HomeMy WebLinkAbout1000-40.-3-1
.
5'ur;<,F
~
VALERIE SCOPAZ
TOWN PLANNER
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-3136
Telephone (516) 765-1938
OFFICE OF THE TOWN PLANNER
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Memorandum
From:
Re:
Joshua Horton, Supervisor and
Members of the Town Board / ~ _ J1h./.
Valerie Scopaz, AICP, Town Planner . owr - {)
KACE property located on South side of CR 48, approximately
2300 feet east of Chapel Lane, Greenport, NY
SCTM # 1000-040-3-1
May 6, 2002
To:
Date:
This memorandum is in response to your request for an updated report
and recommendation on the proposed change of zone (on the Town Board's own
motion) from Hamlet Density (HD) to R-80, Low Density Residential for this 17.1
acre parcel.
This parcel was first recommended for a change of zone from HD to R-80 in
1994. In my report to the Town Board, titled Review of Hamlet Density Zonino in
Southold Town. February 1994. all the vacant HD zoned parcels in Southold
Town were evaluated. The report included an assessment whether that
designation is in keeping with the intent of the Comprehensive or Master Plan for
the Hamlet Density (HD) zoning district.
In 1994, the zoning of the subject parcel was examined and found to be contrary
to the intent of the Zoning Code for Hamlet Density districts. Specifically, the site
lies more than a half-mile from the Village's boundary, and it is not within direct
walking distance of the commercial center of Greenport. Of additional concern
were the presence of freshwater wetlands on the site and its location adjacent to
about 192 acres of highly sensitive properties within the Village of Greenport that
are zoned Park District (under the Village Code) and known as Moore's Woods.
A copy of the relevant sections of that report are attached and highlighted for
your convenience.
.
.
In 1999, the consultant who reviewed this same parcel as part of the County
Route 48 rezoning also recommended that it be rezoned (along with an nearby
parcel of 1.2 acres) to R-80. As noted in the Findings Statement, the rezoning to
a less intensive use would serve multiple purposes. The following quote from
that report is particularly applicable.
"The hamlet centers currently act as the commercial centers of the Town
and provide a sense of place. In contrast, areas outside of the hamlet
centers generally portray a more open and agricultural character, with
small areas of commercial activity. The contrasting characteristics of
these areas are highly prized by the residents of the Town. Southold is
one of the only towns on Long Island where hamlet centers still exist for
the most part. The re-zoning of certain parcels within the corridor to more
appropriate uses will have the effect of enhancing the basic characteristics
of the hamlet centers and areas along the corridor" (County Route 48
Corridor Land Use Study, Findings Statement, August 1999, p.5, Cramer
Consulting Group, Inc.)
It is recommended that the Town Board rezone this parcel from HD to R-80.
.
.
~
JOSHUA Y. HORTON
SUPERVISOR
Town Hall. 53095 Route 25
P.O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971.0959
Fax (631) 765.1823
Telephone (631) 765.1889
OFFICE OF THE SUPERVISOR
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
MEMORANDUM
TO:
VALERIE SCOPAZ, TOWN PLANNER
FROM:
TOWN BOARD
DATE:
MARCH 29, 2002
KACE PARCEL (SCTM#1 000-40-3-1)
RE:
On behalf of the Town Board, a request is made to evaluate the
above referenced parcel in terms of the "Route 48" change of zone proposal.
Specifically, please prepare a report and recommendation as to the previously
proposed zoning district change (from Hamlet Density to Low-Density Residential
R-80) and whether said proposal continues to be in accordance with the Town's
Comprehensive Plan and any other relevant considerations.
By way of history, this parcel was part of the large "Route 48"
rezoning of 1999. The vote to change the zoning district of this parcel was
overturned by the Supreme Court. Therefore, the Board would like an updated
report and recommendation on the proposed change of zone from the current
Hamlet Density district to R-80 Low Density Residential.
At)!< (} .i iUUL
.
.
REVIEW OF HAMLET DENSITY ZONING IN SOUTHOLD TOWN
Report to the Town Board
February 1994
.
.
REVIEW OF HA}!LET DENSITY ZONING IN SOUTHOLD TOWN
Report to the Town Board
February 1994
INTRODUCTION:
The purpose of t~is review is :0 study the cur!ent status
of each vacant property that presently is zoned for Eamlet
Density. The study includes an assessment whether thac
designation is in keeping with the intent of the
Comprehensive or Master Plan for the Hamlet Density (HD)
zoning district.
Initially, this report will describe the reasons for the
review. It then provides a detailed analysis of the
pertinent policies of the Comprehensive or Master Pla~
affecting the Hamlet Density zoning and the history of the
zoning that preceded it.
Next, the report includes an analysis of the properties in
a uniform manner. Each property is described as to its
current physical location, including zoning. Each property
is reviewed in terms of any current approvals and
development. Each is analyzed as to its conformity with
the Comprehensive or Master Plan and other public
policies. Lastly, a recommendation is made as to the
appropriateness of the zoning.
NEED FOR THE REVIEW:
The need for this review evidenced itself in different wcys.
1
.
.
Fir~t, with one exception, the parcels to be reviewed have
b~en zoned HD for long periods of time ranging from 5 to
J6 years. Second, these properties are either undeveloped
or under-developed. Third, seven of the eight parcels are
located adjacent to or within close proximity to.the
Incorporated Village of Greenport.
The fact that these properties remained undeveloped over
such long periods of time raised several questions: which
ranged from why the properties were rezoned in the first
place to why the properties remained undeveloped. The
clustering of these properties adjacent to and around the
Village of Greenport also raised questions as to the
consistency of the Town's actions in context with its own
Comprehensive or Master Plan.
With one exception, the HD zoning designation was
assigned to each parcel in response to a petition by the
property's owner. The rezonings occurred periodically,
starting in 1958. The potential availability of public
water and, in some cases, sewer, services from the Village
of Greenport evidently was a factor considered by previous
Town Boards in granting these parcels the HD zone. All but
one of the undeveloped HD parcels either are adjacent or
within close proximity to Greenport Village.
The resulting pattern has had a significant negative impact
on the Village of Greenport. The Mayor of the Village had
a general discussion with the Town Board on January 4,
1994, in which he indicaced that the cumulative impact of
the added density would not only strain the present
infrastructure capability of the Village's public water and
sewer systems, it would increase Greenport's already
disproportionate share of the Town's affordable housing
units; a situation that was documented in Suffolk County's
Equitable Housing Study of 1991.
The Town has not undertaken a specific study of the
appropriateness of HD rezonings since the Master Plan
Update was conducted during the early 1980s. This review
will look at the appropriateness of the HD zoning
designation for those parcels that are zoned HD and that
are undeveloped.
This is in keeping with the Town Board's commitment to
implement the Town's Comprehensive or Master Plan. Charged
in 1992 with suggesting ways to implement this vision, the
Town's Stewardship Task Force recommended to the Town
Board, in September of 1993, that it "Revise the Zoning
Code and Map to better comply with goals of the Master
Plan". In conjunction with this recommendation, the Task
Force also suggested to the Town Board that it "Review
Zoning Map and revise to eliminate zoned districts which
are incompatible with their present use and physical
2
.
.
~ontext.tl This review is in response to those
recommendations.
AUTHORIZATION FOR REVIEW:
The Town Board Resolution of January 4, 1994 states the
reasons for this review, the Board's intent in authorizing
it, and directs staff to carry out the study.
METHODOLOGY USED IN ANALYSIS: CRITERIA FOR REVIEW:
The methodology used here reflects the purpose of this
review which is to examine the eight vacant parcels
currently zoned Hamlet Density and to determine whether
they are appropriately zoned in relationship to the goals
and objectives of the Town's 1984 Update of its
Comprehensive or Master Plan, the 1991 Report of the US/UK
Countryside Stewardship Exchange and the ongoing work of
the Town's Stewardship Task Force.
Each of the eight properties were reviewed systematically
using the following format:
Site Data
Notable Physical Features and Limitations
Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning
Status of Development: Approvals and Infrastructure
Public Policy
Recommendation
The Site Data section will identify the parcel by its Tax
Map Number, its location and its acreage. Information
about the zoning and ownership history of this parcel will
be presented here also.
The section on Notable Physical Features and Limitations
will review the relevant, available environmental data and
its significance or potential impact on the parcel's
develcpment potential.
The Surroundinq Land Uses and Zoninq section will
describe the land uses and zoning of the surrounding
properties, and will discuss the significance of those uses
and designations for the subject parcel.
The following section, Status of Development: Approvals
3nc I~:~as~~Jcture, will review the current status of any
3ppiicaclons and approvals for the subject parcel.
.
.
The Public Polic'! section will examine the
approprlateness of the Hamlet Density designation relative
to the vision set forth by the Townts Comprehensive or
Master Plan Update in 1984, the 1991 US/UK Countryside
Stewardship Exchange Report and the Stewardship ~ask
Force's draft recommendations of 1993.
The last section, Recommendation, will list a
recommendation for either leaving the Hamlet Density
designation or changing it.
Public Policy in the Context of the Comprehensive Plan and
the Zoninq Code:
Because the Public Policy sections of each case study
presume an understanding of the Town's Comprehensive or
Master Plan and of the Town's ongoing efforts to implement
its vision, as well as an historical knowledge of elements
of the Zoning Code itself, the following section has been
included here. rts purpose is to provide a detailed
analysis of the public policies that were considered in
this evaluation of the pattern of Hamlet Density zoning in
Southold Town.
The Comprehensive Plan
Southold Town has been engaged in an ongoing effort to
implement the Goals and Policies of the 1984 Comprehensive
or Master Plan Update as evidenced by the work of the
Stewardship Task Force (STF). Appointed by the Town Board.
the STF has been charged since its inception in 1992, with
the "study and exploration of amelioratory recommendations
of the Southold Town Zoning Map and Ordinances, in order to
foster and implement the ideals and goals of the existing
Master Plan, incorporating the recommendations of the
US/UK Stewardship Exchange."
The recommendations of the US/UK Stewardship Exchange
reflect the collective thinking of a team of eight
professional planners who met with government officials and
a wide range of community representatives about planning
issues during July of 1991. They found six areas of
agreement with the Comprehensive or Master Plan. These
included:
1) "Concentration
development in
villages, . . . II
of new residential and commercial
and around existing hamlets and
along with the
2) "Preservation of the historic character of the
villages and hamlets, carefully controlling design
.
.
of :J.2W development to maintain compatibili-c'{. It and
J) 1!!"iaintenance and improvement of the environment
through provision of an appropriate infrastructure
to protect water quality and to manage n~tural
resources properly, and to guide development to
appropriate locations.lI
(A Report by the 1991 US/UK Countryside Stewardship
Exchange Team To The People of the Town of Southold,
North Fork. Long Island. November 1991. p.8.)
The aforementioned issues had been derived from the Goals
and policies of Southo1d Town's 1984 Master Plan Update.
That document set forth a number of Goals and subsequent
policies which have a bearing on this study, and which are
stated in Appendix A of this study.
In September of 1993, the stewardship Task Force published
an interim report in which it made a series of draft
recommendations to implement the Goals and policies set
forth by the 1984 Master Plan Update. The preface to its
recommendations on the Character of Hamlets and Rural
Setting states:
The hamlets are the historic focus for residential and
business activity in Southold Town. We consider this
to be a desirable pattern of development, which should
be encouraged by allowing appropriate new residential
and commercial development in the existing centers.
In order to facilitate this growth, careful planning
should undertaken by the Town, so that a rural,
pedestrian orienced village quality, consistent with
our history and traditional pattern of development, is
fostered.
The long history of Southold has given rise to a
tremendous richness and diversity of buildings and
working landscapes. Vigorous steps should be taken to
assure the preservation of these structures and
landscapes, without infringing on the rights of their
individual owners. All residents benefit from ehe
preservation of our historic and scenic heritage, not
only for our "quality of lifell, but for the economic
potential it offers the Town.
Purpose of the Hamlet Densitv Zonina District:
rhlS policy of concentrating residential development
:hraughouL ~~e ~Qwnls ~amlQts is reit9~3ted ~n the Tow~'s
.
.
Zoning Code, which states that the purpose of the HD
Zonlng District is:
"to permit a mix of housing types and level
of residential density appropriate to the _
areas in and around the major hamlet centers,
particularly Mattituck, Cutchogue, Southold,
Orient and the Village of Greenport."
The Zoning Code specifies that the HD district may De
designated by the Town Board upon its own motion, as well
as by petition of the property owner on parcels located
within one-half mile of a Hamlet Business district of the
hamlets of Mattituck, Cutchogue and Southold; and
within one-quarter mile of the Hamlet Business district of
Orient and within one-half mile of the boundary of
Greenport Village.
In the Master Plan Summary of 19B5, three criteria were
set forth for the establishment of a Hamlet Density
district: location relative to the hamlet business area,
the availability of utilities and the provision of moderate
COSe housing. The report suggested Greenport be considered
as a hamlet. It also suggested that the maximum HD
development be permitted "only where necessary utilities
are in place or can be assured and where there is the
provision of moderate cost housing." (p.9). Finally, it
states the "The Hamlet Density category is also designed to
support the establishment of innovative techniques for
getting the optimum use out of existinq housing."
(Emphasis supplied.)
Uses Allowed in the Hamlet Density Zoninq District:
The Zoning Code allows within the HD district only two
uses by right:
1. one-family detached dwellings, and
2. two-family dwellings.
A Special Exception from the Zoning Board of Appeals is
required for other uses such as:
1. multiple dwellings, townhouses, row or attached
houses;
2. accessory apartments in Single-family residences,
(as regulated elsewhere in the Zoning Code);
3. bed and breakfast establishments, (as regulated
elsewhere in the Zonlng Code);
4. wineries, (as regulated elsewhere in the Zoning
Code) _
.
.
The Zoning Code provides guidelines or parameters within
which the Zoning Board of Appeals may grant the Special
Exceptions only for accessory apartments and for bed and
breakfast establishments. No guidance is provlded to the
Zoning Board for the institution of multiple dwe~lings,
townhouses or row-houses, and wineries.
The Zoning Code: Historical Background:
Throughout this report, it is important to remember that
while the "A" Residential-Agricultural zoning district
always permitted residential and agricultural land uses,
the required minimum acreage for a lot in this zone changed
through the years. The following list shows how the
minimum acreage changed (by the year the amendment was made
to the Zoning Code).
Year
Minimum Acreaqe in "An or uRn zones
1957
1971
1983
1989
12,500 square feet
40,000 square feet
80,000 square feet
80,000 square feet in A-C and R-80 zones
(40,000 square feet for areas zoned R-40 only.
Other residential zones provide for three,
five and ten acre minimum acreages.)
As will be seen, the in-depth analysis of each property
will show that each parcel originally had been zoned for
residential use. Some of the parcels have had more than
one zoning designation in their history, mostly because the
Town changed its zoning code and map several times since
the first Code and Map were adopted in 1957. A brief
synopsis of the changes that have been made to specific
zoning districts is provided in Appendix B.
The Impact of Public Water and Sewer Services on Densitv
~:
The minimum required lot area within the HD district is
20,000 square feet per one-family detached dwelling.
Suffolk County's Health Regulations require the provision
of public water where lots are smaller than 40,000 square
feet in area. However, where both Community (Public) water
and Sewer services are available, and a Special Exception
is granted, the density may be increased to one unit for
every 10,000 square feet. Thus, the development potential
of a parcel zoned HD is inextricably tied to the
availability of public water: and for the higher densities,
the availability of sewer. In other words, for the HD
zoned property to be developed in accordance with the
-,
.
.
intent of the Code, it requires access to public water and,
sometimes, sewers.
Number and Location of Properties Zoned Hamlet Density:
There are thirteen properties in mainland Southold
Town that are zoned Hamlet Density (HD), only five of which
are developed. Three are located in Greenport: one is the
Driftwood Cove Apartment Complex, another is the
Seven-Eleven store, and the third is a large historic house
adjacent to Srecknock Hall. The fourth is the Founders
Village Condominium complex in Southold. The fifth is a
large house in Orient on the north side of SR 25, about 87
feet west of Young's Avenue.
On Fishers Island, there are fifteen developed properties
that are zoned HO. All these parcels, save one, are
located within the boundaries of the abandoned Army base;
and appear to have been developed either as base offices or
officer's quarters.
Of the eight vacant ~D-zoned parcels, seven are located
around Greenport Village, which for a long time was the
only source of both public water and sewer services
within the Town. There appears now to be some limitation
on the Village of Greenport's ability to be the focus of
all HD zoning given the current demand on its already
strained water and sewer facilities. CUtchogue has the only
other vacant HO-zoned property. The remaining hamlets in
Southold Town have no vacant HD-zoned properties.
.
.
ANALYSIS OF HAMLET DENSITY PROPERTIES: PARCEL BY PARCEL
Only those properties zoned Hamlet Density that were vacant
as of January 1994, were selected for review. The individu-
al parcels are listed below in the order they were rezoned
starting with the first, in 1958. This is also the order in
which they will be reviewed. Throughout the remainder of
this report, the parcels will be referred to by the identi-
fying Parcel and Tax Map numbers (SCTM#) noted here.
SCTM# Hamlet Location Acreaqe
#1 040-3-1 Greenport, unin. 17 .1
#2 040-4-1 Greenport, unin. 10.55
#3 045-1-2.1 Greenport, unin. 3.5
#4 035-1-25 Greenport, unin. 132.08
#5 045-2-10.3 Greenport, unin. 20.07
#5 102-1-33.3 Cutchogue 45.15
#7 045-2-1 Greenport, unin. 1.2
#8 035-1-24 Greenport, unin. 52.3
The format used in the analysis of each parcel is:
PARCEL # and TAX MAP NUMBER
SITE DATA:
Location:
Acreage:
Zoning History:'
Ownership History:"
NOTABLE PHYSICAL FEATURES AND LIMITATIONS:
SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING:
STATUS OF DEVELOPMENT: APPROVALS AND INFRASTRUCTURE:
PUBLIC POLICY:
RECOMMENDATION:
One or more maps showing the subject parcel may accompany
the written text: they will be found at the end of the
analysis of that parcel.
.
Zoning History was culled from the Town Clerk's Change
of Zone files.
Ownership History was traced from Property Cards in
the office of the Town Tax Assessor.
..
.
.
PARCEL .1 - SCTM # 40-3-1
SITE DATA:
Location: South Side County Route 48, more ~han
1000' east of Chapel Lane, Greenport
Acreage: 17.1 acres
Zoning History
Year Rezoned: 6.13.58.
The original petition was to change the zone from
"A" Residental and Agricultural to HB" Business.
Between Januarj and May of 1958, the applicant
changed his request to "M" Multiple Residence,
which was subsequently granted. The file does not
indicate why the property owner asked for the
change of zone, nor why the Town Board granted
the request.
Ownership History / Year ACQUired / Miscellany
*3:ace Realty Co
3-10-82
Transfer sub-
j ec t to
$184,000 mort-
gage
Kontakosta 3-10-82
Sanzone (Smieh Est) ?
Brereton ?-?-79
1/4 interest
(which was sold
to Sanzone
in 1982 for
$35,000.)
H. Smith & Ano
Sledjecki
7-?-54
?-7-49 or earlier**
. Kontokosta is a principal in KACE Realty
.. Property cards only note ownership as of 1949 when
the records were started.
NOTABLE PHYSICAL FEATU~S AND LIMITATIONS:
There is little environmental informacion in the site
plan file. A review of the aerial photograph reveals
this to be a heavily wooded parcel which appears to
drain in a southerly direction. The topography drops
off to the south f~om 35 feet above sea-level near
County Route 48. :0 about 10 feet at its southernmose
point. The proper~y ~ay have freshwater wooded wet-
lands on or wi:j:~ ~:ose 9roximity.
.
.
SURROUND::;::; LAND USES AND ZONING:
The ~,operty IS currently bounded on the north by CR
48; c~e wes( and south borders by land owned and
zoned by the Village of Greenport as PO or Parkland,
and :he east border by land zoned R-80. North of CR
48, lies an R-80 district, which contains residential
waterfront homes.
Within 500 feet of the perimeter of this parcel (but
not contiguous) there are properties zoned RR and HD.
The ~~ properties to the northwest, diagonally across
CR 48, contain motel and resort condominium uses,
along with one residential use and an unfinished mo-
tel. San Simeon Nursing Home, which is zoned HD, is
about 800 feet to the west. The remainder of the HD
property to the west is mostly undeveloped, and is one
of the parcels under review (Parcel n7). The KOA
Kampground lies due east at a distance of about 500
feet.
STATUS OF JEVELOPMENT: APPROVALS AND INFRASTRUCTURE:
On J~cy 11, 1983, the Planning Board granted site plan
apprcval to construct 108 dwelling units in 27 build-
ings. The property owner has yet to obtain governmen-
tal ~pprovals for water, sewer and curb cuts. No
build~ng permits are known to have been issued.
PUBLIC POLICY:
Althcugh the subject parcel is adjacent to land owned
by the Incorporated Village of Greenport, it. lies
4,500 feet or more ( one mile equals 5,280 feet) from
the developed portions of the Village, and is even
further from the business center.
It is surrounded by vacant woodland, which is zoned PO
or Park District. The Village changed the zone of the
surrounding woodland from R-1 (Residential) to PO in
1987, in response to directives from the State of New
York's Department of Environmental Conservation. The
PO district is defined as follows:
"An area reserved for recreational and firematic
use by the citizens of the Village of Greenport
as regulated by the Park Local Law, and in which
Village utilities and other public uses may be
maintained and expanded.1I
The
c:1ly
:\
::01
uses permitted within this discrict are:
Nature trails
Sports playing fields
"...,~~.i~;(~,'"
.
r
I
.
3) Firematic events
4) utility facilities including necessary
appurtances but not limited to:
a) water towers
b) sewage treatment plants
c) electrical plants
5) Municipally operated camp sites
6) Municipally operated trailer park
7) watershed maintenance
Much of the PD zoned land is environmentally
sensitive, freshwater wooded wetland. Given the
restrictive nature of the Parkland District, it seems
inconsistent for the Town to concentrate its highest
density residential use on the subject parcel.
Further, this parcel is not within walking distance of
the Village hamlet, and the necessary utilities do not
seem to be assured at this time. For these reasons,
intense development of the site does not seem to meet
with the Goals and Policy Objectives of the Comprehen-
sive or Master Plan.
RECOMMENDATION:
The site could be developed in a manner not requiring
multiple density uses. Rezoning to a lower density is
reconunended.
. :~1~;,.y~L.j,. . .
',,'. /~.,:'~.'~r''''~X\':',i'''':-.ri'f'>."",~;, {'.,:;c,.:,~-,
1'\ '\~~~!5':? w(\/( \~~:J \,
", ,', .' \. ~
\ " ,'/ ,,' -~" '~,
." , "-.",,,
,,/' \
\ z'1?': 0, 'I' - <,
...~ .'\' ~ ~ 't :, "'"
~ - ....... 0 \ "- '
'),- ,,-- "'" '.,
/\ ~,.", '-".:\,
~".. t'.~ "<
::e -\ 0 '" \ v '- ~
~,~1<r,\\~ \ ~:-.."
,-r..~~ 0.>:: ,\:\';,. "'"ol-o 0,,-\ ~
._,' a~\<> ..... ~>..ll
~ '" ."l' ~ ~."'" ~\. ll.J\\
~~,\"o ~':; \~~::.._
.'....1 .4"J,,(;. \\... \ _ \ '.,1""_-
,~ \)~'l:1 '. \? \ """~"'"
_o-t . .u..~/~,., \. \ .,riO...../
.r 0"." '... .'~ 'J' \~ a '. '....".. . ,",(;;." .
:-.-ll-.. ~ \'. ,.~;_;-._,....._",.. Y"'.' -(\,-'-
. " ~ ~\ \ ;-!~,....;c:. .,., 'C.. '''_
. i' .... ,~..'- \10...._.
.... Cl, ~ ,.....,;::-:r
,....,.. ';.
...~?/\,. .......,
\) -~...' .----
~......-;"W.:
~;.:~;::
J!
0"
,
.. .
~/
/1/
J
'" Ire...,
/
",.,<
'~.M" O' '"..~U
n."...... ....,
,
""ll.o.G(
"
GI'l((NI"Q'H
,,"
>
"
\
,,'
Q
..
\\
,
,.
, f
~-"::1 ;,'"~::' ;
;.~;:::::<-,,~;,,~.~: \
Q _....,,...l.. \
"'9\-~"~;'::P~"'l :!.::-I.-";i:.. '-"'-. I
v' 'i:: ...../ ~ _1_ I
~, ,- i 0' ~ zJ:.l~ I
'{.O -"3 -I ;t~ ,~,:,..:'~\r:':~:TOW_N~~~~!~~____\-1; ,~'.'~"
J ;." .......,.. YILLAG["OfGAEENPORT ....-..
,!:T.
~ \~'~
.
UUlc.
.,,,,,,,
, ~ ..:::'::~:
.,/~....
............~.,:.....
~(" 0
\"
" ,,-.-
~~~
\..;.
~ ...-.
-,.-.....
@
~l?(
~<<fG'~
.sov',..~<:-.2""
~~"'t~. G'-f'~
"%- ~~
,~... ~::~-9,...
~..~,,' "
..'",'
...,' ~
~..,: "'...".
.......,t....
...},
...
.~ .,
~ .~.
.
/
/
.....u.
II
> ' '"
"
.
~
~
~
,
,
,
,
,
,
@
, A:"
. :'("~'
."""". .
;,.: ,~>:~Jtr :,(
:.",."itl:JZlll!, ',' ... , ':
:;!.-.::ti;.i,,,~,~j-;,,., :'-, ,
':::';;").:
-
'~""'''''?
.!fI": ,~-:tt-;"~~~:i"
. -""'~"'~~~<I-
.- Ii. ~
"':-
~:,X
','"
.
..
'."
""'"
c
~f:':
':.--...--
0)
\~
(
,
, ~
f
'\':
~ ,
~ ~F
~ :\
~ :
'Z,!\"
o
.
~
~
%
~
,
,
t
i If'
'.
'.
'.
1
,
,.
I.
,
.
.
.
@
..,.... \f--""" _
~, -
"
"
o
,
"
"
----'..-
j
;/
.
(
.
r- I-~~
03" -
~- .
RR
~-I
"0 --
, 0'
"
R..-Ljo ))
, ~ _10.3
p~'-~
R---;.;.A
I-<b
'HD
~
-~',
L8 '
I'
~-'
.
-'.
./
<..,.'"
- j
:~"'~
)
:r.
'( ,
Jr
1~j
s:;
I
...-------.
/' '--
/ -----
/ ----
/
/
fO '/itY
/"
/
/
/
/
/
) Po''''
Co-"'-' /
/
./
/
./
--------- .../
s~, - -- - --- 0
,",oCT,o/? --- ISLAN
-
~
~~.
/ ~1
/ 'v~'
',. .;c li1"
'"-, 1, '- _j:,~-,
''''ry,' _ "0 >;:~!:)r;j:;:~-'?,,~,_ ?",' __,'.~l;
_~._.,I.., "}~1fr:."
"1~~~ '~..~:. .;:t~~-;i~,~<~~':
,-
- // : ' ",' "
_ ...~.,.',)>., '''l''''/-
____ ,....,.... ~::~'<. '%-:"~:; _ ,'.t.;;'+\' \7;:.<
----'-",,,, . "~"'''''''"'"...:.".~~,
"-, -.---;'.l-~:}~:i,,:;.):i_.~~');,!,::;'~~~
"9::>-..:;. -"OJ
?s"<'.?-/d
o-/- so'
,
5 J'!d
.
<
,
",..,... ~
f
-
." EJ
DO-
.
~-:
....
-'.~ ,
""-..
"
. ..
~<':1.. :~. ~:.., ." ~ ~" .~, -:_.1
>
~- . ,
'. '
, ,
.
;\ '
>,
~I '.
, ~ ~\' , -
. ,..' t : ',': .
,
o
'.".'
- .. ... "..-.
.. -...
,
/'.
/'
/.
,
/
.~,._'"
-' ',. . /~
-',' . //
. :.. ~
,---.-- ..,
--- .......-:-
- -:::-\ \ . , - .
~"'11 .
::::::::==:--; -is . I:
, ,
.
\; .-:::
. :...;..-
.....--:::
---..
I
~
!
I
7
I
.
I
1
I
-.
--.-. ._.,;.~
.. . .~
~., ......
\.
....--. .
. .....
I
/.
,
.ll ~\1
31J'd"'flo.
-
('.::' ',,,
,i'" '
',' 'l~
:j,::.
\.,.
:.~'''.' ::;.. :'~-1_'f ;:'~: .\.....
,.~;.:'.; ~;::',.: . :.:'~ ~.~: .?> .~:.-:\
l !)-"
i
ad
~,' '.'
.. 1:,...,
"<:JNtI'i;rvilc! .j,'
. '. - . .':'" ,..,~'i'::-;~
j,'.
,
.:/,,~::;:'!' '"
~::<,::.c<~.:., {': : , .'
'/
/, ..
':. .
<>
.,..
roo .,,.,....'.....-.1:1.......'
, ',<.j
" ',',1;',-"",
":~~
' " ";'f{l
. '. Il;\it
..,,'
. " r),
:g- :,'.;"
....--'$,
~,.-.....- ..'
T",'-I.-I
../
.... .
ad~
([ Nb"1-'f CJ tI c!.
; t ,
. ..
,. ,,::-.
'. :.....
" -.'
_. ;:- .... .~.----
.~. --
< t. /'~'l.
. V L..---". //.;-' "?,
\~"t. /".,
\ ;'\ // ' '-:-;~~I' .~~
\ (. fij~
, . -../- 'ftfJ
"\,,~,\ .... /<:~~~
;/ \:. ..'. / "I;1fiI',',t
. ~~ \'. /. ....-"11
. ~~ 0-
\ ~:'"
/ .':,.ii
" -<., 'I ,,v
" .D q'tF~'
'j ...
,...... '-'''r
_:~ .~~. :~: ~~:'i~:
- - '..~: " ..:1
,.-;.. ..
. :it
,~ 1.,;.'''{',D,'IT;1',I,;. l,',.;~~,::..""~l.. "'''' "iliD1"r' l.t
--,
I
I
l
!
i
I
i
~
I
,
j
,
.
r
:;
?
.
.
Town of South old
Long
Environmental Assessment Form
for
Greenport lA
Proposed Change of Zone
on
Town Board's Own Motion
HD to R80
North Road & Chapel Lane
Greenport
Project Sponsor:
Town Board ofthe Town of South old
South old Town Hall
53095 Main Road, Southold, New York I] 971
Contact Person:
Elizabeth A. Neville, Town Clerk
Southold Town Hall
53095 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971
(516) 765-1801
Project Description:
The action is the proposed rezoning of approximately 18.75 acres ofland in the Town of
Southold. The existing zoning is HD and the proposed zoning is R80. The action has frontage
along North Road & Chapel Lane, in the hamlet of Greenport. Specific Suffolk County Tax Map
Numbers (SCTM#) can be found on the next page of this EAF. The action is a change of zone
on the Town Board's own motion based on the County Route 48 Land Use Study, the Generic
Environmental Impact Statement and the Findings related to that study.
Greenport IA - EAF
I
~
"
.Ii
,
i
~
I
,
~
~
i
.
.
Property Owners:
SCTM#,
040-3-1
045-2-1
.
Owner's name and address.
Kace Realty Co" 43 West 54th St., New York, NY, 10019 LL,6 5; '" 1'1'1'\
John Siolas & Catherine Tsounis, 190 Central Drive, Mattituck, NY, 11952
A. Site Description
Physical setting of overall project. both developed and undevc10ped areas.
I. Present land use:
DUrban
o Forest
2,
3,
6,
"
7,
8,
9,
10
D Industrial
D Agrictilture
o Commercial
o Rural (non-fann)
18.75 acres
Total acreage of project area:
APPROXIMATE ACREAGE:
Meadow or Brushland (Non-Agricultural)
Forested
Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland.. pasture. etc.)
Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24, 25 of ECL)
Water Surface Area
Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill)
Landscaping and/or Residential
Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces/Urban
Other (indicate type)
D Residential (suburban)
~ Other Vacant
PRESENTLY
AFTER COMPLETION
11.27 acres
11.27 acres
7.48 acres
7.48 acres
What is predominant soil type(s) on project site? Canadice Silt Loam and Montauk Fine
Sandy Loam [3-8% slopes]
a. Soil drainage: 22.02% Poorly Drained (Canadice Silt Loam) & 77.98%
Moderately Drained (Montauk Fine Sandy Loam [3-8% slopes)).
4,
Are there bedrock outcroppings on project site?
3. What is depth to bedrock?
5,
A"~"Tl.'",::~ ,mj.' w~::':'~
15% or greater %
NO
NA
Is project substantial1y contiguous to, or contain a building, site or district, listed on the State or the National Registers
ofJ-listoric Places? NO
Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural Landmarks'!
NO
What is the depth of the water table?
20' - 40'
Is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aquifer?
Source?
SCDHS 1998 Groundwater Maps and
USGS Quadangle sheets
YES
Do hunting, fishing Of shell tlshing opportunities presently exist in the project area?
NO
Greenport I A - EAF
2
I
I
i
I
~
I
,
~
!
i
.
i
'.J
.
.
11. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal that is identified as threatened or endangered? NO
According to: Cramer Consulting Group and Town of Southold Planning Staff.
Identity each species:
12. Are there any unique natural land fonns on the project site? (Le. cliffs, dunes, other geological fonnations) NO
Describe:
13. Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area? NO
Jfyes, explain:
14. Does the prescnt site include scenic views know to be important to the community? NO
However general character ofthe area has been identified as scenic.
15.
Streams within or contiguous to project area:
a Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary:
NO
16.
Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area:
a. Name: Moore's Woods (Wetlands)
YES
+/- 192 acres
Size (In acres)
b.
17.
Is the site served by existing public utilities?
a) If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection?
b) IfVes, will improvements be necessary to allow connection?
YES
YES
NO
18
ls the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA, Section
303 and 304? NO
19
Is the site located in or substantially contiguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 of the
ECL, and 6 NYCRR 617? NO
20.
Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes?
NO
B.
1.
Project Description:
Physical dimensions and scale of project
Note: As the proposed action is for a change of zone on the Town of South old Town Board's own motion there is no
physical alteration of any property. Therefore these questions are not applicable in this section. More relevant
information can be found in Section C of this EAF. Also please refer to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement
and Findings Statement for the County Route 48 Corridor Land Use Study prepared by the Town of South old).
a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project sponsor: NA
b. Project acreage to be developed; initially: NA Ultimately: NA
c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped: NA
d. Length of project, in miles (if appropriate): NA
c. I[the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed: NA
f. Number ofofT-slreet parking spaces; Existing: NA Proposed: NA
g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour (upon completion of project)? NA
h.
Ifresidential: Number and type of housing units:
NA
Greenport 1 A - EAF
3
I
,
!
I
~
I
I
I
~
i
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
.
.
One Family
Two Family
Multiple Family
Condominium
i.
initially
Ultimately
Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure? Height: Width:
Linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy is? 914'
j
Length:
How much natural material (i.e., rock, earth, etc.) will he removed from the site?
Will disturbed areas be reclaimed?
a. If yes, for what intended purpose is the site being reclaimed?
b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation?
c. Will upper subs oil be stockpiled for reclamation?
How many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site?
Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally important vegetation be removed by this project? NA
If single phase project; Anticipated period of construction in months, (including demolition). NA
If multi-phased;
a. Total number of phases anticipated (number): NA
b. Anticipated date of commencement phase, (including demolition). Month: Year:
c. Approximate completion date of final phase Month: Year:
d Is phase I functionally dependent on subsequent phases? Y es: ~ [;]
8.
Will blasting occur during construction?
9.
Number of lobs generated; during construction: NA j
After project is complete:
10.
Number of jobs eliminated by this project
II.
Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities?
12.
Is surface liquid waste disposal involved?
a. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) and amount:
b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged:
NO
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NO
NA
NA
NO
13.
NO
Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved?
a. lfyes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) and amount:
b. If yes, indicate method of disposal:
14.
Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal?
Explain:
15.
Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain?
16.
Will the project generate solid waste?
a. If yes, what is the amount per month (in tons):
b. If yes. will an existing solid waste facility be used?
c. If yes, give name:
d. Will any wastes not go into a scv.'sgc disposal system or into a sanitary landfill?
e. If Yes, explain:
Grcenport 1 A - EAF
NO
NO
NO
NO
4
!
I
i
!
~
f
!
I
!
~
~
i
-
~
.
.
17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid wa<;te? NO
a. lfyes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal (tons/month)?
b. Jfyes, what is the anticipated site life?
18. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? NO
19. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? NO
20. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise NO
21. Will project result in an increase in energy use NO
If yes ,indicate type(s):
22. If water supply is from wells, indicate pumping capacity (gallons/minute): NA
23. Total anticipated water usage per day (gallons/day):
24. Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding? NO
Yes, explain:
25. Approvals Required.'
City, Town, Village Board Yes X No
City, Town, Village Planning Board Yes No
City, Town Zoning Board Yes No
City, County Health Department Yes No
Other Local Agencies Yes No
Other Regional Agencies Yes No
State Agencies Yes No
Federal Agencies Yes No
Submittal
Tvne Date
Change of Zone
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
C. Zoning and Planning Information
1. Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision?
If Yes, indicate decision required?
YES
~
zoning amendment n zoning variance
site plan D new/revision of master plan
o special use permit
D resource management plan
8
subdivision
other
2.
What is the zoning classification(s) of the site?
HD
Greenport 1 A - EAF
5
I
~
~
,
~
i
.
~
t
~
~
,
~
~
Ii
4:~
'"
.
.
3. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning?
81 multiwfamily units. Estimate does not figure roads, drainage, parking, etc. Computation is based
on a straight arithmetic computation based on percent of lot coverage as allowed in the code.
Actual yield under a detailed site plan may be less. Estimate represents maximum potential yield.
This estimate does include any wetland area that is found on site, actual development would exclude
that area.
4.
What is the proposed zoning of the site?
R80
5. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning?
II single family units. Estimate does not figure roads, drainage, parking, etc. Computation is based
on a straight arithmetic computation based on percent of lot coverage as allowed in the code.
Actual yield under a detailed site plan may be less. Estimate represents maximum potential yield.
This estimate does include any wetland area that is found on site, actual development would exclude
that area.
6.
Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans?
YES
7.
What are the predominant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a 1/4 mile radius of proposed action?
Land uses include: single-family residence, motel, nursing home, attached homes, parkland
(Greenport) vacant. Zoning includes R80, HD, RR, Park District (Green port).
8.
Is the proposed action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses within a 1/4 mile?
YES
9.
If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed?
a. What is the minimum lot size proposed?
NA
10.
Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the fonnation of sewer or water districts?
NO
11.
Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police, fire
protection)? NO
3. If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? NA
12.
Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels?
a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic?
NO
D, Informational Details
Please refer to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement and Findings Statement for the County Route
48 Corridor Land Use Study prepared by the Town of Southold).
E. Verification
1 certify that the infonnation provided above is true to the best of my knowledge.
Name of Pre parer:
Cramer Consulting Group
Date:
Signature:
Title: Consultants to the Town Board
I certify that the infonnation provided above is true to the best of my knowledge.
Applicant/Sponsor Name:
Date:
Signature:
Title:
Greenport 1 A - EAF
6
J....
.\.
. : _~.f """'\'.
.1
t'-8
vS
LAURY L. DOWD
Town Attorney
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P. O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
Telephone (516) 765.1800
OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
MEMO
TO:
FROM:
TOWN BOARD
TOWN ATTORNEy~J
RE:
J EM REALTY V. TOWN
KACE REALTY V. TOWN
DATE:
September 8, 1994
The court has ruled on the two lawsuits filed re the environmental review of
the proposed HD rezonings. They have ruled in favor of the Town, dismissing
the cases. This action was taken because the lawsuits were filed before the
Town Board acted on the rezonings, and the court felt that the cases were
premature.
However, the court dismissed the cases without prejudice. I believe we can
anticipate the suit by Jem will be refiled against the Town sometime soon.
Since the Kace property was not rezoned, that case will not be refiled. Let me
know if you'd like a copy of the decisions.
cc: Town Clerk
Planning Board
00
rn@mo\Vl~[!
I"
SOUTHOLD TOV;;-'"
PLANNING SO;:'['
- .
.
.
SuBF
';S
JUDITHT. TERRY
TOWN CLERK
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Soulhold, New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
Telephnne (516) 765-1801
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS
MARRIAGE OFFICER
RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
SEQR
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
(D;i--"[~lc;~-'T'ij r~'
, J) I ----~..
Utll, ',"
If 1"1'-'
Ul 15 'II"
to lw
SOUTflOW'lOWil
PLANNING BOARD
Notice of Determination of Non-SigpifiNln""
Determination of Si~iEi"Anl"fl!
Leod Agency:
Town Board
of the Town of Southold
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
July 12, 1994
Address:
Date:
1bis notice is issued pursuant to Part 617, of the implementing re2ulations pertaining
to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review) of the Environmentaf Conservation Law.
The lead agency has determined that the proposed action described below will not
have a significant effect on the environment and that a Draft Environmental Impact
Statement need not be prepared
TItle of Action:
Change of Zone on Town Board's Own Motion
SCfM# 1000-40-3-1
. s/s CR 48;more than 1000' e/o Chapel Lane, Greenport
Type I Action
The project which is the subject of this Determination,
involves a the change of zone of 17.1 acres from "Hamlet
Density" to "Residence-8O". The project site contains
freshwater wetlands associated With Moore's Woods
(NYSDEC Freshwater Water Wetlands #SO-I). The
proposed ptoject is one of six (6) ch~e of zones being
considered by the Town Board at this time in the same
geographic area. '
1000-40-3-1
SEQR Status;
Projed Description:
SCfM Number:
Location:
The site consists of 17.1 acres and is located on the south
side of CR 48, more than 1000' east of Chapel Lane in
~
.
.
Comments:
'HI)" CIumge 01 ZoDe
SEQR Determination
the unincorporated portion of Greenport.
TheToWD Board is reviewing this project simultaneously
with the following applications:
PropoSed COZ OIl Town Board's Own Motion
SCfM# 1000-40-4-1
s/s CR 48, 400 feet w/o Moore's Lane, Greenport
Proposed COZ on Town Board's Own Motion
SCfM# 1000-35-1-25
n/s CR 48, 1,139 feet elo Sound Road, Greenport
Proposed COZ on Town Board's Own Motion
SCfM# 1000-45-2-105
e/s Chapel Lane, Greenport
Proposed COZ on Town Board's Own Motion
SCfM# 1000-45-2-1
s/s CR 48, 805 feet elo Chapel Lane, Greenport
Proposed COZ on Town Board's Own Motion
SCfM# 1000-35-1-24
n/s CR 48, 564 feet elo Sound Road, Greenport
Reasons Supporting This Determination:
This determination is issued in full consideration of the criteria for determination of
significance contained in 6 NYCRR Part 617.11, the Long Environmental Assessment Form
Parts I and IT, and the following specific reasons:
(1) The subject change of zoning does not exceed any of the criteria for determining oigJ>i/;<'ance of an action
that wouId warrant the preparation of a Draft EIS. Conversely, the action will m;n;m;7" potential
environmentaI impacts thereby proWling support for issuance of a Negative Declaration.
(2) The propoSed project will reduce the pnt_tl.1 development deDsity on the subject site. As a rcsuIt,
deDsity deriwd impacts includiug: waW use; sanitary waste volume; disturbaJM:e of Iand; traffic
generatioD; and soIid waste generation will also be red'lced Accordingly, the subject change of zoning is
~ to reduce the impact of site c1ewIIopmeut with regard to these impact areas, as COIllpared to
curreDt zoning.
(3) The proposed zoning is <'nn.;dent with land use and zoning of surroundiDg Iands, and will therefore not
cause a oigJ>;fi~"nt impact. As a result, the proposed change of zoning will have a ""neficial impact upon
land use in the area of the site.
(4) Conpderation has been given to the review of the proposed zone change conducted by a consultant to
the Town Board, which concludes the following with regard to the site in consideration of unique site
resources: "These findings suggest that any development OIl this site will have environmentaI impacts.
Our initial impression is that J"e7""ing to "R-8O" resid_tl.1 will provide a .;gpifitant inaeased measure
of protection for the environment than the "lID' zoning now provides.
Page 2 013
I
.
.
'UO' CIumge ofZoae
SEQR DetermInation
(5)
eon,;deralioD has been given to a pIAnn;"1l docllmelll prepared by the SOlllhold pIAnn;"g Staff enntIPd,
"Review of HmnJet Densily Zoning in SouIhbId Town - Repott to the Town Board" dated February 1994.
This report c:oocInd".. the followiDg with regard to the site in oonlPderaiton of unique site resources:
"This ]N11Ul could be developed in IJ numnerllOt requiring multiple density uses. Rezoning to IJ 10wer
density is 1fICOIIIIIIeIId "
The subject site N\IItA;n. unique resources, and is occupied by freshwater wet1ands over approximately 40
percent of the 17.1 acre site. The proposed change of zoning will m;n;m;7p. impact upon wet1ands
resources by reducing the polentialland use density adjacent this habitat. In atl.j;tioq. the Jower potential
land use density will provide more IlexibIe land use options to mA..;m;7P. setbA~),' and ensure
preservation of unique habitat areas.
For Further Information:
(6)
Contact Person:
Judith Terry, Town Clerk
Town of Southold
Address:
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
(516) 765-1800
Phone No.:
Copies oHhis Notice Sent to:
Commi"Sioner-Department of Environmental Conservation, 50 Wolf Road, Albany, NY
12231
Regional Office-New York State the Department of Environmental Conservation, SUNY @
Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY
Suffolk County Planning Commk~ion
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
NYS Legislative Commission on Water Resource Needs of Long Island
Southold Town Planning Boardv'"
Southold Town Board of Appeals
Southold Town Building Department
Village of Greenport
Southold Town Clerk's Bulletin Board
Kace Realty Co.. 113 West 511 Street. New York. N.Y. 10019
.... 3 of3
.
.
Richard G. Ward, Chairman
George Ritchie Latham, Jr.
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Marl< S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
c:j^'~"'U-"'-~'>~_
,':r'/~','r-(:rl /" --~-\.
,&i;;> ~v~ ~~~:\,
',:',,' ? rff!l,,~,:::: \\
.~. ~~:):\" ,-:.:," ,j
~ ".J -, '-'.'/ ~ <\J
:..... . .-:,... ,.)
< ,y;) .,--'-',. .', ,.~? c"
-':.'. ~>>') )',~~~' ,-':~~,~~/
,,,. -/ ".",->./
'~.... '_ " ,1/
,~<. ~ 1, -
---:~?Z2rr:.U'---
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P. O. Box 1179
Southold, New Vorl< 11971
Fax (516) 765-3136
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
,June 27, 1994
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Terry, Town Clerk
Judith T.
Town Hall
Southold,
NY 11971
uear Mrs. Terry:
~e: Change of Zone on Town Board's Own Motion:
SCTM # 1000-40-4-1 - J. Geier
SCTM # 1000-35-1-25 - LBV Properties
SCTM # 1000-45-2-10.3 - Richard Mohring (a.k.a. San Simeon
Retirement Community Inc.)
SCTM # 1000-45-2-1 - Siolas & Tsunis
SCTM # 1000-35-1-24 - Jem Realty
SCTM # 1000-40-3-1 - KACE Realty
At its June 24th meeting, the Planning Board adopted the following
report:
The Planning Board endorses the townspeople's vision for their
Town, which calls for individually distinct or discrete hamlets
separated from each other by open or farmed countryside, and
which calls for the equitable distribution of affordable housing
density throughout the Town.
The Planning Board also recognizes that achieving this vision
will require the careful consideration of the land use within
and adjacent to its hamlet centers; that the Town's Zoning Map
should reflect the intent of the community's vision; and tbat
the Town must weigh the community's interest in its collective
future against the private interest of individual property
owners in the use of their land.
The Planning Board recognizes that the proposed rezoning of
these properties will not deny these property owners the right
or capacity to develop their land; that the proposed zone of
R-80 is the base zoning of the Town and is by no means the most
restrictive zoning categorization in Southold.
The Planning Board endorses the report: "Review of Hamlet
Density Zoning in Southold Town: Report to the Town Board", and
its recommendation that the zones of these six properties be
Changed from Hamlet Density to a lower density such as R-80.
~'.~
Richard G~ard
Chairman
.
7
.
.
JUDITH T. TERRY
TOWN CLERK
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
Telephone (516) 765-1801
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS
MARRIAGE OFFICER
RECORDSMANAGEMENTOFnCER
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER
r~-f~
uQ .l:N
['u \q L~ -r~i':;
ijlf\;
!il!'
8 .!I JIi
1 l!-J;
I I
, .
SOUTHOLD TOWN -l J'
PLANNING BOARD
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
SEQR
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Notice of Determination of Non-Significance
Determination of Significance
Lead Agency:
Town Board
of the Town of Southold
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
May 31, 1994
Address:
Date:
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617, of the implementing regulations pertaining
to Article 8 (State Enviromnental Quality Review) of the Enviromnentaf Conservation Law.
The lead agency has determined that the proposed action described below will not
have a significant effect on the enviromnent and that a Draft Enviromnental Impact
Statement need not be prepared.
TItle or Action:
Change of Zone on Town Board's Own Motion
SCTM# 1000-40-3-1
sls CR 48, more than 1000' elo Chapel Lane, Greenport
Unlisted Action
SEQR Status:
Project Description:
The project which is the subject of this Determination,
involves a the change of zone of 17.1 acres from "Hamlet
Density" to "Residence-80". The project site contains
freshwater wetlands associated WIth Moore's Woods
Page 1 or3
.
.
SCTM Number:
'RD' Change or Zone
SEQR DetermiDatioa
(NYSDEC Freshwater Water Wetlands #S0-1). The
proposed project is one of six (6) change of zones being
considered by the Town Board at this time in the same
geographic area.
100040-3-1
Location:
The site consists of 17.1 acres and is located on the south
side of CR 48, more than 1000' east of Chapel Lane in
the unincorporated portion of Greenport.
The Town Board is reviewing this project simultaneously
with the following applications: .
Comments:
Proposed COZ on Town Board's Own Motion
SCTM# 1()()()..4()..4-1
sls CR 48, 400 feet wlo MOO1'e's Lane, Greenport
Proposed COZ on Town Board's Own Motion
SCTM# 1000-35-1-25
nls CR 48, 1,139 feet elo Sound Road, Greenport
Proposed COZ on Town Board's Own Motion
SCTM# 1000-45-2-10.3
els Chapel Lane, Greenport
Proposed COZ on Town Board's Own Motion
SCTM# 1000-45-2-1
sls CR 48, 805 feet elo Chapel Lane, Greenport
Proposed COZ on Town Board's Own Motion
SCTM# 1000-35-1-2A
nls CR 48, 564 feet elo Sound Road, Greenport
Reasons Supporting This Determination:
This determination is issued in full consideration of the criteria for determination of
significance contained in 6 NYCRR Part 617.11, the Long Environmental Assessment Form
Parts I and n. and the following specific reasons:
(1) The subject change of zoning does not exceed any of the aiteria for determining significance of an action
that would warrant the preparation of a Draft EIS. Conversely, the action will m;nlmi7p' potential
environmental impacts thereby providing support for issuance of a Negative Declaration.
(2) The proposed project will reduce the potential development density on the subject site. As a result,
density derived impacts including: water use; sanitary waste volume; disturbance of land; traffic
generation; and solid waste generation will also be reduced. Accordingly, the subject change of zoning is
expected to reduce the impact of site development with regard to these impact areas, as compared to
current zoning.
Page 2 or3
."
.
.
'HD" Change or Zone
SEQR Determluatlon
(3) The proposed zoning is coasistent with !aDd use and zoning of surrounding lands, and will therefore DOt
cause a sigoificant impact As a result, the proposed change of zoning will have a beneficial impact upon
!aDd use in the area of the site.
(4) Consideration bas been given to the raiew of the proposed zone change conducted by a consultaat to
the Town Board, which concludes the following with regard to the site in consi4eratioa of 1IIIique site
resourc:es: 'These findings suggest that any development on this site will have environmental impacts.
Our initial impression is that rezoning to 'R-8O" rI'-"itlential will provide a oigPifirant increased measure
of protection for the environment than the "HI)' zoning BOW provides.
(5) Q>nsideratioa bas been given to a p1aaaiag cWrnmp.n( prepared by the Southold P1aaaiag Staff eatitled,
"Review of Hamlet Density Zoning in Southold To.... - Repolt to the To.... Board" dated February 1994.
This report concludes the following with regard to the site in coasideraiton of 1IIIique site resourc:es:
"Thi.r pan:eJ could be developed in (I nuI1I1IeT not requiring muJliple density uses. Rezoning to (I lower
density is TeCOI7II>U1Ided "
(6) The subject site contains unique resources, and is occupied by freshwater wetlaDds over apprc"rimate1y 40
percent of the 17.1 acre site. The proposed change of zoning will minimi7p' impact upon wetlands
resources by reducing the potential land use density adjacent this habitat. In addition, the lower potential
!aDd use density will provide more flexible !aDd use options to ma.,.;mi7" setbacks and ensure
preservation of unique habitat areas.
For Further Information:
Contact Person:
Judith Terry, Town Clerk
Town of Southold
Address:
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
(516) 765-1800
Phone No.:
Copies of this Notice Sent to:
Commissioner-Department of Environmental Conservation, 50 Wolf Road, Albany, NY
12231
Regional Office-New York State the Department of Environmental Conservation, SUNY @
Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY
Suffolk County Planning Commission
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
NYS Legislative Commission on Water Resource Needs of Long Island
Southold Town Planning BoardV'
Southold Town Board of Appeals
Southold Town Building Department
Village of Greenport
Southold Town Clerk's Bulletin Board
Kace Realty Co., 43 West 54 Street, New York, N. Y. 10019
Page 3 0(3
.
.
SUe;F
/?6
Y5
JUDITH T. TERRY
TOWN CLERK
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
Telephone (516) 765-1801
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS
MARRIAGE OFFICER
RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
May 20, 1994
Southold Town Planning Board
Southold Town Hall
Southold, New York 11971
Gentlemen:
Transmitted herewith map of of a proposed change of zone on the
Town Board's own motion from Hamlet Density (HD) Residential District to
Low Density Residential R-80 District on the property of Kace Realty Co.,
located on the south side of Route 48, 1000 feet east of Chapel Lane,
Greenport, N. Y.
Please prepare an official report with respect to the proposed change
of zone, and transmit same to me. Thank you.
Very truly yours,
~~
Judith T. Terry
Southold Town Clerk
Attachment
iroJ ~ @ ~ D W ~ tn)1
1JO I4AY 2 4. @/
I
PlASOUTHOtD TOWN
NNING 80ARO
. .
GORDON, GORDON & TEPPER, P.C.
3 PARK AVENUE
28TH FLOOR,
NEW YORK. NEW YORK 10016
SUf!>F".
~~
/Is
l.l)t!W'1>
(212) 725-3700
TELECOPIER (212) 481-5471
MURRAY A. GORDON (1944-198!5J
CABLE ADDRESS
"MURAGOR NEW YORK"
KENNETH E. GORDON
ARTHUR L. TEPPER"
ARAGAW MEHARI
COUNSEL
KATARlNA I. PREDIC
TERI L. SHULMAN""
STEVEN J. SALTfEL......
AO""TTED IN NY &: Fl.'
AOI.UTTED IN NY 8< CT'"
ADMITTED IN NY 8t; NJ'"
January 21, 1994
Mr. Thomas Wickham
Town Supervisor
Town of Southold
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Kace Realtv Co.
Dear Mr. Wickham:
Our firm represents Kace Realty Co. in connection with their
federal court litigation against the Village of Greenport. At
issue in this litigation is the constitutionality of the Village's
denial of water and sewer services for the development of a 17-
acre tract of land located on the North Road east of Chapel Lane
within the Town of Southold.
Our client has learned that the current Mayor of the Village,
Hon. Stephen Clarke, has met with some of the newly elected members
of the Southold government in an effort to encourage the Town to
overturn the HD zoning which now governs the 17-acre tract. We
find it troubling that the Town would reconsider the zoning
applicable to a parcel for which it approved a site plan in 1983.
But more disturbing is the timing of such action, and the
possibility that the Village and the Mayor may have encouraged it
in an effort to effect the litigation and prevent our clients from
pursuing their constitutional rights. It would obviously be
inappropriate, and illegal, for the Town to participate in such an
effort by the Village.
To eliminate any further violation of our clients' rights, we
respectfully request that the Town forego any action at this time
regarding the zoning of this parcel.
Very truly yours,
SJS/rv
GORDON, GORDON & TEPPER, P.C.
p-/ /C. )j:;..,J
,/ I" ,,;{,1",
Steven J. Saltiel
ee: Planning Board, Town of Southold
.
.
':::,0~,
~
'Js,
JUDITH T. TERRY
TOWN CLERK
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Soulhold, New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
Telephone (516) 765-1801
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS
MARRIAGE OFFICER
RECORDS MANAGEMElIIT OFFICER
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
April 11, 1994
00 ~ ;R ~ ;w~ rn
$OUTHOIJl TOWN
;.;"'.' I'lNIHING BOARD
Lead Agency Coordination Request
The purpose of this request is
Environmental Quality Review Act-SEQRA)
and 6NYCRR Part 617 the following:
to determine under Article 8 (State
of the Environmental Conservation Law
1. your jurisdiction in the action described below;
2. your interest in assuming the responsibilities of lead agency; and
3. issues of concern which you believe should be evaluated.
Enclosed you will find the Southold Town Board's findings and a completed Long
Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) to assist you in your response.
Project Name: Kace Realty Co., 43 West 54 Street, New York, N.Y. 10019, SCTM
#1000-40-3-1, property located on the south side of Route 48, 1000 feet east of
Chapel Lane, Greenport, N. Y., containing 17.1 acres.
Requested Action: Change of Zone on. the Town Board's own motion from Hamlet
Density (HD) Residential District to Low Density Residential R-80 District.
SEQRA Classification:
Type I
Contact Person: Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk, Town of Southold
The lead agency will determine the need for a environmental impact statement
(EIS) on this project. If you have an interest in being lead agency, please contact
this office immediately. If no response is received from you within 30 days of the
date of this letter, it will be assumed that your agency has no interest in being lead
agency.
.
.
Page 2
Agency Position:
1 This agency has no objection to your agency assuming lead agency status
for this action.
[Xl This agency wishes to assume lead agency status for this action.
[ 1 Other. (See comments below)
Comments:
Please feel free to contact this office for further information.
Very truly yours,
~~
Judith T. Terry
Southold Town Clerk
Enclosures
Copies of this request and all attachments to the following:
Commis.sioner Langdon Marsh, NYS-DEC, Albany
Robert Greene, NYS-DEC, Stony Brook
NYS Legislative Commission on Water Resource Needs of Long Island
Suffolk County Department of Planning
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
Southold Town Planning Board v
Southold Town Board of Appeals
Southold Town Building Department
Southold Town Clerk's Bulletin Board (without attachments)
Kace Realty Co., 43 West S4 Street, New York, N. Y. 10019
Village of Greenport
.
.
JUDITH T. TERRY
TOWN CLERK
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Soulhold. New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
Telephone (516) 765-1801
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS
MARRIAGE OFFICER_
RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY THE
SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD AT A REGULAR MEETING HELD ON APRIL 5, 1994:
OWNER
PARCEL 1/ 1000-40-3-1
PROPERTY LOCATION
KACE REAL TV, CO.
43 West 54 Street
New York, NY 10019
South Side Route 48
1000 ft. East of Chapel Lane
Greenport, NY 11944
WHEREAS, the Master Plan of the Town of Southold and the recommendations
of the Town's advisory Stewardship Task Force have increasingly emphasized
the promotion of growth in and around the hamlet centers, to strengthen their
business prospects while keeping open space and farmland undeveloped; and
WHEREAS, the Town Board has examined and extensively discussed a report
entitled "Review of Hamlet Density Zoning in the Town of Southold" dated
February. 1994 which assessed the appropriateness of the zoning of all
undeveloped HD zoned properties in the Town of Southold;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of
Southold concludes that HD zoning of this property is not appropriate for the
following reasons:
1. The property has not had development activity pursuant to the HD
zoning, or its predecessor zoning, since it was so zoned in 1958;
2. The HD zoning of this site is not consistent with the Town's
comprehensive plan because it encourages high density residential
growth at a significant distance from the nearest hamlet center of
Greenport and encourages suburban sprawl;
3. The HD (quarter acre) zoning is not consistent with that of the
surrounding land uses, which consist of environmentally sensitive
parkland to the west and south, and. R-80 (two acre) zoning to the
east and north; and
.
.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that
finds that rezoning this property
following reasons:
the Town Board of the Town of Southold
from HD to R-80 is appropriate for the
1. R-80 is the base zoning of the Town because it retains the open
rural environment so highly valued by year-round residents and by
those people who support the Town's economy;
2. R-80 zoning is most consistent with the zoning on immediately
adjacent properties;
3. Over forty percent (110%) of the site can be considered freshwater
wetlands so that rezoning to R-80 will provide a significantly
increased measure of protection for the environment than the HD
zoning now provides.
~-/! ~~
te.,~.~~
Judith T. Terry
Southold Town eler
April 6, 19911
"/
H-1&-2 (2161)-7c
.
.
&17.21
\ Appendix A
Stata Envlronmantal auallly Ravlaw
.FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
SEaR
Purpose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an orderly manner. whether a project
or action may be significant. The question'of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer. Frequent-
ly. there are aspects of a project that are subjective or unmeasureable. It is also understood that those who determine
significance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environmenror may be technically expert in environmental
analysis. In addition, many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting
the question of significance.
The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination
process has been orderly, comprehensive in nature, yet flexible to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action.
Full EAF Components: The full EAF is comprised of three parts:
Part 1: Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic project
data, it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3.
Part 2: Focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action. It provides
guidance as to whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially-
large impact. The form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced.
Part 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentially-large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the
impact is actually important.
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE- Type 1 and Unlisted Actions
Identify the Portions of EM completed for this project:
C Part 1
Part 2
oPart 3
Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF (Pans 1 and 2 and 3 if appropriate), and any other supporting
information. and considering both the magitude and importance of each impact. it is reasonably determined by the
lead agency that:
A. The project will not result in any large and important impactlsJ and. therefore. is one which will not
have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a negative declaration will be prepared.
B. Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant
effect for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been required,
therefore a CONDITIONED negative declaration will be prepared.'
C. The project may result in one or more large and important impacts that may have a significant impact
on the environment. therefore .1 positive declara.tion will be prep~red.
. A Conditioned Negative Declaration IS only valid ror Unlisted Actions
Change of Zone for SCTM# 1000-40-3-1
Name of Action
Town of Southo1d Town Board
Name of Lead Agency
Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer In Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer
Signature of ResponSible Officer In Lead Agency 'Signatur<' of Prepare'.ll! different from responsible officer)
. .
PART 1-PROJECT INFORMATION
\
Prepued by Project Sponsor
NOTICE: This document is desianed to imist in determinina whether the .ction proposed may ha'..: . sianificant effect
on the environment. Please complete the entire form, P aru A throuah E. Answers to these questions will be conside~'
as part of the application for .pproval and may be subject to further verification .00 public review. Provide any addition..
information you believe will be needed to complete Paru 2 and 3.
It is expected that completion of the full EAF will be dependent. on information currently available and will not invol~
new studies, research or investiaation. If information requiring such additional work is unavailab~, so indicate and specify
each instance. .
NAME OF ACTION ;
Change of zone for SCTM# 1000-40-3-1 !
LOCA liON OF ACTION (IneluOe SUM I Address. Municipality and County) J
slo CR 48, 1000 + feet elo Chapel Lane ,
NAME OF APPLlCANTISPONSOR I BUSINESS TELEPHONE
Town of Southold Town Board (51~ 765-1891
ADDRESS
53095 Main Road
CITY/PO I STATE I ZIP CCDE
Southold NY 11971
NAME OF OWNER (II dllleren.) I BUSINESS TELEPHONE
Kace Realty Co. ( )
ADDRESS
43 West 54th Street
CITY/PO I STATE I ZIP CCDE
New York NY 10019
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION
Change of zone from HD to R-80 of a 17.1 acre parcel located on
County Route 48, east of Chapel Lane based on a motion of the
Town Board.
Please Complete Each Question-Indic.te N.A. if not applic.ble
A. Site Description
Physical setting of overall project. both developed and undeveloped areas.
1. Present land use: DUrban Clndustrial DCommercial DResidential (suburban)
89 Forest DAgriculture . ClOther Vacant
17 .1
DRural (non-farml
2. Total acreage of project area:
APPROXIMATE ACREAGE
Meadow or Brushland (Nor.,agricultural)
Forested
Agricultural (Includes orchards. cropland. pasture. etc.)
Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24. 25 of ECL)
Water Surface Area
Unvegetated (Rock. earth or fill)
Roads. buildings and other paved surf aces
Other (Indicate type) acres
3,'Wh' d' '1 e{) . t 'tIMfB, Ra, PIB, De, RdB and Ca
at IS pre ommant SOl typ s on proJec Sl e.
a. Soil drainage: DWell drained 50 % of s.ite
DPoorly drained 1 n % of. site
b. If any agricultural land' is involved. how many acres 01 soil are c1assihed within soil group 1 through 4 of the N'
Land Classification System' NA acres (See 1 NYCRR 370)
acres.
5.3
4.4
PRESENTl Y
acres
AFTER COMPLETION
5 . 3
4.4
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
7 4
acres
7.4
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
DModerately well drained
20
% of site
. L
L "
-. ......... ,....
--.\ ."
v', _
5. APpro~im~tr prrcrnt~ar of propos.rojrct sitr Wit~ sloprs: ~0-10% . % 010-15%
015% or arutrr %
6. Is projrct subst~nti~lIy contiauous to, or cont~in ~ buildina, sitr, or district. Iistrd on thr St~tr or the
. RraiSlrrs of Historic PI~cesl oYrs ')l!iNo (Possible historic resources on site.
7. Is project substantially contiauous to a site Iistrd on thr Rraistrr of National Natur~ll~ndmarksl oYrs
8..WhatisthedepthofthewatertableI17.5-3i\rifeet) Perched water on surface.
9. 15 site locatrd ovrr a primary, principal. or sole source aquiferl J!Yrs DNo
10.. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project arr~1 DYes oNo'
11. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangerrdl
DYes CBNo According to
Identify each species
12. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes. other geological formations)
oVes tilNo Describe
%
Nation.al
l3lNo
13. Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area?
oVes ll!JNo If yes. explain
14.
Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the communityl
DVes JiZlNo
15.
Streams within or contiguous to project area:
a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary
NA
16. lakes. ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area:
a. Name 80-1
180~
b~ Size (In acres) ~("'rp.c::
17.
Is the site served by existing public utilities? WVes oNo
a) If Yes. does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection?
b) If Yes. will improvements be necessary to allow connection?
Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant
Section 303 and 304? oVes '$.No
19. Is the site located in or substantially contIguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8
of the ECl. and 6 NYCRR 617? =Ves ~No
DYes ;gNo
CVes '$)No
for HD Zoning
18.
to Agriculture and Markets Law. Article 25-AA.
20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastesl
::Yes
=No
unknown
B. Project Description
Project is proposed rezoning
1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate)
a. Total contiguous acreage owned or con'trolled by project sponsor 17.1 acres.
b. Project acreage to be developed: NA. acres initially; NA
c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped 17. 1 acres.
NA
d. Length of project, in miles: (If appropriate)
e. If the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed
f. Number of off.street parking spaces existing NA ; proposed NA
g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour N A (upon completion of project]?
h. If residential: Number and type oi housing units:
, One Family Two Family
NA
acres ultimately.
NA
%;
Multiple Family
Condominium
InitiaOy
Ultimately
NA
I Dimension5 iin feet} of largest proposed structure
NA
.helght.
wIdth.
---+
length
.
.
o
tons/cubic yards
2. How much natural material (i.e.. rock. earth. etc.) will be removed from the sitel
3. Will disturbed areas be reclaimedl DVes oNo ~N/A
a. If yes. for what intend . purpose is the site being reclaimedl
b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation! DYes oNo
c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamationl DYes oNo
o
4. How many acres of vegetation (trees. shrubs. ground covers) will be removed from sitel acres.
5. Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this projectl
DVes ~No Site does contain mature forest/project is change of zone
NA
6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction
7. If multi-phased:
a. Total number of phases anticipated NA
b. Anticipated date of commencement phase 1
c. Approximate completion date of final phase
d. Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases?
8. Will blasting occur during construction? DYes (XNo
9. Number of jobs generated: during construction N A
10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project NA
11. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities?
months. (including demolition).
(number).
month
month
DYes
year. (including demolition].
year.
DNo
; after project is complete
DYes
~No
If yes. explain
12. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? DYes "'No
a. If yes. indicate type of waste (sewage. industrial. etc.) and amount
b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged
13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? DYes ~No Type
14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? DYes DNo NA
E I. Project is Change of zone, no physical change will take place at thi
xp am
15. Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain? DYes E1No tim.
16. Will the project generate solid waste? DYes ~No
a. If yes. what is the amount per month tons
b. If yes. will an existing solid waste facility be used? DYes DNo
c. If yes. give name location
d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill1
e. If Yes. explain
DYes
DNo
17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste1
a. If yes. what is the anticipated rate of disposal?
b. If yes. what is the anticipated site life?
DYes IKINo
tons/month.
years.
18. Will project use herbicides or pesticides?
DYes
~No
19. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? DYes
6(jNo
20. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels?
DVes
l8INo
21. Will project result in an increase in energy usel
It' yes. indicate tvV: ,
22. If water supply is from wells. indicate pumping capacity
DYes
~No
NA
gallons/minute.
23. Total anticipated water usage per day
N!\
gallons/day.
~4 ()0t'<' ~rO'('ct Involve local 5t~1~{, or F edcr.11 ''.Jnd,n~l
::y(.~
~NO
C. Zoning and Planning Information
1. Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision?
If Yes. indicate decision required:
jiOzoning amendment Dzoning variance Dspecial use permit Qsubdivision
Onew/revision of master plan Dresource management plan Dother
HD
25. ,.~ppfO't..ls .~uir~
City, Town, Villaie Board
City, Town. Villaie Plannini Board
City. Town Zonini Board
City. County Health Department
Other Laca I Agencies
Other Regional Aiencies
State Agencies
Federal Agencies
.
.
Type
Submittal
o..te
!llIVes DNo
DVes DNo
DVes DNo
DVes DNo
DVes DNo
DVes DNo
DVes DNo
DVes DNo
Change of Zone
~Ves
DNa
Dsite plan
What is the zoning c1assification(s}of the site?
2
3, What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning?
21units without public sewer system/ or 42, units with public sewer system.
R-80
4. What is the proposed zoning of the site?
5, What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning?
5 units
6, Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? (giVes DNo
7 What are the predominant land use{s) and zoning classifications within a ';' mile radius of proposed action?
/hotel/RR, Nursing home/HD, UndeveloDPn/Hn ramporound
8 Is the proposed action compatible with adjoininglsurrounding land uses within a ';' mile?
9. If the proposed action is the subdivision of land. how many lots are proposed 1 NA
a. What is the minimum lot size proposed?
10, Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of sewer or water districts? NA DVes DNo
11, Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police.
fire protection)? DVes ~No
)lOVes
QNo
a. If yes. is existing capacity sufficient to handle proJected demand1 ~Yes DNo
12, Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic signliicantly above present levels? DVes Il!iNo
a. If yes. is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? DVes DNo
D. Informational Details
Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project If there are or may be any adverse
impacts associated with your proposal. please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or
avoid them.
E: Verification
I certify that the inforlJlation provided above is true to the best of my knowledge.
, Applicant/Sponsor Na /~~)}6 ,IV (\' ,.\1~\i'::'t~ ;.'..:', c. lc Date .0, \ ~ \ \ "l't
Signature - ~ Title Ch.A~\d'-, \ )0i'-rt1<, -+ A-~'.'C(\'~ ,u(
-/~VI (OtJSu\....-TA-UT" IV kPl")L.lc.-~l-..J\
11 tht' .Jdinn i\ in thl" (o.Ht.l1 .\rt'.l. J.nd 'l('lU Jr(" J. qJf(" .l:>:enn comrIe-It" the Co~~t.~l "~~sm('nl form befor(' proceedinx
r'
Part 2-,OJECT IMPACTS AND THEUWAGNITUDE
l"f)Onslblllty of LeN A,mcy
GeM,al Information (Rud Clrefully) \
. In completina the form the reviewer should be luided by the question: Have my responses and .l'!terminltions been
rellonablel The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst.
. Identifyina that an Impact will be potentially IlIle (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessarily tl,nlflcut.
Any larae impact must be evaluat.ed in PART 3 to determine sianificance. Identifyina an impact in column 2 simply
asks that it be looked at further.
. The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showina types of impacts and wherever possible the threshold of
mqnitude that would triuer a response in column 2. The examples are aenerally applicable throuahout the State and
for most situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be appropri.tte
for a Potential Laraelmpact response, thus requirina evaluation in Part 3.
. The Impacts of uch project. on uch site, in each locality, will vary. Therefore, the examples are illustrative and
have been oHered as auidance. They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to an~ each question
. The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question.
. In identifyina impacts, consider lona term, short term and cumlative effects.
Instructions (Read carefully)
a. Answer 'each of the 19 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there will be any impact.
b. Maybe answers should be considered as Yes answers.
c. If answerina Yes to a question then check the appropriate box (column 1 or 2) to indicate the potential size of thr
impact If impact threshold equals or exceeds any example provided, check column 2.11 impact will occur but thresholc
is lower than example, check column 1.
d. If reviewer has doubt about size of the impact then consider the impact as potentially larae and proceed to PART 3
e. II a potentially larae impact checked in column 2 Cin be mitiaated by chanae:s) in the project to a small to ~rat'
impact. also check the Yes box in column 3. A No response indicates tNt such a reduction Is not possible. Thi
..must be explained in Plrt 3.
IMPACT ON LAND
1. Will the proposed action result in I physical chao~ to the proiect si~
ll1lNO DYES
Eumples that would ipply to column 2
. Any construction on slopes of 15% or areater, (15 foot rise per 100
foot of lenath), or where the Ileneral slopes in the project area exceed
10%.
. Construction on land where the depth to the water table is less than
3 feet
. Construction of paved parkinll area for 1,000 or more vehicles.
. Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or Ilenerally within
3 feet of existinllaround sun ice.
. . Construction that will continue for more than 1 year or involve more
than one phase or stage.
. Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than 1,000
tons of natural material (i.e., rock or soil) per year.
. Construction or expansion of a sanitary landfill.
. Construction in a designated f100dwav. f
AC~10n 15 a Change O. zone, there
. Other impacts
pill be no physical alteration at this time
2. Will there be an effect t.. _.IV unique or unusual land forms found on
t~ sitel (i.r., cliffs. dunes, Ileolollicil fOfTllatioos. rtdti1lNO DYES
. S~cific land forms:
1
Small to
Moderate
- 'lmPaCf
2
Potenllal
Large
I in pact
o
o
o
o
[l
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
3
Can Impact Be
MItigated By
Pro}ect Change
DYes
Dyes
Dyes
DYrs
DYes
DYes
DYes
DYes
DYes
Dyes
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
DNo
ONe
ONe
DNc
ON,
r.
.
IMPACT ON WATER
3 Will propos~d action aff~ct any wat~ body d~sianal~ as prot~ct~dl
(Und~r Articl~s 15, 24. 25 of the Envlronm~ntal Con~rvation law, ECl)
DNO l8IYES
Eumplet that would apply to column 2.
. D~v~lopabl~ ar~a of sit~ contains. a prot~ct~d wal~r body.
. Dredllinll mor~ than 100 cubic yards of mat~rial from chann~1 of a
protect~d str~am.
. Extension of utility distribution facilities throullh a protected wa~r body.
. Construction in a ~sillnated fr~shwa~r or tidal w~tland.
.Oth' .. No physical alteration of the site
er Impacu:
at this time.
1
Small to
Moderate
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
04. Will proposed action affect any non-protected ~xistinll or n~w body
of waterl DNO ~YES
hamplet that would apply to column 2
. A 10% incrus~ or decreas~ in the surface area of any body of wat~r 0
or mor~ than a 10 acr~ incr~a~ or ~rease.
. Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area. 0
. Oth..,. in'll')act5: Existing wetlands extends beyond NYS EC n
tentative ~e~lands boundaries.
5. Will Proposed Action aff~t surfac~ or IIroundwater
quality or quantityl lXINO DYES
h~mplet that WQuld apply ~ column 2
. Proposed Action will require .i discharae permit.
. Proposed Action requires use of a SO<Jrce of water that d~s oot
have approval to; serve pro~ (pro~t) action.
. Proposed Action requires wa~r supply from wells with Ilreater than 045
aallons per minut~ pumpinll eapacity.
. Construction or operation cawinll arry contamination of a wat~r
supply system. .
. Pro~d Action will adv~rsely affect aroundwater.
. liquid effluent will be conveye<l off the site to facilities wh:~h presently
do not exist or have inadequate capacity.
. Proposed Action would use water in excess of 20.000 Ilallons per
day..
. Proposed Action will likel" ,-,~;e siltation or other discha'l~e into an
existinll body of wat", .v tk e':lent that there will be an obvious visual
contrast to natural conditions.
. Proposed Action will require the storage of petroleum or chemical
products Ilreater than 1.100 aallons.
. Proposed Action will allow residential uses in areas without water
and/or sewer services.
. Proposed Action locat~s commercial and/or industrial uses which may
require new or expansion of existing waste treatment andlor storalle
facilities.
. Other impacu:
I r
~ .J
Will proposed action alter drainaae flow or paNerns. or surface
water runoff! DNO ~YES
EHnple, that would apply to column 2
'.. ,'.. ''-.<
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
2
PotenUal
Large
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
.. .D.
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
3
Can Impact Be
MItigated By
proJlI(;l enange
DYes
DYes
Dyes
DYes
DYes
DYes
DYes
. !iJY~s
DY~s
DYes
DY~s
Dyes
Dyes
DVes
o
DYes
o
DYes
o
DYes
o
DYes
o
DYes
o
DYes
.....,
oNO
oNo
oNo
oNo
oNo
oNo
ONe)
DNa
ONo
dNo
ONe
ONe
oNc
[!~(
ON,
eN,
DN
ON
Or-.
o~
DYes
[!~
c
.
o Proposed Action may cause subsuntial erosion.
o Proposed Action is incompatible with existini drainaie patterns.
o Proposed Action will allow development in a desiinated floodway.
., Other impacts: Poor soils exist on site.
IMPACT ON AIR
7. Will proposed action affect air qualityl ~NO C;YES
Examplei that would apply to column 2
o Proposed Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips in any iiven
hour.
o Proposed Action will result in the incineration of more than 1 ton of
refuse per hour.
o Emission rate of total contaminants will exceed 5 Ibs. per hour or a
heat source producini more than 10 million BTU's per hour.
o Proposed action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed
to industrial use.
o Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial
development within existini industrial areas.
o Other impacts:
IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMAlS
8. Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endaniered
species! (islNO DYES
Eumples that ,",oold apply to column 2 I
o Reduction of Cln<!! or more species listed on the New Yorl< or federal
list, usini the site, over or near site or found on the site.
o Removal of any portion of a critical or siinificant wildlife habitat.
o Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other
than for airicultural purposes.
o Other impacts:
9. Will Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or
nOrH!ndaniered species? j81NO DYES
Eumplei that would apply to column 2
o Proposed Action would substantially interfere with any resident or
miiratory fish, shellfish or wildlife species.
o Proposed Action requires the removal of more than 10 acres
of mature forest (over 100 years of age) or other locally important
vegetation.
IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES
10. ,Will the Proposed Action affect agricultural land resources!
~N; DYES
Exa';'pl~ that would apply to column 2
.. The proposed action would sever, crOIS or limit ~ccelS to airicultura'
land (includes cropland, hayfields, p.,Hture, vineyard. orchard, ete)
r-e 2 3'
Small to potlntlal Can Impact EM
Moderata Largl MItigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
0 0 DYes oNo
0 0 DVes oNo
0 0 DVes DNo
0 0 oVes oNo
0 0 Dyes oNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DVes DNo
0 0 DVes oNo
0 0 DYes oNo
0 0 oVes DNo
(
-. ..- ..
0 0 Dves 'DNo
0 0 Dyes DNo
0 0 DYes oNo
,
0 0 oVes oNo
0 0 DYes oNo
0 0 DYes oNo
I
0 0 Dyes oNo
.
o Construction ICtivity would excavate or compact the soil profile of
aaricultural land. _
o The proposed action would irreversibly convert more than 10 acres
of aaricultural land or, if located in an Aaricultutal District more
. th.In 2.5 acres of aarieultural land.
o The proposed action would disrupt Of prevent installation of aaricuftural
land manaaement systems (e-a., subsurl ace drain lines, outlet ditches,
strip croppina); Of create a need for such me&.lures (e-a- cause I farm
field to drain poorly due to increased runoff)
o Other impacts:
IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES
11 _ Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources! oNO DVES
(If necessary, use the Visual EAF Addendum in Section 617.11,
Appendix B_l
Examples that would apply to column 2
o Proposed land uses, or project components obviously different from
or in sharp contrutto current surroundina land use pallerns, whether
man-made or natural.
o Proposed land uses, or project components vnible' t~ u~ of
aesthetic resources which will eliminate or sianifieantly reduce their
enjoyment of the aesthetic qualities of that resource.
Project components that will result in the elimination or sianificant
screenina of scenic views known to be important to the area.
o Other impacts:
IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES
12. Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure of historic. pre-
historic or paleontolollical importance! oNO jlOVES
Examples that would apply to column 2
o Proposed Action occurring wholly or partially within or substantially
contiguous to any facility or site listed on the State or National Re&ister
of historic places.
o Any impact to an archaeological site or fossil bed located within the
project site_
o Proposed Action will occur in an area designated as sensitive for
archaeological sites on the NVS Site _Inventory_
h. Unknown - EVldence suggests
o at er Impacts:
cultural resources exist on site.
IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION
13 _ Will Proposed Action affect the quantity or quality of existina or
future open spaces or re<:reational opportunities!
Examp!n' ...at would apply to column 2 ONO jlil.VES
( lThe permanent foreclosure of a future re<:reational opportunity.
-.. A major reduction o_f an 'open space important to the community.
o Other impacts: Slte 1S surrounded by a park
_ _O~~? _~~ace district.
re1 2 3
Small to Potenllal Can Impact Be
Moderate large Mlllgated By
Impact Impact Project Change
0 0 DYes oNo
0 0 DYes oNo
0 0 DYes oNo
0 0 DYes oNo
I
I
0 0 DYes oNo
-
0 0 DYes oNo
0 0 oVes oNo
0 0 DYes oNo
0 0 oVes oNo
0 0 oVes ONe>
0 0 oVes oNo
0 0 oVes oNo
0 0 DYes oNo
0 0 Dves ONe
jlJ 0 DYes oNo
.
IMPACT ON TRANSP9RTATION
14. Will there be ~n effect to existinltunsport~tion systems!
l!iNO DYES
Eumpln th~t would ~pply to column 2
. Alteration of present palterns of movement of people ~nd/or ll00ds.
. Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems.
· Other impacts:
IMPACT ON ENERGY'
15. will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or
enerllY supply! i\lNO DYES
Eumples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed Action will cause a Ilreater than 5% increase in the use of
any form of enerllY in the municipality.
. Proposed Action will require the creation or extension of an enerllY
transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two family
residences or to serve a major commercial or industrial use.
. Other impacts:
NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS
16. Will there be objectionable odo<1, noise, or vibration ~s a result
of the Proposed Action! pllNO . DYE5-
Eumples that would apply to column 2
. Blastinll within 1,500 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive
facility.
. Oden will occur routinely (more than one hour per d~y).
. .. -.. --
. Proposed Action will produce operatinll IIoise exceedinll the local
ambient noise levels for noise ou15ide of structures.
. Proposed Action will remove natural barriers that would act as a
noise screen.
. Other impacts:
IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH
17. 'Will Proposed Action affect public health and safety!
~NO
DVES
Exampln that would apply to column 2
. Proposed Action may cause a risk of explosion or release of hazardous
substances (Le. oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) in the event of
accident or upset conditions, or there may be a chronic low level
discharlle or emission.
. Proposed Action may result in the burial of "hazardous wastes" in any
fonm (Le. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritatinll.
infectious, etc.)
. Storage facilities for one million or more gallons of liquified natural
lias or other flammable liquids.
. P-roposed action may result in the excavation or o\h<,r disturbanc~
within 2,000 f~t of a site used for the disposal of solid or hazardous
waste.
. Other impacts:
. ,
1 2 3
Smlllto Potential Can Impact B<
l.4oderlle Large MItigated By
Impact Impact Project Chang
0 0 oVes ONe
0 0 oVes ONe
0 0 DYes ONe
0 0 DYes ON
0 0 DYes ON
0 0 DVes ON
-
.or: .
0 0 DVes 0"
0 D Dyes 01'
- 0 D Dyes 01'
0 D Dyes o~
D D Dves D~
0 D DYes 0
0 D DVes D
0 D DYes 0
0 D DYes C
0 D Dves C
?
.
IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHARACTER
OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD
111. Will proposed .ction .lfect the chuuter of the existinc community!
IXlNO DYES
Eumples th.t would .pply to column 2
. The permanent population of the city, town or villalle in which the
project is loc.ted is likely to crow by more than 5%.
. . The municipal budCet for c.pital expenditures or operatinc services
will incruse by more IMn 5% per year u a result of this project.
. Proposed .ction will conflict with officially adopted pl.ns or co.ls.
. Proposed action will c.use . chanlle in the density of land use.
. Proposed Action will replace or eliminate existinc facilities. structures
or areas of historic importance to the community.
. Development will create a demand for additional community services
(e. II. schools, police and fire, etc.)
. Proposed Action will set an important precedent for future projects.
. Proposed Action will create or eliminate employment.
. Other impacts:
.
1 2 3
Small to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large MItigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
0 0 DYes oNo
0 0 DYes oNo
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYes oNo
0 0 DYes oNo
0 0 DYes oNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo I
!
19. Is there. or is there likely to be, public controversy related to
potential adverse environmental impacts! DNO DYES
C'.
If Any Action In Part 2 Is Identified as a Potential large Impact or
If You Cannot Determine the Magnitude of Impact, Proceed to Part 3
Part 3-EVALUATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS
lesponsibility of lead ^eency
Put 3 must be prepared if one or more iml"'ct(s) is considered to be potentially laree, nen if the impact{s) may ,b.
mltlpted.
Instructions
Discuss the followinll for each impact identified in Column 2 of Part 2:
1. Briefly describe the impact.
2. Describe (if applicable) how the impact could be mitillated or reduced to a small to moderate impact by project chanlle(s
3. Based on the information available, decide if it is reasonable to conclude that this impact is important.
To answer the question of importance. consider:
. The probability of the impact occurrinll
. The duration of the impact
. Its irreversibility. includinll permanently lost resources of value
. Whether the impact can or will be controlled
. The rellional consequence of the impact
. Its potential diverllence from local needs and lloals
. Whether known objections to the project relate to this imr'" .
(Continue on attAchments)
~
.
CRAMER, V~ .J'A~CIATES
ENVIRONMEN~~G CONSULTANTS
.
~,~"S
March S, 1994
ill
Ms. Valerie Scopaz
Planner
Town of Southold
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
RE:
. "' BOARD
Proposal for Semces
Preparation of Long Environmental Assessment Forms (EAF) for Proposed
Hamlet Density Zoning in the Town of Southold
Dear Valerie:
Pursuant to your request, the following will serve as a proposal for services with
regard to the above referenced. It is our understanding that the Town Board wishes to
consider the possible rezoning for six undeveloped parcels from Hamlet Density (HD) to
Residence-SO (R-SO). This proposed action is a result of the study prepared by you and the
staff, entitled "Review of Hamlet Density Zoning in the Town of Southold'; dated February
1994. The following are the six parcels that will be considered in the public hearings:
SCfM#
100-40-3-1
100-40-4-1
100-35-1-25
100-45-2-10.3
100-45-2-1
100-35-1-24
Hamlet Location
Greenport, unincorp.
Greenport, unincorp.
Greenport, unincorp.
Greenport, unincorp.
Greenport, unincorp.
Greenport, unincorp.
Acreage
17.1
10.55
132.0S
20.07
1.2
62.3
CV A proposes to complete the Long EAF necessary for coordination with other
involved a~encies under the State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Act. We will also
carry out field inspections on each of the subject parcels to assist in the preparation on the
documents. It is also our understanding that you have certain information that will be made
available to us to assist in the preparation of the Long EAF's. In consideration of the above
we estimate that the preparatIOn of each Long EAF will cost between $150.00 to $200.00,
with a total sum of not to exceed $1,200.00.
I hope you and the Board find the above proposal acceptable. If there are any
questions with the above please feel free to contact me. If the Board authorizes this
proposal, please let me know and we will begin work immediately as I understand that the
public hearing will be set for March 22. Thank you for your consideration of CV A and I
hope to hear from you shortly. .
/'
Very trulpabrs,
//
,,>"/ ./ //
Viomas W. Cramer, ASLA
/ ;'
~.A/
"
54 NORTH COUNTRY ROAD, SUITE 2, MILLER PLACE, NY 11764 (516) 331-1455
./ . ....
.
.
JUDITH T. TERRY
TOWN CLERK
REGISTRAR OF VITAL srATISTlCS
MARRIAGE OFFICER
RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
March 10, 1994
Thomas W. Cramer, ASLA
Cramer, Voorhis & Associates
54 North Country Road, Suite 2
Miller Place, New York 11764
Dear Tom:
,~ -.:5lt6F/~(~
IJ1lOf~ '1 ~
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Soulhold, New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
Telephone (516) 765-1801
This is to confirm that the Southold Town Board, at their regular
meeting held on March 8, 1994, adopted a resolution accepting your
proposal to prepare Long Environmental Assessment Forms for six proposed
rezonings to be undertaken on the Town Board's own motion. A certified
copy of the resolution is enclosed.
Very truly yours,
~~~
Judith T. Terry
Southold Town Clerk
Enclosu re
V. Scopaz, Senior Planner ~
cc:
rnm
'" m
k:N\ I I
SOUTHOlD TOWN
PlANNING BOARO
W
I'
L-,.
.
.
.
JUDITH T. TERRY
TOWN CLERK
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
Telephone (516) 765-1801
REGISTRAR OF VITAL SfATISTICS
MARRIAGE OFFICER
RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY THE
SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD AT A REGULAR MEETING HELD ON MARCH 8. 1994:
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby accepts
the proposal of Cramer, Voorhis & Associates. dated March 8, 1994, at a
total sum not to exceed $1.200.00. for the preparation of Long
Environmental Assessment Forms for six (6) proposed rezonings to be
undertaken on the Town Board's own motion.
~ ----"-----'
J~L-
Judith T. Ter~
Southold Town Clerk
March 9. 1994
....'-"