 Impacts of the Alternative This alternative calls for adding the parcels within the R-40 zoning district that are vacant, or used for agriculture, or as open space, and that are vulnerable to future development, to the 5 acre upzoning. In total, 855.43 acres of the R-40 lands fall within this category. Approximately 35% of this acreage is environmentally constrained, thereby precluding or severely limiting future development. 560.8 acres remain as potentially developable R-40 land. This acreage represents the additional land area considered in this alternative. Upzoning an additional 855 acres (560 developable acres) will have a beneficial environmental impact when compared to existing conditions. Reducing the potential development density will result in fewer potentially adverse environmental impacts - such as impacts to water, land and air resources. Reducing potential residential density will result in proportional decreases in traffic, community service needs, new infrastructure and other municipal impacts. A potential negative impact resulting from this alternative is the realization that fewer new dwellings will be created, and therefore fewer tax revenues will be generated, compared to what might other~vise be permitted under existing zoning. It is important to bear in mind however, that tax revenue generated by new development generally does not fully offset the increase in the cost Page 8-15 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS of municipal services required to service the new development, particularly with regard to educational costs. As a result, the magnitude of this negative impact is expected to be negligible. 8. 8 Consider Creation Of An R-60 Zoning District To Apply To R-40 Lands 8.8.1 Description of Alternative This alternative calls for upzoning the R-40 zoning district, which requires minimum lot areas of 1 acre, to a new R-60 district, which would require minimum lot sizes of 1-½ acres. This alternative does not propose preserving any of the areas currently zoned R-40. The R-60 district would effectively replace the R-40 district. 8.8.2 Compliance with Town Goals The replacement of the R-40 zone with a new R-60 zone is, to some extent, consistent with the farmland preservation and open space goals. A small amount of agricultural land as well as open space, is located within the R-40 district. Reducing the permissible residential density within the district will result in a degree of land preservation through the design and cluster opportunities that a lower density allows. The change from 1-acre minimum lots to 1-½ acre minimum lots will support a portion of the Town's second goal; e.g. it will serve to reduce residential density within the R-40 district, thereby preserving the rural character of the community. However, increasing the minimum lot size will not preserve the character of the hamlets. In fact, upzoning the R-40 district to R-60 will have a distinct and direct adverse impact on the ability to concentrate new residential development within and immediately around the hamlets. Any reduction in residential density will help to preserve the Town's natural environment simply because fewer buildings will be constructed. In this sense, the R-60 alternative would be consistent with the third goal. The R-60 alternative would be particularly inconsistent with the goal of increasing the range of housing opportunities. As previously noted, it has been determined that the most appropriate area to accommodate new housing opportunities is in the hamlets. Recognizing that the hamlet centers are substantially built-up, and very few opportunities exist to accommodate new residential development, it is proposed to direct new growth into the areas immediately surrounding the hamlet centers. A new floating zone, called the HALO zone, is proposed in these areas. By and large, most of the areas that have been determined to be potentially suitable for HALO designation, are mostly zoned R-40. Raising the permissible minimum lot area would reduce the opportunity to channel growth into these areas. Page 8-16 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS In a similar fashion, the R-60 alternative creates an impediment to concentrating development, which would allow for the development of efficient transportation linkages. This altemative would be inconsistent with the Town's 5th goal. 8.8.3 Impacts of the Alternative The impacts associated with the R-60 alternative are similar to those discussed in the other upzoning alternatives. Increasing minimum lot areas reduces density, which means fewer new homes. Fewer new homes means less development, less construction, less congestion and all of the associated impacts flowing there from. In this regard, no significant adverse environmental impacts are anticipated from this alternative. Adverse impacts to landowner equity may occur under this alternative. Unlike the A-C and R-80 districts were intense residential development was never anticipated; the R-40 zone is the zoning district within which more intensive development is envisioned. A density reduction in this zone is contrary to the vision of the community, and would deprive landowners of equity that appropriately relates to these lands. This is an impact that could not be practically mitigated under this alternative. 8. 9 Consider 5 Acre Upzoning To A Smaller Geographic Area Than Proposed 8.9.1 Description of Alternative The 5-acre upzoning described in the "action" involves the AoC and R-80 zoning district or approximately 17,722 acres. This alternative would reduce the upzoning to a single contiguous block of land, generally refen'ed to as the "farmbelt" or the Oregon Road area. The area is bounded to the west by the hamlet of Mattituck and the more intensive development along Mattituck Creek. The southern boundary extends to the edge of the developed area along the Main Road (SR 25). The eastern boundary is defined by the hamlet of Peconic and the development surrounding Goldsmith Inlet. The north boundary is the Long Island Sound. The area contains approximately 8-9,000 acres, and is uniformly zoned A-C, with an 800' wide swath of R-80 along the Long Island Sound shoreline. The only exception to this pattern is the industrially zoned LI and LIO area surrounding the Town solid waste management facility. The planning concept behind this alternative is to apply the upzoning to the heart of the Town's agricultural area and to an area that is essentially uninterrupted by uses other than agriculture and open space, such as large scale residential development. 8.9.2 Compliance with Town Goals As previously documented, upzoning to 5 acres is consistent with the Town's land preservation goal, its community character preservation goal and the goal of protecting the natural Page 8-17 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS environment. As noted previously, fewer new homes may limit housing opportunities, however that limitation will affect high-end, market rate homes, and not affordable housing, where increased diversity is essential. The degree of compliance with the initial preservation goals is brought into question with this alternative. It is generally recognized that the most vulnerable agricultural lands as well as open space resources, are those on the fringes of the Town's developed areas. The common perception is that farmland and open space is "eroding" most notably from these fringe areas. The central "core" agricultural area generally supports larger, more traditional farms that are surrounded by other similar large farm operations. These traditional core agricultural areas have proven to be relatively stable, and little "erosion" of agricultural lands or open space has taken place. 8.9.3 Impacts of the Alternative The impacts of this altemative, both beneficial and adverse, are anticipated to be negligible. Upzoning to 5 acres has the potential to result in a number of distinct benefits due to the fact that development related impacts would be diminished. In fact, the Oregon Road "core" agricultural area has remained a unified and stable agricultural district for literally hundreds of years. Given the demonstrated flexibility of the agricultural industry to respond to new markets and consumer preferences, it is anticipated that the core agricultural area will continue to remain profitably devoted to agricultural use. Ongoing and increasing development pressures have been, and will continue to be directed toward the fringe areas, particularly those areas surrounding the hamlets. All of the upzoning altematives have the potential to negatively impact farm equity. However, as described in Section 3.2.1 the potential negative impact on equity will not be as significant as originally perceived. Furthermore, upzoning will have little or no impact on the ability of a farmer to continue farming. The potential adverse impact that might occur when a farmer "sells out", thereby allowing the land to be developed to accommodate new residential uses, is clearly inconsistent with the Town's goals. 8.10 Consider Mandatory Clustering That Would Limit The Minimum Lot Size To 1 Acre 8.10.1 Description of Alternative Currently, Article XVIII of the Town's zoning code provides for cluster subdivision development. This section requires clustering on lots of 10 acres or more within the A-C, R-40, R-80, R-120, R-200 and R-400 zoning districts. The provision further provides for minimum lot sizes of: · 30,000 square feet for lots without public sewer or water. · 20,000 square feet for lots wit public water. Page 8-18 I I I I I I i I I I I I I i I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS · 10,000 square feet for lots with both public sewer and water. This alternative would make clustering mandatory for all subdivisions, and would further limit the maximum lot size to one acre. 8.10.2 Compliance with Town Goals The purpose of the Town's existing cluster ordinance is to achieve: Maximum reasonable conservation of land and protection of groundwater recharge areas. · Preservation of agricultural activity by encouraging retention of large continuous areas of agricultural use. · Variety in type and cost of residential development, thus increasing the choice of housing types available to Town residents. · Preservation of trees and outstanding natural features, preservation of soil erosion, creation of usable open space and recreation areas and preservation of scenic qualities of open space. · A shorter network of streets and utilities and more efficient use of energy than would be possible through strict application of standard zoning. Furthermore, as set forth in New York State Town Law, Section 278: "The purpose of a cluster development shall be to enable and encourage flexibility of designing and development of land in such a manner as to preserve the natural and scenic qualities of open lands. Mandatory clustering would support the Town's first goal of preserving land. Development would still be permitted, and clustering, in and of itself, has no effect on density. However, effectively designing subdivision so that no lot exceeds 1 acre in area would allow for larger areas of open lands to be preserved. Clustering would serve to support the goal of preserving the Town's rural character. Alone, clustering would not necessarily support this goal, but considered in conjunction with other initiatives, it would be considered supportive. Of the Town's goals, clustering most importantly supports the goal of preserving the Town's natural environment. Clustering allows subdivisions to be designed in such a way that sensitive environmental resources are preserved. The flexibility offered through the cluster provisions, is the key to achieving this goal. Similarly, the flexibility afforded through clustering provides for opportunities for expanding the range of housing choices. Abandoning traditional, "cookie cutter" conventional subdivisions in favor of clustered subdivisions will serve to support the Town's efforts to increase the range of housing opportunities and provides for a broader range of socio-economic diversity. Clustering, particularly when employed in the hamlet centers and HALO zones, is a useful tool that can enhance the transportation efficiency of the Town. Creating compact and efficiently Page 8-19 I I I I I I I I I t I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS designed new development offers the opportunity of more efficiently integrating new development into the transportation network. 8.10.3 Impacts of the Alternative The adverse impacts of mandatory maximum lot areas of 1 acre are negligible. Any new residential development in the Town's agricultural, open space or environmentally sensitive areas has the potential of negatively impacting the existing character of the community. However, in those areas where new development is suitable, clustering development will certainly reduce the nature and extent of potential adverse impacts. Furthermore, more efficiently designed developments will reduce the extent of supporting infrastructure, and by extension, the burden of the Town to service this infrastructure, including the new dwellings themselves. 8.11 Consideration Of An Affordable Housing Overlay District 8.11.1 Description o f Alternative In 1986, the Town created an affordable housing zoning district (AHD). The district was designed as a traditional zoning district, formally delineated on the Town's zoning map. The purpose of the AHD district was, and is, to "provide opportunities within certain areas of the Town for the development of high-density housing for families of moderate incomes." AHD zones have been designated within the Town, but their creation has usually been reactive rather than proactive. In other words, when the AHD zone was created, the Town did not then rezone various areas of the Town to AHD. Rather, the AHD zones were adopted in response to a specific proposal to create a specific affordable housing project. This practice is contrary to the intent of a traditional zoning district. Such a district(s) should be proactively designated, based on a comprehensive tSlan for the community, and should not be reactive to a particular project. In practice, the current AHD district has been employed much like a floating zone or overlay district. This alternative presents the creation of an affordable housing overlay district. The planning concept behind this alternative is derived from New York State Town Law's authority to provide for incentive zoning. In concept, an affordable housing overlay district would incorporate several basic elements; including: · Bulk, area and parking schedule with density, setback & bulk advantages or bonuses for affordable housing projects. · Provide for a range of housing types, including single family, two-family and multi-family residences; for sale and rent. · A defined review and approval process that is expeditious. A permanent affordability formula and commitment. · Eligibility requirements. · Pricing guidelines. Page 8-20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I i I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS · Property eligibility guidelines. · Overlay zone adoption process & procedure. Should a parcel of land meet the property eligibility guidelines, then upon petition and/or application, a procedure would engage to designate the affordable housing overlay zone and an associated affordable housing project. Those meeting the eligibility requirements would have the opportunity to purchase or rent these new homes. The property eligibility guidelines would be crafted so that the affordable housing overlay zone would only be applicable in appropriate portions of the Town, such as within the hamlet centers, of within the proposed HALO zones. Such guidelines would prevent inappropriate rezoning or the location of affordable housing projects in areas where conflicts with farming would arise. 8.11.2 Compliance with Town Goals Given the understanding that the eligibility guidelines would be crafted specifically to assure that the affordable housing overlay zone is applicable only in appropriate areas of the Town, such as the hamlets, it can be concluded that this alternative would not conflict with the Town's first three goals of preserving land, rural character and natural resources. This alternative would directly support the Town's fourth goal of providing a range of housing opportunities and supporting the socio-economic diversity of the community. It is anticipated that the specific zoning provision of a affordable housing overlay district will allow and encourage the development of a diverse range of housing types, fi.om single family residences to multi-family dwellings. This alternative will support the alternative of enhancing the transportation efficiency of the Town. New affordable housing projects, primarily located in the hamlets, that take advantage of increased densities and result in more compact designs, will improve the efficiency of the transportation network. Opportunities to use alternatives to individual automobiles will increase, which supports this goal. 8.11.3 Impacts of the Alternative As discussed previously, new development, whether designed to support moderate-income residents, or not; that is well designed, appropriately configured and proximate to the Town's hamlets, will not result in significant adverse impacts to the Town's natural resoumes and environment. Development in the areas envisioned for the affordable housing overlay district are generally suitable to support additional development. By directing development into suitable areas, it would be turned away from the agricultural, open space and sensitive environmental areas. New affordable housing developments will result in increases in the demand for municipal services; however, the demand is anticipated to be proportionally diminished. The economic Page 8-21 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i i I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS viability of most affordable housing projects is often predicated on smaller dwelling units. Smaller units usually translates into smaller families, fewer school aged children and correspondingly lower demands on municipal services (e.g. less trash, fewer gallons of water usage, fewer kilowatts of electricity etc.). While affordability is often supported through local government action, such as lower assessments and property taxes, this diminished tax revenue is generally adequate given the reduced municipal services required to serve the development. 8. 12 Consider Allowing Farm Labor Housing Only On Farms Through Incentives 8.12.1 Description of Alternative A problem that has historically plagued Southold's agricultural industry is how to provide adequate housing for the farm labor pool. Unskilled agricultural jobs are typically low paying, seasonal, physically demanding and often-dangerous. These jobs have long been filled by temporary, migrant farmhands and legal (as well as illegal) alien workers. Irish, Polish and Russian immigrants used to fill these jobs that are now filled predominantly by immigrants from South and Central America. The vast majority of these workers are not permanent local residents, are not from the area, nor will they remain in the area for long. Commonly, these workers are trying to earn as much as possible in a short period of time, before returning home. Most of their income is sent home or saved for when they do return home. As a result, very little income is available to spend on housing. Recognizing this, farmers have long provided various means for housing farm labor. It is not uncommon that this housing is illegal, non-conforming and/or non-code compliant. This alternative would allow for legal, safe, clean and decent farm labor housing to be created on farms to help meet the housing needs of farm workers. This housing would be created by adopting special permit provisions that permit this use. Such a program would include several basic elements: Multi-family housing would be permitted (up to a prescribed cap) on farms. · The farm housing would be constructed to comply with applicable building and fire prevention codes. · The housing would be unobtrusively situated within the farm parcel and suitable screened and buffered. · Workers residing within the housing must work on the farm on which they reside. 8.12.2 Compliance with Town Goals A crucial element in successfully maintaining the Town's aghcultural base is maintaining access to viable farm labor. More and more farmers will be forced to "cash-out" if they are unable to secure adequate farm labor to maintain their farming operations. As a result, this alternative can Page 8-22 I I I i I I I I 1 I I t I i I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS be seen as supporting the Town's land preservation goal and rural character goal. This altemative would have no measurable effect on achieving the natural environment goal. This alternative would most directly support the Town's goal of providing a range of housing opportunities and support the Town's socio-economic diversity. Farm labor housing provides for a specific housing niche, and its construction would in turn, free-up existing housing that would otherwise be devoted to housing farm labor. This freed-up existing housing, which is likely quite affordable, could be then used by others. An ever-present problem with the farm labor pool is transporting employees to work at the farm. Providing on-site housing is the best approach to improving the efficiency of the farm labor transportation problems. 8.12.3 Impacts of the Altemative Providing on-site farm labor housing will likely not result in significant traditional "development" impacts. It is likely that farm labor housing will be constructed within existing farm compounds, in areas where buildings already exist. Impacts due to land cleating, road building, grading and the installation of utility infrastructure are not expected to be significant because most of these areas are already developed to some degree, and the impacts likely occurred long ago. The provision of on-site farm labor housing will substantially improve transportation efficiency. Current inefficient (and often unsafe) commuting methods, including car pooling, shuttle bussing, hitchhiking, biking along road fights-of-ways, or simply walking, will become unnecessary. Well-designed and properly scaled farm housing would be consistent with the character of the farms themselves and consistent with the existing land use pattern. On-site residences are traditional components of farms. This alternative is therefore an expansion of this traditional land use. The provision of farm labor housing will not result in substantial adverse impacts to the Town's role in providing community services and municipal infrastructure. A significantly large portion of the farm labor pool in Town is comprised of migrant alien employees. They are typically males, without their families. A low impact on local schools is anticipated, as the reliance of farm labor help on local services and programs has been traditionally very limited. While experience has shown that the farm labor pool contributes little back into the local economy in terms of dollars (as much of the income is saved or sent back to home), they provide the labor foundation upon which a significant segment of the Town's economy is built. In this sense, their impact on the local economy is very beneficial. Page 8-23 I ! I I ! I I I I I ! ! I I I ! I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 8. 13 Zoning That Ensures Permanent Preservation Of Open Space 8.13.1 Description of Alternative This alternative proposed the creation of a new open space preservation zone. Such a zone would prohibit development of any kind, and would allow only vacant open spaces. Even passive, low intensity uses, such as certain types of agriculture, would be prohibited within this zone. This alternative represents a drastic restriction of the property rights of individual landowners. For this alternative to be legally sustainable, the overall community value of the open space resource must be specifically documented, and the precise geographic location of these areas identified. 8.13.2 Compliance with Town Goals This alternative is the most aggressive method to achieve the Town's first three goals of preserving important land, rural character and natural resources. This is so simply because all development would be strictly prohibited. This alternative is in direct conflict with the goal of promoting a range of housing opportunities. This alternative would eliminate any opportunity to create new housing on these lands, and would shift the increased burden to accommodate housing to other zoning districts. This alternative would have no real bearing on the transportation efficiency goal. 8.13.3 Impacts of the Alternative The most obvious impact caused by this alternative is that it would deprive numerous property owners of virtually all of their property rights. No uses would be permitted under this alternative, other than open space. It is likely that such a large-scale depravation of property rights would be bitterly opposed, and legal challenges would follow and persist. Case law suggests that the type of restriction detailed in this alternative, would be considered a "taking" requiring just compensation to the landowners. Ultimately, this alternative would result in a cost to compensate landowners, similar to purchasing the land or acquiring its development rights. Unlike ongoing Town programs to acquire these rights, which have occurred periodically over many years, the open space zone would be imposed at once. This alternative would therefore require that large payment awards be made to property owners, all simultaneously. This represents a potentially significant adverse economic impact. It is useful to consider that any open space zoning that might be created would likely include areas previously zoned R-80, which includes most of the Town's environmentally constrained lands. Generally, these lands have remained as open space because the cost and effort associated with developing the property was substantial, and has been viewed as a deterrent to development. Not a prohibition, but a deterrent. When considering this alternative, it is necessary to weigh the potential benefit to environmental resources and community character gained by employing this Page 8-24 I I I I I I I I I l I I I II I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS alternative (benefits that might be secured through other means) compared to the potential adverse impacts. Obvious positive impacts relate to the direct and immediate preservation of open space and rural character and natural resources. Permanently eliminating any development opportunity is a forceful method to protect these resources. This alternative would benefit transportation resources in that potential traffic generation will be substantially reduced, due to the fact the no new development would be permitted to occur. Similarly, all of the potential municipal impacts, such as those related to community services, infrastructure etc., would be eliminated. As with all development limiting alternatives, eliminating development under this alternative, represents forgone tax revenues that might otherwise be realized. However, it is likely that the development opportunities in the areas considered open space, which are likely environmentally constrained, are limited. 8. 14 Modification To The Cooperative And Assured Protection Plan 8.14.1 Description o f Alternative This alternative was originally a variation on the Cooperative & Assured Preservation (CAP) plan proposed during the BRC and specifically outlined in the Blue Ribbon Commission Report. This alternative is a variation of this plan, and sets forth several components including a 5 acres upzoning, the creation of a Farmland Protection District, the establishment of a Rights Exchange Program, the imposition of mandatory clustering and the establishment of an Affordable Housing Density Credit. These tools would apply to all lands lying with Southold's Prime Agricultural Soils Survey region. 8.14.2 Compliance with Town Goals This alternative presents a package of tools that, taken together, represent a method to achieve the Town's goals. 8.14.3 Impacts of the Alternative Generally, the impacts associated with this alternative are essentially similar to those described in the "Action." The primary difference is that the package of tools described in this alternative would apply to those areas of the Town where prime agricultural soils are present. As indicated in FigureB-11, Prime Agricultural Lands Map, the Town supports very large areas of prime agricultural soils, even in the hamlets. The expansion of the preservation and density reduction tools described, to the expanded area defined by prime agricultural soils, may create conflicts with the goals of strengthening the hamlets and providing for an expanded range of housing diversity. Furthermore, it will likely prove very difficult to actually delineate the precise Page 8-25 I I I I I I I I I I I II ! I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS boundary of the prime agricultural soils and translate that boundary into a mapped district. This represents a concern, and taken along with the possibility of affecting the opportunity to redirect growth into the hamlets, may translate into adverse impacts where mitigation may not be possible, when compared to the package of tools and techniques described in the "Action." 8. 15 Allow Regional Government/Utility To Establish Watershed Protection Zone 8.15.1 Description of Alternative This alternative calls for the establishment of a watershed protection zone by a government agency other than the Town of Southold, or by a private utility, such as the Suffolk County Water Authority. The purpose of designating a watershed protection zone is to regulate the use of land to assure that land use practices and the intensity of development do not result in adverse impacts to groundwater resources; thus assuring the protection of sufficient quality and quantity of groundwater for present and future use. In 2000, the Town of Southold adopted a Water Supply Management and Watershed Protection Strategy. This plan explored all possible strategies for protecting the Town's groundwater resources. The plan recommended a number of"Action Strategies", including: · Continuing land use preservation measures · Coordinate with water utility · Adopt a critical environmental lands ordinance · Adopt watershed protection zones · Create a conservation subdivision program · Permit non-contiguous clustering · Amend the Town's wetland law · Develop a mechanism for approving substandard lots · Improve public awareness and education Taken together, these action strategies provide a viable basis for protecting the Town's groundwater resource. Specific objectives ora watershed protection zone include: · Control or reduce development to limit nitrogen loading · Eliminate the construction of new sewage treatment plants in the Watershed Protection Zones · Restrict the storage and use of toxic and hazardous materials in the WPZ's · Maximize open space and reduce development density near public water supply sources · Protect wetlands and adjacent areas · Provide environmentally compatible stormwater recharge systems · Preserve existing vegetation, specimen trees and wooded edges wherever possible · Align contiguous areas of undeveloped open space and farmland through development design · Minimize areas established in fertilized dependent vegetation · With the exception of agricultural use, re-vegetate permanent buffer areas with plantings having a low fertilizer and irrigation dependency · Identify and protect species in communities of special concern Page 8-26 I ! ! I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS · Provide a mechanism for the management of open space and agricultural lands · Restrict commercial and industrial development to protect quality of groundwater recharge and rural character. This alternative calls for shifting the responsibility of protecting the Town's groundwater resource to another govermnental jurisdiction or to a utility, like the SCWA. Such a concept is worth evaluating for several reasons. First, groundwater is a resource that extends across arbitrary governmental jurisdictions. Therefore, protection of the resource cannot be effectively undertaken by individual communities. Groundwater protection is a regional issue requiring a regional approach.. On Long Island, ground water protection is perhaps one of the most significant regional issues facing the Island today. Several regional studies have focused on the issue of groundwater protection; including: · Areawide Waste Treatment Management Plan (208 Study), Long Island Regional Planning Board, 1978. · Special Groundwater Protection Area Plan, Long Island Regional Planning Board, 1992 · Peconic Estuary Program, USEPA, NYSDEC, 1999 · Suffolk County Comprehensive Water Resoume Management Plan, Suffolk County Department of Health Services, 1987 · North Fork Water Supply Plan, Suffolk County Department of Health Services, 1983 All of these county, regional, state and federal agencies have a legitimate role in protecting groundwater resources in Southold. The SCWA, a water utility, plays yet another important role in the groundwater protection picture through its role in providing potable water for the residents of the Town. This alternative suggests that these agencies should, in some form, be given control of upland land use practices and land use regulations; traditionally a role reserved for the Town. 8.15.2 Compliance with Town Goals The Town's land preservation goals may be supported by a regional agency administering a watershed protection zone within the Town. Presumably, such an agency, say the NYSDEC, would limit growth to prevent adverse groundwater impacts. Such an approach would serve to meet the Town's goals of preserving land, rural character and protecting the environment. On the other hand, if the SCWA were given the task of administering a local watershed protection zone, it is uncertain if the Authority's approach would necessarily be to limit development and new growth. The SCWA has a charter mandate to provide water service. The Authority's revenue stream is derived from water connections and customers. Therefore, more development represents a clear financial benefit to the Authority. Recognizing that the SCWA has a range of alternative sources by which it can provide water to the Town (other than by drilling wells into the groundwater aquifer beneath the Town), it can be concluded that the Authority is not limited by existing groundwater constraints. According to the SCWA, adequate Page 8-27 I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS groundwater resoumes exist within Southold, to serve full build-out and saturation population. It is clear that limiting development is not a necessary, or even a preferable approach for the SCWA. Therefore, if the SCWA were to control the land use practices within watershed protection zones, the Town's preservation and protection goals would not be assured, and would likely be compromised. 8.15.3 Impacts of the Alternative This alternative presents a shift of responsibility for administering watershed protection zones from the Town to another governmental agency of the SCWA. The discussion of impacts does not address the concept of a watershed protection zone itself, but rather the difference between Town administration compared to other agency administration. The difference in government administration between the Town and any other government agency, with respect to natural resources, the environment, etc. is not particularly significant. Each agency has its own particular mission and mandate, and obviously its own perspective on approaching the protection of groundwater resoumes. However, all are essentially charged with protecting the resource. Obviously, the Town is by far the best able to review, govern and control growth within its boundaries. The Town's tradition of home rule reinforces this approach. Generally, abdicating local land use control to regional or state entities represents a less effective method of dealing with local land use decisions. Generally, unless an overriding regional interest is at stake, which is beyond the capability of local government to control, then the local government should retain its traditional role in local land use decision-making. Ideally, the Town should work in cooperation with the water authority and the Health Department to prevent land use practices that would harm the groundwater resource. The substantial variation between a government agency and the water authority regulating the resource, represents a distinct potential impact. As noted earlier, government agency control is based on resource protection. While approaches may differ, fundamental missions are similar. The SCWA, on the other hand, is not strictly limited by a mandate to protect the resoume. Rather, the water authority is required to provide water service to its customer base, and to be financially viable. Therefore, increasing the number of customers is viewed as a positive prospect, and one that runs counter to the Town's resource protection and community character goals. This represents a potentially significant adverse impact. Page 8-28 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SECTION 9.0 REFERENCES Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Town of Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 9.0 REFERENCES American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), A Policy on the Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 1994, Washington, D.C. American Planning Association, A Glossary of Zoning, Development and Planning Terms, PAS Report Number 491/492, 1999 Andrle, R.E. and J.R. Carroll, 1988. The Atlas of Breeding Birds in New York State. Comell University Press, Ithaca, NY. Behler, J.L. and F.W. King, 1979. The Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Reptiles and Amphibians. Alfred Knopf, N.Y. Bent, A. C., 1946. Life Histories of North American Jays, Crows, and Titmice. Publications, New York. Bent, A. C., 1953. Life Histories of North American Wood Warblers, Parts I & II. Publications, New York. Bent, A. C., 1961. New York. Bent, A. C., 1963. New York. Dover Dover Life Histories of North American Birds of Prey, Part I. Dover Publications, Life Histories of North American Gallinaceous Birds. Dover Publications, Bent, A. C., 1964. Life Histories of North American Flycatchers Larks, Swallows, and their Allies. Dover Publications, New York. Bent, A. C., 1964. Life Histories of North American Nuthatches, Wrens, Thrashers, and their Allies. Dover Publications, New York. Bent, A. C., 1964. Life Histories of North American Woodpeckers. Dover Publications, New York. Bent, A. C., 1964. Life Histories of North American Cuckoos, Goatsuckers, Hummingbirds and their Allies, Parts I & II. Dover Publications, New York. Bent, A. C., 1965. Life Histories of North American Wagtails, Shrikes, Vireos, and their Allies. Dover Publications, New York. Bent, A. C., 1965. Life Histories of North American Blackbirds, Orioles, Tanagers and Allies. Dover Publications, New York. Page 9-1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Town of Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS Bent, A. C., 1968. Life Histories of North American Cardinals, Grosbeaks, Buntings, Towhees, Finches, Sparrows and Allies, Parts I, II & III. Dover Publications, New York. Bishop, S.C., 1943. Ambysoma ~rinum tigrinum. New York State Museum Bulletin No. 3(24) p. 155-173. Bull, J. and Farrand, J., 1977, The Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Birds, New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. Burchell, R. W., D. Listokin, and W. R. Dolphin, 1985. The New Practitioners Guide to Fiscal Impact Analysis. Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, N.J. Burt, William H. and Grossenheider, Richard P., 1976, A Field Guide to the Mammals of America North of Mexico~ Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. Chapman, J.A. and G.A. Feldhamer, 1982, Wild Mammals of North America: Biology, Management, Economics. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland. Cohen, Philip, O.L. Frank, and B. L. Foxworthy, 1968. An Atlas of Long Island Water Resources, New York Water Resources Commission Bulletin 62, USGS in cooperation with the New York State Water Resources Commission, Published by the State of New York. Conant, R. and J.T. Collins. 1991. A Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphibians of Eastern and Central North America. Peterson Field Guide Series, Number 12. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, Ma. Connor, Paul F., 1971, The Mammals of Long Island, New York, Albany, New York: New York State Museum & Science Service. Council On Environmental Quality (CEQ), undated. Natural Habitats of Suffolk County, Hauppauge, New York. Crandell, H. C., 1963, Geology and Ground-Water Resources of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, Geological Survey Water Supply Paper 1619-GG, United States Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. Cryan, John F. 1984. Tiger Salamander Report. Town ofBrookhaven, Medford, N.Y. Dofiski, T.P., 1986. Potentiometric Surface of the Water Table, Magoth¥ and Lloyd Aquifers on Long Island, New York, in 1984. Water Resources Investigation Report 86-4189. USGS, Washington D.C. Dvirka & Bartilucci, Correspondence between Ken Wenz of D&B and Steve McGinn of NPV re: Groundwater Quality Results for Southold landfill, April 10, 2001 Page 9-2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Town of Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Egerton, Robert E., Jr., The Effects of Agricultural Zoning on the Value of Farmland. Resource Management Consultants, Inc. February 22, 1991. EPA, undated, National Estuary Program, http://www.epa.gov/owow/estuaries/about 1 .htm Farrand, John, 1997, National Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Birds, Eastern Region, Alfred A. Knopf, New York. Final Report: A Study of The Economic Impact of Land Use Regulations on the Business of Farming in Maryland. Prepared for The Maryland Farm Bureau, Inc. by Legg Mason Realty Group, Inc. January 1993 Forbush, E.H. 1912, The History of the Game Birds, Wildfowl, and Shore Birds of Massachusetts and Adiacent States. Wright and Potter Printing, Massachusetts. Freeze, Allan R. and Cherry, John A., 1979. Groundwater, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. Fuller, Myron L., 1914. The Geology of Long Island, Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Professional Paper 82, Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. Godin, Alfred J., 1977, Wild Mammals of New England. The Globe Pequot Press, Chester, Connecticut. Godin, Alfred J., 1983, Wild Mammals of New England. The Globe Pequot Press, Chester, Connecticut. Heath, Ralph, C., 1998, Basic Ground-Water Hydrology, U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2220. Hughes, Henry B.F.; Pacenka, Steve; Snowdon, Elizabeth, 1985. Thornthwaite and Mather's Climatic Water Budget Method: An Implementation using the Lotus 1-2-3 (TM) Spreadsheet Program, Draft, April 1985, Comell University, Center for Environmental Research, Ithaca, New York. Hughes, Henry B.F.; and Porter, K., 1983, Land Use and Groundwater Quality in the Pine Barrens of Southampton, Comell University, Water Resources Program, Center for Environmental Research, Ithaca, New York. Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) 1994, Trip Generation, 6th Edition, Washington D.C. ITE Technical Council Committee 6A-32. Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1997, Highway Capacity Manual. Washington D.C. ITE Technical Council Committee 6A-32. Page 9-3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Town of Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Jenson, H.M. and Julian Soren, 1974, Hydrogeolog¥ of Suffolk Count,/, Long Island, New York, Hydrologic Investigations Atlas, Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, DC. Kassner, et al, The Trees of Southold_, 2000 Koppelman, Lee., 1978. 208 Arcawide Waste Treatment Management, Hauppauge, New York: Nassau-Suffolk Regional Planning Board. Koppelman, Lee., 1982. Long Island Segment of the Nationwide Urban Runoff Program, Hauppaug¢, New York: Nassau- Suffolk Regional Planning Board. Koppelman, ct al, 1992. The Long Island Comprehensive Special Groundwater Protection Area Plan, Hauppaugc, New York, LIRPB Koszalka, E.J., 1983, Geohydrolog¥ of thc Northern Part of the Town of Brookhaven, Suffolk County, New York: U.S. Geologic Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 83- 4042. Kmlikas, R.K. and E.J. Koszalka, 1983. Geologic Reconnaissance of an Extensive Clay Unit in North-Central Suffolk County, Long Island, N.Y.U.S. Geologic Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 83-4075. USGS, Syosset, N.Y. Leahy, C., 1982, The Birdwatchcr's Companion, Gramercy Books, New York, New York. LILCO, 1997, Long Island Population Survey, 1997, Long Island Lighting Co., Hicksville, New York. LIRR, Alice, King, Rosen & Fleming, Long Island Rail Road East End Transportation Stud,/, 2000 Long Island Business News (LIBN), 1997 Long Island Almanac, Thirtieth Edition, Annual Supplement of the Long Island Business News, Ronkonkoma, New York. Long Island Business News (LIBN), 1998 Long Island Almanac, Thirty First Edition, Annual Supplement of the Long Island Business News, Ronkonkoma, New York. Long Island Power Authority, Long Island Population Survey, 2003 Long Island Regional Planning Board, 1984. Non-point Source Management Handbook. LIRPB, Hauppauge, New York. McClymonds and Franke, 1972, Water-Transmitting Properties of Aquifers on Long Island, New York, Geological Survey Professional Paper 627-E, United States Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. Page 9-4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Town of Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS Nagle, Constance M., 1975, Climatology of Brook_haven National Laboratory: 1949 through 1973. Brookhaven National Laboratory and Associated Universities, inc., Upton, New York. Nassau/Suffolk Transportation Improvement Program, New York Metropolitan Coordinating Committee, 2002 New York State, 1987, (revised January 1996) State Environmental Quality Review, 6 NYCRR Part 617, Environmental Conservation Law Sections 3-0301(1)(b), 3-0301(2)(m) and 8-0113, Albany, NY New York State Department of State, 2001, Long Island South Shore Estuary Reserve Comprehensive Management Plan, Albany, New York. North Fork Recreational Travel Needs Assessment, 2002 NYSDEC (New York State Department of Environmental Conservation), 1975, NYS Environment Conservation Law, New York. NYSDEC (New York State Department of Environmental Conservation), 1986. Long Island Groundwater Management Program. NYSDEC Division of Water. NYSDEC, 1987, Well Permit Data Base, list of Suffolk County Well permits, NYSDEC, SUNY ~ Stony Brook, New York. NYSDEC, 2001, Threatened and Special Concern Species of New York State, NYS DEC Endangered Species Unit, Delmar, N.Y. NYSDEC, Undated, Water Quality Regulations -Surface Water and Groundwater Classifications and Standards, New York State Codes, Rules, and Regulations, Title 6, Chapter X, Parts 700- 705, Section 703.5 Classes and Quality Standards for Groundwater, NYSDEC, Albany, New York. NYSDOT, Traffic Volume Report, Highway Data Services Bureau, 1999 NYSDOT, Traffic Volume Report, Highway Data Services Bureau, 2001 Obst, F.J. Turtles, Tortoises and Terrapins. Saint Martins's Press, NY. Peterson, David S., 1987, Ground-water-recharge Rates in Nassau and Suffolk Counties, New York, Syosset, New York: U.S. Geological Survey, WRI Report 86-4181. Ran, John G., Wooten, David C., 1980, Environmental Impact Analysis Handbook, McGraw- Hill, Inc. Page 9-5 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Town of Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS Reschke C., 1990, Ecological Communities of New York State, New York Natural Heritage Program, Latham, New York. Report to the Valleys Planning Council of the Trading Value of RC-2 Zoned Land Compared with RC-4 Zoned Land in Northern Baltimore County. Applied Data Resources, Inc. 1996. RPPW, Town of Southold Master Plan Update, 1984 Salvato, Joseph, 1982, Environmental Engineering and Sanitation, 3rd Edition, A Wiley- Interscience Publication, New York. SCDHS (Suffolk County Department of Health Services), 1984, Standards for Subsurface Sewage Disposal Systems for Other Than Single-Family Residences, Revised March 5, 1984, Established pursuant to Article VB, Section 2c of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code, Division of Environmental Quality, Hauppauge, New York. SCDHS, 1985-1, Suffolk County Sanitary Code-Article 7 Groundwater Management Zones & Water Supply Sensitive Areas, Map: Scale 1"=2 miles, Hauppauge, New York. SCDHS, 1985-2, Suffolk County Sanitary Code-Article 7 Water Pollution Control, May, 1985, Code of Administrative Regulations, Hauppauge, New York. SCDHS, 1987, Suffolk County Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan, Hauppauge, New York SCDHS, 1987-1, Suffolk County Sanitary Code-Article 6 Realty Subdivisions, Development and Other Construction Proiects, Amended March 4, 1987, Code of Administrative Regulations, Hauppauge, New York. SCDHS, 1987-2, Suffolk County Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan Volume 1, Division of Environmental Health, SCDHS; Dvirka and Bartilucci; and Malcolm Pimie, Inc., Hauppauge, New York. SCDHS, 1997, Contour Map of the Water Table and Location of Observation Wells in Suffolk County, New York, 1997, Division of Environmental Health Services, Hauppauge, New York. SCDHS, 1998, Data Base, Well Network Database for Suffolk County Well Data, 225 Rabro Drive, Hauppauge, New York. Hanppauge, New York. SCDPW, Traffic Volume Data, Traffic Division, 2003. SC Department of Planning, Shopping Centers and Central Business Districts, 2001. Page 9-6 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Town of Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS SC Planning Commission, Retail Commercial Development, Suffolk County, New York, February 5, 1997. SCWA, 2000, Distribution Maps 2000, Oakdale, New York. Shubcrt, 1998, Ground-Water Flow Paths and Traveltime to Three Small Embayments within the Peconic Estuary, Eastern Suffolk County, New York, U.S. Geological Survey Water- Resoumes Investigations Report 98-4181, Coram, New York Sirkin, L., 1995, Eastern Long Island Geology with Field Trips, Book and Tackle Shop, Watch Hill, Rhode Island. Smolensky, D.A., H.T. Buxton and P.K. Shemoff, 1989, Hydrologic Framework of Long Island, New York, Hydrologic Investigation Atlas, Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C. Spinello, A.G., J.H. Makao, and R.B. Winowitch, 1992, Water Resources Data, New York Water Year 1991, Volume 2. Long Island, United States Geological Survey Water Data Report NY~ 89-2, Syosset, New York. Surer, Russel, M.A. deLaguna and Perlmutter, 1949, Mapping of Geologic Formations and Aquifers of Long Island, New York Bulletin GW-18, State of New York Department of Conservation, Water Power and Control Commission, Albany, New York. Town of Southold, Geographic Information System database, 2003 Town of Southold, LWRP (Draft), 1999 Town of Southold, Farmland Protection Strategy, 1999 Trautmann, Porter and Hughes, 1983, Southold Demonstration Site, New York State Fertilizer and Pesticide Demonstration Project Report, Center for Environmental Research, Ithaca, New York. Treweck, Joanna, 1999, Ecological Impact Assessment, Blackwell Science, UK. U.S. Department of Navy, 1979. Solid Waste Disposal; Civil Engineering Design Manual, Dept. of Navy, Washington, D.C. U.S. Geological Survey, 1981, Bellport Quadrangle Suffolk County, NY Topographic Map 7.5 Minute Series, Photo-revised 1991, USGS Dept. of the Interior/NYS Dept. of Transportation, Denver, Colorado/Weston, Virginia. Warner, J.W., W.E. Hanna, R.J. Landry, J.P. Wulforst, J.A. Neeley, R.L. Holmes, C.E. Rice., 1975, Soil Survey of Suffolk County, New York, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Page 9-7 I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I Town of Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, in cooperation with Comell Agriculture Experiment Station, U.S. Government Printing Office. Whitaker, J.O. 1996. National Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Mammals. Alfred A. Knopf, N.Y., N.Y. Wright, A.H. and A.A. Wright, 1949. Handbook of Frogs & Toads. Comstock Pub. Assoc., Ithaca, NY. Wright, A.H., and A.A. Wright, 1957. Handbook of Snakes V. 1. Comstock Pub. Assoc., Ithaca, NY. Page 9-8 I I I I I I I I I i I I t I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS APPENDICES I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I ! APPENDIX A Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS SEQRA-RELATED DOCUMENTS I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I ! I Sout~hold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Appendix A-1 Prior Plans, Key Goals and Implementation Tools I I I i I I I I i I I I I I i I I I PRIOR PLAA'S, KEy GOALS AND IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS · Acquire additional parklands and sign/fie, ant open spaces (utilize alternative acquisition tools). · Conform park district and school district , * Conform park district and school district boundaries. boundaries. · Acquire additional parklands and * Acquire additional parklands and significant · Develop a town-wide park and beach pass. Parks, Recreation & Open * l~velop a town-wide park and beach pass. significant open spaces (utilize open spaces (utilize alternative acquisition * The Town should administer properties of town-wide Space Survey (1982) · The Town should admin/star properties o f town. alternative acqnisition tools), tools), signillennce, not the lceal park dish-iets. wide sigeificance, not the looal park districts. * Create a Department o f Parks & Recreatiun · Create a Deparirnent of Parks & Recreation · Create a centralized, year-round recreation * Create a centralized, year-round recreation cen~plcx complex · Rselrlet development in wetlands, tidal * Encourage hunsing development, ofvarying types and marshes, bluffs, dunes and beaches, densities, in and around existing hamlets. · Promote a development paltem that is * Implemantplsnnlngpoliciaswhiehprovideforanumberof responsive to sensitive areas exhibiting prime housing types, encourage watcr-depandunt and water- agricultural mils, poor drainage, high water enhanced uses of coastal lands, and support mreial and table, high erosion Mzzad, flood hazard, industrial activities in appropriate locations. sensitive coastal features, great scenic quality * Using available assistance programs as well as land uae, end xvoodlands, regulatory techniques and procedures to provide such · Protect the Town's water supply from further assistance as may be needed to provide affordable housing, ] ceniamination by ancouraging the nsc o f cspealally to younger lind ulder se grsents o f tha oommunity [ techniques that reduce pollution from and to allow retired or moderate income homeowners to fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides maintain their propeaies. · Limit non-agricultural uses in designated prime · Promote the inventorying of (agricultural and residential), requiring * Maintain the integrity o f residential neighborhoods by agriceltaral areas thrungh methods such as cultural resources and encourage ' adequate water supply and septic system preventing through traffic movement and by discouraging agricultural zoning and easemants, the establishment of Town historic conditions for new development, and uses that are incompatible with a residential environmunt. * Encourage the use · Promote a Town agricultural preservation dim/ets and preservatiun of employing minimal maintenance dredging of * Encourage diversification of agricultural crops and the and/or development Master Plan Update, program, incorporating purchase of development historic buildings and sites, streams (to minimize salt water intrusion), marketing of Southald as a prirr~ location for climate of public BaekgroundStudies rights, publicinformatiunmtiningundfinaneial · Planforintensityandmixof · Promete development patterns thnt are at a sensitiveformsofagricultur~, tnmspostation. (March, 1984) assistance programs to enable farmers to diversify development of hamlet centers i scale that is corraxl~nsurate with the available * Strength~m the Town's important commercial fishing and * Encourage roadway into mor~ profitable crops, that improve the viability, water supply, agriculture industries, and intersection · Implement plann~n g policies which promote functioning and aesthetics of · Mainlain and improve surface water quality · Promote vacation and seasonal uses with respect for the improvements that agricultural preservation, hamlet commercial centers by reducing sources of pollution and utilizing Town's yenr-round needs, environmental features and rural will improve the tlow · Implement planning policies which encourage the without changing the sc. ale of the modern runoffcontmI techniques to reduce heritage, ofiraffic and promote preservatiun of envirunmentally sensitive areas, centers, s~ream siltation. · Improve the Town's existing commarcial areas bnt do not safety. · Maintain fmfishing and shellfishing habitats encourage large-scale expansion of current development. by seducing sources o f polintiun and by · Encoorage the developrnent o f further public and private limiting dredtgng of streams and disturbance maricultuse acilvities in the waters adjacent to the Town. of watlands. · Encourage the development o f laud based support facilities · Promote water-dependent and wa~er-mlated for the Town's fishing industry. ~ usee in waterfront areas which are not · Provide opportunities to aceonanodute office and research development, light industry and industries related to other · Protect the quality o f coastal waters, elemente of the economy. · Increasethenumberandqunlityofpublic * Limitsiripcommerciularensandencouragetheconcentrstiun beaches, o f ccrmnereial uses in existing shopping areas. · Pmlllotecorrmsereialandrecreationalfishing · Improve, maintsin and expand where approprinte to and boating opportunities where there are no ace. orrnllodate present and future development of the water ~ conflicts with existing residential supply, sanitary sewer, storm cl~i.~ ~ and solid waste I I Prior Plans and Studies L~dP~erVa~n PRIOR PLANS, KEY GOALS AND IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS ult~rnl Charae~r Trm~p~'~nt~n I I I I I I I ! I I I I I i I I I Master Plan Update, Summary (April, 1985) Preserve Southold's prime farmland and encourage the continuation and diversification of aghcultme as an important element in the life and economy of the Town. · Preserve the historic, cultural, architectural and arehaeologicel reseurces of the Town. hamlets as cultural, residential and eomn'~reial centers of activity in · the Town; as a means of contributhig to the preservation of historic bu/ldings and areas and g g sense ofplase. development or sensitive natural l~atures. · Promote manatenance o f existing navigeble waterways. · Implement planning policies which encourage the preservation of environmentally sensitive areas, and protect · Protect environmentally sensitive coastal m, maxlmi~e public access to the waterfront and achieve econcalic benefits from water-enhanced and water-dependant activities, particularly well plamaed seasomd and commercial activities in apprepHete locations. Preserve and enhance the Town's uatt~al environment including waterways, wetlands, tidal nmrshes, woodlands, bluffs, dtmes and beaches. Maintain and protect Sou~hold's agricultural heritage and pastoral and open qmthties. Ensure that there is an adequate quantity of high quality ground water to serve Southold's present and projected year-round and seasonal populations. Promote a development pattern that is responsive to sensitive areas exhibiting prime agrienltmal softs, poor drainage, high water table, high erosion hazard, flood hazard, sensitive coastal features, great sceule quality and xvoodlands. Msi~tein and improve surface water qualit3t Maintain and protect fmfishing and shellfi~bln~ habitats. disposal systems in order to support the desired level of development and to maintain and protect a healthfal living enm..ranment, a viable eeonom/c base and the natural iProvide an open space and recreation system adequate/n size and location to serve the total (seasuaal and year-round) population. Assure availabil/ty of and/or eccess to a full range of modem health services, including emergency services, for all citizens. Provide a full speemma of aeceseible edueatianal facilities and servwes to meet the needs of all segments of the commmaity hi the most efficient and effective rn~nn~r. Pro~ote the provision and a'eailabilit y of necessary social servaces, including appropriate neighborhood, senior citizen, and day care facilities. Provide a full range of public safety services (police, fire, ambulance, rescue, etc.) necessary to creme an environment of persenal security and pmtectian of property. · Preserve the exist/~g housing stock and provide the opportunity for the development of a variety ofhonsing types to .meet .the needs of people at various stages of the life cycle, vsnons raceme and age levels and household cempositians. Strengthen and diversify the Town's economic base as a means of stabilizing and expanding the tax base and year- round and seasonal employment opportanifiee. Ensure the provision of an adequate range of eommumty fecilitias and services to ac~,~,~odata existing and thrum Town needs in a ecnveulant and cost effective manner. Maintain and m'[OrOve existing utility systems and determine where it is approta/ate to expand water supply, sanitary sewer, storm drainage and solid waste disposal systems in order to suppest the desired level &development andre maintain and protect a healthful living environment, a viable economic base and the natural environment. Provide an open space and roereatian system adequate in size and location to accommodate a range o~f facilities to serve the total (seasonal and year-round) population. Provide a commnnlty of sesidential hamlets that are comprised of a variety of housing oppommitias, em-mr~rcial, sermce, and cultural activities, set in an open or nmal atmosphere and supported by a diversified ecenomie base (including ageienlmre, marine commercial and seasonal recreation activities). Maximi?e the Towll's natllral assets, including its coastal · Ensure efficient movement of people and goods within Southold, as well as into and out of'Town, in a R'~maer that maximizes safety and ma/nm/ns the scale and integhty of residential and Page 2 I I I PRIOR PLA/~'S, KEY GOALS AND IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS location and agricultural base and achieve compatibility between the natural environment and development. * Achieve a land uso pattern that is sensitive to the limited indigenous water supply end will not degrade thc subsurface water quality. · Concentrate development within hamlets. · Provide a diversity o f quality affurdablc housing, concentrated in hamlets. · Economic development should be based on the existing · Concentrate developrr~nt within resourues of the urea. · Preserve farmland, hamlets. ! · Create a TDPJPDR program. · Create a TDR, PDR program. * Preserve existing historic and rural , · Devulop a Capital Improvement Program that targets water & US/UKCountryside · Create tax abaterr~nts for fatanland, character ~ * Maintain&hmprovetheenvirunmental sewerimprovemants forbamlets. Stewardship Exchange · Create an economic plan that promotes · Create an economic plan that quality of the area. * Create an economic plan that promotes sustainable Team (1991) sustainshla dev¢loprmnt using exisIing promotes sust ainshl¢ de ve loprrent · Eliminate pofiution in ureeks & bays. developmant using existing agricultural, water-related agricultural, water, related recr~tion, fishing, using existing agricultural, water- * Eliminate brown tide in Peconic Bay. recreation, fishing, historical and cultural assets. Tourism is historical and euliural assets. Tourismis central, related recreation, fishing, central. historical end cultural assets. * Streamline government & establish a new planning process Tourism is central based on consensus of shared visian. ~ · Create a coalit/an ofconanunity groups to address I community issues and achieve vision. · Encourage community stewardship. · Create a visual map of the shared vision. · Suffolk Coanty and the Town of Sonthuld should continue to · Suffolk County and the Town et' purchase farmlend development righta and to ancanmge and Southold should continue to facilitate other programs and maasures to protect farmland, · Suffolk County and the Town of Sonthold should purchase farmland developmant such as renewal of Agricultural Dis~ict agreements and the continue to purchase farmland development rights rights and to encourage and establishment of agrieultaral reserves. end to encourage and fneilitate nthur programs facilitate other programs and * Suffolk County should continue to support the Comell Cooperative Extension Service's efforts to inlrodnee and to and rmasmes to protect farmland, such as renewal measures to protect farmland, such SpecialGroundwater of Ageienltaral District agreemante and the nsrene~valofAgrienliuralDistfict · Suffolk Connty should continue to support secureadoptianofbestmanagemantpracticesforageiculture. Protection Area Plan (1992) establishment ofageicultural resetw-es, agreements e~d the establishment thc Comall Cooperative Extension Service's · The Town of Southold should upgane farmland to require a · Suffolk County should continue to support the of agricultural reserves, efforts to introduce and to secure adoption of five-nero minimum 1ct siz~ but should provide for the transfer Comell Cooperative Extension Service efforts to * The Town of Southold should best management praetlues for agriculture, ofdevolopmant rights to sites outside the SGPA at the introduce and to secure adoption of beat upzone farmland to requite a five- currently prevailing two-asace density. nero minimam lct size bnt should * The transfer of devalopmant right s to sites in nenrby hasnlcts management practices for agriculture, provide fur the lransfer of i ur along the Sound shorefrent, where undeveloped acreage is development rights to sites outside I ax,ailshle, should be permittad in order to offset the impact of the SGPA at the currently I verylowdensityZonm[ Suffolk Coantyshouldutflize funds from its quarter~ent sales tax program to acquire wooded prevailing two-aero density, watershed lends within the Southuld SGPA. I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I P~e 3 I I PRIOR PLANS, KEY GOALS AND IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS C~al Character Env~,,'"~ SO e~'Reem mi· Ea',~a.ment Trlmapert~ n Prior Plans and Studies I · Adopt a policy statsment on the geals (~ f Town housing prograras. · Review housing policies every 2-5 years. · Continue and expand financial assistance programs. Town Affordable Housing I · Irrvprove availabilit y o f acc· ss ory apam~ent s. · Review AHD and ability to racet affordable hoasing gouls Polieies and Program I ! rather than m0demte-inceme housing. (1993) · Improve distribution o f affordable housing in the Town. · Provide incentives for developers to create affordable rental units, and renovate existing large homes into affordable, year-round rental units. · Continue direct actioa effarts and anueurage private initiatives. · Preserve & protect wetlands, watersheds, aquifers, shorelines, habitats and species · Improve safety of diversity. * Strengthen year-round population, roadways, · Encourage owners of undeveloped · Direct growth in an environmentally · Attract new businesses, particularly due to FisherslsinndCd-owthPlan * Encourage owners ofundeveloped land to land to explore land preservation ! sensitive manner. · Disueuragctourisra seasonallraffi¢. (1987-1994) explore land preservation techniques, techniques. * Prepare an emergency plan for contamination · Study the island's infraslmctaral needs. · Discourage ferry , · Support the Fishers Island School. of ground and surface water. · Year round population should be self-sufficient, district ~om · Prepare a drought management plan. ,, Slow the growth of the summer population, accorranodating · Direct growth in an environmentally tourism & seasonal [ sensitive manner ! i I I i I I I I I I I I I I I P~e~ I I I I I I ! I ! I I I I I I i I I I PRIOR PLANS~ KEy GOALS AND IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS Prior Plans tnd Studies · Preserve farmland & open space. · Limitdansity',adoptSaemzoninginSGPA.; · Preserve farmland & spen space. I cembins with rmmdatory clustering. · Encovxage conservation & scenic I · Support mar/nas & mmine economy. · Support Cn~enport ae a Maritirr~ Canter. · Fundpureheseoffarmlandd~velopmentrights anserrente I * AccommodateB&B'sandCounlrylnns (PDR) through now bonding. * Designate sceine conSdors. · Fortrmlate a lis~ of priority pumhe~ areas, · Change business zones on Route I · Acoorm'nodate home occupations. · Repeal AHD zones primerily in the SPGA, adjacent to other 48 to A.C. I preserved isnde and along the Main Road, · Reduce and consolidato industrialI * Supportmhabilitationofexiatinghousingatook. Develop effeative · Resell developrmnt righte to other holding zones on Mnin Road west of · Froteats~rface&groandwaterresourees. · Faeilitateeranfionofaecessuryhousinganits. · mass~ransit ageneies(Conmy, TNCntc). C~reenport. · Prohibit or limit density in SGPA's * Diversifyaffordabishousingstoek. · Create wansportafian 1994 Stewardship * Advance hans£er ofdeveinpmunt fights (TDR) · Review boundary of liD zone in · Adopt 5 acre zoning with mandatory · Eucouroge ~aditional conm~ereia! development in hamlet hubs (Mattock, Task Force (1994) program. C~reenport. ~ clustering in SGPA's. centers. · Create Developrnant Rights Bank · CranteLandmarkPre~ervation * LmplementBMP's · Diseouragepeorlydesignedmulti-tenaneyeommerei~_lstores Southold, C, reenport). · Encourage wineries. Commission & develop incentives · Develop a water supply master plan. (strip shopping centers). · Create ped,eatfian · Create reserve open space through clustering to preserve inatorie reseurees. · Restrict public water fanilitiss to ham/ets * Limit fast-food establisfumnte to HB zone. waikways. subdivisions. · Revise sign ordinance to improve · Adopt a PUD ordinance. · Develop trails & · Encourage conservafian & scenic easements visual character. · Change business zones on Route 48 to A-C. bikeways. · Designate ~cenic corridors. · Develop illumination mnderds to * Reduce and conselidate indnsh~ial zones on Main Road west · Improve public water front acoese, avert light pellufion, o f C, reanport Village. · Develop new ree~ational facilities including a · Create Arehheetural Review · Review boundary off-ID zone in Greonp~. golf course, indoor swimming pool, tennis courts, Board or Committee ; * Support agrieultera! induah'y. ice~k'~i-grink&eulturalcenter · Developdeeignruanual. * Suppertagfiualmralreseereh. · Can~utmt~ future eeonom/c * Concentrate furore ecenomie development in and around · Ensure that Route 48 rem~in~ a by-pass with development in and around · Ense,,'e that Route 48 remains a by-pass with existing ham!et centers. · Ensure a smooth Seaview Trails of the North vista of farm fields 8: open space, exisling hamlet centers vistas of farm fields & open space. * Create an altemete ~ravel route for pedestrians & bicyclists traffic flow between Fork (1~)5') · Link ttnil to other exis~g & proposed open space · Ensure that Route 48 remains a · Promote non-vahieular and creative from Ma~la~ek to Or/ant Point. hamlets to promote a and reereatioual site and facilities, by~pass with vistas o£ farm fields trmspo~a~ion · Ensure a smcoth ttaffic flow batwean hamlets to promote a vigowus bnsinese & open space, vi~oroua bu~ne~ an~o~ent, envirom~t. · Utilize GIS to identify lands to be protected witl~ Pcoonie Bay watershed. · Support identification of additional lands, not i~ Peeonie Eatuary Program already on the CPF lish that warrant eatum'ine & · Utflizo sustainable development &] · Suppo~ overall efforts to address problems (199~) wntershed protection, smart growth tools to assure aszoeiated with Brown Tide, nntr/ents, · Utflizo susmiuable development & smml growth teuls to · Coordinate Peconin estuary land preservation development is properly located, habitat & liv/ng reseurces, pathogens and assure development is properly located. effo~s with SOPA land pmservat/an efforts, toxice in Peconie Bay. · Utilize sustainable development & smart growth toole to assare development is properly located. · Encourage existhag lcoal businesses in targeted indns~es. * Recognizes Town- Eoonomie Development . Recognizes land usu conflicts between residential * Reuse existing buildings inste~ · Encourage new businesses in targeted indns~es to locate in wide h'ansportation Pla~, use and fanning, of new construedon, the Town to broaden tex base. plan in conneatian Town of Southoid (19~7) , · Expansion of recreational uses should not degrade · Encoarage economic growth and · Develop lodging and dialog faeilitiss to attrae~ tourists for with NYSDOT. nahral environment, expansion in hemlets, longer periods. · Recognizos need for I · Develop facilities for business conferense n'~.rket, private ~ranspor/atinn . · Assure adequate, affordable, health care facilities for seniors services. Page 5 I I PRIOR PLANS~ KEY GOALS AND iMPLEMENTATION TOOLS ~1 Ch~aeter I Envlr~-t · Reuse existing buildings instead of new construction. i * Encourage economic growth and expansion in hamlets. · Conserve agricslturel industry · Consolidate capital improvements within geographically manageable boundaries. · Target industries/businesses in need of incentives. · General usas/faeilhie$ in naed of incentives are agriculture, maritime, tourism, affordable health care and recreation. · Preserve the open vistas of fanus, wetlands and manne · Develop Agricultural Protection Strategy waters borderad by discreet i · Develop Water Supply Strategy. · Preserve the open vistas of farms, wetlands and marine waters Southold Township: bordered by discreet clusters o f development. * Improve Plau~ing Initiatives 2000(1997) · mannePreserVewatemthe openborderedvistaSbyOf discreetfarms' weflandSelusters andof · Rnh~uce & focus development i · Preserve the open vistaS of farms, wetlands transportation development, in core hamlet b..in~as centsrs, and marine waters bordered by discreet · Protect the Town's traditional economic base. · Preserve the quality & I clusters of development. · ~nh~nco & foctm development in core hamlet business centers, services & manage [ · PreserVe the quality & tranquility of residential neighborhoods, traffic congestion. tmuquility neighborhoods. Increase in amount of praserved/proteated land will reduce aexeage available for inappropriately development, thereby Iucxease in amount of increasing tendency for such dsvelopment to be located in Inca:eased amount of Increase la amount o f preserved/protected farmland preserved/protected land will rsduce Increase in amount o f preserved/protected land appropriate areaS, such as hamlets, preserved/protected land ' will reduce trip Community Preseevation will reduce pressure for inappropriate development pressure for inappropriate will reduce pressure for inappropriate Project Plan (July, 1998) m such areas, and simultaneously protect the development in such areas, and development in such areas, and simultaneously Increased amount of preserved/protected land will reduce need generation and associated traffic/mpucts in such business of agriculture in the Town. siranltaneously protect the nmal protect the natural environment of the Town. for infrastructttre extensions and/or maintenance, areas, thereby reducing charaater and aesthetics of the Town. Increase in amount ofpreserved/proteated land will reduce cost and need for road potential growth throughant Town, as well as reduce pressures tmprovemente. for non-agrianltumi development in such areas. · Rezone parcels to more appropriate uses. · Continue enforcement of the Town Code with respect to the · Medify the Town Code · Promote incentive zoning as a i type of products pern~t~ed te be seld at ferm stands, to limit curb cuts to one ~ · Continue enforcement of the Town Code with respect to the per site unless unusual means to preserve agricultural and I eonveraion of agricultural buildings to other conmaeralal uses. circumstances exist. · Rezone parcels to more appropriate uses. other desirable pm-eels, and as a I · Require links between mitigation for change of use where · An~nd the Town Code with respect to the Residence Office · Promote incentive zoning as a means to preserve appropriate. (RO) District. the parking areas of County Route 48 Corridor, agrieultaral and other desirable parcels, and as a commercial operations Land Use Study (April, mitigation for change of use where appropriate. · Require greater setbacks fi:om the · Preserve the integrity of the Town's · Amend the Town Cede with respect to the Limited Business 1999)· Modify the Town Cede to allow other uses in roadway for larger agricultural and vegetative habitats, including freshwater (LB) Dis~iet. movementt° allow forbetweenVehicle vineyards under special permit, commeroinl buildings, wetlands and woodlands. · Rezone appropriate parcels adjacent to Mathtuck Creek to MI adjacent · Rezone appropriate parcels adjacent to Mattituck · Orient buildings to limit theI · Madifythe Town Cede to allow other uses in vineyards under°r/°r MII zoning cstegery, establishments. Creek to MI and/or MH zoning category, interruption of sconi¢ vistas and [ · Require that subdivided views. ' special permit. · Continue enforcement of the Town · Reanne parcels to more appropriate uses. lots access side roads and not direatlyto CR Code with respect to the · Promete incentive zoning as a means to preserve agricultural 48, where appropriate. conversion of agricultural I and other desirable parcels, and as a mitigation for change of buildings to other exnumereialI use where appropriate. · Where appropriate, consider the use of flag I I i ! i I I I I I I i i I I I Page 6 I I [~RIOR PLAi~$~ KEY GOALS AND IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I uses. * The Town Code should be amended with respect to non- lots with cornmon · Cantinue enforcement of the Town conformthg uses. drives for residantial Code with respect to the typ~ of * Modify the Town Code to allow other uses in vineyards under development. products permitted to be sold at~ special permit. · Modify the Town Code farm stands. I to 1/mit curb cuts to one · Cluster residential development per site unless musual away from the roadway, circumstances exist. · Require vegetated buffers between · Rcqu/re links between residential development and the the parking areas of roadway, corranercinl operations · Develop and implement the use of to allow for vehicle visual resource best management movement between techniques, adjacent · Amend the Town Code with I establishments. respect to the Residence Office~ · Require that subdivided (RO) District. lots access side roads · Ar~nd the Town Code with and not directlyto CR respect to the Limited Business 48, where appropriate. (LB) District · The Town Code should be amended with respect to non* conforming uses. Modify the Town Co& to allow other nsos in vineyards und~ Sl~inl permit. Implementing recoturnsndafians will provide for raore efficient Implementing recomdations will pressrve/pratect and appropriate land use pattern resulting in more appropriately farmlands and farming, not only on acquired sites, located agriculture and related bnsiness~s to thrive, to the economic benefit ofptivate owners and the Town in general. but also in vicinity of acquired sites. Irr~plemeating recounnandations will preserve Implementing recommendations will preserve open farmlands, with resulting reduction in potential ln~lemanting recommendations will reduce potential growth in Implenmnting muenm~ndafions will space, with resulting reduction in potential impacts Implementing recorrar~ndations will impacts on natural environngnt from Town, particularly in farmland areas, which will reduce potential assecint~d with development, not only on acqinmd preserve farmlands, with resulting developnmnt, not only on acquired sites, but also need for infrastracture extensions and maintenance, reduce potential growth in Farm and Farmland sites, bat also in vicinity of acquired sites, reduction in potential impacts an in vicinity of acquired sites. Term, particularlyin Proteetinn Strategy, Final rural character and uesthstics of Implementing reconmtendetions will provide for stricter control farmland areas, which will (January, 2000) Reconm~cndations specific to this issue include: farmlands from developmant, not Recommendations specific to this issue include: of growth and development pattern more reflective of Town and reduce potential increase in traffic and associated · Identify critical farmland in need ofpratection, only on acquired sites, but also in · Encourage the use of/PM and community goals, particularly in farmland areas, which will impacts, with reduced · Reach out to owners of vulnsrable parcels, vicinity of acquired sit es. environn'~ntally friandly teclmique s to enahie mare appropriate and attractive farmland erans and protect groundwater, agrianltutal b~se. need for and cost of · Compile and malntain a listing ofknown lands for · Enconrageorgenlcfanning. roedwayimprovements. sale. · Provide easily aeuessible literature and resource s Rueomrrgndations Sl~Cific to this issue include: on preservation options. · Encourage farm support services and farm-related businesses to thrive. !e Leverage funds to the greatest extant possible. · Streamline the regelaturyprouess. Page 7 I I t Prior Pl~ns ~n4 Sredles [ PRIOR PLANS, KEY GOALS A.'q) IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I · In vestigate creating a Town Agrinulturui Agreensent Program * Develop a Stewardship Program. · Assign responsibility for implercentation of the above. referenced strategies and actions by January 2000 i * Expedite the Conservation Opportunities plannl, g process. [ Establish Conservation Subdivision Program for sites within the WPZ, which will redixect dewlopmant to other, mere appropriate locations and reducing yields on those sites, thereby minimizing potential impacts to water SCWA to continue to acquire lands for facility expansion and wellhead protection. SCWA also will be proactive in regulating Consider adopting a Critical Environmental pumpago and water main installation, to control areas and Lands ordinance, to enable recognition of intensity of growth, as well as to control potential for salt water enviro~taliy aensitiw lands and their intrusion. impoxlant functions; such lands may include Establish WPZ to control/reduce development wetlands, steep slopes and shallow depth to Water Quality Treatment Districts (intended to allow for water density and therchy protcot open spuce, farmlond groundwater. Such recoguition would eaable quality teeting, instalistian of water treatment systems in areas and agriculture, protection oftheae features, via reduced yields, not p~esenfly served by public water) could be established by the Establish Conservation Establish WPZ to control/reduce appropriate setbacks, etc. i Town, SCDHS and SCWA. Subdivision Program for Water Supply Munagereent Establish Conservation Subdivision Program (75- development density and thereby sites within the WPZ, & Watershed Proteetinn 80% preservation) for sites within thc WPZ, which ~retect rural vistas and aesthetics. ~ Establish Watershed Protection Zones (WPZ) to Establish WPZ to control/reduce development density and which will redirect Strategy, Final (2000) will redirect development to other locations, thereby control/reduce development density and thereby thereby control location and intensity ofgeowth, development to other, minimizing the stress on open space, farmlands and Non-Contiguous Clustering can be protect water resorex:es, more appropriate agricultmal activities, tmplemented to preserve/protect Non-Contiguous Clustering can be implemented as an additional locations, thereby rural vistas and aesthetics. Non-Contiguons Clustering can be irr~lememed tool to control and regulate growth, minimizing the cost and Use non-contiguous clustering to preserve open to preserve/protect sensitive environmental need for roadway space, features or qualities. Establish Conservation Subdivision Program for sites within the improvements. WPZ, which will redirect development to other, mere Town Wetlands ordinance should be amended appropriate locations, thereby minimizing the cost and need for to allow for Town jurisdiction to within 100 feet infrastructure, and provide incentives for alternative methods of I of fresh or tidal w~tiands, from its existing 75 development, to r~dL,'~ development to other, mere appropriate feet. locations, and enable reductions in yields. Creation of substandard lots from preexisting Non-Contiguous Clustering can be implemented as a way to substandard lots in a paxticular zone could be min/mize the need for and cost of infrastructure iroprovemants. allowed under certain circumstances. The Town could charge a fee based on the size of the deficit, such monies to he used for land acquisition for wd~dmt protection. ·Create agrlcultural buffer zones. . Malntainthequalityofthe * Malntain~isib/lity, aecessibil/tyofcorridorbusinesses, Scenic $onthold Corridor * Designate Route 25 & 48 as Scenic Byways. countryside abutting Routes 25 & * Protect Town's unique scenic attributes. * Utilize traffic calming Management Plan (2001) · Public acquisition of key parcels. 48. , * Protect trees along scenic corridors through * consistent with scenic goals, measures in hamlet · Establish acquisition priorities for scenic byways. * Maintain a clear distinction proper trimming practices or ondergrounding Encourage revitalization of hamlets, centore. . Create "scenic overlay" zonin$ & devalopmen~ hetWuen the rural countryside and of overhead power lines. * Create "scenic overlay" zoning & development controls. * Designate Route 25 : * Encourage revitalization ofharniets. & 48 as Scerec Page 8 I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I controls. ~.IOR I~LA.NS, I(EY GOALS AND IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS Define approphate low-key, rather than destlnation-orianted promotion of scenic cordder features. Maintain ,,isibility, accessibility of' corridor businesses, consistent with scenic geals. Designate Route 25 & 48 as Scenic Byways. Iroplen~nt visual improvements along con, dots, including: l. "adopts-road" programs 2. Beautification programs 3. Utility & ro~ximalntenance. 4. Directional & inf'ormshonal signage · Encourage revitalization of hamlets. Further encourage: I. Wineries 2. Farm stands 3. Comtrm~al ~hing 4. Re~a~ational marine activity 5. Overnight aacormnodations Create "scenic overlay" zoning developt~nt controls. Create pl..nlng & design geidetines for rural ai~as within scenic overlay. Create planning mid design guidelines for hamlet ~roas. · Utilize "incentives" to achieve · Refine role of ARB. · Create agrinnitmal buffer zones. · Manage - not rmrk~t tourism Create a network of visitor I · c~ntem. proglam. Create a perlimnent advisory body to advauc~ the scenic pl~servetitm 1. Wineries 2. Farm stands 3. Corm'aeroial fishing 4. Recreational manne activity 5, Overnight accormuodatiens 6. Pedestrian enhancements Manage - not market toudm~ · Create a natwork of visitor e~nters. Implement an overall s/gnage program. Byways. · Develop pedestrian walkways & linkages. · Develop transportation hubs. · Enhance ferry linkages. · Develop winery shuttles. · Enhance bicycle linkages. · Implement a Transportation Management Strategy. P~ge 9 I I PRIOR PLA~S~ I(EY GOALS AND IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS I * The Town recognizes the * The Town of Southold recognizes the * The Town should continue to develop programs wh/eh in'4mrtence of protueting the importance of protecting and enhancing its effectively improve the surface water quality of fresh inland historic and archaeological wetlands and habitats. All of thase habitats water bodies as well as the tidal creeks, embayments and resources of the conmmniW. In have experienced and continue to experience sound areas. 1983, the Town adopted a human disturbance. Probably the most * The Town also requests cooperation and support fi-om federal Landmark Preservation Law and a effective way to protect these identified areas agencies such as the US Army Corps of Engineers, the Preservation Comrmasion. is to maintain an undisturbed vegetative USEPA and the US Navy during the review of dredging and However, both the legislation and upland buffer of sufficient depth around the dredging disposal projects proposed within or near Town · The Town has long recognized the importance of the comnUssion's powers are habitats and other menagemont measures waters. protecting its agricultural resources. Since 1983, lin/ted. The Commission is i including the use of "Best Management · Also of great son·em to the Town is the less than effective · The Town recognizes voters have approved eight separate bond issues actively working with interested Practices" (BMP). The focus of a BMP management of the fisheries resources within State riparian the importance of totaling 15 mill/on dollars to finance the citizens to develop inga~ved should be on habitat protection end waters, achieving a regional aequisifionofdsvelopmentrightatofarmland, as legialation that would afford enhancement. * The Town is laeking in affurdable haulage. Dock space (fur consensus within the wall as for open apuee title in full. greater protection to historic storage of gear, nets, inbster pots) end affordable marinas or East End. Fur that · InJenueryof2000, theTownadoptedaFarmand structures and archaeoingicel sites, i · TheTownofSontholdrecogaizesthencedto rnoorlngarenswhicheanaeeommodatecommereialfinhl-g re~son, ithastakona FarmiandProtuetionStrategy. Several steps have · The Town's seenic resources are maintaln high water quulity in the boats ere relatively few in number. This shurtage of adequate veryuetive leadership been taken towards implementing th/s Strategy, unique and contain great variety, coromuulty. All surface water that flows on and affordable facilities has contributed to the steady decline role in promoting the including appointment of a Land Preservation They include the traditional and through Southold ends up in the seas in the number of lc·al conn,nsroial fishermen who derive all, work of its own Coordinator whose primary function is to business hamlets surrounded by around Southold ur in the groundwater or a significant part, of their income from Southold's coastal Transportation faeilitete the partnerships needed to accelerate the the older homes of the early aquifer. The Town reeo~i~es its waters. Commission. The acquisition of developmont rights, easements and settlements, the sweeping, open- responsibilities to the region and to its · The Town should centince to deveinp programs to improve Cormnissinn works Lo·al Waterfront fee title of targeted properties, sky vistas in agricultural areas, residents to ensure that this water is not its waters to support continued and future sbellfishing closely with the Revitalization Program · The Town reeogulzes the irapm'tance o f open and the mix o f open and enclosed pelluted or londed with sediment that would productivity. NYSDOT, the Plan (2002) apace preservation. In conjonction with its Farm water views along with that of impair either surfuee or groundwater quality. · The Town is actively involved with the spawning and grow- SCDPW and the end Farmland Pmtaction Strategy, it has conmaercial and recreational · In June of 2000, the Town endorsed the out o f clams, oysteas and scellops through its seeding MTA-LIRR. appointed a Land Preservation Coordinatur to maritime activities. The town Water Supply Management and Watershed program. Land-based aqua·ultra· facilities are loented in the · The LWRP is facilhate the edrnlnlatration of it s open space recogeizes the importance o f the Protection Strategy. This raport Town, and are operated by the Pecoinc Land Trust, the designed to result in a preservation program, protection of these rasources to its acknowledged that sufficient water to supply County Cornsll Cooperative Extension and Town, and open better integration of · The Town of Sonthold has nmus access Icoal economy, as well as to its saturation population may not exist, and that water cultivation of shellfish takes place in the Peconic Bay In·al concerns and points to its shoreline. The main objective of the un/que quality of life. its quality had been compromised by past estuary, problems into federal Town is to improve these facilities, thersby · The Town also reeoginzes that and state deeision- pmvlding enhanced public acoass to the shoreline, negetive visual elements can be i end ongoing land use practices. The Strategy · There has been an upsurge in interest and controversy in takes a conservative approach with regard to aquaculture over the Last five years, derived from the elttsh making regarding In addition, the Town has identified opportunities introduced through !0om' site : sustainable development. It proposes a series between traditional methods of aquaeultura employed by interstate ferry to er·ate new public aec·ss to the waterfront as design, lack of property of recornmondatinns that ultimately would baymon and the rmehine-drivon methods employed by large services. wall as to link access mad recreation sites maintenance and excessive or accomplish several objectives: reduction of conmaeroial operators. Clcerly, the issue requires coordinated throughout the Town. poorly-located signage and population density in the area overlying the study bem-uen the NYSDEC, County and Pueonic Estuary hghtmg. Since 1996, the Town's central and deepest portions of the sole Management pmgrsm, as well as the Town in urder to ensure Transportation Commission has source aquifer, protection of the land that pohcies and pernuts are in conformance with the Town's worked with State and County I resource from the development pressure that resource management goals. tranaportation ageneias to ! may be ·rented by the installat/on o f public . hi addition to shullfish aquaculture, thare is a federally- theilitate better highway dealgn, water service and prevention of future funded pilot open water fish farmlocated offPlum Island. upgrades and maintenance sontaminat/on of the groundwater resource The environmental compatibility, the locational suitability practices. Further, the Town has by detrimental land use practices, and the economic feasibility of open water fish farms near actively supported and worked I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Page 10 I I L~d Pr~erval~on PRIOR PLANS~ KEY CwOALS AND IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I with local business groups to develop scenic "gateways" to the business districts along state and county roads. It has also support sd business districts in the renovation of the s~eetscape along local roads. The Town recognizes that the threat to the landscape from ulility companies can equal if not exceed thai perpetuated by haphn 7~rd new developn'~nt Along withthe Town of Riverhaad, the Town of Santhold is insisting that all upgraded/ranar~asian lines be buried underground. The Town also recognizes the importance of maintaining high surface water quality because oftbe positive and algaJficant impact it has on the Town's maritime fisheries, the lecal economy and the quality of life. The Town recognizes that the preservation of its unique environmental, aesthetic, historic, agricultural, nautical and scenic characteristics is critical to its attraction as a qanlity community. To help achieve this goal, the Town has engaged in a number of activities designed to promote the careful stewardship of its land and water resources. Plum Island, Plum Gut and the Pecenic Estuary needs to be detennined. · The potential for flooding along ceriain portions of the shoreline areas of the Town of Sonthold is high. Most of these flood-prone areas are located along the Pecenie Estuary shoreline and its nurremus creeks and inlets. However, there are also places along Long Island Sound that are susceptible to flooding. The Town hopes to add. ss the identified issues through a Flood Hazard Mitigation Plan (FHMP) at son'~ point in the near future. An FHMP would enable the Town to d~valop long range simt~gias for developed areas that have been targeted in the Town's Emergency Preparedness Plans as prim: flooding ~ ~rosion-prone. The goal of such a plan should be to reduce the level of vulnerability, thereby reducing the long-term publ/¢ cost of emergeucy pr~pamdusss and disaster recovery sfforts. · It is difficult to geneml/ze about th~ eanses of beach erosion within the Town. Its shomlni~ is highly variable becaus~ several coastline processas am shaping different glacial landforms. In spite oftkis variability, certain trends or processes have b~n identified within areas defined by specific geograpkieal ur ri'an-rinds forms. When each of these alemants is examined in a geographic context, they suggest a framework for rnanagen~nt. · In the final analysis, a balance nmst be acbiewd b~tw'sen the pro~r siting of shureline hardaning structuras, the in~nxiu~ion o f b~a~ oourishtmnt efforts, and letting natural processes tak~ their ceur~. It would be higkly beneficial if the town began candacting beach width surveys at mgalar intervals of the Sound and Eatuarina shoreliuss on an annual basis. Coupled with GIS tee, huology, these sur~ys would establish/nitial basslin¢ data for current and futura anal3~is of erosion rotes and csuscs. The information would amble more accurate and effective assessments of existing and proposed erosion protection measures or structures. The end result would be bettor uso of limited pablin msour~s. · LWRP s~¢ks to advancs land use goals of Master Plan Update in regard to dsvelopment in hamlet cantsrs, agricultural lands and waturfi'ont areas, with partioflar emphasis on ensu~g that local msidants who work in Town are not priced out of the housing market. · LWRP supports proposal of Mastur Plan Update that mame- related water-dep~ndeat uses be "enonuraged at appropriate locations on or ne. ar the coast and/or along cree. k~ and bays where they do no! negatively impact on rezidantial Page 11 I I PRIOR ]~LANS~ KEY GOALS AND IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS I I I I I I I I neighborhoods or the natural environment.. On the north shore, Matfituck Inlet and Creek is the only harbor area. Here, issues are to protect water-dependent uses, adaptive muse of waterfront properties, protection of navigation channels, provide opportunities for shellfishing and aquacultur% expanding access to the water, resolving conflicts between marine uses and the environment, and tn'~roving water quality. Along the Peconic Eauary shoreline, issues am concentrated in the numerous creeks, and include mooring and channels, water quality, and the impact of marinas on neighborhoods and water quality. Sigaificont harbor rmnagement issues are on Fishers Island. The Town established a Fishers Island Harbor Management Co.urfittee in 1994 to prepare a Management Plan for this area. The main concerns are the quantity, location and availability of moorings, protection of the navigalion cltannel, the extent to which transient boaters should be accommodated and the effects of boating activity and upland uses on both water quality and shellfish resources. A plan was adopted in 1997 (Chapter 33, Town Code). It is clear that current lrends will result in changes that could alter the environment and community character of Fishers Island. The focus of the Town of Southold LWRP is to ensure that the impacts of these changes on the island's coastal resources, both natural and eulturel, am minimized. To this end, the LWRP focuses on the protection of the island's unique natural environment and its water-dependent I I I I I I I I Page 12 I I I PRIOR PLAI~S, KEY GOALS AND IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS PriorPl~nsand$~d~e~ J · Deploy "Best Route to" signs. * Utilize variable message signs to fauilitate varying traffic eonditinns. · Provide le~ and right turn lanes a~ appropriate intersections. · Require a~l fama stands to have adequate off-street parking and defined aggress & ingress. · Work with LIRR to program long-range improvements, such as a North Fork North Fork Travel Needs Require all farm stands to have adequate off-street parking and "Scoot" service, Assessment (2002) defined egress & ingress. North Fork shuttle, Wine Country trains etc. · Coou~inate with Suffolk County Tnmsit to improve bus service, including raft feeder service, S- 92 route ~rovements, new Rte 48 express, circulator service, demand response service, recreational s~uffius and use of LIRR ROW for bus serviee. · Coordinate access n~-~g~-~ut options. Implement a Rural Incentive District (RID) a PDD Conservation subdivision reducing Conservation subdivision reducing density on a Conservation subdivision reducing density on a tract by 60% or Conservation subdivision Blue Ribbon Commission intended to facilitate preservation of open space, density on a ~aet by 60% or more, tract by 60% or more, with emphasis on land more will minimize need for infrustraettue extensions and/or reducing density on a for a Rural Sonthuld, farmland, promote fanning and maintain f~axne~s' with emphasis on land preservation, preservation, will enable protection of sensitive maintenance, and will enable regaintion of growth in areas less tract by 60% or mere will Final Report (July 1~, 200~) equity, would provide for rural resources, amenable to growth, minimi~ growth and eharaeter/austheties protection, aseoeintud ~affic m~naet s I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Page 13 I I I PRIOR PLANS~ KEY GOALS AND IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS Town and County PDR efforts perrrenently preserve I Implet~ont an RID to facilitate preservation of Implement aa RID to facilitate preservation of farmland and and roadwork open space and agricultural land in that use, thereby Implement an RID to facilitate open space, and thereby preserve sites or areas open space will minimize need for in~zastrusture extensions requirements. helping to protect the business of farming, preservation of farmland mad open of valuable natural resources, and/or mtint~nsnce, and simultaneously control location and space, and therefore the rural intensity of growth. Implement an RID to Transfer of density and density incentives to character and aesthetic of the Town. I Town and Count), PDP, efforts pern~nently facilitate preservation of promote agricultural preservation. ~ preserve open spaces having valuable natural Town and County PDR efforts penranently preserve agsicultuml farmland will min/mize Town and County PDR effort s ] cheracter/stics, land aud open space, thereby controlling the location and potential increases in Reduction o f deusity in conjunction with PDD. permanently presorve agricultural ! intensity o f growth and thus the need for extansions and/or traffic and aasociated land and open space, thereby helping rnaintenanae of ~ture. impacts, and Conservation subdivision seducing density on a tract to protect the rural character and simultaneously reduce by 60% or more, with emphasis on land aesthetics of the Town. BRC recommends that the Town Board consider zone changes in need for roadwork. consideration of w.~,y factors, not a blanket approach, and on [ preservation, i overall progress towards preservation targets, due to concerns Town and County PDR [ over land values, attractiveness of other preservation options, efforts permanently and owner interest in joining the RID. preserve agricultural land and open space, minhnizing growth and i thus the potential for increases in traffic and its impacts, as well as the need for roadwork. RO District allows accessory apartments (§100-71)~ I-lB District allows multiple dwelhngs, accessory apartments (§100-91)~ B A-C D/strict encourages farming by legislative [ District allows 1 -family (detached) and 2-family dwellings, intent. view. i accessory apertraants ( § 100-101 ). SEQRA Al-ID District SoutholdTownCade, Recreation requirements in zoning code (review and SEQRAreview. [ SEQKAreview. Aaeessory apanments permitted in residential distr/cts, by Road requisemants in Zoning Code and Zoning update needed). Mandatory clustering, subdivision regulations. Map Special Exception of the ZBA. Mandatory clustering Road, drainage, lighting, infrastructure requirements in Zoning SEQRA review. [ Code and Subdivision Regulations. i Zoning nmp for use restrietians. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Note: Ma~xextraetskeyrec~r~mndeti~nsandin~l~menta~nm~asuresfr~me~dstingplans/studies~f~cusgr~ops~dg~ve~e~ns~re~a~dt~eei~(8)keyg~s~f~T~. The matrix provides a quick underst~ding of the e~isting plmming frzmework, to identify inc~siaencies, ~eas f~ ~ ~, ~d a~sin ne~ o f Economic Plan, 1997 ~ 9,800 acres active agricultural production; 1800 acres of development ~ighU acquired; PDR; recognized loss of 1200 ac~s of farmland to development (1968-1996); V:-3/4 farmland not owned by farmers but leased; Ag Dist~ct exempts up to 80% farmland taxes; recog~zas encouraging wineries; Page 14 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS Appendix A-2 Prior Plans and Key Goals & Conflicts, Tools and GIS Uses I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I and Smdles Parks, Reersution & Open Space Survey (1982) Full acquisition is more expensive than PDR What is purpose of acquisition, based on source Recommended Tools C~onfurm park/school district bouuderias Create Parks/Rec. Dept. Create central year-round recreation complex ~lemented Tools PDR Csu use funds for acquisition Giff~dedication; easements, fee title Cbapt~r 6 Co~,~,~dty Pres. Fund Chapter 59 Open Space Pres. Tom-wide perk/beach pass _Definitions Nceded perklsuds Perk Districts (bounda~es) Define purpose of acquisition Uses Master Plan Update, Background Studies (March, 19S4) ~Conflict Issues Zoning not reflectiug goal to limit non- agricultural uses in designated prime agieultural areas (Master Plan) R~econ-mmnded Tools · A-C zoning district Agricultural easements (clustering with C&R) Education (Town staff; PLT, LI Farm Bureau, Comell Lab, USDA, limited Town involvement) Agricultural Districts (tax incentives) Implement pl~nning policies winch preserve agricuitum and preserve sensitive, areas. PDR Agdeuitural districts (NYS) (see farmland Definitions Needed Designated prirre agricultural soils (AC intended to reflect this) Define a~ricultural eason~nts (use pefino/Counally subdivision example) _OIS Uses Use GIS layer for prime soils ,, Zoning Map, etc. PRIOR PLANS AND KEY GOALS & CONFLICTS, TOOLS AND GIS USES Recommended Tools Acquire perklands Definitions Needed "Significant" Open Space and types of significance Reconm~ended Tools No incentives to protect historic structures Plan for hamlet centers SPLIA inventory National register Local landinunks (over 50 properties, voluntary) Definition Issues Hamlet center (generally I-IB, I-ID; walkable areas) Hamlet (post office area, where you live) Transitional areas Rural areas Sense of place Recommended Tools Acquire perklands De fruitions Needed ;'Significant" Open Space and types of significance Recommended Tools Restrict development in wetlands, marshes, bluffs, dunes and beaches Promote developmem pa~em to protect natural BMP for gloundwater and surface water protection Manage devalopment coromensurate with water supply Maintain frefish/shellfish habitats Promote water.dependent/water-enhanced uses Inereas~ numbar of public beaches Promote commercial/recreational fishing/bontin~ in appropriate areas Promote maintenance of navigable waterways Implement planning policies wh/ch preserve sensitive areas and protect groundwater. GIS Uses Land Use Map, Zoning Map, etc. Definition Issues D~fme weflonds (Chapter 97), marshes, blufth, dunes and beaches (review LWRP, CELIA Chapter 37) NA Recotranended Tools Encourage housing of varying types md densities in and around hamlets. >rovids for affordable housing Prevent through traffic movemant md discourage incompatible uses in residential areas Encourage diversification of agticuiteml crops Promete vacation and seasonal uses Improve the Town's existing conar, ercial areas Encourage the development of further public and private nericulture activities Encomag~ the development oflsud based support facilities for the fishing industry. Provide opportunities to accommodate office and research development, light industry Limit strip con-m'~rcial areas and encourage the concentration of :omm~mial uses in existing shopping areas. Improve, maintain and expand utility, health, educational, social, safety & recreational services. Implement planning policies which provide for a number of housing types, encourage water-related uses of coastal lands, and support commercial and induatrinl uses in appropriate locations. GIS Use__.___~s Utilities, facilities & services Land Use Map, Zoning Map, etc. NA Recotranended Tools Encourage use of publin transit Encourage roadway and intersection improvements GIS Uses Transit services & routes I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Prior Pl~s and ~ud~es [~RIOR PLANS AND KEY COALS & CONFLICTS, TOOLS AND GIS USES Recorramnded Tools Recommended Tools Preserve existing housing stock and Restrict development in wetlands, marshes, provide for a variety of housing bluffs, danes and beaches types Recommended Tools Promote development pattern to protect natural Strangthe~ and diversify the Town's No incentives to protect historic structures resources economic base Plan for hamlet centers BMP for groandwater and surface water Ensure the provision of an adequate protection range ofcommonity facilities and ~ Manage development commensurate with water services SPLIA inventory supply Main~min and improve existing utility Reconunended Tools Master Plan Update, National register Maintain tinfish/sbellfish habitats systems and determine where it is Ensure efficient movement Summary (A. pril~ 19~) NA Local landmarks (over 50 properties, voluntary) Promote water-dependent/water.enhanced uses spprop~le to expand of people and goods within Increase number of public beaches Provide an open space and as welt as into and out of ~ .Promote ~,,,~rcial/recreationul fishing/boating recreation system adequate to serve Town, in a manner that Hamlet center (generally I-IB, HI); walkable m apprepnate areas the tolal population, maximizes safety and areas) Promote maintenance of navigable waterways Provide a community of residentinl maintains the scale and hamlets comprised of a variety of integrity of residential and Hamlet (post office area, where you live) housing opportunities, commercial, agricultural areas. Trans£tional areas Rural areas service, and cultural activities, set in Sense of place Deth~tion Issues an open or rural atmosphere and Define wetlands (Chapter 97), marshes, bluffs, supported by a diversified economic dunes and beaches (review LWRP, CEHA base Chapter 37) Define/map habitats Recommended Tools Concentrate davelopment within hamlets. Recorranended Tools Provide a diversity of quality PDRfI'DR affordable housing, concentrated in Additional tax abatement Recommended Tools hamlet s. Economic strategy/plan to achieve Town goals Concentrate development in hamlet centers Create a TDR, PDR program. Preserve historic/rural character Develop a Capital Improvement US/UK Countryside Imvlemented Tools Create an economic plan Program that targets water & sewer Stewardship Exchange Team PDR Rccerrancnded Tcols nr~prevements for hamlets. (1991) Ag districts/lax abatement ~d Tools Malnlain environmental qualiW Create an economic plan that Zoning ordi,,~rXce, HZ), I-IB Eliminate pollution/brown tide in creeks and bays promotes sustainable development NA De fmitiuns Needed using existing assets Farmland (can't force parcels to be farmed) Definition Issues St~smiine government & establish A~icultural atructures (greenhouse restrictions, Economic plan a new planning process based on etc.) consensus Preserve opportunity to farm Create a coalition of ccnrananity groups to address conmumity issues and achieve vision. Encourage an~,,,,,,nity stewardship. Create a visual map oftbe shared ~ Reconnnended Tools v~slon. PDR Recommended Tools Agricultural districts Recommended Tools Purchase farmland development Agricultural reserves 5-aore upzoning, 2--aore transfer of development rights and encourage and facilitate Education rights other measures to protect farmland Special Groundwater BMPs for agriculture (limited Town Suppor~ the Cornell Cooperative Protection Area Plan (1992) involvement; guidance sheets; be careful how te Irnvlemented Tools Recommended Tools Extension Service efforts to apply) PDR BMP's for agricultural use introduce and secure adoption of best NA Renew agricultural dis'wicts management practices for Impleme~ined Tools Establish agricultural reserves agriculture. PDR Ag d stricts/tax abatercent Up2one fsm'dand to require a five- acre min~trn~m lot size but provide Page 2 I I Pri~r Plan.* ~d ~d~vs ~RIOR PLANS AND KEY GOALS & CONFLICTS~ TOOLS AND GIS USES I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Definitions Needed for the transfer of development fights to sites outside the SGPA at two-acre Agricultural reserves density. Permit TDR to sites in nearby hamlets or along the Sound sherefront, where undeveloped acrea~ is available Recommended Tool__s Adopt a policy statement Perform honsing policy review on a regol~ basis Expand financial assistance programs Private inltinlives/deusity incentives to create, renovate affordable housing Joint direct actioWquusi- governmental (Conananity Land Treat; removes land cost from equation) Town direct action (Create Housing Town Affordable Housing Authority, like Southampton) Policies and Program (1993) NA NA NA TDR NA Definitions Needed Affordable housing (term or perpetuity, income limits, Town residents) Moderate-income housing Accessory apartmanta (existing buildings vs. new buildings) Pendth~ Proposals Accessory apamnenta code changes (up to 3; RO/HB/B) Review AH/3 district to add soeessory aparhments Recorramnded Tools ' Recommended Tools Attract new businesses. Recommended Tools Preserve & protect wetlands, watersheds, aquifers, Discourage tourism In~lementod Tools Support Fishem Island school shorelines, habitats and species diversity. Study the islands infram'ucmml Recommended Tools Fishers Island Growth Plan needs. Im~rova safety of (198%1994) Town staff support for land preservation Direct growth in an onmrom'nontally sensitive tsolmiques Inmlemented Tools~ manner. Direct growth in an anvimatm~ully roadways Town staff support for land preservation Prel~re an emergency plan for contan'fination of semitive intoner. Discourage fen'y district teehniquss ground and surface water. Year round population should be from accommodatthg self4ufficiont, tourism & eem~onal trattlc. Prepare a drought rmnagement plan. Slow the growth of the summer , population. Page 3 I I PRIOR PLANS A~D KEY GOALS & CONFLICTS, TOOLS AND GIS USES Prior Plans ~md ~dies Conflict Issuers Efficacy of ranking parcels Can not resell development rights without alien~6oo process (difficult) Ag & Markets winery definition vs. Town definition (taating facilities) Recorra'i~nded Tools I Support marinas & marine economy. Recomm~nded Tools Support Cr~enport as a Maritime Develop new recreational facilities including a Center. golf eoursu, indeor pool, tennis courts, ice Recommended Tools Accommodate B&B's and Counlry skating rink & cultural center Reduce and consolidate indus/r/al zones on Inns CPPP priority purchase parcels need to Mdu Rood west of Crreanport. Accommodate home occupations. prioritize Review boundary of I-K) zone in Greenport. Repeal AI-ID zones Impreve public waterfxont a~ass. Revise sign ordinance to improve visual Support rehabilitation of existing Resale of development fights to other holding character. In~lernented Tools housing stook. Recon'm~nded Tools agency Develop illumination standers. Facilitate creatioo of accessory Create development rights bank Develop design manual Recommended Tools housing units. ' Develop effective mass 199d Stewardship Reduce density, use 5 acre zoning-, use Adopt 5 aoce upzoning with mandatory clustering Divers/fy affordable housing stock, transit Task Force (1994) mandatory clustering Imvlemented Tools in SGPA Create transportation hubs Preserve farmland & open space. Protect surface and groundwater resources Encourage traditional commercial (iVJ[at~iluck, Southold, l~ted Tools Encourage conservation & scenic easements Implement BMP's development in hamlet centers. C-reenport). Discourage poorly designed multi- Preserve farmland & open space; ongoing Designate scenic con~idors. Develop water supply master plan tenancy ~omm~reinl stores (strip Create pedestrien CPPP priority purchase parcels generally Change business zones on Route 48 to A-C. Restrict public water to hamlets shopping centers), walkways. identified Create Landmark Preservation Corraniseion & Limit fast-food eatablishrmnts to Develop trails & bikeways. Mandatory clustering develop incentives to preserve historic HB zone. Encourage conservation & scenic easements rosuurces. Adopt a PUD ordinance. through subdivision review Create Architectural Review Board or Change business zones on Route 48 Scenic By-ways designation Committee to A-C. Water fzont aceese addressed in LWRP (state Reduce and consolidate industrial wetlands), zones on Main Road west of Encourage wineries (Zoning Code; A-C need 10 Crrsenport. acr0s in vineyards) Review boundary of liD zone in Definiti~ons Needed Greenport. Wineries (review existing Code) Conflict Issues Uses in A-C/R-80 zone potentially conflict with Setting back development from scenic by-way Conflict Issues can imerfere with function of farmiand Sor~ zoning remaining on Route 48 may still conflict with efficacy of by-pass Re~i~u~nded Tools Recommended Tools Maintain Route 48 as scenic by-pass -need Recommanded Tools Concentrate future economic Recommended Tools Seavlew Trails of the North guidelines Strengthen hamlet centers Recon-ax~ended Tools development in and ~xound existing Ensure that Route 48 hamlet centers Fork (1995) Link trails, open space and recreational Smooth traffic flow remains a by-pass with oppoW, mities ln~lemented Tools Create an alternate travel route for vistas of farm fields & Sorae rezoninge implemented pedestrians & bicyclists from Mattilack to Orient Point. open space. Imvlemented Tools Definitions Needed Ensure a smooth traffic flow Subdivision/site plan review Hamlet centers between hamlets Definitions Needed Trails Scenic by-wa),s Recommended Tools Additional lands for protection Defm/tinns Needed Recommended Tools Peeoule Estuary Program Coordinate PEP with S~PA land preservation Sustainable development Imvlementcd Tools Utilize sus*,i~ble development & NA efforts Smart growth Support efforts to address Peconic Bay protection smart grew~h tools to assure Use smart ~owth sustainable development for development is properly located I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I Page 4 I I PRIOR PLANS A~ND KEY GOALS & CONFLICTS, TOOLS AND GIS USES ~d Tools Nature Conservancy bas used GIS to identify sensitive areas OIS Uses~ Noed to identify lands for protection Recommended Tools Enoeumge existing local businesses in targeted industries. Euconrage new businesses in Conflict Issues targeted indu~'ie s to locate in the Ensure recreation does not degrade natural Town environrmnt. D~velop lodging and dining Economic Development Recognizes fan'Nresidential land use conflicts facilities Recornroended Tools D~volop fa~ilitiee for business Plan, NA NA conference market. Town-wide transportation Town of Sourhold (199'/) Reoe~ndod Tools plan in connection with Eoenomi¢ Strategy Assure acleqnate, affordable, health care facilities for seniors NYSDOT. Definitions Needed Reuse existing buildings Encourage economic growth and Agrieultmal industry expansion in hamlets. Conserve aglicnituml indus/fy Consulidate capitol improwmente within geographically vmnageable beonderies, Recommended Tools Reconunended Tools Preserve vistas, farms, wetlands, and marine Recorrsnended Tools wetlands and marine waters Reoemme~nded Tools waters Develop water supply strategy bordered by discreet olnsters of Establish clusters of developroeat Southold Township: 2000 Preserve vistas, farms, wetlands, and marine Strengthen hamlet centers Preserve vislas, farms, wetlands, and marine development. Rucorornended Tools Planning Initiatives (1997) waters waters Protect the Town's traditional Improve transportalion Establish clusters nf development. Preserve tranquility of residential economic base. services & manage traffic Develop Agricultural Protection Slrategy neighborhoods Definitions Needed Enhance & focus development in congestion. Definitions Needed Open farm vistas core hamlet business centers. Preserve the quality & tranquility of Open farm vistas residential neighborhoods. Conflict Issues Permitted uses may be inappropriate in A-C Rsoerranended Tools Acquire lands to reduce dsve lopm~nt pressure. Review tuning oode for conflicting uses allowed in A-C. Community Preservation Implemented Tools Reeotremnded Tools Reeotranended Tools Recormn_ended Tools Project Plan (July, 1998) Parcel acquisition Inca'ease in protected land Increase in amount of Inarease in amount of preserved/protected land preserved/protected land Definitions Needed Business of Farming GIS Uses Parcels listed GIS layer Protected land GIS layer Conflict Issues Reeorran*nded Tools County Route 48 Corridor, Land Use Study (April, Require vegetated buffers between residential Continus enforcement of the Town 1999) Conflict Issuers development and the roadway. Recommended Tools Code with respect to the type of Need better enforcement coordination within Need gu/delines for clustering Preserve integrity of vegetated environment products permitted to be sold at farm Recotrmended Tools Town a~encies (building/code enO stands. Modify the Town Code to I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Page 5 I I PRIOR PLANS AND KEY COALS & CONFLICTS, TOOLS AND GIS USES Prior Pla~ and 5~dles Envtrommm 8o~:lo-F,~o~omie Em, tFonn~m n How is language interpreted for enforcemem Recommended Tools Continue enforcement of the Town limit curb cuts Winery agricultural storage buildings Promote incentive zoning to preserve Code with respect to the conversion Require links between the (commemial) agricultural and other desirable parcels, and as a o f agricultural buildings to other parking areas of mitigation far change of use where appropriate, commercial uses. conm~reial operations Recommended Tools Require greater satbaeks from the roadway for Amend the Town Code with respect Require that subdivided Rezoning of MI/MII zoning adjacent to larger agricultural and cormnereial buildings, to the Residence Office (RO) lots aeuess side roads :md Matthuek Creek (related to marine recreation) Orient buildings to limit the intenuption of District. not directly to CR 48 Appropriate mzuning sceulc vistas and views. Amend the Town Code with respect Whero appropriate, TDR Continue enforcement oftbe Town Code with to the Limited Business (LB) eousider the use offing lots Incentive Zoning (Planned Development respect to the type of products perrmt~ed to be District. with con'anon drives Dis~icts) sold at farm stands. Rezone appropriate parcels adjacent Change of Use/Zone; special public bene fits Develop and implement the use of visual to Mat~iturk Creek to MI ar/or MII Review code far items that need to ha enforced resource best nmnagement techniques, zoning category. (sale of farm products, conversion of Modify the Town Code to allow other uses in Modi~ the Town Code to allow agricultural buildings) vineyards under special permit, other uses ia vineyards under special Modify Code to allow other uses in vineyards permit. under special perwat Implemented Tools PJomote incentive zoMug Some rezoninge implemented Require greater setbacks for larger l~ted Tools p1Ann;,g Board clusters residential development a~iaaltaral and commercial Route 48 rezoninga away from the roadway, buildings. Incentive Zoning (Wineries in Zoning Code Amend the Town Code with respect to the Orient buildings to limit the maintain 10 acres in vineyards) Residence Office (RO) Dis~ct. interruption of sceulc vistas Allowed to sell farm products fi:om the farm The Town Code should be amended with Cluster rosidential development rospect to non-conforming uses. away from the roadway. Definitions Needed Amend the Town Code with respect to the Require vegetated buffers between Incentive zoning Limited Business (LB) DisMct. residential development and roadway. OIS Uses Definitions Needed Develop and implercent use of Route 48 parcels Definitions for conversion of agricultural visual rosource best management buildings to other commercial uses. techniques. Hamlet centers Amend the Town Code with respect to non-conforming uses. Modify the Town Code to limit curb cuts Require links between the pafldng areas of commercial operations Require that subdivided lots aceese side roads and not directly to CR 48 Where appropriate, consider the use Conflict Issues of flag lots with e~,~ ~,, drives Wooded land with prime soils; bow to define. Open space versus farmland Reconm~ended Tools Protect/preserve on and near aequirod sites Improve education Reeo~,ended Tools Maintain/opdate farmland inventory Encourage farm support services Maintain list of vulnerable and "for sale" and farm-related businesses to Farm and Farmland parcels Recommended Tools Recommended Tools thrive. Protection Strategy, Draft Continue to fund acquisition Preserve farmland for rurol/culmral character as Acquire sites to preserve sites and adjacent Streamline the regulatory process. NA (September, 1999) Town Agricultural Agreement Program historical use in Town locations Develop a Stewardskip Progran~ (equivalent to ag district) IPM Assign responsibility for implementation of the above- Implemented Tools referenced strategies and actions by CPPP identifies critical farmland (A-C zone) January 2000. Outa'cach through letters Expedite the Conservation Farm inventory loosely maintained Opportunities planning pr~:ess. Farmland brochure prepared Definitions Needed I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Page 6 I I PRIOR PLANS AND K~Y GOALS & CONFLICTS~ TOOLS AND GIS USES r~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Town Agricultural Agreement Program Active Farmland Fallow or Reating Farmlaad Associated Support Land GIS Users Wo~ed land in prime soil areas (aerial photos) Conflict Issues Meaning of Conservation Subdivision Conflic._____! Recomn~nded Tools Zoning code does not conform to 100 foot Recommended Tools Establish Watershed Protection Zone Recommended Tools SCWA to continue to acquire lands Reduce density in WPZ Conservation subdivision ~ for facility expansion and wellhead Conservation subdivision in WPZ (75-80% TDR protection. yraservetion) Critical environmental lands ordina~nce to Water Quality Treatment Districts Water Supply Management TDR to preserve farmlands mad agricultural Recommended Tools recoguize resources and preteet (Smilhtown Establish Conservation Subdivision & Watershed Protection activities. Adopt WPZ to contrel/reduce development and medel ordinance) Program for sites within the WPZ Recommended Tools Strategy, (Juue, 2000) Adopt WPZ to conffo]/reduce development and protect open space WPZ Non-Conliguous Clustering Establish Conservation protect opea space Use non-contiguous ¢lus~ecing Non-contiguous clustering Establish WPZ Subdivision Program for Establish conservation subdivision Substandard lot fee Creation ofanbatandord lots from sites within the WPZ Use non.contiguous elus~ernig preexiat~ng substandard lots in a Implemented Tools ~artieular ZOne could be allowed, if Defiintig~s Nee,q~el Increased wetland jurisdiction to 100 feet the lots created were generally in Fannisnds conformance with the surroundings, Agricultural activities Definitions ua terms oflot size. Conservation Subdivisicua Crilieal environmental lands WPZ Conflict Issues Utility & road ma~tenauee (uaderground utilities, coordinate, recharge basins) Recon~xeaded Tools Confllat _Lssues Visual guidance for Routes 25/48 ~ Satting back development from scenic by-way Create "scenic overlay" zoning & development can interfele with function of farmlan~ coat~ols hx~plement visual/mprovements along Create agrionltural buffer zones eon-idors "Adopt-a-read" programs Reconm~ende~l Tools Racor~uended Tools Encourage revitalization ofhemlets Utilize traffic calming Acquire key scenic parcois Maintain v'~ibilit y, accessibility of eoayider measures in hamlet Create scenic overlay zoning and development businesses, co~siatent with scenic goals, centers. controls. Beautification programs Designate Route 22 & 48 Scenic Southold Corridor Create afc/cultural buffer zones for scenic Create a permanent advisory body to advance Recommended Tools as Scenic Byways. Mun~gumont Plan (2001) cercidors the scenic preservation effort. Maintain visibility, accessibility of Develop pedestrian Directional & infomxational sigeage (no ferry NA eorrider businesses, consistent with walkways & linkages. le~ Tools slgus, pedestrian) scenic goals. Develop transportation ~N~fS legislature (April 2002) designated Route Encourage atygroprmte uses Encourage revitalization of hamlats, hubs. 25/48 as scenic by-ways. Create planning & design guidelines for rural Create "seanie overlay" zoning & Enhance ferry linkages. axeas within seethe overlay development contreis. Develop winery shat~les. Definitions Create planning and design guidelines for Enhance bicycle linkages. Scenic parcels of Lrnportance hamlet areas Implement a Scenic by-way corridor Utilize "incentives" to achieve seem¢ goals Transportation Agriceltunfl buffer zone (i.e. crops, structures, Refine role of ARB Management Strategy. setback) Create agrieuliural buffer zones Manage - not n~rkat tourism Implement an overall siguage program Implemented Tools Designate Route 25 & 48 as Scenic Byways. Create a network of visitor centers - 2 existin[~ Page 7 I I Prior Plat~ and Stndle~ PRIOR PLANS AND KEY GOALS & CONFLICTS, TOOLS AND GIS USES I Definitions Needed Hamlet centers Appropriate visual uses Visual guidance Commercial fishing ~,~con'enended Tools Continue to develop programs which improve the quality et flesh inland water bodies Cooperation end support from federal agencies during the review o£ dredging end ch~dging disposal projects Ot great conuem to the Town is the less than effective n'mm~gan'~nt of the fisheries resources within State The Town is lacking in affordable haulage. Continue to develop programs to improw Town waters to support sheliflshing productivity. The clash of roethods of aquaculture employed by baym~n requires coordinated study between the NYSDEC, County and Peooni¢ Rocomm0nded Tools Reoon-amnded Tools Estuary Menagen~nt Program and Expend leglslntion for historic Maintain undisturbed vegetalive upland buffers of Town Reuemmended Tools s'~r ucI~/are~ue o 1 o gical site protection sufficient depth around the habitats end other The environn~ntal compatibility, Provide public access to water Scenic resource guidelines (tree clearing mallagement measures including the use of "Best tho loca~ionul suitability end the Loeul Waterfront Maintain agricultural land as part of overall ordinance, etc.) Management Practices" (BIv~). economic feasibility of open water Revit~li~tion Program Toval heritage. NA Plan (2002) Und~rgeound ~ransrnission liues; tree tt ;~l~ing Flood Hazard Mitigation Plen fish farms near Plum Island, Plum I knvlemented Tools pro gra. ms/ueordination Beach width surveys nt regular intorvnls o f the Out end tho Peooni¢ Esluary nasds ; Land Preservation Coordinator Signage, lighting, highway upgrades, scenic Sound end Estaariue shorelines on an annual to be determined. gateways to business districts, renovate basis. LWRP supports Master Plan Update str~etscapes Issues for Mattituck Inlet and Creek are to protect wnter-depoudent uses, adaptive reuse of waterfront properties, protection of navigation channels, provide opportanities for sho]J~ahlng and aquaculture, expanding access to the water, resolving conflicts between marine urns and tho environruent, end improving water quality. Issues along tho Pecenic Estuary shureline are cone~nttated in the Tho Town established a Fishers Islend Harbor M~magemont Committee in 1994 to prepare a Menagem~nt Plen for this are~ The toque of the Town of Southold LWRP is to ensure that the m~mts chi~n~es ell Fistmrs Island's ¢oas~ni resources are minimized. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Page 8 I I PRIOR PLA~S AND KEY GOALS & CONFLICTS, TOOLS AND GIS USES I I I I I I I I I Note: Conflict Issues Farm stsnde in buffers, scenic byways. Reconmaended Tools North Fork Travel Needs Adequate parking, ingress & egress for NA NA NA NA Assessment (2002) lnmle~nted Tools Farm stands >20 SF require permit and site plan review. Conflict Issues Rocunar~nded Tool~ Density reduction and RID Conflict Issues Recommended Tools Conservation subdivision Recomn~. nded Toots Density reduction and RID Conservation mbdivision Implement on RID to Implement an RID to minimize need minimize potential Estsblish conservation subdivision Reonnmaended Tools Rueormuended Tools Reduce density by 60% or mere. for infrastructure extensions and/or increases in traffic and Blue Ribbon Commission for Rural Incentive Di~xict (Il_ID) to preserve Establish conservation subdivision Conservation subdivision maintenance. Reduce deasity by 60% or more Implement an RID to facilitate presexvafion of associated impacts a Rural Soutbold, farmland, pronx)ts farming and maintain Town and County PDR efforts. Town and County PDR farmers' equity. Implement RID open space Implemcm on RID to facilitat~ efforts Final Report (July 14, 2002) ; Town and County PDR efforts preservation of farmland and open Tmuefer and deueity incentives. Implemented Tools space Ironlemented Tools PDR BRC recommande that the Town PDR Board consider zone changes in Definitions consideration ofmony factors De finitioas Conservation subdivision Conservation subdivision Recommended Tools Southold Town Code, Review reoreational requirements. Zoning Code and Zoning Inmlemantod Tools Map SEQRA Review Zoning Districts ........... Matrix extracts ke, vecomn~nd&tions audimplemeaulion tm, asares from existing plans/studies, focus groups and go~lal functions, as related t~ the ~igl~t (8) key goals of the Town. The maffix pro~ides a quick underrtendin of the existing plaumng fiamework, ~o identii inconsistencies, areas for further study, aud areas in need of eddifional implementetion measums~ The matrix also highlights key definitions needed to better understend uiter.relafionships o f the cmt planning fr~nework, in order te refine deliuifions for future planning effol'ts- Page 9 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Appendix A-3 Key Goals & Conflicts, Tools and GIS Uses KEY GOALS & CONFLICTS, TOOLS AND GIS UsEs · Balance goal of Town growth with goal of fam'Jaad preservatio~ · How do these relate: · Limit non-agricaltural uses ia agricultural areas by zoning & easements. · Rezone parcels to more appropriate uses. · Promateinccntive · Balancegoalo£advancinghonsingandbusinasswithgoaloffarmland/oponspace/rural * Balaneegoalo£ zoning as a moans to character/natural environment preservation, transportation preserve agricultural and · How and by whom will "affordable housing" be de£med & determined? irnprovemont with goal of · How to establish legislative anthorit y to balanse goal of Town growth with goal o£ farmland/opon fannland/opon spase/rural other desirable parcels, · Balance goal of Town growth * Balance goal of Town growth character/natural Canfliets and as mitigation for with goal of rural space/roral character/natural environment preservation. cheng~ of use where character/assthctics with goal of preservation of · Reconcile efforts to develop waterfront for tourist & fishing uses vs. wetland, aesthetic, etc. environment preservation. · Reconcile thru-hamlet appropriate, preservation, natural environment, preservation, transit improvements and · ModifytheTownCode · Recenci~ethm~ham~at~~unsitimpr~vemontsandsestheticprcservati~n~fham~etsandadjacentraral aasthntic preservation of to allow other uses in areas. vineyards under special hamlets and adjacent rural permiL areas. · Balance goal of Town growth with goal of open spaae preservation. · Balance goal of infraslractare M~la ovemont with goal of thnnlond/open envirommnt preservation. In general, the Skmilar to those for open Because the raral/fmning As indicated previously, it is a ptirn~ recommendation that development in the fanning areas of the There is, gonarally speaking, a reeorm~ndafions listed in the space/reoreafion, these aesthetic and manne-related Town be discouraged or minimized; as a result, cormncreial and residential growth is directed to the reciprocal "chicken or the Matrix point toward a two- rscon'ar~ndations are related to waterfront uses of the Town existing hamlets. However, as the rural aesthetic sought for protection is based pauly in the hamlets, it egg" relationship between prong route to farmland those for fanning/farmland are the primary factors which is crucial that their growth is controlled in such a way as to preserve the existing high-quality hamlets transportation improvemonts protection & farming preservation, in that, in attract visitors, enhansemont of and provide for a sufficiency of housing types, as well as enable enhancement in hamlets where and davelopmont type, enhaneemeat: 1) promote the cenjunction with marina- the natural environment which adverse impacts have occurred, location and pattara That is, businass of thrming so that related activities, farming support these uses aed the development can laad to the there is reduced economic provides the character of the Town's environment in general The recreational reconmaondations are associated with the goal of'making more o£ the Town available need for transportation incentive for fam~rs to sell Town that is so sought by its is oritical, for use by all its residents as well as by its visitors, which etunprise a sigoifioant portion of its improvements to serve it, or their fin-roland for visitors. As a result, economy. Thus, preservation and enhancelll~nt Of its recreational assets and potential is a valid goal, transpogmtion mxprOvemunts development, and 2) purchase preservation of these two uses and can be achieved in such a way as to enhance the fitlTf~lg aesthetic of the To,va. can lead to growth along these of farmlands/&velopm~nt is the overall goal of the · Acquire additional parklands improvements. In the Town, rights, so that farmland itself recommendations, and significant opan spaces. · Encourage housing developmont, of vat3,mg types and densities, in and around existing hamlets, the term "transportation is not available te be · Resn'ict dsvelcim~nt in · Use available assistunce programs as wall as land use, regolatary taehulqnas and procedures to improvements" implias roads, developrd, wetlands, tidal marshes, provide such assistance as may he needed to provide affordable housing, as, except for the LIRR, · Acquire additional parklands bluffs, dunes and heachas. · Maintain the integrity o fresidsntial neighborhoods by preventing through traffic movement, public transit is not a major l~'onmmended Tools The Town, County and other and significant open spaces. · Promote a development * Encourage diversific~tiun of agricultural crops and the marketing of Southol& transportation resource. Thus, entities would provide farming · Promote the inventorying of pattern that is responsive to · Strengthen the Town's important commercial fishing mad agficaltore industties, as occurred with the LIE and ~rotectioa by enabling flmners culttttal rosources and sensitive areas, parkways ~artber west, Town to operate more eflleienfly, encourage the establishinant * Protect the Town's wa~ · Promote vacation and seasonal uses features and rural heritage, road improvements would mare effectively, to sell their of Town historic districts and supply from further · Improve the Town's existing commercial areas but do not encourage large-scale expansion of result in a developmont wares at a hetter price, at more preservation o£historic contamination oarrent devalopmont, pattsm aligoed with roads. As outlats, and ia a more buildings and sitas. · Promote developmont · Encourago the devalopment of further public and private mariculmre activities, the town's goal is to direct atlractivemodetoceusurmrs. ·Planforinteusityandmixof pattems that are at a scale that · EncouragetbedevelopmontoflandbasedsupportfacilitiesfortheTown'sfkshingindustty. developmont preferentially to In addition, the Town would development of hamlet is con'anonsurate with the · Provide opportunities to accommodate office and rasearch developmont, light industry and hamlets, the Town should n'ovide a tax abatemont centers available water supply, industries r~lated to other elemonts of the economy, direct road improvemonts program, so that the · Concentrate developmont * Maintain and improve surface · Limit strip conunemial areas and oncoorago the eonaentration of comn'~reial uses in existing toward this area, and economics of ~ming would within hamlets, water quality, shopping areas, discourage improvun~nts be improve& · Create an economic plan that * Maintain fmfiahing and · Preserve the existing housing stock and prox4de the opporttmity for the development of a variety of which would attract growth in promotes sustainable shellfishlng habitats, housing types, agricultmal areas. Farmland would remain in development. * Promote water-dependent and · Slrengthon and diversify the Town's economic base. farming use by the purchase of · Suffolk County and the Town water-related uses in · Concentrate development within hamlels. development rights and/or of Southold should continus water front ateas which are · Provide a diver shy o f quality affordsble housing, concentrated in hamlets. · Encourago the use and/or easemonts, whereby the land to purchase farmland not environmentally seusitive, · CseateaPDRprogrant developmontofpublic I I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I ! KEY GOALS & CONFLICTS, TOOLS AND GI~ USES I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I reminds in farmers' ownership, but the ability to develop it is remove& Recommendation s regarding alustering and reduced yield by upzonings may be con/~&red a "last resort", in that wbers total preservation will not occur, absolute ~inimtzation of the effects of farmland development is provided. In addition, the Town has the ability, through zoning, to provide disincentives to development, by upzoulng (thereby reducing yield of a site, mad these fore the profits available, and by zoning for incentives (by establishment ofa PDD, buffer zones, etc.). In conjanctiun with the water and waterfront-related reeotramndations listed in Growth Management, all of the recommendations in the remaining 6 categorias fall into place. That is, realization of the goals for farmland preservation/farming protection and rishing/waterfixmt protection consequence, the goals for open space, rural aesthetics, the natural environment, traffic, [mfi~asUu~ and housinffbu/mass. · Promote a Town agricultural preservation program · Create a PDR program · Create tax shntemonts for farmland. · Suffolk County and the Town of Southold should continue to purchase farmland development rights. · Suffolk County should continue to support the Comei1 Cooperative Extension Service efforts to introduce and to ~¢ure adoption of best management practices for agriculture. · Fund PDR through new bonding. · Formulate a list of priority development rights and to encourage and facihtnte other programs and measures to pmtact farmland. · The Town of Southold should upzoue farmland to require a five-acre minisuurn lot size but should provide for the transfer of development rights. · Encore'age owners of undeveloped land to explore land preservation techniques. · Support the Fishers Island School. · Fmcousage conservation & scenic easements · Designate scenic corridors. · Change business zones on Route 48 to AC. · Reduce and consolidate industrial zones on Main Road west of Cwcenport. · Review boundary of liD zone in Greenport * Create Landmark Preservation Co~muiasiun & develop incentives to IXesorve historic · Revise sign ordinance to impzove visual character. · Develop illumination · Create Azohitactural Review Board or Committee · Develop design rmnunl. · Concentrate future economic development in and around exIsting hamlet centers · Ensure that Route 48 remain~ a by-puss with vistas of farm rialds & open spece. · Rezone parcels to more appropriate uses. · Promote hlcentive zoning us a means to preserve agrieulturel and other desirable parcels. · Require greater setbacks liorn the roadway for larger agricullural and cormnereiul buildings. · Orient buildings to limit the interruption of scenic vistas and views. · Continue enforcement of the Town Code with respect to the conversion of agrieulmrel buildings to other eomm~inl · Increase the number and quality of public beaches. · Promote commercial and recreational fishing and boating opporUmifias where there are no conflicts with existing residential development or seasitive nntuml features. · Promote maintenance of existing navigable waterways. · Protect enviromnentally sensitive coastal areas; maxim/zo pubhc access to the waterfront. · Maintain and. protect Southold's agneulteral heritage and pastoral and open qualifies. · Promote a development pattern that is responsive to sensitive areas. · Maintain and/reprove surface water quality. · Maintain und protect finfishing and sbellfisMng habitats. · El/m/hate pollution in creeks & bays. · Elin~ats brown tide in ?ecoMc Bay. · Suffolk County should continue to supper~ the Comall Cooperative Extension Service efforts to introduce and to secure adoption of best management practices for agfiealtore. · Prepare an emergency plan for contaminat/an of ground and surface water on Fishers Island. · Prepare a drought nmnagement plan for Fishers Island. · Protect surface & ground water resources. · Prohib/t or 1/rnil density ha SGPA's · Adopt 5 acre zoning with mandetory clustering in SGPA's. · Implement BMP's · Develop a water supply n,~ter plan, · Resu'ict public wa~er facilities to hamlets · Ensure a smooth traffic flow between hamlets. · Develop a Capital Improvement Program that targets water & s~wer m~provements for hamlets. · Create an economic plan that prorootes sustainable development, · Suffolk County and the Town of Southold should continue to purehase farmland developmont rights and to encourage and facilitate other programs and measures to protect farmland. · Suffolk County should continue to support the Comall C~operetive Extension Service efforts to intsuduco md to secure adoption of host numagement praedcas for agriculture. · Adopt a policy statement on the goals of Town housing programs. · Review housing policies every 2-5 years. · Continue and expand financial assistance programs. · Improve aveila(flity o f acuessory apartments. · Review AHD and shility to meet affordable houalng goals rather than moderate-income housing. · ~p. eve disttibutinn of affordable housing In the To'~m. Provide incentives for devalopem to create affordable rental units, and renovate existing large homes into affordable, year-round rental units. Arb'act new businesses to Fishers Island. Discourage tourism on Fishers Island. · Support Crreenport as a Maritime Center. · Accommodate B&B's and Country Inns · Accommodate home occupations. · Repeal AHD zones · Support rehabilitation of existing hou/mg stuek. · Facilitate crention o f accessory housing unit s. · Diver sify affordable housing stock. · Encourage traditional corranereial development In hamlet centers. · Discourage poorly designed multi4enaney conanereial stores. · Limit fast-food establishn~ents to lib zone. · Adopt a PUD oralnance. · Concentrate future economic developmant in and around existing hamlet centers · Encourage existing lueal businesses In targeted industrias. · Encousage uew businesses in targeted industries to lueate in the Town. · Develop lodging and dining facilities to atlract tourists for longer periods. · Develop facilltias for businese con ference merkat. Continue enforeement of the Town Code with respect to the type of products permitted to be sold at Continue enforcement of the Town Code with respuet to the conversion of agricultural buildings to other uerrauereial uses. Amend the Town Code with respect to the Residence Office (Re) Dislrict. Amend the Town Code with respect to the Limited Business (LB) District. Rezone appropriate parcels adjacent to Maltituek Creek to MI or/or MII zoning category. Modify the Town Code to allow other uses in v/neyards under special permit. · Encourage farm support services and farm-relnted businceses to thfize. · Prntect the Town's traditional economic base. · Enhance & fueue development in core hamlet business centers. · Msintain visibility, acoessibility o f corridor businesees, consistent with sceule goals. · Encourage revitalization of handlers. · The Town should continue to develop programs to Lmpmve its waters to support continued and future shallfi~hing productivity. · The environmental con~patibility, the locational suitability and the economic fcusibility o f open water rish farms near Plum Island, Plum Gut and the Pecoule Estuary needs to be determined. Sirnfler to the previous discussion regarding road impmvemunts, the relationship between inffustrueture and development is reciprocal in nature. · Limit non-ageicultusal uses in designated prime agrinultural areas. · Provide an open space and recreation system adequate in size and location to serve the total (seasonal and year-round) population. · Assure availability of und/er access to a full range of modem health services, including emerguney services, for all citizens. · Provide a full spectrum of accessible educational fiaeilities and services to meet the needs of all _segments of the ccmmmnlty. tmaspormtion. · Encourage roadway and intareuetion ~t~p~uvernents that will iraprove the flow of traffic and promote safety. · Improve safety of roadways, partieulady due to seasonal traffic, on Fishers Island. · Discourage ferry district ~ acoor~ting tourism & seasonal traffic on Fishere Island. · Develop effective rmss U'unsit · CreMe transportntion hubs (Mattituck, Southold, Crreunport). · Create pedestrian walkways. · Develop trails & bikeways. · Ensure that Route 48 remains a by-pass with vistas of farm fields & open space. · Modifythe Town Code to lin'fit cvxb cuts to eno per site unless unusual c~s exist. · Require links between the parking areas of commercial operarions to allow for vehicle movement between adjacent establishments. · Require that subdivided lots access side roads and not directly to CR 48, where appropriate. · Where appropriate, collfflder the use of flag lots with corranon drives for residential development. · Establish Conservation Subdivision Prognma for sites within the WPZ. · Utilize traffic calming measures in hasulat centers, · Designate Route 25 & 48 as Scenic Byways. · Develop pedestrian walkways & linkages. · Develop transportation hubs. · Enhance ferry linkages. * Develop winery shuttles. · Enhance bicycle lid~,ages. · In~lamunt a Transportation Management Strategy. Page 2 I I KEY COALS & CONFLICTS, TOOLS AND GIS USES I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I purchase ames, v,h~/ly in the S CrPA, adjacent to other preserved lands and along the Main Roa& · Create Development Rights Bank · Support agricultural rem. · Encourage wineries. · Rezone percels to more appropriate U~s. · Promote incentive zoning. · Modify the Town Code to allow other uses in vineyards under special permat. · Establish WPZ to control/rodeos development density. · Establish Conservation Subdivision Program (75 - 80% preservation) for sites · Develop Agfianltuml Protection Stratsgy · Create agricultural buffer · Implement a Rural Incentive District (RID). closely related to those for farml~l/fatroing pmteetion, in that the open spaces sought for preservation are pHromfly agricultural in nature, or pa~ of overall agricultural properties. Thus, aclde ving the goals listed here will simultaneously achieve those for · Acquire additional parklands and significant open spaces. · Conform park district and school district boundaries. · Develop a town-wide park and beach pass. · The Town should adrni~ster properties of town-wide sigoifieanre. · Create a Department of Parks & Reezeation · Create a centralized, year- round recreation complex · Create a PDR program. · Fonnalste a list o£ priority purchase areas, primarily in the SGPA, adjacent to other preserved lands and along the ~,hin Road. · Continue enfm~.~u~nt of the Town Code with respect to the type of prodeets peronttod to be sold at farm stands. · Cluster residential development away from the roadway. · Require vegetated buffers betwesn residential developm~m and the roadway. · Develop and implement the use of visual resource best rmnsgement techniques. · Armnd the Town Code with respect to the Residence Office (RO) District. · Amend the Town Code with respect to the Limited Business (LB) D/strict. · The Town Code should be amended with respect to non- conforming uses. · Modify thc Town Code to allow other uses in vineyards under special permit. · Establish WPZ to contral/reduce development density. · Nun-Contiguous Clustering. · Preserve the open vistas of Farms, wetlands and marine wnters bordered by discreet cinsters of development. · Enhance & focus development in core hamlet · Malntsin the quality of the countryside abutting Routes 25 & 48. Maintain a clear distinction between the rural countryside and hamlet centers. Maintain visibility, accessibility of corridor businesses, consistent with scan/c goals. · Designate Route 25 & 48 as Scenic Byways. 1. Implement visnal improvements along corridors · Encourage revital/zation of hamlets. · Furthor encourage: 1. Wineries 2. Farm stunds 3. Conm~ercial fishing 4. R¢cronrional nmrine · Support overall efforts to address problerm in Peeonic Bay. · Encourage the use of IPM euvironmentslly friendly techniques. · Establish Conservation Subdivision Prolw, un for sites within the WPZ. · Consider adopting a Crifinal Environnmn~al Lauds · Estabhsh WPZ to control/reduce development density. · Non-Contiguous Clustering. · Town Wetlands ordinance should be amended to allow for Town jurisd/ct/on to within 100 feet of fresh or tidal wetlands, from its existing 75 feet. · Creation of substandard lots from preexisting substandard lots in a particular zone could be allowed onder certain circunlstances. · Develop Water Supply Stretsg~ · Preserve the open vistas of farms, wetlands and n'~u'me waters bordered by discreet clusters of development. *Implement an RID to facilitats preservation of open space. · Promete the provision and availability of necessary social s~vices, including appropriate neighborhood, senior citizen, and day care facilities. · Provide a full range of public safety services (police, fire, ambulance, rescue, etc.). * Ensure the provision of un adequate range of community fanihfies and services. · Maintain and improve exist/ng utility systems and determine where it is appropr/ate to expand. · Provide an open space and recreation system adequate in size and location to accommodate a range of facilities to serve the total population. · Study Fishers Island's infrastructural needs. · Assure adequate, affordable, health care fac/lit/es for seniors · The Town, SCDHS and SCWA could establish Water Qual/ty TreaUmnt Districts. · Establish Conservation Subdivision Program for sites within the WPZ. · Non-Contiguous Clustering. · A Flood Hazard Mitigation Plan (YHMP) would enable the Town to develop long range strategies for develop areas that have been targeted in the Town's Emergency Preparedness Plans as prime flooding · A balance must be achieved between the proper siting of shorelius hardening sUuntures, the introduction of beach nourishr~nt efforts, and letting natural processes take their course. · Implement an RID to facilitale preservation of farmland and open space. · Town and County PDR efforts pernmnsntiy preser~ agricultural land and open spaes. In order to attain the goals established in the recormmndations listed in this Matrix, the patterns, locations, dansinas and types of development in the Town must be controlled. Specifically, residential and commercial uses should be designated preferentially for the hamlets, w/th marine-related uses provided for in the waterfront areas. A question which should bo faced, if not addressed, is how mush and what types of grewth are desired in the Town, considering the type of Town these plans seek, and '~here should this growth be located? Finally, balances will have to be struck between i~'owth and Town character, as influenced by the locations and patterns of infi'astrusture, zoning and developable land. · Implement pl~nnlng policies which provide for a number ofhoasing types, promote agricultural preservation, ancourago the preservation of environmentally sensitive areas, protect groundwater, encourage water-dapondent mid water-anhanced uses of coastal lands, and support corm~rnial and industrial activities in appropriate locations. · Stmamlitm government & establish a new planni.~ process based on consensus of shared vision. iCreate a coalition of conmmmty groups to address community issues and achieve vision. Enconmge community stewardship. Concentrate development within hamlets. Create a visual map oftha shared vision. · Require all farm stands to have adequate off-street parking and defined aggress & ingress. · Create an economic plan that promotes sostalnable development. · Suffolk County and the Town of Sonthold should continue to purchase farmland development rights and to encourage and facilitate other programs and measures to protect farmland. · The Town of Southold should upzons farmland to require a five-acre miniraum lot size but should provide for the transfer of development rights. · The transfer of development rights to sites in nearby hamlets or along the Sound shore front, where undeveloped acreage is available, should be permitted in order te offset the impact of very low- density zoning Suffolk County should utilize funds from its quartar-cent sales tax program to acquire wocehd watershed lands. · Slow the growth of the sumxner population. ,sqthin the $outhuld SGPA. · Change busniess zones on Route 48 to A-C. · Reduce and consalichte industrial zones on Main Road west of Greonpert · Review boundery of liD zone in Crreanpert. · Concentrate fnture economic development in and around existing hamlet centers · Reuse exis~ng buildings instead of new constnmtion. · Encourage economic growth and expansion in hamlets. · C~serve agianltoral industrg · Deploy "Best Route to" sigus. · Utilize variable message signs to faeilitats varying traffic conditions. · Provide lei~ and fight turn lanes at appropriate intersections. · Require all farm stands to have adequate off-street parking and defined aggress & ingress. · Work with LIRR to program long-tango in-{provements, su~Jl as a North Fork "Sc, eot" service, North Fork shuttle, Wine Country trains etc. · Coordinate with Suffolk County Transit to improve bus service, including rail feeder servi~e. · Coordinate aceeas rmnagement options. · Implement an P-JD to facilitate preservation of farmland. · Town and County PDR efforts permm~ntly preserve agr/cultural land and open space. · Create an alternate travel route for pedestrians & bicyclists from Mathtuck to Orient Point. · Ensure a smuoth traffic flow between hamlets. · Require greater setbacks from the roadway for larger ageinulturel and commercial buildings. · Modify the Town Code to limit curb cuts to one per site unless unusual circumstances exist. · Require links between the parking areas of commercial operations to allow for vehicle movement between adjacent establishments. · Require that subdivided lots aceess side roads and not directly to CR 48, where appropriate. · Where appropriate, consider the use of flag lots with common drives for residential development. Page 3 I I KEY GOALS & CONFLICTS, TOOLS AND GIS USES · Create reserve open space activity · Consolidate capitol improvements within geographically manageable boundaries. through clustering 5. Overnight *Rezone percelsto more appropriate uses. subdivisions, acoorrmaodations * Promote insentive zoning as a means to preserve agriculuaral and other desirable parcels, and as · Encourage eanservation & 6. Pedestrian enhancoments mitigation for change of use where appropriate. scenic easements * Create "scenic overlay" * Orient buildings to limit the interruption of seance vistas and views. · Designate scenic corridors, zoning & development * Continue enforcement of the Town Code with respect to the conversion of agricultural buildings to · Improve public waterfront controls, other commercial uses. access. * Create planning & design · Require vegetated buffers between residential development and thc roadway. · Develop new recreational guidelines for rasal areas · Develop and implement the use of visual resource best management techniques. faeilitias within sconi¢ overlay. · Amend the Town Code with respect to the Residence Office (RO) District. · Ensure that Route 48 * Create planning and design · Amend the Town Code with respeet to the Limited Business (LB) District. remains a by-puss with gnideliues for hamlet areas. * The Town Code should be amended with respect to non-cxraforming uses. vistas of farm fields & open · Refine role of ARB. · Rezone appropriate purcels adjaeont to Matiituek Creek to MI or/or MII zoinng category. space. * Create agrienitaral buffer · Modify the Town Code to allow other uses in v~eyards under special permit. · Link trails to cthor existing zones. & proposed open spaces and · Cluster residential * Streardine the regulatory process. recreational sites and development away firom the · Develop a Stewardship Program facilities, roadway. * Expedite the Conservation Oppol~lnitios Planning process. · Ccordinate Peeunie estuary · Manage - not marl~t tourism. * Establish WPZ to contxol/reduee development density. land preservation efforts · Create a network of visitor * Non-Contiguous Clustering. with SGPA land contel. · Establish Conservation Subdivision Program for sites within the WPZ. preservation efforts. * Implement an overall signage * Preserve the open vistas of farms, wetlands and marine waters bordered by discreet clusters of · Rezone parcols to mere program, development. appropriate uses. · Create a permanent advisory · Create "scenic overlayTMzoning & development controls. · Rezone appropriate parcels bodyto advanco the scenic adjacent to Mardtuek Creek preservation effort. to MI and/or MII zoning · Along with the Town of category. Riverhead, the Town of · Establish WPZ to Southold is insisting that all eontrol/reduco development upgraded transmission lines density, be buried underground. · Establish Conservation * Implement an RID to Subdivision Program for sites facilitate preservation of within the WPZ. farmland and open spuc. e, and · Non-Contigaons Clustering therefore the rural character can be implemented to and aesthetic, of the Town. preserve/protect open spaco. * Prevent light pollution. · Designate Route 25 & 48 as Scenic Byway. · Create "scenic overlay" zoning & development controls. · Implement Rural Incentive District (ILID). · TDR pregram · TDR program * TDR program · Land-based aquaunlture facllilias are located in the Town, operated by the Peconie Land Trust, the · County & private PDR * County & private PDR * County & private PDR County Comell Cooperative Extension and Town, and open water sultivation of shellfish takes place programs programs programs in the Peconi¢ Bay estuary. · In conjunction with its Farm * In conjunction with its Farm · In conjunction with its Farm · Suffolk County should continue to support the Comall Cooperative Extension Service efforts to and FanvJand Protection and Farmland Protection and Farmland Protection introduce and to secure adoption of best management Practises for agriculture. Implemanted Tools Strategy, tho Town has Strategy, the Town hes Strategy, the Town has * Continue and expand financial assistanco Progeams. · TDR Program appointed a Laud appointed a Land appointed a Land · Continue enforcoruent of the Tow~ Code with respect to the type of products permitted to be sold at · County & private PDR Preservation Coordinator to Preservation Coordinator to Preservation Coordinator to farm stands, programs facilitate the administration facilitate the administration fueilitate the adminisWation · Continue enforcement of the Town Code with respect to the conversion of agricultural buildings to of its open space of its open space of its open space other eormuercial uses. preservation program, preservation pro,am, preservation program. · TDR program · Suffolk County should · State designation of Sconie * Suffolk County should · County & private PDR I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Page 4 I I KEY GOALS & CONFLICTS, TOOLS AND GIS USES continue to suppo~ the Byways Corridor achieved continue to support the Comell Cooperctive during 2002. Comell Cooperative Extension Service efforts to * Continue enforcen-~nt of the Extension Service efforts to in~xoduce and to secure Town Code with rnspect to introduce and to secare adoption of best thc conversion of adoption of bnst management practices lbr agricultural baildings to management pruefices for agriceltme, other commercial uses. agriculture. · Continue enfomemont of the Town Code with respect to the type of products permitted to be sold at farm stands. · SoiI Map · Famtla~d Inventory · Acquired Lands/Rights Map · Candid~e Sites Map · Woodhnds Map · Topogrsphie Map · '%~tlands Map · Identify lands to be * HistoficSites, Districts, * Lund Ownership Map * hifi'astruemreMap C~ogt.phi¢ lnfn~m~tton prot~ted in Peconie Bay Corr/dors, etc. Map * Land Use Map · Hamlet Center Map · Transit/Transportalion System watershed · Scenic Corddors Map · Habita~Map * Developable/Conserved Land Map Resource Map · ZoningMap · Plan/SludyAreaMap · Population Density Map · OpenSpace Map · Fish/ng/Madue Resources · Protected Lands Map Map · cowmumty Infrastructure Map · A~danllural District Map I I I I i I I I I I I ! I I I I AHD - Affordable Housing zoning diswict ARB - Architectural Review Board B&B - Bed & Breakfast inn BMP - Best Management Practices HB - Hamlet Business zoning dis~ct I-ID - Hamlet Density zoning dislzict IPM - Integrated Pest Management LIE - Long Island Expressway LIRR - Long Island Railroad MI- Marine I zoning di~.tict MII- Marine 1I zoning district PDD - planned Development District PDR - Pumhase of Developmont Rights PUD - planned Unit Develoimlent SCDHS - Suffolk County Depm'tment of Health Services SCWA - Suffolk County Water Authority SGPA - Special Groundwater Protection Area TDR - Transfer of Development Rights WPZ - Watershed Protection Zone Page I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS Appendix A-4 Summary of Implementation Tools & Key Goals I I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I i I I SUMMARY OF IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS & KEY COALS ~ Pr~swev~tsn! ; Cuitm-sl Chm'~ei*r · En~ge ~e ~ * L~t non~e~ ~es ~ ~si~ted ~ a~c~ * Pro~te~e~vento~gof * P~tewa~r- . ~e~te~lyof~si~n~nei~rh~byp~vem~g~u~t~ffic~ve~n~dby ~or~velop~ntof * ~te a To~ a~c~ p~on ~e~ c~ ~so~s ~d en~mge de~n~nt ~d water- ~a~ng ~s t~ ~ ~atible ~ a rcsidenti~ enm~nt pubhc ~tion. ~m~g p~ of ~velop~t ~ts, ~blic ~e es~bh~ of To~ ~d ~s ~ * En~ge ~ifi~i~ ofa~c~ ~ps ~d lhe ~ke~g of Sou~old ~ a ~ lo~tion for * En~ge roadway ~d ~f~tion ~g ~d ~u~nei~ ~ ~ ~aodc ~cts ~d ~,afion wa~nt ~ cl~ semiti~ fo~ ofa~cul~. ~te~eefion to e~ble ~ to ~ve~ into ~ ~fitable of ~ao~c b~l~ ~d sites * ~e ~e n~r * Pm~te va~tion ~d ~ ~s ~ r~ct for ~e To~'s y~-m~d nee~, en~nt~ ~mve~nts ~t will ~s. * Con~nlmte ~vel~nt ~ ~d q~ty of public fea~s ~d ~ he~ta~. ~ove ~e flow of * C~ae t~ a~te~nts for f~& ~ets. ~es. * ~ove ~e To~'s e~g co~ci~ a~s b~ do not enco~e ~gc-s~le exp~ion ofc~t ~ffic ~d pro~te * C~ate~e~cpl~tpm~tes~t~ble * Suffo~Co~ty~d~eTo~of * ~te~ial ~lop~m. ~fety. ~velop~nt m~g e~a~g a~l~ wa~r-~lated Sou~old ~o~d ~n~ to ~ ~aio~ * En~ ~e ~vclop~nt offer public ~d pilate ~c~ acti~es ~ ~e wate~ adj~nt to * ~mve ~fety of ~o~ ~g, ~a~ ~d ~ ~. p~ ~d ~vel~nt fis~g ~d ~g ~e To~. r~wa~, p~l~ly To~is ~ ~ ~d to en~m~ ~ o~ties . End,age ~ ~velo~t of l~d b~ed ~ facilifi~ for ~ To~'s fang ~d~. d~ to ~ ~ffie. * F~ a h~ of ~ty p~ ~ p~y f~ihtae o~er ~ ~d * ~te ~ * ~dde ~tks ~o a~te offi~ ~d ~h ~vel~n~ li~ ~s~ ~d ~es * C~ate ~ ~e ~O& ~nt ~o o~er p~ed lm~ ~d ~s to ~ct f~ of exist~g ~ble roland to o~r elects of ~ e~omy, hubs ~a~m~, ...... Sou~ol~ ~en~). ~g ~e M~ R~. s~h ~ renew~ of A~ml wat~a~. * ~t s~p ~ ~ ~d en~m~ ~e ~n~on of ~x~ ~s m emamg sho~mg * C~ate ~s~ci a~e~nts ~d ~e . E~ ~t ~ is ~ * Adv~ ~fer of ~velo~nt fi~Is (~R) e~bl~nt of a~ a~q~ q~iy of * ~velop a Capi~ ~mve~t ~ ~t t~ wat~ & ~w~ ~ve~nts f~ ~ets. w~wa~. * C~aeDevelo~nt~B~ ~s. ~q~ty~o~d . C~ate~e~n~cpl~t~tess~ble~velop~nl~ge~s~ga~e~,~ter~ted *De~l~ls& * ~e To~ ofSou~old ~o~d wa~ to ~e ~afi~, ~hln~ ~o~ ~d ~ as~B. To~ ~ ~. b~e~. * Sup~ a~ ~du~. up~e ~d to ~q~e a five- Sou~old's ~t * Adopt a ~Hcy state~t ~ ~e ~s of To~ ho~g ~. * E~ ~t Route 48 * Su~a~c~h. ~mlot~zebut~o~d ~dpmje~ed~- * Re~ewhe~g~h~esew~2-5~s. * ~a~ w~es. pm~ for ~e ~sfer of m~d ~d ~ * ~ ~d ex~d ~ci~ ~is~ ~. ~st~ of ~ fiel~ * ~te~fi~mmgasa~to~e ~vel~ntd~to~tes ~afions. · ~m~av~abflityofa~ssoryap~n~s. o~ns~. a~cul~ ~d o~r ~s~ble ~ls, ~d ~ a o~si~ t~ SGPA a t~ ~nfly * M~ ~d ~ * Re~ew ~ ~d ab~ty ~o ~et affo~ble ho~g goals m~ ~ ~m~-~ ho~g. * M~ ~e To~ C~e ~fi~ for e~ of ~ w~ ~ae. p~g two~e &~ty. ~ water q~ty. * ~e ~s~bmion of aff~ble hom~g ~ ~ To~. to ~t c~ ~ts to one . ~r si~ ~e~ * Mo~eTo~Co~to~owo~er~s~ * S~eF~ers~l~d * El~ae~fi~ . ~de~n~vesfor~lo~rsto~ate~o~le~n~ts, md~no~tee~g~gcho~smto ~i~se~a. me~ ~ s~ci~ ~. S~ool. ~ Pe~c Bay. affo~ble, ~-m~d ~nl& ~. * Req~ 1~ ~ween * I~ntify ~fi~ ~d ~ ~ed of ~tecti~. * En~ ~ation & ~c [ * ~ ~ ~rgency * Cont~ ~ct action eff~s ~ ~mge ~te ~t~fives. ~e ~g ~a of * Rea~ out ~o o~e~ of ~le ~ls. e~e~nts pl~ for * Su~ ~ & ~e e~y. ~ial * ~ early ~ssible ~tem~ ~d ~s ~ * ~si~te ~c ~do~. ~tmfion of * Su~ ~e~ ~ a M~ C~ter. to ~ow for ve~cle p~ion ~fio~. * C~ge ~s~ ~es on Route ~d ~d ~f~ * A~o~ B&B's ~d Co~ ~ ~nt ~tween * ~sti~ ~ea~g a To~ A~i~ A~ee~nt 48 to A~. ~t~. ~ * Red~ ~d ~li~te ~d~ * ~ a &o~t ~ A~mo~e ho~ ~upati~. adj~nt e~bh~nts. Re~ ~ runes * Req~ ~t ~d * Es~h~ ~Z to ~F~u~ ~velo~nt ~mity runes on M~ R~ wea of ~nt pl~. * Sup~ ~flitati~ ofex~g ho~g a~. lo~s a~ss si~ ma~ * Est~H~ C~fion Su~i~ ~ (75-8~ ~e~. * Mopt 5 ~ ~g F~i~mte ~fion of ~ ho~g ~ts. ~d not ~ecfly to CR ~on) for ~tes wi~ ~e ~Z * Re~ew ~ of~ rune ~ wi~ ~o~ * . * Devel~ A~ ~te~ion S~e~ ~en~. clog m SGPA's. · ~ge ~fio~ ~i~ develop~nt m ~et ~n~s. 48, m a~te. * C~ate a~ buffer ~nes. * Re~ si~ o~ to ~mve * ~pl~ent B~'s * ~ge ~ly desired ~-te~cy ~i~ aoms (a~p sho~ing ~nters). * ~e~ a~ate, * ~le~t a R~ ~ntive D~ct ~) ~s~ ch~. * ~vel~ a wa~r * ~ f~t-f~ estabHs~nB to ~ rune. ~i~r ~ ~ of * A~ Di~a en~ges ~g byle~sl~ive ~ient. * ~velop ~l~fion a~s. s~ply ~t~ p~. * Adopt a P~ o~imn~, flag lots ~ ~n * SEQ~ re~ew. * C~aie ~te~ Re~ew * Re,ct ~bhc wat~ · ~velop ~h~es for ~ess ~fe~n~ ~ket. ~s for * Confo~ p~k &~ ~d ~1 &~ ~es. B~ or Co~ee ~e~ifies to ~s * C~l~ enfo~nt of ~e To~ C~ ~ ~ to ~e t~ of p~ucts ~ed to ~ sold at f~ ~lo~nt. * De~l~ato~-wi~k~s. * ~velopd~i~n~. · En~of s~. * Ut~ffic~g * ~e To~ ~o~d ~a~ pm~es of to~-wi~ * En~ ~t Route 48 m~ a ~M ~d * C~t~ enfor~nt of ~e To~ C~e ~ ~s~ct to ~e ~nversi~ of a~ b~ to olh~ ~s ~ si~fi~, nol 1~ p~k dis~s, by-p~s ~ ~ of ~ fiel~ en~n~y ~i~ ~s. ~ntem * C~atea~ofP~&R~on &o~nsp~. ~en~yte~q~s. . ~d~eTo~C~wi~clto~Resid~Offi~(RO)~ct. * ~si~ateRo~e25& * C~atea~~d~lex * ~nfive~g~a * Esmb~ . ~d~eTo~C~wi~cito~L~t~ess~)~ct. 48~S~cB~a~. * C~atea~R, PDRpm~ ~to~ea~ Con~fi~ . Re~ea~te~lsa~a~nito~m~C~ktoMI~mg~teg~y. * Develop~ * F~ae a ha of~o~ty ~ch~ ~% p~y o~er ~s~able p~ls, ~d as a Su~si~ ~ . M~ ~e To~ C~ to ~ow o~er ~s ~ me~ ~ s~c~ ~t. w~a~ & l~a~s. ~e~a~too~p~s~edl~d ~fionfor~geof~e f~swi~e . ~eTo~o~d~n~l~to~loveits~t~to~p~nt~d~d~ * E~fe~ ~ong ~e ~ R~d. whom ~p~ae. ~Z, ~ell~g ~ty. l~s. * C~ate ~e o~n ~ ~u~ cl~g * ~q~ ~at~ ~t~ ~m ~e * C~ ~g a * ~m~, ~t~ ~ exp~d ~ w~ ap~ to ~te ~sent ~d ~ * ~1~ ~ su~s. roadway for l~r a~c~ C~fi~ dewl~nt ~u~es. * En~ ~tion & s~c ~ ~d ~i~ ~. En~n~ ~ * ~de ~ o~n ~a~ ~d ~ati~ s~m ~ ~ ~ ~d l~ti~ to ser~ ~e to~ (~ ~d * E~ bic~e * Desire ~c ~rs. * ~t b~ to ~t ~e o~ ~-m~d) ~fion. l~s. * ~mve pubhc water~nt ~ss. ~ption of s~c ~st~ ~d * E~bN~ Watched * ~ a~a~ty of~ a~ss to a ~ ~ of~m he~ ~s, ~clu~g e~r~ncy * ~le~nt a * Devel~ new ~eaii~ f~fli~es ~cl~g a ~lf ~ews. ~tection Zones ~s ~, ~ ~1, te~s ~ i~ s~g ~ & * Cont~ enfo~nt of~e (~) W * ~ a ~ s~c~ of ~ssible e~o~ ~ih~es ~d ~s M~nl Stmte~ ~1 ~nt~ To~ C~ ~ ~s~a to ~ ~n~V~ * ~te ~e ~si~ ~d a~ab~iW ofne~s~ s~i~ ~s, * ~ploy "Best Route * ~s~Route48~aby-p~s~of ~n~i~ofa~e~ ~wl~nt~ty . ~a~geofpublic~ety~s~li~,~,~,~,etc.) to"~. ~fiel~&o~ns~. b~gstoo~i~ * N~li~ . E~e~sionof~q~te~of~ty~lifies~d~s * ~lefl~t * L~ ~1 to other e~g & p~d o~n ~a~ ~s. Cl~g , * C~n~e ~vel~nt x~ ~ets. ~ l~s at ~d ~o~ site ~ ~i~es. * C~t~ enfo~nt of ~e * To~ Wet~ * ~wlop a Ca~ ~ve~nt ~t ~ wat~ & ~w~ h~l~nts for ~ets. app~ate * Utfli~ G~ to iden~ l~ds to ~ ~tec~d ~ To~ Co~ ~th ~s~a to ~e o~inan~ ~o~d ~ * FI~ Ha~rd ~fisafion H~ wo~d e~ble ~ To~ to ~lop 1~ ~ s~e~es for develop ~ ~cfions. I I Cu~m'~l Chm-~r SUMMARy OF IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS & KEY GOALS Tramp~rtatton ! I I I ! I I I I I I i I I I I I Pecenlc Bay watershed Support identification of additlenal lands, not already on the CPF list, that warrant estuaxnie & watershed protection. Coordinate Peconic estuary land preservation efforts with SGPA land preservatinn efforts. Rezone appropriate parcels adjacent to Mattituck Creek to MI and/or Mil zoning category. · Nm-Contiguous Cl~tering can be irsplerreated to preserve/pretect open space. · Preserve the open vistas of farm~ wellands and marine waters bordered by discreet clasters of developrcent. Designate Route 25 & 48 as Scenic Byways. Establish acquisition priorities for scenic byways. Create "scenic overlay" zoning & development controls. · Recreation requirements in zoning code (review and update needed). · Mandatory clustering. type ofpzoducts permitted to be sold at farm stands. Cluster residential development away fi, om the roadway. Require vegetated buffers between residential development and the roadway. Amend the Town Code with respect to the Residence Office (RO) District. Amend the Town Code with respect to the Limited Business (LB) District. The To~ Code should be amended with respect to non- conforrnmg uses. Modify the Town Code to allow other uses in vineyards under special permit. Establish WPZ to control/reduce development density · Non-Contiguous Clustering · Preserve the open vistas of farms, wetlz.uds and manne waters bordered by discreet clusters of development. · Malntalnthe qualityofthe countryside abutting Routes 25 & 48. · Maintain a cleardistinction between the rural countryside and hamlet centers. · Designate Route 25 & 48 as Scenic Byways. · Create "scenic overlay" zoning & development controls. · Refine role of ARB. · Create agricultural buffer zones. · Manage - not market tourism · Create a network of visitor ~nter$. · Create a permanent advisory body to advance the scenic preservation effort. · Implement an RID to facilitate preservation of farmland and open space, · SEQRA review. amended to allow for Town jurisdictian to within 100 feet of flesh or tidal wetlands, from/ts existing 75 feet. · Develop Water Supply Strategy. · Implement an RID to faeliitate preservation of open space, · SEQRA review. · Mandntory clastering. that lmve been targeted in the Town's Emergency Preparedness Plans as prime flooding or ~osion-prone. A balance must be achieved between the proper siling of'shoreline lmrdening stmctores, the introduction of beach nourishment efforts, and letting natural processes ~ the/r course. It would be highly beneficial if the town began conducting beach width surveys at regular intervals of the Sound and Estuarine shorelines on an annual basis. Road, dre/nage, lighting, infrastructure requirements in Zoning Code end Subdivision Regulations. · Streamline govenmmnt & establish a new planning proeess besed on cansensus o f shared vision. · Create a eoniifinn of eonmamity groups to address community issues and ach/eve vision. · Enceurage enrnmanity stewardship. · Concentrate development within hamlets. · Create an economic plan that promotes sustainable development using existing agfianlmml, water-related recreation, fishing, historical and cultural assets. Tourism is central. Suffolk County and the Town of Southold should continue to purchase farmland development rights The Town of Southold should upzone farmland to requh-c a five-acre n/innam~ lot size but should provide for the transfer of development rights to sites outside the SOPA at the currently prevailing two- Slowthe growthofthe summerpepulatlon. · Change business zones on Route 48 to AC. · Reduce and consolidate indushqal zones on Mnin Road west of Greenport. · ReviewboundaryofHD zone inGreenpert. · Rense exiating buildings instead of new construction. · Promote incentive zoning as a means to preserve ageicaltm'al end other desirable parcels, end as a mitigation for change of use where appropriate. · Require greater setbacks from the roadway for larger agricultural and corarmmial buildings. · Continue enfor~ment of the Town Code with respect to the conversion of agricultural buildings to other gomrr~reiul u8~8. · Cluster residential development away from the roadway · The Town Cod~ should be amended with respect to non-ennforming uses. · Require links butween the parking areas of conanereial operations to allow for vehicle movement between adjacent establishments. · Require that anlxlivided lots acc~as side reade and not directly to CR 48, where appropriate. · Where appropriate, consider the use of flag lots with common drives for residential developn~nt. · Expedite the Collselvatiou C)pportllnitlas ~nn~ng process, · Establish WPZ to contzol/reduce development density · Establish Conservatlan Subdivision Program for sites within the WPZ · Create "scemc overlay" zoning & development controls. · Conservation subdivision reducing dcasity on a tract by 60% or more will enable regulation of growth in areas less an~nable to growth · Zoning map for use restrictions. · Require all farm stande to have adequate o ff-atseat parking and defined aggmss & ingress. · Work with LIRR to program tong-range imprevemonts, such as a North Fork "Scoot" service, North Fork shuttle, Wine Coontry tralas etc. · Road requirements in subdivision regulations. Note: Matrix extracts key recommendations and implementation measures from existing plans/studies, focus groups and governmental functions, as related to the eight (8) key goals of the Town. The matrix provides a quick understanding of the existing planning framework, to identify inconsistencies, areas for further smd additionat implementetion measurcs. The ma~x ,d~o high/ights key defiatfions needed te better und,rstend inter.~lationships o f the current pla~m/ng framework, in o~l,r te ~fine dcfiuitions for futere planuing efforts. and areas in n~xi of Page 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Appendix A-5 Positive Declaration Southold Town Board January 7, 2003 I I ! I I I ! I i I I I I I I I I I TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SEQRA RESOLUTION JANUARY 7, 2003 SOUTHOLB COMPREHENSIVE IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY ACTION CLASSIFICATION, INTENT TO ASSUME LEAD AGENCY STATUS, INTENT TO REQUIRE AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT, AND RECEIPT AND CIRCULATION OF DRAFT SCOPE OF THE DGEIS WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Southold (the "Board") is aware of, has participated in the preparation of, or has prepared a number of land use plans, studies, analyses, etc. over the past approximately 20 years, and WHEREAS, the Board intends to implement recommendations of these studies that would advance the goals of the Town, and WHEREAS, the Board has articulated the goals of the Town in various documents and reiterates here the intent to achieve the Town's vision as identified in the following goals: · The Town's goal is to preserve land including open space, recreation and working landscapes. · The Town's goal is to preserve rural, cultural, historic character of the hamlets and surrounding countryside. · The Town's goal is to preserve its natural environment; to prevent further deterioration of resources and to restore degraded resources back to pristine or near pristine quality. · The goal of the Town is to preserve and promote a range of housing and business opportunities that would support a socio-economically diverse community. · ' The Town's goal is to increase transportation efficiency and to create attractive alternatives to automobile travel, while preserving the scenic and historic attributes of the Town, State, County and local roadways. WHEREAS, these studies generally included implementation tools and recommendations designed to address the land use and social need aspects addressed in each study, and WHEREAS, since the action is a Town-wide initiative, it is determined to be a Type I action pursuant to SEQRA Part 617.4 (b)(1), and therefore is more likely to require an environmental impact statement, WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Southold has exclusive authority to effect zoning changes, create and/or modify legislation, establish land use programs and implement the various measures and tools identified in the past land use and social need studies of the Town, and WHEREAS, since the Board holds this exclusive authority, the Town Board is the appropriate entity to assume lead agency under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, and WHEREAS, the Board does intend to solicit inter-agency and public input, and will consider potential impacts under a public forum provided through the intended Genetic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) procedure, and I I I ! I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy SEQRA Resolution WHEREAS, implementation of these recommendations may be interrelated and potentially in divergence, to the extent that coordinated consideration of implementation is necessary and appropriate and further that one recommendation on its own may not result in an environmental impact; however, the combined effect of several recommendations may result in environmental impacts, thus indicating the potential for cumulative impacts, and WHEREAS, notwithstanding the far reaching nature of the intended action, the Board finds that by virtue of the fact that the initiative is intended to implement the past planning studies of the Town, it is consistent with the Town Comprehensive Plan which includes the zoning code and building zone map, zoning decisions, goals, legislative actions and the record of decisions that forms the Town's direction in terms of achieving its vision, and WHEREAS, as a result, the action is not expected to cause significant adverse impacts since it advances the goals of the Town; however, the action is of Town-wide significance, and does involve changes to natural and human resources; is a Type I action pursuant to SEQRA Part 617 and therefore is more likely to require an environmental impact statement; and, lastly that the action will affect property, resources and the shaping of the Town's future, and WHEREAS, based on the above facts and the Part I Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) prepared for the Board's consideration in determining significance, the Board finds it prudent to take a "hard look" at the proposed action through the preparation of a Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement (DGEIS), and WItEREAS, the Board is familiar with the scoping process as outlined in SEQRA Part 617.8 Scoping, and WHEREAS, the Board has established a team of professionals to assist with the comprehensive implementation strategy, consisting of the Town Attorney, the Town Planner and Town supporting staff, two (2) planning consultants and two (2) consulting attorneys, and this team has prepared a draft scoping outline for the purpose of determining the scope and content of the DGEIS, and WItEREAS, the Board received this scope and deliberated upon its content and finds the draft scope to be adequate to commence the scoping process for the DGEIS pursuant to SEQRA Part 617.8 (b), and WItEREAS, the Board intends to provide an opportunity for interested agencies and the public to provide input into the scope of the DGEIS through circulation of the draft scope and solicitation of public comments at a public scoping meeting, and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby classifies the Town of Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy as a Type I action pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617, and 2 I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy SEQRA Resolution BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board hereby assumes lead agency status in review of the action and for the purpose of compliance with the State Environmental Quality Review Action (SEQRA) Part 617, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board finds that a Genetic Environmental Impact Statement (GELS) is appropriate and hereby issues the appropriate determination (via a Positive Declaration) to require such document for the proposed action, considering that the recommendations may result in potential impacts which may include cumulative and/or generic impacts, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board hereby receives the draft scope for the purpose of initiating the scoping process pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617.8, and I I I I I I I I I I I I BE IT BE IT BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board will hold a public scoping meeting on January 29, 2003 at 7:30 p.m. at the Southold Town Hall meeting room, and a period of 10-days will be provided following the public scoping meeting to allow for submission of written comments, and FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board authorizes the Town Clerk to file notice of the public scoping meeting in two (2) local newspapers on January 16 and January 23, 2003 and the draft scope will be made available on the Town web-site, at local libraries and at the Town Clerks office prior to the scoping meeting, and FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board authorizes the Town Clerk of the Town of Southold to file this Resolution, the Part I Environmental Assessment Form (EAF), the Positive Declaration, and the Draft Scope of the DGEIS with the following parties: Town of Southold Supervisor's Office Town Clerk of the Town of Southold Town of Southold Planning Board Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold Town Trustees Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services Suffolk County Dept. of Public Works Suffolk County Water Authority Suffolk County Planning Commission NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation, Commissioner, Albany NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation, Regional Office at Stony Brook NYS Dept. of Transportation NYS Dept. of State US Army Corps of Engineers Inc. Village of Greenport Town of Riverhead Town of Southampton Town of Shelter Island Parties of Interest Officially on Record with the Town Clerk (if applicable) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I SEQRA POSITIVE DECLARATION Notice of Intent to Prepare a Draft Generic EIS Determination of Significance Lead Agency: Town of Southold Town Board Contact: Hon. Joshua Horton, Supervisor Address: Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1 I79 Southold, NY 11971 Date: January 7, 2003 This notice is issued pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act - SEQRA) of the Environmental Conservation Law and Chapter 44 of the Town Code of the Town of Southold. The lead agency has determined that the proposed action described below may have a significant effect on the environment and that a Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) will be prepared. Title of Action: Town of Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy SEQRStatus: Type I Action Description o fAction: The proposed project involves the evaluation and where appropriate implementation by the Southold Town Board of the recommended planning and program tools and measures as described in the planning studies undertaken within the Town over the past 20 years. The studies, plans and recommendations have been reviewed in terms of current needs and Town goals to achieve the Town's vision as articulated in the following plans. · Parks, Recreation & Open Space Survey (1982) · Town Master Plan Update and Background Studies (1984/85) · US/UK Countryside Stewardship Exchange Team (1991) · Long Island Comprehensive Special Groundwater Protection Area Plan · Town Affordable Housing policies and program (1993) · Fishers Island GrowthPlan (1987-1994) · Southold Town Stewardship Task Force Study (1994) · Seaview Trails of the North Fork (1995) · Peconic EstuaryPmgram (1995) · Economic Development Plan, Town of Southold (1997) · Community Preservation Project Plan (July, 1998) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Location: SCTM No..' Town Determination of Significance Comprehensive Implementation ~trategy · Southold Township: 2000 Planning Initiatives · County Route 48 Corridor Land Use Study (1999) · Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy (1999) · Town Water Supply Management & Watershed Protection Strategy (20 · Scenic Southold Comdor Management Plan (200I) · Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (2001) · North Fork Travel Needs Assessment (2002) · Blue Ribbon Commission for a Rural Southold, Final Report (July 14, ~ · Southold Town Code, Zoning Code and Zoning Map These recommendations (consolidated and summarized in the attached table) would be considered by the Town Board for implementation in the form of amendments to Town procedures, the Town Code and various Town regulations, in conformance with the Town's Master Plan. As a result, the proposed project involves legislative changes, with no specific physical changes proposed. The Town Board intends to initially consider all prior recommendations with an emphasis on those that protect farmland, and open space, promote affordable housing and preserve natural resources. The Board may prioritize, narrow down or select implementation tools that best achieve the goals of the Town. The basic goals of the above-referenced plans and studies include: · The Town's goal is to preserve land including open space, recreation and working landscapes. · The Town's goal is to preserve rural, cultural, historic character of the hamlets and surrounding countryside. · The Town's goal is to preserve its natural environment; to prevent further deterioration ofresoumes and to restore degraded resources back to pristine or near pristine quality. · The goal of the Town is to preserve and promote a range of housing and business opportunities that would support a socio-economically diverse community. · The Town's goal is to increase transportation efficiency and to create attractive alternatives to automobile travel, while preserving the scenic and historic attributes of the Town, State, County and local roadways. The Board will solicit inter-agency and public input, and will consider potential impacts under a public forum provided through a Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) procedure. The proposed action will provide a means to ensure that the above-listed Town goals will be achieved through a comprehensive, well-established and well- considered land use decision-making framework. The proposed action would apply to the entire Town. All of District 1000 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Determination of Significance Town Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Reasons Supporting This Determination: The proposed project involves the evaluation and where appropriate implementation of 20 years of planning recommendations in a comprehensive manner and consistent with current Town needs. By virtue of the fact that the initiative is intended to implement the past planning studies of the Town, it is consistent with the Town Comprehensive Plan which includes the zoning code and building zone map, zoning decisions, goals, legislative actions and the record of decisions that forms the Town's direction in terms of achieving its vision. The action is not expected to cause significant adverse impacts, since it advances the goals of the Town. However, the action is of Town-wide significance, and does involve changes to natural and human resources. In addition, since the action is a Town- wide initiative, it is determined to be a Type I action pursuant to SEQRA Part 617, and therefore is more likely to require an environmental impact statement. Finally, since the action will affect property, resources and thc shaping of the Town's future, it is prudent to perform a Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS). As a result, the considerations noted above, and the following potential impacts are identified as the Reasons Supporting This Determination: 1. The application has been reviewed pursuant to the Criteria for Determination of Significance contained in Part 617.7. Consideration has been given to information supplied by the applicant including a Part 1 Environmental Assessment Form. 2. The proposed action may result in impacts to the natural and human resources of the Town, individually, cumulatively or synergistically. Zone changes and/or Town Code revisions may be necessary to implement recommendations. 3. The action may set a precedent with regard to the growth and character of the Town and/or individual communities. For Further Information Contact: Greg Yakaboski, Esq., Town Attomey Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: (631) 765-1889 Copies of this Notice Sent to: Town of Southold Supervisor's Office Town Clerk of the Town of Southold Town of Southold Planning Board Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold Town Trustees Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services Suffolk County Dept. of Public Works Suffolk County Water Authority Suffolk County Planning Commission NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation, Commissioner, Albany NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation, Regional Office at Stony Brook NYS Dept. of Transportation NYS Dept. of State US Army Corps of Engineers Inc. Village of Greenport Towns of Riverhead, Southampton and Shelter Island Parties of Interest Officially on Record with the Town Clerk (if applicable) I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS Appendix A-6 Acceptance of Final Scope Southold Town Board April 8, 2003 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Final Scope for the Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement SOUTHOLD COMPREHENSIVE IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY Southold Town Board Action April 22, 2003 This document provides an outline for use by the Town of Southold Town Board (as Lead Agency) in determining the content and format of the Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement (Draft GEIS), for the proposed action known as the Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy (SCIS). DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION The proposed action involves the evaluation and, where appropriate, the implementation by the Southold Town Board of the recommended planning and program tools and measures as described in the planning studies undertaken within the Town over the past 20 years. The studies, plans and recommendations have been reviewed in terms of current needs and Town goals to achieve the Town's vision as articulated in the following plans. · Parks, Recreation & Open Space Survey (1982) · Town Master Plan Update (1985) · Fishers Island Growth Plan (1987-1994) · US/UK Countryside Stewardship Exchange Team (1991) · Long Island Comprehensive Special Groundwater Protection Area Plan (1992) · Town Affordable Housing policies and program (1993) · Southold Town Stewardship Task Force Study (1994) · Seaview Trails of the North Fork (1995) · Peconic Estuary Program (1995) · Economic Development Plan, Town of Southold (1997) · Community Preservation Project Plan (July, 1998) · Southold Township: 2000 Planning Initiatives · County Route 48 Corridor Land Use Study (1999) · Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy (1999) · Town Water Supply Management & Watershed Protection Strategy (2000) · Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (2001) · Scenic Southold Corridor Management Plan (2001) · North Fork Travel Needs Assessment (2002) · Blue Ribbon Commission for a Rural Southold, Final Report (July 14, 2002) These recommendations (consolidated and summahzed in the attached table at the end of this document) would be considered by the Town Board for implementation in the form of amendments to Town procedures, the Town Code and various Town regulations, in conformance with the Town's Master Plan. As a result, the proposed project involves legislative changes, with no specific physical changes proposed. The Town Board intends to initially consider all I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Final Scope Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS prior recommendations with an emphasis on those that protect farmland, and open space, promote affordable housing and preserve natural resources. The Board may prioritize, narrow down or select implementation tools that best achieve the goals of the Town. The basic goals of the above-referenced plans and studies include: · The Town's goal is to preserve land including open space, recreation and farmland. · The Town's goal is to preserve rural, cultural and historic character of the hamlets and surrounding countryside. · The Town's goal is to preserve its natural environment; to prevent further deterioration of resources and to restore degraded resources back to pristine or near pristine quality. · The goal of the Town is to preserve and promote a range of housing and business opportunities that would support a socio-economically diverse community. · The Town's goal is to increase transportation efficiency and to create attractive alternatives to automobile travel, while preserving the scenic and historic attributes of the Town, State, County and local roadways. The Board will solicit inter-agency and public input, and will consider potential impacts under a public forum provided through a Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) procedure. The proposed action will provide a means to ensure that the above-listed Town goals will be achieved through a comprehensive, well-established and well-considered land use decision- making framework. FORMAT AND CONTENT OF DEIS COVER SHEET (Indicate that the document is a "Draft" GEl&' name of project, location of action, name and address of Lead Agency, as well as name, title and telephone number of contact person at the Lead Agency; names, addresses and contact information of all persons or organizations contributing to the document; date of acceptance of the document by the Lead Agency; and date by which written comments on the document are to be received by the Lead Agency.) SUMMARY (Provide brief summary of the proposed action, to include: location of the Town of Southold, the need for and benefits of the action, a description of the action, the anticipated significant adverse impacts of the action, corresponding mitigation measures of those impacts, alternatives considered, and the permits and approvals required to implement the action.) 1.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSEI> ACTION 1.1 Background, Need and Benefits of the Proposed Action 1.1.1 Background and History (Provide brief description of the existing pattern of land use within the Town. Describe the various Town, county, NYS and private planning efforts in regard to land use decision-making, and the interrelationships between these plans and the agencies proposing or implementing each. Discuss the status vis a vis adoption of each prior Plan or Study. Discuss the forces and/or conditions which have caused this effort to be proposed at the present time. Describe GEIS process as it pertains to this action.) Page 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2.0 Final Scope Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 1.1.2 Public Need and Municipality Objectives (Justify proposed action in terms of Town goals, including that to provide affordable housing for various segments of the Town's population. Discuss the need for this action and fulfillment of public desires.) 1.1.3 Benefits of the Proposed Action (Provide brief listing/discussion of the benefits to accrue from the proposed action. Discuss the logic and rationale for the choices being addressed) 1.2 Location of the Proposed Action (Indicate that proposed action is applicable within all of Town. Describe locations of individual types of land uses as distributed within Town, in terms of roadway access, the various zones, districts, utility services, etc.) 1.3 Description of the Proposed Action (Clarify which areas wouM be considered for upzoning. Include analysis to ensure that CIS recommendations do not interfere with each other, or impair existing programs. Indicate whether it is advisable to set a policy on subdivision of farms during preservation process and if so, ifa minimum farm size should be established. Provide definition of "Open Farmland" as per iVYS Ag Law.) 1.3.1 Planning Process, Zoning and Zoning Code Mechanisms 1.3.2 Education/Enforcement Mechanisms 1.3.3 Capital Improvements/Expenditures 1.3.4 Direct Town Management 1.3.5 Inter-Agency/Quasi-Agency Initiatives 1,4 Mechanics of Implementation (Discuss programs, staffing, and needs of Town to ensure that implementation of tools that advance Town goals will occur.) 1.5 Additional Action Thresholds and Permits & Approvals Required (Provide thresholds and conditions that would trigger the need for supplemental determinations of significance or site specific EIS's. Provide brief discussion of the remaining SEQRA processes and review stages required for the proposed action; list all required permits, reviews and approvals.) EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AND FUTURE BUILD-OUT CONDITIONS 2.1 Geological Resources (Provide information on the existing soil, subsurface and topographic conditions of the Town, particularly in regard to those characteristics pertinent to suitability of the soils to support the uses resulting from the proposed action.) 2.2 Water Resources (Describe current status of groundwater quality, quantity, elevation and fiow direction in the Town. Relate areas of current groundwater impact to land use types, patterns and intensities. Provide information on Town surface water bodies.) 2.3 Ecological Resources (Describe/discuss the existing vegetation resources of the Town, including habitats found, acreages of each habitat type, significant species and/or habitats found, etc. Describe/discuss wildlife species found or anticipated, based on habitats found, significance of wildlife species found, etc. Identify wetlands and unique habitat linkages. Document contact with NY Natural Heritage Program and findings regarding unique habitats, species, or information recorded in their files). I Page 3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Final Scope Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS 2.4 Transportation Resources (Describe the existing roadway characteristics and levels of congestion at pertinent intersections and roadway segments in the Town. Relate areas of congestion to land use types, patterns and intensities. Present information on current types, levels of usage and routes of public transit resources serving the Town, and document road improvement plans.) 2.5 Air Resources (Describe/discuss existing meteorological and climate characteristics of the Town, air quality in the Town, and briefly describe the applicable air quality standards and regulations.) 2.6 Land Use, Zoning and Plans (Describe current land use and zoning patterns in the Town. Description of current development regulations and both public and private land preservation efforts in Town, and discuss efficacy/success in meeting Town goals of each. Describe/discuss the various land use plans, studies, etc., on which the proposed action is based, along with the recommendations of each. Include appropriate maps, such as PDR land, TDR land, public land, other preserved.) 2.7 Demographic Conditions (Provide description/discussion of the existing and anticipated demographic characteristics of the Town, including population size, households, income and other relevant data. Relate housing costs to land use type and density.) 2.8 Community Services (Relate costs of each public service listed below to land use type and density. Provide information on the current status of the following public/community services which serve the Town): · public schools · policeprotection · fireprotection · recreation · localgovernment 2.9 Infrastructure (Provide information on the current status of the following infrastructural elements): · solid waste removal and handling, including recycling · water supply (indicate geographic area from where potable water is pumped) · drainage (discuss existingpublic drainage systems) · sewage & wastewater treatment (indicatepresence and limits of districts) · electricity · naturalgas,(ifavailable) 2.10 Community Character (Describe the existing and emerging character of the community, including those of its residents. Describe the visual character of the Town, for observers along bordering roadways and from other public vantage points, for: hamlets, rural areas, and the transition areas between hamlets and rural areas.) 2.11 Cultural Resources (Describe/discuss the history of the Town and the established and potential for the presence of significant pre-historic or historic and/or archaeological resources.) 2.12 Economic/Fiscal Conditions (Provide information on the current tax generation and economic characteristics of the Town and the allocation of taxes to the I Page 4 I I I I I I i I I I I I I I 1 1 I I 3.0 Final Scope Southol~ Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS various taxing jurisdictions. Identify and evaluate various economic sectors within the community, major employers and sources of jobs.) POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Key issues involve concern over 5-acre upzoning and potential socio-economic impacts; ensuring the long-term stability of the Town with respect to natural/cultural resource protection; the need for affordable housing; and how the proposed action relates to achieving Town goals and minimizing adverse environmental impacts. To achieve the necessary level of analysis, a number of assessment techniques will be used. ,4 build-out analysis of the Town will be performed to determine future conditions; an impact assessment will be prepared based on expected future conditions, as well as those aspects that are quantifiable with respect to impact assessment; land preservation efforts will be identified to document past land use review practices and effects; based on recommended changes in the land use decision-making framework. Each of the 43 Implementation Tools will be assessed in relation to environmental resource categories. In addition, the potential impacts of each implementation tool will be assessed and beneficial and adverse impacts will be noted. The following outline identifies the format and contact of these assessment techniques in more detail.) 3.1 Future Conditions Without the Proposed Action 3.1.1 Build Out Analysis (Perform build-out analysis of the Town based on current zoning, to predict population and describe future conditions.) 3.1.2 Regional Impact Assessment for Build Out Conditions (Based on the buiM out analysis of future conditions without the project, determine potential impacts with respect to use parameters, coverage, water resources, demographics, tax revenue, school taxes, solid waste and trip generation.) 3.1.3 Land Preservation Efforts (Discuss the various mechanisms of land preservation and status of each. Discuss relationship between potential development density and intensity of land preservation effort.) 3.2 Potential Impacts of the Proposed Action 3.2.1 Regional Impact Assessment for the Proposed Action (determine potential impacts with respect to use parameters, coverage, water resources, demographics, tax revenue, school taxes, solid waste and trip generation, for quantifiable aspects of the proposed projecO 3.2.2 Resource Impact Analysis (Discuss potential adverse environmental impacts on a regional basis with respect to each environmental resource parameter identified in Section 2. 0 of the DEIS) Geological Resources Water Resources Ecological Resources Transportation Resources Air Resources Land Use, Zoning and Plans Demographic Conditions Community Services Infrastructure Community Character Cultural Resources Economic/Fiscal Conditions I Page 5 I I I I I I I I I I I I I i i 1 I 4.0 5.0 6.0 Final Scope Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS 3.3 Use and Conservation of Energy Resources 3.2.3 Potential Impacts of Implementation Tools (Determine beneficial and adverse impacts associated with each of the 43 implementation tools contemplated by the Town; once determined, assess potential impacts for those tools that are identified as having adverse impacts) Cumulative, Secondary and Long-Term Impacts (Analyze cumulative impacts in conjunction with those of the proposed action. Describe secondary or indirect impacts that will result from the proposed action. Address impacts that might be expected to occur over a long period of time, resulting from the incremental execution of various elements of the proposed action.) MITIGATION MEASURES (Each of the 43 Implementation Tools will be assessed to determine the mitigation available to reduce impacts identified in Section 3.0, with respect to each of the following resource categories; mitigation will only be identified where necessary to minimize identified impacts and may include: site plan/subdivision review parameters, zone changes and land use decisions, performance standards for specific site use and possible further SEQRA review, and inter-agency coordination.) 4.1 Geological Resources 4.2 Water Resources 4.3 Ecological Resources 4.4 Transportation Resources 4.5 Air Resources 4.6 Land Use, Zoning and Plans 4.7 Demographic Conditions 4.8 Community Services 4.9 Infrastructure 4.10 Community Character 4.11 Cultural Resources 4.12 Economic/Fiscal Conditions (In addition, mitigation wdl be considered with respect to each of the 43 implementation tools, in order to minimize potential impacts associated with the various methods the Town has identified to achieve Town goals. Mitigation may include: landowner equity measures, modification of Town review procedures, continued use of purchase of development rights, cross reference to implementation tools that may help mitigate an impact with respect to a specific tool, interagency coordination and coordination with conservation organizations, and pursuit of grant fundingO ADVERSE IMPACTS THAT CANNOT BE AVOIDED (Provide listing of those adverse environmental impacts described/discussed previously which are anticipated to occur, which cannot be completely mitigated.) IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES (Provide listing of the various environmental and human resources which will be permanently committed to the proposed action.) I I Page 6 ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 7.0 8.0 Final Scope Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic EIS GROWTH-INDUCING ASPECTS (Describe and discuss those aspects of the proposed action which may result in additional growth and/or development in the Town, due directly to the proposed action, or indirectly as a result of changes in the community which are caused by the proposed action. The document will consider growth that is related to the proposed action such as infrastructure improvements, utilities, job creation, etc. to the extent that the project will be linked with such growth in the area. The potential for additional development in downtowns, local commercial centers and communities outside the project vicinity will be included. Identify "triggers" that will cause growth.) ALTERNATIVES (Reasonable alternatives to the proposed action are noted as follows) 8.1 No Action (The current land use decision-maMng framework of the Town remains in its current condition, based on build out analysis prepared in Section 3.0; the Town would not embark on a comprehensive implementation strategy.) 8.2 Alternatives to Implementation Tools (Analyze reasonable alternatives to each of the implementation tools, including combinations of proposed implementation tools; include analysis of not implementing (no action) each implementation tool. Alternative strategies will be considered for each of the 43 Implementation Tools in order to fully assess the range of alternatives. The relative change in impacts will be assessed for each alternative as related to the proposed action. In some cases, no action may be the only alternative when considering a specific Implementation Tool.) 8.3 Alternatives to the Proposed Action (Ensure analysis of each of the following specific alternatives.') · Consider changing target land mass for 80% preservation and 60% density reduction to one zone (create an agriculture and open space district). · Consider applying 80% open space, 60% density reduction to all zoning districts. · Creation of tax incentives for landowners to preserve their open space and agricultural use. · Remove all uses other than agriculture from allowable uses within the A-C district. · Consider upzoning to a minimum lot size for yield purposes larger than 5 acre. · Consider 5 acre upzoning of a larger area than proposed. · Consider creation of an R-60 zoning district to apply to R40 zoned lands. · Consider 5 acre upzoning a smaller geographical area than proposed. · Consider mandatory clustering that would limit the maximum lot size to 1 acre. · Consider creation of an affordable housing overlay district. · Consider allowing farm labor housing only on farms through incentive zoning which ensures permanent preservation of open space. · Modifications to the Cooperative and Assured Preservation Plan. · Allow regional govemment/utility to establish watershed protection zone. · Combination regulatory/voluntary program for farmland and open space preservation. 9.0 REFERENCES Page 7 I i I ! I I I ! ! ! I I I I I I I I I Final Scope Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS EXTENT AND QUALITY OF INFORMATION NEEDED The SEQRA process and the Draft GEIS prepared in conformance with this scope are intended to provide comprehensive and important information in the decision-making process for use by involved agencies in preparing their own supplemental findings and issuing decisions on their respective permits. The document will be concise but thorough, well documented, accurate, and consistent. Studies for traffic, cultural resources (if any), and other aspects of the project, prepared by qualified specialists, will be appended and referenced. Technical information may be summarized in the body of the document and attached in a separate appendix. All pertinent correspondence utilized in the document will be contained in appendices, as well as excerpts of pertinent publicly available materials. INFORMATION TO BE INCLUDED IN APPENDICES All pertinent information and correspondence included, presented or discussed in the document shall be included in appendices subdivided for ease of reference. Such appendices may include, but not be limited to: ecological documentation, environmental and socio-economic impact data and analysis, groundwater and air quality data and information, maps, plans, regulations, etc. ISSUES DEEMED NOT RELEVANT, NOT ENVIRONMENTAI,I ~y SIGNIFICANT OR ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED IN A PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This section is required for a complete scoping document under SEQRA. In regard to the appropriateness of economic analysis on business operations, SEQRA is quite clear. As stated in The SEQR Handbook (NYSDEC, November 1992, pg. 60), such an analysis is not appropriate for analysis in an environmental impact statement: Are there economic or social factors that are inappropriate for inclusion in an ElS? The potential effects that a proposed project may have in drawing customers and profits away from established enterprises or in reducing property values in a community may not be considered under SEQR. Potential economic disadvantage caused by competition or speculative economic losses are not environmental factors. There was a comment suggesting that land be made available to establish a "clean, organic solar-powered farm community", on the order of 100 acres, for educational and pilot program purposes. Funding for construction and operation would be obtained from unnamed private grant sources. While such a project may be laudable for its utopian character, such a scheme is outside the purview of the Town's proposed action, and will not be included in the Draft GEIS. There was a comment suggesting that the Town establish a preparedness plan "...for an emergency caused by the isolation of Long Island in the event of bridges being cut." The comment indicated that the plan should provide for "...a month's supply of water, food, fuel and Page 8 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I Final Scope Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS medicine. The same plan is needed for disasters at Millstone and Plum Island." This comment is not applicable to the proposed action, and will not be entertained. No other issues have been identified to date. This applicant's intent is to thoroughly disclose and analyze relevant potential impacts associated with the proposed action. This final scope has been prepared in conformance to the scoping process delineated in SEQRA Part 617.8, as conducted by the lead agency. Page9 I I I I I I I ! i I I I I I I I I I I IMPLEMENTATION TOOLS AND K~Y GOALS This table r~pres~nts a consolidation of the recommendations of planning reports and studies over thc past 20 years (43 spegific r~co~fiations); some measures may apply to more than one sub-categot3,, the most applicable sub~t~gory was chosen as tools/mgchauisrns are listed only once; if each of these rmchainsmsaools w~re impk~mented, the Town governmental/educational/social ~arr~work would Im consistent with thc comprehensive plan as ckfmed by pa.~ initiatives and ~orranendatioRs, thus impish,rating the planning reports and studies of the past 20 years; the current nced for c~rmin measures ~nd their urgency based on current conditions must still be d~-min ed, and policy ci~cisions concerning in~lementatio~ must still he made. Note: Stares Co lurnn intended to indicate prograras exist (E) and will be reviewed and improved/~hanced; or, arc proposed to he created (p). · - p~servnt~on : C~tur~l F. nvlronm~nt F. conon'~ ~n 1. A~ D~a U~ Pmt~ (~ 0f ~e; now e~nfi~y ~ m o~r ~si~M~ ~nes) E X X 2. R~ ~n~ D~ ~d on ~n~ ~ ex~ of~fi~ i.e. ~t~n o~n s~/~ ~ for ~ of t~ m exc~ of PDR at a~ate ~el~ity) P X X X 3. A~ O~r~y ~s~A~ Z~ Renew (~Mc &~fion ~ ~) P X X 4. 5-A~ U~ (A~ Di~a to~-~& ~ ~fic ~) P X X X ~. Renew S~ ~ ~si~ (W~-V~ ~ ~d ~g) E X 6. ~ew of Z~g C~ (~ ~ ~ ~m~ m~ Si~ ~; m~ew R~, ~ ~fi~; ~er ~n~t ~s; ;~s~ aphis, ~ ~ (~o~)~ B~'g home ~cu~fio~, ~e ~p ~ppmg ~ & f~ f~ m ~, ~ lo~, ~o~ge ~-a ~v~ eh~g~ of~ ~q~*~) E X X X X 7. ~ew Z~g ~ ~ ~eg ~ ~ Route 2~ west of~ ~ ~ ~n~; ~er &~&m ~s, ~ - g~ w ex.d) E X X S. ~ew S~ Ro~ (~ ~; ~; ~E, ~) E X 9. ~ew ~y S~eifi~ (~ ~; ~; ~ ~) E X 12. T~fer o f ~velop~nt ~ts (~h~i~ &r ~e ~ity ml~tio~n~t) P X X X X 13. PI~ ~vel~m D~ ~ ~w (~& ~ flefible ~lo~ng~eld ~ exeh~n~ OtS~M ~e ~nefi~ i,e. affo~le ho~ in~, &~tion, etc.) P X X X 14. T~ ~tion ~ ~w ~t ~ of~ ~e~ t~ ~o~te p~ ~ew; &~e ~ si~ ~d ~li~ble ~a~) P X X X 15. Cfifi~ End--mM ~& ~ ~w (s~ep ~s ~ e~ms, ~hnll~w ~r, ~0anda. w~; dele ~ ~eld p~) P X 16. SEQ~ L~ ~w Re~ew~on (T~ I L~; ~biy ~ ~o-B~a~; Cfit[~ En~n~.t~l ~m) E X 17. S~o By-Ways Or.lay ~velopment C~ (Ro~ 4~5; ~e comdor 1~'/5~'; r~on~le f~ ~; ~ ~, ~tee~; Co~ee review, SEQ~ de~i~fion) P X X Zdueafio~nforeement ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 18. A~ D~ Re~ew~tion (~ md M~ts ~ en~ ~ci~fion; mnlnt~i, e~s~g p~ici~ts) E X X 19. C~ ~ ~ ~n~ ~ M~ ~ ~nnga~c ~lmlng~ ~velo~ ill.~natinn ~; B~s; ~ a~ss a~n~; d~ w~ ~) P X X X X 20. Na~ ~ ~fion (~ ~ q~ ~d ~ ~; B~s; ~M; ~s~I ~si~ ~n~l; ~ ~d~ ~to~g) E X 21, W~~on~ndSGPA's(~e,~b~al~, ~~n~ls) E X X X 22. ~ U~ of~blic T~mfion (mlge ~ T~mti~ M~aa~nt ~; ~e h~; f~ linka~g; ~ shu~es) E X 23. ' ......... shu~eg d~e "~ route m"; wo~ ~ L~) P X 24. Economo ~velopm~t P~ (~ge to~ c~ci~ ~g; r~o~ ~ ~e of ~cul~ o~es; ~c~e; ~pi~ ~ov~t ~o~ ~B'g network of ~sit~ ~n~) P X X 26. ~o~ Water~m ~us (~ti~; ob~; m~ To~ ~ ~ ~m~) E X 27. A~m~ P~ of Ten-k& Si~fi~ (~vemo~ To~ 1~ ~ to ~k p~; public ~ q~ty ~n~) E X 28, ~ofi~ ~d S~pl~t ~ (~fi~ ~; ~o by-~ ~.i~!~ ~five lind; ~odfi~) E X 29. Cm~ a CeaSed Y~-~d ~ati~ ~lex (&te~o me~ ~le~nt ifn~) P X Direr ro~ ~.na~m~t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~0. ~bl~ ~o~g Fo~gy (~o~t~ ~, ~ ~d new ~l~.~: ~ew e~, 2-5 ~: ~ ~fi~s, ~ a~., ~nn~i~l ~; ~o~ ~t~) P ~ 31. ~n~n~te ~lop~nt ~ ~ (~e ~ts~ e~ ~nte in~s~; a~b~ ~o~mi~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~hn-i~lm ~pi~ ~nt ~ ~c ~1~.~) E ~ ~ ~ ~ 32. P~ ~1 ~s~ Bo~es C~ (&m~ ~ ~ ~eile dig~nts) E X 33. U~ P~ ~nto~ ~d ~nt ~ ~fi~ 1980 ~y ~ ~ting~ ~p~ into O~; ~n~ ~min~ ~s) E X 34. C~ a P~ ~d R~o~afion ~t ~-~ ~ ~tinn~l mm~ ~ ~fiosl P X 35. S~g By-Wa~ M~nt ~ ~oute ~ ~ ~y ~ai~ta~ ~. ~ ~ O~flay for ~M~a.li~md ~ ~n~ls) P X X X 36. T~ ~ven~ Co~t~wa~ ~ ~c,~,~;~6~. e~mg ~ ap~ ~.~e; ~nto~, ~p~ ~to O~, ~. ~e~ ~ctio~ i.t~. ~ ~os~) P X X 37. ~m~ ~d ~ Cffi~ Re~s (~lo~ly s~itive ~ ~i~tn6c ~et ~ ~t on' nlsn,m~' land~ &~fnn ~ut ~to O~ ~a~e) E X 38. ~to~ ~ow ~ ~d ~sl~ P~ (~e n~d; e~ ~ ~nom~ ~id~o~; ~e~e ~to l~d ~ g~ew ~ss) E X 39. S~e ~ Bo~ (~t~ n~ for mw C~-~; ~.~ ~mc ~, to~-~ ~mc mm~s) P X 40. Ho~ F~ci~ ~i~ ~ ~ Fo~ Ho~ ~; ~ew o~er ~m~fi~ b~d on 1992 ~ ~d U~t~ ~o~ble Ho~m~ PoHcD E X ~1. ~vel~ Water S~pIy M~er ~ ~o~ ~l~n~ SCWA ~,~ ~n~ ~e wi~ o~ ~n~es) P X 42. ~ney ~p~ss (~dwater ~m,~,n6~ ~t ~,~nt: ~ ~e e~ncy ~s ~li~, ~, ~,l~n~); fl~ ~ ~fi~ti~ p~; emsi~) E X 43. ~i~ ~ ~ (~or ~ti~n ~, a~m~ ~y t~ities, ~y ~, ~s ~ ~eels, ~h~es, li~es) E X Page 10 ! ! I I I I I ! ! ! I I I I I i I I I Southol? Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Appendix A-7 Housing Needs Assessment Town of Southold May 2003 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SEQRA RESOLUTION April 8, 2003 SOUTHOLD COMPREHENSIVE IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY ACCEPTANCE OF FINAL SCOPE OF THE DGEIS WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Southold (the "Board") has assumed lead agency status in review of the above-referenced action and for the purpose of compliance with the State Environmental Quality Review Action (SEQRA), as codified in 6 NYCRR Part 617, and WHEREAS, the Board is familiar with the scoping process as outlined in SEQRA Part 617.8 Scoping, and WHEREAS, the Board has established a team of professionals to assist with the comprehensive implementation strategy, consisting of the Town Attorney, the Town Planner and Town supporting staff, two (2) planning consultants and two (2) consulting attorneys, and this team has prepared a draft scoping outline for the purpose of determining the scope and content of the DGEIS, and WHEREAS, the Board received this, deliberated upon its contents for the purpose of initiating the scoping process pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617.8, and found the draft scope to be adequate to commence the scoping process for the DGEIS pursuant to SEQRA Part 617.8 (b), and WHEREAS, the Board has provided an opportunity for interested agencies and the public to provide input into the scope of the DGEIS through circulation of the draft scope and solicitation of public comments at a public scoping meeting, and WHEREAS, the Board held a public scoping meeting on January 29, 2003 at the Southold Town Hall meeting room, and a period of 10-days were provided following the public scoping meeting to allow for submission of written comments, and WHEREAS, the Board forwarded the transcript of the Scoping meeting and written comments to the planning team for incorporation into and revision of the Draft Scoping document, and WHEREAS, the Draft Scope has been revised to the satisfaction of the Board. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board authorizes the Town Clerk of the Town of Southold to file this Final Scope of the DGEIS with the following parties: I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I ! I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy SEQRA Resolution Town of Southold Supervisor's Office Town Clerk of the Town of Southold Town of Southold Planning Board Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold Town Trustees Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services Suffolk County Dept. of Public Works Suffolk County Water Authority Suffolk County Planning Commission NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation, Commissioner, Albany NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation, Regional Office at Stony Brook NYS Dept. of Transportation NYS Dept. of State US Army Corps of Engineers Inc. Village of Greenport Town of Riverhead Town of Southampton Town of Shelter Island Parties of Interest Officially on Record with the Town Clerk (if applicable) 2 Town of Southold Housing Needs Assessment I I I I I I I I I I I I I I May 2003 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I VI. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ...................................................... 4 Study Area & Data Sources .................................... 5 Population Characteristics ......................................5 A. Population .................................................... 5 B. Age & Sex ....................................................8 C. Race & Ethnicity ............................................ 9 Housing Characteristics .........................................9 A. Housing Units ................................................9 B. House Size .................................................... 11 C. Age &Housing Stock ....................................... 12 D. Occupancy Rate ............................................. 13 E. Housing Occupancy ........................................ 13 F. Housing Tenure .............................................. 14 G. Selected Building Characteristics ......................... 14 H. Housing Perceptions & Preferences ...................... 15 Community Housing Characteristics .......................... 17 A. Households ...................................................17 B. Group Quarters .............................................. 17 C. Special Needs Populations ................................. 18 1. Elderly ............................................. 18 2. Female Heads of Households .................. 20 3. Grandparent as Caregiver ....................... 20 4. Disabled ...........................................21 Economic Characteristics ....................................... 22 A. Employment Status .......................................... 22 B. Occupation ...................................................23 C. Income ......................................................... 24 D. Poverty Status ................................................ 26 E. Educational Attainment ..................................... 27 2 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I VII. Cost of Housing .................................................. A. House Values ................................................ 1. 2000 Census ...................................... 2. Recent Sales ...................................... B. Monthly Housing Costs .................................... 1. Mortgages ......................................... 2. Rents ............................................... 3. Subsidized Housing Income Limits ........... VIII. Housing Demand ................................................ IX. Conclusions ...................................................... 28 28 28 29 30 30 31 32 33 34 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I INTRODUCTION The Town of Southold is increasingly becoming a co,~,unity of contrasts. Open space vs. development, intensive agribusiness vs. traditional agriculture, the "haves" vs. the "have-nots." These contrasts are viewed by some as extreme, and by others as modest and not nearly as severe as those facing some of the other communities surrounding Southold. Yet by nearly all accounts, it is considered inevitable that the chasm between these contrasts will deepen. Southold has struggled with the choices it must make to assure the integrity of the character of the conm~anity; its sense of open space, its agricultural base and its maritime identity. These choices, however, all affect and influence the ability of residents to afford the ever-increasing cost of safe, well-planned, decent housing. Affordable housing is today regarded as one of the most important issues facing Southold. The Town has been proactively involved in housing advocacy on behalf of its low and moderate-income residents since 1980, when the Cn-eenport Housing Alliance was formed. In 1986, the Town formed a partnership with the North Fork Housing Alliance (NFI-IA) and expanded its coiihnitment to meeting the housing needs of its residents. Direct legislative acts, such as the creation in 1986 of a new zoning district designed to accommodate affordable housing projects, known as the Affordable Housing District (AHD), and current accessory apartment legislation, clearly demonstrate the Town's ongoing commitment to meeting the housing needs of residents. The question facing the Town today is how broad and deep is the affordable housing problem, how will the problem be affected by ongoing land use policies, and what type of resources should be devoted to solving the problem. This Housing Needs Assessment is an effort to define the nature and characteristics of the affordable housing problem within the Town of Southold. This Assessment is not an affordable I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I housing plan, rather it is the informational foundation upon which such a program can be constructed. STUDY AREA AND DATA SOURCES For the purposes of the Housing Needs Assessment, the study area (or the housing market area) is defined as the Town of Southold, exclusive of the Incorporated Village of Greenport. The US Census Bureau is the main source for the data utilized in this assessment. The primary source is the 2000 Census. A second group of data that proved useful was the 1999 American Housing Survey. This data, compiled for the Nassau/Suffolk Metropolitan Statistical Area provided very detailed housing data for the region within which Southold resides. Additional data was collected from Town sources, past Town studies, other government sources, such as the Suffolk County Clerk's office, as well as from outside sources such as the North Fork Housing Alliance (NFHA), National Association of Realtors and private data collection companies. IH. POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS A. Population The 2000 census recorded the Town's population as 20,599. The Long Island Power Authority (LIPA) estimated~ the Town's 2002 population to be 21,015 (an increase of 416 or nearly 2%). Since the major increases in population experienced island-wide in the aftermath of World War II when the Nassau/Suffolk population exploded fi'om 604,103 in 1940 to 1,966,955 in 1960 (a 70% increase in 20 years), Southold's population has continued to increase steadily. Figure 1 graphically presents Southold's population increases between 1970 and 2000. ~ LIPA annual population estimates are based upon US Census figures and utility rccords of active residential elcclric meters. 5 I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I 25,000, t0,000- Figure 1 Change in Population 1970-2000 1970 1980 1990 2000 I[] Southold Population This steadily increasing population is a constantly moving target, and as such represents a significant planning challenge. Complicating matters is the fact that a relatively high percentage of the Town's housing stock is comprised of second homes, which are seasonally or occasionally occupied, and are not the primapy residences. Based upon 2000 Census data, 34% of the Town's housing stock are second homes. As more fully discussed below in the discussion on households, recent studies suggest that the number of second homes is actually much greater. In order to grasp the full dimensions of the Town's potential population growth, an estimate of full build-out or "saturation" population was calculate& As detailed below, two separate som'ces were utilized to calculate the Town's saturation population; the Su~blk County Planning Department's 2001 Saturation Population Analysis and the 2003 Town of Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy. Both of these studies calculate build-out based on existing zoning and land use controls~ Population is estimated by deducting out the seasonal residences and applying a household size of 2.42. Total saturation population can then be calculated. Figtrre 2 presents these calculations. The average household ske in the Town of Southold, as recorded in the 2000 Ctmsus, was 2.4 individuals. 6 I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I Total Additional % Total# Additional Additional Persons Additional housing units per housing housing housing household pop~ation Suffolk Co. 13,769 8,438 34 7,550 2,869 5,569 2.4 13,365 Planning Southold 13,769 6,763 / 3~ 6,980 2,373 4,607 2,4 11,057 CIS Adding the additional yem'-round population numbers generated in Figure 2 above, to the current 2000 Census population results in a total population satm'ation figure for the Tow~ of Southold of $3,964 (Suffolk County Plmming) - 31,656 (Southold CIS). The Town's existing population is distributed throughout its nine hamlets, as well as Fishers Island. Figure 3 presents the Town's population by hamlet. Figure 3 Population by Hamlet ~Laurel ~ Mattituck D New Suffolk ~ Cutchogue ~ Peconic m Southold [] Greenport (Wl ~ East Marion [] Orient ? Fishers Island ILAMLET POPULATION Laurel 1,188 Mattituck 4,198 New Suffolk 337 Cutchogue 2,849 Peconic 1,081 Southold 5,465 7 I i I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I Greenport (West) East Marion 1,679 756 Orient 709 Fishers Island 622 B. Age & Sex Reflecting the national pattern, the majority of the Town's population is female. 10,654 or 51.7% of the Town's population is female while 9,945 or 48.3% is male Figure 4 Sex Distribution Southold's population is predominantly middle aged. The median age in the Town is 44.7. Approximately 1/3 of the population falls between the ages of 35 to 54 and more than l/3 is aged 55 or older. Figure 5 presents a complete overview of the Town's age distribution. Figure 5 Age Distribution E3 Population Age [ Under t0 to 20 to 35 to 55 to 65 to 85 & 5 14 24 44 59 74 Over I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I C. Race & Ethnicity The vast majority (over 93%) of the Town's population recorded their race, in the 2000 Census, as White. The next largest reported race was Hispanic or Latino (982 or 4.8%), followed by Black or Afi'ican American (600 or 2.9%). 19,212 residents or 93.3% are native bom; 79.9% of which were bom in New York State. 6.7% of the Town's population or 1,388 residems were foreign bom. Roughly half of this population are naturalized citizens, the remainder are not citizens of the U.S. Of the foreign bom population of 1,388, 49.5% were bom in Europe, 36.5% were bom in Latin America, and 11.7% in Asia English is the primary language spoken in 90% of Southold's homes. The most prevalent ancestry in Town is Irish, accounting for 24.9% of the population, followed closely by Ge~nam at 24.00/0, Italian at 16.2%, Polish at 15.3% and English at 15.2%. IH. Housing Characteristics A. Housing Units In 2000, 13,769 housing units were located in Southold. The vast majority, 90.4% of these, were single-family detached units. Figure 6 presents the distribution of units by structure. 9 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Figure 6 Unit Distribution by Structure [~3~ of Units 5,000 0 June '~unit 2un~ts 3-4units 5-9units t0~19 >2Ounlts Mobile Boat/RV In addition to simply establishing the number of existing housing units in the Town, it is necessary to est/mate the number of housing units that could be constructed in the furore. Two sources were ch'awn upon to dete~Tnine the total number of additional housing units that could be constructed, under existing zoning and land use controls. This calculated estimate is known as build-out or saturation development. The first source was a study prepared by the Suffolk County planning Department in 2001 entitled Saturation Population Analysis - Eastern Suffolk County. This study utilized a county GIS database known as 1999 Land Available for Development, to estimate full build-out and the resulting number of additional residential units that could be developed. This study est/mated that an additional 8,438 residential dwelling units could be constructed in Southold (a 61% increase). The second source was the Town's Comprehensive hr~lementation Strategy (CIS). The CIS conducted a highly refined build-out analysis that was designed to be more thorough and detailed, and therefore more accurate than the County's model. The CIS calculated that at saturation, 6,763 new residential units could be constructed (a 67% increase). Figure 7 presents existing housing units and build-out, saturation projections. l0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Figure 7 Housing Units - Existing & at Saturation ~2000 [] CIS ~Suffolk Coun~ B. House Size House sizes in Town vary significantly fi.om small bungalows to very lin'ge, palatial, stately homes. The number of rooms in each dwelling, as recorded by the 2000 Census ranges fi.om one to 9 or more rooms, The median size of the Toxwf s dwellings is 6.1 rooms. Figure 8 displays house size data~ 11 I I I I ! I I I I I I 3500- 3000i 2500i Figure 8 House Size l~# of Rooms 1 Room 2 Rooms 3 Rooms 4 Rooms § Rooms 6 Rooms 7 Rooms 8 R~oms 9 or more Rooms C. AgeofHousing Stock Southold's housing stock is ageing. Over 25% of the Town's dwellings were buik prior to 1939, and a substantial number are historically significant. Nearly half of the dwellings are over 40 years old, predating 1960. This suggests that in addition to new dwellings and the continuing upgrading and renovation that traditionally occurs, the Town may see increasing levels of existing home deterioration and a greater potential need for replacement dwellings being constructed. Figure 9 presents unit ages. I I I I I Figure 9 Year Structure Built [] 1999-2000 [] 1995-1998 [] 1990-1994 [] 1980-1989 [] 1970-1979 [] 1960-1969 [] 1940-1959 [] 1939-Earlier 12 I I I I I I ! I I I I I ! I I I I I D. Occupancy Date It is interesting to note that while the housing stock is quite aged, most of the householders have occupied the units within the last 10 years (since 1990)~ Only 16% of the householders have been in their cmTent residence for more than 30 years. Xhrhile these figures suggest some instability in homeownership patterns, in fact Southold's residents have lived in their residences substantially longer than the County and State averages. 2500 Figure 10 Year Unit Occupied Unit Occupied] 1000 500 0 1999-2000 t~95-1998 1990-1994 1980-1989 t970-1979 1969-Earlier This trend tends to correspond to the relatively large "middle aged" population living in the community, which has resettled from their childhood homes into dwellings of their own. E. Housing Occupancy As noted previously, the Town contains 13,769 housing units. Of this number, 8,461 or 61.4% were occupied on a yem' round basis. 4,689 units or 34.1% were seasonal, recreational or occasional use homes. Recent data collected for the Sustainable East End Development Strategies (SEEDS) lb'eject suggests that the second home data recorded in the 2000 Census notably undercounts the actual number of second homes in the community. While at face value, it may seem that second homes have little to do with the Town's affordable housing problem, in fact, accurately documenting second homes is important to the understanding of the real estate market forces influencing housing costs, to the accurate estimation of the Town's population and for gauging the 13 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I affordable housing opportunities lost due to the development of land for second homes, to say nothing of the implications on the local economy. Some estimates place Southold's actual percentage of second homes at 52% - 68%. Approximately 60% of the seasonal homeowners have their primary residence within 150 miles of Southold. Approximately 20% indicate that the distance to their primary residence is greater than 150 miles. 619 housing units in Town were vacant in 2000. The homeowner vacancy rate was 1.3% and the rental vacancy rate was 6.6%. It is useful to note that the Town's homeowner vacancy rate was slightly higher than was Suffolk County's, which was recorded as 0.9°/, in 2000. New York State's rate during the same period was 1.6%. Interestingly, the Town's rental vacancy rate was double that of the County (3.4%) and higher than the State's rate of 4.6%. This is likely due to the "resort" nature of local housing and the economy. Housing Tenure 6,824 or 80.7% of the Town's 8,461 occupied housing units were owner occupied. 1,637 or 19.3% indicated that the units were renter occupied. Selected Building Characteristics In 2000, 53 dwellings or 0.6% of the Town's housing stock lacked complete plumbing. 22 units (0.3%) laced complete kitchen facilities and 60 dwellings (0.7%) did not have telephone service. Most of Southold's homes (6,673 or 78.9%) use home heating oil for heating purposes. Approximately 9% use natural gas and about 7% use electricity for home heating. 14 I I I ! i i I I I i I I I I I I I I i Of Southold's 8,460 occupied dwelling units, 98.5%, support 1 occupant per room or less. This statistic is used as a measure of over crowding. Only about ~A of 1% of the Town's dwellings support t.5 or more occupants per room. Another interesting statistic indicates that 44.5% of the Town's households (which average 2.4 individuals) have 2 vehicles available for use by the occupants. 32.9% have 1 available. 17.2% have 3 or mom vehicles available and 5.4% have none. This clearly demonstrates that Southold's residents are extremely dependent on private automobiles. H. Housing Perceptions & Preferences The American Housing Survey provided useful insights into housing perceptions and preferences in the Nassau/Suffolk region. When homeowner's were asked to state their overall opinion of their home, most indicated a very favorable opinion of their home. 30 25 20. 15. Figure 1 '1 [[] % Of Tota_[J Overall Opinion of Structure I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 l0 No (Worst) (Best) Report Similm'ly, most homeowners have a favorable opinion of their' neighborhood. 15 I I ! ! I i ! I I I I I I I I I I I I Figure 12 Overal~ Opinion of Neighborhood 1~ % of Total 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 40 (Best) Predictably, most people chose their present dwelling because of its convenience to their place of work Convenience to fhmily and fi'lends was the next most important reason to choose a home, followed by the style/design of the home followed by good schools. These findings make sense for a strictly year-round community. It does not however, provide the whole picture for Southold. Figure 13 Choice of Present Neighborhood 16 I I I ! I I i I I I I I I i I I I I I V. Community Housing Characteristics A. Households In total, the Town supported 8,461 households in 2000. The US Census Bureau defines a household as "all the people occupying a housing unit." A household would include all related family members and unrelated people residing at the housing unit, such as lodgers, foster children, wards or employees. Family households account for 5,801 (68.6%) of the Town's households, while non-family households (non-related people living within a residence) accoum for 2,660 (31.4%) of the Town's households. 3,283 households contained individuals 65 years or older, while 2,373 supported individuals 18 years or younger. In 2,525 households, the householder lived alone. In 721 households, a female is the householder with no husband present. 381 of these households supported children 18 years of age or younger. The average household size in Southold in 2000 was 2.4. This is less than the average household size in Suffolk County of 2.96. Group Quarters The Census Bureau recognizes two general types of group quarters: institutional (for example, nursing homes, mental hospitals or wards, hospitals or wards for chronically ill patients, hospices, and prison wards) and non- institutional (for example, college or university dormitories, military barracks, group homes, shelters, missions etc.) No major group quarter facilities are located in Southold and the group quarter population is modest. In 2000, 0.8% of the Town's population or 165 17 I I I i i I i I I I I ! I i I i I I I individuals lived in institutionalized group quarters. 0.6% or 127 individuals lived in non-institutionalized group quarters. C. Special Needs Populations Special needs populations include the elderly, female heads of households, disabled, homeless, large households etc. Elderly One of the most notable demographic trends in the United States is the significant increase in life expectancy. In 1900, 3.1 million Americans were elderly (aged 65 and older), or about 1 in 25 Americans. The average life expectancy was 47 years. By 1990, there were 31.1 million elderly Americans, a ten-fold increase. Life expectancy had increased to 75. Between 1990 and 2020, the elderly population is expected to increase by 54 million persons nationwide. The growth rate of the elderly will be more than double the total population. By 2020, 1 in 6 Americans will be elderly. By 2030, I in 5. In 2000, Southold supported an elderly population of 4,756 or 23% oftbe total population. Geographically, the elderly population is not evenly distn'buted throughout the Town. As might be expected, the largest percentage of the elderly population are located in the three largest hamlets of Southold, Mattituck and Cutchogue, with the largest concentration in Southold. Figure 14 presents this distribution. 18 i I I ! i i I ! I I i I I I I i I I Figure 14 Elderly Population by Hamlet Elderly Population The oldest old, or the fi`ail elderly (85 years and over) are a small but rapidly growing segment of the population. Between 1960 and 1994 this group /nm'eased 274% nationwide. Southold's fi`ail elderly population was 684/n 2000 or 3.3% of the total population. The Census Bm*eau estimated that this group will be the fastest growing part of the elderly population well into the 21st century. Statewide 2000 Census data revealed that about 94.2% of the elderly lived in households, 62% of this group lived in family households, while 32% lived in non-family households. Of that 19 i I I I i I I I I ! I I I I I i I I I 32%, 29.2% lived alone. 5.8% of the State's elderly population lived in group quarters, such as nursing homes. It is interesting to note that of the population living in group quarters in Town, the number living in institutions (primarily nursing homes) has decreased, while the number living in non- institutional facilities (such as Peconic Landing) has increased faster than the aged 65 plus population as a whole. Female Heads of Households Research has detemfined that households headed by a single female are a vulnerable, at-risk population. The Census Bureau records data on these households to help track levels of economic well being, housing trends, homelessness, poverty and other characteristics. In 2000, Southold contained 721 households where a female was the householder (8.5%). This figure compares favorably to Suffolk County, where 10.8% of the households fall into this category. The statewide figure is 14.7%. Grandparent as Caregiver A similar statistic to the female head of a household is the grandparent as caregiver. In Southold in 2000, 154 grandparents lived in a household with one or more grandchildren. 47 of these grandparents were the primary caregiver responsible for the children. 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 4. Disabled The Census Bureau identifies a disabled person as "one who has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities." Types of disabilities include: · Sensory disabilities - blindness, deafness, or a severe vision or hearing impairment · Physical disability - a condition that substantially limits one or more basic physical activities such as walking, climbing stairs, reaching, lifting, or carrying · Mental disability - problems learning, remembering, or concentrating · Self-care disability - limitations dressing, bathing, or getting around inside the home · Going outside the home disability - problems going outside the home alone to shop or visit a doctor's office · Employment disability - Inability or limitations working at a job or business Disabilities may be severe, requiring constant medical care, or may be less severe, requiring a wheelchair, walker, crutch or cane. The 2000 Census indicated that 3,336 (16.2%) of Southold's residents claimed some form of disability. Of the Town's working population (aged 21 - 64), which in 2000 was 10,881, 1,671 (15.3%) had some form of disability. 70% of this population or 1,170 individuals were employed. 30% or 501 were unemployed. Nearly 30% of the population over age 65 reported some form of disability. 21 I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The percentage of disabled persons in Southold (16.1%) is slightly higher than in Suffolk County (15.0%), but is less than the statewide percentage of 19.0%. VI. ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS A. Employment Status The US Department of Labor defines employment as: Persons 16 years and over in the civilian non-institutional population who, during the reference week, (a) did any work at all (at least 1 hour,) as paid employees, worked in their own business, profession, or on their own farm, or worked 15 hours or more as unpaid workers in an enterprise operated by a member of the family, and (b) all those who wore not working but who had jobs or businesses from which they wore temporarily absent because of vacation, illness, bad weather, childcare problems, maternity or paternity leave, labor- management dispute, job training or other family or personal reasons, whether or not they were paid for the time off or were seeking other jobs. Each employed person is counted only once, even if he or she holds more than one job. Excluded are persons whose only activity consisted of work around their own house (painting repairing or own home housework) or volunteer work for religious, charitable, and other organizations. In 2000 Southold's total population potentially available for employment in the labor force (population 16 years and over) consisted of 16,682 individuals. Of that pool of individuals, 9,542 were in the civilian labor force. 8 were in the Armed Forces and 7,140 were not in the labor force. 22 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 4,000 2,000 Figure 15 Employment Status [] Unemployed [] Employed Civilian Labor Armed Forces Not in Lebor Force B. Occupation In 2000, the majority of Southold's work force (3,372 or 37%) are employed in management, professional and related occupations. Sales and office occupations make up the next largest class of workers (2,389 or 26.2%). Intm'esting, the traditional industries of farming and fishing account for only 169 jobs or 1.9% oftl~e work force. Figure 16 presents these findings Figure 16 Occupations 23 I I I I I I ! I I I I ! I I I I I I C. Income The 2000 Census recorded Southold's median household income3 as $49,898. The median family income was $61,108 while the per capita income was $27,617. 490 households (5~8%) earned less than $10,000 while 26l (3.1%) earned more than $200,000. The largest percentage earned between $50,000 - $74,999 (1,550 or 18.3%). Figure 17 displays Southold's household incomes. Figure 17 Household Income $199,999 $149,999 $99,999 $74,999 $49,999 $34,999 $24,999 $14,999 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Household Income Medmn income ~s the mount which thwdes the income dismbut~on into two equal groups, half having incomes above the median, half having incomes below the median. A family is a group or 2 or more people related by birth, marriage or adoption, residing together. A household is defined as all the people occupying a housing unit. 24 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I $100,000. $90,000. $80,000. $70,000- $60,000- $50,000 * $40,000- $30,000 - $20,000 - $10,0oo - $0- Southold's median household income was ga'eater than the state average of $43,393, but significantly lower than the Suffolk County average of $65,288. By way of comparison, Southotd's median household income is the second lowest in Suffolk Coanty, surpassing Riverhead by less than $4,000. Median fmnily income is the third lowest (Riverhead's and East Hampton's are lower), while 4 communities have lower per capita4 incomes (Babylon, Brookhaven, Islip and Riverhead). Figure 18 presents the median incomes of Suffolk County's 10 towns. Figure 18 Income Comparison by Community Family income Per Capita income 4 Per capita income is the average income computed for every man, woman, and child in a particular group. The Census Bureau derived per capita income by dividing the total income ora pariicular group by the total population in that group 25 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Household income was derived fi'om several source, including wages, social security income, supplemental security income, public assistance income and retirement income. Figure 19 graphically displays income distribution. Figure 19 Income Distribution ~ wages [] social security D supplimental security ~ Public Assistance ~ Retirement Income The average household wages or earnings in the Town in 2000 was $66,776. The average Social Secar'ity income was $13,148. The average supplementary income was $7,553. The average public assistance income was $3,338 and the average retirement income was $25,145. Consistent with the Town's increasing population of older persons, the Town's retirement income and Social Security income averages are greater than both the County and State averages. D. Poverty Status Poverty is defined by the Census Bureau as: A set of money income thresholds that vary by family size and composition to determine who is poor. Ifa family's total income is less than the threshold, then the family and every individual in it, is considered poor. The poverty thresholds do not vary geographically, but they are updated annually for inflation using the offlcial Consumer Priee Index. 26 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The following pove~ly thresholds were effective dm'lng the 2000 census: Size of Family Unit Weighted Average Threshold One Person (unrelated individual) $8,794 Two persons $11,239 Three persons $t3,738 Four porsons $ t 7,603 Five pexsons $20,819 Six persons $23,528 Seven persons $26,754 Eight pexsons $29,701 Nine or more persons $35,060 The 2000 census indicated that 240 families (4.1%) of the Town's population lived below the poverty level. 174 of these families supported children under the age of 18.75 of these fhmilies supported children undo' the age of 5. 150 of the families below the poverty level were run by female householders, with no husband present. 1,178 individuals (5.8%) lived below the poverty level in 2000 (not part of a family). 1,107 of these individuals were 18 years or older, of which 248 were over the age of 65 and 71 were below the age of 18. Southold coma/ned a slightly higher percentage of impoverished families thas~ Suffolk County which contained 3.9%, but much lower than the state pementage of 11.5% Both the County and the state percentages of impoverished individuals is higher than Southold's (6.0% and 14.6% respectively). 27 I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I E. Educational Attah~ment The US Census measures educational atta/nment in the general population aged 25 and above~ In 2000, that population in Town was 15,066. Of that population over 30% hold high school diplomas. Over 18% have some college and over 17% hold bachelors degrees. Figure 21 presents the educational attainment of the Town's population. Figure 21 Educational Attainment [3 <Sth Grade E; 9th-t2th grade, no diploma ~ HS diploma [] Some college, no degree VII. COST OF HOUSI/NG A. Home Values The Nassau-Suffolk region is one of the hottest markets /n the County for residential homes. According to the National Association of Realtors, the region expea-ienced the highest jump in home values in the country between 2001-2002. During that one-year period, home values increased 23.6% (from an average price of $269,900 to $333,600). In 2002, Nassau-Suffolk was the fourth "hottest" market in the US behind Sacramento, California, San Diego, California and Providence, Rhode Island. 28 I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I 1. 2000 Census The value of homes in Southold, as reporteds in the 2000 Census, varied widely. 15 individuals lived in dwellings valued at less than $50,000, while 93 individuals lived in homes valued over $1,000,000. The largest percentage (32.6%) lived in homes valued at between $200,000 - $299,999 The median value of a home in Southold was $218,400. Figure 22 displays housing values Figure 22 Home Values <$50 0 500 t000 1500 2000 2500 Housing Value s The home values recorded in the Census were est/mated by property owners, and do not reflect actual sales averages. 29 I I I I I I l I I I I ! ! l i I I I Recent Sales In an effbrt to gain an in-depth understanding of the real estate mm'ket in Southold, all home sales in Town during 2001 - 2002 wm'e recorded. This data was collected by an independent company "New York Data" :[Yom individual deeds filed in the Suflblk County Clerk's Office. During that 24-month period, 902 homes were sold for $335,966,639. The average sale price in Southold was $390,493. This "actual" sales data is significantly higher than the 2000 Census data, which was collected in April of 2000, and is consistent with the market trends noted above. Figure 23 presents the average home sale price, by hamlet. Appendix 1 includes a listing of all sales, including price, date, address, buyer, seller and parcel size. Figure 23 2001-2002 Home Sale Prices by Hamlet II, Average Sales Price East Marion $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200~000 $250,000 $300,000 $350,000 $400,000 $450,000 $500,000 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Monthly Housing Costs The 2000 Census recorded monthly housing costs, including mortgage payments and monthly rents. This data is presented below. 1. Mortgages In 2000, the average monthly mortgage payment was $1,450. This figm'e is $141 less the Suffolk County average of $1,591.3,107 or 48~8% of Town's privately owned housing stock is not mortgaged~ Figure 24 presents monthly mortgage costs and Figm'e 25 displays monthly mortgage costs as a percentage of household income. Figure 24 Monthly Mortgage Costs [] <$300 [] $300-$499 [] $500-$699 [] $700-$999 [] $1,000-$1,499 [] $1,500-$1,999 [] >$2,000 31 I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Figure 25 Monthly Mortgage as a % of Household income []<15% [] 15.0%-19.9% [] 20.0%-24.9% [] 25.29.9% [] 30.0%-34.9% [] >30% 2. Rents In 2000, the median monthly rent in Southold was $869. In 117 un/ts, the residents lived rent-free~ Figm'es 26 and 27 present monthly rents, and rents as a percentage of household income. Figure 26 Gross Rent [] <$200 [] $200-$299 [] $300-$499 [] $500-$749 [] $750-$999 [] $1,000-$1,49~ [] >$1,500 32 I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I Figure 27 Gross Rent as % of Household Income []<15% [] 15%-19.9% r-120.0%-24.9% [] 25%.29.9% [] 30.0%-34.9% [] >35.0% Figure 27 suggests that a large percentage of renters are paying a disproportionately large amount of their income for monthly rent. 3. Subsidized Housing Income Limits The US Department of Housing and Urban development (HUD) establishes max/mum income limits for eligibil/ty to apply for assistance bom subsidized housing programs, such as the Section 8 Rental Assistance Program Figure 28 pa'esents the current income limits that would apply to the Town of Southold. __ Family Size 50% Income 80% Income 1 $29,300 $46,850 2 $33,500 $53,550 3 $37,650 $60,250 4-- $41,850 $66,950 5 $45,200 $72,300 6 $48,550 $77,650 7 $51,900 $83,000 8 $55,250 $88,350 outhold s median family income in 2000 was $61,108. 33 i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I HOUSING DEMAND Forecasting housing demand is a function of population growth and socio- economic demographic conditions. If a population grows (new births + in- migration =/> deaths + out-migration) then housing demand will increase. Each year in the Nassau/Suffolk SMA, approximately 5,820 housing units are absorbed by population growth. 3,922 units are lost to deterioration and demolition. Combining these two figures, 9742 housing units are needed annually to serve the region. In 2000, 6,099 new housing units were constructed, resulting in a net deficiency of 3,643 housing units. All of Southold's demographic and socio-economic indicators point to continued population growth. The 2000 Census recorded Southold's population as 20,599. LIPA estimated the 2002 population to be 21,015. The Town's full saturation population is estimated to be 31,6566. Recognizing that currently the Town already supports over 66% of its total saturation population, forecasting housing demand becomes increasingly less iiiat,ortant. What becomes more important is how existing and newly created housing will be allocated. As previously noted, approximately 80% of the Town's housing stock was owner occupied in 2000. Approximately 20% is renter occupied. Over 90% of this housing stock is made up of single-family detached houses. The median value ora single-family home in 2000 was $218,4007. Actual sales data for 2001-2002 revealed that the average sales price was $390,493. Absent any significant modification to existing zoning or land use controls, and excluding the land protection variable, it can be projected that the housing dem~and in Southold will out pace the rate of new home construction until saturation is reached. Estimated by the Southold CIS. Thc Suffolk County Planning Department saturation population eslimate is 33,964. US Census Bureau 34 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I It is also important to factor into the evaluation of housing the fact that at least 1/3 of this housing stock may be seasonal, and thus not available to support year'- round populations. This housing is, in a way insulated and separate fi.om the housing that would be otherwise available to the year-round population. The Town's proximity to the New York City metropolitan area assures that individuals with very high incomes will continue to fuel this seasonal housing market, thereby precluding housing opportunities for local residents. If land protection efforts continue and if zoning and land use regulations are made more restrictive, it can be concluded that housing demand would increase proportionally. If the demand cannot be met with new units, including rentals and smaller residences (e.g. townhouses) the cost of housing will increase correspondingly. CONCLUSION The affordable housing problem is, in many ways, a result of the Town's success in preserving its unique rural, agricultural, open space and maritime character. Simply put, Southold is a highly desirable location for a home. The unrestricted market forces of supply and demand have, and will continue to drive the price of housing. Unlike some areas that are struggling to provide for a large population of low to moderate-income residents, only 4.1% of Southold's population falls below the poverty level. The situation documented herein reveals that it is those with comparatively moderate incomes - in-between the very affluent and the impoverished, that must struggle to afford a home in Southold. Over 41% of the Town's homeowners with mortgages devote over 25% of their monthly income for housing payments (excluding taxes). Fully 23% pay over 35%. Renters are affected even more. Almost 54% of the Town's renters pay over 25% of their 35 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I monthly income for housing, over 4i% pay over 35%, which is a clear indication that there is a lack of sufficient, affordable year-round housing in the coimnunity. Even if current modest efforts to provide affordable housing options were continued, the challenge to maintain affordability is extreme. The gap between the "get in" price and the "stay in" price is widening because real estate values are escalating so dramatically, while the population continues to grow. An entire segment of the housing market; that of accessory apartments, remains hidden below the radar screen. These apartments, which are generally, illegal, non-conforming and non-code compliant, serve an increasing large portion of the population that is un-served by the traditional real estate market. Without Town intervention, this segment will remain effectively unavailable to proactively serve the housing needs of the community. The data contained herein clearly demonstrates that the demand for housing in Southold will only increase. It will increase across all segments of the cos[miunity, including special needs populations, and it will increase for those wishing to move into the Town to take advantage of the community's natural beauty and unique character. Continued land preservation efforts and aggressive land use policies will serve to further limit the amount of raw land available to develop new housing. The result will be an inevitable increase in housing costs, in a resort region where the escalation in housing costs has been nothing short of extraordinary. Demand exceeds supply - this is a fact. Beyond the simple calculus of supply and demand, the housing problem is complicated by the lack of housing diversity. Very few options are available to singles, couples and the elderly. Where can one turn, if a large single family home 36 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I on an acre or more of land is not their housing preference? Importantly, where can one turn to find an affordable option to this model? Southold is located on an island, and in a very desirable comer of it. The Town lies with 150 miles of some of the most densely developed and expensive real estate in the United States. The Town has been "discovered" of this there can be no doubt. Left unchecked, the housing crisis will only worsen as more and more people seek to acquire their own piece of Southold. It will require forethought, vision and conviction to break the traditional housing paradigm bearing down on the Town's remaining housing opportunities and provide for a range of housing opportunities for all segments of the Town's population. This Housing Needs Assessment provides the factual foundation upon which those decisions can be based. 37 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I APPENDIX 2001 -2002 Residential Home Sales By Hamlet 38 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I LAUREL I I I I I I I ! NEW SUFFOLK I I I I I I CUTCHOGUE I I 4O I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 4] MA; I I I u(CK 42 I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I 43 I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I 44 I I I I I I I I I I '1 I i I i I I I 45 .29 .25 34 37 .23 .33 I I ! I I I I I '1 I 1 I I I I I I I I PECONIC 46 I I 1 I I I I I I I ! ! I I I I I I I $OUTHOLD 47 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 48 I I I I I I ! ! I ! ! ! I I I I ! I 49 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 5O I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I $] I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 53 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 54 I I I I I I I l I I I i ! I I EAST MARION 55 I '1 I '1 I I I I I I ! I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ! I 57 I i I I I i I I I I I I ! FISHERS ISLAND I I ! I i 58 I I I i I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Draft Generic ElS Appendix A-8 Hamlet Boundary Designation Methodology I I ! I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I HAMLET BOUNDARY DESIGNATION METHODOLOGY The Town of Southold has expressed a goal of strengthening and focusing growth within its nine traditional hamlets. This goal has been articulated in numerous past planning studies, and enjoys broad support within the community. Furthermore, this goal represents a progressive approach toward community planning and is consistent with the planning concepts of"neo-traditional town planning" and "smart growth." Implementing this goal however, has become more difficult that originally anticipated. This difficulty arises from the fact that the hamlets have never been specifically defined geographically. A generally accepted, community-wide understanding of the hamlet locations does exist, but their precise boundaries remain elusive. Therefore, before the hamlets can be strengthened, they must first be delineated. Once delineated, the task of determining how that hamlets can accommodate future growth can be undertaken. I. Southold's Traditional Land Use & Development Pattern The term "hamlet" is understood to mean many things. Webster defines a hamlet as "a very small village." The US Census Bureau considers a Designated Place a hamlet. In fact the Census Bureau has divided the Town into 10 hamlets, accounting for all of the Town's land area: · Laurel · Mattituck · Cutchogue · New Suffolk · Peconic · Southold I I I ! I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I · Greenport West · Orient · East Marion · Fishers Island As typically recognized within Southold today, the hamlets are concentrated areas of commemial activity and public life. The fabric of Southold's traditional land use pattern remains composed primarily of large areas of agricultural land and open space. This pattern, along with the community's maritime heritage, are the hallmarks of the community. Unlike many communities that support great swaths of residential subdivisions and commercialization, a traditional pattern of land use evolved in Southold whereby the agricultural and open space areas are punctuated by a group of small hamlets. These hamlets provide the commercial and community support services necessary for the Town's population. The hamlets also serve to play host to a large portion of the Town's residential housing stock. These factors combine to present a rather unique land use pattern characterized by Exhibit 1. As illustrated, the traditional hamlets play a fundamentally essential role in defining the Town's development pattern. For decades, the Town has managed to prevent unchecked sprawling development from overtaking this historically defined community character by channeling appropriately scaled development into the hamlets. This pattern reflects the commonly accepted future vision of the Town of Southold. II. Hamlet Design Apl~roach Most of the Town's residents could easily provide an outsider with directions to the center of virtually all of the Town's hamlets. Very few, however, would agree on where the hamlets end. Upon closer examination, it becomes quite evident that for all the Town's good efforts to prevent corridor sprawl, it has taken place in some areas, particularly along Route 25. This type of insidious corridor sprawl has, in some I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I instances, eroded the edges of the hamlets and diluted their integrity, thereby confusing and muddling the Town's land use vision. This exercise has attempted to reconcile these issues along with the often-overlooked pressure of addressing future growth. It has often been indicated that future growth will be directed into the hamlets. How much new growth, and where will it go has never been fully evaluated. The planning approach described herein builds upon Southold's traditional pattern of land use and development, but then adds a new flexible component designed to accommodate new growth within the traditional hamlet framework. The concept involves the following elements · The formal designation of "Hamlet Centers" that correspond traditional commercial nodes. · The creation of a new Hamlet LOcus (HALO) zone to the III. Hamlet Centers The term "Hamlet Center" has been selected to reflect the commercial and public use core of each of the Town's hamlets. These areas are typically easier to define because they generally share several basic elements: Character - Each hamlet exhibits certain fundamental characteristics that contribute to its unique "sense of place." These elements of "character", be they public places, civic uses, patterns of land use, or the hamlet's orientation and configuration, tend to lend justification to the delineation of each hamlet. ~lppearance - The streetscape architecture and historic character of each hamlet are typical unifying elements that contribute to the designation of an area as a 3 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I hamlet. This appearance is often directly related to the underlying zoning controls and associated land use regulations. Convenience - A hamlet center must lend itself to ease of pedestrian circulation. Good walkability, ample and proximate parking and well placed civic facilities and businesses combine to create a level of convenience common to all "hamlet centers." Based upon generally accepted planning standards, it should be possible to casually walk across a hamlet center within 10 minutes. These elements form the conceptual basis for delineating the hamlet centers. Additional evaluation was conducted to address: · Zoning · Patterns of land use · Vacancies · Parking · Utilities · Civic/historic features · Traffic conditions Hamlet Center Delineation: Utilizing the approach and data described above, the hamlet centers were defined as follows: 1. Laurel Laurel is the westernmost and smallest functional hamlet center. Known locally as the Middle District because it was situated halfway between Aquabogue and Mattituck, Laurel was known as Franklinville until 1890. The hamlet center itself is comprised of about a half dozen businesses that lie along the western edge of the Old Main Road. The hamlet center is approximately 18 acres in size and is primarily zoned HB. Smaller portions of the R-80 zone are also present. For the most part, the hamlet 4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I center boundary follows the existing HB zoning district. The primary variation is that the large veterinarian hospital, located on land zoned R- 80, was include within the hamlet center boundary. This property fronts on Route 25 and the Old Main Road, and is by far the largest business in the hamlet center. 2. Mattituck Mattituck, along with Cutchogue and Southold, is one of the three major hamlet centers on the Town. The Mattituck hamlet center is well defined and centered around Love Lane, and encompasses about 59 acres. The hamlet center generally corresponds to the HB zoning boundary. The northern edge of the hamlet runs up along Old Sound Avenue across the L1RR tracks, from the railroad tracks in the west, and to the Mattituck/Cutchogue library in the east. The scale and character of the businesses along Love Lane create a traditional downtown setting. This is uniquely reinforced because this downtown area does not lie along Route 25, but rather is located off the Main Road in a more pedestrian friendly location. The area west of the Mattituck hamlet center exhibits the greatest percentage of strip commercial development within the community. This development stretches for nearly 1 ½ miles from the LIRR overpass to the hamlet center's western edge. Numerous automobile service facilities, boat sales and service businesses, restaurants, including the Town's only McDonald's, the North Fork Bank Operations Center, which is the only large office campus in Town, the Mattituck Plaza shopping center, the Mattituck Bowling Alley, and other commercial uses are located along this corridor. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 3. Cutchogue The Cutchogue hamlet center encompasses approximately 30 acres, and includes areas zoned HB RO and R-40. The western edge of the hamlet center extends beyond the HB zone and includes the civic uses of the Library, the "Cutchogue Houses" the Village Green, and a church and associated facilities on the north side of Route 25. These uses reinforce the historical legacy of the community, and serve to demonstrate that the Town's link to the past is both perceptual and enduring. Uses in the hamlet center include a mix of retail, restaurant, office and service uses. 4. New Suffolk The hamlet center of New Suffolk lies the farthest off the beaten path at the end of New Suffolk Avenue, adjacent to Cutchogue Harbor. The hamlet, originally known as Booth's Neck, is approximately 4 acres in size, and mirrors the HB zoning district designation. The hamlet center supports restaurant and eating establishments, but is dominated by the boat yards and associated support facilities located on the waterfront. These maritime uses are a remnant of the bustling port that existed in New Suffolk in the nineteenth century. 5. Peconic Once called Hermitage for an elderly recluse who lived there in a shanty, Peconic grew as early settlers were fomed out of Southold due to overcrowding. The name Peconic is derived from the Native American word for "nut trees." The hamlet of Peconic lies today in the heart of vineyard country. Its rich and fertile soil attracted Irish sharecroppers in the 1850's, and Polish immigrants fifty years later. The hamlet is centered around the Post Office located on Peconic Lane and includes a number of 6 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I commercial operations to the north. South of the historic hamlet center, new public recreational uses, such as the Cochran and Tasker Parks and the Recreation Center are creating a new lively element in the hamlet. The hamlet center covers approximately 44 acres. 6. Southold The Southold hamlet center supports the seat of Town Government, and is the oldest developed portion of the community. The hamlet center is very linear, and parallels Route 25. The Southold Historic District marks the edge of the hamlet center itself. The hamlet center supports a mix of uses including retail stores, offices, restaurants, service establishments, community facilities, residences, and park areas. The northern boundary of the hamlet center mns along the LIRR tracks. The Southold hamlet center is the largest of the Town's hamlet centers, covering nearly 96 acres. 7. Greenport West Due east of the Incorporated Village of Greenport lies the Greenport hamlet center. The area is dominated by commercial uses that run along Route 25 and includes a substantial amount of industrially zoned land, although not many industrial uses are present. 8. East Marion In 1836, the community of Oysterponds Upper Neck (named for the abundant shellfish found in local waters) was renamed East Marion to honor General Francis Marion, the Swamp Fox of Revolutionary War fame. Today, the hamlet center, located along Route 25, is comprised of its post office, Fire Department and a church. The hamlet center covers approximately 5 acres. 7 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 9. Orient Orient (Oysterponds Lower Neck) became prosperous due to farming, fishing and its harbor. The hamlet is a unique area defined as much by the beautifully maintained historic residences in the hamlet center as by its commercial uses. The post office defines the heart of the hamlet center, and several other small businesses complete the district. Puoqutuck Hall is also a defining feature of the hamlet. Orient is geographically, the smallest hamlet in the Town, covering only 2 acres. B. Hamlet Center Design Standards: The following design standards established in this section are intended for the purpose of promoting quality development that is attractive, convenient and compatible with the surrounding uses ands historic buildings in town. These standards are not intended to restrict creativity, variety or innovation. Existing Buildings: Buildings determined to be historic or architecturally significant, shall be protected from demolition or encroachment by incompatible structures or landscape development. The U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Properties shall be used as the criteria for renovating historic/architecturally significant buildings. 2. Building Placement: Buildings shall define the streetscape through the use of uniform setbacks. Architectural Character: Buildings may be either traditional in their architectural character, or be a contemporary expression of traditional styles and forms respecting the scale, proportion, character and materials of existing hamlet structures. 8 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Architectural Variety: A variety of architectural features and building materials is encouraged to give each building or group of buildings a distinct character. Scale: The scale of new construction, including the arrangement of windows, door and other openings within the building fagade, shall be compatible with the existing structures in the hamlet center. Building Mass: Buildings of 40 feet or more in width shall be visually divided into smaller increments to reduce their apparent size and contribute to a human scale of development. The mass of these buildings shall be softened in a variety of ways through architectural details such as divisions or breaks in materials, window bays, separate entrances and entry treatments, variation of roof lines, awnings, or the use of sections that may project or be recessed up to 10 feet. Articulation of Stories: Buildings shall clearly delineate the boundary between each floor of the structure through belt courses, cornice lines, canopies, balconies or similar architectural details. Consistent Cornice Lines: Attached buildings within the same block shall maintain constant comice lines in buildings of the same height. Fenestration: Windows and other openings shall have proportions and rhythm of solids to voids similar to other traditional historic buildings located in the hamlet center. 9 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10. Building Facade: Building facades shall provide architectural detail and such detail, including eaves, columns, pilasters, cornices, windows and window surrounds, canopies, fascia and roofs, shall be proportionate with the building and compatible with the other buildings in the hamlet center. The architectural features, materials, and the articulation of the faCade of a building shall be continued on all sides visible from a public street. Concrete block shall be permitted on rear walls only. The front faqade of the principal buildings on any lot shall face onto a public street. The front fagade shall not be oriented to face directly toward a parking lot. 11. Roof Materials: Desired roof materials include slate (either natural or manmade), shingle (either wood or asphalt composition) and metal to resemble "standing seams." Roof color shall be traditional, meaning it should be within the range of colors found on historic buildings in the hamlet center. 12. Exterior Wall Materials: Exterior wall materials may include stucco, wood clapboard, wood shingle, native stone, or brick of a shape, color and texture similar to that found in the hamlet center. Concrete block and metal structures shall be prohibited. No buildings shall be sided with sheet aluminum, asbestos, corrugated metal, plastic or fiberglass siding. 13. Colors: Colors used for exterior surfaces shall be harmonious with surrounding development and shall visually reflect that traditional colors of historic structures in the hamlet center. 10 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 14. Accessory Structures: All accessory structures shall be of a similar type, quality and appearance of the principal structure. 15. Multiple Uses: Buildings shall be designed for multiple residential units on upper floors. uses, with offices and/or 16. Building Placement: Buildings shall generally be located close together with minimal side yards in order to form a fairly continuous row of storefronts, and to eliminate narrow, unsafe alleys. Periodically, sufficiently sized, well-lit, safe and convenient alleys should be provided to allow for pedestrians to connect between the storefronts and designated parking areas to the rear. Stores shall be located as close to the from lot line as allowed by the existing zoning to reinforce the street wall and facilitate pedestrian access and circulation. 17. Exterior Public and Semi-Public Spaces: Exterior public and semi-public spaces, such as courtyards or squares, shall be designed to enhance surrounding buildings and provide amenities for users, in the form of textured paving, landscaping, lighting, street trees, benches, trash receptacles and other items of street furniture, as appropriate. Courtyards shall have recognizable edges defined on ~it least three sides by buildings, walls, landscaping and street furniture, in order to create a strong sense of enclosure. Seating areas should be conveniently located so as to invite pedestrians to utilize the space. Bicycle parking stations should also be accommodated to encourage the use of the space as a destination. 11 I I I I I I i I I ! I I I I I I I I I 18. Storefront Design: Storefront design shall be based upon the traditional historic examples in the hamlet center. A minimum of fifty percent of the front faCade on the ground level shall be transparent consisting of display windows or door openings allowing views into and out of the building interior to create visual interest at the street level. Windows shall be distributed in a more or less even manner consistent with the rhythm of voids and solids of other structures in the hamlet center. Storefronts shall have low sills and high lintels consistent with the proportions of the hamlet center. Doorways, windows and other openings in the facade shall be proportioned to reflect pedestrian scale and movement. Traditional awnings without interior illumination are encouraged. 19. Entries: Primary entries to storefronts shall be emphasized through the use of roofs, recessions into the faqade, pilasters or other details that express the importance of the entrance. 20. 21. Mechanical Equipment: All mechanical equipment such as air conditioners, condensers, transformers, elevator bulkheads and other utility equipment, whether roof or ground mounted, shall be completely screened from adjacent properties and streets in a manner that is compatible with the architectural treatment of the principal structure. Overhead Utility Lines: All overhead utility lines shall be placed underground when possible. 12 ! i ! I I I i ! I ! I I I i ! I I ! I 22. Trash Storage: Trash storage and recycling areas shall be completely enclosed and screened from public view and adjoining buildings in a manner compatible with the architectural treatment of the principal structure. 23. Landscaping: Landscaping shall include drought resistant native species, and shall be designed to avoid a reliance on an overly manicured, sterile appearance. 24. Loading & Service Areas: Loading and service areas shall be completely screened with a visually impervious buffer, except at aces points, from the ground level view from adjacent properties and streets. 25. Street Lighting: Street lighting fixtures shall be consistent with the character of the hamlet center. The height of the fixture shall be sufficient to provide safe and convenient access and circulation. Fixtures shall be focused and shielded so as to not cast unnecessary illumination onto neighboring properties or to create a nuisance. 26. Parking: Parking shall meet the standards specified in Article XIX of the Town of Southold Zoning Ordinance. In addition, the following standards shall apply. In the event the Hamlet Center parking standards conflict with Article XIX, the Hamlet Center standards shall apply. On-street parking shall be provided in parking lanes parallel to street curbs along all public streets. Along Route 25 area, on-street parking along the front property line shall 13 I I I I I I ! ! ! I I I I I ! I I I I count toward fulfilling the minimum parking requirement for the use on that lot. The off-street parking requirements of Section apply. shall Shared parking shall be permitted for businesses located within 500' of a public parking lot. Buffering of parking lots in the Route 25 area from adjacent residences shall be accomplished through generous landscaping. The number of access points into off-street parking lots shall be limited. Internal access through an alley or through internal connections to parking lots on adjacent properties is encouraged. Cross-access easements for adjacent properties with interconnected parking lots shall be required, in language acceptable to the Town Attorney. No off-street parking shall be permitted in the front yards of buildings, nor shall off-street parking be permitted on comer lots except when screened. Any off-street parking space or parking lot located along Route 25 that abuts a sidewalk shall be buffered from the sidewalk by a landscaped area no less than four feet wide in which is located a continuous row of shrubs no less than 3.5 feet high, or by a wall or fence no less than four feet high and no more than six feet high, in addition to the required shade trees. 14 ! I I I I I I I I I I I i I I i I I I Reduction of impervious surfaces through the use of alternative paving systems is strongly encouraged for areas that serve low-impact parking needs, such as remote parking lots, parking areas for periodic use, and parking in natural amenity areas. The Planning Board may recommend and the Town Board may require a contribution toward community parking facilities in lieu of off-street parking facilities. III. Hamlet Locus (HALO) Zone The hamlet centers are, by their very nature, relatively compact. Parcel sizes are small, often non-conforming. Most of the existing hamlet centers are built-up, and little available new development potential remains. By policy, new residential growth and development should be directed toward the hamlets, yet the hamlet centers are nearly fully built-out and afford very little opportunity to accommodate new residential growth. The limited amount of new residential growth that will occur in the hamlet centers will reflect higher density apartment type development, rather than traditional single-family development. The issue of addressing residential development has become particularly critical given the recent findings of the "Build-Out Analysis" conducted for the Comprehensive Implementation Strategy. This analysis concluded that as many as 6,763 new residential units and 2,541,569 square feet of commercial gross floor area can be built in the Town under existing rules, regulations and requirements. Reflecting the current zoning criteria and land use policy, most of that new development would be located in and around the hamlet centers. The problem of dealing with this new growth while simultaneously preserving the tmique character of the community is the primary challenge facing the Town of Southold today. 15 I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I i I I I A solution can be found in the creation of a flexible floating overlay zone surrounding the hamlet centers. This new zone would accommodate new growth while simultaneously maintaining the integrity of the hamlet centers and the historical character o f the community. The proposal calls for the creation of a new floating overlay incentive zone entitled the Hamlet Locus or HALO zone. The name of the district was selected to convey a specific development concept, consistent with the Town's vision. In geometry, a locus is defined as a line or plane in which every point satisfies a given condition. In our zoning application, a given parcel of land would be eligible for inclusion within the HALO zone, only if it satisfies certain conditions. If the Town determines that the conditions are met, then the HALO zoning designation would be affixed to the property, the Zoning Map amended accordingly, and the new HALO zoning criteria would apply. The authority for the HALO zoning technique is drawn from the incentive zoning provision of Town Law Section 261. This approach is beneficial for three reasons: · It preserves the integrity of the hamlet centers and avoids eroding their edges by bleeding incompatible development into the surrounding agricultural and open space areas. · It allows suitable parcels of land immediately surrounding the hamlet centers to be developed to support new growth. · It allows for the inclusion of bonuses to encourage certain particular types of development, such as affordable housing, clustered conservation development, etc. 16 I I ! i I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I Ao HALO Zone Purpose: In conformance with the planning goals and policies of the Town of Southold, the purposes of the HALO zone are as follows: 1. To preserve the unique rural and agricultural character of the Town of Southold by directing new development toward the hamlet centers thereby reinforcing the traditional hamlet pattern of development while preserving the agricultural and open space areas. To encourage a more efficient use of land and public services by promoting compact smart growth development in appropriate locations. 3. To reduce traffic congestion and promote security and social interaction by providing compact, pedestrian- oriented residential development in close proximity to commercial and civic uses. 4. To encourage diversity in housing styles, types and sizes to accommodate households of all ages, sizes and incomes. 5. To provide a mix of uses, including residential use, within the Town's traditional configuration of historic hamlets. 6. To incorporate a system of appropriately scaled interconnected streets with sidewalks and bikeways that offer multiple routes for motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists and to provide for the logical integration of these facilities into existing and proposed developments. 17 I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I I I I To ensure that new development will be compatible with the historic hamlet character, to create a strong sense of community identity and neighborhood experience. To promote development where the physical, visual and spatial characteristics are established and reinforced through the consistent use of compatible neighborhood design and architectural design elements. This will result in a coherent overall development pattern and streetscape. To retain existing buildings with historical and/or architectural features which enhance the visual character of the community. 10. To enhance the function of the HALO zone, and the hamlet centers as the focus of commercial and civic activity within the surrounding neighborhood, and as a desired alternative to conventional, use-segregated development, such as large lot suburban subdivisions and strip commercial developments. 11. Create receiving areas in the Town where development rights can be transferred from the outlying agricultural and open space areas. HALO Standards: In order for a parcel of land to be eligible for inclusion within the HALO zone, it must meet the following conditions: 18 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2. Parcel Location: A portion of the parcel of land applying for inclusion within the HALO zone must be located within 2000' of the perimeter of its host hamlet center. 3. Minimum Lot Size: The minimum lot size for a parcel in the HALO zone shall be 10,000 square feet. 4. Access: A parcel being considered for inclusion in the HALO zone must have frontage on a mapped street as established on the Town of Southold Official Map or right-of-way. 5. Utilities: All lands included within the HALO zone must demonstrate that utility infrastructure can be brought to the site, and that this utility infrastructure, including the provision of a potable water supply, is adequate and available. Environmental Constraints: A parcel shall only be considered for inclusion with the HALO zone if it does not have environmental constraints covering more than 50% of the total lot area, Active Agricultural Land: A parcel shall only be considered for inclusion with the HALO zone if it is: · Not located on prime agricultural soils, or 19 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Has not been actively farmed for more than 3 years, or The Town Board, acting on advice of the Land Preservation Committee, finds that the parcel is not a agricultural parcel of town-wide significance. HALO Zone Continuity: Parcels considered for inclusion within the HALO zone must be located so that some portion of the parcel is located adjacent to the hamlet center, another HALO zoned parcel, or within 100' from another parcel in the HALO zone. HALO Zone Use & General Requirements: 1. General: The HALO zone is a floating overlay incentive zone. All uses permitted within the underlying zoning district shall be permitted within the HALO Zone. In addition, all uses set forth in section 2. below shall also be permitted. Permitted Uses: The following uses shall be permitted in the HALO zoning district, in addition to any uses permitted in the underlying zoning district: · 1 family detached residences · 2 family detached residences · 1 or 2 family attached residences · Multi-family dwellings. 20 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Density: The number of dwelling units permitted within the HALO zoning district shall be determined by the underlying zoning district's applicable density provision. Overall unit count can be increased in according with the provisions of the Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights program, Section , or if affordable housing units are created (additional detail to be added from affordable housing study). Transfer of Development Right (TDR) Receiving Zones: All HALO zones are hereby designated as receiving districts for the purposes of transferring development rights, in accordance with the provisions of Section Performance Standards: The following performance standards shall apply in the HALO zone: a. The proposed use shall not constitute a nuisance to the neighborhood due to the hours of operation, noise or loitering. b. The emission of smoke, gas, dust, odor or other atmospheric pollution shall be reasonably minimized outside the building in which the use is conducted. 21 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I c. Untreated or insufficiently treated wastes shall be prevented from discharge into any watercourse. Vibration, heat or electromagnetic interference shall not be disseminated beyond the immediate site on which the use is located. No use shall be permitted that presents physical hazard by reason of fire, explosion, radiation, or similar cause. £ No use shall be permitted where it is determined by the Planning Board that the type and number of vehicle trips it is estimated to generate would be expected to produce unusual traffic hazards or congestion or cause or induce emissions which may be expected to interfere with the maintenance of air quality standards established by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation or any other regulatory agency having jurisdiction. g. No loading or unloading shall take place nearer than 35 feet from any residence district boundary. Circulation System: The cimulation system shall allow for the integration of different modes of transportation and shall include streets, sidewalks, bicycle paths and routes and pedestrian ways. It shall provide adequate traffic capacity, connected pedestrian and 22 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I bicycle routes (especially off-street bicycle or multi- use paths or bicycle lanes on the streets), control through traffic, limit lot access to streets of lower traffic volumes, and promote safe and efficient mobility through the neighborhood. The street system shall provide functional and visual links within the residential neighborhoods and adjoining mixed-use, civic, commercial, and open space uses, and shall be connected to existing and proposed external development. Pedestrian Circulation: Convenient and pleasant pedestrian circulation systems shall be provided continuously throughout the HALO zone. Where feasible, any existing pedestrian routes through the site shall be preserved and enhanced. All streets, except for alleys, shall be provided with continuous sidewalks in accordance with the a. Sidewalks shall be made of modular masonry materials, such as brick, slate, and concrete pavers, or concrete with brick borders or cast-in-place materials, such as exposed aggregate concrete slabs. In order to ensure consistency, the final decision on sidewalk material shall rest with the Planning Board. Asphalt sidewalks are specifically prohibited. 23 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I In the Route 25 area, clear and well- lighted walkways shall connect building entrances to the adjacent public sidewalk and to any parking areas. Such walkways shall be a minimum of six feet in width, and shall be landscaped where feasible with trees, shrubs and other plant materials meeting the requirements of Intersections of sidewalks with streets shall be designed with clearly defined edges. In the Route 25 area, crosswalks shall be provided at all street intersections and shall be well lit and clearly marked with contrasting paving materials at the edges or with striping. Sidewalks shall comply with the applicable requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Bicycle Circulation Bicycle circulation shall be accommodated on streets and/or on dedicated bicycle paths. Where feasible, any existing bicycle routes through the site shall be preserved and enhanced. Facilities for bicycle travel may include off-street bicycle paths (generally shared with pedestrians and other 24 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 10. nonmotorized users) and separate, striped, four-foot bicycle lanes on streets. In the Route 25 area, if a bicycle lane is combined with a lane for parking, the combined width should be 14 feet. Bicycle parking stations shall also be provided in appropriate locations. Public Transit Access: Where public transit service is available or planned, convenient access to transit stops shall be provided. Where transit shelters are provided, they shall be placed in highly visible locations that promote security through surveillance and shall be well- lighted. Motor Vehicle Circulation: Motor vehicle circulation shall be designed to minimize conflicts with pedestrians and bicycles. Traffic calming features, such as queuing lanes, curb extensions, roundabouts, and medians may be used to encourage slow traffic speeds. The street system shall act as a functional and visual link between neighborhoods, civic and commercial areas, and open space. a. The street layout shall form an interconnected system of streets primarily in a rectilinear grid pattern. New development should maintain the existing street grid, where present, and restore any disrupted street ghd where feasible. 25 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The orientation of streets should enhance the visual impact of open spaces, agricultural areas and prominent buildings, and minimize street gradients. All streets shall terminate at other streets or at public land, except low-volume residential streets may terminate in stub streets when such streets act as connections to future phases of development. Low-volume residential streets may terminate other than at other streets or public land when there is a connection to the pedestrian and bicycle path network at the terminus. To the greatest extent practical, streets shall either continue through an intersection, or terminate with a "T" intersection directly opposite the center of a building, or a view into an agricultural or open space area. The use of culs-de-sac and other roadways with a single point of access shall be used only where no other alternatives exist. Where culs-de-sac are deemed to be unavoidable, continuous pedestrian circulation shall be provided for by connecting sidewalks that link the end of the cul-de-sac with the next street or open space. A minimum of two interconnections with the existing public street system shall be provided 26 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I where practical. Linkages to adjacent developments and neighborhoods with pedestrian and bicycle paths are recommended where practical. Intersections shall be at right angles whenever practical, but in no case less than 75°. Low volume streets may form three-way intersections creating an inherent right-of-way assignment (The through street receives precedence.) that significantly reduces accidents without the use of traffic controls. To slow turning vehicle traffic and shorten pedestrian crosswalks, the roadway edge at street intersections shall be rounded by a tangential arc with a maximum radius of 15 feet for local streets and 20 feet for intersections involving collector or arterial streets. The intersection of a local street and an access lane or alley shall be rounded by a tangential arc with a maximum radius of 10 feet. Curb cuts for driveways to individual residential lots shall be prohibited along arterial streets. Curb cuts in the neighborhood residential area shall be limited to intersections with other streets or access drives to parking areas located to the rear or side of buildings. Clear sight triangles shall be maintained at intersections, unless controlled by traffic signal devices 27 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11. Alleys Alleys shall be permitted to bisect blocks and to provide secondary access to adjoining properties. The following provisions apply: ao Alleys shall be treated as private streets and shall not be dedicated to the Town. Alleys may be dedicated to a property owners' association or may be dedicated as common easements across the rear portions of lots. b. Any lot having access from an alley shall additionally front upon a public street. Curbing shall not be required except at comers of intersections with other street types. At such comer locations, curbing shall be required for the entire comer radius and five feet preceding same. Such curbing shall not extend more than six inches above the finished pavement. do Alley lighting shall be provided on all garages or on utility poles or lighting poles adjacent to parking areas. Lighting fixtures and lighting poles shall be of consistent architectural style and shall complement the predominant architectural theme. 12. Streetscape Standards: 28 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I Streets shall be designed to serve as a public space that encourages social interaction and that balances the needs of all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists and automotive traffic. To create the appropriate character of the street as a public space, the following streetscape specifications shall apply: Planting strips. Sidewalks shall be separated from street curbs by a planting strip not less than six feet wide, planted with shade trees. In the Route 25 area, the six-foot-wide planting strip may be paved from the curb to the sidewalk, with street trees planted in tree wells of a sufficient size to allow for mature tree growth. Shade trees shall be provided along each side of all streets, public or private, existing or proposed, but not including alleys. In locations where healthy and mature shade trees currently exist, the requirements for new trees may be waived or modified. c. Shade trees shall be located in the planting strip between the street curb and the sidewalk. Shade trees shall have a minimum caliper of two inches measured at chest height at time of planting, and shall be spaced a maximum of 30 feet on center, with exact spacing to be evaluated on a site-specific basis. 29 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I No more than 40% of the street trees shall be of one species. The particular species of shade trees shall be determined upon specific locational requirements. Species shall be selected to cast moderate to dense shade in summer, survive more than 60 years, have a mature height of at least 50 feet where not restricted by overhead utility lines, be tolerant of pollution, heat, and salt, require little maintenance by being mechanically strong (not brittle), and be insect- and disease-resistant. Care should be taken to avoid species that suffer from limb drop and splitting, heavy fruit or nut crops, invasive root systems, or allergen production. In the Route 25 area, the street treescape shall consist of deciduous species that branch above eight feet to facilitate viewing of storefronts and signage. The following urban tolerant street trees are recommended: · Ginkgo (male trees only) · Green Ash · Hackberry · Little-leaf Linden · London Plane Tree · Pin Oak · Red Oak · Regent Scholar tree · Thomless Honey Locust · Village Green Zelkova 30 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Street trees shall be grown to at least American Nursery Association Standards, shall be balled and burlaped or crated nursery stock, and shall be irrigated and fertilized for a minimum of two years after installation. Any tree that dies within two years of planting, or any tree that is removed shall be replaced with the same species and size. 13. Street Lighting Standards: a. Street lighting shall be provided on both sides of all streets at intervals of no greater than 75 feet on center and at intersections. b. Street lighting shall utilize cast-iron posts not exceeding 12 feet in height. Lighting posts and fixtures shall be of consistent architectural style throughout the district and shall complement the predominant architectural theme. c. Street lighting shall be located between the street curb or pavement and the sidewalk. d. Street lighted shall be focused and shielded so as to not cast unnecessary illumination onto adjacent properties. 31 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 14. Street Furniture: Street furniture shall be permitted and shall be located so as not to obstruct site lines of vehicles or pedestrianways. Benches, when provided, shall be placed to face sidewalks and other pedestrianways. Do HALO Zone Designation Procedures. Pursuant to Section 265 of Town Law and Section 100-290 of the Town of Southold Zoning Ordinance, the following procedures shall apply when application is made to include a parcel of land within the HALO zone: 1. The Town Board upon its own motion, or by petition, may consider the application of the HALO floating zone designation to a given parcel of land. 2. The Town Board shall refer the rezoning petition to the Planning Board for review and recommendation. Once the Planning Board has forwarded its recommendation, and ali other agencies having a role in the review of the application have offered their comments, the Town Board shall schedule and hold a public heating on the matter, at which time all those wishing to be heard on the application will be given an opportunity. Before rendering a decision, the Town Board shall determine that the proposal complies with all of the applicable conditions established in Section III above. 32 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The Town Board shall approve, approve with conditions or deny the application, and shall cause the Zoning Map of the Town of Southold to be amended accordingly to reflect the new HALO zoning designation. 33 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I TOWN OF SOUTHOLD CONCEPTUAL COMMUNITY VISION EXHIBIT 1 Legend Hamlet Centers HALO Zones Residential Areas Agriculture] and Open Space Areas Exhibit 2 of Southold Proposed Laurel Hamlet Center ~Boundary Map Created: April 2003 Map Prepared by Town of Southold Geographic Information System May 27, 2003 Suffolk County Real Property Tax Service Agency GIS Basemap COPYRIGHT 2Q02, County of Suffolk, N.Y~ Exhibit 3 Town of Southold Proposed Mattituck Hamlet Center Boundary Map Created: April 2003 Map Prepared by Town of Southold Geographic Information System May 27, 2003 Suffolk County Real Property Tax Service Agency GIS Basemap COPYRIGHT 2002, County of Suffolk, Exhibit 4 Town of Southold Proposed Cutch~ Hamlet Center Boundary Scale: I inch equals Map Created: April 2003 Map Prepared by Town of Southold Geographic Information System May 27, 2003 Suffolk County Real Property Tax Sen, ice Agency GIS Basemap COPYRIGHT 2002, County of Suffolk, N.Y. ibit 5 Town of Southold IProposed New Suffolk Hamlet Center Boundary Map Created: April 2003 Map Prepared by Town of Southold Geographic Information System May 27, 2003 Suffolk County Real Property Tax Service Agency GIS Basemap COPYRIGHT 2002, County of Suffolk, N.Y. Exhibit 6 Town of Southold Proposed Peconic Hamlet Center Boundary Map Created: April 2003 Map Prepared by Town of Southoid Geographic information System May 27, 2003 Suffolk County Real Property Tax Service Agency GIS Basemap COPYRIGHT 2002, County of Suffolk, NY. 7 Town of Southold llProposed Southold Hamlet Center Boundary Map Created: April 2003 Map Prepared by Town of $outhold Geographic Information System May 27, 2003 Suffolk County Real Property Tax Service Agency GIS Basemap COPYRIGHT 2002, County of Suffolk, N.Y. 8 Town of Southold East Marion Hamlet Center Boundary Map Created: April 2003 Map Prepared by Town of Southold Geographic Information System May 28, 2003 Suffolk County Real Property Tax Sen~ice Agency GIS Basemap COPYRIGHT 2002, County of Suffolk, N.Y, 9 Town of Southold Orient Hamlet Center Boundary Map Created: April 2003 Map Prepared by Town of Southold Geographic Information System May 28, 2003 Suffolk County Real Property Tax Service Agency GIS Basemap COPYRIGHT 2002, County of Suffolk, N.Y.