HomeMy WebLinkAboutPeconicEARL & GLQRIA FULTZ Box 146
(Soundview Ave.) F'econic, N.Y.
516 76~-.a~10/I._78
February 20, 1984
11958
TO: SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD
RE: Initial Draft of Town Plan
As property owners on Soundview Avenue~ Peconic, we want to go on
record immediately and strongly as opposing the first version of
the 8outhold Town Master Plan.
Our opposition is based not only on personal concerns in that our
property and our way of life are threatened by some of the
suggested land use but, equally important, that the character and
resources of Southold Town are being threatened.
We will confine our remarks to the suggested use of the
beachfront between Goldsmith's Inlet ("Peconic Inlet" on the
map) and the Peconic Dunes camp; we also will comment on
proposed airport site.
the
I - The suggestion that the beachfront between Goldsmith's Inlet
and Peconic Dunes should be used for recreational purposes wo~ld
be an arbitrary abuse of our rights as land owners and~e~t~hers
who live in the same section between Goldsmith Inlet and P~conic
Dunes.
II - The dunes on the Sound are extremely fragile. We have
forbidden horses and dune buggies on our property because
they were destroying the dunes and increasing the likelihood
that water would inundate the wetland areas between the
beach and the higher ground several hundred feet back.
If even light recreational use erodes the dunes, we can
anticipate that heavy use would obliterate them and
the fragile ecology of wetland area. One good Northeaster
and dozens of acres of wetland would be damaged, perhaps
permanently.
III - This has been an area of some controversy already and it
is generally acknowledged that the previous "recreational
improvement", the jetty at Goldsmith's Inlet, has scoured out a .t~
considerable amount of beachfront to the East. (We have ~l
aerial photos to support this.) --~
pg. 2
IV - This area was earlier considered for a county park by
the Suffolk County planners and abandoned for a number of
reasons, including, as we understand it:
- any recreational facility would severely damaSge
the fragile ecology of the area.
it would serve as a magnet for an influx of day
visitors who would greatly increase costs for police
and maintenance with little or no balancing economic
contribution.
it would be another huge step in the destruction of
the unique character of Southold Town & the North
Fork.
- the cost to acquire the land would very likely be
considered prohibitive.
property owners have rights which the government's
right of Eminent Domain needs to respect. The present
public recreational facilities are more than adequate
for Southold residents. The only purpose in
acquiring such property would be to attract non-
residents. At the time Suffolk County was showing an
interest in this property, local residents responded
with thousands of signatures on petitions.
There is reason to believe the response would be even
greater now.
V - We see no similar suggestions for recreational areas on Pe-
conic Bay or shorefront where housing density is higher. Our
error would appear to be that we are trying to preserve the area
in something like its original state and have not rushed into a
high-density housing plan or mis-used the wetlands.
VI - Any use of the beach by the public seriously lessens the
value of our property and our own enjoyment of it. The view
from our property is serene and uncluttered and in this age of
high density housing, that is a valuable commodity.
pg. 3
We bought this property in 1968 as an investment _as well
as a home. The investment is for our later years. I am
self employed and I will have no pension upon retirement.
VII - Unfortunate as it is,
~particularly in a recreational
of vandalism, crime and casual
an increased volume of people,
setting, increases the probability
trespass.
We do not believe we would be as secure if the beach area
is made public. We do not believe any amount of policing
will keep visitors from casual trespass (especially with
OTV's and ATV's -- we have this trouble now) and vandalism.
(A home was burned in our area. Robberies have occu~ed.
Firewood is stolen. More people -- especially those with no
obligation to the community -- will inevitably cause these
kinds of crime to increase.
We can see very little value to the community if this area is
turned into public recreation and absolutely none for those of us
who live there.
In respect to the suggested sites for an airport, we think this
is poorly conceived. Few residents in this area have -- or want
to have -- airplanes. An airport is primarily a convenience for
people who live outside the area.
Planes are a noisy nuisance, once again destroying the character
and charm of the North Fork and Southold Town. Pilots already
fly very low along the beach, too low for us to read their ID
numbers.
If pilots want a landing strip, we suggest they follow one of the
methods used out West where housing developments are created just
for fliers, with the homes abutting the runway just as they do
on golf courses. That way, those who are flying buffs absorb the
prime effect of noise and odors created by their aircraft.
In other words, why not let private enterprise take care of the
fliers. Let the governing bodies strenuously work at perserving
the character and charm of Southold Town. Making it attractive
for outsiders to buzz in for breakfast is not the way to do it.
Pg. 4
SUMMATION:
We have only begun to indicate our opposition
do want to restate some of the key points:
to the plan but we
I - the Sound beachfront between Goldsmith's Inlet and
Peconic Dunes Camp is extremely fragile.
II - the wetlands area behind the dunes is even more fragile.
III - It would be impossible to make the beachfront public
and not diminish the value of the remaining property.
IV - Any large recreational facility will attract large
numbers of non-residents, increasing the problems (and cost)
of policing, maintenance, roads, etc., and do very little
for the economy. Day visitors bring their lunch.
V - The County already considered and rejected the idea of
turning this area into a recreational facility. Certainly
Southold Planners should be even more sensitive to the
needs of the area and the rights of property owners.
Dept. of Agriculture statistics indicate that something on the
order of a million acres of farmland a year is taken out of
production because of housing and industrial developments. Since
the North Fork is one of the few agricultural areas left on Long
Island, it seems essential we forego boosterism and growth to
protect it.
Sincerely,
(MRS.~LORIA E. FULTZ
EARL L. FULTZ
ps - we do agree with the need to make special efforts to
provide housing for the young and the lower-paid.
KEVIN KNOBLOCH
LAWN CARE
/_,/iM,~cape Contractor
Route 48
Peconic, New York 11958
February 10, 1986 I TOW~ GF 8OU¥1'IOLD
(516) 765-2575
Supervisor Francis J. Murphy
Town Board
Town Hall
Southold, NY 11971
Dear Mr. Murphy:
I am the owner of property on the North Road in Peconlc, enclosed is a copy
of a tax map for the parcel.
This property is currently zoned Agricultural-Residential and is proposed
for R-80 on the Master Plan, see the enclosed copy of the Master Plan map.
The adjoining property on the East is proposed for Limited Business and
there are additional properties in the area which are proposed for LB.
I respectfully request that the Board give consideration to zoning my
property as Limited Business. This proposed zoning district permits a
garden center which is what I would like to open in the near future.
Thank you for your consideration.
Very truly yours,
Kevin 3'. Knobloch
KJK:ml
cc: Rudy Bruer, esq.
LONG
$OUNO
R-80
,/
,
R-80
//
30
/
/A-C'
!
/
L/FTLE
PEGONIG
-
I ~" COUNTY OF SUFFOLK