Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/06/1986 JUDITH T. TERRY TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 CUTCHOGUE HAMLET MEETING Proposed Updated Master Plan and Zoning Code Revisions Knights of Columbus Hall 7:30 P.M., Thursday, February 6, 1986 Present: Also Present: Supervisor Francis J. Murphy Councilman Paul Stoutenburgh Councilman James A. Schondebare Councilwoman Jean W. Cochran Councilman George L. Penny IV Town Clerk Judith T. Terry Town Planning Consultant David Emilita Planning Board Chairman Bennett OrlowskiJr. Planning Board Member William F. Mullen Jr. Supervisor Murphy introduced the Town Board members, Planning Consultant and Town Clerk. He then explained the history of the current proposed updated master plan and zoning code revisions and the purpose of the hamlet meeting, which is to receive public comment and suggestions to avoid any grave mistakes should the present proposal be submitted to a public hearing for adoption. Approximately 100 individuals attended this meeting, and the following comments and objections were received: FRANK McBRIDE, Oregon Road, Cutchogue: He is the owner of two parcels of land adjoining the Disposal Area, Cutchogue. One on the north side presently zoned Industrial and one on the west side of the site which is also Industrial. The proposal is to rezone to Agricultural Conservation. He cannot imagine anyone wanting to build a house in that area overlooking the Disposal Area. He requests that it remain Industrial. P~§e 2 - Cutchogue Meeting 2/6/86 ALICE HUSSEY: He feeling is the master plan is only half of what it ought to be, and that half could be improved. She finds only 11 exceptions to the old master plan. She suggested a concentric circle idea at the center of each hamlet for density and outer circle of less density, out to the shorelines having wldle open spaces. TOM THOMPSON: Referred to a parcel on County Route 48 which is residential and overlooks the Disposal Area. He would like to see it changed to Business. JOSEPH LIZEWSKI, Cutchogue: Expressed concern about the many breakdowns in the zoning classifications. He spoke about a parcel he uses as a dental office on Depot Lane which is being classified R-80, but feels it should be Business. He feels the proposed plan will make it difficult to get anything done due to the amounts and types of zoning proposed which are so specifiC. WILLIAM MIDGLEY, Cutchogue: There are no areas in the proposed Master Plan for those people who provide services to the community, i.e. plumber, electrician, builder, mason. His own business, used as a building contractor, is being downgraded. NANCY SAWASTYNOWICZ: She finds nothing in the Marine uses in the proposed plan for pumping-out stations. The DEC tells her this would be a good time to include it. TOM LOWRY, New Suffolk: Spoke about the Carr (Norris) property on New Suffolk Avenue which is under consideration by the Planning Board for an "M" zone 95 unit condominium on 27 acres, the zoning of which was by a Town Board change of zone in the 1970's. RUTH OLIVA, North Fork Environmental Council: As a whole this plan is really quite good, but needs a bit of fine tuning. Asked that Article XXII be reincluded. Marine Recreation and Marine Business: finds them very confusing, with permitted use of swimmings pools which have to be dumped out, and the marines are along the creeks. The pools contain chemicals and where will they be dumped but in the creeks. She does not feel this should be a permitted use. In the Marine Business District a permitted use is one-family detached dwelling. No such use in Recreation District. WILLIAM PETERS, Trustee, Cutchogue-New Suffolk Historical Society: Read a resolution adopted by the historical society requesting that Fort Corchauge be designated on the proposed Master Plan as a historical landmark. The resolution has been endorsed by the Southold Town Landmark Preservation Commission. HERBERT MANDEI_: Orderly development should be set forth in cearly established codes and regulations, rather than vague and flexible rules which are then open to discretionary interpretation. The plan is repleat with the requirement for Planning Board prior approvals of virtually everything, even down to minor details on lands, houses, signs, livestock, stores, etc. Standards should replace as much as possible the need for prior approvals for the sake of uniformity and reducing costly unnecessary delays. Urged the Town Board to review Raymond & May's Development Pna of 1969/1970. JOHN WICKHAM, Cutchogue: Expressed concern about the two acre zoning classification along Long Island Sound and Peconi¢ Bay. Suggested one acre to one and a half acre 800 ft. back from those areas, to provide a higher sale value for those properties, which would increase the assessment for the Town. Page 3- Cutchogue Meeting 2/6/86 DEBBIE SHARP: Concerned about the proposed down-zoning of her property on the corner of Jockey Creek Drive and Main Road, Southold. R-40 is proposed and she feels it should be business. LINDA FLETCHER, League of Women Voters: Read prel~ared statement. Applauds the Town Board for completing the Master Plan update, but expressed concern for marina zoning, which should be encouraged where they do not negatively impact on residential neighborhoods or natural environments. They feel the proposed new amendments 11 and 12 will have negative impact on both residents and fragile creek and coastal waters. Requests those amendments be deleted and new ones developed more in keeping with sensitive waterfront areas, suggesting the Conservation Advisory Council be consulted with respect to same. Requests proposed Article 22 which addressed the protection of our natural features, which was deleted, be returned to the code. Offered the League's services in holding informational meetings for the public on the proposed zoning amendments, HEATHER CUSACK, Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council: Expressed concern about amendments 11 and 12 and offered to work on rewriting Article XXlI. Suggested certain covenants in certain parts of the zoning laws, i.e. buffer zones and different restrictions on the marine environment. JERRY BUSCHET, New Suffolk: Brought to the Board's attention property in New Suffolk that is zoned residental and is proposed to be Hamlet Business. The parcel is between First and Second Street where there are presently six homes existing, and hotel/motels are possible there. PAT COMBS, Peconic: Requested bed and breakfast homes in the residential areas. RAYMOND NINE, Mattituck: His property on Route 48, Mattituck is being rezoned to RO. He requests the Board leave it B-1 or Light Industrial. ELLEN HUFE, Southold: Requested the Board to reconsider the LB District where her business, Future Machine Products, is located at Route 48 and Kennys Road, and zone it Business. SUPERVISOR MURPHY explained the non-conforming use with respect to changing a zoning classification. WILLIAM MIDGLEY: As long as a business is in existence now it is fine. What happens to a non-conforming business when it is sold or turned over to a family member. BILL PENNY: He owns Tidy Car, Route 48 and Youngs Avenue, Southold. The proposed zoning for his property is LB and it will then be non-conforming. What will happen to him if he should want to sell? (Board members explained that the use stays the same if it is sold for the same type of business. But the building could not be sold for a different use.) JACK MULKAHEY, Cutchogue: Resides on Highland Road across from proposed Seacroft project. What is the current status of Seacroft. (Supervisor Murphy suggested he ask the owners of Seacroft, who are in the room. The property has a zoning classification which was granted several years ago. The Board cannot comment further as this property is in litigation at the present time.) ED SIEGMANN: If the Board designates property for an airport, when someone decides to build the airport is there going to be input from the public before it is granted7 (David Emilita explained that an airport is permitted in the zoning ordinance on sites of 100 acres or more. There is no such designation on the map. Pa~e 4 - Cutchogue Meeting 2/6/86 Any proposal for an airport would be subject to an environmental impact statement, which would be subject to a public hearing, so they would have input.) SUPERVISOR MIJRPHY stated that with respect to the Airport Study probably by the end of the month of February there will be a final input meeting to the committee given by the consultant and the consultant and the committee will give their input to the Town Board. This meeting will be open to the public. MARY MU/KAH£Y: Asked the names of the owners of Seacroft. (Supervisor Murphy stated the owners are Mr. Joe Nolan and Mr. Richard Cron.) Why won't the Town answer questions with respect to this property? (Supervisor Murphy stated the question is in litigation and the Board cannot comment.) RAY BLUM, Cutchogue: His property on the south side of the Main Road, opposite Key Food, is being proposed for RO. He feels this property should be zoned Business. Directly next to his property is an industrial zone. The RO classification is ridiculous. Referred to other areas along the main roads zoned RO or LB. The Board should once more look at the plan. They should go out on the streets and take a look and see what is operating in a lot of the places where they decided to change the zoning. JIM SLAT£R: Suggested the proposed airport meeting should be held at one of the high schools rather than the Town Hall where there is limitedi~pace available. JAMES FOGARTY~ Route 25, Cutchogue: The location of his property is near that of Ray Blum and is probably the busiest business area in Cutchogue and a new residence hasn't been built in that area in over twenty-five years. The area should definitely be zoned Business. PAT GEMMA, Main Road, Cutchogue: On the map, in an area where there are houses on quarter acre lots, one acre minimum lot size is indicated. What is the rationale for this? The proposals is also R40 on the Main Road where there isn't one piece of property that is a legal lot that has 40,000 square feet. Where is the multiple dwelling zone? Except for Seacroft and Founders Village, which are already pre-existing, there is no leaway for apartments. The Board should look at the map, re-examine it and perhaps change it. DAVID SPOHN, Orient: The airport meeting will only address Phases I and II, which are the inventory and the site selection. There will be many areas that there will not be answers for until the study is complete. He just wanted to make sure everyone understood the purpose of the meeting. MARGARET SKABRY, Henry's Lane, Peconic: Two years ago the proposed map showed an airport and Soundview Avenue Extension. The airport and the extension have now been eliminated from the map, but neither are necessarily gone. She expressed her disapproval of the proposed Soundview Avenue Extension. Mrs. Skabry then spoke about the proposed airport meeting relative to Phases I and II, and urged everyone to carefully read the legal notices and articles in the newspapers with respect to the date of the hearing. She further addressed her opposition to Soundview Avenue Extension and the motels shei feels will come with it and possibly marinas. Urged everyone to study the map and speak to the Board members if they have questions or complaints regarding it. Pa, ge 5 - Cutchogue Meeting 2/6/86 COUNCILMAN GEORGE PENNY: Outlined the uses permitted by special exception of the Board of Appeals in the LB District. COUNCILMAN SCHONDEBARE: Explained that the Norris property is presently zoned "M". They go to the Planning Board with their plan under the "M" zone. The Planning Board must follow a procedure set up for the "M" zone. The proposed updated map is R80 for that property. As it stands right now the zone is "M" and the Planning Board came to the Town Board for guidance and they told the Planning Board they must proceed pursuant to the law, and the law is "M". ED SIEGMANN: Feels the Mattituck Hamlet meeting was sprung on them too fast and he joins the League of Women Voters in requesting the Town Board to reschedule a meeting in Mattituck so the people can come out and be heard. With respect to the Norris property he feels the developers can be fought on the "M" zone because contrary to the lawsuit in th~ 1970's when the Town wanted it to be"M" and the residents in the area opposed it, today the Town and the people would be arguing for the property to be two acre zoning and the courts would be willing to listen to the argument that there is a severe water problem in that area and 95 condominiums would result in a tremendous number of salted wells. JANE MINERVA, Cutchogue Library: Thanked the Board for making the proposed updated master plan studies available in the library for anyone would like to come in and they've had a lot of interested people and hav~ made copies of anything they asked for at the expense of the library. Supervisor Murphy thanked everyone for coming out and emphasized that the purpose of the hamlet meetings is to receive input from the people to the Town Board. They are interested in how they feel. The Master Plan is not for the personal satisfaction or gain of one or two people, it's for the entire residents of Southold Town. They have tried to come up with a plan that is fair for everyone in the Town and provide for future growth. Meeting adjourned at 9:00 P.M. $outhold Town Clerk I am Linda Fletcher of New Suffolk, speaking for the League of Women Voters. At the meetings in Mattituck and Orient last week, the League applauded the Town Board for completing the Southold Town Master Plan up,ate. And we asked that the Plan be used as a guide by our Town officials so that they keep uppermost in mind our unique, fragile natural features when considering development in the hamlets of Southold Town. The Master Plan is a guide for zoning but it appears that Town official~ have not always followed the 9uide in their proposed changes for the zoning Code. We refer to a statement in the Master Plan that says "marinas 8hould be encouraged where they do not negatively impact on residential neighborhoo~s or natural environments. - The League believes that the uses permitted in the proposed new amendments 11 and 12, including special exceptions and accessory uses, will have negative impact on both residents and our fragile creek and coastal waters. The League requests that proposed amendments 11 and 12 be deleted and new amendments be developed as rapidly as possible that are more in keeping with sensitive waterfront areas. We suggest that you draw on the expertise of the Southold Town~Advisory Council and others to formulate these new amendments that will permit uses of the waterfront to meet citizen needs without threatening our fresh water supply and our creek and coastal waters. To s~tbstantiate our request, we submit the following~ 1) A quote from a speech by a Southold Town Official given at a League forum in January, 1983= "The National Water Resources Council states that our region is one of the eleven most critical water problem areas in the nation. · . .Salt water encroachment diminishes our groundwater supply . . Zoning controls and land use ordinances need revision to permit protection of sensitive areas." s~o~alisk w~ ~ ~.Y. ~par~ent of Sta~ ~re~d ~nce~ ~u~ pEo~c~on o~ ~at~ resource ~d ra~d quemti~s ~b ~ ex~n= of ~e ~i~ e~sion ~ ~ ~or~ Fork, citing ~e pro.sd develo~n~ for Y~g's ~ty~d ~ So~old ~ ~ exile. He ~ld ~doub~dly e~=ess ~ s~ o~ ~ut ~ p~osed resoning ~i~ Bua~ss ~d ~sort reorea~i~. 3. The pre~t ~iti~ of ~e Vtlla~ of GregorY's wa~r Suffolk C~t~ ~ealth ~p~ says ~a~ new develo~ent coul~ enough wa~r for fire ~=o~c~on.-- ~ that could happea to New Suffolk,too T~ ~&g~ ~lio~a ~at we o~ pre~n~ prob~e~ If our zoning 1awe are ~d 12. To fully pro,ct our g~und wa~r su~Ly ~d our na~ral f~a~ - ~ which was ~el~d - b~ r~d to ~ new ~y I al~ ~ffi~ ~ ~a~'s offer ~ assist in ho~d~q ~o~ional for ~ ~Ach h~l~=, in our ~.. Th~ fou for all~iug ~ ~ ~n~. HM-Hamlet Meeting Speech 2/6/86 LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: MY HAME IS HERBERT MANDEL. THIS IS THE THIRD HAMLET MEETING ON THE MASTER PLAN I HAVE ATTE~ AND ALMOST WEEKLY I HAVE BEEN SITTING DOWN WITH ONE OR THE OTHER TOWN BOARD, AS CHAIRMAN OF THE SOUTHOLD HOUSING ADVISORY COMMITTEE. I WISH TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO VOICE MY CONCERNS RELATIVE TO THE PROPOSED MASTER PLAN -- ONE CONCERN WAS EMPHASISED SUCCINCTLY IN A RECENT ADVERTISEMENT THE SUFFOLK TIMES: "WE THINK THE ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT OF THE TOWN OUGHT TO BE DIRECTED BY CLEARLY ESTABLISHED CODES AND REGULATIONS, DULY ENACTED BY ELECTED OFFICIALS WHO ARE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE PUBLIC. CONTROL OVER LAND BY DISCRETIONARY POWERS HAS SERIOUS LIABILITIES, THE ELIMINATION OF WHICH IS ONE OF THE CHIEF REASONS OF A MASTER PLAN." I BELIEVE THAT AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT OUGHT TO BE SET FORTH IN CLEARLY ESTABLISHED CODES AND REGULATIONS, RATHER THAN VAGUE AND FLEXIBLE RULES WHICH ARE THEN OPEN TO DISCRETIONARY INTERPRETATION. IF THE THE CODE IS CLEAR -- WHETHER STRICT OR LIBERAL -- THOSE WHO MUST ABIDE BY IT KNOW IMEDIATELY WHERE THEY STAND. 2 THE CURRENT MASTER PLAN PROPOSAL IS REPLEAT WITH THE REQUIREMENT FOR PLANNING BOARD PRIOR APPROVALS OF VIRTUALLY EVERYTHING, EVEN DOWN TO MINOR DETAILS -- ON LANDS, HOUSES, SIGNS, LIVESTOCK, STORES, AND ON AND ON. COULDN'T STANDARDS BE ESTABLISHED IN ORDER TO AVIOD THE NEED FOR SOME OF THESE APPROVALS? THE PLANNING BOARD IN THEIR NON-ELECTED CAPACITY HAS TAKEN FOR ITSELF SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASED POWERS OVER OUR DAILY LIVES, URSURPING THE BOARD OF APPEALS. THE PLANNING BOARD HAS BEEN INCORRECTLY GIVEN CREDIT FOR HAVING THE SOLE INPUT TO THE PLAN SINCE APRIL 1985 WHEN RPPW (THE PROFESSIONAL CONSULTANTS) COMPLETED THEIR SUMMARY REPORT AND PROPOSED ZONING REGULATIONS. THE FACT IS -- UNKNOWN TO THE PUBLIC -- THAT THE TOWN BOARD HAS HAD SOLE INPUT ON THE PORPOSED PLAN FOR THE PAST EIGHT MONTHS. THE ZONING MAP IS FILLED WITH ERRORS, OMMISSIONS, AND INCONSTENCIES, AND SHOULD ~VE BEEN UPDATED AND CORRECTED BEFORE PRESENTATION TO THE PURLIC - - CERTAINLY BEFORE APPROVAL. STANDARDS SHOULD REPLACE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE THE NEED FOR "PRIOR APPROVALS" FOR THE SAKE~UNIFORMITY AND REDUCING COSTLY UNNECESSARY DELAYS. 3 I WOULD STRONGLY URGE YOU TO REVIEW RAYMOND & MAY'S DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF 1969/1970 FOR THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD. RAYMOND & HAY HAVE BEEN RETAINED THROUGH THE YEARS AND ARE NOW REPUTABLY STILL THE TOWN'S CONSULTANTS, ALTHOUGH THEY HAVE HAD NO INPUT INTO THE PROPOSED HASTER PLAN SINCE APRIL 1985, AND DO NOT ACCEPT ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE PLAN AS EVOLVED BY OUR TOWN BOARD. DESPITE THE YEARS THAT HAVE PASSED SINCE THE FORMULATION OF THIS PLAN, IT IS INTERESTING TO NOTE THAT OUR FAILURE TO CLOSELY ADHERE TO THE EXPERT'S RECOM~ENDATIONS CO~NTAINED THEREIN HAVE INVARIABLY BEEN REGRETTED, WHILE COMPLIANCE WITH THE PLAN'S RECOMMENDATIONS HAS INVARIABLY PROVEN TO BE IN LINE ITH THE TOWN'S GOALS. FOR EXAMPLE, EXISTING MAJOR ROADS CLASSIFIED IN PART I OF THIS PLAN WERE COUNTY ROUTE 27 AND STATE ROUTE 25. "THE ROADS ARE ADEQUATE FOR EXISTING DEVELOPEMENT AND WILL, IN GENERAL, EFFICIENTLY SERVE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IF THE TOWN PLANNING BOARD EFFECTIVELY LIMITS STRIP COMMERCIAL DEVBELOPMENT. IT HAS, THEREFORE, BEEN RECOMMENDED IN THE SECTION ON COMMERCIAL LAND USE THAT COMMERCIAL STRIP OR R~BON DEVELOPMENT ALONG STATE ROUTE 25 BE DISCOURAGED AND ABSOLUTELY PROHIBITED ALONG COUNTY ROUTE 27" [RT. 48] NOW WE HAVE THE BEGINNINGS OF A JERICHO TRUNPIKE RIGHT BEHIND US. WHILE THIS PLAN WAS IN THE MAKING, SOUTHOLD HAMLET GOT ITS FIRST AUTO BODY SHOP OUT ON THE LAND THAT HAD BEEN FARM. 4 ADDITIONALLY, THE ORIGINA PLAN TOOK INTO ACCOUNT THE NEED~OF ZONING FOR APARTMENTS AS WELL AS ADDRESSING AT THAT EARLY DATE MANY OF OUR INCREASING NEEDS, WHICH, IF THEY HAD BEEN ACTED UPON AFFIRMATIVELY, WOULD HAVE BEEN MOST BENEFICIAL TO OUR CO~g3NITY. THERE IS A~ STRONG TENDENCY ON THE PART OF MOST OF US TO WEARY OF THE REPETITIVENESS NECESARY IN THE APPROVAL PROCESSES RECOM~LENDED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF SUCH AN ALL- IMPORTANT DOCUMENT AS A MASTER PLAN. BY ITS VERY NATURE IT MUST CONSOLIDATE INTO ONE COHESIVE SUMMARY THE WANTS AND NEEDS OF OUR ENTIRE POPULATION. IT MUST BE FORWARD- LOOKING; IT MUST BE ACCURATE; AND WHILE IT CANNOT ACCOMODATE SPECIFICALLY THE WANTS AND NEEDS OF EVERY INDIVIDUAL, IT SHOULD PROFESSIONALLy AND IN A TOTALLY UNBIASED WAY BECOME OUR PLAN TO ACCOMMODATE AND GUIDE THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF SOUTHOLD. I PLEAD WITH YOU ON BEHALF OF OUR COMMUNITY'S WELFARE THAT YOU CONTINUE TO REVIEW WITH THE AID OF PROFE~IONAL UNBIASED INPUT THIS PROPOSAL -- NOT UNTIL YOU WEARY OF IT, NOT UNTIL YOU ARE "SICK OF IT," BUT RATHER UNTIL YOU ARE CERTAIN IT IS THE BEST THAT WE CAN ACHIEVE. Februar~ 6, 1986 Request to the Town Board. We would like to Join the request of the League of Woman Voters to reschedule well advertised Master Plan meetings in the Town of Mattituck where people can ask questions and make comments. The last meeting was poorly attended because many residents were not aware of the meeting. It will be of substantial bene- fit to both the townboard and th~ residents if the plan is understood before it is voted on. ~war~ ~legmann ' For Mattltuck/Senior Citizens FRANCIS J. MURPHY SUPERVISOR -SOL MAIN ROAD $OUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1800 (516) 765-1939 SYNOPSIS OF PROPOSED ZONING ORDINANCE for HAMLET MEETINGS JANUARY & FEBRUARY, 1986 -2- List of new districts A-C - Agricultural -Conservation District (Two acre minimum) R-80 - Residential Low Density District (Two acre minimum) R-40 - Residential Low Density District (One acre minimum) R-120 - Residential Low Density District (Three acre minimum) R-200 - Residential Low Density District (Five acre minimum) Residentiali, Low Density District (Ten acre minimum) I' R-400 - HD - Hamlet Density Residential District RR - Resort Residential District RO - Residential Office District HB - Hamlet Business District LB Limited Business District B-1 General Business District M-Rec - Marine Recreation District MB - Marine Business District LIO - LI - Light Industrial Park/Office Park District Light Industrial District -3- Purpose of each District Agricultural-Conservation A-C District Low Density Residential R-80~ ~-120~ R-200~ R-400 District~ Section 100-30. Purpose. The purpose of the Agricultural-Conservation (A-C) District and the Low Density Residential R-80, R-120, R-200 and R-400 Districts is to reasonably control, and to the extent possible prevent, the unnecessary loss of those currently open lands within the Town containing large and contiguous areas of p~ime agricultural soils which are the basis for a significant portion/of the Town's economy and those areas with sensitive environmental features including aquifer recharge areas and bluffs. In addition these areas provide the open rural environ- ment so highly valued by year-round residents and those persons who support the Town of Southold's recreation, resort and second home economy. The economic , social and aesthetic benefits which can be obtained for all citizens by limiting loss of such areas are well documented, and have inspired a host of governmental programs designed, with varying degrees of success, to achieve this result. For its part, the Town is expending large sums of money to protect existing farm acreage. At the same time, the Town has an obligation to exercise its authority to reasonably regulate the subdivision and development of this land to further the same purposes, while honoring the legitimate interests of farmers and other farmland owners. Low Density Residential R-40 District Section 100-30A. Purpose. The purpose of the Low Density Residential R-40 District is to provide areas for residential development where existing neighbor- hood characteristics, water supply and environmental conditions permit full development densities of approximately one dwelling per acre and where open space and agricultural preservation are not predominate objectives. Hamlet Density Residential (HD) District Section 100-40. Purpose The purpose of the Hamlet Density (HD) Residential District is to (1) 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 and (2) to promote the provision of lower cost housing in these hamlet and village areas, where provision of utilities exists or may be possible and desirable and where public facilities and commercial activities are available. -4- Resort Residential (RR) District Section 100-50. Purpose. The purpose of the Resort Residential (RR) District is to provide opportunity for waterfront resort development in what are essential low density residential areas at a density and character consistent with surrounding uses. Residential Office (RO) District Section 100-70. Purpose. To provide a transition area between business areas and low density residential development along major roads which will provide oppor- tunity for limited nonresidential uses in essentially residential areas. Limited Business (LB) District Section 100-80. Purpose. The purpose of the Limited Business District (LB) is to provide an opportunity to accomodate limited business activity along high- way corridors, but in areas outside the hamlet central business areas that is consistent with the rural and historic character of surrounding areas and uses. Emphasis will be placed on review of design features so that existing and future uses will not detract from surrounding uses. The additional uses must generate low amounts of traffic and be designed to protect the residential and rural character of the area. Hamlet Business (HB) District Section 100-90. Purpose. The purpose of the Hamlet Business (HB) District is to provide for business development in the hamlet central business area, including retail, office and service uses, public and semi-public uses, as well as hotel and motel and multi-family residential development that will support and enhance the retail development and provide a focus for the hamlet area. General Business (B-I) District Section 100-100. Purpose. The purpose of the General Business/Highway Business (B-i) District is to provide for retail and wholesale commercial development and limited office and industrial development outside of the hamlet central business areas, generally along major highways. It is designated to accomodate uses that benefit from large parcels o~ land, and that may involve characteristics such as heavy trucking and noise. -5- Marine Recreation (M-Rec) District Section 100-110. Purpose. To permit and encourage water-related recreational uses on waterfront properties that are located on inland waterways or creeks. Marine Business (MB) District Section 100-120. Purpose. To provide a waterfront location for a range of water dependent and water related uses which are those uses which require or benefit from direct access to~ or location in marine or tidal waters. Light Industrial Park/Planned Office Park (LIO) Distric~ Section 100-130. Purpose. The purpose of the Light Industrial Park/Planned Office Park (LIO) District is to provide opportunity for the location of business and professional offices, research facilities, industrial uses and similar activities in an open, campus-like setting in areas which are not appropriate for commercial activity or low density residential development. In this area such uses can be established in an attractive environment and serve both as a means of preserving the open qualities of an area and providing an area, adjacent to hamlet areas where such uses can be appropriately developed with suitable protection for ground and water surface waters. All uses must conform to Suffolk County Health Department standards. Light Industrial (LI) Distr~ct Section 100-140. Purpose. The purpose of the Light Office (LI) District is to provide an opportunity for business and industrial uses on smaller lots than would be appropriate for the LIO Light Industrial Park/Planned Office Park District. The pages to follow are copies of the Table entitled. Summary of Permitted Uses Accessory apartment lB existing one-family delached dwelling Agriculture (~ncluding accessory buildings) ? - P£P44ITTED SE - SPECIAL EXCEFrlON [by Planning Board) SE* - SPECIAL EXCEPTION (by Town Board) A -ACCSSSOR¥ RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE P P P P P P P P P P P p~ SE SE SE SE SE SE A A A A A A A SE P P SE P P SE P P P P SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE P P A A A A A A P P SE SE P A A P SE SE SE SE SE ,llding, electrical or plund31ng contractor's l/ustness or yard ~lldi~lgs, structures and uses owned or operated P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P A A SE SE SE SE /- ~--~ SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE P SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE A A A A A A A SE A A P SE A A SE SE SE SE SE SE SE P P pursuant to ~10~-31C Gasoline service station, partial self service SUMMARY OF pEP~IITTED USES BY ZONING DISTRICT SE SE P A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A SE SE P P P P P P P P P P P A A A A A A A A A A A SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE S£ SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE* SE* SE* SE* SE* SE* SE* SE A SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE P P SE SE SE P A SE SE SE SE* SE* SE SE SE* SE* SE* P P SE SE A SE SE SE SE SE A A P P SE* SE* SE* SE* M~tor vehicle, mobile home sales room or ou[door SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE P P P P P P P P P P P P P P SE SE SE SE SE Sg SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE A A A A A A SE SE P P A A SE SE A A A A SE SE SE SE SE Recreation facility, fully enclosed, co~ercia! Recreation facility for use of employees Repair garage Repair shop for householdt business, or personal appliances Research design or development la~oratory Restaurant, drive-in, curb service Or fast food Restaurant (except drive-in) SE P P SE SE SE S£ P P P P P P P P P P P P A A SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE P P A A A A A A A A A A A A A SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE P. P A SE A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A SE* SE* SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE P SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE SE P P SE* SE SE P SE P A SE SE P P SE SE SE SE SE SE P P