Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutC059943 TDRPLANNING BOARD MEMBE~ MARTIN H. SIDOR Chair WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS JAMES H. RICH III DONALD J. WILCENSKI PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cot. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 February 18, 2011 Christopher Eastman, Land Use Training Specialist New York Department of State One Commeme Plaza 99 Washington Avenue - Suite 1015 Albany New York 12231-0001 Re~ Contract C059943 Development of a Transfer of Development Rights Program As discussed the Southold Town Board has decided not to extend the contract. The following are enclosed: 1. Final Summary Report 2. Final Voucher with Products If you have any questions, please contact me at 631-765-1938. Sincerely, Eno. Cc: Town Board Heather Lanza, Director of Planning Contract C059943 FINAL PROJECT SUMMARY REPORT Use the following outline to complete the Final Project Summary Report: 1. Project Title: Development of a Transfer of Development Rights Program 2. Name of Contractor: Town of Southold 3. Actual Project Costs: State funds expended - Quality Community Funds $50,011.00 a. Local funds expended: $12.502.75 (20% of the voucher amount) b. Other funds expended: $0.00 Project Manager: a. Name: b. Title: c. Mailing address: Mark Terry Principal Planner 54375 State Route 25, P.O. Box 1179, Southold NY 11971 Federal Tax Identification Number: Project Background: briefly explain in a short paragraph why this project is necessary, what its value is and/or its importance to the community. The Town of Southold is comprised of seven hamlets surrounded by farms and/or woodland. A TDR program is an important planning tool that would allow density to be transferred from one location to another. The receiving area would be more suitable for development than the sending._A successful TDR program would further the following Town Goal(s): 1. Preserve Southold's prime farmland and encourage the continuation and diversification of agriculture as an important element in the life and economy of the Town. (1985 Master Plan Update) 2. To preserve land, including farmland, open space and recreational landscapes. (2006 Hamlet Study) 7. Project Work: briefly describe the work that was done to complete the project. A tremendous amount of work has been accomplished during this effort including: a. A TDR Work Group was established. The group met weekly to produce .the Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Report June 25, 2008 (FINAL DRAFT) b. Draft Local Law- although several drafts ora TDR Local law were attempted none gained support of the Town Board. The Town is however, in the position to develop a Local Law and finalize the program at a future date. c. State Environmental Quality Review Act - Completion of Full EAF Forms 1 & 2. This was accomplished during the DGEIS phase. Project Classification and SEQRA Issuance of Significance/SEQR Scoping Process/Preparation of DGEIS were all completed. d. Processing of DGEIS and Final Supplement E1S/TDR Work Group delivered comments to consultant for integration of the FGEIS. Consultant responded to public comments. Town Board scheduled meeting to discuss DGEIS and accept it. e. Preparation of Findings Statement -Consultant prepared Findings Statement (FS). Town Board adopted FS on 5/5/09 Project Descriptions: use the following guidelines to describe the project and please be concise in the description: a. for a Planning Project, describe the findings strategies recommended )CUMENTATION FOR Quality Communities Grant Program CONTRACT # C059943 Expenditures Incurred During the Period 03 / 01 / 09 through 03/31/10 SUMMARY SHEET I. BUDGET/EXPENDITURE DATA ( Total Project Costs, Appendix B, Budget Summary in the Contract) Cumulative Current Expenditures Expenditures Available Budget Documented Documented Balance to Amount this Report to Date Document '(1) (2) (3) (1-3) A. Salaries, Wages and Fringe $19,100.00 $507.21 $19606.91 $__(506.91~__ $42,907.26 $12,992.74 $62.514.17 $12.485.83 B. Travel 0 0 0 C. Supplies and Materials D. Equipment E. Contractual Services $55,900.00__ $0 TOTAL $75.000.00 $507.21 II. CLAIM TYPE Interim Claim X Final Claim III. CERTIFICATION By signature on the attached voucher, I further certify that: 1) the amounts claimed accurately represent the expenses as recorded in our accounting records; 2) we are in compliance with all applicable provisions of the above-referenced Contract; 3) the attached narrative report (if required) accurately represents project accomplishments; 4) funds received are being used solely for the purposes of the "Project" as described in Appendix D of the above-referenced Contract. FORM 1 PROJECT NARRATIVE DETAIl ,lNG PROJECT ACCOMPLISHMENTS FOR THIS, CLAIM ONLY~ INCLUDE COSTS AND DATES THAT GOODS WERE RECEIVED AND SERVICES WERE COMPLETED TDR Program work as follows: Task 3. _Assistant Town Attorney (new hire) Work performed through 3/09 - 8/15/09. Reviewed and researched TDR legislation of East End Towns; review drat~ of TDR legislation. Town Staff (Principal Planner) reviewed Findings Statement, propose corrections and edits and met with Assistant Town Attorney to discuss different Town TDR programs. Discussed TDR program with new Town Board members. Drafts of a TDR local law was developed, however, the drai~ did not gain support of the Town Board. FORM 2 - Expenditure Detail for this Payment Request. Be descriptive and specific. A. SALARIES~ WAGES AND FRINGE BENEFITS REQUEST 2. 3. 4. 5. TITLE Assistant Town Attorney _Principal Planner PAY PERIODS FROM - TO 3/09-8/09 3/09-8/09 AMOUNT CHARGED TO THIS PROJECT $199.91 $307.50 $ SUBTOTAL $507.21 B. TRAVEL (include name of traveler, date, destination and purpose and costs) SUBTOTAL $ 0 FORM 3 C. SUPPLIES/MATERIALS (describe and include dates received and costs) SUBTOTAL $ 0 D. EQUIPMENT (describe and include dates received and costs) SUBTOTAL $. 0 FORM 4 E. CONTRACTUAL SERVICES (include name of any contractors/consultants, describe services, dates received, and costs) SUBTOTAL $ 0 TOTAL OFALLCATEGO~ES ............................................. $__507.21__ (SAMEASTOTALSUMMARYSHEETCOLUMN#2) ^o92(.~.~) IDARU VOUCHER DEPARTMENT OF STATE 19000 / 11-6001939 4 Payee Name (Limit to 30 spaces) Town of Southold Uablllty Date (MM) (DD) (YY) (MM) (DD) / / PO Box 1179 5 Ref. qnv. NO. (Limit to 20 spaces) Southold 11952 s Claiming reimbursement of expenditures incurred pursuant to Quality Communities Contract #C059943 as detailed on the attached Documentation Forms, A. Total Summary Sheet Column #2 $ 507.21 B. Less Local Share- circle 10% or~ $ 101.44 C. Total This Claim $ 405.77 1/24/11 7 Payee Cerflflcationca~o~ · I certify that t h ?~e b;ll is just,'true and correcl; that no part thereof has been paid except as stated and that ~.~:;'~~' SuperVisor Payee's Signature in Ink T~e Town of Southold T~I $ 405.77 Discount % Net $ 405.77 FOR AGENCY USE ONLY Expenditure O~ject Amount STATE COMPTROLLER'S PRE-AUDIT Vera~cl By Liquidation Orig. Agency PO/Contract OSC New York ~ ~5c]~ L 1 of l Agency Code/Name: 19000 Reference/Invoice No, 2005 QCP C059943-01 *** Remittance Information for ACH Trace# 01268857 *** *** Effective Date of Deposit is May 28, 2009 *** DEPARTMENT OF STATE 518-474-2754 Ref/Inv Date Invoice Amount ?aymen_t Amount Batch No. 05/15/2009 41,894,93 41,894.93 908210 Total ACH Deposit 41,894.93 For additional information about your payment, please call the telephone number fo~' the agency listed above. [History of Payments] [Information On Other Payments] ~oucherNo. 0901386 tttps ://wwe 1. o sc. state, ny. c s/ach3/achPR, cfm 5/27/2009 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS MARTIN H. SIDOR Chair WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 F~x: 631 765-3136 April 6, 2009 Mr. Christopher Eastman New York State Department of State One Commerce Plaza 99 Washington Avenue -Suite 1015 Albany, New York 12231-0001 Re: 2005-2006 Quality Communities Grant Contract C059933. Dear Mr. Eastman, Enclosed, please find the following documents to comply with the Quality Communities Grant 2005-2006 contract C059933. 1. Standard Voucher Form 2. Documentation Forms Quality Communities Grant Program 3. Quarterly Project Status Report dated April 2, 2009 Please contact me with any questions. Sincerely, Enc. Cc: John Cushman, Town Comptroller w/o enclosures Heather Lanza, Director of Planning w/o enclosures AC 92 (Rev, 6FJ4) Orfginating Agency DEPARTMENT OF STATE ;TANDARDVOUCHER 19000 11-6001939 4 Payee Name (Limit to 30 spaces) Town of Southold Date Payee Amount (MM) (OD) (YY) MIR Date (MM) (DD) PO Box 1179 (Lim~ to 20 spaces) Southold 11952 Claiming reimbursement of expenditures incurred pursuant to Quality Communities Contract #C059943 as detailed on the attached Documentation Forms. A. Total Summary Sheet Column #2 $ 4,491.16 B. Less Local Share - circle 10% or ~-~ $ 898,23 C. Total This Claim $3.592.93 Payee Certification: I certify that the abe~ill is just, true and correct; that no part thereof has been paid except as stated and tha the balance is a due and ' nd that taxes om wflich the state is exempt are excluded, V ~ayee;s Signature in Ink! /itre 4/15/09 Town of Southold Dale FOR AGENCY USE ONLY Date Title 'rota $ 3,592.93 Discount % N.t $ 3,592.93 STATE COMPTROLLER'S PRE-AUDIT Liquidation Cost Center Code Accum Dept Cost Center Object Amount Orig Agency PO/Contract OSC DO 3MENTATION FORMS Quality Communities Grant Program CONTRACT #_ C059943 Expenditures Incurred During the Period 7 / 23 / 08 through 11/11/08 SUMMARY SHEET I. BUDGET/EXPENDITURE DATA ( Total Project Costs. Appendix B, Budget Summary in the Contract) Cumulative Current Expenditures Expenditures Available Budget Documented Documented Balance to Amount this Report to Date Document (1) (2) (3) (1-3) A. Salaries, Wages and Fringe $19,100.00 $0 $19,100.00_ 0 B. Travel 0 0 0 C. Supplies and Materials D. Equipment E, Contractual Services $55,900.00 $4,491.16 $37,759.82_ $18,140.18__ TOTAL $75.000.00 $4.491.16 $56.859.82 $18.140.18 II. CLAIM TYPE X Interim Claim Final Claim IlL CERTIFICATION By signature on the attached voucher, I further certify that: l) the amounts claimed accurately represent the expenses as recorded in our accounting records: 2) we are in compliance with all applicable provisions of the above-referenced Contract; 3) the attached narrative report (if required) accurately represents project accomplishments; 4) funds received are being used solely for the purposes of the "Project" as described in Appendix D of the above-referenced Contract. FORM 1 PROJECT NARRATIVE DETAILING PROJECT ACCOMPLISHMENTS FOR THIS CLAIM ONLY; INCLUDE COSTS AND DATES THAT GOODS WERE RECEIVED AND SERVICES WERE COMPLETED On July 23, 2008, Nelson, Pope, and Voorhis, LLC, prepared for and attended a meeting with the TDR Team at Southold at a cost of $700 as described under Task VII. This task is 80% complete. Subsequently, Nelson, Pope, and Voorhis, LLC prepared the FSGEIS, including formatting the document, delineating commems, coordinating staff, reviewing and revising text and assembly of the document, a draft of which was completed and distributed on November 11, 2008, at a cost, including re-imburseables, of $3,791.16 as described under Task V. This task is 90% complete. FORM 2 - Expenditure Detail for tb~ayment Request. Be descriptive an~l~ecific. A. SALARIES~ WAGES AND FRINGE BENEFITS REQUEST 1 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. PAY PERIODS TITLE FROM - TO SUBTOTAL AMOUNT CHARGED TO THIS PROJECT $ $ 0 B. TRAVEL (include name of traveler, date, destination and purpose and costs) SUBTOTAL $ 0 FORM 3 C. SUPPLIES/MATERIALS (describe and include dates received and costs) SUBTOTAL $ 0 D. EQUIPMENT I describe and include dates received and costs) SUBTOTAL $ 0 FORM 4 E. CONTRACTUAL SERVICES (include name of any contractors/consultants, describe services, dates received, and costs) Nelson ?ope and Voorhis LLC - TDR Program work as follows: Task V ~- Prepare FSGEIS, including formating document, delineating comments, coordinating staff, reviewing and revising text and assembly. Worked performed through November 11,2008 $3,791.16 Task VII -- Prepare for and attend meeting with TDR Team a! Southold. Work performed through July 23, 2008 $700.00 SUBTOTAL $ 4,491.16 TOTAL OF ALL CATEGORIES ............................................. $ (SAME AS TOTAL SUMMARY SHEET COLUMN #2) 491.16 Project Status Form Project Status Form RECIPIENT PROJECT TITLE Town of Southold CONTRACT # CO59943 Development and Implementation of Transfer of Development Rights Program Status Report Date: April 2. 2009 Task Date of Percent of g A/T Completion Completion 1 A 6/07 100 2 A 3/08 100 Task Description /Task Accomplishments Creation of TDR Work Group TDR Work Group was established. The group continues to meet. Program Foundation/The program foundation was established by the TDR Work Group. Details of the program can be found in the Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Report to Town Board. Product Submitted to DOS Note: That the DGEIS includes all the products identified within Task 2. Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Report to Town Board (June 25. 2007 Revised March 26, 2008 i. April l 1, 2007 [Draft) ii. May 8; 2007 (Draft) iii. May 12, 2007 (Draft) iv. May 18, 2007 (Draft) v. May 26. 2007 (Draft) vi. June 13, 2008 (Draft) vii. June 25, 2008 (FINAL DRAFT) viii. March 26, 2008 2. Report on the Delineation and modeling of Sending Areas (Included in Product 1, Section 4.1) 3. Report on the Delineation Modeling and Design on Receiving Areas titled (Included in Product 1, Appendix G, Section 4.2). 4. Report on the value and Allocation of Transfer 4.2.09 Status Report.doc of Development Rights (lncluaect m ~roauct l ) Analysis and Implications of a Transfer of Development Rights Program on Currem Town preservation Plans and Current Town Zoning (Included in Product 1, Section 4.0) 3 T 3/09 4 A 10/07 4a A 10/07 4b A 4/08 4c A 4/08 4d A 4/08 0 Draft Local Law 100 100 State Environmental Quality Review Act 100 Completion of Full EAF Forms 1 & 2/ This was accomplished during the DGEIS phase. 4e T 1/09 90 Project Classification and SEQRA Issuance of Significance/Complete 1 O0 SEQR Scoping Process/ 1 O0 Preparation of DGEIS/This task is compete. Processing of DGEIS and Final Supplement EIS/TDR Work group delivered comments to consultant for integration of the FGEIS. Consultant responds to public comments. Town Board schedule meeting to discuss DGEIS and Accept. Note: This product will be sent upon completion of the SEQR process and linked to the Findings of the process. Complete EAF Forms I & II included as Appendix DGEIS. Positive Declaration included as Appendix D, DGEIS Draft and Final Scope DGEIS "Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Report as a Supplement to the GElS for Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy" April 2008 Apd12,2009 4f T 2/O9 0 Preparation of Findings Statement To be submitted 4.2.09 Status Repcrc.doc ADJUSTMENTS. Please indicate proposed adjustment(s) to Work program/schedule, reason(s) for the proposed adjustment(s), and any other problems encountered durin~ this reoortinl~ I~eriod: Person to contact if we have questions about the information provided on this form: I Name: Mark Terry Email Address: mark.terry~southold.town.ny.us Title: PrinciPal Planner Affiliation: Town of Southold Phone: 631-765-1938 Fax: 631-765-3136 4.2.09 Status Report.doc Guidelines for completing the Proiect Status Form lease fill out all items in the top section - Recipient, Contract #, Project Title, and Status Report Date. In the next section, list each task from the work plan of the ,greement and provide corresponding information for each. 1.2.09 Status Report.doc · Task # and Brief Task DescripO should agree with the tasks listed in the O plan of the Agreement. · A/T should indicate if Date of Completion is the Actual completion date or the current Target Date for completion of the task. · Percent of Completion is the percentage that the task is complete as of the Status Report Date. · Task Accomplishments should be brief, but describe specific accomplishments for each task. · Product Submitted should be "Draft" if the draft product has been submitted to DOS (or is being submitted with this report), "Final" if the final product has been submitted to DOS (or is being submitted with this report), "None" if product has not yet been submitted, or "N/A" if not applicable. Alternatively, the specific product(s) submitted may be listed. Important things t~ consider when filling out this section of the status Report Form: Tasks should match those in the work plan of the Agreement with DOS (not a subcontractor agreement). All tasks (including subtasks) in the work plan of the Agreement must be listed on each report submitted. · All columns must be completed for every task. A task cannot be considered 100% complete until the required product is submitted~ by DOS. Task accomplishments should be as specific as possible (but brief). Status reports submitted with generic accomplishment entries will take longer to review by DOS and may not be accepted. Here are some tips on how accomplishment entries can be improved: Generic accomplishment entry: Advisory committee established. RFP issued. Consultant Selected. Final designs. Permits. Specific accomplishment entry: 8 person advisory committee was established and has met (6) times to date. RFP was released through local papers and NYS Contract Reporter. 5 responses were received and ABC Construction Company, Inc. was selected. Certification of procurement procedures have been provided to DOS. Final Design & Construction Drawings (incorporating DOS comments of · 11/5/05) were approved by DOS. Permit applications have been submitted to DEC and COE, copies are included with this report. In the ADJUSTMENTS section - Indicate proposed adjustments to the budget, work program, or project schedule, and the reason why the adjustment is necessary. If any problems have been encountered during this reporting period, they should also be indicated here. Keep in mind that the information listed in this section should refer to this reporting period only. If an extension is requested on this form, the reasons provided should be detailed and specific. For example, requesting an .... ks" extension to "complete the project" or "allow t~me to finish remmmng tas is not acceptable. The information provided in this section should indicate specific reasons that tasks were delayed and/or problems were experienced. On the bottom of the sheet, please provide the Name, Affiliation, Email Address, Phone Number, and Fax Number of the person to contact if we have questions on the information provided on this form. If you submit this form by fax or email, there is no need to forward the original by mail. We only need to receive one copy Of the report. If you have any questions, please contact Laurissa parent at (518) 474-5559 or your DOS project manager at (518) 474-6000. FINAL GENERIC ENVIRONMENTAL ~PACT STATE~NT F~R THK TOWN OF $OUTHOLD TRANSI~ER OF ])E¥~PMENT RIGHTS PROGRAM As A ~UPPIA~MI~NT TO SUFFOLK, NEW YORK NOVEMBER 2008 FINAL GENERIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS PROGRAM as a SUPPLEMENT to the GENERIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT for the SOUTHOLD COMPREHENSIVE IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY Town of Southold Suffolk County, New York Town Board of the Town of Southold (SEQRA Lead Agency) Supervisor, Hon. Scott A. Russell Justice Louisa P. Evans Councilman William P. Ruland Councilman Thomas H.Wickham Councilman Vincent M. Orlando Councilman Albert J. Krupski, Jr. Nelson, Pope & Voorhis, LLC 572 Walt Whitman Road Melville, New York 11747 Contact: Charles J~ Voorhis, CEP, AICP (631) 427-5665 Prepared by: Town TDR Program Team Patricia A. Finnegan, Esq.; Town Attorney John Sepenoski, Deputy Supervisor . Mark Terry, Town Principal Planner Melissa Spiro, Town Land Preservation Coordinator Leslie Weisman, Member, Town ZBA & Chair, Town Hamlet Stakeholder Committee November 2008 Pagei Town of Southold Transfer of Development Righls Program Final Supplemental Generic EIS TABLE'OF CONTENTS COVER SHEET Page i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 2.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose of this Document 1.2 Organization of this Document COMMENTS AND RESPONSES 2.1 Comment 1 2.2 Comment 2 2.3 Comment 3 2.4 Comment 4 2.5 Comment $ 2.6 Comment 6 2,7 Comment 7 2.8 Comment 8 2.9 Comment 9 2.10 Comment 10 2.11 Comment 11 2.12 Comment 12 2.13 Comment 1;3 2,14 Comment 14 2.15 Comment 15 2.16 Commen! 16 2.17 Comment 17 2.18 Comment 18 2,19 Comment 19 2.20 Comment 20 2.21 Comment 21 2.22 Comment 22 2.23 Comment 23 2.24 Comment 24 2.25 Comment 25 2.26 Comment 26 1-1 1-2 1-2 2-1 2-1 2-2 2-3 2-3 2-4 2-5 2-6 2-6 2-8 2-9 2-9 2-10 2-11 2-12 2-12 2-13 2-13 2-13 2-14 2-t5 2-16 2-17 2-17 2-18 2-19 2-19 APPENDICES: A B C D E Acceptance of DSGEIS, Town Board. April 22. 2008 Written Comments Transcript of Public Hearing, Town Board, May 27, 2008 HALO Zone Parcels Near NYSDEC~Regulated Freshwater Wetlands HALO Zone Parcels Near NYSDEC-Regulated Tidal Wetlands Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Final Supplemental Generic ElS SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Final Supplemental Generic ElS This document is a Final Supplement to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement ("FSGEIS") fsr a proposed amendment to the Southold Town Code, to implement a voluntary Transfer of Development Rights ("TDR") program. This proposal is hereafter referred to as the "proposed action". This document is submitted in compliance with the roles and regulations for implementation of the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act ("SEQRA"). In general, an environmental impact statement ("ELS") is required under SEQRA in order to provide a lead agency (in this case, the Southold Town Board) and other involved agencies with the information and analysis necessary to make informed decisions on a proposed action or project where one or more significant impacts are anticipated. The GElS that this document supplements was prepared for and accepted by the Southold Town Board in 2003; it analyzed the potential impacts of a set of proposed amendments to the Southotd Town Code and various Town regulations, procedures, policies, and planning and management initiatives then being considered by the Town Board. This prior proposal was known as the Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy ("CIS"). Because the prior proposal was not based on a site-specific application, it was determined that a more general type of ElS was warranted under' SEQRA; such an EIS is known as a "Generic" EIS. One of the amendments recommended in the CIS was a voluntary Transfer of Development Rights ("TDR") program, which would permit and facilitate private transactions that would shift development from agricultural lands in the Town to defined areas within the (hamlet locus, or "HALO" zones). The proposed action was formulated in response to this recommendation. The proposed TDR program would not increase net density in the Town, as each "Sending Area" credit would equal one "Receiving Area" credit. A variety of unit types would be considered in hamlet areas, which would actually be expected to decrease density, since fewer large homes would be built in rural areas and logically, any unit types received in the liamlets would include smaller and/or multiple-family units. In addition, the proposed action would include an upper limit on the number of units that can be received in the HALO zones, in order to maintain a careful balance of existing community character and comply with density limitations of the Suffolk County Department of Health Services ("SCDHS"). This proposed action considers implementation of an important planning and program tool described and recommended in the numerous planning studies undertaken within the Town over the past 20 years. These studies, plans and recommendations were reviewed in term~ of current needs and Town goals, in order to achieve the Town's vision as articulated in those plans. That review, known as the Southold CIS, found that many of the newer planning documents reiterated recommendations of prior Town plans and studies, resulting in much consistency between studies and the goals of the Town over the years. It should be emphasized that the proposed action involves primarily legislative changes, with no specific physical changes proposed. Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Final Supplemental Generic ElS This FSGEIS is a part of the GElS record; the prior DSGEIS is incorporated by reference such that the combination of the prior CIS GEIS, the DSGEIS for the proposed action, and this document constitutes the complete GEIS. The DSGE1S was submitted to the lead agency (the Southold Town Board, the agency having discretionary jurisdiction over the proposed action) was accepted by that agency as complete for public review and comment on April 22, 2008 (see ApPendix A). This document addresses the written comments on the DSGE1S received by the lead agel~cy from other governmental agencies (see Appendix B), and the oral comments provided during the. May 27, 2008 public hearing (see Appendix C for transcript). No additional written comments were provided to the lead agency. 1.1 Purpose of this Document Once the DSGEIS is accepted, the Lead Agency issues a Notice of Completion (which is published by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation ("N¥SDEC") in the Environmental Notice Bulletin). From this point, the DSGEIS is available for public inspection at the offices of the lead agency and local libraries, and public comments are accepted for a minimum of 30 days from the date of acceptance of the DSGE1S, or 10 days al~er the close of the public hearing, whichever occurs later. The lead agency chooses whether to hold a public hearing based upon the potential for significant impacts, public interest, etc. This is followed by preparation of an FSGEIS. The FSGEIS addresses issues and comments provided by the public, and interested and involved agencies on the information presented in the DSGEIS and public hearing, if held. Al~er acceptance of the FSGEIS by the lead agency and an additional 10-day period, the lead agency will issue a statement of findings on the proposed project and decisions can be rendered by the lead and involved agencies. 1.2 Organization of this Document Each substantive comment contained in Appendices B and C has been numbered sequentially, followed by the subsection where the response can be found. There were a total of 26 individual comments; Appendix B contains comments I through 10, and Appendix C contains comments 11 through 26. Each subsection of Section 2.0 presents one of the comments, along with the applicant's response. The comment numbers are also listed in each subsection, so that the reader may refer back to the comment in its original form. Each response provides the information necessary for the lead agency (the Southold Town Board) and other involved agencies to make informed decisions on the specific impacts of the project. This document fulfills the obi igation of the lead agency in completing an FSGEIS based on SEQRA procedures and requirements presented in Title 6 of the New York Code of Rules and Regulations, Part 617.9(b)(8). Page I-2 Town of Southoid Transfer of Development Rights Program Final Supplemental Generic ElS SECTION 2.0 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights program Final Supplemental Generic ElS 2.0 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES 2.1 Comment 1 "There are a number of New York State regulated freshwater wetlands located within and/or directly adjacent to the proposed H./ILO receiving areas. Increasing the development density of lots that contain or are adjacent to regulated freshwater wetlands may lead to proposed projects that do not meet the standards for permit issuance pursuant to the Freshwater Wetlands ~lct. This Department is interested in preventing property owners from purchasing TDR credits to increase the development density of lots which contain wetlands only to learn afterwards that their proposed project is not compatible with New York State regulations. We recommend that the Town require applicants within the receiving at:ea with property on or near regulated freshwater wetland to obtain a permit or letter of non-jurisdiction from the NYSDEC prior to being granted approval by the Town to use TDR credits to mcrease development density on their property. Response: The Town of Southold has abundant freshwater and tidal wetlands resources, and the Town recognizes the need to protect these resources for the economic and environmental benefit of the Town and its residents. The proposed TDR program will not adversely impact these resources for the following reasons: · The HALO receiving areas consist primarily of areas near hamlet centers that already have development and are considered to be appropriate to accommodate for conlxolled density transfer. · Locations where a proposed development using TDR would occur would be subject to review by the Town Planning Board, the Town Board or the Town Zoning Board of Appeals ("ZBA"). Wetland density restrictions for NYSDEC regulated Article 25 wetlands would be considered in the Town's review process, as would any setback and coverage requirements. For the most part, tidal wetlands would only be located at the perimeter of certain hamlets that are near Peconic Bay or creeks associated with the Bay. The NYSDEC areas of jurisdiction may include sites up to 300 feet from tidal wetlands (unless the land rises to an elevation above 10 feet), or a functional bulkhead or substantial mad existed and still remains functional since August 20, 1977. · Freshwater wetlands regulated under NYSDEC Article 24 would likewise be protected through agency review in consideration of required setbacks. A jurisdiction area of 100 feet from NYSDEC mapped wetlands is recognized. · The Southold Town Board of Trustees also regulates development proximate to wetlands. Any land use applications involving such activity would be reviewed by the Trustees. Appendix D of this FSGEIS contains maps of the hamlets that may have parcels near NYSDEC regulated freshwater wetlands. The majority of parcels in the hamlets are not near freshwater wetlands, and the hamlets of Cutchogue and Orient do not contain any freshwater wetlands in proximity to the HALO zones. Appendix E of this document contains maps depicting the hamlets that may have parcels near NYSDEC regulated tidal wetlands. Similar to freshwater wetlands, very few parcels are proximate to tidal wetlands. Page 2-1 Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Final Supplemental Generic EtS The comment is acknowledged, and it is the Town Board's intent, through the Town Planning Board office, to recommend that those applicants within the receiving areas that own property on or near regulated freshwater wetlands submit a permit application or seek a letter of non- jurisdiction from the NYSDEC at the time of submission of a land use application to the Town. 2.2 Comment 2 "1. The early discussions of TDR were firm in assuring us that the plan was density neutral; that means that RDUs (residential housing units) moved from agricultural land to hamlet with no net increase in numbers. It seems now. reading the report that a net density increase shouM be expected The value of one right to build on a 2 acre plot is naturally worth a lot more than one right to build a smaller house on ~ acre in the hamlet. Thus, TDR does bring with it an increase in the number of residences, taxes, traffic congestion and loss of rural atmosphere. (Note: at the hearing the one to one ratio was definitely supported as the ONLY option by the Supervisor, the board and Mr, Voorhis.) " Response: The TDR program does not propose an increase in density. This is clearly stated in the TDR Planning Report to the Town Board, the DSGEIS and was stated again at the public hearing on the DSGEIS. One development right from a sending pamel may be transferred to a receiwng pamel and used as one (1) residential development unit. Units have been identified to include various types (i .e. residential accessory dwelling, single family dwelling, apartment, townhouse, etc.) depending on the type of project proposed for the receiving site. The TDR shifts the density from an inappropriate agricultural site to an existing hamlet area, where there is existing infrastructure to accommodate controlled density increases on appropriate parcels. IfTDR were not used, the development right would be constructed on a lass-appropriate site, and would result in increased development, taxes, traffic and loss of rural atmosphere. The fact that the development right is shifted to a HALO area results in the same development right, but potentially could be a smaller unit in an area where there are existing services, recreational facilities, shopping opportunities, walkability, access to public transportation, and less impact on rural qualities, given the existing hamlet center development pattern. As a result, the TDR is considered to be appropriate, will not increase density, and will result in development in more appropriate locations with more supporting services and infrastructure to reduce the impact of that shift in density. Town residents are assured that the TDR program is density-neutral and will not result in increased density. Page 2-2 Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Final Supplemental Generic ElS 2.3 Comment 3 "2. There is discussion in the TDR planning document that points out that the increase in residential development in the Hamlet~Halo through TDR will necessitate an increase in commercial development and infrastructure in the Hamlet. This is logical. Consequently, we shouM allow TDR to be used to augment commercial uses while we allow it to grow the residential side of the Hamlet/Halo. Thus we could get a less than a 1 to 1 transfer and achieve a net reduction in density with some transfer credits. Since the ability to transfer ultimately hinges on the ability of the receiving land to accept sewage based on rulings by the SCHD, we will very likely have commercial uses suggested for properties that can receive TDR credits. TDR for commercial use should be a part of the program. ' Response: This comment is acknowledged; the TDR Planning Report to the Town Board, as well as the DSGEIS (Alternatives section), address the potential for use of TDRs to increase commercial use. While the program supports this concept, the difficulty is that many of the commercial uses in hamlet centers are on small lots and do have the ability to receive additional density due to the increase in sanitary flow and potential non-conformanc~ with Article 6 or the Suffolk County Sanitary Code ("SCSC'). The TDR Planning Report and the DSGElS Alternative section provide a framework for equalizing a residential development right with various sizes/intensities of commercial use, primarily by relating the sanitary flow of' a single- family unit [300 gallons per day per acre ("gpd/acre')] with the equivalent flow for a certain size commercial use. As indicated in the comment, this concept has substantial merit since it would reduce the residential growth of the Town by using residential TDRs for commercial growth. This has the benefit of increasing tax revenue and decreasing population and demand for services, particularly with respect to schools. In addition, there is a need to provide opportunities for landing transfer credits in receiving areas, and the TDR Planning Report recognizes that while Southold is unique and there is an expected demand for credits, a more successful program would provide !ncreased receiving zone opportunities. One way to do this is to consider use of TDRs for commercial use. The original program was intended to be simple and amenable to straightforward implementation. As a result, the Town Board may wish to start with a residential TDR program at first, and add commercial transfer opportunities in the future. Since the DSGEIS did not identify any significant adverse impacts with the commercial credit transfer, the flexibility to offer a commercial TDR transfer program should be provided at the Town Board's discretion. 2.4 Comment 4 "3. It is suggested in the report that the transfers of density wouM be aided by the addition of strategically placed sewage treatment systems. This is a bad idea. The forces of growth will use this pOtential for added density to ram in more commercial and residential development. Page 2-3 Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Final Supplemental Generic EIS Sewage plants would give ammunition to the proponents of the 'big box' stores that we do not want. ~Ye will have trouble enough 'keeping it rural' without this added factor." Response: Zoning is the mechanism that should control land use, not the availability of sanitary waste treatment. Many of the smart growth principals that municipalities seek to implement are not implemented due to land use density limitations associated with sanitary flow constraints. As noted above, a commercial TDR program would be well-served by providing the opportunity to increase appropriate commercial development facilitated by available sanitary waste treatment. Further, regardless of the TDR program, revitalization of downtown areas, potential for increases in "wet" uses such as additional restaurant seating, and office and medical office use all would be more feasible if wastewater treatment were available. Wastewater treatment also assists in protecting groundwater quality, and could be used to treat wastewater in pre- existing developed areas that exceed current density limitations imposed for groundwater protection. The potential for increased commercial and residential development should be controlled through proper zoning, and if wastewater treatment is considered, it should be to facilitate appropriate land use. Any siting of new sewage treatment plants ("STPs") should be based on either a municipal feasibility study to determine the benefits and potential impacts of such an initiative, o~ a privately-proposed facility that would also be subject to scrutiny through the land use review process and SEQRA. If so-called "big box" stores are not desired, limitations on building size, floor area ratio ("FAR") coverage, dimensional requirements and use district regulations, are all tools that would be used to ensure that the appropriate character and type of development is achieved. The TDR Planning Report and the DSGEIS overall find benefit to use of STPs for planned mumcipal revitalization and individual projects, and more specific impacts associated with such initiatives would be subject to further review once an action is defined. For the purpose of the Town of Southold TDR Program, it is recommended that STPs remain a consideration due to their ability to reduce groundwater impacts and facilitate appropriate land use including landing of TDRs, which would provide a benefit by shii~ing density from rural areas of the Town to existing hamlet centers. 2.5 Comment 5 "4. AHD will not require TDR. so there is an additional amount of growth that is not counted Hence more Hamlet density that is uncounted." Response: The Affordable Housing District ("AHD") is a Town zoning district that provides affordable housing. Existing AHD zoning in the Town is for the most part occupied by existing developments. If the Town Board feels that a location has merit for AHD zoning to achieve the Page 2-4 Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Final Supplemental Generic ElS goals of the Town Comprehensive Plan by providing increased opportunities for affordable housing, this district can be used. Requiring TDR for affordable housing is counter-intuitive, since the zoning is intended to decrease the cost of housing, and purchase of credits would increase the cost of housing. ~he notion that there is some additional growth that is not counted in the context of the TDR Program is inaccurate since the program acknowledges that the Town is addressing affordable housing through other programs. The Town continues to advance affordable housing through projects in the AHD zone, accessory apartments, and other housing projects in association with affordable housing advocacy groups operating in the Town It is noted that units transferred from sending areas that are built as two-family, multiple family, residential accessory dwellings, or residences that are part of planned development districts, would be smaller in size than homes built in the sending areas, and as a result would have lower sales prices and would therefore assist with creating more affordable housing opportunities in the Town. 2.6 Comment 6 "5. The report states that the movement of growth from the 2 acre zoning (and large houses) to the hamlet~halo ~and smaller houses) will result in a lesser tax impact because of fewer children. I wonder of there is back up for this assertion. I can envision smaller houses with younger occupants putting just as many kids in school as the larger 2 acre houses. Many citizens stood up at the meeting and supported the idea that this density transfer would raise school enrollment and taxes." Response: The TDR Planning Study indicates that, in cases where smaller units are constructed in receiving zones than the larger single-family dwellings that would be expected on the sending parcels (if built), it is expected that fewer school children would be generated and consequently, a more positive tax benefit scenario would result. Units in hamlet areas may be desirable to young professionals, smaller families, single occupants, seniors wishing to downsize, and other types of families that would have fewer children. Conversely, larger homes outside of hamlets would be desired by families who seek single-family residences with yards and amenities common to such developments. Standard planning and demographic references support the finding that smaller units with fewer bedrooms have fewer children based on actual data of occupied communities~. It is noted that some units constructed on receiving parcels will be single-family residences, specifically, those units involving slight increases in residential subdivision density as provided for in the program. Therefore, it is difficult to quantify the full benefit of the shil~ and change in type of housing. Work conducted by the Center for Urban Policy Research at Rutgers University, NJ is most notably involved with this research and demographic findings. Other local groups including the Long Island Housing Partnership and Western Suffolk BOCES also support these findings through empirical data local to Long Island. Town of Southold Transfer of Development Righls Program Final Supplemental Generic Nevertheless, density and impacts will certainly not increase as compared to current conditions, and the likely result is some lesser impacts as outlined above. 2.7 Comment 7 "6. Conservation subdivisions currently achieve 75 or 80% preservation and 75 or 60% density reduction. There is a net reduction in density, but still a few houses on the Ag. land. If the TDR program allows partial sale of the density on a parcel and supports building on the remainder, it results in what looks like a conservation subdivision but we do not lower density. If the TDR rules allow this scenario we will not see another conservation subdivision. The detail in the TDR regulations is critical. The effect on current land use legislation is very important. Could we apl~l}, the TDR idea onl}, to land that is alreadF in the conservation subdivision process? This would let the Ag. land owner receive cash for his last Iotst and therefore remove ail the houses from his iant~ Thus further preserving farm land while reducing total density." Response: TDR is envisioned as an additional option to landowners. Conservation subdivisions typically involve some form of compensation to a landowner to reduce density and cluster development. The Peconic Land Trust ("PLT") has been a major facilitator in structuring conservation subdivisions that provide monetary benefits to landowners through tax structuring. This benefit may not be valuable to all landowners, and therefore has limited application. The Town and County facilitate conservation subdivisions by combining purchase of development rights ("PDR") with an approval process whereby a landowner is compensated for density not constructed. The funding for PDR may not always be available at current levels, and it is doubtful that there is sufficient funding to acquire all of the development rights represented by the TDR program. Likewise, there are insufficient receiving sites for all of the TDR's that can originate from sending areas. As a result, TDR is an additional tool to assist in compensating landowners for density not constructed on a sending parcel. The current programs involving Conservation Subdivisions and PDR will continue, and as a result, overall density will continue to decrease as a result of PDR. TDR will be added as a tool to compensate landowners and shift development to appropriate locations, and will not have the larger cost associated with purchase of those development rights. The concept of allowing an owner of agricultural land to transfer the remaining development rights not purchased, could be possible if it conforms to the criteria established in the TDR Planning Report. 2.8 Comment 8 "There is a window of opportunity now during the mortgage crisis and the building slowdown to determine how much growth in Southold is appropriate and to move legislation to set a firm goal. A few years ago NFEC presented a plan that used the 80 percent preservation~60 percent density reduction formula (a part of the conservation subdivision idea/ as a target for all of Southold. From figures in the DGEI$ of 2002 this meant that a build out of 15,500 residences Town of Southold Transfer of Development Right~ Program Final Supplemental Generic ElS would be reduced to 12,434 when $outhold was all settlea[ The last town census figures showed 21,500 full time residents, which equates to approximately 9,000 dwellings. This means that $outhold, even with the 80/60 "brakes applied formula" will go at best, from 9,000 full time dwellings now to 12,434 at build out. We see this growth (28%), as more than enough! Southold Town seriously needs this sort of stated objective. The current attitude of 'we are doing fine now and if the numbers change we will act' is fatally flawed An up to c~ate comprehensive master plan that unequivocally states a build out goal that reflects the citizens desire to preserve rural Southold will allow something real to be done. A sudden awakening to overdevelopment without the backup of a master plan will be allpain and no gain. To properly think about the potential of TDR we need more information. Southold needs an up to date analysis, possibly the status of preservation and development as of December 2007. The residential build out number if all existing houses and possible buildable lots are counted is required Of course this also requires UlJ to date calculation of the 'real build out potential' of the Hamlet/Halo zones." Response: The comments requests that the Town consider an updated Comprehensive Plan to address build-out goals for the Town. This is something that the Town Board may consider, but is separate and apart fi.om the proposed TDR Program. The TDR Program is not intended to be a density control measure. The Town has prior comprehensive plans, numerous planning studies, the 2003 CIS (which was intended to implement prior planning studies) and ongoing initiatives that address population, rural character and build out of the Town. The TDR Planning Report was in fact an outgrowth of the Town CIS and has been a recommendation of many prior reports. It is recognized that the TDR program involves a shif~ of density from rural and agricultural areas to more appropriate locations that have supporting infrastructure. As a result, TDR will result in retention of rural character and preservation of agricultural land, but not necessarily a density decrease. This is a topic for other Town studies and initiatives. The PDR program and use of Conservation Subdivisions will continue, as will outright acquisition of critical parcels. The Town, County and State have a solid track record of successful open space acquisition and purchase of development rights, and it is expected that this will continue. As far as build-out potential of the hamlets, this will be dictated by zoning, and will in small part be increased through the TDR Program, with a consequent reduction in density in the sending areas. In addition, all TDRs are proposed to occur within the same school district as the site from which the credit is derived, further ensuring that there is no net change in density, and a potential for reduced size of units was discussed previously. As a result, the TDR Program itself does not require an updated build-out analysis, as this has been performed previously and the TDR Program is not a factor in changing these other Town initiatives. Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Final Supplemental Generic ElS It is further noted that only a very limited increase, in receiving zone potential units is contemplated. The table in the TDR Planning Report (Table 4-3) and included in the DSGEIS outlines a total number of potential receiving units, and a proposed growth factor or limit of 30 percent of the total possible density, which would be monitored as the program proceeds. The concepts in the TDR Planning Report and the stated limitation will further ensure that any density that is shifted is shffied in a way that disperses the local increase in development within the hamlet, and will not overburden the hamlet as a result of the limitations. 2.9 Comment 9 "Question? The DGE1S of 2002 stated population numbers at that time and population at build out /when all land is used in accordance with zoning tn place at that time]. These numbers convert to housing units at the rate of 2.4 person per unit in accordance with Suffolk County Planning Department calculations. 2002 population 21.500 Build out population 37.338 or 8.958residences or 15.578 residences The DGEIS also states that potential residential units (RDUs) from all zones other than AC. R 80 and R 40 wouM be only 388. The TDR report cites the receiving zone for TDR as allowing 663. This seems to be a very large mcrease in RDU count. Where will it stop? SHOULDN'T }YE KNOW WHAT THE GROWTH TARGET I$? I hope the 30 percent cut off suggested in the TDR report can be permanent. If the result of this amount of growth is recognized as a loss of 'the rural, feel, country ambiance, and the magic of Southold; and the hum of traffic and the rise of taxes ge,ts noticeable we need to act quickly." Response: The statement above seems to imply that the TDR Program would result in an increase in density at full build-out of the Town; this is inaccurate. The 388-unit figure noted above is based on other than AC, R-80 and R-40 zones. The 663-unit figure is a hypothetical number based only on the potential maximum receiving units in the HALO areas if sub-dividable lots were divided at 10,000 square feet ("SF") per lot. This number represents the maximum potential development based on sanitary flow, and is further reduced by the growth limitation of 30 percent. No new units are created, and any density that lands in a HALO would originate as a TDR from a sending parcel. The TDR Planning Report does not change any zoning in the Town as related to density or ultimate build-out. The number of units originating from sending zones is the same as what existed in 2003, minus any PDR's that have occurred since that time. The 663-unit figure is the potential maximum The TDR program is not expected to cause any change in rural feel or country ambiance of the Town for the following reasons: Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Final Supplemental Generic EIS the HALOs are already established and have the supporting infrastructure to potentially decrease vehicular traffic; · the types of density increases are diverse and would not represent any single type of growth but would be dispersed as various unit types within the HALOs; no new density is created, all units originate as a development right from an area that would be preserved once the development right is'transferred; · open space will still be retained within the HALOs as outlined in the TDR Program; · PDR, Conservation Subdivisions and outright acquisition of land will continue based on availability of funds, thereby'reducing density through other ongoing programs; and · potential growth in the HALOs is limited by a 30 percent growth factor, which would be monitored. The 30 percent growth factor is intended to provide the ability to track and monitor the TDR Program as it evolves. It would be prudent to allow the flexibility to permit changes in the growth factor if warranted based on the tracking of the program, its use and the result. 2.10 Comment 10 "There is also a question; will the agricultural land owners continue any form of conservation subdivision after TDR sales start? There could be a reaction by those who miss out on TDR (there is an oversupply) and they might go for the profit of. full development." Response: The use of Conservation Subdivisions will continue once the TDR Program is established. The sale of a development right under the PDR program would be expected to provide a market indicator for purchase of development rights for the TDR Program. The Town will still aggressively pursue PDR, and the levels of goverument and non-profit entities such as PLT that currently help to structure Conservation Subdivisions, PDR and acquisition of land will continue. The TDR Program would offer an additional option that does not'involve the greater expenditure of public funds as compared with PDR and acquisition, allowing the remaining funds in these programs to be leveraged for further purchases and resulting benefits to Town residents. As a result, the scenario outlined above would not occur (i.e. "... a reaction by those who miss out on TDR ?there is an oversupply) and they might go for the profit offull development. ' This is evident since there would be more options for landowners in sending areas to not seek full development once TDR is added as a potential method of compensation to not construct on land in agricultural areas. 2.11 Comment 11 "I do get concerned when by the numbers in this study that the sending area represents a total area of almost 3.000 acres or almost 1.600 potential TDR's out there or excuse me, development rights of which the receiving areas as it designated and I have these numbers orally that were Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Final Supplemental Generic ElS given to me about one week ago, receivtng units that can be put into the HALO's and hamlet centers is 662. Mr. Meinke made reference to 663. my addition gave me the smaller number by a unit, l am concerned when we can land in this program 42% of the development rights that are out in the agricultural fields into our HAl, O's and hamlet centers as the first stop in this program. I have always felt that a TDR program could be invaluable to .farmland and open space preservation in this Town. I wouM like to see a first target of perhaps landing up to 10% of the total available development rights into the hamlet centers. 1 mean. currently as the plan stands, the village of Southold and HAI,O can receive up to 160 more residential building units. Mattituck 138. Peconic and why I don't understand this. 142 and then lesser amounts to East Marion. 73: New Suffolk 57 more units: Cutchogue 47; Orient 24 and Greenport 21 to get to this magic number of 662. 1 once had a boss who was president of a major bank in New York City and his modus of operating was if we are gotng to make mistakes, let's make mistakes slowly and right now. I see a plan here that says we can put up to 42% of all development rights out on the ag lands, right into our village centers and HALO's and you know. we can always adjust this in the future, l wouM rather see a number like, if there are 1.600 potential the report says 1,571 potential TDR's. Let's say, let's start 150 and see how it works and we can always up it if it works. You know, this ts going to be sort of a cat chasing its tail. lf you want to land a building site in a village center and you have got to start out andpay an additional $160.000 or $200,000 to land that development right and then go build a structure and is that structure going to give a return to the builder that makes it worthwhile for him to increase that density presumably on a property that he owns in the village, to begin with. Let alone what an outside developer might do So, currently I perceive this really not as a preservation plan at 662 development rights out of 1.571 being allowed to land in our HALO's and hamlet centers. 1 see this as a development plan not a preservation plan." Response: This comment is more of a statement than a question. In addition, prior responses provide information that addresses this comment (see response to Comment 9~ Section 2.9). It is not necessary or useful to label the TDR Program as either a development plan or a preservation plan. It is an additional tool to bring compensation to landowners in sending areas as an incentive to not pursue development of those parcels, in exchange for the value ora TDR for each development right that would otherwise be permitted by zoning. Rather than having government fund this purchase, it is funded by private market factors that would allow the development right to be constructed in a more appropriate area of the Town. As noted in prior responses, there are diverse opportunities to distribute TDRs within the HALOs, and there are recommended limits to avoid potential for over-intensification of use in the HALOs. Also, as previously noted, the program allows available public funds to be leveraged to ensure that the PDR and fee title acquisition programs continue. 2.12 Comment 12 · 'And also, another concern of mine. when I was looking at the map originally 1 saw the HALO area in East Marion was originally fust north of the road. Now there is a large parcel south of Page 2-10 Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Final Supplemental Generic lEIS the road. The community has expressed, they don't want the development ora HALO district and I feel like, even though we are saying that, the Town is going right ahead and look at that, the HALO district is growing. So, I know in there you said that you will take what the community has to say in mind but 1 don't how much power we are going to have when there is just buying and selling going on. l don't know." Response: East Marion is unique in this program, since there are no sending parcels identified in East Marion and therefore no development rights originate within that community. Since the 'recommended TDR program is intended to be based on school district boundaries, East Marion was combined with Orient under the Oysterponds Union Free School District ("UFSD,'). As a result, in the program outlined in the TDR Planning Report, development rights originating in Orient could be placed in East Marion, without East Marion having the benefit of the resulting open space that would be retained on the sending pamel. Several possible remedies exist: 1) the part 0fthe HALO to be used ag a receiving area could be reducedin size to the area north of Main Road, thereby reducing the number of TDRs that would be placed in East Marion by that amount; or 2) the program could be modified to not establish receiving sites in East Marion. The TDR Planning Report identified 112 TDRs originating within the Oysterponds UFSD, and as noted above, all of the development rights originate in Orient. As far as potential receiving units, the total of 98 units identified in the TDR Planning Report has been recalculated to determine tbe number for each hamlet, with 73 potential units in East Marion and 24 potential units in Orient (it is noted that this totals 97 units, not 98 as outlined in the TDR Planning Report). If the program were modified to remove East Marion as a receiving zone, the resulting receiving zone potential for Orient would be 7 units, in consideration of the 30 percent growth factor. Given the i~umber of potentia TDRs (112 units), it is evident that more efforts should be made toward PDR, Conservation Subdivision and fee title acquisition in Orient to achieve the Town's agricultural land retention and open space goals for this area. The HALO locations were established as a separate initiative by the Town, and will not change; however, the reduction or removal of East Marion as a defined receiving zone would be a modification of the program that is considered equitable to the residents of that community that are concerned with over, intensification without the benefits of retained agricultural open space land. 2.13 Comment 13 '7 want to. speak of the impact on East Marion in regards to this. I would like, well, each hamlet is unique in itself, it is, you know, Cutchogue has a hamlet center and developed land and roads and Mattituck does too. East Marion doesn't. We can't bear any extra traffic. We have a ferry Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Final Supplemental Generic ElS that gives us a problem and as 1 was going through this TDR paperwork here, I saw on one page 116, it says who benefits from this program? It says ascending area landlords, the investors, the developers, landowners, etc. etc. Local businesses benefit. It doesn't say anything about the community desires of the community. The community definitely will benefit somewhat from businesses and so forth but the desires, like you said, is not there, we don't want, in East Marion, we do not want a hamlet center.. We don't want any development. East Marion has been there for 350 years and it has been the same for 350 years. Throughout this paperwork, you know it mentioned single family homes, two family homes, multiple family homes, etc. etc. Which is frightening to us out in East Marion. Your potential adverse impacts, it says here, would result in clearing and grading in HALO areas for development resulting from density shift. We don't want it. Everything here is what East Marion doesn't want. We presented you with a petition stating that. Showing that out of 440 households. 328 households did not want it and I could have given you 440 households except it was too exhausting for me. But I could have got about 98% of the households. And East Marion is unique and l wish when you make judgments on this TDR that you consider that. Consider each hamlet as a unique entity. It can't be one blanket coverage. I know that is difficult to do, 1 am sure it is difficult to do in planning but this is what 1 want and this is what most of the people East Marion want. We want to be treated differently because we are different." Response: This comment is acknowledged and is addressed in response to Comment 12, Section 2.12 above. 2.14 Comment 14 "The other one is transfer of development rights in the school districts. It says shouM generally be in the general school system. And I was wondering, 1 didn't bother looking in a dictionary what generally meant but it is an unusual term. ,4re we going to get around it or are we going to merge school districts?" Response: The recorfimended program involves respecting school district boundaries such that sending zone TDRs would have to be located in a receiving area in the same school district. 2.15 Comment 15 "The other one is. it mentions all sorts of housing, single, double, multiple occupancy but there is almost no mention of affordable housing. And my impression was that originally the only transfer of development rights were for affordable housing and now apparently that isn't mentioned anyplace" Response: This comment is addressed in response to Comment 5, Section 2.5. A key concept is identified in that response and is repeated herein: "Requiring TDR for affordable housing is counter-intuitive, since the zoning is intended to decrease the cost of housing, and purchase of Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Final Supplemental Generic ElS credits would increase the cost of housing." The Town is pursuing affordable housing through other programs and initiatives. 2.16 Comment 16 "But tonight your objective is to receive comments on the supplemental impact statement dealing with the transfer of development rights in Southold This prefatory to accepting a document which is an environmental impact Statement in support of future legislation which is not yet written." Response: The recommended TDR Program is outlined in detail in the TDR Planning Report to the Town Board. This report is part of the DSGEIS, and fully describes the recommended program. Any TDR legislation that is Created will be completely consistent with those recommendations, or will be modified to be consistent with further findings based on this FSGEIS and the Statement of Findings prepared for the GElS process. Once the Statement of Findings is adopted, the Town Attorney's office will dmf~ the final legislation and will ensure that it is consistent with the TDR Planning Report, the Statement of Findings, and any mitigation or changes in the program identified that are needed to address environmental concerns stemming from the GEIS process. 2.17 Comment 17 "One of the basic principles that we have discussed many, many times through the years is the idea of making changes by transfer resulting in neutral density. This principle is not well expressed in the document, in fact it actually goes out of its way to talk about incentives that would overbalance towards more density..So that is an important point that I think is missing from the impact statement. That the idea was to not create more density by transfer." Response: This comment is acknowledged and is responded to in response to Comment 2, Section 2.2. A key part of that response that directly addresses this comment is repeated herein: "The TDR program does not propose an increase in density. This is clearly stated in the TDR Planning Report to the Town Board, the DSGEIS and was stated again at the public hearing on the DSGEIS. One development right from a sending parcel may be transferred to a receiving parcel and used as one (1) residential development unit. Units have been identified to include various types (i.e. residential accessory dwelling, single-family dwelling, apartment, townhouse, etc.) depending on the type of project proposed for the receiving site." 2.18 Comment 18 "There is another piece that is not actually missing but it is mentioned only as an alternative and that is the commercial component. The commercial component is a very important part of this Page 2-13 Town of South01d Transfer of Development Rights Program Final Supplemental Generic ElS picture because it could be the element that makes this a successful program. We talked before just a moment ago about incentives to get people to transfer development from farmland into the hamlet centers, that transfer, that incentive of course is hard to come by. Why would you want to do that necessarily? Well. one way of course is to change the exchange rate and get two for one. three for one whatever and the Town Board can do that. That is something we don't' want to go. And the commercial component however, let's say that a restaurant wanted to have outdoor dining or something like that which is currently prohibited by the code I think, then perhaps if you saved a couple acres of farmland, that could be take into consideration. So it is a very powerful element here in the commercial aspect that is missing from the document now. You are moving towards perhaps legislation that would enact something. With this part missing, I think we have got the heart out of the program. " Response: This comment is acknowledged and is responded to in response to Comment 3, Section 2.3. A key part of that response that directly addresses this comment is repeated herein: "As indicated in the comment, this concept has substantial merit since it would reduce the residential growth of the Town by using residential TDRs for commercial growth. This has the benefit of increasing tax revenue and decreasing population and demand for services, particularly with respect to schools. In addition, there is a need to provide opportunities for landing transfer credits in receiving areas, and the TDR Planning Report recognizes that while Southold is unique and there is an expected demand for credits, a more successful program would provide increased receiwng zone opportunities. One way to do this is to consider use of TDRs for commercial use. The original program was intended to be simple and amenable to straightforward implementation. As a result, the Town Board may wish to start with a residential TDR program at first, and add commercial transfer opportunities in the future. Since the DSGEIS did not identify any significant adverse impacts with the commercial credit transfer, the flexibility to offer a commercial TDR transfer program should be provided at the Town Board's discretion." 2.19 Comment 19 "I am going to use some round numbers to describe what could happen here. From the sending areas. 1.600 let's call them residential development units, can be transferred to the receiving areas. In the receiving areas we can receive 660 units. This means that you have more coming in than will fit. However. the Town Board can make them fit by changing the exchange rate. Very dangerous business. Right now, by using the numbers in the document, it looks like 42% of that which could be transferred theoretically wouM only fit in the receiving zone. so not all of a could go in. However, we have got more to put in. The how many actually land depends upon the legislation, on what is actually set up. In other words, this document sets up some models, studies the issue, shows what could or couldn't happen but the real key is going to be the change to the code itself,, not yet written. Without the code the ej~cacy of this program really can't be measured. Can't even be judged. You have to know what the code is going to say. $o this is a cart and a horse problem. You need the environmental impact statement to do the legislation but Page 2-14 Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Final Supplemental Generic ElS you can't understand the impact if you don't have the legislation. Somehow we have to get the horse and the cart together here yet." Response: As indicated in response to Comment 16, Section 2.16: "Any TDR legislation that is created will be completely consistent with those recommendations, or will be modified to be consistent with further finditlgs based on this FSGEIS and the Statement of Findings prepared for the GElS process. Once the Statement of Findings is adopted, the Town Attorney's office will draft the final legislation and Will ensure that it is consistent with the TDR Planning Report, the Statement'of Findings, and any mitigation or changes in the program identified thht are needed to address environmental concerns stemming from the GEIS process." With respect to the "exchange rate" the Town Board is committed to a density-neutral program that will not increase density ora unit that is transferred from a sending zone to a receiving area; see response to Comments 2 (Section 2.2) and 17 (Section 2.17). With respect to the observation that there are more development rights originating from sending areas than can be accommodated in receiving areas, this is acknowledged and exemplifies the need for continued efforts for PDR, Conservation Subdivision and fee title acquisition. The TDR Program provides an additional means to protect/preserve farmland by having the private market compensate landowners through the purchase of a TDR; this will reduce the amount of public funds and will allow PDR, Conservation Subdivision and fee title acquisition to continue. 2.20 Comment 20 "My basic concern, though, given all that is the marginal cost of the program may be quite a problem. That is. how much land will we actually preserve for every say, $100, O00 worth of cost of operating the program. This program is complex it is going to be costly to administer and because of these complexities it is going to be of dubious impact. }Ye are not going to see a lot of volume here. So it is a btg question in my mind of whether we are being wise in spending our tax dollars preserving land this particular way. We won't know the answer to that until we actually see the legislation that you may propose. Thank you." Response: As noted in response to Comments 16 (Section 2.16) and 19 (Section 2.19), the legislation that is created will be consistent with the TDR Planning Report and any modifications considered to be appropriate to reduce impacts of the program as identified through the SEQRA process and incorporated into the Statement of Findings. The program is relatively simple in terms of implementation, and it is not expected that substantial additional expenditures will be necessary to implement it. The program would be implemented through the existing personnel and departments of the Town. The Town Attorney's office will draft the legislation consistent with the TDR Planning Report and the SEQRA process. The Town Clerk will record TDRs assigned to landowners, extinguished on the sending parcel and redeemed as part of a development projects on a receiving parcel. The Planning staff Page 2-15 Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Final Supplemental Generic ElS will help facilitate the program through their role in review of projects. The various Boards that will help with implementation of the program through their land use reviews will discharge their duties in accordance with their enabling legislation. No new personnel are expected to be necessary, as the program implementation components are distributed across existing Town departments and Boards and will be relatively simple to implement. 2.21 Comment 21 "Well. under your who benefits from this program, this to me is the whole thing in a nutshell. Landowners, investors and developers benefit from an additional mechanism to facilitate compatible and planned development projects that provide return on investment. That has nothing to do with the community. That has everything to do with people from the outside coming tn and purchasing land to develop it to make money. And the other thing I would like clarification on is HALO communities benefit from investment in their hamlet areas resulting in redevelopment, whatever redevelop means, and compatible land use which strengthens the hamlet and achieves other land preservation goals. 1 wouM like somebody to please explain that." Response: In response to the question. "Who benefits from this program?" in the TDR Planning Report, the following full response is provided: The residents and visitors of the Town of SouthoM benefit from continuing land preservation of rural areas and retention of the bucolic character associated with the Town. Sending area landowners benefit from an additional option to gain monetary value for their land. and their continued ability to utilize the underlying value of the land absent the development rights. Landowners. developers and investors benefit from an additional mechanism to facilitate compatible and planned development projects that provide return on investment. HALO communities benefit from investment in their hamlet areas resulting in redevelopmem and compatible land use which strengthens the hamlets and achieves other land preservation goals. Local businesses benefit from an increased local consumer/customer base. First and foremost, the "residents" of the Town of Southold are noted as benefiting from the program. The reference to the benefit to HALO communities is self-explanatory and is re-stated in the comment above. The commentator may not agree with the statements, but no further explanation is needed, as the paragraph is thorough in explaining the benefits of the program. It is the opinion of the consultant and team that authored the TDR Planning Report that there is an overall net benefit to the Town and its residents, by providing an alternative means to reduce developmem in inappropriate agricultural areas of the Town, and shit~ that development in a carefully-considered, controlled and compatible way, toward existing hamlet centers that' have infrastructure and are more appropriate for small incremental increases in land use than the rural areas of the Town. Page 2-16 Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Final Supplemental Generic ElS 2.22 Comment 22 "Okay, my other question is we are talking about within school district lines and things like that. You need to remember that if density increases in East Marion the school district grows in Greenport because we send everybody, we send 90 students up there now. So if the density increases in East Marion, Greenport school district increases students and we pay tuition to Greenport so it wouM be very costly for the taxpayers in Greenport when you increase that. The other thing is is that we are talking again about big houses, doesn't mean they have the least children. Well, I have lived in East Marion a long time and when my children were in school probably 18 years ago, there weren't big houses. There was tons of farmland. There were 136 children in Oysterponds school. Today with all the big gigantic houses and everything, is 101." Response: The comment with respect to East Marion as a receiving zone is addressed in response to Comment 12 (Section 2.12) above. This is an additional reason why East Marion may not be appropriate as a receiving zone. The comment with respect to house size and school-aged children is addressed in response tO Comment 6 (Section 2.6) above. As indicated in that response, it is expected that the size of some units which are built in HALO areas may be less than a single-family home, and that if this occurs, it is likely that the unit will have a smaller household population based on standard references. The comment with respect to house sizes and the number of children in the Oysterponds school 18 years ago is interesting, and may be due to local influences or trends unique to East Marion. While interesting, the comment is not directly relevant to the proposed TDR Program. 2.23 Comment 23 "One, on the sending areas, how are, is it determined which properties will be allowed to sell the development rights and how does that compare with the current evaluation program in connectton wtth our purchase of development rtghts programs. Response: A landowner wishing to sell development rights may comact the Town for a certificate recognizing the number of credits applied to a given parcel of land. The owner may then market those credits. The Town will assist in putting credit owners together with potential purchasers through the land use review process. Any landowner in a sending zone would be eligible to sell development rights. This compares with and is complementary to the PDR program Under PDR, a landowner wishing to sell development rights contacts the Town expressing this interest. The same process would occur for TDR. Section 4.5, Program Mechanics Summary, of the TDR Planning Report to the Town Board provides additional information that is in direct response to this comment. Under the subsection, Examination of Grant Tasks, there are two question-answer points of information that address this comment. Town of Southold Transfer of Development Righls Program Final Supplemental Generic ElS 6. What will be the Town's role in implementing and monitoring the program? It is expected that the Town will implement the program by complying with SEQRA and creating legislation in the form of a TDR local law which would be adopted by the Town Board in conformance with the requirements established under New York State Town Law. Once enacted, it is expected that the Town will implement the program through issuance of credit certificates to sending area landowners, and will facilitate the redemption of TDR credits through the land use review process for landowners and developers of prejects within the receiving areas. The Town will record redeemed TDR's in a manner that ensures that parcels from which credits are transferred are recognized as having no residual development rights. The Town will monitor the program and make adjustments as necessary to facilitate its success in conformance with applicable laws. The Town Planning Board, Town Board, potentially the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Town Clerk would all be involved in various aspects of program implementation. The Town may in the future pursue a credit registry or credit bank; however, this is not essential to the initial program. 7. How do I participate ifl own land within a Sending Area? A sending area landowner would contact the Town, make application on forms to be provided, obtain a TDR credit certificate~ and seek a private purchaser for the credits. 2.24 Comment 24 "Second question is on the receiving areas. You said several times that each receiving parcel would require a zone change and so that is going to make it awful hard for people who want to buy one of these properties to go through a complete change of zone. Is that the way this program is intended to work? To have to do a rezoning every time a development credit is received?" Response: The interpretation indicated in this comment is inaccurate. The various types of land use that would enable redemption of TDRs, and the land use decisions that would need to occur, are outlined in the TDR Planning Report. The following land use types were identified'as being appropriate for redemption of credits: · Single-Family Homes · Two-Family Homes · Multiple Family Dwellings · Detached Accessory Dwelling Units, and · Mixed use or flexible zoning developments under potential future Planned Development District Only the methods of Multiple Family Dwellings and potential future Planned Development Districts would involve zone changes. As indicated in the TDR Planning Report~ Single-Family and Two-Family Homes would be reviewed and approved by the Town Planning Board, and Detached Accessory Dwelling Units would be reviewed and approved by the Town ZBA. As a result, a change of zone is not needed for all types of receiving site approvals. Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights pragrarn Final Supplemental Generic EIS 2.25 Comment 25 "It seems to me that we are mentioning affordable housing, unaffordable housing, four and five bedroom housing etc. The problem is housing. No matter what cost the housing is here and the easiest solution to housing in my estimation, your estimation and your previous Board's recommendations that your chaired, is regulating accessory apartments. I don't ' know why that isn't being, that is an immediate fix. An immediate fix." Response: This comment is partially addressed in response to Comment 5 (Section 2.5) and 15 (Section 2.5). It is noted that units transferred from sending areas that are built as two-family, multiple-family, residential accessory dwellings, or residences that are part of planned development districts would be smaller in size than homes built in the sending areas, and as a result would have lower sales prices and would therefore assist with creating more affordable housing opportunities in the Town. With respect to accessory apartments, the Town created the accessory apartment provisions in the Town Zoning law, and as a result, accessory addressed through that legislation under a separate initiative. 2.26 Comment 26 '~Preuiously farmers wouM sell their land, sell their development rights and that was it, it wasn't like, well, okay what am I going to get for it? They would just sell their development rights, the land wouM be preserved for the future and right now something has started where well, they can get probably more money in the meantime it is going to be creating higher density somewhere else. To me 'it is an observation that just says it is kind of sad in my respect. I don't know *6hat incentive a farmer wouM have to just sell the development rights for the land to be preserved unless they were truly altruistic and),ou know, unfortunately they want to make a buck too, so 1 wouldn't blame'them for getting more money with the TDR. But it is just an observation." Response: This comment is more ora statement; however, it is important to note that the TDR Program is intended to supplement other programs including the continued PDR program. TDR shifts density from areas that are inappropriate, for residential growth toward hamlet centers that have infrastructure in-place and are more appropriate for controlled, appropriate development. PDR will continue and will help to establish a market value for sale of development rights through the appraisal process. This would apply to continued PDR purchases and would be a benchmark for TDR. TDRs would be purchased through private markets unless the Town implements the alternative of creating a bank to purchase and either hold, sell or extinguish those credits (much like the PDR program). The same incentive would apply, whether a farm owner sells development rights to the Town through PDR, or sells development rights privately through TDR. Continued PDR, Conservation Subdlvision and fee title purchase would retain farmland and open space and would further reduce density in the Town, though PDR and acquisition require Page 2-19 Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Final Supplemental Generic ElS expenditure of public funds. TDR retains open agricultural land and does not require expenditure of public funds, and therefore will help to supplement the continuing purchase programs while achieving other important goals of the Town. Page 2-20 Agency Code Contract Period APPENDIX X Agreement Modification Form 19000 4/1/05 - 3/31/09 Contract Number C059943 Funding for Period $ 60,000 This is an AGREEMENT between THE STATE OF NEW YORK, acting by and through the New York State Department of State, having its principal office in Albany, New York (hereinafter referred to as the STATE), and the Town of Southold (hereinafter referred to as the CONTRACTOR), for modification of Contract Number C059943, as amended above and in the attached Appendix B. All other provisions of said AGREEMENT shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this AGREEMENT as of the dates appearing under their signatures. Scott A. Russell STATE AGENCY SIGNATURE By: (print name) (print name) Title: Town Superv±sor Title: Date: January 8, 2009 Date: State Agency Certification: "In addition to the acceptance of this Contract, I also certify that original copies of this signaiure page will be attached to all other exact copies of this Contract." STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF SUFFOLK )ss: OnthisSth dayof January Scott A. Russell Supervisor , in the year 20 09., before me personally appeared , to me known and known to me to be the of the Town of Southold _, the unincorporated association described in and which executed the above agreement; and who acknowledge to me that (s)he executed the foregoing agreement for and in behalf of said unincorpomt~ association. /-/'~- - - ' N~TARY P~BLIC Thomas P. DiNapoli State Comptroller: By:. Date: AC 92 (Rev, 6/94) VOUCHER TANDARU Ordinating Agency Orig. Agency Code DEPARTMENT OF STATE 19000 Payment Date (MM) (DD) (YY) OSC Use Only 4 Payee Name (Limit to 30 spaces) Payee Name (Limit to 30 spaces) Address (Limit to 30 spaces) Address (Limit to 30 (Limit to 2 Spaces)_~ Zip Code Clty (Limit to 20 spaces) Interest Eligtole (Y/N) Liability EXlte (MM) (DD) (YY) payee Amount MIR Date (MM) (DD) (YY} IRS Code I IRS Amount (MM) (DD) (YY) Claiming reimbursement of expenditures incurred pursuant to Quality Communities Contract # C O ~°1 el ~ ~ as detailed on the attached Documentation Forms. A. Total Summary Sheet Column #2 B. Less Local Share - circle 10%o~ C. Total This Claim $Cll Payee Cer~flcatlon: Icer ti;y that the atxwe.~s just, tree and correct; that no part thereof has been paid except as stated and that the balance is a and owing, a that taxes from which the State is exempt are excluded. Payee's SignatUre in Ink ~- Title FOR AGENCY USE ONLY Expenditure Total Discount % Net STATE COMPTROLLER'S PRE-AUDIT By Liquidation Dept. Cost Center Unit Object Amount Orig. Agency PO/Contract Town of Southold, New York - Pa',ment Voucher Vumdor A 6 d m.q.~ ~scdp~c~ oi' Goo4s or $~c¢s Purchase Order # Date ' 20031 ~pril 24~-~ 2009 Tt~WN OF SOUTHOLD ~/~/~ I '' Tax Exempt ~t A1635, 54, ~' Account;# B 8020 4 500 3Off IDeliv,er and send billing to: Depar~ment:- BbA~NING Address IVendor #14161 Nelson Pope A,.Voorhls-, LLC 57~ Walt ~mam Road Melville, NY 11747 VENDOR -*."Return this~op¥,and Town,of seUth~ld;~0oehq[ i.temized~and .~ig~ed ~ocpa~m~n~, ITEM "TOTAL 765.18 TH IS PO RCHASE ORDER IS NOT VALID WITHOUT THE SIGNATURES OF THE DEPT. HEAD ANI~ THE.SUPEBVISOR I CERTIFY THAT THERE ARE SUFFICIENT FUNDS AVAILABLE Dept. Head Supervisor VI~DOR ?'elson, Pope & Vj2orhis, LLC 572 Walt Whitman Road Ph(~631 -~27-5665 Melville NY 11747 Fax: 631-427-5620 Invoice Property: 07008 Project: VA02296 Southold TDR Program & SEQRA Implt Manager: Voorhis, Charles ~_.0 ~'~ Town of Southold Town Hall, 53095 State Rte 25 P.O. Box l 179 Southhold NY 11971-0959 Attention: Mark Terry Invoice #: 6751 Invoice Date: Jtme 25, 2009 MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO NELSON POPE & VOORHIS Invoice Amount $772.44 Task 7: SEQRA meeting TA. Meeting on FSEIS acceptance. Scope for code preparation. Work Performed thru 5/8/09 Reimbursables Color Reoroduetion 8.5 x 11 (5200) COLOR PRINTS Postage. Freiv_ht. & Messeneer (5250~ Fedex to Lynda Rudder. Xerox Conies B&W 8 1/2x11(5200~ DEIS Reimbursables Totals Contract Amount: $3,500.00 Percent Complete: 92.86% Fee Earned: $3.250.00 Prior Fee Billings: $2,800.00 ~g.rxent~Fe~'rftfil: ~ · ~, '~;~$~5~0.00 04/08/09 48.00 105.60 04/08/09 1.00 41.64 04/08/09 1,168.00 175.20 $322.44 *** Total Project Invoice Amount $772.44 Please make all checks payable to NELSON POPE & VOORHL¥ Please include invoice number on check NELSON POPE & VOORHIS NOW ACCEPTS CREDIT CARDS VISA - MASTERCARD - AMERICAN EXPRESS Town of $o uthold, New York- Payment Voucher Pun:h~e Nelson, Pope & Voo s, LLC 572 Walt Whitman Road Phor~e: 631-427-5§65 Melville NY 11747 Fax: 631-427-5620 InvOice : 07008 Project: VA0229§ Southold TDR Program & SEQRA Implementation Manager: Voorhis, Charles Invoice #: 6572R Invoice Date: Apdl 22, 2009 To; Town of Southold Town Hall, 53095 State Rte 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Attention: Mark Terry MAKE CHECKS PAYAIBLETO NELSON, POPE &VOORHIS Invoice Amount $ 4,375.00 Task 5: Meet with TDR workgroup on December t0, 2008; revise FSGEIS to Incorporate cornmen~ prepare document for Final Team Review (sent March 12, 2009); review and finalize FSGEIS for Town Board~ Work Performed thru 3/19109 Contract Amount: Percent Complete: Fee Earned: Prior Fee Billings: Current Fee Total: $7,500.00 100.00% $7,500.00 $5,625.00 ~1,875.00 Task 6: Prepare Findings Statement Work PerfOrmed thru 3i16109 Contract Amount: Percent Cornplete; Fee Earned: Prior Fee Billings: $2.500.00 100.00% $2,500.00 $0.00 Current Fee Total: 00,00 $ 4,375.00 All inv~ces are due net 30 days. A late charge of 1.5% per month will be added to any unpaid balance after 30 days. Please make all checks payable to Nelson & Pope Please include invoice number on check ~ ~.~ NELSON & POPE NOW ACCEPTS CREDIT CARDS . .~ VISA - MASTERCARD - AMERICAN ExpREss '~ Town of Southold, New York- Payment Voucher Veudor No. Payee Cerdfication Department Cerlii'icalion Nelson, Pope & Voo=bis, LLC 572 Walt Whitman Road Phone: ~ ~7-5665 Melville NY 11747 Fax: 631-427-5620 Invoice  TD07008 Project: VA02296 Manager: Voorhis, Charles To: Town of Southold Town Hall, 53095 State Rte 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southhold NY 11971-0959 Attention: Mark Terry Invoice #: Invoice Date: 6350 December 30, 2008 MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO NELSON POPE & VOORHIS Invoice Amount Task 5: FSGEIS; format document, delineate comments, etc. Prepare FGEIS and coordinate staff. Review/revise text; assemble. Work Performed thru 11/11/08 Task 7: Prepare for and attend meeting with TDR Team at Southold. Work Performed thru 7/23/08 Contract Amount: Percent Complete: Fec Earned: Prior Fee. Billings: Current Fee Total: $4,491.16 $7,500.00 75.00% $5,625.00 $1,875.00 $3,750.00 $3,500.00 80.00% $2,800.00 $2,100.00 $700.00 JAN - 5 2009 Reimbursables Color Renroduction 8.5 x 11 (5200~ COLOR PPJNTS Postage. Freieht. & Messenger (5250~ Date Bill Units Charge 11/12/08 3.00 6.60 11/12/08 1.00 23.61 Nelson,,Pope ~e Voorhis, LLC .Pr°ject:- VA02296 Bill Group: REIMB Invoice: 6350 December 30, 2008 Page 2 of 2 FED EX TO MARK TERRY Xerox Copies B&W 8 1/2x11(5200~ FGEIS - TDR - DRAFT Reimbursables Totals 11/12/08 73.00 10.95 $41,16 *** Total Project Invoice Amount $4,491.16 Please make all checks payable to NELSON POPE & VOORHIS Please include invoice number on check NELSON POPE & VOORItIS NOW ACCEPTS CREDIT CARDS VISA - MASTERCARD - AMERICAN EXPRESS Purchase Order # Date !8901 July 23, 2008 'I VN OF SOUTHOLD Tax Exempt # A163554 Account # B 8020 4 500 300 JDeliver and send billing to: Department PLANNING BOARD Address I Nelson, Pope & Voorhis, LLC 572 Walt Whitman Road Melville, NY 11742 VENDOR **Return this copy and Town of Southold voucher itemized and signed for payment** ITEM QUANTITY DESCRIPTION Envirommental Consulting Services re: TDR & SEQRA in paymemt of Invoice #5951 UN IT COST TOTAL $6,739.16 THIS PURCHASE ORDER IS NOT VALID WITHOUT THE SIGNATURES OF THE DEPT. HEAD AND THE SUPERVISOR I CERTIFY THAT THERE ARE SUFFICIENT FUNDS AVAILABLE IN ~N ~HARGED Dept. Head I CERTIFY TI-~ TO BE A JUST AND T~~ Supervisor VENDOR COPY Town of Southold, New York- Pa'Tment Voucher Department N l son, Pope & Voorl f , LLC 572 Walt Whitman Road Phone: 631-~'=Z7-5665 Melville NY 11747 Fax: 631-427-5620 Invoice To: Town of Southold Town Hall, 53095 State Rte 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southhold NY 11971-0959 Attention: Hon. Scoit Russell 07008 Project: VA02296 DR Program & SEQRA Imph/ Manager: Voorhis, Charles ~( ~ Invoice #: 5951 Invoice Date: July 16, 2008 MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO NELSON POPE & VOORHIS Invoice Amount $6,739.16 Task 5: Revise DGEIS; prepare key point summary; prepare for and attend public hearing; prepare hearing introduction.,~-~ Work Performed th~ Task 7:Department/Staff/TB Meetings, Hearings: Town Board Meeting to advise/consult with Board on DSGEIS prior to acceptance. Prepare for and attend Public Hearing (5/27/08). Work Performed thru 5/27/08 Contract Amount: $7,500.00 Percent Complete: 25.00% Fee Em-ned: $1,875.00 Prior Fee Billings: $0.00 Contract Amount: Percent Complete: Fee Earned: Prior Fee Billings: Current Fee Total: $1,875.00 $3,500.00 60.00% $2,100.00 $0.00 $2,100.00 NetsO'n, Pope & Voorhis, LLC Project: VA02296 BillGroup: TASK8 Invoice: 5951 July 16, 2008 Page 2 of 2 Task 8: Report Reproduction: 13 Copies prepared (7 copies included per contract agreement - $1,500.00: 6 additional copies prepared - $1,250.00).) Work Performed thru 5/1/08 Contract Amount: Percent Complete: Fee Earned: Prior Fee Billings: Current Fee Total: $2,750.00 100.00% $2,750.00 $0.00 $2,750.00 Reimbursables Postaee. Freieht. & Messeneer (5250~ Fedex to Town of Southold Planning Reimbursables Totals Date 05/07/08 Bill Units 1.00 Charge 14.16 $14.16 *** Total Project Invoice Amount $6,739.16 (411 invoices are due net 30 days. A late charge of 1% per month will be added to any unpaM balance after 30 days. Please make all checks payable to NELSON POPE & VOORH1S Please include invoice number on check NELSON POPE & VOORHIS NOW ACCEPTS CREDIT CARDS VISA - MASTERCARD - AMERICAN EXPRESS FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE, YOU MAY PAY THIS INVOICE WITH YOUR CREDIT CARD. TO PAY WITH YOUR CREDIT CARD, PLEASE COMPLETE THE iNFORMATION BELOW AND RETURN BY MAIL. ~IVISA WIMastercard I~American Express Account No. Exp. Date Signature Amount Or call our office with the i~formation: 631-427-5665 NdlSen, Pope & Vool % LLC 572 Walt Whitman Road Phone: 631~/7-5665 Melville NY 11747 Fax: 631-427-5620 Invoice To; Town of Southold Town Hall, 53095 State Rte 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southhold NY 11971-0959 Attention: Hon. Scott Russell l.~r.~°PertY: 0~7008 Project: yA02296__~ Southol~d TDR Progxam & sEQRA Imp?~_J Manager: Voorhis, Charles ~' ~, ~41 Invoice #: 5951 Invoice Date: July 16, 2008 MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO NELSON POPE & VOORHIS Invoice Amount $6,739.16 Task 5: Revise DGEIS; prepare key point summary; prepare for and attend public hearing; prepare hearing introduction. Work Performed thru 5/07/08 Task 7:Department/Staff/TB Meetings, Hearings: Town Board Meeting to advise/consult with Board on DSGEIS prior to acceptance. Prepare for and attend Public Hearing (5/27/08). Work Performed thru 5/27/08 Contract Amount: $7,500.00 Percent Complete: 25.00% Fee Eamed: $1,875.00. Prior Fee Billings: $0.00 Current Contract Amount: Percent Complete: Fee Earned: Prior Fee Billings: $1,875.00 $3,500.00 60.00% $2,100.00 $0.00 Current Fee Total: $2,100.00 Nelsav~ Pop¢~& Voorhis, LLC Project: VA02296 Bill Group: TASK8 Invoice: 5951 July 16, 2008 Page 2 of 2 Task 8: Report Reproduction: 13 Copies prepared (7 copies included per contract agreement - $1,500.00: 6 additional copies prepared - $1,250.00).) Work Performed thru 5/1/08 Contract Amount: Percent Complete: Fee Earned: Prior Fee Billings: Current Fee Total: $2,750.00 100.00% $2,750:00 $0.00 $2,750.00 Reimbursables Postane. Freieht. & Messeneer (5250~ Fedex to Town of Southold Planning. Reimbursables Totals Date 05/07/08 Bill Units 1.00 Charge 14.16 $14.16 *** Total Project lnvoice Amount $6,739.16 Ali invoices are due net 30 days. ,4 late charge of 1% per month will be added to any unpaid balance after 30 days. Please make aH checks payable to NELSON POPE & VOORtlIS Please include invoice number on check NELSON POPE & VOORHIS NOW ACCEPTS CREDIT CARDS VISA - MASTERCARD - AMERICAN EXPRESS FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE, YOU MAY PAY THIS INVOICE WITH YOUR CREDIT CARD. TO PAY WITH YOUR CREDIT CARD, PLEASE COMPLETE THE iNFORMATION BELOW AND RETURN BY MAIL. WIVISA WIMastercard [21American Express Account No. Exp. Date Signature Or call our office with the information: 631-427-5665 Town of Southold, New York - Pa ,ment Voucher 9~7-0908 Vendor No. 1378] A.1010.4.600.200 ~ ,/ Allcn Video 35 Plane Tree Lane Saint James, N.Y. 117~0 Bill To Town of Somt~ho~d 53095 Route 25 P.O. []ox I Soulhhold, N.Y. 11971 Aun: Town Clork Invoice Date Invoice 5/7/2008 1849 ! Job Date I Cli~t Name Item Descrtptio~ Job Date Amount Mecting Tape Video Tape Bonrd Meeting Special infommtional m~fing TDR'S 05106/08 300.00 We appreciatc your prompt paym~t. Total : s3o8.oo 'Nelson, Pope & o is, LLc 5~2.Walt Whitman Road Phone: 631-427-5665 Melville NY 11747 Fax: 631-427-5620 Invoice 07008 Project: VA02296 Southold T'DR Program & SEQRA Implr Manager: Voorhis, Charles TO: Town of Southold Town Hall, 53095 State Rte 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southhold NY 11971-0959 Attention: Hon. Scott Russell Invoice #: 5778 Invoice Date: April 29, 2008 MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO NELSON POPE & VOORHIS Invoice Amount $7,500.00 Task 4: Preparation of a Draft Supplemental Geaeric Environmental Impact Statement. Work Performed thru 10/22/07 Contract Amount: $15,000.00 Perc~at Complete: 100.00% Fee Earned: $15,000.00 Prior Fee Billings: $7,500.00 Current Fee Total: *** Total Project Invoice Amount $7,500.00 Please make ali ckecks payable to NEI~ON POPE & VOORItI$ Please include invoice nmnber on check NELSON POpE & VOORI-IIS NOW ACCEPTS CREDIT CARDS VISA - MASTERCARD - AMERICAN EXPRESS MAY - 1 200,8 'I'OW~ OF SOdTHOLD Purchase Order # '17874 Date OWN OF SOUTHO~I//~)~ Tax Exempt # A163554 Account # 6~D'~)'q"S~)'~ IDeliver and send billing to: Department ~\O~V,,.~.'~ ~:>o(~,', ~._ Address VENDOR **Return this copy and Town of Southold voucher itemized and s~gned for payment ITEM QUANTITY DESCRIPTION UN IT COST TOTAL THIS PURCHASE ORDER IS NOT VALID WITHOUT THE SIGNATURES OF THE DEPT. HEAD AND THE SUPERVISOR I CERTIFY THAT THERE ARE SUFFICIENT FUNDS AVAILABLE IN TH~,/~PPROPRIATION CHARGED Dept.'Head v I CERTIFY T~S TO BE A JUST Supervisor VENDOR COPY 5~'~i[~hitrnarl :R~iad · :i ? (.').I~,hon~ J1-~27=5~15 lnvo:ce PAGE 02 07008 q~rojcct: ¥A02296 ..... Sout~1d.'~R.~ro~Fa~t&SEQR~A tmplr J . Man~gcr; VOOThiS, 'Oharles invoice #: 5596 :lnvoi~e Da~e: lanuary 3 l; 2008 · ln¥oieeAmount 9,$2t. 50 Task,x: Pro~eet~ta~t-ug.and Preparatlon of ~ai[:E n~ironm enta[ Ass~'~sm~nt.:Form (EAF) parts I and It. ($i¢$0i00i . Task'U:'Project (~laSSification and Issuance of · '.~tetminati0n:of SignifiCance (~250 00) C.r~nt Fee~ Total: $1,500:00 100.00% $!,500q00 $0-00 Task, 4:.i,P~eparafi0fi,ofa Draft supplement~] Generic EUVironmentnl ,WOrk Pelrformed thru . Contra~t Amount: Percent Comi)!ete~ Fee Eam ed:: Prior Fee ~illings: $15,000:00 50i00% $7,30~.00 . · $0.00 Current Fee Total: 57,500.00 NELSON POPE 07/01/07 07/01/07 07/0,1/07 {J7/01/07 07/0{/07 PAGE Invv~c~; 5596 ~lanuary 3 l, 2008 PagD 2 of 2 Bill Units 10,00 lO,O0 20,00 70:00 ' 530.00 {33 3,00 90200 ~-4.00 '105:00 7~,$0 *** TOtal Project Invoice AmOunt AII Inin~e~w ~trt ~t n~t $O da~ A late charge ~' l ~ per m~ntle m~!ll ~ a~ to ~ ~t~d,~dan~ ~ JO ~y& PleaSe ~ ~:eh~ ~ab~ to ~ggON ~PE ~gO0~lS" Pleat ~c~dq ~oice number on cheek ~ON.~PE & VO0~S NO~ ACCESS. C~9~ Nelson, Pope & Voo is, LLC 572 Walt Whitman Road Phone: 631-427-5665 Me~ille NY/~1~747 Fax: 631-427-5620 Invoice 07008 Project: VA02296 Sou&old TDR Pror,.a.~ & SEQRA lmpb Mana~: Voorhis, Chiles Town of Somhold Town Hall, 53095 StYe gle 25 P.O. Box 1179 Soulhhold WY 11971-0959 Attention: Hon. Scott Rm~ll Invoice #: 5018 Invoicg Date: Juno 29, 2007 MAK~ Cl~CKS PAYABLE TO NELSON POPE & VOORHIS Invoice Amount $16,900.00 Conmtct Amount: $16,900.00 Pcrccm Complete: 100.00% Fcc Earned: $16,900.00 Prior Fcc Billings: $0.00 Rasolution Numbar 200%335 adop~d March 27, 2007: Prof~dmml PlanMng S~rvi~s in connection with a TDR Program pursuant to Nelson, Pope and Voorhb proposal dated March 13, 2007. Current Fee Total: $16,900.0~ *** Total Project Invoice Amount $16,900.00 __ Town of Southold, New York - P~ ,merit Voucher .......... 7- ~ ~,¢~ Town of Southold - Letter Board Meeting of March 27, 2007 RESOLUTION 2007-335 ADOPTED Item # 39 DOC ID: 2761 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2007-335 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON MARCH 27, 2007: RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby retai~s Nelson~ Pope and Voorhis to orovide professional plannino, services in connection with a TDR program pursuant to their proposal dated March 13, 2007 in an amount not to exceed $16,900, subject to the approval of the Town Attorney. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANZMOUS] MOVER: William P. Edwards, Councilman SECONDER: Albe~ Krupski 3r., Councilman AYES: Evans, Wlckham, Ross, Edwards, Russell, Krupski .~r. Generated April 3, 2007 Page 62 STATE AGENCY (Name and Address): NYS Department of State 41 State Street Albany, NY 12231-0001 NYS COMPTROLLER'S #: C059943 ORIG. AGENCY CODE: 19000 TYPE OF PROGRAM: 2005 Quality Communities Program TOTAL PROJECT COST - $75,000.00 STATE FUNDING AMOUNT FOR $60,000.00 INITIAL PERIOD 4-1-05 - 3-31-07 LOCAL SHARE $15,000.00 INITIAL CONTRACT PERIOD: FROM: 4-1-05 TO: 3-31-07 Multi-Year Term: From: 4-1-05 To:3-31-08 CONTRACTOR (.Name and Address of Lead Agency) Town of Southold Supervisor P.O.B. 1179 Southold, NY 11971 FEDERAL TAX IDENTIFICATION NUMBER: ! i -' .~ O O (' ?~ 7 MUNICIPALITY #470379000 C (Td,, APPENDICES ATTACHED TO AND PART OF THIS AGREEMENT APPENDIX A: Standard clauses as required by the Attorney General for all state contracts APPENDIX Al: Agency-Specific Clauses Attachments I, 2, 3, 4, thereto: Final Project Summary Report, Quarterly Contractor Report, Project Status, Procurement Certification APPENDIX B: Budget APPENDIX C: Payment and Reporting Schedule APPENDIX D: Program Workplan APPENDIX E: Grant Application APPENDIX X: Modification Agreement Form (to accompany modified appendices for changes in term or consideration on an existing period or for renewal periods) ~-=~5~;'zv RECEIVED DIVISION OF LOCAL GOVER~'~ENT MAR 1 3 2008 ALBANY OFFICE DEPARTMENT OF STATE -1- DIVISION OF LOCAL OOVERNIvfENT OCT 0 4 200? ALBANY OFFICE [~PARTMENT OF SYAIE 1N WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have executed or approved this AGREEMENT on the dates below their signatures. By:. (Print Name) Title: ~ ~ c./i~cp-q Date: - I~ _~ CONTRACTOR STATE AGENCY: New York State Department of State DO~ ~x~)of A~inistratt~h Title: - ~d M~agement Date: ~ /~ /O~ State Agenc~ Ce~ification "In addition to the accept~ce of this contract, I also ee~i~ that original copies of this signature page will be a~ached to all other exact copies oftNs contract." State of New York ) Countyof ~'tg_~&;~o(.(~ )ss: ,,~t. aA~._~ On this ~1~ day of ~'--/~'-2or~"fir, 20 ~5', before me personally came _)"'c.,c>-lc~ /~, /~t4_&cc~[ { to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say _he is the ~4 ~,'~ ~ of -7~O.~,~ o~ t Contractor described in and which executed the abo : insJ. mrrre~; and ~hat _he signed his/her name thereto Cmen'tiJd~ooi k by order of the governing body of the a~ tractor. KIERAN M. CORCORAN ~--- QUALIFIEDNoTARyIN ¢~020061SUFFOLK19838COUNTY ¢ / NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES DEC. 6, 2~_g ~ Approved: Andrew M.Cuomo, Attom~c&General S ~0 FORt~ Date: Approved: u 'z -2- $TAI'E STATE OF NEW YORK AGREEMENT The AGREEMENT is hereby made by and between the State of New York agency (STATE) and the public or private agency (CONTRACTOR_) identified on the face page hereof. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the STATE has the authority to regulate and provide funding for the establishment and operation of program services and desires to contract with skilled parties possessing the necessary resources to provide such services; and WHEREAS, the CONTRACTOR is ready, willing and able to provide such program services and possesses or can make available all necessary qualified personnel, licenses, facilities and expertise to perform or have performed the services required pursuant to the terms of this AGREEMENT; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises, responsibilities and covenants herein, the STATE and the CONTRACTOR agree as follows: I. Conditions of A~reement A. This AGREEMENT may consist of successive periods (PERIOD), as specified within the AGREEMENT or within a subsequent Modification Agreement(s) (Appendix X). Each additional or superseding PERIOD shall be on the forms specified by the particular State agency, and shall be incorporated into this AGREEMENT. B. Funding for the first PERIOD shall not exceed the funding amount specified on the face page hereof. Funding for each subsequent PERIOD, if any, shall not exceed the amount specified in the appropriate appendix for that PERIOD. C. This AGREEMENT incorporates the face pages attached and all of the marked appendices identified on the face page hereof. D. For each succeeding PERIOD of this AGREEMENT, the parties shall prepare new appendices, to the extent that any require modification, and a Modification Agreement (the attached Appendix X is the blank form to be used). Any terms of this AGREEMENT not modified shall remain in effect for each PERIOD of the AGREEMENT. To modify the AGREEMENT within an existing PERIOD, the parties shall revise or complete the appropriate appendix form(s). Any change in the amount of consideration to be paid, or change in the term, is subject to the approval of the Office of the State comptroller. Any other modifications shall be processed in accordance with agency provided guidelines and instructions. Subject to the availability of funds, determination by the Department that it is in the best interest of the Project and the State, and upon mutual execution of an Appendix X and approval by the Office of State Comptroller, the Multi-Year Term of this Agreement may be extended by one -3- Contract Period not to exceed twelve (12) months. E. The CONTRACTOR shall perform all services to the satisfaction of the STATE. The CONTRACTOR shall provide services and meet the program objectives summarized in the Program Workplan (Appendix D) in accordance with: provisions of the AGREEMENT, relevant laws, rules and regulations, administra!ive and fiscal guidelines; and where applicable, operating certificates for facilities or licenses for an activity or program. F. If the CONTRACTOR enters into subcontracts for the performance of work pursuant to this AGREEMENT, the CONTRACTOR shall take full responsibility for the acts and omissions of its subcontractors. Nothing in the subcontract shall impair the rights of the STATE under this AGREEMENT. No contractual relationship shall be deemed to exist between the subcontractor and the STATE. II. 11I. G. Appendix A. (Standard Clauses as required by the Attorney General for all State contracts) takes precedence over all other parts of the AGREEMENT. Payment and Reporting A. The CONTRACTOR, to be eligible for payment, shall submit to the STATE's designated payment office (identified in Appendix C) any appropriate documentation as required by the Payment and Reporting Schedule (Appendix C) and by agency fiscal guidelines, in a manner acceptable to the STATE. B. The STATE shall make payments and any reconciliations in accordance with the Payment and Reporting Schedule (Appendix C). The STATE shall pay the CONTRACTOR, in consideration of contract services for a given PERIOD, a sum not to exceed the amount noted on the face page hereof or in the respective Appendix designating the payment amount for that given PERIOD. This sum shall not duplicate reimbursement from other sources for CONTRACTOR costs and services provided pursuant to this AGREEMENT. C. The CONTRACTOR shall meet the audit requirements specified by the STATE. Terminations A. This AGREEMENT may be terminated at any time upon mutual written consent of the STATE and the CONTRACTOR. B. The STATE may terminate the AGREEMENT immediately, upon written notice of termination to the CONTRACTOR, if the CONTRACTOR fails to comply with the terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT and/or with any laws, rules, regulations, policies or procedures affecting this AGREEMENT. C. The STATE may also terminate this AGREEMENT for any reason in accordance xvith provisions set forth in Appendix Al. D. Written notice of termination, where required, shall be sent by personal messenger service or -4- by certified mail, return receipt requested. The termination shall be effective in accordance with terms of the notice. E. Upon receipt of notice of termination, the CONTRACTOR shall cancel, prior to the effective date of any prospective termination, all outstanding obligations, and agrees not to incur any new obligations after receipt of the notice without approval by the STATE. F. The STATE shall be responsible for payment on claims pursuant to services provided and costs incurred pursuant to terms of the AGREEMENT. In no event shall the STATE be liable for expenses and obligations arising from the program(s) in this AGREEMENT after the termination date. IV. Indemnification VI. A. The CONTRACTOR shall be solely responsible and answerable in damages for any and all accident and/or injuries to person (including death) or property arising out of or related to the services to be rendered by the CONTRACTOR or its subcontractors pursuant to this AGREEMENT. The CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and hold harmless the STATE and its officers and employees from claims, suits, actions, damages and costs of every nature arising out of the provision of services pursuant to this AGREEMENT. B. The CONTRACTOR is an independent contractor and may neither hold itself out nor claim to be an officer, employee or subdivision of the STATE nor make any claim, demand or application to or for any right based upon any different status. Property Any equipment, furniture, supplies or other property purchased pursuant to this AGREEMENT is deemed to be the property of the STATE except as may otherwise be governed by Federal or State laws, rules or regulations, or as stated in Appendix A 1. Safeguards for Services and Confidentiality A. Services performed pursuant to this AGREEMENT are secular in nature and shall be performed in a manner that does not discriminate on the basis of religious belief, or promote or discourage adherence to religion in general or particular religious beliefs. B. Funds provided pursuant to this AGREEMENT shall not be used for any partisan political activity, or for activities that may influence legislation or the election or defeat of any candidate for public office. C. Information relating to individuals who may receive services pursuant to this AGREEMENT shall be maintained and used only for the purposes intended under the contract and in conformity with applicable provisions of laws and regulations, or specified in Appendix Al. -5- APPENDIX A Standard Clauses for Ali New York State Contracts The parties to the attached contract, license, lease, amendment or other agreement of any kind (hereinafter, "the contract" or "this contract") agree to be bound by the following clauses which are hereby made a part &the contract (the word "Contractor" herein refers to any party other than the State, whether a contractor, licenser, licensee, lessor, lessee or any other party): 1. EXECUTORY CLAUSE. In accordance with Section 41 of the State Finance Law, the State shall have no liability under this contract to the Contractor or to anyone else beyond funds appropriated and available for this contract. 2. NON-ASSIGNMENT CLAUSE. In accordance with Section 138 of the State Finance Law, this contract may not be assigned by the Contractor or its right, title or interest therein assigned, transferred conveyed, sublet or otherwise disposed of without the previous consent, in writing, of the State and any attempts to assign the contract without the State's written consent are null and void The Contractor may, however, assign its right to receive payment without the State's prior written consent unless this contract concerns Certificates of Participation pursuant to Article 5-A of the State Finance Law. 3. COMPTROLLER'S APPROVAL In accordance with Section 112 of the State Finance Law (or, if this contract is with the State University or City University of New York, Section 355 or Section 6218 of the Education Law), if this contract exceeds $15,000 (or the minimum .nresholds agreed to by the Office of the State Comptroller for certain S.U.N.Y. and C.U.N.Y. contracts), or if this is an amendment for any amount to a contract which, asso amended, exceeds said statutory amount, or if, by this contract, the State agrees to give something other than money when the value or reasonably estimated value of such consideration exceeds $10,000, it shall not be valid, effective or binding upon the State until it has been approved by the State Comptroller and filed in his office. Comptroller's approval of contracts let by thc Office of General Services is required when such contracts exceed $30,000 (State Finance Law Section 163.6a). 4. WORKERS' COMPENSATION BENEFITS In accordance with Section 142 of the State Finance Law, this contract shall be void and of no force and effect unless the Contractor shall provide and maintain coverage during the life of this contract for the benefit of such employees as are required to be covered by the provisions of the Workers' Compensation Law. 5. NON-DISCRIMINATION REQUIREMENTS. To the extend required by Article 15 of the Executive Law (also known as the Human Rights Law) and all other State and Federal statutory and constitutional non-discrimination provisions, the Contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, creed, color, sex, national origin, sexual orientation, age, disability or marital status. Furthermore, in accordance with Section 220-e of the Labor Law, if this is a contract for the construction, alteration or repair of any public building or public work or for the manufacture, sale or distribution of materials, equipment or supplies, and to the extent that this contract shall be erformed within the State of New York, Contractor agrees that neither it .or its subcontractors shall, by reason of race, creed, color, disability, sex, or national origin: (a) discriminate in hiring against any New York State citizen who is qualified and available to perform the work; or (b) discriminate against or intimidate any employee hired for the performance May 03 of work under this contract. If th is is a building service contract as defined in Section 230 of the Labor Law, then, in accordance with Section 239 thereof, Contractor agrees that neither it nor its subcontractors shall by reason of race, creed, color, national origin, age, sex, or disability: (a) discriminate in hiring against any New York State citizen who is qualified and available to perform the work; or (b) discriminate against or intimidate any employee hired for the performance of work under this contract. Contractor is subject to fines of $50.00 per person per day for any violation of Section 220-e or Section 239 as well as possible termination of this contract and forfeiture of all moneys due hereunder for a second or subsequent violation. 6. WAGE AND HOURS PROVISIONS. If this is a public work contract covered by Article 8 of the Labor Law or a building service contract covered by Article 9 thereof, neither Contractor's employees nor the employees of its subcontraclors may be required or permitted to work more than the number of hours or days stated in said statutes, except as otherwise provided in the Labor law and as set forth in prevailing wage and supplement schedules issued by the State Labor Department. Furthermore, Contractor and its subcontractors must pay at least the prevailing wage rate and pay or provide the prevailing supplements, including the premium rates for overtime pay, as determined by the State Labor Department in accordance with the Labor Law. 7. NON-COLLUSIVE BIDDING REQUIREMENT. In accordance with Section 139-d of the State Finance Law, if this contract was awarded based upon the submission of bids, Contractor warrants, under penalty of perjury, that its bid was arrived at independently and without collusion aimed at restricting competition. Contractor further warrants that, at the time Contractor submitted its bid, an authorized and responsible person executed and delivered to the State a non-collusive bidding certification on Contractor's behalfi 8. INTERNATIONAL BOYCOTT PROHIBITION. In accordance with Section 220-f of the Labor Law and Section 139-h of the State Finance Law, if this contract exceeds $5,000, the Contractor agrees, as a material condition of the contract, that neither the Contractor nor any substantially owned or affiliated person, firm, partnership or corporation has participmed, is participating, or shall participate in an international boycott in violation of the federal Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 USC App. Sections 2401 et seq.) or regulations thereunder. If such Contractor, or any of the aforesaid affiliates of Contractor, is convicted or is otherwise found to have violmed said laws or regulations upon the final determination of the United States Commerce Department or any other appropriate agency of the Uniled States subsequent to the contractors execution, such contract, amendment or modification thereto shall be rendered forfeit and void. The Contractor shall so notify the State Comptroller within five (5) business days of such conviction, delermination or disposition of appeal (2NYCKR 1054). 9. SET-OFF RIGHTS. The State shall have all of its common law, equitable and statutory rights of set-off. These rights shall include, but not be limited to, the State's option lo withhold for the purposes of set-off any moneys due to the Contractor under this contract up to any amounts due and owing to the State with regard to this contract, any other contract with any State department or agency, including any contract for a term commencing prior to the term of this contract, plus any amounts due and owing to the Stme for any other reason including, without limitation, tax delinquencies, fee delinquencies or monetary penalties relative thereto A-2 The State shall exercise its set-offrights in accordance with normal State practicesincluding, in cases ofset-offpursuamto an audit, the finalization of such audit by the State agency, its representatives, or the State Comptroller. 10. RECORDS. The Contractor shall establish and maintain complete and accurate books, records, documents, accounts and other evidence directly pertinent to performance under this contract (hereinafter, collectively, "the Records"). The Records must be kep~ for the balance of the calendar year in which they were made and for six (6) additional years thereafter. The State Comptroller, the Attorney General and any other person or entity authorized to conduct an examination, as well as the agency or agencies involved in this contract, shall have access to the Records during normal business hours at an office of the Contractor within the State of New York or, if no such office is available, at a mutually agreeable and reasonable venue within the State, for the term specified above for the purposes of inspection, auditing and copying. The State shall take reasonable steps to protect from public disclosure any of the Records which are exempt from disclosure under Section 87 of the Public Officers Law (the "Statute") provided that: (i) the Contractor shall timely inform an appropriate State official, in writing, that said records should not be disclosed; and (ii) said records shall be sufficiently identified; and (iii) designation of said records as exempt under the Statute is reasonable. Nothing contained herein shall diminish, or in any wa>, adversely affect, the State's right to discovery in any pending or future litigation. 1. IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AND PRIVACY NOTIFICA- FION (a) FEDERAL EMPLOYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER and/or FEDERAL SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER. All invoices orNew York State standard vouchers submitted for payment for the sale of goods or services or the lease of real or personal property to a New York State agency must include the payee's identification number, i.e., the seller's or lessor's identification number. The number is either the payee's Federal employer identification number or Federal social security number, or both such numbers when the payee has both such numbers. Failure to include this number or numbers may delay payment. Where the payee does not have such number or numbers, the payee, on its invoice or New York State standard voucher, must give the reason or reasons why the payee does not have such number or numbers. (b) PRIVACY NOTIFICATION. (1) The authority to request the above personal information from a seller of goods or services or a lessor of real or personal property, and the authority to maintain such information, is found in Section 5 of the State Tax Law. Disclosure of this information by the seller or lessor to the State is mandatory. The principal purpose for which the information is collected is to enable the State to identify, individuals, businesses and others who have been delinquent in filing tax returns or may have understated their tax liabilities and to generally identify' persons affected by the taxes administered by the Commissioner of Taxation and Finance. The information will be used for tax administration purposes and for any other purpose authorized by law. (2) The personal information is requested by the purchasing unit of the agency contracting to purchase the goods or services or lease the real or personal property covered by this contract or lease. The information is ,aaintained in New York State's Central Accounting System by the irector of Accounting Operations, Office of the State Comptroller, AESOB, Albany, New York 12236. 12. EOUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR MINORITIES AND WOMEN. In accordance with Section 312 ofthe Executive Law, if this contract is: (i) a written agreement or purchase order instrument, providing for a total expenditure in excess of $25,000.00, whereby a contracting agency is committed to expend or does expend funds in return for labor, services, supplies, equipmant, materials or any combination of the foregoing, to be performed for, or rendered or furnished to the contracting agency; or (ii) a written agreement in excess of $100,000.00 whereby a contracting agency is committed to expend or does expend funds for the acquisition, construction, demolition, replacement, major repair or renovation of real property and improvements thereon; or (iii) a written agreement in excess of $100,000.00 whereby thc owner ora State assisted housing project is committed to expend or does expend fuhds for the acquisition, construction, demolition, replacement, major repair or ren- ovation of real property and improvements thereon for such project, then: (a) The Contractor will not discriminate against employees or applicants for employment because of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, age, disability or marital status, and will undertake or continue existing programs of affirmative action to ensure that minority group members and women are afforded equal employment opportunities without discrim- ination. Affirmative action shall mean recruitment, employment, job assignment, promotion, upgradings, demotion, transfer, layoff, or termination and rates of pay or other forms of compensation; (b) at the request of the contracting agency, the Contractor shall request each employment agency, labor union, or authorized representative of workers with which it has a collective bargaining or other agreement or understanding, to furnish a 'aritten statement that such employment agency, labor union or representative will not discriminate on the basis of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, age, disability or marital status and that such union or representative will affirmatively cooperate in the implementation of the contractor's obligations herein; and (c) the Contractor shall state, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees, that, in the perfom~ance of the State contract, all qualified applicants will be afforded equal employment opportunities without dis- crimination because of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, age, disability or marital status. Contractor will include the provisions of"a, "b", and "c" above, in every subcontract over $25,000.00 for the construction, demolition, replacement, major repair, renovation, planning or design of real property and improvements thereon (the "Work") except where the Work is for the beneficial use of the Contractor. Section 312 does not apply to: (i) work, goods or services unrelated to this contract; or (ii) employment outside New York State; or (iii) banking services, insurance policies or the sale of securities. The State shall consider compliance by a contractor or subcontractor with the requirements of any federal law concerning equal employment opportunity which effectuates the purpose of this section The contracting agency shall determine whether the imposition of the requirements of the provisions hereof duplicate or conflict with any such federal law and if such duplication or conflict exists, the contracting agency shall waive the applicability of Section 312 to the extent of such duplication or conflict. Contractor will comply with all duly promulgated and lawful rules and regulations of the Governor's Office of Minorit~ and Women's Business Development pertaining hereto. 13. CONFLICTING TERMS. In the event ora conflict between the terms of the contract (including any and all attachments thereto and May 03 amendment~ thereof) and the terms of this Appendix A, the terms of this Appendix A shall control. 14. GOVERNING LAW. This contract shall be governed by the laws of the State of New York except where the Federal supremacy clause requires otherwise. A-3 15. LATE PAYMENT. Timeliness of payment and any interest to be paid to Contractor for late payment shall be governed by Article 1 I-A of the State Finance Law to the extent required by law. 16. NO ARBITRATION. Disputes involving this contract, including thc breach or alleged breach thereof, may not be submitted to binding arbitration (except where statutorily authorized), but must, instead, be heard in a court of competent jurisdiction of the State of New York. 17. SERVICE OF PROCESS. In addition to the methods of service allowed by the State Civil Practice Law & Rules CCPLR"), Contractor hereby consents to service of process upon it by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested. Service hereunder shall be complete upon Contractor's actual receipt of process or upon the State's receipt of the return thereof by the United States Postal Service as refused or undeliverable. Contractor must promptly noti~, the State, in writing, of each and every change of address to which service of process can be made. 'ervice by the State to the last known address shall be sufficient. mntractor will have thirty (30) calendar days after service hereunder is complete in which to respond. 18. PROHIBITION ON PURCHASE OF TROPICAL HARD- WOODS. The Contractor certifies and warrants that all wood products to be used under this contract award will be in accordance with, but not limited to, the specifications and provisions of State Finance Law § 165. (Use of Tropical Hardwoods) which prohibits purchase and use of tropical hardwoods, unless specifically exempted, by the State or any governmental agency or political subdivision or public benefit corporation. Qualification for an exemption under this law will be the responsibility of the contractor to establish to meet with the approval of the State. In addition, when any portion of this contract involving the use of woods, whether supply or installation, is to be performed by any subcontractor, the prime Contractor will indicate and certify in the submitted bid proposal that the subcontractor has been informed and is in compliance with specifications and provisions regarding use of tropical hardwoods as detailed in 8165 State Finance Law. Any such use must meet with the approval of the State, otherwise, the bid may not be considered responsive. Under bidder certifications, proof of qualification for exmnption will be the responsibility of the Contractor to meet with the approval of the State. 19. MACBRIDE FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRINCIPLES. In accordance with the MacBride Fair Employment Principles (Chapter 807 of the Laws of 1992), the Contractor hereby stipulates that the Contractor either (a) has no business operations in Northern Ireland, or (b) shall take lawful steps in good faith to conduct any business operations in Northern Ireland in :cordance with the MacBride Fair Employment Principles (as described ,o Section 165 of the New York State Finance Law), aud shall permit independent monitoring of compliance with such principles. 20. OMNIBUS PROCUREMENT ACT OF 1992. It is the policy of May 03 New York State to maximize opportunities for the participation of New York State business enterprises, including minority and women-owned business enterprises as bidders, subcontractors and suppliers on ils procurement contracts. Information on the availability of New York State subcontractors and suppliers is available from: NYS Department of Economic Development Division for Small Business 30 South Pearl Street, 7~h floor Albany, New York 12245 518-292-5220 A directory of certified minority and women-owned business enterprises is available from: NYS Department of Economic Development Minority and Women's Business Development Division 30 South Pearl Street, 2''~ floor Albany, New York 12245 http://www.empire.state.ny.us The Omnibus Procurement Act of 1992 requires that by signing this bid proposal or contract, as applicable, Contractors certify that whenever the total bid amount is greater than $1 million: (a) The Contractor has made reasonable efforts to encourage the participation of New York State Business Enterprises as suppliers and subcontractors, including certified rainority and women-owned business enterprises, on this project, and has retained the documentation of these efforts to be provided upon request to the State; (b) The Contractor has complied with the Federal Equal Opportunity Act of 1972 (P.L. 92-261), as amended; ©) The Contractor agrees to make reasonable efforts to provide notification to New York State residents of employment opportunities on this project through listing any such positions with the Job Service Division of the New York State Department of Labor, or providing such notification in such manner as is consistent with existing collective bargaining contracts or agreements. The Contractor agrees to document these efforts and to provide said documentation to the State upon request; and (d) The Contractor acknowledgos notice that the State may seek to obtain offset credits from foreign countries as a result of this contract and agrees to cooperate with the State in these efforts. 21. RECIPROCITY AND SANCTIONS PROVISIONS. Bidders are hereby notified that if their principal place of business is located tn a country, nation, proviace, state or political subdivision that penalizes New York State vendors, and if the goods or services they offer will be substantially produced or performed outside New York State, the Omnibus Procurement Act 1994 amendments and 2000 amendments (Chapter 684 and Chapter 383 respectively) require that they be denied contracts which they would otherwise obtain. NOTE: As of May 15, 2002, the list of disct'iminatory j urisdict ions subject to this provision includes the states of South Carolina, Alaska, West Virginia, Wyoming, Louisiana and Hawaii. Contact NYS Department of Economic Development for a current list of jurisdictions subject to this provision. 22. PURCHASES OF APPAREL. In accordance with State Finance Law 162 (4-a), the State shall not purchase any apparel from any vendor unable or unwilling to certify that: (I) such apparel was manufactured in compliance with all applicable labor and occupational safety laws, including, but not limited to, child labor laws, wage and hours laws and workplace safety laws, and (ii) vendor will supply, with its bid (or, if not a bid situation, prior to or at the time of signing a contract with the State), if known, the names and addresses of each subcontractor and a list o1~ all manufacturing plants to be utilized by the bidder. A-4 May 03 II. This A. APPENDIX A1 Agency-Specific Clauses Agreement has been entered into pursuant to the following understandings: The 2005-2006 Fiscal Year Budget provides aid to municipalities, not-for-profits, local benefit corporations, local public authorities and Indian tribe or nations, through the Environmental Protection Fund under the Quality Communities Program. The Department is authorized to evaluate and determine eligibility of applications for funding of projects. Based upon information, representations and certifications contained in Contractor's application for funding, including the Work Program as set fmXh in Appendix D and the application for funding set forth in Appendix E, the Department has made a determination of eligibility of funding for Contracto~"s project under such Budget Act. The Contractor is the Lead Agency for the Project and will be responsible for managment of the project and submitting under signature any reports and requests for reimbursement according to the requirements of this Agreement. General For the purposes ofthis Agreement, theterms State and"Department" are interchangeable, unless the context requires otherwise. The contract period as set forth on the Face Page is the inclusive period within which the provisions of this Agreement shall be performed. No costs will be reimbursed for liabilities incurred outside of this period. No liabilities are to be incurred beyond the termination date and no costs will be reimbursed for such liabilities unless: 1) funds have been reappropriated for the Project in the subsequent State fiscal year, 2) the Department determines that it is in the best interest of the Department .and the State to provide additional time to complete the Project and 3) an extension agreement is approved in accordance with Section IA., Conditions of Agreement (State of New York Agreement, page 3). The Department shall not be liable for expenses of any kind incurred in excess of the State Funds as set forth on the Face Page, and shall not be responsible for seeking additional appropriations or other sources of funds for the Project. The Contractor shall perform all services to the satisfaction of the Department. The Contractor shall provide all services and meet the program objectives described in Appendix D in accordance with: provisions of this Agreement; relevant Slate, federal and local laws, rules and regulations, administrative and fiscal guidelines; where applicable, operating certificates for facilities or licenses for an activity or program, and conditions of applicable permits, administrative orders and judiciaI orders. F. The Contractor shall submit with its request for final payment a Final Project Summary Report in the format described in Appendix A 1, Attachment I. Al-2 The Contractor agrees to proceed expeditiously with the Project and to complete the Project in accordance with the timetable set forth in the Workplan (Appendix D) as well as with the conditions of any applicable permits, administrative orders, or judicial orders and this Agreement. The Department will provide Contractor with a Quarterly Contractor Report form (Appendix A 1, Attachment 2) pursuant to the Department's Minority and Women-owned Business enterprises as discussed in Section XIII in Appendix Al. Such report shall be provided to the Department at the address on the Quarterly Contractor Report by all involved Minority and Women-owned Businesses. The Contractor shall submit two copies of a "Project Status Report" (Appendix Al, Attachment 3) every six months from Contract execution date and when requesting payment. m. Reports, Documents and Maps The Contractor shall identify documents, reports, and maps produced in whole or in part under this Agreement by endorsing on said documents, reports, and maps the following: "This (document, report, map, etc.) was prepared with funds provided by the New York State Department of State under the Quality Communities Grant Program." IV. License to use and reproduce documents and other works: By acceptance of this Agreement, Contractor transfers to the Department a nonexclusive license to use, reproduce in any medium, and distribute any work prepared for or in connection with the Project, including but not limited to reports, maps, designs, plans, analysis, and documents regardless of the medium in which they are originally produced. Contractor warrants to the Department that it has sufficient title or interest in such works to license pursuant to this Agreement. Such warranty shall survive the termination of this agreement. Contractor agrees to provide the original of each such work, or a copy thereof which is acceptable to the Department, to the Department before payments shall be made under this Agreement. V. Property Pursuant to the provisions set forth in Section V, page 5 of this Agreement, the ownership of all property described therein shall reside with the Contractor unless otherwise specified in writing by the Department at any time during the term of this Agreement and up to thirty (30) days following the issuance of the final payment. VI. Year 2000 Warranty NEW YORK STATE YEAR 2000 WARRANTY STANDARD Updated:6/2005 Al-3 Date and Time Warranty Contractor warrants that Product(s) furnished pursuant to this Agreement shall, when used in accordance with the Product documentation, be able to accurately process date/time data(including, but not limited to, calculating, comparing, and sequencing) transitions, including leap year calculations. Where a contractor proposes or and acquisition requires that specific Products'must perform as a package or system, this warranty shall apply to the Products as a system. Where contractor is providing ongoing services, including but not limited to: i) consulting, integration, code or data conversion, ii)maintenance or support services, iii) data entry or processing, or iv) contract administration services (e.g. billing, invoicing, claim processing), Contractor warrants that services shall be provided in an accurate and timely manner without interruption, failure or error due to inaccuracy of Contractor's business operations in processing date/time data (including, but not limited to, calculating, comparing, and sequencing) various date/time transitions, including leap year calculations. Contractor shall be responsible for damages resulting from any delays, errors or untimely performance resulting therefrom, including but not limited to the failure or untimely performance of such services. This Date/Time Warranty shall survive beyond termination or expiration of this Agreement through: a) ninety (90) days or b) the Contractor's or Product manufacturer/developer's stated date/time warranty term, which ever is longer. Nothing in this warranty statement shall be construed to limit any rights or remedies otherwise available under this Agreement for breach of warranty. Al-4 VII. VIII. IX. Terminations In addition to any other actions authorized by this Agreement, the Department may terminate the Agreement in the best interests of the State of New York by providing written notice to the Contractor as provided in this Agreement. The Contractor shall complete the project as set forth in this Agreement, and failure to render satisfactory progress or to complete the project to the satisfaction of the State may be deemed an abandonment of the project and may cause the suspension or termination of any obligation of the State. In the event the Contractor should be deemed to have abandoned the project for any reason or cause other than a national emergency or an Act of God, all monies paid to the Contractor by the State and not expended in accordance with this Agreement shall be repaid to the State upon demand. If such monies are not repaid within one year after such demand, the State Comptroller of the State of New York may cause to be withheld from any State assistance to which the Contractor would otherwise be entitled an amount equal to the monies demanded. In the event that the Department has provided written notice to the Contractor directing that the Contractor correct any failure to comply with this Agreement, the Department reserves the right to direct that the Contractor suspend all work during a period of time to be determined by the Department. If the Contractor does not correct such failures during the period provided for in the notice, this Agreement shall be deemed to be terminated after expiration of such time period. During any such suspension, the Contractor agrees not to incur any new obligations after receipt of the notice without approval by the Department. Subcontracting Requirements The Contractor may subcontract for all or any portion of the activities covered by this Agreement as provided for in Appendix D subject to prior approval of the Department of the terms of any subcontract. Requirements for Contract Map Products [Intentionally Left Blank] Compliance with Procurement Requirements All contracts by municipalities for professional services, and all purchase contracts involving not more than $10,000 are subject to the requirements of General Municipal Law § 104-b, which requires such contracts to comply with the procurement policies and procedures of the municipality involved. All such contracts shall be awarded after and in accordance with such municipal procedures, subject to any addilional requirements imposed by the STATE as set forth in Appendix D hereof. A1-5 B. The municipal attorney, chief legal officer or financial administrator of the CONTRACTOR shall certify to the Department of State that applicable public bidding procedures of General Municipal Law § 103 were followed for all contracts involving more than $10,000 for purchase contracts. In the case of purchase contracts involving not more than $20,000, and contracts for professional services, the municipal attorney, chief legal officer or financial administrator shall certify that the procedures of the municipality established pursuant to General Municipal Law § 104-b were fully complied with (see Appendix Al, Attachment 4) XI. XII. Paxanent and Records Retention A. Payments shall be made as set forth in Appendix C. The Contractor shall maintain, at its principal place of business, detailed books and accounting records supported by original documentation relating to the incurring of all expenditures, as well as payments made pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall make such records available for review by the Department upon request at any time. The Department shall have the right to conduct progress assessments and review books and records as necessary. The Department shall have the right to conduct an on-site review of the Project and/or books and records of the Contractor prior to, and for a reasonable time following, issuance of the FINAL payment. The Department shall be entitled to disallow any cost or expense, and/or terminate or suspend this Agreement, if the Contractor has misrepresented any expenditures or Project activities in its application to the Department, or in this Agreement, or in any progress reports or payment requests made pursuant hereto. The Contractor shall maintain such books and accounting records in a manner so that reports can be produced therefrom in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. The Contractor shall maintain separate fiscal books and records for all funds received through the Department pursuant to this Agreement. During the term of this Agreement and for a period of six years after its termination, the Contractor shall make all such books and records available to the Department and the Office of the State Comptroller, or their designated representatives, for inspection and audit. Equal Employment Opportunity The Contractor hereby assures that it is, and shall be for the duration of this Agreement, in compliance with the Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972 (Public Law 92- 261), as amended. XIII. Article 15-A of The New York State Executive Law The Department of State administers a Minority and Women-owned Business Enterprises (MWBE) Program as mandated by Article 15-A of the New York State Executive Law. Al-6 This law supersedes any other provision in state law authorizing or requiring an equal employment opportunity program or a program for securing participation by minority and women-owned business enterprises. Under this law, all state agencies must, subject to certain exceptions, establish goals for minority and women-owned business participation in certain state contracts and grants. Where MWBE goals are required, even in circumstances where this goal is zero, a Quarterly Contractor Report is required to be submitted to the Minority and Women-owned Business Program of the Department on forms provided by the Department. Article 15-A requires that rules and regulations be established for contracts entered into by the Department. In accordance with Article 15-A, goals must be set for contracts entered into by the Department in excess of $25,000 for labor, services, supplies, equipment, and materials, or any combination of the foregoing, and for contracts entered into by the Department in excess of $100,000 for acquisition, construction, demolition, replacement, major repair, renovation or improvement of real property. In applying these rules and regulations, the Department must consider the availability of certified minority and women*owned businesses in the region in which the state contract will be performed, the total dollar value of the contract, the scope of work to be performed, and the project size and term. The contractor will, when required as a part of the bid or proposal, submit a Staffing Plan on the form provided by the Department. This Plan will detail the work force anticipated in the performance of the state contract reported by ethnic background, gender, and Federal Occupational Categories. After a bid opening and prior to the award ora state contract, tho contractor will submit an Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Policy Statement to the Department within the time frame established by the Department. The law requires that, as a precondition to entering into a valid and binding state contract, the contractor will agree to the following stipulations and will include them in the EEO Policy Statement: · The contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, age, disability or marital status. · The contractor will undertake or continue existing programs of affirmative action to ensure that minority group members and women are afforded equal employment opportunities without discrimination because of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, age, disability or marital status. For these purposes, affirmative action applies in areas of recmitment, employment, job assignment, promotion, upgrading, demotion, transfer, layoff, or termination and rates of pay or other forms of compensation. · The contractor will make active and conscientious efforts to employ and to utilize minority group members and women at all levels and in all segments of its work force on state contracts, and the contractor will document these efforts. · The contractor will state in all solicitations and advertisements for employees that, in the performance of the state contract, all qualified applicants will be afforded equal employment opportunities without discrimination because of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, age, disability or marital status. · The contractor will, at the request of the Department, request each employment agency, labor union, or authorized representative of workers with which it has a collective bargaining or other agreement or understanding, to furnish a written statement that such employment agency, labor union, or representative will not discriminate because of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, age, disability or marital status, and that such union or representative will affirmatively cooperate in the implementation of the contractor's obligations herein. · The contractor will include the provisions regarding the EEO Policy Statement and the Staffing Plan enumerated above in each and every subcontract of a state contract in such a manner that the subcontractor is bound by these requirements. · Failure to provide an EEO Policy Statement and a Staffing Plan without reasonable written justification or commitment to provide these requirements by a specified date will result in rejection of the contractor's bid or proposal. · After the award of a state contract, the contractor will submit to the Department a Workforce Employment Utilization Report, on the form supplied by the Department, detailing the work force actually utilized on the state contract, by ethnic background, gender and Federal Occupational Categories, as specified on the form. This Report will be submitted to the Department on a quarterly basis throughout the life of the contract. Al-7 · The contractor, and any of its subcontractors, may be required to submit compliance reports relating to their operations and implementation of their affirmative action or equal employment opportunity program in effect as of the date the state contract is executed. Questions regarding this program should be directed to the Department's Minority and Women-owned Business Program by calling (518) 474-5741. Potential contractors can access the NYS Directory of Certified Minority and Women-owned Business Enterprises on-line through the Empire State Development website at: http://x~,~v.empire.state.nv.us, double click (left column)on: NY [~ BIZ (Doing Business in New York); put the curser over: Small and Growing Business and, from that menu, click on: Minority and Women- Owned Business. From the center column, highlighted in blue, click on the bullet: "Search the Directory of Certified Minority-and Women-Owned Business Enterprises." The Department makes no representation with respect to the availability or capability of any business listed in the Directory. XIV. XV. XVI. Submission of all correspondence and documentation Al-8 The Contractor agrees to provide the Department with original and two copies of all documentation relating to this Project, including, but not limited to: notices of public meetings, products described in Appendix D, and payment request documentation as described in Appendix C. B. All information as described in A. above shall include the NYS Comptroller's # as indicated on the Face Page of this Agreement. Environmental Review Contractor agrees to provide the Department, in a timely manner, with all documentation, including but not limited to, permit applications, environmental assessments, designs, plans, studies, environmental impact statements, findings, and determinations, relating to the Project. Contractor acknowledges that compliance with the State Envirm~nental Quality Review Act is a material term and condition of this Agreement. In no event shall any payments be made under this Agreement until Contractor has provided Department with appropriate documentation that contractor has met any requirements imposed on Contractor by the State Environmental Quality Review Act. Fully-Executed Agreement or Amendment Thereto If this Agreement or amendments thereto, allocates funds totaling $15,000 or less, it shall be deemed to be fully executed when approved and signed by the Contractor and the Department. B. If this Agreement, or amendments thereto, allocates funds totaling more than $15,000 it shall be deemed to be full executed when approved by the Office of the State Comptroller. RECEIVED DIVISION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT ALBANY OFFICE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 0 Appendix Al, Attachment 1 Page -1 Final Project Summary Report Final payment of the grant is dependent upon the satisfactory completion and acceptance by the Department of State, Division of Local Government of this FINAL PROJECT SUMMARY REPORT along with the requisite documentation. In addition to the other requirements of the contract, the grant recipient is responsible to relay the importance, the significance and the value of the completed project to the community, the region and the state through the completion of the report. The following outline should be used to complete the FINAL PROJECT SUMMARY REPORT: 1. Project Title: 2. Name of Contractor: Actual Project Costs: a. State funds expended (identify source, eg. Quality Community Funds, EPF, Clean Water/Clean Air Bond Act, etc.): b. Local funds expended: c. Other funds expended: Project Manager: Name: Title: Mailing address: Tel. number: Fax number: E-mail address: Federal Tax Identification Number: Project Background: briefly explain in a short paragraph why this project was necessary, what its value is and/or its importance to the community Project Work: briefly describe the work that was done to complete the project Project Descriptions: use the following guidelines to describe the project and please be concise in the description a. For a Planning Project describe the findings strategies recommended b. For a Design Project describe what is to be built Project DocumentationdVisuals: The following guidelines are suggested for Planning and Design Projects. a. Visuals of renderings and/or graphics, newspaper articles or photographs that depict the final product or a before and after scenario. Appendix Al, Attachment 1 Page-2 Final Project Summary Report Cont. b. Photo and video documentation is encouraged but not mandalory. The video, which can be in VHS or digital format may be used in a future documentary. Photographs should be 35mm or digital. Color slides and/or digital camera discs should be labeled and dated. Appendix A 1, Attachment 2 NYS Department of State · Minority and Women-owned Business Enterprises Program 41 State Street Albany NY 12231-0001 · (518) 474- 5741 Minority and Women-owned Business Enterprises (MWBE) Program Quarterly Contractor Report INSTRUCTIONS: 1. Please prepare reports based on calendar quarters, or prepare one annual report. 2. Use a separate Report sheet for each contract or program area 3. Record the amount paid for each service/product for the time period identified below. 4. Send completed reports to the Minority and Women-owned Business Enterprises Program at the above address. REPORT PERIOD Report should cover a calendar quarter OR the program year. FROM: Enter the inclusive dates of the quarter or for the program year. -~ .-" ,' TO: CONTRACTOR NAME PROGRAM IDOS CONTRACT NUMBER Service Area of Contract Work CONTRACTOR ADDRESS NAME and TITLE of CONTACT PERSON (Please Print) TYPE of DESCRIPTION of ENDOR NAME and ADDRESS VENDOR SERVICE/PRODUCT [] MBE [] WBE [] MBE [] WBE [] MBE [3 WBE [] MBE [] WBE [] MBE [] WBE [] MBE •WBE [] MBE [] WBE [] MBE D WBE [] MBE D WBE AMOUNT PAID THIS PERIOD ( ) TELEPHONE NUMBER COMMENTS CONTRACTOR: Agreement # PROJECT STATUS As of (Submit semi-annually and with each payment request.) Appendix Al, Attachment 3 'Task# ShOuld match thetask number:in the Agreernerit work pro, ram I hdi~te if D~{~ of C~pi~tibh s ACtual 6~ TatgetD~te fO~ ~i ~iPatea ~°rnP ~t on bf the ta~k. Task Date of Percent of # AFF Completion Completion Products/Accomplishments Please note problems encountered, proposed adjustment(s) to work program/schedule, and reason(s) for proposed adjustment(s): Please provide the following information: Name of contact Person: r~'xc,.,.v-. Email Address: IrV'x0~. ~:~ ,-T~ ,'e,-J ~ ~'-O Phone Number: Q~ t..-t Lo~'~ t ~ '~ ~, FaxNumber: ~'~,' -I [~-~.- [ [ 3(,~ Appendix Al, Attachment 4 Certification of Grantee to New York State Department of State that all State and Local and Private Procurement Requirements Have Been Met. (Complete the certification in the paragraph that applies and strike out that which is not applicable) 1. I hereby certify that the (County) (City) (Town) (Village) (Other ) of , awarded the c~)ntract appended hereto pursuant in whole or in part to NYS Department of State Contract No. ~n accordance with all requirements of law and Article 5A of the General Municipal Law, as follows: (place check mark where applicable) Contract for professional services, public works contracts involving not more than $20,000 or purchase contracts involving not more than $10,000, procured according to the policies and procedures of the municipality adopted pursuant to General Municipal Law§ 104-b. Contract for public works contracts involving more than $20,000 or purchase contracts involving more than $10,000, procured pursuant to the bidding requirements of General Municipal Law{}103. Print name Signature Title Date Appendix A 1, Attachment 4, page 2 Certification of Grantee to New York State Department of State that all State and Local and Private Procurement Requirements Have Been Met 2. I hereby certif3~ that the (Insert NYC Agency or Borough name) of the City of New York awarded the contract appended hereto pursuant in whole or in part to NYS Department of State Contract No. in accordance with all requirements of law and Article 5A of the General Municipal Law, as follows:(place check mark where applicable) Contract for professional services, public works contacts involving not more than $20,000 or purchase contracts involving not more than $10,000, procured according to the rules and regulations of the Policy Procurement Board. Contracts for public works contracts involving more than $20,000 or purchase contracts involving more than $10,000, procured to the bidding requirements of General Municipal Law§ 103 and the regulations of the Procurement Policy Board. Print Name Title (Agency Chief Contracting Officer must sign) Signature Date 3. I hereby certify that the (Insert name of not-for-profit organization) awarded the contract appended hereto pursuant in whole or in part to Department of State Contract No. in accordance with all requirements of law, including the NYS Not-for-Profit Corporation law and the bylaws of this organization, and pursuant to a publicly advertised process to ensure the prudent and economical use of public funds to obtain maximum quality at reasonable cost. Print Name Title Signature Date APPENDIX B Budget Budget Summary Sheet A. SALARIES, WAGES AND FRINGE $ 19,100 B. TRAVEL $ 0 C. SUPPLIES/MATERIALS $ 0 D. EQUIPMENT $ 0 E. CONTRACTUAL SERVICES $ 55,900 TOTAL $ '75,000 STATE FUNDING $ 60,000 LOCAL SHARE $ 15,000 The TOTAL of your BUDGET and the State funding and local share amounts must equal the amounts on the CONTRACT FACE PAGE! The BUDGET is intended to show the items of expense which will be funded under this Contract plus the local share amount. Please do not show the entire cost of the project if it exceeds the amount of funding provided by this Contract, plus the minimum required local share amount. Please be advised that where there is a conflict between Appendix B and Appendix E, concerning the budget, Appendix B shall control. Budget Detail Sheet A. SALARIES, WAGES AND FRINGE Title Patricia Finnigan, Town Attorney Mark Terry, Acting Department Head, Project Manager Anthony Trezza, Senior Planner Melissa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator John Sepenoski, Technical Coordinator Amount Charged to this Pr~ect $7,000 $5,600 ___$2,100__ $1,900 __.$2,500 TOTAL SALARIES, WAGES AND FRINGE $ !9,100 B. TRAVEL Please indicate destination, purpose and cost of such travel. TOTAL TRAVEL $ 0 Budget Detail Sheet C. SUPPLIES/MATERIALS Please use general categories such as office supplies, printing supplies, and like category descriptions. Indicate the cost of each category. TOTAL SUPPLIES/MATERIALS $ 0 D. EQUIPMENT Please list each item of equipment that exceeds $200.00 per item and has a useful life of one year or more. Group items of less than $200.00 each into general categories indicating total cost per category. TOTAL EQUIPMENT $ 0 Budget Detail Sheet E. CONTRACTUAL SERVICES This category includes items such as, postage, rental or repairs to equipment, lease of equipment and contracted services. The Town of Southold will hire a Consultant to accomplish the majority of the work plan outlined in this grant application. Please see attached document that outlines the work of each task. Task 1 Creation of TDR Work Group Task 2 Program Foundation Task 3 Draft Local Law Task 1,2 and 3:$17,400 Note, that part of Task 3 is reflected in the above amount. The Town Attorney on staffwill accomplish the majority of work outlined in Task 3 and review the products of Task 4. Task 4 State Environmental Quality Review Act Task 4:$38,500 The total costs of the outlined tasks that will be achieved through contractual services is $50,400. TOTAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES $ 55,900__ APPENDIX C Payment and Reporting Schedule I. Payment Schedule The Department shall make interim payments for eligible costs incurred up to an amount not to exceed 90% of the State Funds Awarded. The final payment will be made upon satisfactory completion of the Project activities funded pursuant to this Agreement. Not more frequently than once every 30 days, a properly executed payment request, on forms as prescribed by the Department, a program progress report, and any work products documenting completion of one or more of the tasks set forth in Appendix D, Program Workplan, and total project costs incurred to date, may be submitted. Payment provided above shall be made to the Contractor upon the submission by the Contractor of properly executed payment request. Such request shall contain the following: (a) "Summary Sheet Documentation Forms" as provided by the Department, for reimbursement of actual and eligible expenditures, (b) the required report and work products, and c) a properly executed State Voucher. Payment requests will be reviewed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement to determine total allowable project costs incurred and the level of project completion to date. For the purpose of determining the level of reimbursement, otherwise allowable project costs may be reduced if the level of project completion is deemed insufficient. Total allo~vable project costs, adjusted pursuant to 2. above, will be prorated between State Funds and Local Share costs in the same proportions as Total State Funds is to Total Local Share as set forth on the Face Page. Interim payments will be issued in amounts equal to the allowable project costs incurred as calculated in 2. above, less all previous payments to date. II. Reporting The final payment will be issued upon receipt and approval of a payment request marked "FINAL" documenting all project costs incurred and tasks completed and submission of the Final Project Summary Report. Such final payment request shall be submitted within 60 days following the ending date of this Agreement. By submission ora payment request as described in I.B. above, the Contractor certifies the information accurately represents such accomplishments and expenses as recorded in the Contractor's accounting records, including, where goods or services are provided by third parties not party to this Agreement, a certification that any payment obligations arising from the provision of such goods or services have been paid by the Contractor and do not duplicate reimbursement or costs and services received from other sources. B. Notwithstanding the above requirements, upon written notification by the Department, the Contractor may be required to submit source documentation and additional verification of III. allowable expenditures. Appendix C, page 2 Payment requests shall be submitted to: New York State Department of State Division of Local Government - QCP 41 State Street - 9th Floor Albany, New York, 12231-0001 Attention: Quality Communities Contract Coordinator Claimed expenditures per cost category may not exceed the amounts indicated in the Budget, Appendix B, by ten percent (10%) without approval of the Department, provided that the Total Project Cost as set forth in Appendix B, Budget Summary is not exceeded. Any expenditure in excess of such 10% or that changes the State Share or Local Share funding amount shall require an amendment to the Project Budget submitted in writing by the Contractor and approved by the Department. No expenditures shall be allowed for items not set forth in the Project Budget without written approval of the Department. Other Notwithstanding the submission of timely and properly executed payment requests, the Department shall be under no obligation to make payment for expenditures incurred without the prior Department approvals and/or amendments required under this Agreement and, further, shall have the right to withhold any such payment pending the execution of such approval and/or amendment. Interest income earned on funds received pursuant to this Agreement shall be used to further the purpose of this Project or shall be deducted from total eligible cost to determine the net eligible costs to be reimbursed by the Department. The Department shall have the right to conduct on-site progress assessments and reviews of the Project and Contractor's books and records during the life of this Agreement and for a reasonable time following issuance of the FINAL payment. The Contractor shall furnish proper facilities, where necessary or useful, for such access and inspection. The Department shall be entitled to disallow any cost or expense, or terminate or suspend this Agreement, if found that the Contractor has misrepresented any expenditures or project activities in this Agreement, or in any progress reports or payment requests made pursuant hereto. The Contractor shall maintain separate fiscal books and records for all funds received through the Department and project activities conducted pursuant to this Agreement, and shall make all such books and records available to the Depamnent, the Office of the State Comptroller, or their designated representatives for inspection and audit for a period of six years following termination of this Agreement. By submission of this Agreement and payment requests provided for herein Contractor warrants that funds claimed and received pursuant to this Agreement do not duplicate reimbursements or payments from any other source. APPENDIX D PROGRAM WORK PLAN (To Be Developed By Contractor in Consultation with DOS) 1. Project Description Brief summary of project, geographic area, panners, goals and objectives, studies, history of project, relationship to other projects etc. 2. Proiect Components A. Initial scoping meeting (determine whether project advisory committee to be formed). B. Procurement (must be in accord w/Municipality's procurement policy). (i) If project is to be performed by a consultant and subject to competitive bid, the Contractor shall prepare Draft RFP for DOS review. Identify separate tasks and deliverables with a schedule for completion for each and associated costs. Items which should be considered by Contractor include: (i) Public participation process (ii) Other tasks and deliverables based upon application and scoping meeting. Depending on nature of project, tasks and deliverables could include: g. h. i. J. Vision Statement Maps/GIS Intermunicipal agreement Inventory of conditions Economic or market analysis Land use plan or functional plan Action plan/strategies Designs and plans Local laws or ordinances Other 3. Review and Status DOS shall review Project Components for consistency with the application and scoping meeting. Contractor shall provide Project Status Reports every six months and when payment is requested. Please build these reports into the work schedule. Please attach additional pages as necessary. Town of Southold Work Program for the New York State Quality Communities Program TDR Grant The Town of Southold was approved for a $60,000 grant from the New York State Quality Communities Program (2005-2006) for the development and implementation ora town-wide Transfer of Development Rights Program (TDR). The TDR Program will be an important implementation strategy for the Town's Comprehensive Plan, Hamlet Study and Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. It is expected that the Town's TDR Program will use market forces to promote conservation in high-value natural, agricultural, and open space areas while encouraging smart growth in developed and developing sections in each of the Hamlet Centers and HALO Zones. The primary goal of the TDR Program is to produce a voluntary approach to preserving lands that provides a public benefit and gives landowners the opportunity to financially benefit from their property without having to sell or develop it. The TDR Program will allow the Town to focus development in areas capable of handling additional growth, while minimizing impacts on the environment and public services. A successful TDR Program would further the following Town goals: Preserve Southold's prime farmland and encourage the continuation and diversification of agriculture as an important element in the life and economy of the Town (1985 Master Plan Update). To preserve land, including farmland, open space and recreational landscapes (2006 Hamlet Study). Most of the grant money is proposed to be used for consulting services for the creation and implementation of the Transfer of Development Rights Program, including the SEQRA review for the project. The Town has retained the firm of Nelson, Pope and Voorhis, LLC for this project, with Charles Voorhis as the lead consultant providing the services. The work program is set up into four major tasks, along with several snbtasks, that are designed to bring the project from inception through completion. TASK 1: CREATION OF THE TDR WORK GROUP (April 2006 - September 20O7) A TDR Work Group was created to assist Charles Voorhis with the technical components of the program and to ensure that the Town was directly involved with its development. Because of the Town's existing catalogue of planning studies, demographic information and the general expertise of professional staff, it was determined that this would be the most effective way to facilitate the program's creation. The Work Group is made up of professional staff and includes members of the Planning Board, Land Preservation, Planning and Zoning Committee, Code Committee and the Town Board. The time spent on these meetings will be calculated into the Town's match for this grant. The product of this task is the creation of the TDR Work Group, which has been meeting on a regular basis to conduct a comprehensive inventory and analysis of the available data that wi#provide the framework for the program as described in Task 2. TASK 2: PROGAM FOUNDATION (April 2006-June 2007) PRODUCT 1: Report on the Transfer of Development Right Program Foundation Based upon the inventory and analysis of the various data collected by the members of the Work Group, the following technical issues relating to the creation of a TDR Program will be addressed: A. How will the TDR Program work? B. Who will benefit from the program? C. How much do TDRs cost? D. How is the value of a TDR established? E. Is the program voluntary or mandatory? F. What will be the Town's role in implementing and monitoring the program? G. How do I participate ifI own land within a Sending Area? H. How do I participate ifI own land within a Receiving Area? I. How can the TDRs be used within the Receiving Areas? J. Where are the Sending Areas located and how are they to be established? K. Where are the Receiving Areas located and how are they to be established? L. How does the TDR Program impact other Land Preservation Programs? M. What are the implications with regard to existing zoning and possible recommended zone changes? N. How do Suffolk County Department of Health Services regulations impact the TDR Program? O. An analysis of the advantages and disadvantages that a TDR Program would have on commercial use. P. An analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of including only agricultural use or both agricultural and open space use in a TDR Program. Q. An analysis of the TDR credit balance between the Sending and Receiving Areas. R. Definition and development of the mechanics of the program. It is expected that the above-mentioned issues relating to the development of a TDR Program will be combined and presented in one or more reports/studies, as follows: PRODUCT 2: Report on the Delineation and Modeling of the Sending Areas A. Identify and exclude un-buildable lands (wetlands). Many of the Town's resources are inventoried and mapped. Computerized maps made possible by computerized Geographic Information System (GIS) are an objective and accurate information source available for this type of resource documentation. B. Establish criteria to and eligibility for Sending Area parcels. C. Identify and map the parcels that are designated as the Sending Area. PRODUCT3: Report on the Delineation, Modeling and Design of the Receiving Areas A. Identify the infrastructure that will be available to support the increased density and growth. The three main types of infrastructure that must be designed are facilities for public sewer, public water, and public transportation. B. Establish parcel eligibility parameters for Receiving Areas. C. Establish the Receiving Area (HALO Zones) maps for each Hamlet. D. Establish development and open space goals within the Receiving Areas. E. Establish affordable housing goals in the Receiving Areas. F. Mathematically model the residential build-out in the Receiving Areas based upon ½ acre zoning. G. Identify the type or types of development (housing) in the Receiving Areas that best meets the goals of the community. PRODUCT 4: Report on the Value and Allocation of Transfer of Development Rights A. Identify the value of a Development Right. B. Identify the marketability of the Development Rights in terms of the amount that a developer in the Receiving Areas is willing to pay to build an additional dwelling unit. C. Identify the method for the allocation of Development Rights. PRODUCT 5: Analysis of Implications of a Transfer of Development Rights Program on Current Town Preservation Plans and Current Town Zoning. A. Assess a Transfer of Development Rights Program to local zoning ordinances or laws and the Town of Southold Comprehensive Plan. B. Analyze the positive and negative impact that a Transfer of Development Rights Program would have on existing Town Preservation Programs. C. Develop the structure for tracking protocol for recording Transfer of Development Rights transactions. D. Identify the method for the execution and filing of Conservation Easements on land in the sending district whose Development Rights have been purchased under the program TASK 3: DRAFT LOCAL LAW (June 2007) TASK 4: STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT (July-September 2007) Once the TDR Program has been drafted and accepted by the Town, the SEQRA review for the project will commence Task 4a. Project start-up and preparation of Full Environmental Assessment Form Parts I and II This involves several initial meetings, preliminary research, and preparation of initial process documents and EAF forms. The form can be circulated to interested agencies and parties of interest under SEQRA notice and filing requirements in order to advise the public and agencies of the Town's intent. The Town Board is the only agency that can implement the action, and therefore will assume lead agency status. The Town Board will provide a "proposed action" or program that will identify the initiative. The product of this task is the completed Environmental Assessment Form Parts I and II. Task 4b. Project Classification and Issuance of Determination of Significance The type of action proposed mandates the preparation of a Draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (DSGEIS). The action involves the adoption of a Land Use Program that has town-wide implications and affects a large area of land. As a result, the project is classified as a Type I Action, thereby requiting the preparation ora GEIS. The Town should issue a Positive Declaration, which identifies the key issues. Key issues are expected to include benefits of transfer parcels and potential impacts on receiving parcels, shift in density, traffic, in-fill development, socio-economic benefits of housing and potential socio-economic issues involved with density relocation. It is expected that a Draft Supplemental GEIS will be the most appropriate way to solicit input and subject the program to an orderly review process designed to obtain and factor in public and agency input in decision making. The product of this task is a Positive Declaration. Task 4c. Scoping Process (optional) The proposal should be subject to public scoping. A Draft Scope should be circulated and a date set for a public scoping meeting to solicit input on additions or revisions to the draft scoping document. Once the meeting and any follow-up written comments are completed, the draft scope should be revised accordingly and issued as a final scope in accordance with Part 617.8(0. The product of this task is a Drqft and Final Scope. Task 4d. Preparation of a Draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement A Draft SGEIS will be prepared that presents the proposed program in the Description of the Proposed Project in Section 1.0, summarizes the Town's important environmental resources relating to the proposed action in Section 2.0, and analyzes the impacts of adoption of the proposed action in Section 3.0. Additional major sections include Mitigation Measures and Altematives to the proposed action. Additional sections required to complete a comprehensive Generic EIS should be included. The product of this task is a Draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement. Task 4e. Processing of Draft SGEIS and Preparation of Final Supplemental EIS The Draft SGEIS will be reviewed in conjunction with Town Staff to determine acceptability and indicate revisions as appropriate or necessary. After acceptance, the Draft SGEIS will be circulated in accordance with Part 617.9 and a public hearing on the Draft SGEIS will be held no sooner that 15 days from document acceptance. The comment period will be no less than 30 days in length, or no less than 10 days after the pubic heating. Written comments as well as public hearing comments will be accepted by the Lead Agency. Comments on the Draft SGEIS will be reviewed and summarized. A Final SGEIS will be prepared, which includes a response to each substantive comment on the Draft SGEIS. The Final SGEIS will be reviewed by Town Staff to determine acceptability and indicate revisions as appropriate or necessary. The Final SGEIS will be circulated in accordance with Part 617.9 and will be considered for no less than 10 days prior to preparation and filing of the Findings Statement. The product o['this task is a Final Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement. Task 41. Preparation of Findings Statement Findings will conform to Part 617.11 and 617.10(c) for Generic EIS's. Findings will identify the conformance of the project review with SEQRA requirements and will discuss and weigh the social, environmental and economic issues for pertinent resource areas. Findings will set forth conditions or criteria under which future actions will be undertaken or approved, including requirements for any subsequent SEQRA compliance. The product of this task is a Findings Statement. Once these steps are complete, the Town will be in a position to initiate the program (or a modified program if changes are discerned through the SEQRA process. Southold Transfer of Development Rights Amendments Staff Duties for Quality Communities Project Mark Terry, Acting Department Head, Project Manager - Mr. Terry will act as Project Manager of the grant application and work plan overseeing all aspects of the application. He is a member of the work group created to facilitate the development of the Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program which will meet on a weekly- biweekly basis. Mr. Terry will work closely with Mr. John Sepenoski, Technical Coordinator in developing a Geographic Information System land use model to establish TDR Receiving Zones within the hamlets of the Town. He will also participate in the assessment and evaluation of the program to the Town of Southold existing zoning codes and land uses. It is expected that most of Mr. Terry's time will be allocated to Task II: Program Foundation. The budgeted amount for this task is $5,600. Anthony Trezza, Senior Planner - Mr. Trezza represents the Planning Board in the work group and participates in weekly and biweekly meetings of the group. Mr. Trezza will provide scenarios of subdivisions to model the potential effects a TDR program would have on the subdivision review process. Most of Mr. Trezza's time will be allocated to Task II: Program Foundation. The budgeted amount for this task is $2,100. Melissa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator - Ms. Spiro represents the Land Preservation Department in the work group and participates weekly and biweekly meeting of the group. Ms. Spiro will work with Mr. John Sepenoski, Technical Coordinator in the development Geographic Information System land use model identifying the TDR Sending Zones. Most of Ms. Spiro's time will be allocated to Task II: Program Foundation. The budgeted amount for this task is $!,900. John Sepenoski, Technical Coordinator - Mr. Sepenoski is the Town of Southold Geographic Information Systems Coordinator. He is a member of the work group and will participate in the weekly/biweekly meeting of the group. Mr. Sepenoski is expected to produce a series of maps and data sets to base work group decisions upon. Also as discussed above Mr. Sepenoski is involved in the modeling both the sending and receiving areas. Most of Mr. Sepenoski time will be allocated to Task II: Program Foundation. The budgeted amount for this task is $2,500. Patricia Finnegan, Toxvn Attorney: Ms Finnegan is a member of the work group created to facilitate the development of the Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program which will meet on a weekly-biweekly basis. Ms. Finnegan will work closely with the Consultant in developing a local law that will establish TDR Receiving Zones within the hamlets, sending zones and TDR credit redemption. She will also participate in the assessment and evaluation of the program to the Town of Southold existing zoning codes and land uses. It is expected that most of Ms. Finnegan's time will be allocated to Task 1II: Drafting Local Law and reviewing and presenting products to the Town Board which are submitted by the Consultant. The total for amount appropriated to this work is $7,000. APPENDIX E GRANT APPLICATION Insert Appendix E here. RECEIVED Di¥1$tON OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT OCT 0 4 2007 DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FUND' APPLICATION FOR STATE ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS NEW YORK STATE QUALITY COMMUNITIES PROGRAM, YEAR 2005-2006 PLEASE CONTINUE ON ADDITIONAL SHEETS AS NECESSARY 1. APPLICANT: I ~ Town of Southold City - Town - Village - County - Local Public Authority - Public Benefil Corporation - Indian Tribe/Nation - Not-For-Profit Corporation: 2~ APPLICTANT MAILING ADD-RESS7 p ~ Box i i 79 ............ q (no. & street) 54375 NYS Route 25 (-C!t~) I Southold l NY (zip) T- 119 71 ---[ PHONE: 3. FEDERAL TAX IDENTIFICATION No. 111-6001939 NYS CHARITIES REGISTRATION No./~ 4. CONTACT PERSON: I Mark Terry _TITLE: ,Interim Planning Director 5. PHONE: ~(]63i V)] 765-1930 ~FAX: i (1631 ]~)~765-3136 IMark. Terry@ t own. southold, ny. us I .......... 7' ~ONTACT ~AiIA~AD~RES~-i'if differen~ fr-o'n appJJc~iJ~) ' 'I (no. & street~ ] (city)7' NY ~zlp) I PART B - GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION il. PROJECT NAME: Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program - Development ,2. PROJECT LULAIIUN: COUNTY: Suffolk and Implementation NEW YORK STATE SENATE DISTRICT: SD 1 NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY DIS'~RiCT: AD ' 3. PROJECT TYPE: intermunic~pal Growti~ P~'c;gram Community Center Program Community Growth Program Community Open Space Program Mountain Communities Program 1. Proposed Start Date: [Februarff 1, 2006 2. Expected Completion Date: August 1, 2006 3. Total ProjectV Costs:---- '$ ~]95 000-- + - ~i 4. State-- Assistance- Requested:-- $ ~'] 7~ ann ? 5. Local ~eh: .... !~ ~ ~-,-,~- Is your m~nic,pahtfi~tent,'fied as;n econ~micall~ distr;ssed mur~ici~ality, Y;;' ~9 ~i ~ ,,~,,u. ~Resolut~on ts attached. 9 Resolution will be submitted by ,2005 I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury that information provided on this form and attached statements and exhibits is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. False statements made herein are punishable as a Class A misdemeanor pursuant to Section 210.45 of the Penal law. Print name: ! ....... [ wiii~--[Sr. Planner i °f(entlty) ! ........... Town of Southold iAnthon~v Trezza Date i .... 7Sigeature / ___ · December !, 2005 ~ ~ee ~htenee~i describe th~ projeei type, pUrp0se and ibeaii6n the freed for t~& Projeel: and wha~ ~i p~dj~et i~ ~d~rtak~n~ Typehere: Proposal is to develop a Town-wide Transfer of Development Rights Program (TDR) as an implementation tool for the Town's Comprehensive Plan, including the Hamlet Study and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP). The TDR Program is a necessary mechanism for the Town to meet its preservation goals while at the same time accomodating new growth and promoting strong economic development. This initiative will preserve farm- land and open space, direct new development to appropriate areas in each of the hamlets, and provide incentives for property owners and developers to participate in the program. ype ere. Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - Type,here: Please - See Attachment - 4 Type here: Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - Please - See Attachment Type here: Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - Typehere: A consultant has not yet been chosen for this project. The Planning Department / is currently working with the Town Board in determining who will be contracted to do the work. In-House Staff: Mark Terry, Interim Planning Director Anthony Trezza, Senior Planner Melissa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator John Sepenoski, Technical Coordinator PART J - ADDITIONAL WEIGttI'ING Indicate if the applicant is eligible to receive additional weighting Are you a Greenway Compact Community? 9 Dutchess County 9 Town of Amenia 9 City of Beacon 9 Town of Beekman 9 Town of Clinton 9 Town of Dover 9 Town of East Fishkill 9 Town of Fishkill 9 Village of Fishkill 9 Town of Hyde Park 9 Town of LaGrange 9 Town of Milan 9 Village of Millerton 9 Town of North East 9 Town of Pa~vling 9 Village of Pawling 9 Town of Pine Plains 9 Town of Pleasant Valley 9 Town of Poughkeepsie 9 City of Poughkeepsi_e 9 Town of Red Hook 9 Village of Red Hook 9 Town of Rhinebeck 9 Village of Rhinebeck 9 Village of Tivoli 9 Town of Union Vale 9 Town of Wappinger 9 Village of Wappingers Falls 9 Westchester County 9 Village of Buchanan 9 Town of Cortlandt 9 Village of Croton-on-Hudson 9 Town of North Salem 9 Town of Ossining 9 City of Peekskill 9 Village of Tarrytown D Village of Briarcliff Manor [] Town of Somers ~ Town of Yorktown ELIZABETH NEVILLE TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER 53095 Main Road PO Box 1 179 Southold, NY 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone: (631) 765-1800 southoldtown.north fork.net RESOLUTION # 2005-736 Resolution ID: 1319 Meeting: 11/22/05 07:30 PM Department: Town Clerk Category: Grants THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2005-736 OF 2005 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON NOVEMBER 22, 2005: RESOLVED that the Southold Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Southoid Town Planning Board to submit an application to the Department of State Quality Communities Program (2005-2006} for Environmental Protection Funds to develop local laws, land use regulations and provide graphic support to implement the Town of Southold Comprehensive Plan documents including the Town of Southold Hamlet Study, and be it further RESOLVED that the Southold Town Board authorizes and directs the Supervisor to execute all financial and/or administrative processes, and WHEREAS, the funds solicited through this program will be used for the purposes of or development of local laws, land use regulations and graphic support to implement the Town of Southold Comprehensive Plan documents including the Town of Southold Hamlet Study in an amount not to exceed up to $75,000 (seventy- five thousand dollars) and that the town wilI commit up to $15,000 (fifteen thousand dollars) in match (the match will include in-house staff salaries, copying and materials), now therefore be it RESOLVED that the Town of Southold supports this proiect to develop local laws~ land use regulations and provide graphic support to implement the Town of Southold Comprehensive Plan documenIs including the Town of Southold Hamlet Study. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk Town of Southold Suffolk County, New York Application for New York State Quality Communities Grant Program The Town of Southold's Comprehensive Plan is a series of planning initiatives undertaken over the past 20 years, including most recently the Hamlet Study and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan (LWRP). The Comprehensive Plan establishes a group of fundamental goals that, together, provide the underpinnings of Southold's future vision. These goals are: to preserve land, including farmland, open space and recreational landscapes; to preserve the rural, cultural and historic character of the hamlets surrounding the countryside; to preserve the Town's remaining natural environment, to prevent further deterioration of the Town's natural resources and to restore the Town's degraded and natural resources back to their previous quality; to preserve and promote a range of housing and business opportunities that supports a socio- economically diverse community; to increase transportation efficiency and to create alternatives to automobile travel, while preserving the scenic and historic attributes of roads in the Town. The primary goals of the recently adopted Hamlet Study was to formally delineate the Hamlet Centers and HALO zones, evaluate the technical and practical feasibility of redirecting potential future growth from the agricultural and open space areas of the Town toward the hamlets, and also to critically evaluate the Hamlet Centers themselves, to define strengths and weaknesses with an eye toward enhancement, improvement and revitalization. To transfer development into the Hamlet Centers and HALO zones in accordance with the recommendations made in the Hamlet Study, the development and implementation of a Transfer of Development Rights program is needed. Therefore, the Town of Southold is eager to establish a TDR program as one implementation strategy of the Hamlet Study. Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) programs use market forces to simultaneously promote conservation in high value natural, agricultural, and open space areas while encouraging smart growth in developed and developing sections of a community. Successful TDR programs have been in place throughout the country since 1980, and have protected tens of thousands of acres of farmland and open space. PART F- PROJECT PARTNERS It is anticipated that much of the funding will be used for consulting services. The consultants we retain will work closely with the Town, particularly the Planning Department. However, it is also expected that the Southold Town Board, Land Preservation Department, the Suffolk County Department of Health Services and the Suffolk County Water Authority will have limited roles in the project, primarily providing information on an "as need" basis. The folloxving is the contact information of those who may be participants in this project: Southold Town Board Joshua Horton, Supervisor 53095 NYS Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 631-765-1889 Southold Town Land Preservation Department Melissa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator 54375 NYS Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 631-765-5711 Suftblk County Dept. of Health Walter Hilbert, Chief Engineer 360 Yaphank Avenue, Suite 2C Yaphank, NY 11980 631-852-5700 Suffolk County Water Authority Stephen Jones, Chief Executive Officer 4060 Sunrise Highway Oakdale, NY 11769 631-563-0219 PART G- WORK PROGRAM The quest for controlled growth requires creative planning and foresight: Transfer of development rights is just one tool used in the battle to contain sprawl. TDR is the exchange of zoning privileges from areas with low population needs, such as farmland, to areas of high population needs, such as the Hamlet Centers. These transfers allow for the preservation of open spaces and historic landmarks, while giving the Hamlet Centers areas a chance to expand and experience continued growth. There are three basic elements to a TDR program: the sending district, the receiving district, and the TDR credits themselves. In developing the TDR program, we are expecting that the consultant(s) will exanfine the following: 1. How will the TDR Program work? 2. Who benefits from this program? 3. How much do TDR's cost? 4. How is the value of the TDR's established? 5. Is the program voluntary or mandatory? 6. What will be the Town's role in implementing and monitoring the program? 7. How do I participate ifI own land within a Sending Area? 8. How do I participate ifI own land in a Receiving Area? 9. How can the TDR's be used on the Receiving Area properties? 10. Where are the Sending Areas located? Where are the Receiving Areas located? It is anticipated that the work will begin in early February of 2006 and will be completed by August of 2006. A more detailed schedule of the work to be completed will be provided to the Town once the consultant has prepared a proposal. It is expected that much of the grant money will be used for consulting services. However, we do intend to use a portion of the money for additional in- house costs, educational materials, and travel expenses. The Town is committing up to $15,000 in matching funds to include in-house staff salaries, copying and materials. We will update the Community Preservation 2 Project Plan, reassess the water main map and determine if amendments are needed, and continuously review the progress made by the consultants who are developing the TDR program. All SEQRA related work will be completed by the Planning Department, with the exception of the preparation of an EIS, which will be completed by the consultant if one is required. In addition, the Town's match will be combined with a~ion~oo_f the gr~_nt_money for additional travel expenses, ~.~in-h0~e software upgrad~s¥ PART H- GRANT SELECTION CRITERIA The following is a description of the how the proposed project is consistent with each of the Quality Communities Grant Program grant selection criteria. 1. Public Investment The development and implementation of a TDR program is consistent with the public investment grant selection criteria. Once developed in accordance with the recommendations made in Hamlet Study, the TDR program will allow new development to be transferred into the Hamlet Centers and HALO zones based on their ability to absorb additional density without overtaxing the community's infrastructure. These areas have adequate roads, water service, utilities and schools, or the capacity to develop such services to the extent necessary to accommodate the additional density. This will help to minimize the additional public costs of new development as well as mitigate the potential adverse environmental impacts that the development would have in other areas of the Town. 2. Economic Develo£ment Economic development is a key component of a successful TDR program. The transfer of development fights allow for the preservation of agricultural land, open spaces and historic landmarks, while giving the Hamlet Centers a chance to expand and experience continued growth. The Hamlet Center is the first and foremost area of commercial activity, a business district. Fostering an appropriate level of business enterprise is critical to the ultimate sustainability of the Hamlet Centers. However, in order to enhance the economic vitality of the Town's business districts, there must be a population to support local businesses. The TDR program will encourage new development to occur within the Town's existing Hamlet Centers and HALO zones, where adequate infrastructure is in place or provisions for additional services have already been made. In addition, the TDR program will promote the use or reuse of existing buildings and sites within the Hamlet Centers and HALO zones, to create a mix of commercial and residential uses that would otherwise be difficult to accomplish under our current zoning regulations. 3. Conservation and Restoration The establishment of a TDR program is wholly consistent with the conservation and restoration grant selection criteria. A TDR progrmn is a land use tool that protects an area designated for preservation where little or no development is permitted by shifting development potential to other growth areas more suitable for development, such as the Town's Hamlet Centers and HALO zones with services close by. TDRs can be used to save historic structures from demolition, prevent the undesirable development of farmland, and preserve unique environmental areas and scenic vistas. After the transfer of TDRs, future use of the sending parcel is restricted by easements or deed restriction. The program will limit future use to the existing use, whether it be agricultural or farmland, historical building, open space, or environmentally sensitive land/wetlands with an easement. 4. Partnership The Town of Southold prides itself on its reputation for establishing close working relationships with other government agencies, non-profit organizations and private developers. It is one of our philosophies that more can be accomplished when all of the "players" involved in a project work together towards reaching common goals. The creation of a TDR program will enhance our ability to continue to provide quality public service. For example, the Town is currently working with several non-profit organizations and private developers on a number of affordable housing developments. Although these projects are consistent with the goals and objectives of the Town's Comprehensive Plan, they have become difficult to achieve without an appropriate land use tool in place to allow for higher density development. The implementation ofa TDR program will allow those projects to come to fruition without having to modify the entire zoning ordinance. In addition, the increased growth we are anticipating in the Hamlet Centers may have an impact on the Town's transportation network, which includes local roads, state and county highways, and a mass transit system including bus and train services. Increasing public transportation opportunities within the Hamlet Centers will reduce the dependence on individual passenger vehicles, thereby reducing roadway congestion and associated pollution, and will also reinforce the Town's smart growth policies. However, in order to increase the ridership of mass transportation, there must be a population to support its use. The creation ofa TDR program will allow the Town to work closer with other agencies to develop a transportation network that will ultimately support the use of public transportation, thereby mitigating some of the traffic impacts that new development has brought to the east end of Long Island. Prior to codification of any TDR program, the Town will address the important issue of inter-jurisdictional cooperation to establish the necessary water and sewer infrastructure, adequate public facilities and development standards in the receiving areas. The Town will also undertake a TDR public education program so that when the above issues are adequately addressed, codification of the actual program would be more effective due to heightened public awareness. 5. Community Livability When developed in accordance with the Town's Comprehensive Plan, TDRs will enhance the livability of each of the Town's unique communities but directing new development into the most appropriate areas under a strict set of dcsign guidelines. The 4 alternative to cookie-cutter development, which is typical on Long Island, is to concentrate allowable development in certain areas within the community and to protect the remainder as open space or environmentally conserved land. TDR promotes compact development patterns because the development potential of protected areas is combined with the development potential of nonsensitive areas and those nonsensitive areas are then developed at a greater density than normally allowed. In turn, this will promote more new housing in HALO zones and Hamlet Centers, which reduces the costs of services and facilities by concentrating development. In addition, the Town has in place a comprehensive and aggressive affordable housing program that will become increasingly successful with the implementation of the TDR program. With respect to downtown revitalization, one way for the Town's businesses to experience significant economic growth is to ensure there is a population to support them. By transferring development into the Hamlet Centers and HALO zones, local businesses will benefit from an increasing population that lives near them. This will also create additional employment opportunities and provide a range of housing types for an increasingly diverse population. The TDR can provide additional housing in the form of accessory apartments above offices or retail stores; it may provide an opportunity for senior housing within walking distance of a Hamlet Center or mass transit hub; or it may result in the creation of"starter homes" for the Town's workforce. 6. Transportation The TDR program will support a variety of transportation choices that will improve health and quality of life, reduce automobile dependency, traffic congestion and automobile pollution. Through the TDR program, the Town will be able to concentrate development within waking distances of the Hamlet Centers and mass transit hubs. Continued patterns of suburban sprawl will only exacerbate traffic problems, leaving many with no options other than to drive from one place to another. With an increasing population living near the Hamlet Centers as a result of a successful TDR program, use of mass transit or other means of non-automobile travel will increase. 7. Consistency The Hamlet Study specifically calls for new development to be concentrated within the designated Hamlet Centers and HALO zones. However, as part of the Town's policies of enacting smart growth principles, and to be consistent with creating a density neutral program, it was determined that the best way to facilitate this development is through a TDR program rather than a change of zone or through the traditional zoning ordinance. A change of zone, if granted, would give a property owner or developer an "as-of-right" increase in density without having to transfer it from a parcel land that is slated for preservation. A TDR program, on the other hand, will result in a development pattern that is consistent with the Town's policies of both accommodating growth and preserving land. In addition, the TDR program will ensure better predictability in land use regulations and procedures by eliminating the need to obtain variances or changes of zone, which can often be inconsistent from one applicant to another, depending on the nature of the reviewing Board. TDR is consistent with the Town's planning efforts to further the conservation and preservation of natural and undeveloped areas, wildlife, flora and habitats for endangered species; the preservation of agricultural resources; protection of ground water, surface water and groundwater quality, as well as the other natural resources of the Town; balanced economic growth; the provision of adequate capital facilities, including transportation, water supply, and solid, sanitary and hazardous waste disposal facilities; the coordination of the provision of adequate capital facilities with the achievement of other goals; the development of an adequate supply of affordable housing; and the preservation of historical, cultural, archaeological, architectural and recreational values. & Sustainability The development and implementation of the TDR program will provide for broad-based public involvement of community-based organizations, neighborhood groups, not-for- profit organizations, private property owners and developers. TDRs provide a development solution with multiple benefits. The developers achieve greater profits from the higher level of development. The not-for-profit is able to achieve higher densities, thereby ensuring a permanent stock of affordable housing. The sending site owners are able to liquidate the development potential of their properties while still using these properties for non-development and, in some cases, income-producing activities. Finally, the community itself is able to implement its preservation goals without relying exclusively on tax revenues and other traditional funding sources, which are often difficult to adopt. Given the Town's successful grassroots approach to community planning, combined with our ongoing efforts to educate the public about important planning initiatives, we expect that the TDR program will have a very strong educational component to it. The Town of Southold often sponsors public seminars and forums when new planning initiatives are undertaken that will have a profound impact in how the community will grow in the future. 9. Regional Significance The TDR program will preserve land, direct new development to the Town's business districts and surrounding areas, and help to advance our affordable housing efforts. These issues are not only being addressed by the Town of Southold through the implementation of our Comprehensive Plan, but have also become part of regional effort to improve the quality of life for all the residents of Suffolk County. Suffolk County has adopted very progressive land preservation, economic development and affordable housing programs to assist local municipalities in their efforts to address the issues that concern local citizens. The development of a local TDR program will further advance those initiatives. In addition, the Town has developed a public water plan, endorsed by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services and the Suffolk County Water Authority. This plan 6 outlines the locations where public water is currently provided or is planned for future expansions. The TDR program will be developed in accordance with this plan. Any updates to the water main map will be reflected in the TDR program. The creation of a TDR program will ensure an appropriate balance between development and open space protection within a regional context. TDR programs can achieve numerous land use goals ranging from growth management to the preservation of agricultural land, open space, natural wetlands, forest areas, or historic landmarks. Residents benefit from TDR programs because they can preserve important resources at minimal cost. Landowners can benefit because they can sell the use rights and receive compensation for not using or developing their property. Non-residents, who are large contributors of a very active agri-tourism industry, will continue to support the economy as long as the resources that exist are protected and preserved for future use. 10. Innovation, Comprehensiveness The Town of Southold has identified community opportunities and constraints through the development of the Hamlet Study, the LWRP and other Comprehensive Plan documents produced over the years. A TDR program is an innovative approach to address these opportunities and constraints by producing more orderly growth; helping to preserve family farms; compensating landowners for the cost of restrictions to their lands; fostering economic development while minimizing negative impacts; and helping to maintain other open spaces. Because the preservation of open space and agricultural land is a fundamental goal of any TDR program, this project incorporates the community open space program an eligible grant activity. The TDR program is an integral part of the Town's Comprehensive Plan and is essential to the implementation of the Hamlet Study. 11. Leveraging of Public Funding The Town of Southold finds that the funding from the Quality Communities Grant Program, as requested, is sufficient to support this project. However, as a small Town with limited resources, we are always exploring funding options and will seek grant money from other sources as needed. 12. Advancing State Planning Initiatives The Town adopted its Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan in 2005 as approved by the New York State Department of State. The LWRP provides a planning framework synopsis of all past and ongoing planning documents and progran~s that govern decisions and actions of the Town of Southold. Among the many programs that Town has explored is the establishment ora TDR program. Because the LWRP is designed to build on these plamfing programs, the development of a TDR program is vital for the successful implementation of the LWRP. 13. Level of Local Commitment As already stated, the development and implementation of a TDR program is necessary for the successful implementation of the Town's Comprehensive Plan, including the Hamlet Study and the LWRP. Recognizing and understanding the interconnectedness and interrelationships between community development, environmental protection, economic development and natural resource conservation requires the articulation of very clear goals and objectives. The Hamlet Study represents a unique exercise in Southold's long tradition of community planning in that it was driven by local stakeholders. After a recruiting process involving the submission of resumes and documentation representing individual qualifications to serve, a diverse group of nearly 100 individuals, including property owners, merchants, builders, activists, community leaders and well-intentioned citizens, were appointed to represent their respective hamlets. Hamlet stakeholders assessed and evaluated, argued and compromised, established goals and policies, and in the end reached consensus concerning the vision of their respective hamlets. This grassroots effort proved to be a remarkable and successful process. The Town of Southold remains committed to achieving its goals and objectives by seeking to develop a TDR program in accordance with the various components of the Comprehensive Plan, including the very successful Hamlet Study. There is a widespread commitment from local citizens, business leaders, non-profit organization, environmental groups, government officials and local board members to see this project come to fruition. The development of a TDR program has been in the works for some time but has proved to be very complicated given our limited funding and staffing resources. Funding through the Quality Communities Grant Program will allow the Town to move forward with this project, which will in turn advance both our preservation and smart growth initiatives. Salaries and Wages N/A $8,500. Travel $ 2~500. $1,500. Supplies and Materials $ 4,000. $3,500. Equipment N/A $1, .500, Contractual Services $63,500. N/A Other $ 5,000. ~q/A Totalll ,75,00°. I $1 ,ooo. 11 $9o.ooo. 1. SALARIES & WAGES, including fringe benefits (List by title and affiliation) AMOUNT CHARGED TITLE ANNUAL SALARY TO THIS PROJECT Mark Terry~ Interim Planning Dir. $55.825. $3,000. Anthony Trezza, Senior Planner. $50,667. $2,100. Melissa Spiro, Land Pres. Coord. $66,039. $1,900. John Sepenoski, Technical Coord. $70,100. $1.500, 2. TRAVEl. (Indicate purpose and extent of travel and associated costs). Travel costs involve field inspections, on-site inspections and travel to County Offices, and travel costs associated with research for the project including visiting other municipalities. i : St~BTOI'AI $ $4 000 l0 3. SUPPLIES/MATERIALS (Describe and indicate cost by type). tn-house costs associated with producing maps, preparing reports, making copies and mailing. 4. EQUIPMENT (Describe and indicate the cost of each item). Costs for software up-grades allowing the Planning Department to produce presentation drawings. ~-- -]'SUBTOTALS I $1,500' 5. CONTRACTUAL SERVICES (Describe services to be acquired and cost of each, if more than oae type of service will be secured). Costs associated with the bulk of the work which will be done by a private consultant. Consulting services to develop a TDR Program, reports, code changes and implementation strategies. 6. OTHER (List professional~ml~teer services and time at market rate, and describe the services to be "provided. List nonCpr~'6fessi~nal volu~ervices and time at $15.00 pet' hour, and describe the services to be pro~ded~2 Costs associated with the educational and public relations component of the project. Money will be used to hold a seminar on the TDR Program and to produce and distribute educational materials. SUBTOTAl $ i $5 000. ~ ' APPLICATION COMPLETI~]NESS CHECKLISI Do You f:[ave? 1. A Certification Signature 2. Four COllies plus an original of the application 11 3. Tax and Charity ID numbers entered if you are a not-for-profit organization 4. A complete and accurate budget 12 APPENDIX X Modification Agreement Form Agency Code: 19000 Contract Period: 4-1-05 to 3-31~09 Contract No. C059943 Funding for Period: $60,000 This is an AGREEMENT between THE STATE OF NEW YORK, acting by and through the New York State Department of State, having its principal office at 41 State Street, Albany, New York, 12231 (hereinafter referred to as the STATE), and the Town of Southold (hereinafter referred to as the CONTRACTOR), for modification of Contract Number C059943, as amended above and in attached Appendice(s) (not applicable) All other provisions &said AGREEMENT shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this AGREEMENT as of the dates appearing under their signatures. CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE By: DEPARTMENTOFSTATE By: (print name) (print name) Title: Title: Date: Date: State Agency Certification: "In addition to the acceptance of this contract, I also certify that original copies of this signature page will be attached to all other exact copies of this contract." CONTRACTOR State of New York ) County of )ss: On this day of ,20 , before me personally came to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say that he is the of the municipality described in and which executed the above instrument; and that _he signed his/her name thereto by order of the local legislative body of the above mentioned municipality. NOTARY PUBLIC APPROVED: Thomas P. DiNapoli, State Comptroller Title: Date: NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF STATE CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION UNIT 2005-2006 QUALITY COMMUNITIES GRANT PROGRAM VOUCHERING PROCEDURES 1. These guidelines explain what supporting documentation is required to be submitted for each payment request to he considered a proper invoice. 2~ For the purpose of this Program the designated payment office is: New York Department of State Division of Local Government - QCP 41 State Street, 9th Floor · Albany, New York 12231-0001 3. A payment request consists of a properly completed and signed Standard Voucher, a Summary Sheet and Forms 1 through 4 and a Project Status Report (Appendix Al, Attach. 3). A desk audit must be completed before payment can be made. Generally, payments will be made approximately twenty to thirty (20-30) working days fi.om receipt of a complete claim provided all requirements are met and, your agency is meeting all other contractual obligations. Care should be taken to insure that all forms are legible and completely filled out. 4. Please note that when signing the Voucher, you are also certifying to the statements in the certification section of the Summary Sheet, which is an integral part of our payment review, allowing you to maintain source documentation at your local office versus our requiring copies of all documentation to be submitted to the Department of State for review. The certification also places the responsibility of assuring that appropriated expenditures are being made in relation to the project with your organization. 5. Please take care in completing all documents as any errors can and will result in the rejection of your payment request. If assistance is needed in completing the Documentation Forms, please call the number below. NOTE: Please photocopy the Voucher, Summary Sheet and Forms to use for subsequent payment requests. If you have any questions regarding these guidelines, please contact the Quality Communities Program at 518-473-3355. SUMMARY SHEET Insert your contract number, as it appears on the Contract Face Page of your contract in the space provided. Insert the inclusive (start and end) dates within which the expenditures claimed in this report were incurred (goods and services received or completed) in the spaces provided. SECTION I: Column #1 - Column #2 - Column #3 - Please insert the current budget amount (s) reflected in the most recently approved budget. These should equal the Total Project Costs indicated on the Contract Face Page and in The Budget Summary, Appendix B of the Contract. These figures must reflect the expenditures being documented on Forms 2-4 in this payment request only. These figures represent the cumulative expenditures documented to date including this payment request and previous payment request in which expenditures were documented. If this is the first payment request, Columns #2 and #3 will be the same. Column g4 - The Available Balance to Document can be calculated by subtracting the Cumulative Expenditures to Date (Column #3) from the Current Budget Amounts (Column #1). If this results in a negative balance which exceeds the budget amount by 10 percent or $1,000.00, whichever is greater, or there is no budget amount for the category of expense, a budget amendment is required in accordance with Appendix C of your contract. SECTION II: Interim Claims - A claim for any period during which project activities have been only partially completed and additional activities and expenditures are expected. Final Claims - Any claim for any period during which all project activities have been completed. See Final Project Summary Report in the body of the contract FORMS 1-4 The purpose of these forms is to detail the expenditures claimed in Column #2 of the Summary Sheet. Although these forms are the same design and format as the forms used in Appendix B of the Agreement which detail the budget categories, please do not photocopy the budget pages to be used as documentation forms in the payment requests. 2 Since supporting documentation (receipts, invoices, etc.) is not required, unless requested, it is very important that these forms be completed as accurately and detailed as possible. Failure to do so will result in the rejection of your payment request. Please note: If you do attach receipts,etc, you must still complete all forms. For example: you may not leave Form 1, the Project Narrative, blank and indicate "see attached billing". FORM 1: PROJECT NARRATIVE, This report should describe in detail all project accomplishments and any problems encountered during the period being reported. Whereas the project narrative in the Agreement details the project intent, the project narrative in payment requests must detail what proj eot accomplishments have been met with the funds being claimed for reimbursement in the payment request. This information should coincide with the approved workplan. FORMS 2-4: EXPENDITURE DETAIl. For each category claiming reimbursement, detail the types of expenses, the actual costs and the dates incurred. The items detailed must be the same as those included in the original budget, and must be shown in the same budget categories. The amount reflected in the Sub-total line of each category must be the same amount claimed in Column #2 of the Summary Sheet. PROJECT STATUS FORM This form must be submitted every six months and/or when requesting reimbursement. DETAIL: Expenditures being documented should be descriptive and itemized. Listed below are some examples for documenting expenditures. A. Salaries, Wages and Frinee: Include all pay periods covered by this report and list the amount paid (including Fringe) to each employee for the work done relating to this Contract during the pay periods covered by this report. B. Travel: Break-out the traveling expenses incurred, including date, who traveled and destination and purpose of travel, in relation to the project. How much of the total travel amount was for taxi fare? or mileage reimbursement? How many miles were traveled? C. ~aterials: List the different types of supplies and materials purchased, the cost of each and the dates received. i.e. Office Supplies (paper, pens, stationary) - $845.00 - received 06/30/05 Gas and Oil $35.00 - received 06/30/05 15 Gallons of Gas ~ $1.50 = $22.50 - received 06/30/05 10 Quarts of Oil @ $1.25/quart = $12.50 - received 06/30/05 D. Equipment: List each piece of equipment purchased, the cost of each piece and the dates received. Please give some description of the equipment such as make, year, model number, etc. E. Contractual Services: The contractual services category includes items such as postage, rental or repairs to equipment, lease of equipment, and sub-contracted services. List the different types of contractual services, the cost for each and the dates services provided. i.e. Lease (photocopying machine) $200.00 - June 2005 If there are any questions on how to correctly document expenditures, please call the number listed on Page 1 of the instructions. STANDARD VOUCHER - complete Sections 4, 6 and 7 only In Section 4, Payee Name and Address, indicate the organization's name and address as it appears on the CONTRACT FACE PAGE. In Section 6, indicate your Contract Number, as it appears on the CONTRACT FACE PAGE of your contract, in the space provided. Section A.- indicate the total of expenditures claimed (total of Column 2 on the Summary Sheet). Section B. - indicate the local share amount and subtract this from A. Section C. - Enter the remainder here which is the total of the reimbursement claimed. This is the amount you will be reimbursed by the STATE. DO NOT put anything else in this Section. The Payee Certification, Section 7, must be an original signature by the responsible official authorized to certify claims. If the Voucher is not signed and dated, the payment request will automatically be rejected. updated 3-20-07 4 i~CUMENTATION FOR~ Quality Communities Grant Program CONTRACT # Expenditures Incurred During the Period / / through SUMMARY SHEET I. BUDGET/EXPENDITURE DATA ( Total Project Costs, ApPendix B, Budget Summary in the Contract) Cumulative Current Expenditures Expenditures Available Budget Documented Documented Balance to Amount this Report to Date Document (1) (2) (3) (1-3) A. Salaries, Wages and Fringe B. Travel C. Supplies and Materials D. Equipment E. Contractual Services TOTAL II. CLAIM TYPE Interim Claim Final Claim III. CERTIFICATION By signature on the attached voucher, I further certify that: 1) the amounts claimed accurately represent the expenses as recorded in our accounting records; 2) we are in compliance with all applicable provisions of the above-referenced Contract; 3) the attached narrative report (if required) accurately represents project accomplishments; 4) funds received are being used solely for the purposes of the "Project" as described in Appendix D of the above-referenced Contract. FORM 1 PROJECT NARRATIVE DETAIl,lNG PROJECT ACCOMPLISHMENTS FOR THIS CLAIM ONLY~ INCLUDE COSTS AND DATES THAT GOODS WERE RECEIVED AND SERVICES WERE COMPLETED FORM 2 - Expenditure Detail foi~s Payment Request. Be descriptive~l~i specific. A. SALARIES, WAGES AND FRINGE BENEFITS REQUEST 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. PAY PERIODS TITLE FROM - TO SUBTOTAL AMOUNT CHARGED TO THIS PROJECT $ $ $ $ $ $ $ B. TRAVEL (include name of traveler, date, destination and purpose and costs) SUBTOTAL $ FORM 3 C. SUPPLIES/MATERIALS (describe and include dates received and costs) SUBTOTAL $ D. EQUIPMENT (describe and include dates received and costs) SUBTOTAL $ FORM 4 E. CONTRACTUAL SERVICES (include name of any contractors/consultants, describe services, dates received, and costs) SUBTOTAL $ TOTAL OF ALL CATEGORIES ............................................... $ (SAME AS TOTAL SUMMARY SHEET COLUMN #2) AC 92 (Rev. 6'94) DEPARTMENT OF STATE STANDARD VOUCHEF Veucher No. 19000 Payn~nt Date (MM) (DO) (Y~) Llabgit~ Date (MM) (DO) (YY) Addm~ (Limit to 30 spa~s) RefAnv, No. (Umi/to 20 spaces) Address (Limit to 30 spaces) Ratanv. Date (MM) (DD) (YY) City (Limit to 20 spaces) (Limit to 2 Spaces)_~ Zip Code Claiming reimbursement of expenditures incurred pursuant to Quality Communities Contract # as detailed on the attached Documentation Forms. A. Total Summary Sheet Column #2 $. B. Less Local Share - circle 10%or 20% $, C. Total This Claim $ Payee Certltication: I certify that the above bill is just, true and correct; that no part thereof has been paid except as stated and that the balance is actually due and owing, and that taxes from which the State is exempt are excluded. Payee's Signature in Ink Title Date Name of Company FOR AGENCY USE ONLY Authorized Signature Date Title Expenditure Cost Center Ccde Accum Cost Center Unit Statewide Amount Total Discount % Net STATE COMPTROLLER'S PRE-AUDIT Liquidation OSC APPENDIX B Budget Budget Summary Sheet A. SALARIES, WAGES AND FRINGE $ 19,100.00 B. TRAVEL $ 500.00 C. SUPPLIES/MATERIALS $ 0 D. EQUIPMENT $ 0 E. CONTRACTUAL SERVICES $ 55,400.00 TOTAL $ 75,000.00 STATE FUNDING $ 60,0000.00 LOCAL SHARE $ 15,0000 The TOTAL of your BUDGET and the State funding and local share amounts must equal the amounts on the CONTRACT FACE PAGE! The BUDGET is intended to show the items of expense which will be funded under this Contract plus the local share amount. Please do not show the entire cost of the project if it exceeds the amount of funding provided by this Contract, plus the minimum required local share amount. Please be advised that where there is a conflict between Appendix B and Appendix E, concerning the budget, Appendix B shall control. Budget Detail Sheet A. SALARIES, WAGES AND FRINGE Title Patricia Finnigan, Town Attomey Mark Terry, Acting Department Head, Project Manager Anthony Trezza, Senior Planner Melissa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator John Sepenoski, Technical Coordinator Amount Charged to this Project $7000.00 $5600.00 $2100.00 $1900.00 $25OO.OO TOTAL SALARIES, WAGES AND FRINGE $ 19,100.00__ B. TRAVEL Please indicate destination, purpose and cost of such travel. This amount reflects the anticipated mileage expense to and from the Consultants office. II II TOTAL TRAVEL $ 500.00 Budget Detail Sheet C. SUPPLIES/MATERIALS Please use general categories such as office supplies, printing supplies, and like category descriptions. Indicate the cost of each category. TOTAL SUPPLIES/MATERIALS $ 0 D. EQUIPMENT Please list each item of equipment that exceeds $200.00 per item and has a useful life of one year or more. Group items of less than $200.00 each into general categories indicating total cost per category. TOTAL EQUIPMENT $ 0 Budget Detail Sheet E. CONTRACTUAL SERVICES This category includes items such as, postage, rental or repairs to equipment, lease of equipment and contracted services. The Town of Southold will hire a Consultant to accomplish the majority of the work plan outlined in this grant application. Please see attached document that outlines the work of each task. Task 1 Creation of TDR Work Group Task 2 Program Foundation Task 3 Draf~ Local Law Task 1, 2 and 3:$16,900.00 Note, that part of Task 3 is reflected in the above amount. The Town Attorney on staff will accomplish the majority of work outlined in Task 3 and review the products of Task 4. Task 4 State Environmental Quality Review Act Task 4:$38,500.00 The total costs of the outlined tasks that will b e achieved through contractual services is $50,400.00 TOTAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES $ .55,400.00__ APPENDIX X Agreement Modification Form Agency Code 19000 Contract Period 4/1/05 - 3/31/09 Contract Number C059943 Funding for Period $ 60,000 This is an AGREEMENT between THE STATE OF NEW YORK, acting by and through the New York State Department of State, having its principal office in Albany, New York (hereinafter referred to as the STATE), and the Town of Southold (hereinafter referred to as the CONTRACTOR), for modification of Contract Number C059943, as amended above. All other provisions of said AGREEMENT shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this AGREEMENT as of the dates appearing under their signatures. Title: Date: Scott A. Russell STATE AGENCY SIGNATURE By: (print name) (print name) Southold Town Supervisor Title: 9/17/08 Date: State Agency Certification: "In addition to the acceptance of this Contract, I also certify that original copies of this signature page will be attached to all other exact copies of this Contract." STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ) ss: Onthis 17thdayof September Scott A. Russell Supervisor of , in the year 20 08, before me personally appeared , to me known and known to me to be the Town of Southold the unincorporated association described in and which executed the alfove agreement; and who acknowledge to me that (s)he executed the foregoing agreement for and in behalf of said unincox~orated association. ¢~/OTARY PUBLIC Thomas P. DiNapoli State Comptroller: MELANIE DOROSKI NOTARY PUBLIC, State of New Y~k No. 01D04634870 Qualified in Suffolk County Commission Expires Septembe~ 30, By: Date: II. APPENDIX A1 Agency-Specific Clauses This Agreement has been entered into pursuant to the following understandings: The 2005-2006 Fiscal Year Budget provides aid to municipalities, not-for-profits, local benefit corporations, local public authorities and Indian tribe or nations, through the Environmental Protection Fund under the Quality Communities Program. B. The Department is authorized to evaluate and determine eligibility of applications for funding of projects. Based upon information, representations and certifications contained in Contractor's application for funding, including the Work Program as set forth in Appendix D and the application for funding set forth in Appendix E, the Department has made a determination of eligibility of funding for Contracto['s project under such Budget Act. The Contractor is the Lead Agency for the Project and will be responsible for managment of the project and submitting under signature any reports and requests for reimbursement according to the requirements of this Agreement. General For the purposes of this Agreement, the terms "State" and "Department" are interchangeable, unless the context requires otherwise. The contrac~ period as set forth on the Face Page is the inclusive period within which the provisions of this Agreement Shall be performed. No costs will be reimbursed for liabilities incurred outside of this period. No liabilities are to be incurred beyond the termination date and no costs will be reimbursed for such liabilities unless: 1) funds have been reappropriated for the Project in the subsequent State fiscal year, 2) the Department determines that it is in the best interest of the Department .and the State to provide additional time to complete the Project and 3) an extension agreement ~s approved in accordance with Section IA., Conditions of Agreement (State of New York Agreement, page 3). The Department shall not be liable for expenses of any kind incurred in excess of the State Funds as set forth on the Face Page, and shall not be responsible for seeking additional appropriations or other sources of funds for the Project. The Contractor shall perform all services to the satisfaction of the Department. The Contractor shall provide all services and meet the program objectives described in Appendix D in accordance with: provisions of this Agreement; relevant State, federal and local laws, rules and regulations, administrative and fiscal guidelines; where applicable, operating certificates for facilities or licenses for an activity or program, and conditions of applicable permits, administrative orders and judicial orders. F. The Contractor shall submit with its request for final payment a Final Project Summary III. IV. Al-2 Report in the format described in Appendix Al, Attachment 2. The Contractor agrees to proceed expeditiously with the Project and to complete the Project in accordance with the timetable set forth in the Workplan (Appendix D) as well as with the conditions of any applicable permits, administrative orders, or judicial orders and this Agreement. The Department will provide Contractor with a Quarterly Contractor Report form (Appendix Al, Attachment 3) pursuant to the Department's Minority and Women-owned Business enterprises as discussed in Section XIV in Appendix A 1. Such report shall be provided to the Department at the address on the Quarterly Contractor Report by all involved Minority and Women-owned Businesses. I. The Contractor shall submit two copies of a "Project Status Report" (Appendix Al, Attachment 4) every six months from Contract execution date and when requesting payment. Reports, Documents and Maps The Contractor shall identify documents, reports, and maps produced in whole or in part under this Agreement by endorsing on said documents, reports, and maps the following: "This (document, report, map, etc.) was prepared with funds provided by the New York State Department of State under the Quality Communities Grant Program." License to use and reproduce documents and other works: By acceptance of this Agreement, Contractor transfers to the Department a nonexclusive license to use, reproduce in any medium, and distribute any work prepared for or in connection with the Project, including but not limited to reports, maps, designs, plans, analysis, and documents regardless of the medium in which they are originally produced. Contractor warrants to the Department that it has sufficient title or interest in such works to license pursuant to this Agreement. Such warranty shall survive the termination of this agreement. Contractor agrees to provide the original of each such work, or a copy thereof which is acceptable to the Department, to the Department before payments shall be made under this Agreement. Property Pursuant to the provisions set forth in Section IV, page 2 of this Agreement, the ownership of all property described therein shall reside with the Contractor unless otherwise specified in writing by the Department at any time during the term of this Agreement and up to thirty (30) days following the issuance of the final payment. VI. Year 2000 Warrant,/ NEW YORK STATE YEAR 2000 WARRANTY STANDARD Updated: 6/2005 Al-3 Date and Time Warranty Contractor warrants that Product(s) furnished pursuant to this Agreement shall, when used in accordance with the Product documentation, be able to accurately process date/time data(including, but not limited to, calculating, comparing, and sequencing) transitions, including leap year calculations. Where a contractor proposes or and acquisition requires that specific Products'must perform as a package or system, this warranty shall apply to the Products as a system. Where contractor is providing ongoing services, including but not limited to: i) consulting, integration, code or data conversion, ii)maintenance or support services, iii) data entry or processing, or iv) contract administration services (e.g. billing, invoicing, claim processing), Contractor warrants that services shall be provided in an accurate and timely manner without interruption, failure or error due to inaccuracy of Contractor's business operations in processing date/time data (including, but not limited to, calculating, comparing, and sequencing) various date/time transitions, including leap year calculations. Contractor shall be responsible for damages resulting from any delays, errors or untimely performance resulting therefrom, including but not limited to the failure or untimely performance of such services. This Date/Time Warranty shall survive beyond termination or expiration of this Agreement through: a) ninety (90) days or b) the Contractor's or Product manufacturer/developer's stated date/time warranty term, which ever is longer. Nothing in this warranty statement shall be construed to limit any rights or remedies otherwise available under this Agreement for breach of warranty. Al-4 VII. Terminations In addition to any other actions authorized by this Agreement, the Department may terminate the Agreement in the best interests of the State of New York by providing written notice to the Contractor as provided in this Agreement. The Contractor shall complete the project as set forth in this Agreement, and failure to render satisfactory progress or to complete the project to the satisfaction of the State may be deemed an abandonment of the project and may cause the suspension or termination of any obligation of the State. In the event the Contractor should be deemed to have abandoned the project for any reason or cause other than a national emergency or an Act of God, all monies paid to the Contractor by the State and not expended in accordance with this Agreement shall be repaid to the State upon demand. If such monies are not repaid within one year after such demand, the State Comptroller of the State of New York may cause to be withheld from any State assistance to which the Contractor would otherwise be entitled an amount equal to the monies demanded. In the event that the Department has provided written notice to the Contractor directing that the Contractor correct any failure to comply with this Agreement, the Department reserves the right to direct that the Contractor suspend all work during a period of time to be determined by the Department. If the Contractor does not correct such failures during the period provided for in the notice, this Agreement shall be deemed to be terminated after expiration of such time period. During any such suspension, the Contractor agrees not to incur any new obligations after receipt of the notice without approval by the Department. VIII. Subcontracting Requirements The Contractor may subcontract for all or any portion of the activities covered by this Agreement as provided for in Appendix D subject to prior approval of the Department of the terms of any subcontract. IX. Requirements for Contract Map Products [Intentionally Left Blank] X. .Compliance with Procurement Requirements All contracts by municipalities for professional services, and all purchase contracts involving not more than $10,000 are subject to the requirements of General Municipal Law § 104-b, which requires such contracts to comply with the procurement policies and procedures of the municipality involved. All such contracts shall be awarded after and in accordance with such municipal procedures, subject to any additional requirements imposed by the STATE as set forth in Appendix D hereof. A1-5 B. The municipal attorney, chief legal officer or financial administrator of the CONTRACTOR shall certify to the Department of State that applicable public bidding procedures of General Municipal Law § 103 were followed for all contracts involving more than $10,000 for purchase contracts. In the case of pumhase contracts involving not more than $20,000, and contracts for professional services, the municipal attorney, chief legal officer or financial administrator shall certify that the procedures of the municipality established pursuant to General Municipal Law § 104-b were fully complied with (see Appendix Al, Attachment 4) XI. XII. Payment and Records Retention A. Payments shall be made as set forth in Appendix C. The Contractor shall maintain, at its principal place of business, detailed books and accounting records supported by original documentation relating to the incurring of all expenditures, as well as payments made pursuant to this Agreement. The Contractor shall make such records available for review by the Department upon request at any time. The Department shall have the right to conduct progress assessments and review books and records as necessary. The Department shall have the right to conduct an on-site review of the Project and/or books and records of the Contractor prior to, and for a reasonable time following, issuance of the FINAL payment. The Department shall be entitled to disallow any cost or expense, and/or terminate or suspend this Agreement, if the Contractor has misrepresented any expenditures or Project activities in its application to the Depamnent, or in this Agreement, or in any progress reports or payment requests made pursuant hereto. The Contractor shall maintain such books and accounting records in a manner so that reports can be produced therefrom in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. The Contractor shall maintain separate fiscal books and records for all funds received through the Department pursuant to this Agreement. During the term of this Agreement and for a period of six years after its termination, the Contractor shall make all such books and records available to the Department and the Office of the State'Comptroller, or their designated representatives, for inspection and audit. Equal Employment Opportunity The Contractor hereby assures that it is, and shall be for the duration of this Agreement, in compliance with the Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972 (Public Law 92- 261), as amended. XIII. Article 15-A of The New York State Executive Law The Department of State administers a Minority and Women-owned Business Enterprises (MWBE) Program as mandated by Article 15-A of the New York State Executive Law. Al-6 This law supersedes any other provision in state law authorizing or requiring an equal employment opportunity program or a program for securing parlicipation by minority and women-owned business enterprises. Under this law, all state agencies must, subject to certain exceptions, establish goals for minority and women-owned business participation in certain state contracts and grants. Where MWBE goals are required, even in circumstances where this goal is zero, a Quarterly Contractor Report is required to be submitted to the Minority and Women-owned Business Program of the Department on forms provided by the Department. Article 15-A requires that rules and regulations be established for contracts entered into by the Department. In accordance with Article 15-A, goals must be set for contracts entered into by the Department in excess of $25,000 for labor, services, supplies, equipment, and materials, or any combination of the foregoing, and for contracts entered into by the Department in excess of $100,000 for acquisition, construction, demolition, replacement, major repair, renovation or improvement of real property. In applying these rules and regulations, the Department must consider the availability of certified minority and women-owned businesses in the region in which the state contract will be performed, the total dollar value of the contract, the scope of work to be performed, and the project size and term. The contractor will, when required as a part of the bid or proposal, submit a Staffing Plan on the form provided by the Department. This Plan will detail the work force anticipated in the performance of the state contract reported by ethnic background, gender, and Federal Occupational Categories. After a bid opening and prior to the award of a state contract, the contractor will submit an Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Policy Statement to the Department within the time frame established by the Department. The law requires that, as a precondition to entering into a valid and binding state contract, the contractor will agree to the following stipulations and will include them in the EEO Policy Statement: · The contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, age, disability or marital status. · The contractor will undertake or continue existing programs of affirmative action to ensure that minority group members and women are afforded equal employment opportunities without discrimination because of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, age, disability or marital status. For these purposes, affirmative action applies in areas of recruitment, employment, job assignment, promotion, upgrading, demotion, transfer, layoff, or termination and rates o£pay or other forms of compensation. · The contractor will make active and conscientious efforts to employ and to utilize minority group members and women at all levels and in all segments of its work force on state contracts, and the contractor will document these efforts. · The contractor will State in all solicitations and advertisements for employees that, in the performance of the state contract, all qualified applicants will be afforded equal employment opportunities without discrimination because of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, age, disability or marital status. · The contractor will, at the request of the Department, request each employment agency, labor union, or authorized representative of workers with which it has a collective bargaining or other agreement or understanding, to furnish a written statement that such employment agency, labor union, or representative will not discriminate because of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, age, disability or marital status, and that such union or representative will affirmatively cooperate in the implementation of the contractor's obligations herein. · The contractor will include the provisions regarding the EEO Policy Statement and the Staffing Plan enumerated above in each and every subcontract of a state contract in such a manner that the subcontractor is bound by these requirements. · Failure to provide an EEO Policy Statement and a Staffing Plan without reasonable written justification or commitment to provide these requirements by a specified date will result in rejection of the contractor's bid or proposal. · After the award of a state contract, the contractor will submit to the Department a Workforce Employment Utilization Report, on the form supplied by the Department, detailing the work force actually utilized on the state contract, by ethnic background, gender and Federal Occupational Categories, as specified on the fom~. This Report will be submitted to the Department on a quarterly basis throughout the life of the contract. Al-7 · The contractor, and any of its subcontractors, may be required to submit compliance reports relating to their operations and implementation or' their affirmative action or equal employment opportunity program in effect as of the date the state contract is executed. Questions regarding this program should be directed to the Department's Minority and Women-owned Business Program by calling (518) 474-5741. Potential contractors can access the NYS Directory of Certified Minority and Women-owned Business Enterprises on-line through the Empire State Development website at: http://wwwv.empire.state.nv.us.. double click (left column)on: NY ~'; BIZ (Doing Business in New York); put the curser over: Small and Growing Business and, from that menu, click on: Minority and Women- Owned Business. From the center column, highlighted in blue, click on the bullet: "Search the Directory of Certified Minority-and Women-Owned Business Enterprises." The Department makes no representation with respect to the availability or capability of any business listed in the Directory. XIV. Submission of all correspondence and documentation Al-8 The Contractor agrees to provide the Department with original and two copies of all documentation relating to this Project, including, but not limited to: notices of public meetings, products described in Appendix D, and payment request documentation as described in Appendix C. B. All information as described in A. above shall include the NYS Comptroller's # as indicated on the Face Page of this Agreement. XV. Environmental Review Contractor agrees to provide the Department, in a timely manner, with all documentation, including but not limited to, permit applications, environmental assessments, designs, plans, studies, environmental impact statements, findings, and determinations, relating to the Project. Contractor ackno~vledges that compliance with the State Envirmunental Quality Review Act is a material term and condition of this Agreement. In no event shall any payments be made under this Agreement until Contractor has provided Department with appropriate documentation that contractor has met any requirements imposed on Contractor by the State Environmental Quality Review Act. XVI. Fully-Executed Agreement or Amendment Thereto If this Agreement or amendments thereto, allocates funds totaling $15,000 or less, it shall be deemed to be fully executed when approved and signed by the Contractor and the Department. B. If this Agreement, or amendments thereto, allocates funds totaling more than $15,000 it shall be deemed to be full executed when approved by the Office of the State Comptroller. 0 APPENDIX B Budget Budget Summary Sheet A. SALARIES, WAGES AND FRINGE B. TRAVEL C. SUPPLIES/MATERIALS D. EQUIPMENT E. CONT~CTUAL SERVICES STATE F~ING [OC~ SHA~ The TOTAL of your BUDGET and the State funding and local share amounts must equal the amounts on the CONTRACT FACE PAGE! The BUDGET is intended to show the items of expense which will be funded under this Contract plus the local share amount. Please do not show the entire cost of the project if it exceeds the amount of funding provided by this Contract, plus the minimum required local share amount. Please be advised that where there is a conflict between Appendix B and Appendix E, concerning the budget, Appendix B shall control. Budget Detail Sheet A. SALARIES, WAGES AND FRINGE Title Amount Charged to this Project ~©00 TOTAL SALARIES, WAGES AND FRINGE B. TRAVEL Please indicate destination, purpose and cost of such travel. TOTAL TRAVEL $ Budget Detail Sheet C. SUPPLIES/MATERIALS Please use general categories such as office supplies, printing supplies, and like category descriptions. Indicate the cost of each category. TOTAL SUPPLIES/MATERIALS D. EQUIPMENT Please list each item of equipment that exceeds $200.00 per item and has a useful life of one year or more. Group items of less than $200.00 each into general categories indicating total cost per category. TOTAL EQUIPMENT $ ' O- Budget Detail Sheet E. CONTRACTUAL SERVICES This category includes items such as, postage, rental or repairs to equipment, lease of equipment and contracted services. TOTAL CONTRACTUAL SERVICES APPENDIX C Payment and Reporting Schedule I. Payment Schedule The Department shall make interim payments for eligible costs incurred up to an amount not to exceed 90% of the State Funds Awarded. The final payment will be made upon satisfactory completion of the Project activities funded pursuant to this Agreement. Not more frequently than once every 30 days,~roperly executed payment request, on forms as prescribed by the Department, a program progress report, and any work products documenting completion of one or more of.&~e tasks set forth in Appendix D, Program Workplan, and total project costs incurred to dat~may be submitted. Payment provided above shall be made to the Contractor upon the submission by the Contractor of properly executed payment request. Such request shall contain the following: (a) "Summary Sheet Documentation Forms" as provided by the Department, for reimbursement of actual and eligible expenditures, (b) the required report and work products, and c) a properly executed State Voucher. Payment requests will be reviewed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement to determine total allowable project costs incurred and the level of project completion to date. For the purpose of determining the level of reimbursement, otherwise allowable project costs may be reduced if the level of project completion is deemed insufficient. Total allowable project costs, adjusted pursuant to 2. above, will be prorated between State Funds and Local Share costs in the same proportions as Total State Funds is to Total Local Share as set forth on the Face Page. Interim payments will be issued in amounts equal to the allowable project costs incurred as calculated in 2. above, less all previous payments to date. II. Reporting The final payment will be issued upon receipt and approval ora payment request marked "FINAL" documenting all project costs incurred and tasks completed and submission of the Final Project Summary Report. Such final payment request shall be submitted within 60 days following the ending date of this Agreement. By submission of a payment request as described in I.B. above, the Contractor certifies the information accurately represents such accomplishments and expenses as recorded in the Contractor's accounting records, including, where goods or services are provided by third parties not party to this Agreement, a certification that any payment obligations arising from the provision of such goods or services have been paid by the Contractor and do not duplicate reimbursement or costs and services received from other sources. B. Notwithstanding the above requirements, upon written notification by the Department, the COntractor may be required to submit source docUmentation and additional verification of III. allowable expenditures. Appendix C, page 2 Payment requests shall be submitted to: New York State Department of State' Division of Local Government - QCP 41 State Street - 9th Floor Albany, New York, 12231-0001 Attention: Quality Communities Contract Coordinator Claimed expenditures per cost category may not exceed the amounts indicated in the Budget, Appendix B, by ten percent (10%) without approval of the Department, provided that the Total Project Cost as set forth in Appendix B, Budget Summary is not exceeded. Any expenditure in excess of such 10% or that changes the State Share or Local Share funding amount shall require an amendment to the Project Budget submitted in writing by the Contractor and approved by the Department. No expenditures shall be allowed for items not set forth in the Project Budget without written approval of the Department. Other Notwithstanding the submission of timely and properly executed payment requests, the Department shall be under no obligation to make payment for expenditures incurred without the prior Department approvals and/or amendments required under this Agreement and, further, shall have the right to withhold any such payment pending the execution of such approval and/or amendment. Interest income earned on funds received pursuant to this Agreement shall be used to further the purpose of this Project or shall be deducted from total eligible cost to determine the net eligible costs to be reimbursed by the Department. The Department shall have the right to conduct on-site progress assessments and reviews of the Project and Contractor's books and records during the life of this Agreement and for a reasonable time following issuance of the FINAL payment. The Contractor shall furnish proper facilities, where necessary or useful, for such access and inspection. The Department shall be entitled to disallow any cost or expense, or terminate or suspend this Agreement, if found that the Contractor has misrepresented any expenditures or project activities in this Agreement, or in any progress reports or payment requests made pursuant hereto. The Contractor shall maintain separate fiscal books and records for all funds received through the Department and project activities conducted pursuant to this Agreement, and shall make all such books and records available to the Department, the Office of the State Comptroller, or their designated representatives for inspection and audit for a period of six years following termination of this Agreement. By submission of this Agreement and payment requests provided for herein Contractor warrants that funds claimed and received pursuant to this Agreement do not dUplicate reimbursements or payments from any other source. APPENDIX D PROGRAM WORK PLAN (To Be Developed By Contractor in Consultation with [)OS) 1. Project Description Brief summary of project, geographic area, partners, goals and objectives, studies, history of project, relationship to other projects etc. 2. Project Components A. Initial scoping meeting (determine whether project advisory committee to be formed). B. Procurement (must be in accord w/Municipality's procurement policy). (i) If project is to be performed by a consultant and subject to competitive bid, the Contractor shall prepare Draft RFP for DOS review. Identify separate tasks and deliverables with a schedule for completion for each and associated costs. Items which should be considered by Contractor include: (i) Public participation process (ii) Other tasks and deliverables based upon application and scoping meeting. Depending on nature of project, tasks and deliverables could include: g. h. i. .1. Vision Statement Maps/GIS Intermunicipal agreement Inventory of conditions Economic or market analysis Land use plan or functional plan Action plan/strategies Designs and plans Local laws or ordinances Other 3. Review and Status DOS shall review Project Components for consistency with the application and scoping meeting. Contractor shall provide Project Status Reports every six months and when payment is requested. Please build these reports into the work schedule. Please attach additional pages as necessary. APPENDIX E GRANT APPLICATION Insert Appendix E here. Town of Southold Work Program for the New York State Quality Communities Program TDR Grant The Town of Southold was approved for a $60,000 grant from the New York State Quality Communities Program (2005-2006) for the development and implementation of a town-wide Transfer of Development Rights Program (TDR). The TDR Program will be an important implementation strategy for the Town's Comprehensive Plan, Hamlet Study and Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. It is expected that the Town's TDR Program will use market forces to promote conservation in high-value natural, agricultural, and open space areas while encouraging smart growth in developed and developing sections in each of the Hamlet Centers and HALO Zones. The primary goal of the TDR Program is to produce a voluntary approach to preserving lands that provides a public benefit and gives landowners the opportunity to financially benefit from their property without having to sell or develop it. The TDR Program will allow the Town to focus development in areas capable of handling additional growth, while minimizing impacts on the environment and public services. A successful TDR Program would further the following Town goals: Preserve Southold's prime farmland and encourage the continuation and diversification of agriculture as an important element in the life and economy of the Town (1985 Master Plan Update). To preserve land, including farmland, open space and recreational landscapes (2006 Hamlet Study). Most of the grant money is proposed to be used for consulting services for the creation and implementation of the Transfer of Development Rights Program, including the SEQRA review for the project. The Town has retained the firm of Nelson, Pope and Voorhis, LLC for this project, with Charles Voorhis as the lead consultant providing the services. The work program is set up into four major tasks, along with several subtasks, that are designed to bring the project from inception through completion. TASK 1: CREATION OF THE TDR WORK GROUP (April 2006 - September 2007) A TDR Work Group was created to assist Charles Voorhis with the technical components of the program and to ensure that the Town was directly involved with its development. Because of the Town's existing catalogue of planning studies, demographic information and the general expertise of professional staff, it was determined that this would be the most effective way to facilitate the program's creation. The Work Group is made up of professional staff and includes members of the Planning Board, Land Preservation, Planning and Zoning Committee, Code Committee and the Town Board. The time spent on these meetings will be calculated into the Town's match for this grant. The product of this task is the creation of the TDR Work Group, which has been meeting on a regular basis to conduct a comprehensive inventory and analysis of the available data that will provide the framework for the program as described in Task 2. TASK 2: PROGAM FOUNDATION (April 2006-June 2007) PRODUCT 1: Report on the Transfer of Development Right Program Foundation Based upon the inventory and analysis of the vahous data collected by the members of the Work Group, the following technical issues relating to the creation ofa TDR Program wilt be addressed: A. How will the TDR Program work? B. Who will benefit from the program? C. How much do TDRs cost? D. How is the value of a TDR established? E. Is the program voluntary or mandatory? F. What will be the Town's role in implementing and monitoring the program? G. How do I participate ifI own land within a Sending Area? H. How do I participate ifI own land within a Receiving Area? I. How can the TDRs be used within the Receiving Areas? J. Where are the Sending Areas located and how are they to be established? K. Where are the Receiving Areas located and how are they to be established? L. How does the TDR Program impact other Land Preservation Programs? M. What are the implications with regard to existing zoning and possible recommended zone changes? N. How do Suffolk County Department of Health Services regulations impact the TDR Program? O. An analysis of the advantages and disadvantages that a TDR Program would have on commercial use. P. An analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of including only agricultural use or both agricultural and open space use in a TDR Program. Q. An analysis of the TDR credit balance between the Sending and Receiving Areas. R. Definition and development of the mechanics of the program. It is expected that the above-mentioned issues relating to the development of a TDR Program will be combined and presented in one or more reports/studies, as follows: PRODUCT 2: Report on the Delineation and Modeling qf the Sending Areas A. Identify and exclude un-buildable lands (wetlands). Many of the Town's resources are inventoried and mapped. Computerized maps made possible by computerized Geographic Information System (GIS) are an objective and accurate information source available for this type of resource documentation. B. Establish criteria to and eligibility for Sending Area parcels. C. Identify and map the parcels that are designated as the Sending Area. PRODUCT 3: Report on the Delineation, Modeling and Design of the Receiving Areas A. Identify the infrastructure that will be available to support the increased density and growth. The three main types of infrastructure that must be designed are facilities for public sewer, public water, and public transportation. B. Establish parcel eligibility parameters for Receiving Areas. C. Establish the Receiving Area (HALO Zones) maps for each Hamlet. D. Establish development and open space goals within the Receiving Areas. E. Establish affordable housing goals in the Receiving Areas. F. Mathematically model the residential build-out in the Receiving Areas based upon ½ acre zoning. G. Identify the type or types of development (housing) in the Receiving Areas that best meets the goals of the community. PRODUCT 4: Report on the Value and Allocation of Transfer of Development Rights A. Identify the value of a Development Right. B. Identify the marketability of the Development Rights in terms of the amount that a developer in the Receiving Areas is willing to pay to build an additional dwelling unit. C. Identify the method for the allocation of Development Rights. PRODUCT 5: Analysis of Implications ora Transfer of Development Rights Program on Current Town Preservation Plans and Current Town Zoning. A. Assess a Transfer of Development Rights Program to local zoning ordinances or laws and the Town of Southold Comprehensive Plan. B. Analyze the positive and negative impact that a Transfer of Development Rights Program would have on existing Town Preservation Programs. C. Develop the structure for tracking protocol for recording Transfer of Development Rights transactions. D. Identify the method for the execution and filing of Conservation Easements on land in the sending district whose Development Rights have been purchased under the program TASK 3: DRAFT LOCAL LAW (June 2007) TASK 4: STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT (July-September ~007) Once the TDR Program has been drafted and accepted by the Town, the SEQRA review for the project will commence Task 4a. Project start-up and preparation of Full Environmental Assessment Form Parts I and II This involves several initial meetings, preliminary research, and preparation of initial process documents and EAF forms. The form can be circulated to interested agencies and parties of interest under SEQRA notice and filing requirements in order to advise the public and agencies of the Town's intent. The Town Board is the only agency that can implement the action, and therefore will assume lead agency status. The Town Board will provide a "proposed action" or program that will identify the initiative. Theproduct of this task is the completed Environmental Assessment Form Parts I and II. Task 4b. Project Classification and Issuance of Determination of Significance The type of action proposed mandates the preparation of a Draft Supplemental Genetic Enviromnental Impact Statement (DSGEIS). The action involves the adoption ora Land Use Program that has town-wide implications and affects a large area of land. As a result, the project is classified as a Type I Action, thereby requiring the preparation of a GEIS. The Town should issue a Positive Declaration, which identifies the key issues. Key issues are expected to include benefits of transfer parcels and potential impacts on receiving pamels, shift in density, traffic, in-fill development, socio-economic benefits of housing and potential socio-economic issues involved with density relocation. It is expected that a Draft Supplemental GEIS will be the most appropriate way to solicit input and subject the program to an orderly review process designed to obtain and factor in public and agency input in decision making. The product of this task is a Positive Declaration. Task 4c. Scoping Process (optional) The proposal should be subject to public scoping. A Draft Scope should be circulated and a date set for a public scoping meeting to solicit input on additions or revisions to the draft scoping document. Once the meeting and any follow-up written comments are completed, the draft scope should be revised accordingly and issued as a final scope in accordance with Part 617.8(1'). The product qf this task is a Draft and Final Scope. Task 4d. Preparation of a Draft SupPlemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement A Draft SGEIS will be prepared that presents the proposed program in the Description of the Proposed Project in Section 1.0, summarizes the Town's important environmental resources relating to the proposed action in Section 2.0, and analyzes the impacts of adoption of the proposed action in Section 3.0. Additional major sections include Mitigation Measures and Altematives to the proposed action. Additional sections required to complete a comprehensive Generic EIS should be included. Theproduct q£ this task is a Dra_ft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement. Task 4e. Processing of Draft SGEIS and Preparation of Final Supplemental ElS The Draft SGEIS will be reviewed in conjunction with Town Staff to determine acceptability and indicate revisions as appropriate or necessary. After acceptance, the Draft SGEIS will be circulated in accordance with Part 617.9 and a public hearing on the Draft SGEIS will be held no sooner that 15 days from document acceptance. The comment period will be no less than 30 days in length, or no less than 10 days after the pubic hearing. Written comments as well as public hearing comments will be accepted by the Lead Agency. Comments on the Draft SGEIS will be reviewed and summarized. A Final SGEIS will be prepared, which includes a response to each substantive comment on the Draft SGEIS. The Final SGEIS will be reviewed by Town Staff to determine acceptability and indicate revisions as appropriate or necessary. The Final SGEIS will be circulated in accordance with Part 617.9 and will be considered for no less than 10 days prior to preparation and filing of the Findings Statement. The product o£this task is a Final Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement. Task 4f. Preparation of Findings Statement Findings will conform to Part 617.11 and 617.10(c) for Generic EIS's. Findings will identify the conformance of the project review with SEQRA requirements and will discuss and weigh the social, environmental and economic issues for pertinent resource areas. Findings will set forth conditions or criteria under which future actions will be undertaken or approved, including requirements for any subsequent SEQRA compliance. The product o£this task is a Findings Statement. Once these steps are complete, the Town will be in a position to initiate the program (or a modified program if changes are discerned through the SEQRA process. x APPENDIX Agreement Modification Form Agency Code 19000 Contract Period 4/1/05 - 3/31/09 Contract Number C059943 Funding for Period $ 60,000 This is an AGREEMENT between THE STATE OF NEW YORK, acting by and through the New York State Department of State, having its principal office in Albany, New York (hereinafter referred to as the STATE), and the Town of Southold (hereinafter referred to as the CONTRACTOR), for modification of Contract Number C059943, as amended above. All other provisions of said AGREEMENT shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this AGREEMENT as of the dates appearing under their signatures. CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE By: STATE AGENCY SIGNATURE By: (print name) (print name) Title: Title: Date: Date: State Agency Certification: "In addition to the acceptance of this Contract, I also certify that original copies of this signature page will be attached to all other exact copies of this Contract." STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF ) ss: On this day of of · in the year 20 ., before me personally appeared , to me known and known to me to be the ., the unincorporated association described in and which executed the above agreement; and who acknowledge to me that (s)he executed the foregoing agreement for and in behalf of said unincorporated association. NOTARY PUBLIC Thomas P. DiNapoli State Comptroller: By: Date: / APPE~iX X Modification Agreement Form Agency Code: 19000 Contract Period: Contract No.: Funding for Period: This is an AGREEMENT between THE STATE OF NEW YORK, acting by and through the New York State Department of State, having its principal office at 41 State Street, Albany, New York, 12231 (hereinafter referred to as the STATE), and (hereinafter referred to as the CONTRACTOR), for modification of Contract Number, as amended above and in attached Appendice(s) All other provisions of said AGREEMENT shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this AGREEMENT as of the dates appearing under their signatures. CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE By: By: DEPARTMENT OF STATE (print name) (print name) Title: Title: Date: Date: State Agency Certification: "In addition to the acceptance of this contract, I also certify that original copies of this si~aature page will be attached to all other exact copies of this contract." CONTRACTOR State of New York ) County of )ss: On this_ day of ,20 , before me personally came to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say that _he is the of the contractor described in and which executed the above instrument; and that _he signed his/her name thereto by order of the governing body of the above mentioned contractor. NOTARY PUBLIC APPROVED: Alan G. Hevesi, State Comptroller Title: Date: CONTRACTOR: Agreement # PROJECT STATUS As of (Submit semi-annually and with each payment request.) Appendix Al, Attachment 3 Task Date of Percent of # A/T Completion Completion Products/Accomplishments Please note problems encountered, proposed adjustment(s) to work program/schedule, and reason(s) for proposed adjustment(s): Please provide the following information: Name of contact Person: r~o,.~-V-. 'V~.,¢,.I Email Address: Ir~o~. ~:~ .-F~ ¢e,4 ~i 4-~,-,~rx · %_c~u'~ ~ ~._ · Phone Number: (a~ --lq~.~ ~ k 9~ ~ Fax Number: ~'5 ~' q ~K.- ~ I ~ (~ Appendix Al, Attachment 1 Page -1 Final Project Summary Report Final payment of the grant is dependent upon the satisfactory completion and acceptance by the Department of State, Division of Local Government of this F1NAL PROJECT SUMMARY REPORT along with the requisite documentation. In addition to the other requirements of the contract, the grant recipient is responsible to relay the importance, the significance and the value of the completed proiect to the community, the region and the state through the completion of the report. The following outline should be used to complete the FINAL PROJECT SUMMARY REPORT: 1. Project Title: 2. Name of Contractor: Actual Project Costs: a. State funds expended (identify source, eg. Quality Community Funds, EPF, Clean Water/Clean Air Bond Act, etc.): b. Local funds expended: c. Other funds expended: Project Manager: Name: Title: Mailing address: Tel. number: Fax number: E-mail address: Federal Tax Identification Number: Project Background: briefly explain in a short paragraph why this project was necessary, what its value is and/or its importance to the community Project Work: briefly describe the work that was done to complete the project Project Descriptions: use the following guidelines to describe the project and please be concise in the description a. For a Planning Project describe the findings strategies recormnended b. For a Design Project describe what is to be built Project Documentation/Visuals: The following guidelines are suggested for Planning and Design Projects. a. Visuals of renderings and/or graphics, newspaper articles or photographs that depict the final product or a before and after scenario. Appendix Al, Attachment 1 Page -2 Final Project Summary Report Cont. b. Photo and video documentation is encouraged but not mandatory. The video, which can be in VHS or digital format may be used in a future documentary. Photographs should be 35mm or digital. Color slides and/or digital camera discs should be labeled and dated. QUALITY COMMUNITIES GRANT 2005- 2006 (QCEPF0064) ~,~EVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS PROGRA!VX Meeting Record Date Hours Agenda and Topic (Staple Agenda (s) to Form) Travel/Mileage Record Date Mileage Destination .~.---, ('~j, P,~, .~,~ Supplies Date Item Itemized Cost Total Cost Example 100 Copies .25 $2.50 QUALITY COMMUNITIES GRANT 2005- 2006 (QCEPF0064) DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS ?ROGRAi Meeting Record Date Hours Age. nda and Topic (Staple Agenda (s) to Form) Travel/Mileage Record Date Mii'eage Destination Supplies l~ate Item Itemized Cost Total Cost Example 100 Copies .25 $2.50 QUALITY COMMUNITIES GRANT 2005- 2006 (QCEPF0064) DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS PROGRAi NAME Meetin Record Date Hours Agenda and Topic (Staple Agenda (s) to Form) ~. I .~l~ cl ~,~, ~,1_ , ~., ~ i /~ ~.~... ~-~ , '~, ~ , ~ . ~ ~'~ ~.( .~v. ~.~? c.v . ~.~ ~_ _~.~ ~..,~. ' ' ~ ....... I /u~ ~ Travel/Mileage Record Date Mileage Destination Supplies Date Item Itemized Cost Total Cost Example 100 Copies .25 $2.50 QUALITY COMMUNITIES GRANT 2005- 2006 (QCEPF0064) DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS PROGRA NAME Meetin Record Date Hours Agenda and Topic (Staple Agenda (s) to Form) Travel/Mileage Record Date Mileage Destination Supplies D~te Item Itemized Cost Total Cost Example 100 Copies .25 $2.50 w OP~~DEVELQUALITY COMMUNITIES GRANT 2005- 2006 (QCEPF0064) MENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS PROGRA NAME Meetin Record Date Hours Agenda and Topic (Staple Agenda (s) to Form) Travel/Mileage Record Date Mileage Destination Supplies D~te Item Itemized Cost Total Cost Example 100 Copies .25 $2.50 QUALITY COMMUNITIES GRANT 2005- 2006 (QCEPF0064) DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS PROGRA NAME Meetin Record Date Hours Agenda and Topic (Staple Agenda (s) to Form) Travel/Mileage Record Date Mii~age Destination ! Supplies D~te Item Itemized Cost Total Cost Example 100 Copies .25 $2.50 QUALITY COMMUNITIES GRANT 2005- 2006 (QCEPF0064) EVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS PROGRA NAME Meetin Record Date Hours Agenda and Topic (Staple Agenda (s) to Form) Travel/Mileage Record Date Mileage Destination Supplies Date Item Itemized Cost Total Cost Example 100 Copies .25 $2.50 QUALITY COMMUNITIES GRANT 2005- 2006 (QCEPF0064) DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTION OF TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS NAME John Sepenoski Meeting Record Date Hours Agenda and Topic (Staple Agenda (s) to Form) 2/3/06 2 TDR workgroup meeting 2/6/06 1 Discuss TDR with Mark Terry 2/6/06 1.5 Planning & Zoning meeting 2/7/06 0.75 Generate HALO & target acreages for TDR 2/8/06 0.75 Generate HALO statistics 2/13/06 0.75 Discuss HALO/TDR numbers with Melissa Spiro 2/15/06 2.0 TDR workgroup meeting 2/16/06 1.0 HALO mapping 2/16/06 1.25 Work on HALO/TDR statistics with Melissa Spiro 2/17/06 1.75 Discuss HALOs with Mark Terry, work on Mattituck HALO map 2/21/06 0.5 HALO mapping 2/23/06 0.75 Generate HALO build out numbers 2/27/06 1.0 Work on HALO maps 2/28/06 1.5 Generate HALO statistics, print HALO maps 3/3/06 1.5 Discuss TDR statistics with Melissa Spiro, generate TDR statistics D/6/06 0.25 Discuss TDR build out with Bill Edwards -3 /7/06 0.75 Generate TDR statistics 3/8/06 2.0 Work on HALO/TDR methodology 3/9/06 3.25 Work on HALO/TDR analysis 3/9/06 1.0 Discuss TDR build out with Melissa Spiro & Anthony Trezza 3/13/06 1.0 Work on HALO/TDR methodology 3/14/06 1.5 Work on HALO/TDR methodology & statistics 3/14/06 2.0 Town Board work session 3/22/06 7.0 Work on HALO/TDR build out 3/24/06 0.25 Print parcel listing for HALO/TDR analysis 3/27/06 2.5 Work on HALO/TDR analysis 3/27/06 1.75 Discuss HALO/TDR with Melissa Spiro, Anthony Trezza & Mark Terry 3/28/06 2.75 Work on HALO/TDR analysis 3/28/06 2.0 Town Board work session 4/7/06 2.25 Planning & Zoning meeting 4/10/06 0.5 Work on HALO/TDR analysis 4/17/06 0.75 Work on HALO/TDR analysis 4/18/06 1.5 Prepare for stakeholder meeting 4/18/06 2.75 Stakeholders meeting 4/26/06 2..25 Stakeholders meeting 4/26/06 2.0 Stakeholders meeting 18/23/06 1.25 Review proposed TDR legislation for meeting q,~/24/06 1.5 Planning & Zoning meeting re TDR program · I~5/26/06 1.0 Discuss TDR program with Melissa Spiro ~ ~/30/06 1.5 Discuss HALO modeling methodology with Mark Terry, generate HALO statistics for Southold 5/31/06 0.25 Generate Southold HALO statistics for Mark Terry 6/1/06 2.25 Discuss HALO maps & modeling with Mark Terry, generate HALO statistics 6/2/06 0.25 Generate Southold HALO statistics 6/6/06 1.75 Discuss HALO mapping with Mark Terry, create HALO density map 6/7/06 0.25 Update HALO density map 6/8/06 0.75 Update HALO density map, work on Southold HALO modeling 6/8/06 2.0 HALO meeting 6/9/06 0.25 Work on Southold HALO modeling 6/12/06 1.0 Update HALO modeling 6/15/06 2.25 HALO modeling group meeting with Mark Terry, Melissa Spiro & Leslie Weisman 6/16/06 1.75 Review HALO modeling, discuss HALO modeling with Mark Terry 6/19/06 1.0 Review Leslie Weisman's HALO write up, discuss HALO modeling with Melissa Spiro 6/20/06 0.75 Review Leslie Weisman's HALO write up 6/21/06 2 Planning & Zoning meeting 6/21/06 1.25 HALO modeling group meeting 6/30/06 3.5 Update Southold HALO map, create charts for meeting 7/5/06 2 HALO modeling group meeting 7/6/06 0.5 Update Southold HALO modeling map i ~/19/06 0.5 ! Review Leslie Weisman's draft HALO document · ~'?/27/06 2.0 Planning & Zoning meeting 8/8/06 2.0 Town Board work session 8/8/06 2.75 HALO modeling Mattituck & Orient 8/9/06 2.25 HALO modeling 8/14/06 1.0 Discuss HALO modeling with Mark Terry 8/16/06 1.0 HALO modeling group meeting 8/16/06 1.5 Planning & Zoning meeting re HALO modeling for Mattituck & New Suffolk 8/21/06 1.0 Update Mattituck HALO modeling 8/22/06 1.25 Work on HALO modeling 8/23/06 1.75 HALO modeling group meeting 8/23/06 1.75 Update Southold HALO modeling 8/24/06 1.0 HALO modeling 8/28/06 0.5 Update Orient HALO modeling 8/30/06 1.5 Update HALO modeling for Cutchogue & East Marion 8/30/06 2.25 Planning & Zoning meeting re Cutchogue & East Marion HALOs 8/31/06 3.0 Update Peconic & Greenport HALO modeling 9/7/06 1.0 Town Board hamlet meeting 10/10/06 1.0 Discuss HALO modeling with Mark Terry & Leslie Weisman 10/11/06 1.0 Update HALO modeling 10/12/06 1.75 TDR workgroup meeting ,~11~0/31/06 1.25 Print HALO maps for Planning Board ~.~'~/2/06 1.5 PDD/TDR work group meeting ]1~1/8/06 2 Individual PDPdTDR meeting p~ 1.5 Work on HALO maps, individual PDR numbers 11/17/06 1.5 TDR/PDR work group meeting 11/20/06 2 Planning Board work session - discuss HALO boundaries 11/28/06 1 SCDHS meeting re TDR 11/29/06 1 Discuss HALO boundaries with Mark Terry 130.5 Travel/MileageRecord Date Mileage Destination Supplies ~Date Item Itemized Cost Total Cost STATE OF NEW YORK MARY O. DONOHUE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR Mr. Mark Terry Interim Planning Director Town of Southold P.O.B. 1179, NYS Route 54375 Southold, NY 11971 RE: 2005-06 Quality Communities Grant Program L.---- 'gh Town of Southold Transfer of Development Ri ts Program - Develop?er~ em~ntatlon~- QCEPF0064 Dear Director Terry: Thank you for submitting an application to the Department of State for state assistance payments under the Quality Communities Grant Program. We are pleased to announce that your community's application was successful and your project will receive funding in the amount of $60,000. Congratulations! The next step is to prepare a contract. A staff`member from the Department of State Division of Local Government will be in contact with your office in the coming weeks to make arrangements for developing this document. If you have any questions please contact Charlie Murphy or Laurie Savage in our Division of Local Government at (518) 473-3355. Sincerely, Sincerely, Mary O. Donohue Lieutenant Governor Christopher L. Jacobs Secretary of State cc: SuperOgorcRt~e~lHE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR STATE CAPITOL ALBANY 12224 PATRICIA A. FINNEGAN TOWN ATTORNEY patricia.finnegan@town.southold.ny.us KIERAN M. CORCORAN ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY kieran.corcoran@town.southold.ny.us LORI HULSE MONTEFUSCO ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY lori.montefusco@town .southold .ny .us SCOTT A. RUSSELL ......... Supervisor Town Hall Annex, 54375 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1939 Facsimile (631) 765-6639 OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD To: From: Date: Subject: MEMORANDUM Mr. Mark Terry, Acting Department Head, Planning Dept. Lynne Krauza Secretary to the Town Attorney June 4, 2007 New York State Quality Communities Program TDR Grant Contract No. C-059943 Attached please find the referenced Agreement in connection with the referenced matter. Kindly forward this Agreement to the NYS DEC in order for them to obtain the remaining signatures. Please request that they send us a fully executed original for our records, which original document should be retained by the Town Clerk. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you for your assistance. /Ik Enclosure cc: Ms. Elizabeth A. Neville, Town Clerk (w/encl.) JUN - 5 2007 STATE AGENCY (Name and Address): NYS Department of State 41 State Street Albany, NY 12231-0001 NYS COMPTROLLER'S #: C059943 ORIG. AGENCY CODE: 19000 CONTRACTOR (.Name and Address of Lead Aeencv} Town of Southold Supervisor P.O.B. 1179 Southold, NY 11971 TYPE OF PROGRAM: 2005 Quality Communities Program I TOTAL PROJECT COST - $75,000.00 I STATE FUNDING AMOUNT FOR $60,000.00 INITIAL PERIOD 4-1-05 - 3-31-07 LOCAL SHARE $15,000.00 FEDERAL TAX IDENTIFICATION NUMBER: [ [ - ~ t9 O [ ?~ ~ MUNICIPALITY #470379000 INITIAL CONTRACT PERIOD: FROM: 4-1-05 TO: 3-31-07 Multi-Year Term: From: 4-1-05 To:3-31-08 APPENDICES ATTACHED TO AND PART OF THIS AGREEMENT APPENDIX A: Standard clauses as required by the Attorney General for all state contracts APPENDIX Al: Agency-Specific Clauses Attachments 1, 2, 3, 4, thereto: Final Project Summary Report, Quarterly Contractor Report, Project Status, Procurement Certification APPENDIX B: Budget APPENDIX C: Payment and Reporting Schedule APPENDIX D: Program Workplan APPENDIX E: Grant Application APPENDIX X: Modification Agreement Form (to accompany modified appendices for changes in term or consideration on an existing period or for renewal periods) IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have executed or approved this AGREEMENT on the dates below their signatures. CONTRACTOR: Title: STATE AGENCY: New York State Department of State By:. Title: Date: State A~enc¥ Certification "In addition to the acceptance of this contract, I also certify that original copies of this signature page will be attached to all other exact copies of this contract." CONTRACTOR State of New York County of ~ ~.~ (/~ On this ) day of ~-~tTr-~, 20~, before me personally came ! t~_ct ~2;~ [/ to me ~own, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose ~d say _he is the ~ ~lJ ~ ~ of ~ ~ ~ the Contractor described in ~d which executed the above~s~ument; ~d that ~e signed hisser name thereto byorder of the governing body of the a~~~ntractor. ~ MY COMMISSION EXPIRES DEG. 6, Approved: Andrew M.Cuomo, Attorney General Approved: Alan G. Hevesi, Comptroller Title: Title: Date: Date: -2- IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have executed or approved this AGREEMENT on the dates below their signatures. CONTRACTOR: (Pdnt Name) Title: 5~t4 ~a.~ Date: ~- ~ ~ STATE AGENCY: New York State Department of State By: (Pdnt Name) Title: Date: State Agency Certification "In addition to the acceptance of this contract, I also certify that original copies of this signature page will be attached to all other exact copies of this contract." CONTRACTOR State of New York ) Countyof ..5 ~"/5'~c> (/~--~ )ss: On this /~'~k day of~, 20 0~, before me personally came ~J<~4-(- .7~, ~5~_~tX2;C.,(/ to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say _he is the . ~,~z~4 c~ [4' ~ of ,'~'.d o'-~ _.Co the Contractor hh(; described in and w ic executed the above by order of the governing body of the ab KIERAN M. CORCORAN / QUALIFIED IN SUFFOLK COUNTY NOTARY ¢~02C06119838 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES DEC. 6, 2~( einstrument; and that _he signed his/her name thereto I~/ntractOr. ~ Approved: Andrew M.Cuomo, Attorney General Approved: Alan G. Hevesi, Comptroller Title: Title: Date: Date: -2- IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties hereto have executed or approved this AGREEMENT on the dates below their signatures. CONTRACTOR: By: (Print Title: STATE AGENCY: New York State Department of State By: (Print Name) Title: Date: CONTRACTOR State Agency Certification "In addition to the acceptance of this contract, I also certify that original copies of this signature page will be attached to all other exact copies of this contract." State of New York ) Countyof _~tA~;~xc>(.[.<~ )ss{ (/'0t44._~ On this ~I~ ~day of ~-~---~r-on~/¢, 20 or/ before me personally came -5~C-~>'~L /4. ,~64_r5-c~[ { to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say he is the ~-c,~::ff~t v[~ c~ of -77~zo~,4 o~ the Contractor described in and which executed the abo~ insJx, urne~; and that _he silo by order of the governing body of the qt~ve men'tior/ed/~o}tractor. QUALIFIED IN SUFFOLK COUNTY [ ~ NOTARY #02C06119838 J / NOTARY PUBLIC MY COMMISSION EXPIRES DEC. 6, 2~ Approved: Andrew M.Cuomo, Attomey General Approved: Alan G. Hevesi, Comptroller Title: Title: Date: Date: -2- STATE OF NEW YORK AGREEMENT The AGREEMENT is hereby made by and between the State of New York agency (STATE) and the public or private agency (CONTRACTOR) identified on the face page hereof. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the STATE has the authority to regulate and provide funding for the establishment and operation of program services and desires to contract with skilled parties possessing the necessary resources to provide such services; and WHEREAS, the CONTRACTOR is ready, willing and able to provide such program services and possesses or can make available all necessary qualified personnel, licenses, facilities and expertise to perform or have performed the services required pursuant to the terms of this AGREEMENT; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises, responsibilities and covenants herein, the STATE and the CONTRACTOR agree as follows: I. Conditions of Agreement A. This AGREEMENT may consist of successive periods (PERIOD), as specified within the AGREEMENT or within a subsequent Modification Agreement(s) (Appendix X). Each additional or superseding PERIOD shall be on the forms specified by the particular State agency, and shall be incorporated into this AGREEMENT. B. Funding for the first PERIOD shall not exceed the funding amount specified on the face page hereof. Funding for each subsequent PERIOD, if any, shall not exceed the amount specified in the appropriate appendix for that PERIOD. C. This AGREEMENT incorporates the face pages attached and ali of the marked appendices identified on the face page hereof. D. For each succeeding PERIOD of this AGREEMENT, the parties shall prepare new appendices, to the extent that any require modification, and a Modification Agreement (the attached Appendix X is the blank form to be used). Any terms of this AGREEMENT not modified shall remain in effect for each PERIOD of the AGREEMENT. To modify the AGREEMENT within an existing PERIOD, the parties shall revise or complete the appropriate appendix form(s). Any change in the amount of consideration to be paid, or change in the term, is subject to the approval of the Office of the State comptroller. Any other modifications shall be processed in accordance with agency provided guidelines and instructions. Subject to the availability of funds, determination by the Department that it is in the best interest of the Project and the State, and upon mutual execution of an Appendix X and approval by the Office of State Comptroller, the Multi-Year Term of this Agreement may be extended by one -3- Contract Period not to exceed twelve (12) months. E. The CONTRACTOR shall perform all services to the satisfaction of the STATE. The CONTRACTOR shall provide services and meet the program objectives summarized in the Program Workplan (Appendix D) in accordance with: provisions of the AGREEMENT, relevant laws, rules and regulations, administrative and fiscal guidelines; and where applicable, operating certificates for facilities or licenses for an activity or program. F. If the CONTRACTOR enters into subcontracts for the performance of work pursuant to this AGREEMENT, the CONTRACTOR shall take full responsibility for the acts and omissions of its subcontractors. Nothing in the subcontract shall impair the rights of the STATE under this AGREEMENT. No contractual relationship shall be deemed to exist between the subcontractor and the STATE. II. III. G. Appendix A. (Standard Clauses as required by the Attorney General for all State contracts) takes precedence over all other parts of the AGREEMENT. Payment and Reporting A. The CONTRACTOR, to be eligible for payment, shall submit to the STATE's designated payment office (identified in Appendix C) any appropriate documentation as required by the Payment and Reporting Schedule (Appendix C) and by agency fiscal guidelines, in a manner acceptable to the STATE. B. The STATE shall make payments and any reconciliations in accordance with the Payment and Reporting Schedule (Appendix C). The STATE shall pay the CONTRACTOR, in consideration of contract services for a given PERIOD, a sum not to exceed the amount noted on the face page hereof or in the respective Appendix designating the payment amount for that given PERIOD. This sum shall not duplicate reimbursement from other sources for CONTRACTOR costs and services provided pursuant to this AGREEMENT. C. The CONTRACTOR shall meet the audit requirements specified by the STATE. Terminations A. This AGREEMENT may be terminated at any time upon mutual written consent of the STATE and the CONTRACTOR. B. The STATE may terminate the AGREEMENT immediately, upon written notice of termination to the CONTRACTOR, if the CONTRACTOR fails to comply with the terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT and/or with any laws, rules, regulations, policies or procedures affecting this AGREEMENT. C. The STATE may also terminate this AGREEMENT for any reason in accordance with provisions set forth in Appendix Al. D. Written notice of termination, where required, shall be sent by personal messenger service or by certified mail, return receipt requested. The termination shall be effective in accordance with terms of the notice. E. Upon receipt of notice of termination, the CONTRACTOR shall cancel, prior to the effective date of any prospective termination, all outstanding obligations, and agrees not to incur any new obligations after receipt of the notice without approval by the STATE. F. The STATE shall be responsible for payment on claims pursuant to services provided and costs incurred pursuant to terms of the AGREEMENT. In no event shall the STATE be liable for expenses and obligations arising from the program(s) in this AGREEMENT after the termination date. IV. Indemnification VI. A. The CONTRACTOR shall be solely responsible and answerable in damages for any and all accident and/or injuries to person (including death) or property arising out of or related to the services to be rendered by the CONTRACTOR or its subcontractors pursuant to this AGREEMENT. The CONTRACTOR shall indemnify and hold harmless the STATE and its officers and employees from claims, suits, actions, damages and costs of every nature arising out of the provision of services pursuant to this AGREEMENT. B. The CONTRACTOR is an independent contractor and may neither hold itself out nor claim to be an officer, employee or subdivision of the STATE nor make any claim, demand or application to or for any right based upon any different status. Property Any equipment, furniture, supplies or other property purchased pursum~t to this AGREEMENT is deemed to be the property of the STATE except as may otherwise be governed by Federal or State laws, rules or regulations, or as stated in Appendix Al. Safeguards for Services and Confidentiality A. Services performed pursuant to this AGREEMENT are secular in nature and shall be performed in a manner that does not discriminate on the basis of religious belief, or promote or discourage adherence to religion in general or particular religious beliefs. B. Funds provided pursuant to this AGREEMENT shall not be used for any partisan political activity, or for activities that may influence legislation or the election or defeat of any candidate for public office. C. Information relating to individuals who may receive services pursuant to this AGREEMENT shall be maintained and used only for the purposes intended under the contract and in conformity with applicable provisions of laws and regulations, or specified in Appendix Al. -5- APPENDIX A Standard Clauses for All New York State Contracts The parties to the attached contract, license, lease, amendment or other agreement of any kind (hereinafter, "the contract" or "this contract") agree to be bound by the following clauses which are hereby made a part of the contract (the word "Contractor" herein refers to any party other than the State, whether a contractor, licenser, licensee, lessor, lessee or any other party): I. EXECUTORY CLAUSE. In accordance with Section 41 of the State Finance Law, the State shall have no liability under this contract to the Contractor or to anyone else beyond funds appropriated and available for this contract. 2. NON-ASSIGNMENT CLAUSE. In accordance with Section 138 of the State Finance Law, this contract may not be assigned by the Contractor or its right, title or interest therein assigned, transferred conveyed, sublet or otherwise disposed of without the previous consent, in writing, of the State and any attempts to assign the contract without the State's written consent are null and void Thc Contractor may, however, assign its right to receive payment without the State's prior written consent unless this contract concerns Certificates of Participation pursuant to Article 5-A of the State Finance Law. 3. COMPTROLLER'S APPROVAl, In accordance with Section 112 of the State Finance Law (or, if this contract is with the State University or City University of New York, Section 355 or Section 6218 of the OEducation Law), if this contract exceeds $15,000 (or the minimum oresholds agreed to by the Office of the State Comptroller for certain S.U.N.Y. and C.U.N.Y. contracts), or if this is an amendment for any amount to a contract which, as so amended, exceeds said statutory amount or f, by th s contract, the State agrees to give something other than money when the value or reasonably estimated value of such consideration exceeds $10,000, it shall not be valid, effective or binding upon the State until it has been approved by the State Comptroller and filed in his office. Comptmllar's approval of contracts let by the Office of Ganeral Services is required when such contracts exceed $30,000 (State Finance Law Section 163.6a). 4. WORKERS' COMPENSATION BENEFITS In accordance with Section 142 of the State Finance Law, this contract shall be void and of no force and effect unless the Contractor shall provide and maintain coverage during the life of this contract for the benefit of such employees as are required to be covered by the provisions of the Workers' Compensation Law. 5. NON-DISCRIMINATION REQUIREMENTS. To the extend required by Article 15 of the Executive Law (also known as the Human Rights Law) and all other State and Federal statutory and constitutional non-discrimination provisions, the Contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, creed, color, sex, national origin, sexual orientation, age, disability or marital status. Furthermore, in accordance with Section 220-e of the Labor Law, if this is a contract for the construction, alteration or repair of any public building or public work or for the manufacture, sale or distribution of materials, equipment or supplies, and to the extent that this contract shall be ~erformed York, Contractor agrees that neither it within the State '~,r. or its subanntractors shall, by reason of race, creed, color, disability, sex, or national origin: (a) discriminate in hiring against any New York State citizen who is qualified and available to perform the work; or (b) discriminate against or intimidate any employee hired for the performance May 03 of work under this contract. If this is a building service contract as defined in Section 230 of the Labor Law, then, in accordance with Section 239 thereof, Contractor agrees that neither it nor its subcontractors shall by reason of race, creed, color, national origin, age, sex, or disability: (a) discriminate in hiring against any New York State citizen who is qualified and available to perform the work; or (b) discriminate against or intimidate any employee hired for the performance of work under this contract. Contractor is subject to fines of $50.00 per person per day for any violation of Section 220-e or Section 239 as well as possible terminafion of this contract and forfeiture of all moneys due hereunder for a second or subsequent violation. 6. WAGE AND HOURS PROVISIONS. If this is a public work contract covered by Article 8 of the Labor Law or a building service contract covered by Article 9 thereof, neither Contractor's employees nor the employees of its subcontractors may be required or permitted to work more than the number of hours or days stated in said statutes, except as otherwise provided in the Labor law and as set forth in prevailing wage and supplement schedules issued by the State Labor Department. Furthermore, Contractor and its subcontractors must pay at least the prevaiIing wage rate and pay or provide the prevailing supplements, including the premium rates for overtime pay, as determined by the State Labor Depart~nent in accordance with the Labor Law. 7, NON-COLLUSIVE BIDDING REQUIREMENT. In accordance with Section 139-d of the State Finance Law, if this contract was awarded based upon the submission of bids, Contractor warrants, under penalty of perjury, that its bid was arrived at independently and without collusion aimed at restricting competition. Contractor further warrants that, at the time Contractor submitted its bid, an authorized and responsible person executed and delivered to the State a non-collusive bidding certification on Contractor's behalfi 8. INTERNATIONAL BOYCOTT PROHIBITION. In accordancc with Section 220-f of the Labor Law and Section 139-h of thc State Finance Law, if this contract exceeds $5,000, the Contractor agrees, as a material condition of the contract, that neither the Contractor nor any substantially owned or affiliated person, firm, partnership or corporation has participated, is participating, or shall participate in an international boycott in violation of the federal Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 USC App. Sections 2401 et seq.) or regulations thereunder. If such Contractor. or any of the aforesaid affiliates of Contractor, is convicted or is otherwise found to have violmcd said laws or regulations upon the final determination of the United States Commerce Department or any other appropriate agency of the Unilcd States subsequent to thc contractors execution, such contract, amendment or modification thereto shall be rendered forfcit and void. Tbe Contractor shall so notify the State Comptroller within five (5) business days of such conviction, determination or dispos!tion of appeal (2NYCRR 105.4), 9. SET-OFF RIGHTS. The State shall have all of its common law, equitable and statutory rights of set-off. These rights shall include, but not be limited to, the State's option to withhold for the purposes of set-off any moneys due to the Contractor under this contract up to any amounts due and owing to the State with regard to this contract, any other contract with any State department or agency, including any contract for a term commencing prior to the term of this contract, plus any amounts due and owing to the State for any other reason including, without limitation, tax delinquencies, fee delinquencies or monetary penalties relative thereto. A-2 The State shall exercise its set-offrights in accordance with normal State practicesincluding, in cases ofset-offparsuantto anaudit, the finalization of such audit by the State agency, its representatives, or the State Comptroller. 10. RECORDS. The Contractor shall establish and maintain complete and accurate books, records, docmnents, accounts and other evidence directly pertinent to performance under this contract (hereinafi. er, collectively, "the Records"). The Records must be kept for the balance of the calendar year in which they were made and for six (6) additional years thereafter. The State Comptroller, the Attorney General and any other person or entity authorized to conduct an examination, as well as the agency or agencies involved in this contract, shall have access to the Records during normal business hours at an office of the Contractor within the State of New York or, if no such office is available, at a mutually agreeable and reasonable venue within tbe State, for the term specified above for the purposes of inspection, auditing and copying. The State shall take reasonable steps to protect from public disclosure any of the Records which are exempt fi.om disclosure under Section 87 of the Public Officers Law (the "Statute") provided that: (i) the Contractor shall timely inform an appropriate State official, in writing, that said records should not be disclosed; and (ii) said records shall be sufficiently identified; and (iii) designation of said records as exempt under the Statute is reasonable. Nothing contained herein shall diminish, or in any way adversely affect, the State's right to discovery in any pending or future litigation. 1. IDENTIFYING INFORMATION AND PRIVACY NOT1FICA- __ (a) FEDERAL EMPLOYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER and/or FEDERAL SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER. All invoices or New York State standard vouchers submitted for payment for the sale of goods or services or the lease of real or personal property to a New York State agency atust include the payee's identification number, i.e., the seller's or lessor's identification number. The number is either the payee's Federal employer identification number or Federal social security number, or both such numbers when the payee has both such numbers. Failure to include this number or numbers may delay payment. Where the payee does not have such number or numbers, the payee, on its invoice or New York State standard voucher, must give the reason or reasons why the payee does not have such number or numbers. (b) PRIVACY NOTIFICATION. (1) The authority to request the above personal information from a seller of goods or services or a lessor of real or personal property, and the authority to maintain such information, is found in Section 5 of the State Tax Law. Disclosure of this information by the seller or lessor to the State is mandatory. The principal purpose for which the information is collected is to enable the State to identify individuals, businesses and others who have been delinquent in filing tax returns or may have understated their tax liabilities and to generally identify persons affected by the taxes administered by the Commissioner of Taxation and Finance. The information will be used for tax administration purposes and for any other purpose authorized by law. (2) The pemonal information is requested by the purchasing unit of the agency contracting to pumhase the goods or services or lease the real or personal property covered by this contract or lease. The information is eaintalned in New York State's Central Accounting System by the irector of Accounting Operations, Office of the State Comptroller '~AESOB, Albanyl New York 12236. 12. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR MINORITIES AND WOMEN. In accordance with Section 312 of the Executive Law, if this contract is: (i) a written agreement or purchase order instrnment, providing for a total expenditure in excess of $25,000.00, whereby a contracting agency is committed to expend or does expend funds in return for labor, services, supplies, equipment, materials or any combination of the foregoing, to be performed for, or rendered or furnished to the contracting agency; or (ii) a written agreement in excess of $100,000.00 whereby a contracting agency is committed to expend or does expend funds for the acquisition, construction, demolition, replacement, major repair or renovation of real property and improvements thereon; or (iii) a written agreement in excess of$100,000.00 whereby the owner of a State assisted housing project is committed to expend or does expend fuhds for the acquisition, construction, demolition, replacement, major repair or ren- ovation of real property and improvements thereon for such project, then: (a) The Contractor will not discriminate against employees or applicants for employment because of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, age, disability or marital status, and will undertake or continue existing programs of affirmative action to ensure that minority group members and women are afforded equal employment opportunities without discrim- ination. Affirmative action shall mean recruitment, employment, job assignment, promotion, upgradings, de,notion, transfer, layoff; or termination and rates of pay or other forms of compensation; (b) at the request of the contracting agency, the Contractor shall request each employment agency, labor union, or authorized representative of workers with which it has a collective bargaining or other agreement or understanding, to furnish a x~ritten statement that such employment agency, labor union or representative will not discriminate on the basis of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, age, disability or marital status and that such union or representative will affirmatively cooperate in the implementation of the cantractor's obligations herein; and (c) the Contractor shall state, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees, that, in the performance of the State contract, all qualified applicants will be afforded equal employment opportunities without dis- crimination because of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, age, disability or marital status. Contractor will include the provisions of"a, "b", and "c" above, in every subcontract over $25,000.00 for the construction, demolition, replacement, major repair, renovation, planning or design of real properly and improvements thereon (the "Work") except where the Work is for the beneficial use of the Contractor. Section 312 does not apply to: (i) work, goods or services unrelated to this contract; or (ii) employment outside New York State; or (iii) banking services, insurance policies or the sale of securities. The State shall consider compliance by a contractor or subcontractor with the requirements of any federal law concerning equal employment opportunity which effectuates the purpose of this section. The contracting agency shall determine whether the imposition of the requirements of the provisions hereof duplicate or conflict with any such federal law and if such duplication or conflict exists, the contracting agency shall waive the applicability of Section 312 to the extent of such duplication or conflict. Contractor will comply with all duly promulgated and lawful rules and regulations of the Governor's Office of Minority and Women's Business Development pertaining hereto. 13. CONFLICTING TERMS. In the event of a conflict between the terms of the contract (including any and all attachments thereto and May 03 amendments thereof) and the terms of this Appendix A, the temps of this Appendix A shall control. 14. GOVERNING LAW. This contract shall be governed by the laws of the State of New York except where the Federal supremacy clause requires otherwise. A-3 15. LATE PAYMENT. Timeliness of payment and any interest to be paid to Contractor for late payment shall be governed by Article 1 I-A of the State Finance Law to the extent required by law. 16. NO ARBITRATION. Disputes involving this contract, including the breach or alleged breach thereof, may not be submitted to binding arbitration (except where statutorily authorized), but must, instead, be heard in a court of competent jurisdiction of the State of New York. 17. SERVICE OF PROCESS. In addition to the methods of service allowed by the State Civil Practice Law & Rules ("CPLR"), Contractor hereby consents to service of process upon it by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested. Service hereunder shall be complete upon Contractor's actual receipt of process or upon the State's receipt of tbe return thereof by the United States Postal Service ,as refused or undeliverable. Contractor must promptly notify the State, in writing, of each mid every change of address to which service of process can be made. Oerviceby the State to the last known address shall be sufficient. ontractor will have thirty (30) calendar days after service hereunder is complete in which to respond. 18. PROHIBITION ON PURCHASE OF TROPICAL }lARD- WOODS. The Contractor certifies and warrants that all wood products to be used under this contract award will be in accordance with, but not limited to, the specifications and provisions of State Finance Law § 165. (Use of Tropical Hardwoods) which prohibits purchase and use of tropical hardwoods, unless specifically exempted, by the State or any govarnmental agency or political subdivision or public benefit corporation. Qualification for an exemption under this law will be the responsibility of the contractor to establish to meet with the approval of the State. In addition, when any portion of this contract involving the use of woods, whether supply or installation, is to be performed by any subcontractor, the prime Contractor will indicate and certify in the submitted bid proposal that the subcontractor has been informed and is in co~npliance with specifications and provisions regarding use of tropical hardwoods as detailed in § 165 State Finance Law. Any such use must meet with the approval of the State, otherwise, the bid may not be considered responsive. Under bidder certifications, proof of qualification for exemption will be the responsibility of the Contractor to meet with the approval of the State. 19. MACBRIDE FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRINCIPLES In accordance with the MacBride Fair Employment Principles (Chapter 807 of the Laws of 1992), the Contractor hereby stipulates that the Contractor either (a) has no business operations in Northern Ireland, or (b) shall take Iawful steps in good faith to conduct any business operations in Northern Ireland in O:cordance Employment Principles'(as described ~he MacBride Fair ,n. Section 165 of the New York State Finance Law), and shall permit independent monitoring of compliance with such principles. 20. OMNIBUS PROCUREMENT ACT OF 1992 It is the policy of May O3 New York State to maximize opportunifies for the participation of New York State business enterprises, including minority and women-owned business enterprises as bidders, subcontractors and suppliers on its procurement contracts. Information on the availability of New York State subcontractors and suppliers is available from: NYS Department of Economic Development Division for Small Business 30 South Pearl Street, 7~ floor Albany, New York 12245 518-292-5220 A directory of certified minority and women-owned business enterprises is available from: NYS Department of Economic Development Minority and Women's Business Development Division 30 South Pearl Street, 2~ floor Albany, New York 12245 http://www.empire.state.ny.ns Thc Omnibus Procurement Act of 1992 requires that by signing this bid proposal or contract, as applicahle, Contractom certify that whenever the total bid amount is greater than $1 million: (a) The Contractor has made reasonable efforts to encourage the participation of New York State Business Enterprises as suppliers and subcontractors, including certified minority and women-owned business enterprises, on this project, and has retained the documentation of these efforts to be provided upon request to the State; (b) The Contractor has complied with the Federal Equal Opportunity Act of 1972 (P.L. 92-261), as amended; ©) The Contractor agrees to make reasonable efforts to provide notification to New York State residents of employment opportunities on this project through listing any such positions with the Job Service Division of the New York State Department of Labor, or providing such notification in such manner as is consistent with existing collective bargaining contracts or agreements. The Contractor agrees to document these efforts and to provide said documentation to the State upon request; and (d) The Contractor acknowledges notice that the State may seek to obtain offset credits from foreign countries as a result of this contract and agxees to cooperate with the State in these efforts. 21. RECIPROCITY AND SANCTIONS PROVISIONS Biddem are hereby notified that if their principal place of business is located in a country, nation, province, state or political subdivision that penalizes New York State vendors, and if the goods or services they offer will be substantially produced or performed outside New York State, the Omnibus Procurement Act 1994 amendments and 2000 amendments (Chapter 684 and Chapter 383 respectively) require that they be denied contracts which they would otherwise obtain. NOTE: As of May 15, 2002, the list of discriminatoryj urisdictions subject to this provision includes the states of South Carolina, Alaska, West Virginia, Wyoming, Louisiana and Hawaii. Contact NYS Department of Economic Development for a current list of jurisdictions subject to this provision. 22. PURCHASES OF APPAREL. In accordance with State Finance Law 162 (4-a), the State shall not purchase any apparel from any vendor unable or unwilling to certify that: (l) such apparel was manufactured in compliance with all applicable labor and occupational safety laws, including, but not limited to, child labor laws, wage and hours laws and workplace safety laws, and (ii) vendor wilI supply, with its bid (or, if not a bid situation, prior to or at the time of signing a contract with the State), if known, the names and addresses of each subcontractor and a list of all mannfacturing plants to be utilized by the bidder. A-4 May 03 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FUND APPLICATION FOR STATE ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS NEW YORK STATE QUALITY COMMUNITIES PROGRAM, YEAR 2005-2006 PLEASE CONTINUE ON ADDITIONAL SHEETS AS NECESSARY 1. APPLICANT: Town of Southold City - Town - Village - County - Local Public Authority - Public Benefit Co~oration - Indian Tribe/Nation - Not-For-Profit Corporation: 2. APPLICANT MAIL1NG ADDRESS: POBox 1179 (no.&street) l 54375 NYS Route 25 ~ Southold [NY (zip) [ 11971 PHONE: I(] ~6_31 I)1765-1938 _] FAX: I (1631 I)1765-3136 3. FEDERAL TAX IDENTIFICATION No. 11-6001939 NYS CHARITIES REGISTRATION No. 5. PHONE: Mark Terry li~-i938- IFAX:j (163 )1765-3136 TITLE: Interim Planning Director 6. E-MAIL [Mag. terry~town.southold.ny.us 7. CONTACT MAILING ADDRESS (if different from applicant) (no. & street) ~ 1. PROJECT NAME: [ Town of Southold TDR Program-Development and Implementation 2. PROJECT LOCATION: COUNTY: [ Suffolk 1 NEW YORK STATE SENATE DISTRICT: SD NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY DISTRICT: AD 1 Intermunicipal Growth Program Community Growth Program Community Center Program Community Open Space Program Mountain Communities Program 1. Proposed Start Date: February 1, 2006 2. Expected Completion Date: 3. Total Project Costs: 95,000 4. State Assistance Requested: 5. Local Match: Is your municipality identified as an economically distressed municipality? Yes ku~ustl, 2006 75,000 15,000 X X Resolution is attached. 9 Resolution will be submitted by .,2005. I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury that information provided on this form and attached statements and exhibits is true td the best of my knowledge and belief. False statements made herein are punishable as a Class A misdemeanor pursuant to Section 210.45 of the Penal law. erintname: i] Joshua Horton ITitle I Supervisor 'of(entity) [TownofSouthold Date -~20, 2005 [Signature Type here: Proposal is to develop a Town-wide Transfer of Development Rights Program (TDR) as an implementation tool for the Town's Comprehensive Plan, including the Hamlet Study and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan (LWRP). The TDR program is a necessary mechanism for the Town to meet its preservation goals while at the same time accommodating new growth and promoting strong economic development. This initiative will preserve farmland and open space, direct new development to appropriate areas in each of the hamlets, and provide incentives for property owners and developers to participate in the program. 2 SOUTHOLD,._g~.~oDM store USPS Cashier KK~QRO Cashier's Name PO pi,one Number %54B3309~1 USPS ~ 0.00 1. ExD: ...... 12231 Destlnat/un. i hr' 3.60 oz. ~e . , Non~ po~a9~ l~e. 13 BB tal uos~' ' To .... ' 13.B5 Base ~a~u. 0.00 Subtotal 0,00 Total Number of Items SolO: 1 lhank ~ou please come again! Customer Copy Label 11-B August 20oo ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FUND APPLICATION FOR STATE ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS NEW YORK STATE QUALITY COMMUNITIES PROGRAM, YEAR 2005-2006 PLEASE CONTINUE ON ADDITIONAL SHEETS AS NECESSARY 1. APPLICANT: Town of Southold City - Town - Village - County - Local Public Authority - Public Benefit Corporation - Indian Tribe/Nation - Not-For-Profit Corporation: 2. APPLICANT MAILING ADDRESS: PO Box 1179 (no. & street) 1 54375 NYS Route 25 (~city) I Southold I NY (zip) { 11971 PHONE: I(I 63_1 I )1765-1938 F_~F~.' T~)-1765_3136 3. FEDERAL TAX IDENTIFICATION No. i 11-6001939 NYS CHARITIES REGISTRATION No. )N: Mark Terry TITLE: Interim Planning Director 5. PHONE: 1(163i I)7~-1938 IF~631D~765-3136 6. E-MAIL I Ma~terry~town.southold.ny.us 7. CONTACT MAILING ADDRESS (if different from applicant) (no. & street) ~citY) ' IiNY (zip) ~ 1. PROJECT NAME: ~ Town of Southold TDR Program-Development and Implementation 2. PROJECT LOCATION: COUNTY: i Suffolk D NEW YORK STATE SENATE DISTRICT: SD 1 YORK STATE ASSEMBLY DISTRICT: AD 1 3. PROJECT TYPE: Intermunicipal Growth Program [ X Community Growth Program Community Center Program Community Open Space Program Mountain Communities Program 1. Provosed Start Date: February 1, 2006 2. Exvected Comvletion Date: August 1, 2006 3. Total Project Costs: $ 95,000 4. State Assistance Requested: $ 75,000 5. Local Match: $ 1},000 Is your municipality iden_tifi-ed'aS an ~conomically distressed municipality? Yes- No X X Resolution is attached. 9 Resolution will be submitted by _,2005. I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury that information provided on this form and attached statements and exhibits is true td the best of my knowledge and belief. False statements made herein are punishable as a Class A misdemeanor pursuant to Section 210.45 of the Penal law. Print name: I Joshua Horton Date ] December 20, 2005 Type here: Proposal is to develop a Town-wide Transfer of Development Rights Program (TDR) as an implementation tool for the Town's Comprehensive Plan, including the Hamlet Study and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan (LWRP). The TDR program is a necessary mechanism for the Town to meet its preservation goals while at the same time accommodating new growth and promoting strong economic development. This initiative will preserve farmland and open space, direct new development to appropriate areas in each of the hamlets, and provide incentives for property owners and developers to participate in the program. 2 UNITED PO$ L mmm~m ~ELCONE TO SOUTHOLD HPO SOUTHOLD, NY 11971-1000 12/02/05 01:24PH Store USPS Trans 121 ~kstn sysSO03 Cashier KCYZ9G Cashier's Name ANDRE~ Stock Unit Id WINDANDREW PO Phone Number 800-ASK-USPS USPS ~ 3548330971 1. Exp. Mail PO-ADD 0.00 Destination: 12231 Weight: 1 lb. 2.60 oz. Pos[age Type: None Total Dost: 1~,85 Sase Rate: 1T,85 Label~: ETO28772512US Corporate Acct,: 119294 Amount Charged: 17.85 Subtotal 0.00 Total 0.00 Number of Items Sold: 1 Thank You Please come again! ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FUND APPLICATION FOR STATE ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS NEW YORK STATE QUALITY COMMUNITIES PROGRAM, YEAR 2005-2006 PLEASE CONTINUE ON ADDITIONAL SHEETS AS NECESSARY 1. APPLICANT: Town of Southold City - Town - Village - County - Local Public Authority - Public Benefit Corporation - Indian Tribe/Nation - Not-For-Profit Corporation: 2. APPLICANT MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 (no.&street) 54375 NYS Route 25 (city)~southold [NY (zip) [ 11971 I - PHONE: 3. FEDERAL TAX IDENT1FICATIONNo. 11-6001939 NYS CHARITIES REGISTRATION No. ~CONTACT PERSON: I Mark Terry TlTLE:_llnterim Planning Director 5. PHONE: _~631]-J[765-193~ ~F%X:ld6_31 I)}765-3136 6. E-MAIL ..... ]Mark. Terry@town. southold, ny.us I 7. CONTACT MAILING ADDRESS (if different from applicant) (n°- & tr !t)I ~(c2Y)Z .j NY (zip) 1. PROJECT NAME: :2. PROJECT LOCATION: Town of Southold Transfer of Development Riihts COUNTY: Suffolk NEW YORK STATE SENATE DISTRICT: SD Y0~ ~ATEXSSEMBLYDISTRICT: ADI 1 Progyam - Development and Implementation 3. PROJECT TYPE: Intermunicipal Growth Program Community Growth Program Community Center Program Community Open Space Program Mountain Communities Program 1. Proposed Start Date: February 1, 2006 2. Expected Completion Date: 3. Total Project Costs: 000. + 4. State Assistance Requested: 5. Local Match: ls your municipality identified as an economically distressed municipality? Yes 1, 2006 75,000. 15,000. 9 IResolution is attached. 9 Resolution will be submitted by ,2005. I Date I December 1, 2005 I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury that information provided on this form and attached statements and exhibits is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. False statements made herein are punishable as a Class A misdemeanor pursuant to Section 210.45 of the Penal law. Printname: [Anthony Trezza __~!tl~-~iSr. Planner [of(entity) I Town of Southold Typehere: Proposal is to develop a Town-wide Transfer of Development Rights Program (TDR) as an imptemenfiation tool for the Town's Comprehensive Plan, including the Hamlet Study and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP). The TDR Program is a necessary mechanism for the Town to meet its preservation goals while at the same time accomodating new growth and promoting strong economic development. This initiative will preserve farm- land and open space, direct new development to appropriate areas in each of the hamlets, and provide incentives for property owners and developers to participate in the program. 2 Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - 3 Type here: Please - See Attachment - here: Please - See Attachment - 4 Please - See Attachment - TYPe here: Please - See Attachment - TYPe here: Please - See Attachment - Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - ype here: Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - Type here: A consultant has not yet been chosen for this project. The Planning Department is currently working with the Town Board in determining who will be contracted to do the work. In-House Staff: Mark Terry, Interim Planning Director Anthony Trezza, Senior Planner Melissa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator John Sepenoski, Technical Coordinator PART J- ADDITIONAL WEIGHTING ~ yOU a Greenway Compaet Community? 9 Dutchess County 9 Town of Amenia 9 City of Beacon 9 Town of Beekman 9 Town of Clinton 9 Town of Dover 9 Town of East Fishkill 9 Town of Fishkill 9 Village of Fighkill 9 Town of Hyde Park 9 Town of LaGrange 9 Town of Milan 9 Village of Millerton 9 Town of North East 9 Town of Pawling 9 Village of Pawling 9 Town of Pine Plains 9 Town of Pleasant Valley 9 Town of Poughkeepsie 9 City of Poughkeepsie 9 Town of Red Hook 9 Village of Red Hook 9 Town of Rhinebeck 9 Village of Rhinebeck 9 Village of Tivoli 9 Town of Union Vale 9 Town of Wappinger 9 Village of Wappingers Falls 9 Westchester County 9 Village of Buchanan 9 Town of Cortlandt 9 Village of Croton-on-Hudson 9 Town of North Salem 9 Town of Ossining 9 City of Peekskill 9 Village of Tarrytown [] Village of Briareliff Manor [] Town of Somers [] Town of Yorktown 9 ELIZABETH NEVILLE TOWN CLERK EGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER O Town Hall, 53095 Main Road PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone: (631) 765-1800 southoldtown.northfork.net RESOLUTION # 2005-736 Resolution ID: 1319 Meeting: 11/22/05 07:30 PM Department: Town Clerk Category: Grants THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2005-736 OF 2005 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON NOVEMBER 22, 2005: RESOLVED that the Southold Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Southold Town Plannine Board to submit an application to the Department of State Quality Communities Program {2005-2006~ for Environmental Protection Funds to develop local laws, land use regulations and provide graphic support to implement the Town of Southold Comprehensive Plan documents including the Town of Southold Hamlet Study, and be it further OESOLVED that the Southold Town Board authorizes and directs the Supervisor to execute all financial and/or administrative processes, and WHEREAS, the funds solicited through this program will be used for the purposes of or development of local laws, land use regulations and graphic support to implement the Town of Southold Comprehensive Plan documents including the Town of Southold Hamlet Study in an amount not to exceed up to $75,000 (seventy- five thousand dollars) and that the town will commit up to $15,000 (fifteen thousand dollars) in match {'the match will include in-house staff salaries, copying and materials), now therefore be it RESOLVED that the Town of Southold supports this proiect to develop local laws~ land use regulations and provide graphic support to implement the Town of Southold Comprehensive Plan documents including the Town of Southold Hamlet Study. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk Town of Southold Suffolk County, New York Application for New York State Quality Communities Grant Program The Town of Southold's Comprehensive Plan is a series of planning initiatives undertaken over the past 20 years, including most recently the Hamlet Study and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan (LWRP). The Comprehensive Plan establishes a group of fundamental goals that, together, provide the underpinnings of Southold's future vision. These goals are: to preserve land, including farmland, open space and recreational landscapes; to preserve the rural, cultural and historic character of the hamlets surrounding the countryside; to preserve the Town's remaining natural environment, to prevent further deterioration of the Town's natural resources and to restore the Town's degraded and natural resources back to their previous quality; to preserve and promote a range of housing and business opportunities that supports a socio- economically diverse community; to increase transportation efficiency and to create alternatives to automobile travel, while preserving the scenic and historic attributes of roads in the Town. The pr/mary goals of the recently adopted Hamlet Study was to formally delineate the Hamlet Centers and HALO zones, evaluate the technical and practical feasibility of redirecting potential future growth from the aghcultural and open space areas of the Town toward the hamlets, and also to critically evaluate the Hamlet Centers themselves, to define strengths and weaknesses with an eye toward enhancement, improvement and revitalization. To transfer development into the Hamlet Centers and HALO zones in accordance with the recommendations made in the Hamlet Study, the development and implementation of a Transfer of Development Rights program is needed. Therefore, the Town of Southold is eager to establish a TDR program as one implementation strategy of the Hamlet Study. Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) programs use market forces to simultaneously promote conservation in high value natural, agricultural, and open space areas while encouraging smart growth in developed and developing sections of a community. Successful TDR programs have been in place throughout the country since 1980, and have protected tens of thousands of acres of farmland and open space. PART F- PROJECT PARTNERS It is anticipated that much of the funding will be used for consulting services. The consultants we retain will work closely with the Town, particularly the Planning Department. However, it is also expected that the Southold Town Board, Land Preservation Department, the Suffolk County Department of Health Services and the Suffolk County Water Authority will have limited roles in the project, primarily providing information on an "as need" basis. The following is the contact information of those who may be participants in this project: Southold Town Board Joshua Horton, Supervisor 53095 NYS Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 631-765-1889 Southold Town Land Preservation Department Melissa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator 54375 NYS Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 631-765-5711 Suffolk County Dept. of Health Walter Hilbert, Chief Engineer 360 Yaphank Avenue, Suite 2C Yaphank, NY 11980 631-852-5700 Suffolk County Water Authority Stephen Jones, Chief Executive Officer 4060 Sunrise Highway Oakdale, NY 11769 631-563-0219 PART G- WORK PROGRAM The quest for controlled growth requires creative planning and foresight. Transfer of development rights is just one tool used in the battle to contain sprawl. TDR is the exchange of zoning privileges from areas with low population needs, such as farmland, to areas of high population needs, such ag the Hamlet Centers. These transfers allow for the preservation of open spaces and historic landmarks, while giving the Hamlet Centers areas a chance to expand and experience continued growth. There are three basic elements to a TDR program: the sending district, the receiving district, and the TDR credits themselves. In developing the TDR program, we are expecting that the consultant(s) will examine the following: 1. How will the TDR Program work? 2. Who benefits from this program? 3. How much do TDR's cost? 4. How is the value of the TDR's established? 5. Is the program voluntary or mandatory? 6. What will be the Town's role in implementing and monitoring the program? 7. How do I participate ifI own land within a Sending Area? 8. How do I participate ifI own land in a Receiving Area? 9. How can the TDR's be used on the Receiving Area properties? 10. Where are the Sending Areas located? 11. Where are the Receiving Areas located? It is anticipated that the work will begin in early February of 2006 and will be completed by August of 2006. A more detailed schedule of the work to be completed will be provided to the Town once the consultant has prepared a proposal. It is expected that much of the grant money will be used for consulting services. However, we do intend to use a portion of the money for additional in- house costs, educational materials, and travel expenses. The Town is committing up to $15,000 in matching funds to include in-house staff salaries, copying and materials. We will update the Community Preservation Project Plan, reassess the water main map and determine if amendments are needed, and continuously review the progress made by the consultants who are developing the TDR program. All SEQRA related work will be completed by the Planning Department, with the exception of the preparation of an EIS, which will be completed by the consultant if one is required. In addition, the Town's match will be combined with a portion of the grant money for additional travel expenses, in-house costs, and possible software upgrades. PART H- GRANT SELECTION CRITERIA The following is a description of the how the proposed project is consistent with each of the Quality Communities Grant Program grant selection criteria. 1. Public Investment The development and implementation of a TDR program is consistent with the public investment grant selection criteria. Once developed in accordance with the recommendations made in Hamlet Study, the TDR program will allow new development to be transferred into the Hamlet Centers and HALO zones based on their ability to absorb additional density without overtaxing the community's infrastructure. These areas have adequate roads, water service, utilities and schools, or the capacity to develop such services to the extent necessary to accommodate the additional density. This will help to minimize the additional public costs of new development as well as mitigate the potential adverse environmental impacts that the development would have in other areas of the Town. 2. Economic Development Economic development is a key component of a successful TDR program. The transfer of development fights allow for the preservation of agricultural land, open spaces and historic landmarks, while giving the Hamlet Centers a chance to expand and experience continued growth. The Hamlet Center is the first and foremost area of commercial activity, a business district. Fostering an appropriate level of business enterprise is critical to the ultimate sustainability of the Hamlet Centers. However, in order to enhance the economic vitality of the Town's business districts, there must be a population to support local businesses. The TDR program will encourage new development to occur within the Town's existing Hamlet Centers and HALO zones, where adequate infrastructure is in place or provisions for additional services have already been made. In addition, the TDR program will promote the use or reuse of existing buildings and sites within the Hamlet Centers and HALO zones, to create a mix of commercial and residential uses that would otherwise be difficult to accomplish under our current zoning regulations. 3. Conservation and Restoration The establishment of a TDR program is wholly consistent with the conservation and restoration grant selection criteria. A TDR program is a land use tool that protects an area designated for preservation where little or no development is permitted by shifting development potential to other growth areas more suitable for development, such as the 3 Town's Hamlet Centers and HALO zones with services close by. TDRs can be used to save historic structures from demolition, prevent the undesirable development of farmland, and preserve unique environmental areas and scenic vistas. After the transfer of TDRs, future use of the sending parcel is restricted by easements or deed restriction. The program will limit future use to the existing use, whether it be agricultural or farmland, historical building, open space, or environmentally sensitive land/wetlands with an easement. 4. Partnership The Town of Southold prides itself on its reputation for establishing close working relationships with other government agencies, non-profit organizations and private developers. It is one of our philosophies that mom can be accomplished when all of the "players" involved in a project work together towards reaching common goals. The creation of a TDR program will enhance our ability to continue to provide quality public service. For example, the Town is currently working with several non-profit organizations and private developers on a number of affordable housing developments. Although these projects are consistent with the goals and objectives of the Town's Comprehensive Plan, they have become difficult to achieve without an appropriate land use tool in place to allow for higher density development. The implementation ofa TDR program will allow those projects to come to fruition without having to modify the entire zoning ordinance. In addition, the increased growth we are anticipating in the Hamlet Centers may have an impact on the Town's transportation network, which includes local roads, state and county highways, and a mass ~ansit system including bus and train services. Increasing public transportation opportunities within the Hamlet Centers will reduce the dependence on individual passenger vehicles, thereby reducing roadway congestion and associated pollution, and will also reinforce the Town's smart growth policies. However, in order to increase the ridership of mass transportation, there must be a population to support its use. The creation ora TDR program will allow the Town to work closer with other agencies to develop a transportation network that will ultimately support the use of public transportation, thereby mitigating some of the traffic impacts that new development has brought to the east end of Long Island. Prior to codification of any TDR program, the Town will address the important issue of inter-jurisdictional cooperation to establish the necessary water and sewer infrastructure, adequate public facilities and development standards in the receiving areas. The Town will also undertake a TDR public education program so that when the above issues are adequately addressed, codification of the actual program would be more effective due to heightened public awareness. 5. Community Livability When developed in accordance with the Town's Comprehensive Plan, TDRs will enhance the livability of each of the Town's unique communities but directing new development into the most appropriate areas under a strict set of design guidelines. The 4 alternative to cookie-cutter development, which is typical on Long Island, is to concentrate allowable development in certain areas within the community and to protect the remainder as open space or environmentally conserved land. TDR promotes compact development patterns because the development potential of protected areas is combined with the development potential of nonsensitive areas and those nonsensitive areas are then developed at a greater density than normally allowed. In turn, this will promote more new housing in HALO zones and Hamlet Centers, which reduces the costs of services and facilities by concentrating development. In addition, the Town has in place a comprehensive and aggressive affordable housing program that will become increasingly successful with the implementation of the TDR program. With respect to downtown revitalization, one way for the Town's businesses to experience significant economic growth is to ensure there is a population to support them. By transferring development into the Hamlet Centers and HALO zones, local businesses will benefit fi.om an increasing population that lives near them. This will also create additional employment opportunities and provide a range of housing types for an increasingly diverse population. The TDR can provide additional housing in the form of accessory apartments above offices or retail stores; it may provide an opportunity for senior housing within walking distance of a Hamlet Center or mass transit hub; or it may result in the creation of"starter homes" for the Town's workforce. 6. Transportation The TDR program will support a variety of transportation choices that will improve health and quality of life, reduce automobile dependency, traffic congestion and automobile pollution. Through the TDR program, the Town will be able to concentrate development within waking distances of the Hamlet Centers and mass transit hubs. Continued patterns of suburban sprawl will only exacerbate traffic problems, leaving many with no options other than to drive from one place to another. With an increasing population living near the Hamlet Centers as a result of a successful TDR program, use of mass transit or other means of non-automobile travel will increase. 7. Consistency The Hamlet Study specifically calls for new development to be concentrated within the designated Hamlet Centers and HALO zones. However, as part of the Town's policies of enacting smart growth principles, and to be consistent with creating a density neutral program, it was determined that the best way to facilitate this development is through a TDR program rather than a change of zone or through the traditional zoning ordinance. A change of zone, if granted, would give a property owner or developer an "as-of-fight" increase in density without having to transfer it fi.om a parcel land that is slated for preservation. A TDR program, on the other hand, will result in a development pattern that is consistent with the Town's policies of both accommodating growth and preserving land. In addition, the TDR program will ensure better predictability in land use regulations and procedures by eliminating the need to obtain variances or changes of zone, which can 5 often be inconsistent from one applicant to another, depending on the nature of the reviewing Board. TDR is consistent with the Town's planning efforts to further the conservation and preservation of natural and undeveloped areas, wildlife, flora and habitats for endangered species; the preservation of agricultural resources; protection of ground water, surface water and groundwater quality, as well as the other natural resoumes of the Town; balanced economic growth; the provision of adequate capital facilities, including transportation, water supply, and solid, sanitary and hazardous waste disposal facilities; the coordination of the provision of adequate capital facilities with the achievement of other goals; the development of an adequate supply of affordable housing; and the preservation of historical, cultural, archaeological, architectural and recreational values. 8. Sustainability The development and implementation of the TDR program will provide for broad-based public involvement of community-based organizations, neighborhood groups, not-for- profit organizations, private property owners and developers. TDRs provide a development solution with multiple benefits. The developers achieve greater profits from the higher level of development. The not-for-profit is able to achieve higher densities, thereby ensuring a permanent stock of affordable housing. The sending site owners are able to liquidate the development potential of their properties while still using these properties for non-development and, in some cases, income-producing activities. Finally, the community itself is able to implement its preservation goals without relying exclusively on tax revenues and other traditional funding sources, which are often difficult to adopt. Given the Town's successful grassroots approach to community planning, combined with our ongoing efforts to educate the public about important planning initiatives, we expect that the TDR program will have a very strong educational component to it. The Town of Southold often sponsors public seminars and forums when new planning initiatives are undertaken that will have a profound impact in how the community will grow in the future. 9. Regional Significance The TDR program will preserve land, direct new development to the Town's business districts and surrounding areas, and help to advance our affordable housing efforts. These issues are not only being addressed by the Town of Southold through the implementation of our Comprehensive Plan, but have also become part of regional effort to improve the quality of life for all the residents of Suffolk County. Suffolk County has adopted very progressive land preservation, economic development and affordable housing programs to assist local municipalities in their efforts to address the issues that concern local citizens. The development of a local TDR program will further advance those initiatives. In addition, the Town has developed a public water plan, endorsed by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services and the Suffolk County Water Authority. This plan 6 outlines the locations where public water is currently provided or is planned for future expansions. The TDR program will be developed in accordance with this plan. Any updates to the water main map will be reflected in the TDR program. The creation ofa TDR program will ensure an appropriate balance between development and open space protection within a regional context. TDR programs can achieve numerous land use goals ranging from growth management to the preservation of agricultural land, open space, natural wetlands, forest areas, or historic landmarks. Residents benefit from TDR programs because they can preserve important resoumes at minimal cost. Landowners can benefit because they can sell the use rights and receive compensation for not using or developing their property. Non-residents, who are large contributors of a very active agri-tourism industry, will continue to support the economy as long as the resources that exist are protected and preserved for future use. 10. Innovation, Comprehensiveness The Town of Southold has identified community opportunities and constraints through the development of the Hamlet Study, the LWRP and other Comprehensive Plan documents produced over the years. A TDR program is an innovative approach to address these opportunities and constraints by producing more orderly growth; helping to preserve family farms; compensating landowners for the cost of restrictions to their lands; fostering economic development while minimizing negative impacts; and helping to maintain other open spaces. Because the preservation of open space and agricultural land is a fundamental goal of any TDR program, this project incorporates the community open space program an eligible grant activity. The TDR program is an integral part of the Town's Comprehensive Plan and is essential to the implementation of the Hamlet Study. 11. Leveraging of Public Funding The Town of Southold finds that the funding from the Quality Communities Grant Program, as requested, is sufficient to support this project. However, as a small Town with limited resources, we are always exploring funding options and will seek grant money from other sources as needed. 12. Advancing State Planning Initiatives The Town adopted its Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan in 2005 as approved by the New York State Department of State. The LWRP provides a planning framework synopsis of all past and ongoing planning documents and programs that govern decisions and actions of the Town of Southold. Among the many programs that Town has explored is the establishment ora TDR program. Because the LWRP is designed to build on these planning programs, the development of a TDR program is vital for the successful implementation of the LWRP. 7 13. Level of Local Commitment As already stated, the development and implementation of a TDR program is necessary for the successful implementation of the Town's Comprehensive Plan, including the Hamlet Study and the LWRP. Recognizing and understanding the interconnectedness and interrelationships between community development, environmental protection, economic development and natural resource conservation requires the articulation of very clear goals and objectives. The Hamlet Study represents a unique exercise in Southold's long tradition of community planning in that it was driven by local stakeholders. After a recruiting process involving the submission of resumes and documentation representing individual qualifications to serve, a diverse group of nearly 100 individuals, including property owners, merchants, builders, activists, community leaders and well-intentioned citizens, were appointed to represent their respective hamlets. Hamlet stakeholders assessed and evaluated, argued and compromised, established goals and policies, and in the end reached consensus concerning the vision of their respective hamlets. This grassroots effort proved to be a remarkable and successful process. The Town of Southold remains committed to achieving its goals and objectives by seeking to develop a TDR program in accordance with the various components of the Comprehensive Plan, including the very successful Hamlet Study. There is a widespread commitment from local citizens, business leaders, non-profit organization, environmental groups, government officials and local board members to see this project come to fruition. The development ofa TDR program has been in the works for some time but has proved to be very complicated given our limited funding and staffing resources. Funding through the Quality Communities Grant Program will allow the Town to move forward with this project, which will in turn advance both our preservation and smart growth initiatives. 8 Travel Supplies trod Materials Equipment Contractual Services Other Total N/A $ 2,500. $ 4,000. ~/A $63,500. $ 5,000. $75~000. $3,500. $1,500, N/4 N/~ $15.000. $90.000. 1. SALARIES & WAGES, including fringe benefits (List by title and affiliation) AMOUNT CHARGED ~ ANNUAL SALARY TO THIS PROJECT l~[rk Terry~ Interim Planning Dir. $55.825. $3,000. Anthony Trezza, Senior Planner $50,667. $2,100. Melissa Spiro, Land Pres. Coord. $66~039. $1,900. John Sepenoski~ Technical Coord. $70,100. $1.500. SUBTO~TAL_$ ] $8,500. I ' 2. TRAVEL ( ndtcate purpose and extent of travel and associated costs). Travel costs involve field inspections, on-site inspections and travel to County Offices, and travel costs associated with research for the project including visiting other municipalities. 10 SUPPLIES/MATERIALS (Describe and indicate cost by type). In-house costs associated with producing map~, preparing reports, making copies and mailing. 4. EQUIPMENT (Describe and indicate the cost of each item). Costs £or software up-grades allowing the Planning Department to produce presentation drawings. SUBTOTALS $1,5oo. 5. CONTRACTUAL SERVICES (Describe services to be acquired and cost ofeach, if more than oae secured). associated with the bulk of the work which will be done by a private consultant. Consulting services to develop a TDR Program, reports, code changes and implementation strategies. ~ SUBT, O~T. AL$ _ $63,500. 6. OTHER (List professional volunteer services and time at market rate, and describe the services to be provided..List non-professional volunteer services and time at $15.00 per hour, and describe the services to be provided). Costs associated with the educational and public relations component of the project. Money will be used to hold a seminar on the TDR Program and to produce and distribute educational materials. ~i[PLICATION COMPLETENESS CItECKLIST You Have? 1. A Certification Signature 2. Four copies plus an original of the application 11 3. Tax and Charity ID numbers entered if you are a not-for-profit organization iA complete and accurate budget 12 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FUND APPLICATION FOR STATE ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS NEW YORK STATE QUALITY COMMUNITIES PROGRAM, YEAR 2005-2006 CONTINUE ON ADDITIONAL SHEETS AS NECESSARY 1. APPLICANT: Town of Southold City - Town - Village - County - Local Public Authority - Public Benefit Corporation - Indian Tribe/Nation - Not-For-Profit Corporation: 2. APPLICANT MAIL1NG ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 (no. & street) 54375 NYS Route 25 (city)~$°uth°ld TNY (ziP) [ 11971 PHONE: [.( -31 76 1938 FXX= 1(163' I>1 ,65-3136 3. FEDERAL TAX IDENTIFICATION No. 11-600!.939 NYS CHARITIES REGISTRATION No. CONTACT PERSON: Mark Terry TITLE: Interim Planning Director 6. E-MAIL IMark'Terry@t°wn's°uth°ld.nT.us I 7. CONTACT MAILiNG ADDRESS (if different from applicant) (no. & street) (ci-ty)~. [NY(zip) 1. PROJECT NAME: Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Pr~ogram - Development 2. PROJECT LOCATION: COUNTY: Suffolk £ and Implementat±on NEW YORK STATE SENATE DISTRICT: SD 1~/i' _~. NEWYORK STATE ASSEMBLY DISTRICT: AD _ 1 .. [ 3. PROJECT TYPE: Intermunicipal Growth Program Community Growth Program Community Center Program Community Open Space Program Mountain Communities Program 1. Proposed Start Date: February 1, 2006 2. Expected Completion Date: 3. Total Project Costs: 000.+ 4. State Assistance Requested: 5. Local Match: Is your municipality identified as an economically distressed municipality? Yes ;ust 1, 2006 75,000. I5,000. 9 Resolution is attached. 9 Resolution will be submitted by ,2005. I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury that information provided on this form and attached statements and exhibits is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. False statements made herein are punishable as a Class A misdemeanor pursuant to Section 210.45 of the Penal law. Printname: ]Anthony Trezza ~ ]Sr. Planner ~of(entity)] Town of Southold Date [ December l,, 2005 [ ~g~a~_ture [i~~~ Type here: Proposal is to develop a Town-wide Transfer of Development Rights Program (TDR) as an implementation tool for the Town's Comprehensive Plan, including the Hamlet Study and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP). The TDR Program is a necessary mechanism for the Town to meet its preservation goals while at the same time accomodating new growth and promoting strong economic development. This initiative will preserve farm- land and open space, direct new development to appropriate areas in each of the hamlets, and provide incentives for property owners and developers to participate in the program. 2 Please - See Attachment - Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - here: ~ -" Please - See Attachment - here: Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - e here: Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - ~e here: Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - Please - See Attachment - Type here: Please - See Attachment - Type here: A consultant has not yet been chosen for this project. The Planning Department is currently working with the Town Board in determining who will be contracted to do the work. In-House Staff: Mark Terry, Interim Planning Director Anthony Trezza, Senior Planner Mel±ssa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator John Sepenoski, Technical Coordinator PART J - ADDITIONAL WEIGHTING Indicate if the ap~olicant is eligible to receive additional wei~ sGreenwa Com act Com~ County 9 Town of Amenia 9 City of Beacon 9 Town of Beekman 9 Town of Clinton 9 Town of Dover 9 Town of East Fishkill 9 Town of Fishkill 9 Village of Fi~hkill 9 Town of Hyde Park 9 Town of LaGrange 9 Town of Milan 9 Village of Millerton 9 Town of North East __ 9 Town of Pawling 9 Village of Pawling 9 Town of Pine Plains 9 Town of Pleasant Valley 9 Town of Poughkeepsie 9 City of Pougl~eepsie 9 Town of Red Hook 9 Village of Red Hook 9 Town of Rhinebeck 9 Village of Rhinebeck 9 Village of Tivoli 9 Town of Union Vale 9 Town of Wappinger 9 Village of Wappingers Falls 9 Westchester County 9 Village of Buchanan 9 Town of Cortlandt 9 Village of Croton-on-Hudson 9 Town of North Salem 9 Town of Ossining 9 City of Peekskill 9 Village of Tarrytown [3 Village of Briarcliff Manor [] Town of Somers [] Town of Yorktown ELIZABETH NEVILLE TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER CORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER 53095 Main Road PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone: (631) 765-1800 southoldtown.northfork.net RESOLUTION # 2005-736 Resolution ID: 1319 Meeting: 11/22/05 07:30 PM Department: Town Clerk Category: Grants THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2005-736 OF 2005 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON NOVEMBER 22, 2005: RESOLVED that the Southold Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Southold Town Plannin? Board to submit an application to the Department of State Quality Communities Program (2005-2006) for Environmental Protection Funds to develop local laws, land use regulations and provide graphic support to implement the Town of Southold Comprehensive Plan documents including the Town of Southold Hamlet Study, and be it further QRESOLVED that t.h.e Southold Town Board authorizes and directs the Supervisor to execute all financial nd/or administrative processes, and WHEREAS, the funds solicited through this program will be used for the purposes of or development of local laws, land use regulations and graphic support to implement the Town of Southold Comprehensive Plan documents including the Town of Southold Hamlet Study in an amount not to exceed up to $75,000 (seventy- five thousand dollars) and that the town will commit up to $15,000 (fifteen thousand dollars) in match (the match will include in-house staff salaries, copying and materials), now therefore be it RESOLVED that the Town of Southold supports this project to develop local laws~ land use regulations and orovide eraphic support to implement the Town of Southold Comprehensive Plan documents including the Town of Southold Hamlet Study. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk Town of Southold Suffolk County, New York Application for New York State Quality Communities Grant Program The Town of Southold's Comprehensive Plan is a series of planning initiatives undertaken over the past 20 years, including most recently the Hamlet Study and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan (LWRP). The Comprehensive Plan establishes a group of fundamental goals that, together, provide the underpinnings of Southold's future vision. These goals are: to preserve land, including farmland, open space and recreational landscapes; to preserve the rural, cultural and historic character of the hamlets surrounding the countryside; to preserve the Town's remaining natural environment, to prevent further deterioration of the Town's natural resources and to restore the Town's degraded and natural resources back to their previous quality; to preserve and promote a range of housing and business opportunities that supports a socio- economically diverse community; to increase transportation efficiency and to create altematives to automobile travel, while preserving the scenic and historic attributes of roads in the Town. The primary goals of the recently adopted Hamlet Study was to formally delineate the Hamlet Centers and HALO zones, evaluate the technical and practical feasibility of redirecting potential future growth from the agricultural and open space areas of the Town toward the hamlets, and also to critically evaluate the Hamlet Centers themselves, to define strengths and weaknesses with an eye toward enhancement, improvement and revitalization. To transfer development into the Hamlet Centers and HALO zones in accordance with the recommendations made in the Hamlet Study, the development and implementation of a Transfer of Development Rights program is needed. Therefore, the Town of Southold is eager to establish a TDR program as one implementation strategy of the Hamlet Study. Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) programs use market forces to simultaneously promote conservation in high value natural, agricultural, and open space areas while encouraging smart growth in developed and developing sections of a community. Successful TDR programs have been in place throughout the country since 1980, and have protected tens of thousands of acres of farmland and open space. PART F- PROJECT PARTNERS It is anticipated that much of the funding will be used for consulting services. The consultants we retain will work closely with the Town, particularly the Planning Department. However, it is also expected that the Southold Town Board, Land Preservation Department, the Suffolk County Department of Health Services and the Suffolk County Water Authority will have limited roles in the project, primarily providing information on an "as need" basis. The following is the contact information of those who may be participants in this project: Southold Town Board Joshua Horton, Supervisor 53095 NYS Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 631~765-1889 Southold Town Land Preservation Department Melissa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator 54375 NYS Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 631-765-571 ! Suffolk County Dept. of Health Walter Hilbert, Chief Engineer 360 Yaphank Avenue, Suite 2C Yaphank, NY 11980 631-852-5700 Suffolk County Water Authority Stephen Jones, Chief Executive Officer 4060 Sunrise Highway Oakdale, NY 11769 631-563-0219 PART G- WORK PROGRAM The quest for controlled growth requires creative planning and foresight. Transfer of development rights is just one tool used in the battle to contain sprawl. TDR is the exchange of zoning privileges from areas with low population needs, such as farmland, to areas of high population needs, such as the Hamlet Centers. These transfers allow for the preservation of open spaces and historic landmarks, while giving the Hamlet Centers areas a chance to expand and experience continued growth. There are three basic elements to a TDR program: the sending district, the receiving district, and the TDR credits themselves. In developing the TDR program, we are expecting that the consultant(s) will examine the following: 1. How will the TDR Program work? 2. Who benefits from this program? 3. How much do TDR's cost? 4. How is the value of the TDR's established? 5. Is the program voluntary or mandatory? 6. What will be the Town's role in implementing and monitoring the program? 7. How do I participate ifl own land within a Sending Area? 8. How do I participate ifI own land in a Receiving Area? 9. How can the TDR's be used on the Receiving Area properties? 10. Where are the Sending Areas located? 11. Where are the Receiving Areas located? It is anticipated that the work will begin in early February of 2006 and will be completed by August of 2006. A more detailed schedule of the work to be completed will be provided to the Town once the consultant has prepared a proposal. It is expected that much of the grant money will be used for consulting services. However, we do intend to use a portion of the money for additional in- house costs, educational materials, and travel expenses. The Town is committing up to $15,000 in matching funds to include in-house staff salaries, copying and materials. We will update the Community Preservation 2 Project Plan, reassess the water main map and determine if amendments are needed, and continuously review the progress made by the consultants who are developing the TDR program. All SEQRA related work will be completed by the Planning Department, with the exception of the preparation of an EIS, which will be completed by the consultant if one is required. In addition, the Town's match will be combined with a portion of the grant money for additional travel expenses, in-house costs, and possible software upgrades. PART H- GRANT SELECTION CRITERIA The following is a description of the how the proposed project is consistent with each of the Quality Communities Grant Program grant selection criteria. 1. Public Investment The development and implementation ofa TDR program is consistent with the public investment grant selection criteria. Once developed in accordance with the recommendations made in Hamlet Study, the TDR program will allow new development to be transferred into the Hamlet Centers and HALO zones based on their ability to absorb additional density without overtaxing the community's infrastructure. These areas have adequate roads, water service, utilities and schools, or the capacity to develop such services to the extent necessary to accommodate the additional density. This will help to minimize the additional public costs of new development as well as mitigate the potential adverse environmental impacts that the development would have in other areas of the Town. 2. Economic Development Economic development is a key component of a successful TDR program. The transfer of development rights allow for the preservation of agricultural land, open spaces and historic landmarks, while giving the Hamlet Centers a chance to expand and experience continued growth. The Hamlet Center is the first and foremost area of commercial activity, a business district. Fostering an appropriate level of business enterprise is critical to the ultimate sustainability of the Hamlet Centers. However, in order to enhance the economic vitality of the Town's business districts, there must be a population to support local businesses. The TDR program will encourage new development to occur within the Town's existing Hamlet Centers and HALO zones, where adequate infrastructure is in place or provisions for additional services have already been made. In addition, the TDR program will promote the use or reuse of existing buildings and sites within the Hamlet Centers and HALO zones, to create a mix of commercial and residential uses that would otherwise be difficult to accomplish under our current zoning regulations. 3. Conservation and Restoration The establishment of a TDR program is wholly consistent with the conservation and restoration grant selection criteria. A TDR program is a land use tool that protects an area designated for preservation where little or no development is permitted by shifting development potential to other growth areas more suitable for development, such as the Town's Hamlet Centers and HALO zones with services close by. TDRs can be used to save historic structures from demolition, prevent the undesirable development of farmland, and preserve unique environmental areas and scenic vistas. After the transfer of TDRs, future use of the sending parcel is restricted by easements or deed restriction. The program will limit future use to the existing use, whether it be agricultural or farmland, historical building, open space, or environmentally sensitive land/wetlands with an easement. 4. Partnership The Town of Southold prides itself on its reputation for establishing close working relationships with other government agencies, non-profit organizations and private developers. It is one of our philosophies that more can be accomplished when all of the "players" involved in a project work together towards roaching common goals. The creation ofa TDR program will enhance our ability to continue to provide quality public service. For example, the Town is currently working with several non-profit organizations and private developers on a number of affordable housing developments. Although these projects are consistent with the goals and objectives of the Town's Comprehensive Plan, they have become difficult to achieve without an appropriate land use tool in place to allow for higher density development. The implementation ofa TDR program will allow those projects to come to fruition without having to modify the entire zoning ordinance. In addition, the increased growth we are anticipating in the Hamlet Centers may have an impact on the Town's transportation network, which includes local roads, state and county highways, and a mass transit system including bus and train services. Increasing public transportation opportunities within the Hamlet Centers will reduce the dependence on individual passenger vehicles, thereby reducing roadway congestion and associated pollution, and will also reinforce the Town's smart growth policies. However, in order to increase the ridership of mass transportation, there must be a population to support its use. The creation ofa TDR program will allow the Town to work closer with other agencies to develop a transportation network that will ultimately support the use of public transportation, thereby mitigating some of the traffic impacts that new development has brought to the east end of Long Island. Prior to codification of any TDR program, the Town will address the important issue of inter-jurisdictional cooperation to establish the necessary water and sewer infrastructure, adequate public facilities and development standards in the receiving areas. The Town will also undertake a TDR public education program so that when the above issues are adequately addressed, codification of the actual program would be more effective due to heightened public awareness. 5. Community Livability When developed in accordance with the Town's Comprehensive Plan, TDRs will enhance the livability of each of the Town's unique communities but directing new development into the most appropriate areas under a strict set of design guidelines. The 4 alternative to cookie-cutter development, which is typical on Long Island, is to concentrate allowable development in certain areas within the community and to protect the remainder as open space or environmentally conserved land. TDR promotes compact development patterns because the development potential of protected areas is combined with the development potential of nonsensitive areas and those nonsensitive areas are then developed at a greater density than normally allowed. In turn, this will promote more new housing in HALO zones and Hamlet Centers, which reduces the costs of services and facilities by concentrating development. In addition, the Town has in place a comprehensive and aggressive affordable housing program that will become increasingly successful with the implementation of the TDR program. With respect to downtown revitalization, one way for the Town's businesses to experience significant economic growth is to ensure there is a population to support them. By transferring development into the Hamlet Centers and HALO zones, local businesses will benefit from an increasing population that lives near them. This will also create additional employment opportunities and provide a range of housing types for an increasingly diverse population. The TDR can provide additional housing in the form of accessory apartments above offices or retail stores; it may provide an opporttmity for senior housing within walking distance of a Hamlet Center or mass transit hub; or it may result in the creation of"starter homes" for the Town's workforce. 6. Transportation The TDR program will support a variety of transportation choices that will improve health and quality of life, reduce automobile dependency, traffic congestion and automobile pollution. Through the TDR program, the Town will be able to concentrate development within waking distances of the Hamlet Centers and mass transit hubs. Continued patterns of suburban sprawl will only exacerbate traffic problems, leaving many with no options other than to drive from one place to another. With an increasing population living near the Hamlet Centers as a result of a successful TDR program, use of mass transit or other means of non-automobile travel will increase. 7. Consistency The Hamlet Study specifically calls for new development to be concentrated within the designated Hamlet Centers and HALO zones. However, as part of the Town's policies of enacting smart growth principles, and to be consistent with creating a density neutral program, it was determined that the best way to facilitate this development is through a TDR program rather than a change of zone or through the traditional zoning ordinance. A change of zone, if granted, would give a property owner or developer an "as-of-right" increase in density without having to transfer it from a parcel land that is slated for preservation. A TDR program, on the other hand, will result in a development pattern that is consistent with the Town's policies of both accommodating growth and preserving land. In addition, the TDR program will ensure better predictability in land use regulations and procedures by eliminating the need to obtain variances or changes of zone, which can often be inconsistent from one applicant to another, depending on the nature of the reviewing Board. TDR is consistent with the Town's planning efforts to further the conservation and preservation of natural and undeveloped areas, wildlife, flora and habitats for endangered species; the preservation of agricultural resources; protection of ground water, surface water and groundwater quality, as well as the other natural resoumes of the Town; balanced economic growth; the provision of adequate capital facilities, including transportation, water supply, and solid, sanitary and hazardous waste disposal facilities; the coordination of the provision of adequate capital facilities with the achievement of other goals; the development of an adequate supply of affordable housing; and the preservation of historical, cultural, archaeological, architectural and recreational values. 8. Sustainability The development and implementation of the TDR program will provide for broad-based public involvement of community-based organizations, neighborhood groups, not-for- profit organizations, private property owners and developers. TDRs provide a development solution with multiple benefits. The developers achieve greater profits from the higher level of development. The not-for-profit is able to achieve higher densities, thereby ensuring a permanent stock of affordable housing. The sending site owners are able to liquidate the development potential of their properties while still using these properties for non-development and, in some cases, income-producing activities. Finally, the community itself is able to implement its preservation goals without relying exclusively on tax revenues and other traditional funding soumes, which are often difficult to adopt. Given the Town's successful grassroots approach to community planning, combined with our ongoing efforts to educate the public about important planning initiatives, we expect that the TDR program will have a very strong educational component to it. The Town of Southold often sponsors public seminars and forums when new planning initiatives are undertaken that will have a profound impact in how the community will grow in the future. 9. Regional Significance The TDR program will preserve land, direct new development to the Town's business districts and surrounding areas, and help to advance our affordable housing efforts. These issues are not only being addressed by the Town of Southold through the implementation of our Comprehensive Plan, but have also become part of regional effort to improve the quality of life for all the residents of Suffolk County. Suffolk County has adopted very progressive land preservation, economic development and affordable housing programs to assist local municipalities in their efforts to address the issues that concern local citizens. The development of a local TDR program will further advance those initiatives. In addition, the Town has developed a public water plan, endorsed by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services and the Suffolk County Water Authority. This plan 6 outlines the locations where public water is currently provided or is planned for future expansions. The TDR program will be developed in accordance with this plan. Any updates to the water main map will be reflected in the TDR program. The creation of a TDR program will ensure an appropriate balance between development and open space protection within a regional context. TDR programs can achieve numerous land use goals ranging from growth management to the preservation of agricultural land, open space, natural wetlands, forest areas, or historic landmarks. Residents benefit from TDR programs because they can preserve important resources at minimal cost. Landowners can benefit because they can sell the use rights and receive compensation for not using or developing their property. Non-residents, who are large contributors of a very active agri-tourism industry, will continue to support the economy as long as the resources that exist are protected and preserved for future use. 10. Innovation, Comprehensiveness The Town of Southold has identified community opportunities and constraints through the development of the Hamlet Study, the LWRP and other Comprehensive Plan documents produced over the years. A TDR program is an innovative approach to address these opportunities and constraints by producing more orderly growth; helping to preserve family farms; compensating landowners for the cost of restrictions to their lands; fostering economic development while minimizing negative impacts; and helping to maintain other open spaces. Because the preservation of open space and agricultural land is a fundamental goal of any TDR program, this project incorporates the community open space program an eligible grant activity. The TDR program is an integral part of the Town's Comprehensive Plan and is essential to the implementation of the Hamlet Study. 11. Leveraging of Public Funding The Town of Southold finds that the funding from the Quality Communities Grant Program, as requested, is sufficient to support this project. However, as a small Town with limited resources, we are always exploring funding options and will seek grant money from other sources as needed. 12. Advancing State Planning Initiatives The Town adopted its Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan in 2005 as approved by the New York State Department of State. The LWRP provides a planning framework synopsis of all past and ongoing planning documents and programs that govern decisions and actions of the Town of Southold. Among the many programs that Town has explored is the establishment ofa TDR program. Because the LWRP is designed to build on these planning programs, the development of a TDR program is vital for the successful implementation of the LWRP. 7 13. Level of Local Commitment As already stated, the development and implementation of a TDR program is necessary for the successful implementation of the Town's Comprehensive Plan, including the Hamlet Study and the LWRP. Recognizing and understanding the interconnectedness and interrelationships between community development, environmental protection, economic development and natural resource conservation requires the articulation of very clear goals and objectives. The Hamlet Study represents a unique exercise in Southold's long tradition of community planning in that it was driven by local stakeholders. After a recruiting process involving the submission of resumes and documentation representing individual qualifications to serve, a diverse group of nearly 100 individuals, including property owners, merchants, builders, activists, community leaders and well-intentioned citizens, were appointed to represent their respective hamlets. Hamlet stakeholders assessed and evaluated, argued and compromised, established goals and policies, and in the end reached consensus concerning the vision of their respective hamlets. This grassroots effort proved to be a remarkable and successful process. The Town of Southold remains committed to achieving its goals and objectives by seeking to develop a TDR program in accordance with the various components of the Comprehensive Plan, including the very successful Hamlet Study. There is a widespread commitment from local citizens, business leaders, non-profit organization, environmental groups, government officials and local board members to see this project come to fruition. The development ofa TDR program has been in the works for some time but has proved to be very complicated given our limited funding and staffing resources. Funding through the Quality Communities Grant Program will allow the Town to move forward with this project, which will in turn advance both our preservation and smart growth initiatives. Salaries and Wages N/A $8,5OO. Travel $ 2,500. $1,500. Supplies and Materials $ 4,000. $3,500. Equipment N/A $1,500, Contractual Services $63,500. N/A Other $ 5,0oo. ~/A 1. SALARIES & WAGES, including fringe benefits (List by title and affiliation) AMOUNT CHARGED TITLE ANNUAL SALARY TO THIS PROJECT Interim Planning Dir. ~ 3~_~00. Anthony Trezza, Senior Planner. $50,667. $2,100. Melissa Spiro, Land Pres. Coord. $66~039. $1,900. John Sepenoski~ Technical Coord. $70,100. $1.500. SUBTOTALS I $8,500. 2. TRAVEL (Indicate purpose and extent of travel and associated costs). Travel costs involve field inspections, on-site inspections and travel to County Offices, and travel costs associated with research for the project including visiting other municipalities. $4,000. l0 ~/MATER/ALS (Describe and indicate cost by type). In-house costs associated with producing mapm, preparing reports, making copies and mailing. SUBTOTALS $7,500. 4. EQUIPMENT (Describe and indicate the cost of each item). Costs for software up-grades allowing the Planning Department to produce presentation drawings. SUBTOTAL $ $ i, 500. 5. CONTRACTUAL SERVICES (Describe services to be acquired and cost of each, if more than oae pe of service will be secured). sts associated with the bulk of the work which will be done by a private consultant. :onsulting services to develop a TDR Program, reports, code changes and implementation strategies. 6. OTHER (List professional volunteer services and time at market rate, and describe the services to be provided. List non-professional volunteer services and time at $15.00 per hour, and describe the services to be provided). Costs associated with the educational and public relations component of the project. Money will be used to hold a seminar on the TDR Program and to produce and distribute educational materials. $5,000. APPLICATION COMPLETENESS CHECKLIST You Have? A Certification Signature 2. Four copies plus an original of'the application 11 3. Tax and Charity ID numbers entered if you are a not-for-profit organization 4. A complete and accurate budget 12 New York State Department of State New York State Quality Communities Program Environmental Protection Fund 2005-2006 REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS The Department of State is soliciting applications for grants from the New York State Environmental Protection Fund's Quality Communities Program for the following activities: Intermunicipal Growth Program Community Growth Program Community Center Program Community Open Space Program Mountain Communities Program State assistance will be provided up to 80% of the eligible cost of the activity, except for activities in those municipalities identified as economically distressed municipalities where state assistance will be provided up to 90% of the eligible cost. See a list of these communities online at: www.qualitycommunities.org. APPLICATION SUBMISSION An application form is attached. An applicant may submit applications for more than one project. Each project should be submitted as a separate application. An original and 4 copies of each application should be sent to: THE NEW YORK STATE QUALITY COMMUNITIES PROGRAM New York State Department of State Bureau of Fiscal Management, l0th Floor, Suite 1000 41 State Street Albany, NY 12231-0001 Applications must be received at the above address not later than 4:00pm on MONDAY, DECEMBER 5, 2005 Incomplete Or Late Applications Will Not Be Considered. Fax And E-Mail Transmissions Will Not Be Accepted. Electronic copies in Word Perfect and Word of the application form as well as Grant FAQ's plus resolution tips can be found at the Quality Communities Clearinghouse Website at www.qualitycommunities.org. To request a copy of the application or for any additional questions on the application process, the eligibility m tiOn, or its content, please call the New York State Quality Communities Program at ail the program at QC~dos.state.n¥.us. Environmental Proteci~on Fund 2005-2006 Request,for Application - ~ualit~ Communities Program WHO IS AN ELIGIBLE APPLICANT? For the Intermunicipal Growth Program, Community Growth Program and Community Open Space Program: A municipality, i.e, any County, City, Town, Village, Local Public Authority, Public Benefit Corporation or Indian Tribe or Nation, in New York State may apply. NOTE: Under the Intermunicipal Growth Program, applications must involve two or more eligible applicants. For the Community Center Program: A municipality or a not-for-profit corporation working in cooperation with a municipality. In instances where a municipality and a not-for-profit are co-applicants, one must be identified as the lead applicant with whom contracts will be developed. A not-for-profit organization maybe the lead applicant and serve as local program administrator provided that it is incorporated pursuant to New York State not-for-profit corporation law and be approved for tax-exempt status under the Internal Revenue Service code for at least one year prior to contract execution. For the Mountain Communities Program: A municipality located wholly or partially within the boundaries of the Adirondack Park and the Catskill Park or a not-for profit corporation working in cooperation with such a municipality. In instances where a municipality and a not-for-profit are co-applicants, one must be identified as the lead applicant with whom contracts will be developed. A not-for-pro fit organization may be the lead applicant and serve as local program administrator provided that it is incorporated pursuant to New York State not-for-profit corporation law and be approved for tax-exempt status under the Internal Revenue Service code for at least one year prior to contract execution. JOINT APPLICATIONS One of the principles of the Quality Communities Program is to encourage the formation of partnerships to address environmental, land use and economic development opportunities. Therefore, it is encouraged that two or more eligible applicants submit joint applications for proposals that cross municipal boundaries. One applicant must be identified as the lead applicant with whom contracts will be developed. Environmental Protection Fund 2005-2006 Request,for Ap?lication - ~uality Communities Pro~ram QUALITY COMMUNITIES PRINCIPLES Quality Communities activities proposed in the Intermunicipal Growth Program, Community Growth Program, Community Center Program, Community Open Space Program, and the Mountain Communities Program are to be consistent with the following "Quality Communities Principles" as defined by Chapter 63 of the Laws of 2005 and derived from the Quality Community Interagency Task Force report - "State and Local Governments: Partnering for a Better New York" (January 2001): Public Investment: to plan so as to account for and minimize the additional public costs of new development, including infrastructure costs such as transportation, sewers and waste-water treatment, water, schools, recreation, open space and other environmental impacts; Economic Development: to encourage redevelopment of existing community centers, and to encourage new development in areas where transportation, water and sewer infrastructure are readily available; o Conservation and Restoration: to protect, preserve, enhance and restore the state's natural and historic resources, including agricultural land, forests, surface water and groundwater, recreation and open space, scenic areas, significant habitats, and significant historic and archaeological sites; Partnerships: to establish intermunicipal and other intergovernmental partnerships to address development issues which transcend municipal boundaries, and which are best addressed by effective partnerships among levels of govemment, in order to increase efficient, planned, and cost-effective delivery of government services by, among other means, facilitating cooperative agreements among adjacent communities and to ensure within a regional context, the appropriate balance between development and open space protection; 5. Community Livability: to strengthen communities' sense of place by encouraging communities to adopt development and redevelopment strategies which build on each community's vision for its future, including integration of ail income and age groups, mixed land uses and compact development, downtown revitalization, open space protection, brownfield redevelopment, enhanced beauty in public spaces, and diverse and affordable housing in proximity to places of employment, recreation and commercial development; / 6. /Transportation: to provide transportation choices, including increasing public transit, pedestrianx~ / and bicycle and other choices, in order to improve health and quality of life, reduce automobile q..x~ependency, traffic congestion and automobile pollution; / 7. Consistency: to ensure predictability in building and land use codes; and Sustainability: to strengthen existing and create new communities which do not compromise the needs of future generations, by among other means encouraging broad based public involvement in developing and implementing a community plan and ensuring the governance structure is adequate to sustain its implementation. Environmental Protection Fund 2005-2006 ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES lntermunicipal Growth Program The "Intermunicipal Growth Program" is an activity undertaken 1 prepare a plan for the purposes of increasing protection development in suitable locations, setting forth implementing the strategy, consistent with Quality Com or more municipalities to space, increasing ease of these objectives, and Articulated in the statute cr. eating this grant program address development issues which transcend municipal the effective cooperation of two or more eli communities and: ' ' partnerships to This grant category emphasizes common visions for their Ali eligible activities must include meaningful by two or more municipalities· include but are not limited to the following: Activities which will increase ~rotection of open space, such as the activities listed under the category Open Space Program" if they will be conducted in a coordinated approach by two r more municipalities. Activities which i, under the approach by two for development, such as the activities listed Growth Program" if they will be conducted in a coordinated ~ municipalities. Activities which intermunicipal (GEIS shared tax ease development in suitable locations as identified in an plan consistent with Quality Community Principles, such as · ' transfer of development rights programs; identification of activities or creation of generic environmental impact statements parcels identified in intermunicipal plans; development of or negotiated payment-in-lieu of taxes agreements. Activities ' facilitate the processing of applications for development in suitable locations identified in an intermunicipal growth plan consistent with Quality Principles, such as development of compatible and coordinated land use and application forms; creating on-line applications and e-permitting; creation of review boards for intermunicipal projects; creation of shared code enforcement materials for review boards; and creation of development Community Growth Program The "Community Growth Program" is an activity undertaken by a municipality to prepare a comprehensive land use plan or a portion thereof, which includes the elements of a comprehensive plan set forth in comprehensive planning enabling legislation for the purposes of, increasing protection of open space, increasing ease of development in suitable locations, setting forth the Environmental Protection Fund 2005-2006 Request for Application - Quality Communities Program strategy to address these objectives, and implementing the strategy, consistent with Quality Communities Principles. A comprehensive land use plan expresses a community's vision for its future land use and development activities and establishes a blueprint for growth and development as spelled out in General Municipal Law §239-d(1), General City Law §28-g(4), Town Law §272-a(3) and Village Law §7-722(3). The plan must take into consideration county, agricultural and farmland protection plans. The development or revision of such comprehensive land use plans, as well as the regulations to implement the plans, can move a community closer towards the achievement of the Quality Communities Principles. Achieving the objectives and implementing the strategies of the community growth program takes not only municipal action, but private action as well. To enhance predictability for the regulated community, municipalities are encouraged to review their existing land use and development regulations and policies to ensure consistency with Quality Communities Principles. Examples of activities to achieve the purposes of increasing protection of open space, increasing ease of development in suitable locations, setting forth the strategy to address these objectives, and implementing the strategy, consistent with Quality Communities Principles may include but are not limited to the following: Efforts leading to and including the development of a land use plan, such as: community visioning; mapping, development of geographic information systems (GIS) data to support the creation of maps and analysis of data, citizen participation efforts, strategic plans for geographic areas, development of generic environmental impact statements (GEIS) associated with comprehensive plans, and functional plans. Program planning needed to advance a land use and development component of a comprehensive plan, such as: watershed protection plans, access management plans, open space plans, capital improvement plans, infrastructure plans, transportation plans, transfer of development rights and purchase of development rights programs, and affordable and mixed use housing plans. Development or revision of land use and development regulations consistent with Quality Community Principles, such as: zoning, site plan, and subdivision local laws and ordinances, and the integration ofstormwater management and sediment and erosion control into review processes. Community Center Program The "Community Center Program" is an activity undertaken by a municipality, or a not-for-profit corporation working in cooperation with a municipality for the purposes of conducting a public process to develop a community center vision; identifying the economic and market niche of such a center; preparing an implementation strategy consistent with such vision and niche; establishing sustainable organizational capacity to implement the strategy; and implementing the strategy, consistent with Quality Communities Principles. Environmental Protection Fund 2005-2006 Request for Application - Quality Communities Program Thriving commercial and cultural centers are the product of a community's unique vision for its own future, an as~sessment of its market niche, and the organizational capacity necessary to implement the strategy.[Funding is available for planning, design and pre-construction activities related to the development and re-development of community centers and downtowns.) Examples of activities to achieve these purposes may include but are not limited to the following: Preparing a comprehensive community center revitalization program - undertake coordinated activities to lay the foundation for a comprehensive community center revitalization program based on the approach used throughout the country by the National Main Street Center as follows: Organization of community talent and resources to implement a community center revitalization program. Promotion to create a positive image of the commercial district and encourage consumers and investors to live, work, shop, play and invest in the community center. Design to improve the physical characteristics of the community center. Economic Restructuring to strengthen existing businesses while recruiting compatible new businesses and new economic uses to the community center. Potential activities that are part of the comprehensive community center revitalization program may include but not be limited to the following: An assessment to identify opportunities and assets in the community center; determine how the community might organize to carry out a long-term community center revitalization program; and recommend a 12-24 month program of activities to launch the program. In-depth community training on each element of the revitalization approach, and how this is applied in the community to create a comprehensive revitalization program. Organizational development to create the public participation and project management structure that the community would use to guide its community center revitalization program. Creating a Community Center Vision - by developing a public consensus for the future of the community center. Potential activities include surveys, public meetings, focus groups, data collection, charettes, designs and reports. Identifying Economic Market~- by identifying the unique economic and market niche that best serves residents, attracts visitors and encourages investors. Potential activities include inventory and analysis of the existing resources; market analysis of the potential demand for wntown residential, commercial/retail and support services; urban design analysis. veloping Implementation Strategies - such as action-oriented implementation plans or designs for priority projects in downtown districts. Potential activities include marketing campaigns, including brochure and website design; plans for cultural, historic, arts and Environmental Protection Fund 2005-2006 Request,for Application - Quali~y Communities Pro~ram entertainment districts; plans for transportation oriented projects, such as increasing transportation choices, evaluating downtown traffic impacts, parking strategies, and designs for pedestrian-friendly streetscapes; plans and designs of public spaces; planning for mixed-use/mixed-income redevelopment; developing employer assisted housing programs; and coordinating redevelopment with theexpansion of medical, educational and resear~ facilities. Developing Organizational Capacity for Implementation- This involves examining and developing the institutional tools needed to support revitalization of a downtown or community center. Potential activities include the creation of coordinated retail management organizations; business improvement tax districts; public-private partnerships; creating financial strategies and organizational structures; developing local laws and land use regulations to foster desired development strategy. Community Open Space Program The "Community Open Space Program" is an activity undertaken by a municipality for the purposes of identifying open space suitable for preservation having environmental, recreational, scenic or agricultural values which contribute to or enhance the community's natural, cultural and economic character, and preparing a strategy for preservation, consistent with Quality Communities Principles. Protecting open space can achieve several community objectives concurrently. For example, the same swath of green may serve as a recreation field, a scenic foreground to another vista, a buffer to a stream, a connector in a system of walking and bike trails, and a venue for community events. Often, well-located and well-designed open space can be the engine to drive improvement in adjacent development. Projects which protect open space in order to protect natural resources and improve community life are eligible. Projects which demonstrate the strategic use of open space to advance multiple community objectives are encouraged. Those which involve public-private partnerships and examine a range of open space conservation tools, from conservation to innovative land use controls, are especially desirable. Applicants are encouraged to review the "Local Open Space Planning Guide" which may be downloaded at the Quality Communities Clearinghouse Website at www.qualitycommunities.org. Examples of activities to achieve the above purposes may include but are not limited to the following: Creation of an inventory of resources suitable for preservation as a step toward developing an open space plan - This may include identification of open space resources by the community through meetings, surveys or planning workshops; the inventory of environmental, recreational, scenic or agricultural resources (such as significant wetlands and stream corridors) which contribute to or enhance the community's natural, cultural and economic character; and integration of resource information identified by state or regional agencies into the local system (such as flood plains and productive agricultural lands). Environmental Proteci:'on Fund 2005-2006 Request,for ,~?plication - Quality Communities Program Development of an open space plan or open space component of a comprehensive plan - This may include the development of an open space plan and its components, such as a community vision plan, recreation plan, bikeway plan, farmland preservation plan and other elements, that address open space suitable for preservation having environmental, recreational, scenic or agricultural values which contribute to or enhance the community's natural, cultural and economic character. Planning for recreation and trails leading to completion of a community open space plan - This may include the develo~nt ,~'~ re,'re~*iq l~d~t~~ a recreational access plan for the disable~l~,',~ecreati0pal facilities nlan fnr~nei~hborhoo_d~r a system of trails (both intra- and inter-~r~w-~c, ua2~i. -- -- Assessment of development impacts - This may also include the assessment of the impact of new development on open space resources. Preparation of Implementation Strategies - This may include the identification of strategies and approaches to preserve open space having environmental, recreational, scenic or agricultural values which contribute to or enhance the community's natural, cultural and economic character, such as: regulatory tools, including the drafting or updating of zoning laws and subdivision regulations to implement local open space planning objectives, incentive zoning, performance zoning, cluster subdivision regulations, conservation subdivision regulations, parkland dedication requirements are some examples of eligible regulatory tools. acquisition tools and techniques, including standardized conservation easements, establishment of a Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) program, development of information for local open space bond acts. - public-private partnerships for conservation and stewardship, including establishment  oqx''' of land trusts to acquire and manage open space and creation of community ~.- orgamzat~ons to foster local open space planmng, conservation and stewardship. Mountain Communities Program The "Mountain Communities Program" is an activity, including a local land use program as defined in Section 802 of the Executive Law, undertaken by a municipality, or a not-for-profit corporation working in cooperation with a municipality, located wholly or partially within the boundaries of the Adirondack Park or Catskill Park for the purpose of preparing a community-based program implementing the vision of the people in the community using locally derived strategies that protect natural resources and enhance local economies unique to these mountain regions, consistent with Quality Communities Principles. Communities in the Adirondack and Catskill Parks have unique characteristics - scenic settings; important and sensitive natural resources; traditional community centers; and an economy that 8 Environmental Protection Fund 2005-2006 Request,for Application - Quality Communities Program benefits from tourism, recreation and natural resources. Mountain Communities projects are comprehensive, locally driven programs to address resource protection and economic revitalization issues in communities in the Adirondack and Catskill Parks. Mountain Communities projects can be used to help communities define a local vision of the future indicating how they want to develop and how they will protect important natural, scenic and cultural resources and community character. Mountain Communities projects can also be used to develop plans, strategies and implementation techniques to address a range of important resource protection and community revitalization issues. Applicants are encouraged to submit intermunicipal projects, such as those along river and highway corridors, or within watershed areas. Examples of activities to achieve the above purpose may include but are not limited to the following: Community participation techniques designed to generate a broad understanding of community issues, create a consensus for the future, and develop a strategy for the steps needed to advance the consensus. Community inventory and analysis to describe existing conditions and to identify issues and opportunities related to resource protection and economic revitalization. Development or revision of a local land use program, as defined in Section 802 of the Executive Law, for communities within the Adirondack Park. Development of plans to improve two or more of the following community resources, such as: Main Streets in village and hamlets, including streetscapes, bicycle and pedestrian access, and abandoned or underutilized buildings and sites. Waterfronts. Natural resources, including watersheds, habitats, wetlands, and stream corridors. Recreation sites and public access, including parks, trails, greenways or blueways. Scenic resources including viewsheds and scenic byways. Historic and cultural resources. Open space, farmland and working forests. Tourist attractions, with a focus on resource-, recreation- and heritage-based tourism. Development or revision of local laws, such as zoning, site plan review, subdivision, resource protection, design guidelines and design review, to implement the provisions of a new or revised community plan, including projects which address the adequacy of local land use controls. Project specific feasibility, design, or market planning for projects identified through a community visioning process and described in a community plan or intermunicipal revitalization strategy. 9 Environmental Protection Fund 2005-2006 Request for Application - Quality Communities Pro~ram GRANT SELECTION CRITERIA Applications will be reviewed according to specific grant selection criteria, based on the Quality Communities Principles outlined above. A successful proposal is not expected to meet all of these grant selection criteria. Each element of the grant selection criteria is rated using the following numerical evaluation to assess the degree that the application meets the grant selection criteria: High - 3 points Medium - 2 points Low - 1 point Does not meet criteria (a resource or factor is present, but the proposal has been evaluated to have no value or to not have an intended benefit) - 0 points. Not applicable (a resource or factor is not present) - NA The grant selection criteria and elements are: 1. Public Investment (a) Makes efficient use of and/or protects public investment and infrastructure (b) Minimizes the additional public costs of new development (c) Minimizes adverse environmental impacts of development 2. Economic Development (a) Encourages new development in existing community centers and areas where infrastmcture is readily available (b) Encourages the use or reuse of existing buildings and sites in existing community centers and areas where infrastructure is readily available (c) Encourages mixed use development in existing community centers and areas where infrastructure is readily available (a) (b) (c) (d) Conservation and Restoration Protects, preserves, enhances or restores natural and ecological resources, including surface water, groundwater, sign/ficant habitats and wetlands Protects, preserves, enhances or restores historic, archeological and cultural resources Protects, preserves or enhances agricultural land, other open spaces, and forests Protects, preserves or enhances recreation lands (a) (b) Partnerships Creates or advances intermunicipal, intergovernmental, public, private, or not-for-profit partnerships to address development issues Creates or advances intermunicipal and intergovernmental partnerships in order to increase efficient, planned, and cost-effective delivery of govermnent services o (a) (b) Community Livability Provides for a mix of land uses and compact development Provides for downtown revitalization I0 Environmental Protection Fund 2005-2006 Request for Application - Qualit~ Communities Program (c) Provides for enhanced public spaces (d) Provides for a range of housing choices in proximity to places of employment, recreation and community development (e) Promotes and implements strategies that include integration of all income and age groups o (a) Transportation Provides transportation choices that will improve health and quality of life, reduce automobile dependency, traffic congestion and automobile pollution 7. Consistency (a) Demonstrates consistency between existing and proposed community plans and land use regulations (b) Ensures predictability in land use regulations and procedures So (a) (b) (c) Sustainability Provides for broad-based public involvement of community-based organizations, neighborhood groups, not-for-profit organizations and others who would be affected by or who can advance project implementation Demonstrates an existing or proposed organizational structure adequate to sustain implementation Provides an ongoing educational component for local officials and/or community residents 9. Regional Significance &kvr,.,o~2'~ (a) Advances a regional initiative recommended in a county or regional plan ~\~ (b) Ensures an appropriate balance between development and open space protection within a regional context 10. Innovation, Comprehensiveness (a) Presents an innovative approach to address community opportunities and constraints .------- ~0~'~/~ 00~ (b) Incorporates more than one eligible grant activity- -- -- (c) Is an integral part of a set of ac i~g!~l~that comprehensively addresses an issue or opportunity 11. (a) Leveraging of Public Funding Leverages other public funds, including the Environmental Protection Fund, Small Cities funding from the Governor's Office for Small Cities, the New York Main Street program, Quality Communities program, and other state and federal grant programs 12. (a) Advancing State Planning Initiatives Advances or implements an approved: Local Waterfront Revitalization Program activity, an Adirondack Park Agency local land use program, an Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) planning and development strategy, a New York State Scenic Byway initiative, or furthers a planning project begun under a Department of Transportation (DOT) transportation planning grant or a Small Cities planning grant and other state and federal grant programs 13. Level of Local Commitment (a) Advances an approved or substantially completed community plan, strategy or vision (b) Builds on other successful local projects 11 Environmental Protection Fund 2005-2006 Request,[or Application - ~uali~ Communities Program (c) Demonstrates a committed government and community leadership (d) Demonstrates readiness to advance the project In addition, the geographic distribution of grant proposals, information from interagency discussion and the level of funding available will be factors used in determining successful grant proposals. NOTE: An additional weight of 5 points will be given to grant proposals that are from applicants that are a Greenway Compact Community. Greenway Compact Communities are: Dutchess County, Amenia (T), Beacon (C), Beckman (T), Clinton (T), Dover (T), East Fishkill (T), Fishkill (T), Fishkill (V), Hyde Park (T), LaG-range (T), Milan (T), Millerton (V), North East (T), Pawling (T), Pawling (V), Pine Plains (T), Pleasant Valley (T), Poughkeepsie (T), Poughkeepsie (C), Red Hook (T), Red Hook (V), Rhinebeck (T), Rhinebeck (V), Tivoli (V), Union Vale (T), Wappinger (T), Wappingers Falls (V) Westchester County, Briarcliff Manor (V), Buchanan (V), Cortlandt (T), Croton-on-Hudson (V), North Salem (T), Ossining (T), Peekskill (C), Somers (T), Tarrytown (V), Yorktown, (T) FUNDING RESTRICTIONS/GUIDELINES 1. There is no limit to the amount of funds that may be requested by an applicant. 2. Payments shall not exceed 80% of the eligible cost of the project, except for those municipalities that are identified as economically distressed municipalities where state assistance will be provided up to 90% of the eligible cost of the activity. See a list of these communities online at: www.qualitycommunities.org. Eligible Costs Grant funds may be used for the following costs: 1. Direct salary costs for applicant employees, while working on award project including wages, salaries, fringe benefits, and supplemental compensation for personal services. 2. Direct non-salary costs, including costs for printing, photocopying, travel, materials, supplies, consultant and contractual services, and other goods and services directly associated with the project. Ineligible Costs The following may not be paid with grant funds, nor used to provide the required local share: 1. Construction or capital costs. 2. Indirect or overhead costs of the municipality, such as rent, telephone service, and general 12 Environmental Protection Fund 2005-2006 Request for Application - Quali~v Communities Program administrative support not related to the project. o Salaries and other expenses of elected officials, whether incurred for purposes of project direction, execution, or legislation, are not an eligible cost. However, volunteer services contributed by these officials to the project may be classified as local contribution, provided that such services are outside the performance of their duties. 4. In-kind costs and volunteer services. 5. Grant writing costs. 6. Print runs such as brochures and marketing pieces CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS Standard Cost Reimbursement Contract Each successful applicant must enter into a standard cost reimbursement contract with the Department of State which includes this Request for Applications, the successful applicant's proposal, any attachments or exhibits and the standard clauses required by the Attorney General for all state contracts including Appendix "A" along with Article 15-A of the New York Executive Law. All necessary municipal resolutions and certifications must be received prior to entering into contracts. The contract will: be subject to approval by the Attorney General and State Comptroller, require submission of final products in both hard copy and electronic form, be subject to payment only upon proper documentation and compliance with reimbursement procedures and all other contractual requirements. (A copy ora standard contract along with Appendix "A" and Article 15-A are available from the Department or can be downloaded from the Quality Communities Clearinghouse Website www.qualitycommunities.org.) Compliance with Procurement Requirements The municipal attorney, chief legal officer, or financial administrator for the municipality shall certify to the Department of State that applicable public bidding procedures of General Municipal Law § 103 were followed for all purchase contracts involving more than $10,000. In the case ofpumhase contracts involving not more than $10,000, and contracts for professional services, the municipal attorney, chief legal officer, or financial administrator shall certify that the procedures of the municipality established pursuant to General Municipal Law § 104-b were fully complied with. The chief legal officer or financial administrator for the not-for-profit corporation shall certify to the Department of State that alternative proposals and quotations for professional services were secured by use of written requests for proposals through a publicly advertised process to ensure the prudent and economical use of public funds for professional services of maximum quality at reasonable cost. Contract Period Subject to the continued availability of funds in the budget the contract period shall not exceed 2 years from the start of the project with the provision to extend for one twelve month period if necessary. 13 Environmental Protection Fund 2005-2006 Request for Application - ~uality Communities Program SATISFACTORY PROGRESS It is imperative that the grant recipient complete the project as set forth in the agreed work program. Failure to render satisfactory progress or to complete the project to the satisfaction of the State may be deemed an abandonment of the project and may cause the suspension or termination of any obligation of the State. Satisfactory progress toward implementation includes, but is not limited to; executing contracts and submitting payment requests in a timely fashion, retaining consultants, completing plans, designs, reports, or other tasks identified in the work program within the time allocated for their completion. The DOS may recapture awarded funds if satisfactory progress is not being made on the implementation of a grant project. Applicants should not submit applications if they cannot expect to initiate the project within a reasonable time period after receiving an executed contract and be able complete the project within the equivalent time period cited in the application. INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THE APPLICATION FORM Part A. Applicant Information 1. Project Applicant: The applicant must be a county, city town, village, local public authority, public benefit corporation, Indian Tribe/nation, located in New York State and will be the sole contractor for purposes of executing the contract with the State and to request and receive payment for eligible costs. For the Community Center Program: The applicant must be a municipality or a not-for-profit corporation working in cooperation with a municipality. In instances where a municipality and a not-for-profit are co-applicants, one must be identified as the lead applicant with whom contracts will be developed. A not-for-profit organization may be the lead applicant and serve as local program administrator provided that it is incorporated pursuant to New York State not-for-profit corporation law and be approved for tax-exempt status under the Internal Revenue Service code for at least one year prior to contract execution. For the Mountain Communities Program: The applicant must be a municipality located wholly or partially within the boundaries of the Adirondack Park and the Catskill Park or a not-for profit corporation working in cooperation with such a municipality. In instances where a municipality and a not-for-profit are co-applicants, one must be identified as the lead applicant with whom contracts will be developed. A not-for-profit organization may be the lead applicant and serve as local program administrator provided that it is incorporated pursuant to New York State not-for-profit corporation law and be approved for tax- exempt status under the Internal Revenue Service code for at least one year prior to contract execution. Project Applicant's Address and Telephone Number: Provide the postal address and telephone and fax number of the applicant. Federal Tax Identification Number and Charities Registration Number: Provide the applicant's Tax ID number and Charities Registration Number if applicable. 14 Environmental Protection Fund 2005-2006 Request for Application - Quali{y Commun t es Program 4-7. Contact Information: Provide the name, telephone and fax number, e-mail and postal address (if different fi'om the applicant) of the person to contact regarding the proposed project. Part B. General Project Information 1. Project Name: Provide a brief but descriptive name for your project. 2. Project Location: Provide County, Senate and Assembly District. Project Type: Mark the box(es) that best indicates how this application should be categorized. Definitions of the project types are provided on pages 3 - 9 of the Request for Applications. Part C. Project Timing and Cost 1-2. Schedule: Provide the proposed starting date and the expected completion date of the project. Note: The earliest allowable project start date is April 1, 2005, and the project shah not exceed 24 months from the start date. If your proposed project start date will be prior to the date you will sign a funding contract with the Department, you must clearly identify the project tasks or activities that will have been conducted prior to contract execution. 3-5. Project cost: Provide an estimate of the total project cost and the amount of Quality Communities Program dollars requested to help fund the project. The dollar amounts entered must match what is calculated in the budget page(s), Parts K/L. Part D. Resolution and Certification The applicant must submit a formal resolution of the governing bodies designating, by title (Mayor, Town Supervisor, Manager, etc.), the representative authorized to act on behalf of that body in all matters related to this fmancial assistance. The applicant authorized by the Resolution must sign the certification on the information contained in this application. Where the applicant is a not-for-profit corporation it must include a resolution from all the municipalities with which it is working agreeing to the application, as well as proof that the Corporation's Board of Directors has authorized the application. All co-applicants/partners (municipal and not-for-profits) listed who have an active role in the project are required to submit a resolution as well. These documents should be submitted with the application but must be received by the Department of State as soon as possible after the application deadline. If not attached please indicate date(s) resolution(s) will be submitted. Failure to submit in a timely manner may result in forfeiture of a potential award. Part E. Project Summary Provide a brief summary statement that describes the proposed project. Part F. Project Partner Provide details on each project partner identified in the application. Part G. Work Program Briefly describe the proposed project, including a description of the objectives to be achieved and problem(s) to be addressed. Identify the project's component tasks to be funded by this program, their costs as they 15 Environmental Protection Fund 2005-2006 Rerluest for Application - Quali~, CommuniZes Program relate to the amounts in the budget and a schedule for their completion. Part H. Grant Selection Criteria Describe the extent to which the proposed project is consistent with the specific grant selection criteria outlined on pp. 11-13 of the Request for Applications. Part I. Project Personnel Identify the key personnel who will work on the project and describe their qualifications. Part J. Additional Weighting Indicate if the applicant is eligible to receive additional weighting Part K/L. Budget Summary and Detail Include only costs to be funded in this program and indicate local match in the Summary. 1. Salaries and Wages For each employee assigned to this project, indicate the title, annual salary (if an hourly employee, please indicate rate and approximate number of hours to be worked on the project) including fringe benefits, and total dollar amount to be charged to the project. (Fringe benefits include social security, workers compensation, unemployment insurance, health insurance, and any other benefits.) 2. Travel Describe the purpose, start and end points and mode of travel, and how costs are calculated. 3. Supplies, Materials and Equipment State the cost and describe briefly the supplies, materials, and equipment to be purchased. 4. Contractual Services State the cost and describe briefly the extent and purpose of contractual services. Note: Make sure that all items of cost in the budget are clearly described in the Part G - Work Program and justified as necessary to the project. 16 ~ Woodhull, Rutha... RE:TDR Tue 7/10/2007 2:52_ ~_~ Woodhull, Rutha... RE:T DR Tue 7/10/2007 2:39_. ~ Woodhull, Rutha... RE:I'DR Tue 7/10/2007 2:23... ~ Woodhuiil RUthaill R~= ~ Mort 6/18/2007 9=54... William Cremers Re: meeting next wed. am Wed 7/16/2008 4:3... ~ Valede Scopaz RE: 2007/2008 EPF Grant Opportunity Mon 11/19/2007 7:4... ;-,,-it Valerie Scopaz RE: 2007/2008 EPF Grant Opportunity Mort 11/19/2007 5:0... ~ Valede Scopaz RE: 2007/2008 EPF Grant Opportunity Mort 11/19/2007 5:0... ~ Trezza, Anthony RE: town board 6 26 07.doc ~ Trezza, Anthony RE: AgPDD more torture ~ Trezza, Anthony ll~u 6/28/2007 10:5... Fri 5/25/2007 8:16 AM lllu 11/9/2006 3:02... Trent, Mar[in RE: Please review 'Planning Zoning TDR Croma' Trent, Martin RE: Please review 'Planning Zoning TDR Croma' Trent, Martin RE: Cromaglass Sytems and HALO's Trent, Martin RE: TDR Density Calculation Wed 9/28/2005 12:... Tue 9/27/2005 11:0... Fri 9/23/2005 I:~N. PM Mon 8/29/2005 11:4... Terry, Mark TDR Grant Tnu 8/21/2008 2:21... Terry, Mark RE: meeting next wed. am Wed 7/16/2008 2:2... Terry, Mark RE: ~H ~R Tracking Non 6/9/2008 3:18 ... Ter~, Ma~ RE: ~H ~R Tracking M0~ 6)9)2008 3~5 ~ Ter~, Ma~ Tue 5/27/2008 10:2... Ter~, Mark RE: Emailing: 2008_Reque~or_apps.pdf Tue 5/20/2008 1:35... Ter~, Ma~ ~: tdr Fd 5/2/2008 8:39 AM Ter~, Mark Reminder Non 4/7/2008 9:15 ... Te~, Mark RE: Hamlet ~velopment M~el Fri ~/4/2008 3:15 PM Te~ Mark RE: Hamlet ~?mgp~ent M~em Fri 4/4/2008 2:51 PM Te~, Ma~ RE: Hamlet ~velopment M~el Fri 4/4/2008 11:50 AM Ter~, Ma~ ~: Hamlet ~velopment Model Fri 4/4/2008 8:45 AM Ter~, Mark RE: Hamlet Development Model ~u ~/3/2008 8:~ AH Ter~, Mark RE: Hamlet Development Model W~ 4/2/2008 12:4... Te~, .ar~ R~: H~i~ ~vei~ ~i ~ue ~/i~008 8~0 ~ Te~, Mark RE: Hamlet Development Model Non 3/31/2008 8:37... Te~, Mark RE: Hamlet Development M~el Mort 3/24/2008 12:5... Ter~, ~a~ ~: ~ntra~ S~tus Mon 3/17/2008 9:06... Ter~, ~ark RE: Affordable Housing initiative - ~ink a~ut it Tue 2/26/2008 4:00... Te~, Mark RE: Final Se~ions of ~R GEIS for Review - S~ions 4, S and 6 Tue 2/26/2008 8:01... Ter~, Hark RE: TDR DGEIS ~on 2/25/2008 2:32... Te~, Hark RE: Final ~ees of TDR GEIS for Review - ~on$ 4, 5 and 6 W~ 2/20/2008 10:... Te~, Mark RE: Planning Hee~ng ~u 2/14/2008 3:58... Te~ ~ark RE: Downtown Se~er Summit and G0~ernor's Sma~ Gro~h ~iq~t ~S~~ W~ 2/13/2008 12:_. Terry, Mark 1 9/26/2008 11:14 AM Terry, Mark Planning Meeting Tue 2/12/2008 10:1... Terry, Mark FW: TDR SEQR STATUS Wed 2/6/2008 1:45 ... Terry, Mark ll)R SEQR STATUS Wed 2/6/2008 12:1... Terry, Mark RE: Budget Mon 1/28/2008 2:42... Terry, Mark RE: Budget Fri 1/25/2008 10:05._ Terry, Mark RE: TDR Program Thu 1/24/2008 9:17... -Ferry, Mark RE: Grant Amendment Thu 1/10/2008 9:28... Terry, Mark RE: Grant Amendment Wed 1/9/2008 2:12 ... Terry, Mark TDR Quality Communities Grant Wed 1/9/2008 12:3... Terry, Mark TDR Grant Total Wed 1/9/2008 9:42 .. Terry, Mark RE: 2007/2008 EPF Grant Opportunity Tue 11/20/2007 8:3... Ten'y, Mark 2007/2008 EPF Grant Opportunity Mon 11/19/2007 3:2... Terry, Mark FW: Grant Amendment Wed 11/7/2007 12:... Terry, Mark RE: 2006_App_form Grant.doc Thu 11/1/2007 1:30... Terry, Mark RE: accessory apartments Thu 10/25/2007 1:3... Terry, Mark SCDOH and PDD Tue 10/16/2007 2:5... Terry, Mark RE: mtgcode Wed I0/3/2007 2:3... Terry, Mark RE: TDR Tue 10/2/2007 1:05.- Terry, Mark RE: Date & time for next Code Committee Fri 9/14/2007 4:28 PM Terry, Mark RE: TDR Report Fri 7/13/2007 1:06 PM Terry, Mark RE: TDR Report Problem Tue 7/10/2007 10:2... Terry, Mark town board 6 26 07.doc Thu 6/28/2007 10:5... Te;ryl ~J~ REi ~R Mon 6/25i2007 1:34... Terryl ~ REi ~R Mon 6/25/2007 1:22... Yerry, Mark RE: HALOfrDR work Fri 6/22/2007 11:13.,. Terry, Mark REi Updated HALO TDR Numbers Thu 6/21/2007 8:40... ¥;~i'fi;;k d~: 6~ted dALo 'FOd ~ wed 6/20/2007 3:4-. Terry, Mark RE: TDR Tue 6/19/2007 4:06... Ten'y, Mark FW: TDR Tue 6/19/2007 12:0... Terry, Mark RE: TDR Tue 6/19/2007 11:5_. Wed 6/13/2007 4:1... Terry, Mark RE: TDR Revised 5/26 Wed 6/13/2007 4:0... Terry, Mark RE: Update 5ending Area Numbers Wed 6/13/2007 3:4... Terry, Mark ~i N;xt ~R Meeting Fri 6/1/2007 8:15 AM Terry, Mark RI:: AgPDD more torture Thu 5/24/2007 2:55... Terry, Mark RE: My comments on TDR Report Thu 5/24/2007 8:lq... Terryf Mark RE: My c0mme~ts on ~DR Report Wed 5/23/2007 8:4... Terry, Mark RE: My comments on TDR Report Tue 5/22/2007 8:33... Terry, Mark Thu 5/17/2007 9:51... Terry, Mark TDR Work Program final (2).doc Thu 5/17/2007 8:23... Terry, Mark TDR Work Program final.doc Tue 5/15/2007 2:37... Terry, Mark Tue 5/15/2007 2:18... Terry, Mark RE: Ag PD Legislation Tue 5/15/2007 9:44... Terry, Mark RE: Ag PD Legislation Tue 5/15/2007 8:43._ Terry, Mark TDR work program fin~Ld0u Fri 5/11/2007 9:43 AM Terry, Mark RE: TDR Meeting Conflict Wed 5/2/2007 I2:0... Terryl Maik ToR Work Program final.doc Tue 5/1/2007 1:06 PM Terry, Mark RE: TDR Meeting Conflict Tue 5/1/2007 10:05... Terry, Mark 2 9/26/2008 11:14 AM Terry, Mark TDR Meeting Conflict Tue 5/1/2007 8:03 AM Terry, Mark RE: tdr Tue 5/1/2007 7:54 AM Terry, Mark grant.doc Tue 4/3/2007 10:18... Mon 3/19/2007 11:4... Terry Mark TDR Workgroup Terry, Mark FW: 5CAN8658_000.pdf Mon 3/19/2007 11:3... Terry, Mark TDR Meeting with Chic Fri 3/16/2007 12:09... Te~ IRark ~: 'FDR M;~tin~ Continuation Wed ~1~00~ 1:i111 Terry, Mark TDR Meeting Confirmation Wed 3/14/2007 12:... Terry Mark RE: TDR Wed 3/14/2007 12:... Wed 3/14/2007 12:... Terry Mark RE: Next TDR Meeting and Needs Terry~ Mark RE: Next TDR Meeting and Needs Terry, Mark RE: Next TDR Meeting and Needs Fri 3/9/2007 1:39 PM Terry, Mark Next TDR Meeting and Needs Fti 3/9/2007 12:08 PM erry 6;i Mon 3/5/2007 2:20 ... Terry, Mark Friday @ 8:30 TDR Meeting Thu 2/15/2007 3:05... Terry Mark RE: Meeting Thursday morning Thu 2/15/2007 8:57... 2/13/2007 Terry Mark FVV: Meeting Thursday morning Tue 11 Zl Terry, RE: Fo,ow to our ast meeUng Terry, Mark TDR/HALO Legislation Mort 2/5/2007 11:51... Terry, Mark TDR Meeting with Chic Voorhis Fri 2/2/2007 2:48 PM Teiry Mar Fri 2/2/2007 1:39 PM Terry Mark RE: Planning Department HALO Boundary Review and Hamlet Study Implementation Tue 1/30/2007 8:29... Terry, Mark RE: Tue 1/23/2007 3:02... Terry Mark RE! Tue 1/23/2007 10:2... Terry Mark Mort 1/22/2007 8:19... Terry, Mark RE: 2007 work plan.doc Terry, Mark 2007 work plan.doc Fri 1/5/2007 2:41 PM Terry, Mark RE: HALO/TDR Buildout Mon 3/13/2006 9:14,.. ~ ~ TechSupport@m... 7591.91637 ScreenShots for 3-D maps Fri 10/21/2005 1:01.- ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: TDR meeting Thu 7/10/2008 1:24... ~.~ ~ Spiro, Melissa RAh [Fwd: Pipes Cove Stackier Properties - Sanitary Flow Credit Question] Fri 6/27/2008 2:00 PM ~ Spiro, Melissa FW: The Dirt On Transfer of Development Rights, Food Policy Councils and Breaking Farm Bil... Thu 5/8/2008 4:00 PM ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: TDR Sending Area Tue 5/6/2008 9:29 AM ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: TDR Info Session handout Tue 5/6/200~ g!09 AM ~:'~'~ Spiro, Melissa RE: TDR Info Sas,sion handout Tue 5/6/2008 8:56 AM ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: TDR Info Session handout Tue 5/6/2008 8:12 AM ~ ro ire ~ ~d~ Thu 5/1/2008 3.36 PM ~ Spiro Melissa RE' Final Hamlet Development Model 'rDR Report Mort 4/14/2008 9:18... i?~ Spiro, Melissa RE: TDR Program Planning Report and DSGEIS Summary Mon 4/7/2008 9:28 ... ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: TDR GE!S Section 1.0 Tue 2/26/2008 8:34... ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: Final Sections of TDR GEIS for Review- Sections 4, 5 and 6 ~'~ ~?~00~ ~!32!;: ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: TDR Report Thu 7/12/2007 7:20... ~ Spiro, Me[issa RE: TDR Report - Sending Area Wed 7/11/2007 11:... Spiro M~ii~ REi TDR Tue 7/10/2007 2:51... Terry, Mark 3 9/26/2008 11:14 AM ~ Spiro, Melissa TDR Tue 7/10/2007 2:20... ~ 5piro, Melisse RE: TDR Report Problem '1'~ ~/i0}200~ 9118]]] ~ Spiro, Mel!sse RE: TDR RePOrt Problem Tue 7/10/2007 8:46.- ~ Spiro Melissa RE: [NEWSENDER] - Southold 'FDR Report - Message is from an unknown sender Tue 7/10/2007 ~ ,~ Spiro~ Melissa FW: [NEWSENDER] - 5outhold TDR Report - Message is from an unknown sender Mort 7/9/2007 4:14 ... {~.J Spiro, Melissa RE: 'FDR Report Problem Mon 7/9/2007 4:12 ... ~.~ Spiro, Melisse RE: TDR follow-up Tue 6/26/2007 1:42... ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: TDR Revised 5/26 Wed 6/13/2007 11:... ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: TDR Revised 5/26 Wed 6/13/2007 9:3... ~ Spiro, Melissa melissas quick comments on last TDR draft. Mon 6/11/2007 5:58... [] ~.:~ Spiro Melissa FW' AgPDD more torture Non 6/4/2007 3:25 ... ~ Spir0~ Me!!ssa AgPDD more torture Thu 5/24/2007 1:35.- ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: My comments on TDR Report Wed 5/23/2007 8:0... ~ Spiro~ Melissa RE: FW: My comments on TDR Report Tue 5/22/2007 7:34... ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: My comments on TDR Report Tue 5/22/2007 7:29... ~ ~ Spiro Melissa RE: TDR Draft Report MaY 11 Thu 5/17/2007 9:49... ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: TDR Meeting Conflict Wed 5/2/2007 11:4... ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: TDR Meeting conflict Tue 5/1/2007 8:22 AM ~.~ Spiro, Melissa tdr M°~4(~O~O0~ 4!00:;: ~ 8piro MeJisse RE: Next TDR Meeting and Needs Fri 3/9(~00~ ~ 08 P~ ~,tj spiro, Melissa RE: Next TDR Meebng and Needs Fri 3/9/2007 12:17 PM Mon 3/5/2007 5:39 ~ 5piro, Melissa RE: revision to my e-mail that I'm available ~ 5pJro Melisse RE: Mort 3/5/2007 5:32 ... ~ 8piro, Melisse RE: Friday @ 8:30 TDR Meeting Thu 2/15/2007 4:22... ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: TDR HALO Meeting at Annex Wed 11/1/2006 11:... ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: Tue 10/31/2006 2:2... ~i~ Spiro, Melissa RE: Greenport HALO Numbers Tu~ 9~1~(~0~6 ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: Greenp°rt HALO Numbers Tue 9/12/2006 8:01... ~ Spiro, MeJissa RE: New Orient HALO Numbers Tue 8/29/2006 2:50... ~ 5piro, Melissa RE: Hamlet Modeling Mon 8/21/2006 3:45... ~ Sp!r? Me!!s~a RE: Mattituck and Orien.! Ham!~ ?0del!ng Tue 8~B/2006 4:46 PM ~ 5piro, Melissa RE: corrected draft 3 of Hamlet Development Model Mon 7/24/2006 6:57... ~ 5piro, Melissa RE: SCWA Map Tue 3/14/2006 4:32... ~ 5piro, Melissa RE: Health Dept meeting Non 10/31/2005 10:... ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: Meeting with SCDOH Wed 10/5/2005 9:4... ;s~Im Spiro, Melissa RE: Meeting with SCDOH Tue 10/4/2005 4:42... ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: Meeting with SCDOH Thu 9/29/2005 3:45... Tnu 9/29/2005 3:07... tdF ~ Spiro, Melissa FW: tdr Tnu 9/29/2005 2:37... ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: tdr Thu 9/29/2005 1:28... i~ Spiro, Melisse RE: tdr Thu 9/29/2005 9:13... ;:~ Spiro, Melissa tdr ~? ~9~005 ~.~ Spiro, Melissa RN: HALO Tnfo Thu 9/29/2005 8:09... ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: HALO Buildout Mon 9/26/2005 2:16... Thu 9/22/2005 1:50... ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: tdr ~ Spiro, Melissa tdr W~d 9(21(200~ ~ Spiro, Maliss~ RI:: tdr meeting Wed 9/21/2005 10:... ~ Spiro, Nlelisse tclr meeting Tue 9/20/2005 4:11... Terry, Mark 4 9/26/2008 11:14 AM ~ Spiro, Nelissa TDR Wed 9/14/2005 11:... ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: tdr sending Wed 9/14/2005 11:... ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: HALO Boundaries Wed 9/14/2005 11:... RE: tdr sending Tue 9/1]/2005 3:59... ~ Spiro, Melissa tdr sending Tue 9/13/2005 2:56... ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: Site plan efficiency memorandum Tue 9/6/2005 4:34 PM ~ Spiro, Melisse RE: TDR Statu? Tue 9/6/2005 4:31 PM ~ , S@!ro M?issa tdr Thu 9/1/2005 9:58 AM ~ Spiro Melissa TDR Thu 8/25/2005 10:1... ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: TDR/HALO Mon 8/22/2005 2:14... ~:~t Spiro, Melissa RE: TDR Wed 8/3/2005 11:1... ~ Spiro, Melissa RE: TDR Wed 8/3/2005 10:5... ~ Sepenoski, John TDR Numbers by Hamlet Wed 7/23/2008 2:4... ~ Sepenoski, John RE: SCDOH TDR Tracking Mon 6/30/2008 11:4... ~. Sepen°~k~i ]°hn RE: SCDOH TOR Tracking" Mon 6~9~2008 3:38 ... ~ SePenoski John RE: SCDOH TDR Tracking Mort 6/9/2008 3:17 ... ~1 Sepenoski, John RE: SCDOH TDR Tracking Mon 6/9/2008 12:38... ~ SePenos~il ]ohn RE: scDOH TDR Tracking Mon 6~9/~008 !~!3~! ~. Sepenos?, ~]~hn .RE: TDR [nfo Sessi?r~ h~ndot~t Tue 5/6~2008 9:35 AM ~ Sepeno~ki~ JOhn RE: Final Hamlet Development Model TDR Report Mort 4/14/2008 3:47... ~ Sepenoski, John RE: Final Hamlet Development Model TDR Report Mort 4/14/2008 10:1... ?,~ Seponoski, John RE: Hamet Deveopment Mode Fn 4/4/2008 11.05 AM ~ Sepenoski, John RE: Hamlet Development Model Wed 4/2/2008 9:59 ... Tue 4/1/2008 9:48 AM ~ Sepenoski, John RE: Hamlet Development Model ~'~m Sepenoski, John RE: Hamlet Development Model Non 3/31/2008 3:39... ~ Sepenoski, John RE: Final Sections of TDR GElS for Review - Sections 4, 5 and 6 Mon 2/25/2008 4:11... ~ Sepenoski, John RE: TDR GEIS Section 110 Mon 2/25/2008 4:09... L~ Sepenoski, John RE: Greenport Numbers ~ Sepenoski, John TDR Report - Sending Area Wed 7/11/2007 11:_. ~ SePenoski' JOhn RE: TDR RePort Problem Tue 7/10/2007 9:00... ~ S~l~en0sk!~ Joh~ . P-E! TDPt P-ep?~ pr°b!em 1-ue ~/!0/2007 8:53::. ~ Sebenoski, John RE: [NEWSENDER] - Southold TDR Report - Message is from an unknown sender Tue 7/10/2007 8:43... ~ Seponoski, John RE: TDR Report Problem Tue 7/10/2007 8:38... ~ sepe~oskif Job0 RE: [NEWSENDER]- Bouthold TDR Report -Message is from an unknown sender Mon 7/912007 4:58 ... [~ Sepenoski, John TDR Report Problem Mon 7/9/2007 4:01 ... ~.~ Sepenoski, John RE: HALO/TDR work Tho 6/21/2007 3:39... [~ Sepenoski, John RE: HALO/I'DR work Thu 6/21/2007 2:43... [~ Sepenoski, John HALO/TDR work Thu 6/21/2007 1:02... Se?0$k! N .bers 6/21/200 ~ Sepenoski, John RE: Updated HALO TDR Numbers Thu 6/21/2007 8:40... ~ Sepenoski, John Updated HALO TDR Numbers Wed 6/20/2007 2:3._ se "0, i: u a e ,Aio O ,,mbers 6/20/2007 2:3... [,:~ sepenoski, john Updated HALO TDR Numbers Wed 6/20/200~ ~2:'" ~ Sepenoski, John Updated HALO TDR Numbers Wed 6/20/2007 12:... ~ Sepenoski, John Updated HALO 'rDR Numbers wed 6/20/2007 10:... [~ Sepenoski, John Updated HALO TDR Numbers Wed 6/20/2007 8:4... ~:~ Sepenoski, John RE: TDR Tue 6/19/2007 1:19... ~ Sepen0$ki, John RE: Update Sending Area Numbers 'mu 6/14/2007 8:05... ~ Sepenoski, John Update Sending Area Numbers Wed 6113/2007 10:... Terry, Mark 5 9/26/2008 11:14 AM ~ Sepenoski, John RE: TDR Revised 5/26 Wed 6/13/2007 9:5.- ~ Sepenoski, John RF: Ag District/Exemption Question and Information Thu S/31/2007 11:5... ~ Seponoski, .lohn RE: AgPDD more torture Tnu 5/24/2007 3:2~t... ~ Seponoski, ,lohn RE: My comments on TDR Report Wed 5/23/2007 2:1... ~ Seponoski, John RE: My comments o~ 'i~DP~ ReP0rt 1-~ 5/22/200~ 8i! !.- ~ Sepenoski, John RE: FW: My comments on TDR Report Tue 5/22/2007 8:09... ¢i~J Sepenoski, John RE: My comments on TDR Report Mon 5/21/2007 1:22... ~ ~ Sepenoski, John FW: My comments on TDR Report ~on ~ Sepenoski, John RE: TDR DraFt Report May 11 Tue 5J15J2007 10:5... k~ Sepenoski, John RE: TDR Meeting ~flict Tu~ ~ili2007 $i~ A~ ~ ~ SepenoskJ, .lobe Clustered Lot Size Analysis Fri 3/23/2007 3:02 PM ~ ~ Sepenoski lohn Sending Area Stats Fri 3/23J2007 ~!!~9'" ~ 5ePenoski, John 'rDR Meeting Wed 3J]JJ2007 2:3._ ~ Sepenoski, John RE: TDR Meeting with Chic Fri 3J16J2007 1:1J plvj ~ Sepenoski John Updated TDR Numbers Thu 3JlSJ2007 12:3... ~ SepenoskJ .lohn RE: Next TOR Mee!!ng ~od Needs Wed 3J14/200~ ~!1... ~ Sepenoski lohn RE: Next TDR ~eeting and Needs Wed 3J14J200~ 1:1... ~ Sepenoski, John RE: Next TDR I~eeting and Needs Wed 3/14/2007 8:3... ~ Sepenoski, John RE:Next TDR Meeting and Needs Tue 3J13J2007 10:0._ ~ Sepenoski, .lohn RE: Next TDR Meeting and Needs Fri 3JgJ200~ ~ Sepenoski, John RE: revision to my e-maJJ that i'm available Mon 3JSJ2007 9:20 ... ~ Sepenoski, John TDR Stats Wed 2J28J2007 8:5... ~i~ Sepenoskir .1Ohn TDR Meeting Fd 2J16J2007 I!~J S~peno~k!! ]Ohrl J~[!! M~!ng ~rhursdoy morning Wed 2!?(2007 2:2..T ~ sepenoski, John RE: ~ee~!ng Thursday morning Wed 2J14J2007 10:... ~t Sepenoski, John RE: Meeting Thursday morning Tue 2/13/2007 11:5... ~i~ SePenoskjl Jo~n RE: Follow UP ~o OUr last meeting Wed 2J7J2007 8:~ ... ~;.~ Sepenoski, John RE: ~ Sepenoski, John RE: TDR Meeting Tue 1/23/2007 10:3... P,E: Tue 1/ 3/2007 10:2... ~ SePenoski, ~ohn RE: FW: Ft. Wdght R~ad~ G~ound Historic District on Fishers Is. Tue ~.0/24/2006 11:... ~ Sepen0~ki! .1ohn RE: Historic Districton F!~h~rs Is. Tue 10/24/2006 ~!:... ~ Sepenoski, ~lohn RE: Fw: Ft. Wright Parade Ground H!st0ric District on Fishers Is. 'mu :L0/19/2006 12:... ~ Sepenoski, .lohn RE: Fw: Ft. Wright Parade Ground Historic District on Fishers Is. Thu 10/~L9/2006 :L2:... ~ SePen0ski, ,lohn RE: our TDR report for Thursday Thu 10/12/2006 9:4... RE: Updated ,a tuck and ,ew ? be em/2oo g:... ~ Sepenoski, John Updated Mattituck and New Suffolk Numbers Wed 10/11/2006 8:... ~ Seponoski, .lohn Updated Mati:ituck Numbers Wed 10/11/2006 8:... ~ Seponoski, John RE: follow up meeting Tnu 10/5/2006 8:32... Tue 9/12/2006 12:5... HALO Numbers ~ Sepenoski, John Greenport HALO Numbers Mort 9/11/2006 12:5... ~ Sepenoski, John Update Peconic HALO Numbers Thu 8/31/2006 10:0... ~ Seponoski, John Wed 8/30/2006 12:... ~i~ Seponoski, John RE: New Orient HALO Numbers Wed 8/30/2006 9:0... ~-~ Sepenoski, .lohn RE: New Orient HALO Numbers Tue 8/29J2006 2:34... ~ Sepenoski, ,lohn New Orient HALO Numbers Tue 8/29/2006 8:31... ~ Sepenoski, John RE: Updated Southold Numbers Thu 8/24/2006 9:13... Orient Numbers ~ Sepenoski, John RE: Updated Southold Numbers Thu 8/24/2006 8:32... ~ Sepenoski, John Updated Southold Numbers Wed 8/23/2006 1:1... ~ ~ Sepenoski, .lohn Hamlet Summary Tee 8/22/2006 2:22... Terry, Mark 6 9/26/2008 11:14 AM ~ Mon 8/21/2006 2:51... ~ Sepenoski, .lohn Hamlet Modeling Mon 8/21/2006 1:31... ~]~ Sepen0ski, .lohn RE: Hami~ M~eling Fd 8/!8~2006 8!06 AM ~ SepenoskJ, ]ohn Hamlet M~elJn~ ~:~ Se~noski, Mee~;~ ~;dule Mon 8/14/2006 2:~0... ~ ~noski, John RE: Mee~ng schedule Mort 8/14/2006 12:5... ~ ~pen~, John RE: MeetJng ~hedule Mon 8/14/2006 ~1:3... ~ Se~noski, ]ohn Ma~ituck and Odent Hamlet M~elJng Tue 8/8/2006 3:59 PM ~ ~noski, ]ohn RE: Hamlet ~velopment Model dra~ 3 Non 7/10/2006 11:4._ ;L.~ ~Penoski, ]ohn RE: D~a~ 2 of Sou~old Hamlet DeW M~el ~u 6/29/2006 8:45_. ~ Sepenoski ]ohn RE: Dra~ 2 of Sou~old Hamlet ~v. Model Tue 6/27/2006 9:17... ~ ~noski, ]ohn RE: Fi~ Cut ~ Southold HALO S~ W~ 5/31/2006 9:3.- ~ Sepen~ki, ]ohn RE: S~A Map ~u 3/16/2006 1:15... ~ Se~noski, ]ohn RE: ~A Map Tue 3/14/2006 4:54... ~ ~a~i ~b~ S~A M~ TUe ~/!4/2006 ~:28''' ~ Sepenoski, ]ohn RE: HALO~R Buildout Mon 3/13/2006 11:2... ~ ~noski, John HALO~DR Anal~is ~u 3/9/2006 12:41... <~ ~pe,oski, ]ohn HALO~R Buildout Wed 3/8/2006 10:2._ ~ Se~nosk[, 3ohn HALO Buildout Mon 9/26/2005 2:42... ~ ~noski, John RE: HALO Buildout ~u 9/22/2005 1:08... /2 / 00S ~ ~penoski, John RE: TDR S~s Wed 9/7/2005 8:20 ... ~ ~penoski, John ~R S~tUs Tue 9/6/2005 2:55 PM John TDR- ~d~Q Alea stati~ Tue 9~6/2005 !0~47"' ~ Sepeno~i, John RE: TDF HALO Mon 8/22/2005 1:08... ~ Se~noski, 3ohn RE: TDF HALO Mort 8/22/2005 11:5... ~ ~penoski, John RE: ~F HALO Mort 8/22/2005 11:0... ~ Se~nos~, 3ohn RE: TDR HALO Mon 8/22/2005 9:50... ~ Se~noski, John RE: TDR HALO ~u 8/18/2005 4:01... ~ Se~noski, John RE: TDR HALO ~u 8/18/2005 3:28... ~ Se~noski John RE: TDR HALO ~u 8/18/2005 12:5... ~ ~noski, John RE: ~R HALO ~u 8/18/2005 12:2... ~ ~penoski, ]ohn RE: ~R HALO Wed 8/17/2005 2:4... / /2oos ~ Sepen~ki, John RE: TDR HAlO ~ Se~noski, 3ohn RE: TDR HALO W~ 8/17/2005 1:1... ~ Se~noski, 3ohn RE: TDR 'HALO Wed 8/17/2005 11:... ~ ~penoski John RE: TDR 'HALO W~ ~ ~penoski John RE: TDR 'HALO W~ 8JlTJJO05 9:1... ~ Sepenoski, John RE: ~HAIO Mon 8JlSJ~O05 ~ ~noskJ, ]ohn RE: TD~H~O Mon 8J15J2005 3:20... Russell, Scott RE: Mon 1/22/2007 9:10... Randolph Unda FW: Mark Te[rY Memo of 9/3 requesting signature: NYS Quality Communit!es Program TDR ... Mon 9/15/2008 11:0... Terry, Mark 7 9/26/2008 11:14 AM ~ melspiro@optonli... Re: RE: TDR Mon 12/3/2007 4:05... ~ Ipevans%fishersi... Re: TDR follow-up Tue 6/26/2007 6:03... Les!ie Weisman RE: TDR meeting ll3u 7/10/2008 11:0... Leslie W~i~man RE: TDR Info S~ssi0n handout ~T~ 75~200~ Leslie Weisman RE: TDR Info Session handout Mon 5/5/2008 7:07 .,, Leslie Weisman TDR Info Session handout Sun 5/4/2008 6:13 PM Leslie Weisman copies of our report Mon 4/21/2008 8:10..· G; e we ~an i=i~ai Re~rt O~ ~e H~rniet Deveigpmen~ 1-DR Fea~i§iii~ ~dy Thu 4/17/2008 3:36... Leslie Weisman Hamlet Development Model TDR Feasibility Study Final Report Wed 4/16/2008 9:3... Leslie Weisman RE: Final Hamlet Development Model TDR Report Non 4/14/2008 3:36.,, Leslie Weisman RE:Baal Hamlet Development Model TDR Report Non 4/14/2008 3:05_. Les!i~ Weisman RE! F!N,~L REPORT ON TH~ HAMLET DEVELOPMENT MODEL FEASIBILIT~ STUDY A@ri111 2..; Mon 4/14~008 Leslie Weisman RE: Final Hamlet Development Model TDR Report Mon 4/14/2008 2:50... Leslie Weisman Final Hamlet Development Model TDR Report Fri 4/11/2008 5:21 PM Leslie Weisman RE' ~R Progi~m Planning Report and DSGEIS Summary Mon 4/7/2008 12:02... RE: Mode! F,' /2008 PM · Fri 4/4/2008 2:50 PM Leslie We~sman RE: Hamlet Development Model Leslie Weisman RE: Hamlet Development Model Thu 4/3/2008 6:10 PM Leslie Weisrnan RE: Hamlet DeveloPment M0~ei Wed 4/2/2008 2:55 ... Leslie Weisman RE: Hamlet Development Model Wed 4/2/2008 8:56 ... Leslie Weisman RE: Hamlet Development Model Mort 3/31/2008 3:28.., i i~l!~ w;isman REi Hamlet Development Model Fri 3/28/2008 11:37... [] Leslie Weisman RE: Final Sections of TDR GEIS for Review - Sections 4, 5 and 6 Tue 2/26/2008 10:5,.. Leslie Weisman RE: Final Sections ofTDR GEIS for Review - Sections 4, 5and 6 Mon 2/25/2008 4:55_. Leslie Weisman RE: Final Sections of TDR GEI$ for Review - Sections 4, 5 and 6 Non 2/25/2008 4:38.. Leslie Weisman RE: Final Sections of TDR GEI$ for Review - Sections 4, 5 and 6 Non 2/25/2008 4:30... Leslie Weisman TDR Set 12/1/2007 9:44 ... Leslie Weisman RE: TDR Tue 10/2/2007 1:15... Leslie Weisman RE: TDR follow-up Tue 6/26/2007 1:39... Leslie Weisman RE: TDR Non 6/25/2007 2:04... Leslie W~i~m~n RE: TDR Fri 6/22~2007 5:56pM Leslie Weisman RE: TDR Fri 6/22/2007 2:32 PM Leslie Weisman RE: HALO/TDR work Fri 6/22/2007 2:19 PM LeSlie Weisman RE: TDR Thu 6/21/2007 7:26,,. Thu 6/21/2007 6:55... Leslie we.sman RE! HALO/-rDR work Leslie Weisman RE: TDR Tue 6/19/2007 8:47... Leslie Weisman RE: TDR Non 6/18/2007 5:42.., Leslie Weisman RE: Next TDR Meeting Fri 6/1/2007 5:32 PM Leslie Weisman RE: My comments on TDR Report Wed 5/23/2007 1:1... Leslie Weisman RE: My comments on TDR Report Tue 5/22/2007 3;52... Leslie Weisman RE: My comments on TDR Report Tue 5/22/2007 9:49,.. · Mon 5/21/2007 4:54_. Leshe We~sman RE: My comments on TDR Report Leslie Weisman RE: My comments on TDR Report Mort 5/21/2007 1:09... Leslie Weisman RE: My comments on TDR Report Mon 5/21/2007 1:08.,. Leslie Weisman RE: Fri 5/18/2007 4:00 PM Thu 5/17/2007 7:49.,. Leslie Weisman RE: Terry, Mark 8 9/26/2008 11:14 AM Leslie Weisman Hamlet Stakeholders Priorities Tue 5/8/2007 1:09 PM Leslie Weisman RE: TDR Meeting Conflict Wed 5/2/2007 2:53 ... Leslie weisman RE: ~R N~§ng C~nflict Tue 5/1/2007 9:46 Al',1 Leslie Weisman RE: Clustered Lot Size Analysis Fd 3/23/2007 3:46 PN Leslie Weisman RE: TDR Neeting with Chic Fd 3/16/2007 1:37 PN Leslie Weisman RE: TDR 1'4eeting Confirmation Wed 3/14/2007 1:2... Leslie Wei ;man RE: Next 'FDR Neeting and Needs Fd 3/9/2007 1:43 PN Leslie Weisman RE: Next TDR Heeting and Needs Fd 3/9/2007 1:34 pM Leslie Weisman RE: Next TDR I~leeting and Needs Fr! 3/9/2007 1:01 Prvi Leslie Weisman RE: Mort 3/5/2007 5:32 ... Leslie Weisman RE: meeting Thu 3/1/2007 1:40 PM Leslie Weisman RE: TDR Stats Wed 2/28/2007 2:3... Leslie Weisman RE: Friday @ 8:30 TDR Meeting Thu 2/15/2007 3:51... Leslie We~sman RE: I~leeting Thursday morning Thu 2/15/2007 2:27... Leslie Weisman RE: Meeting Thursday morning Wed 2/14/2007 2:0... Leslie Weisman RE: Meeting Thursday morning Tue 2/13/2007 6:10... Leslie Weisman RE: Follow up to our last meeting Thu 2/8/2007 9:11 AH Leslie Weisman Follow up to our last meeting Tue 2/6/2007 4:59 pi,,1 Leslie Weisman RE: Tue 1/23/2007 12:2... Leslie Weisman RE: Non 1/22/2007 9:z~4... Leslie We~sman RE: I',IA~ ~ItUCK Fd 11/3/2006 8:40 PN 11/3/2006 Leslie Weisman updated TDR Program Summary Sun 10/15/2006 9:1... Thu 10/12/2006 9:5... Le~!!e We!sman RE: our TDR report for Thursday Leslie Weisman our TDR report for Thursday Wed 10/11/2006 5:... Leslie Weisman RE: Updated hlal'cituck and New Suffolk Numbers Wed 10/11/2006 11... Leslie Weisman RE: Updeted hlattituck and New Suffolk Numbers Wed 10/11/2006 9:... Leslie Weisman RE: Updated rvlati:ituck and New Suffolk Numbers Wed 10/11/2006 8:... Leslie Weisman RE: follow up meeting Tue 10/10/2006 9:0,.. Leslie Weisman RE: follow up meeting Sat 10/7/2006 2:Zl3 ... Leslie Weisman follow up meeting FH 9/29/2006 1:58 PM Leslie Weisman meeting Tue 9/19/2006 3:00... Leslie Weisman RE: Greenport HALO Numbers Tue 9/12/2006 2:16._ Leslie Weisman RE: Greenport HALO Numbers Tue 9/12/2006 12:3... Leslie Weisman RE: Greenport HALO Numbers Non 9/11/2006 7:33... i_e~iie ~ei~e R~:: Ll~te ~e~nic HALO Nu~e~ TOe 9?5/2006 7:28 Pl~l Leslie Weisman RE: Wed 8/30/2006 1:4... Leslie Weisman RE: New Orient HALO Numbers Wed 8/30/2006 10:... Leslie Weisman RE: New Odent HALO Numbers Tee 8/29/2006 4:50... Leslie Weismee RE: New Odent HALO Numbers Tee 8/29/2006 12:2... Leslie Weisman RE: Updated Southold Numbers Thu 8/24/2006 5:22.- Leslie Weisman RE: Updated Southold Numbers Thu 8/24/2006 3:41... Leslie Weismae RE: Updated Southold Numbers Thu 8/24/2006 11:2... Leslie We,smart RE: Updated Southold Numbers ~u Leslie Weisman RE: Updated Southold Numbers Leslie Weisman RE: Hamlet Summary Tue 8/22/2006 3:55... Leslie Weisman RE: Hamlet I~1odeling Non 8/21/2006 2:23... [.esiie Weisman RE: H~mlet ~eiin~ Ed 8/18/2006 8:53 PI',1 Terry, Mark 9 9/26/2008 11:14 AN Leslie Weisman RE: Meeting schedule Mon 8/14/2006 3:22... Leslie Weisman RI:: Meeting schedule Mon 8/14/2006 1:24... Leslie Weisman RE: Meeting ~E~le Mon 8/14/2006 11:3... ~_e~!i~ Weisman RE: Meeti~9 scbed?!e Mon 8/14/200~ !!:2... Leslie Weisman RE: Mee6ng schedule Mon 8/14/2006 11:0_. Leslie Weisman RE: Mattituck and Orient Hamlet Modeling Tue 8/8/2006 4:48 PM Leslie Weisman RE: Mattituck and Orient Hamlet Modeling Tue 8/8/2006 4:20 PM Leslie Weisman RE: Hamlet Development Nodel draft 3 Thu 7/13/2006 4:21... Leslie Weisman RE: Next Planning and Zoning Meeting Tue 7/4/2006 10;33... Leslie Weisman RE: Draft 2 of Southold Hamlet Dev. Model Tue 6/27/2006 9:28... ~ Lanza, Heather Grant filing & invoices Tue 9/9/2008 5:21 PM ~ Lanza, Heather Grant spreadsheet Tue 9/9/2008 5:05 PM ~ Lanza, Heather TDR cost to Environmental Consultant line Tue 9/9/2008 11:49... ~ Lanza, Heather RE: TDR Grant Fri 8/22/2008 12:22... ~ Lanza, Heather RE: Heshamomuck Watershed Management Plan Fri 8/22/2008 12:18... ~ Lanza, Heather budget questions Mon 8/18/2008 i2:i.ii ~ Lanza, Heather RE: meeting next wed. am Wed 7/16/2008 3:1... Heather FW: meeting next wed. am Wed 7/16/2008 ~!0... ~ Lanza, Heather meeting next wed. am Wed 7/16/2008 12:... ~ Lanza, Heather Agenda item for Town Board - Consultant RFP for Planned Development District recommend... Thu 6/26/2008 4;35... ~1 Lanza, Heather RE: SCDOH TDR Tracking Wed 6/18/2008 11:... ~ Lanza, Heather RE: Emailing: 2008_Request_for_apps.pdf 'ru~ ~ Lanza, Heather RE: TDR info Session handout Tue 5/6/2008 1:25 PM ~ Lanza, Heather RE: TDR Info Session handout Tue 5/6/2008 9:00 AM ~.~ ~ Lanza, Heather Fw: POD.pdf Tue 4/29/2008 3:14.- ~ Lanza, Heather Wed 3/12/2008 9:5... ;~ Lanza, Heather Affordable Housing intitiative - think about it Tue 2/26/2008 2:38... ~ Lanza, Heather RE: Final Sections of TDR GEIS for Review - Sections 4, 5 and 6 Mon 2/25/2008 3:10... ~ Lanza, Heather FW: Downtown Sewer Summit and Governor's Smart Growth Cabinet session Wed 2/13/2008 11:... ~ Lanza, Heather RE: TDR Tue 10/2/2007 11:4... ~ Lanza, Heather Date & time for next Code Committee Fri 9/14/2007 4:26 PM ~ ~ Krauza, Lynne TDR & HALO Document Wed 3/7/2007 12:1... ~.~ Krauza, Lynne TDR Mee6ng Thu 1/18/2007 12:1... ~ Krauza, Lynne TDR HALO Meeting Thu 11/9/2006 3:32 ~ Krauza, Lynne TDR HALO Meeting at Annex Wed 11/1/2006 11:... ~ Krauza, Lynne Tue 10/31/2006 2:0... ~ ~ Kalin, Carol proofed TDR document Wed 5/16/2007 9:5... ~ Kalin, Carol Tuesday's Town Board Mtg. Fd 3/10/2006 3:43 PM ~;~'~ Kalin, Carol RE: tdr Tue 9/27/2005 3:10... ;~ jedwood@aol.com budget Tue 10/18/2005 12:.,. ~; ~ ~ Finnegan, Patricia FW: TDR Wed 7/16/2008 11:... ~ Finnegan, Patricia FW: TDR mee6ng Thu 7/10/2008 9:03... ~ Finnegan, Patricia RE: TDR Info Session handout Tue 5/6/2008 8:47 AM Ter~, Mark 10 9/26/2008 11:14 AM Finnegan, Patricia RE: TDR Program Planning Report and DSGE[S Summary Mon 4/7/2008 9:57 ... ~ Finnogan, Patricia TDR Ffi 3/21/2008 11:20.- ~ Finnegan, Patricia RE: Thu 3/13/2008 7:23... ~:~ Finnegan, Patfida RE: Final Sections of TDR GEIS for Review - Sections 4, 5 and 6 Mon 2/25/2008 8:24_. ~ Finnegan, Patdcia RE: Final Sections of TDR GEIS for Review - Sections 4, 5 and 6 Mon 2/25/2008 4:28... ~t Finnegan, Patrida RE: Final Sections of TDR GEIS for Review - Sections 4, 5 and 6 Mon 2/25/2008 2:40... [i~ Finnegan, Pat:ficia RE: TDR DGEIS Mon 2/25/2008 2:31... ~ Finnegan, Patricia RE: TDR Sun 12/2/2007 9:55... [~1 Finnegan, Pathcia FW: TDR Tue 10/2/2007 lk4... [~ Finnegan, Patdcia RE: TDR Report Problem Tue 7/10/2007 1:49... ['~ Finnogan, Patrida TDR follow-up Tue 6/26/2007 1:36... ~1 Finnegan, Patricia RE: HALO/TDR work Thu 6/21/2007 2:30... ~ Finnegan, Patricia RE: TDR Thu 6/21/2007 9:19... ~1 Finnegan, Patricia RE: TDR Tnu 6/21/2007 9:15... i~ Finnogan, Patricia RE: TDR Tue 6/19/2007 3:48... ~ Finnegan, PatricJa RE: Ag District/Exemption Que~on ~nd informaii0n Thu 5/31/2007 11:3... }.i~ Finnegan, Patficia RE: AgPDD more torture Thu 5/24/2007 2:50... ~.~ Finnegan, Patricia RE: My comments on 'rDR Report Tue 5/22/2007 8:50- ~ Finnegan, Patricia RE: My comments on TDR Report Mon 5/21/2007 9:19... ~ Finnegan, Patdcia RE: Ag PD Legislation Tue 5/15/2007 9:45... v~i~ Finnegan, Patricia RE: Ag PD Legislation Tue 5/15/2007 8:43... ~ ~ Finnegan, Patricia FW: TDR Draft Report May 11 Mon 5/14/2007 8:46... ~ ~ Finnegan, Patricia FW: TDR Program Planning Report Draft 5-8 Wed 5/9/2007 11:1... ~l~ Finnegan, Patricia RE: TDR Meeting Conflict Tue 5/1/2007 8:41 AH ~ ~ Finnegan, Patricia Transfer Station Fri 3/30/2007 12:46... ~ Finnegan, Patrida RE: Next TDR Meeting and Needs Fri 3/9/2007 1:44 PM ~ Finnegan, Patdcia RE: Next TDR Meeting and Needs Fri 3/9/2007 12:20 PM ~ Finnegan, Patricia RE: M0n 3/5/2007 2:23 ... ~ ~ Finnogan, Patricia RE: Meeting Thursday morning Mort 2/12/2007 9:25... ~ Finnegan, Patricia RE: Tue 10/31/2006 2:2... ~:~ Finnegan, Patricia Health Dept meeting Fd 10/28/2005 10:4... ~ Finnegan; Patri(:ia RE: RETAIL Thu 9/29/2005 4:01... ~ Finnegan, Patricia RE: Meeting with SCDOH Thu 9/29/2005 3:46... ~ F~nnegan, Patnc~a RETAIL Thu 9/29/2005 3:40... ~ Finnegan, Patrida RE: tdr Thu 9/29/2005 11:2... ~/'~ Finnegan, Patricia RE: HALO Buildout Non 9/26/2005 2:18... Finnegan, Pa cia "E: tdr meeting 9/20)200{ 9:37... ;,~ Finnegan, Patricia RE: tdr sending Wed 9/14/2005 9:4... ~i~ Finnegan, Patricia RE: tdr sending Tue 9/13/2005 3:55... ~ Finnegan, Patricia 'rDR/HALO Mort 8/22/2005 11:5... Patricia REiTDR/HAIo ~ed 8/17/2005 2:1... ~ Finnegan, Patricia RE: TDR/HAIO Wed 8/17/2005 11:... [;i~ Finnegan, Patrida RE: TDR/HAIO Wed 8/17/2005 10:... ~:~ F~nnegan, Patricia RE: TDR/HAIO Mort 8/15/2005 3:30... ~ Finnegan, Patdda TDR/HAIO Mort 8/15/2005 3:09... Terry, Mark 11 9/26/2008 11:14 AM ~ ~ Finnegane Patricia I'DR and Ha!o Zone !egislat!on Fd 8/!2~?05 12!25!:: ~ Finnegan, Pa~icia TDR Wed 8/3/2005 11:0... ~ ii Finnecjan, Pa~ricia TDR and HALO Fri 7/2g/2005 12:33... ~ ~!1~ ~ ReF LWRP and TDR Thu 9/Z/2006 3:31 PM ~ Eileen Duff'/ LWRP and TDR Thu 9/7/2006 1:08 PM Eastman, Christo... RE: Contract Status Mop 3/17/2008 8:46... Eastman, Christo... RE: Budget Mop 1/28/2008 3:32... Eastman, Chnsto... RE: Budget Mop 1/28/2008 1:47... Eastman, Chfisto... RE: Budget Fri 1/25/2008 11:02_. Ea~anl Christ0111 RFi Budget Fri 1/11/2008 4:59 PM Eastman, ChrlstO... RE: Grant Amendment Thu 1/10/2008 9:08 Dorc:~ki, Me{anie Agenda for 5/27/08 LPC mtg - 6:30 p.m. Fr{ 5/23/2008 2210 PM time change to 6!30pm Thu5(22/2008 2:... Doroski, Melanie FW: Next TDR Meeting and Needs Tue 3/13/2007 10:2... Doroski, Melanie FW: Agenda for 9/6/05 LPC meeting Thu 9/1/2005 2:28 PM Cooper, Unda Meeting notices for week of 6/2 Tue 5/27/2008 10:0... COOpeF, Linda mtgTDR work group Mon 11/13/2006 3:3... Cooper, Linda mtgTDR work group Mort 11/13/2006 2:1... ~ Chic Voorhis RE: 'rDR Wed 7/16/2008 1:3... ~ d Chic voorhis RE: TDR ]nfo Session handout Tue 5/6/2008 4:27 PM ~ ii Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Info Session handout Tue 5/6/2008 4:26 PM ~'~ Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Info Session handout Tue 5/6/2008 2:08 PM ~ ~ Chic Voorhis RE: 'rDR Info Session handout Tue 5/6/2008 10:02... ~ Chic Voothis RE: TDR Info Session handout Tue 5/6/2008 9:41 AM ~ Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Info Session handout Tue 5/6/2008 8:51 AM ~ Chic VoorhJs RE: TDR Info Session handout Moo 5/5/2008 1:44 ... ~i~ ~ Chic Voorhis RE: Final Report on the Hamlet Development TDR Feasibility Study Fd 4/18/2008 7:51 AM ~i~ d Chic V°°rhis RE: TDR Program Planning Report and DSGEIS Summary Tue 4/8/2008 8:59 AM ~ Chic Voothis RE: Hamlet Development Model Sun 4/6/2008 4:11 PM ~-~ll Chic: V0orhis RE: Hamlet Development Model Fri 3/28/2008 6:28 PM ~ ~ Chic Voorhis RE: Hamlet Development Model Fri 3/28/2008 12:04.- ~ ~ Chic Voorhis TDR Program Planning Report and DSGEIS summary wed 3~008 8!1:7 [] L~ Ch!c V0orhis Hamlet Development Medel Moo 3/24/2008 8!52''' ~ Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Fri 3/21/2008 3:29 PM ~ Chic Voorhis RE: TDR GEIS Section 1.0 Tue 2/26/2008 10:0_. ~ Chic Voorhis RE: Final Sections of TDR GEIS for Review - Sections 4, 5 and 6 Mop 2/25/2008 10:1... ~ Chic Voorhis RE: Final Sections of TDR GEIS for Review: Sect!ohS 4, 5 and6 Mon 2)~s}~oo~ ~ ~O~m : I ~ Chic Voorhis RE: Final Sections of TDR GElS for Review - Sections 4, 5 and 6 Non 2/25/2008 4:51... ~:~ Chic Voothis RE: Final Sections of TDR GElS for Review - Sections 4, 5 and 6 Non 2/25/2008 4:21... ~ Chic Voorhis RE: Final Sections of TDR GEIS for Review - Sections 4, 5 and 6 Mop 2/25/2008 3:44... ¢~:~ Chic Voorhis RE: Final Sections of TDR GEIS for Review - Sections 4, 5 and 6 Wed 2/20/2008 10:... ~ ~ Chic Voorhis Fina~ Sections of 'FDR GEIS for Review - Sections 4, 5 a~d 6 Mop 2/18/2008 8:06... Terry, Mark 12 9/26/2008 11:14 AM Chic Voorhis RF: TDR SEOR STATUS Wed 2/6/2008 12:3-. Chic Voorhis RE: 'i'DR Program Thu 1/24/2008 10:0... Chic Voorhis TDR Program Wed 1/23/2008 8:4... Chic Voorhis Re: TDR Sun 12/2/2007 8:25... Chic Voorhis RE: TDR SEQRA Steps Tue 10/16/2007 11:... Chic Voorhis TDR SEQRA steps Mon 10/15/2007 5:3... Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Tue 10/2/2007 1:41... Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Tue 10/2/2007 11:4... Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Report Fri 7/13/2007 2:17 PM Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Report Thu 7/12/2007 7:22... Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Report - Sending Area Wed 7/11/2007 3:0... Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Report Problem Tue 7/10/2007 1:44... Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Report Problem Tue 7/10/2007 9:29... Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Report Problem Mort 7/9/2007 6:25 ... Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Report Problem Mon 7/9/2007 6:23 ... Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Report Problem Mon 7/9/2007 6:21 ... Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Report Problem Mort 7/9/2007 6:19 ... Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Report Problem Mon 7/9/2007 6:18 ... Chic Voorhis RE: TDP, follow-up Tue 6/26/2007 5:26... Chic V00rhis FW: TDR Hon 6/25/2007 8:17_. Chic Voorhis F'W: Draft TDR Report 6-25 Track Changes Version Mon 6/25/2007 8:15... Chic Voorhis TDR Report Circulation Mon 6/25/2007 8:14.,, Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Sun 6/24/2007 9:27,,, Chic Voorhis Draft TDR Report 6-25 Track Changes Version Sun 6/24/2007 9:23... Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Fri 6/22/2007 2:38 PM Chic v00rhiS RE: HALo/TDR work Thu 6/21/2007 3:51.- Chic Voorhis RE: HALO/l-DR work Thu 6/21/2007 3:29... Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Tue 6/19/2007 4:21... Chic Voorhis RI:: TDR Tue 6/19/2007 3:30... Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Revised 5/26 Wed 6/13/2007 11:... Chic Voorhis TDR Revised 5/26 Sat 5/26/2007 9:~9 .,. Chic Voorhis RE: My comments on TDR Report Thu 5/24/2007 8:56.., Chic Voorhis RE: My comments on TDR Report Tue 5/22/2007 10:3... Chic Voorhis RE: My comments on 'rDR Report Tue 5/22/2007 9:03... Chic Voorhis RE: My comments on TDR Report Mon 5/21/2007 9:15... ~ ~!i~Voo;his REi TDP, Dra~ P, eport ivlay i i Fri 5/i8/2007 6i~ PM Chic Voorhis RE: Fri 5/18/2007 6:20 PM Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Draft Report Hay 11 Tue 5/15/2007 11:5... Chic Voorhis RE: TDR hleeting Conflict Wed 5/2/2007 5:17 ... Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Meeting Conflict Wed 5/2/2007 5:16 .. Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Meeting Conflict Wed 5/2/2007 11:3... Chic Voorhis TDR Program Proposal Tue 2/20/2007 8:13... Chic Voorhis ee ,cJ 2/16/2007 Terry, Mark 13 9/26/2008 11:14 AF*I Chic Voorhis RE: TDR Meeting Fri 1/19/2007 11:09,,, ~ Behn, Lynda lO0~.doc Tue 8/16/2005 10:2... ~' ~ Beltz, Phillip FW: new info Thu 5/3/2007 1:51 PM ~J~ Bel~, Phillip FW: new info lhu 5/3/2007 1:50 PM [~ Beltz, Phillip FW: Greenporl: West Accessory Apartments.doc Tue 8/15/2006 9:12... ~ Al KnJpski RE: Letter from Greenport west Hamlet Stakeholders Wed 9/13/2006 5:4... ~m Al Krupski Re: Letter from Greenport West Hamlet Stakeholders Sun 9/10/2006 7:09... Terry, Mark 14 9/26/2008 11:14 AM ~l Trezza, Anthony RE: Time Record for Grants Tue 11/21/2006 2:5,,, ~ ~ Sepenoski, .lohn RE: Time Record for Grants Wed 12/27/2006 3:... ~ Russell, Scott RE: 2007 work plan.doc Fri 1/S/~00~ 3:~ ~M Terry, Mark 1 9/26/2008 11:16 AM Terry, Mark RE: First Cut Of Southold HALO Stats Wed 5/31/2006 9:3;:. Terry, Mark RE: Meeting with $CDOH Wed 10/5/2005 8:3... Terry, Mark i 9/26/2008 11:16 AM C059943 Quality Communities: Transfer Dev. Rights (TDR) Time Log Time People Involved Task PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS MARTIN H. SIDOR Chair WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND DONALD J. WILCENSKI PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 MEMORANDUM To: Christopher Eastman, New York Department of State From: Mark Terry, Principal Planner Date: April 22, 2010 Re: Contract C059943 Development of a Transfer of Development Rights Program The above reference contract expired on March 31,2010. There is $13,765 left in the grant budget in contractual services, of which, $11,014 is State funding. The Town Board proposes to extend the grant for another year and restructure the work plan to seek reimbursement for staff time to draft the Transfer of Development Right legislation during 2010. The reasons for the extension include: 1. The Town of Southold is in the middle of the Comprehensive Plan process. The TDR program will be one of the land use tools we expect to employ and would like time to assess how best to apply it. If you have any questions, please contact me at 631-765-1938. Cc: Heather Lanza, Director of Planning PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS MARTIN H. SIDOR Chair V~ILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND DONALD J. WILCENSKI PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cot. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 MEMORANDUM ro~ Scott Russell, Supervisor Members of the Town Boar~--- From: Mark Terry, Principal Planner Date: March 9, 2010 Re: Contract C059943 Development of a Transfer of Development Rights Program The above reference contract is due to expire on March 31, 2010. There is $13,765 left in the grant budget all in contractual services, of which, $11,014 is State funding. In speaking with Heather we propose to extend the grant for another year and restructure the work plan to seek reimbursement for staff time to draft the Transfer of Development Right legislation during 2010. If you agree with the proposal, please sign the attached Appendix X. Agreement Modification Form and return to me. Cc: Heather Lanza, Director of Planning Town of Southoid TDR Program Summary FAQs Transfer of Development Rights Program TDR PROGRAM SUMMARY FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQs) 1. How will the TDR Program work? The program involves designation of sending zones which primarily include larger farm parcels in the rural areas of the Town where there is a goal of preservation. Parcels would be eligible for recognition of a number of credits related to their size and potential development yield based on their zoning. Applicants would file for recognition of credits associated with their parcel, and the assigned credits would be a salable commodity. Receiving zones associated with the HALO of each of Southold's hamlets would be designated as overall receiving zones. The zoning districts within the HALO boundaries would be modified through a TDR program local law that would identify the means by which credits could be redeemed in exchange for increased utilization of parcels in accordance with guidelines established for individual zoning districts within the HALO's. TDR credits would be exchanged privately and exchanges between buyer and seller could be facilitated by the real estate market, as well as by the Town through a listing of TDR credits issued, which would be researched by landowners, developers and investors seeking to pursue development in the HALO's in conformance with the credit redemption options. One sending credit would equal one receiving credit and once transferred, the credit would be extinguished. 2. Is the program voluntary or mandatory? The program that is proposed is voluntary, and not mandatory. 3. Where are the Sending Areas located? A list and map of specific parcels has been created and included in the DSGEIS and on Town's web site as part Section 4.1 of the TDR Planning Report. Sending parcels generally include buildable parcels larger than 7 acres, not in a HALO that have Agricultural District or Individual Commitment status. 4. Where are the Receiving Areas located? Receiving areas are outlined in detail the DSGEIS and on the Town's web site as part of Section 4.2 of the TDR Planning Report. Receiving parcels only include lands in HALO areas that would result in the redemption of credits based on a land use application that involves Single Family Homes, Two-Family Homes, Multiple Family Dwellings, Detached Accessory Dwelling Units, and potentially for Planned Development District projects at such time in the future when the Town Board enacts a PDD local law, subject to the provisions included in TDR Report. 5. How do I participate if I own land within a Sending Area? A sending area landowner would contact the Town, make application on forms to be provided, obtain a TDR credit certificate, and seek a private purchaser for the credits. 6. How do I participate if I own land in a Receiving Area? A receiving area landowner would contact the Town, make application for a land use development in conformance with one or more of the options available to achieve density increase using TDR's and process the application with the applicable Board. ~ Summary Town of Southold TDR Program Summary FAQs Transfer of Development Rights Program 7. Who benefits from this program? The residents and visitors of the Town of Southold benefit from continuing land preservation of rural areas and retention of the bucolic character associated with the Town. Sending area landowners benefit from an additional option to gain monetary value for their land, and their continued ability to utilize the underlying value of the land absent the development rights. Landowners, developers and investors benefit from an additional mechanism to facilitate compatible and planned development projects that provide return on investment. HALO communities benefit from investment in their hamlet areas resulting in redevelopment and compatible land use which strengthens the hamlets and achieves other land preservation goals. Local businesses benefit from an increased local consumer/customer base. 8. How can the TDR's be used on the Receiving Area Properties? TDR's can be used on receiving area properties for the purpose of increasing density of Single Family Homes, Two-Family Homes, Multiple Family Dwellings, Detached Accessory Dwelling Units, and potentially for Planned Development District projects at such time in the future when the Town Board enacts a PDD local law. 9. How much do TDR's cost? The cost of TDR credits will be market based. It is expected that the Town's continuing PDR program will provide a benchmark for TDR credit value, but the ultimate cost will be determined between buyer and seller based on supply and demand. 10. How is the value of the TDR s estabhshed. The value of TDR's is established by creating potential for redemption of TDR credits in connection with land use and development that brings a return on investment to a landowner, developer or investor. 11. hat wdl be the Town s role tn tmplementmg and momtormg the program? It is expected that the Town will implement the program by complying with SEQRA and creating legislation in the form ora TDR local law which would be adopted by the Town Board in conformance with the requirements established under New York State Town Law. Once enacted, it is expected that the Town will implement the program through issuance of credit certificates to sending area landowners, and will facilitate the redemption of TDR credits through the land use review process for landowners and developers of projects within the receiving areas. The Town will record redeemed TDR's in a manner that ensures that parcels from which credits are transferred are recognized as having no residual development rights. The Town will monitor the program and make adjustments as necessary to facilitate its success in conformance with applicable laws. As envisioned, the Town Planning Board, Town Board, potentially the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Town Clerk would all be involved in various aspects of program implementation. The Town may in the future pursue a credit registry or credit bank; however, this is not essential to the initial program. Summary Town of Southold TDR Program & DSGEIS Summary Transfer of Development Rights Program TDR PROGRAM PLANNING REPORT AND DSGEIS SUMMARY Summary of Proposed Action The proposed project is the creation of a Transfer of Development Rights ("TDR") Program for the Town of Southold. A Draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement ("DSGEIS') has been prepared for the Southold Town Board as lead agency, to analyze the potential impacts of an amendment to the Southold Town Code to implement a voluntary TDR program (the "proposed action") to permit and facilitate private transactions that would shift development from agricultural lands in the Town ("sending areas") to locate new residential units in defined hamlet areas (hamlet locus, or "HALO" zones referred to as "receiving areas"). The program would not increase net density, as 1 transferred credit is proposed to equal 1 receiving credit. Once transferred, the development potential of a sending parcel would be completely extinguished. A variety of unit types would be considered in hamlet areas; this would be change the resulting demographics depending upon unit type since fewer large homes would be built in rural areas and logically, any unit types received in the hamlets would include smaller and/or multiple-family units. In addition, the proposed action would include a "cap" on the number of units that can be received in the HALO zones to maintain a careful balance of existing community character and ensure compliance with density limitations of the Suffolk County Department of Health Services ("SCDHS'). The proposed action considers implementation of an important planning and program tool described and recommended in the numerous planning studies undertaken within the Town over the past 20 years. Obiectives of the Project The Town's "objectives" in this case, are the previously stated Town goals: · To preserve land including farmland, open space and recreational landscapes · To preserve the rural, cultural and historic character of the hamlets and surrounding countryside. · To preserve the Town's remaining natural environment; to prevent further deterioration of the Town's natural resources and to restore the Town's degraded natural resources back to their previous quality. · To preserve and promote a range of housing and business opportunities that supports a socio- economically diverse community. · To increase transportation efficiency and to create attractive alternatives to automobile travel, while preserving the scenic and historic attributes of roadways in the Town. How the TDR Program Works The program involves designation of sending zones which primarily include larger farm parcels in the rural areas of the Town where there is a goal of preservation. Parcels would be eligible for recognition of a number of credits related to their size and potential development yield based on their zoning. Applicants would file for recognition of credits associated with their parcel, and the assigned credits would be a salable commodity. Areas associated with the HALO of each of Southold's hamlets would be designated as overall receivihg zones. The zoning districts within the HALO boundaries would be modified through a TDR program local law that would identify the means by which credits could be redeemed in Town of Southold TDR Program & DSGEIS Summary Transfer of Development Rights Program exchange for increased utilization of parcels in accordance with guidelines established for individual zoning districts within the HALO's. TDR credits would be exchanged privately and exchanges between buyer and seller could be facilitated by the real estate market, as well as by the Town through a listing of TDR credits issued, which would be researched by landowners, developers and investors seeking to pursue development in the HALO's in conformance with the credit redemption options. The cost of TDR credits will be market based. It is expected that the Town's continuing PDR program will provide a benchmark for TDR credit value, but the ultimate cost will be determined between buyer and seller based on supply and demand. The value of TDR's is established by creating potential for redemption of TDR credits in connection with land use and development that brings a return on investment to a landowner, developer or investor. To participate, a sending area landowner would contact the Town, make application on forms to be provided, obtain a TDR credit certificate, and seek a private purchaser for the credits. A receiving area landowner would contact the Town, make application for a land use development in conformance with one or more of the options available to achieve density increase using TDR's and process the application with the applicable Board. TDR's can be used on receiving area properties for the purpose of increasing density of Single Family Homes, Two-Family Homes, Multiple Family Dwellings, Detached Accessory Dwelling Units, and potentially for Planned Development District projects at such time in the future when the Town Board enacts a PDD local law. Potential Adverse and Beneficial Impacts There are six (6) key factors which are expected to significantly limit the potential for impacts with respect to new development in hamlet areas, noted as follows: 1. The proposed action is voluntary on the part of both landowners that choose to sell development rights from sending parcels and those that wish to advance a land use project involving purchase and redemption of development credits in a receiving area. 2. The proposed action is to create legislation that would establish a TDR program in the Town of Southold; the action does not authorize actual land use, as any development which would use transferred credits would be subject to individual site plan and/or subdivision review for the specific land use application that would involve the redemption of transferred credits. As a result, further review would occur on a site-specific, project-specific basis. This document is a Supplement to a Generic ElS that identified this program as potentially beneficial, and as is required under SEQRA, analyzes the potential impacts associated with the creation of this legislation. The analysis is by necessity generic and can not anticipate all site-specific or project- specific impacts. Each future action which proposes to redeem transferred credits must be evaluated in terms of conformance to the Statement of Findings that will be generated on the Supplemental GEIS record, and a decision made if the project is consistent with the Findings and/or iftbere are potential impacts which have not been adequately addressed. 3. There is a limit on the amount of new residential development which would be received in the hamlets, primarily as a function of the need to comply with Article 6 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code and as a result oftbe Hamlet Development Model and resulting limitations. Town of Southold TDR Program & DSGEIS Summary Transfer of Development Rights Program Hamlet growth will be monitored through program implementation to ensure that open space remains in hamlet areas, and development occurs in a manner that is consistent with design goals of the Town. 5. Development will take the form of small incremental increases as a result of the various options for redemption of credits in receiving zones, specifically, options include: · Single Family Homes through limited density increases of new subdivisions; · Two-Family Homes through creation of such homes where appmpriate; · Multiple Family Dwellings where appropriate and subject to Town Board change of zone. Detached Accessory Dwelling Units associated with existing homes, and Mixed use or flexible zoning developments under potential future Planned Development District 6. Purchase of development rights and outright land purchase programs will continue, thus continuing to reduce density and potential impacts of land development primarily outside of hamlet areas. A summary of potential adverse and beneficial impacts is included in Table 1 at the end of this summary. It should be noted that this proposed action does not propose any development, construction or growth; it has been formulated specifically to control the amount and pattern of future growth expected in the Town. In this sense, the prospect that the Town will experience growth is inevitable - it is the control of this growth and how it is accomplished that is the thrust of the TDR program. The proposed action is simply intended to channel expected growth into appropriate areas while reducing the amount of this growth in areas which the Town Board, based upon numerous prior plans and studies, proposes to preserve and protect, and to minimize the potential impacts of this growth on the environment. Obviously, relocation of growth to hamlets and commercial centers will increase the amount of and need for infrastructure improvements in these areas, if such are not already present or prove inadequate. These improvements include sanitary, water supply and drainage systems, roadway improvements, increased community services capacities (solid waste handling, energy supply, public transportation, parking, etc.). In addition, increased populations may increase the potential for changes in need for and types of commercial businesses, particularly if these population changes include shit,s in age and/or income distribution. The proposed Town Board action would provide an increased level of protection for agricultural land and open space and the rural qualities of the Town associated with these uses, while maintaining the capability of these privately-held properties to provide a reasonable economic return. Residential units would be available for development as transferred development rights or credits, to be used in designated receiving areas. In consideration of the foregoing, it may be concluded that the proposed action is not expected to result in a significant adverse change in the growth potential in the Town and that changes would be beneficial as a result of better conformance to land use plans and location of growth in more appropriate locations. Summary of Mitigation The summary of impacts includes the identification of six (6) factors that present a potential for mitigation of potential adverse impacts. These provide mitigation that is inherent in the TDR program. Two tables summarizing potential impacts as well as mitigation measures are included as Tables 1 and 2. ~ Summary Page 3 Town of Southold TDR Program & DSGEIS Summary Transfer of Development Righls Program Alternatives Considered The following alternatives are considered in detail in the DSGEIS: 1. No Action - assumes that the proposed action is not implemented. 2. Density Transfer Incentive - assumes that development credits are increased when transferred to a receiving area. 3. Use of Open Space as Sending Areas - assumes that farmland combined with open space (non- agricultural and/or wooded lands) or open space alone are established as sending areas. 4. Non-Residential Credit Redemption - assumes that development credits can be redeemed for non- residential use. 5. TDR Bank - assumes the Town establishes a method for purchase and re-sale of transfer credits. Next Steps and Approval Process The Town Board has received and approved the TDR Program Planning Report for the purpose of commencing review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act ("SEQRA"). This DSGEIS for the TDR program provides an opportunity for further review by the Town Board, the public and involved agencies. The DSGEIS will be the subject of a public hearing and comment period, and all substantive comments on the DSGEIS will be addressed in a Final SGEIS. After completion of a FSGEIS, a 10-day public consideration period must pass, after which the Town may issue a Statement of Findings which would form the basis for a decision on the TDR program. In addition to compliance with SEQRA, completion of this process ensures that involved agencies, parties of interest and the public have an opportunity to comment on and provide input into the TDR program, and further ensures that the Town Board has the benefit of this input in the decision-making process. The Town Board will consider the SGEIS record and Statement of Findings on the TDR program prior to any decisions on legislative changes, policy or Town management/implementation associated with the proposed action. The Town Board is the primary and, in effect, the only board that has approval authority to implement the program. As necessary, the Board will direct preparation of legislation by the Town Attorney and follow proper hearing, notice and filing requirements prior to enacting legislation. This document is intended to comply with the SEQRA requirements as administered by the Town Board of the Town of Southold. In conclusion, Southold Town has been progressive and successful in planning efforts to preserve farmland and maintain the character and quality of the Town. The Town has considered TDR as a useful tool to help achieve planning goals. The TDR program differs from other preservation programs in that it would not eliminate development potential, but would shift the location of development to appropriate locations in the Town which have been identified through previous studies. The program also differs in that expenditure of public funds is not necessary. The use of TDR credits would therefore preserve farmland and locate an equivalent density to the yield ora parcel in a hamlet area where infrastructure exists. This allows public funds to go farther in achieving total preservation goals through continued use of PDR. This form of development would also achieve a greater level of sustainability since it would promote various forms of residential development (not only single family homes) in areas where residents may live, work or seek recreation using multiple forms of transportation (walking, biking, car pooling, public transportation). Town of Southold TDR Program & DSGEIS Summary Transfer of Development Rights Program Table 1 - SUMMARY OF ANTICIPATED IMPACTS R~ouree B~neficial Impacts Potential Adve~ I~pa~t~ · Would preserve existing farmland on Sending sites, and eliminate development · Would result in clearing and grading in Geological Resources potential bom these properties. HALO areas for development resulting from · Would retain agricultural soils on existing farmland parcels, density shifL · Would use public water supply in HALO · Would eliminate increase in groundwater withdrawals in rural areas, areas and not in sending area locations. Water Resources · Would eliminate discharge of sanitary effluent in sending areas. · Would locally increase nitrogen load in HALO areas through transfer conforming to Article 6, with reduced load in sending areas. · Would eliminate clearing of natural vegetation and habitat loss in rural areas. · Would decrease natural vegetation and habitat Ecological Resources · Would enable preservation of existing agricultural land in large cont guous bocks, acreages in HALO areas for those parcels with less fragmentation of farmland open space, which currently possess such characteristics. · Would minimize potential increase in traffic and congestion in rural areas. · Would generate traffic in HALO areas with Transportation ,, Would place additional density in areas where road systems and infrastructure reduced traffic generation in sending areas; Resourn~ exists. HALOs are more walkable and promote use · Would encourage pedestrian activity and use of alternative forms of transportation, of alternative transportation. · Would maintain rural land use patterns. · Would provide for diversity of housing types in HALO areas, which would Land U~, Zoning & otherwise not be possible. Plan~ · Would establish conditions to address affordable housing needs. · No adverse impacts expected. · Would minimize potential for "sprawl' pattern of growth. · Would conform with land use plans. · Would eliminate potential increase in rural development, with associated reduction · Would result in need for community services Community Sorvic,~ in impacts to rural services, and infrastxucture in HALO areas, with · Would eliminate need to expand or increase infrastructure services in rural areas, reduced demand in sending areas; HALOs can · Would protect watersheds and wellfields (existing and proposed), more readily provide infrastructure. · Would maintain the existing high aesthetic quality &the hamlet areas. · Would result in more development in HALO Conununity Charactm' · Would strengthen consumer base for business interests in hamlets, adding to areas, with resultant reduction of development character and vitality of hamlets, in sending areas; HALO development would · Would stimulate increase in social interaction, adding to fabric of community, be varied and potentially smaller in unit size. So~io-Economica ,, Would increase taxes generated in the Town. · Would necessitate costs to provide services to · Would stimulate establishment of new business in HALO areas, the HALO development. Page 5 Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Draft Supplemental Generic EIS Table 2 - SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES Resouree Potential Adverse Impacts Mitigation Measures Geological Resources * Would result in clearing and grading in HALO * No significant unique features exist; clearing and grading will be localized to specific areas for development resulting from density shil~, project sites; site plan and subdivision review will minimize potential impacts. · Would use public water supply in HALO areas and not in sending area locations. · Public water will be supplied by the Suffolk County Water Authority in conformance with Water Resources * Would locally increase nitrogen load in HALO the approved water map; hamlet locations are identified as appropriate water supply areas. · A model was used to ensure that the average density of new development will not exceed areas through transfer conforming to Article 6, with reduced load in sending areas. Article 6 limitations based on 20,000 SF lots. · HALO areas generally are suitable for development due to the current land use pattern; · Would decrease natural vegetation and habitat current activity levels preclude the presence of unique or sensitive wildlife species; impacts Ecological Resources acreages in HALO areas for those parcels which would be localized to specific projects sites and site plan and subdivision review would be currently possess such characteristics, used to ensure that significant adverse impact will not occur. · Though traffic would increase in some areas, it is noted that density is transferred from · Would generate traffic in HALO areas with other locations within the hamlet and many of these trips would exist on area roads; Transportation reduced traffic generation in sending areas; development in hamlets is encouraged for walkability shared parking and trips and use of Resources HALOs are more walkable and promote use of public transportation where available; individual land use proposals will be subject to site alternative transportation, plan and subdivision review for site access geometry, sight distance and traffic impacts which can be mitigated once a problem is identified. Land Use, Zoning & · The proposal would implement the Towns in~nded land use pattern through zoning law Plans · No adverse impacts expected, measures in conformance with past land use plans and studies; land use can be monitored and adjustments made if found to be necessary. · Service providers would experience small incremental increases in demand over a long · Would result in need for community services and period of time and as a result, providers would have time to anticipate and serve infrastructure in HALO areas, with reduced community needs; it is noted that the TDR program anticipates equal density between Commtmity Sentice~ demand in sending areas; HALOs can more transfer and receiving areas and would not increase density. readily provide infrastructure. · Existing infrastructure is more prevalent in the hamlet areas and therefore better able to accommodate localized land use projects which redeem development credits. Communities participated in planning during the hamlet study and in the fall of 2006 when · Would result in more development in HALO · the Hamlet Density Model was discussed; a limit on development that will be monitored areas, with resultant reduction of development in will be used to conh'ol density and assist in addressing community character; community CommmaltyCheracter sending areas; HALO development would be use will be subject to small incremental changas over time and as a result can accommodatc varied and potentially smaller in unit size. reasonable use through equal density transfer. · The program anticipates equal density with no increase in what is permitted under full build Socio..Economics · Would necessitate costs to provide services to the out Townwide; the TDR program is voluntary which is a mitigation in itself; the program provides options to landowners wishing to preserve agricultural use, and will be used to HALO development, supplement the PDR program; increased service demand will be addressed by utility providers in accordance with their charters, these providers will regain costs through rates. Summary Page 6 Summary APPENDIX X Agreement Modification Form Agency Code 19000 Contract Period 4/1/05 - 3/31/11 Contract Number C059943 Funding for Period $ 60,000 This is an AGREEMENT between THE STATE OF NEW YORK, acting by and through the New York State Department of State, having its principal office in Albany, New York (hereinafter referred to as the STATE), and the Town of Southold (hereinafter referred to as the CONTRACTOR), for modification of Contract Number C059943, as amended above. All other provisions of said AGREEMENT shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this AGREEMENT as of the dates appearing under their signatures. CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE By: STATE AGENCY SIGNATURE By: (print name) (print name) Title: Title: Date: Date: State Agency Certification: "In addition to the acceptance of this Contract, I also certify that original copies of this signature page will be attached to all other exact copies of this Contract." STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF ) ss: On this day of of , in the year 20__, before me personally appeared , to me known and known to me to be the , the unincorporated association described in and which executed the above agreement; and who acknowledge to me that (s)he executed the foregoing agreement for and in behalf of said unincorporated association. NOTARYPUBLIC ' Thomas P. DiNapoli State Comptroller: By: Date: Terry, Mark From: Sent: To: Subject: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) [Christopher. Eastman@dos.state.ny.us] Wednesday, February 03, 2010 4:27 PM Terry, Mark RE: TDR Attachments: Budget Amendment Form.pdf; Appendix X, Southold 2011.pdf I'll approve the extension and amendment, if you complete the budget amendment forms and attached Appendix X (we need three signed and notarized copies of the Appendix X and one original, signed copy of the budget amendment with a narrative---essentially what you explain below: send it to me at the New York Department of State, 99 Washington Avenue, Albany, NY 12231). I'm nearly certain it'll be approved by Budget, Attorney General, and Comptroller's Offices. It might be the only QC contract from the 05 round that'll need an extension beyond 3/31/10, which is fine because I understand why it makes sense for you to do it. Let me know if you have any questions. Good luck with the coordination of these efforts. I hope the town's new land use tools work well together. Chris From: Terry, Hark [mailto:mark.terry@town.southold.ny.us] Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 3:43 PM To: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) Subject: RE: TDR Chris. I have spoken to the involved staff and have decided it would be best to seek an extension. As you may be aware we are in the process of updating the Comprehensive Plan and expect that a TDR program will be integrated as one of the land use tools to control sprawl. Due to this effort, the writing of the TDR code has been delayed. What do you think are our chances of a successful extension? Mark Terry Principal Planner LVVRP Coordinator Town of Southold Planning Department P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 (631) 765-1938 Mark. Terry@town.southold.ny.us From: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) [mailto:Christopher. Eastman@dos.state.ny.us] Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 11:33 AH To: Terry, Mark Subject: RE: TDR 2/4/2010 Mark, Have you decided how you're going to handle this? Are you going to have staff finish the work and amend the budget, which will require another extension, or are you going to try and wrap up before March 31 ? Chris From: Terry, Mark [maJlto:mark.terry@town.southold.ny.us] Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 10:52 AM To: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) Subject: RE: TDR Chris, Is it possible to have in-house staff write a draft of the TDR code and be reimbursed with remaining funds? Mark Terry Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Town of Southold Planning Department P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold. New York 11971 (631) 765-1938 Mark. Terrv~.town.southold.n¥.us From: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) [mailto:ChrJstopher. Eastman@dos.state.ny.us] Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 11:15 AM To: Terry, Mark Subject: TDR Hi, Mark, Happy New Year! How are the amendments to Southold's zoning proceeding for the TDR section? My sense was that the project would be complete--you'd have a work product to share with me and all the bills from your consultants to claim for reimbursement--by the end of March. I hope that's still the case. Let me know. Christopher Eastman New York Department of State 518-473-3367 2/4/2010 Terry, Mark From: Terry, Mark Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 3:34 PM To: Lanza, Heather; Andaloro, Jennifer Subject: RE: TDR I will apply for the extension. Mark Terry Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Town of Southold Planning Department P.O. Box 1179 83095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 (631) 765-1938 Mark. Terry~.town.southoldny.us From: Lanza, Heather ~ent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 3:32 PM To: Terry, Mark; Andaloro, Jennifer Subject: RE: TDR We need an extension! I don't think we have the "staff-power" to get it done in-house. Too much else going on at once. We all decided in our last meeting to ask for an extension and keep the consultant in. If we found we could do it in-house when the time came, then we can amend the work plan. From: Terry, Mark Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 3:22 PM To: Lanza, Heather; Andaloro, Jennifer Subject: FW: TDR We need a resolution on this. Mark Terry Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Town of Southold Planning Department P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 (631) 765-1938 Mark. Terry~townsouthold.ny.us From: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) [mailto:Christopher. Eastman@dos.state.ny.us] Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 11:33 AM To: Terry, Hark Subject: RE: TDR Mark, Have you decided how you're going to handle this? Are you going to have staff finish the work and amend the budget, which will require another extension, or are you going to try and wrap up before March 31 ? 2/3/2010 Chris From: Terry, Mark [mailto:mark.terry@town.southold.ny.us] · ent; Thursday, January 21, 2010 10:52 AM To: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) Subject: RE: TDR Chris, is it possible to have in-house staff write a draft of the TDR code and be reimbursed with remaining funds? Mark Terry Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Town of Southold Planning Department P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 (631) 765-1938 Mark. Terry~,town.southold.n¥.us From: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) [mailto:Christopher. Eastman@dos.state.ny.us] Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 11:15 AM To: Terry, Mark Subject: TDR Hi, Mark, Happy New Year! How are the amendments to Southold's zoning proceeding for the TDR section? My sense was that the project would be complete--you'd have a work product to share with me and all the bills from your consultants to claim for reimbursement--by the end of March. I hope that's still the case. Let me know. Christopher Eastman New York Depart~nent of State 518-473-3367 2/3/2010 Terry, Mark From: Terry, Mark Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 3:34 PM To: Lanza, Heather; Andalom, Jennifer Subject: RE: TDR I will apply for the extension. Mark Terry Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Town of Southold Planning Department P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 (631) 765-1938 Ma rk. Terry (~,town.southold. ny us From: Lanza, Heather Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 3:32 PM To: Terry, Mark; Andaloro, Jennifer Subject: RE: TDR We need an extension! 1 don't think we have the "staff-power" to get it done in-house. Too much else going on at once. We all decided in our last meeting to ask for an extension and keep the consultant in. If we found we could do it in-house when the time came, then we can amend the work plan. From: Terry, Mark Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 3:22 PM To: Lanza, Heather; Andaloro, Jennifer Subject: FW: TDR We need a resolution on this. Mark Terry Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Town of Southold Planning Department P.O, Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 (631) 765-1938 Ma rk. Terryt~,town.southold ny.us From: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) [mailto:Christopher. Eastman@dos.state.ny.us] Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 11:33 AM To: Terry, Mark Subject: RE: TDR Mark, Have you decided how you're going to handle this? Are you going to have staff finish the work and amend the budget, which will require another extension, or are you going to try and wrap up before March 317 2/3/2010 Chris From: Terry, Mark [mailto:mark.terry@town.southold.ny.us] Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 10:52 AM To: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) Subject:: RE: TDR Chris. Is it possible to have in-house staff write a draft of the TDR code and be reimbursed with remaining funds? Mark Terry Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Town of Southoid Planning Department P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 (631) 765-1938 Mark. Terr¥~.town southold.ny.us From: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) [mailto:Christopher. Eastman@dos.state.ny.us] Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 11:15 AM To: Terry, Hark Subject: TDR Hi, Mark, Happy New Year! How are the amendments to Southold's zoning proceeding for the TDR section? My sense was that the project would be complete--you'd have a work product to share with me and all the bills from your consultants to claim for reimbursement--by the end of March. I hope that's still the case. Let me know. Christopher Eastman New York Department of State 518-473-3367 2/3/2010 Terry, Mark From: Cushman, John Sent: Thursday, January 21, 2010 2:24 PM To: Terry, Mark Subject: RE: 8.26.09 memo to TB PB update..doc Four payments totaling $49,60582. From: Terry, Mark Sent: Thursday, 3anuary 21, 2010 10:49 AM To: Cushman, ]ohn Subject: 8.26.09 memo to TB PB update..doc John, What is the total reimbursment amount recieved to date for this grant? Thanks Mark Terry 1/21/2010 Terry, Mark From: Sent: To: Subject: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) [Christopher. Eastman@dos.state.ny.us] Thursday, January 21, 2010 2:49 PM Terry, Mark RE: TDR Attachments: Budget Amendment Form.pdf Hi, Mark, According to your latest reimbursement request, there's an available balance of $12,994.74 but it's all in contractual services. If you want to amend the contract to move that to the salaries, wages, and fringe line, I'd approve that, but it would involve a few months of waiting for the amendment to go through, which would also require the contract's being extended. Do you think there are other ways of completing the project before the end of March that won't require a budget amendment? If you hire a consulting planner or attorney to make some of the amendments and the Town only spends half of what remains in the contractual services line, the Town will save itself the 20% of its local share and could maybe use it to pay its staff to put the finishing touches on the changes to the zoning regulations. Let me know what you decide to do or if you want to talk further. Chris From: Terry, Mark [mailto:mark.terry@town.southold.ny.us] Sent: Thursday, 3anuary 21, 2010 10:52 AM To: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) Subject: RE: TDR Chris, Is it possible to have in-house staff write a draft of the TDR code and be reimbursed with remaining funds? Mark Terry Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Town of Southotd Planning Department P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 (631) 765-1938 Mark. Terry~,town,southold ny.us From: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) [mailto:Christopher. Eastman@dos.state.ny,us] Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 11:15 AM To: Terry, Mark Subject: TDR Hi, Mark, 1/21/2010 Happy New Year! How are the amendments to Southold's zoning proceeding for the TDR section? My sense was that the project would be complete--you'd have a work product to share with me and all the bills from your consultants to claim for reimbursement--by the end of March. I hope that's still the case. Let me know. Christopher Eastman New York Department of State 518-473-3367 1/21/2010 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS MARTIN H. SIDOR Chair WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD M~II.ING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 September 14, 2009 Mr. Christopher Eastman New York State Department of State One Commerce Plaza 99 Washington Avenue -Suite 1015 Albany, New York 12231-0001 Re: 2005-2006 Quality Communities Grant Contract C0599~/3. Dear Mr. Eastman, Enclosed, please find the following documents to comply with the Quality Communities Grant 2005-2006 contract C0599~3. 1. Standard Voucher Form 2. Documentation Forms Quality Communities Grant Program 3. Quarterly Project Status Report dated August 26, 2009 Please contact me with any questions. Sincerely, Enc. Cc: John Cushman, Town Comptroller w/o enclosures Heather Lanza, Director of Planning w/o enclosures i CUMENTATION FORr Quality Communities Grant Program CONTRACT # C059943 Expenditures Incurred During the Period 11 / 12 / 08 through 05/08/09 SUMMARY SHEET I. BUDGET/EXPENDITURE DATA ( Total Project Costs, Appendix B, Budget Summary in the Contract) Cumulative Current Expenditures Expenditures Available Budget Documented Documented Balance to Amount this Report to Date Document (1) (2) (3) (1-3) A. Salaries, Wages and Fringe $19,100.00 $0 $19,100.00 0 $12,992.74__ $12.992.74 B. Travel 0 0 0 C. Supplies and Materials D. Equipment E. Contractual Services $55,900.00__ $772.44 $42,907.26 TOTAL $75.000.00 $772.44 $62.007.26 lI. CLAIM TYPE X Interim Claim Final Claim IlL CERTIFICATION By signature on the attached voucher, I further certify that: 1) the amounts claimed accurately represent the expenses as recorded in our accounting records; 2) we are in compliance with all applicable provisions of the above-referenced Contract; 3) the attached narrative report (if required) accurately represents project accomplishments; 4) funds received are being used solely for the purposes of the "Project" as described in Appendix D of the above-referenced Contract. FORM 1 PROJECT NARRATIVE DETAILING PROJECT ACCOMPLISHMENTS FOR THIS CLAIM ONLY~ INCLUDE COSTS AND DATES THAT GOODS WERE RECEIVED AND SERVICES WERE COMPLETED 1. Task 3. - Consultant met with Assistant Town Attorney to discuss Findings Statement and begin to scope preparation of draft Town Code language based on the Findings Statement. Work performed through 5/8/09. Task 3 is 10% complete. FORM 2 - Expenditure Detail f~s Payment Request. Be descriptivd~l'~k specific. A. SALARIES~ WAGES AND FRINGE BENEFITS REQUEST 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. PAY PERIODS TITLE FROM - TO AMOUNT CHARGED TO THIS PROJECT $ $ $ $ $ $ SUBTOTAL $ 0 B. TRAVEL (include name of traveler, date, destination and purpose and costs) SUBTOTAL $ 0 FORM 3 C. SUPPLIES/MATERIALS (describe and include dates received and costs) SUBTOTAL $ 0 D. EQUIPMENT (describe and include dates received and costs) SUBTOTAL $ 0 FORM 4 E. CONTRACTUAL SERVICES (include name of any contractors/consultants, describe services, dates received, and costs) Nelson Pope and Voorhis LLC - TDR Program work as follows: Task 3. - Consultant met with Assistant Town Attorney to discuss Findings Statement and begin to scope preparation of draft Town Code language based on the Findings Statement. Work performed through 5/8/09. Task 3 is 10% complete. Total $772.44 SUBTOTAL $ 772.44 TOTAL OF ALL CATEGORIES ............................................. $ (SAME AS TOTAL SUMMARY SHEET COLUMN #2) 772.44 , ^o92(,..~) VOUCHER · Ofiginatl~ Agency DEPARTMENT OF STATE Payee ID 11-6001939 4 Payee Name (Limit to 30 speces) Town of Southold Payee Name {Limit to 3~ spaces) PO Box 1179 19000 Date (MM) (DD) (YY) : Payee Amount MIRDate (MM) (OD) (YY) I Southold 11952 s Claiming reimbursement of expenditures incurred pursuant to Quality Communities Contract #C059943 as detailed on the attached Documentation Forms. 7 A. Total Summary Shee! Column #2 $ B. Less Local Sham - circle 10% or ~'~ $ C. Total This Claim $ 8/26/09 772.44 154.48 617.96 Payee CerUflceflom I certify that the above bill is just, true and correct; that no part thereof has been paid except as stated and that ' the balance is actually due and owing, and that taxes from which the State is exempt are excluded. Supe~isor Payee's Signature in Ink Title Town of Southold Tl~;ll $ 617.96 Discount % $ 617.96 FOR AGENCYUSEONLY Date Title Dept. Cost Center Unit Expenditure Accum DepL Statewtde STATE COMPTROLLER'S PRE-AUDIT Veiled Uquldaflon ObJe~ Amount Orig. Agency POICoe~act OSC (~OCUMENTATION FOI~S ° ~ Quality Communities Grant Program CONTRACT # C059943 Expenditures Incurred During the Period 11 / 12 /08 through 05 / 08/09 SUMMARY SHEET I. BUDGET/EXPENDITURE DATA ( Total Project Costs, Appendix B, Budget Summary in the Contract) Cumulative A. Salaries, Wages and Fringe B. Travel Current Expenditures Expenditures Available Budget Documented Documented Balance to Amount this Report to Date Document (1) (2) (3) (1-3) $19,100.00 $0 $19,100.00_ __0__ 0 0 0 $55,900.00~ $772.44 $42,907.26 $12,992.74~ ~ $12.992.74 C. Supplies and Materials D. Equipment E. Contractual Services TOTAL $75.000.00 $772.44 Il. CLAIM TYPE X Interim Claim Final Claim IlL CERTIFICATION By signature on the attached voucher, I further certify that: 1) the mounts claimed accurately represent the expenses as recorded in our accounting records; 2) we are in compliance with all applicable provisions of the above-referenced Contract; 3) the attached narrative report (if required) accurately represents project accomplishments; 4) funds received are being used solely for the purposes of the "Project" as described in Appendix D of the above-referenced Contract. FORM 1 PROJECT NARRATIVE DETAILING PROJECT ACCOMPLISHMENTS FOR THIS CLAIM ONLY~ INCLUDE COSTS AND DATES THAT GOODS WERE RECEIVED AND SERVICES WERE COMPLETED 1. Task 3. - Consultant met with Assistant Town Attorney to discuss Findings Statement and begin to scope preparation of draft Town Code language based on the Findings Statement. Work performed through 5/8/09. Task 3 is 10% complete. FORM 2 - Expenditure Detai~ this Payment Request. Be descripOand specific. A. SALARIES~ WAGES AND FRINGE BENEFITS REQUEST 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. PAY PERIODS TITLE FROM - TO SUBTOTAL AMOUNT CHARGED TO THIS PROJECT $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 0 B. TRAVEL (include name of traveler, date, destination and purpose and costs) SUBTOTAL $ 0 FORM 3 C. SUPPLIES/MATERIALS (describe and include dates received and costs) SUBTOTAL $ 0 D. EQUIPMENT (describe and include dates received and costs) SUBTOTAL $ 0 FORM 4 E. CONTRACTUAL SERVICES (include name of any contractors/consultants, describe services, dates received, and costs) Nelson Pope and Voorhis LLC - TDR Program work as follows: Task 3. - Consultant met with Assistant Town Attorney to discuss Findings Statement and begin to scope preparation of draft Town Code language based on the Findings Stt~tcment. Work performed through 5/8/09. Task 3 is 10% complete. Total $772.44 SUBTOTAL $ 772.44 rol'$.t OF ALL CATEGORIES ............................................. $ 772.44 (SAME AS TOTAL SUMMARY SHEET COLUMN #2) New York State Comptroller's Office Payment Information Inquiry '~ Page 1 of I Agency Code/Name: 19000 ReferenceWn~mce~e~ 2005 Q~ *** Remittance Information for ACH Trace~ 01325690 *** *** Effective Date of Deposit is August 28, 2009 *** DEPARTMENT OF STATE Ref/Inv Date 08/19/2009 518474-2754 Invoice Amount Payment Amount Batch No. Voucher No. 3,592.93 3,592.93 919650 0904870 Total ACH Deposit 3,592.93 For additional information about your payment, please call the telephone number for the agency listed above. [History of Payments] [Information On Other Payments] ~ttps://wwe 1 .osc.state.ny.us/ach3/achPR.cfm 8/31/2009 DAVID A. PATERSON 518-474-G572 NVSDO$ LOC~,,L GOVT. STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF STATE ONE COMMERCE PLAZA ~)g WASHINGTON AVENUE ALBANY, NY 1223'J-Q00'1 PAGE 01 LORRAINE A. CORT'~S-VAZQUEZ Office of Coastal, Local Govcmm.ent, and Community Sustainability August 27, 2009 To: Mark Terry Fax: 631-765-3136 From: Cb. fistopher Eastman Fax: 518474-6572 Re: Quality Communities Extension - Southold TDR Pages, Including Cover: 2 Mark I hope all is going well with the final adjustmenk~ to and implementation of the TDR. Chris ~,DO~,STATE.NY.US E-MAIL:INF~DO$.STATE.NY.U$ · ~@/27/2009 09:17 518-474-6572 N¥$DO$ LOOAL GOVT. PAGE 02 APPENDIX X Agreement Modification Form Agency Code 19000 Contract Period 4/1/05 - 3/31/10 Contract Number C059943 Funding for Period $ 60.000 This is an AGREEMENT between THE STATE OF NEW YORK, acting by and through the New York State Departmant of State, having its principal office in Albany, New York 0aereinaf~er referred to as the STATE), and the Town of Southold (hereina~er referred ;o as the CONTRACTOR), for mod/[[catio~ of Contr4ct Number C059943, as amended above. All other provisions of said AGREEMENT shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hevoto have executed this AOKEEMENT aa of the dates appearing under their signatures. Scott Russell (print name) Title: Southold To~rn Supervisor Date: ~ State ARena7 Certification: "In ad{lition to thn ncccptane, c of this Contract. I alao certify that original copies of thin s~gnamre page will bc attached to all other exact coplca ofthi~ ContYact." STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF SUI:FOLI~ ) ss: On this~-ffr~day of ..T'664~ £ Scott Ruese~l S~pervisor , in the year 20 09 _, before mc personally tppea~d , to me known and known to me to be the of ehe To,,ra of $outhold . , the unincorporated association described in and which executed the above agreement; and who acknowledge to me that la)he executed the foregoing agreement for and/n behalf of said ,mi-,'nrporatod association. t NOTAR~ PUBLIC Thoma~ P. DiNapoli State Cqmp~._~ ller. D_at, e: . , , , ' LINDA j COOPER NOTARy pUB/lc~ ~ltate ~f New NO. 01CO4822563, Suf Term EXpires Dece--~ ~lk Cour~t~ ,,,per 31, 20_~ PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS MARTIN H. SIDOR Chair WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 To: From: Date: Re: Scott Russell, Supervisor Member of the Town Board Martin Sidor, Chair Members of the Planning Board Mark Terry, LWRP Coordinator Principal Planner August 26, 2009 Transfer of Development Rights Program Project Update (Qualities Community Grant Contract C059943) Currently, a total available balance of $12,992.74 remains in the above grant contract for development of code language for a Transfer of Development Rights Program (Task 3). To date, the Town has billed $62,007.26 in expenses to the contract; of this amount, $49,605.80 is reimbursable to the Town from the New York Department of State. The Town has received a reimbursement of $41,894.93 from the New York Department of State to date. The remaining $7,710.70 reimbursement is outstanding. Please contact me with any further questions. Enc. Cc: John Cushman, Town Comptroller Jennifer Andaloro, Assistant Town Attorney Heather Lanza, Director of Planning Ok, I am learning....I figured it out. When I said the match has been met...it has. The total required balance was just not appropriated on the vouchers. For example: Voucher Billed Reimbursement Match 1/09 52,368.66 41,894.93 10,473.32 4/09 4491.16 3592,93 4/09 4375 3500.00 875.00 8/09 772.44 617.95 144.88 898.23 The total match required (20% of 75.000.00) is 15,000.00. To date only 12,391.43 has been billed as match. Technically we need to complete Task 3. (code drafting) to fulfill our match requirement. Its 20% of the total 75,000.00. Mark Terry Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Town of Southold Planning Department P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road $outhold, New York 11971 (631) 765-1938 Mark. TerryC, town. southold, ny. us Terry, Mark From: Eastman, ChristoPher (DOS) [Christopher. Eastman@dos.state.ny.us] Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 4:42 PM To: Terry, Mark Subject: RE: 4.23.09 C059943 Voucher.doc Mark, Thanks for these. The electronic copies are fine, since we have the hard copy voucher that you submitted a few weeks back. I hope you're pleased the progress of the TDR law and the associated work. Chris From: Terry, Hark [mailto:mark. terry@town.southold.ny.us] Sent'- Thursday, Hay 21, 2009 4:28 PM To.' Eastman, Christopher (DOS) Subject.' 4.23.09 C059943 Voucher.doc Chris, Attached are the revised documents to add clarity to the voucher request. Do you need the hard copies sent or will this email suffice? Please clal me with any further questions. Mark Terry Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Town of Southold Planning Department P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 (631) 765-1938 MarkTerry@town:southo!d ny~us 5/22/2009 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS MARTIN H. SIDOR Chair WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-i938 Fax: 631 765-3136 To; From: Date: Re: Scott Russell, Supervisor Member of the Town Board Martin Sidor, Chair Members of the Planning Board / Mark Terry, LWRP Coordinator Principal Planner May 12, 2009 Transfer of Development Rights Program Project Update (Qualities Community Grant Contract C059943) Attached please find the Summary Sheet for the Transfer of Development Rights Program project grant submitted to the New York Department of State on April 28, 2009. To date, a total of $61,234.82 has been submitted, of which, $48,987.85 will be reimbursed to the Town. Staffmatch time has been satisfied for the grant. Currently, a total available balance of $13,765.18 remains in the contract. Of this amount, $11,012.14 is reimbursable. It is recommended that the Board await the final bill from the consultant for the completion of the Findings Statement before considering retaining the consultant for any additional tasks. The amount of the final bill will be deducted from the $13,765.18. Please contact me with any further questions. Eric. Cc: John Cushman, Town Complxoller Jennifer Andaloro, Assistant Town Attorney Heather Lanza, Director of Planning ( }OCUMENTATION FOI IS Quality Communities Grant Program CONTRACT # C059943 Expenditures Incurred During the PeriOd 11 / i2 / 08 through 3 / 19 / 09 SUMMARY SHEET I. BUDGET/EXPENDITURE DATA ( Total Project Costs, Appendix B, Budget Summary in the Contract) Cumulative A. Salaries, Wages and Fringe B. Travel C. Supplies and Materials D. Equipment E. Contractual Services Current ExPenditures Expenditures Available Budget Documented Documented Balance to AmoUnt this Report to Date Document (1) (2) (3) (1-3) $19,100.00 $0 $19,100.00 0 0 0 0 $55,900.00 $4,375.00 $42,134.82__ ~ TOTAL $75.000.00 $4.375.00 $61:234.82 $13.765.18 II. CLAIM TYPE X Interim Claim Final Claim III. CERTIFICATION By signature on the attached voucher, I further certify that: 1) the amounts claimed accurately represent the expenses as recorded in our accounting records; 2) we are in compliance with all applicable provisions of the above-referenced Contract; 3) the attached narrative report (if required) accurately represents project accomplishments; 4) funds received are being used solely for the purposes of the "Project', as described in Appendix D of the above-referenced Contract. Southold Town Board Otter Ooard Meeting of May 5, 2009 WHEREAS, the Board has received and reviewed the SEQRA Findings Statement for the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program and finds that the next procedural-step under SEQRA is the acceptance and adoption of said document. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby accepts and adopts the SEQRA Findings Statement for the Town of Southold TDR Program; and be it further RESOLVED that the Town Board authorizes the Town Clerk of the Town of Southold'to file the SEQRA Findings Statement for the Town of Southold TDR Program with the following parties: Town of Southold, Town Clerk Town of Southold, Supervisor's Office Town of Southold, Planning Board Town of Southold, Town Trustees Town of Southold, Zoning Board of Appeals Suffolk County Dept. of Health Suffolk County Dept. of Public Works Suffolk County Planning Commission Services Suffolk County Water Authority NYS Dept. of State - NYS Dept. of Transportation NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation, Commissioner; Albany NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation, Regional Office, Stony Brook Parties of Interest Officially on Record with the Town Clerk (if applicable) Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] HOVER: Vincent Orlando, Councilman SECONDER: Thomas H. Wickham, Councilman AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Krupski Jr., Wickham, Evans, Russell Generated May 7, 2009 Page 46 Southold Town Board Boar~eeting of May 5, 2009 RESOLUTION 2009-376 ADOPTED Item # 5.35 DOC ID: 4995 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2009-376 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON MAY 5, 2009: TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SEQRA RESOLUTION May 5, 2009 NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE OF THE FINDINGS STATEMENT FOR THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of SouthoId (the "Board") commissioned and received a study entitled the "Transfer of Development Rights (TDR)Planning Report to the Town Board"; and WHEREAS, the Board determined that the Program outlined in the study warranted the preparation of a Drat~ Generic Environmental Impact Statement ("DGEIS") and issued a Positive Declaration requiring the preparation of said document; and WItEREAS, the DSGEIS was submitted to the lead agency (the Southold Town Board, the agency having discretionary jurisdiction over the proposed action) and was accepted by that agency as complete for public review and comment on April 22, 2008; and WHEREAS, a public hearing on the DSGEIS was conducted on May 27, 2008; and WHEREAS, a Final SGEIS was prepared to address the written comments on the DSGEIS received by the lead agency from other governmental agencies and the oral comments provided during the May 27, 2008 public heating; and WHEREAS, the Board accepted the Final SGEIS by resolution dated May 5, 2009; Generated May 7, 2009 Page 45 STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT FINDINGS STATEMENT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS PROGRAM Town Board, Town of Southold Pursuant to Article '8 of the New York Environmental Conservation Law ("ECL") and Title 6. New York Code of Rules and Regulations ("6 NYCRR") Part 617, the Town Board of the Town of Southold, as Lead Agency, hereby makes the following findings. Name of Action: Lead A g ency : Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Town Board of the Town of Southold 53095 Main Road Southol6. NY 11971 Contact Person: Hon. Scott A. Russell, Supervisor (631) 765-1800 Date Final ElS Filed: Date of Findings: April 7, 2009 May' § , 2009 INTRODUCTION This Findings Statement has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of 6 NYCRR Part 617.11. This regulation requires that no Involved Agency shall make a decision on an action that has been the subject 9f an Environmental Impact Statement ("EIS") until that agency has made a written Findings Statement concerning the facts and conclusions of the Draft and Final EIS's, and weighed 9nd balanced the relevant environmental impacts analyzed therein with social, economic and other considerations. As intended by the ECL, the Findings Statement specifies the facts that the decision makers rely upon to support its decision-making, and provides a rationale for the agency's decision. In order to meet this New York State Environmental Quality Review Act ("SEQRA") provision, the Southold Town Board has prepared this Findings Statement, which is related to the significant issues identified in the Draft and Final Supplemental Generic EIS's written for the proposed action. Page I Town of Southold TDR Program Findings Statement DESCRIFFION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION The proposed action will implement an important planning and program tool that was described and recommended in the numerous planning studies undertaken within the Town over the past 20+ years. These studies, plans and recommendations were previously (2002-03) reviewed in terms of Town goals and needs, in order to achieve the Town's vision as articulated in those plans. That review, known as the Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy ("CIS"), found that many of the planning documents noted above reiterated recommendations of prior Town plans and studies, resulting in much consistency between studies and the goals of the Town over the 20-year period. The proposed action was formulated in response to one of these recommendations, and was also recommended as part of the recent Town Hamlet Study program. The proposed action involves an amendment to the Southold Town Code that is necessary to implement a voluntary Transfer of Development Rights ("TDR") program. This is a tool whereby owners of land in established rural areas of the Town (designated as "Sending Areas"), would be able to shift potential development of these sites to targeted parcels within .the Town's hamlets (known as "Receiving Areas") where appropriate infrastructure, infill potential, muse potential, public services and/or lack of environmental constraints are present The proposed action would establish a Town program to permit and facilitate private transactions that would shift development from agricultural lands in the Town to sites in defined hamlet areas (_b._amlet locus, or "HALO" zones). The program would not increase net residential density in the Town, as each transferred development credit will equal one receiving area development credit. A variety of unit types' would be considered in HALO zones, meaning that a unit transferred from a site that would have yielded a detached single-family house could be developed in a HALO zone as a smaller unit in a multi-unit structure. This feature could decrease the overall density of physical development in the HALO zones, and reduce the density of development in rural areas, since fewer large homes would be built in these areas. Ln addition, the proposed action would include a growth management factor on the number of units that can be received in the HALO zones, to ma/ntain a careful balance of deyelopment and community character, and to ensure compliance with density limitations of the Suffolk County Department of Health Services ("SCDHS"). The proposed Town TDR program would also be consistent with the Suffolk County TDR policy, which recognizes that groundwater protection needs are served when land is protected in a sending area, and controlled increase in density is permitted at a receiving site. It should be emphasized that the proposed action involves primarily legislative changes, with no specific physical changes proposed. The legislation would be consistent with the June 2007 TDR Planning Report and any appropriate modifications determined through the ElS process, which outline in detail the elements of the TDR Program. TDR is an appropriate tool for preservation of farmland and its associated economic, natural resource, aesthetic and community benefits by shifting density to appropriate areas, thereby providing a means for land protection without the resulting cost of purchasing the development fights. Sending areas are located within agrieuitural districts and/or on parcels encumbered with Page2 Town of $outhold TDR Program Findings $latemem individual commitments. Receiving areas are locafed only within HALO areas and are intended to provide sites where transferred development rights can be placed. These redemptions can be in the form of: Single-Family Homes Two-Family Homes Multiple Family Dwellings Detached Accessory Dwelling Units. and Mixed use or flexible zoning developments under potential future Planned Development District ("PDD") A PDD local law is recognized as a way to promote compatible land use projects through zoning and land use flexibility for well-designed projects that provide special public benefits such as affordable housing, community investment, redemption of transferred development rights and other creative land use benefits, LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION The proposed action would potentially affect lands designated by this action either as Sending Areas or Receiving Areas. Figures 1 and 2 depict these zones, respectively. Since Sending parcels are those lands in agricultural districts or those thal have individual Letters of Commitment, Sending zones are "fluid" and may change as parcels are entered into or withdrawn for these programs. STEPS TAKEN IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROPOSED ACTION The' following steps have been taken by the Town Board, in compliance with SEQRA and the ECL: The Town Board, in consideration of the provisions of SEQRA, determined that .the proposed action meets the criteria for a Type I action, and, as the Town Board proposed to undertake the action itself, assumed Lead Agency status on December 4. 2007. The Town Board~ as Lead Agency under SEQRA,.then determined that the proposed action may have a s!gnificant impact on the environment, and issued a Positive Declaration, requiring that a Supplement to the GEIS for the Town CIS be prepared (December 4, 2007). This document would be a Supplemental GEIS ("SGEIS"); the Lead Agency determined that public scoping would not be performed. · On April 22, 2008, the Town Board accepted the Draft SGEIS as complete and adequate for public review and issued a Notice of Completion of the Draft SGEIS. · A public hearing on the Draft SGEIS was held on May 27, 2008; the Lead Agency accepted written comments until June 6. 2008. Page 3 Town of Southold TDR Program Findings Statement · The Town Board issued a Notice of Completion of the Final SGEIS on April 7. 2009. In consideration of the foregoing, it is clear that the Southold Tow~n Board, as lead agency, has fully and properly complied with the procedural.requirements of SEQRA. POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION The following natural and human resources are described in the Draft SGEIS, along with analyses of the potential impacts of the proposed action on each, and ~he corresponding mitigation measures of the project for each impact (if any): Geological Resources Water Resources Ecological Resoumes Transportation Resources Land Use, Zoning and Plans Community Services Community Character SocioEconomic Conditions Cumulative Development PERTINENT FACTS AND ANALYSES PRESENTED IN THE SGEIS The following discussions of the specific potential impacts and mitgafion measures of the proposed action are taken from the Draft SGEIS, and support the conclusions of the Lead Agency with regard to the potential environmental impacts associated with the subject action. There are six (6) key factors that' are expected to significantly limit the potential for impacts with respect to new development-in hamlet areas, noted as follows: The proposed action is voluntary on the par of both landowners that choose to sell development fights from sending parcels and those that wish to advance a land use project involving purchase and redemption of development credits in a receiving area. The proposed action is to creme legislation that would establish a TDR program in the Town of Southold; the action does'not authorize actual land 'use, as any development which would use transferred credits would be subject to individual site plan and/or subdivision review for the specific land use application that would involve the redemption of transferred credits. As a result, further review would occur on a site-specific, project-specific basis. This document ts a Supplement to a Genetic EIS that identified this program as potentially beneficial, and as is required under SEQRA, analyzes the potential impacts associated with the creation of this legislation. The analysis is by necessity generic and cannot anticipate all site-specific or project- specific impacts. Each future action which proposes m redeem tmasferred credits must be evaluated in terms of conformance m the Statement of Findings that will be generated on the Supplemental GEIS record, and a decision made if the project is consistent with the Findings and/or if there are potential impacts which have not been adequately addressed. Page 4 Town of Southold TDR Program Findings Statement 3. There is a limit on the amount of new residential development that would be received in the HALOs, primarily as a function of the need to comply with Article 6 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code, as well as a growth management factor that further reduces the potential maximum development in the HALOs. 3,. HALO growth will be monitored through program implementation to ensure that open space remains in hamlet areas, and development occurs in a manner that is consistent with design goals of the Town. 5. Development will take the form of small incremental increases as a result of the various options for redemption of credits in receiving zones, specifically, options include: · Single Family Homes through limited density increases of new subdivisions: · Two-Family Homes through creation of such homes where appropriate: · Multiple Family Dwellings where appropriate and subject to Town Board change of zone. · Detached Accessory Dwelfing Units associated with existing homes, and · Mixed use or flexible zoning developments under potential future Planned Development District 6. Purchase of development rights and outright land purchase programs will continue, thus continuing to reduce density and potential impacts of land development primarily outside of hamlet areas. Impact Analysis The DSGEIS determined that the potential for adverse impacts to the resource categories listed above would be significantly limited, due to the nature and characteristics of the proposed action. These factors are tenets of the program designed to minimize impacts. Overall, the project will implement Town land use programs in a manner that is consistent with past planning studies. The intent of the program.is to provide options for land preservatiori through alternative forms of compensation to landowners that will leverage the PDR program. Land use will occur in areas where infrastructure exists and reasonable controlled growth can be accommodated. As such, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated, and no additional mitigation measures are necessary or proposed. Geological Resources The proposed action would be expected to reduce impacts compared to conditions if the proposed action were not implemented wi~h regard to geology, by malmaining prime farm soils and directing development to appropriate areas where geologic resources are less- sensitive. Development in the hamlet areas will necessitate grading and excavations for utilities, foundations, roadways, etc.; however, this development would occur in areas considered appropriate for development and therefore lacking in significant geological features (such as steep slopes, glacial features, etc.) and on soils having less value relative to farming potential, no significant impacts would result from these grading activities. In addition, Sending Area parcels would be preserved. Site specific land use would be subject to subdivision and/or site plan review which would' ensure that grading, proper drainage installations and proper erosion control practices, are tmplemeated at the time of development. Water Resources The proposed action would result in a pattern of development that would take place primarily as tn- .fill and in the hamlets, where the necessary infrastructure is already located. Hamlet areas have Page 5 Town of Southold TDR Program Findings Statement infrastructure in terms of public water, and it is expected that most development would occur using on-site sanitary systems. These systems are simple, effective systems in use thrgughout Suffolk County, that provide an adequate method of wastewater handling when appropriate densities are mmntained. Sewage treatmem facilities may be explored in connection with some development, depending upon density proposed, parcel size and available ~pace for plant siting as well as economic factors. A key factor is that each hamlet would be subject to a limit on the amount of development that could be sustained in conformance with Article 6 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code ("SCSC"). A second key factor is that the program is based on an equal density approach, where each sending credit equals a single development unit of the types specified for receiving parcels. It is possible that some of the units will be smaller with a concomitant reduction in sanitary flow. Fically, continued purchase of development rights would further reduce nitrogen input and maintain natural recharge areas. Increase in water usage to serve this growth is not anticipated to significantly impact the groundwater supply or the ability of water suppliers to serve the area. Although the volume of available water supply is limited, Suffolk County Water Authority ("SCWA') has continued to seek appropriate-well sites and increase the distribution sysmm in order to provide serv!ce to existing residents and businesses, and in areas where currem water supply infrastructure is presem. As a result, it is expected that the volume of this resource is adequate, and the infrastructure is in place, or can be economically extended. SCWA will continue to coordinate with the'Town of Southold with respect to the water map, which recognizes where water main extensions are appropriate and able to be sustained. Individual projects will require letters of water availability and commitment from SCWA to provide water supply. Private wells are not an option ff land use occurs on lots of less than 20,000 SF as required under Article 6. As a result, use of water resources can be conU'olled through the purveyor, in concert with the Town, in a manner that allows continued water supply for the Town's residents. As a consequence of the overall relocation of development, the. potential for adverse impact to groundwater supplies would be significantly reduced, as growth would be directed towards areas already served by public water suppliem, where adequate water supply and infrastructure already exist. The CIS indicates that there are numerous areas of the Town where the depth to groundwater is less than 10 feet. These areas are generally located along the northern and southern shores of the Town and its inland creeks, and include limited portions of the designated HALO areas. Development in these HALO areas would be subject to design review by the SCDHS, thus ensuring that properly functioning systems would be installed. The installation and operation of drainage and sanitary systems would remain under the jurisdiction of the Town and SCDHS, respectively, so that the potential for adverse impacts would be minimized by adherence to the regulations administered by these entities. In summary, conformance with Article 6, use of water supply from SCWA, a one-to-one, sending-to- receiving unit ratio, continued purchase of development rights and land acquisition, and location of development in areas that are less environmentally sensitive with more appropriate infrastructure, are all considerations which ensure that no significant adverse water resource impacts will occur as a result of the proposed action. Page 6 Town of Southold TDR Pro, ram Ecological Resources Development that would occur in HALO Areas as a result of TDR would take place primarily in and near the hamlets in accordance with the prescribed development pattern that allows for preservation of larger contiguous open space areas and natural recharge lands associated with areas outside_of the HALOs. As receiving areas would be less likely to have significant areas of natural vegetation present (given their proximity to HALO Areas). or in the event, natural vegetation of sufficient quality and/or quantity to provide habitat areas, it would not be expected that ecological functions of such areas would be significantly impacted. The proposed action would result in an increase in the amount of developed'areas within the Town, but these increases would occur on lands not optimal for habitat use; conversely, the action will permanently preserve open lands and rural areas in the Town that would be much more likely to provide habitat value, resulting in no significant adverse impact on ecological resources. Additionally, no impact to Town wetland resources are expected, as all future development will continue to be required to obtain both Town and State wetland permits, requiting conformance with current regulations. Trananortation Resources As the proposed project would not increase the number of residential units that could be built Townwide (but would merely relocate the siting of that development), there would be no change in the number o'f vehicle trips generated Townwide. However, the proposed action would increase the number of vehicle trips generated within the HALO zones. A significant feature of the proposed action is the flexibility to change the type of residence to one that would inherently generate a lesser number of trips, and thereby mitigate the potential impacts from these traffic increases. The primaD, mitigation of the proposed action with respect to traffic is that roadways and other traffic-related infrastructure (stop and signal controls, lane striping, siguage, etc.) are already in place. An additional mitigating feature of the proposed action is that it would tend m increase the atWactiveness of traffic-reducing lifestyles for HALO area residents, including increased use of alternative trmasportation, such as bicycling, walking, carpooling, home employment, public transportation, etc. The Town will need to pursue traffic calming measures in coordination with State and County agencies. In addition, a transportation management plan and outgrowth of efforts identified in the SEEDS project will assist in public education and promoting alternative forms of transportation. Managemem and redirection of growth, reduction in ultimate density through ongoing PDR and acquisition programs, coordination with State and County tiansportation agencies, promotion of intermodal transportation, and continuing monitoring efforts with further transportation management are intended to control transportation resoumes. Land Use, Zoning and Plans The proposed action would protect the existing land use pattern of the Town's rural areas, as vacant and/or agricultural land whose development fights are transferred wilt not be changed in their type of use. Development rights that are transferred in conformance with this proposed action will shift development from agricultural land areas in the Town's hamlet areas. The proposed action recognizes the conti/med applicability of SCSC Article 6, so that there would continue to be a limit on the amount of new development that could occur in each HALO area. Page7 Town of Southold TDR Program Findings Statement The Town CIS examined the recommendations of 19 prior land use plans and studies prepared by and/or for the Town. The CIS listed, described, summarized and analyzed the potential impacts of the 42 individual recommendations contained in those prior documents. The use of TDR as a vehicle by which to redistribute development in the Town and simultaneously preserve valuable land (whether as open space or farmland) was Recommendation #12 of the CIS. The proposed action would relocate the development potential of specific agricultural parcels into mapped portions of the Town's hamlets. These HALO zones were delineated in a cooperative effort between the Town and local 'citizenry, which was part of the Town Hamlet Study. This use of receiving parcels for TDR requires changes in Town regulations to allow controlled relocation of density; this new regulation would apply only to the HALO areas in terms of physical development. It can be expected that there would be no significant adverse impacts to zoning, since the TDR Program builds upon the current ~oulng and patterns of development to allow relatively small incremental increases in density to achieve redemption of TDR credits with resultant reduction of density elsewhere in the Town. It is not anticipated that this growth would impact the pattern of zoning in the Town, as all deYalopment is assumed to occur in accordance with the zoning of each site or through programs to promote more desirable growth such as sUengthening of hamlets, and projects which provide special public benefits. The project would advance numerous goals of the Town. which previously recommended the use of TDR for land preservation and to achieve other goals of redirecting growth to appropriate areas. As this proposed action is intended to implement the recommendations of the numerous Town plans and studies of the CIS, and the zoning of these sites would be changed where appropriate to reflect these recommendations, it may' be assumed that this growth would not impact these plans. Furthermore, implementation of the recommendations of relevant studies will allow the Town to more closely conform with goals such as protecting open space, agricultural, rural character and resources, as well as providing housing diversity and a reasonable pattern of growth and development consistent with the comprehensive plan. Community Services As the pro'posed action would relocate development in the rural areas of the Town m the HALO zones, the potential need for infrasu-uctare expansions and usages, as' well as use of community services, on the zending sites would be reduced. As a.result of the growth in the hamlets resulting from this proposed action, demand for emergency services such as police and lire protection would be increased in these areas. Howevar~ this redirected growth would occur where these services are already present; thus, while there would be an increased need for and usage of these services as controlled and limited development occurs, these ~mpacts would be minimized because the proposed action locates potential impacts in these areas, thereby reducing the extent of further necessmy infrastructure expansions. In addition, limits on the potential development within the HALO area~ through a growth management factor.would tend to reduce the need for and use of these services, but would also limit the need for expansions of such infrastructure, Tax revenues would be significantly increased on the developed HALO zone receiving sites, so that the cost of necessary senace expansions would be available to those providers. Page 8 Town of $outhold TDR Pro.am Finc~ngs $1at~ment The shift in location of development would, also result in the need for and demands upon the various infrastrncmre servmes, as follows: Solid Waste Handling and Recycling - While there would be a shift in the geographical distribution of solid waste generation toward the hamlet areas, this would not be significant as all wastes would be handled in the same facility regardless of where the they originate. Water Supply - As tnmsferred development would be distributed preferentially to the hamlets, the pattern of water demand will be distributed toward areas already served by water supply. Drainage - Any U'an~ferred or new development would have to provide on-site stormwater retention facilities, in conformance with Town and/or County regulations. Wastewater Treatment - The volume of sanita~ wastewater generated in the hamlets will increase as a result of the shift in density. This will have theresult of shifting the number of on-site septic systems or, if economic and density factors prove sufficient, the establishment or extension of existing community sewer systems within HALO Areas. Electricity - The location of residential development would increase the demand for expanded electrical services within the HALO areas. These areas contain existing development that serves current demand providing an indication that services could be readily expanded to accommodate limited growth due to the transferred density. Natural Gas - Similar to that for electrical services, the demand for and pattern of demand for natura3 gas services will be changed by the development pattern, to areas where existing services are more likely to exist. As mentioned above, the change in location of development and associated populations on a Town- wide scale (with locations of these impacts directed toward the hamlet areas) would represent an increase in the demand on community services in HALO Areas. As the geographic distribution of these impacts will be limited primarily to hamlet areas, the needs for and costs of expansions and improvements will also be limited to these areas and associated services providers. Community Character A primary goal of the proposed action is to preserve and protect farmlands and farming in the Town. which provides a s~gnificant aspect of the Town's rural character. This will be achieved, as these farmlands will continue m provide a rural aesthetic for res!dents and visitors. Relocating the development potential of these lands to specific HALO areas within the hamlets will reinforce and enhance the character of these areas as well, by requiring residential development to conform to and complement the character of theses zones. The proposed action includes options for redemption of development credits, providing the flexibility to construct differing types of residential units, and thereby will ensure the ability m conform to and enhance the character of the hamlets. The residential density shifted to the hamlets, in conjunction with the community-building effects associated with the ~ypes of residential development envisioned by the proposed action, would tend to enhance the sense of community. Finally, the limitations on growth in the HALO areas, primarily associated with growth management tools inherent in the TDR Program and SCSC Article 6,would simultaneously place a limit on the intensity of land uses and activities that could occur in these Page 9 Town of Southold TDR Program Findings Statement Implementation of the proposed action would direct growth toward the hamlets, thereby enhancing existing conununity character and vitality by use of well-regulated building and site design, layout and architecture. In addition, the shift in local population, some of which would be in close proximity to the hamlet centers (enabling pedestrian visits in lieu of aura trips and associated congestion, to the. detximent of character) will add to the fabric and economies of these communities, by increasing the customer bases of existing and potential new local businesses. In addition, the "small town" character of the individual hamlets would be protected, by locating appropriate residential uses in proximity to these areas. Shifting the geographic distribution of new residential development would, have the effect of reducing the potential for adverse impacts to the rural quality and character of the entire Town (by maintaining and preserving the breadth and depth of viewsheds and the character of the land and land uses within those viewsbeds). The shift in the pattern of development would reduce the potential for adverse impacts on existing and undiscovered cultural resources in rural areas, and would also reduce the potential for impact on such resources as have already been determined, by locating development in hamlet areas and away from rural areas. Significant portions of the Town, particularly within the hamlets, have been mapped by the OPRHP as "Sensitive" with respect to potential cultural resources~ Sites within the HALO zones that are also within these SensiOve areas would first be examined for the presence of such resources before development can occur, hi this way, undiscovered cultural resources of the Town would be recovered. For those cases where cultural resources are found, various methods of credit redemption could be designed within the proposed implementing Town regulations to reduce impacts to these resources while yield. Finally, the jurisdictions of the Town entities that review site plan applications (e.g., Town Board, Town Planning Board, Town Architectural Review Board, etc.) would not be usurped by the proposed action, so that Town cultural resources and community character would continue to be protected and preserved. SocioEconomic Conditions The relocation of potential residential development from the rural farmland properties in the Town to sites within the designated HALO hamlet areas would increase the number of residents in the hamlets, which would tend to have secondmy effects, inchiding: · Increased patronage of existing hamlet businesses due to the increased customer base; · Increased potential fo?.the establishment of new businesses to serve the increased customer base in the hamlets; · Change in the number of residents and age distribution of hamlet residents; and · Change in the need for and patronage of businesses that serve a particular age or economic. group in the hamlets. The proposed action will increase the level of residential development in the hamlet areas, balanced by a reduced level of growth Of this usein mrel areas of the Town. The short-term economic effect of this would be to increase the amount of construction employment and associated costs, and the long-term effect will be to increase the total amount of taxes generated and tax revenues allocated to all taxing jurisdictions. The social impact will be to increase the total number of residents in the hamlet areas. Page 10 Town of Southold TDR Program Finding~ Statement In terms of socio-economics, businesses in the hamlets will experience increased customer bases due to the increased populations residing in their vicinities. Associated with these increases will be the fact that this growth would be within a short commute or even walking distance of these local shops, with con~sequem strengthening of community character and vitality. The proposed action is anticipated to maintain the equity value of the lands designated as sending and fcc(lying sites, as well as of the development rights generated. The program must be successful to realize the benefits of land preservation and redirected growth. The program is designed to be' successful as it incorporates the following elements that address housing, fiscal, socioeconomic and equity considerations: · The program will conform to SCDHS TDR standards, and as a result ~s consistent with groundwater management as established under SCSC Article 6. · There are a variety of receiving site types oh which the credits can be located; · While there are more sending sites than receiving sites, there are several alternative programs and mechanisms whereby credits can be redeemed, ensuring credit holders that there would be a potential market for credits; · Experience with pine barrens credits has shown that there is a healthy market for credits, the value of which has steadily grown: · The growth in credits' value indicates that developers consider credits a viable investment; · The Town has the ability to administer laws already on its books and modify the Town Code to accommodate the TDR Program; · The Town continues to work with landowners, applicants and developers to achieve a balance of compatible land uses and preservation; TDR provides an additional tool to achieve these goals; and · The Town and its residents have a legitimate desire to preserve natural resources and promote orderly growth in areas able to sustain such growth. Cumulative Development The sending and receiving areas constitute the parcels within the proposed action. As the sending sites would remain permanently undeveloped, the type of growth that could still occur would change from potential residential land use to maintained agricultural use. For the sending sites, no significant amount of development is anticipated, and so no significant level of additional cumulative impacts would occur. The receiving sites would be developed in conformance with existing zoning and any controlled growth incrementally permitted through increases in various unit types as permitted through the TDR Program. As a result, any additional development would be induced by preservation of corresponding agricultural acreage. Primary and secondary growth would occur in the HALO zones; within the parameters established for types of uses and Within the .boundaries established under growth management factors. As such, the individual impact analyses presented and discussed in this section assume and include all potential cumulative development in these areas. Review of the above discussions indicates that the proposed action would, not result in adverse environmental impacts to the resource categories analyzed. Page 11 Town of Southold TDR Program Findings Statement Mitigation Measures Geological Resources Mitigation. of potential impacts to geologic resources is inherent in the proposed action, as it would reduce development on agricultural land and on lands tha~ are presently open spaces. The accompanying relocation of development into hamlet areas would result in location of development in areas better suited to ficcommodate such development. Use of erosion control techniques during · construction operations will further reduce the potential for adverse impacts to the Town's geological resources· Water Resources Implementation of the proposed action would provide substantial mitigation; the relocation of development to the laamlet areas would result in a reduction in groundwater usage in the rural portions of the Town, which would avoid need for extension of infrastructure to these areas, which could result in corresponding growth. While deveinpmem in the hamlets would be incxeaaed, the requisite groundwater supply system is already in place here, so that impacts would be reduced. In addition, and all development would conform to SCSC Article 6 and would be subject to individual site/project review. Use of water-saving plumbing fixtures would further reduce potential impacts to groundwater supplies. Ecoloeical Resources As a consequer~ce of the proposed action, the potential for impacts to ecological resources would be significantly mitigated, in comparison to conditions if the action were not implemented. This is due to the reduced amount'of deveinpment and guidelines/limitations with respect to development in farm areas of the Town. Development relocated to HALO areas are expected to be less sensitive in terms of ecological resources and any use would be subject to site and project specific review including wetland permitting, if applicable. Transportation Resources Because of the relocation of developmem associated with the proposed action (into the hamlets), there would be a substantial reduction in the potential for impacts to the Town's.rural transportation resources, but a potential increase in impacts in the hamlets. The pattern of development and impacts would be changed, to the vicinities of the hamlets and the roadways linking them, and away from the more rural pot*ions of the Town. In response, the Town may choose to 'implement traffic-calming measures, and provide further active and/or passive transportation improvements as provided in its ongoing transportation planning efforts. Use of alternative forms of transportation would be encouraged by this action, and public transportation providers would be expected to expand services to meet demand. Land Use, Zoning and Plans Mitigation of potential impacts to land use. zoning and land use plans is inherent in the proposed action, as follows: While the proposal would reinforce the e~isting pattern of land use in the Town, the goal is to achieve a level of protection for valuable aesthetic and environmental, social and other characteristics and' resources that would otherwise not be achievable absent the proposed action. This would be achieved by a relocation of this growth toward the hamlets and away from the areas where these resources are found. Page 12 Town of Southold TDR Program Findings Statement · The proposed action would conform to the zoning pattern in the Town (in order to achieve the specific land preservations and development concentrations inherent in the proposal), and this development would be in conformance with the applicable elements of the Town Zoning Code. · The proposed action has been formulated specifically to implement a number of the recommendations contained in numerous Town land use plans and studies prepared over the past 204- years, and therefore is consistent with the Town's comprehensive plan, including preservation of farmland, community character and addressing housing needs. Community Services Due to the anticipated relocation of future development in the Town [and in associated populations), the need for and usages of the various community services needed to serve this growth would be relocated as well. This relocation of growth would tend to relocate the need for (and costs to) services providers to expand/upgrade existing systems and/or services. The relocation of future development in the Town away from primarily rural and agricultural areas and toward the existing hamlets (where infrastructure systems such as solid waste handling and disposal, water supply, wastewater treatment, and energy are established) would minimize impacts on these systems, as the availability of these services would be greater in the hamlets. Community Character The proposed action contains its own mitigation of impacts to community character, as the devel, opment resulting from this action would tend to enhance the vitality and small-town character of the hamlets, while preserving the rural aesthetics of the adjacent open spaces and farmlands. Potential impacts to cultural resources would be mitigated by the proposed action by its preservation of undeveloped and agricultural lands (under which as-yet undiscovered cultural resources may lie undisturbed), thereby reducing the potential for impacts on established cultural resources. In addition, site-specific review of potential cultural resources would ensure that no impact would occur. SocioEconomic Conditions It should be noted that the purpose of the proposed action is to provide for residential development to be located in the HALO areas of the Town (where necessary infrastructure is present), mthur than in the rural areas (where such supporting public facilities and services may not be available). An additional Town consideration is to reinforce and enhance the aesthetics of the hamlets with welt- designed and appropriattly~located growth that conforms to the character of each hamlet. This will simultaneously preserve and protect the rural character of major portions of the Town, which is the source of much of the Town's atixaction for tourism and business. Cumulative Development Mitigation measures are inherent in the proposed action itself, as it has been conceived as a way to accommodate legitimate and needed residential development in the Town and simultaneously preserve the Town's valuable rural aesthetics and agriculture industry. Page 13 f Southold TDR Program Findings Statement IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION Upon completion of the SEQRA process, and in conformance with requirements of the New York State Town Law, the Southold Town Board would implement the proposed action by first enacting a TDR local law. This ordinance would legallyestablish the TDR Program regulations and procedures that would implement the proposed action, and formally empower the Town to conduct and oversee the program. It is expected that the ~i'own would then issue credit certificates to those sending area landowners that volunteer for the TDR Program, and would facilitate the redemption of TDR credits through its land use review process for projects to be sited within the receiving areas. The Town will record redeemed credits in a manner that ensures that parcdls from which credits are transferred are recognized as having no residual development rights. The Town Board may, in the future, pursue a credit registry or credit bank, to more actively encourage and participate in the TDR process; however, this is not essential to the initial program. THRESHOLDS FOR FURTHER REVIEW It is noted that the SEQRA regulations state: "GEIS's and their findings shouM set forth specific conditions or criteria under which future actions will be undertaken or approved, including requtrements for any subsequent SEQR compliance.' Therefore, SEQRA review of fut~lre implementation programs will be conducted pursuant to the SGEIS procedures for future actions as follows: 1. No further SEQRA compliance is required if a subsequent proposed action will be carried out in conformance with the conditions and thresholds established for such actions in the SGEIS or its findings statement; 2. An amended Findings Statement must be prepared if the subsequent proposed action was adequately addressed in the SGEIS but was not addressed.or was not adequately addressed in the Findings Statement for the SGEIS; 3. A Negative Declaration must be prepared if a subsequent proposed action was not addressed or . was not adequately addressed in the SGEIS, and the subsequent action will not result in any significant environmental impacts; 4. A Supplement to the Final SGEIS must be prepared if the subsequent proposed action was not addressed or was not adequately addressed.in the SGEIS and the subsequent action may have one or more significant adverse environmental impacts. In conformance with this portion of the SEQRA regulations, criteria and thresholds have been established to indicate when such additional review will be required for actions carried out in conformance with the proposed action. These criteria and thresholds do not preclude the Town from reviewing such actions, but rather states when SEQRA review is required. Page 14 Town of Southold TDR Program Findings Statement CERTIFICATION OF FINDINGS TO APPROVE/UNDERTAKE THE PROPOSED ACTION Based upon the information contained in the Final SGEIS, as outlined in these Findings and the supporting documentation provided, the Southold Town Board hereby finds that the proposed action minimizes potential environmental impacts and will provide the necessary balance between the protection of the environment and the need to accommodate social and economic considerations. Therefore. having considered the Draft SGEIS, the Final SGEIS and having further considered the foregoing written facts and conclusions relied upon to meet the requirements of 6NYCRR Part 617.11, this Statement of Findings certifies that: 1. The requirements of 6NYCRR Part 617 have been met. 2. Consistent with social, economic and other essential considerations from among the reasonable altemafives thereto, the proposed action is one which minimizes or avoids adverse environmental impacts to the maximum extent practicable, including the effects disclosed in the Final Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement. 3. Consistent with social, economic~ and other essential considerations, to the maximum extent practicable, adverse environmental effects revealed in the Final Sapplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement process will. be minimized or avoided by adoption of the proposed plan and by incorporating as conditions to the decision those mitigative measures which are practicable contained herein. The Town Board, pursuant to 6NYCRR Part 617.11 has prepared the Findings Statement stated herein and shall cause it to be filed in accordance with 6NYCRR Part 617.12(b). Copies of this Findings Statement have been filed with: Town of Southold. Supervisor's Office Town of Southold. Town Clerk Town of Southold. Planning Board Town of Southold. Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold. Town Trustees Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services Suffolk County Dept. of Public Works Suffolk County Water Authority Suffolk County Planning Commission NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation. Commissioner. Albany NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation. Regional Offic6, Stony Brook NYS Dept. of Transportation NYS Dept. of State US Army Corps of Engineers Parties of Interest Officially on Record with the Town Clerk Iif applicable) Page 15 NELSON, POPE ,~ VO01=~l-II~, LLC May 8, 2009 Jennifer Andaloro Lynne Krauza Town of Southold Office of the Town Attorney Town Hall Annex, 54375 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Re: Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Planning Assistance with Preparation Of Draft Local Law for TDR Program Implementation Dear Jennifer and Lynne: Thank you for contacting NP&V for services in connection with the above referenced project. The following planning services and fees are proposed: I. Review TDR Planning Report to the Town Board, Supplemental GElS process documents and Statement of Findings to update and refine recommendations and program understanding. 2. Research TDR programs from other municipal jurisdictions for background and approach to preparation of legislation for the Town of Southold. 3. Prepare draft Local Law and/or draft amendments to existing Local Laws to facilitate implementation of TDR program. 4. Meet with Town Attorney's office and members of TDR advisory team as necessary to review mechanics of program implementation through proposed draft legislation. 5. Update as necessary to finalize proposed Local Law and/or amendments. 6. Meet with Town Board and/or Town representatives to present and discuss draft legislation, and amend and revise as necessary. 7. Assist at discretion of Town Attorney, with preparation of final Local Law and/or amendments for consideration of adoption by the Town Board. The t~e for these services will be based on hourly rates, and will not exceed $9,000.00. Fee will be backed up with breakdown of personnel, standard Southold hourly rates and the number of hours expended in completion of the project. Thank you for the opportunity to assist on this project. Please feel free to call should you have any questions. Respectfully submitted, NELSON, POPE & VOORHIS, LLC Charles J. Voorhis, CEP, AICP PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS MARTIN H. SIDOR Chair WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 April 28, 2009 Mr. Christopher Eastman New York State Department of State One Commerce Plaza 99 Washington Avenue -Suite 1015 Albany, New York 12231-0001 Re.' 11/12/08 -3/19/09 Quality Communities Grant Contract C059943. Enclosed are the following documents relating to the above: · S*dard Voucher' orm signed by Supe, isor,',ussell 2. Documentation Forms 1-4 If you have any questions, please contact me. Enc. CC: John Cushman, Town Comptroller w/enclosures Heather Lanza, Director of Planning w/o enclosures ^c g=~v.~ $~)NDARD VOUCHER Odgin~ting Agency DEPARTMENT OF STATE 19000 11-6001939 4 Payee Name (Limit to 30 spaces) Town of $outhold Lteblllty Date Payee A~nount (MM) (DD) (MM) (DD) (YY) Ref,'lnv. NO. (Limit to 20 spaces) PO Box1179 I / Southold 11952 e Claiming reimbursement of expenditures incurred pursuant to Quality Communities Contract #C089943 as detailed on the attached Documentation Forms. A. Total Summary Sheet Column #2 $ 4,378.00 B. Less Local Share - circle 10% or~ $ 875.00 C. Total This Claim $ 3.500.0{I ? - Payee Certification: I certi~ that the above Piti is just, tree and co~ect; that no part thereof has I~en paid except as stated an(] that the Palance is actually due and owing, and that taxes from which the State is exempt are excluded. '=) Supervisor' Payee's Signature in Ink Title 4/23/09 Town of Southold T~ $ 3,500.00 Discount % $ 3,500.00 FOR AGENCY USE ONLY STATE COMPTROLLER'S PRE-AUDIT Date Cost Center Code Dept. Cost Centre Unit Expenditure object Accum Dept. Statewide Amount Liquidation Orig. Agency PO/Contract OSC I~CUMENTATION FOR~ Quality Communities Grant Program CONTRACT # C059943 Expenditures Incurred During the Period 11 / 12 / 08 through 3 / 19 / 09 SUMMARY SHEET I. BUDGET/EXPENDITURE DATA ( Total Project Costs, Appendix B, Budget Summary in the Contract) Cumulative Current Expenditures Expenditures Available Budget Documented Documented Balance to Amount this Report to Date Document (1) (2) (3) (1-3) A. Salaries, Wages and Fringe $19,1'00.00 $0 $19,100.00 0 $13,765.18 $13.765.18 B. Travel 0 0 0 C. Supplies and Materials D. EquiPment E. Contractual Services $55,900.00 $4,375.00 $42,134.82 TOTAL $75._000.00 $4.375.00 $61.234.82 II. CLAIM TYPE X Interim Claim Final Claim Ill. CERTIFICATION By signature On the attached voucher, I further certify that: 1) the amounts claimed accurately represent the expenses as recorded in our accounting records; 2) we are in compliance with all applicable provisions of the above-referenced Contract; 3) the attached narrative report (if requirgd) accurately represents project accomplishments; 4) funds received are being used solely for the purposes of the "Project" as described in Appendix D of the above-referenced Contract. FORM 1 PROJECT NARRATIVE DETAILING PROJECT ACCOMPLISHMENTS FOR THIS CLAIM ONLY; INCLUDE COSTS AND DATES THAT GOODS WERE RECEIVED AND SERVICES WERE COMPLETED 1. In March of 2009, Nelson, Pope, and Voorhis, LLC, prepared FSGEIS; format document, delineate comments etc. Review/revise text assemble and present to TDR work group. Work performed through March 19, 2009 (Task is 80 percent complete) 2. On March 16, 2009 Nelson, Pope, and Vo0rhis, LLC, prepared the Findings Statement. The document was forwarded to the TDR work group for review on April 20, 2009. Work performed through March 16, 2009. Task 4lis 75% complete. FORM 2 - ExPenditure Detail for this Payment Request. Be descriptiVen~ll~d A. SALARIES~ WAGES AND FRINGE BENEFITS REQUEST 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. PAY PERIODS TITLE FROM - TO SUBTOTAL specific. AMOUNT CHARGED TO THIS PROJECT $ $ $ $ $ $ $ B. TRAVEL (include name of traveler, date, destination and purpose and costs) SUBTOTAL $ FORM 3 C. SUPPLIES/MATERIALS (describe and include dates received and costs) SUBTOTAL $ D. EQUIPMENT (describe and include dates received and costs) SUBTOTAL $ FORM 4 E. CONTRACTUAL SERVICES (include name of any contractors/consultants, describe services, dates received, and costs) Nelson Pope and Voorhis LLC - TDR Program work as follows: Task 4e - Preparation of FSGEIS; format document, delineate comments etc. Prepare FGEIS and coordinate with staff. Review/revise text assemble and present to TDR work group. Work performed through March 19, 2009. Total $1,875.00 Task 4f- Preparation ofFindings Statement -Work performed through March 16,2009. Total $2,500.00 SUBTOTAL $ 4,491.16 TOTAL OF ALL CATEGORIES ............................................. $ 4, 491.16 (SAME AS TOTAL SUMMARY SHEET COLUMN #2) NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE OF THE FINAL GENERIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (GELS) I*OR THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) PROGRAM AS A SUPPLEMENT TO THE GEIS FOR THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD COMPREHENSIVE IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY Lead Agency: Town of Southold, Town Board Contact: Hon. Scott A. Russell, Supervisor Address: Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Date: April 7, 2009 This notice is issued pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act - SEQRA) of the Environmental Conservation Law and Chapter 44 of the Town Code oftbe Town of Southold. The lead agency has determined that the Final Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (FSGEIS) prepared for the proposed Town of Southold TDR Program is complete and adequate for public review. Title qfAction: Town of Southold, Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program SEQR Status: Type 1 Action Description of Action: The proposed action involves an amendment to the Southold Town Code to implement a voluntary TDR program, to permit and facilitate private transactions that would shift development from agricultural lands to locate new residential units in defined hamlet areas (hamlet locus, or "HALO" zones). The program would not increase net density, as I transferred credit is proposed to equal 1 receiving credit. The proposed action would include a limit on the number of units that can be received in the HALO zones to balance of community character and ensure compliance with density limitations of the SCDHS. The proposed action considers implementation of an important planning and program tool described and recommended in the numerous planning studies undertaken within the Town over the past 20 years. These studies, plans and recommendations were recently (2002-03) reviewed in terms of current needs and Town goals, in order to achieve the Town's vision as articulated in those plans. That review, known as the Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy (CIS), found that many of the newer planning documents reiterated recommendations of prior Town plans and studies, resulting in much consistency between studies and the goals of the Town over the years. Acceptance of Final Supplemental Generic ElS and Scheduling of Public Hearing Town of Southold TDR Program Location: As required by SEQRA, the potential environmental impacts associated with the CIS were determined, described and analyzed in a GELS, and a Findings Statement was prepared. The Findings Statement discussed the potential impacts of the recommendations analyzed in the CIS, and established procedures to be followed when the Town Board implemented those recommendations. These procedures included preparation of supplemental analyses for these recommendations. It should be emphasized that the proposed action involves primarily legislative changes, with no specific physical changes proposed. The proposed TDR program is expected to provide the following public benefits: · Protect critical resources associated with sending parcels including rural character, farm and agricultural land use to promote land preservation and environmental protection. · Provide an increase in the amount of diverse housing stock for a variety of income levels. · Reduce suburban sprawl and promote "smart growth" development principals including strengthening of hamlets and businesses, walkable communities, sustainable growth, mixed-use development, improvements to and use of existing infrastructure, controlled in-fill development, reduction in vehicle trip ends, and increase in inter-modal transportation opportunities. · Reduce infrastructure needs as a result of encouraging controlled development in appropriate use areas. · Promote beneficial design guidelines and standards within the hamlets including neo-traditional development in appropriate areas, maintenance of natural vegetation, minimization of fertilizer application, buffers and setbacks. · Promote the long-term planning goals of the Town by utilizing TDR to protect critical and valuable resources while helping to address the housing and social needs of the Town. In summary, the proposed TDR program is a furtherance of the Town's comprehensive planning efforts to achieve its goals of protecting valuable environmental and cultural resources, providing diversified housing to meet Town needs, managing limited resources, facilitating appropriate infrastructure in hamlet areas and promoting appropriate development consistent with good design and planning principles The proposed action would apply to the Sending Areas and Receiving Areas as designated in the proposed action. Notice/Action: The Southold Town Board has reviewed the FSGEIS prepared for the proposed action and, based upon its review of its contents, determined that the document is adequate for public review. At least 10 days will be provided for written comment after the date of acceptance of this document. Acceptance of Final Supplemental Generic ElS and Scheduling of Public Hearing Town of Southold TDR Program For Further Information Contact: Betty Neville, Town Clerk Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: (631) 765-1889 Copies of this Notice Sent to: Town of Southold, Supervisor's Office Town of Southold, Town Clerk Town of Southold, Planning Board Town of Southold, Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold, Town Trustees Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services Suffolk County Dept. of Public Works Suft'olk County Water Authority Suffolk County Planning Commission NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation, Commissioner, Albany NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation, Regional Office, Stony Brook NYS Dept. of Transportation NYS Dept. of State US Army Corps of Engineers Parties of Interest Officially on Record with the Town Clerk (if applicable) 3 TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SEQRA RESOLUTION April 7, 2009 NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE OF THE FINAL GENERIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (GELS) FOR THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS (TDR) PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Southold (the "Board") commissioned and received a study entitled the "Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Planning Report to the Town Board", and WHEREAS, the Board determined that the program outlined in the study warranted the preparation of a DraR Generic Environmental Impact Statement ("DGEIS") and issued a Positive Declaration requiring the preparation of said document, and WHEREAS, the DSGEIS was submitted to the lead agency (the Southold Town Board, the agency having discretionary jurisdiction over the proposed action) was accepted by that agency as complete for public review and comment on April 22, 2008, and WHEREAS, a public hearing on the DSGEIS was conducted on May 27, 2008, and WHEREAS, a Final SGEIS has been prepared to address the written comments on the DSGEIS received by the lead agency from other governmental agencies and the oral comments provided during the May 27, 2008 public hearing, and WHEREAS, the Board has reviewed the DSGEIS and finds that the next procedural step under SEQRA is the acceptance of this document for public distribution. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby accepts the Final SGE1S for the Town of Southold TDR Program as complete, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that in conformance with 6NYCRR Part 617.11(a), a comment period of not less than 10 calendar days is provided for comments on the FSGEIS, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board authorizes the Town Clerk of the Town of Southold to file the Notice of Complete DSGEIS with the following parties: Town of Southold, Supervisor's Office Town of Southold, Planning Board Town of Southold, Town Trustees Suffolk County Dept. of Public Works Suflblk County Planning Commission NYS Dept. of State Town of Southold, Town Clerk Town of Southold, Zoning Board of Appeals Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services Suffolk County Water Authority NYS Dept. of Transportation NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation, Commissioner, Albany NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation, Regional Office, Stony Brook Parties of Interest Officially on Record with the Town Clerk (if applicable) Page I PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS JERILYN B. WOODHOUSE Chair KENNETH L. EDWARDS MARTIN H. SIDOR GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southald, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cot. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southald, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 December 17, 2008 Mr. Christopher Eastman New York State Department of State One Commerce Plaza 99 Washington Avenue -Suite 1015 Albany, New York 12231-0001 Re: 2005-2006 Quality Communities Grant Contract C059933. Dear Mr. Eastman, Enclosed, please find the following documents, one product binder and three product CD's to comply with the Quality Communities Grant 2005-2006 contract C059933. 1. Standard Voucher Form 2. Documentation Forms Quality Communities Grant Program 3. Quarterly Status Report April 1, 2005 to November 17, 2008 4. Quarterly Status Report December 17, 2008 5. Appendix X. Agreement Modification Form 6. Appendix Al, Attachment 4 Procurement Form (With attachments) 7. Staff Time Records to date (In binder) Please contact me with any questions. Enc. Cc: John Cushman, Town Comptroller w/o enclosures Heather Lanza, Director of Planning w/o enclosures Terry, Mark From: Sent: To: Cc: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) [Christopher. Eastman@dos.state.ny.us] Monday, October 20, 2008 3:35 PM Terry, Mark Lanza, Heather Subject: RE: Quality Communities Grant Program C059933 Mark, Since that change does not require reallocating resources from shaff to consulting services, for example, just note in Form 1, the narrative of what was accomplished, that your Technical Coordinator did the work designated for the Senior Planner in his absence. I'll let you know if anything is missing once I receive and have a chance to review your packet. I hope you're pleased with the results of the work. Christopher Eastman New York Department of Slate From: Terry, Mark [mailto:mark.terry@town.southold.ny.us] Sent: Monday, October 20, 2008 2:54 PM To: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) Cc: Lanza, Heather Subject: RE: Quality Communities Grant Program C059933 Chris, As you are aware we are preparing a substantial packet to comply with the grant requirements, t have a question. Anthony Trezza, Senior Planner was listed in the grant and expected to commit $2100.00 of time to the project. However, Mr. Trezza has since left the Town. My question is... what is the simplest way to re- appropriate the monies to John Sepenoski, Technical Coordinator who worked a great deal on the project? Mark Terry Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Town of Southold Planning Department P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 From-' Eastman, Christopher (DOS) [mailto:Christopher. Eastman@dos.state.ny.us] Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 2:22 Pti To: Terry, Mark Subject: RE: Quality Communities Grant Program C059933 Mark, I don't see it in the file. Can you send it? 11/17/2008 Chris From-' Terry, Mark [mailto:mark.terry@town.southold.ny.us] Sent; Thursday, September 25, 2008 2:12 PM To: town.southold.ny.us, john.cushman; Eastman, Christopher (DOS) Subject: RE: Quality Communities Grant Program C059933 Chris, As discussed, we are preparing the necessary paperwork for submission to you. One question I have is did you ever receive the Procurement form (Appendix A1 Attachment 4) for C0599337 When you spoke to Scott Hilary in my office a few weeks back it was not mentioned. Do you still require the form? Mark Terry Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Town of Southold Planning Department P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 From: Cushman, John Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 1:12 PM To: Eastman, ChrJstopher (DO$} Cc: 'Terry, Hark Subject: RE: Quality Communities Grant Program Chris, Can you send me the Wordperfect version? I may be able to use them. As for the zoning amendments, Mark will need to update you on them. John From: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) [mailto:Christopher. Eastman@dos.state.ny.us] Sunt: Thursday, September 25, 2008 1:07 PM To: Cushman, John Cc: Terry, Mark Subject: RE: Quality Communities Grant Program John, Unfortunately, we don't have reimbursement forms that can be filled electronically. And the original forms are in Wordperfect, not Word, which complicates matters. Go ahead and print out the PDF and fill it out by hand. If you'd like, you can send the narrative page alone printed from a Word document, or you can physically cut the text and paste it into the form. How are your zoning amendments with TDR progressing? Christopher Eastman New York Department of State 11/17/2008 Division of Local Government From: Parent, Laurissa (DOS) Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 12:54 PM To: town.southold.ny.us, john.cushman Cc: Terry, Mark; Eastman, Christopher (DOS) Subject: RE: Quality Communities Grant Program l ii From: Cushman, John [mailto:John. Cushman@town.southold.ny.us] Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 11:41 AH To: Parent, Laurissa (DOS) Cc: Terry, I~lark Subject: Quality Communities Grant Program Hi Laurissa, Can you e-mail me a "Word" version of the documentation forms for requesting payment under the Quality Communities Grant Program, as I see that they are slightly different than what we typically use? Thanks. John 11/17/2008 Terry, Mark From: Sent: To: Subject: Cushman, John Tuesday, October 14, 2008 8:29 AM Terry. Mark RE: 2008 MT Grant Salary Worksheet.xls Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Red Salaries~_[ 12/31/05 Pat Finnegan $75,368.00 Anthony Trezza $50,667.94 Melissa Spiro $66,039.46 John Sepenoski $70AOQ34 Pat Finnegan $90,000.00 Anthony Trezza $52,441.31 Melissa Spiro $68,350.85 John Sepenoski $76,181.54 ~l~d~s @ 12/31/07 Pat Finnegan $93,375.00 Anthony Trezza $54,407.86 Melissa Spiro $70,914.00 John Sepenoski $79,038.35 Sala_ri~s @ ~0/!~108 Pat Finnegan $103,000.00 Melissa Spiro $83,148.36 John Sepenoski $82,002.29 For hourly rates, divide the about by 1820 hours. From: Terry, Mark Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 8:44 AFl To: Cushman, John Subject: FW: 2008 ivrl- Grant Salary Worksheet.xIs John, I am in need of pay rates (since 2005) for all below listed staff in order to calculate the match for the TDR grant. Mark Terry Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Town of Southold Planning Department P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 From: Sepenoski, John Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2008 8:59 AM To: Terry, Mark Cc: Cushman, John 10/20/2008 Subject: RE: 2008 MT Grant Salary Worksheet.xls Mark. Here's my time sheet from December 2006 on. The previous time sheet form you sent me for my hours prior to December 2006 is a different form than this new one. I assume this is not a problem. John Sep From: Terry, Mark Sent: September 25, 2008 1:45 PM To: Finnegan, Patricia; Spiro, Melissa; Sepenoski, 3ohn; Hilary, Scott Cc: Cushman, 3ohn; Lanza, Heather Subject: 2008 MT Grant Salary Worksheet.xls All. As per John Cushman, all time allocated to grants shall be recorded on the attached excel time sheet (Example data included). That said, I am in the process of submitting the required paperwork for the Quality Communities TDR grant and am in need of all time that you allocated to this grant. I have a list of the working group attendees, dates and times if that would help in your preparation. Note, the total money (equated to staff time) for each is as follows: PF - $7000.00 AT - Anthony Trezza was appropriated $2,100 for the project, I will re-appropriate the monies to John or Melissa depending on time spent. MS - $1,900 JS- $2,500 Please call me or John Cushman with any questions. Mark Terry Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Town of Southold Planning Department P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 10/20/200g PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS JERILY~N B. WOODHOUSE Chair KENNETH L. EDWARDS MARTIN H. SIDOR GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 MEMORANDUM To: Scoff Russell, Town Supervisor From: Mark Terry, Principal Planner ~ Date: September 3, 2008 Re: NYS Quality Communities Pro.qram TDR Grant: Contract #C059943 Please sign the attached Agreement Modification Form and return it to me. .Once the signed form is received, we will forward the document to the State as required. APPENDIX X Agreement Modification Form Agency Code 19000 Contract Period 4/1/05 - 3/31/09 Contract Number C059943 Funding for Period $ 60,000 This is an AGREEMENT between THE STATE OF NEW YORK, acting by and through the New York State Department of State, having its principal office in Albany, New York (hereinafter referred to as the STATE), and the Town of Southold (hereinafter referred to as the CONTRACTOR), for modification of Contract Number C059943, as amended above. All other provisions of said AGREEMENT shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have appearing under their signatures. as of the dates CONTRACTOR SIGNATURE By: (print name) (print name) Title: Title: Date: Date: State Agency Certification: "In addition to the acceptance of this Contract, I also certify that original copies of this signature page will be attached to all other exact copies of this Contract." STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF ) ss: On this day of of , in the year 20 ., before me personally appeared , to me known and known to me to be the ., the unincorporated association described in and which executed the above agreement; and who acknowledge to me that (s)he executed the foregoing agreement for and in behalf of said unincorporated association. NOTARY PUBLIC Thomas P. DiNapoli State Comptroller: By: Date: Project Status Form Project Status Form RECIPIENT PROJECT TITLE Town of Southold CONTRACT # CO59943 Development and Implementation of Transfer of Development Rights Program Status Report Date: Task # A/T Completion 1 A 10/07 Date of Percent of August 21, 2008 Completion Task Accomplishments I00 Completion of Full EAF Forms Pts 1 & 2 EAF Forms Product Submitted to DOS 2 A 10/07 100 Project Classification and SEQR Issuance of Significance 3 A 03/08 100 SEQR Scoping Process 4 A 03/08 100 Planning Report to Town Board 04/08 100 Preparation of Draft Supplemental EIS Positive Declaration Draft and Final Scope Draft DGEIS Draft DGEIS ADJUSTMENTS - Please indicate proposed adjustment(s) to work program/schedule, reason(s) for the proposed adjustm~t(s), and any other problems encountered during this renortine period: . CZ~'~' . \ Person to contact if. dye have questions about the information provided on this form: Name: Mark Teny Title: Principal Planner Email Address: mark.terry~southold.town.ny.us Affiliation: Town of Southold Phone: 631-765-1938 Fax: 631-765-3136 June 1, 2008 TO: Scott Russell and the Southold Town Board FROM: Howard Meinke and the North Fork Environmental SUBJECT: Comments and opinions concerning the current TDR discuSSion and the .~ proposal submitted by Nelson, Pope and Voorhis ......... 1. The early discussions of TDR were firm in assuring us that the plan was density neutral; that means that RI)Us (residential housing units) moved from agricultural land to hamlet with no net increase in numbers. It seems now, reading the report that a net density increase should be expected. The value of one right to build on a 2 acre plot is naturally worth a lot more than one right to build a smaller house on ½ acre in the hamlet. Thus, TDR does bring with it an increase in the number of residences, taxes, traffic congestion and loss of rural atmosphere. (Note: at the hearing the one to one ratio was def'mitely supported as the ONLY option by the Supervisor, the board and Mr. Voorhis.) 2. There is discussion in the TDR planning document that points out that the increase in residential development in the Hamlet/Halo through TDR will necessitate an increase in commercial development and infrastructure in the Hamlet. This is logical. Consequently, we should allow TDR to be used to augment commercial uses while we allow it to grow the residential side of the Hamlet/Halo. Thus we could get a less than a 1 to 1 transfer and achieve a net reduction in density with some transfer credits. Since the ability to transfer ultimately hinges on the ability of the receiving land to accept sewage based on rulings by the SCHD, we will very likely have commercial uses suggested for properties that can receive TBR credits. TDR for commercial usc should be a part of the program. 3. It is suggested in the report that the transfers of density would be aided by the addition of strategically placed sewage treatment systems. This is a bad idea. The forces of growth will use this potential for added density to ram in more commercial and residential development. Sewage plants would give ammunition to the proponents of the "big box" stores that we do not want. We wffi have trouble enough "keeping it rural" without this added factor. 4. AHD will not require TDR, so there is an additional amount of growth that is not counted. Hence more Hamlet density that is uncounted. 5. The report states that the movement of growth from the 2 acre zoning (and large houses) to the hamlet/halo (and smaller houses) will result in a lesser tax impact because of fewer children. I wonder of there is back up for this assertion. I can envision smaller houses with younger occupants putting just as many kids in school as the larger 2 acre houses. Many citizens stood up at the meeting and supported the idea that this density transfer would raise school enrollment and taxes. 6. Conservation subdivisions currently achieve 75 or 80 % preservation and 75 or 60 % density reduction. There is a net reduction in density, but still a few houses on the Ag. land. If the TDR program allows partial sale of the density on a parcel and supports building on the remainder, it results in what looks like a conservation subdivision but we do not lower density. If the TDR rules allow this scenario we will not see another conservation subdivision. The detail in thc TDR regulations is critical. Thc effect on current land use legislation is very important. Could we apply the TDR idea only to land that is already in the conservation, subdivision process? This would let the Ag. land owner receive cash for his last lots, and therefore remove all the houses from his land. Thus further preserving farm land while reducing total density. 7. Arranging for the town to serve as a TDR bank may be worth while. The down side is the requirement for interim financing by the town. However, if the TDRs reside with the town we maintain control of which rights sell first and what projects are developed first. It seems liked a very strong and important control mechanism. There is a window of opportunity now during the mortgage crisis and the building slowdown to determine how much growth in Southold is appropriate and to move legislation to set a firm goal. A few years ago NFEC presented a plan that used the 80 percent preservation/60 percent density reduction formula (a part of the conservation subdivision idea) as a target for all of Southold. From figures in the DGEIS of 2002 this meant that a build out of 15,500 residences would be reduced to 12,434 when Southold was all settled. The last town census figures showed 21,$00 full time residents, which equates to approximately 9,000 dwellings. This means that Southold, even with the 80 / 60 "brakes applied formula" will go at best, from 9,000 full time dwellings now to 12,434 at build out. We see this growth (28%), as more than enough! Southold Town seriously needs this sort of stated objective. The current attitude of'%ve are doing fine now and if the numbers change we will act" is fatally flawed. An up to date comprehensive master plan that unequivocally states a build out goal that reflects the citizens desire to preserve rural Southold will allow something real to be done. A sudden awakening to overdevelopment without the backup of a master plan will be all pain and no gain. To properly think about the potential of TDR we need more information. Southold needs an up to date analysis, possibly the status of preservation and development as of December 2007. The residential build out number if all existing houses and possible buildable lots are counted is required. Of course this also requires up to date calculation of the "real build out potential" of the Hamlet/Halo zones. With this the Town Board plus the citizens can judge at what growth point Southold loses the rural, quality of life that makes it special. On the other hand, if as time passes we agree that we are wrong it is easy to authorize more growth, lfwe blunder on with no plan and see that growth is strangling Southold, hand wringing will be our only answer. The Town Board will have failed. Question? The DGEIS of 2002 stated population numbers at that time and population at build out (when all land is used in accordance with zoning in place at that time). These numbers convert to housing units at the rate of 2.4 persons per unit in accordance with Suffolk County Planning Department calculations. 2002 population 21,500 or 8,958 residences Build out population 37, 338 or 15,578 residences The DGEIS also states that potential residential units (RDUs) from all zones other than AC, R 80 and R 40 would be only 388. The TDR report cites the receiving zone for TDR as allowing 663. This seems to be a very large increase in RDU count. Where will it stop? SHOULDN'T WE KNOW WHAT THE GROWTH TARGET IS? I hope the 30 percent cut off suggested in the TDR report can be permanent. If the result of this amount of growth is recognized as a loss of"the rural, feel, country ambiance, and the magic of Southold; and the hum of traffic and the rise of taxes gets noticeable we need to act quickly. There is also a question; will the agricultural land owners continue any form of conservation subdivision after TDR sales start? There could be a reaction by those who miss out on TDR (there is an oversupply) and they might go for the profit of full development. Sincerely, Howard Meinke Mark, Find below summary of conversation I had with Chris Eastman regarding TDR reimbursement and reporting requirements. 1) If project work was conducted past March 31, 2008 then a Project Extension Form must be submitted before reimbursement can proceed. 2) The final project summary: 3) Fill out voucher forms explaining/describing what payment is for. Attached a copy of ail applicable invoices and payment verification for each invoice i.e. cancelled check etc. Fill out vouchers for all in-kind staff services billed to the TDR project and for all consultant work. 4) If claiming payment full, compile a summation of all costs, including in-kind services for staff and all consultant costs. When you have a total of all project expenses subtract 20% from the total. The Town will be reimbursed for 80% of the TDR project expenses. 5) Finally, disk copies of all applicable documents that satisfy the original project description/contract, including the final TDR document (law). ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 southoldtown.northfork.net OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: Supervisor's Office Planning Board ~ Zoning Board of Appeals Trustees FROM: LyndaMBohn Deputy Town Clerk DATE: April 30, 2008 RE: DGEIS tbr TDR On April 22, 2008, the Southold Town Board adopted the Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement (DGEIS) for the proposed Transfer of Development Rights program. A hardcopy is on file in the Town Clerk's office, on Laserfiche under Studies/Reports, TDR-DGEIS-April 2008, and on the town website. There will be a Public Information Session for review of the DGEIS on May 6, 2008 at 7:30 pm at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold and a public hearing at a Special Town Board meeting on May 27, 2008 at 7:30 pm to receive public comment on this document. 2008 Southold Town Bo~ Meeting of April 22, 2008 RESOLUTION 2{)08-415 Item # ADOPTED DOC ID: 3820 THISIS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2008'415 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON APRIL 22, 2008: WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Southold (the "Board") has assumed lead agency status for review of the proposed Transfer of Development Rights program and for the purpose of compliance with the State Environmental Quality Review Action (SEQRA) for the action, as codified in 6 NYCRR Part 617, and WHEREAS, the Board found that a Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) would be necessary, and issued the appropriate determination (via a Positive Declaration) to require such document for the proposed action, and WHEREAS, the Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement (DGEIS) has been prepared, the Board has reviewed the document and determined that it is adequate for public review and comment. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby accepts the Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement after due deliberation and review of the prepared documentation, for the purpose of public and interested agency review and input, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Town Board hereby directs the Town Clerk to file a Notice of Complete Draft EIS and Notice of Public Hearing in accordance with the Notice and Filing Requirements of SEQRA and circulate the Draft ElS to public, interested agencies and parties of interest (noted below), in accordance with 6 NYCRR Part 617.12, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Town Board hereby sets a Public Information Session for review of the DGEIS document on Mag 6, 2008 at 7:30 p.m. at the Southold Town Hall~ Generated April 24, 2008 Page 60 SoutI~old I'own Board - Board of April 22. 2008 53095 Main Road~ Southold; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, theTown Board will hold a public hearing on the Draft GElS at a special Town Board Meeting on May 27~ 2008 at 7:30 p.m. at the Southold Town Hali~ 53095 Main R0ad~ Southold, to receive public comment on the DGEIS. At least 10 days ' - ........ will be provided for written comment alter the close of the public hearing, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby directs the Town Clerk to file Notice of the Public Hearing in at least one (1) local newspaper, at least fifteen (15) days prior to the Public Hearing. Town of Southold Supervisor's Office Town Clerk of the Town of Southold Town of Southold Planning Board Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold Town Trustees Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services Suffolk County Dept. of Public Works Suffolk County Water Authority Suffolk County Planning Commission NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation, Commissioner, Albany NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation, Regional Office at Stony Brook NYS Dept. of Transportation NYS Dept. of State US Army Corps of Engineers Inc. Village of Greenport Town of Riverhead Town of Southampton Town of Shelter Island Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Albert Krupski Jr., Councilman SECONDER: Thomas H. Wickham, Councilman AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Krupski Jr., Wickham, Evans, Russell Generated April 24, 2008 Page 61 LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN That the Town Board will hold a public hearing on the Draft GElS at a special Town Board Meeting on May 27~ 2008 at 7:30 p.m. at the Southold Town Hall~ 53095 Main Road~ Southold, to receive public comment on the DGEIS. At least 10 days will be provided for written comment after the close of the public hearing. Dated: April 22, 2008 BY ORDER OF THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Elizabeth Neville Town Clerk PLEASE PUBLISH ON May 15, 2008, AND FORWARD ONE (1) AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO ELIZABETH NEVILLE, TOWN CLERK, TOWN HALL, P.O. BOX 1179, SOUTHOLD, NY 11971. Copies to the following: The Suffolk Times Town Clerk's Bulletin Board ~i~ :~ent . Town Attorney Town Board Land Preservation LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will Public Information Session for review of the DGEIS document on the proposed Transfer of Development Rights program on May 6~ 2008 at 7:30 p.m. at the Southold Town Hall~ 53095 Main Road~ Southold Dated: April 22, 2008 BY ORDER OF THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Elizabeth Neville Town Clerk PLEASE PUBLISH ON May 1, 2008, AND FORWARD ONE (1) AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO ELIZABETH NEVILLE, TOWN CLERK, TOWN HALL, P.O. BOX 1179, SOUTHOLD, NY 11971. Copies to the following: The Suffolk Times Town Clerk's Bulletin Board ~lanning Department Town Attorney Town Board Land Preservation DAVID A. PATERSON GOVERNOR STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF STATE ONE COMMERCE PLAZA 99 WASHINGTON AVENUE ALBANY, NY 12231-0001 LORRAINE A. CORTt~S-VAZQUEZ SECRETARY Otc STATE March 17, 2008 Mr. Mark Terry Planning Director Town of Southold PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 RE: Quality Communities Grant Program 2005-06 Contract #C059933~ Dear Mr. Terry: Enclosed please find a copy of your executed Quality Communities contract, signifying an agreement by the Department of State to fund your project as described in the contract. In order to receive reimbursement of expenses, please refer to the enclosed Vouchering Procedure Guidelines and the Documentation Forms. As you will note in Appendix C of the Contract--the Payment and Reporting Schedule~the Department of State will make interim payments for eligible project costs up to an amount of 90% of the State Funds awarded. A final payment will be made upon satisfactory completion of your project activities. Appendix C also states that reimbursement requests by a municipality for project costs incurred may not be made more frequently than once every 30 days. When you submit for reimbursement, please include a properly executed payment request, a program progress report, and any work products documenting completion of one or more of the project tasks. In addition, if you have not done so already, please forward the Procurement Certification document. We look forward to working with you to insure successful completion of your Quality Communities project. If you require any additional assistance, please do not hesitate to call me at 518-473-3355. Land Use Training Specialist VWWV.DOS.STATE NY.US E-MAIL: INFO,DOS.STATE.NY.US STATE AGENCY (Name and Address): NYS Department of State 41 State Street Albany, NY 12231-0001 NYS COMPTROLLER'S #: C059943 ORIG. AGENCY CODE: 19000 ITYPE OF PROGRAM: 2005 Quality Communities Program TOTAL PROJECT COST - $75,000.00 STATE FUNDING AMOUNT FOR $60,000.00 INITIAL PERIOD 4-1-05 - 3-31-07 LOCAL SHARE $15,000.00 INITIAL CONTRACT PERIOD: FROM: 4-1-05 TO: 3-31-07 Multi-Year Term: From: 4-1-05 To:3-31-08 CONTRACTOR (Name and Address of Lead Aeencv~ Town of Southold Supervisor P.O.B. 1179 Southold, NY 11971 FEDERAL TAX IDENTIFICATION MUNICIPALITY #4?03?9000 C,(15('5 APPENDICES ATTACHED TO AND PART OF THIS AGREEMENT APPENDIX A: Standard clauses as required by the Attorney General for all state contracts APPENDIX Al: Agency-Specific Clauses Attachments 1, 2, 3, 4, thereto: Final Project Summary Report, Quarterly Contractor Report, Project Status, Procurement Certification APPENDIX B: Budget APPENDIX C: Payment and Reporting Schedule APPENDIX D: Program Workplan APPENDIX E: Grant Application APPENDIX X: Modification Agreement Form (to accompany modified appendices for changes in term or consideration on an existing period or for renewal periods) ~-~CE!VED RECEIVED DIVISION OF LOCAL GOVERi'~ENT MAR ] ,':1 2008 ALBANY OFFICE DEPARTMENT OF STATF DIVISION OF LOC;q_ GOVERNMENT ALBAN? OFF,CE DEPARTI',,1Er I 1 OF ~S I Al E Terry, Mark From: Sent: To: Subject: Terry, Mark Monday, January 28, 2008 2:42 PM 'Eastman, Christopher (DOS)' RE: Budget Attachments: image001 .png Chris, I would like it to remain as $38,500. As the proposal indicates it does not include administrative time and copying fees, hence, the amount shown. Mark Terry Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Town of Southold Planning Department P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 From: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) [mailto:Christopher. Eastman@dos.state.ny.us] Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 1:47 PH To: Terry, Mark Subject: RE: Budget Mark, Thanks for this. The proposal you sent estimates the cost of the scoping and draft generic environmental impact statement at $33,500, and your budget has it at $38,500. Should I keep it at $38,500 or do you want to double check that? Chris From: Terry, Hark [mailto:mark.terry@town.southold.ny,us] Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 1:20 PM To: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) Subject: RE: Budget Chris, The Town Attorney duties on the grant or as follows: Patricia Finnegan, Town Attorney: Ms Finnegan is a member of the work group created to facilitate the development of the Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program which will meet on a weekly- biweekly basis. Ms. Finnegan will work closely with the Consultant in developing a local law that will establish TDR Receiving Zones within the hamlets, sending zones and TDR credit redemption. She will also participate in the assessment and evaluation of the program to the Town of Southold existing zoning codes and land uses. It is expected that most of Ms. Finnegan's time will be allocated to Task II1: Drafting Local Law and reviewing and presenting products to the Town Board which are submitted by the Consultant. The total for amount appropriated to this work is $7000.00 9/25/2OO8 Terry, Mark From: Sent: To: Subject: Terry, Mark Friday, January 25, 2008 1:20 PM 'Eastman, Christopher (DOS)' RE: Budget Attachments: image001.png Chris, The Town Attorney duties on the grant or as follows: Patricia Finnegan, Town Attorney: Ms Finnegan is a member of the work group created to facilitate the development of the Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program which will meet on a weekly- biweekly basis. Ms. Finnegan will work closely with the Consultant in developing a local law that will establish TDR Receiving Zones within the hamlets, sending zones and TDR credit redemption. She will also participate in the assessment and evaluation of the program to the Town of Southold existing zoning codes and land uses. It is expected that most of Ms. Finnegan's time will be allocated to Task II1: Drafting Local Law and reviewing and presenting products to the Town Board which are submitted by the Consultant. The total for amount appropriated to this work is $7000.00 Let me know if you need anything else. Mark Terry Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Town of Southold Planning Department P,O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 From: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) [mailto:Christopher. Eastman@dos.state.ny.us] ~ent: Friday, 3anuary 25, 2008 11:01 AN To: Terry, Hark Subject: RE: Budget Mark, Thanks for this. I made a couple minor changes to the budget, adding travel to the consultants' costs and eliminating your travel line. If it were your staff traveling, then you'd use that, but if it's for consultant travel, it should be under contractual expenses. Your consultant's spending much more on SEQR than on the rest of the project. Can you send me (in an email is fine, and I'll add it to the text of your budget) a sentence or two explaining what will be involved in meeting the requirements of SEQR, which should explain why that expense is so great. Finally, can you email me a summary for the activities of the town attorney, as you did for yourself and your other colleagues several weeks back? Once you do that, I'll put it through. Thanks. Chris 9/25/2008 Terry, Mark From: Sent: To: Subject: Terry, Mark Friday, January 25, 2008 10:06 AM 'Eastman, Christopher (DOS)' RE: Budget Attachments: Amended TDR Quality Comm Budget (2).doc; image001.png Chris, Sorry for the confusion, the total Consultant expenditures (as projected by our consultant) is $55,400.00 appropriated as such. 1 apologize; the Program Foundation math was incorrect. I have posted the corrected amonnts below. The Town of Southold will hire a Consultant to acco~nplish the majority of the work plan ontlined in this grant application. Task I. Creation of TDR Work Group Task 2. Program Foundation Task 3. Draft l,ocal Law' Total Cost of Task 1,2 and 3:$16.900.00 Note, that part of Task 3 is reflected iu the above a~nount. The Town Attorney on staffwill accomplish the majority or'work outlined in Task 3. Task 4. State Enviromnental Quality Review Act Fotal Cost of Task 4:$38,500.00 ~he total costs ol'the Tasks 1 through 4 which are appropriated to ite]n E. CONTRA~fU~[ ~_ERVICES equals $55,400.00. The Program Foundation includes the modeling and providing answers to the following questions: 9/25/2008 Task 4. State Environmental Quality Review Act Total Cost of Task 4:$38,500.00 The total costs of the Tasks 1 through 4 which are appropriated to item E. ~Q~T~A~T[!~L 5[g~!~E5 equals $55,400.00. The Program Foundation includes the modeling and providing answers to the lbllox~ing questions: 1. ltow will the TDR Program ~vork? 2. Who benefits from this program? 3. How much do TDR's cost? 4. How is the value of the TDR's established7 5. ts the program voluntary or mandatory7 6. Whm will be the Town's role in implementing and monitoring the pr 7. How do I participate ifI o~ landwithin a Sending Area? 8. How do I participate ifI mwt land in a Receiving Area? ',.~ 9. How can the TDR's be used on the Receiving Area Properties? ? 10. Where are the Sending Areas located? 11. Where are the Receiving Areas located? In addition, based on our meetings to date, there are other questions whicl Southold Town which require consideration in the development of a TDR prr 12. How does the TDR pmgrmn impact other Town land preservation pn 13. What are the mpncat~ons with regard to existing zoning, and p changes? 14. How do SCDHS regulations impact the TDR program? 9/25/2008 Regarding the Town Attorney, she is on stafl~ I propose to add her time spent to Item A. SA_LARIES, WAGES AND FRI~GE~ My records indicate that the Town Attorney has accumulated 22.5 hours towards this initiative to date. 1 estimate that total amount applied to the project will be $7000.00. Note, John SepenoskL Technical Coordinator and I have also have spent more time on the projects as originally proposed, therefore, I amended the budget accordingly shifting monies l¥om the E. CONTRACTUAL SERVICES to A. SALAd!ES, iW~ES AND.[R!NGE. Thank you tbr your help and let me know if you need anything else. I can be reached at 631-765-1938 with questions. Mark Ferry From: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) [mailto:Christopher. Eastman@dos.state.ny.us] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2008 4:59 PM To: Terry, Hark Subject: RE: Budget Mark, You have three different amounts for the contractual services. This is straight from your budget: The Town of Southold will hire a Consultant to accomplish the majority of the work plan outlined in this grant application. Please see attached document that outlines the work of each task. Task 1 Creation of TDR Work Group Task 2 Program Foundation $31,500.00 Task 3 Draft Local Law $2,000.00 Task 4 State Environmental Quality Review Act $17,000.00 The total costs of the outlined tasks is expected to be $48,900.00 Total Contractual Services: $66,000 1. Which is it? $50,500; $48,900; or $66,000? 2. Whafs "Program Foundation"? I'm assuming design of the TDR program. But can you provide a sentence or two description so there's no question. 3. What are you going to do about your attomey? Is he/she on staffor a consulting attorney or on Town staff?. Maybe we should discuss this on Monday. Call me at your convenience. 518-473-3355. Chris From: Terry, Hark [mailto:mark.terry@town.southold.ny.us] Sent: Thursday, 3anuary 10, 2008 9:28 AM To: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) Subject: RE: Grant Amendment Chris, 9/25/2008 Good catch, after I sent the revised budget I realized that the Contractual Section was incomplete. The total amount expected to be appropriated to this line in around $48,900.00. After speaking with the consultant, he indicated that the $17,000.00 is for the SEQR services outlined in Task 4. Attached is a revised budget. I apologize for the oversight. Mark Terry From: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) [mailto:Christopher. Eastman@dos.state.ny.us] .gent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 9:07 AM To: Terry, Nark Subject: RE: Grant Amendment Mark, Thanks for sending this. The staff duties is exactly what I needed. I'm assuming the Town Attorney is a member of the municipal staff, not a consultant. If you want to add him/her to your list here and allocate some of the $66,000 from what you have in contractual services to your attorney, go ahead. Consultants' travel should be included in the consultants' part of the budget, so you can eliminate it from your travel line and add it to the contractual (or now your attorney's) part of the budget. You outline in the budget where $17,000 of your contractual budget will be spent. What about the other $49,000? Can you provide a little more information there. Please amend the budget as indicated and, if you want to add your attorney's time to staff salaries, wages, fringe, please include a brief description of his/her work on the project in your response as you did for yourself and the others here. Thanks. Chris From: Terry, Mark [mailto:mark.terry@town.southold.ny.us] ~ent: Wednesday, January 09, 2008 2:13 PM To: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) Subject: RE: Grant Amendment Chris, 1 am sorry for the delay in responding to you. Attached are the revised budget forms as requested. I will send the procurement certification and the contractor's proposal hard copy to you this week. The staff involvement in the grant is as follows: Mark Terry, Acting Department Head, Project Manager - Mr. Terry will act as Project Manager of the grant application and work plan overseeing all aspects of the application. He is a member of the work group created to facilitate the development of the Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program which will meet on a weekly-biweekly basis. Mr. Terry will work closely with Mr. John Sepenoski, Technical Coordinator in developing a Geographic Information System land use model to establish TDR Receiving Zones within the hamlets of the Town. He will also participate in the assessment and evaluation of the program to the Town of Southold existing zoning codes and land uses. tt is expected that most of Mr. Terry's time will be allocated to Task I1: Program Foundation. The budgeted amount for this task is $3000.00 9/25/2008 Terry, Mark From: Sent: To: Subject: Terry, Mark Thursday, January 10, 2008 9:28 AM 'Eastman, Christopher (DOS)' RE: Grant Amendment Attachments: Amended TDR Quality Comm Budget (2).doc Chris, Good catch, after I sent the revised budget I realized that the Contractual Section was incomplete. The total amount expected to be appropriated to this line in around $48,900.00. After speaking with the consultant, he indicated that the $17,000.00 is for the SEQR services outlined in Task 4. Attached is a revised budget. I apologize for the oversight. Mark Terry From: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) [mailto:Christopher. Eastman@dos.state.ny.us] Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 9:07 AM To: Terry, Mark Subject: RE: Grant Amendment Mark, Thanks for sending this. The staff duties is exactly what I needed. I'm assuming the Town Attomey is a member of the municipal staff, not a consultant. If you want to add him/her to your list here and allocate some of the $66,000 from what you have in contractual services to your attorney, go ahead. Consultants' travel should be included in the consultants' part of the budget, so you can eliminate it from your travel line and add it to the contractual (or now your attorney's) part of the budget. You outline in the budget where $17,000 of your contractual budget will be spent. What about the other $49,000? Can you provide a little more information there. Please amend the budget as indicated and, if you want to add your attorney's time to stuff salaries, wages, fringe, please include a brief description of his/her work on the project in your response as you did for yourself and the others here. Thanks. Chris From: Terry, Mark [mailto:mark.terry@town.southold.ny.us] Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2008 2:13 PM To: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) Subject: RE: Grant Amendment Chris, 9/25/2008 1 am sorry for the delay in responding to you, Attached are the revised budget forms as requested. I will send the procurement certification and the contractor's proposal hard copy to you this week. The staff involvement in the grant is as follows: Mark Terry, Acting Department Head, Project Manager - Mr. Terry will act as Project Manager of the grant application and work plan overseeing all aspects of the application. He is a member of the work group created to facilitate the development of the Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program which will meet on a weekly-biweekly basis. Mr. Terry will work closely with Mr. John Sepenoski, Technical Coordinator in developing a Geographic Information System land use model to establish TDR Receiving Zones within the hamlets of the Town. He will also participate in the assessment and evaluation of the program to the Town of Southold existing zoning codes and land uses. It is expected that most of Mr. Terry's time will be allocated to Task I1: Program Foundation. The budgeted amount for this task is $3000.00 Anthony Trezza, Senior Planner - Mr. Trezza represents the Planning Board in the work group and participates in weekly and biweekly meetings of the group. Mr. Trezza will provide scenarios of subdivisions to model the potential effects a TDR program would have on the subdivision review process. Most of Mr. Trezza's time will be allocated to Task I1: Program Foundation. The budgeted amount for this task is $2100.00. Melissa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator - Ms. Spiro represents the Land Preservation Department in the work group and participates weekly and biweekly meeting of the group. Ms. Spiro will work with Mr. John Sepenoski, Technical Coordinator in the development Geographic Information System land use model identifying the TDR Sending Zones. Most of Ms. Spiro's time will be allocated to Task I1: Program Foundation. The budgeted amount for this task is $1900.00. John Sepenoski, Technical Coordinator - Mr. Sepenoski is the Town of Southold Geographic Information Systems Coordinator. He is a member of the work group and will participate in the weekly/biweekly meeting of the group. Mr. Sepenoski is expected to produce a series of maps and data sets to base work group decisions upon. Also as discussed above Mr. Sepenoski is involved in the modeling both the sending and receiving areas. Most of Mr. Sepenoski time will be allocated to Task I1: Program Foundation. The budgeted amount for this task is $1500.00. A question, The Town Attorney has been involved in this grant, is it possible to amend the grant proposal to shift Consultant monies to cover this time spent? Mark Terry From: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) [mailto:Christopher. Eastman@dos.state.ny.us] ~ent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 11:56 AN To: Terry, IVlark Subject: RE: Grant Amendment Ma~k, Sorry that didn't get through. Thanks for following up. Here's the content of the email I sent last Friday. Chris I think I mentioned in our phone conversation that, having chosen a firm to do the work, you should sign and send back to us your procurement certification, which is a page from the contract, which you should receive, executed, about a month after I have everything to send on to our Fiscal Management division. That certification states that you followed your local law in selecting the firm to write your TDR law and draft the associated documents for it. 9/25/2008 I've attached the budget forms for you to revise your budget. As I understood it, you were thinking you'd eliminate spending in Travel and Supplies/Materials categories (travel reimbursement for consultants should be under Contractual Services anyway). If you want to be reimbursed for staff time spent on this project, please summarize (and you can do this in the body of an email response) what each member of the staff will be doing to justify that salary expense. Then, in the Contractual Services section of the budget form, please provide a breakdown of the expenses associated with your consultant's work. For example, an estimate of what what each Task (1-4) from your workplan will cost. I hope this is clear. Please respond to this email or call me at 518-473-3367 if you have any questions. Christopher Eastman New York Department of State Division of Local Government From: Terry, Mark [mailto:mark.terry@town.southold.ny.us] Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 11:50 AM To: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) Subject: Grant Amendment Chris, As discussed. Mark Terry Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Town of Southold Planning Department P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 9/25/2008 Anthony Trezza, Senior Planner - Mr. Trezza represents the Planning Board in the work group and participates in weekly and biweekly meetings of the group. Mr. Trezza will provide scenarios of subdivisions to model the potential effects a TDR program would have on the subdivision review process. Most of Mr. Trezza's time will be allocated to Task t1: Program Foundation. The budgeted amount for this task is $2100.0Q Melissa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator - Ms. Spiro represents the Land Preservation Department in the work group and participates weekly and biweekly meeting of the group. Ms. Spiro will work with Mr. John Sepenoski, Technical Coordinator in the development Geographic Information System land use model identifying the TDR Sending Zones. Most of Ms. Spiro's time will be allocated to Task I1: Program Foundation. The budgeted amount for this task is $1900.00. John Sepenoski, Technical Coordinator - Mr. Sepenoski is the Town of Southold Geographic Information Systems Coordinator. He is a member of the work group and will participate in the weekly/biweekly meeting of the group. Mr. Sepenoski is expected to produce a series of maps and data sets to base work group decisions upon. Also as discussed above Mr. Sepenoski is involved in the modeling both the sending and receiving areas. Most of Mr. Sepenoski time will be allocated to Task I1: Program Foundation. The budgeted amount for this task is $1500.00. A question, The Town Attorney has been involved in this grant, is it possible to amend the grant proposal to shift Consultant monies to cover this time spent? Mark Terry From: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) [mailto:Christopher. Eastman@dos.state.ny.us] Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 11:56 AM To: Terry, Mark Subject: RE: Grant Amendment Mark, Sorry that didn't get through. Thanks for following up. Here's the content of the email I sent last Friday. Chris I think I mentioned in our phone conversation that, having chosen a firm to do the work, you should sign and send back to us your procurement certification, which is a page from the contract, which you should receive, executed, about a month after I have everything to send on to our Fiscal Management division. That certification states that you followed your local law in selecting the firm to write your TDR law and draft the associated documents for it. I've attached the budget forms for you to revise your budget. As I understood it, you were thinking you'd eliminate spending in Travel and Supplies/Materials categories (travel reimbursement for consultants should be under Contractual Services anyway). If you want to be reimbursed for staff time spent on this project, please summarize (and you can do this in the body of an email response) what each member of the staff will be doing to justify that salary expense. Then, in the Contractual Services section of the budget form, please provide a breakdown of the expenses associated with your consultant's work. For example, an estimate of what what each Task (1-4) from your workplan will cost. I hope this is clear. Please respond to this email or call me at 518-473-3367 if you have any questions. 9/25/2008 Mark, Sorry that didn't get through. Thanks for following up. Here's the content of the email I sent last Friday. Chris I think I mentioned in our phone conversation that, having chosen a firm to do the work, you should sign and send back to us your procurement certification, which is a page from the contract, which you should receive, executed, about a month after I have everything to send on to our Fiscal Management division. That certification states that you followed your local law in selecting the firm to write your TDR law and draft the associated documents for it. I've attached the budget forms for you to revise your budget. As I understood it, you were thinking you'd eliminate spending in Travel and Supplies/Materials categories (travel reimbursement for consultants should be under Contractual Services anyway). If you want to be reimbursed for staff time spent on this project, please summarize (and you can do this in the body of an email response) what each member of the staff will be doing to justify that salary expense. Then, in the Contractual Services section of the budget form, please provide a breakdown of the expenses associated with your consultant's work. For example, an estimate of what what each Task (1-4) from your workplan will cost. I hope this is clear. Please respond to this email or call me at 518-473-3367 if you have any questions. Christopher Eastman New York Department of State Division of Local Government From: Terry, rqark [mailto:mark.terry@town.southold.ny.us] Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 11:50 AM To: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) Subject: Grant Amendment Chris. As discussed. Mark Terry Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Town of Southold Planning Department P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 9/25/2008 Christopher Eastman New York Department of State Division of Local Government From'- Terry, Mark [mailto:mark.terry@town.southold.ny.us] Sent-' Wednesday, November 07, 2007 11:50 AH To-' Eastman, Christopher (DOS) Subject.' Grant Amendment Chris, As discussed. Mark Terry Principal Planner LVVRP Coordinator Town of Southold Planning Department P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 9/25/2008 Terry, Mark From: Chic Voorhis [cvoorhis@nelsonpope.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 9:50 AM To: Terry, Mark Subject: Southold TDR Mark, You had called for billing information regarding the above. Please note the following: TDR Planning Report Billed: 16,900 Paid: 16,900 TDR Draft Supplemental GElS Work in Progress: 14,767.75 (not yet billed) This is tasks 1-3 and part of 4 per the December 19, 2006 contract Work Remaining: 18,732.25 (to be completed) This is the rest of task 4 and tasks 5-8 Please call if you have any questions or require anything further. Thanks, Chic NELSON, POPE & VOORHIS, LLC ENVIRONMENTAL · PLANNING · CONSULTING 572 Walt Whitman Road Melville, NY 11747 ph: (631) 427-5665 ex. 206 fax: (631) 427-5620 1/24/2008 Terry, Mark From: Sent: To: Subject: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) [Christopher. Eastman@dos.state.ny.us] Wednesday, November 07, 2007 11:56 AM Terry, Mark RE:-Grant Amendment Attachments: Budget.doc Mark, Sorry that didn't get through. Thanks for following up. Here's the content of the email I sent last Friday. Chris I think I mentioned in our phone conversation that, having chosen a firm to do the work, you should sign and send back to us your procurement certification, which is a page from the contract, which you should receive, executed, about a month after I have everything tO send on to our Fiscal Management division. That certification states that you followed your local law in selecting the firm to write your TDR law and draft the associated documents for it. I've attached the budget forms for you to revise your budget. As I understood it, you were thinking you'd eliminate spending in Travel and Supplies/Materials categories (travel reimbursement for consultants should be under Contractual Services anyway). If you want to be reimbursed for staff time spent on this project, please summarize (and you can do this in the body of an email response) what each member of the staff will be doing to justify that salary expense. Then, in the Contractual Services section of the budget form, please provide a breakdown of the expenses associated with your consultant's work. For example, an estimate of what what each Task (1-4) from your workplan will cost. hope this is clear. Please respond to this email or call me at 518-473-3367 if you have any questions. Christopher Eastman New York Department of State Division of Local Government From: Terry, Mark [mailto:mark.terry@town.southold.ny.us] Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 11:50 AM To: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) Subject: Grant Amendment Chris, As discussed. Mark Terry Principal Planner 11/7/2007 Terry, Mark From: Sent: To: Subject: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) [Christopher. Eastman@dos.state.ny.us] Wednesday, November 07, 2007 11:56 AM Terry, Mark RE: Grant Amendment Attachments: Budget.doc Mark, Sorry that didn't get through. Thanks for following up. Here's the content of the email I sent last Friday. Chris I think I mentioned in our phone conversation that, having chosen a firm to do the work, you should sign and send back to us your procurement certification, which is a page from the contract, which you should receive, executed, about a month after I have everything to send on to our Fiscal Management division. That certification states that you followed your local law in selecting the firm to write your TDR law and draft the associated documents for it. I've attached the budget forms for you to revise your budget. As I understood it, you were thinking you'd eliminate spending in Travel and Supplies/Materials categories (travel reimbursement for consultants should be under Contractual Services anyway). If you want to be reimbursed for stafftime spent on this project, please summarize (and you can do this in the body of an email response) what each member of the staff will be doing to justify that salary expense. Then, in the Contractual Services section of the budget form, please provide a breakdown of the expenses associated with your consultant's work. For example, an estimate of what what each Task (1-4) from your workplan will cost. I hope this is clear. Please respond to this email or call me at 518-473-3367 if you have any questions. Christopher Eastman New York Department of State Division of Local Government From: Terry, Mark [mailto:mark.terry@town.southold.ny.us] Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 11:50 AM To: Eastman, Christopher (DOS) Subject: Grant Amendment Chris. As discussed. Mark Terry Principal Planner 11/7/2007 PATRICIA A. TOWN ATTORNEY patricia.fianegan@town.southold.ny.us KIERAN M. CORCORAN ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY kieran.corcoran@town.southold.ny.us LORI M. HULSE ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY lori.montefusco@town.southold.ny.us ?~oute 25 ~1-0959 .939 639 OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD New York State Department of State 41 State Street Albany, NY 12231-0001 October 2, 2 ~... Attention: Mr. Christopher Eastman, Land Use Training ~pecial!st/ ' ! Quality Communities Contract Administrate,--.../ ~ ~ : ~.~"~ "~ RE: New York State Quality Communities Program TDR Grant Contract No. C-059943 Dear Mr. Eastman: Pursuant to your letter dated September 18, 2007, I am enclosing the referenced Agreement which has been signed by Supervisor Russell. We would appreciate your sending us a fully executed Agreement for our records. If you have any questions or require anything fudher regarding this Agreement, please do not hesitate to call me. Thank you for your assistance. /Ik Enclosure cc: Members of the Town Board (w/o encl.) Very truly yours, Secretary to the Town Attorney Ms. Elizabeth A. Neville, Town Clerk (w/encl.) The following provisions are recommended to facilitate the redemption of TDR' .~ Single Family Homes · Apply to B, HB, Rlb, R-40, R-80, A-C, R-200 zones. - · Allow in zoning district through further subdivision. · · Use TDR code to permit such development by application to the Planning Board. · Minimum permitted lot size to be 20,000 SF. · Consider creation of R-20 zone to establish dimensional requirements for 20,000 SF size which does not currently exist. ~', ~x~ ~ .~,j\~,--- Tw- ' g d'strict through creation of one structure per lot. · Allow in zoning district through further subdivision· -- · Use TDR code to permit such development by application to the planning Board · Minimum permitted lot size to be 20,000 SF in the R-40 and~0,000 in the R-80 and A-C-[ zones.L.. . _- · Dimensional requirements pursuant to 1.25 times the underlying zone except area which is specified above. Multiple Family Dwellings · Allow in residential zoning district through change of zone to HD or HB for qualifying lots based on sound planning principles and merits of proposal. · Town Board determinl~ased on change of zone which would reqqi~e of TDR's. · Dimensional requirements pursuant to HD/HB~T Detached Accessory.R~v~T Dwelling Unit · Not currently provided for in Town Code; recommen~Lllew form of dwelling unit to be allowed in R-40, R-80, A-C and R-200 zones through~oning Board of Appeals (ZBA) special permit'S. · ibot oi~c must be i.~ dines zomn ,~: Planned Development District Encourage adoption of PDD local law. Apply to HALO's t~ough ch~ge of zone, therefore Town Bo~d discretion. Identify lots 5 acres ~d ~eater as c~didates. Seek mixed ~e dewlopment with public benefits. Major public benefit is extinguishing TDRs ~d providing sewage treatment. These forms of TDR credit redemption would be provided for through the TDR local law that would specify the parameters for development as noted above. The identification of forms of credit redemption provides a means to visualize and understand that type of development that would result in the HALO's as a result of the TDR program. Transfer of Development Rights Program TDR PROGRAM PLANNING REPORT AND DSGEIS SUMMARY Summary of Proposed Action The proposed project is the creation of a Transfer of Development Rights ("TDR") Program for the Town of Southold. A Draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement ("DSGEIS") has been prepared for the Southold Town Board as lead agency, to analyze the potential impacts of an amendment to the Southold Town Code to implement a voluntary TDR program (the "proposed action") to permit and facilitate private transactions that would shift development from agricultural lands in the Town ("sending areas") to locate new residential units in defined hamlet areas (hamlet locus, or "HALO" zones referred to as "receiving areas"). The program would not increase net density, as 1 transferred credit is proposed to equal 1 receiving credit. Once transferred, the development potential of a sending parcel would be completely extinguished. A variety of unit types would be considered in hamlet areas; this would be change the resulting demographics depending upon unit type since fewer large homes would be built in rural areas and logically, any unit types received in the hamlets would include smaller and/or multiple-family units. In addition, the proposed action would include a "cap" on the number of units that can be received in the HALO zones to maintain a careful balance of existing community character and ensure compliance with density limitations of the Suffolk County Department of Health Services ("SCDHS"). The proposed action considers implementation of an important planning and program tool described and recommended in the numerous planning studies undertaken within the Town over the past 20 years. Obiectives of the Project The Town's "objectives" in this case, are the previously stated Town goals: To preserve land including farmland, open space and recreational landscapes · To preserve the rural, cultural and historic character of the hamlets and surrounding countryside. · To preserve the Town's remaining natural environment; to prevent further deterioration of the Town's natural resoumes and to restore the Town's degraded natural resources back to their previous quality. · To preserve and promote a range of housing and business opportunities that supports a socio- economically diverse community. · To increase transportation efficiency and to create attractive alternatives to automobile travel, while preserving the scenic and historic attributes of roadways in the Town. How the TDR Program Works The program involves designation of sending zones which primarily include larger farm parcels in the rural areas of the Town where there is a goal of preservation. Parcels would be eligible for recognition of a number of credits related to their size and potential development yield based on their zoning. Applicants would file for recognition of credits associated with their parcel, and the assigned credits would be a salable commodity. Areas associated with the HALO of each of Southold's hamlets would be designated as overall receiving zones. The zoning districts within the HALO boundaries would be modified through a TDR program local law that would identify the means by which credits could be redeemed in Town of Southold OTDR Program & DSGEIS Summary Transfer of Development Rights Program exchange for increased utilization of parcels in accordance with guidelines established for individual zoning districts within the HALO's. TDR credits would be exchanged privately and exchanges between buyer and seller could be facilitated by the real estate market, as well as by the Town through a listing of TDR credits issued, which would be researched by landowners, developers and investors seeking to pursue development in the HALO's in conformance with the credit redemption options. The cost of TDR credits will be market based. It is expected that the Town's continuing PDR program will provide a benchmark for TDR credit value, but the ultimate cost will be determined between buyer and seller based on supply and demand. The value of TDR's is established by creating potential for redemption of TDR credits in connection with land use and development that brings a return on investment to a landowner, developer or investor. To participate, a sending area landowner would contact the Town, make application on forms to be provided, obtain a TDR credit certificate, and seek a private purchaser for the credits. A receiving area landowner would contact the Town, make application for a land use development in conformance with one or more of the options available to achieve density increase using TDR's and process the application with the applicable Board. TDR's can be used on receiving area properties for the purpose of increasing density of Single Family Homes, Two-Family Homes, Multiple Family Dwellings, Detached Accessory Dwelling Units, and potentially for Planned Development District projects at such time in the future when the Town Board enacts a PDD local law. Potential Adverse and Beneficial Impacts There are six (6) key factors which are expected to significantly limit the potential for impacts with respect to new development in hamlet areas, noted as follows: 1. The proposed action is voluntary on the part of both landowners that choose to sell development rights from sending parcels and those that wish to advance a land use project involving pumhase and redemption of development credits in a receiving area. 2. The proposed action is to create legislation that would establish a TDR program in the Town of Southold; the action does not authorize actual land use, as any development which would use transferred credits would be subject to individual site plan and/or subdivision review for the specific land use application that would involve the redemption of transferred credits. As a result, further review would occur on a site-specific, project-specific basis. This document is a Supplement to a Generic ElS that identified this program as potentially beneficial, and as is required under SEQRA, analyzes the potential impacts associated with the creation of this legislation. The analysis is by necessity generic and can not anticipate all site-specific or project- specific impacts. Each future action which proposes to redeem transferred credits must be evaluated in terms of conformance to the Statement of Findings that will be generated on the Supplemental GElS record, and a decision made if the project is consistent with the Findings and/or if there are potential impacts which have not been adequately addressed. 3. There is a limit on the amount of new residential development which would be received in the hamlets, primarily as a function of the need to comply with Article 6 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code and as a result of the Hamlet Development Model and resulting limitations. Summary Town of Southold TDR Program & DSGE1S Summary Transfer of Development Rights Program Hamlet growth will be monitored through program implementation to ensure that open space remains in hamlet areas, and development occurs in a manner that is consistent with design goals of the Town. 5. Development will take the form of small incremental increases as a result of the various options for redemption of credits in receiving zones, specifically, options include: · Single Family Homes through limited density increases of new subdivisions; · Two-Family Homes through creation of such homes where appropriate; · Multiple Family Dwellings where appropriate and subject to Town Board change of zone. · Detached Accessory Dwelling Units associated with existing homes, and · Mixed use or flexible zoning developments under potential future Planned Development District 6. Purchase of development rights and outright land purchase programs will continue, thus continuing to reduce density and potential impacts of land development primarily outside of hamlet areas. A summary of potential adverse and beneficial impacts is included in Table 1 at the end of this summary. It should be noted that this proposed action does not propose any development, construction or growth; it has been formulated specifically to control the amount and pattern of future growth expected in the Town. In this sense, the prospect that the Town will experience growth is inevitable - it is the control of this growth and how it is accomplished that is the thrust of the TDR program. The proposed action is simply intended to channel expected growth into appropriate areas while reducing the amount of this growth in areas which the Town Board, based upon numerous prior plans and studies, proposes to preserve and protect, and to minimize the potential impacts of this growth on the environment. Obviously, relocation of growth to hamlets and commercial centers will increase the amount of and need for infrastructure improvements in these areas, if such are not already present or prove inadequate. These improvements include sanitary, water supply and drainage systems, roadway improvements, increased community services capacities (solid waste handling, energy supply, public transportation, parking, etc.). In addition, increased populations may increase the potential for changes in need for and types of commercial businesses, particularly if these population changes include shifts in age and/or income distribution. The proposed Town Board action would provide an increased level of protection for agricultural land and open space and the rural qualities of the Town associated with these uses, while maintaining the capability of these privately-held properties to provide a reasonable economic return. Residential units would be available for development as transferred development rights or credits, to be used in designated receiving areas. In consideration of the foregoing, it may be concluded that the proposed action is not expected to result in a significant adverse change in the growth potential in the Town and that changes would be beneficial as a result of better conformance to land use plans and location of growth in more appropriate locations. Summary of Mitigation The summary of impacts includes the identification of six (6) factors that present a potential for mitigation of potential adverse impacts. These provide mitigation that is inherent in the TDR program. Two tables summarizing potential impacts as well as mitigation measures are included as Tables 1 and 2. ~ Summary Town of Southold TDR Program & DSGEIS Summary Transfer of Development Rights Program Alternatives Considered The following altematives are considered in detail in the DSGEIS: 1. No Action - assumes that the proposed action is not implemented. 2. Density Transfer Incentive - assumes that development credits are increased when transferred to a receiving area. 3. Use of Open Space as Sending Areas - assumes that farmland combined with open space (non- agricultural and/or wooded lands) or open space alone are established as sending areas. 4. Non-Residential Credit Redemption - assumes that development credits can be redeemed for non- residential use. 5. TDR Bank - assumes the Town establishes a method for purchase and re-sale of transfer credits. Next Steps and Approval Process The Town Board has received and approved the TDR Program Planning Report for the purpose of commencing review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act ("SEQRA"). This DSGEIS for the TDR program provides an opportunity for further review by the Town Board, the public and involved agencies. The DSGEIS will be the subject of a public hearing and comment period, and all substantive comments on the DSGEIS will be addressed in a Final SGEIS. After completion of a FSGEIS, a 10-day public consideration period must pass, after which the Town may issue a Statement of Findings which would form the basis for a decision on the TDR program. In addition to compliance with SEQRA, completion of this process ensures that involved agencies, parties of interest and the public have an opportunity to comment on and provide input into the TDR program, and further ensures that the Town Board has the benefit of this input in the decision-making process. The Town Board will consider the SGEIS record and Statement of Findings on the TDR program prior to any decisions on legislative changes, policy or Town management/implementation associated with the proposed action. The Town Board is the primary and, in effect, the only board that has approval authority to implement the program. As necessary, the Board will direct preparation of legislation by the Town Attorney and follow proper hearing, notice and filing requirements prior to enacting legislation. This document is intended to comply with the SEQRA requirements as administered by the Town Board of the Town of Southold. In conclusion, Southold Town has been progressive and successful in planning efforts to preserve farmland and maintain the character and quality of the Town. The Town has considered TDR as a useful tool to help achieve planning goals. The TDR program differs from other preservation programs in that it would not eliminate development potential, but would shift the location of development to appropriate locations in the Town which have been identified through previous studies. The program also differs in that expenditure of public funds is not necessary. The use of TDR credits would therefore preserve farmland and locate an equivalent density to the yield of a parcel in a hamlet area where infrastructure exists. This allows public funds to go farther in achieving total preservation goals through continued use of PDR. This form of development would also achieve a greater level of sustainability since it would promote various forms of residential development (not only single family homes) in areas where residents may live, work or seek recreation using multiple forms of transportation (walking, biking, car pooling, public transportation). ~ Summary Table 1 ~ SUMMARY OF ANTICIPATED IMPACTS Town of Southold TDR Program & DSGEIS Summary Transfer of Development Rights Program Resource Beneficial Impacts Potential Adverse Impacts · Would preserve existing farmland on Sending sites, and eliminate development * Would result in clearing and grading in Geological Resources potential from these properties. HALO areas for development resulting from · Would retain agricultural soils on existing farmland parcels, density shift. · Would use public water supply in HALO Would eliminate increase in groundwater withdrawals in rural areas, areas and not in sending area locations. Water Resources : Would locally increase nitrogen load in Would eliminate discharge of sanitary effluent in sending areas. · HALO areas through transfer conforming to Article 6, with reduced load in sending areas. · Would eliminate clearing of natural vegetation and habitat loss in rural areas. · Would decrease natural vegetation and habitat Ecological ReSoUrces · Would enable preservation of existing agricultural land in large contiguous blocks, acreages in HALO areas for those parcels with less fragmentation of farmland open space, which currently possess such characteristics. : : Would minimize potential increase in traffic and congestion in rural areas. · Would generate traffic in HALO areas with Transportation Would place additional density in areas where road systems and infrastructure reduced traffic generation in sending areas; Resources exists. HALOs are more walkable and promote use · Would encourage pedestrian activity and use of alternative forms of transportation, of alternative transportation. :: Would maintain rural land use patterns. Would provide for diversity of housing types in HALO areas, which would Md Use, Zo~ ~ otherwise not be possible. · No adverse impacts expected. Plans · Would establish conditions to address affordable housing needs. ! ~ Would minimize potential for "sprawl" pattern of growth. Would conform with land use plans. Would eliminate potential increase in rural development, with associated reduction · Would result in need for community services Community Services in impacts to rural services, and infrastructure in HALO areas, with Would eliminate need to expand or increase infrastructure services in rural areas, reduced demand in sending areas; HALOs can Would protect watersheds and wellfields (existing and proposed), more readily provide infrastructure. ~ Would maintain the existing high aesthetic quality of the hamlet areas. · Would result in more development in HALO Community Character Would strengthen consumer base for business interests in hamlets, adding to areas, with resultant reduction of development character and vitality of hamlets, in sending areas; HALO development would · Would stimulate increase in social interaction, adding to fabric of community, be varied and potentially smaller in unit size. Soeio-Economies · Would increase taxes generated in the Town. · Would necessitate costs to provide services to · Would stimulate establishment of new business in HALO areas, the HALO development. Summary Page 5 Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program Draft Supplemental Generic ElS Table 2 - SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES Resource Potential Adverse Impacts Mitigation Measures Geological Resources · Would result in clearing and grading in HALO · No significant unique features exist; clearing and grading will be localized to specific ureas for development resultin~ from density shift, project sites; site plan and subdivision review will minimize potential impacts. · Would use public water supply in HALO areas Public water will be supplied by the Suffolk County Water Authority in conformance with and not in sending area locations. · the approved water map; hamlet locations are identified as appropriate water supply areas. Water Res°urces · Would locally increase nih'ogan load in HALO · A model was used to ensure that the average density of new development will not exceed areas through transfer conforming to Article 6, Article 6 limitations based on 20,000 SF lots. with reduced load in sendin$ areas. · HALO areas generally are suitable for development due to the current land use pattern; · Would decrease natural vegelation and habitat current activity levels preclude the presence of unique or sensitive wildlife species; impacts Ecological Resources acreages in HALO areas for those parcels which would be localized to specific projects sites and site plan and subdivision review would be currently possess such characteristics. used to ensure that significant adverse impact will not occur. · Though traffic would increase in some areas, it is noted that density is transferred from T · Would generate traffic in HALO areas with other locations within the hamlet and many of these trips would exist on area roads; r~0n reduced traffic generation in sending areas; development in hamlets is encouraged for walkability shared parking and trips and use of Res~ HALOs are more walkable and promote use of public transportation where available; individual land use proposals will be subject to site alternative transportation, plan and subdivision review for site access geometry, sight distance and traffic impacts which can be mitignted once a problem is identified. · The proposal would implement the Towns intended land use pattern through zoning law ~ !Jae, Zoning & · No adverse impacts expected, measures in conformance with past land use plans and studies; land use can be monitored plans and adjustments made if found to be necessary. · Service providers would experience small incremental increases in demand over a long · Would result in need for community services and period of time and as a result, providers would have time to anticipate and serve Community Services infrastructure in HALO areas, with reduced community needs; it is noted that the TDR program anticipates equal density between demand in sending areas; HALOs can more transfer and receiving areas and would not increase density. ~ readily provide infrastructure. · Existing infrastructure is more prevalent in the hamlet areas and therefore better able to accommodate localized land use projects which redeem development credits. · Would result in more development in HALO · Communities participated in planning during the hamlet study and in the fall of 2006 when the Hamlet Density Model was discussed; a limit on development that will be monitored with resultant reduction of development in community Character areas, will be used to control density and assist in addressing community character; community sending areas; HALO development would be use will be subject to small incremental changes over time and as a result can accommodate varied and potentially smaller in unit size. reasonable use through equal density transfer. · The program anticipates equal density with no increase in what is permitted under full build · Would necessitate costs to provide services to the out Townwide; the TDR program is voluntary which is a mitigation in itself; the program Soeio-Economics provides options to landowners wishing to preserve agricultural use, and will be used to HALO development. supplement the PDR program; increased service demand will be addressed by utility providers in accordance with their charters, these providers will regain costs through rates. Summary Page 6 Southold Hamlet Development Model Dreft 6:8/24/2006 Revised 6/25/07 Proposal developed by: Mark Terry, Acting Head, Planning Department John Sepenoski, Data Processing Melissa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator Leslie Weisman, Southold Hamlet Stakeholder Chairperson GOALS 1. To create a planning model for Southold Hamlet that will prevent undesirable over- development and protect the hamlet's unique qualities, scale, and historic character. Development includes existing residential and commercial structures, new residential and commercial construction, new infrastructure, affordable units, green/open space, and TDR units (transfer of development rights from agricultural/open space within the Southold school district - the sending zone- to Southold's HALO- the receiving zone). 2. Make this planning model equitably transferable to other hamlets in Southold Town. CONCEPT 1. High Density Subdivision Planning This planning model calculates the TDR potential in Southold within the framework of desirable over-all development. Southold's HALO/Hamlet Center is conceptualized as a "high density" subdivision in which 70% development and 30% open/green space is proposed as the desirable total build out, as defined above. 2. Growth Control (TDR Cap) To contrel the grewth rete of the HALO build-out the group established a preposed cap on the number of potential TDR units available for transfer into the HALO zone linked to a set time period. The preposed cap is 30% of the total potential TDR units within the receiving zone. The time frame is arbitrery; there is no ability to actually forecast the pace of TDR development. An annual audit by the Town's Planning Department would maintain growth rate by recommending mo~'ifications as needed. 3. TDR and Open Space in the HALO When open space is preserved in the HALO and density reduction results, to maintain the target 70 percent development density, the related number of development rights extinguished will be added to the total TDR cap. For example, if the Town purchases for preservation a 20 acre parcel in the HALO zone on which 20 units could have been built by right, the TDR cap will be increased by 20 potential development units. 4. Affordable/VVorkforce Housing The group recommends that a minimum 10 % of all new residential units created within the HALO and Hamlet Center be affordable/workforce housing. These units would include rentals, new construction, and inclusionary zoning units. Adaptive reuse/renovation of existing structures for affordable units are encoureged, and will be considered over and above the 10 percent recommendation for new construction. The 10% figure would only include applications submitted after the effective start year of the Town's affordable housing legislation. Moreover, it is consistent with Chapter A-106 Subdivision of Land inclusionary affordable housing requirements. METHODOLOGY Yield of Southold's HALO was calculated using a standard subdivision model at 20,000 sq. ft. or .5 acre density. Streamlined ERSAP requirements were applied removing unbuildable lands (wetlands and community facilities/infrastructure, existing protected lands and lots less than .5 acre (nonconforming under HALO down zoning)) and density was calculated based upon the total HALO buildable acreage. Calculations will be conducted for each HALO for the following parameters: 1. Calculatin.q HALO Density Total acreage of the Southold HALO equals: XX Acres XX Acres Total available buildable acreage: All future applications for development within the Hamlet will be evaluated relative to achieving the overall development and preservation goals in this proposal. Each application will be approved, expedited, or denied based upon the Town's tracking and monitoring the status of the caps on TDR's, open space and affordable housing units throughout the Hamlet over time. Each development project can and will vary in scale and character, but total development/preservation goals for the Hamlet will remain the same. 2. Build Out Under Current ZoninR Total number of existing commercial and Residential units: XX Units Total potential new residential units by right: XX Units Total: XX Units 3. Residential Build Out (at .5 Acre Density) Total number of potential TDR units: XX Units Total number of units 30% CAP (see above): XX Units Total number of acres preserved in sending zone through TDR assuming a one to one transfer rate and preservation within the 2 acre zones: XX Acres Total number of affordable units (at '10% of potential new construction): XX Units 4. TOTAL NUMBER OF RESIDENTAIL AND COMMERCIAl UNITS AFTER 25 YEARS BUILD OUT XX Units When an affordable unit is created through new construction not requiring a TDR (for example through AHD rezoning) and the 10% total target for affordable units is thereby exceeded, then the TDR cap is reduced by the same number of units. This number reflects existing and potential residential units, and existing commercial properties, but does not include projections for new commercial development that might occur. ASSUMPTIONS UPON WHICH THIS PROPOSAL HAS BEEN DEVELOPEr) The TDR program is one unit from sending to one unit in receiving at market rate, assuming that a TDR program is established by the Town. The Town Board will continue to consider AHD zone changes as per existing code. AHD zone changes will not require TDR credits but may require sanitary flow credits as per existing code. Any down zoning other than AHD within the Hamlet HALO zone will require TDR. Of the 30% goal of open space preservation in the HALO, two-thirds will be for pubic use and enjoyment (parks, ball fields, trails etc) and the remaining will consist of visually open public and private space. The total potential number of by right units is assumed to be residential. When commercial development occurs in the Hamlet, the potential number of market rate housing units will diminish. Specific design standards will be developed to create "mini-master plans" for each of the hamlets that incorporate the recommendations in the respective Hamlet Stakeholder Committee Reports. The intent is to ensure that any development that does occur will be compatible with the specific qualities, scale, character, and uniqueness of each hamlet. PHASE I1: IMPLEMENTATION OF PROPOSAL: Evaluate existing subdivision and zoning codes to determine any necessary changes/legislation 75-2-8 Cichanowicz, N & S 16.91 4100 Ag 4000 120 Trust 75-6-6.1 Little Bear Realty Inc 23.82 7100 105W 75-6-11 Anderson,Bradley 28.53 7800 Ag 6700 130 75-7-2 Anderson,Bradley 20.60 16200 Ag 4800 130 75-7-6.1 Pearson, Nancy 16.98 20200 Ag 1300 120W STAR 790 83-1-32.3 Duck Pond Rd Assoc 30.77 13300 Ag 7100 120 83-2-16 McBride, Richard & 30.80 17100 Ag 7500 120 James 84-1-11 Demchak, Michael 27.00 11700 Ag 6400 120 84-1-13 Demchak, Michael 12.00 3000 Ag 2800 120 84-1-25.2 Grim, Donald 7.47 5600 321 84-2-3.3 WJK LLP 57.00 19100 Ag 12900 120W 85-1-3 Hamilton Coastal 8.37 5800 120 Plantings 85-1-9 Damianos, Herodotus 12.47 3100 Ag 3000 152 85-1-10 Damianos, Herodotus 17.28 4300 Ag 4200 152 85-2-7 VanBourgondien CJ 33.68 38400 Ag 7300 170 Inc 85-2-9.2 Damianos, Herodotus 69.99 23400 Ag 16800 152 85-2-14 Pindar Associates 36.00 29500 Ag 7800 120 85-2-15 Pindar Vineyards 36.00 19400 Ag 8600 120 85-2-16 Otto Keil Florists 33.00 14700 Ag 7600 120 85-3-8 Krupski, Albert Sr 21.73 10500 Ag 4200 120 STAR 1480 86-1-10.9 : Zip Peconic Wells 32.83 8200 Ag 7300 120 86-1-15 Damianos, Herodotus 28.37 7200 Ag 7000 152 94-3-2 Menger, Jorg 36.95 17700 Ag 7800 120W STAR 790 94-3-4.1 Lowerre Partners LP 10.09 18800 Ag 1000 250W 95-1-1.1 Lowerre Partners LP 32.35 11500 120W 95-1-2 Little Bear Realty 33.94 15900 Ag 7300 120W 95-1-3.1 Little Bear Realty 45.21 16600 Ag 10100 120W 95-1-7.2 Woodhaven Manor 31.64 12400 Ag 7400 120W Realty 95-1-8.3 Woodhaven Manor 54.38 30000 Ag 11900 120W Realty 95-4-3.1 Kauneckas, Louise 25.14 6300 Ag 6200 120 95-4-11 Krupski, John 11.56 2900 Ag 2800 120 96-2-7 RHX Corp 35.67 9800 Ag 8600 120 96-2-10 Macari Associates 26.50 14300 120 96-3-7.3 Glover, Leander Jr 11.57 2900 Ag 2800 120 96-3-9 PHC Realty 17.69 18600 Ag 4300 170 Bldg 5100 96-4-4.3 Rose's Vineyard 15.04 15700 Ag 3200 120 97-1-1 Dank, Leonard 24.43 19100 Ag 5700 120 STAR 1480 97-2-23 Viviano, Cheryl 17.50 9900 Ag 2500 120W Bldg 2000 97-5-2.1 Glover, Leander Jr 10.00 10200 Ag 2300 120 100-2-3.2 Krupski, Eugene 55.99 24800 Ag 13000 120 100-2-4 Robinson, John 35.00 12400 Ag 8400 120 100-3-12 Kmpski Family 23.06 10800 Ag 5400 120 100-4-4 Sidor, Martin & Ors 62.00 21900 , Ag 15000 120 101-1-4.1 L & R Vineyards 14.00 3500 120 101-I-4.3 Tuthill, Stanley 8.38 5600 STAR 1480 120 101-1-5.2 L & R Vineyards 95.01 29900 152 101-1-8.2 Wickham, Abagail 24.00 4500 Ag 1000 120 Trustee 101-1-14.7 Schmoupy Juntunen 8.48 15700 Ag 2100 120 LLC 101-2-3.1 Tuthill, John 9.10 2300 Ag 2300 120 101-2-5 Tuthill, John 10.26 2600 Ag 2500 120 101-2-6 Wickham, Agagail 16.50 3500 Ag 2000 120 Trustee 102-1-5.2 Rose's Vineyard 17.55 6200 Ag 4000 120 102-2-16 Edson, Grace 22.50 19000 Ag 4800 120 102-4-6.2 Simon, Howard 7.80 11700 250 102-6-20.2 Wickhams Fruit Farm 33.28 22600 Ag 7500 151W 103-1-19.3 Little Bear Realty 26.21 8200 Ag 6500 120 103-1-19.12 Lav-Cor Agricultural 27.03 ! 22600 Ag 5200 120 106-9-2.3 Cooper, David 25.86 8600 Ag 6300 120 107-10-10.1 Girards, Carol 10.10 14600 Ag 2300 120 STAR 790 108-2-7.1 Steele, David 18.15 11000 Ag4300 120 Vets 936 STAR 790 108-3-1 Tuthill, John 17.25 8400 Ag 4200 130 Vets 950 108-3-5.44 Shipman, Joseph 9.43 9300 Ag 2200 170 108-3-6.2 Croon, June 11.32 10300 STAR 790 240 108-4-1.1 Pindar Vineyards 23.80 11100 120 109-1-8.7 Pellegrini Holdings 35.92 28700 Ag 7400 120 109-1-10.1 Carnation Properties 53.54 23200 120 109-1-11 Wickham, William 68.68 25000 Ag 16500 120 109-5-23.3 ~ Wickham, Thomas & 29.60 700 Ag 700 323W Ors 110-8-2 Wickham, Thomas & 14.50 500 Ag 500 31 lW Ors 113-7-2.5 Lindsay, William Jr 8.89 7400 Ag 2000 210 113-7-2.6 Hinderliter,Catherine 8.54 7200 120 115-4-8.6 Marratooka Props LLC 32.26 17000 Ag 8000 120 115-7-13.2 Koehler, Frederick 16.78 4200 Ag 4100 170 115-9-4 Norris, Susan 45.33 82500 STAR 790 250W 115-10-1 Ruland Family LLC 15.21 6800 Ag 3500 120W 116-1-10 Elak, John Jr 7.80 2000 Ag 2000 120 120-1-3 Harbes, Edward 13.51 15300 Ag 3000 120 STAR 1480 120-1-4 Harbes FarmMattituck 7.50 4550 Ag2100 120 120-3-2 MDH LLC 10.80 2700 Ag 2700 120 120-3-11.8 DiVello, Patricia 10.26 2600 Ag 2600 120 120-3-11.9 KKP LLC 10.00 2500 Ag 2500 120 120-3-11.10 Harbes, May 13.95 3700 Ag 3400 120 120-3-11.11 P & E LLC : 22.17 5500 Ag 5400 120 121-3-7.4 Peconic Homes Corp 11.31 22700 Ag 3100 120 Gmhse 1700 122-7-8.8 Mega Styl LLC 47.80 23200 Ag 2700 117 Bldg 11200 125-2-2.2 Lebkuecher, Joseph III 33.00 27900 Ag3200 120 125-3-11 Hommel, Jeanette 11.20 15000 Ag 2400 120 STAR 1480 127-1-1 Lebkuecher, Joseph Jr i 49.41 13300 Ag 9800 120 127.-2-2.1 TPC - LLC 14.91 47500 Bldg 24200 120 127.-3-7 Half Hollow Nursery 39.99 10000 Ag 9800 120 Realty 127-3-11 Half Hollow Nursery 37.00 9300 Ag 9100 120 Realty 127-3-12 Half Hollow Nursery 37.00 9300 Ag 9100 120 Realty 129-1-1 Half Hollow Nursery 55.96 16000 Ag 15500 120 Realty Tax Map # Owner Acreage Assessment Exemptions Cls Code 13-2-8.2 Vallo, Benjamin 22.9 13300 105 W 17-6-14.2 Tuthill, John Fam Part 35.34 4400 Ag 2900 971W 18-3-30.3 North Brown LLC 28.64 8400 Ag 2100 312W 18-4-7.1 Droskoski, Anna 21.25 5300 Ag 5200 120 18-6-4.1 Latham, James 11.35 5500 Ag 3400 120 18-6-5 Stevenson, Thomas & 10.25 10100 STAR 790 241 Ors 18-6-17.3 South Brown LLC 26.68 3300 Ag 3200 105 18-6-19.3 The Calverton Group 27.64 7700 Ag 7500 105 19-1-8.4 Terry, Frederick 34.60 9100 Ag 8100 130 20-3-4.1 Gillispie, Hope 15.91 1700 Ag 1600 130W 27-1-2 Guadagno, Patrick 10.00 2500 105 27-1-3 Martocello, Steven 13.30 3300 105 27-4-10.4 Latham, Elizabeth 7.69 1500 120 50-5-1 Lind, George 8.16 6500 170 51-6-3.8 Hasel, Mary 8.65 2200 105 52-5-60.2 Yaxa, Dean 13.08 10500 Ag 3000 240W STAR 790 Vet 936 54-3-24.1 Sepenoski, Genevieve 53.90 15100 Ag 10800 130 54-7-21.1 Conway, Julia 34.00 13400 Ag 8100 130 Age 2650, 1855 STAR 1480 55-1-5.1 Grigonis, Antone Jr 10.14 2500 Ag 2400 105 55-1-9 New Suffolk Land Co 16.00 4000 105 55-2-10.1 Moffat-Wolfe, 25.30 8000 130 Maureen & Ors 55-3-6.1 Moffat-Wolfe, 36.34 11100 105W Maureen & Ors 56-5-1.3 Baiz, Christian III 22.20 32400 Ag 4200 250W STAR 790 59-3-27 Vitti, Irene 20.76 5200 Ag 5100 105 59-3-28.5 Damianos, Herodotus 32.11 8000 Ag 7900 130 59-10-1 Threshold Blue 11.50 7300 Ag 2500 170 68-4-18 Sepenoski, Julia 39.00 13800 Ag 8700 130 69-4-11 Doroski, Stephen 9.30 4900 Ag 2700 130 74-1-38 Damianos, Herodotus 45.00 11200 Ag 8600 105 74-1-42.7 Damianos, Herodotus 69.64 25100 120W & Ors 74-4-3.2 Damianos, Herodotus 21.63 5400 Ag 5300 152 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS PROGRAM PLANNING REPORT TO THE TOWN BOARD JUNE 25, 2007 1.0 Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report Town of Southold TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS PROGRAM Planning Report to the Town Board EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION CONTENTS 2.0 PROGRAM FOUNDATION PAGE 2.1 Components of a Successful TDR Program 2.2 Public Need 2.3 Town Objectives 2.4 Background and History of Town TDR and Related Programs 3.0 PROGRAM OVERVIEW AND GENERAL PARAMETERS 7 7 10 10 11 4.0 PROGRAM ELEMENTS 13 4.1 Sending Zones 4.2 Receiving Zones 4.3 Interrelationship of Land Preservation Programs and Tools 4.4 Density Limitations in the Receiving Zones 4.5 Program Mechanics Summary 5.0 CONCLUSION 14 14 18 21 23 28 31 Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report ATTACHMENTS Attachment A Attachment B-I Attachment B-2 Attachment B-3 Attachment C Attachment D Attachment E Attachment F Attachment G Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Background Sending Area Map List of Sending Zone Parcels Receiving Area Maps and Potential PDD Parcels Sample R-20 Local Law Land Preservation Flow Chart SCDHS General Guidance Memorandum #17 SCDHS Design Flow Factors Hamlet Development Model Table 3-1 Table 4-1 Table 4-2 Table 4-3 Tables School Districts and Hamlets Sending Area Credits by School District Potential Receiving Credits Sending Credits vs. Receiving Credits 13 17 26 26 Page ii Town of Southold TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS PROGRAM Planning Report to the Town Board Draft 6-25-07 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This document provides a TDR Planning Report to the Town Board of the Town of Southold for consideration in pursuing a Transfer of Development Rights program. The report was prepared by Nelson, Pope & Voorhis, LLC (NP&V) in coordination with a team of Town representatives including planning, data processing, land preservation and legal staff. The team sought to prepare a simple, understandable and implementable TDR program for consideration by the Town Board. After seeking input from the Town Board on various aspects of a program, the team endeavored to work through complex issues and consider the TDR program in relation to other land preservation programs and planning goals of the Town. This report outlines the team recommendations for a program, and provides discussion of the rational for these recommendations. The Town Board will ultimately determine the nature of a TDR program, so at this time, this report is intended to provide a basis for discussion, analysis under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) through a Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GELS) and to assist in identifying alternatives to the recommendations as contained herein. The program outlines the components ora successful TDR program, which includes: 1. Encouraging TDR Sales 2. Selecting Receiving Sites 3. Facilitating the Use of TDRs, and 4. Building Public Support Through further Board consideration, hearings and the ElS process, it is the hope of the team that public support can be garnered for a meaningful TDR program. This program is voluntary, and represents an additional tool which the Town can use for preservation with corresponding shift in density to appropriate locations. In addition, the program contemplates that one sending credit will equal one development unit in a receiving area. The program considers farmland as a primary candidate for sending areas. This is because farmland has residual value after transfer of development rights, allowing such land to remain in productive use to the benefit of the owner. In addition, wooded areas, environmentally sensitive areas and other forms of open space are prime candidates for the use of outright fee title acquisition, as these lands must be managed and maintained for passive open space and/or recreation. Since the use of TDR to preserve some farmland does not require expenditure of public funds, it allows the dollars allocated for Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) and fee title acquisition to be leveraged more effectively for farmland and open space preservation. Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report The Town conducted the Hamlet Study in 2005, and has recently taken initiatives to establish Hamlet Locus (HALO) boundaries for the purpose of identifying those areas of the Town which represent hamlet centers. Through many past planning studies, the hamlet centers have been thought of as areas where additional properly planned development could be sustained in a manner that promotes good planning. This TDR Planning Study reinforces this planning concept by identifying the HALO's as receiving areas for the purpose of shifting density from lhrmland to the hamlet centers. The form that development takes within the HALO areas is a critical aspect of designing the TDR program. For the purpose of this program, it was determined that a simple and easy way to implement the initial program would involve only redemption of credits for the purpose of creating residential dwelling units, not for increase in commercial density. Zoning districts within the hamlets which are identified for receiving TDR credits include the B, HB, LB, RO, AHD, HD, R-40, R-80 and A-C zones. Through discussions and research, it was determined that there were a limited number of ways that credits could be redeemed and density could be realized within the HALO's. The form that increased density could take includes the following: · Single Family Homes · Two-Family Homes · Multiple Family Dwellings · Detached Accessory Dwelling Units, and · Mixed use or flexible zoning developments under potential future Planned Development District These forms of TDR credit redemption would be provided for through the TDR local law that would specify the parameters for development as noted above. The identification of forms of credit redemption provides a means to visualize and understand the type of development that would result in the HALO's as a result of the TDR program. Part of the benefit of the program is the creation of options for various forms of development that would result in use of credits in a manner that does not overburden the HALO's and does not create any one type of new development. This issue identified the need for a limit to the amount of increased density which would occur in the HALO areas. Consideration was also given to Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS) density requirements. In 2006 a team was formed through the Town's Planning and Zoning Committee to create a Hamlet Development Model that would determine the potential TDR credits that could be placed in the HALO's based on a 20,000 square foot (SF) lot size. The concept and methodology of the Hamlet Development Model is recommended as a basis for establishing limitations on the amount of development which can occur within each hamlet. The total acreage of each HALO was determined, then reduced by removing unbuildable lands (wetlands and community facilities/infrastructure), existing protected lands and lots less than 20,000 SF, and density was then calculated based on the resultant total buildable acreage in the HALO. A total number of potential TDR units was computed for each HALO area. For the purpose of this study, and consistent with the Hamlet Development Model meetings that were conducted in 2006, it is Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report recommended that several additional factors related to potential over-development be considered. Each hamlet was conceptualized as including both development and open space at a ratio of 70 percent developed area to 30 percent open space. A cap of 30 percent of the total was applied as a value that would be monitored and potentially revised over time as HALO development is realized. In comparing the number of available sending credits, to the number of potential receiving credits, it is evident that there are more sending credits than receiving credits. IfTDR were the only mechanism for land preservation, there would be concern that land preservation goals would not be achieved; however, the Sending Zone TDR's will be eligible for PDR and other preservation methods. The large number of available Sending Zone TDR's indicates that there would be a continuing need for ['DR as well as Conservation Subdivisions. The TDR program will supplement the public expenditures associated with PDR and fee title acquisition of open space lands, by providing a means whereby private landowners, developers and investors can acquire development rights for the purpose of increasing density in connection with parcels in the HALO areas. The combination of these programs gives the Town multiple land use tools to achieve land preservation goals. As development in the HALO's continues, the Town may wish to review the cap and ultimately achieve density increases at a level between the recommended 30 percent cap and the total potential receiving zone credits. An annual audit by the Town's Planning Department would maintain growth rate by recommending modifications as needed. The 20,000 SF development model is a conceptual residential density scenario. Consideration could be given to expanding the program in the future to include other methods to increase commercial density in the hamlets through TDR credit redemption, in a manner that would not adversely impact the character of these areas. This must be balanced with SCSC Article 6 compliance, parking requirements and design guidelines. The use of PDD's remains a recommendation to assist in the redemption of TDR credits. This technique has been used successfully in other Long Island Towns, and provides a means to achieve public benefits which could include use TDR's, in connection with creative, flexible and compatible development projects. The Hamlet Development Model provides residents with the assurance that reasonable density limits will be established in their communities. From a land use perspective, the overriding benefit of TDR is the preservation of land where development is inappropriate (such as agricultural areas in the Town of Southold), with a resultant increase in density in the hamlets. Hamlets, and their surrounding HALO areas, have been identified and mapped by the Town in recognition of the fact that these areas are appropriate for additional development given the following land use considerations: · Infrastructure such as roads, utilities and water supply currently exist. · Residential density proximate to the hamlets strengthens the business environment. Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report · Residential density in the HALO's provides opportunity for alternative transportation such as walking and bicycle travel. · Use of TDR's in the HALO's may promote beneficial investment and redevelopment. · Use of TDR's in the HALO's will provide alternative forms of housing to single family detached development, thus increasing housing stock providing potentially more affordable housing of various types. As a result, the author's of this report believe that transfer of density to the HALO's in accordance with the Hamlet Development Model and the considerations noted above, is a responsible form of development which allows the Town to achieve both significant land preservation goals while also preserving the scale and uniqueness of each of the hamlets, provided that appropriate design standards and guidelines are established, as per the recommendation in the Hamlet Development Model. In conclusion, the TDR program is only expected to address a portion of the potential available credits. The Town of Southold continues to pursue other land preservation programs and tools listed as follows: · FeeTitle Land Pumhase · Pumhase of Development Rights · Conservation Subdivision · Standard Subdivision This TDR Planning Report is a draft report prepared by NP&V in coordination with Town professionals that will assist in implementing the program on an ongoing basis. This report is submitted to the Town Board for the purpose of identifying a simple and effective TDR program which considers the unique aspects of the Town of Southold, ensures compliance with SCDHS density requirements, and factors in other related programs to ensure program compatibility to achieve the planning and preservation goals of the Town. It is requested that the Town Board receive this report for the purpose of conducting the SEQRA process through preparation of a GEIS. This will ensure that the potential environmental impacts of the program are addressed, and will provide a forum for public input and consensus building. Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report Town of Southold TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS PROGRAM Planning Report to the Town Board Drall 6-25-07 1.0 INTRODUCTION The Town of Southold is seeking to implement a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program for the purpose of enhancing the range of tools available for land preservation and to provide incentives for appropriate growth in the hamlets. The Town Board of the Town of Southold is pro-actively involved in advancing this initiative. As a means of defining a program that recognizes the complexities of a TDR program in Southold, the Town Board retained an environmental planning consulting firm to coordinate efforts with a team of Town representatives. The program as recommended by the team is outlined in this Planning Report to the Town Board, and is intended to provide a base framework for environmental impact evaluation [in the form of a Supplement to the prior Generic Environmental Impact Statement (SGEIS) for the Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy (CIS)] and to facilitate drafting of a proposed Local Law to implement the Program. The program contained herein provides recommendations only, based on the judgment of the team members. The team was designed to include Town representatives who recognize and appreciate the inter-relationships among land preservation programs, data management, smart growth planning principles, and the planning and legal process, and would be expected to continue in a capacity that will assist in implementing the program once some form of legislation is adopted. The rationale associated with various recommendations is discussed relative to various program elements, in order to identify various complexities and the logic used to resolve issues. Those issues which still remain can be identified and studied as alternatives in the Supplemental GElS process. While recommendations and guidance are provided through this report, final decisions are to be made by the Town Board, and flexibility exists in outlining and implementing program elements as directed by the Board. Team participants are listed as follows: Mark Terry, Town Principal Planner and Project Manager John Sepenoski, Town Data Processing Patricia Finnegan, Esq., Town Attorney Melissa Spiro, Town Land Preservation Coordinator Leslie Weisman, Me~nber Southold Town ZBA & Chair of Southold Hamlet Stakeholder Committee Charles Voorhis, CEP, AICP, Nelson, Pope & Voorhis, Consultant The team met on a regular basis between January and May of 2007; periodic involvement of Town Board members provided direction and policy guidance during the course of this study. Other Town staff and resources of Nelson, Pope & Voorhis, LLC (NP&V), consultant to the Town, were used in the preparation of this study. This report constitutes the study's findings and team recommendations resulting from these efforts. Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report The purpose of this report is to define the elements of a Town of Southold TDR Program. It should be noted that, through the TDR Program, the Town seeks to provide an additional mechanism for the preservation of farmland, without expenditure of public funds. At present, the Town has successful farmland and open space preservation programs underway through the Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) program and fee title acquisition of land. In addition, the Conservation Subdivision program provides a means to reduce density and maximize open space preservation. The Town seeks to continue these programs, but seeks to provide a means to expand programs which provide Ibr land preservation in those areas of the Town which warrant such preservation, and to leverage funds through alternative preservation tools that do not require public expenditures. The proposed TDR program is viewed as a means of accomplishing this goal. Existing preservation programs primarily involve purchase of fee title land or purchase of development rights which result in the permanent extinguishment of development rights of a given parcel or part ora parcel of land. The TDR Program is recognized as a program that shifts development (hereafter, referred to as a more general term of "density") from the rural areas of the Town, where density is not desired, to the hamlets where an increase in density is viewed as appropriate. The balance between preservation, density shift and ability of the hamlet areas to absorb density while maintaining the character and qualities valuable to the residents of Southold will be examined in this study as key elements of the overall program. Once the Town Board approves this document for the purpose of commencing review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), a Draft Supplement to the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for the Town of Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy will be prepared. This will provide an opportunity for further review by the Town Board, the public and involved agencies. Issues which warrant study of alternatives to the program or elements of the program can be identified and examined in the Alternatives section of the DSGEIS. The DSGEIS will be the subject of a public hearing and comment period, and all substantive comments on the DSGEIS will be addressed in a Final SGEIS. The Final SGEIS may support the TDR program, or changes to the program may occur if necessary to adequately respond to comments. After completion ora FSGEIS, a 10-day public consideration period must pass, after which the Town may issue a Statement of Findings which would form the basis for a decision on the TDR program. In addition to compliance with SEQRA, completion of this process ensures that involved agencies, parties of interest and the public have an opportunity to comment on and provide input into the TDR program, and further ensures that the Town Board has the benefit of this input in the decision-making process. Page 6 Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report 2.0 PROGRAM FOUNDATION The Town of Southold has a long history of preserving its rural heritage and character through sound land use planning. Since early 2005, the Town Board has had a limited TDR ordinance (Chapter 117), to use as an additional tool in achieving affordable housing goals in tandem with land preservation eftbrts. The TDR mechanism was recommended for widespread use in the Town CIS of 2003 and the Town Hamlet Study of 2005. Additional insight regarding the existing Town TDR law and the prior findings of the Town CIS are contained in subsections of Section 2.0. It is noteworthy that the Town CIS included TDR as an implementation mechanism number 12, and the CIS was the subject of a Generic Environmental Impact Statement. The Findings of the CIS recognized TDR as a valuable land preservation/density relocation mechanism subject to further definition of the program. This TDR Program Planning Report and any subsequent SEQRA review builds upon the prior Town CIS recognition of the environmental and social value of TDR in the Town of Southold. In this proposed TDR Program, the Town seeks to make use of a land use tool whereby sites in established rural areas of the Town ("sending areas"), would shift density to target hamlet parcels within the respective hamlet HALO zones where appropriate infrastructure, infill potential, reuse potential, public services and/or lack of environmental constraints are present ("receiving areas"). The following sections present additional information on the TDR concept, the Town's need for such a program, the Town-wide objectives of preservation, and the history of the Town's efforts to preserve land through TDR. 2.1 Components of Successful TDR Programs Transfer of Development Rights is defined in the New York State Town Law as "...the process by which development rights' are transferred from one lot, parcel, or area of land in a sending district to another lot, parcel, or area of land in one or more receiving districts." This planning tool is used to protect land where development is not desired by shifting density to more appropriate areas. TDR is a well-established, progressive land use tool that has been utilized nationwide in order to preserve one or more significant environmental characteristics of land areas for the benefit of an entire community, while at the same time protecting the value of landowners' property by enabling the development potential of that land to be realized elsewhere in the community, in a location more appropriate for development. A TDR program permits the transfer of density, which would retain landowners' equity in their land. Transferred development credits can be marketed privately or supported through municipal measures to facilitate the program. The Town can determine in advance how transferred credits or density may be used. For instance, transferred credits can be targeted for use as residential units in hamlet areas where density and planned growth is appropriate and sustainable. In order Page 7 Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report for a TDR program to work, the Town must identify sending and receiving areas for reduction and corresponding increase in development. A TDR program must be designed with a number of common elements in order to be successful in achieving the comprehensive planning goals it is intended to achieve. The Program should be conceived and implemented through cooperative eflbrts between local and regional governments and planners, civic and environmental groups and other stakeholders. The major part of a successful program is to ensure that an adequate, achievable or attractive incentive package exists, in order to draw landowner and developer interest. An analysis of other TDR programs in the U.S. identified the following factors that were more likely to contribute to a successful program. Southold Town has already implemented some of these recommendations which will be reviewed in the next section of this report: 1. Encouraging TDR Sales Successful TDR programs encourage TDR sales by reducing the development potential of the sending sites through zoning incentives, favorable alternatives to development, restrictions, environmental regulations, farmland protection measures, and ordinances that require adequate public facilities before development can occur. Just as sending site owners need to be encouraged to sell their development rights, receiving site developers must be motivated to buy TDRs. Developers will only buy TDRs if they can make a greater profit from a project that uses TDRs. A most important concept is that there must be sufficient incentive to encourage a seller to sell, and a buyer must be encouraged to buy. 2. Selecting Receiving Sites One approach is for the community to consider designating village or hamlet areas where more concentrated development will be encouraged. TDRs can then be used to obtain the higher densities that are possible in these select areas. 3. Facilitating Use of TDRs After appropriate stakeholder involvement and adoption of appropriate legislation subject to public disclosure, hearings and review processes, most communities approve TDRs administratively, without public hearings or discretionary decisions. This approach can increase the use of TDRs since it gives developers greater certainty over the cost, timing, and approval of their projects. Many communities also facilitate transfers by treating TDRs as a commodity, available for sale to anyone at any time. In addition, some programs feature a "TDR bank" which serves as a buyer and seller of TDRs when private transactions become too time consuming. Finally, the most successful TDR programs provide ongoing information to the general public, as well as staff support and instructional materials to assist TDR buyers and sellers. 4. Building Public Support A successful TDR program will mean more intense development at receiving sites. The community as a whole needs to understand and accept that this will occur. Community-wide, comprehensive planning efforts are important in developing TDR programs. In the context of a comprehensive plan, Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Repor~ the public is encouraged to identify areas where more intense development would be appropriate (i.e., the receiving areas) as well as areas that need to be preserved (i.e., the sending areas). Not surprisingly, the most successful TDR programs are in communities that specifically designed their comprehensive plans to be implemented through TDR. An effective TDR program can add optimism to the planning process by offering a way for compensation to be provided to property owners without the use of tax dollars. This optimism can encourage the public to establish stronger land use protection goals. Thus, an adequate incentive may not be a sufficient feature for a TDR program to be successful, but it is a necessary one. Such an incentive could include provision for an increased density for transferred yield, so that an increased number of credits are generated for a landowner, thereby increasing the potential return on investment. Such an increase in development potential must he carefully considered by each jurisdiction contemplating TDR so that transferred density reduces impacts through reduced unit size and appropriate siting to ensure sustainable development in areas where infrastructure and the land use pattern is capable of accommodating growth. In addition, the unit types realized in a receiving zone may be smaller and have less impact than if the same unit were developed in the sending area. Finally, it is common for only a small number of credits to be located at a particular receiving site, as there are other physical and environmental factors such as parking and sanitary capacity to be considered. This is a unique consideration in the Town of Southold, and it is possible that, given water resource limitations, receiving area constraints and a unique real estate market, a density neutral transfer may have a high probability of success. This will be examined further in this report and the Supplemental GElS for the Town of Southold TDR program. It is noted that the Town of Southold has made great progress in considering the key elements of a successful TDR program. The following steps have been taken to date, that will facilitate a successful program in the Town of Southold: · The Town Board has long envisioned the concept of increased development density in hamlets and substantially decreased development with as much preservation of existing farm use as can be achieved in the rural areas of the Town outside of the hamlets, thus identifying both sending and receiving sites. · The Town Board conducted prior studies and incorporated TDR into the planning documents (including the Town-wide CIS) as a desirable tool, thus incorporating the concept into its comprehensive plan. · The Town has built community support by assembling stakeholders and conducting the 2005 Hamlet Study to determine the desires and concerns of local residents and identify hamlet centers and surrounding HALO boundaries (receiving sites), resulting in direction on a community-by- community basis to build community support. · The Town and the Suflblk County Water Authority have sought to manage limited groundwater resources, in a manner that locates water supply infrastructure in already developed areas to serve existing populations, as well as to serve water quality impaired areas. This necessitates reduced expansion of water supply to rural areas, in order to maintain a balance of growth potential due to limited water resources, aquifer management and public health safety in coordination. Initiatives include the Water Supply Management & Water Protection Strategy, and adoption of an official Water Map (of water supply extension areas) in 2000 and amended in 2007. Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report The challenges that lie ahead include the following: · Defining sending and receiving sites, particularly in view of the myriad of preservation programs currently in use, and the desire to continue a policy of density reduction through purchase of development rights. · Determining the land use mechanisms for redemption of credits and realization of transferred development in the HALO's. · Providing adequate economic incentives to facilitate transfers, and ensuring a proper balance of supply and demand. · Ensuring a margin of program success in consideration of the Suftblk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS) policy on density transfer. The remainder of this document will focus on addressing these issues and providing a base framework for environmental impact evaluation and to facilitate drafting of a proposed Local Law to implement the Program. This will enable the Town to advance the most appropriate program to the public review forum to garner further public support and input that will lead to a final program. 2.2 Public Need As discussed above, the Town of Southold, through the action of its Town Board, is seeking to provide for the preservation of its significant environmental and agricultural resources, so that those characteristics of the Town that give it its rural aesthetics and economy are protected. The proposed action would utilize an existing land preservation tool of the Town Code, in combination with the hamlet receiving areas outlined in the HALO Study, to enhance the Board's ability to preserve land while promoting sustainable hamlet development. 2.3 Town Objectives The overall program is intended to encourage development in appropriate areas and protect lands with rural qualities that add to the Town's character, historic context and economic base, and promote appropriate development on parcels where such development can be sustained. The following factors were considered by the Town Board in formulating the current proposed TDR program. · The Town Board has in the past prepared GEIS's that evaluate the effects of proposed laws that seek to protect identified valued natural resources within the Town. · The Town Board acknowledges that agricultural and other rural lands are a significant resource in the Town, in terms of both economics and aesthetics and provides for an important sector of the Town's economic base, while maintaining the open, rural atmosphere. · As a result of the Town's efforts, a number of mechanisms are being used, that provide opportunities and alternatives to land development that arc intended to provide an increased level of land preservation. Page 10 Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report The proposed TDR program is expected to provide the following public benefits: · Protect critical resources associated with sending parcels including rural character, farm and agricultural land use to promote land preservation and environmental protection. · Provide an increase in the amount of diverse housing stock for a variety of income levels. · Reduce suburban sprawl and promote "smart growth" development principals including strengthening of hamlets and businesses, walkable communities, sustainable growth, mixed-use development, improvements to and use of existing infrastructure, controlled in-fill development, reduction in vehicle trip ends, and increase in inter-modal transportation opportunities. · Reduce infrastructure needs as a result of encouraging controlled development in appropriate use areas. · Promote beneficial design guidelines and standards within the hamlets including neo-traditional development in appropriate areas, maintenance of natural vegetation, minimization of fertilizer application, buffers and setbacks. · Promote the long-term planning goals of the Town by utilizing TDR to protect critical and valuable resources while helping to address the housing and social needs of the Town. In summary, the proposed TDR program is a furtherance of the Town's comprehensive planning efforts to achieve its goals of protecting valuable environmental and cultural resources, providing diversified housing to meet Town needs, managing limited resources, facilitating appropriate infrastructure in hamlet areas and promoting appropriate development consistent with good design and planning principles. 2.4 Background and History of Town TDR and Related Programs Use of the TDR concept as a way to better control the rate and pattern of growth in the Town (as well as to minimize potential adverse land use impacts) had been recommended in the Town CIS Study of 2003. The Town CIS provided additional guidance regarding TDR as related to County sanitary regulations and sound planning. The basic elements of the program were defined for the purpose of analyzing a variety of land use, appropriate development and land preservation tools. The program was recognized as beneficial in achieving Town goals, and laid the groundwork for recognition of HALO areas, strengthening of hamlet centers and preservation of rural areas of the Town. The Town CIS TDR component recognized a need to comply SCDHS sanitary density restrictions and ensuring that the infrastructure of hamlet centers and HALO areas were not over burdened. Sending areas were discussed broadly as involving lands worthy of protection, subject to further review. The following quote from the Town CIS provides a general sense of the program concept. Because of Southold's unique environmental constraints, a TDR program would have to discourage/eliminate inappropriate development on sensitive and important lands and promote appropriate development on parcels where such development can be sustained. The Generic ElS for the Town CIS included an assessment of potential impacts related to TDR which is valuable to consider in the context of updating and refining this program. Both beneficial and potential adverse impacts were considered. The Town CIS recognized the need to balance preservation with land values and to ensure that affordable housing needs are also Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report addressed. The 2003 report was a broad-based planning study and implementation of many of the tools identified in that report have been accomplished, including a number of provisions to expand aftbrdable housing programs in the Town of Southold. Attachment A provides a summary of the Town CIS TDR component. It is recognized that specific designation of sending and receiving areas had not been accomplished in the 2003 Town CIS. As a result, refinement of the elements of the Town TDR program is accomplished in this report. The Town CIS also identified Planned Development Districts (PDDs) as a means of promoting flexible zoning that would result in public benefits. The basis for a PDD local law was outlined in the Town C1S, studied in the Generic ElS and is under ongoing consideration by the Town Board. This TDR Program Report recognizes PDD legislation as a tool which can assist in the use of TDR credits, as did the Town CIS of 2003. Included in Attachment A is a summary of the considerations for a PDD local law as they were outlined in the Town CIS. Subsequent to the Town CIS, Southold placed an initial TDR local law on the books. Chapter 117 of the Southold Town Code was enacted in March 2005, to strictly regulate the use of TDR in shifting development from areas where it is not desirable ("sending areas") to areas where the Town considers growth to be appropriate and desirable ("receiving areas"). The Purpose and Intent section of that ordinance states: As set fi)rrb in numerous comprehensive planning documents, the Town's goals include the preservation of open space, agricultural lands and recreational landscapes; preservation of the rural, cultural and historic character of the hamlets and surrounding countryside; preservation of the natural environment and prevention of further deterioration of resources; preservation and promotion of a broad range of housing and business opportunities to support a socioeconomically diverse community; and increased transportation efficiency. To achieve these goals, it is the intent and purpose of this chapter to provide for the transfer of sanitary flow credits, and thereby transfer development potential from areas designated for preservation to areas designated as more appropriate for higher-density residential development. Unless expressly permitted herein, the transfer of development potential may not occur in the Town of Southold. The basic purpose of Chapter 117 is to preserve land through Town purchase of development rights, capture the sanitary development credits for preserved land and use those credits to provide affordable housing. The Town seeks to expand this program to enable private investment to obtain TDR credits, and to use those credits for development and re-development in hamlet areas. For background, Chapter 117 defines a "sanitary flow credit" as the equivalent to a right to develop a single-family residential parcel with an individual on-site sewerage system, or its nonresidential wastewater flow equivalent. The ordinance created a Town TDR Bank, through which development rights are to be received, retained and sold by the Town Board for the purpose of providing affordable housing. Revenues generated by the sale of development rights are deposited into a Town Community Preservation Fund, for the purchase of additional lands or development rights, in accordance with the Town land preservation goals noted above. It is important to note that, as part of this legislation, the Town Board designated all lands in the Town not defined as a Receiving District, as a Sending District, to maximize the potential for Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report transfer of development into those Receiving Districts. Receiving Districts are defined as all lands zoned Business (B), Hamlet Business (HB), Residential Office (RO) or Affordable Housing (AHD). The Town Board and planning staff recognized that the TDR ordinance contained in Chapter I 17 had limited application only for the purpose of promoting aflbrdable housing. This TDR Program Planning Report is intended to establish the basis for a more extensive TDR program that will involve private exchange of development rights (facilitated by the Town) for the purpose of preserving rural lands in the Town with a concomitant shift in density to appropriate areas designated as receiving areas (HALO's). 3.0 PROGRAM OVERVIEW AND GENERAL PARAMETERS This section of the report identifies the overall program and those parameters that are not expected to change. The more specific program elements and the rationale for how they were derived as recommendations are identified in Section 4.0. Overall, the program involves establishing "sending areas" which would enable a landowner to obtain TDR credits for land to be preserved through density transfer. Receiving zones would be established in designated Hamlet HALO areas; these would represent locations where TDR credits would be redeemed at a density that would not otherwise be permitted without the credit redemption. It is contemplated that sending and receiving areas would be within the same school district and that the program would be voluntary.. The Town Hamlet Study of 2005 provided a basis for defining the hamlets business centers and HALO zones. The Study, which involved participation of stakeholders from each hamlet, also allowed residents and business owners to identify and promote features that contribute to the unique identity of their communities and make recommendations for future improvements and growth. For the purpose of this program, the hamlets are identified and related to their school district boundaries as follows: TABLE 3-1 SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND HAMLETS School District i Hamlet Mattituck Union Free School District Mattituck and Cutchogue New Suffolk Common School District New Suffolk (K-7); Southold (8-12) Southold Union Free School District Southold and Peconic; New Suffolk (8-12) Greenport Union Free School District Greenport; Oysterponds (9-12) Oysterponds Union Free School District Orient and East Marion; Greenport (9-12) In 2006, the Town's Planning and Zoning Committee appointed a TDR Work Group, whose members also belong to this TDR Team. The group's task was to create a Hamlet Development Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report Model designed to study the feasibility of establishing a Town wide TDR program that would provide the Town with another land use tool for desirable farmland preservation without creating undesirable over development within the hamlets. The work group held meetings with each of the hamlet stakeholder committees during mid to late 2006, to explain the model, review the potential impacts on preservation and development in their respective hamlets, and obtain feedback. Based upon projected Town wide numbers, the work group's study concluded that a TDR program was feasible and that stakeholders recognized the benefits that would accrue to the Town through the transfer of density. These results were presented to the Town Board. The original Hamlet Development Model was based on the 2005 earlier geography of the hamlet HALO boundaries, but has been updated in this report (see section 4.4 for further discussion). Based on the TDR Work Group, Town Board, and Planning staff eflbrts preceding this report, a number of basic components of the program have been established. These are listed as follows: · The TDR program would be voluntary, not mandatory. · The HALO areas representing the hamlets noted above would be the receiving areas. · Density transfer would occur within the same school district (unless authorized by the Town Board). · One TDR credit fi'om a "sending" site would be equal to one development unit in a "receiving" area; an increase in receiving area density per credit as an incentive will be explored as an alternative under the SEQRA process for the TDR program. · The TDR program contemplates redemption of credits for residential units, but will examine the potential for commercial development as an alternative under the SEQRA process. · Affordable housing would not be required as part of a development involving redemption of TDR credits. Affordable housing will continue to be required of residential subdivision, and establishment of parcels in the AHD zone can be considered on a case-by-case basis. · Each hamlet will retain open space, with a goal of 30 percent within hamlets, devoted to both public use and visually open public and private space. At this time, the Town has formally adopted the HALO boundaries for Mattituck, Cutchogue, New Suffolk, Peconic, Southold, East Marion and Orient (Greenport is pending). The designation of the HALO areas and the program components noted above provides a basis for further efforts to define the specific sending and receiving zone areas and establishing the mechanics of the TDR program. 4.0 Program Elements 4.1 Sending Zones Sending zones must be selected to identify the parcels from which development will be transferred. It is necessary to identi~y sending sites in order to quantify the number of development rights which will be generated, and to target the program to address preservation of parcels in conformance with Town Comprehensive Plan goals, with a resultant density shif~ to receiving sites that are also consistent with comprehensive planning goals. Page 14 TowII of Southold TDR Program Planning Report The general concept is to specify areas where new residential development is to be discouraged. For Southold Town, areas outside of the hamlets are being targeted for preservation through PDR. The Town has an aggressive and successlhl program and is working in concert with Suffolk County government to actively purchase development rights of farm parcels. The program is voluntary and has been used by many farm families to receive value for their land, which allows them to continue farm businesses and retain ownership of the underlying land. This involves expenditure of public funds, and thus far Southold has been successful in using land transfer tax monies and bonds for this purpose. Additional preservation tools are needed to leverage public funds with private investment, which would increase land preservation in the sending areas, with managed density increases in the receiving areas. The Town and County also use outright purchase of fee title lands, and has found this to be most successful for open space non-farmed land that does not have underlying crop or agricultural value. It is expected that the Town will continue to pursue PDR from farm parcels and fee title acquisition of woodland open space and other environmentally sensitive lands. This understanding helps to target the application of a TDR program and identification of sending areas. Definition of Sendine Areas Sending areas are typically identified by a mapped geographic area and/or by designation of individual parcels of land in one or more zoning districts. The Town G1S database was used to initiate the identification of sending areas. The vast majority of land outside of the hamlets is zoned Agriculture-Conservation (A-C) and is in farm use or has been farmed in the past and contains suitable prime farm soils. Given the allowable density of I dwelling unit (du) per 80,000 SF in the A-C zone, once parcels are identified, the number of potential development rights in a given area can be computed. Discussions conducted by the team centered on ensuring that the program targets prime areas of concern for preservation, while balancing the need to establish a sufficient number of credits for a TDR program, but not an excessive number so that the combination ofTDR, PDR and fee title acquisition would ensure that Town goals are met. An additional consideration was the need to ensure that transferred credits could be utilized on a receiving parcel, in consideration of the SCDHS TDR policy which does not allow sanitary flow credit to be transferred from parcels which will continue to be fertilized through farming or golf course use. In order to ensure compliance, the density limit established by SCDHS for groundwater protection in areas with public water (minimum 20,000 SF lots unless sewage treatment is provided) must be observed. The sending area identification process began by eliminating the following: · Land in hamlet and HALO areas · Business zoned land not subdividable (single and separate lots of less than the minimum zoning acreage) and residential zoned land of twice the minimum zoning lot size requirement) · Unbuildable land (wetlands, dune, beach, surface water) · Existing community facilities (lands in public ownership, used for public purpose and certain non-public lands (churches, utilities, etc.) · Land currently protected through prior PDR, acquisition or conservation subdivision Page 15 Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report The remaining land area included all buildable, subdividable, unprotected, non-community facility land outside of the HALO's. Further consideration was given to the size of parcels to target, which zoning districts were appropriate and whether both farmland and non-farmland should be designated as sending areas. It was believed that larger parcels were more appropriate so that preservation efforts were directed toward larger tracts of contiguous open space. As a result, parcels of greater than 7 acres in size were targeted for the TDR program. Consideration ofTDR offFarmland and/or Open Space Sevemt discussions about including farmland, non-farmland, or both as sending zones took place. Given the targeting of non-farmland for fee title preservation, and the lack of residual income potential from non-farmland, it was felt that fee title acquisition would be most appropriate for continued acquisition of non-farmland. As a result, agricultural land was felt to be appropriate for designation as sending areas under the TDR program, provided SCDHS density criteria would be met in the receiving zones. This can be accomplished, and is discussed in more detail in Section 4.4. An additional discussion centered around how to designate farmland for the purpose of sending areas. The Town has various farmland strategies through which a listing of parcels and GIS inventory observed to be actively farmed has been created. This however does not constitute an official map and involves subjective determination of land use status. The team felt it was necessary to seek a more objective inventory and as a result considered the Town database which records existing Agricultural District parcels and parcels with individual commitment status. This inventory was found to already have controls in place to objectively determine whether a parcel is actively farmed. The inventory is in GIS and is maintained in an up-to-date fashion to ensure that parcels in this district are recognized. As a result, the Town Agricultural District parcel inventory and lands which are the subject of an individual commitment were believed to be the most appropriate method of designating farm status for sending parcels. It should be noted that parcels can apply for Agricultural District and individual commitment status, as long as they meet the parameters for such designation. As a result, the sending area will be updated periodically as parcels are accepted or removed to or from the Agricultural District or individual commitment status. The Town may wish to consider adopting a revised sending area map every three (3) years based on the updated inventory. Consideration of TDR off AIl and/or Part of a Parcel Extensive discussion was held regarding whether transfer of only part of the development rights from a given parcel was appropriate. A major concern was that sale of part of the development rights would provide revenue that could stimulate subdivision of the balance of the land, contrary to preservation goals. In addition, the logistics of identifying what part of a parcel the rights were transferred from and the record keeping of these transactions were believed to be onerous. As a result, it was concluded that for the initial program partial transfer would not be recommended except to allow an owner to of course to maintain any existing use plus one additional credit to be subtracted from the parcel yield to be used in the future subject to subdivision filing. In addition, at the time of preparation of this TDR Planning Study, the Town To~rn of Southold TDR Program Planning Report is also considering an Agricultural PDD (AgPDD). If the AgPDD were created in a form similar to it's current draft, it may be possible to amend this legislation to allow TDR as a means of selling all or part of the credits of a parcel enrolled in the AgPDD since full protection is guaranteed unless the Town is unable to purchase the development rights over time. Recommended Criteria for Sending Areas As a result, the following definition of sending areas is recommended as part of this TDR Program Planning Report. Sending areas are proposed to include parcels which meet all of the following criteria: · Land not in a designated HALO or hamlet; · Land recorded in Town GIS as being greater than 7 acres in size; · Land not in Town GIS database as community facility lands; · Land not in Town GIS database as including wetlands (greater than 90 percent), dune, beach and/or surface water; · Land not in Town GIS database as having a protected status through prior PDR, acquisition or conservation easement; and · Land in the Town GIS database as having an Agricultural District or Individual Commitment status. It should be noted that these criteria result in all sending area lands being zoned either A-C or R- 80 (both 80,000 SF minimum lot size for yield), except Oysterponds, which includes 41 acres of R-200 (200,000 SF minimum lot size for yield). These criteria provide a logical, identifiable and mappable land area to be considered for sending zones. Using the Town GIS database, a list of parcels, zoning and size can be used to determine the sending areas, and to determine the potential number of sending area credits for the purpose of analysis. A tabulation of the number of credits is provided on the basis of individual school districts in Table 4-1: TABLE 4-1 SENDING AREA CREDITS BY SCHOOL DISTRICT Mattituck Union Free School District 1,907 1036 New Suffolk Common School District (CSD) 0 0 Southold Union Free School District (UFSD) 825 448 Greenport Union Free School District 8 4 Oysterponds Union Free School District 235 112 Notes: Mattituck UFSD includes Mattituck and Cutchogue HALO's. Southold UFSD includes Peconic and Southold HALO's. Oysterponds UFSD includes East Marion and Orient HALO's. See Table 3-1 for grade level transfers between school districts. Note: Credits derived based on acreage times a yield factor of 1.84 for A-C and R-gO; and 4.60 tbr R-200. This yield factor is consistent with the formula used by the Town Ibr yield of conservation subdivisions. Page 17 Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report Sending zone parcels are mapped and included in Appendix B-I. A list of parcels designating the proposed sending zone is included in Attachment B-2; this list includes parcel tax number, zoning and size. 4.2 Receiving Zones Receiving Zone Designation The Town Board has taken the initiative to designate HALO areas for Mattituck, Cutchogue, New Suffolk, Peconic, Southold, East Marion and Orient (Greenport is pending). The unique configuration and historical origin of Orient is such that a hamlet is recognized in the area of a small retail/service nucleus which is part of a small historical area of Orient. The Stakeholders determined that increased density associated with the HALO designation could be sustained, but not in this historical hamlet area. As a result, an area east of the hamlet was designated as the HALO zone in Orient. The designation of HALO's fully anticipated that increased density with concomitant density reduction in rural areas outside of the HALO's would occur. The HALO Study and subsequent stakeholder meetings with each hamlet all contemplated this density relationship between HALO's and areas outside of HALO's. As a result, it is recommended that the HALO's be designated as the broad receiving areas for the purpose of this study. It is recognized that each HALO has a different composition of existing non-buildable land in the form of community facility uses, existing protected land and environmentally sensitive areas. It is on the lands not bearing one of these designations, that it is expected density will be increased. As a result, a broad receiving zone boundary can be established coincident with the HALO boundaries, but actual redemption of credits can only occur on lands which meet the criteria noted above. Receiving Zone Mechanics The form that development takes within the HALO areas is a critical aspect of designing the TDR program. Currently, there are a variety of zoning districts in the hamlets that could potentially receive credits. These include: · B-business · HB-hamlet business · LB-limited business · RO-residence office · AHD-affordable housing district · HD-hamlet density · R-40 residential · R-80 residential · A-C agriculture-conservation For the purpose of this program, it was determined that a simple and easy way to implement the initial program would involve only redemption of credits for the purpose of creating residential Page 18 Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report dwelling units, not for increase in commercial density. As a result, use of credits in the LI district (which exists in some hamlets) would not be possible. Increased commercial density through TDR could be considered in the future, and will be explored as an alternative in the GEIS. Each of the other districts including B, HB, LB, RO, AHD, HD, R-40, R-80 and A-C , all allow forms of residential development. With respect to AHD, it was determined that aflbrdable housing was a benefit in itself, and should not be burdened with purchase of credits that could potentially increase building costs and cost of units and thereby defeat the purpose of the affbrdable housing designation in the first place. As a result, the AHD zone was not considered appropriate for redemption of credits, and it is recommended that the Town Board continues to consider changes of zone to AHD where appropriate based on sound planning principles and community needs and the merits of placing this zoning on a given parcel of land. This leaves lands within the HALO zoned B, LB, RO, HD, R-40, R-80 andA-C as potential receiving zones, plus potential future use ora PDD local law. Incentives for TDR Purchase and Redemption Proper incentives must be established to facilitate use of TDR credits, and proper zoning must be established to ensure that if credits are redeemed in the HALO areas, that development will achieve desired goals in design and density. A number of options are available to achieve the function of incentivizing the redemption of credits in a form that will result in compatible land use design. Consideration was given to use of several options; it was determined that retaining the underlying zoning, but providing criteria under which increased density could be achieved through TDR in a separate TDR local law based on each individual zoning district, was the most appropriate option. This option would involve creating a TDR section of the Town Zoning Law that would recognize the specific zoning district eligible to receive TDR credits. The code section would specify the density that could be achieved through the use of credit redemption for each zone. This was supported by the following considerations: · Since the program is voluntary, development could occur without redemption of TDR's and a means of allowing such development to occur must be provided. · This is the simplest option to ensure an understandable and effective program. · This option could be adopted as a separate TDR local law that would complement existing code provisions. Recommended Receiving Zones which are coincident with the HALO boundaries are mapped in Attachment B- 1. Receiving Zone Options Through discussions and research, it was determined that there were a limited number of ways that credits could be redeemed and density could be realized within the HALO's. The form that increased density could take included the following: · Single Family Homes · Two-Family Homes Page 19 Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report · Multiple Family Dwellings · Detached Accessory Dwelling Units, and · Mixed use or flexible zoning developments under potential future Planned Development District The following provisions are recommended to facilitate the redemption of TDR's: Single Family Homes - The intent is to permit transfer of credits to develop single family homes in areas where additional density can be accommodated. The mechanics of how this can occor are described below: · Existing zones which are recommen~led for or permit single family residential uses include the B, HB, RO, R-40, R-80, A-C, R;200 zones. · Additional single family residential homes would be allowed in the zoning district through further subdivision under guidelines noted herein. · The TDR code would be used to permit such development by subdivision application to the Planning Board. · The recommended minimum permitted Iol.'size would be 20,000 SF to ensure consistency with SCDHS Article 6, and not over-inten~if.y development. · The Town may wish to consider creation:-of an R-20 zone to establish dimensional requirements for 20,000 SF lot size which does not cnrrently exist. A sample Local Law for R-20 zoning is included in Attachment C. Two-Family Homes - The intent is to permit transfer of credits to develop two-family homes in appropriate areas, by the methods noted below: · Existing zones which are recommended for or permit two-family homes include the R- 40, R-80, A-C zones. · Two-family homes would be permitted in these zoning districts by allowing one, two- family structure per lot. · The establishment of a two-family dwelling would be allowed in the zoning district through further subdivision under the guidelines noted herein. · The TDR code would be used to permit such development by site plan/subdivision application to the Planning Board. · The recommended minimum permitted lot size would be 20,000 SF in the R-40 and 40,000 SF in the R-80 and A-C zones to ensure consistency with SCDHS Article 6, and not over-intensify development. · Consideration could be given to requiring dimensional requirements pursuant to 1.25 times the underlying zone to provide a larger lot to accommodate the two-family dwelling. Multiple Family Dwellings - Multiple family dwellings could be constructed in appropriate areas using transfer of credit through the measures noted below: · New multiple family dwellings would be allowed on appropriate parcels through application for a change of zone to HD or HB for qualifying lots based on sound planning principles and merits of proposal. · The Town Board would determine the appropriateness and location of such uses based on change of zone review which would require use of TDR's. '[own of Southold TDR Program Planning Report · The recommended dimensional requirements would be the same as for the existing HD/HB zones. Detached Accessory Dwelling Units - A new provision is recommended which would allow an existing residence or principal use to add an additional residence to an existing lot. This is not currently provided for in Town Code. Recommendations are included below: · This new form of dwelling unit is recommended for consideration in the R-40, R-80 andA-C zones, through a Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) special permit. · The recommended minimum permitted lot size would be 40,000 SF. Planned Development District PDD is an important tool that was recognized in the Town of SouthoM CIS. PDD ~' are provided for under NFS Town Law dealing with incentive zoning. A PDD is a change of zone, typically to a more intense use than permitted by the underlying zoning; however, any increase in density must be offs'et by public' benefit*' which would be provided to the community. Projects may include mixed use& and project sites typically require larger size for appropriate setback*', land use compatibility and potential location of sewage treatment facilities. Redemption of TDR credit*' would be an appropriate public benefit, or other benefits which enhance land use in the HALO's couM also be considered. Recommendations are provided below: · This TDR Planning Study encourages the adoption of a PDD local law. · The PDD would apply to HALO's through change of zone review at the discretion of the Town Board. · Larger lots are typically more appropriate, therefore identification of lots of 5 acres and greater should be performed to identify potential PDD candidate sites.The Town should seek mixed use development with public benefits. · A major public benefit would be redemption of TDRs and potentially providing sewage treatment facilities which could accommodate additional flow from off-site parcels, provided this conforms with hamlet character and Town goals. These forms of TDR credit redemption would be provided for through the TDR local law that would specify the parameters for development as noted above. The identification of forms of credit redemption provides a means to visualize and understand that type of development that would result in the HALO's as a result of the TDR program. 4.3 Interrelationship of Land Preservation Programs and Tools The TDR program is only expected to address a portion of the potential available credits. The Town of Southold continues to pursue other land preservation programs and tools listed as follows: · FeeTitle Land Purchase · Purchase of Development Rights · Conservation Subdivision · Standard Subdivision Page 21 Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report Fee title land purchase and PDR are both methods which involve total density reduction of the parcel based on its potential yield. Conservation subdivision is a partial density reduction technique which results in preservation of a portion of a property, combined with reduction in density. The Conservation Subdivision local law provides options which preserve 80 percent with a 60 percent reduction in density, or preserve 75 percent with a 75 percent density reduction. This in effect is a creative land use technique that involves a combination of clustering and yield reduction through voluntary yield loss, PDR or other creative tax incentive and owner benefit programs through the assistance of Peconic Land Trust (PLT) and/or other land preservation groups. A standard subdivision typically results in no yield reduction, but must retain at least 60 percent ora property in open space.; In designing the TDR program, strong consideration was given to the interrelationship of these programs. There is a desire to not compete with successful programs that achieve Town goals. There is an awareness that agricultural land has residual value in farming, after the purchase or transfer of development rights, whereas woodland and non-agricultural areas do not have residential value, except as open space. The Town has primarily directed the PDR program toward agricultural lands, and utilized fee title land purchase more for open space preservation. Once the land is owned, management of open space for passive public recreational use (i.e. hiking, birdwatching, etc.) provides public benefit beyond just maintaining rural character of open space which is achieved in farmland preservation where the land continues in agricultural production. These factors compelled the team to consider agricultural lands as target locations for the use of TDR to supplement the Town PDR program. This allows public funds to be leveraged in a manner that private purchase of development rights frees up funds for continuance of the PDR program to preserve farmland as well as for acquisition of open space. Directing the TDR program toward the larger agricultural parcels ensures several additional important considerations. As noted in Section 4.1, use of TDR from part of an agricultural parcel could provide a landowneffdeveloper with revenue to pursue development on the balance of the parcel which would be contrary to overall land preservation goals. The TDR program was also felt to be inappropriate for preservation of smaller open space areas which would remain in private ownership with no potential use or value, which could result in maintenance and nuisance issues. Finally, the simplification of the application of the TDR program was considered knowing the commitment of the Town Board toward creating an effective and implementable program. These factors lead to the identification of land types and target preservation programs as related to Town lands outside of the HALO areas. A flow chart has been prepared in order to understand the interrelationship of these land preservation programs. The chart, included as Attachment D, illustrates the options which landowners have in pursuing either controlled development or total land preservation including TDR. The chart relates to the sending areas and lands outside of the HALO's of the Town and assists in defining the Town goals through various land preservation programs relative to parcel size, location, existing use and special district designations. Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report 4.4 Density Limitations in the Receiving Zones Suffolk County Department of Health Services Density Regulations The number of potential sending area credits is computed and listed by school district in Table 4-1. Given the variety of receiving area options for redemption of credits as outlined in Section 4.2, it is difficult if not impossible to determine the actual number of credits that will be used and by what means they will become established in a receiving area. In addition, the Town recognizes the need to comply with SCDHS requirements as contained in the Suflblk County Sanitary Code (SCSC) Article 6 in order to create a l~asible TDR program. As a result, this section documents Article 6 density limitations and establishes a basis for density limits within the HALO's. This serves the purpose of providing compliance with Article 6, but also provides assurance to hamlet stakeholders that reasonable density limitations and resultant development in the HALO's will occur. Article 6 establishes density limitations in order to achieve best groundwater management practices relative to nitrogen load in sanitary effluent. The requirements stem from the Long Island Waste Treatment Management program published in 1978 under funds provided by Section 208 of the Water Pollution Control Act of 1972. The 208 Study identified hydrogeologic zones based on groundwater recharge and flow characteristics, water quality, long-term water supply goals and potential impacts to water bodies receiving groundwater outflow. Article 6 of the SCSC codified the findings of the 208 study in the form of minimum lot size equivalents for residential development. The majority of Southold Town and all of the HALO areas are identified in Article 6 as lying in Groundwater Management Zone IV. Zone IV allows a 20,000 SF minimum lot size where public water is available, and requires a 40,000 SF lot size in areas without public water. Densities in excess of yields based on these lot sizes require wastewater treatment. Article 6 became effective in 1981; any lawfully existing use or legally subdivided tax parcels which existed prior to 1981 are grandfathered. As a result, any buildable lot, even ones smaller than 40,000 SF, would have an allowable flow equal to that of a single family dwelling of 300 gallons per day (gpd) assigned to thatlot. Lots that are already built upon that exceed the allowable flow would not be eligible for additional density unless permitted under the Town Code Accessory apartment provisions and in conformance with the Article 6 exemption which involves no new sanitary facilities. For parcels which are built upon and are less than the allowable flow, density transfer and resulting new construction could occur. Any new subdivision or site plan development occurring after 1981 must conform to the density provisions of Article 6, provide wastewater treatment, or obtain a waiver from the Suffolk County Board of Review. Article 6 is implemented through SCDHS review of realty subdivisions and site plans. There are several additional aspects of SCDHS implementation of this program which are important to understand. Suflblk County recognizes that consideration can be given to regional compliance within a Groundwater Management Zone, provided excessive nitrogen loads are not created in a given area. As Towns establish land use programs to preserve open space and direct development toward appropriate location through TDR programs, SCDHS provided guidance on how this could be accomplished and still conform to the goals of Article 6. This is contained in a Tov, n of Southold TDR Program Planning Report General Guidance Memorandum //17 which pertains to agricultural and golf course density (Attachment E). In essence, if open space is to be retained and density transferred, the open space must not continue to cause nitrogen load in addition to the transferred residential density, or the intent of Article 6 is violated. As a result, lands established in agricultural or golf course use which requires fertilization are not eligible for transfer. Further, the guidance document establishes a limit for parcels receiving transferred density of twice the density allowed under Article 6. As a result, the HALO areas can not exceed an equivalent of 20,000 SF lots since the minimum lot size required in these areas under Article 6 is 20,000 SF and the program as envisioned would transfer density from agricultural land. If land from which density was transferred did not involve continued nitrogen application, the minimum lot size would be 10,000 SF. Applications which involve density transfer that are less than the Article 6 minimum lot size of 20,000 SF are typically determined by the Board of Review. Consistent with the Suffolk County TDR policy, the County also recognizes regional watershed management plans and/or planning studies that include provisions for TDR in consideration of watershed management. SCDHS has indicated that County-recognized watershed management plans may exempt use of transfer credits from having to undergo review by the Suflblk County Board of Review for approval. This would save time and expense on the part of applicants, and would be a beneficial aspect of this program. This TDR Program Planning Report will be subject to review under SEQRA, and the SCDHS will be an involved agency that wilt have opportunity to comment on the program. The intent of preservation of sending area parcels and increase of density for receiving area parcels is consistent with regional watershed management strategies, provided there is compliance with Article 6 and double use of density does not occur. In addition, this TDR document addresses the interrelationship of TDR with other municipal land management programs that include density reduction through PDR and Conservation subdivision. The Town PDR program, coupled with Chapter 117 (which permits transfer of Town preserved transfer credits for the purpose of affordable housing) ensures protection of watershed recharge areas and provides a means to increase affordable housing opportunities. For those credits that are not utilized, or density that is reduced through Conservation Subdivision there is a watershed benefit as a result of reduced density through extinguished credits. This consideration is important in continuing compliance with Article 6 and to address the legal mandate that incentive zoning and TDR programs consider how such programs may impact afl-brdable housing. SCDHS also establishes design flow for various uses which is important to understand as related to sending and receiving of density. A single family residence of 1,200 SF or more in size has an assigned flow of 300 gpd. Residences of between 600 and 1,200 SF have a flow of 225 gpd and for dwellings less than 600 SF and senior-citizen residences, the assigned flow is 150 gpd. Commercial flow is based on wet and dry uses, and there is recognition that food service uses have a higher flow of gray water (non-nitrogen bearing waste) and therefore density limitations Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Reporl are based on the nitrogen-bearing component of the flow. The Suflblk County design flow factors are contained in Attachment F. Use of TDR for increase in commercial density is not considered as a receiving zone option under this TDR Program Planning Report, but may be considered as an alternative under the $EQRA process which will be conducted for TDR program implementation. 2006 Hamlet Development Model As noted, due to the variety of receiving area options for redemption of credits, it is not possible to determine the actual number of credits that will be used and by what means they will become established in a receiving area. Part of the benefit of the program is the creation of options for various forms of development that would result in use of credits in a manner that does not overburden the HALO's and does not create any one type of new development. This issue identified the need for a limit to the amount of increased density which would occur in the HALO areas. In 2006, at the request of the Town's Planning and Zoning Committee, Town staff, all of whom are also members of this TDR program team, prepared a Southold Hamlet Development Model to explore the feasibility ora TDR program and it's potential impact on hamlets, using Southold as a pilot case study. The goal of the model was, "To create a planning model for Southold Hamlet that will prevent undesirable over-development and protect the hamlet's unique qualities, scale and historic character". The model was discussed with the Southold Hamlet Stakeholders, refined, and then applied to all of Southold Town's hamlets in order to estimate the total number of potential TDR credits and the amount of potential farmland preservation Town wide, and the total potential number of residential units within each hamlet. HALO (receiving sites). Meetings were conducted with each of the hamlet stakeholder committees to discuss the individual hamlet model results and to obtain feedback from these communities. The results were presented to the TownBoard. The concept and methodology of the Hamlet Development Model is recommended as a basis for establishing limitations on the amount of development which can occur within each hamlet. In 2007, the hamlet development model calculations were updated to be consistent with the HALO boundaries finally adopted by the Town Board, and the boundary pending for Greenport as of the date of this report. The Goals, Concept and Methodology associated with the model are contained in Attachment G. In summary, the model calculates the additional density which could be achieved in the HALO areas, based on a hypothetical standard subdivision model of 20,000 SF lots. The total acreage of each HALO was determined, then reduced by removing unbuildable lands (wetlands and community facilities/infrastructure), existing protected lands and lots less than 20,000 SF, and density was then calculated based on the resultant total buildable acreage in the HALO. A total number of potential TDR units was computed for each HALO; the results are provided for each school district in Table 4-2. Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report TABLE 4-2 POTENTIAL RECEIVING CREI)ITS School District Total Potential TDR Credits Mattituck UFSD 185 New Suffolk CSD 57 Southold UFSD 302 Greenport UFSD 0 Oysterponds UFSD 98 Notes: Mattituck UFSD includes Mattituck and Cutchogue HALO's. Southold UFSD includes Peconic and Southold I IALO's. Oysterponds UFSD includes East Marion and Orient HALO's. See Table 3-1 for grade level transfers between school districts. The Hamlet Development Model considerg several additional factors related to potential over- development. Each hamlet was conceptualized as including both development and open space at a ratio of 70 percent developed area to 30 percent open space. In review of the pilot model run for Southold, the total number of potential credits gave rise to concern that the use of credits should be monitored and capped at a percentage of the total potential at full buildout. A cap of 30 percent of the total was applied as a value that would be monitored and potentiall~ revised over time as HALO development is realized. Table 4-3 provides a summary of the TDR credits available in each sending zone by school district, as related to the total receiving zone TDR's and the receiving zone TDR's based on a 30 percent cap. TABLE 4-3 SENDING CREl)iTS VS. RECEIVING CREDITS School District Sending Zone Receiving Zone Receiving Zone TDR's TDR,S (Totai) ~R~S ~30% Mattituck UFSD 1036 185 56 New Suffolk CSD 0 57 17 Southold UFSD 448 302 91 Greenport UFSD 4 0 0 Oysterponds UFSD 112 98 29 Notes: Mattituck UFSD includes Mattituck and Cutchogue HALO's. Southold UFSD includes Peconic and Southold tlAI.O's. Oystcrponds UFSD includes East Marion and Orient HALO's. See Tablc 3-1 for grade level transfers between school districts. Review of Table 4-3 provides a basis for several conclusions. It is apparent that there are more sending credits than receiving credits. If TDR were the only mechanism for land preservation, To~rll Of Southold TDR Program Planning Report there would be concern that land preservation goals would not be achieved; however, the Sending Zone TDR's will be eligible for PDR and other preservation methods. The large number of available Sending Zone TDR's indicates that there would be a continuing need for PDR as well as Conservation Subdivisions. The TDR program will supplement the public expenditures associated with PDR and fee title acquisition of open space lands, by providing a means whereby private landowners, developers and investors can acquire development rights for the purpose of increasing density in connection with parcels in the HALO areas. The combination of these programs gives the Town multiple land use tools to achieve land preservation goals. As development in the HALO's continues, the Town may wish to review the cap and ultimately achieve density increases at a level between the recommended 30 percent cap and the total potential receiving zone credits. An annual audit by the Town's Planning Department would maintain growth rate by recommending modifications as needed. The quantity of existing open space in the HALO's should be reviewed, and for those HALO's where more than 30 percent open space exists, consideration should be given to identifying additional potential TDR redemption strategies. The 20,000 SF development model is a conceptual residential density scenario. Consideration could be given to expanding the program in the future to include other methods to increase commercial density in the hamlets through TDR credit redemption, in a manner that would not adversely impact the character of these areas. This must be balanced with SCSC Article 6 compliance, parking requirements and design guidelines. The use of PDD's remains a recommendation to assist in the redemption of TDR credits. This technique has been used successfully in other Long Island Towns, and provides a means to achieve public benefits which could include use TDR's, in connection with creative, flexible and compatible development projects. Parcels in excess of 5 acres located within the HALO boundaries would be target parcels for such development, as this size permits adequate buffering and provides sufficient area for potential single or mixed-use projects, and would also provide the potential for location of on-site wastewater treatment facilities such as a Cromoglass TM system which can treat up to 15,000 gpd on single and separate parcels in conformance with SCDHS policy and regulations. Parcels of 5 acres or more (according to tax map data) are inventoried as candidate parcels for PDD's; a map of these parcels is provided as Attachment B- 3. HALO and community. The Hamlet Development Model provides residents with the assurance that reasonable density limits will be established in their communities. From a land use perspective, the overriding benefit of TDR is the preservation of land where development is inappropriate (such as agricultural areas in the Town of Southold), with a resultant increase in density in the hamlets. Hamlets, and their surrounding HALO areas, have been identified and mapped by the Town in recognition of the fact that these areas are appropriate for additional development given the following land use considerations: · Infrastructure such as roads, utilities and water supply currently exist. Page 27 Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report · Residential density proximate to the hamlets strengthens the business environment. · Residential density in the HALO's provides opportunity for alternative transportation such as walking and bicycle travel. · Use of TDR's in the HALO's may promote beneficial investment and redevelopment. · Use of TDR's in the HALO's will provide alternative forms of housing to single family detached development, thus increasing housing stock providing potentially more affordable housing of various types. As a result, the author's of this report believe that transfer of density to the HALO's in accordance with the Hamlet Development Model and the considerations noted above, is a responsible form of development which allows the Town to achieve both significant land preservation goals while also preserving the scale and uniqueness of each of the hamlets, provided that appropriate design standards and guidelines are established, as per the recommendation in the Hamlet Development Model. 4.5 Program Mechanics Summary Quality Communities Grant This TDR Program Planning Report has been prepared with funding through a New York State Quality Communities Grant. The grant included a work program that identified the basic requirements to be fulfilled. The language included in the work program of the grant is useful in understanding the intent of the Town TDR program: The quest for controlled growth requires creative planning and foresight. Transfer of development rights is just one tool used in the battle to contain sprawl. TDR is the exchange of zoning privileges from areas with low population needs, such as farmland, to areas qf high poptdation needs, such as the Hamlet Centers. These transfers allow fi~r the preservation of open space and historic landmarks, while giving the Hamlet Centers areas a chance to expand and experience continued growth. There are three basic elements to a TDR program: the sending district, the receiving district, and the TDR credits themselves. The grant work program includes eleven (11) tasks that must be examined in order to fulfill the grant. A review of these tasks will be used for the purpose of providing a program mechanics summary. The following represents the consultant and Town representative team's interpretation of the TDR program for Southold Town and is subject to review of the Town Board for the purpose of commencing the SEQRA evaluation process. The final program will result from further evaluation of potential environmental impacts, public and agency input, refinement of the program to address comments received, and further deliberation by the Town Board. Work program tasks under the grant are outlined below, and are followed by an examination of program mechanics in a summary form and based on other sections of this report. Page 28 Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report Examination of Grant Tasks I. How will the TDR Program work? The program involves designation of sending zones which primarily include larger farm parcels in the rural areas of the Town where there is a goal of preservation. Parcels would be eligible for recognition of a number of credits related to their size and potential development yield based on their zoning. Applicants would file for recognition of credits associated with their parcel, and the assigned credits would be a salable commodity. Receiving zones associated with the HALO of each of Southold's hamlets would be designated as overall receiving zones. The zoning districts within the HALO boundaries would be modified through a TDR program local law that would identify the means by which credits could be redeemed in exchange for increased utilization of parcels in accordance with guidelines established for individual zoning districts within the HALO's. TDR credits would be exchanged privately and exchanges between buyer and seller could be facilitated by the real estate market, as well as by the Town through a listing of TDR credits issued, which would be researched by landowners, developers and investors seeking to pursue development in the HALO's in conformance with the credit redemption options. 2. Who benefits from this program? The residents and visitors of the Town of SouthoM benefit from continuing land preservation of rural areas and retention of the bucolic character associated with the Town. Sending area landowners benefit from an additional option to gain monetary value for their land, and their continued ability to utilize the underlying value of the land absent the development rights. Landowners, developers and investors benefit from an additional mechanism to facilitate compatible and planned development projects that provide return on investment. HALO communities benefit from investment in their hamlet areas resulting in redevelopment and compatible land use which strengthens the hamlets and achieves other land preservation goals. Local businesses benefit from an increased local consumer/customer base. 3. How much do TDR's cost? The cost of TDR credits will be market based. It is expected that the Town's continuing PDR program will provide a benchmark for TDR credit value, but the ultimate cost will be determined between buyer and seller based on supply and demand. 4. How is the value of the TDR's established? The value of TDR's is established by creating potential for redemption of TDR credits in connection with land use and development that brings a return on investment to a landowner, developer or investor. 5. Is the program voluntary or mandatory? Page 29 Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report The program as envisioned in this TDR Program Planning Report is voluntary, and not mandatory. What will be the Town's role in implementing and monitoring the program? It is expected that the Town will implement the program by complying with SEQRA and creating legislation in the form of a TDR local law which would be adopted by the Town Board in conformance with the requirements established under New York State Town Law. Once enacted, it is expected that the Town will implement the program through issuance of credit certificates to sending area landowners, and will facilitate the redemption of TDR credits through the land use review process for landowners and developers of projects within the receiving areas. The Town will record redeemed TDR's in a manner that ensures that parcels from which credits are transferred are recognized as having no residual development rights. The Town will monitor the program and make adjustments as necessary to facilitate its success in conformance with applicable laws. The Town Planning Board, Town Board, potentially the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Town Clerk would all be involved in various aspects of program implementation. The Town may in the future pursue a credit registry or credit bank; however, this is not essential to the initial program. 7. How do 1 participate ifl own land within a Sending Area? A sending area landowner would contact the Town, make application on forms to be provided, obtain a TDR credit certificate, and seek a private purchaser for the credits. 8. How do 1 participate ifl own land in a Receiving Area? A receiving area landowner would contact the Town, make application for a land use development in conformance with one or more of the options available to achieve density increase using TDR's and process the application with the applicable Board. 9. How can the TDR's be used on the Receiving Area Properties? TDR's can be used on receiving area properties for the purpose of increasing density of Single Family Homes, Two-Family Homes, Multiple Family Dwellings, Detached Accessory Dwelling Units, and potentially for Planned Development District projects at such time in the future when the Town Board enacts a PDD local law. Additional details are provided in Section 4.2 of this report. 10. Where are the Sending Areas located? Sending areas are outlined in detail in Section 4.1 and mapped in Attachment B-I of this report. 11. Where are the Receiving Areas located? Receiving areas are outlined in detail in Section 4.2 and mapped in Attachment B-1 of this report. Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report 5.0 CONCLUSION Southold Town has been progressive and successful in planning efforts to preserve farmland and maintain the character and quality of the Town. The Town has considered TDR as a useful tool to help achieve planning goals. The TDR program differs from other preservation programs in that it would not eliminate development potential, but would shil~ the location of development to appropriate locations in the Town which have been identified through previous studies. The program also differs in that expenditure of public funds is not necessary. The use of TDR credits would therefore preserve farmland and locate an equivalent density to the yield ora parcel in a hamlet area where infrastructure exists. This allows public funds to go farther in achieving total preservation goals through continued use of PDR. This form of development would also achieve a greater level of sustainability since it would promote various forms of residential development (not only single family homes) in areas where residents may live, work or seek recreation using multiple forms of transportation (walking, biking, car pooling, public transportation). This TDR Program Planning Report provides a basis for the Town to move forward with the SEQRA process relating to this action, and to consider public and agency input for additional deliberation by the Town Board in reaching an informed decision on the Town's TDR program. Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT A Comprehensive Implementation Strategy Background APPENDIX A TOWN ClS - TDR AND PDD PROGRAM ELEMENTS This Appendix includes excerpts from the Town CIS for the purpose of background and recognition of the importance of TDR and PDD legislation in prior planning studies and to use as a baseline in designing a program at this time. It must be recognized that elements of the program may have changed since the completion of the Town C1S in 2003. The complete TDR Program Planning Report should be reviewed for the current context and recommendations for implementing a TDR program in the Town of Southold at this time. The program must be consistent with Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS) TDR provisions and must provide an overall community benefit to preserve open space, improve groundwater recharge in sending areas, and promote "smart growth" and other community benefit in receiving areas. Sending areas should be those areas the Town wants to protect such as environmentally sensitive parcels, critical woodlands, and groundwater recharge areas. Receiving areas must be identified in zoning districts where a small incremental increase in density may be permitted without serious environmental or other detrimental impacts; these areas might include the HALO zones. Other receiving opportunities could involve special land use projects that provide mixed-uses or that otherwise advance planning goals of the Town. A TDR program can be designed to work with incentive zoning provisions through a PDD and can be used to promote affordable housing. In any case, a receiving area must have one or more of the following characteristics: · Proximity to hamlet centers; · Lack off'environmental sensitivity; · Suitable road access; · .4vailablepublic water; and · Ability to handle sewage or access to a sewage treatmentplant (STP). In Southold, a TDR program will have to assume a number of basic parameters to guide the program and provide consistency with the SCDHS TDR policy, specifically as'follows: · Transfers shouM be generally within the same school district, · Transfers must occur within the same Groundwater Management Zone as defined by the SCDHS, · Density must be determined based on underlying single ff~mily residential zoning (by accepted yield factors), with the intent that a formula for providing additional density for less-intensive units (multiple family and senior citizen units) will be established as an incentive to shifting and creating appropriate development in receiving locations, · Sending parcels must be appropriately encumbered through dedication to a public or recognized non-profit entity or covenants restricting future development, and should be registered by an appropriate tracking method through the Town, · Receivingparcels shouM be within areas serviced bypublic water, · Receiving parcels should not exceed twice the density allowed under the Suffolk County Sanitary Code (SCSC) unless an appropriate form of sewage treatment is available, Receiving parcels should be sul?ject to.[&rtilized area restrictions, clearing restrictions and site plan or subdivision review, Receiving parcels should be subject to ~[)rther design standards and/or special exception criteria as may be determined through further review and analysis; such standards may include design parameters, development guidelines, buffering, clearing restrictions, .fertilized area restrictions, setbacks, iqfrastructure installation and measures to improve community compatibility. Because of Southold's unique environmental constraints, a TDR program wouM have to discourage/eliminate inappropriate development on a'ensitive and important lands and promote appropriate development on parcels where such development can be sustained. The Generic EIS for the Town CIS included an assessment of potential impacts related to TDR which is valuable to consider in the context of updating and refining this program. Both beneficial and potential adverse impacts were considered and are noted as follows: The Town would benefit from a sound TDR program in a number of ways, noted as follows: · Preservation of open space and watershed recharge areas associated with sending sites. · Ability to redirect growth to areas suitable from such growth considering environmental resources and infi'astructure. · Ability to transfer density credits from outside to inside hamlet centers in a manner that promotes creation of affordable housing. · Ability to promote mixed use, multifamily residential use and diverse housing opportunities including affordable housing through density incentives and transfkr. · Reduction in the number of development rights and~or fee title purchases thai would need to be made to achieve the Towns open space preservation goals. These measures are discussed and are analyzed in more detail below to provide the framework Jbr an effective TDR program. The program would not be expected to result in groundwater impacts, provided it is consistent with the SCDHS TDR Standards, issued September 30, 1995. These standards recognize that groundwater protection needs are served when open a'pace is protected in a sending area, and controlled increase in density is permitted at a receiving site and shouM therefore be incorporated into a Town TDR program. In general, TDR is an appropriate tool for preservation and open space (and to a lesser extent farmland, due to SCDHS TDR requirementa') that envisions shifting density to appropriate areas, thereby providing a means for land protection without the resulting coa't of purchasing the development rights. [It is noted that this aspect of the original TDR research is being re-evaluated to determine how TDR can be utilized for farmland preservation since transfer of development rights still allows a fannowner to maintain the residual ownership and farmrights of a parcel. Measures for conforming to the SCDHS TDR policy are considered in the current program as will be defined in subsequent sections of this report.] Receiving areas can include limited density increases in subdivisions located outside of the A-C and R-80 districts in areas referred to as HALO zones, mixed ua'e opportunities in hamlet center areas and, where appropriate, diverse housing opportunities including affordable housing on larger parcels with sewage treatment potential. A PDD local law ia' also proposed to provide zoning and land use flexibility for well-designed projects that provide special public benefits that could include redemption of transferred development pighls. A sound TDR program depends on adequate incentives to ensure program success. The Pine Barrens Preservation Act allowed Towns to adopt Pine Barrens local laws consistent with the pine barrens plan; some Towns elected to provide incentives such that one development right in a sending area, wouM be credited with 2 multiple family units or 3 planned retirement community units at the receiving location. This is logical since, multiple family units are generally smaller, and therefore have less sewage flow (within certain size limitation.s9, lower solid waste generation, less school-aged children, less traffic trip generation, and generally cause less impact than a single family dwelling. The reduction of impacts is even greater for retirement units. Such receiving site opportunities would be provided by special land use projects that provide mixed-uses or that otherwise advance planning goals of the Town. This form of the TDR program would be designed to work with incentive zoning provisions through a PDD. In addition, tramferred units remove density from those districts where preservation is desired, to those areas where infrastructure is present. As a result, density increases would be expected where bus routes and public transportation opportunities are enhanced, and in hamlet center areas where walkability and local services are provided Very minor density increases may be permitted in areas that are currently experiencing growth in accordance with zoning. Under this portion of the program, receiving areas would be provided in zoning districts where a small incremental increase in density may be permitted without serious environmental or other detrimental impacts; these areas might include the HALO zones. An additional potentially beneficial aspect of the TDR program is the ability of the Town to use acquired parcels for redirection of growth to appropriate locations or for appropriate programs which wouM specifically include providing diverse and affordable housing. NYS Town Law 261-(a) requires that "the town shall evaluate the impact of transfer of development rights upon the potential development of low or moderate income housing lost in the sending districts and gained in receiving districts and shall find either there is approximate equivalence between low and moderate housing units lost in the sending district and gained in the receiving district or that the town has or will take reasonable action to compensate for arty negative impact upon the availability or potential development of low or moderate income housing caused by the transfer of development rights." The proposed TDR program has given strong consideration to ensuring that the program will not negatively affect the availability of affordable housing, and in fact provides significant benefit in terms of providing diverse housing opportunities including affordable housing. The 2000 Census data provides relevant information with regard to TDR and affordable housing, including: demographics, income levels, housing characteristics and values. The data clearly indicates a distinct lack of affordable housing throughout the hamlets of Southold Town. Based on the cost of homes as noted in the Census and Home Sales data, there are few if any housing affordable housing opportunities, particularly in the environmentally sensitive (as well as scenic and desirable areas of the Town) coinciding with R-80 and some A-C lands that would become the sending locations under this TDR program. In addition, there are virtually no new mult~lmily unit opportunities in the Town and there is a greater demand for housing than supply. The designation of sending parcels, and identification of receiving site opportunities which include multifamily housing, mixed housing, and smaller unit development, as well as a density incentive d~br the creatian of new housing opportunities at receiving sites, significantly increases the potential for affordable housing in the Town of Southold Therefore, a Town TDR program wouM conform to NYS Town Law 261-(a), as it would provide opportunities .[br aJfordable housing that currently do not exist, and no afJbrdable housing would be removed by the program. Further, there is little likelihood of developing new affordable units in the sending sites, as the necessary infra*'tructure is not present or sufficient to service such development, and the locations of sending sites is such that natural resources would have made such development unlikely. Further with regard to affordable housing, the Town is com'idering the potential to use land acquired subsequent to the completion of the Build-Out analysis, for tran*fer of development credits for afJbrdable housing. This would involve selling a development credit for each acre of land preserved, to a private development company and/or home~land owner that u*'es that credit to create a unit or an accessory apartment available for affordable housing in perpetui~. The credits wouM sell at a reduced rate (perhaps 75%0 of the average of development rights purchased under PDR) for those projects that conform to the program by providing permanent affbrdable housing opportunities in appropriate locations. This program ha*' the added benefit of supplementing funding for open space acquisition. As envisioned, this program wouM work in tandem with the PDD or could be used for accessory apartments or addition of afJbrdable housing to other existing Town zone*' where density credits are needed and wouM conform to the SCDHS TDR sanitaryflow restrictions. With regard to TDR, it is noted that wastewater impacts are not expected to be significant, as the predicted concentration of nitrogen in recharge for each zoning district at fidl build-out indicates that the highest potential concentration was 6. 09 mg/l in the R-40 zoning district. Only very limited increases wouM be permitted in the R-40 district, and only in conformance with SCDHS TDR standards. Other hamlet zoning districts (HD, HB, AHD and other*') all were 5 mg/l or less, unless full density is achieved at the maximum allowed by the zoning district (if public water is available). This comes with the added benefit that natural recharge area*' wouM be preserved in sending location*' and the overall dem'ity would be reduced as the Town achieves success in meeting density reduction goals through voluntary PDR, upzoning or both. As this tool will comply with SCDHS and Town planning initiatives, and site-*pecific review of any proposal would occur, no significant adverse impacts are expected The Town CIS also recognized that an additional mechanism involving a Planned Development District local law would also dovetail with the TDR program as a means of providing special public benefits as required under NYS Town Law Section 261-b. The following is excerpted from the CIS for the purpose of background and potential further consideration by the Southold Town Board: Planned Development District (PDD) The Town could implement a PDD Local Law consistent with Incenlive Zoning as provided for under NYS Town Law Section 261-b so that, for those hamlet-area properties which are to be developed, a single use or a combination of complementary uses could be located on a single site. The PDD law allows a property to be mapped and designated as a PDD, so that all development within it would be planned, distributed and designed as a single unit, with regulations and standards for setbacks, building heights, etc..specificaliy designated for this zone. The PDD concept includes a requirement for "~special public benefits ", which wouM be provided over and above other requirements that normally apply to the application. Special Public Benefits could include: use of TDR, provision of affbrdable housing, community facilities, community infrastructure, or other creative incentives. In this way, development would occur on a well-planned basis with minimal opportunity for adverse impacts on infrastructure and service& as public' benefits wouM be accrued to the community and all infrastructure requirements and amenities necessary would be included from the onset of the project. The impact evaluation for the PDD found a valuable tool with minimal impacts expected as documented in the Town CIS Generic Environmental Impact Statement: PDD Legislation The PDD tool provides the potential to provide for development ora higher quality and more imaginative design and amenities, in addition to the "special public benefits" which might not otherwise be achieved. The PDD wouM be available to private applicants to pursue more creative land use applications that provide affordable housing, redemption of transfer credits, or other public' benefits. The PDD wouM also be available to the Town Board to study and/or designate parcels that are appropriate for creative development opportunities. The program is beneficial in providing diversified housing and mixed land use potential, as well as design flexibility. Protection of environmental resources would be achieved through review of the individual site and individual land use proposal for a PDD, which could only occur under the program that establishes standards for locations, types of use& and public benefits in connection with such a program. Each proposal would be subject to site/use specific NYS Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) review, to ensure that there is no significant adverse impact on environmental resources and the overall goals of the Town are met. Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report ATTACHMENT B Sending and Receiving Zone Identification Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report Attachment B-1 Sending Area Map Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report Attachment B-2 List of Sending Zone Parcels TDRSendList Listing of parcels within proposed TDR sending area as of 6/13/0 District Tax Map Number District Tax Map Number 1000 13.-2-8.2 1000 85.-2-16 1000 17,-6-14.2 1000 85.-3-8 1000 18.-3-30.3 1000 86.-1-10.9 1000 18.-4-7.1 1000 85.-1-15 1000 18.-6-4.1 1000 94.-3-2 1000 18.-6-5 1000 94.-3-4.1 1000 18.-6-17.3 1000 95.-1-1.1 1000 18.-6-19.3 1000 95.-1-2 1000 19.-1-8.4 1000 95.-1-3.1 1000 20.-3-4.1 1000 95.-1-7.2 1000 27.-1-2 1000 95.-1-8.3 1000 27.-1-3 1000 95.-4-3.1 1000 27.-4-10.4 1000 95.-4-11 1000 50.-5-1 1000 96.-2-7 1000 51.-6-3.8 1000 96,-2-10 1000 52.-5-60.2 1000 96.-3-7,3 1000 54.-3-24.1 1000 96 .-3-9 1000 54.-7-21.1 1000 96-4-4.3 1000 55.-1-5.1 1000 97.-1-1 1000 55.-1-9 1000 97.-2-23 1000 55.-2-10.1 1000 97,-5-2.1 1000 55.-3-6.1 1000 100.-2-3.2 1000 56.-5-1,3 1000 100.-2-4 1000 59,-3-27 1000 100.-3-12 1000 59.-3-28.5 1000 100.-4-4 1000 59.-10-1 1000 101 .-1-4.1 1000 68.-4-18 1000 101 .-1-4.3 1000 69.-4-11 1000 101.-1-5.2 1000 74.-1-38 1000 101.-1-8.2 1000 74.-1-42.7 1000 101.-1-14.7 1000 74.-4-3.2 1000 101 .-2-3.1 1000 75.-2-8 1000 101 .-2-5 1000 75.-6-6.1 1000 101 ,-2-6 1000 75.-6-11 1000 102.-1-5,2 1000 75.-7-2 1000 102.-2-16 1000 75.-7-6.1 1000 102.-4-6.2 1000 83.-1-32.3 1000 102.-6-20.2 1000 83.-2-16 1000 103.-1-19.3 1000 84.-1-11 1000 103.-1-19.12 1000 84.-1-13 1000 106.-9-2.3 1000 84.-1-25.2 I000 107.-10-10.1 1000 84.-2-3.3 1000 108.-2-7.1 1000 85.-1-3 1000 108.-3-1 1000 85.-1-9 1000 108.-3-5.44 1000 85.-1-10 1000 108.-3-6.2 1000 85.-2-7 1000 108.-4-1.1 1000 85.-2-9.2 1000 109.-1-8.7 1000 85.-2-14 1000 109.-1-10.1 1000 85.-2-15 1000 109.-1-11 District Tax Map Number 1000 109.-5-23.3 1000 110.-8-2 1000 113.-7-2.5 1000 113.-7-2.6 1000 115.-4-8.6 1000 115.-7-13.2 1000 115.-9-4 1000 115.-10-1 1000 116.-1-10 1000 120.-1-3 1000 120.-1-4 1000 120.-3-2 1000 120.-3-11.8 1000 120.-3-11.9 1000 120.-3-11.10 1000 120.-3-11.11 1000 121.-3-7.4 1000 122.-7-8.8 1000 125.-2-2.2 1000 125.-3-11 1000 127.-1-1 1000 127.-2-2.1 1000 127.-3-7 1000 127.-3-11 1000 127.-3-12 1000 129.-1-1 Page 1 Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report Attachment B-3 Receiving Area Maps and Potential PDD Parcels #~ HALO Parcels Larger than $ Builder's Acres $outhold HALO Map · Community Facilities · Protected Land F'"-'I HALO L-~I Hamlet Center i HALO Parcels Larger than ~ 5 Builder's Acres Cutchogue HALO Map [] Community Facilities · Protected Land ~ HALO ~r'~z..~ Hamlet Center HALO Parcels Larger than 5 Builder's Acres East Marion HALO Map · Community Facilities · Protected Land ~ HALO ~r'~...~ Hamlet Center ~ HALO Parcels Larger than ~ $ Builder's Acres New Suffolk HALO Map · Community Facilities · Protected Land ~ HALO L'~I Hamlet Center -- HALO Parcels Larger than i__; $ Builder's Acres Orient HALO Map · Community Facilities · Protected Land ~ HALO L'~Z~I Hamlet Center HALO Parcels Larger than S Builder's Acres Peconic HALO Map · Community Facilities · Protected Land ~ HALO ~_-~, .am~et Center ~ HALO Parcels Larger than ! S Builder's Acres Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report ATTACHMENT C Sample R-20 Local Law Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report ATTACHMENT D Land Preservation Flow Chart Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report ATTACHMENT E SCDHS General Guidance Memorandum #17 #~ DEPAR'['MEI~ OF I-EAR. TH SERVICES COUNTY OF SUFFOLK STEVE:L~/'t' SUFFOLK COUN'i3' EX~clYrlv~ BRIAN I. I-IAF~PEP,,M.D., M.P.H. COMMISSIONER May13,2002 SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPAR~ OF ~Oi'.A:LTH SF_,RVICES GF.a'gE~ GUIDA.NCE ~O~UM #17 AGRICULTURAL AND GOLF COURSE DENSITY AUTHORITY The Suffolk County Sanitary Code sets forth req~ents for apprOVal of water and sewage disposal systems. The statutory authority for these guidelines can be found in Article 6 Seotion 760-603. PURPOSE Article-6 allows for the installation of subsurface sewage:disposal Systems in Groundwater Management Zones (GWMZ) I]I, E, and VI when :the.population density .equivalent is equal to or less than that oLa malty subdivision or development of single fsmi!y residences in which all parcels areat least 40,000 sq. ft. For pamels that are-outside .ofthese zones :and served by a commtmity water supply, the population density equivalent is based on minimum 20~000 sq. ft. lots. Article 6 further defines :a Clustered realty subdivision as one which allows a substantial unimproved p-on'ioti of the l~allt ~ ~titl'0pelPaa8 ~tahab-~ted: - Other ~ctto-i1 ]~roje~ that a~ not sttbdivisiom ofland such as condominiums, .planned retirement commllulties, and apartments muSt :also comPly with Article 6 population dc~slty requirements. These re4uirements are based on a standard subdivision yield map or calculation of the adjusted gross land area. PROBI;EM The process of determining population density eXlulvalent is straightforward when the undeveloped portion is to remain as.unimproved :open space, covenants and restrictions recorded agalnst.theproperty allow only ,for property maintenance activities and passive .r~reafional pursuits 'in the open space. Complications'arise when the undcvelgped pgrtion is pro:posed for agricultural use or recreational turf ~.g:.gotf. coarss~-I~lla~las). ~Be~am~-~ami'ole-6 dens~ectuimm~nts-a~6;d~° limit-total -nilrogen cone.,enll~011s in-gl~olllldl~ ~4 Mg/L ,in ,G~ l~ ¥, ~ 'alld :6 ]VIGIL in ,/he .re~ainlng zones, it is incumbent an the de!oartm~at to disallow lot ~el_'d f~rsuch.~ses. Monitoring ~cll a,ta~has shown that mrfm~ee and ~giitltl)iw~.:can add s~ni~q_am ~ilrogen to!h~ ~s shows an average nitroge~ concentration o£approximntaly 4 Mg/L and dala from fuma fields sh_ows~,at_ ni~-ate levels dom agricultural practices exceed 5 Mg/L in This guids~ce for allocating density for parcels where a~icult~e, or golf courses .or other recreational turf are proposed o~;allOWed Supersedes all p~vious guidelines ,nd is as ~follows: In 6~ie~,,,:,a~o allowable rle~siW~iconsitler.as developable only that land which will NOT be ~sed f_or a~ieultural___2 golf course,.or :other recreational ~ur~. · If 40 aores of a 1 O0 acre parec] may be farmed,,or used as a golf course, then approximately 60 units (based,on 1 unit per acre) would be allowed in Zones Ill, ¥, and VI, 'and approximately 120 units would'be.allowed in other zones (based :c~'2 units per ac~). This assumes full yield: Actual yield Would likely be lower based on either a sma/lard 20;000/40,000 sq. It. Yield map or 75% of adjusted gross land area. · if a vineyard wishes to consh'uot a .winery and "wine t~ting" la,iii!y, only that portion oi' the ;vineyard not in crops may be used for.calculation of population density equivalent. · ~or concl~mlnlnms or ll~e llnits int~tmlngled with a golf :course, the golf course portion of the pmj~-t-must be separated.out ofthe'-percal:area- Densi~ would be based on the.~nnain8er of the * For golf courses, density for accessory uses such as clubhouse or restaurant, may be derived f~om those areas not neY, rally used for Play such asparking, area of buildings and area of any wooded · For pre_existing deValopments Where land ~es been set aside fur agricultural use ur recreatinnal tur~ the same rules apply. I-Ieace, a partially dev¢laped.parcal may not ,claim density credit for acreage used for,agriCUlture .or recreational tur~.regardless of deusity atlocarion formulas that were originally used in the review and approval of the initial itevelopment proposals. Issued by: Vito A. Minei, P£., Director, Division of Environmentnl Quality May13,2002 Rev. ~uly 22, 2002; .~anuary 31, 2003; A. prll '2B, 2003 Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report ATTACHMENT F SCDHS Design Flow Factors S-OXX DETEBII.INZH~ )tJ. mJ. dOH DESXGN FLOM All sub-sur£aoe sewage d£sposaZ systems are to be deaZgned accord£ng to the occupancy rating and/or the £ollow4ng cr£teria, Buildin~ Us~ I Design Flow se Planned Ret ~e ~edroom ~ 160 allons da Seasonal Cot~a es I 100 allons da bedroom TOUr te ' Trailer Park I 150 ~allons/da~/trailer Theaters J 1.5 ~allons/day/occupant Drive-In Theaters ~ 5 ~allons{da~/parking space Bowling Alley, Racquetball or Tennis Courts [ 100 or area Public Bars Markets and Wet Stores Bath House floor area floor.area area Town of Southold TDR Program Planning Report ATTACHMENT G Hamlet Development Model TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS ORDINANCE Sarasota County, FL Department of Planning (941)951-5593 TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS SARASOTA, FLA. ORDINANCE NO. 82-61 An ordinance of the county of Sarasota, Florida, mending Sarasota County Ordinance No. 75-38, relating to transfer of development fights; providing findings; providing for establishment of sending and receiving zones; providing circumstances under which development fights may be issued and transferred; providing for issuance of trausferable development tights; providing for disqualifying land; providing for change of zoning upon transfer of development fights; providing for imposition of a development limitation on property transferring development fights; providing the procedures for approval of transfer of development rights; providing for initiation of the issuance of transferable development fights by the county; providing for the issuance of a transfer permit; providing for the exercise of rights granted by transfer permits; providing definitions; providing for the RSZ, residential sending zone and the RRZ, residential receiving zone; providing for pemdtted uses and special exceptions; providing for maximum residential density and other requirements; providing for sevembility; providing an effective date. Be it ordained by the Board of County Commissioners of Sarasota County, Florida: Section 1: Findings. The Board of County Commissioners hereby makes the following findings: 1. Zoning as applied to land permits cettain tight to develop the land for residential and other purposes. 2. Such development tights are identifiable, valuable, and severable fi'om the parcel where initially permitted. 3. It is desirable planning practice to permit the transfer of development fights fi'om certain locations in the County to other locations which can accommodate growth without increasing the overall amount of permitted development in the County. 4. Issuance of development fights for a particular parcel of land and permitting their transfer to other more suitable land can serve to prevent an unconstitutional taking of property rights without just compensation. 5. In the process of permitting the transfer of development fights from one parcel to another, the public health, safety, and general welfare may be furthered by providing for the prevention of urban sprawl, and the preservation of open space, important agricultural lands, and environmentally sensitive areas, and other purposes which serve to implement the Comprehensive Plan. Section 2. Amendment of Ordinance 75-38. Sarasota County Ordinance No. 75-38 is hereby amended as follows: In Subsection 6.5, after "RTR, Residential, Tourist Resort" add the following: RSZ Residential Sending Zone RRZ Residential Receiving Zone 2. In Subsection 6.6.a, after "RTR, Residential, Tourist, Resort" add the following: RSZ RRZ Residential Sending Zone Residential Receiving Zone 3. In Section 7, add Subsection 27 to reed as follows: 2Z Transfer of Development Rights. Transfer of development fights is intended as one method of implementing the Sarasota County Comprehensive Plan, permitting the transfer of development fights from one location to another where the associated development can be more appropriately accommodated. The transferring, or sending, location is designated as an RSZ Residential Sending Zone. The receiving location is designated as an RRZ Residential Receiving Zone. At the same time that the development fights are transfened fi`om property, a Development Limitation is placed on the transferring property to control the nature and extent of its subsequent use and development, and the transferring property will normally be rezoncd to reflect the absence of the rights transferred. Establishment of Sending Zones. The RSZ district is herewith concurrently established as an overlay sending zone for the transfer of development rights. The RSZ district when applied designates land fi`om which development rights may be transferred upon issuance ora Transfer Permit as provided below; provided, however, the RSZ district shall not be applied tmless such zoning is consistent with and serves to implement the Comprehensive Plan and the land involved constitutes: (1) A platted subdivision which due to the size of the lots, the lack of paved streets or drainage, or other deficiencies fails substantially to conform to the requirements oftbe Sarasota County Land Development Regulations, Ordinance No. 81-12, in force at the time such zoning is to be applied; (2) An environmentally sensitive area; or (3) An area which should be retained in agricultural open space, or other conservation uses. Establishment of Receiving Zones. Thc RRZ district is herewith concurrently established as an overlay receiving zone for the transfer of development rights. Where the RRZ district is applied, land may be used as permitted by the underlying zoning and in addition may be used for single family, two family, townhouse, cluster housing, or multiple family dwellings at a density which combines that permitted by the underlying zoning and that allowed by any development rights transferable to the land in the RRZ district. The RRZ district shall not be applied where such zoning would be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Further, it is not intended that by designating land in the RRZ district that rezoning to higher density is appropriate for the land generally or its immediate environs. Circumstances Under Which Transfer of Development Rights May Be Allowed. After land has been designated under the RSZ district, the Board of County Commissioners may issue transferable development rights for such land and authorize their transfer in accordance with this section where the Board finds that issuance and tmusfer of the development rights will serve to implement the Comprehensive Plan. Any development rights issued pursuant to this section shall not be used on the property from which they derive, but may be used on any land designated under the RRZ district consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. (1) Issuance of Transferable Development Rights. Transferable development rights shall be (2) issued in dwelling units based upon the amount of dwelling units permitted under the current zoning on the property, taking into consideration any pre-existing plats. A suitable numbering system shall be followed by the County to identify particular development rights issued pu~usnt to this section. Disqualifying Land. In the computation of any transferable development rights under this section, no transferable development fights shall be computed for any land in a right-of-way or easement which precludes its occupation by dwellings or where, by operation of private restrictions or state or federal law, development of the land is prohibited. (3) Change of Zoning. Upon issuance of development rights in accordance with this section, the zoning on the land from which they derive shall be changed to reflect the absence of the rights to be transferred unless the zoning has already been so changed. (4) Development Limitation. Prior to exercise of the tmusferable development rights issued pursuant to this section, the property owner shall grant a conservation easement to Sarasota County pursuant to Section 704.06, Florida Statutes. Such easement shall limit use of the transferring property to agricultural or open space uses and shall prohibit, except as reasonably incidental to agricultural use, the activities and uses cited in paragraphs (a)-(g) of section 704.06(1), Florida Statutes. The easement may provide, however, upon Board of County Commissionem approval, for existing uses to continue and for limited development of new uses based upon any residual development tights remaining after the primary development rights have been transferred evidence o~ title satisfactory to the County Attorney shall also be provided. Upon the establish, anent of conservation easements pursuant to this section, the County shall not auth~c/rize their release. d. Initiation by Property Owner - Approval Procedure. (1) Application. A property owner desiring to obtain permission to transfer development rights from particular property which has been zoned RSZ shall apply for issuance of a Transfer Permit. Such application shall be filed with the Planning Dh'~ctor on a form requesting information as the Director may reasonably require and approved by the Board of County Commissioners, which shall include the following: (a) Name, address and telephone number of applicant and the applicant's agent, if any. (b) Legal description of the property. (c) Map drawn to scale of not less than 1 inch equals 400 feet showing existing land use on the property and any existing streets, structures, water courses and easements within or adjacent to the property. This map shall include a North directional arrow and shall also show the gross acreage of the property. (d) Statement identifying the existing zoning on the property. (e) The proposed grant of easement to Sarasota County creating the Development Limitation for the property, and evidence of title. (f) Such fee as the Board of County Commissioners may by resolution establish. County shall (2) Agency Review~ The planning Director shall circulate any application for review by appropriate County agencies, and upon completion of such review shall forward the application to the Planning Commission for review. (3) Planning Commission Review. The Planning Commission shall review the application, the comments of County agencies, and, after notice and heatings required by Section 20.2 and 20.3 for special Exceptions, shall make findings of fact and recommend the application to the Board of County Commissioners for approval, approval with modifications or conditions, or (4) Board of County Commissioners Action. The Board of County Commissioners shall review the application and the fmdings and recommendation of the Planning Commission, and after notice and heating as required by Section 20.2 and 20.3, shall approve, approve with modifications or conditions, or deny the application for a Transfer Permit. Such approval shall be conditioned upon delivery to the County of an executed grant of easement creating a Development Lhnitation pursuant to paragraph c(4) above, as approved in the application or as specified by the Board, and recording copies of same together with a copy of the Transfer Permit in the deed records for Sarasota County, and may include other reasonable conditions including, but not limited to, rezoning related to the transfer and vacation or change to existing plats. Initiation by the County. In addition to the foregoing procedures for initiation of a transfer of development rights by a property owner, the Board of County Conmuss~oners on Its own motion may issue transferable development fights to a given parcel of property zoned RSZ. Such rights shall only be issued where the Board finds, after review by the Planning Commission in accordance with Paragraph d(3) above and notice and heating as required by Sections 20.2 and 20.3, that issuance and transfer of the development rights will serve to implement the Comprehensive Plan. f. Exercise of Rights Granted by Transfer Permit. (1) Who May Exercise Such Rights. Upon issuance of a Transfer Permit by the Board of Commissioners, the Clerk to the Board shall register the identifying numbers os such rights together with the name and address of the person to whom they are issued. Such rights may be subsequently exercised by the registrant or they may be assigned. In the event of assignment, the name and address of the assignee must be registered with the clerk to the Board identifying the rights assigned prior to their exercise by assignee. All assignments also be recorded in the deed records for the property for which the Transfer Permit was issued. (2) Application for Building Permits. Upon application for a building permit in an RRZ dislrict where the applicant seeks to utilize development rights authorized by a Transfer Permit, the applicant shall also submit a copy of the Transfer Permit, evidence of compliance with the conditions of the Permit's issuance, a copy of any assignment of development rights being relied upon in the application, and a certification by the Clerk to the Board that the applicant (3) (4) transfer these is the current registrant for such rights as shown by the Clerk's records. Upon such submission, the applicant shall be authorized to utilize the development tights transferred in addition to rights allowed under existing zoning on the receiving parcel, subject to the requirements of the RRZ district and the underlying zoning. Extinguishment of Rights. Utilization ofparticniar development rights transferred shall extinguish such fights. In Section 28, add Subsections 135A and 135B as follows: 135A. Transfer of Development Rights. Transfer of development rights is a means of transferring residential density authorized pursuant to this ordinance form one parcel in an RSZ Residential Sending Zone district to another parcel in the RRZ Residential Receiving Zone district. (See also Section 7.27, Transfer of Development Rights.) 135B. Transfer Permit Transfer Permit means a permit issued by the Board of County Commissioners authorizing the transfer of rights to develop a specified number of units from one parcel in an RSZ Residential Sending Zone disttrct to another parcel in the RRZ Residential Receiving Zone disttrict. (5) In the Official Schedule of District Regulations make the following amendments: (a) Amend sheet S-i adding in the three columns on the line after" 'RTR', Residential, Tourist Resort" the following: Residential Sending Zone S-60-f Residential Receiving Zone S-60-g (b) Add new pages beginning with S-60-f as follows: "RSZ" - RESIDENTIAL SENDING ZONE (See also Section 7.27, Transfer of Development Rights.) INTENT: The RSZ Residential Sending Zone is established to designate areas for the of development rights to other locations in the county. It is further the intent of regulations that the RSZ district is to operate as an overlay zone in conjunction with the underlying zoning on the land where the RSZ district is applied. It is intended to utilize this district to implement the Comprehensive Plan within locations which meet the requirements of subsection 7.27.a of the regulations for the application of this district. PERMITrED USES, SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS, AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS: Uses permitted by right and by special exception and other requirements in this district shall be as provided by the underlying zoning where the RSZ district is applied. (c) Add new pages beginning with S-60-g as follows: "RRZ" - RESIDENTIAL RECEIVING ZONE (See also Section 7.27, Transfer of Development Rights.) i. INTENT: The RRZ Residential Receiving Zone is established to provide areas for the receipt of devehipment fights transferred from other locations in the county. It is further the intent of these regulations that the RRZ district is to operate as an overlay zone in conjunction with the underlying zoning on the land where the RRZ district is applied. It is generally intended to utilize this district to implerv~nt the Comprehensive Plan within locations which can reasonable accommodate the increased density associated with this district.  ERMITTED USES AND EXCEPTIONS ) In addition to the permitted uses and special exceptions allowed by the underlying zoning where the RRZ district is applied the following are allowed as ~x~ I permitted uses with the utilization of development rights transferred in / ~,~5~4{0,N,..12' ~ o{O accordance with Section 7.27, Transfer of Development Rights ~0 ~ a) Single family dwel!ings. ~-~e*[~'l~'~'-~- -- ~'k ~.~'&~, b) Two family dwellings.~.,~" ~ ~"~ 3{~e-'' ~-- ~ OX~ /~ c) Multiple family dwelffng?.~ ( (~0O~\ '~'~ ' /~ d) Townhouses (see Section 7.27 and Section 28.131) orclaster housing (see M..~..~ ~ Section 7.26 and Section 28.25).* f 2) The foregoing uses in addition to being permitted in the RRZ dislxict shall also be ~ deemed to be penrdtted uses in the underlying district where the RRZ district is applied provided that development rights are utilized as provided above. (3) For multiple family dwellings, townhonses, and cluster housing / / ~ site plan approval is required (See Section 15.5). The residential density of permitted uses shall not exceed one hundred and twenty- five percent (125%) of the maximum residential density of the underlying zoning nor shall it exceed under any circumstances the applicable density limitations set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. A special exception shall be required to exceed the limit of one hundred and twenty-five percent (125%) provided that in no case shall the residential density exceed eighteen (18) units per acre. Section 3. Severability. If any provision of this ordinance is for any mason finally held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such provision shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon receipt of official acknowledgment from the office of the Secretary of State of Florida that his ordinance has been filed with said office Identification of Receiving Zone Options Single FamilY Homes ' · Allow in residential zoning district through further subdivision x~ ~ · Half lot size requirements (not less than t-0,000-~F) -. ¢ · Dimensional requirements pursuant to applicable lot size nearest zone · Specify existing applicable zones and resultant zones for requirements Two-Family Homes · Allow in residential zoning district through creation of one structure per lot. · Dimensional requirements pursuant to underlying zone · Specify existing applicable zones ¢~' Multiple Family DU · Allow in residential zoning district through change of zone to HD. or HB for qualifying lots · Dimensional requirements pursuant to HD/HB ~' Ix~.~? Detached Accessory RDU · Allow in residential zoning district through building permit j · Lot size must be 1.5 times zoning, or ./~, · Must conform to l.5 times setback requiremelas x ~ ~ · Specify existing applicable zones 'J tx '~ X~.,. Planned Development District \ ~ · Encourage adoption of PDD local law · Apply to HALO's through change of zone · Identify lots 5 acres and greater as candidates · Seek mixed use development with public benefits · Major public benefit is extinguishing TDRs and providing sewage treatment Sending/Receiving TDRs SENDING CREDITS VS. RECEIVING CREDITS BASED ON MODEL School District Sending Zone Receiving Zone Receiving Zone TDRs TDRs (Total) TDRs (30% cap) Mattituck-Cutchogue 1071 150 44 New Suffolk 0 56 16 Southold 458 541 162 Greeport 7 0 0 Oysterponds 122 104 31 Town of Southold TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS PROGRAM Planning Report to the Town Board Drai~ 4-11-07 1.0 Introduction The Town of Southold is seeking to implement a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Program for the purpose of enhancing the range of tools available for the preservation of open spaces. The Town Board of the Town of Southold is pro-actively involved in advancing this initiative. As a means of defining a program that recognizes the complexities ofa TDR program in Southold, the Town Board retained an environmental planning consulting firm to coordinate efforts with a team of Town representatives to define the planning parameters for a Southold TDR Program. The program is outlined in this Planning Report to the Town Board, and is intended to provide a base framework for environmental impact evaluation [in the form of a Supplement to the prior Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GELS) for the Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy] and to facilitate drafting of a proposed Local Law to implement the Program. The program will be devised through this process and while recommendations and guidance is provided through this report, final decisions are to be made by the Town Board, and flexibility exists in implementing program elements. Team participants are listed as follows: Mark Terry, Project Manager · Melissa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator · John Sepenoski, Data Processing Patricia Finnegan, Esq., Town Attorney · Leslie Weisman, Volunteer · Charles Voorhis, CEP, AICP, Consultant The team met on a regular basis between January and April of 2007; periodic involvement of Town Board members provided direction and policy guidance during the course of this study. Other Town staff and resources of Nelson, Pope & Voorhis, LLC (NP&V), consultant to the Town, were used in the preparation of this study. This report constitutes the study's findings and team recommendations resulting from these efforts. The purpose of this report is to define the elements of a Town of Southold TDR Program. It should be noted that, through the TDR Program, the Town seeks to provide an additional mechanism for the preservation of open spaces, without expenditure of public funds. At present, the Town has successful farmland and woodland open space preservation programs underway through the Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) program and fee title acquisition of land. The Town seeks to continue these programs, but seeks to provide a means to leverage funds through alternative preservation tools that do not require public expenditures. The proposed TDR program is viewed as a means of accomplishing this goal. Anticipated TDR Credits Available in Proposed Sending Area by School District Min Lot School District Acres Size Credits Green@ort 13 1.84 7 Mattituck 1972 1.84 1071 New Suffolk 0 1.84 (: Oysterponds (2 acre zones) 211 1.84 114 Oysterponds (5 acre zone) 41 4.6 ~ Southold 843 1 .Sz 458 Totals 3080 1658 Notes: Proposed sending area includes land as follows: Subdividable, buildable only At least 7 buildable acres AC, R-80, R-200 zones ~ In Ag District or with Ag Exemption Not in a HALO Not Protected Not Community Facility Credits calculated based on maximum yield calculation used for Conservation Subdivisions i.e. buildable acreage divided by minimum lot size and then rounded down Quality Communities Grant Program 2005-2006 WHEREAS, the Southold Town Board authorizes the Southold Town Planning Board to submit an application to the Department of State Quality Communities Program ( 2005- 2006) for Environmental Protection Funds to develop local laws, land use regulations and provide graphic support to implement the Town of Southold Comprehensive Plan documents including the Town of Southold Hamlet Study, and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Board authorizes The Supervisor to execute all financial and/or administrative processes, and WHEREAS, the funds solicited through this program will be used for the purposes of or development of local laws, land use regulations and graphic support to implement the Town of Southold Comprehensive Plan documents including the Town of Southold Hamlet Study in an amount not to exceed up to $75,000 (seventy-five thousand dollars) and that the town will commit up to $15,000 (fifteen thousand dollars) in match (the match will include in-house staff salaries, copying and materials). THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Town of Southold supports this project io develop local laws, land use regulations and provide graphic support to implement the Town of Southold Comprehensive Plan documents including the Town of Southold Hamlet Study. Resolution offered by and seconded by: Vote of governing body: Certification of vote by Clerk: LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the th day of April, 2007 a Local Law entitled "A Local Law in relation to an Agricultural Planned Development District" NOTICE IS HERBY FURTHER GIVEN that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, on the at 8:00 p.m. at which time all interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard. The proposed Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to an Agricultural Planned Development District" reads as follows: LOCAL LAW NO. 2007 A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to an Agricultural Planned Development District". BE IT ENACIED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: I. Legislative Intent. Farmland is a critical component of the Town of Southold's rural character. Agriculture provides the cornerstone of the land use environment valued by year-round residents as well as visitors. Numerous planning documents and studies in the Town's comprehensive planning over the past 20 years have recognized this value and have recommended strategies to preserve this key resource. In recent years, the Town has engaged in an aggressive effort to preserve farmland through the use of a variety of conservation tools, most notably the purchase of development rights. The Town has joined with other governmental agencies at the Federal, State and County levels, and with conservation groups such as the Peconic Land Trust to further its efforts. In addition, the Town has made use of various long- and short-term funding options to purchase interests in farmland, such as the Community Preservation Fund (CPF) transfer tax, voter-approved bonds and grants. The Town Board recognizes that preservation efforts must continue in accordance with the Town's comprehensive planning efforts and initiatives. Additional funds will be required, and if possible, leveraged, to enable the Town to continue to purchase interests in farmland and retain the Town's rural character. The Town Board determines that its land preservation efforts can best be accomplished through a number of legislative initiatives. This local law creates an Agricultural Planned Development District, a floating zone classification. The Agricultural Planned Development District is intended to encourage the preservation and conservation of farmland, while preserving land equity. It is intended to provide incentive to Landowners dedicated to the preservation and conservation of farmland, while providing the Town with a means to prioritize lands at risk of development. New York State Town Law Section 261-c provides the framework to accomplish these goals. II. Chapter 280 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended to create a new Article XXX, as follows: Sec. 280-170. Purpose. The Agricultural Planned Development District is designed to provide for the implementation of the Town's comprehensive planning initiatives and encourage the protection and business of farming in the Town of Southold. The creation of the district emphasizes the importance of agriculture as both a vital economic base and as a land form that provides the town with much of its rural character and scenic beauty. This program will provide the landowner with another mechanism to access the equity in his land by providing him with development rights that can be immediately transferred or sold, incrementally or at one time, to facilitate the preservation of farmland without having to subdivide his property. This Agricultural Planned Development District creates a mechanism whereby the property can be rezoned upon application of the landowner. 280-172. Classification. A. The Agricultural Planned Development District (AgPDD) is established as a Planned Development District pursuant to Town Law Section 261-c. 2 B. The AgPDD classification may be considered on a floating zone basis. Upon rezoning to the AgPDD classification, all principal and accessory uses, restrictions and controls listed in the specific AgPDD shall govern the lands subject to the rezoning. 280-173. Requirements for Eligibility. All properties meeting the standards and criteria set forth in this Article shall be deemed eligible for rezoning as an AgPDD. In order to be considered for rezoning to AgPDD, lands in the Town of Southold must meet all of the following criteria: A. The lands must consist of a sub-dividable parcel of at least seven (7)acres meeting the Town's preservation goals and included in the Community Preservation Project Plan (CPPP), which may consist of a lot designated as a separate tax map number, or of two or more contiguous lots with separate tax map numbers. A landowner may also apply for the rezoning of a parcel contiguous to property already zoned AgPDD or already preserved, even if smaller than seven (7) acres. B. The parcel must be enrolled in an agricultural district or individual commitment, pursuant to Article 25AA of New York State Agriculture and Markets Law. C. The Town Board must find that the parcel provides an environmental, physical, economic, aesthetic, social or cultural benefit to the Town. 280-174. Zoning Approval; Application and review procedure. The Town Board may rezone lands from that of their underlying zoning district to the AgPDD classification upon written application of the landowner pursuant to this Article. A. Application. An applicant shall submit two (2) copies of the following to the Town Board: 1. Form of Application approved by the Town Board, including the name of the owner and/or applicant, description of current use of the property, and disclosure affidavit; 2. Deed(s) covering all lands for which application is made; 3. Survey(s) or map(s) showing all lands proposed to be rezoned to AgPDD, and any improvements on those lands. B. Upon receipt of a completed application, the Town Board shall review the application at a worksession and make a preliminary determination whether the Board is interested in considering rezoning of the parcel to AgPDD. If the Town Board is interested in considering the rezoning, it shall refer the application to the Planning Board and to the Land Preservation Committee and, as applicable, to the Agricultural Advisory Committee, for review and recommendation. C Upon receipt of the application, the Land Preservation Committee shall consider the application at its next meeting and prepare recommendations to the Town Board with a copy to the Planning Board. E. If the applicant seeks an agricultural structure area and/or residential structure area, the placement shall be agreed upon between the Land Preservation Committee, the Planning Board and the landowner. D. Upon recommendation of the Planning Board and the and the Land Preservation Committee, the Land Preservation Coordinator shall commission a survey and a title search of the property, which will be forwarded to the Planning Department upon receipt. E. The Planning Department will calculate the yield on the parcel based on the zoning in effect at the time of the application. Yield will be calculated as follows: Buildable Lands + Mimimum Lot Area of Zoning District= Yield on Entire Parcel. The landowner will be informed of the number of development rights available on the parcel. C. Environmental Review. The Town Board shall comply with SEQRA in acting upon any application for the rezoning of any lands to the AgPDD classification. F. The Planning Board and other committees shall provide a report within ninety (90) days of the date of the meeting at which the referral is received from the Town Board. No action shall be taken by the Town Board until receipt of the Planning Board report and other Committee reports, as applicable, or the expiration of its 60-day review period, whichever comes first. The review period may be extended by mutual consent of the applicant, the Town Board, the Planning Board, and, as applicable, the Land Preservation Committee and/or the Agricultural Advisory Committee. G. Planning Board Report. The Planning Board may recommend approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval of the proposed rezoning. In preparing its report, the 4 Planning Board shall take into account the recommendations of the Southold Town Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy, adopted as policy by Town Board resolution of January 18, 2000 and supporting documents, the recommendations of the Land Preservation Committee, the Agricultural Advisory Committee, the studies contained in the Town's comprehensive planning efforts and initiatives, the existing characteristics of the property and the surrounding properties, the environmental, social, physical, aesthetic, economic and cultural aspects of the property and its surroundings, and such other factors as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this Article and this Chapter. The Plaiming Board's report shall provide detailed reasons for its recommendation. H. Public Heating. Within thirty (30) days of the receipt of the Planning Board report, or the expiration of the Planning Board review period, whichever occurs first, the Town Board may schedule a public hearing on the application, with the same notice prescribed for zoning amendments. I. Town Board Action. Within thirty (30) days of the date of the closing of the public heating, the Town Board shall either approve or disapprove the rezoning and file its decision with the Town Clerk, with notice to the applicant. In approving such rezoning, the Town board shall determine, after considering the Planning Board's recommendation, that the subject parcel contains adequate resources, environmental quality and public facilities, including adequate transportation, water supply, waste disposal and fire protection, and that there will be no significant environmentally damaging consequences. If approved, the Town Board shall amend the zoning map of the Town in accordance with the approval and forward a copy of the resolution containing the decision to the Planning Board, the Land Preservation Committee, the Agricultural Advisory Committee, and the applicant. Any such approval shall be subject to the Conditions of Approval as set forth below in 280-175 of this Chapter. 280-175. Conditions of Approval. A. The boundaries of the re-zoned property, permitted uses thereon, and number of development rights shall become part of this Town Code and the Zoning Map shall be amended accordingly. B The Land Preservation department shall coordinate the closing and filing of the easement in accordance with their normal procedures for purchase of development rights. C Easement. 1. Following a public hearing and approval of the rezoning pursuant to Chapter 280 of the Town Code and Chapter 247 of the General Municipal Law, the Landowner shall sell at least one (1) development right to the Town. The landowner shall file a Preservation Easement (the "Easement") on the property following the sale, in the form provided by the Town, which shall indicate that at least one (1) development right has been sold, and shall also indicate the number o f remaining development rights available for sale or transfer from the parcel. a. The easement shall be acceptable to the Landowner, the Town Attorney's office and shall be consistent with the terms of the AgPDD. b. The easement shall be recorded in the Office of the Suffolk County Clerk. 280-175 Price for Development Rights The Town Board shall by resolution, at least annually, set a price to be paid by the Town for AgPDD development rights sales. This price shall be based on a recommendation from the Land Preservation Committee and shall be based on comparable sales data. 280-176. Subsequent Development Right Sales to the Town A. At any time, the landowner may offer to sell development rights on all or part of the parcel that has been zoned AgPDD. The development rights may be sold to the Town or to others provided that the landowner enters into a conservation easement on the property in a form acceptable to the Town. The conservation easement shall list the number of development rights sold and the number remaining, based on the yield for the parcel as set forth at the time of rezoning to AgPDD. B. At the discretion of the Town, the Town may commission a new survey and a title search of the property. C. The Land Preservation Coordinator shall make a determination of the number of development rights remaining for purchase on the parcel based on the original yield as calculated by the Planning Department less any development rights sold, and shall so advise the Land Preservation Committee. The Land Preservation Committee shall make a recommendation to the Town Board on the purchase of development rights. D. The Town Board shall hold a public heating on the question of the purchase of development rights from the AgPDD zoned parcel, and may adopt a resolution approving or disapproving the sale. Any resolution shall set forth the number of development rights pumhased and the number remaining on the parcel. At the time of sale, a preservation easement as set forth above in 280-175 shall be filed indicating the additional number of development rights that have been extinguished from the parcel, and the remaining number of development rights. E. Development rights may be purchased by the Town in increments of one-half (1/2) of a development right. F. The Town Board shall not be required to purchase development rights from a parcel zoned AgPDD sooner than six (6) months after the previous pumhase on the same parcel. G. Upon the landowner's application, the Town shall purchase up to at least ten percent (10%) of the landowners residual development rights, or not less than one full development right, per year. The Town has the option, if requested by the landowner, to purchase more than ten percent each year. 280-177. (Reserved) 280-178. Clearing House. The Land Preservation Coordinator will maintain a log indicating the development rights sold and remaining on any parcel zoned AgPDD. The easement executed and recorded by the landowner at the time of each sale will indicate the number of development rights sold and the number remaining on the parcel. §280-179 Conditions A. Any reserved area for development shall be set by the Town Board and defined in the Town Code at the time of rezoning to AgPDD. A landowner may apply to the Town Board to 7 amend such code if circumstances have changed since the rezoning. Any additional reserved area will be deducted from the available development rights on the pamel. B. Any structure proposed on a parcel which is zoned AgPDD will require the approval of the Land Preservation Committee prior to issuance of a building permit. The approval of the committee shall take into account the conditions set forth in the preservation easement on the property. C. Ifa residential structure exists on property zoned AgPDD, any new non-agricultural structure must be located within 150 feet of the existing residential structure. §280-180 Subdivision A. If the landowner of property zoned AgPDD files for subdivision of the property, the land Preservation Coordinator shall advise the Planning Board of the number of development rights remaining on the parcel. B. Any conservation subdivision of AgPDD property must accomplish preservation of eighty percent (80%) of the parcel, and density reduction of seventy-five percent (75%) of the original yield. If the landowner elects to pursue this Conservation Subdivision, the land preserved by sale of development rights shall apply toward the required preservation component. C. If the Townis unableto meet its obligation to purchase 10% of development rights as set forth in 280-176G, the landowner may pursue a Standard Subdivision based on the zoning in effect on the parcel at the time it was zoned AgPDD. Any land preserved by sale of development rights shall not be applied toward any preservation or subdivision open space requirement. III. SEVERABILITY If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this law as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid. IV. EFFECTIVE DATE This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as provided by law. HALO RESIDENTIAL TDR WORKGROUP/ April 4th, 2007 / \' A. ESTABLISHEMENTOFSENDINGDISTRICTS V~ 1. Should the Sending District include only land in agriculture use or land in~ agriculture and open space? 2. If only agriculture use is designated should it be all land in agriculture use or only agricultural lands participating in the Agricultural Exemption Program,?--,,,,,, 3. To maintain consistency through the programs, should the minimum acreage eligible to participate in the program be 7 acres?, / ~,~ B. ESTABLIS" 'ENTOF CE,VIN DISTRICTC 1. Is the receiving area limited to the HALO areas. ~'"~..5a;~' '\ C"*'- C. USE OF TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS AND UNDERLYING ZONING The TDR program will not impede or adversely impact current "by right" use or density (zoning) of a parcel. By right use and density permitted under existing zoning will not require a TDR credit. Any proposal to downzone a parcel or create a accessory detached residential building on a parcel would require a TDR credit. The following residential uses will require a TDR credit. 1. Two Family Dwelling Unit {} 280-4. Definitions. of the Town of Southold Town Code defines a two family dwelling unit as: DWELLING, TWO-FAMILY -- A detached building containing two dwelling units only. Table 1. Town of Southold Town Code Two Family Dwelling Units Requirements Zoning District Permitted by Special Owner One Site Plan Right Exception Occupied Structure Required Restriction AC, R-80, R-120, NO YES YES YES NO R-200 and R-400 RO YES NO NO NO NO LB YES NO YES NO NO HD YES NO NO YES/COND YES HB NO NO YES YES NO B NO NO YES YES NO Note: In the HD zonin district two-family dwellings are subject to residential site plan approval for more than one such structure Der lot. 2. Multiple Family Dwelling Unit § 280-4. Definitions. of the Town of Southold Town Code defines a multi family dwelling unit as DWELLING, MULTIPLE -- A building or portion thereof containing three or more dwelling units. Table 2. Town of Southold Multiple Family Dwelling Unit Requirements Zoning District Permitted by Special Owner One Site Plan Right Exception Occupied Structure Required Restriction HD YES NO NO NO YES HB YES NO NO NO YES Note: In the HD/HB zone multiple dwellings, townhouses, row or a~ached dwellings are, subject to residential site plan approval. It is recommended that the Town Board allow accessory detached residential dwelling units (~) in the HALO areas. Table 3. Residential Use and Transfer of Development Right Requirement Residential Use Transfer Dev~lopme'nt Right Required Two Family Units Yes Multi Family Units Yes Accessory Detached Residential Yes Dwelling Units Accessory Apartment No Note: That pursuant to Article 6, the inclusion of accessory ap~tments within a principal residential dwelling will not require a TDR credit, however, the applicant must demonstrate to the SCDOH services that the septic system can handle the added septic flow. ii. iii. iv. Will applicants seeking a TDR for a two family residential use be required to apply to the Town Board for approval of the TDR? Will a two family residential use require twice the minimum lot size in the respective zoning district to qualify for a TDR? Will an applicant be required to seek a ZBA determination for variances once a TDR credit is granted? or Will a new bulk schedule for HALO parcels be created similar to the AHD bulk schedule below? AHD District Minimum Requirements Total lot area (square feet) Two-Family Dwellings 20,000 Multiple Dwellings 40,000 Lot width (feet) 100 150 Lot depth (feet) 140 200 Front yard (feet) 35 45 1 side yard (feet) 15 20 Both side yards (feet) 30 40 v. Will applications proposing multi-family units be required to seek Town Board approval for TDR credits? vi. In the HALO area, will the Planning Board have the ability to waive the cluster open space requirement? vii. Will the Town Board permit accessory detached accessory residential dwelling units (DA~IDU) in the HALO areas? viii. Would parcels which have received a TDR for DARDU be permitted to subdivide to less than the minimum lot size in the zoning district? ix. Will__nonconforming lots which have received a TDR to construct an DA~DU. . be required' to file a "no further subdiws~on'" ' ' covenant and restriction if the lots are nonconforming? D. TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHT RATIO 1. ls the transfer ratio for 1 TDR unit -- 1 Single Family Unit w/300 gpd sanitary flow?X'~ / E. CALCULATION OF TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS 1. Will the Planning Board calculate the number of density credits on a parcel using the folloxving (SCDHS) formula? Buildable Land Acres (sq ft) x 0.75 (SCDHS Yield Factor) = Land Area/Zoning Lot Size = Density Credits For Example: 25 (1,089,000 sq. ft.) acres of AC Zoned Land x 0.75 = 816,750 sq. ft. 816,750 sq. ft./80,000 sq ft = 10.20 density credits or 11 density units. Numbers shall be rounded up to the next number (,proposed built in density bonus). IMPORTANT NOTE: SCDHS criteria would assign the following gpd sanitary flow to the same 25 acre parcel: 25 acres without public water = 6300 gpd sanitary flow equal to 21 units. 25 acres with publ/c water -- 12,251 gpd sanitary flow equal to 41 units. F. MANAGEMENT OF TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHT CREDITS 1. Does the Town Board want to establish a TDR bank to manage the "Certificates o f Development Rights" credit transaction and recording? 2. Will the recording of TDR transactions be accomplished by the Land Preservation Department, Office of the Planning Board or Town Clerks Office? PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS JERILYN B. WOODHOUSE Chair KENNETH L. EDWARDS MARTIN H. SIDOR GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cot. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 To: Scott Russell, Supervisor Members of the Town Board From: Mark Terry, Principal Planner Date: March 27, 2007 Re: Proposed Amended NYS Quality Community Grant/Transfer of Development Rights Work Plan The Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) Workgroup would like to clarify the intent of the added proposal prepared by Chic Voorhis and submitted to the Town Board via email on March 14th, 2007. As discussed in the email, the work plan closely reflected the work-plan outlined in the original NYS Quality Communities Grant Award. However, it is recommended that the consultant also include the following: 1. Analyze the advantages and disadvantages that a TDR program would have on commercial use. 2. Analyze the advantages and disadvantages of including only agriculture use or both agriculture and open space use in a TDR program. 3. Analyze the TDR credit "balance" between the Sending Area and the Receiving Area. 4. Define and develop the mechanics of the program. If the Town Board is in agreement with the proposed amendments I will revise the grant work plan with the Department of State. Cc: Melissa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator John Sepenoski, Technical Coordinator II Terry, Mark From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Terry, Mark Wednesday, March 14, 2007 12:05 PM Russell, Scott; alkrupskitown@yahoo.com; Lpevans (Ipevans@fishersisland.net); Bill Edwards (wpe@post. harvard.edu); Jeriwood (Jeriwood@aol.com); jtownsend2@aol.com; Ross1042 (ross1042@aol.com); wickhamthomas@yahoo.com; Ken Edwards (pappy@fishersisland.net); Marly Sidor (sidor@optonline.net); Goerge Solomon (wallst71@optonline. net); Finnegan, Patdcia Spiro, Melissa; Sepenoski, John; Weisman, Leslie; Cushman, John SCAN8658_000.pdf SCAN8658_000.pdf In response to the Town Board hiring Chic Voorhis of Nelson, Pope and Voorhis, LLC to perform SEQR on the Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program; the Transfer of Development Rights Work Group has been meeting regularly every two weeks over the past month to discuss the details of the program and the progress the Town has made to date. As you may recall, Chic was hired under the premise that the $60,000. Quality Communities Grant that the Town received would fund the work. The problem is that the scope of the original proposal does not coincide with the Quality Communities Grant Work Plan. To receive the full amount of the grant award the scope of the proposal must significantly meet the work plan. Correspondingly, the Transfer of Development Rights Work Group has also concluded that the Transfer of Development Rights Plan is not at a stage and/or format that SEQR can be effectively applied. Therefore, the work group is recommending that the Town Board expand the scope of Chic's proposal to include the tasks outlined in the Quality Communities Grant Work Plan. Chic's original proposal for SEQR services for the Transfer of Development Rights program totaled $33,500. Attached is a second proposal in the amount of $15,400, which closely follows the scope of the grant work plan. It is the position of the work group that the implementation of the work plan is vital to developing an effective and successful Transfer of Development Rights program to which SEQR could be applied. It is recommended that the scope of work of the second proposal be added to Chic's contractual services. The total amount of contractual services would then equal $48,900. The remaining money in the grant budget would equal $11,100. I am available to discuss this further at the next Town Board worksession. In the interim, please call me with any questions. 3/27/2007 NELSON, POPE ~, VOOF:IHIS, LLC From: Date: Re: Voor is, March 13, 2007 TDR Program; Proposal for Serv'ie/~ NP&V No. 07008 Memorandum Dear Mark, I am in receipt of a copy of the Work Program (Part G) which is the basis of the Quality Communities Grant. You had asked me to review this and ensure that the work being conducted conforms to this grant. In review of the Work Program, it is noted that the questions which must be answered for the grant are very similar to thc items requested in my Memorandum of January 19, 2007 which requested items to assist in commencing the environmental analysis and Supplemental GEIS for this project. These existing contract is for SEQRA services only, and as a result, the current contract does not address the essential items needed for the creation of a TDR program, which must be completed to conform with the grant and to commence SEQRA review. The specific ta~k~ identified in the grant area as follows: 1. How will the TDR Pro or am work* ,,tiS"~l}-- t~'r-n O'"~ ~~ ~ 2. Who benefits from th,s program? ,~'j-4o,-~.~/ 3. ff6w'inuch do TI~R's cost? t~oa' 4. How is the value of the TDR's established? ~ 5. 'l~'~he program voluntary or mandatory* ' '~}~:~:2~ 6. gat will be the Town's role in implementing and monitoring the program? ~t~-~.~~ 7. 2How do i participate ifI own land within a Sending Area? ~.~ 8. How do I participate ifI own land in a Receiving Area? 9. FI~w can the TDR s.be used on tile Receiving Area Properties?~"x~ ~ ,,~,.~_~ ~-- _ 10. Where are the Sending Arefis located? ~:~.4- ~t~,J~v - 11. Where are the Receiving Areas located. In addition, based on our meetings to date, there are other questions which are specific and unique to Southold Town which require consideration in the development of a TDR program. These are: 12. How does the TDR program impact other Town land preservation programs? 13. What are the implications with regard to existing ~ _~mq~g, and possible recommended changes?c~O~--<_ CockO~ 14. How do SCDHS regulations impact the TDR program? Answers to these questions would form the basic elements of a program and would allow the SEQRA review to proceed. Addressing the first 11 items would fulfill the grant, and addressing 12-14 is requked to ensure that the program is designed to be successful in the Town of Southold Based on our meeting, I believe that we have a core group that can take the input that we have received to date, and formulate the basic program. It is recommended that a small group meet on a regular basis to formulate the program based on professional plaiming judgment. The program would be framed out with rationale and justification for the decisions made by the group. of Southold TDR Program Proposal for Services I believe that my expertise, and the expertise of my fh-m can be useful in creating the document needed to establish the basic program. I would bring professional planaing capabilities to the project, a proven track record of working hand-and-hand with you and your planning staff, and resources from outside of the Town that would be useful and would help to provide solutions. Once a TDR Program document is complete, this could be handed over to the Town Attorney's office for drafting as legislation. As the plan is formulated, we can anticipate and commence the environmental analysis that we are now under contract to perform. It is extremely difficult to anticipate the costs associated with the formulation of the program as outlined above. As a result, given the finite amount of the grant, and the continuing involvement that we will have in the SEQRA review, I would propose a budget of $16,900 be allocated for the services of my f'mn to assist in this expanded project scope. This anticipates that we will continue to meet as a group to address issues, and that the existing hamlet model, as well as GIS data generation would be prepared by the Town of Southold. A table of how this might be applied, is provided below, but as in the past, we will only bill for hours expended in completion of the project, up to the maximum budget (please note reduced municipal billing rates). Personnel Hours Rate Cost Managing Partner 60 150 9000 Partner 20 140 2800 Senior Environmental Planner 20 95 1900 Environmental Planner 40 80 3200 Total $16,900 It is expected that approximately 2 months would be needed to formulate the program. Please review this proposal, and advise if you wish us to proceed as outlined herein, or call to discuss any questions which you may have. Page 2 Leslie Weisman From: Sepenoski, John [johnsep@town.southold.ny.us] Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 3:02 PM To: Terry, Mark; Spiro, Melissa; Finnegan, Patricia; Weisman, Leslie; cvoorhis@nelsonpope.com Subject: Clustered Lot Size Analysis All, Attached is a spreadsheet with my first stab at the clustered lot size analysis. I am not sure if this is exactly what we need but it has already provided me with some insight so it is definitely useful. This should not be distributed beyond the group because I haven't included explanations and may need to change the headings. I am not going to explain it in gory detail here since it is only a draft but here are some initial comments. I set it up to calculate the ultimate lot size based on different open space requirements and the minimum lot sizes for the R-80 and R-40 zones. The columns labeled "Actual Lot Size" are the results assuming no TDR. Note that as the open space requirement decreases the lot sizes increase and that you end up with lots in the R-80 zone that are twice as large as those in the R-40 zone for the same open space requirement. This is just as we would expect. The "Lot Size After TDR" columns show the resulting size assuming that the maximum number of TDR units needed to get to the half-acre density we have been discussing are transferred. Note that once again the lot sizes increase as the open space requirement decreases. However, in this case the lot sizes for both R-80 and R-40 are the same for the same open space requirement since a standard R-80 lot supports more TDR than a standard R-40 lot. This is an important point to note because although we have been modeling everything at the half-acre density based on this week's meeting we may not go in this direction which would mean this analysis would have to be changed. One thing that this spreadsheet does not show but that came to light in developing it is that the loss for infrastructure is important. Efficient designs that reduce the 15% infrastructure will allow for larger lots. Obviously, this is as always with any subdivision in Town but it is more important when TDR is in play because of the higher densities involved. Let me know your thoughts and comments. John Sep 3/23/2007 Clustered Parcel Size Analysis Open Space Min Lot Percentage Size (sq fi) R-80 60 80000 50 80000 40 80000 30 80000 20 80000 10 80000 R-40 60 40000 50 40000 40 40000 30 40000 20 40000 10 40000 Open Space per Iot(sq fi) 48000 40000 32000 24000 16000 8000 24000 20000 16000 12000 8000 4000 Open Space per lot (acres) 1.10 0.92 0.73 0.55 0.37 0.18 0.55 0.46 0.37 0.28 0.18 0.09 15% LOSS for Roads, etc. (sq ft) 12000 12000 12000 12000 12000 12000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 15% Loss for Roads, etc. (acres) 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.14 0,14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 Actual Lot Size (sq ft) 20000 28000 36000 44000 52000 60000 10000 14000 18000 22000 26000 30000 Actual Lot Size (acres) 0.46 0.64 0.83 1.01 1.19 1.38 0.23 0.32 0.41 0.51 0.60 0.69 Units at Half Lot Size Lot Size Acre Density after TDR after TDR with TDR (sq ft) (acres) 4 5000 0.11 4 7000 0.16 4 9000 0.21 4 11000 0.25 4 13000 0.30 4 15000 0.34 2 5000 0.11 2 7000 0,16 2 9000 0.21 2 11000 0.25 2 13000 0.30 2 15000 0.34 HALO RESIDENTIAL TDR WORKGROUP March 21, 2007 A. TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS AND UNDERLYING ZONING The TDR program will not impede or adversely impact current "by right" use or density (zoning) of a parcel. By right use and density permitted under existing zoning will not require a TDR credit. Any proposal to downzone a parcel or create a accessory detached residential building on a parcel would require a TDR credit. The following residential uses will require a TDR credit. 1. Two Family Dwelling Unit § 280-4. Definitions. of the Town of Southold Town Code defines a two family dwelling unit as: DWELLING, TWO-FAMILY -- A detached building containing two dwelling units only. Table 1. Town of Southold Town Code Two Family Dwelling Units Requirements Zoning District Permitted by Special Owner One Site Plan Right Exception Occupied Structure Required Restriction AC, R-80, R-120, NO YES YES YES NO R-200 and R-400 RO YES NO NO NO NO LB YES NO YES NO NO HD YES NO NO YES/COND YES HB NO NO YES YES NO B NO NO YES YES NO Note: In the HD zoning district two-family dwellings are subject to residential site plan approval for more than one such structure per lot. 2. Multiple Family Dwelling Unit § 280-4. Definitions. of the Town of Southold Town Code defines a multi family dwelling unit as DWELLING, MULTIPLE -- A building or portion thereof containing three or more dwelling units. Table 2. Town of Southold Multiple Family Dwelling Unit Requirements Zoning District Permitted by Special Owner One Site Plan Right Exception Occupied Structure Required Restriction HD YES NO NO NO YES HB YES NO NO NO YES Note: In the HD/I-IB zone multiple dwellings, townhouses, row or attached dwellings are, subject to residential site plan approval. It is recommended that the Town Board allow accessory detached residential dwelling units (ADRDU) in the HALO areas. Table 3. Residential Use and Transfer of Development Right Requirement Residential Use Transfer Dev~lopme'nt Right Required Two Family Units Yes Multi Family Units Yes Accessory Detached Residential Yes Dwelling Units Accessory Apartment No Note: That pursuant to Article 6, the inclusion of accessory apartments within a principal residential dwelling will not require a TDR credit, however, the applicant must demonstrate to the SCDOH services that the septic system can handle the added septic flow. 3. Questions for Town Board ii. iii. iv. Will applicants seeking a TDR for a two family residential use be required to apply to the Town Board for approval of the TDR? Will a two family residential use require twice the minimum lot size in the respective zoning district to qualify for a TDR? Will an applicant be required to seek a ZBA determination for variances once a TDR credit is granted? or Will a new bulk schedule for HALO parcels be created similar to the AHD bulk schedule below? AHD District Minimum Requirements Two-Family Dwellings Multiple Dwellings Total lot area (square feet) 20,000 40,000 Lot width (feet) 100 150 Lot depth (feet) 140 200 Front yard (feet) 35 45 1 side yard (feet) 15 20 Both side yards (feet) 30 40 Will applications proposing multi-family units be required to seek Town Board approval for TDR credits? In the HALO area, will the Planning Board have the ability to waive the cluster open space requirement? vii. Will the Town Board permit accessory detached accessory residential dwelling units (DARDU) in the HALO areas? viii. Would parcels which have received a TDR for DARDU be permitted to subdivide to less than the minimum lot size in the zoning district? ix. Will nonconforming lots which have received a TDR to construct an DARDU be required to file a "no further subdivision" covenant and restriction if the lots are nonconforming? 4. Recommendations~ the Town Board AHD District Minimum Requirements Two-Family Dwellings Multiple Dwellings Total lot area (square feet) 20,000 40,000 ' Lot width (feet) 100 150 Lot depth (feet) 140 200 Front yard (feet) 35 45 1 side yard (feet) 15 20 TDR RECEIVING ZONE OPTIONS Town of Southold Halo Areas Prepared for: Town of Southold TDR Discussion Group Prepared by: Chic Voorhis, NP&V Environmental Planning Consultant Date: March 20, 2007 Introduction The form that development takes within the HALO areas is a critical aspect of designing the TDR program. Currently, there are a variety of zoning districts including hamlet business, residential office, and residential zones, all of which have current density and setback requirements. Proper incentives must be established to facilitate use of TDR credits, and proper zoning must be established to ensure that if credits are redeemed in the HALO areas, that development will achieve desired goals in design. A number of options are available to achieve the function of incentivizing the redemption of credits in a form that will result in compatible land use design. This document explores several options from a planning perspective and for preliminary discussion purposes; input from the Town Attorney on legal aspects of these techniques is recommended prior to selecting an option. Receiving Zone Options TDR Overlay District This option would involve creating a TDR HALO overlay district as a new Local Law, which could be customized for each individual hamlet. The overlay district would retain the underlying zoning. Since the program is intended to be optional the Town may wish to establish performance and design standards for development of individual lots under current zoning which will achieve some of the goals of the HALO area. This could include additional or modified landscaping, architectural, parking and access, lighting, signage, amenity and setback requirements, all intended to ensure that the goals of development in the HALO areas are met. Incentives could be provided to encourage the use of TDR credits in order to achieve greater densities. The process could be simplified by expanding the list of permitted uses to include uses that will result in credit redemption, thus allowing the Planning Board to review projects for conformance with the design requirements. If certain uses are believed to have potential for greater land use review and or controls, these could be identified as Town Board Special Permit uses, and opposed to permitted uses in the District. TDR Receiving Zone Options Town of Southold HALO Areas The TDR Overlay District would identify the form that development would take by detailing the options for land use through credit redemption. For example, multiple family housing could be permitted in a single family residential zone through the overlay district, thus achieving more of a hamlet density style development in say an R-40 zone. This technique could be particularly effective in facilitating mixed~use development, apartments, and potential increases in commercial use and density, if this alternative is pursued. Benefits of this technique are that comprehensive hamlet design guidelines could be established. Incentives. would facilitate the use of TDR credits, and the process could be conducted by the Planning Board. TDR Planned Development District ~ ~2>r-~ A Planned Development District (PDD) is intended to provide flexibility in zoning through potential increases in density with public benefits provided to justify any increase in density above a base established in the current zoning district. A Local Law for one or more HALO area PDD's could be established for each hamlet, which would recognize the underlying zoning, but provide a means where a landowner could conceive of a land use project that would not ordinarily be permitted in the current zoning district. The application would involve an evaluation of the existing use potential, an evaluation of the proposed land use, and an analysis of the public benefits that would be provided to achieve a land use project that would require greater flexibility in zoning use and bulk requirements to permit the project. The Town Board would review such applications after establishing the basic requirements for the existing and proposed use and quantification of public benefits. Public benefits could include redemption of TDR credits, but could also include on-site or off-site improvements that would strengthen and improve the infrastructure, services and function of the hamlet. Benefits of this technique are maximum flexibility in design and the Town Board would most likely retain control over the use and redemption of credits. Use Individual Underlying Zoning Districts This option would involve creating a TDR section of the Town Zoning Law that would recognize the specific zoning district which would be eligible to receive TDR credits. The code section would specify the density that could be achieved through the use of credit redemption for each zone. For example, an R-20 zoned parcel in the HALO zone could achieve 10,000 square foot lots, where 20,000 square foot lots are typically required. This form of credit redemption could be set up to be implemented by the Planning Board as part of site plan or subdivision review. The benefits of this technique are it's simplicity in understanding the method by which credits are redeemed and that it could easily be implemented by the Planning Board. Page 2 of 3 TDR Receiving Zone Options Towil of Southold HALO Areas Conclusion Each option is intended to achieve the same goal of providing an incentive and a means by which TDR credits can be redeemed. Each option uses base zoning as a starting point upon which to provide the necessary zoning flexibility to achieve the goals. Since the end result is the same for each option, there are similarities and subtle differences between them, with the primary differences being the form that the technique would take in the code modifications and implementation method. These options are identified for the understanding and consideration of the TDR Discussion Group, in order to formulate a preferred option for further review by the Town Attorney and ultimate recommendation to the Town Board in a cohesive TDR program. Page 3 of 3 NELSON, POPE ~, VOOP, HIS, LLC From: Date: Re: S. Voorhis, nIC / Maroh 13, 2007 TDR Program; Proposal for Scrv~.~ NP&V No. 07008 Memorandum Dear Mark, I am in receipt of a copy of tho Work Program (Part G) which is the basis of thc Quality Communities Grant. You had asked me to revicw thi~ nnd ensRr¢ that thc work being conducted conforms to this grant. Ia review of the Work Program, it is noted that the questions which must be answered for the grant are very similar to the items requested in my Memorandum of January 19, 2007 which requested items to assist in comrn~/cing tho e~v~e~tal axlalyais and Supplemental GEIS for this project. These existing contract is for SEQRA services only, and as a result, thc current contract does not address thc essential items needed for thc creation of a TDR program, which must be completed to conform with the grant and to commencc SEQRA review. The specific m.~k~ iden~fied in thc grant area as follows: 1. I-Iow will thc TDR Program work? 2. Who benefits from this program? 3. How much do TDR's cost? 4. How is the value of the TDR's established? 5. ls the program voluntary or mandatory? 6. What will be the Town's role in implementing and monitoring the program? 7. How do I participate ifI own land within a Sending Area? 8. How do I participate ifI own land in a Receiving Area? 9. How can the TDR's be used on the Receiving Area Properties? 10. Where are the Sending Areas located? 11. Where are the Receiving Areas located? In addition, based on our meetings to date, there are other questions which are specific and unique to Southold Town which require consideration in the development of a TDR program. These are: 12. How does the TDR program impact other Town land preservation programs? 13. What are the implications with regard to existing zoning, and possible recommended changes? 14. How do SCDHS regulations impact the TDR program? Answers to these questions would form the basic elements of a program and would allow the SEQRA review to proceed. Addressing the first 11 items would fulfill the grant, and addressing 12-14 is required to ensure that the program is designed to be successful in the Town of Southold Based on our meeting, I believe that we have a core group that can take the input that we have received to date, and formulate the basic program. It is recommended that a small group meet on a regular basis to formulate the program based on professional planning judgment. The program would be framed out with rationale and justification for the decisions made by the group. of Southold TDR Program Proposal for Services I believe that my expertise, and the expertise of my £n-m can be useful in creating the document needed to establish the basic program. I would bring professional planning capabilities to the project, a proven track record of working hand-and-hand with you and your planning staff, and resources from outside of the Town that would be useful and would help to provide solutions. Once a TDR Program document is complete, this could be handed over to the Town Attorney's office for drafting as legislation. As the plan is formulated, we can anticipate and commence the environmental analysis that we are now under contract to perform. It is extremely difficult to anticipate the costs associated with the formulation of the program as outlined above. As a result, given the f'mite mount of the grant, and the continuing involvement that we will have in the SEQRA review, I would propose a budget of $16,900 be allocated for the services of my fhm to assist in this expanded project scope. This anticipates that we will continue to meet as a group to address issues, and that the existing hamlet model, as well as GIS data generation would be prepared by the Town of Southold. A table of how this might be applied, is provided below, but as in the past, we will only bill for hours expended in completion of the project, up to the maximum budget (please note reduced municipal billing rates). Personnel Hours Rate Cost Managing Partner 60 150 9000 Partner 20 140 2800 Senior Environmental Planner 20 95 1900 Environmental Planner 40 80 3200 Total $16,900 It is expected that approximately 2 months would be needed to formulate the program. Please review this proposal, and advise if you wish us to proceed as outlined herein, or call to discuss any questions which you may have. Page 2 From: Sepenoski, J Sent: Wednesday, Pe~ruary 28, 2007 8:59 AM To: Terry, Mark; Spiro, Melissa; Chic Voorh~is (E-mail); Weisman, Leslie Subject: TDR Stats Protected, not Community Facilities by school district UaBituck 3341- ~, ~ / . -- -- .~wSu,o~0 - /~g~;~[ q~Oystorpond$ 4O¢ NELSON, POPE ~, VOOF~HI~, LLC To: Mark Tent From: Charles Z Voorhi~, CEP, AICP Date: February 20, 2007 Re: TDR Program; Proposal for Services NP&V No. 07008 Dear Mark, Memorandum I am in receipt of a copy of the Work Program (Part G) which is the basis of tho Quality Communities Grant You had ~ked me to n~law ~ and ensure that the work being conducted conforms to this/rant In ~,iew of the Work Progran~ it is noted that the questions which must be answered for the grant are very slmilnr to tho items requested in my Memorandum of January 19, 2007 which requested items to assist in commencing the. environmental mmlysis and Supplemental GElS for this project. ~T~ese items are: -~. How will thc TDR Program work? ~., Ix-e''w _ ' 3 How much do TDR's cost9 v ~ '~'~P'-"~ ' 4. HOW is thc value of the TDR's established? ~-. ~'~5. Is the program voluntary or mandatory? 6. What will be the Town's role in implementing and monitoring the program? 7. How do I participate' ..... ~f I own land w~thm a Sendtn~_ Area* ~"t ~'~ / 8. How do I participate ,f I own tand m a Receiving Area? [ 9. How can the TDR's be used on the Receiving Area Properties? \ 10. Where are the Sending Areas located. ~ 11. Where are the Receiving Areas located? / ~'q. ~,4e AnL'w~'a to__th~ 2u~ans-wouin'-~rm me ~asic elaments of a program and would allow the SEQKA review to proceed. Addressing these 11 items would also fulfill the grant. Based on our meeting, I believe that we have a core group that can take the input that we have received to date, and formulate the basic program. It is recommended that a small group meet on a regular basis to formulate the program based on professional planning judgment. The pmgrnm would be framed out with rationale and justification for the decisions made by the group. I believe that my expertise, and the expertise of my f'u'm can be useful in creating the document nendcd to establish the basic program. I would bring professional planning capabilities to the project, a proven track record of working hand-and-hand with you and your planning staff, and resources from outside of the Town that would be useful and would help to provide solutions. Once a TDR Program document is complete, this could be handed over to the Town Attorney's office for drafting as legislation. As the plan is formulated, we can anticipate and commence the environmental analysis that we are now under contract to perform. It is extremely difficult to anticipate the costs associated with the formulation of the program as outlined above. As a result, given the finite amount of the grant, and the continuing involvement that we will have in the SEQRA review, I would propose a budget of $15,000 be allocated for the services of my firm to assist in this expanded project scope. A table of how this might be applied, is provided below, but as in the past, we will only bill for hours expended in completion of the project, up to the maximum budget (please note reduced muincipal billing rates). Rersonnei Hours Rate Cost Managing Partner 50 150 7500 Pa~ner 20 140 2800 Senior Environmental Planner 20 95 1900 Environmental Planner 40 80 3200 Total $15,400 It is expected that approximately 2 months would be needed to formulate the program. Please review tiffs proposal, and advise if you wish us to proceed as outlined herein, or call to discuss any questions which you may have. NELSON, POPE ,~, VOORHI~B, LLC To: Mark Tony From: Charles J. Voorhis, CEP, AICP Date: February 20, 2007 Re: TDR Progl~m; Proposal for Services NP&V No. 07008 Memorandum I am in receipt of a copy of the Work Program (Pan G) which is the basis of the Quality Communities Grant You bad asked me to review this and ensure that the work being coodueted conforms to this grant in mvinw of the Work Program, it is noted that the questions which must be answered for the grant are very similsr to the items requested in my Memorandum of January 19, 2007 which requested items to assist in corame~lciug the environmental snal.vsis and Supplemental GElS for lhis project. These items are: 1. How will the TDR Program work? 2. Who benefits from this program? 3. How much do TDR's cost? 4. How is the value of the TDR's established? 5. ls the program voluntary or mandatory? 6. What will be the Town's role in implementing and monitoring the program? 7. How do 1 participate if 1 own land within a Sending Area? 8. How do [ participate if I own land in a Receiving Area? 9. How can the TDR's be used on the Receiving Area Properties? 10. Where are the Sending Areas located? 1 I. Where are the Receiving Areas located? Answers to these questions would form the basic elements of a program and would allow the SEQRA review to proceed. Addressing these 11 items would also fulfill the grant. Based on our meeting, I believe that we have a core group that can take the input that we have received to date, and formulate the basic program, It is recommended that a small group meet on a regular basis to formulate the program based on professional planning judgment. The program would be framed out with rationale and justification for the decisions made by the group. I believe that my expertise, and the expertise of my fu'm can be useful in creating the document needed to establish the basic program. I would bring professional planning capabilities to the project, a proven track record of working hand-and-hand with you and your planning staff, and resources from outside of the Town that would be useful and would help to provide solutions. Once a TDR Program document is complete, this could be handed over to the Towa Attorney's office for drafting as legislation. As the plan is formulated, we can anticipate and commence the environmental analysis that we are now under contract to perform. It is extremely difficult to anticipate the costs associated with the formulation of the program as outlined above. As a result, given the finite amount of the grant, and the continuing involvement that we will have in the SEQKA review, I would propose a budget of $15,000 be allocated for the services of my fura to assist in this expanded project scope. A table of how this might be applied, is provided below, but as in the past, we will only bill for hours expended in completion of the project, up to the maximum budget (please note reduced municipal billing rates). P, eraounel Hours Rate Cast~ Managing Partner 50 150 7500 Pa-'mcr 20 140 2800 Senior Environmental Planner 20 95 1900 Environmental Planner 40 80 3200 Total $15,400 It is expected that approximately 2 months would be needed to formulate the program. Please review this proposal, and advise if you wish us to proceed as outlined herein, or call to discuss any questions which you may have. Partial Development Rights Procedure The Town Board will set a standard development rights cost per acre or per Development Right to be reviewed annually or every six months. This price will be based on a recommendation fi.om the Land Preservation Committee and shall be based on comparable sales data. · Only landowners enrolled in the Southold Town Rural incentive District (RID) program will be allowed to participate in the Partial Development Right Sales Program. The program will apply only to Development Rights sales, not to fee title transactions. In the first transaction the landowner will be required to sell at least one full Development Right. Thereafter the landowner would be required to sell Development Rights in increments of ¼ a development right. · If landowner wishes to execute a Conservation Subdivision after selling one or more Development Rights, the preserved land represented by the Development Rights sold will be permitted to count as part of the preserved portion in calculating a Conservation Subdivision. However, Development Rights already sold shall not be allowed to count toward the preservation component of a Standard Subdivision. · The landowner must wait at least six months after the previous Development Right sale before applying to sell more Development Rights to the Town. · The Town wdl maintain a Clear g House" which will record the Development Rights balance on every parcel enrolled in the Partial Development Rights Program, recording each DR sold, whether to the Town or on the private TDR market. These records will be maintained by the Town Clerk [Or the Planning Department?] Note: It is not the intention of this program to create estate lots at the Town's expense. Should any other residential development occur on the parcel, any subdivision open space must be contiguous with the property preserved through this program. ~oraerg_~. · Landowner must enroll in RID if not already enrolled. (parcel must be in the AC zone to be eligible for the RiD). · Landowner applies for entry to program and agrees to sell at least one full Development Right to the Town upon entry to the program. · LPC commissions survey (paid for by Town). · LPC commissions a title search, but no more than one within a twelve month period. 1/25/07 · Using the survey and title search, the Town Planning department will calculate the potential yield based on the zoning effective when the landowner entered the RID. The potential yield shall be calculated using the formula normally used for a Conservation Subdivision. · Using Planning Dept. Yield formula, Town Board holds pubhc heating and votes on admission of parcel into the "Partial program, as well as to authorize purchase of initial Development Right transaction. · LPC completes transaction with landowner and disburses payment. · Landowner completes formal Preservation Easement with the Town, specifying how many Development Rights have been sold and how many are still intact. · Any structure to be erected on the property will require the consent of the LPC. The Building Department will not issue a permit for construction on land in the program until the landowner has obtained prior approval fi'om the LPC. Such approval shall be given based on the conditions set down in the initial easement. · If there exists a residential structure on the parcel, any new non-agricultural structure erected must be placed within a foot setback fi.om the existing residential structure. · At some point the landowner has the right to define a reserved area which may reduce the numbers of Development Rights available to sell (for example, a decision to open a winery with tasting room). In any case, the minimum percentage to be preserved at the end of the process must not be less than 75%. Procedure for Subsequent Development Right Sales to Town~ : Landowner files application for Partial Development Right sale with LPC. LPC gives Landowner formal notification of current price paid for Development Rights per most recent Town Board resolution. The Town will have the discretion to order a new survey if substantial time has passed or conditions on the property have changed. LPC commissions title search, to be paid for by the Town. The Town will not pay for more than one title search in any twelve month period. LPC determines how many Partial Development Rights are still intact and schedules public hearing with The Town Board. Town Board holds a public hearing and votes the purchase of Development Right in multiples of one-half(½) a Development Right. ~' LPC completes transaction with landowner and disburses payment. * Landowner completes formal Preservation Easement with the Town, specifying how many Development Rights have been sold and how many are still intact. Because the Town is permitted by law only to pay for quantifiable development rights, it is necessary to determine before each transaction that the landowner still has valid Development Rights to sell. 1/25/07 Page 2 o£ 3 Procedure for Development Right sales to a Private Developer: · Landowner files application with LPC to sell one or more Development Rights to a private developer with specifics. · LPC verifies how many Development Rights are still intact on parcel and schedules Town Board public hearing. · Assuming at least one full Development Right is still intact on the parcel, The Town Board holds public hearing and votes to authorize Landowner's private sale of Development Right. · Developer completes Development Right transaction with Landowner. · Landowner completes formal Preservation Easement with the Town, specil~ding how many Development Rights have been sold and how many are still intact. Conclusion of the Partial Sales Process: · At the conclusion of the Development Right sale and RID process, the acres sold will be added up to determine the number of development rights given up. Landowner may sell all residual Development Rights to Town, Landowner may file for a Conservation Subdivision based on the original computed yield minus the Development Rights already purchased by the Town. 1/25/07 Payie 3 of 3 Incentive District Process Landowner applies to enter RID Possible exits from RID BTown Board refers application to Planning oard and LPC for review & recommendation. with recommendations LPC makes recommendation to TB TB hearing &~ vote on zonin.g. I change to admit prop5 in o ~ TB vetoes zoning change to Landowner and returns application Land remains in RID for minimum of 8 years change, admitting ~Preservation EasementI parcel into RID .~ (with Town on property) ~After 8years la.downer can require town to buy OR[~ ~ [ at market price or he/she regains pre RID zoning for 3 ~ devek rights to town Complete Conservation Subdivision Hardship exit lpplication to TI single transaction Standard LPC acquisition procedure (appraisal, offer, etc.) Sell development rights incrementally File formal COS subdivision ~ Sell all development rights in per code ~ [. single transaction [ R e t a i; uS~dbid:i~iidoend~at (nS)per1 IfTB approves, landowner has 3 years at pre-RE) zoning but town has right of[ first refusal on fee title or / development rights ] Standard LPC acquisition procedure/ (appraisal, offer, etc.)~) (ProCedure For Pall:iai sale oF PevelopmerR ('Pmperl:¥ Already in RIP) I permission to join program and[ ]agrees to sell at least one full! LDR upon entry to program ~ i LPC commissions' ~ survey (paid for ~ byi°wn) · ( L L 5P lanning D ept' determines'~ ~ full buildout yield (formulaI ~ I TBD), determining max #/ L of DR's on parcel fl TB hearing and vote on admission of parcel into "Partial" program + authorization of initial DR purchase. I 5 Landowner completes formal I Preservation Easement with 1 ~ Town, specifying how many 1 J I development rights are still 1 [x.~ntact and other conditions TBDj I_PC completes 1 transaction with Landowner Land is now locked into RiP as long as Town is willing/able to purchase development rights Future partial DR Sales Landowner wishing') ~ 5 LPC checks how many to sell partial DR ~ partial DR's are intact and schedules hearing [.. applies toLPC .) L with TB Alternative: Landowner wishing to sell DR to 5Assuming partial DR's are ~) (LPC completes'~ [~ available, TB holds hearing and ~ transaction / I approves purchase of partialsI~ I with I ) ~ Landowner ~ [in multiples of at least I/2 DR Landowner completes formal Preservation Easement with i Town. revising downward the number of DR's still intact as [x..we as other cond tons TBD.~.] , LPC checks how many , , dssumingpartial DR's Preservation Easement with ~ Town, revising downward the ', ~..~ partialOR'sareintact i .... .~ areavailable, TBholds ! ~ completes private developer as TDR ' ~ and schedules hearing ~ , hearing and approves transaction with ' ~ . ' number ofDR's stillintact as ' applies to LPC ." ,'. with TB ~ ~ Landowner's sale ofTDR .~ '~ Landowner *' ~ well as other conditions TBD. " NELSON, POPE ,~ VOORHIS, LLC Memorandum From: Date: Re: TDR Team Scott Russell, Tom Wickham, John Sepa/av~',x Pat Finnegan, Melissa Spiro, Mark Tei4y/^'l /1 \ Charles J. Voorhis, CEP, AICP January 19, 2007 Discussion items for TDR Progran The meeting of January 12, 2007 provided a very useful roundtable and workshop discussion of the TDR program. This memo provides a summary of that meeting for future reference, after the summary, there are questions for the Town to consider in advance of the next meeting. It was acknowledged that the current HALO Zone Incentive District is an early draft and requires update. Each attendee shared their knowledge and intent for the program. Summary Pat Finnegan indicated that sending areas would include farms over 7 acres, and that receiving sites, would apply for inclusion in the HALO zone on an individual site basis to increase density. Mark Terry indicated that the RID is a valuable tool for ag land preservation, but that the overall TDR program may be low on incentives. The initial thinking is a density neutral program. SCDHS limitations are a key issue to density increase. Mark participated with John Sep on HALO models and boundaries. John Sep shared detailed analyses (HALO density models) that have been conducted on the hamlets that will be useful in evaluating impacts under the SGEIS. John sees the program with a cap on density in the HALO's; program success would be gauged by achieving the cap. The transfer rate will regulate how fast the density will be achieved, the cap is the same regardless. If neutral density is used, it can be adjusted after the program is put in place if it is found that additional incentives are needed. Hamlets must be developed so they are not "wall to wall" units. Open space in the hamlets is still desired, with a goal of perhaps 30% (parks, trails, passive, active, etc.). Melissa Spiro discussed informal goal of 80% preservation/60% density reduction and it's practical application over the past several years. John Sep added that the US/UK report recognized that density reduction in rural areas would involve density increase in hamlet areas. It was expressed that PDR is working for subdivision review and design, and it is important to not jeopardize this program. Public water main locations and growth implications were discussed as a concern. Need for a TDR bank was discussed with the concept of maintaining the program as a privately conducted program between DR sellers and buyers. The need for affordable units in the HALO areas was discussed, mechanically accomplished through rezoning to AHD. Tom Wickham indicated the primary objective of the program is to shift density. Though the TDR program may be density neutral, other methods (PDR, RID, Conservation Subdivision) will result in density decrease. The 80/60 goal was discussed noting the difference between it's application in 1-2 acre Southold TDR January 19, 2007 zoned areas or townwide. A discussion ensued regarding sending zones and what they would involve: all eligible farmland, wooded land (open space), with the concern of too many potential DR's to be reasonably absorbed in receiving areas. Receiving zones are more defined by HALO boundaries, areas near the Sound and Bays, and even recognition that new hamlet areas could emerge in the future. Density neutral versus adequate incentives was further discussed. The concept of using DR's for commercial density in the hamlets was discussed. Tom mentioned prior meetings with the Town of Riverhead to understand their program, then defined how he viewed Chic Voorhis' role in the program. Chic is requested to assist with the "quantified" review and advise on zoning framework; many board members are seeking to use the SGEIS to get the project done. Tom requested that Chic frame questions to be answered by the Town to help define the program to be analyzed, and acknowledged that the program is moving in several directions. Chic Voorhis related work completed previously for Southold and that it is a good baseline. Any SEQRA document would be a Supplement to the GEIS on the Comprehensive Implementation Strategy, which recognized TDR as a tool. Chic discussed the differences between perceived density in terms of dwelling units, number of bedrooms and population, indicating that a 4-5 bedroom home in a low density residential or A-C zone is bigger, has more bedrooms, greater population and more impact than a relocated multifamily unit, apartment or retirement unit in a hamlet area. This is the basis for controlled density increase in some municipalities. Chic discussed the Pine Barrens program as a model program for several important issues that Southold is wrestling with: potential retirement of credits by small increases in subdivision density outside of hamlets, and the credit clearinghouse program (letter of interpretation, credits issued, and purchase/sale of credits) run by the Pine Barrens Credit Clearinghouse. There was discussion that perhaps the Town Clerk would be a good entity for long-term record keeping and program assistance. Chic indicated that Southampton has considered carriage house or garage apartments as a means of credit redemption, and discussion indicated that there would be an expected demand, but potential impacts (excessive population, parking, buffering) would have to be controlled. There was further discussion about use of GIS to document specific sending and receiving parcels for quantified analysis. Database limitations and potential use of this method would be explored and further considered by John and discussed. There was discussion of having the program based primarily, if not exclusively on transfer of credits within the same school district. Toward the end of the meeting there was a general of SCDHS policy and sanitary flow limitations. The issue is that once DR's are transferred, SCDHS policy requires that the land be sterilized; continued farm use and fertilization would not be consistent with this policy. The Town summarized discussions with SCDHS. The County has indicated that they may accept an analysis of the sanitary loading in a geographic area with available water supply, to ensure that the total flow would not exceed 600 gallons per day per acre. The land area could include preserved open space and would allow for intensification of the HALO zones. This is a critical issue for the TDR program and a full understanding of the issue is important. Questions for Consideration Below are a few thoughts that come to mind that may assist in refining the program. 1. Definition of sending zones - GIS should be used to establish geographic area, zoning and the type of database for the sending zones on a tax parcel basis if possible. 2. Definition of receiving zones - GIS should be used to establish area, zoning and type of receiving zone on a tax parcel basis if possible. 3. School District modeling of sending and receiving potential using above information. Page 2 Southold TDR January 19, 2007 Full understanding of how the density will be built in the HALO and receiving zones - it is suggested that a variety of receiving types be identified including; multifamily projects, retirement community projects (possible new code), hamlet business development of residential units, 2"~ floor and a special permit provision for 3rd floor residential in the hamlets (code modification), further subdivision of lands similar to the Pine Barrens provision (code modification), use of Planned Development Districts for appropriate parcels (may require new code), carriage house and garage apartments in receiving areas outside of hamlets as well as HALO zones (code modification), affordable housing (use AHD) and commercial density (code provision). Refinement of credit interpretation and certificates as well as redemption and record keeping. Information on the rate of open space acquisition, pumhase of development rights, funding of acquisition, and conservation subdivision density tracking over time to assist in reasonable projections of need for TDR as a program supplement. Legislation to define action and alternatives to be considered. The goal is to write a piece of legislation that can be defined as the action, and to identify alternatives that will give the Town Board information they need for decision-making as we conduct the analysis. I hope the summary and commentary is helpful. I look forward to seeing you next Friday. Page 3 STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF STATE 41 STATE.STREET ALBANY, NY 12231-0001 GEORGE E. PATAKI CHRISTOPHER L. JACOBS December 22, 2006 SECRETARY OF STATE Honorable Scott Russell Supervisor Town of Southold P.O.B. 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Quality Communities Grant Program, 2005-2006 Town of Sout~a~:a~fer of Development Rights Program - Development & Implementation Contract No.~ Dear Supervisor Russell: Attached is the contract for your Quality Communities Grant Program Award and a set of instructions for completion of the contract. Please review the documents carefully, and complete all areas required. When reviewing the contract and directions, you will note that it is the responsibility of the applicant to complete the work plan and the budget. Additionally, please review project costs, state funding amount, and local share listed on the contract cover sheet. These may be different from the numbers in your original application. If you have any questions regarding these components or any other area of contract development, please contact Laurie Savage at (518) 473-3355 or email at lsavage(fi dos.state.ny.us. Again, congratulations to you on your award and we look forward to working with you on this grant process. Please let me know by phone or email that you have received the contract. Thank you. ChaHie Murphy Director, Division of Locai Govemment cc: Mark Terry WWW.DO$.STATE.NY.US - E-MAIL: INFO~OOS.STATE.NY.US NELSON, F~OPE & VOORHIS, LLC Thoma~ Wickh~m Tow~ of Southold TOW~ Hall, 53095 Main Ro~t P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Dear Mr. Wickham: Re: December 19, 2006 Proposal for Services TDR Program & SEQRA Implementation As discussed, this letter provides you with a proposal for services and a procedure for the implementation of the proposed Townwide TDR Program initiative, s, specifically involving matters relating to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) process. The proposal cont~nphtes using the information prepared by this office for the Southold Comprehensive Implementation Strategy (Cig) to the maximum extent; I have tried to keep cost down as much as poss~le given the Town-wide scope of the project, balanced with our familiarity with the Town, the program and regional impact analysis capabilities. I believe that N'P&V is uniquely qualified to complete this project for the Town of Southold in the most expedient time flame and for the most competitive cost based on our prior involvement in the CIS and our e::p~ise ,.'n L',ds specLfic ar~: of regional impact analysis. Thc following tasks arc outlined for your use and understanding in completing this project. Task h Project Start-up and Preparation of Full Envirnnmnnt.! Asses.~m~nt Form (EAF) Parts I and II Task I includes several start-up meetings, preliminary research, and preparation of initial process documents and EAF forms. The EAF is a screening tool used to outline the basic project and determine the magnitude of potential impacts. The form can be circulated to interested agencies and parties of interest under SEQRA notice and ~ling requirements hi order to advise the public and agencies of the Town's intent. The Town Board is the only agency that can implement the action, and therefore wilt assume lead agency status. The Town will provide a "proposed action" or program that will identify the intiative. Theproduct of this task is an F_,,4.F Parts I and IL. Task 2: Proiect P-lae~ification and Issuance of Determination of Si~nifiea~nc,. The type of action proposed mandates the preparation of a Draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (DSGEIS). The action involves the adoption of a land use program that has town-wide implications and affects a large area of land. As a result, the action is a Type I action requiring a GEI8. The Town should issue a Positive Declaration ($EQR Determination of SiL3nificance) which identifies the key issues. Key issues are expected to include benefits of transfer parcels and potential impacts on receiving parcels, shit~ in density, traffic, in-fill developmem, socio-ecenomic benefits of housing and potential socio-~conomic issues involved with density relocation. It is expected that a Draft Supplemental GEI8 will be the most appropdste way to solicit input, and subject the program to an orderly review process designed to obtain and factor-in public and agency input in decision-making. Theproduct of this task is a Posilive Declaration. Townwide TDR Prograln & SEQRA Implementation Proposal for Services Task 3: Scopin~ Process (optional- to be discussed) The proposal should be subject to public scoping. A draft scope should be circulated, and a date set for a public scoping meeting to solicit input on additions or revisions to the draft scoping document. Once the meeting and any follow-up written comments are completed, the draft scope should be revised accordingly and issued as a t~mal scope in accordance with Part 617.8(f). The pro&tct of this task is a drqft attdfinal scope. Task 4: Preparation of a Draft Supplemental Genetic Environmental Impact Statement A Draft SGEIS should be prepared which presents the proposed prog?am in the Description of the Proposed Project in Section 1.0, summarizes the Town's important environmental resources relating to the proposed action in Section 2.0, and analyzes the impacts of adoption of the proposed action in Section 3.0. Additional major sections include Mitigation Measures and Alternatives to the proposed action. Additional sections required to complete a comprehensive Generic EIS should be included. A &afl outline oft. he document is as follows: 1.0 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION 1.1 Purpose, Need and Benefits of the Proposed Acfion 1.1.1 Back~ound and History l. 1.2 Public Need and Municipality Objectives 1.1.3 Benefits oftl~e Proposed Action 1.2. Location 1.2.1 Geographic Boundaries 1.2.2 Districts or Lands Affected 1.2.3 Study Area Description of the Proposed Action 1.3 1.4 1.5 ENVIRONMENTAL SE2~F[NG 2.1 Geology (Provide an ovetn,iew of the To~vn of $oatbold geologic environment bt areas which pertain to the proposed action. Describe the hnporlance of the resource and the protection of same. Obtain h~brmation fi.om ~t~o& CounO~ Soil &l~v and re~onal mapping.) 2.1.1 Surface Soils (Discuss soil associations as described h~ &~folk CoonOt Soil 2.1.2 Topo~aphy (Describe based on USGS or regional mapph~g resources.) 2.2 Water Resources (Provide an ove~n~iew of the Town of SoutboM water resource environment b~ areas' that pertaht to the proposed action. Describe the intportance of the resource and the protection of same. Obtah~ il~ot~tation fi.om SCDHS, To~vn GI~ 208 ~ltt~v, Comprehensive Pla,, etc0 2.2.1 Gro~dwater (Recharge areas, watersheds, general water qualiO~, water (Describe proposed prog~'am and implementation. Describe ht detail the proposed progr'am, its' intent as well as its mechanics. Attach copies hr att appendix to the document.) Schedule of Implementation (Provide tn? pertinent htsigbt into the schedule for implementation of the proposed action.) Permits and Approvals Required (Deso-ibe an_v approvals n ecessa~, to implement the proposed program.) Page 2 Tmvmvlde TDR Program ' & SEQRA Implementation Proposal tbr Services 2.2.2 Surface Water and Drainage (Significant smface water featores and drainage characteristics.) 2.3 Ecological Resources (Provide att oven,Jew of the Town of Southoht ecological environment itt areas that pertain to the proposed action. Describe the importaace of the resom.ce and the protection of same, Obtain it~/brmation fi'om Town GElS's, Open Si)ace and/or Natural Resoarce [m,entories or Studies, etc,) 2.3,1 Vegetation (Describe generalized habitats of aJfected lands.) 2.3.2 Wildlife (Describe unique species (threatened, endangered, special co.cern) and abundance of common species ht habitats of affected hinds.) 2.3.3 Wetlands (Provide regional alap of wet[ands ia affected areas ttsing Tow, GIS or NYSDEC Article 24 GIS based fi'eshwater wethtnds maps. Describe benefits and importance of wetlattd resources.) 2.4 Transportation (Describe major highways, access to lands, local roads attd over¥iew of transportation it!fi'astructure.) 2.5 Land Use, Zoning and Plans 2.5.1 Land Use (Describe and map where possible, existhtg land use pattern itt study area. Use generalized land use categories ~vhere possible and ase Town G£S.) 2.5.2 Zoning (Describe a.d map existing zoning o./'lamls itt st c6~ area.) 2.5.3 Special Districts (Describe and map special districts i. cludiag Agricultaral Overlay District, protected lands, etc.) 2.5.~ Land Use/Zoning Analysis (Present inJbrmatio, on la.ds ~¢~cted, estimated yield of transfer parcels, estimated yield of receivh~g parceh', etc.) 2.5.5 Land Use Plans (Review available land use plans to rletet~nine prior comprehensive planning q/forts q' the Town which would sopport or conflict with the hfftiative attd provide a foun&ttion Jbr the efJbrt. Studies to inchtde but not be limited to: Town Comprehensive Platt, Comprehensive Platt Updates, Comprehensive 3nplementation Stretch,, Existing Zoning attd Regulations including Special Districts, Farm attd Farmland Protection Strate~, Communi.tv Preservation Project Plan, and relevant regional land use plans and regalations inehtding the 208 Stttd. v, SC DensiO, Limitations, SC TransJbr qf Development Rights.) 2.6 Community Services (Discttss and map school districts, and discuss other cotntnttniO~ services attd it~.fi'astrttctttre as related to proposed la.d ese initiative, including police, fire, solid waste, and otilities.) 2.7 Cultural Resources 2.7.1 Visual Resources (Discuss importattce of visttal resota'ces, raral character and open al)ace as related to the proposed action.) 2.7.2 Cultural Resources (Discttss generalized historic attd pre-historic seositivit), osing available regional maps and local reports.) 2.8 Socio-Economic Conditions (Establish the social/demographic and economic conditions itt areas that pertain to the proposed action; review ht detail affordable housing issues, need and opportuoities) 2.9 Cumulative Impacts Page3 Townwide TDR Program ' & SEQRA lmplementa~on Proposal for Services (Determine pending or potential fittta'e projects at~d describe existing em~h'omnental conditions to form basis Jbr cumtdative impact analysis to be hTchtded in Section 3.00 2.10 Growth-Inducing Aspects 3.0 SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Impacts of each resource at'ca noted above will be discussed and aaaIyzed hr detail; impacts will be discussed as long term/short term, site specific or culnulatiYe where appropriate.) 4.0 MITIGATION MEASURES 4.1 Geology 4.2 Water Resources 4.3 Ecological Resources 4.4 Transportation 4.5 Laud Use, Zoning and Plans 4.6 Community Services 4.7 Cultural Resources 4.8 Soeio-Economic Conditions 4.9 Cumulative Impacts 4.10 Growth-Inducing Aspects 5.0 ADVERSE IMPACTS THAT CANNOT BE AVOIDED 6.0 ALTERNATIVES 6.1 No Action Alternative 6.2 Other Alternative Scenario (Densit~ Transfer Incentive) Tl:e product of this task is a Draft Sttpplementa! Generic Em,iroitmental hnpact Statement Task 5 Processin~ of Draft SGEIS and Preparation of Final Supplemental EIS The Draft SGEIS will be reviewed in conjunction with Town staff to determine acceptability, and indicate revisions as appropriate or necessary. After acceptance, the Draft SGEIS will be circulated in accordance with Part 617.9, and a public heating on the Draft SGEIS will be held no sooner than 15 days from document acceptance. The comment period will be no less than 30 days in length, or no less than 10 days after the public heating. Written comments as well as public hearing comments will be accepted by the lead agency. Connnents on the Draft. SGEIS will be reviewed and summarized. A Final SGEIS will be prepared which includes a response to each substantive comment on the Draft SGEIS. The Final SGEIS will be reviewed by Town staff to determine acceptability and indicate revisions as appropriate or necessary. The Final SGEIS will be circulated in accordance with Part 617.9, and will be considered for no less than I0 days prior to preparation and filing of the Findings Statement. The pro&tct of t/tis Task is a Final Suppleme. tal Generic Em'irotm~entaI Impact ,-gtatement. Task 6 Preparation of Findings Statement Findings will conform to Part 617.11, and 617.10(c) for Genetic EIS's. Findings will identify the conibrmance of the project review with SEQRA requirements, and will discuss and weigh the social, enviromnental and economic issues tbr pertinent resource areas. Findings will set ~:brth conditions or criteria under which futm'e actions will be undertaken or approved, including requirements l:br any subsequent SEQRA compliance. The product of this task is a Findings Statement Page 4 Townwide TDR Program: & gEQRA Implementation Proposal for Services Once these steps are complete, the Town will be in a position to initiate the proposed pro.am (or a modified program if changes are discerned tlu'ough the SEQ1LA process). Fee Summary Fees are based on time rates spent in completion of tas'ks. follows: Preliminary budget figures are noted as Task I Description Budget 1 I Start-up and EAF I/II $1,250.00 2 Positive Deelaration $250.00 3 Scoping Process (optional - to be discussed) ($2,000.00) 4 Draft SGEIS a) $15,000.00 5 Heating and Final EIS ~21 (dependent upon magnitude/substance of comments) ($7,500.00) 6 Findings Statement $2,500.00 7 Departmant~Staff/TB Meetings, Hearings o} $3,500.00 8 Repart Reproduction $1,500.00 Total m Not Including Scopin$ Process and Final SGEIS (m be determinod) $24,000.00 Total Including Scoping and Estimated Final ElS $33,500.00 Notes: (I) Inl'bnnation available from Comprehensive Implementation Strategy will be used to fullest extent; Full Traffic Impact Study not included; scope and need to be determioed based on land use initiatives, (2) Could be less depending on substance of comments and responses from the public beating; FEIS cost c~timate eno be provided after close of FSGE1S comment period. (3', includes two (2) NP&V representatives attendance at 3 meetings. 2 depamnen~/staffmeetings, 2 town board hearings and I town board work session. (4) Not including Scoptng Process and Final SGEIS (to be determined). To the extent possible, I have tried to include meetings, research, report preparation, graphics, text, and preparation of admimstrative documents (i.e. resolutions, etc.) as par~ of the scope and budget as noted above. The budget includes 7 copies el'the DGEIS and 7 copies of the FGEIS, plus one (I) master copy of each. The budget does not include havolved agency mailing costs or administtation/cierinal processing for SEQRA documents. The budget figures provide you with an estimate of the anticipated fees; however, only time incurred in completion of the project will be billed per our rate schedule as approved by the Town Board. We are able to commence this project immediately and I will work with you on mandatory, time flames and product snbmission to meet your needs and schedule. Please review this proposal and feel free to contact me should you have any questions. I look forward to worldng with you on this project. P/File: 03-774 Respectfully submitted, Page 5 SUMMARY REPORT ON A POTENTIAL TDR PROGRAM IN SOUTHOLD TOWN Mark Terry, Acting Head, Planning Department John Sepenoski, Data Processing Leslie Weisman, Chairperson, Southold Hamlet Stakeholder Committee Updated Draft: October 15, 2006 Background Based upon the methodology and assumptions outlined in the attached document titled Southold Hamlet Development Model (draft 6: 6/24/2006), numbers were projected to determine the total potential number of TDR credits and preserved acres that could be generated Town wide in the sending zones, without creating undesirable overdevelopment in the various receiving zones (hamlet business centers and HALO zones). The model was presented to each of the Hamlet Stakeholder Committees (August-September 2006) to discuss its specific application to their · respective hamlets, and to obtain their feedback. Numerical Summary * Hamlet Total number of potential Total number of TDR units Total number of affordable TDR units @ 30% cap units @10% of potential new construction Cutchogue 55 16 13 East Marion 79 24 · 12 Greenport West 0 0 12 Mattituck 95 28 26 New Suffolk 56 16 8 Orient* 25 7 3 Peconic 209 63 24 Southold 332 99 53 TOTALS 851 253 151 TOTAL number of potential acres preserved in sending zones through TDR at full buildout (assuming a 1=1 transfer rate and preservation within the 2 acre zones): 1,562 acres TOTAL number of potential acres preserved at 30% cap: 469 acres *Calculations for each hamlet were all based upon ~ acre density with the exception of Orient which was calculated at 1 acre density due to the lack of public water. Since different iterations and some changes in methodology were made while testing the Hamlet Development Model, the numbers listed above need to be updated and recalculated from scratch to be sure there are no errors and that there is consistency, after the Hamlet/halo maps have been finalized and formally adopted. Conclusions/Recommendations 1. Based upon the projected potential numbers, a Town wide TDR program is feasible. However, impacts will vary substantially from hamlet to hamlet, and so will the method of implementation. These impacts on hamlet development should be carefully considered and monitored by the Planning Department, the Town Board and the Planning Board within the context of hamlet design standards and schematic master plans appropriate to each different hamlet. These plans should be developed with the expertise of planning and other design professionals in consurtation with the various stakeholder groups. The potential numbers of TDR credits listed above were calculated based upon the hamlet centedHALO boundaries proposed by the various Hamlet Stakeholder groups. These boundaries must be finalized by each group (some may recommend minor revisions based upon the final projected numbers) and formally adopted by the Town Board. NOTE: At the Oct 7, 2006 meeting, it was agreed that Mark Terry and John Sepenoski would review the proposed Hamlet/HALO maps for each hamlet and make recommendations as to which maps might be adopted as proposed to date and which, if any, need further clarification, revision or updating. Connect a TDR program to the creation of PDD (Planned Development District) legislation to create a market for developers Next Steps Request that the Health Depadment analyze Southold and Mattituck Hamlets as a test study to determine the number of septic credits (the cap) that they will allow in the receiving zones (Hamlet/HALO) based upon current zoning and building use (dry or wet). Determine what constitutes a TDR credit, e.g. 1 TDR credit=l unit of single family or two family residential construction? commercial construction? etc. Define a commercial TDR component Establish eligibility criteria for TDR credits for properties in both the sending zones and the receiving zones See below the material copied into this document by Leslie Weisman as presented by Melissa Spiro at the Oct. 7, 2006 meeting) 4. Create PDD enabling legislation 5. Continue to work with Peconic Land Trust in the application of a PDD in East Marion. Hire former Southampton Town Planning Director Kyle Collins as a consultant to do a preliminary schematic plan, with graphic imagery (site plans, perspective renderings) for Southold and Mattituck Hamlets, the two hamlets that are at greatest risk of unchecked development. These schematic plans would evaluate the potential physical benefits and impacts of a PDD and TDR program in these hamlets relative to desirable planned future growth and development. For use at April 7, 2006 Planning and Zoning Meeting Prepared by Melissa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator Statistics generated by John Sepenoski Sending Area Statistics **NOTE: These statistics are as of September 2005. Due to time limitations, they were not updated for April 7, 2006 Plannin.q and Zonin.q meetin,q. For discussion purposes: Sending Area statistics are based on the following:: · Parcels located within R-80, AC, R-200 Zoning District; and · Parcels not located within HALO/Hamlet boundary; and j. Parcels > 7 buildable acres. The above parameters DO NOT include transfer from: · R-40 and other zones · Parcels less than or equal to 7 acres (unless adjacent parcels cumulatively > 7 acres. · Individual building lots (even if they are 100% surrounded by preserved land) · Reserve Areas (even if they are 100% surrounded by preserved land) We had discussed the following in regard to Sending Area: · Limiting to just parcels on farmland inventory (with additional clarification needed as to makeup of inventory) but ended up including non-farmland due to issues with Health Department restrictions. · Allowing parcels within other zones to be eligible on a case by case basis with TB approval. I'm not sure if this discussion was concluded. The September 2005 statistics showed 275 parcels, totaling 6,459 acres meeting the above parameters, broken down as follows: School Farmland Only Non-Farmland Farmland and Non- District Farmland Parcels Acres Parcels Acres Parcels Acres Green port 2 19 9 224 11 243 Mattituck 135 3621 26 504 161 4,125 Oysterponds 23 414 15 212 38 626 Southold 52 1267 13 198 65 1465 Total 275 6,459 Notes in regard to statistics: · We did not have time to break down by Hamlet · We did not have time to calculate more precise number of units available for sending (i.e. how many of the above acres are within R-200 zone) · Split zoned parcels were included in statistics if the primary zone was a parameter. · Parcels with C&Rs limiting yield were included as full yield parcels. These applications would be reviewed upon application and only the allowed number of units (by C&R) would be eligible for TDR. MARY O. DONOHUE Honorable Scott A. Russell Supervisor Town of Southold P.O.B. 1179, NYS Route 54375 Southold, NY 11971 STATE OF NEW YORK August 31, 2006 RE: 2005-06 Quality Communities Grant Program Town of Southold Transfer of Development Rights Program - Development & Implementation QCEPF0064 Dear Supervisor Russell: Thank you for submitting an application to the Department of State for state assistance payments under the Quality Communities Grant Program. We are pleased to announce that your community's application was successful and your project will receive funding in the amount of $60,000. Congratulations! The next step is to prepare a contract. A staffmember from the Department of State Division of Local Government will be in contact with your office in the coming weeks to make arrangements for developing this document. If you have any questions please contact Charlie Murphy or Laurie Division of Local Government at (518) 473-3355. Sincerely, Sincerely, Mary O. Donohue Lieutenant Governor Christopher L. Jacobs Secretary of State cc: Direct0~e~Or THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR STATE CAPITOL ALBANY 12224 Southold Hamlet Development Model Draft 6:8/24/2006 Proposal developed by: Mark Terry, Acting Head, Planning Department John Sepenoski, Data Processing Melissa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator Leslie Weisman, Southold Hamlet Stakeholder Chairperson GOALS 1. To create a planning model for Southold Hamlet that will prevent undesirable over- development and protect the hamlet's unique qualities, scale, and historic character. Development includes existing residential and commercial structures, new residential and commercial construction, new infrastructure, affordable units, green/open space, and TDR units (transfer of development rights from agricultural/open space within the Southold school district - the sending zone- to Southold's HALO- the receiving zone). 2. Make this planning model equitably transferable to other hamlets in Southold Town. CONCEPT 1. High Density Subdivision Planning This planning model calculates the TDR potential in $outhold within the framework of desirable over-all development. Southold's HALO/Hamlet Center is conceptualized as a "high density" subdivision in which 70% development and 30% open/green space is proposed as the desirable total build out, as defined above. 2. Growth Control (TDR Cap) To control the growth rate of the HALO build-out the group established a proposed cap on the number of potential TDR units available for transfer into the HALO zone linked to a set time period. The proposed cap is 30% of the total potential TDR units within the receiving zone or 99 units over a 25 year period (see below). The time frame is arbitrary; there is no ability to actually forecast the pace of TDP, development. An annual audit by the Town's Planning Department would maintain growth rate by recommending modifications as needed. 3. TDR and Open Space in the HALO When open space is preserved in the HALO and density reduction results, to maintain the target 70 percent development density, the related number of development rights extinguished will be added to the total TDR cap. For example, if the Town purchases for preservation a 20 acre parcel in the HALO zone on which 20 units could have been built by right, the TDR cap will be increased by 20 potential development units (99 plus 20= a new TDR cap of 119 units). 4. Affordable/VVorkforce Housing The group recommends that a minimum 10 % of all new residential units created within the HALO and Hamlet Center be affordable/workforce housing. These units would include rentals, new construction, and inclusionary zoning units. Adaptive reuse/renovation of existing structures for affordable units are encouraged, and will be considered over and above the 10 percent recommendation for new construction. The 10% figure would only include applications submitted after the effective start year of the Town's affordable housing legislation. Moreover, it is consistent with Chapter A-106 Subdivision of Land inclusionary affordable housing requirements. Based upon the figures below, 53 units of new construction would be required within the Southold HALO zone and Hamlet Center. METHODOLOGY. Yield of Southold's HALO was calculated using a standard subdivision model at 20,000 sq. ft. or .5 acre density. Streamlined ERSAP requirements were applied removing unbuildable lands (wetlands and community facilities/infrastructure, existing protected lands and lots less than .5 acre (nonconforming under HALO down zoning)) and density was calculated based upon the total HALO buildable acreage. 1. Calculatinq HALO Density Total acreage of the Southold HALO equals: 519 Acres 334 Acres Total available buildable acreage: All future applications for development within the Hamlet will be evaluated relative to achieving the overall development and preservation goals in this proposal. Each application will be approved, expedited, or denied based upon the Town's tracking and monitoring the status of the caps on TDR's, open space and affordable housing units throughout the Hamlet over time. Each development project can and will vary in scale and character, but total development/preservation goals for the Hamlet will remain the same. 2. Build Out Under Current Zoning Total number of existing commercial and Residential units: 386 Units 206 Units Total potential new residential units by right: Total: 592 Units 3. Residential Build Out (at .5 Acre Density) Total number of potential TDR units: 332 Units 99 Units 609 Acres 53 Units Total number of units 30% CAP (see above): Total number of acres preserved in sending zone through TDR assuming a one to one transfer rate and preservation within the 2 acre zones: Total number of affordable units (at 10% of potential new construction): 4. TOTAL NUMBER OF RESIDENTAIL AND COMMERCIAl UNITS AFTER 25 YEARS BUILD OUT 592+99-- 691 units When an affordable unit is created through new construction not requiring a TDR (for example through AHD rezoning) and the 10% total target for affordable units is thereby exceeded, then the TDR cap is reduced by the same number of units. This number reflects existing and potential residential units, and existing commercial properties, but does not include projections for new commercial development that might occur. ASSUMPTIONS UPON WHICH THIS PROPOSAL HAS BEEN DEVELOPED The TDR program is one unit from sending to one unit in receiving at market rate, assuming that a TDR program is established by the Town The Town Board will continue to consider AHD zone changes as per existing code. AHD zone changes will not require TDR credits but may require sanitary flow credits as per existing code. Any down zoning other than AHD within the Hamlet HALO zone will require TDR. Of the 30% goal of open space preservation in the HALO, two-thirds will be for pubic use and enjoyment (parks, ball fields, trails etc) and the remaining will consist of visually open public and private space. The total potential number of by right units is assumed to be residential. When commercial development occurs in the Hamlet, the potential number of market rate housing units will diminish. Specific design standards will be developed to create "mini-master plans" for each of the hamlets that incorporate the recommendations in the respective Hamlet Stakeholder Committee Reports. The intent is to ensure that any development that does occur will be compatible with the specific qualities, scale, character, and uniqueness of each hamlet. PHASE I1: IMPLEMENTATION OF PROPOSAL: Evaluate existing subdivision and zoning codes to determine any necessary changes/legislation ELIZABETH NEVILLE TOWN CLERK ~EGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER ~rown Hall, 53095 Main Road PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone: (631) 765-1800 southoldtown.northfork.net RESOLUTION # 2005-736 Resolution ID: 1319 Meeting: 11/22/05 07:30 PM Department: Town Clerk Category: Grants THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2005-736 OF 2005 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON NOVEMBER 22, 2005: RESOLVED that the Southold Town Board hereby authorizes and directs the Southold Town Plannine Board to submit an application to the Department of State Quality Communities Program (2005-2006) for Environmental Protection Funds to develop local laws, land use regulations and provide graphic support to implement the Town of Southold Comprehensive Plan documents including the Town of Southold Hamlet Study, and be it further ~ESOLVED authorizes and directs the Supervisor to execute all financial that the Southold Town Board and/or administrative processes, and WHEREAS, the funds solicited through this program will be used for the purposes of or development of local laws, land use regulations and graphic support to implement the Town of Southold Comprehensive Plan documents including the Town of Southold Hamlet Study in an amount not to exceed up to $75,000 (seventy- five thousand dollars) and that the town will commit up to $15,000 (fifteen thousand dollars) in match (the match will include in-house staff salaries, copying and materials), now therefore be it RESOLVED that the Town of Southold supports this project to develop local laws~ land use regulations and provide graphic support to implement the Town of Southold Comprehensive Plan documents including the Town of Southold Hamlet Study. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS JERILYN B. WOODHOUSE Chair WILLIAM J. CREMERs KENNETH L. EDWARDS MARTIN H. SIDOR GEORGE D. SOLOMON PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cot. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 The Town of~Sauthold Tovm Board The Town of Southold Planning Board From: Mark Terry, Acting Department Head Re: New York Department of State Qualities Grant Program Date: November 17, 2005 The Planning Department is seeking approval to apply for The New York State Quality Communities Grant Program; a grant program totaling $3 million for planning projects statewide. The grant would reimburse the Town for a project and would cover employee salaries and non- salary costs for copying, printing, travel, materials and consultant and contractual services up to 80 percent of expenditures. A 20 percent match is required by the Town. Applications may be submitted for more than one project. The deadline is December 5, 2005. The Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) and The Town of Southold Hamlet Study provides a framework for projects that would qualify for the grant specifically, projects proposed under the Community Growth and Community Center Programs. In addition the LWRP increases the odds of the Town receiving the grant. Patricia Finnegan, Melissa Spiro and I met to discuss projects that would rate high to the grant program assessment criteria. The projects that the group feels would receive the highest overall rating include: 1. Development of a strategy and organizational capacity to implement the Town of Southold Hamlet Study. 2. The development and implementation of a Transfer of Development Rights Program. If the Town Board decides to proceed with the grant, the application requires that the Town Board authorize a representative to act on behalf of the Town. A sample resolution and details of types of projects that would qualify for each program follow. Please call me with any questions. SAMPLE RESOLUTION Quality Communities Grant Program 2005-2006 Resolution Development Tips In the past cycle there were several questions about how to create a resolution and what should be contained within it. The goal of the resolution is to show official support of the governing/managing body for the application process and the project; to indicate who will manage the project, and any entity costs associated with the project. The following are some suggestions for the content of your resolution. Please note that resolutions can differ greatly and that yrmrs may not contMn al! the items listed below. Applicant Resolution The Title and Authorization of the Project: For Example: A resolution authorizing "person's name/entity", to submit an application to the Department of State Quality Communities Program(year) for Environmental Protection Funds to support (name of project and type of project.) Also, authorize a person to execute all financial and/or administrative processes. Funding Request and Contribution Information That funds solicited through this program will be used for the purposes of or development of( name and type of project ) in an amount not to exceed "amount of money" and that the entity will commit "amount of money" in match and that other entities (list each) and what they will each contribute. Co-applicant and Partner Information: List the co-applicant and other involved parties who will be submitting resolutions and their responsibilities. Other Actions: List other activities of the body related to the project which will need approval of the board. Support of the Governing Body: Therefore be it resolved that the "municipality name" supports this project (title of project.) Resolution offered by and seconded by: Vote of governing body: Certification of vote by Clerk: PROGRAMS AND TYPES OF QUALIFYING PROJECTS Community Growth Program The "Community Growth Program" is an activity undertaken by a municipality to prepare a comprehensive land use plan or a portion thereof, including the development or revision of a comprehensive land use plans, as well as the regulations to implement the plans. Examples of activities include: · Efforts leading to and including the development of a land use plan, such as: community visioning; mapping, development of geographic information systems (GIS) data to support the creafi~and analysis of data, citizen participation efforts, strategic plans for geographic areas, development of generic environmental impact statements (GEIS) associated with comprehensive plans, and functional plans. · Program planning needed to advance a land use and development component of a comprehensive plan, such as: watershed protection plans, access management plans, open space plans, capital improvement plans, infrastructure plans, transportation plans, transfer of development rights and purchase of development rights programs, and affordable and mixed use housing plans. · Development or revision of land use and development regulations consistent with Quality Community Principles, such as: zoning, site plan, and subdivision local laws and ordinances, and the integration of stormwater management and sediment and erosion control into review processes. Community Center Program The "Community Center Program" is an activity undertaken by a municipality, for the purposes of conducting a public process to develop a community center vision; identifying the economic and market niche of such a center; preparing an implementation strategy consistent with such vision and niche; establishing sustainable organizational capacity to implement the strategy; and implementing the strategy, consistent with Quality Communities Principles. Thriving commemial and cultural centers are the product of a community's unique vision for its own future, an assessment of its market niche, and the organizational capacity necessary to implement the strategy. Funding is available for planning, design and pre- construction activities related to the development and re-development of community centers and downtowns. Examples of activities to achieve these purposes may include but are not limited to the following: · Preparing a comprehensive community center revitalization program - undertake coordinated activities to lay the foundation for a comprehensive community center revitalization program based on the approach used throughout the country by the National Main Street Center as follows: Organization of community talent and resources to implement a community center revitalization program. Promotion to create a positive image of the commercial district and encourage consumers and investors to live, work, shop, play and invest in the community center. Design to improve the physical characteristics of the community center. Economic R~'strnetnrlngto strengthen eYisting buslnesse_~ while recruiting compatible new businesses and new economic uses to the community center. Potential activities that are part of the comprehensive community center revitalization program may include but not be limited to the following: An assessment to identify opportunities and assets in the community center; determine how the community might organize to carry out a long-term community center revitalization program; and recommend a 12-24 month program of activities to launch the program. In-depth community training on each element of the revitalization approach, and how this is applied in the community to create a comprehensive revitalization program. Organizational development to create the public participation and project management structure that the community would use to guide its community center revitalization program. · Creating a Community Center Vision - by developing a public consensus for the future of the community center. Potential activities include surveys, public meetings, focus groups, data collection, charettes, designs and reports. · Identifying Economic Markets - by identifying the unique economic and market niche that best serves residents, attracts visitors and encourages investors. Potential activities include inventory and analysis of the existing resources; market analysis of the potential demand for downtown residential, commercial/retail and support services; urban design analysis. · Developing Implementation Strategies - such as action-oriented implementation plans or designs for priority projects in downtown districts. Potential activities include marketing campaigns, including brochure and website design; plans for cultural, historic, arts and entertainment districts; plans for transportation oriented projects, such as increasing transportation choices, evaluating downtown traffic impacts, parking strategies, and designs for pedestrian-friendly streetscapes; plans and designs of public spaces; planning for mixed-use/mixed-income redevelopment; developing employer assisted housing programs; and coordinating redevelopment with the expansion of medical, educational and research facilities. · Developing Organizational Capacity for Implementation - This involves examining and developing the institutional tools needed to support revitalization of a downtown or community center. SEE BELOW Town Board DESCISIONS IN ALL CAPS To: Town of Southold Town Board From: Town of Southold Planning Board Department of Data Processing Re: Recommended methodology to exclude parcels unsuitable for high density development within the HALO boundaries. Date: August 30, 2005 The Planning Board recommends the following set of planning and environmental criteria that would render parcels as ineligible to be included within the HALO District. Following the approval of the criteria by the Town Board, amended HALO maps will be produced for each Hamlet. Once the amended maps are approved by the Town Board, a build out analysis for each HALO will be prepared based on the best available data. Note, that inclusion of a parcel within the HALO boundary does not guarantee that the parcel will receive the HALO District designation. Eligible parcels would be assessed on a case by case basis to numerous parameters that would include Town goals and planning principles and approved or disapproved by the Town Board. The following criteria are recommended to amend the HALO boundaries. Assumption: The mapping of HALO and Hamlet areas should be accomplished using the following assumption: 1. The permitted uses in the HALO Overlay District zoning requirements apply to both the HALO and Hamlet boundary designations. Methodology: It is recommended that the HALO/Hamlet parcels are excluded if one or more of the following criteria apply. Parcels that are split by the recommended HALO boundary and are less than fil2y pement within the HALO boundary unless the parcel was specifically incorporated in a Stakeholders' recommendation. THIS CRITERION WILL BE MAPPED AS EXCLUDED WITH DISCRETION. b. Parcels identified on the Town of Southold Protected Lands Map. c. Parcels identified on the Town of Southold Community Facilities Map. d. Non-subdividable waterfront parcels and non-subdividable parcels that contain bluffs, primary or secondary dunes. eo Parcels included within a subdivision that a Homeowners' Association has been filed for or which a "no further subdivision" clause has been filed in a Covenant and Restriction. THIS CRITERION VOLL NOT BE MAPPED, HOWEVER IT SHOULD BE INCORPORATED IN THE LEGISLATION TO EVALUATE THE APPLICATION OF THE HALO DISTRICT. f. Parcels entirely located within a Suffolk County Water Authority wellhead zone of influence. Parcels split by a wellhead zone of influence could be assessed on a case by case basis and the area avoided and protected pursuant to Chapter A106. THIS CRITERION WILL NOT BE MAPPED, HOWEVER IT SHOULD BE INCORPORATED IN THE LEGISLATION TO EVALUATE THE APPLICATION OF THE HALO DISTRICT. Parcels less than 10,000 square feet and not served by community sewage disposal system and public water. Parcels retain the underlying zoning uses therefore applicants could still apply for an Accessory Apartment. Structures that are listed on the Historic Preservation Commission's Southold Town Designated Landmarks Roster and the state or national registers of historic places. This would prevent a more intense use of historic structures and associated properties. If these structures are not excluded, permitted uses could include; garden apartments, multi- family residences and accessory apartments. THIS CRITERION WILL NOT BE MAPPED, HOWEVER IT SHOULD BE INCORPORATED IN THE LEGISLATION TO EVALUATE THE APPLICATION OF THE HALO DISTRICT. Parcels that are suitable for public park/open space uses. This prevents planning for parks and recreation on "left over parcels" that may not be suited for such use based upon location, accessibility and infrastructure support. ONLY PARCELS RECOMMNEDED BY THE STAKEHOLDERS WILL BE EXCLUDED FROM HALO ELIGIBILITY. Marine and freshwater wetlands, flood zones, areas within the Special Groundwater Protection Area, parcels with shallow depth to groundwater, and areas that contain protected species and significant habitats were not excluded. Impacts to these areas should be assessed and on a case by case basis pursuant to Chapter Al06 Existing Resource Site Analysis Plan (ERSAP) process, State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR) and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program during the review of HALO District application. Additionally, it is recommended that the Town Board refine the HALO district goals to insure mixed uses within the HALO. This would give clear direction to the Planning Board and Land Preservation Committee and assist in future decisions during the concept design process. One way to achieve this is to establish target land use percentages based upon land areas. For example: i. High Density Housing - 1 unit up to 20,000 square feet (50 %) a. Affordable Housing (25% of total units) ii. Moderate Density Housing- 1 unit to 40,000 square feet (15%) b. Affordable Housing (25% of total units) i. Commercial- (25%) ii. Public Parks/Recreation Areas and Open Space - (10%) The HALO district goal numbers would be adjusted based upon the build out analysis.