HomeMy WebLinkAboutAngel Shores Vol II 1991 CRAMER, VOORHIS & ASSOCIATES
ENVIRONMENTAL AND PLANNING CONSULTANTS
Final Environmental
Impact Statement
VOLUME II
COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT EIS
ANGEL SHORES, SECTIONS I AND II
Southold, New York
� - 1i991
NRANING$OD
September, 1991
54 NORTH COUNTRY ROAD, MILLER PLACE, NY 11764 (516) 331-1455
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS �� _ '�' SCOTT L. HARRIS
Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman y�� O� Supervisor
George Ritchie Latham, Jr. �O b
Richard G. Ward 1 = y Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
Mark S. McDonald P.O. Box 1179
Kenneth L. Edwards PLANNING BOARD OFFICE Southold, New York 11971
Telephone (516) 765-1938 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765-1823
March 22, 1991
William D. Moore
Moore & Moore
Clause Commons Suite 3
P.O. Box 23
Mattituck, New York 11952
RE: Angel Shores
SCTM# 1000-88-6-1,4,5
Dear Mr. Moore:
The public comment period on the Draft DEIS ended March 21,
1991.
The next step is to prepare a Final EIS. As lead agency, it is
the Planning Board's responsibility to determine the adequacy and
accuracy of the Final EIS. The Planning Board feels it would be
helpful if you prepared a response to the public comments received to
date. This will provide you with the opportunity to modify the
project, conduct the necessary research, and propose mitigation
measures which may be appropriate or necessary to address the
relevant comments.
In preparing these comments, please consider the following:
1. The Draft EIS need 'not be reproduced for the Final EIS,
but may be incorporated by reference;
2. All original comment letters and transcripts should be
included;
3 . Comments should be identified as to whether they were made
at the public hearing or if they were submitted as part of
the written record;
4. Comments should be annotated to indicate the source;
5. Comments should be summarized without detracting from the
nature, scope or intent of the comment;
. ?l-1
Page 2
Angel Shores
6. A response for each substantive comment must be provided.
Responses should be accurate, consistent, and objective,
and should be referenced to indicate source material for
conclusions (If it is necessary to revise any part of the
DEIS, it would be helpful if this was clarified in the
response. ) ;
7. The most encompassing comment document should be addressed
first in the responses. Subsequent comments that are
duplicative can be reference to a previous response.
A list of written and verbal comments is enclosed along with
copies of the actual comments.
The State Environmental Quality Review Regulations indicate that
a Final EIS should be prepared within 45 days after the close of
the public hearing; unless it is determined that additional time is
necessary to prepare the statement adequately. If additional time is
needed to provide an adequate and accurate response, it is not
necessary to adhere to the 45 day time frame.
Upon receipt of five (5) copies of the responses, the Planning
Board will review the documentation in a timely fashion in order to
determine adequacy and accuracy.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact
this office. i
Very truly yours,
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
enc.
7L-Z
March 22, 1991
List of Comments Received During the Public
Comment Period and the Public Hearings on
the D.E.I.S. dated December 10, 1990, for Angel Shores
Comments from Planning Board
Review dated March 11, 1991
Comments from the Planning Board's Environmental Consultant,
Cramer, Voorhis & Associates
Review dated January 31, 1991
Comments from Involved Agencies
Letter dated March 11, 1991 from Robert DeLuca, Department of
Health Services, Office of Ecology
Letter dated March 21, 1991 from Mohabir Persaud, Department of
State
Written Comments from the Public
Sophia Adler March 18, 1991
Steve Barbato March 21, 1991
Sydney Breese March 12, 1991
Cedar Beach Park Assoc.
(Frank Francia) February 12, 1991
Cedar Beach Park Assoc.
(Charles Michel) Jan. 24, 1991, Feb 11, 1991
Frank Cichanowicz
(Misc. information
pertaining to lawns) March 21, 1991
Michel Costello Submitted at 2-11-91 meeting
Eric Lamont March 14, 1991 ""
Cecelia Loucka
(Terry Waters Property Owners) February 12, 1991
Robert Maus & Gurly Maus Jan. 18, 1991, March 11, 1991
jt 3
.. .. _.. -... _ .,.., .. .sc .. .._i1ri::.ri.,.-.�.L.wYI'.fdl...-aZs'..:nMi�la...+...Nr• r - __ �:.t
, t
Page 2
List of Comments for Angel Shores
North Fork Envir. Council
(Sherry Johnson) Feb. 4, 1991, March 11, 1991
Ernest Pappas February 12, 1991
Dorothy Phillips February 1, 1991
Daniel Ross,
Attorney for Mr. & Mrs. Wohl March 21, 1991
Donald Spates March 20, 1991
Georgeanne Spates (submitted
petition from residents
who use pond) Submitted at 2-11-91 meeting
Georgeanne Spates March 20, 1991
Transcripts from Public Meetings
February 4, 1991
February 12, 1991
March 11, 1991 * (This will be forwarded under separate cover)
- - - .. .-. -.:.,s:-�...a.r.�.vi.:.+..rir"�..a.....-+�'i.x..,•.,w+s.i.:�.ifYW`in:.l�
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
7� t r Z
r `3 T SCOTT L. HARRIS
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.,
Chairman ti: `� .y ��' Supervisor
George Ritchie Latham, Jr. -
Richard G. Ward Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
Mark S. McDonald P.O. Box 1179
Kenneth L. Edwards PLANNING BOARD OFFICE Southold, New York 11971
Telephone (516) 765-1938 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765-1823
PLANNING BOARD REVIEW OF DEIS FOR ANGEL SHORES
March 11, 1991
INTRODUCTION
This section should state clearly that the lot yield �-
Stipulated in the court settlement is subject to change based on
the findings of this environmental review.
The discussion of the Critical Environmental Area on page
vi should be expanded to examine the environmental impacts of P8-Z
the proposal relative to the sensitivity of the Critical
Environmental Area. As written, it just lists the general
characteristics of a CEA.
The statement on page vii that "The water supply system was 1>8 --3
approved and constructed in accordance with all applicable State
and County regulations and procedures and is now being operated
by the Village of Greenport Water District." should be changed
to reflect the present state of affairs.
SUMMARY
This section should state the number of dwelling units the
water system can supply pursuant to the Health Department's 8 -4
approval.
In general, the description of the impacts and the proposed
mitigation measures is cursory. This section should be rewritten PIB ''- '
after other deficiencies in the report are addressed.
SECTION 1: DESCRIPTION .'
1-1. It would be more accurate to describe the open part
of the property as being a meadow and the beginnings of an old
field rather than as being in agricultural use. The text does
not mention the existence of a clump of five mature trees along
Main Bayview Road.
1-2. The discussion on access should be clarified by the PDr-7
addition of a map showing the location of the private roads and
the rights of way. This map should indicate which property
owners have right of way over this property.
1-5 through 1-30. The chronology of events listed here is p Q-
not relevant to the environmental review. While this information
jr-s-
may have been of value to the court, it is of no value to the
DEIS. Deletion of same is suggested.
1-30. Provide documentation to support the statement that
there is a public need for this project. Also, the discussion
of the goals of the Master Plan update does not explain how this
project furthers those goals.
1-32. Provide documentation and proof to support PB-10
statement that this project will generate sufficient tax revenue
to exceed public expenditures.
1-35. Where will topsoil be stockpiled? How will the
stockpile be protected from erosion? Will all topsoil remain on �B—
site, or will some of it be sold? Finally, if lots are not going
to be developed until individual lot owners chose to begin
construction, which may be years after the initial purchase of
the lot, what is the purpose of stripping the lots and
stockpiling the topsoil?
SECTION II : INVENTORY OF EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS.
2-1 to 2.4. The Geology section is too general. Test
hole boring data should be included here, along with an analysis
of the data.
2-5 to 2-8. The Soils section should be expanded to
include a discussion of the suitability of the soils for septic
systems. Accordingly, the discussion should include a review of PIE43
the probability of nitrates or otherichemicals leaching into the
groundwater and the fresh and salt water wetlands from septic
systems.
2-9 to 2-11. The Topography section could be expanded to PS-14
include answers to the following questions: What types of soils
underlie the 'areas of greater than 10% slope? What is the total
volume of runoff that is generated on the site? What percentage
of that runoff feeds the fresh and salt water wetlands on the
site? What percentage drains onto Main Bayview Road? What
percentage runs off onto surrounding properties? Does any of the
runoff moving off the site feed adjacent salt or freshwater
Wetland systems? Are there any erosion problems on the site?
2-12 to 2-26. The section on Vegetation is not definitive P$
in its description of what exists. For instance, it goes into
detail about the Maritime Red Cedar forest, but does not seem to
establish whether there is or isn't such a forest. If there is
no such forest, then, at the least, there should be a letter
from a recognized expert who has been on the site stating that
there is no such forest.
2-27 to* 2-30. The Wildlife section does not document the
importance of the habitats either in general or for specific
species. For instance: Is this a significant deer habitat? How
-2-
many deer frequent the site? How will development of the site
affect the suitability of this habitat for deer? The absence of
quantified field data from an on-site survey makes it difficult
to determine the significance of the impacts for each of the
species named within this section.
2-31 to 2-39. The section on Wetlands does not rate or
rank the value of the wetland habitats relative to other PB- 17
wetlands, whether nearby or within the Town.
2-40 to 2-44. The section on Land Use and Zoning omits
the fact that the court's "Stipulation of Settlement" regarding P8_18
the density does not absolve the Planning Board of its
responsibility to look at the impacts of the proposed density
and determine whether those impacts are severe enough to warrant
a reduction in density.
The discussion about the recommendations of the 208
Wastewater Management Study does not explain how the PW1C)
recommendations have been incorporated into the Angel Shores
development. The discussion about the Town's Master Plan and
the purposes of the Town's cluster ordinance does not show how
the proposed project achieves those purposes.
2-45 to 2-58. The Water Supply section does not contain a
discussion of the significance of the conditions that were
attached to the State Department of Environmental Conservation' s
permit approval. And, since we do not have a copy of the
application that was submitted to the DEC, we cannot judge the
permit approval in the context of what was applied for.
If we could review the applicat' n and the supporting
documentation, we might know answersvo the following questions
among others: At what rate was the well pumped before salt water
intrusion occurred? Was the well being pumped to capacity?
What was the result of the drawdown analysis?
This section also does not include an analysis of the PS—z�
probability of salt water intrusion occurring, both vertically
and horizontally, as a result of the pumping. It does not
discuss the possible effects of a long term drought on the
groundwater regime or on the probability of salt water intrusion?
A map showing the vertical and horizontal configurations of
the draw down effect on the water table around the wells should P8
be included. This map also should show the potential zone of
influence along with the zone of contribution at the calculated
maximum withdrawal rate.
Also, an analysis of how drought might affect the water
table should be included. Historical data collected by the Pa-Z3
Suffolk County Department of Health Services showing the depth
to groundwater in drought periods should be used in this
analysis. A map of same would be useful.
Copies of the applications and supporting test data that
were submitted to the Suffolk County Department of Health PS Z�
Services and the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation should be attached to the DEIS Appendices.
-3-
A7
2-59 to 2-64. The Groundwater Hydrology Section does not
indicate the nature of the groundwater flow. For instance, does
it generally flow from north to south, or from northwest to
southeast?
What level of water quality exists on the site now? What
is the water quality in the wells that are down gradient from 'Pg—Z(O^
the site? Is there groundwater contamination by nitrates and
pesticides that used when the property was being farmed? Has
that contamination affected the wells of the properties
downgradient from the site? How will the projected nitrate
loading from sewage and lawn fertilization affect the nitrate
levels of the down stream wells?
2-11.
2-65 to 2-67. See comments made on pages 2-9 through Also, the discussion of the flood zones does not examine PS-Z7
the fact that fill, bulkheading and regrading will be needed in
order to construct houses at the ten foot elevation or higher.
This change of grade may change the existing stormwater runoff
patterns. How will these topographic changes affect the
remaining vegetation and habitat, on both the upland and wetland
portions of the site?
2-68. See comments on suitability of soils for sewage P�
disposal (2.5 to 2-8) .
2-70. The traffic section does� not explain why traffic
impacts were estimated by using only one, non-peak day during
- g--
the low demand part of the season. There is no data in this
discussion that is relevant to peak demand traffic.
2-74. The demographic data is outdated. 1985 updates P8- O
should be obtained from the Suffolk County Planning Department.
SECTION III: 'ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS.
3-1. This section on Geology and Soils does not assess Pg_31
the impacts of the addition of fill that will be required in
order to raise the first floor elevation of the homes to ten or
more feet above sea level.
It does not discuss the impacts of placing septic systems pen-
in areas where the soils may not be suitable for this purpose.
It also does not assess the environmental impact of the
Proposed stripping and stockpiling of topsoil. �$"
3-2 to 3-3. This section does not specify proposed
changes to the topography. It subsequently fails to address the
specific impacts that will result from grading the site in
accordance with the proposed plan. This discussion should
include a detailed analysis of how the grades will change due to
the construction of roads and recharge basins; and the
introduction of sand for septic systems or fill for flood
protection. (Although the developer does not intend to be
responsible for construction of the actual homes, the law
-4-
jr-8
requires a "hard look" at the impacts of their construction as
part of the environmental review. )
In addition, this section should estimate the effect these
topographic changes will have on the stormwater runoff
patterns. And it should analyze how these changes are likely to
affect the volume of stormwater runoff that feeds the wetland
systems.
3-5 to 3-6. First, this section offers the guarantee that
"homeowners will not clear their lots completely," without any P1S-3G
supporting documentation or assurances that this will in fact
occur.
Second, the 'worst case" assumption, that all the lots will Pg-37
be built upon, is not a "worst case" scenario: it is actually
the proposal being presented and reviewed.
Third, this section does not provide the calculations that
were used to arrive at the statement that 9.7 acres of land3�
would be cleared for road and recharge basins construction, and
that more than 43 acres "could be disturbed" when the entire
site is built upon.
Fourth, the statement that preservation of 48% of this
community (the maritime red cedar forest) "represents a
significant effort and concession of the part of the project P8_,39
sponsor to respect the environmentally sensitive nature of the
area. " is not supported by any documentation whatsoever. The
existence of the community is neither proved nor disproved. And
no determination by a qualified expert has been made as to
whether disturbance or removal of more than half of this plant
community will destroy its viability as a self-sustaining
community.
3-7 to 3-10. This section on Wildlife does not quantify P8-#1D
of the environmental impacts that are expected to occur. And
it does not address how those impacts might be mitigated in a
meaningful, quantitative fashion.
Further; it is contradictory. On the one hand, it
recognizes that while the impact of the Angel Shores project may Pg �
be small for most species, there are species that may be
significantly impacted by the development of this property (on
page 3-7) . Then, it states (on- page 3-8) "While not trying to
minimize the impacts to wildlife from this development, it is
felt that no significant impacts to any species will result from
the habitat loss anticipated. " Neither statement is supported by
any type of quantitative inventory and analysis of actual
wildlife on the site for any of the species mentioned. Nor is
there a categorization of the habitat itself. There is no
documentation in this section (or the Appendix) ' that reflects
actual on-site surveys, such as was recommended by the New York
State Department of Environmental Conservation in February of
1989 and 1990, (pages G-2 and G-13) .
3-11 to* 3-12. The statement that the proposed development PB.42.
"is not expected to have any significant impacts on either tidal
or freshwater wetlands" should be supported by quantitative .
-5-
X-1
documentation and analysis. The reference to the need for
stormwater replenishment of freshwater wetlands should be
buttressed by data on the volume of runoff that presently flows
into these wetlands now, and the volume of runoff that will flow
into these wetlands after development. Further, the first
statement in this section, that no significant impacts are
expected, must be reconciled with later statements that
"elimination of all surface runoff into wetlands is neither
feasible nor desirable." and "The majority of runoff will be
collected by the drainage system and be directed to the recharge
basins away from the wetland areas."
3-13 to 3-16. First, the last paragraph on page 3-13
gives the reader the erroneous impression that the proposed P6-y3
density, lot size and layout have the Planning Board's implicit
approval. They do not.
Second, comparison of previous plans with the proposed
plans in order to show the proposed plan as being less damaging P$-491
environmentally, are irrelevant for purposes of assessing the
probable impacts of the proposed plan.
Third, the second paragraph on page 3-14 is not correct.
The Town code allows for a minimum of 30,000 square foot lots PB-41s-
within a clustered development. It also allows for a minimum of
20,000 square foot lots when public water is available.
Fourth, the mooring of boats is within the scope of this '
report. Since all lot owners within this subdivision will have
access to the water over the waterfront park property, each
owner could apply for a mooring permit off this stretch of
beach. Accordingly, this section should identify all the
potential impacts of mooring permits.
Fifth, among the visual impacts hre that which will be PB-47
by lots where extensive fill will be required to raise
the first floor elevation of the homes to ten feet above sea
level or higher. This section should address this impact to the
view of the shoreline from the vicinity, as well from
neighboring properties.
3-17 to 3-19. In this section on Ground Water Hydrology, PB-d$
the term "slight impact" which is used in the first sentence,
should be defined quantitatively.
How will the construction'- of the recharge basin alter the 08
existing hydrology?
The last sentence of the first paragraph in this section is P8
based on an assumption that is not correct. While the Town Code
requires the installation of recharge basins in subdivisions,
the substitution of leaching rings and other, alternate forms of
natural drainage is permitted.
Also, the calculations accompanying this section do not P8_�
account for the total water budget, in that they do not include
the volume of water withdrawn from the ground by the water
supply system.
Finally, the section on the projected nitrogen loading from Pa.�
sewage effluent and from lawn fertilization does not mention the
existing background nitrate levels of the groundwater. The
-6-
projected nitrate levels should be added on to the existing
nitrate levels. The Water Supply Report (Appendix A) indicates
that in 1985 the background level near the wellhead was 7 mg/1.
If this level is still the case, then total nitrate loading will
exceed the State's 10 mg/1 standard.
3-19 to 3-22. Given the fact that the Greenport Water P8�s3
Utility Company is no longer' operating the supply system, this
section should explain how the system is being operated at
present.
3-23 to 3-24. The following questions come to mind: on Pam
what basis was the decision made to allow 3.4 acres of
impervious surface for 49 homes? Does this figure include for
patios, swimming pools and garages?
The statement that individual lots are going to be graded _
so that the first floor will be 1.2 feet above the drainage
divide of the lot clearly does not apply to those lots where the
existing elevation does not meet federal flood management
standards which require the first floor elevation to be at least
ten feet above sea level.
As observed in other sections, there is no discussion of
the impact the recharge basins will have on the overall surface P8-�
water hydrology, as well as the wetland ecology and the
vegetation.
Finally, as mentioned earlier, alternate forms of drainage P8.,S7
can be substituted for recharge basins.
3-25 to 3-29. Since some soils present on this property
may not be suitable for septic systells, or the depth to
groundwater may be less than eight feet, this section on Sewage
Disposal should examine each proposed lot to see if it can meet
the requirements of the Suffolk County Department of Health
Services. There should be a listing of the lots that would-
require excavation of unsuitable soils or the addition of
either sand or fill to provide sufficient separation between the
water table and the bottom of the septic leaching pools.
3-31 to 3-34. The conclusions of the traffic study do not
address either the quantitative or the relative impact this
project will have during the time of peak traffic volume - the
summer months. Since the assumptions are not based on actual
summer traffic loads, the projected impacts are conjectural.
Although the report states that the carrying capacity of
the road will not be exceeded, it does not address the very real
impact of an 39 % to 82 % increase in traffic as it will be felt
by the current residents of Hog Neck. (The two percentages noted
ate the range of increase noted in this section. )
Finally, this additional wear and tear on the road will
result in an additional financial expense to the Highway
Department. This cost should be examined in the section on
community services.
-7-
�-ll
3-35. This section does not consider the percentage
increase of population that will occur on Hog Neck should the
project proceed.
3-37. This section does not offer any idea as to what the P$-403-
impacts will be, yet asks the reader to believe that the impacts
will not "overtax " community services.
Was there any contact with the Southold Town Police-
Department or the Fire Department to determine if they
anticipate problems servicing this project? Since the Health
Department has stipulated that fire hydrants may not be operated A$_/_ZJ
off the water supply system, the installation of fire wells will W7
be required. A fire well must be able to pump 350 gallons per
minute in order to be accepted by the Fire District.
3-38. Include supporting documentation from the School
District that the addition of 40 students will not have a
significant impact on the system.
SECTION IV: CRITICAL IMPACT AREAS & IMPACTS WHICH CANNOT BE
AVOIDED.
4-1 to 4-4. This section discusses the Delineation of
Critical Impact Areas. It should be revised after the questions
noted earlier in this letter are addressed.
4-5 to 4-9. Of what value will the recharge basins be as �(D
wildlife habitat? And for which species? 7
4-10 to 4-11. The discussion orthe loss of wildlife
habitat and vegetation is too general. It fails to quantify the zv-(.B
extent to which mitigation efforts can offset impacts.
4-12. The entire paragraph on growth inducement needs to
be supported by documentation and analysis.
SECTION V: DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES.
This discussion is too narrow in its scope. There are
numerous other alternatives which should be studied.
Specifically, there was no consideration of layout changes that '
might mitigate some of the specific impacts that were mentioned.
For instance, the relocation of lots so that all lots have at
least eight feet to groundwater could have been considered in
one of the alternatives.
Examination of the following alternatives is being
required with the intent of mitigating specific impacts that
were identified in this report. Since some of the impacts remain
to be quantified, that new or additional data must be taken into
account when fleshing out these alternative layouts.
Alternative 4:
A cluster layout which avoids:
- the placement of buildings at elevations below ten feet
-8-
Jr-t2
above sea level.
the placement of septic systems in areas with
unacceptable soils, steep slopes and groundwater
table within eight feet of the surface. P$—?O
Further, this cluster layout should utilize natural
drainage swales and alternative drainage facilities instead of
recharge basins.
Alternative 5:
A cluster layout based on Alternative 4, but which uses P13-7/
20, 000 square foot lots.
Alternative 6:
A cluster layout based on Alternatives 4 and 5 which
minimizes intrusion on the maritime red cedar forest community,
the wetlands and the agricultural land by using attached housing. P/3-72
No Development Alternative:
This alternative was not explored fully. For instance, no
consideration was given to alternatives which would preserve
portions of the property, while resulting in some financial M-73
compensation. One such alternative is to sell the development
rights to the farmland. Another is to sell or donate the most
environmentally sensitive portions of the property to a
conservation group such as the Peconic Land Trust.
-9-
�-�3
CRAMER, VOORHIS & ASSOCIATES
ENVIRONMENTAL AND PLANNING CONSULTANTS
To: Bennett Orlowski,Jr., Chairman
Town of Southold Planning Board
From: Cramer, Voorhis and Associates, Inc.
Date: January 31, 1991
Re: Angel Shores, Southold
Sections I and II
Review of the Draft EIS
The Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS), for the project known as Angel
Shores was accepted by the Southold Town Planning Board on January 14, 1991. The
document has been circulated to involved agencies and parties of interest, for the purpose of
providing comments on the document for use by the decision making agency in the
preparation of a Final EIS, and ultimately a decision on the project. A copy of the Draft EIS
has been submitted to Cramer, Voorhis and Associates, Inc. (CVA), as consultants to the
Planning Board, for review of the SEQR documentation. This letter constitutes the review
of the Draft EIS for Angel Shores by CVA. The following comments with regard to content
and accuracy of the document are provided:
INVENTORY OF EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
1. Soils PageZJ
The soils map on Page 2-7 identifies an area of Haven Loam soils with a thick surface
layer (He), occupying a major portion of Lot 5 and part of Lot 6. Review of the
Suffolk County Soil Survey finds that these soils pose significant constraints with
regard to sanitary disposal, homesites, streets, etc., due to flooding and poor drainage.
In fact, the majority of both Lots 5 and 6 are less than elevation 10 indicating severe
constraints with regard to installation of a mandated three (3) pool sanitary system
with a minimum of two (2) feet above groundwater. This impact has not been G V�
identified or mitigated. Lot enlargement, transfer or some means of mitigation
should be considered to allow for proper sanitary system functioning and remove
activity from the Flood Zone A.
2. Ve etg ation Page 2-21
The statement in the last paragraph, "It is also very likely that any rare or endangered
species would be present on the site due to past human disturbance and agricultural
activities", is unsupported. In fact many of the rare plants thrive on the sunlit
conditions of farm fields and road edges. The statement in the Draft EIS should be
clarified or supported with references. G VA-
Page 1 or 6
54 NORTH COUNTRY ROAD, MILLER PLACE, NY 11764 (516) 331-1455
Angel Shores
Review of Draft EIS
3. Vegetation and Wildlife Pages 2-21 to 2-32
Review of the Vegetation Zone Map on Page 2-22, indicates that Section I is
comprised of at least three (3) distinct, unusual and biologically productive habitats,
whereas Section H is depicted as being homogeneous recently farmed field. Given
the fact that the Draft EIS considers both sections as a whole, please provide more
detail regarding the relative wildlife importance and habitat value between these
parcels. Further, please provide additional insight into the importance of edges CVA -3
between, and interconnection of freshwater wetlands, tidal wetlands and adJ'acent
scrub/shrub areas, in terms of wildlife value. Please indicate the wildlife habitat
importance of the area of dominant red cedar. Finally, please review the potential
for increased wildlife activity in southwest corner of Parcel I,between Peconic Bay
and the "flinger" of tidal wetlands which protrudes into the property.
4. Lan Use and Zonin Page 2,�
This section contains the statement, "It would be possible to link the proposed open
space areas of Angel Shores to these areas across Main Bayview Road. This should
be considered if development plans for an of this land are proposed in the future."
Please provide a vicinity of land use map customary to DEIS's) in order to provide
the Town with the information necessary or project coordination recommended in
this statement. CV 4-�
5. Ground Water Hydrology Page 2-63
The groundwater velocity calculation suggests a K value (hydraulic conductivity) of 33
feet per day, providing the 208 Study as a reference. Page 38 of the 208 Study
Groundwater Conditions report, indicates a hydraulic conductivity of 270 feet per day
in the Upper Glacial aquifer. Computations should be changed to reflect a verified
conductivity value. Further, the groundwater elevations in the well drillers reports
may not be synoptic, and are most likely not controlled in terms of horizontal and
vertical elevations to within acceptable standards. Therefore, the accuracy of they+$.
suggested groundwater velocity should be qualified.
6. &LIW Waste Disposal Page 2-69
This section does notprovide background information on the Town of Southold's
solid waste program. It does not provide information describing the local capabilities
to accommodate additional solid waste and where it will be processed, needed in
order to reach valid conclusions in the impact section. CY-4-(o
7. Traffic Page 2-7
The key intersections along Main Bayview Road should be identified either
graphically or in text. In addition, speed limit and accident information, along with
existing sight distances on Main Bayview Road should be incorporated into this
section. This information is necessary in order clearly assess the current traffic
situation in the project vicinity. C f/,4. - 7
CRAMER, VSOCIATES
ENVIRONMENT ��IG CONSULTANTS Page 2 of 6
Jt-r>r
Angel Shores
Review of Draft EIS
8. Schools Page 2-81
The Draft EIS does not provide background information on the per capita cost of
providing education services within the school district. This data is necessary to
determine the fiscal impact of the proposed subdivision on the impacted school
district. G VA-_8
ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
9. Geology and Saa Page 3-1
This section does not discuss the excavations that will result from constructing septic
systems, foundations, recharge basins, etc. Such excavations result in significant
environmental impacts which should be mitigated during construction. The
disposition of material and control methods should be identified. GVA
10. Topography PApe
L
The grading plan may have to accommodate problems associated with depth to
groundwater, particularly with respect to the installation of septic systems and
cesspools. Depth to groundwater should be identified in the constrained areas of the
site, particularly in the vicinity of Lots 5, 6, and 14 through 18. This information G V.4—/D
should be used to guide the final preparation of the site design, and to provide
general conditions for development activities, in consideration of these significant
environmental factors.
11. It appears as though fill will be necessary in order to achieve the proposed grades in
the eastern portion of Recharge Basin #1. The extent of this fill and impact on
adjacent lots should be identified. C VA 11
Vegetation P e 3
12. The statement, "It should also be noted that none of the existing vegetative species
observed on the site is [sic] classified as rare, threatened, or endangered (Federally or
in New York State), so than any loss of the site's vegetation would not have a
significant impact on the site or the general area in that regard". This statement is
misleading and should be clarified to indicate that no classified species were GY�t
observed; however, such species may,be present. Further, this statement totally
disregards impacts to vegetation which is not under State or Federal classification by
may be significant in terms of local importance or habitat value.
Wildlife Pag_3-7
13. The statement, The Angel Shores project is relatively small in terms of the scope of
most species.", is unsupported. The document does not contain sufficient information
regarding species biology to reach this conclusion. The site may be important to
many species in the context of size, diverse habitat, surrounding uses, etc. CVA y3
CRAMER, V R , SOCIATES
ENVIRONMENT `_ �1G CONSULTANTS Page 3 of 6
?C-/b
Angel Shores
Review of Draft EIS
14. The statement on Page 3-8, "While not trying to minimize the impacts to wildlife from
this development, it is felt that no significant impacts to,any [highlight added] species
will result from the habitat loss anticipated.", is likewise totally unsupported. The
value of the site in terms of diverse and unique habitats (comment #3 above), should
be considered and properly referenced conclusions should be provided. Areas of
increased wildlife activity connections, edges, etc.), should also be considered.
Domestic impacts from residential land use, and impacts to species not tolerant of
increased human activity has been ignored. L YA-Iq
Ground Water Hydrology PT -17—tQ�1
15. Page 3-18, indicates a fertilizer nitrogen application rate of 1.5 pounds per 1000
square feet. The references identify this number as an ideal value achieved only C YA 15.
through the implementation of a fertilizer management plan and education of
property owners. Actual rates of fertilizer nitrogen application range from 2.3 to 2.5
pounds per 1000 square feet, as referenced in the Long Island Regional Planning
Board, Non Point Source Management Handbook. Unmitigated groundwater
nitrogen budget computations should be changed accordingly.
16. The sewage component of nitrogen loading is based upon a concentration of nitrogen
released in liouid waste from the cesspool. Therefore, the dilution from the sanitary
component of recharge is already accounted for, and would not cause additional
dilution. It appears as though a recharge of 50 MG per year would be more G✓4'11,
appropriate.
17. The final computed concentration of nitrogen in recharge should be compared to the
statistical analysis of the percentage of time which the value would be expected to
exceed the 10 mg/l drinking water standard (as devised by Cornell University,
Hughes and Porter, 1983, and used by government agencies), in order to determine
the significance. CYA./7
Sewage Disposal Papp-3-29
18. Additional information should be presented regarding the depth to groundwater on
constrained lots (Lots 5, 6, and 14 through 17), and the ability to install properly
functioning sanitary systems. SCDHS does not recognize five (5)pool sanitary
systems for new subdivisions under the regulations. Excessive grading and fill to
achieve elevations needed for three (3)pool systems is totally inappropriate on these
lots adjacent to wetlands. The impact statement should acknowledge impacts or
provide feasible mitigation in order to overcome these significant constraints. CYI"+1
Solid Waste Disposal Page 3,sQ3
I
19. This section does notpresent background data on the local government's solid waste
capabilities and how the '
solid waste generated by the project will impact existing facilities. CY,4 19
Traffic Page 331
20. The analysis should discuss the effect that the proposal will have on the various
CYA-zo
CRAMER, VC CRSOCIATES
ENVIRONMENT �1G CONSULTANTS Page 4 of 6
��7
Ansel Shores
Review of Draft EIS
connector streets that intersect with Main Bayview Road in the project vicinity, and
traffic impacts in consideration of the in consideration of speed limits, accident
information and sight distances requested in comment # 7 above.
Schools Paee L$
21. The factors used in the analysis to project the number of students by unit type for the
Angel Shores proposal understates the number of school children that will actually be
F
by this project. Review of Rutgers data, as contained in The New
Practitioner s Guide to Fiscal Impact Analysis (Burchell et al, 1985), indicates 0.705
school-age children (SAC) for a 3-bedroom house, and 1.328 SAC for a 4-bedroom
house. These figures are for Middle Atlantic States which includes Long Island by
definition in the reference. This matter should be addressed. CY�4-Z J
22. The conclusion that students generated by the pro1'ect will not have a significant
impact is unsupported. The analysis should consider the cost of providing
educational services to this subdivision, based on current per capita pupil Clog -2Z
expenditures. This cost should be compared to the tax revenues that will be
generated to the school district by the project. In the alternative, the district should
be contacted to verify capacity.
MITIGATING MEASURES
23. This section does not provide any specific recommendations regarding the reuse of
excavated materials on site. Arrangements should be made with respect to the soils
being stockpiled on site and reutilized in appropriate areas. CY.4-Z3
24. A specific goal should be offered with respect to a limit of the fertilizer de,Pendent
vegetation that may be used on site, to minimize nitrogen loading. In addition,
specific limitations should be placed on grading and clearing activities that may take
place on lots and in the open space and conservation areas. GY,4-24/
25. Building envelope guidelines should be established, beyond existing bulk zoning
requirements, to control development. These envelops should be established in the
subdivision process in recognition of groundwater level and slope constraints, and the
preservation of significant vegetation and habitat. CYa-2s
ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS THAT CANNOT BE AVOIDED
26. Based on the comments provided herein, it appears appropriate to include a section
on Adverse Environmental Effects That Cannot Be Avoided, in the Final EIS. CY.4-Z&
ALTERNATIVES
27. Alternative paw 5-1 GYM-27
This section states that the No Development Alternative will not allow the Town to
CRAMER, VSOCIATES
ENVIRONMENT �G CONSULTANTS Page 5 of 6
Z-0
1
Angel Shores
Review of Draft EIS
realize the additional tax revenue that would be generated from its development. In
actuality, the revenue impact may be negative, once that the service demands are
considered in the analysis. However, since the Draft EIS did not present a
cost/revenue analysis on this proposal,with respect to the existing taxing jurisdictions,
a conclusion on this matter is not possible.
28. The No Development Alternative should also identify the potential or lack of
potential for the project site to be purchased under open space preservation CYA -Za
programs. This would mitigate the negative impact on the project owners.
Alternative II Page 5-1
29. It is questionable as to whether this alternative could meet the requirements of the
State DEC or local environmental regulations and actually be constructed. The siting
of primary and accessory structures would not be able to comply with fresh water and
tidal wetland restrictions. CVA -Z 9
30. Cluster Development Alternative Page 5-4
The Draft EIS does not adequately explore the alternative of clustering building lots
from'Section I to Section II. Consideration should be ten to the net environmental
benefit of relocating Lots 14 through 17, and perhaps Lots 5 and 6, or a combination
of these lots, given the significant constraints regarding depth to groundwater, poor
subsoils, diverse habitat,wildlife interconnection, and domestic impacts to wetlands
adjacent to these lots. Such an alternative would remove lots from environmentally
sensitive and flood zone areas, preserve more red cedar dominant areas, provide
interconnection of habitats, minimize wetlands impacts, and increase the probability
for property functioning sanitary systems. In addition, this alternative would
significantly reduce the necessary length of cul-de-sacs. This alternative could be
accomplished by nominally reducing some or all lot sizes to less than 40,000 square
feet adjacent (35,000 to 37,500 square feet), or decreasin&the proposed open space
areas. Additional visual mitigation could include vegetative buffers, maintaining
setbacks albeit perhaps reduced, or other measures.
CVA--3p
CRAMER, VRAl
OCIATES
ENVIRONMENT G CONSULTANTS Page 6 of 6
a-M
�d
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK -�I' '�C
/t'1S
s2'�t� � VV S
PATRICK G. HALPIN
SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES t DAVID HARRIS, M.D., M.P.H.
March 11, 1991 COMMISSIONER
Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Town Planning Board
53095 Main Road
Southold,New York 11791
RE: Angel Shores I & II - Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)
Revised Document of December 1990,SCTM#01000-88-1-4& 5
Dear Mr. Orlowski:
The Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS)has reviewed the above-
referenced document. Based on our evaluation,we find that the document is adequate for public
review, but lacks sufficient attention to the evaluation.of reasonable alternatives.
We do not believe that the desired action,or development alternatives discussed in the
document,provide sufficient mitigation to minimize potential impacts which c:ui reasonably be
expected to occur as a result of the development of this site.
As the Board is aware,our agency has been involved in the review of this proposal since
1988 and has commented on this action in detail, on several occasions (see Appendix I of DEIS).
We have consistently encouraged consideration of reasonable design alterni,tives which
would maxinize protection of this site's well-documented natural,visual, and possible
archeological resources, while remaining consistent with the applicant's objectives and
capabilities (as required by the State Environmental Quality Review Act -SEQRA).
Rather than reiterate our general concerns for the critical need to protect this site's
resources, we have taken the initiative of preparing a reconvnended design alternative for this
project which we believe is responsible and reasonable (see attached).
We hope this altentative will be considered in an addendum to the DEIS for this proposal.
COUNre CENTER
RIVERHEAD.N.Y. 11901
.- .:cam .. . _ _ ... u. ... ., w.i:.+:�.... .. .. .. .._,..-... ..,. •...�..�.if
t` l
Letter to Bennett Orlowski
March 11, 1991
Page 2
It should be pointed out,that we understand this is not the only alternative which could be
examined on this site,but that it does incorporate several key design considerations which afford
appropriate mitigation for impacts identified in the DEIS.
Details of this alternative are discussed below. 1
A. Design and Layout:
1. The recommended design alternative incorporates the use of lot-yield transfer,integrated
clustering and selective lot-size reduction, to accommodate full yield,single lot development of
the property,with the assurance of further protection for the site's contiguous wildlife habitat,
steep slopes, freshwater and tidal wetlands, scenic vistas,most significant coastal erosion areas,
and possible archeological resources.
2. This alternative design relocates nine of the proposed lots from Angel Shores I to Angel
Shores H,and realigns 4 proposed lots and a recharge basin within the northern half of Angel
Shores II,to the southern half of Angel Shores II.Two lots within Angel Shores I have also been
realigned to eliminate the need for the northernmost lateral access road and thereby better
preserve the site's contiguous habitat.
3. Size reductions are incorporated for those lots nearest to the shoreline, and for 8 lots
located in the northern portion of Angel Shores II.These modifications will reduce potential
shoreline lot erosion, increase wildlife habitat, and enynce the protection of the scenic vista
along Bayview Road.
4. The alternative does not rely on the use of lot-specific conservation easements to-protect
many of sensitive areas on the site. It has consistantly been our experience that such conditions
are of limited value because they are extremely difficult to enforce and,therefore,should be
used only where no other alternative exists.
The recommended alternative design expands the common open space dedication to
incorporate the most significant and sensitive areas of the site.This common area should be
strictly covenanted and overseen by a homeowners association or possibly by the Town.
S. The project incorporates the use of only "single-flag" clustering and disperses clustered lots
throughout the development area. It is our opinion that this type of detign is consistent with
"country-rural" development objectives and promotes community character consistent with
historically developed communities.
/'Letter to Bennett Orlowski
March 11, 1991
Page 3
6. The alternative provides for water-view lots but does not extend lot boundaries into those
portions of the site which are most subject to coastal erosion hazards and property loss. We
believe strongly that this design consideration can substantially limit the long-tens negative
effects of shoreline property loss and,consequently,eliminate the need for individual
homeowners to seek structural stabilization of a naturally Onarnic coastal area.
i
We recornmend the provision of combined shoreline access easements for waterfront
property owners to reduce the potential for shoreline erosion and destabilization from foot traffic.
Given the few lots served by the site's waterfront access road,we would encourage
consideration of a non-asphalt pervious surface which would assist in the reduction of
stormwater runoff and reduce development costs.
7. We also suggest the imposition of stringent clearing restrictions on all waterfront and
wooded parcels to reduce erosion potential and to maximize protection of the site's biological
resources. For those parcels currently vegetated in early successinal "old field" cover,we
recommend turf limitation and native planting covenents be imposed.
8. As an impuitant water conservation measure, we recommend restrictive lot covenants
which would prevent the installation and operation of in-ground spriikler systems which can
significantly increase the water usage demands on the site's community supply well.
B. Summary & Conclusions:
t!r
The project site is located within the Suffolk County-designated Peconic Estuary CEA
(Critical Envirorunental Area). According to the DEIS (p. v.), the enabling legislation creating
this CEA stated that "the Peconic Bay and its immediate surrounding area contain natural
resources requiring the most stringent steps to protect them as integral components of Suffolk
County's unique environmental and fragile scenic beauty."
We believe the subject parcel embodies many if not all, of the important resources values
enumerated in this designation and should be developed only with the strictest regard for their
protection.
Also,we believe the SEQRA process allows for the alternative design flexibility required
to develop a subdivision plan which mininizes the potential inpacts,to the greatest degree
practicable.
• .-:.:..a..,w:.i.:.3aG%:a�.Mar.:.d.�._. .+...t.�,,.+.:.rem
Letter to Bennett Orlowski
March 11, 1))1
Page 4
We are hopeful that the incorporation of our agency's alternative design reconunendations $C —
will assist um the Board in making its most well informed decision on this important parcel.
We appreciate the opportunity to evaluate this proposal and provide our recommendations,
and remain available to provide further technical assistance+in this matter.
Should you have any questions please feel free to contact the Office of Ecology at 548-
3060.
Sincerely,
Robert S. DeLuca
Biologist
Office of Ecology
cc: Vito Minei, P.E.
Louise Harrison
Stephen Costa, P.E.
Frank Panek, NYSDEC
Robert Greene, NYSDEC
Charles Hamilton,NYSDEC
Molmabir Persaud,NYSDOS
Enclosure
. .. .. . _ - - - - _... _. .,. ,o..e......:�kae::+�r::iyc•:ki.:►...«va4.:—...ar..1....c+ta++uct+e..s
1
� e
STATE OF NEW YORK
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
GAIL S SNAPPER ALBANY.N.Y 12231-0001
SEGRCTARYOF STATE
March 21, 1991
Ms. Mellisa Spiro
Town of Southold
Planning Board
Main Street
Southold, NY 11791
Re: S-88-046
Revised Draft Environmental Impact
Statement Angel Shores
Town of Southold
Dear Me. Spiro:
The Department of State has completed its review of the Revised Draft
Environmental Impact Statement for Sections 1 and 2 of Angel Shores dated
December, 1990 and the Proposed Sketch Plan gated 9-10-90.
This Department has sub-mitted comments regarding this proposal on
12-01-88 and again on 02-24-89 and is pleased to see the modifications made to
the original plane. These modifications, contained in the Proposed Sketch
Plan have greatly reduced the potential adverse impacts, of the original
proposal, on the environment.
However, the Department feels that Lots 14, is, 16, 17, and 18 can be
modified to exclude all of the tidal wetlands on their southern boundaries as
is depicted in the attached sketch on a photocopy of this portion of the plan. p0 '
The property lines on this sketch can be adjusted to create lots of equal
areas.
This option would place the access road to these lots at the side if the
hill, but judging form the contours, the slope at this location would not be
so great as to seriously affect the proposal. The ianda`to the south of these
lots, mostly wetlands, should be dedicated as open space and managed either by
the homeowners or the Town of Southold.
it would be in the interest of all the property owners who have access to
the Bay to create a common walkway to the beach so as to avoid damage to
vegetation by foot traffic or creation of multiple pathways. - ---- p Os- 2
RAR 2 1 1991 : .
I IHr'-_i-:_71 l0• __ F 1 1 .-_'JLI i _-_ •L "' 1__- r'.i.'_
r
Ms. Mellisa Spiro
March 21, 1991
Page 2
A requirement for ownership of these lots should be that the owners will
not construct individual shore hardening structure such as bulkheads, groins
breakwaters, etc. but must utilize non structural measures to reduce OS
potential erosion along the waterfront.
Should access to navigable waters be required, this can be creatad by
construction of a common boat launching ramp and identification of a mooring
area offshore rather than be constructing individual docks to serve the
waterfront property owners.
We hope that the foregoing comments will be of assistance in future
modifications to this proposal.
Should you have any questions on the above please call me at (51$)
474-3642.
Sincerely,
lk�4 �
Mohabir Persaud
Coastal Processes
Technical Specialist
MP/jtb
-7_7
nv
",wn
do
g4 t"
1P11(
3>,
ab
44
.lr
.510,
ris ii��
L
a j !�`F5�-y i _a:.. ,� � `_r moi` ,AI` r� *' ,"h• r�r,••,:•1'` • Y, ♦ •t�')x»�ti/i<.w.. '`'9j.• 'e "
IM—
XT
o • Y
WEI
X-.
4' �_, ZA
TV
doe
E"Ift."I M-1
-`V x
N
:7.7
ex
vrk,
-
-W�
A 34� wt
7
tn
-4 ".0,MW
rs .rt M
its'.
NVI
A,
Vo_ W, Rvio
44*ik'X�XNZ�Z�,
fU.�d -
ggp,
Nx
V
A,
A
I
K,4--f.
11:4
4v
N
-TOTAL P.
Sophia Adler
P.O. Box 1481
Southold. NY 11971
Southold Town Planning Board March 18, 1991
Town Hall
Southold, N.Y. 11971
To Members of the Board,
Many here in the vicinity of Cedar Beach Park are concerned that
our communal aquifer is threatened by the water demands of the
proposed "Angel Shores" project.
The D.E.C. has warned that the aquifer on our end of Hogs Neck
(which supplies each of our home wells with our drinking water) is
"Quantity-stressed". That term means that our underground water-
table is severely limited in capacity and it is also a clear
signal to avoid its overuse.
Here are some of our concerns:
1. After a long history of water probl,�ems associated with
developer-built satellite wells, the Town of Southold has ruled
that satellite wells will no longer be permitted. Nevertheless,
the "Angel Shores" Project had already obtained a permit to SA—I
construct a satellite well Pumping Station. They contracted to
pipe its water a mile distant to "The Cove", a recently completed
building project whose own wells had proved incapable of supplying
drinkable water to its 33 homes.
2. The "Angel Shores" proposal to build 49 homes on its property
is now awaiting approval from the Town of Southold. Those 49
proposed "Angel Shore" homes, plus the 33 homes in the "Cove" "Z
development, would make a total of 82 homes to \be supplied with
water delivered by the "Angel Shores" pumping Stations from our
"quantity-stressed aquifer".
2
3. Litigation is presently being conducted between the owner of
the "Angel Shores" satellite wells and the Greenport Water
District. We hope that in the midst of claim and counterclaim,
the concerns of established Cedar Beach homeowners for the
preservation of our water supply are being considered and
protected.
4. Evidence of the inadequacy of our "quantity-stressed aquifer"
to safely pump the necessary quantity of water to supply 82
homes, is implied in the special restriction demanded by the
Department of Environmental Control before it can approve the
"Angel Shores" proposal:
A restriction in the covenant must "prohibit use of the
Water System for non essential purposes such as lawn
irrigation." (Sec.2, P.57)
Since such a covenant prohibition is transparently unenforceable,
it serves only as a warning that the amount of water that would
actually have to be pumped to supply the 82 houses of the "Angel L/
Shores" Proposal, will dangerously oveAax the capacity of our
"quantity-stressed aquifer". As a consequence the water supply
of our long-existing neighborhood homes will be threatened.
Therefore we ask that the Southold Planning Board reject the
"Angel Shores Proposal".
Sincerely
7� 3 Oa_ez�
?l-ZQ
JVaZ17-6&f
4�
M,S
d ¢ v
/y6W?-t
March 21 , 1991
Mr. Bennet Orlowski, Jr.
Charinan of Town of Southold Planning Board
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971
RF: Angel Shores Development
.i
Dear Mr. Orlowski:
As future honcowners in t.hc
Angel Shores development, we worltot;r. Or ,ou*_l;old, ;;Pecific3l: near the Proposed
d like to express our 'houghts to the situation
at hand.
We've know» Southold for Over 30 years ,incl one of the attractions the town
has to offer is It uniqueness; as being q,,:r i r.t and rural. The people of Southold
should be very thankful (as T'm sure they are) nh,
and beautiful area of the state and country. 11t. they wive in Such a peaceful
For the last ten yews or •-o ►• ,�
c"
lenged. People who want to J ' eY�'r, thl�s ct,aract�r'isLic has been chal-
prcmot.F "Rr-owth" are rcplacir,g once rolling fields
with cluster homes, strip shop.^,, etc. . yoc, know the picture. The western
I of Long Island has severely succumbed ?,c� part
to see the eastern end fall to 3 r jcvclOV:nPrit, pressures. We would hate
imilar demise,' This pressure i$ migrating
toward your direction; dust 1nry; at what, the p_anti are for the Pine Parrens in
Brookhaven township!
We've asked people in and around the proposed Angel shores site what their
feelings are concerning Angel Shores. WC did not. hoar an
Residents are not ha Y Positive thoughts.
PPYi not only with. the eyesurc that these homes will create
but other Issues such as traffic, beach rlgh,t.s, water qualit
baY, contrestion and basically a dPrreasc ill
c!„tllity of ? ;fe.y' pollution of the
Many residents feel the proposed dp vplopment site wan a
the $10 million lawsuit imposed by ;.i,� cicve'o�e-r. , approved because of
hearing some of the comments from nr ^ - i, t;tie can ssure you that after
tainted and/ or dimimished or ir' r.r.,;1Ceyi,1P �c Frtj' 11^ t.h�. drinking water becomes
occurs, that $10 million law>;ult trill cio�.rbl�Fdr �, effect: upon the environment
PSR 2 11991
Page Two
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
We fully understand the economics than, could be made to benefit the town
and its people. Growth is good but. it alr-.a chin Lac cxpl.)ited as witnessed in
other areas of the Island. Once Freund h,-)r, heFn broken it can never be
restored to its natural state. What w(-:Ire corivF-ying to ycu is that we hope
moral and honest decisions are helirp ;Wade On top of all the economic, ones
for the benefit of the town and its companerA*.r:- r,Psidents, beauty, life!
' Sincerely,
Charles Barbato
16 Covingtcn Street
Huntington Station, NY 11746
t Steve Barbato
h Lancaster Place
Huntington Station, NY 11746
f
CB:SB/ra
cc North Fork rnvronmental ('ounr'il
SYDNEY S. BREESE, JR. ,SL('7F��G
1700 CEDAR BEACH ROAD F
SOUTHOLD, L.I.
NEW YORK 11971 MS
C4L
r,arch 12, 091
Southold Town t'ianning board
Greetings:
Having read and been impressed by the
thoroughness of the Environmetal Impact Statement for the
development to be known as angel Shores, 1 want to snake a
few comments.
The number of tots semis excessive for
the area in terms of quality of life for the residents of
Bayview and the town in general. It is also unfortunate
that when developments of this size are proposed that there
is not a requirement that a certain portion , say 10%, 5 Q
of the lots be assigned for what we would like to caii
"affordable housing" . ,.hen a large number of 3-4 bedroom
dwellings are in place there wiil be a need for services
that might well be staffed by people of the town who are
unable to afford the costs of angel Shores.
while L understand the ,pressures to
approve and move on with this project, 1 feel that in
general it is too concentrated and tivt it should be
denied under these circumstances.
Sincerely,
n
�
Sy y s. Breese,Jr.
I'M 14
,�
CEDAR BEACH PARK ASSOCIATION
Southold , New York, 11971
February 12, 1991
Re :Proposed Angel Shores Development Plan
The Cedar Beach Park Association (CBPA) represents 60 "t
homeowners, and therefore is concerned about the impact
of the Angel Shores development on our properties and the
area ' s environment . We have read the DEIS and find it
deficient in several areas. We need to be assured that these
areas are addressed by tle Planning Board before it «ccepts
the DEIS.
These areas , including water supply, roads and traffic,
and layout of the subdivision are defined in the following
paragraphs :
WATER SUPPLY
1 )RE: A-1 letter from Suffolk County Board of Health,
dated 11/30/83 :Letter specifies that water for Angel
Shores must be provided from a central water supply
and not from individual home wells . ��
The DEIS should specifically acknowledge this
statement and stipulate clearly that individual
wells would be prohibited .
2 )The DEIS states that water from the central
supply could not be used for "unnecessary purposes : . . P14' _Z
including lawn watering" . It should be clearly stated
that homeowners would be prohibited from any such un-
necessary use of water.
3)We believe that the DEIS should specifically acknowledge
that the developer understands these restrictions;
i .e, that prospective prt)perty buyers will be prohibited
from the unnecessary use 'of water and from drilling GaPA1 3
individual wells, and will disclose this information
to prospective land buyers.
4)It should also be acknowledged that water from this
central supply can only be used by the 49\propertyP�1 _
owners in Angel Shores and the 33 units in The Cove.
5)The DEIS should contain assurances that the Board of
Health has certified adequate water supply for both G8 Pik!-s
projects : Angel Shores and The Cove- a total of 82
units.
X-72.
�. -2-
r5 )The DEIS states that the Greenport Water District has
assumed operation of the central water supply. The
DEIS should specify who owns the supply, whether the
Greenport Water District 's operating agreement G81'/-1- &
is tied to a similar agreement with The Cove, and what
would happen if the agreement with the GWD is canceled
for any reason.
7 )We request that the DEIS guarantee that if the water
supply or water quality of CBPA residents is impacted
as a result of the Angel Shores project, that the GWD C Q PA-1-7
would be obligated to extend their service of potable
water to impacted residents. (CBPA is in the GWD. )
8 )We further request that GWD shall not be allowed to
just spot zone areas of service which can impact C-B Pkf 8
adjoining areas.
9 )P. 3-21 refers to a design report of a test of 48
hours of continuous drawdown at the rate of 60
gallons a minute produced negligible impact up to CAF*1_9
100 feet away. Although this test is the basis for
concluding that there is an adequate water supply,
and the DEIS states that it includes this copy of the
report, we found no such copy. It should be
included.
10 )P. 2-55: NSDEC permit specifies sfpecial conditions. We 6-8 PA 1-10
request that the Planning Board certify that these
conditions have been met.
Roads and Access :
1 )Re: Map 90. There should be in the DEIS an absolute
guarantee that neither Sections I nor II of the Angel
Shores plan has any rights to use Cedar Point Rd West
• (AKA Cedar Pt . Drive W. ) *.or Cedar Beach Rd. These are
roads privately maintained by the CBPA. The Pg. 1-3
reference to "Title Insurance Guarantee" should
apply to Little Peconic Bay Road, only. (Map 90)
2)This restriction of course, also applies to CBPA
residents ' private beaches at the foot of' Inlet
Way and at the foot of Cedar Pt . Dr. E.
�'33
• -3- \
3)The DEIS bases the conditions relative to traffic on
Main Bayview Rd on a single survey done on April 15,
1987 and a formula extrapolating summer and weekend
traffic as a percentage of this number . We find this
method faulty and question the conclusion and methodology. �pk�—�Z
The calculation of determining traffic congestion
should include an actual survey taken on a representative
summer day. There was and still is ample time to take
such a survey and include it in a DEIS submitted for
approval to the Planning Board .
LAYOUT OF THE SUBDIVISION:
The Board must assure that the sub-division remain
inviolate after approval; i .e. ,there can be no future GgP/�'1 -13
application to use any of the buffer zones presently shown.
Respectfully submitted ,
Cedar Beach Park Association
P�
(4tibar
GENERAL DELIVERY
SOUTHOLD,L.I.,NEW YORK
To: Membership, Cedar Beach Park Association Jan . 24 , 1991
From: Charles Yichel, President
Re: Angel Shores LEIS Review
This is to alert you to (1) the existence of an Angel Shores
Lraft Environmental Imnact Statement (DEIS) available for ,your
perusal at the Southold Town Planning Board office, and (2) an
open review/hearinR of this DEIS at Town Ball on Feb. 4th, 7:30
In the evening.
The LEIS was prepared. by Ilenderson and Bodwell , consulting
engineers , on behalf of the developer and addresses all the
pertinent concerns about various environmental impacts related
to the planned development , i .e . , drinking water, traffic ,
wild life , etc .
The DEIS includes much technical data supporting their-
contention that the water needs of 49 Angel Shores homesites
will not impact the quality of water supply available to Cedar
Beach Park residents .�� I don ' t know whether to be "dazzled by
their brilliance or baffled by their baloney" but it would
appear that some of their assumptions bear closer examination,
particularly if your home is south4of the Angel Shores develop-
ment ( since the drift of groundwater is north to south) . Also,
according to the LEIS "Angel Shores Section kap" vehicular
access to the development will be possible from our roads . Of
course, by the same token , access to our private roads will be
possible from their roads (which may be in better shape than
some of ou. s ) .
In any event, there is not much time to review this
document before the open meeting and if you have any concerns
about the development 's impact on ,your particular environment
I urge you to look it over and to attend the open meeting, .
CC: Southold Town Planning Board .
3(0
- tis
GENERAL DELIVERY
SOUTHOLD,L.I.,NEW YORK
//Ac-'Ap
CA- .paw
.��•�.-4�C>.�f�a� �-s��GLr.4�� i�/t�G�.� a .��-�•cv���`'�'"a�'��
�•uc Ivo , C8 Pio Z- 1
w
1' • O
71jaA
GENERAL DELIVERY
SOUTHOLD,L.I.,NEW YORK
Ire
•�.-�, .,ems'` .�' � �� / /''� ��'°�„'�
/N"cs JOE¢ -sl �`o-.w �law'P GwA,...P "oz
a �,G„a,Gu oCP ..y► r""� �irn, T
.h
Ap
R��p� � �Q� �a� .11�-`�`Q-�.� u•.ee���mss,.� ��,
4-0
��/���?�� .moi .r��./,� �►- .,�.��
ff�8
C
GENERAL DELIVERY
SOUTHOLDD,,tL.I.,NEW YORK
CB PA-2-2
"&f-74 /-Z^
J /
�-3q
SUBMISSION WITHOUT COVER LETTER
SENDER: �/'4-"". c(
SUBJECT:
SCTM# :
COMMENTS:
4
1
a.....;.,..�. ,,,v:!..•�.7c::+(:�w-ALy' :1...! i � '�4,�;»{• c >:.� ::,.. `�'�. �•: ii, y3s•' ,,��; .:• ��':•-��•a• -�a'ijt.�
. _ � R� tlT:'�U., .i, _ ,_,.•�i � �r'y.t�..a�.t?l.•�Icrj.L��.��+.nw-i>f✓i.�sem__ • `��i
Cornell Nassau County Plainview Complex,13ldg.3
_ 1425 Old Count ry Hoid
Cooperative Plainview,NY 11803 5015
Extension 516-454-0900
M;1 r c•h 11 . 1 9 9 1
Mr. Joseph Saaricki , Jr.
New York Sl-a Le Assembl.v ,
107 Roanoke Ave .
Riverhead. NY 11901
Dear Mr. Sawicki :
I would like to inl.roduce myself, T nm Maria Cinque , the Turfgrass
Specia.tist for Cornell Cooperative tension . While my office is in
Lhe Nassau Coun l.,y t>r;inch of (A-WIle l I Coo f>er at i ve Ea lens ion my turf
responsibi ..1i.ties nre for both Nass;iti and Suffr)llc count..ies .
Due to a I'ec;t'n L converses t i ort i hnd N i 1 h Crank C i chanowi ez
Corlr.1er-nifig Lh-e Great. Ilog Neck building dilennna , I IhoughL you might
f.inct Lhc> c,ne l.osed i n fot•mat i.on Ilf- I fu l , since it ' s concerning Lhe
env i ronrnen t.al benef i Ls Lo having a nice lawn .
Unfort,unal.ely Lhrre ;tee manv misrotirrpt. ions concerning .lawns , Inwn
fert.i. l.izers anti lawn pesticidrjs . M;lelY of I,hese rnisundersl,;ind.ings nre
clarified .i n Lhe enclosed ma Ler i n i s .
T add.il.ior► , there has been a 1.remen .o ifs amount of res ea r. r_h
conducted by Cornel I Uni.versi Lv and of her SI,aLe Uni.versi Lies showing
different findings from that, of Lhe- original. 208 SLudy of the mid 70 's .
Tr you are in need of acldi ti oral i nfor•mn t ion ill ensu feel free to
contact file at 516-454-0900.
fi i.rlr•ertil y,
MARIA T. C1NQU1s
Cooperntive Extension Agent
Ttirfgr•nss Spe,in.ust
Long Island
i u�'• L I , �.�
Helping You Put Knowledge to Work
Cornell Cooperative Extension provides equal program and employment opportunities.NYS College of ARrin,lture and Life•Sciences,NYS College or Human F.colMy.and
M College of Veirrivary Medicine ar Cornell University,Cooperative Extension amociatlons,county rwrning lwdies,and U.S.Department of Agriculture,cuopernting.
.t,.a - - •.
_
vkL• �+i_ _. a. .. .�sa�i+a••1'.i�Y.+.. ... _.. -•.A. �...a+r-.-i+�. .—, A'�-�-�� '• .. � :. 1.i.'i-:L r. -� � :__ !i,- .a��•ti�'�
- ���ii.
l t�f Cornell J3ssau County Plainview Complex,13:dg.J
1425 Old Country Road
Cooperative Plainview,NY 11303.5015
T Extension 516-454-0900
b EsA
CONTACT:
ARIA CINQUE
516-454-0900 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS OF_HAVING A GOOD LAWN
"Having a good lawn can actually benefit the environment ," says
Maria Cinque, turf specialist for Cornell Cooperative Extension of Nassau
County. According to researchers at Texas A & M University, the front
lawns of eight average-size houses provide- the tooling effect of about 70
tons of air conditioning. By comparison, the average home air conditioning
unit has about a three or four ton capacity. Grass is such an efficient
carbon dioxide-oxygen converter that just a 50 square foot area of lawn
space generates enough oxygen to meet the needs of a family of four.
Lawns are comprised of millions of grass plants so intertwined that
a 10,000 square foot lawn can trap some 12 millions tons of dust and dirt
from the air each year. Healthy lawns help trap pollutants and prevent
them from being washed into our drinking water; the materials move into the
thatch where they are broken down by millions of microorganisms . . Studies
at Penn State University have shown runoff water to be within drinking
water standards when it was collected two days after fertilizers and
pesticides were applied to a sharply sloped lawn. Research conducted on
Long Island by Cornell University shows that using slow-release fertilizers
poses no greater threat toourgroundwater than unfertilized turf. `
You can have a complete packet of information on the environmental
benefits of having a good lawn by sending a check for" $3.00 payable to
Cornell Cooperative Extension to Maria Cinque, Cornell Cooperative
Extension of Nassau County, 1425 Old Country Rd. , Plainview, NY 11803.
_ # # "AR 2
newse neWSv news • news .
Cornell Cooperative Extension in Nassau County provides equal program and employment opportunitift
_ r.•.: _..2.. .di ...;.i+�_��•.rn►;i+liai. ``�a"..�.-sd -L._ .:, -�_`�
r. �;N�; � "`�:•`iZ ;,T,' ,, •�;"_:.�,,� .ys4�• ,.Y,; : ENVIRONMENTAL
rN:VaIss�RONMENTAL BENEFITS OF HAVING A NICE�;t LAWN
. .' ,."y;}'' a:";,,--_,aYa7r:•.'.;,. .<.„:
..
nnt':•''j :-y• " ,G v.ri 1, ,Y:•i•. `�..J :*' y,��:;^-�.e�,,
�i ,Y&�ryp;�,z..:;.«;:J}e,;-i•,;•:e x''��`;;;};,tir:.�:. .y�., Tur9eon, Professor and Head
Agronomy
Department of Ag y r�i,..•, :° :_r ;, r a�:;, '�=� ,;;:
•� •'+ t'. -. ..y.: C-�'
T•'�~ �.�yYp'�,'-A,.^r� ��;. f`'• »' Pennsylvania $ v,3t�;' i•'�''• � ,,iti'i.,lf'; .�'L'"�. � +:�T
;.r,. e,-� The r
'Rl- 'it'• .i, } tate University'
sity =.•fi'"�' -: ' '�_ • ,.
� -'? •-i(1}:�-'`.1 .J;i - ��• ,y,,,r� ''s�?`•;`'iJ:?:.+1�, i .�I; t��'+,8'•J•• .y+C' .y iF.1 .. '•'F!v"t•' '`f.S.4 1,; '' •—a.•
- ;x}= - J^:?��f �.i j'•'YytJit ill id ,C��!"�.� 1.r .:%g y! 'i4�' _ 'ift ;ty, r. dNj`•.£ 31 t 'y ''t �
S.l! .. , _,.},"qY� ..';ti�i:'4'�.,.'S:-� w-, - .e.. �'s:'i.+`"• •_,��.�i � x'!�i:l".+,!r +�.,, 'S ��� �' `_
s. ., 'Lawngrasses are plants that fo .,••, ,,:.Y.... x:.. :s. '.{ ;� a..� __.., :, k-�a,4 �,.;'�i ;;�
rm a more or less contiguous ground cover
persists under i that : ` -
regular mowing and traffic. They
j are grown for various -'
:.utilitarian, aesthetic and recreationalpurposes."-; :Aof u ��
is used rim utilitarian -lawn or
primarily for soil stabilization. A "decorative"decorative" lawn also :� �
performs this function, ' but its �
:.: :; �• tion, r ,,.•. . • .-
:�: p imary purpose i s to enhance th � �?`;;.
.
.,.,._. , , value. of a lands a aesthetic ,mac
cape. And a °recreational" lawn, while also servi
utilitarian and aesthetic functions. provides an arena for a broad arra of
1;',sports and other recreational activit .
�.� • activities for both s y �•=#' =� .
pectators and partici ants .
C+i'Y'.-7 ,r • .,. �:fi. k,-`- h'•.; 'di'".X�±'i� f. Lf.S ..•, ' ,. p +e
�} ; ie,,�:'.. i� •:3" . :r+. #:•i��=J:- ci;�7�..r� _,'j:..^ + :}3' }"' ��3:x�. '�,. v .fir•���:�: >.,- �:":7 .�
w�''•; �ti'°=t91 •,. ':, y.'�'.': 'i�:,'•i� `:•� + '_i•: ,,,'?r �.�"��J•,, ,,3�y4•�,y.` '}., "'1 'Yl� �y '+f'• ;JYr.i;- •` .
•-' •1 •• {t: . :.it•• L'rj1yP.}e.. •,�. .�;• . ', � ' r• l . ) •l i! l..p r.'1'.-- jai, -s{;•�{•;C•] J
-'The nature �,. r t,, ;:�, ;•. ;:it_ .Fp
,.``>sc' •� _ and mag tude of the envbenefits
:-�.•ir.�-�.;:. . A.�> _- �'- ,�,-- • ' _
si ro 'mental benef i n ' "-
,., with the ante tS derived from lawns var
nsity of culture y _
provided and the level i '
• � :� ee Of •
,.. A dense vigorously growing, healthy lawngrass Community quality achieved,
-greater environmental benefits Y I11 yield far ='• k .-
.. its than one of lower quality n a lawn new }-
""•�;�
leaves areneeded a ual it
' leaf growth may be necessaryhwherendf undergoing natural senescence; additional
ease, traffic and other factors cause '
.,:: •t'`, older leaves to deteriorate more quickly. -, New aerial shoots (
�., (i.e., tillers, Y •�� k
=rt• .+' `':. daughter plants from emerging rhizomes and 'stolons) are needed at a rate
sufficient to offset the rate at which older ones die. '!-�'rAnd new roots are
needed to ensure that a sufficient nutrient- and water-absorbing capacity is Y"
maintained to support the entire plant community. -The rate at which theses
plant organs are formed reflects: the genetic
$ potential Y
�,:�Comprising a la comrtunity "�Vthe fava bi sof :the plants
-;"environment, , . tabs 1 i t ..
J �y'r' rvrIInent, and the composition of he `'Collo y of e n
t :nth atural
rco y• program g th 4
�.; crQnunit ;�r:� r:r'h .�, :;'.;��p`�. .t x.. v , + ,„J'Cultural ,pro r in is
i •fes yd�p+�,,j�' ... .. / .•, •.•J.T 5,-M7. i.. ON
^ •ILS1J; "t.�t'} ;I'. 'i` �'!h'' :' JF':.z� '�� j _ � �; '�i L �},T4 Y1. _-,••;xr ,.ITM .Y';'}�'S�- .' "' • r - is
yUti7itarian lawns are t icall a' 4 . .T;, ., • , ,
ma .
Yp y intatned at •.a relat�vely.',� 1" level '
F� : + ,cultural intensity: ' mowing ;is conducted y'-at high heights and mire r,y,'�
��:.irrigation and fertilization are minimai quentl
(coring, vertical mowin etc• supplementary ;culturAl_�,voperations
- dy ?be limited g' ) are usually not performed, `and pest management =b,
tl to occasional treatments with herbicides f r
�a f. _ , _ti o %broadleaf weed
;control.
-.Despite such 'limited , attention Tlawns _;mayXvappear:;�quite .'
ractive during favorable growing "
g g periods, �especinlly at a distance or'-nt e
yfy ugh speeds of travel; during periods ,of,lnadequate rainfall ,or,Au"' rifavorable _
mperatures, :-:they are usually dormant:'��From'an environmental rs•'`ective Utilitarian lawns play a vitally important ro e:''=I f. P„
"_A"% ,-,can"recall Mhjt,.the 1 tying•' �t
-��. ,conditions were like in 1967 at a base camp�in Vietnam :Lwherea all ` _ve eta i
had been clear ed: �During the rainy season;`�.the thick mud.stucCo our, boots' x
`and we carried 'it ever here: , .' uring the dry,seasori;1 the dust assaulted our
' nostrils '.'end •;sometimes obscured our:yision • not_ so unimportant when you're
1•i•'� ¢• p,w
trying to land a' 'helico ter! ^ '�. , " i,,, r
,_,,. P Successfully established jutilitarian,}laxns
" stabilize•`the •soil, "and ;thus} moderate 'an`otherv►ise_ hostile ,envirorunent:
SAlong roadsides and airport runways, n- �� ,V ' • . y
+► . '
for . preserving P Ys• . soil••stabiiity FIs• , especIaIl
P g -.the ,rintegrity '' ofr.:concrete'��and as halt yt;, mportant.
P "Surface for -
;i:. x ,preventing damage to_ i►ehici is '•and ''`airs"aft 'Stabil izing ';the il
4:;. *• .
lawngrasses "also , prevents er'dsion•'"and sedimentation (and associat d`tuti'ie .t
• pollution) of iponds, 'streams;�nd other
R^. establ ishment , es. ;Yet, bejro tie ,toS o
, ,the,��,investment.�,�tnmaintaining a utilitarian lawri''m y fi`v • v -
• i
leYmore than occasional mowing. .
Decorative lawns serve all of the functions typically associated with
utilitarian lawns; however, much more is expected from them. .. Landscape
.
-,.;,..,, ,beautification isn't just a bonus that occurs during especially favorable
growing conditions;
It is expected - perhaps demanded - all of the time. And
the level of visual -quality Is often greater than that associated
--utilitarian lawns under the best conditions. The quality of a decorative lawn -..• -zx
determined not only by color, but by texture, "density, -leaf orientation,-Y
smoothness and uniformity.
A�
N
m a I n* t al n foliarcolor throughout t '
he growing season t is '11"eces'sary 4.
-ensure that adequate moisture and nutrients are available to support plant
growth. "'This requires irrigation during periods of inadequate rainfall. The
and intensity of irrigation are influenced by soil physical
properties, especially texture and structure. Sandy Soils require more
requent,, but less Intensive, irrigation than do clayey soils; this reflects
he greater aeration porosity (andmore rapid Infiltration3, percolation, and
rainage) but lower total porosity (and reduced water retention) of the sandy k
soils. - Well-structured soils have more aeration porosity than compacted It 'tilt•
oils; thus, they are better drained and support healthier, deeper roots than
those typically occurring In compacted soils. - Regardless of how favorable or
unfavorable the soil conditions are, Irrigation should be performed to ensure-J...
uniform appl Icatlon of water at "precip" rates that do not exceed the
infiltration capacity of the lawn. For specific sprinklers or irrigation
o
,,-,!".,Systems,, distribution patterns and precip rates can be checked using coffee
cans or other containers spread over the lawn during irrigation. ` Non-uniforM
patterns should be corrected to avoid differences In growth and color that'-
might otherwise result. , --Excessive precip rates can sometimes be corrected by -
5 adjustments made to the system or to Individual sprinklers; however, `4they may
also reflect the
,low :.infiltration rates associated with compacted soil
Conditions. =One 'way of effectively reducing sprinkler precip rates Is
procedure called Omultiple cycling.* -This involves turning the spH-nkler or.,-
on and off at Intervals to
4 Irrigation system
W aglow small amounts 6f -Water,'"
soak in before more is applied.`-`-For example. sprinklers could be'operated -for
';,-:X4.',30 minutes.'
-then ".turned off for 30 minutes,
recip rate by one hd thus effectively.redticing the. ,
P
half. :If normally delivers 0.5 inch per- hour - -,
:_,and a total of 1.0 -inch is desired,``'normal operation would require twd�
ou
W .1
hile the multiple method would require four hours (actually three and to ippfy".the desired amount of water. the"Jnfj ltration,.
Howeve
apaclty'of the lawth w- is-oinly 0.25 inch p*er hour',';-normal operation d hi
on Woul ave
suited in extensive puddling on "Ieve
groundand ' substantial -:iunoff .:6
n
loping ground: ;nultiple cycling,"'on
the other hand, would have kept the
X precip rate close- to the infiltration capacity of
the lawn and Ithus 'avoided
X 4T
Z�Wf.4 K
i'e'nutritional..
.:Nitrogen,-
potassium -i�dsome 'phosphorus dr �
F.,puddling or runoff problems.'
S.-"�wwi
0 le needed to meet h In
r4equirementsof the ..p,lants."'.Appl I cations should correspond t
o natural
1p
A, growth Cycles,; and appropriate rsponsendows. lFor'ixampI e; Kentucky
'blue
dcky
bluegrass responds especia I ly - well "to ate-season
RpPl icat ionsF
WN ::(.Usually
ovember, Y'ivhen shoots are green but od"longer maintaining vertical gr' h) .of
.. el, -
?t4 * owt
-nitrogen as long as the plants are �-.photosynthetically -"active.ctive.,'-*-T -i'often
��i . results In-'early spring greenup and health spring growth withI,nd Wddiifonal
.Cgro
nitrogen "providede spring. � loensdreadequiaiite im"fall: W- th--s
in the slIjI
moderate late spring and late summer applications are -needed "lei !UndI
Post conditions,--�S.6: tote three pounds of actual fiitr6jen is 4`
�o
'needed during the"yee'ar"'to."�Ill aipj'.0high levl bf- .1.1 o as
phosphorus,fern I ded ifti
ld be SO
Jlz . . ....... ...... - P
t$1 r1 wa,With continuous and vigorous growth of the 1a ' t'V. r:
wngrass community throughout theR':
growing season, mowing. becomes more than an occasional activity. In fact. it •.
should be performed as often as necessary to ensure that no more than one
third of the foliarowth is removed at
any one
ed
one-third rule" • and it is important tofollow tthis rule iifia high slevel lof ,A°a '
visual quality is desired especial, durin summer stress 'periods.` Lawns
. .: q Y y g
mowed at less-frequent ' schedules tend to be coarser-textured and have lower
. shoot densities.
- During summer stress periods, some vigor and color may be
lost as well. ..Adhering to the one-third rule also obviates the need for the. l.j' ,.
awn owner to bag clippings and for the community to dispose of them. •-- -'An
additional benefit is that one can reduce fertilizer requirements through the �;': �� y '
recycling of nutrients contained in the clippings. ' Of course, mower blades
:should
be sharp at all times to provide a clean cut and avoid bruising leaf
.U, tips and the associated "tip dieback" problem that
M, y can seriously detract ' fro�,:..r�. visual quality ,.,..-,...>�. • ' �� ..,: k,;. .. ._ °m
Q Y of,the lawn. •�_ s..,,�,'•- :••'. y�.L...�'�i•„i V,: '.' .ti�l.�.S.c•Y.:. - ��•^� ♦ -•
� ,a�Lr•�.'+„'f f:;5 �t'a'p't-�titd7T ,.`•' t�i�lkf�'.`"c+�;;1i.�•�r,:' .xl.� �,•M".�!i"f,"K',I�i.,,l¢•=; �'tt,+; +.' :-•'i,�+n+
.�.i u, .r.•.. .J,),:v:• '•{+'.� Y.,Vii!" T•� ,•• .r ♦ ''Y I •.l. J• + ;.5'.vr!}7"►(, 7.{t,t,t �T^,.yt'�.`•�•,'fp.X.Cl :i ..dr�:''it• aT,
y,',..+.. Yy.•.J',' 4 tr .J �..' v 1,,••a`'�i'3
dev 10 m nt 7.,'•'*Y! tV°4 IS ii'!yi. 4;'..,}�is.iri e!11rjr
e p e of thatch tanresult in more disease acid insect problems and
ease the susceptibility of the lawn ass coamunit to damage from drought ,.�;.�;� ..
- and other environmental stresses. Thatch can be controlled through '
9 periodic.• ; ��,s�,,��::ti;
• Y~: :`'�"` extraction of excessive organic debris by vertical mowing (dethatchin g
operations, or through modification (and eventual decomposition of the thatch
layer by core cultivation and subsequent reincorporation of the soil cores.
The .
se procedures should be planned whenever the thatch 1 �'";" ' '
exceeds one-half inch in thickness. oyer reaches or
�' ti , !).r '.. f,{.; w;„ fly• - :1, r�'..,.:ls w.l':: b:,.l.�" +., +yV. � :' S. .'�[. u'%i.2•i• .Cfi4
jj. .. C 3. .,�-•. , 1.', ,1'�fir`• :' ;s '♦ '»1:.. r b`
;:%�•'!% ',•` ;Y;•` Y:' pest
s .P1c�" y'T}
Fin
oily, dawn pest "management may Include ' :`
Y regular use of reeme ence1;
herbicides for controllingcrabgrass and other summer annual grasses, ;:use of
F` other herbicides for broadeaf weed control µrtr
�: . ;- , and occasional use °of selected -�
insecticides for controlling
infestations 4o.�f r.g,,.r;..u.,,b,s_, �-`t'c,hi,nj..5c:hb..�u„`s, '�x-•,s
od fw�eRbwlolr-m
s.
and other destructive insects Fungicides are rarely needed for�'.controingdiseases in well-maintained lawns
' +�•�� ;:17/1, "iyi'„°r<<'x!'a: �yy/ 3 °`x`.•'ff _-Sr• '� 1i.�'h',iC�l'.• '�-.`}_�.,s�fi...(-jt y.��j�i ��.�t f� ,�.',�' 4.
J*' +77'-••Z �•?��')(V-�L�,.2.• �•:a:. - "):,.•�,1. � I�•l[�,• �'^JAi M.�•i...r, t [�:•+ . _;� ,.
� Cl earl . , �..�,,,.� .a>_•..;•:t.�-a:, •. ; =� <,. �,..,. ,�.: �� 1rt ,f �•i- -
c �I•V� y• ,• Z -Investment ' ''•: ).,;,'A, -..._.,I1.JINX,.1X4'x' S�iR•,3'J.f, �ij-.ci' t ) ",)
' 'r;�; I' ;•the required for 'sustainin ` ` ” Y {c ,
;� "+t substantial. t Mdny potential roble 9 a decorativg lawn S
'5avoided by ' `? ell problems and associated costs to t in y -be,r
selecting w ed can r a 1 !_
5... ,1..$ -ad p :and superior law rass .h� .. «:.
ng u 1 t ivars _..and '
--,establishing them Properly; however `
•; Y. , ''even with all 'operations t. �'
''accordance with current guidelines, achieving pperformed ''in' Vit,
and sustainin -
9 9 n'Ttonsisteiitly
. high level of visual quality in a . decorative- lawn ,':requires "a ` significant': )
•> '` ;'.investment :of time and resource
s. Yet �.,,.,t.
many people are;wi 11 Ing -ain t fact; .;
enthusiastic to do'a11 of this and more in order to have an-attractive lawn`
"• , r". round their homes, businesses and other
sites. Their motivation`.f r"doing 'so
1:. goes well ,beyond the merely utilitarian objectives of.-reducing mudfand''Adast
- :Nand ` protecting driveways and foundations. ',- While attractive landsca 'in "can' '. 1
' - Surely add to the resale value of one's. P 9
Y f property,',. most ` eo lei''
” ;substantial •commitment to their lawnsp e- t �donaR Coke I
theirs propterty,' they do it because theynwantnto live
there, hey'`vran� to uii
-X14;: 1_•'�• fti1;'•'kY„tf.��, .yf � •xi.v• 'F [ ,�� x�`:.t *.E h�.+,-'i <: �O 1 iye he a! 'i' t �1
.' ' i~ 1 t ``, •�'SS'=t+.•k-i�[t ..` ,'♦i"rJ, �'h'}`.+,i(•/':2 r� •f�= V.J,�., �«� x>i,•Y
's very ;'�i ff icui t '-to" + r r.• . ..;.rzs? . .='�
..explain why people at all income levels want,h niee ;-
w, 7i.'Is there "something special about the color green? ,,.If,so' '''wh' "` s'`tiroarri'}
an acceptible color for a piece of furniture•inside the -House- but Una' A
'as a color for the lawn?� .Is it the coolnes--f 'liytn °)° ' �'
g, ' growing, transpiring_.:
, , , ,vegetation' that make ;Ai,,So,appealing, especially`during •warm weather? �" 'Is t
Fthe ,Softness of„'- mall,, ,egetation that feels good to�,thg touch? ' s t'
carpetlike appearance of -a well-groomed.`outdoor land 01111 1tjjave ,
t
'wi h,some"i-ilationship ''wit ~'' a or�harmon 'w
he fa t- haie'�can"�"ahleve�`a` 11ar fav nth
orable s .• s.
gels - �ose .
rturnnyolved' 7n awn'' culure? . dor' arentl m
.r
aPP. so
Y
'7+•��:,� h sical and .some psychological, peopleobviously want to have a
nice lawn.
t apparently is important to them. Their willingness to spend substantial }
quantities of discretionary resources and time at what would have to be - <
escribed as hard physical labor) to achieve this continuing objective -
4 �,.. a testimony tthat fact. -- ,r- k.«• ,,- �s. ls
`adequat •;> �• ,
_•.-i•' . f::�iJ::�P 'I. J:.-U.y.. ., S J• r •J. T'1r - "'"1 ccc
'!t4�'�NIG .�^�. `''ftt• -S s.`• 2 Y t�.,!' i a'..;•h'.y SY, Y,A: +A�•..t..
<?ti C5M �7.•+,
A well-maintained decorative lawn, ~ with the incredible amount of plant growth
wand associated biological activity above and below the surface of the soil
W ,
exerts an enormous influence on its immediate environment. Transpirational
;:r :>• g, t
"cooling, "absorption -41,;y�N
pion of a broad array of substances from the soil and from the , .xn.
:;y� �;; •; «; aty.
mosphere, degradation of many inorganic and organic substances received .sr
{
in (pesticides, fertilizers, etc-) or by circumstance (driveway and ,'=f
x .,,roof runoff), buffering of noise from traffic and equipment, and absorption of
+e-• •y�L,.....,.
i• `. precipitation and subsequent recharge of groundwater resources are
just some
;
of the many largely unrecognized benefits from lawns.'-'�V;If a community were a
. *.'':• ''::,.farm, -,,the lawns collectively would be functionally analogous to the grass:
-
strips. "The roles of both are to mitigate, buffer, compensate, dilute A `
and cleanse ' z
ja-%'i-;• ,i+ . `i't•: ,��. s'T t`x .'�:t., _ S7,
Einall ' -1a " -•._.. ``��� ` • ' .-• -• - ,,�.. : : .:,:. : -�,:�. • -. , :• _- ;:�; -~;,-��,w.r>.
1 :;,' -•t�: y, recreational lawn does all of the things attributed to decorative
.f'""-lawns and more. Its function is to Support
k±,:Y s ppo t human activity - sometimes, very
lin potentially destructive activity. =:Football is a potentially "sit
-;, '.�.,:•�, _""Intensive ve and
A�''"dan erous sport. Even "touch" football can be -highly destructive to at least "
one middle age, somewhat 'out-of-shape, academic administrator I know. But, it ".... - �~
' is not nearly as destructive or dangerous when played on'a resilient, -• dense,'-`
'-* �h� vigorously growing lawn. _'Jo be sure, this is Important for 'us middle age
11.•...guys; however, it's especially important - in fact, ''vitally important = for
w =•. ;.young children to ensure they can grow and develop strong and .,.healthy ;bodies
't-�'l' through rigorous ' but safe physical activity. - Thi
r Y• s requires not`just lawns;`'
''but the kinds of lawns that . are specifically designed ''and maintained for
.a: .::,::;safety N:�o ,; �: a;;-' :::�� •� t` x+..t. >• F iryf' r
i9. (++,.,.. Y' .c••5�,,;.ti x „f';•+3 -=A^ heti+'.=�",';.�}•i•,w+�.Y. .1'
_:y t v 7FG Y fc•T r.w ;) * l ' ..•Z.. .r+�'s i _f 1.1,'C r
+-i%<r' ,y •'>Z7'!:V'S. .,:t _17.f"1rs 30'4*j�' ,•;;;14?�%` ••t,.�
ar:.' ;7•;•n2rF.,.,,y :;y`:a°sy+;.'r•?ST^ .- •L`-:w•� �.:i.';ftit;`�rrj':3 �,�� *'.fn`.•th�i' •fir_. �,y, •�.
- 7€ .�� �ir,,�> -:'s•y � ,G.4_ .sal
�•�: 4.In 'summary, '� eo le want to have nice 1 `" .
!, P P ce awns for many utilitarian -„IIesthetic
nd recreational purposes. .;;Some of the truly �important'environmenta7 benefits
ir4re hardly recognized or appreciated. `Recent investigationave'axrev`
' Baled
; p specific benefits ,of enormous 'value to Individuals and to society: But,"it.is '
£ ;`� obvious that nice ,•lawns are important to many people ,in our society for a wide
y L•r physical and psychological 'well-being
.1A,.variety of.reasons relatingto their h sical
� �.�;-.t^l15° , ,�a j yy,j:,+�;i',i� � -Y•- ;,�,„:,v°E':L.f'#''"' �'�.'r,.. �r r_+J... . . .,1� .• ::S^.f ':'•. . '•'�•
�Z jl.t7y. t� ,.`.r •n,�. •;ti.� r_• v_ _ xsr�l.r. s
a::,,-`r�:r.ei, �� i•,�''�,lw� 'k;••�;j.�.,.,'F v �_ ���'-: r,•_�` .:� �.:,;> .J` t, �_„• .e �, t��fi:i,icali•
•t i#i�2�1 >it� yy'. ',�- l� "r -" :L'-!`f.' !,! .F.:y}:'•'' _
'i'11•••r•1�.. FI.M 1��..r��. 7,1 '�yT.—'
�• mob, 4pi�� .�j•F.F ,. y� i.�}•.7{{' f'•! �_Z-"r�tii:.� �•.�+ •=*�+' � .t
,�•i,��R��f.:%��i .w�1i';�ty:';+: i?:"'L�� �+Q.X' .'Tv',., may!y'•''.����•«•�'��'.'�f� �Z ,...�, `.• w .`7!A'� w'• •�
�_I, -1 Y.1• t/�;l..j�...k'��t.t:l` b.'- `rc,..} .t\K'f*«,(„ .. +,la;:�f'�F•..- ice. +��Y fjF -'a
%�'!t'h�i..1,. �•�•.�i•�qq�:r�'�~Sj+�yJ`It�j ?,s � t'r•. S.F'�N�i,.M,�'i�•ta-tL.��Wk ��j"•
� r,(�. ' t b� .' " T1 a u,►,�'V`+�'liYf�'.�+w•� _ A _.
.fti c�� ���?••:�.; iN.1 { 3 t _;y, �.r'1T"�+;�.l;.i=7�yr�f<��` zh �..'�.� '`.
y'��f,'Z. � l �':� •-•;•{{>, r� •�" -.iJ-'. �•
44
:r-
' !'.;in :•'�X• i'SGt�:��<+•S;„
a J '�K• a'
"'.q� T.yh.�!�al. �:�+_��`,•y�t.vYL •-�,F.: tf..o`�,_.�'�,;,C�.:"Ira"l�v-'•.z >
r
f
R.
AND
F
(c
i
• i Y RBy a
Eliot Roberts
THE LAWN INSTITLrrE
and Beverly C. Roberis
SANT HILL, TENNESSEE TURF� •
BENEFITS
11! 2 1 1991
T
STITU
s�y
�¢ Betted•. ti �,' � �� - x - �- _
LAWN AND SPORTS TURF BENEFITS
by
Eliot C. and Beverly C. Roberts
The Lavin Institute
Pleasant Hill,Tennessee
r-
p L
a
. r.
',�,; ;'_ - - ::.: ._•- .. - _-•. •' -••.t__�;:' ►'iiiiii
!1 _ , _ - iii S. _� •- - •ji.�i:'' Ys�
�itA:.i.� - , 1• �. -;Y c •' - �. F. . tilk!
t !c; .�,-;�.jg -.rb'1�.- •_�� .�.
..y--..• .< i4_' f- - i -.�Y r.. r.•-:.b:'i-1�.C'� -�. ,+e' 'k• .+s.: •L:".'...
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LAWN AND SPORTS TURF BENEFITS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
BENEFITS OF LAWNS 2
AESTHETIC VALUE OF LAWNS 2
ECONOMIC IMPACT OF LAWNS AND SPORTS TURF . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
HEALTH BENEFITS FROM LAWNS 6
Noise Abatement 9
Temperature Modification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Glare Reduction 11
Allergy Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS 11
Water Purification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Absorb Pollutants from the Air . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Entrapment of Particles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Oxygen Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Fire Retardation . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Soil Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Erosion Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
LAWNS AND SMALL ANIMALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
TRAFFIC CONTROL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
SPORTS TURF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
APPENDIX 1: PROFESSIONAL LAWN CARE SERVICE . . . . `. . . . . . . . . . . 25
APPENDIX 2: SUMMARY OF LAWN AND SPORTS TURF BENEFITS . . . . . . . . 26
APPENDIX 3: LAWN AND SPORTS TURF STATISTICS — U.S.A. . . . . . . . . . . 28
APPENDIX 4: THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF TURF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
LAWN AND SPORTS TURF BENEFITS
by
Eliot C. and Beverly C. Roberts
The Lawn Institute
Pleasant Hill,Tennessee
"The grasses are the least noticed of the flowering plants. They
seem to be taken for granted like air and sunlight, and the general
run of people never give them a thought." [Hitchcock, 193 1]
This concept of grasses is changing. Today lawns are highly visible and well recognized. In
the United States,gardening is the number one outdoor leisure activity and lawn tending is the most
Popular gardening pursuit. More than fifty six million Americans take part in their own lawn care
[National Gardening Association 1987-81. Lawns occupy an area estimated at between 25,000,000
and 30,000,000 acres, nearly 50,000 square miles or the size of the five New England states. The
acreage of turfgrass coincides closely with population size. As the U.S. population continues to
increase, so too will turfgrass acreage[Roberts 19861.
When one turfgrass plant is plucked for viewing,it's not very impressive. It isn't very strong
under the prodding of fingers. It isn't a plant to display in a bud4vase. But, it is impressive
when banded with 5 others in each square inch of lawn, resulting in a turf of over 850 plants per
square foot or about eight million in each lawn of 10,000 square feet. This array of green grass
plants protect us,pleases us,enhances the envir'onment4nd is beneficial to our health.
When decisions have to be made about use of water, fertilizer or pesticides on lawns, there
have often been only limited objective comparisons made of benefits of turf in relation to cost or
possible risk. At times,because of this lack of information on lawn and sports turf benefits, lawns
have been allowed to perish only to be replaced by inert or artificial surfaces that are definitely
hazardous to our health. "In the United States, turf is probably the most widely grown, talked
about and least appreciated commodity' [Huffine and Grau 1969].
Why is there such broad interest in lawns?
Lawns have a long history of being recognized as beneficial. The Bible tells us that grass was
part of Creation [Genesis 1:11-12]. The Emperors of China in 157-87 B.C. had extensive areas of
closely cropped grass. The Mayans and Aztecs in the Western Hemisphere cared for lawns and
Ancient Persia boasted of garden carpets in A.D. 531-579. L.H. Bailey in H res defines a lawn
as "an area of the landscape carpeted with a greensward designed as a foundation setting for
buildings.." [Johns 19701. For many centuries lawns were the symbol of the powerful-and rich
[Hufrme and Grau 19691. The American Indians played games such as lacrosse on cropped-grass
areas. In England "grass yards", "home greens", "yardways" and "lawns" were open spaces
covered with grass. The wide open village"greens"were used as a place for residents to gather for
community business,celebrations and relaxation. Even today these open expanses of green invite
Participation. By Revolutionary times, visitors were impressed with grass yards surrounding
private homes in America [Wilson 1961]. Today lawns are enjoyed by most segments of the
Population in our country and in most other parts of thewrid. They are still a symbol of beaus ,
respectability,peace and creativity and are a part of"The American Dream." Y
Plants are symbols of our ancestry—we came from the land. In some cases lawns are created
in an attempt to bring the countryside and its heritage into the city,providing a linkage with our loss
of contact with nature. The undisciplined naturalness of plants is symbolic and seems to
be a
necessity for the human spirit in this urban age. Respondents to a Harris/Life survey reported that
one of the things 9s% of the respondents wanted most around them was "green grass and trees"
[Lorence 1973].
Some believe that lawns and gardens are important because they are the result of a natural
internal drive to form a familiar type of habitat. This featuresgrassland, similar to that grazed b
animals, with a few trees. Some of humankind may well have evolved in similar surroundings
[Falk 1977]. As there is variation in all people, some express this drive more directly than others
Many people also feel that the love of green lawns is born in us as part of our harmony with nature
[Hitchcock 19311. e
BENEFITS OF LAWNS
The grass family is extremely important to humankind with species ranging from our major
food grains to turfgrasses. The United States has several climatic regions and different turfgrasses
grow in each of these areas but the benefits derived from lawns cross over these boundaries.�TuTurf
is an amenity that touches upon a fundameptal chord of plant-humankind relationships. T
following benefits give an overview of how turfgrasses make our world a good place to live. he
AESTHETIC VALUE OF LAWNS
Landscaping is an ongoing project for homeowners. Thegreening ,
of spring for many and so attention is given to getting it in the best condition of tha lawn the first sign `
Possible. After being ±'
housebound during the colder weather, this often is an opportunity to visit with neighbors _
compare notes on whythe g burs and to '
grass is greener on the other side of the fence.
2
Plants are beautiful to look at and they stimulate the senses. As living, natural forms, plants
are full of grace, charm and excitement. Their forms are diverse and add color and texture to a
man-made environment that is often bleak, inert and harsh, resulting in cold and stark feelings
related to urban structures. Plants are dynamic — ever changing. The light from natural and
artificial sources plays over the texture of the lawn creating ever changing patterns. Rain, sleet, fog
and snow alter our perception of the plant's form and when wind is blowing, the movement of
grass leaves brings character to the landscape. The green of lawns is soothing to the eye and the
yearly cycle of the seasons produces changes in color.
While trees and shrubs provide a vertical orientation of green within the landscape,
lawngrasses develop the green carpet upon which other plantings are located. Lawns provide the
ideal background for the most pleasing landscape possible. They make and complete an inviting
setting. Grassed areas provide visual coherence by pulling tegether and organizing all of the
divergent parts of a scene. Turfgrasses are the only plant in the landscape that can recuperate, and
in fact thicken, when consistently cut at a 1-2 inch height. This occurs because the growth tissue is
located near the base of the leaf or shoot so the plant grows back from the base [Brown 1979].
This attribute allows a well-maintained lawn to be uniform in appearance from front to back and
from side to side and gives a feeling of harmony. A grassed area creates illusory space and
expands the landscape [Carleton 1971]. These areas can be used to direct our attention toward a
particularly pleasing view.
A lawn is at least 1/3 of the entire picture of the douse. The first thing people see when
approaching a property is the yard so it gives that important first impression and can convey
hospitality and warmth. Sometimes this is referred to as curb appeal. The appearance of the lawn
speaks to the person4l values of the resident. Some lawns are kept with precision showing that the
gardener is meticulous. Some feel that a person who keeps the lawn perfectly clipped is a person
who can be trusted [Logsdon 19871. Thirty five percent of respondents to one survey connected a
beautifully landscaped and well cared for lawn and garden with "success" [Weyerhaeuser 1986]
whereas a second rate weedy lawn is judged to belong to people who care little for appearance or
are lazy [Carleton 19711. Attitudes and emotions differ among people but generally it is felt that
well kept lawns are beautiful.
Whatever the interpretation, homeowners feel a sense of creativity from landscaping their
property. Many homeowners hire professionals to tend to their lawn, but even so, they have input
and can choose the type of turfgrasses and the maintenance program. These interact with the soil
and climate to produce a unique yard expressing the gardener's interest and artistry.
The green surface serves to emphasize and never detract from other features of the ]andscape.
Green is a color that also affects people's moods. It has been linked with having a calm, peaceful - -
.. - .. .. - - ... ... _ - - .. .._ ...t..-:.Yy.{.c-.�.�. -_ �cba y�'_``_•�:Y.irti•"`y�:.s`=moi ar..ri'.sf i..i
and serene influence. The natural green color gives a feeling of coolness which, in addition to the
actual temperature modification of turfgrasses, makes the yard a pleasant place. Turf
prevent the formation of muddy areas which are slippery underfoot and unpleasant wends help
tracked into the house. n dirt is
Parks are often the only green places left amid gray city walls. Surroundings affect the wa
people feel abut themselves. Parks offer beau Y
can be remedial and restorative to those who enter from a manmade w to provide a living oasis which
million acres of turf in municipal, coup or cit world. There are about one
county y parks in the United States [Ciba-Geigy 1988].
The lawn area offers a surface to touch that is pleasing; tranquility as a part of-nature; a sense
of security provided by the timeless duration of nature; and a feeling of a good quality of life
[Stainbrook 1973]. The turf expands existing openness, and gives a green liquidity to modif the
harshness of city surroundings. As buildings are constructed taller and taller, grass plants provide
a more familiar scale to which we all can relate. These areas give a place for people to have some
breathing room.
Modern technology has provided specially bred turfgrass cultivars which are more vigorous
and easier to grow for beautiful lawns. Also, equipment which makes mowing and spreadin
fertilizer and selective pesticides precisely has been newly developed. g
Although new turfgrass cultivars are more inset and disease resistant than the common
varieties, there are times when the grass thins or becomes weak and weeds, insects or disease
attack in full force. The use of approved pesticides is needed at these times to turn the tide and give
the grass plants a chance to recover. This is a good time for do-it-yourselfers to hire a licensed
applicator who has the knowledge of when to apply the chemical to be most effective and as the
Proper equipment to do the job. Turf pesticides are generally not mobile, nor are they Persi h
h
ent as }
microbes break down the chemicals into harmless materials. Dr. john )agschitz reported that even
consistent application of pesticides on turf fbr a 17 year period did not cause a cumulative buildu
on his test grounds in Rhode Island [Schery 19821. Dr. Bruce Ames, a UniversityP
rn
cancer researcher, has found no evidence that use of synthetic chemicals, such as pesticides ut ed to
lawn care, are causing cancer[Anonymous M 19881. to
Green of lawn and landscape plant foliage produces a pleasing background
residential living as well as for the profitable conduct of business and commerce Lawns provi for
measure for determining price in neighborhoods and the degree of individual Garin within
a
g a
community. Evidence across the country supports the "green is clean" concept. Where
have failed to develop or have lost their interest in lawns and arden People
unavailable, litter and trash collect and soon replace g s or where adequate"space is
P green grass. A thick, dense turf eliminates "
x-la "�.
mud and dust problems around homes and trash is less likely to be thrown on the ground where
there is a well maintained lawn. This helps keep the neighborhood cleaner and more beautiful. It
takes the cultivation of living ground cover to make a habitat suitable for humankind. Without
lawns and gardens, we are likely to lose ground, literally, to the"throw away"society. Quality of
life places emphasis on green being clean.
Many states depend on tourism as an important pan of their economy. The U.S. Department
of Commerce predicts it will be the number one industry in America by the year 2000 [Anonymous
M 1988]. To encourage tourists, landscaping at rest stops, scenic overlooks, and roadsides is
improved each year so that people will have pleasant places to relax, walk around and picnic while
traveling.
ECONOMIC IMPACT OF LAWNS AND SPORTS TURF
In our world today nearly everything has been quantified with an economic value placed upon
it or its use. Plants, including lawngrasses, are used to enhance and beautify and thus it is difficult
to translate this aesthetic value into hard dollars and cents values. Plants are used to make the
environment more desirable — more livable, but they also increase property values and have a
strong positive impact on our economy.
Turfgrass is considered a$25 billion plus per year ind4stry in the United States. It is estimated
that more than 500,000 people make their living directly from the care and maintenance of turf in
this country [Huffine and Grau 1969]. These figures increase each year. Sale of lawn care items is
estimated at$4 billion a year, nearly 1/3 of the total spent for all gardening in this country.
Looking at a hypothetical city with a population of 170,000 [about the size of New Bedford,
MA or Appleton,WI] one would find:
50 city parks, 3 cemeteries, 56 schools, 2 colleges, 195 churches and 350 factories all
located on 1,338 acres of lawn, employing 126 maintenance workers and costing one and
one half million dollars a year for lawn maintenance;
45,200 single family residences on 3,495 acres of lawn with over nine million dollars spent
a year for lawn products and upkeep;
— 19,600 multiple family residences located on 987 acres of lawn costing $392,000 a year for
lawn maintenance;
'ia"'t+.i+'r•_-'_- 'a::i�iis:.%sidwa�,i .'�E _- _ _` Y. .� •,�.a •i•a.C�.�', i�• _ .ei i�-. �.�
iiiia"--'•-'� ;�.'=1 :s+isr.�risiiiLi:aGjO�i�i'..����i�:i`+1Y7�L�'=.S:i�iY:svi. - —
— 3 bowling greens and 6 golf courses utilizing 600 acres of sports turf with maintenance
amounting to$1,320,000 a year.
These 6,400 acres of turf and 166 individuals employed to care for them is typical of a city this
size. With a total of over twelve million dollars in direct expenditures alone, the turf in this cit
significantly affects the economy. Two thirds of all turf expenditures go to maintain home lawns
[Gibeault and Cockerham 19851.
A recent Gallup Survey concludes that a well maintained lawn has real monetaryvalue.
impressions [curbside appeal] are crucial when a property is for sale. Many are willing to see the
+ inside of a house if the outside is well tended as it is the total living package that creat
es Structures that are designed well, and located on appropriately sized lots realize a 15% in interest.
home value or selling price when nicely landscaped crease in
' p [Weyerhaeuser 1986]. Appraisers estimate that
this adds at least 7% to the appraised value of residential property [Flynn 19871. Lawns create
outside living areas which increase the size of the home.
The Gallup Survey also reported that 62% of all U.S. homeowners felt investment in lawns
and landscaping was as good or better that other types of home improvements. Grass is a perennial
ground cover so lawns are investments that last many years. The recovery value is 100% - 200%
for landscape improvement compared to an investment in a new deck or patio which have recovery
values of 40% - 70% [Weyerhaeuser 19861. this would indicate that landscaping is considered a
good return on investment.
If
Increases in business property values are also recognized. A lawn around a business or facto
conveys a favorable impression to the general public as well as to employees and customers
Appraisers estimate well designed and maintained landscapes added 6% to commercial ro
value and this plays an important role in the selling of such property [Flynn 19 p perty
[ y 871.
Golf courses influence the tax base of the community. The properties surrounding a cour
reflect,higher appraised values. The game of golf is second only to"United Way"in raising ss
for charity in Weschester County, New York, where about two and one half million dol funds
raised each year through golf for philanthropies [Horton 19881. olars is
f
HEALTH BENEFITS FROM LAWNS
"Today almost everyone living in the urbanized centres of the Western
intuitively a lack of something in life. This is due directly to he eatiiondof as
artificial environment from which nature has been excluded to the greatest o n
extent."[Hossein 19681 possible
6
Americans have become more health conscious in the 1980's even as urban living abuses to
physical and mental health seem to increase daily. Problems have become more complex and more
difficult to cope with. The media regularly features headlines about health hazards, over which
individuals have little control. Concerns about water, food and air pollution have mounted to near
panic levels at times from the feeling that disaster is about to strike.
It is important to see what we have in nature that is working for us, providing health and
environmental benefits that are often overlooked. Survival and health of humankind are based on
an understanding of nature and her processes. Professor Patrick Horsbrough, Professor of
Architecture at the University of Notre Dame, considers the proximity of plants to people as a
psychological imperative [Horsbrough 1972]. Seeking the benefits nature provides is necessary
for our own well being.
Keeping a lawn free of insect and disease damage provides a dense turfgrass cover which can
yield many health benefits. Use of the new cultivars gives vigor to the turf. When needed, the
careful use of pesticides will help to give a thick turfgrass cover which not only will be more
beautiful but will help to cut back on noise, modify the temperature,reduce glare, and help control
allergens, which are some of the environmental stressors which add to daily living discomfort.
Plants are not a cure all to tensions and personal problems, but"involvement with plants can help
you cope"[McDonald 1976].
Roadside rest stops, parks, cemeteries and homellawns are all conducive to good health
because they provide settings that calm us, create a sense of well-being and help to reduce stress.
Over 4000 members of the American Horticulture Society were surveyed as to the benefits of
gardening. Over 60 percent stated the most important satisfaction as"peacefulness and tranquility."
Taking care of a lawn, like other gardening activities"is a process which includes all the thoughts,
actions and responses which occur from the time a gardening activity is first contemplated, through
the planting and growth of seeds, to the enjoyment of the mature plant"[Lewis 1978].
In addition,lawn tending provides the best in walking,bending and lifting exercise that help to
promote good health. Out-of-doors gardening is more enjoyable to many than physical fitness
workouts indoors. The soft, resilient cushioning attributes of turf allows outside activities to be
safer and more enjoyable. ,
Plants affect people's moods. A lawn can create feelings of happiness, thoughtfulness,peace,
serenity, privacy or sadness, depending on our association with their use—city park, golf course,
home lawn or memorial park. Where vegetation grows, child mortality, suicide, and energy
consumption are less than in places where there are no plants[Schery 19761. Watching grass grow
and respond to the seasons may be for city people a last link to the solace and understanding our
7
vanishing wilderness once gave.
The therapeutic value of gardening has been recognized since ancient Greece. Hippocrates'
famous work on Airs, Waters and Places recognized "that man's life, in sickness and in health i
bound up with the forces of nature..." s
[McHarg 1971]. In the 18th century, mental hospitals in
Spain prescribed gardening as therapy [McGrath 1987]. Today Horticultural Therapy has become
an important professional specialty in the rehabilitation of the ill, the elderly, the chemicall
dependent, the handicapped, the incarcerated and school dropouts. "Gardening y
is used as a tool to achieve treatment goals" [Fearing 1978], b as a normal activity
There is a growing body of evidence that personal health is linked with
the inner-space or psychological landscape [Lewis 1978]. A person who takes pride nehelpin beliefs,
to grow, ants
and in nursing plants back to health after they have declined, starts to regain belief in
themselves, establishing a level of pride, confidence and self worth that can help in the healing
Process. Those who work on lawns and in nurseries and greenhouses show a high degreeof
respect for these areas and gain a feeling of accomplishment.
Working with plants has helped in cases where people have been hospitalized for sever
depression so this type of activity can be of use to combatting normal everyday blues Mc e
[ Donal
1976]. New skills are learned through these activities which build enthusiasm for lifeovd
boredom and ease the mind. The excitement generated by watching and he ping
ants ercome
make patients feel that they have overcome their disabilit . A person who has been ill often
l can
the power to focus on tasks at hand. When a person foc'swith g
s on the tasks associated n loses s
plants, their power of concentration is enhanced. This important quality can be trap rowing
tasks and increase the individual's productivity [McGrath 1987]. sferred to other
It has been noted that the recovery rate among hospitalized patients when t
landscaped areas is often uicker than among he rooms viewed
q g patients who have non-landscaped views
[Weyerhaeuser 1986]. The restorative qualities of turf and
s provide
experience for people that is real [Stainbrook 1973]. Plants are non-threatening her ias they
a healing
care by everyone; they have natural inner rhythms which can teach us lessons about our ownresplives.s.
In patients who are overcome with a feeling of failure, plants offer paths to °�'n lives.
Heightened socialization is noted among nursing home patients who are exposedp [Autry 1986].
Evidence is strong that involvement in lawn care and other gardeningactivities to plants.
individual gardener but that it serves to connect people in a positive wa not only benefits the
in places where residents become involved in gardening. y. Neighborliness increases
community and brie g g Anew spirit rises which can impact the
g people together[Lewis 19781.
When you take care of lawns and gardens, you also take care of yourself. Plants are a creative
8
life force which can offer many benefits tot who are strong and well as well as to those who
need medical care. We cannot exist on this a without plant life. As we learn more about plants,
we find hope for the future and reassurance in today [McDonald 19761.
i
1
"Grasses and people get on truly good together." [Wilson 19611 ►
Noise Abatement
Grasses, as well as other ornamentals, reduce undesirable noise levels by 20-30% [Robey '
1977]. Excessive sound is an increasing problem in urban areas. Noise has increased in some
locations to the point of threatening human health and happiness. In large cities continuous,intense
and persistent noise has reached a level that can threaten the very foundation of community life.
Professor Mangeri has written: "any noise above 90 decibels in intensity and 4000 cycles/sec
in frequency induces a constant generalized arterial spasm, thereby increasing peripheral resistance
and subjecting the heart to abnormal strain" [McHarg 1971]. This noise level is frequently reached ►
and exceeded in cities.
I
Landscape vegetation, including turfgrass, is more effective in screening sounds at some I
frequencies than others. Plants can screen out certain objectionable sounds by modifying climatic I
conditions as well as by absorbing,deflecting,reflecting and refracting noise.
Research on the acoustical properties of turf has been conducted at the Riverbank Acoustical
Laboratory in Geneva, Illinois. Grass plants have the ability to absorb sound. In fact a Merton
bluegrass turf rated superior in performance to a heavy carpet on a felt pad [Robinette 19721. I
Noise levels are affected by the softness or hardness of the surface over which sound travels. ►
Turf planted on the banks of a lowered expressway reduces traffic noise twice as much as paving
on the same bank. Other studies have determined that if a grassy turf is planted on barrier slopes
facing the noise source,especially if the freeway is depressed 15-20 feet, reduction of noise can be
as much as 8-10 decibels [Robinette 19721. Turf acts as a sound absorber.
a
Lawns with tree and shrub borders absorb sound while hard surfaces reflect and may even
amplify sound [Robinette 1972]. Sounds that do penetrate lawn and garden areas are rendered
softer and less irritating. Plants make their own sounds which help mask more offensive noises.
Birds, squirrels and other animals are attracted to plantings and contribute to a more pleasing I
diversity of sounds. Lawns and gardens are restful places to enjoy the out-of-doors.
Temperature Modification
People function best physically and mentally within a given range of climatic conditions. The
major elements to be considered are air temperature, solar radiation, humidity, and air movement.
When these are balanced so that the human body is not t stressed, those conditions are termed
comfort zone." Although individuals vary in their preferences for these conditions, there i
general comfort zone which is suitable most of the time. s a
On a block of eight average houses, front lawns have the cooling effect of about 70 tons of air
conditioning. [The average home-size central-air unit has a 3 to 4-ton capacity.] [Baker 1987].
Plants play an important role in controlling climate. Turf is one of the best exterior solar
radiation control ground covers because it absorbs radiation and converts it to food forow
though photosynthesis [Huffine and Grau 19691. Grassed surfaces reduce temperature e tr th
by absorbing the sun's heat during the day and releasing it slowly in the evening thus moderating
mes
temperature. ating
Temperature fluctuates less under plant cover than where there is bare soil. Grass scatters lig
ht
and radiation and at the same time absorbs some solar radiation. It also cools itself and its
surroundings by the evapo-transpiration process. Each blade acts as an evaporative cooler
[Carleton 19711. An acre of turf on a summer day will lose about 2,400 gallons of water cooler
gh
evaporation and transpiration to the atmosphere [Rob(nette 1972]. Roughly 50% of the sun's h a
striking turf may be eliminated by transpirational cooling [Emmons 19841. eat
Grasses reduce infrared surface temperatures by as much as 50°F and air temperature
as
much as 7°F [Schery 1976]. When the temperature of a sidewalk or street is well over
0 F
[38°C] the temperature at the surface of a lawn will remain arounder 100°F
Temperatures over turfed surfaces on a sunny summer day will be 0 14°cooler (Emmons 1984].
asphalt (Anon cooler than concrete and
[Anonymous N 1987]. One study Showed the temperature over a paved area at 4 PM on an
August day to be 27°F higher than over a nearby grassed area. Even at 9 PM the to
still 13° cooler over the grass. This "air conditioning" mperature was
1973], g grass provides is of real service [Schery
Temperature reduction thus helps make lawns and gardens pleasant laces
days. Since they never become as hot during the day, further c p on hot summer
enjoyable. This cooling also helps make our homes more comfortable over g evening hours is most
all to hot weather.
10
Glare Reduction
I
I
Glare from natural and artificial surfaces is another contributor to stress. Bright sunlight is I
made more comfortable as glare is reduced. Ours is a shiny world made of polished and highly i
reflective building materials, vehicles, paved surfaces and signs. Reflection of daylight and high I
lights can cause visual discomfort and at times even become a hazard. Glare and reflection can be
screened or softened by plants used in a variety of ways to block, filter, or intercept glare and
reflection. Well maintained turf provides a soft, green surface which significantly absorbs and
reduces glare.
I
Z urf makes travel safer. Grassed roadsides are effective in controlling excessive glare and I
reflection that could annoy passing drivers and make dangerous conditions.
Allergy Control
Lawns help reduce some causes of allergies. Mown turf helps control dust, pollen from weeds
and grasses, seeds, spores, and biting and stinging insects. These sources of irritation bring about
allergic reactions that are highly uncomfortable for many people.
If a turf gets thin because of poor managementractices weeds eeds can come in at a great rate
because there are always weed seeds in the soil ready to germinate when any space permits. If
weeds become a problem, the use of a turf herbicide at the f roper time can help the turfgrasses fill
in and form a thick turf again. When weeds are allowed to take over, the pollen and the stinging
insects that like the weeds can cause allergy problems. For instance, clover and other weeds that
bloom in lawns attract.bees and many people are very allergic to bee stings. A strong thick turf
cover can help eliminate many of these problems.
Although some people are allergic to grass pollens, a lawn is mowed at a height that should not
allow the grass to flower and produce pollen.
ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS OF LAWNS
The environment certainly is basic to our health and to our future. Soil erosion, water quality
and quantity, air pollution, threat of fire, diseases spread by small animals are all environmental
issues that are important to everyone and become critical as population increases in an area. It is
I
amazing what positive impact tiny grass plants have in these areas.
A dense turf cover develops from the new cultivars but may need to have some help when
environmental or soil conditions are not optimum. When insects which are destructive to the lawn
start to do damage or when disease starts to spread, the use of proper pesticides can bring the lawn
back to health so that we can enjoy its benefits.
WATER PURIFICATION AND CONSERVATION
"Grass is what saves and holds the water that keeps life good and going... It keeps
the falling rain from flushing away. Blades of grass take water from the air and
transpire it into the ground. That works the other way around too. Because grass
blades help put water back into the air so that rain can fall again."
Theodore Roosevelt
Water is essential for the maintenance of all life and the quality of the water we use is very
important.
The biology of turfgrass soils makes lawns a near ideal medium for the biodegradation of all
sorts of environmental contamination. These soils are active in purifying the water as it leaches
through the rootzone and down into underground aquifers. Soil microbes help break down
chemicals, including turf pesticides, into harmless materials. ;
As the population of an area increases, more impervious surfaces are constructed, like streets,
driveways, parking lots,and roofs, and as a result, the rate of surface runoff increases and the time
elapsed before runoff occurs decreases. Water and chemicals infiltrate into the ground more
quickly on dense turf than on other surfaces so that runoff is diminished. Research shows
infiltration rates on dense sodded slopes at 7.6 inches an hour and on slopes with thinner cover,
2.3 - 2.5 inches an hour. Seeded slopes show 10 to 12 times more runoff [7.5 gal/min] than
sodded slopes which have dense turf cover [.5 gal/min] when irrigation is added at the rate of 6
inches per hour [Watschke et al 1988]. A thick healthy lawn reduces runoff"to next to nothing."
Pasture runoff is much higher than lawn runoff because pastures are more compacted and are not as
thickly vegetated as lawns.
A high quality turf will buffer loss of nutrients in runoff water or in the leachate [Roberts
19871. When effluent water is used on turf, the water is cleaned and this is a tremendous benefit to
our environment. Ten percent of U.S. golf courses are already using effluent waste water for :
turfgrass irrigation. This reclaimed water by law cannot be returned to most municipal water
supplies nor released into streams, lakes or oceans. Turfgrass therefore helps recycle this water
[Payne 1987].
Turf fertilization has resulted in unfounded accusations against lawns when nitrates are found
12
in nearby ground water. Growing grass plants absorb most fertilizer nitrogen almost immediately,
or, in the case of slow-release fertilizer, the nitrogen remains immobilized in the sod for gradual
feed-out. The small amount of phosphate in turf fertilizers is quickly fixed by the soil and
vegetation contributing to plant growth that has many ecological benefits [Schery 1973]. Tests of
water seeping through sod show that very little in the way of applied nutrients escape the grass
itself.
Use of pesticides on turf has also been the cause of concern. Approved turf pesticides, used
according to directions, are not a hazard to the environment. Thick lawns are found to limit
pesticide runoff. When the turf is dense, it slows the velocity of runoff and allows the water to j
infiltrate and soil microbes degrade the chemicals [Watschke et al 1988]. Current research is also
showing that pesticides irrigated after application stay in the thatch layer of the turf and that this
organic layer between the plant tops and roots acts as a buffer to the movement of these chemicals
[Niemczyk et al 19881. The root zones of turfgrasses provide excellent conditions for herbicide
degradation. "Routine applications of 2,4-D and dicamba to home lawns do not appear to threaten
ground water quality" [Gold et al 19881.
Most of us can't do much to prevent acid rain, but we can help neutralize some of it. Rainfall
is often as much as 10 times more acid in reaction than the same water filtered through a good
healthy lawn turf. Lawns help restore a more favorable quality to the environment. Ground
limestone used on lawns further neutralizes acid rain as it sweetens the soil for improved growth of
turfgrasses.
Groundwater recharge is an important benefit of turf. "An acre left in open space provides an
average of 600,000 gallons of recharge per year." An average golf course has 150 acres. In the
northeast, this area will recharge the water table with a net of 90 million gallons of rainwater and
'i
snowmelt a year, allowing for evaporation and transpiration. Consumption of water by a golf
course in this same area would be about 9 million gallons [Horton 1988]. '!
i!
I•
ABSORB POLLUTANTS FROM THE AIR
ii
Progress has been made in upgrading our air quality but recently the levels of nitrogen oxide,
sulfur dioxide and particulate matter have started to increase again [The 1988 Information Please !'
Almanac]. Plants absorb gaseous pollutants [toxious emissions] from vehicles, such as carbon
dioxide, into their leaves and assimilate them so they help clean the air[Turgeon 1985]. An acre of
flourishing growth will probably absorb hundreds of pounds of sulfur dioxide during a year
[Schery 1973]. Grass also "takes in carbon dioxide, ozone, hydrogen fluoride, and peroxyacetyl
nitrate — the worst group of atmospheric pollutants — and returns the true breath of life: pure
- i
13
oxygen." [Baker 1987].
The acceptable ratio of polluted air is 1 part polluted air to 3,000 parts relatively pure air.
Along heavily traveled highways, three parts polluted air in 3,000 parts of pure air is not
uncommon. This causes real concern [Robinette 1972]. A one-half-mile-wide green belt on either
side of an expressway would readjust the air balance. Plants mix fresh and polluted air thereby
diluting the polluted air.
Grasses and other plants transpire water into the air which increases the humidity and helps
settle out many pollutants. Lawns contribute their fair share to the maintenance of air that is fit to
breathe.
ENTRAPMENT OF PARTICLES
Particulate matter is continually falling from the atmosphere. Dust haze over a city can reduce
sunlight as much as 15% and ultraviolet radiation 30% or more in winter. These dust particles in
the air act as nuclei for fog,increase rainfall and made for darker days [Schery 19731. Grasses trap
much of an estimated 12 million tons of dust and dirt released annually into the atmosphere [Daniel
and Freeborg 1979]. This dust and smoke is trapped in part by lawngrass leaves so that it does not
reenter the atmosphere. The particles are washed away by water condensed on leaf surfaces and by
rain. They are deposited on the ground, where they enter a dynamic living soil system. Grassed
areas lower atmospheric dust appreciably.
Turf along airstrips reduces dust and prolongs engine life of planes [Turgeon 1985]. The first
U.S. airport, located in College Park, Maryland and many other fields which serve light aircraft
still have turf runways. Large airports have turf areas between runways serving to entrap particles
which cause decreased visibility and are detrimental to plane engines.
OXYGEN GENERATION =°
Plants, including turfgrasses, release significant amounts of oxygen into the air. A turf area
50'x 50'produces enough oxygen to meet the needs of a family of 4 [Huffine and Grau 19691.
"All life, with minor exceptions, is now, and forever has been, entirely dependent upon
photosynthesis and the plant." There is good evidence that from the beginning of time plants have
generated and released free oxygen that now makes up such an important part of our atmosphere
[McHarg 1971]. 14
- -
�- .i. - - .-. -.. - -i _ - •tea-�`s. sY•=_ � -. - -•
Air is cleansed by plants through the process of photosynthesis. Green plants take carbon
dioxide and water and use sunlight energy in photosynthesis which produces organic compounds
and releases oxygen to the environment which is essential for our health and longevity. Only 25
sq. ft. of turf is required to provide the oxygen requirement for 1 person for a day [Huffine and
Grau 1969]. The grass and trees along our country's interstate system produce enough oxygen to
support 22 million people [Baker 19871.
FIRE RETARDATION
Healthy green turf will not sustain fire as dense woody vegetation does [Flynn 19871. Thus,
where landscapes are prone to frequent uncontrolled burns, a buffer zone of well maintained
lawngrass around buildings is good insurance.
SOIL BUILDING
Topsoil takes thousands of years to develop. It is lost quickly by wind and water erosion.
Turfgrasses finger many fine rootlets into all crevices of the soil where they grow and as they
decay, they turn clay into topsoil! Grass is the most effective plant in conditioning the soil.
Lawn grass roots are continually developing, dyidt off, decomposing and redeveloping.
Every individual plant of Kentucky bluegrass produces about three feet of leaf growth under
favorable growing conditions each year. The average lawn produces clippings at the rate of 233
pounds per 1000 square feet a year. By leaving clippings on the lawn and allowing them to decay I.
in place, the equivalent of three applications of lawn fertilizer is made. This process builds up
I!
humus, keeps soils microbiologically active and over time, improves soils physically and
chemically. Microorganisms in the soil feed on grass roots. World wide grassland soils are best in
terms of productivity. Grass improves the soil by stimulating biological life in it and by creating a ;.
more favorable soil structure for plant growth [Hamm 1964].
I
EROSION CONTROL
'i
i
Lawns protect our natural soil resource. Grass roots hold the soil in place and also grass
leaves act as a covering to protect soil particles from blowing or washing.
Soil erosion is one of"the most pressing environmental issues facing the U.S. today. Nearly 6
15 -"''
billion tons of soil wash or blow away each year, a figure now exceeding the total amount of
erosion experienced during the devastating `Dust Bowl' years of the 1930's." This soil erosion
costs between $6 billion and$16 billion/year. All of us share in paying this cost [Payne 1987].
Wind causes loss of soil by erosion of bare earth. The lighter soil particles, lifted by the wind
and held in suspension as dust,create a safety hazard by reducing visibility. Soil particles that are
larger may be dropped and deposited, and in the process act as abrasives. Even a 2 inch bare spot
on the ground can be subject to erosion so plant densities of at least 70% are recommended. A
good turf cover meets this need.
The most common soil eroding agent is water. The impact of raindrops on bare soil displaces
the particles and causes them to mix with water and to be carried away. The leaves and stems of
grass plants cover the soil and intercept the raindrops. They also help to control runoff by
interfering with the water as it flows across the ground, slowing the velocity and allowing water to
infiltrate the soil [Hamm 1964].
Turfgrass roots penetrate into the soil and hold particles so that they are not lost by wind and
water erosion. Fine fibrous roots make up an extensive, branched system that is characteristic of
the grass plant. Up to 90% of the weight of the grass plant is in roots [Brown 19791. Grass binds
the soil more effectively than any other plant. One single grass plant grown under ideal conditions
has a tremendous root system - 387 miles of roots [equivalent to the distance between New York
and Montreall. Howard Dittmer at the University of New Mexico estimated that a Kentucky
bluegrass plant can have 2,000 root branches [Owns 19801. Roots also loosen the soil and add
organic matter, both of which increase soil permeability so there is less water runoff. The denser
the cover, the more efficient the turf is in preventing erosion. [Watschke 1987] and grass plants
remove soil particles from silty water. Studies show healthy lawns absorb rainfall 6 times more
effectively than a wheat field and 4 times better than a hay field [Anonymous N 19871. Plant
transpiration pulls water out of the soil helping to keep the soil from getting water logged.
[Margolin 19751
When new roads are being built, grass seed or sod is put in place as soon as thero r
made in an area to prevent soil erosion. The medians are often protected b ss evebefore grade is
road surface is put down because without such protection, soil would move grass
wind d water
and cover the roadway [Heady 1968].
Golf turfgrass in the United States protects two million acres against soil erosion. Numerous
golf courses have been built on old waste land fills, making unproductive•regions into useful site
and undesirable locations into desirable ones. This is direct land conservation plus conserving
s
topsoil by grassinghighly g
g y erodible land with turfgrass [Payne 1987]. _
16
- - • _ _ _.'s =:.`::.s,� ��` ..-a.-..; •�S�w�'�•'__..:ice'.':'."' c
i
i
Silt has filled many watersystems around the world. The U.S. Soil Conservation Service
found that reservoirs with dams averaging 30 feet high often filled in with silt completely in 29 jl
years. Grass areas protect soil from eroding-and prevent the loss of lakes and reservoirs [Heady
1968]. They also lessen the cleanup of drainage channels [Schery 19761. These water storage Ilii
spaces are important for water supply and also provide desirable recreation areas.
LAWNS AND SMALL ANIMALS
A lawn mowed a 1-2 inches is not a safe home for many small animals and they will seek taller
cover. Use of the yard is therefore more pleasant in the absence of rodents, snakes, ticks, skunks
and other small animals [Engel 19801. Since they move away from lawn areas,they are less likely
to invade the home.
.I
The other side of the coin suggests that a lawn serves as a source of food for birds [Robey
1977] and insects like earthworms which are beneficial to our environment [Johns 1970].
I
i.
I
h
TRAFFIC CONTROL
�j
Plants can help direct movement of people in a controfled way. When plans are made for an
area accessed by numbers of people, the predictable movement of pedestrians and vehicles must be
considered before traffic circulation systems are designed. Plants,including lawns, not only add to
the visual quality of the environment, but can direct the movement of traffic through an area in
planned directions. A grass area, of the proper width, can be an effective barrier in many
instances. j
Roadside turf areas provide a stabilized zone for emergency stopping for vehicles that lose
control or are in trouble [Beard 1973]. Lawns along roads provide areas free of obstructions that
reduce visibility and prevent collision hazards.
I
SPORTS TURF
i
The National Football League Players Association has studied player injuries and has taken a
position in favor of natural grass playing fields. Injuries on natural grass are fewer and less severe �
than on other surfaces [Macik 1987]. Some baseball players contract to play only on teams that
have home fields of natural ss [Anonymous S 1987 . Natural �j
8Ta [ y ] grass fields were part of the NFL
17 �.
.%Z/Atiti4.io laBaa-- .e'.►r6.i'-- —.:.Kv�.,..."r�riiY.•.n: .r..u:.c;rte...._:.w.ira�.a::a.�.M.iti
players demands in their 1987 contract dispute. There are injuries on grass fields but these are
most often noted where the condition of the field is poor. Improper field construction, inadequate
seeding and poor management practices can mean slippery or hard fields which can cause injuries
[Aungst 1986]. Injuries often happen on practice fields which are not as well maintained as the
playing field. Some coaches indicate that as their grass fields improve, the numbers of injuries
decrease [Kuhajda 1986].
Americans are very sports minded and sports like golf and softball are especially popular.
Football and baseball, as well as golf, are staged for the enjoyment of spectators. In other
countries, soccer, cricket, and lawn bowls are also very popular and are played on turfgrass fields.
In sports, the surface on which the game is played contributes a great deal to the outcome of the
contest, the safety of the players and the aesthetic enjoyment of the fans. Turfgrass provides
resiliency and durability which adds to the quality of play as well as to the safety of the players.
The quality of turf on a playing field can make or break a game. Training of athletes is
important but this advantage can be lost unless the turf surface is of high quality [Emmons 1984].
The new improved turfgrasses have high recuperative power to heal when torn up by heavy play.
Natural turf provides for good traction between the ground and the shoe sole. This means s a e
footing on home lawns,playgrounds and sports fields. A sod cover helps keep shoes from contact
with loose stones and slippery wet soil that are often responsible for unexpected falls. Turf ass is
cooler than artificial surfaces; thus it is more comfortable to play on. When the air temperature is
90°F, synthetic turf can be MOT [Anonymous S 1987]. In a 1978 poll of trainers from 6 major
college football conferences showed that 75% felt daft there were detrimental effects on thela ers
from the absorption of heat from artificial surfaces [Roberts 19851. p y 3
Hardness of playing fields is being studied. An egg drop test shows the resiliency
cushioning of turfgrasses. When a dozen eggs were dropped from 11 feet onto a 2 inch h ag h
nd
dense bluegrass/ryegrass turf, none broke. Two thirds of the eggs dropped from the same hei
onto a thin turf broke. All dozen e d o ght
eggs r pped from just 18" onto an all-weather track broke [Turf
Seed 1986].
Turf on home lawnsla _
p ygrounds and sports fields feels good to walk or run on because of its
cushioning properties. There is a resiliency that helps keep legs healthy. It's a good surface
play from roughhousing to football. No other surface material feals as good o for
good for games like croquet, badminton and volleyball [Emmons 1984]. g n bare feet or as
School enrollment in the United States, kindergarten through college, is over 58
19 8 IELM ion plea g lmina J. PhTh
ysical development of school ����[
important that physical education is part of the mandatory curriculum n1 this cls thought to be so
ountry and others.
18
The condition of playing fields and playgrounds contributes to the safety of children. In 1984 there
were over 189,000 children who received injuries on playgrounds that required hospital care [Kurtz
1987]. The University of Pennsylvania found that over 4010 of ankle and foot injuries to school
athletes were attributed to field conditions [Roberts 19851. Well grassed surfaces can prevent
injuries that may interfere with a young person's or athlete's future. Unfortunately, the majority of
playing fields in local communities are in dire need of improvement and there is increasing concern
about this issue [Macik 1987].
t Golf has long been the favorite game on turf. The game dates to the 1500's when the Dutch
practiced a combination of winter hockey and summer golf. By 1754, St Andrew's of Scotland
had become a public golf course. Golf is played by millions of people world wide as a means for
exercise, relaxation, and as an avenue for business transactions. The first U.S. golf course was
built before 1390 [Daniel and Freeborg 1979]. Today there are an estimated 20,200,000 golfers
who play 445 million rounds of golf a year in the United States and by the year 2000, it is expected
there .vill be 40 million golfers. The 13,181 U.S. golf courses spend $3,400,000,000 a year to
maintain their facilities [Golf Course Maintenance Report 19711.
Horse racing, tennis, polo, rugby, grass skiing, lacrosse, bocce, archery, badminton, croquet,
horseshoes, field hockey, Frisbee, lawn darts, softball, steeplechase, tetherball and volleyball are
other popular sports played on grass surfaces.
Common recommendations call for 6 acres of pu�licly-owned land to be maintained as
communal recreational facilities, not including public golf courses, for every 1000 people [Dawson
1977].
CONCLUSION
"I believe a blade of grass is no less than the journeywork of the stars"
- Walt Whitman
Grass plants are a unique gift of nature and give the world enormous benefits. They provide i
beauty, enhance health,provide recreation, and help maintain environmental quality—all for a very
low cost. The role grass plays in preventing soil erosion and run-off is of major importance to the
world's environment. Grass and other green plants are important in the environmental balance that
makes our life on earth possible. The importance of turf needs to be recognized for those necessary
benefits it provides, especially in cities and suburbs where the current focus is towards inert,
man-made surroundings rather than dynamic, living plants. Vegetation around us is basic to social
stability and personal confidence [Horsbrough 1972].
I
19
Perhaps the greatest benefit of all has little to do with monetary matters or health or
environment. It is simply FUNdamental to maintain a nice lawn. There is great satisfaction gained
from creating beautiful surroundings. All people have some degree of creative genius. More and
more this is being expressed through landscape design and gardening. And, the fact that there are
monetary, health and environmental benefits is indeed an added value.
In his classic eulogy to Kentucky bluegrass, Senator John J. Ingalls wrote a century ago:
"Next in importance to the divine profusion of water, light and air—may be reckoned the universal
beneficence of grass. Grass is the forgiveness of nature — her constant benediction" [Sche
1973]. ry
I AM A BLADE OF GRASS—The Alpha of visible organics. I was ordained
by the CREATOR to be the first evidence of organic life on earth, when HE said,
"Let the earth bring forth grass—and the earth brought forth grass—and the evening
and the morning were the third day."
I preceded man by millions of years as he was not created until the sixth day.
Through eons of times, I absorbed and assimilated the inorganic elements of
land, sea and atmosphere, building them into living cells; evolving new forms,kinds
and species; zealously guarding the GOD-given power to retain and reproduce that
mysterious thing called life against such time as man should require it for his
physical existence.
I am an indispensable source of all life on earth, regardless of genus, which
may account for my being placed before man and the animals in GOD'S PLAN OF
CREATION. 4
I belong to a family so numerous and varied as to almost defy description.
I am utilitarian to a degree which is limited only by man's ability to adapt me
to his needs and desires.
I serve the aesthetic as well as the practical, for all the creatures we behold
are
but the hues of the field, digested into flesh in them, or more remotely carnified in
man himself—I AM A BLADE OF GRASS.
E.W. Hamilton
[Roberts 19871
�r
•lit%
20 _ }-
REFERENCES
Anonymous. N1987. "Facts and Figures for Defending Lawns". Grounds Maintenance.
November: 31-34, 72-74.
Anonymous. S1987. "Randy Hundley Talks Sports Turf'. ,Sports Turf Manager. 3(3):3.
Anonymous. M1988. "National Trends". Associated Trends. May 1988 page 11.
Anonymous. M1988. "Much Ado About Nothing?" ALA. May 1988 page 13.
Aungst,H. 1986. "An Act of God?" Weeds Trees an T�ii . September: 50.
Autry, A.J. 1986. "Nonverbal Aspects of Horticultural Therapy." Journal.Qf Therapeutic
Horticulture 1:3-6.
Baker,J. 1987. kay Baker',j Lawn Book. Ballantine Books,NY.
Beard,J.B. 1973. Turfgrassi n ns1�Culture. Prentice-Hall, Inc.,Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Pages 1,2, 11.
Brown, Lauren. 1979. (Grasses: An Identification Guide). Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, MA.
Page 6.
Carleton, R.M. 1971.- Your Lawn=How I4 Make liAAn K=_11 (2nd Ed). VanNostrand
Reinhold Co. New York.
Ciba-Geigy. 1988. Turf Statistics. Greensboro, North Carolina.
Daniel,W.H. and R.P: Freeborg. 1979. Iua Manage '
York. Harvest Publishing Co. New
Dawson, R.B. and R. Hawthorne. 1977. Dawn's pra tiW Lawncraft. Crosby Lockwood
Staples, London. Pages 11, 13.
Emmons, R. 1984. Turfgrassi n nr3 d Management. Delmar Publ Inc.,Albany,NY. Pages
3-6.
Engel, R. 1980. "Why Turf is Needed". Green 'V orld. New Jersey Turfgrass Association
i
10(2):4-5.
Falk,J. 1977. "The Frenetic Life Forms That ,
8(1):90-96. Flourish in Suburban Lawns". Smithsonian
Fearing,Ginny. 1978. "What is Happening on a Community Level with Horticultural Therapy".
Horticultural Therapy, ed. S. Taylor. University British Columbia. Tech Bull #9; October 1987: j
15.
Flynn, L.T. 1987. Lawn Cm h mical : What fansLimCrhoul Know. A report by the
American Council of Science and Health, Summit,NJ. Page 26.
Gibeault, V.A. and S.T. Cockerham (Eds). 1985. Turfg M Water Conservation. University of
California Division of Agriculture and Natural Resource. Publication 21405. Pages 8,9, 10.
Gold, A.J.,T.G. Morton, W.M. Sullivan and J. McClorry. 1988. "Leaching of 2,4-D and
Dicamba from Home Lawns." Water,Airnn 5Qi1 Pollution. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
37(1988):121-129.
Golf Course Maintenance Report. 1987. National Golf Foundation and Golf Course
Superintendents Association of America.
Hamm,R.L. and L. Nanson. 1964. An Ecological Approach IQ Conservation, Burgess Publ
Co.,Minneapolis,MN. Pages 169-173, 181-182.
Heady,E.B. 1968. fI.Qf"Earth.W.W. Norton &Co.,New York, NY. Page 136.
Hirchcock,A.S. 1931. Y_ U"I Ln-d New PJ"n j g. Smithsonian Institute. 249 pp.
Horsborough,P. 1972. "Human-Plant Proximities: A Psychological Imperative". Indiana
Num News. 33(4).
Horton,T. 1988. "Presenting a Case for Golf Courses". SQf Course Management 56(5):76,78.
Hossein,Nasr Seyyed. 1968. The EncounterQfiV�r Ln-d Nature: 'ne Spiritual Crisis DfModern _
Mn. London, Allen and Unwin Press.
Huffine,W. and F. Grau. 1969. "History of Turf Usage". American Society Df Agronomy
Monograph L• Pages 2, 3, 6-8.
Johns,G.F. (Ed.). 1970. La vin Beauty Ihc Qcganic Way. Rodale Books Inc. Emmaus, PA.
Pages 39,44.
Kuhajda,K. 1986. "Preventing Not Promoting the Injury". Weeds Trees of JWf.
(September):64.
Kurtz, K. 1987. "Beat Neglect on the Playing Field"$pms Tuff Managen. 3(1):9.
Lewis,C.A. 1978. "Healing the Urban Environment: A Person/Plant Viewpoint". ABY
Morrison Memorial Lecture. New Orleans,LA.
Logsdon,G. 1987. "The Inalienable Lawn". Qh:iq Magazine10(3):35-39,98.
Lorence, H.E. 1973. Hay, ow',1 Y-=Lawn? Thomson Publishers. Indianapolis, IN. Page 1.
Margolin, Malcolm. 1975. wig EWb Manual. Houghton Mifflin Co. Boston, MA. Page 70.
Macik,J. 1987. "Sports Turf Injuries-Are They Avoidable?" Sports Tud Manager. Volume 3 '
No. 2. Page 12-13.
McDonald,E. 1976. Plants i Therap ; A Frank E Taylor Book, Praeger Publishing,NY.
McGrath,J. (Ed). 1987. In Touch. University of Rhode Island College of Agriculture. ,
(November).
McHarg,1. 1971. Design With Nature. Double Day/Natural History Press,Garden City,NY.
Pages vi,46, 195.
National Gardening Association. 1987-8. National Gardeningrvey. Burlington,Vermont.
Niemczyk, H.D.,Z. Filary and H. Krueger. 1988. "Movement of Insecticide Residues in y
Turfgrass Thatch and Soil". Ohio TurferassFoundation Newsletter. March. Pages 1-2.
Owen, O.S. 1980, National Resource Conservation: An E,ological APProach Ord Ed).
McMillan Publishing Co., Inc. New York. Page 231.
Payne,R.A. 1987. "Resource Conservation: The Golf Course Role". Q&Course Managemeni:
55(10) 50-58.
22
Roberts, E.C. 1985. "A Playground Surface Can Mean Safer Play for Our Children." PTA
Today. May issue.
Roberts, E.C. (Ed). 1986. Harvests. The Lawn Institute. Pleasant Hill,Tennessee 32(4). .
Roberts, E.C. (Ed). 1987. Harvests. The Lawn Institute. Pleasant Hill,Tennessee 34(1):16.
Roberts, E.C. (Ed). 1987. Harvests. The Lawn Institute. Pleasant Hill, Tennessee 34(2):19.
Robey, M.J. 1977. Lawns. David McKay Co., Inc. New York. Pages 2,5.
Robinette,G. 1972. Plants, People and Environmental unlit . U.S. Department of the Interior
in collaboration with American Society of Landscape Architects Foundation. Pages 42-50, 89-,
96,97.
Schery, R. 1976. A Perfect Lawn. MacMillan Publ Co NY. Pages 8-16.
Schery, R. 1976. Lawn Ke in . Prentice Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Pages 7-8.
Schery, R. 1982. "Managing Urban Habitat". American Lawn AQ licator 3(2).
Stainbrook, E. 1973. "Man's Psychic Needs for Nature". National RaLk5 and Conservation
Magazine 47(9):22-23.
The 1988 Information Please Almanac (41st Ed). Houghton Mifflin Co. Boston, MA. Pages 497,
820.
Turf Seed Co. 1986. T rfin' USA. Hubbard, OR. Page 11.
Turgeon, A. 1985. Turf ass Management, Revised Edition. Reston Publ Co Inc., Reston,VA.
Page 1.
Watschke, T., G. Hamilton and S. Harrison. 1988. "PVn-off from Turf as Effected by
Establishment Method". New York tt TurfraSS
1286. Association Bulletin jM. Spring 1988 page
Weyerhaeuser Co. 1986. "The Value of Landscaping". Ideas for Today Volume IV.
Weyerhaeuser Nursery Products Division,Tacoma, WA. Pages 13-20.
Wilson, C. 1961. Grass and People. University of Florida Press. Gainesville, Florida.
i
t
J ;
23
APPENDIX 1
PROFESSIONAL LAWN CARE SERVICE
Lawn and landscape care are increasingly being performed by professionals. Professional
service assures a level of quality in turf maintenance that may be difficult for most homeowners to
achieve. The attainment of high quality lawns and sports turf may also require the use of
pesticides, chemical or biological. Weeds are always plentiful in the soil and will germinate and
take over any place where grass plants grow poorly. Often this lack of vigor is caused by activity
of insects and diseases within the turf.
Effective use of pesticides when required, involves knowledge and expertise on the part of
professional lawn care operators. The proper chemical must be used to provide control of the pest
problem (weed, insect or disease). The placement of the proper amount of chemical must be such
that it does its job without contamination of the surrounding landscape. This latter practice involves
the use of precisely calibrated equipment that is well maintained and properly operated.
Generally only a trained professional would know precisely if, when and how to use a
chemical or biological controls on turf. Many times the cultural and maintenance techniques used
on turf affect its vigor and growth, such as mowing heights and frequency, watering and
fertilization—techniques known to the professional. d
Some bome gardeners have the right equipment and the knowledge and expertise for safe and
effective use of pesticides. Many do not. Grounds superintendents and sports turf managers are
generally well equipped and knowledgeable. They handle pesticides with little risk. Where there is
any question about diagnosis of a pest problem, or the appropriate chemical to use for control, or
when to make the application, or how to apply the chemical, contact a professional lawn care
specialist. They will make certain that you will"enjoy all the benefits that lawn and sports turf have
to offer.
25 -
2r-73
w►�.:..sa. Y �iaw�t'J
APPENDIX 2
SUMMARY OF LAWN AND SPORTS TURF BE,NEFTTS
Grass benefits in lawns and sports turf are often overlooked. Most homes h
the beauty of a uniform, green carpet surrounding the house sets the stageave lawn areas and
Many people enjoy participating in outdoor sporting activities and otherfor other landscaping.
events. Turf adds to the enjoyment and safety of the players and contributes
enjoy watching such
bute
the spectator. But, there are man s to the entire scene for
y more benefits which are not as obvious but which are very
important to our health, to our environment and to the economy.
Lawns are estimated to occupy between 25,000,000 to 30,000,000 acre
[the size of the 5 New England states] and as the population increases stn the United States
turfgrass acreage. Aesthetic values of turf have been recognized since ern too will the amount of
BC] maintained extensive mowed grass areas for beauty and enjoyment. too
in China [157-87
the population of the United States enjoy Lawns around their homes and t Today most segments of
In urban America, lawns contribute a measure of the countryside 'n parks open to the public.
needed linkage with nature and this benefits us by lessening stress.nd its heritage providing a much
Health of humans is enhanced by turfgrasses a they
generating ox � function in cushioning, cleaning air,
g ygen and creating a serene landscape. Knowledge of the care of turf ra
Plants is therapeutic to humans and is used in rehabilitation Programs
g sses and other
handicapped and the incarcerated. Q p g ms for the ill, the elderly, the
of serenity, Quiet grassed areas affect people's m -
y, privacy, thoughtfulness, happiness or sadness depending moods,
thus creating feelings
use — home lawn, roadside rest area, cit p g on our association with their
nature produce changes in color of lawns wharh�arelamourse or memorial '
Park. Yearly cycles of -
bringing a lift to human spirits and linking urban inhabitantsng the first areas to
green up in the spring
its heritage. Junk is less likely to be thrown where there is with a symbol of the countryside and
well maintained lawn.
Climate is controlled at
working as exterior"air conditoionedrsevelDust
tur{grasses as they cool temperatures appreciably, thus
by turf which helps keep the air cleaner. Non e imab oke p��cles from"the atmosphere are trapped
sorbed b e
excessive sound, a growing problem in urban areas. For example,
areas which cut down on
expressways reduce noise 8-10 decibels. P , biassed slopes beside lowered
Pollutants, such as carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide
rendering the air fit to breathe. Turf' • are absorbed b - -
grass thatch acts as a barrier deterring y turfgrasses thereby _
g chemicals from entering
26 _
the soil profile.
Oxygen generation by turfgrasses has a major impact in making our environment habitable. A
50'x 50' lawn produces enough oxygen for a family of four.
Erosion of soil by water is effectively controlled by grasses as they intercept raindrops before
they disturb the soil and slow flowing water so that it drops larger soil particles collected.
Groundwater is enhanced in two ways by a dense turf. Turfgrasses increase infiltration of water
and also clean the water as it passes so that underground water supplies are recharged for use by us
all. Run-off of water and pollutants is greatly reduced by a highly maintained lawn. Dense
turfgrass cleans•the water helping to maintain a high quality environment.
Sports playing surfaces are made safer when grassed with sure footing and cushioning sod that
adds to the quality of the play. Injuries in sports and games can be buffered by a soft, resilient
turfgrass surface.
Worldwide golf is a popular game played by millions of people as a means for exercise,
relaxation and as an avenue for business transactions. In the United States there are more than 14
million golfers that enjoy highly groomed grass on golf courses. Volleyball, badminton,croquet,
bocce and other games are enjoyed by young and old on grassed areas. No other surface material
feels as good on bare feet or is as good for playing games and even turning somersaults.
4
Zones that are stabilized by turfgrasses enhance safety on roads and airfields by reducing
run-off which can cause flooding, and diminishing soil erosion which muddies the surfaces, and
absorbing dust which cuts back visibility. Traffic, both vehicular and pedestrian, is directed by
lawn barriers in areas bf heavy movement of people and on roadsides and medians.
Fire retardation by buffer areas of well maintained lawngrass around buildings is good
insurance.
Monetary value is associated with a well manicured lawn and this may amount to a 15%
increase in the home selling price. Business and manufacturing complexes that have well
maintained grass areas extend a favorable impression to the general public,as well as to employees
and customers and the lawn increases the value of the property by up to 6%.
This overview of some of the many benefits of lawns and sports turf provides a tribute to the
grass plant, truly a gift of nature. Although each plant is small, in contributes so much to our
well-being.
27
APPENDIX 3
LAWN AND SPORTS TURF STATISTICS—USA
The total twfgrass area in the United States is estimated to be 25,000,000
[size of the 5 New England states], with 81% of this lawns [over 20,000,000 30,000,000 acres
crecounty and city parks have close to 1,000,000 acres of turfs]• Municipal,
- In a thick lawn,there are 6 turf
9rass Plants in and about 8 million in an average lawn of 10,000 square
each square inch,850 turf plants in a square foot
q are fect.
Turf9rass is considered to be a $25 billion plus per year industry in the United
estimated that 500,000 people make their hg duiectl
vin States. It is
sale of lawn care items is estimated at b' y from the care and maintenance of { The
gardening.
$4 illion a year, nearly 1/3 of the total amount spent on
Surveys show that a well
maintained and designed landscape adds 15% to the selling price of a
home. Recovery value is 100% to 200% for landscape improvement coin
new deck or patio which have recovery values of 40% _ 7ve p�to an investment in
commercial properly value.
landscapes add 6% to co Well designed and maintained
Undesirable noise levels can be
reduced 20-30% by grassed areas which absorb sounds.
Lawns are important in reducingtemperatures peratures and can be 30°F cooler than asphalt and 10-14
cooler than bare soil.
A turf area 50'x 50'produces enough
ygen tomeet the needs of ••
a family of four.
Grasses trap much of an estimated 12 million tons of dust and dirt released eased annually into the
An acre Of grass will absorb hundreds of pounds of sulfur dioxide during a year.
Healthy lawns absorb rainfall 6 times more effectively than a wheat field a hay field, d and 4 times better than
One single grass plant can have 387 miles of roots.
28
--- a
Most of the 58 million children enrolled in public and private schools participate in physical
education. It is important to have their playing surfaces well-maintained and resilient to help
minimize injuries.
20,200,000 golfers play 445 million rounds of golf a year in the United States.
It is recommended that 6 acres of publicly-owned land be maintained as communal recreational
facilities [not including golf courses] for every 1000 people.
In the State of New Jersey, the total area under turf is over 800,000 acres with an annual
maintenance cost of$452 million. The 2,200,000 home lawns are 76% of this area with 660,000
acres. In the State of North Carolina, the total turf acreage is over 2 million acres with home lawns
61% or 12,200,000 acres.
a
29 a- -a
APPENDIX 4
THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF TURF
HOME LAWNS
$9 MILLION
GOLF COURSES
& BOWLING
GREENS
PARKS,CEMETERIES,FACTORIES $1.3 MILLION
SCHOOLS, CHURCHES - $1.5 MILLION
APARTMENTS & CONDOS- $400,000
The typical town of 170,000 people has:
of 1,338 acres of turf in Parks, Cemeteries, factory, school and church yards
requiring 126 employees and $1.5 million to maintain.
✓ 3,500 acres of home lawns around 45,200 single family homes costing $9
million to maintain.
✓ 987 acres of lawn around 19,60Q apartments and condominiums costing nearly
$400 thousand to maintain.
✓ Golf courses and bowling greens occupy another 600 acres and require another
$1.3 million to maintain.
✓ In the total the 6,400 acres of turf require 166 professionals and over$13
million dollars to maintain. Those figures don't include the time homeowners
spend maintaining their own lawns.
The Lawn Care Institute estimates that turf and lawn maintenance is a
$25,000,000,000 industry in the U.S.
31 =:
s 7$
. Y.. , . -. ._ - ,. -. _ �..._.._.�.:.:.:..�._. ..ie:.�r;�v��,o: -_���'.'-'.:s;i":�;�r:;�ts..is :+ii..�•'r:iii�iic"
- 't
lwaterWorhs
PUBLISHED BY THE NASSAU COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
County Unveils Groundwater Computer Model
Nassau County has unveiled a quality drinking water for today that the county and water cies in developing policy for
= state-of-the-art computer and for future generations. supply agencies have been future water consumption.
model that will guide the The use of this computer collecting over the years. it The model is expected to
county in addressing water model will enable appropriate incorporates available infor- have a wide variety of applica-
s quality and quantity issues in officials to compare historical mation on Long Island's geol- tions. The Department of
z the years ahead. The model water usage with current ogy,weather,land uses, P.fblic Works will use it to
Will be an integral part of the trends and make accurate recharge basin effects,water evaluate the effects of various
county's long-range water predictions and reoommenda- supply pumping,and sewer natural events: for example,
management program. "Wa- tions on future water usage in systems. By combining all prolonged droughts and hu-
ter is one of our most precious Nassau County." this information and entering it man activities such as water
commodities,"County Execu- The model,a mathemati- into the computer program, supply pumping and contami-
F tive Thomas S.Gulotta noted. cal representation of Nassau the county will be able to nation of groundwater. The
j: "We must take those steps County's groundwater ro- forecast future groundwater regional groundwater model
} necessary now to ensure an sources,is based on a com- supply levels and to assist will become a valuable tool
f adequate supply of high- prehensive tabulation of data appropriate regulatory agen- correnued on page 2
Bicounty
Beach Plan
Announced
Nassau and Suffolk counties �t
have announced a bicounty
program designed to prevent -'
the dosing of beaches that
occurred last summer as a
result of waste washing up on
the shore. The plan,which
includes intensified cleaning
procedures and beach litter •
patrols,was developed in
conjunction with the Long
Island Chapter of the New
York Water Pollution Control
Association. (� -
Waste washed up on
beaches from Maine to Geor-
gia last summer. "While we
recognize that many beach
operations are regulated
under state and federal stat- county Executive Phomas S.Gulotta(center)and sumo«county F_xemAive Patrick G.Halpin(second nom right)outlined the multh-
utes,there are a number of Phased beach Program at a recently held Press conference at Gilgo Beach. Also present were Ned Montalto,chairman of S.AT.E.
areas where the counties and (Shore Alen for Envvonmentalsanny),John Cameron,Long Island Chapter,New York Water Pollution Control Association,and
local municipalities can play Arthur G,Pits.supervisor,Town of Babylon.
an important role,"noted operators rake,on a daily to enlist the public's coopera- Improved Street Sweep-
County Executive Thomas S. basis,all stranded debris in tion in keeping beaches and ing--Various local communi-
Gulotta. "Based upon last the area of the high water shoreline areas dean and to ties will upgrade street sweep-
years experience,it is abso- mark foster a better understanding ing operations in shoreline
lutely essential that we take a Helicopter Patrols—Nas- of the medical waste situation. communities to minimize the
appropriate action now to sau and Suffolk police air ' Minimization of Plastics likelihood of debris being
protect one of Long Island's bureaus will intensify patrols and Polystyrene Use—Con- transported into surface wa-
greatest natural resources." of beach areas,paying dose cessionaires at all beaches in ters as a result of stormwater
The bioounty plan in- attention to the condition of the Nassau-Suffolk region run-off.
dudes the following: the shoreline areas where have been urged to dtscon-
• Beach Permits—The debris has been a problem In tinue the use of plastic and See water-saving tips
health departments of both the past polystyrene materials in the ,
Page$
packaging Nassau and Suffolk counties • Public Education—A major in of food and Bever-
1
will require that the beach media effort will be launched ages.
.� W
Groundwater Computer Model
Do Your Part-- � ' ` Continued from page I
that Nassau County can use
Eliminate ..
in planning ahead to protect
our groundwater resources.
Water Waste ;_ It ��� , i Gulotta said that the
Nassau County has adopted a ,,t _F. county has been meeting With
- comprehensive water conser- various water districts and
vation and management community groups to explain
program designed to eliminate t and demonstrate the use of
water waste. The county , t' the model. In this way the
placed particular emphasis on A county hopes to increase
_ formulating a plan that incor- understanding of how the
_ porated those elements of groundwater system works
water conservation that have and of the steps required to
_ proven successful in eliminat- ensure the quality and quan-
ing water waste in other areas tity of drinking water for today
of the country. and tomorrow.
1 While the ordinance
includes provisions to fine Supervisor Gregory P Peterson(right)uses a Heltige pocket comparoor to measure
V101ators,the plan's SUCCeSS
pH and chionne concentrations in water with Hempstead Water Department Commis• i
stoner Daniel Davis. Mandated by the Nassau County Health Department.water
rests on voluntary compliance quarry testing is a regular part of focal water depannrnl procedures.
I by all residents. The basic
elements of the plan are
described below. Cornell Cooperative Extension Offers Water
Lawn Spnnkling--Sprin-
kling is permitted on even Education Program for Youth
dates by residents With even
house numbers and on odd During the past year,Correll varieties of water contamina- cylinder filled with sand,clay,
ii dates by residents with odd Cooperative Extension has tion. A variety of prepackaged and gravel representing pro-
house numbers. Residents offered a water education games and experiments, portionately the various layers
' may not sprinkle lawns be- program to students in kinder- which allow students to draw of the aquifer system in Nas-
s
i tween the hours of 10 A.M. garten through sixth grade. their own conclusions,are sau County.
# and 4 P.M.on any day. The cooperative provides provided in support of each of With the support of
Car Washes—A.11 car lessons specially designed for these units. County Executive Thomas S.
V washes and fleet maintenance kindergarten through third- The Nassau County Gulotta and the Department of
washes not using a water grade students and fourth- Department of Public Works Public Works,Cornell Coop-
recirculation system must grade through sixth-grade has produced two educational erative Extension offers this
convert to such a system. students. The curriculum is tools used in the program. program free of charge to any
Commercial Air Condi- divided into five units covering The first is a detailed graphic school in Nassau County.
tioning/Refrigeration—All the dynamics of the water depicting the water cycle. Additional information about
commercial air conditioning, cycle,the importance of water Included in the graphic are the water education program
_ cooling,and refrigeration units in human existence,water clouds,mountains,a water can be obtained by calling
s 4 utilizing flow-through water conservation techniques,the treatment plant,houses,and a 593-9604.
systems must have a water water supply picture in Nas- waste treatment plant. The
b recirculation system installed sau County,and sources and second is an 184nch Plexiglas
or be converted to an air op-
erative
_ • sem.
Fre Hydra
nts—All water Despite Record t I ! 3 t65'3
suppliers must institute a Rainfall,We Must Y ,
special permitting system to
prevent unauthorized use of Still Eliminate Water
fire hydrants. Waste! :t t ter dtuw -
Enforcement—Willful ,•
violations will result in fines Record amounts of rain fell in
r ' `• tr
ranging from$50 to$1000. Nassau County during May
Local Water Suppliers— and June. With the highly {f A.
Water suppliers may have a publicized lifting of the New 1r
variation of the ordinance; York City drought alert,the
therefore,residents should natural tendency is for all of us
check with their local supplier. to relax our efforts to eliminate
water waste. We cannot e-
permit that to happenl
it is vita)that we continue
Pure water is one of our to conserve water in order to
most precious natural re- keep the aquifers that supply
sources. It is our respon- our water replenished for the
future. We must conserve oyster say SuwrV&w Angeb A D@%W(arraA dausses sus n+ern a hotnett W
sibility to preserve that water to ensure a long-term Watef 001sarvadw wrb Comclrnan T^d^"s L CMA(r4^t1 and Michael Steiningar.a
natural resource for future 1e Su for our chit- 1011 r d 00 baetti dwbn a&Awy Envini nsrrtal C=W Comrtssloa "bra.od
adequate supply Ilgattl tlleptaya a awl sur-earn bag,prat d a wafaii 4W r U ava"We to Wider"
generations. By working dren and for future genera- 1*0 arm rn Oyder Bar public Not Won orgoa.-
together in a pint effort we Ions. Please contirwe to 15!__.1n
can conserve water today abide by qVili'cable lawn- To Receive a Free Water Conservation Kit for Your Home.
...for tomorrow. sporrkling reigulations and Call the Nassau County Department d Public Works at
other water consemabon 535-4370
- guidelines in your community. :• - •_: ?+ � .
,}. -.r `,�....:.. ..a. _:e+ �`.•,iQFrrai-oar - —_--- -_-- -
1
r
1
Mobile Trailer Exhibit Opens
Nassau County has unveiled a three phases of groundwater
mobile water trailer exhibit as management through visual
part of its water management displays,including a detailed
program. The exhibit,which is replica of the hydrologic cycle.
open to the public at Eisen- It offers visitors,primarily
hower Park(parking lot 6-6A) elementary school students,
in East Meadow,was de- an explanation of the connec-
signed to assist in educating tion between rainfall,ground- •,r.,
residents on the importance of water,and drinking water; "
preserving water quality and conservation ideas and tech- _
quantity. niques;and groundwater
"The mobile water trailer quality protection.
exhibit has been established "Despite the record
to educate our residents on rainfall experienced in May,it
the continued necessity to is important that our residents
practice water conservation," continue to practice water w•• ,_? -•
stated County Executive conservation at all times,"said ,,, °' 7 ' - , -• a
Thomas S.Gulotta. "It pro Gulotta. "The new exhibit will j;�i •- ;,_ �� :, ..!' ~ .,
f vides information on many help visitors to the mobile
methods of water conserva water trailer visualize the need Nassau County's Open Space and Perpetual Preservation programs will insure that
tion and quality control and for water conservation. 1 valuable acres of pristine land,the majority located in deep-water recharge regions of
will be a valuable adjunct to would urge everyone to visit the county,will be preserved and protected forever. Each acre of these undeveloped
our comprehensive water the display." areas,such as the Stillwell Woods Preserve to Woodbury(pictured above),provides
management program." 624,tx>o gallons of water annually to our underground aquiter.
Along with verbal presen-
tations,the exhibit dramatizes
3 -
-- Use of Slow-Release Water-Saving Ideas Tip You Off
Fertilizers Results in - -
Healthier Lawns and County residents supplied many of the following water-saving ideas to the Nassau
Helps Protect County Department of Public Works. Residents can easily implement these ideas in their
everyday lives. Several of the suggestions not only help to save water,but they also help-
Groundwater to conserve energy.
r
Slow-release fertilizers offer • IN THE HOME
several benefits over fast-re- Repair all leaking plumbing.
lease fertilizers. Nutrients in Use only as much water as is needed for showers or baths.
fast-release fertilizers are Use flow restrictors on fath:ets and shower heads.
quickly exhausted by lawns; Take shorter showers;less than five minutes is sufficient.
they also are more likely to be Consider purchase of uftra4ow-flow toilets,faucet aerators,and low-flow shower heads
removed from the root zone when replacing or remodeling.
by water seeping through the Do not let water run while brushing teeth or washing hands.
s
soil. Nutrients in slow-release Use washing machine only With a toll bad.
It fertilizers,however,are re- Keep a pitcher of water in the refrigerator to avoid running faucet to obtain cold water.
z leased slowly throughout more - When you empty dehumidifiers,use that water for plants,flowers,eta
r< of the growing season. Be-
i cause nutrients in these fertil- • -1 ;' _ ''' y- ':-•
IN THE GARDEN ;;:. :M:
izers become available as the
lawn rows,the are used
Obey Nassau County ordinance on outdoor water use. ti
� g y - Do not overwater lawn and gardens;about 1 to 1 1/2 Inches per week will do for turf ":�..
more efficiently. Therefore, _ areas. Use a coffee can to catch and measure how ch water is being applied when �rt
they are less likely to seep _" watering ttirl areas. "t
lower than the root zone, ':_ Adjust sprinkler systems to minimize watering time while still maintaining a green lawn.
which reduces the possibility _ ;�.- -� Vit-2..._ ;z ,
Do not let'sprinklers water pavement areas. ,r. ;,. •-Y es,
of groundwater contamination. t3 •_ s; i , -
In addition,unlike fast-release Use ashurt-off nozzle when using hose.
Plant water-conserving shrubs in landscapes.
fertilizers,which produce one Use mulch in gardens to retain moisture.
rapid flush of growth,slow- Plant drought-tolerant grass seed in turf areas. '` ?
release fertilizers provide a - Keep gra height as long as possible;high grass requires less watering in order to '
more constant fertilization ,may green. `
and,thus,more even growth. `
Use of slow-release fertilizers • AT THE SWIMMING POOL
not only lessens the need to Fill pool to minimum level so draining pool after rainstorm can be avoided. ,
mow as often but also results `
in a healthier lawn. Thomas S.Gulotta,county executive
To determine if a fertilizer One West Street , r
is a fast-,medium-,or slow- ` Kne0la,New York 11501
release one,divide the water :
Insoluble nitrogen(W.I.N.) .s 535-3131ori
number on the fertilizer label � 7 3 s "�' cF;or _L+ ;• ' ?C,. ,its '` e
by the first number on the .3y :='.;_' i�,j '` ?{t r3r a ,.: -.�A i..=;w!i iw L.": '1t�yA'{�!'tv3's 4
J.
fertilizer bag. For example, .QW,:t�;,. Clip and Save
bra 10-6-4 fertilizer with a
Continued on paps 4
_ - 3
slow-Reiesse Ferttn:of The optimum times to for- bar of pounds that should be
Continued from pays 3 tilize a lawn are late May, spread over each 1,000 a+ " COUNTY
8 GULOTTA
W.I.N.number of 3.0(on the early September,and again in square feet of lawn. For County ExeaAW
fertilizer label),10 would be early December. Fertilizer example,for a 26-3-10 fertil- t OMMOFsuPEEFMSORS
Moodedivided into 3,resulting in.3. should be applied only in izer,the first number,26, •IOiePf'K� d
rr4we Town a
This number is then multiplied amounts that meet the nitro- would be divided into 100. �
fPrecldrq Stgerviea
by 100,resulting in 30. This gen needs of the lawn. For The application should be, Gregory Paterson
4 final number indicates that the this reason it is best to use no therefore,about four pounds Town of Hempstead supervleor
fertilizer is a slow-release one. more than one pound of per each 1,000 square feet. It Town of North Hempstead Supervisor
If the final number were be- actual nitrogen per applica- is to the lawn caretaker's Angelo A.De6gattl
tween 15 and 29,the fertilizer tion. The correct application advantage to apply the correct Tam a Oyster Say supervisor
would be considered a me- amount can be determined by amount of fertilizer since CRY a Gown� wervisoRW ;'x'
dium-release one;if it were dividing the first number on overfertilization makes grass Brum Hyman
below 15,ft would be Consid- the fertilizer bag into 100. The grow faster increasing the City of Beach Strpenlsor
f
Bred fast release. answer represents the num- need for mowing.
County Demonstrates Cultivation of Lawn Grasses That Require Less Watering
: To demonstrate how residents contain an endophytic fungus release fertilizer within guide- Signs direct visitors to the
can grow an excellent lawn that,without harming it,makes lines recommended by Cornell demonstration site. The test
without utilizing excessive the grass less desirable to Cooperative Extension. plots are located adjacent to
amounts of water,Nassau some turfgrass insects such The demonstration lawn the water supply building,ap
County has developed 16 as chinch bugs and sod project is a joint venture of the proximately 1/4 mile east of
demonstration lawn plots at its webworms. The county used NCDPW(Sanitation and Carman Avenue. Visitors can
water supply building located Three Way Mixture,AII'Star, Water Supply Division)and reach the site via Carman
at 425 Salisbury Park Drive in Omega II,and Palmer Cornell Cooperative Exten- Avenue,turning east on Salis-
East Meadow. Each of the ryegrasses in its demonstra- sion. The Nassau County De- bury Park Drive. Markers on
plots measuring 20 by 60 feet tion lawn plots. partment of Parks and Rec- each plot describe the various
contain a different variety of Kentucky bluegrasses reation Landscape Unit also types of grasses used in the
grass,which may be locally have been the prime constitu- assisted in the project. demonstration.
obtained and easily grown in ant of sod for many years due
the Long Island climate. to the knitting action of their county Executive Thomas S.Guiotta inspects fast pias of grass newirin low water
Tall fescues are the most rhizomes or underground usage with Maria Cinque(right),turtgrass specialist of Cornea cooperative Extension.
l drought tolerant of all the stems. Although these
\ grasses tested by the county. grasses previously were
Until five or six years ago, associated with high water
these grasses were never and fertilizer usage,newer
considered for home lawn use varieties require less mainte-
because the varieties avail- nance while retaining their
able were very coarse and good looks. Because of these �_:•. . _ *;,.••�=�a' _:•��:
unpleasing in appearance. characteristics,the county t +at
Through the efforts of some of chose the Merit,Adelphi,
the top turf breeders in the Eclipse,Nassau,and Liberty
country,tall fescue varieties varieties for testing. "
have been devgtoped that are The county also tested _.
f not only drought and wear Reliant,a fine-textured variety
tolerant but aesthetically of medium-height fescue that
4 pleasing. The tall fescues has good drought,heat,and
tested by the county include shade tolerance and high im-
the Jaguar,Rebel,Rebel 11, munity to many turlgrass dis- _ _ .+•_• ,
Tribute.Houndog,and Adven- eases. u " O4r"
lure varieties. Maria Cinque,turfgrass r• T-
Perennial ryegrasses are specialist of Cornell Coopera -• '-" - -ter r'' A =-
+ known for their quick germina- tive Extension(Nassau `?�'ss:-. t ••K.' - `- I. 1 ;:��._.•
Ition and establishment rate. County),will evaluate the
Somewhat wear tolerant,they demonstration plots on a
grow well in moderate to light monthly basis. Grasses will WaterWorks is published as a public service by the Nas-
shade and tolerate short-term be watered as needed within sau County Department of Public Works, Ludwig C.
drought conditions. Many of Nassau County water restric- Hasl,commissioner,
the perennial ryegrasses tions and fertilized with low-
NASSAU COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
BULONE WEST STREET ALP PATE
UPOSTAGE
MINEOLA,N.Y. 11501 PAID
LUDWIG C.HASL,COMMISSIONER BEU.MORENY
Permit No.t
Zip Code 11710
F-R-E E :
V L.I. GARDEN CALENDAR
® MASTER GARDENER PROGRAM
T ADULT EDUCATION
V SOIL pH TESTS
V CONSULTATIONS
T GARDEN GUIDES
V L.I. GARDENING
� f L.I. EXPRESSWAY Exit
s N NORTHERN STATE PKY.
I
_I
39
Exit
a 48
X
w
m
OLD COUNTRY ROAD
j Oa
m
O NASSAU COUNTY1425' a
a
PLAINVIEW COMPLEX
- � o
z
Exit
Southern State Pky. 28A 0
i
1 �
'i
3 x C�
m = ►� p
rn /� r
a
-� r
o zZ
MEMBERSHIP APDLICATION
Pleaae return this appl(eatIOU (PLEASE PRINT) to: Nor ticul ture Program, Coraell Cooperative
Istenal on of Nassau County, 1473 old Country Road, RI dg.J. Plainview, N.Y. lle03-Sols.
Enrollment year 4/1/90-3/31/91.
NAME PHONE
ADDRESS
TOWN STATE ZIP -
Make check payable to CORNELL COOPERATIVE EXTENSION.
Check One: Homeowner. . . $10. 00
Commercial . . $15 .00-Type of Business
EducatoriStudent. . $5 . 00-Name of Insti'=ution
- CONSULTATIONS-Hy phone (10:00-12:30) or office visit at Plant Diagnostic Lab (10:00-4:00).
($1.00 charge for non-enrollees).
V LONG ISLAND GARDENING MAGAZINE-A bi-monthly publication written specifically for L.I. gardeners.
IF GARDENING CALENDAR-A yearly calendar that addresses local gardening topics.
' GARDEN GUIDES-A timely newsletter on gardening problems and activities sent bi-weekly during the
growing season.
FACT SHEETS-In-house horticultural leaflets are available upon request.
V SOIL pH TEST-To determine soil lime needs. 3 tests free/per year for enrollees. (Rion-participants
pay $3.00 per sample).
. EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS-Lectures, demonstrations and field days on horticultural subjects are
designed to 'help people help themselves.' Notices ire sent advising members of these programs.
- RECORDED TELEPHONE MESSAGE-Daily gardening tips. Call 454-0920 day or night. Changed daily
at 9:00 A.M. Monday through Friday.
- COMMERCIAL PROGRAM-The ionthly L.I. Horticulture News and notices of educational programs that
are conducted solely for professional horticulturists.
V PESTICIDE CERTIFICATION CREDITS-Educational programs and classes offered throughout the year.
Attendees may receive D.E.C. credits.
Cooperative Extension in Nassau County is an educational agency
supported by the Board of Supervisors , State and Federal funds .
In addition to Horticultural Programs, classes and educational
materials are offered in Water, Home Economics and 4-H Youth
Development . It is the responsibility of the Korticultural
Program staff to provide the latest, unbiased horticultural and
gardening information based on research (Cornell and USDA) rather
than hearsay.
If you are already enrolled, please pass this brochure
onto a friend or neighbor.
Cornell cooperative Ertessi o■ provi dos eoual
program a employaeat opportualt)es.
.v--. _ Ir..�t.'��.r.. � _ . ' _ _rr..T i.✓yrtr.^=1wY�nf.�'= --� —-_ — '��'.'�_`"i`_srt
l A MESSAGE FROM ince we are all aware of the
' TOM GULOTTA growing need to preserve our
'-='- : r_100 water supply, we all want to
5•rr 5' w x o o
`•o�• : �-p -,
Sdo our part to conserve this
LAWNS
z , Dear Neighbor:
n 0 precious resource. But as
K4 s o'c^i homeowners, we also want to have the
r Nassau County has enacted an nicest lawn on the block.
o t; aggressive environmental protection
program designed, in part, to By providing the information con-
preserve our precious water supply tained in this pamphlet, Cornell Coop-
If to eliminate water waste. erative Extension of Nassau County is
;'4pleased to show you how to have it all
� With your support, we are nn attractive lawn and a clean.
already realizing the benefits from bountiful water supply.
our efforts to conserve our natural
®meq(j Can resources. Cornell Cooperative Extension, in—
conjunction
nconjunction with Nassau County Ex-
One way in which we can all help ecutive Thomas S. Gulotta and the
Vziave It W is to practice common sense when Nassau County Department of Plrblic
watering our lawns. lVorks, is at the forefront in the field of
groundwater management. In addi-
•p You can eliminate water waste tion to providing residents with the
and produce a healthier lawn by latest research-backed information on
following the ten major water/ fertil- planting and maintaining drought tol-
izing tips contained in this erant lawns, Cooperative Extension
brochure. staff is available to answer your indi-
Cornell Please follow the guidelines vidual questions on a multitude of
' ve
Coo eratigardening topics.
'4 Cooperative p contained in this publication. By
!-1 _ Extension working together we can insure an
adequate supply of water for our
Nassau County children and future generations.
Plainview Complex, Bldg.J o y o 1435 Old Country Road Warmest regards,
S k 0 v Plainview, M' I1803-5015 '
m Z Z n y o 516-154-0900v
�
�,o ——
m THOMAS S. GULOTTA County Executive lilIfI i ffl���d�IIIIUIlYY�'��Wi 'I,
r
R
10 Commonly Asked pearance. but (he variables previously men- 6. Which kind of fertilizer $, What is the best mowing
Questions About Boned help to determine frequency as well as should I choose? g
Watering and Fertilizing quantity of watering. Dally Irrigation is not heightfor my lawn and should
necessary. and where possible. It's better to Slow or controlled release fertilizers are I remove the clippings?
water less often but for longer periods of time. recommended. They allow for a more con- •PPigS?
1. How will I know when Other considerations affecting frequency of stant feeding over a longer period of time. It is best to maintain your grass at a
watering include: which Is healthier for your lawn and less work mowing height of 2-2 1/2 Inches at all Umes.
my lawn needs watering? • watering restrictions imposed by for you. Never remove more than one third of the leaf
Simply walk across your]a%,.-n. if you see county and/or local ordinances Apply one pound of'actual'nitrogen per blade at any one time.
your footprints In the grass. It's Lime to water • degree of natural rainfall which may 1,000 square feet of lawn. To calculate how Clippings can be left on the lawn provid-
(for this test to be accurate,don't let your Imm supply your lawn with adequate much that really is: Ing they are less than 1 Inch long, otherwise
grow too tall:keep It to an average height of 2- water • find the three numbers printed on remove them. Leaving the clippings can re-
2 1/2 inches), the ferUlizer bag: the first number is duce fertilizer needs by 25 percent.
4. I hate to see sprinklers the percent of nitrogen
2. How much water , divide that number Into 100 9. What is thatch and
operating in the rain; how • the resulting number Is the amount
should I give my lawn? can I use my in-ground irriga- (in pounds)you should take out of the does my lawn have it?
Although the normal Long Island lawn tion system and still conserve bag and spread over each 1,000 Thatch Is a thick.spongy layer composed
needs 1-2 inches of water per week. (sandy square feet of lawn of dead plant parts that lie Just underneath
soils may require the full 2 Inches per week) water? Slow or controlled-r;lease fertilizers are the grass but above the roots. if too thick,
the actual amount your property requires de- Unless you plan to be away for a prolonged denoted as such somewhere on the bag-per- thatch can prevent water from penetrating to
pends on these variables: period of time,why not leave your system on haps even In the Me print. the roots below. Grass clippings allowed to re-
amount of rainfall 'manual?' You would then have total control There is often confusion over the word main on the lawn do not contribute to thatch
• type of soil of your system as to when and how much organic as It relates to fertilizers. Most fertil- build-up.
• air temperature Irrigation your lawn will get. iters consist of urea and therefore are organic Thatch Isn't visible as you walk across
• type of grass You can also have a soil moisture sensor fertilizers,although the word'organic'In this your lawn, but If there is a cushiony feeling
• height of grass attached to your system. This device will case means synthetic or'man-made'organic underfoot, you may very well have a high
• amount of thatch override your time clock if supplemental ini- rather than natural organic which Is what thatch build-up. Not all grasses produce
• relative humidity gallon Isn't necessary. most people think it should mean. Organic thatch — perennial ryegrasses and tall fes-
* degree of sun/shade can be either fast or slow releasing depending cues don't, while Kentucky bluegrasses and
• soil compaction 5. How often should on the way In which it is formulated. fine rescues do.
For example, If your lawn has soil with a ,� if you have a thatch buildup,consider de-
high clay content and is growing in the shade, I.fertilize my lawn. 7. Should I add thatching or aerating either In the spring or
it will need less water than one growing In a It's best to fertilize a lawn three times a lime to my lawn? early fall.
sandy soil with full sun. year: late May/Memorial Day; early Septem-
To determine how long your spriAler ber/ Labor Day: and early December/Just Add limestone to your lawn if the pH level 10. With drought conditions
takes to deliver an Inch or two of water,place after Thanksgiving...the holidays provide an is below 6.5. Soil nutrients are more readily
a few coffee cans in the sprinkler's pathway easy way to remember the datesl available to the grass plant at 6.5,making the so common today, how can I
and check the time it takes to accumulate the More frequent fertllizaUon only necessi- ant healthier and slightly more drought toler- still have a nice lawn?
desired amount of water in the can. tates more frequent lawn mowing... and it
also makes your lawn more susceptible to Since Nassau County sops are naturally You might consider seeding your lawn
ten should certain diseases. Low maintenance turf-type acidic. ft's a good idea to check your lawn with a'drought tolerance grass. Many of the
3. How often earl tall rescues are quite tolerant of drought con-
I water m lawn? tall rescues, fine rescues and some perennial yearly. Cornell Cooperative Extension can diUons as well as are some of the fine rescues.
y ryegrasses require even fewer applications test your soil,or you can purchase the Comell In addition. some varieties of perennial
Only you can determine how much water per year. Sol] pH Test Kit and do it yourself.
your lawn needs to maintain a healthy ap- ryegrass and even a few of the Kentucky
bluegrasses can withstand these conditions.
Zoysia is another alternative.
the Dust and smoke particles from the atmosphere
are trapped by turf which helps keep the air cleaner.
benefits of turf
Erosion of soil by water is highly controlled by
are as simple as grasses as they intercept raindrops before they C,,'�,-;�
disturb the soil and slow flowing water so that it
drops larger soil particles collected.
A, B, Coo .
s
Fire retardation by buffer areas of well maintained
lawngrasses around buildings is good insurance.
AAesthetic is enhanced in two ways by a \
esthetic values of turfed areas have been dense turf. Turfgrasses increase infiltration of
recognized since emperors in China (157-87 BC) • water and also clean the water as it passes so that ;
maintained extensive mowed grass for beauty and underground water supplies are recharged for use OX YGEN ;; GIVER
enjoyment.Today most segments of the population by us all.
of the United States enjoy lawns around their A blade of grass. ■ It takes polluting gases and
homes and in parks open to the public. Health of humans is enhanced by turfgrasses as CO, from the air and returns pure oxygen. A
they function in cushioning,cleaning air,generat- 50' x 50' healthy turf area supplies the oxygen
Business and manufacturing complexes that ing oxygen and creating a serene landscape. needs of a family of four — every day. ■
have well maintained grass areas extend a favor-
able Impression to the general public, as well as Injuries In sports and games can be buffered by
to employees and customers and the lawn a soft, resilient turfgrass surface.
increases the value of the property by up to 6%a. .
Climate Is controlled at round level b turf Junk is less likely thrown on an area where Oxygen generation by turfgrasses has a major
g Y there is a well maintained lawn.
grasses as they COOL temperatures appreciably, impact in making our environment habitable. A
thus working as exterior'air conditioners'. 50'x 50'lawn produces enough oxygen for a family
Knowledge of the care of turfgrasses and other of four.
plants Is therapeutic to humans and is used in
rehabilitation programs for the ill, the elderly, the Pollutants, such as carbon dioxide and sulfur
handicapped and the incarcerated. dioxide, are absorbed by turfgrasses thereby
rendering the air fit to breathe.Turfgrass thatch
Lawns are estimated to occupy an area of acts as a barrier detering chemicals from entering
between 25,000,000 to 30,000,000 acres in the the soil profile.
United States (the size of the 5 New England
i states)and as the population increases so too will Quiet grassed areas affect people's moods,thus
the amount of turfgrass acreage. creating feelings of serenity, privacy, thoughtful-
ness, happiness or sadness depending on our
Monetary value is associated with a well association with their use — home lawn,roadside
MANICURED lawn and this may amount to a 15% rest area,city park,golf course or memorial park.
<; increase in the home selling price.
Runoff of water and pollutants is greatly reduced
Noise is absorbed b grass areas which cut g y
Y 9 by a highly maintained lawn. Dense turfgrass
COOLING down on the excessive sound,a growing problem cleans the water helping to maintain a high quality
in urban areas. Grassed slopes beside lowered environment.
expressways reduce noise 8-10 decibles. �+
EFFECT Sports playing surfaces are made safer when
va grassed with sure footing and cushioning sod that
Bart feet, thick grass, a hot summer day. ■ Grass adds to the quality of play.
is a natural air conditioner. Eight healthy front
lawns have the cooling effect of 70 tons of air Traffic,both vehicular and pedestrian,is directed
conditioning — enough for 16 average homes. ■ by lawn barriers in areas of heavy movement of
people and on roadsides and medians.
Urban area lawns contribute a measure of the TO LEARN MORE
countryside and its heritage, providing a much Publication of these ABC's was made possible
needed linkage with nature. This benefits us by through Eliot and Beverly Roberts of The Lawn
lessening stress. Institute and the Professional Lawn Care Associa-
tion of America. For more information, contact:
Volleyball,badminton,croquet,bocce and other
psi
games are enjoyed by young and old on grassed
areas.No other surface material feels as good on
bare feet or is as good for playing games and even
turning somersaults. MOULUU011111 The Lawn Institute
�HS11rUlf P.O. Box 108
r } 'leasant Hill, TN 38578-0108
I`k IINt
I 1 .....�,.......M."..., •
WATER '
Professional Lawn Care Association of America lawn
FILTER Vr% turf
1000 Johnson Ferry Road N.E. • Suite C-135 Marietta, GA 30Oenefils
068-2112
!'f
Densehealthy grass slows and filters runoff,
removing particles, contaminants and trapping soil.
■ Fresh, filtered water retums to our underground
water supply. ■ Healthy turf means
Whealthy lives ...
orldwide golf is a popular game played by
millions of people as a means of exercise,
relaxation and as an avenue for business trans-
actions. In the United States there are more than Those little green factories at
14 million golfers that enjoy highly groomed grass
on golf courses. our feet are so often taken for
Xeriscape,a very dry environment where water granted. We might easily
is conserved by creative landscaping, provides a overlook the many reasons
place for some ornamental grasses.
Yearly cycles of nature produce changes in the why a healthy lawn or a
color of lawns,which are among the first areas to dense athletic turf is an
green up in the spring, bringing a lift to human
spirits and linking urban inhabitants with a symbol essential part of our lives.
of the countryside and its heritage.
Zones that are stabilized by turfgrasses enhance The Professional Lawn Care
safety on roads and airfields by reducing runoff Association of America and the
Which can cause flooding,diminishing soil erosion
vhich muddies the surfaces, and absorbing dust Lawn Institute suggest the
vhich cuts back visibility, reasons why ...
roundwater con- Many things can happen to fertil- Research has shown that leach- rate by a third If clippings are re-
L(
�� tamination is a izer nitrogen when it Is applied to a Ing of nitrates on even sandy soils turned after mowing. Older lawns
vital issue on lawn. 0% to 36% can be volatilized can be prevented by using slow re- require less nitrogen due to a build
Long Island. We into the air. 20%-65% is taken up by lease fertilizers. Most slow release up of soil organic nitrogen that oc-
__ are all deeply the plant, and 5%-45% is stored in fertilizers release nitrogen at a rate curs through time. Lawns on Long
concerned about the soil as organic nitrogen or undis- consistent with plant needs. Conse- Island require two or three applica-
the purity of our solved fertilizer. 0% to 49% can be quently, very little nitrogen is left to tions per year: around Memorial Day,
drinking water. leached out of the root zone. be leached out of the root zone. This Labor Day, and just after Thanksgiv-
Much has been written about the Researchers from Cornell Uni- is especially important if fertilizer is ing.
effects of lawn fertilizers and pes- versity have worked with Cornell applied when rainfall is greatest, in
ticides on our water supply. Cooperative Extension of Nassau late fall and spring. Examples of amount of fertilizer to use
In this pamphlet, we'll discuss County measuring nitrate losses slow release fertilizers include bone (for each application on established lawns)
lawn fertilizers and pesticides, and from lawns on Long Island. They meal, activated sewage sludge, Percent Pounds
show you what you can do to found that in many cases leaching manures (poultry), ureaform, sulfur of nitrogen of nitrogen
maintain the quality of our pre- from fertilized lawns was no greater coated urea, and IBbU. Avoid fertil- (as listed on (1 lb.per
cious groundwater. than on,unfertilized lawns. Similar iters that contain large percentages fertilizer bag) 1,000 sq.ft.)
findings have been reported from of urea, ammonium nitrate, ammo- 4 25
FERTILIZERSaround the country. nium sulfate, or ammoniated phos- 5 20
17
There are cases, however, in which phates, especially if used in late fall. 7 14
Fertilizers are applied to lawns to the potential for nitrate leaching does This information can be found in the 8 12 1/2
make them thick and green. Nitro- exist. Conditions that promote leach- guaranteed analysis on the fertilizer 9 11
gen is the nutrient most needed by ing include: sandy soils, too much bag. 10 to
lawns and other garden plants. While water from irrigation or rainfall, 20 5
the soil contains some nitrogen, it 25 4
g applying more fertilizer than neces- DOn't overfertilize
usually isn't enough to maintain a sary, and using quick release fertil-
quality lawn. That's why people,use izers in the late fall. If there is too much nitrate nitro-
lawn fertilizers. gen in the root zone, it can ]each out. Dont overwater
A form of nitrogen called nitrates You can prevent nitrate leaching by Apply no more than 1 pound of Apply only enough water to moisten
can be leached, or carried through, following a few simple steps: actual nitrogen per 1,000 square the root zone; about 3/4 of an inch
the soil by water. When large feet at one time. The following on dry soil. Adjust irrigation system
amounts of nitrates reach the ground table lists fertilizer rates to deliver programs according to water needs.
water, they can accumulate to toxic Use slow-release this amount of nitrogen using differ- Too much water will drain through
levels. fertilizer ent analysis fertilizers. Reduce this the soil, carrying nitrates with it.
•
PESTICIDES used for lawn care about which we We are all aware of the grow-
know less. Researchers at Cornell ing need to preserve and protect THE
Like fertilizers, the fate of pes- and other universities will con-
our water supply. While we all
ticides applied tinue to inform the public about
pp to lawns can vary. the movement of pesticides and if want to do our part to conserve this FACTS
Pesticides are most often decayed precious resource, as homeowners
in the soil by microorganisms. there are any that should be we also want to have the nicest
Some pesticides are taken up by avoided. While there is no cause lawn on the block.
the plant where they are later bro- for concern, taking the following By providing the information
ken down. Pesticides can also be steps makes good sense. contained in this pamphlet, Cornell
decomposed by light, lost to the Cooperative Extension of Nassau
air, chemically broken down or * Only apply a pesticide when County is pleased to show you
tied up in the soil. absolutely needed. how to have it all...an attractive
We are just beginning to learn lawn and a clean, plentiful water
about the leaching of pesticides *Follow the directions for rate, supply.
applied to lawns. Studies on the timing and method of pests - Cornell Cooperative Extension, AB DUT
Insecticides isofenphos (Oftanol), efd'e application. in conjunction with Nassau County
chlorpyrifos (Dursban), and diaz- Executive Thomas S. Gulotta and FERTILIZERS
have shown very little move- • Do not overwater your lawn. the Nassau County Department of
AND
ment of these materials beyond Public Works, is at the forefront in
the field of groundwater manage-
the point where thatch and soil ment. In addition to providing resi-
meet. They all bind strongly to dents with the latest research- PESTICIDES
organic matter and, in some cases, � backed information on fertilizers
are decomposed there. _
Rhode Island researchers have and pesticides, Cooperative Exten-
- yF+ Cornell
sion staff is available to answer r s
reported rapid breakdown of the / � � your individual questions on a ��� Cooperative
herbicides dicamba and 2,4-D / ) � multitude of horticultural topics. �� � Extension
when applied to turf. They de- ""
tected little movement of these '°' ' Nassau county
weed control products even when j�, Helptng You Put Knowledge To Work Plainview Complex,Bldg.J
Irrigated at three times the recom- �,/� Cornell Cooperative Extension 1425 old Country Road
mended rate. - "' in Nassau County provides equal Plainview, NY 11803-5015
There are many other products program and employment opportunities 516-454-0900
a
o
_:.M�i_�_�s-V i�i!�-rf�a-� _•.� ��-a7S_:'E�IT��i�-i•--�t-St_ OE-/�f �._--
.�1t-st ,t. �._t � _,�9u -f�a 1 - .Wit•:�c.e •� y
O v 1
VlGsGfrl2spl�(—�.• � ��� -L. 1f►_ -- _ �ECESS�
A4 =_s-.o-ujb—j6&4 .v '1.�-
1 i —J`f46
ks Let.&— _�q&w _on-
15�- 4—s- 4esh[1a i_ -II�A —
'
Gam- 5-3Y++i t �S_a_!/H etc H __c6� JE A1;� , -t-T -pe v F-�l S fob j
--i-�K1S�� �--��- -GIosE_.SC.QK��j►!_y_;._.� I I ! I
— 7— � i •-----—I j a I � i � '. � � i 1
� I 1
O`` ll li.l YC1 MSI „hM„O � r
THE NEW YORK BOTANICAL GARDEN
14 March 1991
Mr . Robert S . DeLuca , Biologist
Suffolk Co. Dept . of Health Services
Office of Ecology
County Center , Riverhead , N .Y. 11901
Dear Bob :
Thank you for sending me a copy of the discussion
of the Maritime Red Cedar Forest contained In the
DEIS for the Angel Shores proposal In Southold.
Generally , I have no problems with the statement .
The DEIS states that more research Is needed on
this plant community - Bob Zaremba , Carol Reschke ,
and Andy Greller have not visited the site . NYNHP
has documented only one occurrence of this plant
community In the state , and has not systematically
searched for others .
It seems logical to me that before the DEIS Is
accepted by the Town of Southold, the question of
the occurrence of a Maritime Red Cedar Forest at
Angel Shores be settled .
Thanks again for you help .
Sincerely ,
Eric E . Lamont
(212)220-8700 BRONY,New YORx 10458-5126 FAX(212)220-6504
;- - "i. .... ... .. ....• ..` •- _- _ .r. .. rig-.. - �:1 .'=.' _11!l.NY+.i ix;-. ^t,. .y
6o Rambler Ct .
Southold . NY 1J971
February 10, 195'1
Southold Town Planning Board
Southold Tovan Hall
Main Road
Southold. '.,.IY 119.71
Att: Mr Bennett Orlowski
Re: Angel Chores DEIS
Dear Mr. Orlowski :
It is well I: norvn that e\,ryone living in the area around
Angel Shores has a legitimate concern about their drinhinq water .
As stated on page 2-46 of the current DCIS, the 5 test wells
that were placed on section I of Andel Stores showed vgjy -oor
result=__, thereby necessitating the Suffolk County Health
Department to rEquirp a central water supply. Further , in
reference to page 2-64 it states that according to the Long
Island 209 study, saltwater intrusion has been found there
intensive pumpin has occurred in concentrated areas._
I have questions concerning the ' Jrinlring water :
When the testing was done on the present water system, downdraw
tests were conducted which showed minimal dowindraw, Lint is, there
A--way to test if there was intrusion of salt water_ that displaced
the fresh water that was purnped out durinq_the test ??
Who is going to enforce the NYSDCC_ rulg,_, page 2--57, that there
will be no irrigating with the water from the Anqel Shores .,ell ?
We have already observed irrigation in operation at the Cove
during the summer of 1`90. Wh6 in-./es-tige:tFs t_he s.o_urce of this
water ? I understand that her . Laoudis has a right to supply
water for the proposed development Angel Shores. However , I do
not see his right to supply water to the Cove development . ThIE.
additional demand for 33 units may very well cause adjacent.
homeowners problems with their existing we-lis. Ovtrr 402: of the
water from this system will be pumped out of the area almost a
mile away to the Cove. ,
Who is going to manage the well system now that the Greenport
Utility Department has terminated its contract to �_upply C."f
maintenance and operational support for the water plant, as per
recent newspaper- articles ?
� �.. ..�.... .. V.. ve. T.... .. w.. r....W Vi.... .i.wWl►r.�X�rI.wtw%Y _'�N w.�. "Imo. ..�.f�.ar�.y.{
As per special condition It 10 of the NYSDC'C well pE�rrrtjit , page P-
53, "provisions shall be made to pro,- ide an adequate =apply of
water to those residents who e private- well water systems; are
diminished or rendered non productive by the use of the wells
developed by the permittee" . t•Jt�at_�rr�visions_havP_hven made to
comply with this provision ?_ There is nothing in the DL"IO _
addressing this . Is it pos_.ible to reGUirr- a surety bond to cover
any future problems ? Wi11_.the pF•rmit be c.an_c_ll_ d_nr rr_•T.r_icte_d
if problems develop — _._ _
It is of utmost importance that these questions be answered
satisfactorily before final approval is given to this project .
Sincerely,
Cecilia Z _ouc4-a
vice rresi' Ent
Terry Waters Propr-rty Ot,ners
lfSO c �E7f2 ViEw �o�� yI5
.5 p u >/-/O�D i Dpi✓ ffi7�'r�/!
N co
,7oqNu/4,t-y
SOv�•fa'� i0�'� Fji�LL
M.4 1N %Lf7
97/
RE: i*/FEZ S/YeAC 3
ON P4&1:5 OF Tt>",IF �E/S "V6 z j_ I-cc,,g�/on/
M�P �� �!f i!� Cv/�'S T/�/G EN T,T�r7 ONL y O/✓C td•EL L
!f P ROX l �1 i E 2S PR l v'4Tc- 06U,5 1lq�`f€Z 19 TEL y
sv/',z o�� /iy C� �v l�E S/f��c iy >!!is ,!Y�p Eli
�e N '-7 Plzo Fm's 7o FU��y �N� s= T/ - ��rz Poste
OF 771, ¢%
OP Tett:
I"
CL, t-J7 i/ 5N 1) /Z ESa�vr.S orf✓E �E�'�/
Sv �S%�isr'79�yy /Fi=BIZ %-? Thi ��iS Sl�a4-P 8E
wig 1Noo•siPeiE t>ti� >/�� !,✓EuS �!-� Go�.f->E�
/Vs i.D QZ4E:t> /N %/fit'
N Yoa/< s%9%� /46)PiTH SXR 771
57g-7E-S rye- TSE S TEL L/7�' 0 #1-67L ,SVp y S/�u- MoT
Z?E V_ eE b /s This >o 8E
/NS4..(7:' ON G U f J4
L/},dNS R�F���v��
t
�2M-2
!o L//a I'i t� L�/I✓ �-11.�� ��D t��TL r Z-F3�- u S�. k�4J
so you NditForupens
i H lS lir/v 00 yo U H/f/
�.,L� o f %h�S C 1LF372ic i�of'S ? SES�C. �i✓�
�O/LT� cUGTv�AL �D/ TAM
mw .rioN LW7v-D /S D t
7-eM iK E xP�/ ��� T 7/V6 'ZN –3
(yEGLS 4lZG` St/$ G7 70 CON 7��1"i✓/ ley,
jo ►� P /� �t/ft7vrz.�C 9VrF&-7L A .�� 05
p05s 18 Lam/ jO to,*l -r/7V7 (2--o-5/DEn/'T S D` GEDO-lz B eWfN,
h,�iv y O � v 5 �j,,ESE�rrr�y !fir? c GtoJ7 Pa�/f 3�E w F��
Q�i w/ [v/Gc. P�av/ate vs [vl!H 0tr-7 /F ovt'YL✓.SE
CRO DvR SOo/�ct /�L�DwS � �/�iEx- /Ncv✓zS icy
1y To a U R
SEzTio/v 3-31
c0 4p_ Po�IV i jIzr i, �
Pn j9Y /75 A31.DePo;175 &',TH
No bra !'�iaj T/fz
A/ -sN D tJ c
/v o w A Y BE coH.sm vz— �✓ /�/o> S olL
s�/oo�a 86 .DFZi5ri5:1 F/Zp/,.l 7'44j-
1r-9b
To �C I� �� D v✓Z PosTro�/ G-i ULW
LE��EIi-S
RC, G{}7"LD/A/6- Clu,S- 4-12W /L'- BA)
)4t-10k145'3' SIN CZ-- 17'
DOt✓N 7,0111ye-- /Vo
X- /#Wa 7L
2 Y vNriS
S/N CC2EL j
c�2�
Tr-i7
Mr. & Mrs. Robert Maus7�y
450 Clearview Road
Cedar Beach Park
Southold, New York 11971
Southold Planning Board March 11, 1991
Town Hall
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: DEIS Angel Shores
Members of the Board,
The DEIS for Angel Shores calculates that nitrates will be
introduced into groundwater at the site. I am concerned that this
will increase nitrate levels in my private water supply well which
is located near the site. It appears that the DEIS does not
address two issues associated with this concern. The first issue
is what will be the cumulative effect of adding nitrates to
groundwater which already has nitrates present in it both on site
and in my supply well? The second issue which I feel needs to be
clarified to answer this questions is; is my supply well located
downgradient of the site?
My supply well currently contains 6.1 mg/1 of nitrates. The
DEIS calculates that the project will add 6.8mg/1 of nitrates.
Simple math ( 6.1 mg/1 plus 6.8 mg1l) would indicate that my
supply well will exceed the 10 mg/1 • drinking water standard. I
therefore have the following questions regarding the completeness
of the DEIS;
1) Did the DEIS locate all of the supply wells surrounding. the
site and obtain water quality information to establish the
current conditions? The DEIS is lacking the vast majority
of the wells in the area. The assumption that all the 2
private wells would be listed in public files is obviously
wrong. Each house surrounding the site has a private supply
well associated with it as there is no public water supply
in the area.
2) A side issue related to the on site well; Did the DEIS
establish the level of nitrates on site to
determine the cumulative effect of adding nitrates and
what effect this would have upon the site water supply
wells?
Is my supply well located downgradient of the site? My supply
well and my neighbors supply wells contain nitrates and some
contain temik which was applied to the former potato farm at the
Page 1 of 4
�-'S a
site. Does this tell me anything about groundwater flow direction?
I always though that groundwater flowed from the land to the sea
which in this case flow would be to the south, southeast and east
from the site and not just to the south as indicated in the DEIS.
If the nitrates and temik that are in the above mentioned wells are
from the farm will the nitrates that the project will add end up in
my well? I therefore have the following questions regarding the
completeness of the DEIS;
1) The DEIS used water level data collected from several wells
over a period of years. Does using water levels collected
from different wells at different times yield accurate
information on groundwater flow direction?
2) Were the private water supply wells, which were used to
determine groundwater flow direction, surveyed and water
levels obtained with the same accuracy that the SCDHS would
utilized to determine groundwater flow direction? When my
supply well was installed no one surveyed my well and took
detailed water level measurements.
3) Over the different years that the water levels were
obtained did the levels flucuate and flow directions change
resulting in erroneous flow determination? What is the
present flow directions? 2
4) Wells were not used to determ a groundwater flow direction
between the site and the supply wells located to the south
or east of the site. What is groundwater flow direction to
the east and south of the site? My well is located to the
east of the site and contains nitrates and my neighbors
contain temik. If the temik is from the site and the DEIS
states that groundwater flow is to the south how can this
be?
5) The DEIS references two reports that map groundwater
flowing to the south.- If the DEIS does not include wells
between the site and the south and eastern water supply
wells, do these reports? If these reports do reveal wells
in the area to the east and south of the site why are they
not included in the DEIS?
6) Do the two referenced reports contain enough data to
accuratly map groundwater flow at a level of detail needed
to determine groundwater flow direction on the site?
7) Will additional monitoring wells be installed in sufficient
numbers to answer these questions?
Page 2 of 4
8) What will be the groundwater flow directions once the
surface water runoff is directed to the central recharge R
basis?
9) Will diverting surface runoff that contains nitrates to
central locations introduce concentrations of nitrates
above the 6.8 mg/l potentially into a small area and HZ'S
increase nitrate levels in selected areas that could impact
surrounding wells? Is this similiarly true of each of the
cesspool locations?
Does the DEIS address salt water intrusion? Many of the wells
in the area have experienced saltwater intrusion. A brief review of
the well data in the DEIS indicates that the test wells installed
encountered salt water only 26 feet below grade. Therefore I have
the following questions;
1) What will be the long term effect of pumping these wells on
my well water quality and the project well? I see no
mention of the long term effect of pumping. Will this well
draw water up from depth and in from the shore line over
time? What kind of evaluation if any did the DEIS make of
this?
2) Has the DEIS addressed present extent of saltwater "Z-7
intrusion in the area?
3) If the present extent of sal-i water intrusion is known how
will it change when the site wells are operating?
4) The DEIS mentions a water level elevation of minus 4 feet
below mean sea level in the area. Does this mean that the R�yZ
water is f lowing from the bay into the area and bringing in
salt water? Will the water levels decrease further with
pumping and increase salt water flow inland?
5) Historically, on Long Island, hasn't increased pumping of
groundwater resulted -in saltwater intrusion along the south
shore and therefore resulted in the installation of public
water supply from west to east with population growth? If RMZ_O1
so what information can be derived from this occurance and
what plans are being implemented for this area should this
project result in increased salt water intrusion in the
area?
6) Similiarly hasn't nitrates also been a major reason for
the installation of public water supply wells on most of
Long Island? If so what information can be learned
historically and what contingencies if any has this Fi4t-16
DEIS evaluated?
Page 3 of 4
tz-foo
Has the DEIS evaluated the economic impact on surrounding
residences that would occur if water quailty degrades and public
water supply is introduced. The majority of the surrounding
residences are on fixed incomes and could potentially lose thier
homes if made to bear the cost of a public water supply system.
Should the Town or Angel Shores be made to post a bond at this time
incase the surrounding water supplies degrade or the project water
supply fails?
Lastly I would like to know what the accuracy of the work
completed in the DEIS is. I would like to know what are the
qualifications of an engineering firm to conduct a DEIS in New York
State. Does it require a trained and registered hydrogeologist? I
understand that New York State has no registration program for
hydrogeologist and therefore anyone can provide this service. Does
it require a New York registered P.E.? If so does the New York P.E.
certification require or have a testing or education requirement
for groundwater supply work? If not how can I be sure that the
groundwater portions of the DEIS are done to any degree of
accuracy? What are the qualifications of the firm that prepared
the DEIS? Similiarly what are the qualifications of the Towns staff
with respect to the hydrogeologist who reviewed this Study?
Respectfully,
Robert Maus
cc: President Cedar Beach Park Assoc.
Suffolk County Department of
Health Services
Page 4 of 4
31 Ol .
NORTH FORK ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL
Route 25 at Love Lane. PO Bo: 799, Mattituck, NY 11952 516-298-8880
Southold Town Planning Board
February 4 , 1991
public hearing on draft EIS
"Angel Shores"
comments of Sherry Johnson
First , I 'd like to thank the planning staff for their
assistance when I have visited the office to review documents ,
they are always pleasant and helpful. However, as this was
my first experience regarding the review of a DEIS, I was
disappointed to learn that it is the policy of the Board not
to allow DEIS's to be taken from the office . This policy
makes if difficult to prepare a statement , it is much easier
to refer to the document as you work.
I would as that you consider requesting future applicants
to provide you with enough copies so that several are available
to be loaned out . In Brookhaven, copies of DEIS's are provided
to anyone who requests one, in Riverhead a $25 .00 deposit is
required. The $25 .00 is refunded when the document is returned.
As your present policy almost totally eliminates the working
public 's ability to review a DEIS, I would also ask that you
consider placing copies in the local libraries . For you
information, I have copied the section of SEQRA that pertains
to the distribution of DEIS's so that you might review it . I
hope that you will consider changing your policy.
As for the "Angel Shores" DEIS, I have spent several
hours in the planning department office reviewing this docu-
ment . I was only able to finish reading it today and in
order to prepare comments that at least make sense I will
take advantage of the comment period that extends past tonight .
I will submit my full review later this week.
Given the historical background of this project I
suppose that information that wasn ' t in this DEIS could have
• been received at some other time. However going by just what
is contained in this draft it is deficient in several areas
including: water consumption, solid waste disposal and
sewerage disposal, particularly on the lots where there is
as the site exists now, insufficent room above the water
table, to place a conventional septic system.
a non-profit organization for the preservation of land, sea, air and quality of life
printed on 100% recycled paper
-- JT-,IOL
IBJ
S(4
v�L�
NORTH FORK ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL
Route 25 at Love Lane, PO Box 799, Mattituck, NY 11952 516-298-8880
4
March 11, 1991
Mr . Bennett Orlowski, Jr . , Chairman
Southold Town Planning Board
Southold Town Hall
Main Road -
Southold, New York 11971
Dear Por . Orlowski,
The North Fork Environmental Council strongly feels that the
Angel Shores project site is very important and arguably critical
to the continued well being of the wildlife populations on Hog
Neck. As discussed in the documentation on the red cedar
maritime forest community in the draft EIS, and in the coastal
habitat reports which I have included with my comments, much more
work needs to be done to fully understand and identify all the
species and plant communities found here and to adequately assess
their habitat needs. Fragmentation of the Section I site will
effectively end any chance of studyiXg the site and interpreting
its significance to the Hog Neck populations.
Further , we feel that there is significant evidence
questioning the availability of sufficient quantities of
groundwater -to fully serve this project as proposed and the ST Z.
existing homes already in the area.
I hope that yQu will consider our attached comments and
continue to give this project the carefull review it deserves.
Sincerely,
Sherry Johnson
Attachments
a non-profit organisation for the preservation of land, sea, air and quality of life
printed on 100% recycled paper
Southold Planning Board - Lead Agency
"Angel Shores"
comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement
North Fork Environmental Council ,
February 12, 1991
OPEN SPACE
Wildlife Conservation Easement
lots 1 - 15
Section II
This 50' wide strip is of little ecological value to wildlife.
In fact other than providing the applicant with the ability to
claim an additional 6.2 acres for "conservation purposes"
provides no other value. Clearly, the natural features found on
the Section I site which include tidal and freshwater wetlands,
steep slopes and the red cedar maritime forest indicate that this
is the more environmentally significant section of the Nper__ I
subdivision. If the open space buffered by the easement were
forested or to be used for agricultural purposes there would be
justification for incorporating an "edge" into the site plan.
Neither of these scenarios exist.
Reducing the lot sizes and utilizing more of the open space in
Section II for the purpose of transferring a greater number NF-SG-Z
(preferably all) of the lots from Section I should be discussed
in the FEIS. g
Additionally, the FEIS should discuss the benefits of open space
retained on Section I opposed to the open space on Section II.
Included should be a comparison of habitat types, variety of
species utilizing each site, topography, depth to groundwater and
replaceability of the features found in each section.
WILDLIFE
White-tail Deer
Despite comments to the contrary filed by both the SCDHS Office
of Ecology dated 8/15/88 and from Frank Panek of the DEC dated
7/28/88 which state that the white-tail deer population of Hog
Neck may actually permanently inhabit Section I , the DEIS fails
to demonstrate the importance of this site to the Hog Neck herd.
The FEIS should fully discuss the white-tail deer, its habitat
needs both in the winter and summer, suitable habitat locations N FOC-3
Hog Neck and the acreage needed to support the local herd.
Impacts such as an increase in damage to ornamental plantings as
a result of the loss of natural habitat should also be discussed.
�t-+oy
Osprey, terns, piping plover
The FEIS should substantiate the claim on page 2-29 that osprey
wouldn' t be likely to nest on the project site because they
"would require a larger tract of undeveloped land". N f qur-�
TOPOGRAPHY
Section 3 of the DEIS states that a grading plan will be
submitted on each lot as they come in for building permits. This
method -does not allow the lead agency control over the steep
slopes on the entire site, or allow for mitigation measures based
on the entire project site. Of particular concern is lot #5 in ' /�IFGG-S
Section I. This lot should be eliminated.
Building envelopes should be designated on other lots and strict
measures outlined for protection against sedimentation and run-
off entering wetlands on-site and off.
SANITARY SEWAGE
It should also be noted that the DEIS states that it is
anticipated that several lots are not going to meet Health
Department requirements for a sanitary sewage system as the depth
to groundwater is as little as 4 feet. It is stated (page 3-29)
that these lots will be graded to the appropriate height. The NPC-G-0
EEIS should identify all of these lots. It should also discuss
relocating these lots so that they wil meet sanitary health code
standards.
FLOOD PLAIN
The DEIS states that "the only portions of the flood plain not in
open space are the lots on the bay and lots 5, 6, 12 and 13" .
This statement on the flood plain in relationship to the proposed
development leads the reader to believe that most of the flood
plain is in designated open space and the portion that isn' t is
insignificant. Actually 9 lots; or a full half of the Section I
lots contain areas designated as flood plain. The FEIS should
state what percentage of the total lot coverage in within the
flood plain.
GROUNDWATER '
Appendix A, page 3 contains the only table that I found in the
document that attempted to estimate water usage. This is,
however, totally inadequate. Although the household use of 350
gpd (100 sfdu x 3.5 people per household x 100 gpd) = 35,000 gpd
was an acceptable estimation for that portion of consumption,
there are no estimates on other uses which would normally be
�C-/off
--•- - -• - - "''"'.1 -_ '- - - __ r ink•-.,�.. ,. ,... ---�;c _f. __ ;.J�...r-.-"sr►+.!1!+i�►i�lL
l
associated with a residential development i.e. lawn irrigation.
The DEIS does state however that the water from the public water
system will only be used for household consumption. The FEIS NFr$
must discuss how it will enforce this claim. How watering lawns,
landscape plantings and washing cars will be prevented. How the
drilling of a second well by each future homeowner will be
prevented.
The FEIS should discuss the Department of Environmental
Conservation' s Draft Groundwater Management Program's statements
and recommendations on groundwater quantity problems. N KC'9
PESTICIDE CONTAMINATION
The FEIS should discuss pesticides and their impacts on
groundwater and the bay. The Department of Environmental
Conservation' s Groundwater Management Study's identification of NF-M-0
the project site as being contaminated should be discussed.
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
This section of the DEIS is inadequate. The Feis should discuss
amounts expected to be generated, and cost, if Southold has to NFC-C-1'
ship solid waste out of Town.
SCHOOLS
The projected number of school children is based on a mix of 3
and 4 bedroom houses. The worse case scenario should be
discussed in the FEIS wherein using the formula in the DEIS 51 NFO /Z
children could be generated. The FEIS should discuss the
projected cost to educate each child.
ENERGY CONSERVATION
The DEIS failed to discuss energy consumption and conservation.
I strongly feel that lead agencies should begin to take this
segment of an impact statement seriously. Many times project
sites can be developed in a manner to take advantage of passive
solar energy. This site will offer a southern exposure to many N �
of the home sites. Use of passive solar technology should be
discussed as a means of conserving energy.
V-Vo&
ALTERNATIVES
I strongly feel that transferring 3 lots from Section I onto
Section II was not representative of an honest attempt to /qFGC- 14
preserve the more sensitive of the two sections, Section I.
The FEIS should fully discuss concentrating all the development
onto Section II. It should be noted that this move is supported
in the "Stipulation of Settlement" which gives the final
determination of lot yield and placement to the Planning Board
(page H-5) . NFC--Cr1S
=t-�►o7
COASTAL N.SH 6 WILDLIFE HABITAT RATING Ff ..
Name of Area: Cedar Beach Point
County(ies) : Suffolk
Town(s) : Southold FEB 1 6 1987
7.5' Quadrangle(s) : Southold. New York
---------------------------------------------------------
(IS) (R) (ISzR)
Individual Replace- Final
Score ability Score
---------------------------------
ECOSYSTEM RARITY (ER) : 9 x 1.2 = 10.8
-------- --------- -----
Relatively small. undeveloped.
salt marsh. beach. and spoil
deposits on the north fork of
Long Island.
SPECIES VULNERABILITY (SV) : 48.5 x 1.2 = 58.2
--------- ---------
Least tern (E) and osprey (T) nesting.
Diamondback terrapin (SC) have been
seen. but importance of the area to this
species is not adequately documented.
Additive division: 36 + 25/2 = 48.5.
HUMAN USE (HU) : 9 x 1.2 = 10.8
--------- ---------
This area serves as an important natural area for
research and education by Suffolk County Community
College's Marine Sciences Technology Program; of
regional significance.
POPULATION LEVEL (PL) : 4 x 1.2 = 4.8
--------- --------- ------
One of the two largest concentrations
of nesting least terns on the north"
fork in 1982 and 1983. of county-level
significance.
-------------------------------------------------------
REPLACEABILITY (R) : 1.2
Irreplaceable —
------------------------------------------------------------
SIGNIFICANCE : ((ERzR) + (SVzR) + (HUzR) + (PLxR)j = 84.6
_•� '= J/ "� Quad: 5outho t o. NY
•� ' �•.i ' ==="�� Area Nartle: CC zr Beach Point
• �y ,t idd.
:--� �• Pon
•1 'i �/• p S, •.
80
�z V � Beiiedon :• Vs fa n ::�
310WO
ISLA
`i,:Sol2
S fouf•da.s
—~ C'IAarw r Park'"` S H E L T E R es I S L A N D
a4��: Nirpen t �a \ a
> Pt Jr \
M 7D
s C T' \
' Southold \ -
Say n is
• _ S 0 U N D,o sz
so
_i_ .��... • .1 '7� �� Sow1hold Peredist
Yacht Clu Point
�� '� %- •'' ` a J�/ `•�_°res . ' i• ���' --_ �' t' fop \
Lllp
• {�'• ���:•+ ^ate •. ` .i �' r �, .. - •
., •' • },^•, •, 1v►•n•1vr'" p=er .C �' .Ip.^i "••�••
(' • •} •
rmv
•`
t:•je_. :• 1 •.�,
F,
_.. ��•� G • � ^• r Cada �
• •• '.��� I J•. •
Cr.
so
1
�� • -'��...i •• _ I;tdatr Bench
. , +,. •• -sem J: •,' Point
•i ;7 IDS ` .
• ILI /,
' / n
• COASTAL FISH 6 WILDLIFE HABITAT RATING FOILM
I ----------------------------------------- -- - ------- -----—-------
Name
------ -------------Name of Area: Corey Creek
County(ies) : Suffolk
Town(s) : Southold FEB.
7.5' Quadrangle(s) : Southold. New York
(IS) (R) (ISXR)
Individual Replace— Final
Score ability Score
ECOSYSTEM RARITY (ER) : 0 x 1.2 = 0.0
--------- ------
Small, partially developed creek/
marsh/beach area; not rare in
Suffolk County.
SPECIES VULNERABILITY (SV) : 25 z 1.2 = 30.0
--------- -----
Osprey (T) nesting in 1983 and 1984.
Small population of least terns (E)
and piping plover (T) present in 1984.
but importance of the area to these
species is not adequately documented.
HUMAN USE (HU) : 9 z 1.2 = 10.8
Commercial scalloping in the creek is
important in the Long Island region.
Clamming is significant at the local
level.
POPULATION LEVEL (PL) : 4 z 1.2 = 4.8
Concentrations of scallops significant
in Suffolk County.
REPLACEABILITY (R) : 1.2
Osprey nesting platform easily replaced. —
but creek/beacb ecosystem irreplaceble.
SIGNIFICANCE = [(ERxR) + (SVxR) + (HUzR) + (PL:R)l = 45.6
sm
20
-= . .
`';; :•, .. :. -�'_:.�� •� •.+. - — tem� '� •.°'� •�':�•'•� i,
•�� • 'r •� �: � '>
Ifo :.: . °�r`":' ::��•:� -'�-i `�,Pe•w. .o•.
.. — ,—ae19• tib, S-4. _ q.CIN
'
gi
i . •0
;' •'• ;c,, . ••'•• ��. �` ' r '' ; '1, A ��`>:
Y •� a: � +O •••,'•.. •�•^• , ) 'Iarvtw�l !,(`s• �• ' t- :.• •el
01
C.
gat-
• .•. <q. s 1io -
,. �: --► ••��� !°'• 1- t__ — v Bev eh
"�-- og NecCre
k '
_ BayA.
'rte .• � neo-- .. •' . �
_r Is
//
loe
` s u ii
:2 .L I T T' L- E ;1P E C 0 N I C
f ;r
::
23 7
1 j7
' = _3 B A Y as
n �� � S O U T 1
_.
• �_` Quad: Southold, NY
Area Name: Corey Creek
=►.�� � „ Habitat Boundary:
_.�•�- - Al �a Page 1 of 1
7�yr _F,• SOc1TNAMPTON 25' • 2/40000
2 430 COL
LN
- CONSULTING Elk EERS
' HENG�. .SON AND BODWELL \\
subdivision , and this stipulation is expressly contingent
upon such consent being obtained and appended hereto . The
parties acknowledge that the yield for Angel Shores II shall
be predicated upon two-acre zoning and that the combined
r - yield for Angel Shores I and II shall be approximately 49
L
building lots to be clustered so that approximately 18 lots
shall be within Angel Shores I with the remaining approxi-
mately 31 lots being contained within Angel Shores II .
3 . Defendant Planning Board, and its individual mem-
bers , shall forthwith process plaintiff 's subdivision appli-
cation for Angel Shores I and II and upon the completion of
such processing shall issue final subdivision approval pur-
suant to 5 276 of the Town Law, and shall expeditiously take
all requisite steps in respect to such processing to com-
plete its review under the State Environmental Quality Re-
view Act ( "SEQRA" ) .
4 . The Court shall retain jurisdiction until such
time as the SEQRA process has been completed and the final
subdivision approval has been obtained, and plaintiff may
apply to the Court for appropriate relief, as indicated,
should there be any unnecessary delay or interfere.ice with
the conclusion of the SEQRA process and the obtainment of
final subdivision approval . It is understood that the mer-
-5-
The final determination of lot yield and placement shall be
t made forthwith by the Planning Board upon completion of SEQRA.,
1
N-5
• Public water supply wells contaminated with
pesticide.
Areas of pesticide contamination of O�
igroundwater.
I'
f
1
i 1 n
i 1 V 1
� 1
i
Figure 5
t Pesticide Contamination of Long Island Groundwater
Pesticides
Contamination of Long Island groundwaters with synthetic organic pesticides has
become a serious problem over the last decade.
In 1978, wells on both the North and South Forks were sampled for the pesticide
aldicarb which had been extensively used on eastem Suffolk County potato farms between
1975 and 1979. An initial sampling survey of 330 wells in the area adjacent to the farms
detected aldicarb in concentrations exceeding the DOH recommended guideline in 23
percent of the wells.
In 1979, the manufacturer requested EPA to revise the label for Temik (the
commercial name of aldicarb),and, thus,effectively ban its use on Long Island.As a result.
aldicarb is no longer being applied. Residers whose private wells exceeded the guideline
were advised not to use the water and were subsequently provided with activated carbon
filtration systems at the expense of the manufacturer.The village of Greenport also installed
activated carbon treatment on one municipal well.
In 1980, more than 8,000 wells in eastem Suffolk were sampled in areas where
aldicarb contamination was suspected.Thirteen percent of the private wells,seven percent of
the community water supply wells and eight percent of noncommunity supplies(restaurants.
hotels, etc.) exceeded DOH guidelines.
The extent of aldicarb contamination on eastem Long Island Is illustrated in Figure 5.
The Suffolk County Department of Health Services has continued to monitor for
other pesticides used in the agricultural areas of eastem Suffolk.Other pesticides detected to
date include Carbofuran, Dacthal, 1,2 dichloropropane, Dinoseb, Methomyl, Paraquat,
Oxamyl and Carbaryl. Although none of these have been found as extensively as aldicarb.
this evidence nonetheless points to the extreme sensitivity of Long Island soils as regards
leaching of organic pesticides to groundwater.
DEC — Draft L. I . Groundwater
Management Program
i11YY Y�YYf 7�WY WAr rbrr-- r.MMM
Figure II.b.
Aldicarb Contamination of Long Island Groundwater
. v
1
►
i
w
vv �
► Public Water Supply Wells Contaminated with Aldicarb r
l� � •
� H
/� 1 rt •
( J Areas of Aldicarb Contamination of Groundwater 1 ro 4)
0 0
1
September 1993 0
rt
ro
� H
i
i
(herbicides and the total of organic phosphates plus carbamates) are
limited to 100 ug/l (ppb), pursuant to Part 170 of the NYSDOH
regulations.
In 1978, wells on both the North and South Forks were sampled for
the pesticide aldicarb which had been extensively used on eastern
Suffolk County potato farms. An initial sampling survey of 330 wells
near the potato farms detected aldicarb in concentrations exceeding
the recommended guideline of 7 ppb in 23 percent of the wells.
Several actions resulted from the widespread detection of
aldicarb in the groundwater. In 1979, the manufacturer (Union
Carbide) requested the EPA to revise the label for Temik (the
commercial name of aldicarb), and thus effectively ban its use on
Long Island. As a result, aldicarb is no longer being applied.
Residents whose private wells exceeded the guideline, were advised not
to use the water, and were subsequently provided with activated carbon
filtration systems at the expense of Union Carbide. The Village of
Greenport also resorted to activated carbon treatment on one municipal
well .
An extensive sampling program was conducted between between May
and July 1980, with more than 8,000 wells in eastern Suffolk being
sampled. The guideline value of 7 ppb aldicarb was exceeded in
13 percent of the private wells, 7 percent of the community water
supply wells, and 8 percent of non-community supplies (restaurants,
hotels , etc. ) which were sampled.
The extent of aldicarb contamination on eastern Long Island is
illustrated in Figure II.b. 4
The Suffolk County Department of Health Services has conducted,
and is continuing to conduct, an extensive monitoring program for
other pesticides which may have been used in significant amounts in
the agricultural areas of eastern Suffolk and which may have the
potential to leach to groundwater. Other pesticides detected to date
include Carbofuran, Dacthal , 1.2 dichloropropane, Dinoseb, Methomyl ,
Paraquat, Oxamyl , and Carbaryl . Although none of these have been
found as extensively as aldicarb, this- evidence nonetheless points to
the extreme sensitivity of Long Islanq soils as regards leaching of
organic pesticides to groundwater.
Pesticides and herbicides are also used widely across other areas
of Long Island on crops, in parks and golf courses, and on lawns,
trees and shrubbery. None of these uses are as intensive as the use
in the agricultural areas of eastern Suffolk, and there is no current
evidence to indicate problems in other areas. Nevertheless`, sampling
has not been extensive to date and further monitoring may be needed.
II-13
(
- .`.a......a.:.ate ......c•+rw+w„..:MW
eeelr
Figure II .e.
Quantity Stressed Areas on Long Island
5 1 7 10
9
4 1 �► ; Q 6
3
2
I � �
Area Aquifer Affected
1 - Long Beach Lloyd
2 - SE Queens/SW Nassau Magothy
3 - Jamaica Glacial Magothy Lloyd
4 - Great Neck Lloyd "
5 - Bayville Lloyd
6 - NassaL' Point Upper Glacial
7 - " -eat Hog Neck Upper Glacial
8 - 0,lent Upper Glacial
9 - North Haven Upper Glacial
10 - Montauk Upper Glacial
.i�
� Revised June 1984
In spite of the widespread use of subsurface sewage disposal
systems on Long Island, only one public water supply well has been
closed due to bacterial contamination. That well , located in
Brookville and closed in 1978, was 300 feet deep. The mechanism of
contamination is believed to be from rainwater entering the well pit
rather than via the land surface.
Microbiological contamination of groundwater is not considered a
major threat on Long Island. Past reports indicate that virtually all
micro-organisms are removed from the groundwater within a short ►;
distance from the source of contamination. Filtration and absorption
are the mechanisms responsible for this removal .
F. GROUPNATER QUANTITY PROBLEMS
Simply stated, a groundwater quantity management problem occurs
when there is too little groundwater (depletion) or too much
groundwater (flooding) in a localized area relative to some "normal"
groundwater condition or some existing level of human development.
t�
Since all fresh groundwater on Long Island ultimately comes from
precipitation and since there have befn no significant changes in the
"normal" precipitation in the region, the quantities of groundwater f"
available in any local area are subject to depletion trends or
flooding trends primarily as a result of human activity. There are !
cjclic changes of climate which result in droughts or wet periods of
several years duration; however, the natural wet and dry periods tend
to average out around an equilibrium condition or "normal" groundwater `
elevation in the absence of human-induced changes. Water table
elevations on Long Island were first mapped by Veatch in 1903 and for
the most of the Island, this study is used as a benchmark of
predevelopment-conditions.
1 . Low Water Table "
Lowering trends in the water table elevations are generally
caused by the activities of man which (a) pump the available k
groundwater faster than it can be replenished by natural recharge, or
(b) block or divert the natural recharge and thus prevent the
replenishment of the groundwater.
R.
1F(j1
Low water table elevations are accompanied by reduced volume of
water in storage, and may cause any or all of the following:
II-24 .
Reduction of water table elevation to a point below the suction
tail piece of the pump. In severe cases, the water table may be
reduced to an elevation below the well screen, thus causing the
well to dry up.
When a single well or cluster of wells is pumped, the water table
in the immediate vicinity forms a conically-shaped depression
with the lowest point at the center of the well . This phenomenon
is called the cone of depression of the well . Since the
groundwater tends to flow rapidly down this induced gradient
toward the well , it can significantly increase the transport
velocity of any contaminants released to groundwater in the
vicinity of the cone of influence. Groundwater depressions tend
to act as sinks for the accumulation of contaminants.
Water table levels decline to the point where streams, lakes,
ponds and wetlands decrease in size and/or quantity of flow.
Reduction in stream flow due to water table declines also has the
indirect effect of increasing bay salinity.
Depression of the elevations of the fresh groundwater table can
result in saltwater encroachment. Due to the greater density of
saltwater it will displace the fresh groundwater unless the
latter is maintained at an elevation significantly above sea
level .
The aquifers underlying Long Island are treated as storage
reservoirs. It is generally less costly to develop producing wells in
the immediate vicinity of the water demands, rather than to transmit
water supplies long distances. For this reison, withdrawal facilities
(well fields) have generally been developed in or near areas of dense
population.
The tendency for withdrawals to generally follow population
density has created an east/west imbalance in the distribution of
pumpage. Additionally, in some areas concentrated withdrawals have
exceeded the capacity of the resource while in other areas the
resource is relatively under-utilized.
Water table elevations are monitored throughout Long Island, and
water table maps are prepared periodically. Evidence of groundwater
levels substantially below those that would occur under natural
conditions, as approximated by the water table map of 1903 by Veatch,
have been most evident in Kings and Queens Counties. Between 1903 and
1936, the water table in portions of Kings dropped from ar elevation
of 10 to 15 feet above sea level to an elevation of 5 to 10 feet below
sea level . This depressed water table resulted in saltwater
encroachment to the extent that public supply wells were removed from
service in 1947 due to chloride contamination. Since that time, the
water table has risen to elevations as high as 8 to 10 feet above sea
II-25
;
I
level (Soren, 1976). The changing groundwater levels in Kings and
Queens Counties are illustrated in Figure II.d. , which shows water
level contours for 1903, 1936 and 1965.
In Queens County, a cone of depression currently exists, with
water table elevations below sea level throughout a large portion of
the county and minimum levels 10 feet below sea level , as indicated in
Figure I.f. Since 1974, this has been the only section of Long Island ;
where freshwater table elevations have been below sea level .
k
The major cause of reduction in groundwater elevations in s
Brooklyn and Queens between 1903 and 1936 was excessive water supply
withdrawals during this period. The impact on water table elevation
of excessive withdrawals is evident on Figure II.d.2. This
cause/effect relationship was reversed following the discontinuance of
pumpage at east New York in 1947. The cone of depression which
currently exists in central Queens is a direct consequence of public
water supply pumpage in the Jamaica area. Pumpage in the area
currently exceeds recharge to the groundwater resulting in a loss of
storage in the groundwater reservoir (groundwater mining). This is
accompanied by reductions in stream flow and advancement of the
saltwater interface.
Land use practices may have an effect on water table elevations
by creating an imbalance of withdrawals and recharge. Development and
urbanization tend to reduce recharge by shielding the land surface.
Runoff, from paved areas and above-grade structures is diverted to
surface waters, thereby reducing the quantities available for
recharge. An example of this is Queens County, where natural recharge
in 1903 was estimated at 110 MGD, and impervious surface covered
approximately 20 percent of the land surface. Presently, recharge is
less than 50 MGD and the impervious area is approximately 80 percent.
In 1903, water demand was 37 MGD, and currently it is 60 MGD. Hence,
Queens went from an area where natural recharge (inflow) exceeded
withdrawals to one in which water mining presently takes place.
The expansion of sanitary sewerage systems into areas -previously
served by on-lot systems (cesspools and septic tanks) constitutes an
increase in consumptive use of water. That is, waste waters that were
previously recharged to the groundwater system through the on-lot
systems are collected and discharged to surface (usually tidal) 1
waters. This decrease in recharge results in a reduction of water in
storage within the aquifers underlying the area.
From the 1950's to the early 1970's, expansion- of sanitary
sewerage in southwest Nassau County contributed to progressive
declines in groundwater levels. Average groundwater levels in a 32
square mile portion of the sewered area declined roughly 12 feet more t
than in the unsewered area to the east. During the same time period
II-26 rt
N .� ♦,i . y S w r • . �...f -.. � .. Jr t.....j�..+..� \.%.Lta..ir � --__- --T^'�^�
(1953-1976) , discharges from the Bay Park sewage treatment plant (to
Hempstead Bay) gradually increased from 5.8 MGD to 57.8 MGD
(Sulam, 1979).
Under the auspices of the Lon Island Comprehensive Waste
Treatment Management Study (LIRPB, 1978, the United States Geological
Survey (USGS) conducted groundwater modelling aimed at predicting the
response of the groundwater systems to hypothetical conditions.
Predicted responses to extensive sewering in Nassau and western
Suffolk, coupled with increases in withdrawals associated with
population projections for the year 1995, included declines in the
water table elevation up to 16 feet in east/central Nassau and 6 feet
i-i central Suffolk (Kimmel and Harbaugh, 1976). Streamflow was
reduced in the simulation by as much as 56 percent. Similar
predictive results have been outlined using subregional groundwater
models of southern Nassau and southwest Suffolk.
Saltwater intrusion from the sea into Long Island's fresh water
aquifers can be a direct result of man's actions which result in
lowering of the water table. The hydraulic phenomenon of saltwater
"upconing" is a variation of this effect in peninsula areas where
fresh water is completely underlain by saltwater (see Figure I.h. ).
Historically, chloride contamination from saltwater intrusion
caused the closing of many public water supply wells in Kings and
Queens counties beginning in the early 1900's and continuing through
1974. The largest saltwater encroachment front on Long Island today
still lies under south Queens andf southwest Nassau counties (see
Figure II.e. ).
Many of the north shore peninsulas of Nassau County, the barrier
islands along the south shore, and the North and South Forks of
eastern Suffolk are underlain by saltwater. When appropriate
withdrawal rates are exceeded in these areas, local water table
depressions accompanied by saltwater upconing occur. The extent of
the upconing is approximately 40 times the magnitude of the depression
(i.e. , a depression of one foot is accompanied by an upconing of about
40 feet) . Elevated chloride concentrations related to upconing have
resulted in the closing of public supply wells in Kings Point. Areas
on the north and south shores and the Forks which currently exhibit
saltwater intrusion or upconing problems are also shown on Figure
II.e. . Wells in these areas must be constantly monitored.
The NYSDEC manages the saltwater intrusion problem by imposing
chloride monitoring requirements and/or pumpage, limitations on wells E
in known critical areas. These areas include the north shore
peninsulas, the eastern forks, shoreline areas along the south shore
and any locations where chloride concentrations have been known to
exceed 50 mg/1 . Presently between 50 and 100 wells have restrictions
II-28
11`/LO
placed on them. Well applications have been denied in such areas.
The NYSDEC also restricts marine dredging where it might create an
avenue for saline migration.
Obviously, the "effect" of saltwater intrusion is a groundwater
quality effect, i.e. , excessive chloride concentrations. However, the
"cause" is over-pumpage. Therefore, saltwater intrusion is best dealt
with as a quantity problem.
While nature tends to balance out periods of drought and excess
precipitation in the long-term, droughts of several years duration
have been associated with significant reductions in water table
elevation. The drought of 1962-66 was characterized by both a
reduction in precipitation and sporadically occurring precipitation
with intense storms contributing much of the total rainfall . Although
most precipitation on Long Island is rapidly absorbed by the soil ,
intense storms contribute large amounts of runoff to streams and fill
surface ponds that evaporate, and little of the storm precipitation
becomes groundwater recharge. Temporary water table declines of up to
10 feet were attributed to the drought of 1962-66 (Getzen, 1977).
2. High Water Table (Flooding)
There are no widely accepted guidelines or criteria for
establishing appropriate water table elevations on Long Island, or for
defining problem occurrences. Practically speaking, problems
associated with high water table elevations are identified by
complaints regarding flooding of roadways, basements, subways,
conduits and cesspools. Also, buoyancy forces resulting. from raised
groundwater levels have caused empty or partially empty underground
storage tanks to break free from their mountings and come up through
the ground.
Above average rainfall during the late 1970's, especially 1979,
was the major cause of localized flooding in portions of Nassau and
Suffolk Counties. Areas which arerone to flooding are characterized
' by minimum depth to groundwater (a function of local topography) ,
impermeable soils, and/or the existence of subsurface clay layers.
Development patterns may contribute to localized flooding (both
: surface and subsurface) by funneling runoff to low lying areas.
During 1979, water levels in Suffolk County were at their highest
• level since the early 1950's. Flooding was experienged in the areas
of Huntington Village, Lake Ronkonkoma, Artist Lake, and the upper r
reaches of the Nissequogue River. In Nassau County, high groundwater
levels have resulted in basement flooding in Uniondale, East Meadow, !
and the South Shore. The reduction of precipitation in 1980 was
principally responsible for alleviating some of the problems
II-30
_. ...._. .. � ... . . .. ... �. -... _ -_. . �r.. _.. a... -. .. ,.�..�_..-�_..+...-..... ...+.�:.
2/12/91
To: Southold Planning Board
RE: Angel Shores
From: Ernest H. Pappas
75 Cedar Point Dr. E.
Southold, NY 11971
My comments concerning the DEIS for Angel Shores are as follows :
-- Referring to the Introduction, page V; I find it questionable
that the town has agreed upon 1 acre zoning in an area that has
been deemed in print and verbal language to be a very fragile
environmental space even as the wording in the 3rd paragraph —�
states that the "project lies within the Peconic Bay and Environs
Critical Environmental Area {CEA; as designated by the Suffolk
County Legislature . "
I direct my comments to the Planning Board and ask you all , as
lead Agency and the people whom we as taxpayers and laypeople in
these matters look to for guidance and protection of our already
fragile water system, to be steadfast in your difficult task and
to not rubber stamp, be cajoled, intimidated or rushed by any
pressures and to look upon this project as though each one of you
lived in the immediate area, and that this project might impact
upon you .as it certainly will adversel� affect us if this project
goes through and is developed.
The Introduction of the DEIS further states that preserving
this area will constitute a benefit to public health.
I would like to think this suggests a call for more- than a 1
acre density, to in fact insure the public health referred to in
the Introduction.
Item #3, page 6, states that any development of this land
might adversely affect the drinking water supply and constitute a
threat to the public safety.
I respectfully submit , that the very inclusion of this
statement is clear evidence of the concerns we all have been
voicing here and ask you, the Planning Board, to please address
these items fully.
Item #5 on this same page, also goes into the hydrological
sensitivty and aquifer, which could be adversely affected by
change, and change is exactly what the developer has in mind.
What is important here is that this area hap been critically
affected in the past by self–serving commercial interests, who
without doing their homework and carefully checking the type of
aquifer that exists here in this fragile area, caused Temik to
pollute our ground water and required us to have filters located
at great distances from the plowed land. As food for thought, I
might hasten to add, potential and future medical problems and
complications are still an unknown concern, as the saying goes;
all the reports are not in as yet!
In a letter dated 3/1/89, and contained in the DEIS, there
appears the following statement, and I quote: . . in the opinion
of the Town Attorney, new zoning amendments establish a 2 acre
zoning on the entire parcel . . ", -unquote. I would like to state malty
that I couldn't agree more.
page 2
On page 1-30, the the DEIS avers that the developer wants to
maximize the towns natural assets including its local and
agricultural base. Is that accomplished by covering the land with
roads and homes and despoiling the land and water supply and its
quality? How does he propose to do this?
The writer of the DEIS states that land use patterns are
sensitive to the limited indigenous water supply and will not
degrade subsurface water quality. Those are the words in the
DEIS, not mine . I am not sure what that means except tie admits to Cp-�
the limited water but still wants to over develop and would he
p03t a bond to insure our pure water and its limited supply if he
is so sure?
Further, on page 1-30, there is written the intent to preserve
and enhance the towns natural environment including waterways,
wetlands, tidal marshes, etc. I view that with great reservation
being in the construction industry for 40 years . How this
can even be stated, when we have seen what non-construction
runoff has done to our creeks in the adjacent areas just from
agriculture .
There are continuous references to water quality and surface
water quality; all purporting to not harm anyone . Who will step
forward and guarantee this, knowing wAt has been documented. The
DEIS contains a letter dated 11/30/83, which states there is only
limited water available to shallow wells; most of my neighbors
and I have shallow wells!
The DEIS claims that the Agricultural-Conservation status of
this area would be maintained. Actually, the opposite would
occur. This projected development would not contribute towards
retaining the agricultural and rural environment . On the EP-3
contrary, it would create another tract development, rushing us
all headlong into overpopulation and the inability of this area
to Support the kind of growth that this developer envisions .
I shall now address my comments to the roadways . The DEIS
talks about access roads . On 2/27/89, there was a written request
from Valerie Scopaz for clear proof showing what roads would be
used and the effects on the neighboring associations private
roads . I am requesting a much more definitive explanation, so
that it would be clear to the general public Zahat is actually
proposed. In addition, I feel that the traffic survey was
inconclusive, insufficient, flawed, and prejudiced. A one day !1
test is a non-test . At least, let it be conducted during the
summer months, on more than one day, plus a holiday weekend to at
least approach some realistic numbers.
I also noticed that the "Drainage Shed Map" Fig. #6, clearly
shows that the general flow is East and South predominantly
towards the Cedar Beach Park Association in addition to the
majority of the surface runoff which in the past has inundated Ep_S'
Cedar Beach Road, contaminated the creek causing ecological
damage, and put tons of silt into the creek bottom seriously
affecting the biological balance and the food chain in our creeks
and estuaries. 1l;172,
page #3
To sum up my comments, I recognize that the Planning Board is
not the CIA, but I would hope that the Board would accept the
responsibility of being the standard bearer in the effort to
preserve our water supply and its quality, that there are
mitigating measures such as runoff into our creeks , and to
protect our way of life .
I also hope that all agencies and the people whose duty it is
to lobleafter the greater common good, do not abrogate their
responsibility to the Present or to the future .
Thank you for the opportunity to present my comments and I
would ask you in closing to put yourselves in our position.
Sincerely,
Ernest H. P4ppa
/`/5
VS1'ez-
�SS
195 Midway
Southold, NY 11971
Q- February 1, 1991
Mr . Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Town Planning Board
Town Hall
Southold, NY 11971
Dear Mr . Orlowski :
I have these comments to make on the Draft Environmental
Statement for the proposed subdivision Angel Shores .
TRAFFIC
Henderson and Bodwell conducted Traffic Counts along Main
Bayview Road on Friday, April 15, 1988 at a point where the
existing dirt road (Sunset Lane) enters the site. This is the
least populated area of Hog Neck, the Askin Nursery and the DP- 1
Angel Shores site are empty so traffic would be limited. I
submit that traffic calculations from this site would be
incorrect because the bulk of population lives elsewhere.
There were no weekend traffic volumes taken at that time. The
study used to calculate weekend traffic was performed b
Henderson and Bodwell in 1987, a date too long ago in our D P-Z
Increased traffic pattern to be helpful .
Using a formula from the Highway Capacity Manual of the
Transportation Research Board, the consulting engineers
calculated the traffic impact or� Main Bayview. There is no
information given about the Transportation Research Board.
What is the Transportation Research Board, why is its formula
applicable to Main Bayview, is it a governmental agency 7
The projected number of trips generated by Cove home owners
was not included in the count of traffic projections.
There are 20 unsold units there. There was no mention of
traffic entering Hog Neck from Oaklawn Avenue and Goose Creek DP_3
Bridge either . Since there are two paths for entering Hog
Neck and for approaching Angel Shores, it seems that both
should have been included in the survey.
The portion of the DEIS dealing with traffic seems perfunctory
and invalid .
WELL LOCATION MAP, 2-61
This map shows the number and location of 'ten existing wells
recorded in the vicinity of the Angel Shores site. Why these wells
were selected is not clear, but evidentally the difference between
the depth of these wells and the depth to the ground water in feet
was part of a velocity formula applied by the consulting engineers.
Unfortunately the map leads to misinformation, there are 44 homes
In the Bay Haven development ( Gin Lane, Bay Haven, Midway, and
Watersedge) and 54 homes in the Terry Waters development. There
a-►tr
-t-
are many homes with wells on the north side of Bayview and also
in the Cedar Beach area. The misinformation from the sketch is
that there are only ten wells in the area where in reality there L>p-44
are over 100 pumping wells. The question is whether such a small
sampling is satisfactory for use in this formula.
PRIVATE ROADS, ACCESS
The DEIS states that "a portion of the private road, Little
Peconic Bay Lane, runs through Section II from Cedar Point Road to
the Main Entrance Road. Thus a third access to the site is
provided via this commection, to Cedar Point Road on the south, and
Cedar Beach Road on the east. " These are private roads, and
although the owners of Angel Shores have the right of access , the
neighboring homes should not have their rights pre-empted by the �P $
needs of this development. There are questions of road
maintenance, access to the beaches, and road improvements that must
be solved. What protection do the owners have if these are not
addressed in the DEIS?
REVISED WATER SUPPLY REPORT, ANGEL SHORES, Revised Sept. 26, 1986
This report states that ductile iron pipe (cement lined) and
PVC pipe were both acceptable for supply lines . It later states
that the connecting water main between Angel Shores and the Cove DP-14
will be constructed of ductile irol pipe, thickness class 52,
cement lined . I talked to the Greenport Utility inspector who
examined these lines and he said that PVC piping was used.
Now that the Angel Shores Water System is providing the Cove
with water, it is an ideal time to assess the quality of water
provided and the efficiency of the delivery system. The Health
Department said that the system would work, the developers said DP-7
that it would, isn't it time to ask the 11 Cove owners if the water
Is good to drink and reaches -the second floor without difficulty?
Very truly yours,
dOROTHY A. PHILLIPS
�-+2rL
-�-- -.carry.... _ ..-. ►. - ...... ..�...� _..G.P .. . � -_. .... .- �..`. •-e, _ __ � _ .tY
LAw OFFICES
WICKHAM, WICKHAM a BRESSLER, P.C.
MAIN ROAD, P O BOX 1424
MATTITLICK,LONG ISLAND
WILLIAM WICKHAM MORTGAGE OFFICE
ERIC J.BRESSLER NEW YORK 11952
ABIGAIL A.WICKHAM 516-298.5300
516.298-8353 TELEFAX NO.516-298-2012
DANIEL C.ROSS
KAREN J HAGEN TELEFAX NO 516-298-8565
HUBERT F SULLIVAN
JOSEPH C.SAVING March 21, 1991
Southold Town Planning Board
Southold Town Hall
Southold, New York 11971
Attention: Mr. Bennett Orlowski
Re: Comments on Angel Shores Draft
Environmental Impact Statement
SCTM # 1000/88/06/1,4 ,5
Dear Mr. Orlowski:
We represent Mr. and Mrs. Harold Wohl with respect to
the referenced subdivison. As the Board is aware the Wohls
own real property in the immediate vicinity of the proposed
subdivision.
It is our position that the Draft Environmental Impact
Statement is inadequate in many respects. The document does
not deal adequately with the impact upon the sensitive
wetlands in the area or set forth in sufficient detail DA-1
alternatives that could minimize the adverse environmental
impacts. We have similar concerns regarding its failure to
deal adequately with methods to reduce the impact on the &Z_Z
resident and transitory wildlife. Of utmost concern is the
effect the proposed sub-division will have on the ground
water table. These and other inadequacies of DEIS have been
dealt with by other groups and persons whose comments are
before the Board and with which we join.
On this basis we urge the Board to reject the DEIS
until such time as the environmental impacts and
alternatives are properly presented by the applicant.
V truly yougs,
aniel C. oss
DCR:vm
NAR 2 1 "
3-1 Z7
;ate
Donald C. Spates
11115 Main Bayview Road
Southold, New York 11971
TO: Southold Town Planning Board
RE: Angel Shores Applications
Board Members;
The Angel Shores development on Main Bayview Road in Southold reflects,in its unprecedented
application period,the best example of a'worst case scenario' that could be imagined with respects
to the need for true planning in this town. Planning that does not exist nor will exist unless the
Town Planning Board gets off its collective rear ends and does what it is mandated to do PLAN.
The frustrations expressed in great number by members of the local community can only be
matched by those experienced by the applicant, and to say that no one is satisfied by way this
application has been handled would be a gross understatement. Yet the Town Planning Board has
excluded the public from active participation in this process through a self-serving and locally
unique application of SEQRA. The Town Planning Board actively, either through ignorance or
intent, encourages the public to become adversarial with to applicant.
What this obviously calls for is a plan,to assure all involved with future applications,that this both
will not and can not happen again. There was no planning in evidence, dealing with either the —
application itself or of the resulting community desire to input their knowledge and opinions into
the process.
With full realization of my own limitations I Would ask the town to consider the enactment of any
and all measures which could help shop this current failure of the planning process;perhaps these
suggestions would be of help.
1- First and most difficult is the need for true planning to be taken by the
board so that applications are handled in a manner consistent with an overall PLAN (emphasis
intentional)which plan is established prior to the applications being conkidered and not in a 'seat of
the pants' manner as is now the case in Southold. Because such a PLAN is an undertaking of
great import as well as huge scope, covering as it needs to the entire town and because of the
already overburdened Planning Board workload;I would suggest that applications be held until the
PLAN is in place and ready to be worked with. Understanding that the PLAN will never get done
a1z� .
while the board has insufficient time to just consider the applications before it now, a moratorium
seems to be the only reasonable way to approach the dilemma.
2- Secondly the board needs to consider a way in which to embrace the
community in a plan which would involve those most directly impacted by an application,with a
result that would be a cooperative effort to promote a well balanced direction for the application
rather than the adversarial stalemate that results from the current format used by the board SEQRA
does not limit the public from participation in all phases of the process- Southold Town Planning
Board does.
As can be seen from the application in question the current process is a failure it needs to be
overhauled,if perhaps not in the manner outlined above then in some other way;if my limitations
prevent me from making the suggestions which can turn around this governmental disaster then let
us find an.expert who can find the right methods. It needs to be fixed because it sure as hell is not
working.
Donald C. Spates
March 20, 1991
f
To Our Southold Town Government:
This is a letter we want to send to you about the ice skating pond
Fb u P
in our neighborhood. It is on Main Bayview Road in Southold, t�e
streets passed the triangle at Jacobs Lane, then down the hill across
from the old Arch Davis house -- where they want to put the Angel Shores
development.
The ice skating pond provides a good place for both ice hockey and
figure skating. It is a good-sized pond that freezes easily for ice
skating, without plants sticking up. The pond is a very convenient place
for kids who don't drive, and for parents so they don't have to "schlep"
their kids all over. The pond is close to the street but not close
enough to cause an accident. It 's a beautiful area where you can see
wildlife like deer. Considering all the people that use the pond for
ice skating, the area stays pretty clean.
It 's bad enough taking away t31e land where we take nature walks,
but please don't take away our only good Vice ska•tiiig. pond.
Written by:
�5��
� -Otc) �,�; l(1YL �1 - 13
-�
,tel D( vL,
(d,
N1 r
u.� e J
-7c:o Bcy Pc.ve*v j. / .S
fLe,1C1 to
•�an1`.-�..+s:r..�. ..... .5;4..a.+�:ivi�s:ra..:risat:..c.. _ .... . .,.- ' .. •- _ • - - .
wf- beef �1,;, scc r c���y �o : —
s�+h� 1 '
s u oa to S �� tl(f - ���a 1� real
Ala
' .Z)J-;
°700
J A Ri Y. I (q I
`7 0O L a,
?t-rsl
�z also leu L (?- S'i etT e'y ::t r -%<< <'1 �..►��iu -
Aid we- --reel I-lie wa-y-ef
&ICA ,M. .4_ '- 4L
r t ,fir,
71
-�
I
`talo Iva E30\ kj iFlo Pae
c � a
yIiq7I
-
r zr�3Z
1_...�.�:a ....._._..I. _ .-.�._ �:-'�:. a .. i - - ! ..ti �. -.. 3.. iJ..yi.:..:�,...:>ri�:++int:,.►+1:�-..-�-.:.:r.:�::'d..,..;.:ztirr�.-�
!S A -IL/ All
,iP `I /SS 5htj s Ot iue SoJ-�ho`C�
.tee C-0
'T6pSOt l
a
dd; —j �rt-'t i �1 `:;t --`__ fix— +`1�:� �,. ��:— •
C4
i
. ;
.41
, ns -. _
C-1-rel ��ti ��w►S ( � Soy o �d t
-
: . C �y1
i', K
L4R„
..ICCKey Ctft Dccvf— - V�J�I�!Vl 'Y Y �( l l � • �<7sy cf
-�r"`k Flv,�• ES Joc�eY Ch k Onry .
To: Sc-utlioi.-I "'skin :lanniif E•:)ard starch Id , 1991
Re : Angri _h,.;res developmnt
A��
On a walk as a new resident of Southold some eight years ago I '_1,-.
was attracted by the glint or water through a small irregular opening citU
in a dense hedgerow by the side of the road I -Lived on. :stooping ejc"Z'/l.c�
under the low branches of a tree I straightened to the full effect of
a modest-sized, dark but colorrul ►gond tucked into a thick variety of
vegetation only 15 ' from the Adge of 11ain Bavview Road. (Little did
I know then that, years later, I would feel compelled to buy a large
watercolor of a pond which so reminded me of this one . Its edge was
and is nearly impenetrable , but for the arorementioned opening, 311
aclutter with vines ; brambles; shrubs; small and large willows, some
leaning out over the pond, offering a broader vista for anyone daring
to inch out on one.
It seemed familiar. Then I realized why. I had come here on my
first North Fork Christmas bird count only the year before, not know-
ing then quite where I was nor that I ;could ever live nearby.
I was, in ensuing summers, to see or hear many an osprey stoop-
dive and crash-splash into this diminutive but amply-rewarding pond.
Any summer day, it one can squeeze into an observational position, it
is truly unlikely not to stare at staring night herons, great blue
herons, large and small egrets, and even one delightful day, the
young of green-backed herons spilling out of their nest. So tight
with foliage is the shoreline that turtles almost vainly seek out an
open, dry surface to sun themselves. In the late summer and fall ,
swarms of scavenging whirligig beetles swirl their way across the
surface of t1he %i.iter, creating endless concentric circles which in
turn gently break up the quiet reflections of the water. In the cold
of winter, my memories most warmly recall a periences with those
large mammals, called people--my daughter T I among them--dili-
gently skating across the hard, often irregular ice : hockey players,
swift, bold, and loud; young figure skaters, moderate and even grace-
ful; adults of the species, often stiff and tentative, sometimes with
little ones in tow, out perhaps for the first time .
Next to the pond on one side are the tall spires of a conifer
woodlot where on that previously-mentioned Christmas bird count, for
the first time , I had gone "daytime -owling" . Daytime owling takes
advantage of the available daylight to look for owls. Several
people, spread out in a line , walk the shaded forest floor whacking
the trunks of the trees with a substantial stick. Though this may
seem appropriate behavior only to the residents of the local insane
asylum, this rather musical technique of thumping and vibrating
serves to awaken owls from their well-suited roost high above, while
several other people awaiting outside the woodlot watch for owls
"flying the coop" . It is memorable; and it even sometimes works !
Another memory I have of the tall, evergreen woodlot is a frustrat-
ing-satisfying one of seeing-hut-not-seeing seemingly millions of
tiny birds, called "ever-moving" spring warblers, which were seeking
food in the dark of the needled, multitudinous branches too high
overhead.
So many, many times I have walked on the paths, both well-worn
and not, throughout the main body of this area we necily call Angel
_ x
Shores . As the %,ears go by, the walks :ire less easy but nc,ne-the-
less memorable , as cedars ' girths grow eider and rosebush "7.111ips"
grog longer. For a time , once or tuice , I have even been lost,
though satisfactorily, in this modest-sized acreage .
There is value, but on Long Island, less and less opportunity,
in being able to get lost for awhile. Though small, that Mildness
and opportunity is here : stalking various animal tracks along deer
trails, or human ones; discovering for oneself the pocket wetlands
within the cedar forest, with maybe a pair of black duck jumping out
and scaring whom the most, I don' t know; sniffing pungent fox smell
and finding leathery turtle eggs with one friend and a possible rare
habitat with another. This is :chat this ar«� -1 is important for, for
me, and how many others now and yet to come? There ' s more: out
passed the last of the singular cedars to the pleasingly irregular
shoreline of the bay estuary we call Peconic , where one summer' s day
my sister and I, having swum well-out from shore, looked back to the
surprise that our whole field of vision could be taken up by a
natural shoreline , truly angel ' s shores -- we human beings need
vistas uncluttered by human-wrought stuff, no matter how nice it is.
And more : my husband ' s constant delight in the tiny, undredged , self-
maintained, mostly jump-acrossable channel that •alternately drains or
freshens the saltwater wetlands on one corner of this former Davis
property.
All of this, yet there is much, much more flooding my memory of
this very special area. I will close with a more recent experience
of discovering a trail through the as-yet privately owned tract of
land across the street from Angel Shores I , a trail pushing through
sun-drenched, knee-high grasses, passing under green-arching branches
into a shadowy woods and up the side of a hill from whence comes a
close-up view of part of the undisturbed pond system which is con-
nected to that of Angel Shores at one end and comes from at least as
far as Leeward Drive at the other end. Thet trail meanders through
clearings and fields, splits, and can end up around on Leaward or
Seawood. I have walked, and ridden horseback, and hoped to cross-
country ski along this trail, and dreamed that maybe some day this
might be preserved along with all, or at least most, of Angel Shores .
This would not be an impossible dream; this dream would allow for the
existing, relatively undisturbed pond system and the underlying
groundwater aquifer to be protected all the way to its outflow into
the bay, as well as preservation of the many interesting land
habitats surrounding these watery ones.
XI
Geor7eannC�ia
11115 1fain Bayview Road
Southold, NY 11971
PLANNING BOARD 4 FEBRUARY 4, 1991
Mr. Orlowski: I have a motion made and seconded to hold this
motion open. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor?
Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered.
****************************************
Mr. Orlowski: 7:40 p.m. Southold Villas - This subdivision
is for seventeen affordable lots. The parcel is located on the
west side of NYS 25 approximately 1, 400 feet north of
Ackerly Pond Lane in Southold.
SCTM #100-70-1-6. Are there any objections to this
, subdivision? Hearing none, are there any endorsements of this
subdivision? Hearing none, is there anyone out there neither
pro nor con but may have information pertaining to this
subdivision that may be of interest to the Board? Hearing none,
any questions from the Board?
Board: No questions.
Mr. Orlowski: Being there are no further questions, I ' ll
declare this hearing closed. This is an affordable housing
project and I' ll ask if the Board has any pleasure.
C Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following
resolution.
RESOLVED that the Southold Town Panning Board grant
preliminary approval on the subdivision map dated
January 16, 1991, subject to the following condition.
1. Review and acceptance by the Planning
Board and the engineer, of the revised
drainage plans dated January 16, 1991.
Mr. Latham: Second.
Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and'-seconded. Any questions on the
motion? All those in favor?
Ayes: Mr. Latham, Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered.
****************************************
Subdivisions - State Environmental Quality Review Act
Mr. Orlowski: 7: 45 p.m. Angel Shores - Public hearing on
the Draft Environmental Impact Statement dated December 1990.
SCTM # 1000-88-1,4,5. This is open for public comments. This
comment period will be open to February 13th so there is still
�-�36
PLANNING BOARD 5 FEBRUARY 4, 1991
time to address any comments in writing. At this time I will
Cask if there are any comments on this Environment Impact
Statement?
Dorothy Phillips: I live in the Hog Neck area not far from the
projected development and I spent some time looking at the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement and I was very concerned with the
traffic survey that was completed in this DEIS and I would
like to comment on that. Henderson and Bodwell conducted a
traffic count along the Main Bayview Road on Friday, April
15th, 1988, at a point where the existing dirt road, Sunset
Lane, entered the site. Now, this is the least populated area
of Hog Neck. There is nothing on Angel Shores and there is
nothing but a nursery across the way. Traffic would be limited. -n -
This is not the place to conduct a traffic count. I submit that
traffic calculations of this site to be incorrect because the
bulk of the population lives somewhere else.. There were no
weekend traffic volumes taken at that time. This was a weekday
one; the first one that I spoke of. The study used to calculate -n _Z
weekend traffic was performed by Henderson -Bodwell in 1987, a
date too long ago, given our increased traffic pattern, to be
helpful; and the traffic survey went into detail of the number
of trips generated by people who would be living in Angel
Shores; and the projected number of trips generated by the Cove
homeowners were not included in the count of these traffic
projections. There are twenty unsold units there. There was no
C mention of traffic entering Hog Neck from entering from Ti-3
Oaklawn Avenue and Goose Creek Bridge either, since there are
two roads for entering Hog Neck and for approaching Angel Shores
it seems that both should have been in luded in the survey. I
would also like to talk about a well l cation map that was in
the DEIS. It shows ten existing wells in the vicinity of the
Angel Shores site. Now why these wells were selected is- not
clear, but evident the difference of the depth of these wells
and the depth of the groundwater in feet was part of a velocity
formula applied by the consulting engineer. The map leads to
misinformation because it just shows ten wells and there are 44 T-1-
homes in the Bay Haven area, 54 homes in the Terry Waters
development area and over 100 wells all pumping and I would like
to know why such a small sampling is satisfactory for use in
this formula? Another thing the DEIS says is that a portion
of the private road, Little Peconic Bay Lane, runs through
Section II from Cedar Point Road to the main entrance road.
Thus a third access to the site is provided there for this
connection to Cedar Point Road. I believe, also a private road T� -�
and Cedar Beach Road. Now these are private roads and I 'm sure
the owners of Angel Shores have right of access, but I don't
think the rights of people who live there should be pre-empted
by the developer to meet the needs of the development; and there
are questions of roads, maintenance, access to the beaches, road
improvements that must be solved. Were they addressed at all in
the DEIS because they should be included, I think, or some
method of solving these problems should be included. I also
looked at the revised water supply report, Angel Shores revised
PLANNING BOARD 6 FEBRUARY 4, 1991
September 26th, and this report states
Cthat ductile iron pipes, cement lines and PVC pipe were both
acceptable to supply lines. It later states that the connecting
water main between Angel Shore and the Cove will be constructed
of ductile iron pipe, thickness class fifty-two cement lined,
and I talked to the Greenport Utility Inspector who examined Tl—(p
these lines and he said that PVC piping was used. Therefore
if this is correct, your DEIS has some flaws in it. The
other thing I would like to talk about is the analysis by
botanist of the Angel Shores tract. We discovered a very rare
and ecologically sensitive plant community covering almost 1000
of site one of the proposed development site. It was called a
Maritime Red Cedar Forest that was classified by the New York
Natural Heritage Program as critically imperiled. Very few
remaining acres occur in New York State and the community is
extremely vulnerable to extinction. The DEIS mentions this.
It mentions it in a way that suggests that the botanist word is
really not good enough. The other thing it says is that part of T�-7
this maritime red cedar forest will be eliminated in the process
of setting up the lots. A more creative and probably sensitive
solution would have been for the developer to decide to leave
that area alone and make it a feature of the development: name
it for his mother or his wife and provide a feature of this
development which would be less greedy and less destructive of
the environment. The other thing I would like to say is that I
know very well that this is DEIS and we are well on the way
through the process of the SEQRA process which we know is going
to result in Angel Shores. This is very late in the game for
public comment and I don't know why this happens but it is
almost as if we were providing the devloper with the
information he needs to clean up the DIIS and go ahead with
his plan. I think probably it would much better if the
opportunity for the public comment came earlier. Thank you.
Mr. Orlowski: Thank you, any other comments?
Cecilia Louckaand I represent Terry Waters Property Owners
Association. I haven't seen the new DEIS cause I understand
it is not open to public until -it is approved by the Board is
that correct?
Board: No.
Cecilia Loucka: In it the access to Angel Shores was to be
through Terry Waters. Is that correct?
Board: No. It is not on the recent map.
Mr. Orlowski: The impact statement itself and all of the maps
are in the office available for public review.
Cecilia Loucka: The most recent map had Rambler Court
extended through Angel Shores. I will also give you a letter
from the Botanist, in case you haven't seen it.
st-fu j_
PLANNING BOARD 7 FEBRUARY 4, 1991
Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments?
CRobert E. Mitchell: Am I correct that there will be another
public hearing on this DEIS for some of us who have not had
the opportunity to read it?
Mr. Orlowski: On the final, there will be another one.
Mr. Mitchell - No, I 'm talking about the draft?
Mr. Orlowski: On the draft, you have until February 13th to
make comment. You can do that in writing and the Board will
address them.
Mr. Mitchell: Will there be another hearing on the draft?
Mr. Orlowski: No.
Mr. Mitchell: May I make a request that there be another
hearing on the DEIS?
Harvey Arnoff: I doubt another one will be permitted unless the
applicant is willing to consent.
Mr. Mitchell: Well, I would make a personal request that we
have another hearing on the DEIS and if necessary, if the
applicants have to consent then ask for their consent, I mean
this is a December DEIS and a lot of us have not had the
opportunity to read this or comment on it or bring our comments
to the attention of this Board. Maybe you don't have to have a
second hearing on it but you could adj6urn this hearing. You
could make that formal request that you adjourn this hearing.
Mr. Orlowski: You have until February 13th, to make
comment. This is just a public comment period.
Mr. Mitchell: I understand that. I think it is important to
hear what the public has to say and a response to the public
when you say it; so I make a formal request that you adjourn
this hearing until after February 13th when you can have
additional comments from the public.
Mr. Arnoff: Sir, I don' t believe the statute affords the Board
the right to do that.
Mr. Mitchell: You can adjourn any hearing at anX time. You
know that as well as I do.
Mr. Arnoff: I don't believe that that is correct.
Mr. Mitchell: Well, I would suggest that you ask the Town
Attorney to consult on that.
Mr. Arnoff: I am the Town Attorney.
PLANNING BOARD 8 FEBRUARY 4, 1991
Mr. Mitchell: Oh, you are the Town Attorney.
CMr. Arnoff: That is why I 'm here.
Mr. Mitchell: Well, then may I request that you again check the
law and see if you can adjourn this meeting?
Mr. Arnoff: We will take your request under advisement.
Mr. Mitchell: Right, well I request that the Board agree to
adjourn this hearing if the law permits the Board to do that.
Mr. Arnoff: The Board will then make a determination based on
that.
Mr. Mitchell: How does the public know? I mean I 'm asking you
to make a decision right now. If the law permits you to adjourn
this hearing until people who have not had a chance to read this
DEIS will have a chance to read and comment on it, would you
adjourn the hearing? This is a simple request.
Mr. Orlowski: Well, you have until February 13th to make
comment on this.
Mr. Mitchell: Chairman Orlowski, you said that four times. I
perfectly understand that. I do understand the English
language. What I 'm asking is, " would you adjourn this meeting
until after February 13th so that you can receive these
comments and allow the public to sit here to hear these comments
and make their comments to the comments?"
4
Ms. Scopaz: Are you aware that the Board will be deciding
whether to accept the DEIS. In other words the decision is
not made behind closed doors.
Mr. Mitchell: • I 'm just asking that you adjourn this public
hearing until people who have not had the opportunity to read
this DEIS will be able to do so.
Ms. Scopaz: But you have until- the 13th to come into the
office and read it. Then you can read all the other comments.
Mr. Mitchell: Yes, but I don't have the opportunity to appear
before a public hearing and give my comments on it and that is
why I am asking that this meeting be adjourned.
Ms. Scopaz: Your comments can still be accepted after the
Public hearing.
Mr. Mitchell: I want them during the public hearing. That is
why I am asking that you adjourn this public hearing to get
further comments on this. That you have the power to do.
L
- t V
PLANNING BOARD 9 FEBRUARY 4, 1991
C Mr. Orlowski: Yes, I know and we could have public hearings
until the cows come home but this is why we scheduled the public
hearing and this is the comment period on the Draft Impact
Statement.
Mr. Mitchell: Chairman Orlowski, you do have the authority to
adjourn the public hearing and that is what I am asking you to
do.
Mr. McDonald: My questions would be simple. This has been in
the paper, it has been listed in the paper. Every motion on
this particular subdivision has been done in public. What
overwhelming reason or criteria would you have for us to call
for this? Simply because you haven't?
Mr. Mitchell: I think a lot of people haven't sir, Mr. Edwards.
Board: Mr. McDonald.
Mr. Mitchell: Mr. McDonald, I 'm sorry.
Mr. McDonald: Stay at the microphone because they won't be able
to pick you up for the tape and we won' t get you in the minutes.
Mr. Mitchell: O.K. , sorry if people can't hear me when I talk.
The drinking water problem is critical from this and I don't
think there is any reason to rush into this. I mean the
developers can't rush into it. I mean, you couldn't sell a
house in Southold right now to a homeless man if he just won the
lottery so, I mean, what is the rushthis? I mean I think we
could adjourn this public hearing until these people have a
chance to read this. Everybody doesn't sit there and read the
legal notices, Mr. McDonald. What is the reason for not
adjourning the public hearing so that people who have not had an
opportunity to read this DEIS, to have a chance to comment on
it?
Mr. Moore: Mr. Chairman, may I make a comment or make a
suggestion?
Mr. Orlowski: Are you through with your comments sir?
Mr. Mitchell: I would yield to my colleague here.
Mr. Orlowski: I don't know if he is your colleague.
Mr. Moore: Attorney for the applicant. I do not endorse the
suggestion that we adjourn this hearing. It has occurred to me
perhaps if I can make life easier, I could obtain an extra copy
of this Impact Statement and place it, I would suggest, in the
public library that has hours that extend beyond Town Hall
library hours of business and perhaps that can give them an
opportunity to review this. If you can leave word at your
._.. .-. - .-r.►).._...:' .:it Mac..;{: ._. --..-a'Rt•�.:.:Jl�tat �
PLANNING BOARD 10 FEBRUARY 4, 1991
office, I will see that the copy gets there. If that makes any
Csense to anyone.
Mr. Mitchell: Well, that is a generous offer, but do I gather
from that, that you object that the people who have not read it,
having a chance to read it and having a chance to make comments
on it at a public hearing.
Mr. Moore: Well, as Mr. McDonald stated, this has gone through
a full process and the fact that people do not read the legal
notices that are there for them is not the applicants fault.
That is why I offered to put the document out for public comment.
Mr. Orlowski: Listen, this is a comment period and not a
debating period.
Mr. Mitchell: I leave on the table my formal request that this
hearing be adjourned so I would hope you would vote on that.
Mr. Orlowski: O.K.
Mr. Voorhis: Mr. Orlowski, written comments and comments
at a public hearing do carry equal weight. They will all be
responded to the satisfaction of the Board. It is just
something that you should certainly be aware of. The fact that
it is not brought up at the hearing, that it is in writing, it
C will be reviewed and all the comments and subsequent comments
will be reviewed and subsequent comments must be addressed.
Mr. Orlowski: This is Mr. Voorhis, ON consultant on the
Impact Statement. The only thing I cavi say, and I have been
here for quite a few years, and we sit and listen to the public
hearing and we listen to people's comments and sometimes it gets
pretty emotional and pretty heavy and I find out later on when
we go back and the rest of the comments that are sent in in
writing that are put down on paper, we have a better chance of
reviewing and getting a better look at and in making our
decisions rather than having somebody stand up here yelling and
screaming and fighting. I mean it detracts from the real point
that everyone is trying to get to or what we are trying to find
out. Any other comments?
Charlie Michele: I am the president 'of the Cedar Beach Park
Association and we have at least fifteen homes which are
contiguous or somewhat contiguous to this Angel Shores
Development and so I came out and I read the draft statement and
I circularized our homeowners. Over half of them, I would say,
don't live in Southold, so many of them are unable to attend
this hearing, and several of them called me and put me in the
Position of trying to interpret that draft statement which I
don't feel competent to do so I was wondering if you've
representatives of the Henderson Bodwell, your consulting
engineers here, and that way I wouldn't misinterpret what the
draft says and even though I try to read carefully?
ll'/y2-
•
PLANNING BOARD 11 FEBRUARY 4, 1991
Mr. Orlowski: Those are the applicant's engineers. Henderson
C and Bodwell put it together. Cramer and Voorhis are our
consultants.
Mr. Michele: For example, Mr. Mitchell's point was that a lot
of these people haven't had the opportunity to read the draft
statement and yet they are vitally concerned with several
aspects of the statement, mainly any possible impact on the
drinking water, any possible impact on the privacy of the road
because we are a private landowners association on private roads
and according to this map, if I read it right, it looks like
some of these roads within the development will enter or will
tie into our private roads. That means there are forty-nine
homes in here. Does that mean we are going to have possibly TI—$
forty-nine people traveling on our private roads down to our
private beach because they don't know where their beach leaves
off and ours begins. That is one point and I don't know how to
answer that. The second point is another neighbor called me up
the other night and her home is very close to the Angel Shores:
caddycornered to the southeast corner of Angel Shores, and she
said "You know when I bought my home, the water the water wasn' t
potable. It had salt water intrusion because they use to pump
to irrigate the farmland. They used to pump the water and suck
the water in such a rapid rate, but now it is beautiful. " I
said "well, if you read the draft statement, and, here again,
they are putting six inch wells and they ran it at 60 gallons a
C minute for, I don't know for how long maybe a day and the impact
a hundred feet away was negligible and since you are a thousand
feet away from the pump; you know, I tried to reassure her and
who am I to reassure her that her water is going to be good? I
don't want to be in that position. NAber one, I would like to
ask the engineer, alright, they pumped the water at sixty
gallons a minute for, let us say, twenty-four hours. Is -that an
analysis in a situation where you have forty-nine homes in Angel
Shores and you've got another thirty some odd in the Cove and
who knows how many have swimming pools and they are all going
full blast? Maybe this is twenty years in the future I don' t
know, and that is going continuously, not just for twenty four
hours but day after day after day so is this test a valid test
of what the situation would be if all of these things are up and
running? I would like to ask the engineer. My confusion goes
back Mr. Mitchell. These people have questions that only they
can satisfy themselves that if they come to this meeting they
will have a chance to read the DEIS because it shouldn't be a
layman trying to explain what is in the draft statement.
Mr. Orlowski: Have you reviewed the Environmental Impact
Statement?
Mr. Michele: Yes, I spent a couple of hours looking at it but
I 'm not technically competent to comment on their assurances
that there won't be any impact on the water. That is a primary
concern down there. You know it's going to be too late once
these homes are in there to do anything about it. We're not
PLANNING BOARD 12 FEBRUARY 4, 1991
going to have Union Carbide come in and take care of the salt
Cwater. They took care of the Temik so who comes in to get the
salt water out? That is the concern these people have and I
think either you should have an engineer come up and explain it
in an open meeting why they shouldn't be concerned, that there
is no chance of any impact on the water or if you're not
prepared to have engineer, to state that, now then, you should
reschedule a meeting in two weeks where you can have an engineer
here explaining technically why there is no threat to our water
supply down there.
Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments?
Cecilia Loucka: Terry Waters Property Owners Association -
Who is now in charge of the water that is being pumped? T-1-10
Greenport water is no longer in charge.
Mr. Orlowski: I have no idea.
Cecilia Loucka: You don' t? In the newspaper about a week or
two ago there was an article that stated that because there is
thirty thousand dollars in arrears in payments to the Greenport
Water Authority that the Greenport Water Authority is no longer
in charge or has jurisdiction?
Mr. Arnoff: Maybe I can help you a little. This is a private
C matter. By a private matter, there is a private contract
entered into between the developers of the Cove and the
Greenport Water Authority. We, the Town of Southold, don't
control either of them at this point. It is a private
contractual agreement. It is my underltanding that that private
contractual agreement has been breached. We have not been
brought into that nor have we been requested to enter into the
dispute which may or may not exist. To my knowledge, basically,
what is going on down there comes from homeowners I know
personally as long as what I have had and what we have all read
in the paper and from a practical point of view it is my
understanding I think there has been some agreement that H2M
is going to go in and manage the water and the water will
continue to flow under some other agreement. I 'm sorry, it's
Gremler, not H2M. I forget the name of this company in
Mattituck.
Cecilia Loucka: Isn't the original agreement that Greenport
would manage it?
Mr. Arnoff: I believe so with the Cove. Whether or not there
has been a breach?
Cecilia Loucka: How can the Town say they have nothing to do
with it?
CMr. Arnoff: We're not privy to that contract.
PLANNING BOARD 13 FEBRUARY 4, 1991
y
C Cecilia Loucka: It's horrible to dig up our road and put in
pipes along the public highway.
Mr. Arnoff: Water is still being provided.
Cecilia Loucka: If we wanted to tie into that do you know
what it would cost us? Twenty-five hundred dollars.
Mr. Arnoff: I am pretty much aware of that.
Cecilia Loucka: It' s our road and then you don' t know
anything about it. I think it is relevant. You don't know who
is managing it and they are pulling all the water out of there.
Mr. Orlowski: It is very relevant to the final approval. I
can assure you of that. There will be no approvals made unless
they have water.
Cecilia Loucka: Yes, could you also tell me are they getting
water on the second floor at the Cove? They weren't. No
answer? O.K. , and then we can' t postpone it for another hearing
and you don' t have the answers?
Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments?
Charles Stenalsik: I am on Cedar Beach Point and my property
Cis south southeast of this location. If we had one of our
normal drought periods and they are pumping for this piece of
property and getting plenty of fine water and I am getting sea
water, what recourse do I have? Can I sue them or can I come Tl—tz
back here to the Board and ask for so4 action or do I get a
free hook-up to my fresh water that they are pumping?
Helga Michele: Cedar Beach Park - I am as selfish as the next
person. Now, when I look at this map and I have a copy of it
here, I want to know whether there are any of there roads, Angel
Shore roads which are leading into private roads of Cedar Beach
Park? It is hard to tell whether they would be or not. Anybody
know anything about map reading? I 'm confused. I can read
where there is a cul-de-sac but I don't know what this broken
line means. I know there is suppose to be three entrances
Ms. Scopaz: Excuse me, what page is that?
Ms. Michele: Page 138. There are no tie in's?
Mr. Voorhis: These are the only two ways to get into the
subdivision?
Ms. Michele: There is no road that goes into Cedar Beach Park.
This is Bayview, this is Sunset. This is the private road and
there is no connection with the private road?
Ms. Scopaz: They are showing a connection.
PLANNING BOARD 14 FEBRUARY 4, 1991
CMs. Michele: They are showing a connection.
Mr. Voorhis: You should come down to the Planning Board
office and look at the map.
Ms. Michele: Can I send you a letter?
Mr. Voorhis: Yes.
Mr. Orlowski: O.K. , any other comments? I would just like to
say that this is a comment period and the reason for having this
public hearing is so you can make your comments and your
questions. Mr. Voorhis is here as our reviewer and he will be
addressing all these comments and questions and you still have
until February the 13th to make these comments and make them
in writing and they will be addressed. This is a comment period
and not a question and answer period. I would like to sit here
and talk to you all night long answering questions but Mr.
Voohris will have to review all of these comments and you have
until February 13th to still make these comments.
Sherry Johnson: Representing the North Fork Environmental
Council. I would like add the request that you keep this
hearing open. Sorry to do it but you just, the notice of this
hearing was published on January 31st in the Watchman and
according to SEQRA you are supposed to give fourteen days notice
in advance to the hearing and I really think that the time was
short to have access to the document and to review it. I know
that I had difficulty and I 'm glad that Mr. Moore did agree to
come up with another copy because when I called him last week he
couldn't find one and also a copy of S1QRA should be at the
local public library. First I would like to thank the Planning
Staff for their assistance when I visited the office to review
the document because they are always pleasant and helpful.
However, as this is my first experience regarding the review of
the DEIS in Southold, I was disappointed to learn that it is
the policy of the Board not to allows DEIS' s to be taken from
the office. This policy makes it difficult to prepare a
statement, it is much easier to. refer to the document as you
work.
I would ask that you consider requesting future applicants
to provide you with enough copies so that several are available
to be loaned out. In Brookhaven, copies of DEIS's are
provided to anyone who requests one, in Riverhead a twenty-five
dollar deposit is required. The twenty-five dollars is refunded
when the document is returned. As your present policy almost
totally eliminates the working public's ability to review a
DEIS, I would also ask that you consider placing copies in the
local libraries. For your information, I have copied the
section of SEQRA that pertains to the distribution of DEIS's
so that you might review it. I hope that you will consider
changing your policy.
_ .. . __ -- - - - -• - - �. ..,._. .. =r...�-:..:...:�;:�...: ..._....,.vim....���.:.��s:c
PLANNING BOARD 15 FEBRUARY 4 , 1991
As for the "Angel Shores" DEIS, I have spent several
Chours in the Planning Department Office reviewing this
document. I was only able to finish reading it today and in
order to prepare comments that at least make sense I will take
advantage of the comment period that extends past tonight. I
will submit my full review later this week.
Given the historical background of this project I suppose
the information that wasn't in this DEIS could have been
received at some other time. However, going by just what is
contained in this draft it is deficient in several areas
including: water consumption, solid waste disposal and sewerage
disposal, particularly on the lots where there is as the site
exists now, insufficient room above the water table, to place a
coni,entional septic system. Thank you.
Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments?
Ms. Dorothy Phillips: I ' ll be very brief. I would like to
comment on the DEIS from the point of view of an English
teacher. It is not a very good document. It lacks clarity; for
example, they use these words "using a formula from the Highway
capacity manual of the Transportation Research Board, the
consulting engineer' s calculated the traffic impact on Main TI-13
Bayview. I would like to know, there is no information given
about the Transportation Research Board, what is it? Why is its
formula applicable to Main Bayview and is it a governmental
agency? This document continues to talk on about the fact that
the water system is being managed by Greenport. Well, really
you could have changed that. It wouldn' t have taken a very
short time to get rid of this outdatedffact. I could go on but
I won't.
Mr. Orlowski: On the question of water, I just want to assure
you before this subdivision is ever approved that that will have
to be answered and the applicant and their engineers are going
to have to answer that question. They have to produce potable
water for the number of units in this subdivision and they are
going to have to prove it. -
Mr. Stenalsik: To expend on your statement. It is potable
water for them and also for ourselves. We're just as important,
in fact we're more important then they are. We want our water
taken care of if possible.
Mr. John Mae: I am a property owner at Cedar Be4ch and I have a
question. A comment or a question. The comment is that the
common sense or the practicality indicates that the real problem
of traffic is in the summertime and you have got the cove now
adding forty nine homes who are all going to access onto Main
Bayview road I think could present a problem. It seems to me,
practically speaking, that if you are going to base traffic
concerns on a survey, it ought to be done in summer time because
there is much more traffic in the summer time. I don'tknow,
ZC-�T
PLANNING BOARD 16 FEBRUARY 4, 1991
i
what the percentage is but an awful lot of the residents in that
Carea are only there in the summer time. If the only survey was
done sometime other than summer I think that is invalid. I
don't know whether a summer time survey would show it was O.K.
or not but could I ask the question of, is it true that the
traffic impact survey that was referred to in April is the main
one that is being used or was there a traffic impact study done
anytime this summer? Does anybody know?
Mr. Voohris: I believe it is the April survey but you may
wish to have a clarification from the engineer who prepared it.
Mr. Mae: If it is, I would think it common sense that a traffic
survey done on Friday, April 15th has almost no relationship
to the traffic pattern that would take place in July and August
and September.
Mr. Arnoff: I would agree with you.
Mr. Mae: I would think that if you are really trying to assess
the traffic, you ought to assess it at a time when it would be
severe. If it comes out that it is fine O.K. . The other
comment I would like to make is that a number of us who have
lived at Cedar Beach for a number of years have experienced
brackish water. It does occur and has occurred in some years to
all of us. I think a number of people can tell you that, and we
C are authorities on that because we drink the water. I share the
feeling of a number of people here that as laymen, lay people we
are not able to interpret that report and so we are concerned.
My question is who can interpret whate er studies are done
effectively to satisfy us or to satisf you. We don't get any
satisfaction from the environmental study because we are not
engineers. Now, I guess we rely on you as our representatives
to be satisfied. Is there some engineer not representing the
applicant but representing the Board who can stand up to you or
will or will not have water and that I think is the concern of
some of us. If there could be an engineer representing the
Board who would say yes, I read this report or I have made this
report and this is what my basis is and have us question that
engineer, tell us of our experience and have him comment that
would be great. Otherwise, we sort of talk to each other.
Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Voorhis is here tonight and they are our
environmental engineers and our consultants on this. They do
the review. As a matter of fact when it comes time for the
final environmental impact statement they will do it.
Mr. Mae: Could he make some comment to us and the public so we
know what to base our further oral remarks or written remarks
on? Could he tell us why we should not be concerned about
Potable water.
Mr. Voohris: We are in the process of reviewing the document
at this time and we will supply out input to the Board relative
-• . - - .. ., - _ ,::. .... -f..:r as�+i.�..a►6�.t••.-,.a+.+- '. ..•r`'-apiiEi
PLANNING BOARD 17 FEBRUARY 4, 1991
to all our aspects to the DEIS. I think it is also important
Cto note that there are other agencies which are responsible for
water supply issues and they do have professional engineers on
staff and the water supply report which is included in the EIS
must satisfy those agencies. They will be approached and we
will be sure put them in as well. My problem is and I think
what a number of our problems is we are laymen and whoever is
doing this with technical knowledge can say this is our report.
We have reviewed this 'and here are our concerns or here are our
non concerns and it gives us something to comment on, otherwise
we have nothing to comment on. What you are saying you haven' t
completed your study yet and you are going to complete your
study and give it to the Board after we have had our time to
comment on it.
Mr. Voorhis: I think if I could just direct it to your
comment, I think what you are looking for is some independent
party to assure you and the residents of your area that the
water supply for this project is satisfactory. What I am saying
and what I said before is that the Health Department reviews
that and must issue approval for the water supply before permits
to construct sanitary systems and buildings are approved.
Mr. Mae: The Health Department issued a report as to whether
these forty-nine homes can get good water or does the Health
Department issue a report which includes the forty nine homes
Cplus all the other homes that are south of the property.
Mr. Voorhis: Presumably, the other homes in the area have
already had that type of review.
d
Mr. Mae: Yes.
Mr. Voorhis: And have satisfied the requirements of the
department.
Mr. Mae: That's like the people in Los Angeles having enough
water and when the people of Northern California divert the
river the people of Los Angeles (inaudible) .
Mr. Voorhis: Maybe I misunderstood your question. The
department will certainly consider the additional impact of this
project in relation to the water supply situation in the area at
this time. I mean it is an accumulative thing and if there is a
certain withdrawal from the aquifer they will certainly consider
what is presently available and what is proposed as far as
consumption for this project. That has got to bb part of the
consideration and before they will issue any permits they have
to be satisfied with that. Let me just explain one other
thing. This Board only has the approval power over the
subdivision, naturally they are the lead agency and they have
required a draft environmental impact statement. That EIS is
the document of all of the involved agencies as well. This is
the lead agency tonight and they look at road subdivision
?l-71!14
'-_- . - � - - aL ..: .)- -0CY:i'ar,J«4tTrwWM•"�� '+.•fJSi.r;i�w'riwwz:+i+a�xi�
PLANNING BOARD 18 FEBRUARY 4, 1991
layouts, lot layouts and everything else and naturally they are
Con the front lines as far as gaining input from the public and
they are the lead agency so all of this gets factored into their
review of the project. However, each of the involved agencies
is also responsible to make a findings statement after the
completion of the process. Each of the other involved agencies
is responsible or certainly obligated to provide input to the
lead agency to extract through this subdivision review. You are
not going to get all of the answers to all of your questions
tonight. As I indicated, we are in the process of reviewing it
and there are other agencies which are involved in other permit
approvals other then the subdivision which also must make use of
this document and the comment period which this process
provides.
Mr. Mae: Is there a time provided after all the agencies submit
all of their findings and have all the answers to give so, is
there a time for the residents to have this kind of a comment
and answer period?
Mr. Voorhis: I believe you have a final subdivision hearing?
Do you have a hearing at the time of final?
Mr. Orlowski: Yes.
Mr. Voorhis: Let me just outline the process briefly.
Tonight is a comment period on the DEIS. After the close of
C the comment period there is a ten day period for the written
comments to be provided to the Board and they will either direct
our firm or review the comments themselves to determine the
substance of issues and require that tiey be addressed. Those
issues have to be addressed to the sat sfaction of the Board and
they are responsible for adopting what is known as a final
environmental impact statement which essentially addresses all
of the comments brought up. Once that is completed, the final
EIS is subject to a minimum ten day review period. A hearing
is optional because it is an option. Once that is completed,
the Board is free to act after preparing a findings statement
they are free to act on the subdivision. In this town, it is
part of a final subdivision hearing process, again, at which
time if there are issues that were not addressed in the document
or issues which the Board is not aware of through the review
process there are options to look at those issues. It is hoped
that all of the issues are covered at this time and that is why
we are here tonight and are raising the questions.
Mr. Mae: Then I can make my comments and I would ask, would you
consider two factors in the review at this stage'of the draft
environmental impact statement and that is that the real concern
or topic is that in the summer time they ought to be satisfied
that you ought to know what the traffic situation is by some
sampling or whatever in the summer and secondly that you take
into effect that a number of us can tell you actually that there
is brackish water at times on the properties to the south of
Angel Shores and that we are concerned and want to make sure
_ _ ._ .. ._. ..... ...._o ..r .._. -.c•'..rs- ,•v'. ra�.•�- "•c.:i�io:r:iiiw
PLANNING BOARD 20 FEBRUARY 4, 1991
Dorothy Phillips: I would like to speak to the issue of summer
Ctraffic and this is a quote from Henderson and Bodwell the
consulting engineers for the DEIS. The highway capacity
manual by the Transportation Research Board that elusive,
amorphic agency that we don' t know anything about shows that
summer traffic in areas with prevailing recreational traffic may
be as much as one hundred and twenty eight percent higher than
the average annual daily traffic and what Henderson and
Bodwell did was calculate the annual average daily traffic and
then use a formula to come up with the figure of the final
figure which will be the percentage of increase in traffic along
Main Bayview. They did not do a summer survey, they used a
formula and I read this DEIS.
Mr. Orlowski: O.K. , any other comments?
Ernest Papas: I am a resident of Cedar Beach Park. I just want
to concur with everything that has been said by everyone else in
the community that is concerned. The fact that we are in the
southerly drift of all this cesspool and negative water impact.
I just want to know can we come back into you, Mr. Orlowski,
and the rest of the Board later if we have a problem if you let
this thing go through and tell you that we are not able to drink
the water or live there anymore because of the situation that
has resulted?
Mr. Orlowski: As Mr. Voorhis said, the Planning Board is
the lead agency. We approve the layout in the subdivision of
the land. Other agencies are involved and when it comes to this
sewer and water it is the Suffolk County Department of Health.
They have not been known to be real easy on any developer. They
have to provide water and they have tolprovide sewer and they
have to make sure that it is not going to create a problem to
the surrounding area and I have been here ten years and in all
cases they take into consideration the area that they are in and
the density around them to make sure there shouldn't be a
problem there.- In regards to coming back to us to say we were
right or wrong, I think the Health Department would be the place
to go.
Joseph Spitalary: In regards to the Health Department as far
as guarantees or whatever, I would just like to pass along
something I have heard recently in regards to the Health
Department and water particularly in this area. As of
January 1st past, anyone installing a well will have to file a
covenant with the County more or less holding the Board of
Health holding them harmless. If the well, let's say two or
three years later this well comes up dry, you cah't turn to
them. They become so aware of the situation that they are
taking extra steps to protect themselves.
Sophia Adler: I would just like to ask if whether the Health
Department is concerned or is there any awareness now of salt
Cintrusion for instance myself in the Cedar Beach Park area from
creeks and that occurs only periodically when there isn't any-
. -�
PLANNING BOARD 19 FEBRUARY 4, 1991
that your impact studies take into consideration the drawing of
Cthe homes on the water; the effect not on those forty-nine homes
but on the properties to the south of them. I think but we are •n_�S
not sure from what Mr. Voorhis has said that those concerns
have fully have been addressed by the DEIS. Thank you.
John Michele: Now I understand what you want.
Mr. Orlowski: Before you start, I just want to say that your
final comments were good ones and the Board gets the jest of
most of the comments. It is traffic and water and they will be
addressed and reviewed and on into the final impact statement
which we have that option to hold another hearing and if the
Board wants to we will, but we get the gest of the comments
and these are the comments that we are looking for.
John Michele: In your last statement on the section that has to
be with water you state initially that the water for the forty
nine homes and there are three well points located on the north
side of the property so we are not concerned with them not
having good water. You also state in the water section that
hey, when there is a farm here and they fertilized it all the
nitrogen ran into the ground and that is not happening anymore.
There is no more Temik but then you go on to say we will urge
the new home owners to only put a small portion of their lot in
lawns. Now, that is just utterly ridiculous that sixty acres
Section II or fifty acres is flat, treeless, shrubless and
there is nothing there but goldenrod and rag weed and all 71
kinds of weeds. Those homeowners don't have any choice but to
put sod in and fertilize like crazy so why do you even put that
in? Number one, it is impracticable. ' You can't control what
someone is going to do with their property after you sell it to
them, but the homeowners says hey why are they sending this,
shouldn't we be concerned about all that fertilizer going onto
all of that sod in addition to all of the cesspools cause the
water does run off the sod. You know, those forty nine people,
they are getting their water on the northside and the people
south of the development their groundwater is coming right
underneath all of this sod and -cesspool so I would suggest you
take that bit out. f
Mr. Voorhis: Just one additional piece of clarification. Our
firm is retained by the Board to assist in reviewing the draft
environmental impact statement. We do not prepare the document,
my firm did not prepare the document. An engineering firm by
the name of Henderson and Bodwell which is also the firm that
designed the subdivision, is retained by the applicant to
prepare the document. The purpose of this Board is to determine
obviously that it is objective and that it is complete and that
is what my role; is to assist the Board in making those
determinations. Again, I think we understand your comment but we
don't want to get into a question and answer session, but I
C think that clarification is important.
2"T2.
... -, ... ... _ .. .- .:.-e ar:.•...s...-+w._...w.a..fi:+.:.�..da'tt:t.• - :--dab a.r�
PLANNING BOARD 22 FEBRUARY 4, 1991
Board: No questions.
CMr. Orlowski: Being no further comments, what is the Board's
pleasure?
Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion that
we hold this hearing open and have another public hearing on
this on February 12, 1991 at 7: 30 p.m. .
Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the
motion? All those in favor?
Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham, Mr. Ward.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered.
Hearings Held Over From Previous Meetings:
Mr. Orlowski: The North Forty - This major subdivision is
for thirteen lots on 30. 3565 acres on the south side of Oregon
Road; 621 feet west of Depot Lane in Cutchogue.
SCTM #1000-95-4-14.1.
Mr. Pete Danowski: I know I have stood before you before and
have asked you to approve a large lot concept on a cluster based
on Number 281 of the Town Law that the large lot satisfies the
cluster definition and I am well aware that both Mark and Dick
were at the last meeting that I attended with us and the Town
Board members where we discussed the p&ssible code revisions.
However, I think there was a consensus at that meeting and it
certainly the thing I took away from the meeting, that everyone
felt that this Board was imperative that they saw fit, that they
could, without any referral to the Town Board grant the large
lot subdivision that still places it into your discretion to
approve it or not approve it. I would ask you now to approve
the concept. My major concern with this subdivision and others
that I have submitted to this Board, is I have gotten Health
Department approval on many of ,the maps and as you know they
expire in six months and to bring them back to the Health
Department is not an automatic granting because of the variation
in policy with the Health Department from map to map and time to
time; approvals are sometimes granted and sometimes they are not
extended. Obviously, there is some unjustice to my client
going back before the Health Department again. I would like you
to close the meeting and approve the large lot concept and I am
willing, as I have mentioned to you before, to file covenants
with the County Clerk to not put any structures on the majority
of that large lot and I have showed you the limited building
envelope for that lot and I think you are also well aware that
Walter Gatz, one of my friends and owner of this, or George
McDowell, is a landscaper and may in fact put nurse
ry that large lot. Between his kids and the McDowell kids
tIck on
PLANNING BOARD 21 FEBRUARY 4, 1991
rain so that it can' t be measured. For years we've had to buy
our water. Now, we are very concerned and we hope the Health
Department will take that into consideration and be aware of it.
Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments?
John Mae: Could I ask a question? I would like to ask Mr.
Papas to comment because of where he lives. We have another
problem and I am not sure it was addressed to the DEIS and
that is at times there is a run-off where the mud from that farm
goes across the road into our creeks particularly on Mr. Papas'
property area. Could I as you to comment on it because I am not
sure it' s another factor and I think whatever is done if and I'm
not sure why it happens but it happens when dirt is dug out and
rain water expands it. It ought to be considered whatever is
done there. I don't know why they are putting twenty nine homes
on this.
Ernest Papas: I just want to respond to that question. Going
back to when the farm was being farmed, it was a constant
problem of the top soil filtering across the road into the
creek; the creek becoming dead and the shrimp turning belly up
pink. No fish were alive in the creek at that time when he was
using chemicals. We even had samples taken of the runoff and
then we were requested to get the samples and give them to the
Department of Health and suddenly the Department of Health said,
we were mistaken we really aren' t going to get into the middle
of this, yes we've got a problem and you are going to have to
address it another way. The town fathers shook their heads in
this, nobody wanted to know anything about it. Water runs off
that farm because we are lower. The t6pography over there is
much higher. They are going to wash out that road and it is a
private road and we've had a problem to begin with and I think
it is just going to go on and on. But again, on this DEIS I
really have to agree with the others that you either vote for a
adjournment or• more time for us to respond to this because a lot
of us have been away and haven't had a chance to review it.
Thank you.
Mr. Orlowski: As I said, it is available in the office and in
regards to road runoff and and -drainage in creating this
subdivision the Board keeps a very watchful eye on this and I
don't know if we can eliminate what problems are happening down
there, but we don't want to see any runoff going off of this
property onto someone else's or into the creeks.
John Mae: Does this DEIS address this runoff problem?
Mr. McDonald: They will have to now that they made the comment.
John Mae: Thank you.
f" Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Hearing none, any
questions from the Board?
�LANNING BOARD MEMBERS ='*
SCOTT L. HARRIS
Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman ✓�. 'W'� ",r• , Supervisor
George Ritchie Latham, Jr.
Richard G. Ward Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards P.O. Box 1179 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE Southold. New York 11971
Telephone (516) 765-1938 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765-1823
SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD
SPECIAL MEETING - ANGEL SHORES PUBLIC HEARING
MINUTES
FEBRUARY 12, 1991
Present were: Bennett Orlowski Jr. , Chairman
G. Richie Latham
Richard Ward
Mark McDonald
Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner
Melissa Spiro, Planner
CJane Rousseau, Secretary
Mr. Orlowski: Good evening, I would liJ-.e to call this meeting
to order. This meeting is for the public hearing on the DEIS
for Angel Shores. I will open the hearing again. This has
remained open from our last meeting. I thought I would just
like to let you know before we get started that we will be
conducting another public meeting and we will advertise for
March 11th, we will advertise fourteen days prior to the
meeting so we are in conformance with the SEQRA regulations. I
would also like to state at this time that if you have any
comments that you try to give us new ones and not repeat the
same ones as last time if possible. You will have until March
the 21st to make all of your comments which is even after the
March 11th meeting. This will give you more time to review
the document which is in three libraries, Southold, Mattituck
and Cutchogue and here at Town Hall. I will ask if there are
any comments?
Mr. Ernest H. Pappas: 75 Cedar Point Drive East, Southold, NY.
My comments concerning the DEIS for Angel Shores are as
follows:
Referring to the Introduction, page V, I find it
questionable that the Town has agreed upon one acre zoning in an
area that has been deemed in print and verbal language to be a
very fragile environmental space even as the wording in the
third paragraph states that the "project lies within the Peconic
PLANNING BOARD 2 FEBRUARY 12 , 1991
Bay and Environs Critical Environmental Area (CEA) as - /
designated by the Suffolk County Legislature. "
I direct my comments to the Planning Board and ask you all,
as Lead Agency and the people whom we, as taxpayers and
laypeople in these matters look to for guidance and protection
of our already fragile water system, to be steadfast in your
difficult task and to not rubber stamp, be cajoled, intimidated
or rushed by any pressures and to look upon this project as
though each one of you lived in the immediate area, and that
this project might impact upon you as it certainly will
adversely affect us if this project goes through and is
developed.
The Introduction of the DEIS further states that
preserving this area will constitute a benefit to public health.
I would like to think this suggests a call for more than a
one acre density, to in fact insure the public health referred
to in the Introduction.
Item #3 , page 6, states that any development of this land
might adversely affect the drinking water supply and constitute
a threat to public safety.
I respectfully submit, that the very inclusion of this
Cstatement is clear evidence of the concerns we all have been
voicing here and ask you, the Planning Board, to please address
these items fully.
IF
Item #5 on this samea e also
P 9 goes into the hydrological
sensitivity and aquifer, which could be adversely affected by
change, and change is exactly what the developer has in mind.
What is important here is that this area has been
critically affected in the past by self-serving commercial
interests, who without doing their homework and carefully
checking the type of aquifer that exists here in this fragile
area, caused Temik to pollute our ground water and required us
to have filters located at great distances from the plowed
land. As food for thought, I might hasten to add, potential and
future medical problems and complications are still an unknown
concern, as the saying goes; all the reports are not in as yet!
In a letter dated 3/1/89, and contained in the DES, there
appears the following statement and I quote; " . ., .in the opinion
of the Town Attorney, new zoning amendments establish a two acre
zoning on the entire parcel. . .11, unquote. I would like to
state that I couldn't agree more.
On page 1-30, the DEIS avers that the developer wants to
maximize the towns natural assets including its local and
agricultural base. Is that accomplished by covering the land
3 Vo
PLANNING BOARD 3 FEBRUARY 12, 1991
with roads and homes and despoiling the land and water supply
and its quality? How does he propose to do this?
The writer of the DEIS states that land use patterns are
sensitive to the limited indigenous water supply and will not
degrade subsurface water quality. Those are the words in the TZ-2
DEIS, not mine. I am not sure what that means except he
admits to the limited water but still wants to over develop and
would he post a bond to insure our pure water and its limited
supply if he is so sure?
Further, on page 1-30, there is written the intent to
preserve and enhance the towns natural environment including
waterways, wetlands, tidal marshes, etc. I view that with great
reservation being in the construction industry for forty years.
How this can even be stated, when we have seen what
non-construction runoff has done to our creeks in the adjacent
areas just from agriculture.
There are continuous references to water quality and
surface water quality; all purporting to not harm anyone. Who
will step forward and guarantee this, knowing what has been
documented. The DEIS contains a letter dated 11/30/83, which
states there is only limited water available to shallow wells;
most of my neighbors and I have shallow wells!
CThe DEIS claims that the Agricultural-Conservation status
of this area would be maintained. Actually, the opposite would
occur. This projected development would not contribute towards
retaining the agricultural and rural efvironment. On the
contrary, it would create another tract development, rushing us TZ-3
all headlong into overpopulation and the inability of this area
to support the kind of growth that this developer envisions.
I shall now address my comments to the roadways. The
DEIS talks about access roads. On 2/27/89, there was a
written request from Valerie Scopaz for clear proof showing
what roads would be used and the effects on the neighboring
associations private roads. I -am requesting a much more
definitive explanation, so that-.-it would be clear to the general
public what is actually propose. In addition, I feel that the
traffic survey was inconclusive, insufficient, flawed, and �-
prejudiced. A one day test is a non-test. At least, let it be
conducted during the summer months, or more than one day, plus a
holiday weekend to at least approach some realistic numbers.
I also noticed that the "Drainage Shed Map"k
Figure #6, clearly shows that the general flow is East and South
predominantly towards the Cedar Beach Park Association in
addition to the majority of the surface runoff which in the past
has inundated Cedar Beach Road, contaminated the creek causing TZ-5-
ecological damage, and put tons of silt into the creek bottom
seriously affecting the biological balance and the food chain in
our creeks and estuaries.
PLANNING BOARD 4 FEBRUARY 12, 1991
C To sum up my comments, I recognize that the Planning Board
is not the CIA, but I would hope that the board would accept
the responsibility of being the standard bearer in the effort to
preserve our water supply and its quality, that there are
mitigating measures such as runoff into our creeks, and to
protect our way of life.
I also hope that all agencies and the people whose duty is
to look after the greater common good, do not abrogate their
responsibility to the present or to the future.
Thank you for the opportunity to present my comments and I
would ask you in closing to put yourselves in our position.
Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments?
Cecilia Loucka: I represent Terry Waters Property Owners
Association. It is well known that everyone living in the area
around Angel Shores has a legitimate concern about the drinking
water. As stated on page 2-46 of the current DEIS the five
test wells that were placed on Section I of Angle Shores showed
very poor results, thereby necessitating the Suffolk County
Health Department to require a central water supply. Further,
in reference to page 2-64 it states that according to the Long
Island 208 study, saltwater intrusion has been found where
intensive pumping has occurred in concentrated areas.
CI have questions concerning the drinking water:
When the testing was done on the preset water system,
downdraw tests were conducted which showed minimal downdraw, -6
but is there a way to test if there was intrusion of salt water
that displaced the fresh water that was pumped out during the
test?
Who is going to enforce the NYS DEC rule, page 2-57, that
there will be no irrigating with the water from the Angel Shores
well? We have already observed irrigation in operation at the
Cove during the summer of 1990 Who investigates the source of TZ—7
this water? I understand that Mr. Laoudis has a right to
supply water for the proposed development Angel Shores.
However, I do not see his right to supply water to the Cove
development. This additional demand for thirty-three units may
very well cause adjacent homeowners problems with their existing "TZ-6
wells. Over 40% of the water from this system will be pumped
out of the area almost a mile away to the Cove.
Who is `
going to manage the well system now that the Greenport
Utility Department has terminated its contract to supply
maintenance and operational support for the water plant, as per _9
recent newspaper articles?
01
As per special condition #10 of the NYS DEC well permit, page
2-53, "provisions shall be made to provide an adequate supply of
PLANNING BOARD 5 FEBRUARY 12, 1991
C water to those residents whose private well water systems are
diminished or rendered nonproductive by the use of the wells
developed by the permittee" . That is an exact quote. What 7Z!d
provisions have been made to comply with this provision? Is it
possible to require a surety bond to cover any future problems?
Will the permit be cancelled or restricted if problems develop?
It is of utmost importance that these questions be answered
satisfactorily before final approval is given to this project.
You are the lead agency. The DEC can pull that permit.
Robert E. Mitchell: Chairman Orlowski, I want to thank you
and the gentlemen and the ladies up there for giving us this
opportunity to have another public hearing on this. We did
finally come and read the Draft Environmental Impact Statement
and so not to waste this Board' s time, I wart to thank you very
much for coming again to do this. You would all rather be home
I am sure. It is an interesting document and the one thing I
found that was most interesting was is why we would have it at
all? One of the things they said was that Southold could use a
decreased tax base and I think that is wonderful. The tax on
that property is farmland but once this DEIS Impact Statement
is accepted, you can all tax it as forty-nine building lots.
There are many of us here that will see that is done. Well,
anyway, I want to thank you all for hearing us again tonight.
C Mr. Francea will give our comments so we don' t all do the
same thing four times over.
Mr. Frank Francea: I would like to apologize for the fact
that we are going to be redundant in some of these things
because some people have made independent statements and of
course, if you read the sameDEIS, and of course you come up
with the same questions. I ' ll read it as we put it together for
those of us of the Cedar Beach Park Association have met several
times during the week.
The Cedar Beach Park Association (CBPA) represents 60
homeowners, and therefore is concerned about the impact of the
Angel Shores development on our- properties and the area's
environment. We have read the DEIS and find it deficient in
several areas. We need to be assured that these areas are
addressed by the Planning Board before it accepts the DEIS.
These areas, including water supply, roads and traffic, and
layout of the subdivision are defined in the following
statements:
WATER SUPPLY:
1. A-1 letter from Suffolk County Board of Health,
dated 11/30/83. This letter specifies that water
for Angel Shores must be provided from a central TZ —��
water supply and not from individual home wells.
PLANNING BOARD 6 FEBRUARY 12, 1991
C The DEIS should specifically acknowledge this
statement and stipulate clearly that individual
wells would be prohibited. In a clear statement.
2. The DEIS states that water from the central supply
could not be used for "unnecessary purposes. . .
including lawn watering" . This statement exists
in the DEIS. It should be clearly stated that TZ-/Z.
homeowners would be prohibited from any such
unnecessary use of water and there should be a
covenant and restriction to cover that point
probably even in the deed.
3. We believe that the DEIS should specifically
acknowledge that the developer understands these
restrictions and that prospective property buyers TZ--13
will be prohibited from the unnecessary use of
water and from drilling individual wells, and this
fact should be disclosed to the buyers.
4. It should also be acknowledged that water from this
central supply can only be used by the forty-nine
owners in Angel Shores and the thirty-three units in TZ-/y
The Cove.
5. The DEIS should contain assurances that the Board
of Health has certified adequate water supply for
both projects: Angel Shores and The Cove which of 71-Ir
course add up to a total of eight-two units. Not the
forty-nine.
If
6. The DEIS states that the Greenport Water District
has assumed operation of the central water supply.
I understand now from tonights comment that that
might not be true anymore. The DEIS should specify
who owns the supply, whether the Greenport Water -��
District will continue with the operating agreement
and is it tied to a similar agreement with The Cove,
and what would happen- if the agreement with the
Greenport Water District is cancelled for any reason
on both sides?
7. We request that the DEIS guarantee that if the water
supply or water quality of Cedar Beach Park Association
residents is impacted as a result of the Angel Shores
project, that the Greenport Water District would be TZ-/7
obligated to extend their services of potable water
to impacted residents. That would be Cedar Beach
Park Association.
8. We further request that Greenport Water District shall
L not be allowed to just spot zone areas of service which
can impact adjoining areas. I would like to digress a
moment from reading my statement. A while back, about �_y8
PLANNING BOARD 7 FEBRUARY 12, 1991
a year and one-half ago, some developers came along and
C wanted to do some developing at the foot of Jacobs Lane
and he asked the Greenport Water District to go in there
and put in a central supply. The whole of Hogs Neck is
part of the Greenport's Water District and I don' t
believe that the water district should be allowed to
spot zone the individual for central supply. If you
are going to do an area you should have to do the whole
area because the whole area is fed from the same
aquifer.
9. Reference 321 in the DEIS refers to a design report
of a test of forty-eight hours of continues drawdown
at the rate of sixty gallons a minute produced
negligible impact up to one-aundred feet away.
Although this test is the basis for concluding TZ_/9
that there is an adequate water supply, and the
DEIS states that it includes this copy of the
report, we found no such copy. Couldn' t find it
in the report. It should be included.
10. Item 2-55: The New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation permit specified special
conditions. We request that the Planning Board certify
that all of these conditions have been met for this
particular project. TZ ZO
CThat covers the water. Now the Roads and Access:
1. I refer you to map 90 which i4 the original
subdivision map of Cedar Beach Park Association.
There should be in the DEIS an absolute guarantee
that neither Sections I nor II of the Angel Shores
plan has any rights to use Cedar Point Rd. West or
Cedar Beach Roads. These are roads privately
maintained by the Cedar Beach Point Association.
The page 1-3 reference to "Title Insurance Guarantee"
should specifically apply to Little Peconic Bay Road,
t only. Which is also on map 90.
2. This restriction of course, also applies to Z�
Cedar Beach Park Association residents' private
beaches at the foot of Inlet Way and at the foot of
Cedar Point Drive East should not go down to the
private beaches.
3. The DEIS bases the conditions relative to traffic on
Main Bayview Road on a single survey done on April 15,
1987 and a formula extrapolating summer and weekend
traffic as a percentage of this number. We find this
method faulty and question the conclusion and '.ZZ
L methodology. The calculation of determining traffic
congestion should include an actual survey taken on a
representative summer day. There was and still is
PLANNING BOARD 8 FEBRUARY 12, 1991
C ample time to take such a survey and include it in
a DEIS submitted for approval to the Planning Board.
As for the layout of the subdivision, the Board must assure
that the subdivision remain inviolate after approval; that is
there can be no future application to use any of the buffer
zones presently shown. Thank you for your time.
Charlie Michele: I live in Cedar Beach Park. At the risk of
a slight overlap because I want to talk about the water too but
perhaps I can add a new dimension to it.
The Angel Shores DEIS includes several ambiguous points
which may lead to future controversy and litigation unless
clarified ncw; to wit:
1. Ref. Pg. A-1 Suffolk County Department of Health
letter dated 11-30-83 states (re: the applicants request for
development) and I quote "since wells located on each individual
lot would of necessity be very shallow and there would be a
limited amount of quality water, this application will be
approved only if a central water supply is provided."
a. Does this mean that individual lot wells
are forbidden or does it mean that the developer
must only provide a central water supply of
quality water and that individual lot owners TZ-23
are free to put down wells for so-called
non-essential lower quality water?
40,
b. If the intent was to forbid individual lot wells
does the Suffolk County Department of Health
Services have the means to enforce the restriction
or is this dependent upon the Building Department' s
interpretation of the subject clause since they are
responsible for controlling the related permits?
2. Next reference page 2-57 special condition #9 attaching
to the DEC permit to construct .a central water supply
installation states that "steps should be taken via covenants or
use restrictions to prohibit use of the water supply system for
non-essential purposes such as lawn irrigation" .
3. Given that the homeowner is apparently precluded from
putting down his own well and from using his source of essential
water for non-essential purposes, how do you square the
statements included in the "mitigating factors slection of the
DEIS (pages A-8/9) wherein the developer proposes to limit the
amount of fertilizer used for plants and lawn and to limit the
amount of total lot area given over the lawns?
The disconnect here is that no homeowner would invest
in landscaping without possessing the means to protect his
investment, i.e. ability to sprinkle. Does the developer
anticipate that (a) each lot owner will put down his own
• _ . ___ _ ....:w.r_._�:_s,_.-.:�_. �._ .y.....z - --ice
PLANNING BOARD 9 FEBRUARY 12, 1991
irrigation well point so that eventually there might be as many
as forty-nine additional wells tapping into the aquifer or
(b) each lot owner will ignore the DEC prohibition against using
house water for sprinkling (not to mention swimming pools) ?
Clearly, the only alternative would be for each homeowner to
collect rain water in a system but this is not suggested in the
DEIS.
Unless these points are resolved before approval of the
DEIS, a not far fetched scenario might find a drought
situation, say five to ten years from now, with the Angel Shores
homeowners attempting to save their landscaping investment by
the use of sprinklers while some surrounding area homeowners are
experiencing a deterioration of their drinking water. Will the
homeowners hunting for essential water blame their problem on
the drought or will they seek injunctions, damages and/or other
legal remedies from the Angel Shores people and the Town of
Southold. This is precisely the sort of problem the Planning
Board was established to prevent.
Sophia Adler: I appreciate the remarks by the Chairman of our
Homeowners Association in Cedar Beach where I live but I have a
few remarks that I would like to say even thought they might be
poorly arranged. I have only come to grips with the situation
within the last few days, within this last week really. We have
lived in Cedar Beach for over twenty years, all year round.
This is where we are and during this time we have experienced
the character of the water table and that is what I want to talk
about. The fluctuations in the quality of the water have
sensitized us to its shallow vulnerabl character and changeable
character from which our private well graws the water for our
home use. We know for instance that for quite a few years in a
row the Health Department warned us that salt intrusion made our
water unpotable but later we needed no warning and we became
aware and watched for the changes both in rain and in weather
and how it affected this shallow water aquifer under us from
which all of us drew our water. Now, for the past year, for
instance, following the end of a long drought when we lived with
salt water and we went to Greenport or the Town of Southold to
get our drinking water. In the- last year, the water has become
sweet and we have enjoyed coffee and tea and watering our house
plants all year round but, we know only too well that this water
table is vulnerable to changes which we may or may not
understand but they happen. When I discovered this portion of
the environmental, the Department of Environmental Conservation
in Section II of page 57 and I know this is repetitious, the DEC
lists these special conditions on which a permit will be granted
to Angel Shores and in the face of what we have experienced, I
recognize that the DEC, in spelling out these kind of
conditions, the ninth point in section II page 57, which if I
repeat again, steps should be taken, the use restriction to
prohibit the use of the water system for non-essential purposes,
such as lawn irrigation, and the lawn irrigation is the only
point that they make in this Draft Environmental Statement but
PLANNING BOARD 10 FEBRUARY 12, 1991
you know people like to put in swimming pools too and people
want to water their gardens too and people want to live here the
way everyone else does. I don't know what kind of people would 7Z-2-S
want to come out here, there might be people desperate enough
that would want to live in a place where they can't even take
care of their lawns or their surroundings when it needs water
but I do understand it is possible for a developer to be
satisfied to claim to fulfill such conditions in their covenants
and deeds and perhaps the homeowner won' t notice it and buy
anyway or perhaps the homeowner will think why worry about it,
_ Southold isn' t going to provide policemen all year round and all
night and all day to watch so that they don't water during a
drought. I can understand the developer who wants to get his
money out of the situation but I can not understand that the
Southold Planning Board with their eyes open can agree to such a
kind of a community in the midst of Southold. The community
which is called Angel Shores and it is my private opinion that
this restriction could be better called. It is a scandalous and
a syntonic restriction. If we expect to live and have a
community built with that kind of a restriction it is going to
impact terribly on Southold. Not only on the surrounding homes
but on the reputation of a community that would allow that kind
of a disaster. Thank you.
Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments?
C Mr. Robert E. Mitchell: Just one last comment, Mr.Chairman.
Thank you for holding this second hearing on this subject. I
assume you will either accept or not accept the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement and I gVess it is actually called
a final Environmental Impact Statement which you have the option
to have a hearing on or not. In considering the comments you
heard on it tonight, it probably would be a good idea to have a
hearing on it. Winston Churchill said was (inaudible) . I know
the town attorney is not here but could you give us the rest of
the process for Angel Shores? I am sure the DEIS has a
preliminary hearing on a site plan and a final hearing on the
site plan which is fully engineered and so forth. Could I ask
you to comment on what the rest of the process is?
r
Mr. Orlowski: Well, we will either accept or reject after the
next hearing. Actually, after March 21st, after all the
comments are made.
Mr. Mitchel: That will be the draft, right?
Mr. Orlowski: Yes, and then at that time the Board would have
the option to move on to the final and we' ll probably do the
final ourselves, in house and if the Board wishes, we will hold
another public hearing on that.
Mr. Mitchel: Do you then have to have a preliminary site plan
proceeding?
PLANNING BOARD 11 FEBRUARY 12, 1991
Mr. Orlowski: Yes, There will be a preliminary subdivision
hearing on the subdivision. After preliminary there will be a
final hearing in the final subdivision.
Mr. Mitchel: Well, can I ask this? I know people look at the
draft site plan. Do you have to have a hearing on preliminary
site plan and then you have to have it fully engineered?
Mr. Orlowski: Yes. Preliminary is basically the layout and
then the final is drawn up with all the road specifications and
gradings. That will be in the final hearing.
Mr. Mitchel: Is there any chance that they may change what
we've seen in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement?
Mr. Orlowski: It could, yes.
Mr. Mitchel: What would you say the time table would be?
Mr. Orlowski: I couldn' t say.
Mr. Mitchel: O.K. , thank you.
Gee Gee Spates - Excuse me, I would like to speak. I didn' t
realize we were at the end.
Valerie Scopaz: I just would like to make one thing clear.
If you have any questions during any stage of the process of the
review, feel free to come into the office and the staff will
explain where we are in the process aswego along. The files
are open to the public at any time. The office is open from 9 to
S. If you want to come in and just keep track of where the
project is, feel free to do that.
Mr. Mitchel: Well, you are very kind. Thank you very much.
Gee Gee Spates: I live at Main Bayview Road in Southold. You
are familiar faces to me over the years dealing with this
development. I would like to speak on something that I don't
think has been spoken on before- by anyone including the
developer and his staff and that is concern about public access
to the pond to what some of us in the local community consider a
ice skating pond. About three years ago I was talking to my own
child and a couple of her friends and they, all teenages,
developed what I would call sort of an informal petition and I TZ
have been holding it all these years for tonight'I guess. What
it says very briefly is, to the Southold Town Government: This
is a letter we want to send to you about the ice skating pond in
our neighborhood. It is on Main Bayview Road in Southold four
streets past the triangle at Jacobs Lane, then down the hill
across from the old Archdavis House where they want to put the
Angel Shores development. The ice skating pond provides a good
place for both ice hockey and figure skating. It is a good size
pond that freezes easily for ice skating without plants sticking
PLANNING BOARD 12 FEBRUARY 12, 1991
up. The pond is a very convenient place for kids who don' t
drive and for parents so they don't have to schlep their kids
all over. The pond is close to the street but not close enough
to cause an accident. It is a beautiful place where you can see
wildlife like deer. Considering all the people that use the
pond for ice skating, the area stays pretty clean. It is bad
enough taking away the land where we take nature walks but
please, don't take away our only good ice skating pond. As I '
said, that was written by three pre-teen and teenagers and was
later signed by approximately, mostly kids, a couple of adult
kids but mostly kid kids from the neighborhood. I would like to
submit this now and as final proof as this could only be done by
children, this last page has everything on it. This was in a
teenagers car for many weeks and he kept saying to me
Mrs. Spates, I have that and I will get it to you sooner or
later. So just to sum up for them, my concern about having
continued public access to the fresh water pond that is up by
Main Bayview, it has been used by more than just ice skaters,
people go there and bird watch and just sit by the shore and
meditate or whatever. It is an aesthetic use and I hope this
will be taken into consideration as to any other public access
that is aestmetic to the whole Angel Shores site. That would
include the swimming down at the beach and so forth but I
especially wanted to talk about the pond and that is all I want
to say about that. Just briefly, because so many people tonight
have addressed the water use and restriction of the
non-essential water use, I wanted to comment that, and I 'm kind
of reiterating their concern that this is a very difficult thing
to police after people move in and I think Sophia Adler sort of
adequately stated how much people do wont to sprinkle themselves
in hot water or whatever. I think it is very important that the
Planning Board address this issue in a more thorough way and how
that might be done might be through either restricted lawn size
or, going a little further, it might mean that the lot size
itself would actually be diminished and whatever one is calling
it the buffer zone, the wildlife corridor might be expanded into
the person's so that the person really wouldn't be allowed, I
guess because he really wouldn't own that property. That part
of his parcel would really become part of the communal buffer or
whatever it is called. I think, that would be the better way of
handling it. Myself being in involved in the buffer zone
alongside of the Quogue Wildlife Refuge down in Quogue, and
it is very difficult for homeowners to continueto remember that
they are not suppose to tear apart theirwoods in the back or
develope into the back area that is suppose to be buffered, so I
hope the Planning Board will take that very seriously. Thank
you.
Donald Spates: I live on Main Bayview Road. I have only had
a chance to briefly run down to the Southold Library to verify
that indeed the telephone book size DEIS is there. Two things
I want to say, first of all, on a specific nature I did peek at
the map. There were a few maps and I was a little bit confused
by what your talking about, I guess what you guys call building
PLANNING BOARD 13 FEBRUARY 12, 1991
envelopes I would like you to also consider the possibility of
doing a similar type of restriction on the Peconic Bay front
lots, most of which lie on the wrong side of the FEMA one
hundred year flood line that has been drawn through the map at
least according to the way I read it. It seems to me that if
there were such a restriction on the area on the lot that the
owner could build on then that would cut down on the possibility
for bulkheading or jetty or whatever might develop sometime in
the future. Really, what I wanted to briefly say was that I
hope that you will consider the concept of total planning,
basically your jobs here as planners in a more overall or
generic sort of a way. Many people here have commented upon Hog
Neck as being an entity, which it is. We like to consider it to
be a fairly fragile entity and I think that my neighbors here
are expressing them: concerns about it. You, as the Planning
Board are intimately familiar not only with the Angel Shores
development but up the road the connected Cove development which
has an inordinate amount of density in there. Recently we had
occasion to come down to Town Hall here and discuss the
Bayview Woods development, the Fuchs and Fischetti
development, which is also, why for some reason, zoned to higher
than usual density. I guess what I would like to say is that I
would like to hope that the Board would be reminded to look at a
lot of the overall planning that is taking place. The
development on Hog Neck and make whatever necessary
recommendations they feel to take all of these developments into
C consideration in dealing with the Angel Shores application.
Thank you.
Robert Morse: I live in Cedar Beach also. I don' t have the
reference on the DEIS but there was a chart showing some type
of test well mostly in the Southwest corner of the plot and I
don' t understand how any conclusion can be made from that-
limited amount. One well tested in Cedar Beach but nothing to 7ZZ7
the east at all and there are many wells over there. Many of
them were impacted with the Temik at the time they had the
problem and there is no reference to that at all in the DEIS.
I don't understand how that can be excepted in that condition.
Thank you. _
Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Hearing none, I will
entertain a motion to close this hearing.
Mr. McDonald: I make a motion we close this hearing.
Mr. Ward: Second.
Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on
this motion? All those in favor?
Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered.
PLANNING BOARD 14 FEBRUARY 12, 1991
Mr. Orlowski: I will also entertain a motion to set Monday,
C March 11, 1991 at 7:45 p.m. for a public hearing on the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement dated December, 1990.
Mr. Latham: Move it.
Mr. Ward: Second.
Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the
motion? All those in favor?
Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered.
Mr. Orlowski: I think it is explanatory where we are going
from here to everybody that is here. I explained it before the
meeting started so there will be another hearing on the 11th
and you still have until March the 21st to put all your
comments in writing to the office. Thank you for coming. I
would like to make a motion that we adjourn.
Mr. McDonald: I move we adjourn.
Cecelia Louka: Can I ask a question? The next hearing, you
want reiteration of tonights comments? Do you want new
comments?
Mr. Orlowski: We would always like to have new comments. We
see the major problems but ---.
Cecelia Loucka: Can you explain why you are having another
hearing because the notice in the newspaper was not fourteen
days in advance of the first hearing?
Mr. Orlowski: ` Yes. All those in favor?
Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered.
Being there was no further business to come before the Board,
the meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. .
Res ectful�Jl`yV- submitted,
Jane Rousseau,
Bennett Orlowski Jr. , firman
PLANNING BOARD 7 MARCH 11, 1991
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered.
Mr. Orlowski: 7: 45 p.m. Subdivisions - State Environmental
Quality Review Act - Angel Shores- Public hearing on the
Draft Environmental Impact Statement dated December 1990. This
proposed subdivision is located in Southold. At this time I ' ll
ask if there are any comments on this Draft Environmental Impact
Statement?
Mr. DeLuca: With your permission, I am going to try and set
this up to show you a little site plan I have. I am here this
evening on behalf of the Suffolk County Health Department Office
of Ecology. For the sake of the record and for those who may
not know, the Office of Ecology was created in 1986 to expand
the Health Department' s role beyond simply the sanitary code
regulations of water supply and sewage disposal, and to fill a
void that existed within a copy with respect to review of
environmental project's of County wide significance. This is
one such project and we have been involved since about 1988 in
the review of this action through the numerous DEIS' s and
revisions and addendum' s and so forth.
As I reviewed the current document, two things came to
mind, one was my continuing concerns about the various natural
resources that exist on this site, which have been enumerated
and which appear in the appendices of the document. I won't
restate those in detail for the sake of time, but as all of you
are well aware, there are numerous resources including fresh 73—/
water wetlands, tidal wetlands, a very nice area of second
growth woodland vegetation which provide a lot of habitat for
critters, as evidence I think in a lot of the information in the
DEIS. We have a scenic issue which has been brought to my
attention on several occasions. We have agricultural land and
just a number of other resources that really make this the kind
of project that has a lot of important concerns. As I said,
rather than restating a lot of those for you, I thought what I
would do this time around, is to address the second issue which
has constantly been the focus of our comments and that is the
issue of alternatives.
In our opinion, the current document doesn' t provide enough
attention to alternative proposals and we thought we would take
a crack at giving you one that you might want to consider. I
think I should point out that we're not saying this is the only
alternative, it is simply one among many and based on our
involvement with this project, we think it is a reasonable and
responsible one.
I would like to discuss with you a couple of major points
of this but first, if I 'm speaking loud enough and I come over !
here if it is alright I would just like to leave the microphone.
PLANNING BOARD 10 MARCH 11, 1991
has also been our experience when you preserve large continuous
tracks of open space it is something that is manageable by ,
either a homeowners association, which can be managed under Town
jurisdiction and those areas tend to remain more intact. They
tend to have less opportunity for this guy to come in and clear
off his lot and then the next guy then says, gee, I guess that
is where the lot boundary is, he clears his off, so that' s why
it is a concern for us and where you will notice in the lots
that we put in here, we didn' t include those.
What we also did in Angel Shores II, was to take a little
bit away from the conservation easement and move it outside the
lot boundary so when a individual buys a piece of property that
individual is aware basically, of where he is going to be
operating and so forth, so those are some of the other things
that we have done here.
Just briefly, we have thirteen lots of one acre iri size,
the original one obviously, I believe was forty-nine. We have
the rest of them being between 21,000 and 30,000 square feet,
primarily these are around 30,000 and some of these other ones,
again this is not something that we absolutely have to have but
just to point out that these lots are of reasonable size and
that you don' t have to have that concern about the cluster being
sort of a big apartment building in the middle of this otherwise
country rural kind of atmosphere.
Something else that we did was to relocate the recharge
basin, because of the concern that was brought to our attention
on several occasions, which was that of the scenic vista which T3—�
exists across here which we tried to maintain, by just moving
back behind some of these lots, we thought that you could
probably accommodate that if that was necessary, given the grade
and given the amount of flow that could be expected from those
different areas. I think you will find that this will probably
work out.
O.K. , let' s see what else -we have here. Just a couple of
other considerations. Not to sound of two minds here, but one
of the things we are concerned about is we do have lots in this
area, if its absolutely, the last alternative, we would
encourage native vegetation and would encourage turf
limitations. We also know that those kinds of things are not as
easy to manage but are well intended, and I think that they are
in harmony with what the law is out to here, trying to find
something that will minimize or mitigate potential impacts to
the greatest degree practicable.
A couple of other things, the road that services these lots
down in the southern portion here, because it only serves four
lots, we would ask the Board whether or not it is appropriate to
consider a impervious surface or a smaller road rather than a
large paved surface which generates more runoff and could
a��z
PLANNING BOARD 11 MARCH 11, 1991
potentially have more impacts to the immediate and to the
wetlands areas here. Also, you will notice, that by eliminating
a lot of these lots, what we have done is to eliminate the need
for this whole access road in here, which again would make it
cheaper to develop the site for the applicant and it would also
help to preserve the integrity of the wildlife corridor. Two
lots that are a little bit different from the others you will
just notice up here. What we really did was to provide for a
wider area of continuous habitat. We could take two lots off
this road, and kind of just turn them and allow the access onto
Main Bayview which is sort of a double flag this way. This
one is one acre, and this one is a little bit less.
One other thing that I wanted to bring to your attention
was the issue of underground sprinkler systems. Because this is
a community supply area, we have concern that water in that
community supply be protected as best as possible, for drinking
water purposes, and that the Board may wish to consider, within
other alternatives, a covenant or some sort of restriction on
the proliferation of underground irrigation systems as part of
this.
I think I would just like to leave you with the comments
that I brought. I' ll leave you with this map and just to point
to something that I found in the DEIS this morning, which was
a statement from the enabling legislation for the Peconic Bay
CEA of which this is partially included, and therefore,
C involved in that designation. In accordance to the document,
the enabling legislation said that the Peconic Bay and its
immediate surrounding area contain natural resources requiring
the most stringent steps to protect them as components of
Suffolk County' s unique environmental and fragile scenic
beauty. I haven' t, in all honesty, run across many sites that
have as many different types of natural resources, concerns,
features, values, aesthetic and visual concerns and that is one
of the reasons that we have been so heavily involved in this
project. I think that the SEQRA process allows the Board a great
deal of flexibility in the kinds of alternatives that it can
request, and we are hopeful that this alternative might be seen
that is reasonable for the Board and reasonable for the
applicant, and one which best protects this whole site given the
fact that this site in all likelihood will be developed. With
that, I thank you for your kind, courteous attention and I will
be happy to answer any questions if you have them. Thank you.
Mr. Orlowski: O.K. , any other comments?
Michael J. Costello - I live at West Lake Drive. Has any
study been made of the relationship of cesspools to the amount
of water there? I 've been out there for over twenty five years.
When the Dickerson's farmed that area, and when they had the
irrigation going, I live on the water, and I would get salt 7-7
intrusion, so I was wondering if any study was made with Z
relationship to that? The water is only ten feet down there.
PLANNING BOARD 12 MARCH 11, 1991
Mr. Orlowski: I can' t answer those questions right now, but
we' ll have to look into those. This is just a comment period. C
Mr. Costello: Thank you.
Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments?
Sherry Johnson: I represent the North Fork Environmental
Council. The North Fork Environmental Council strongly feels
that the Angel Shores project site is very important and
arguably critical to the continued well being of the wildlife
populations on Hog Neck. As discussed in the documentation on
the red cedar maritime forest community in the draft EIS, and
in the coastal habitat reports which I have included with my
comments, much more work needs to be done to fully understand
and identify 211 the species and plant communities found here
and to adequately assess their habitat needs. Fragmentation of
the Section I site will effectively end any chance of studying
the site and interpreting its sign:«icance to the Hog Neck
populations.
Further, we feel that there is significant evidence
questioning the availability of sufficient quantities of
groundwater to fully serve this project as proposed and the
existing homes already in the area.
I hope that you will consider our attached comments and
continue to give this project the careful review it deserves.
I 've included some extensive comments, in lieu of time, I won' t
go through and read them I will just hi-light some of them. I
also took exception's to the fifty foot conservation easements
because I felt it would be better to use that, some of that
area, to reduce the size of the lots and possibly to concentrate
more from Section I into the Section II site.
Wildlife, we have also had comments on the wildlife.
Topography in Section III. The DEIS states that a
grading plan will be submitted -on each lot as they come in for
building permits. This method ;doesn't allow the lead agency
control over the steep slopes on the entire site, or allow for
mitigation measures based on the entire project. Of particular
concern to me is lot #5 in Section I . Building envelopes should 73--6
be designated on other lots and strict measures outlined for
protection against sedimentation and run-off entering wetlands
on-site and off. We are also concerned about Sanitary Sewage,
the DEIS stated that it was anticipated that several lots were
not going to meet Health Department requirements. We felt these
lots should be recognized and identified and we thought that
relocating these lots should be discussed so that they will meet
sanitary health code standards.
Groundwater, I thought that the section on groundwater was
fairly inadequate. It did give estimates for household use and
V-174
PLANNING BOARD 13 MARCH 11, 1991
theDEIS stated that the public water system would only be
Cused for household consumption. The FEIS must discuss how it
will enforce this claim. How watering lawns, landscape
plantings and washing cars will be prevented. How the drilling 7-3-7
of a second well by each future homeowner will be prevented.
The FEIS should discuss the Department of Environmental
Conservation's Groundwater Management Program' s statements and
recommendations on groundwater quantity problems.
I felt the section on Solid Waste Disposal was inadequate.
The FEIS should discuss the amounts expected to be generated, 7-3-8
and the cost if Southold has to ship the solid waste out of Town.
There were some comments on schools. The school children
estimated to come from the project were based on a mix of three
and four bedroom houses. The worst case scenario should be 7-3_cj
discussed in the FEIS wherein using the formula in the DEIS
fifty one children could be generated. The FEIS should
discuss the projected cost to edu--ate each child.
The last part was on alternatives. We felt that
transferring three lots from Section I onto Section II was not --/O
representative of an honest attempt to preserve the more
sensitive of the two sections, which was Section I. The FEIS
should fully discuss concentrating all the development onto
Section II . Thank you.
Mr. Orlowski: Are there any other comments?
Mr. Robert Maus: I live at Cedar Beach. I am concerned with
my drinking water. The DEIS for Angel Shores calculates that
nitrates will be introduced into groundwater at the site. I am
concerned that this will increase nitrate levels in my private
well which is located near the site. It appears that the DEIS
does not address two issues associated with this concern. The
first issue is what will be the cumulative effect of adding
nitrates to groundwater which already has nitrates present in
it, both on site and in my supply well? The second issue which
I feel needs to be clarified to answer this questions is; is my
supply well located downgradiarit of the site?
My supply well currently contains 6. 1 parts of nitrates.
The DEIS calculates that the project will add 6. 8 nitrates.
Simple math would indicate that my supply well will exceed the
10 parts drinking water standard. I therefore, have the
following questions regarding the completeness gf the DEIS.
Did the DEIS locate all of the supply wells surrounding the
site and obtain water quality information to establish the
current conditions? The DEIS is lacking the vast majority of
the wells in the area. The assumption that all the private 7-3-/7,-
wells would be listed in public files is obviously wrong. Each
house surrounding the site has a private supply well associated
with it and there is no public water supply in the area. A side
issue related to the on site well; did the DEIS establish the
ff-i7S'
PLANNING BOARD 14 MARCH 11, 1991
level of nitrates on site to determine the cumulative effect of
adding nitrates and what effect this would have upon the site
water supply wells?
Is my supply well located downgradiant of the site? My
supply well and my neighbors supply wells contain nitrate and
some contain temik which was applied to the former potato farm
at the site. This is on Angel Shores II. Does this tell me
anything about groundwater flow direction? I always thought
that groundwater flowed from the land to the sea which, in this
case flow would be to the south, southeast and east from the
site and not just to the south as indicated in the DEIS. If
the nitrates and temik that are in the above mentioned wells
are from the farm, will the nitrates that the project will add
end up in my well? I therefore, have the following questions
regarding the completeness of the DEIS. The DEIS used water
level data collected from several wells over a period of years.
Does using water levels collected from different wells at
different times yield accurate information on groundwater flow
direction? Were the private water supply wells, which were used
to determine groundwater flow direction, surveyed and water
levels obtained with the same accuracy that the Suffolk County
Department of Health Services would utilize to determine
groundwater flow direction? When my supply well was installed
no one surveyed my well and took detailed water level
measurements. Over the different years that the water levels
were obtained did the levels fluctuate and the flow directions
change resulting in erroneous flow determination? What is the
present flow directions? Wells were not used to determine
groundwater flow direction between the site and the supply wells
located to the south or east of the site. What is groundwater
flow direction to the east and south of the site? My well is
located to the east of the site and contains nitrates and my
neighbors contain temik. If the temik is from the site and
the DEIS states that groundwater flow is to the south how can
this be? The DEIS references two reports that map groundwater
flowing to the south. If the DEIS does not include wells
between the site and the south and eastern water supply wells,
do these reports? If these reports do reveal wells in the area
to the east and south of the site why are they not included in
the DEIS? The DEIS references two reports that map
groundwater flowing to the south. If the DEIS does not
include wells between the site and the south and eastern water
supply wells, do these reports? If these reports do reveal
wells in the area to the east and south of the site why are they
not included in the DEIS? Do the two referenced reports
contain enough data to accurately map groundwater flow at a
level of detail needed to determine groundwater flow direction
on the site? Will additional monitoring wells be installed in
sufficient numbers to answer these questions? What will be the
groundwater flow directions once the surface water runoff is T.3—
directed to the central recharge basis? Will diverting surface
runoff that contains nitrates to central locations introduce
concentrations of nitrates above the 6. 8 parts potentially into
.V-17`
PLANNING BOARD 15 MARCH 11, 1991
r a small area and increase nitrate levels in selected areas that
could impact surrounding wells? Is this similarly true of each
of the cesspool locations?
Does the DEIS address salt water intrusion? Many of the
wells in the area have experienced saltwater intrusion. A brief
review of the well data in the DEIS indicates that the test
wells installed encountered salt water only twenty six feet
below grade. Therefore, I have the following questions; What
will be the long term effect of pumping these wells on my well
water quality and the project well? I see no mention of the
long term effect of pumping. Will this well draw water up from n-/6
depth and in from the shore line over time? What kind of
evaluation if any did the DEIS make of this? Has the DEIS
addressed present extent of saltwater intrusion in the area? If 7-3 17
the present extent of salt water intrusion is known how will it
change when the site wells are operating? The DEIS mentions a
water level elevation of minus four feet below mean sea level in
the area. Does this mean that the water is flowing from the
bay into the area and bringing in salt water? Will the water 7-3-46
levels decrease further with pumping and increase salt water
flow inland?
Historically, on Long Island, hasn' t increased pumping of
groundwater resulted in saltwater intrusion along the south
shore and therefore, resulted in the installation of public
water from west to east with population growth? If so, what T3'7�9
information can be derived from this occurrence and what plans
are being implemented for this area should this project result
in increased salt water intrusion in the area? Similarly hasn' t
nitrates also been a major reason for the installation of public
water supply wells on most of Long Island? If so, what T3 ZQ
information can be learned historically and what contingencies
if any has this DEIS evaluated? Has the DEIS evaluated the
economic impact on surrounding residences that would occur if 7-3-21
water quality degrades and public water supply is introduced.
The majority of the surrounding residences are on fixed incomes
and could potentially lose their homes if made to bear the cost
of a public water supply system. Should the Town or Angel
Shores be made to post a bond at this time in case the
surrounding water supplies degrade or the project water supply
fails?
Lastly, I would like to know what the accuracy of the work
completed in the DEIS is. I would like to know what are the
qualifications of an engineering firm to conduct a DEIS in New
York State. Does it require a trained and registered
hydrogeologist? I understand, that New York State has no
registration program for hydrogeologist and therefore, anyone
can provide this service. Does it require a New York registered
P.E. ? If so, does the New York P.E. certification require or T3 ZZ
have a testing or education requirement for groundwater supply
work? If not, how can I be sure that the groundwater portions
of the DEIS are done to any degree of accuracy? What are the
PLANNING BOARD 16 MARCH 11 , 1991 1
qualifications of the firm that prepared the DEIS? As you see,
I am concerned with the water. I appreciate you considering it c
and furthermore, seeing this presentation and hearing the
previous comments I think at this point we have more than enough
homes projected for Angel Shores II . We have a two acre zoning
in the area and we've already downgraded that with projected
movements from one and I see no sense in putting in more than
have been proposed up until now.
Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Hearing none, any
questions from the Board?
Mr. Ward: The Planning Board does have a copy of their comments
in the file which the applicants should receive.
Mr. Orlowski: The Planning Board does have its own comments
and they are on file. They are on record right now. Any other
questions from the Board?
Board: None.
Mr. Orlowski: Hearing no further comments or questions, I
will entertain a motion to close this hearing, but before I do I
just want you to all know that the comment period runs until
March the 21st, so you still have time to get comments in to
us in writing.
Mr. Ward: So moved.
Mr. McDonald: Second.
Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the
motion? All those in favor?
Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. McDonald,
Mr. Edwards, Mr. Orlowski.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered.
****************************************
Engineering Reports
Mr. Orlowski: Cornfields - This major subdivision is for
ten lots on 20. 995 acres located on the east side of Youngs
Avenue; approximately 500 feet north of Middle Rpad (C.R. 48) in
Southold. SCTM #1000-69-5-7. What is the pleasure of the
Board?
Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I would like to adopt the following
resolution.
RESOLVED to adopt the engineer' s report dated February 26,
1991.