DETAILED COMMENTS OF LONG ISLAND BUILDERS INSTITUTE

DATE: NOVEMBER 15, 2005

RE: TOWN OF BROOKHAVEN DRAFT 2005 MIDDLE COUNTRY ROAD
LAND USE PLAN FOR CORAM, MIDDLE ISLAND AND RIDGE &
DRAFT GENERIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT.

INTRODUCTION
This Draft Plan for the future development of the Middle Country Road corridor, including parts of Cram, Middle Island and Ridge is an innovative document incorporating many, creative concepts and techniques which embody Smart Growth principles. It brings a rare element of planning and vision to Brookhaven. However, the lack of attention to practical considerations on how projects are approved and built, flaw the Draft Plan and its recommendations. The dream of making this plan a reality depends on successful development of practical solutions to these issues.

The foreword to the Plan states that numerous and “extensive meetings have been held with property owners, developers, stakeholders, …to identify and address any issues relative to the recommendations contained in the Plan” LIBI was certainly not included and has had only a brief time to address this Draft. LIBI is generally supportive of use of the concepts put forth in the plan, but urges a series of reality checks.

Without a more detailed roadmap of how the Town gets from here to there, LIBI fears you may be enacting a Plan, accepting an inadequate DGEIS and adopting overlay districts that need considerable evaluation. More detailed comments will be forthcoming from LIBI and we fervently hope the process of adopting this Draft will allows time for more extensive comment from others as well.

The focus of this study and land use plan is the 6 mile corridor along Middle Country Road (Route 25) between North Ocean Avenue to William Floyd Parkway and beyond to the Town line in the hamlets of Coram, Middle Island and Ridge. The general goals of this plan are to promote development of hamlets centers that are better defined and compact. Open space, parklands and less intensive commercial and residential uses will serve as a transition between the hamlet centers. To achieve there goals the Plan develops land use policy and zoning patterns that attempts to create traditional neighborhoods while fostering a greater sense of community.

Immediately, unanswered questions include:

QUERY? What happens if some or all of the incentive programs are not implemented?

QUERY? Can the hamlet centers be fully developed without these incentives?

QUERY? If the hamlet centers are not fully developed, what justifies the Transition Overlay District?

QUERY? In the event the goals and objectives of the Plan are never achieved, will the development restrictions be lifted?

GOALS AND EXISTING CONDITIONS

The goals of the plan are sound and worthy.

NOTE: The evaluation of Multi-Family residential development needs are out dated and flawed. No new studies have been conducted. The conclusions and recommendations are based on the questionable needs analysis of multi-family housing conducted by Dr. Koppleman in September 2002. Since 2002 there has been a moratorium on Multi-family and senior housing and the population and demand for both multi-family and senior homes has increased.

LAND USE RECOMMENDATIONS IN CORAM

The commercial and industrial developments in the hamlet center areas do not take into consideration the limitations and restrictions that exist under the new code for these districts. (Building coverage, buffers, landscaping, etc,) Most of the parcels in the hamlet centers are subject the clearing standards of the Pine Barrens Plan. It is suggested that relief of these standards can be obtained through the purchase of TDRs. The cost to achieve such a reduction by purchasing TDRs may be cost prohibitive and must be evaluated.

Existing heavy commercial uses such as auto repair and gasoline filling stations should be relocated to more appropriate locations outside of this hamlet center. Exactly how this is going to be accomplished is unclear.

Parks and open spaces are proposed for certain areas in the transition overlay district. The Plan recommends that the area along the west side of route 112, south of Middle Country Road should remain in a natural or revegetated state after State improvements to NYS Route 112. Additionally the lands between Middle Country Road, Grant Smith Road and Route 112 should also remain undeveloped with consideration for enhanced “green spaces” within roadway corridors. Property owners may lose the right to develop their properties under the present zoning until these hamlet areas are developed.

QUERY? If the hamlet center is not developed, because the owners may be risk adverse or lands are tied up in estates, etc., is the open space need justifiable?

The Plan states the following:
A regional Sewage treatment Plant for both the Coram west as well as the Coram east Centers should be considered and could be located on the northerly portion of lands of Speigal just south of Skips Road, adjacent to the existing LIPA properties, subject to appropriate engineering. Other locations for a regional STP could also be considered. Relief of Pine Barrens Standards may be offered through a transfer of developments rights program.

QUERY? How is the vision for the proposed hamlet centers going to be implemented without a clear plan for sewerage capacity?

NOTE: Location of the facilities and their environmental impact, alternatives, financing mechanisms, tax implications, etc. are nowhere addressed in the DGEIS.

Pine Barrens TDRs are going for $100,000 per PBC.

QUERY? Does the cost create multiple family homes at rents or sales prices that are more expensive than the market will bear?

QUERY? If sewers are not available, the Plan mentions the purchase of parcels within the TRANSITIONAL CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT for TDRs. Most of these parcels are zoned commercial with frontage along Middle Country Road and are worth $300,000 per acre.

QUERY? How much is this purchase going to cost?

QUERY? If the Hamlet areas never get built, will the property values of the parcels burdened by the Transitional Overlay Districts decline?

NOTE: The DGEIS does not take into consideration in its economic impact analysis that some of the yield and density in the transitional Overlay District will be used to achieve the expected yield and density in the hamlet areas. Therefore, there will be economic loss of residential and commercial yield in the transitional overlay district that will not be built. The total build out of the transitional Overlay district was counted towards the full development analysis under the proposed plan.

In order to accomplish the vision required under the Coram Hamlet Center East, New York State owns a 150-foot wide parcel, which runs through the north end of this hamlet center, and it is recommended that this parcel of land be transferred to the Town of Brookhaven.

QUERY? If New York State does not transfer this parcel to the Town of Brookhaven is the hamlet center viable?

The Plan states that the third hamlet center in Coram can be handled “by onsite septic systems.” The Plan states again that in cases where the sanitary requirement is exceeded transfer of development rights can be used to satisfy these requirements. Relief of Pine Barrens standards may also be offered through a transfer of development program.

QUERY? What is the cost associated with the purchase of the TDRs and is it economically feasible to build this hamlet center if TDRs are required to increase the yield?

Most of the heavy commercial land uses are located within areas designed for transition between the hamlet centers. The plan states that some of these heavy commercial uses should be discontinued, due to their inconsistency with surrounding land uses or inappropriately closes proximity to environmentally sensitive areas. Proposed is amortization through zoning changes and/or relocation to more appropriate locations. These parcels are not identified in the plan. For some parcels in the transition area, the plan states that some “existing land uses within the transition area should be discontinued due to their inconsistency with surrounding land uses or inappropriately close proximity to environmentally sensitive areas.” These parcels are not identified in the Plan.

Failure to identify parcels could mean that any parcel in the transition area could be burdened without effective notice to the owners. Certainly, many parcels would be made non-conforming uses.

NOTE: DGEIS analysis does not include any zone change or zoning amortization alternative evaluation or evaluation of suitable locations for relocation.

The land uses that could be considered in the transition area can be either single- family residential or low intense commercial uses, such as offices uses consistent with a “J” Business District. Farmers’ market, general store uses and churches or similar places of worship should be encouraged. All uses within this district must have a residential appearance, scale and architecture. Front yard parking will not be permitted with the exception of driveway access for single-family homes.

These restrictive provisions in the Plan have the effect of over riding the existing base zoning of each parcel in the transition area. The transition area comprises most of the study area and development restrictions may impact end-use and project feasibility. This is a major concern. The plan states further that additional “general retail uses within the transitional area should be discouraged.”

QUERY? Do these restrictive provisions of the plan make it almost impossible to market and develop a commercial project in the transition area?

If the hamlet centers take years to be fully developed and commercial and residential development is restricted in the transitional areas due to the restricted provisions of the draft plan, will there be significant commercial and residential development in this study area?

NOTE: The GDEIS and economic
analysis does not address this concern.

Within the Coram Hamlet centers multi-family and second story residential land uses are desired. Areas have been identified where additional multi-family land uses could be developed. They include the Speigal site adjacent to and incorporated into the Coram west hamlet Center and the parcel presently zoned for MF1 along the east side of route 112 north of Middle Country road and north of Old town Road. Further multi-family housing in the Coram hamlet is discouraged. Values of these sites may increase dramatically, impacting cost of homes. There will be limited opportunities for multi-family development available for anyone who doesn’t own the above mentioned two sites.

QUERY: If the landowners of these parcels decide not to develop their properties where will multi-family needs be met?

The plan recommends that the Town of Brookhaven should consider an Architectural Review Board to provide detailed recommendations to the Planning Board for each application made to the Town within each Overlay District. The design and materials of all of the elements in any building in the transition area are subject to the Planning Board or the Commissioner of Planning, Environmental and development approval. The standards are unclear and why should the Commissioner be given should broad discretionary power. An Architectural Review Board is to provide detailed recommendations to the Planning Board for each application to the town. All these discretionary and additional layers of approval increase the cost and time of review and bring uncertainty to the review process.

QUERY? With the Town’s planning process already a lengthy, expensive muddle, how does an architectural review board help?

MIDDLE ISLAND LAND USE RECOMMENDATIONS

The general comments for the Coram Land Use Plan mentioned above are applicable to the Middle Island Land Use Plan.

The hamlet center plan calls for the development of Lafayette Street which may necessitate some additional takings in order to connect to Yaphank-Middle Island Road, C.R. 21 to the east, opposite an existing commercial center access.

NOTE: The cost associated with this action nor alternatives have not been evaluated.

The Kogel site is identified as a hamlet center and a designated area for multi-family housing. Again, one owner will control most of the development in this area. The draft plan states that small lot residential development or workforce housing can be provided on the old filed map directly to the north of the Kogel site. In order to provide this much-needed workforce housing, an act of the NYS Legislature would be required to re designate the existing lands of Suffolk County.

NOTE: The GDEIS does not evaluate this necessary action and like all the hamlets centers assumes that they will be fully developed. The GDEIS ignores the fact that these hamlet centers may take decades to be developed and may never be built if certain development concerns are not addressed and implemented by the Town of Brookhaven and other applicable agencies including the Suffolk County Health Department and the Suffolk County Department of Public Works. What happens if the hamlet centers are not built after five (5) years? Ten?

An on-site Sewerage treatment Plant COULD be located on the northerly portion of the Sandy hill parcel or OTHER LOCATIONS within hamlet center which could handle SANITARY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ENTIRE CENTER. Relief of Pine Barrens standards may be offered through a transfer of development rights program.

NOTE: These statements are conclusory, no planning design for the required or size of required land needed for such

STP has been performed. Nor has any discussion of TDR’s been offered.

The other hamlet center in Middle Island is identified as the Artist Lake Hamlet Center, which will be used to provide recreational opportunities. Utilizing the existing K-Mart site along with the vacant lands to the east and west and the existing King Kullen Shopping Center a Recreational Center can be realized drawing on the scenic vistas of Artist Lake. The vacant lands adjoining the Kmart site to the east (known as the Breslin parcel) can be developed for indoor/outdoor recreational uses such as a bowling alley, amusement, etc. The vacant lands to the west of the existing Kmart site along with the wetlands parcel should be dedicated to the Town of Brookhaven for passive uses such as ball fields, playground and walking trails.

As with much of the hamlet center recommendations it is not clear who will be paying for the cost of the recommendations and the road and site improvements for the entire hamlet area. There will be much needed coordinated review and cooperation among property owners, State DOT and other agencies to make this happen.

NOTE: The DGEIS and economic analysis do not look into the question of costs or alternatives to these acquisitions.

The Breslin site is also the site recommended for the on-site sewage Treatment Plant on the Northerly end. One owner may control what happens in this area.

NOTE: The DGEIS says nothing about potential environmental impacts or alternatives.

The plan recommends that contiguous properties subject to the NYSDEC mined land Reclamation permits be rezoned to A-5 Residential District. This is one of the seven recommended rezonings

QUERY? Will A-5 be appropriate in that location years hence when the reclamation is completed?

NOTE: The DGEIS does not examine alternatives.

The recommendations in the transition overlay district area are very restrictive with respect to landscaping in the front yards and architectural provisions. As any new applications are accepted and reviewed for any general commercial uses, changes to the sites will be implemented. New general retail uses outside of the hamlet centers are discouraged.

QUERY? What is the cost associated with such changes? Will the costs prohibit much needed renovation and repairs to existing commercial centers?

The Plan states that some land uses within the transition area should be discontinued due to their inconsistency with surrounding land use or inappropriately close proximity to environmentally sensitive areas. This leaves the base zoning of these parcels in doubt.

QUERY?Is the town again proposing to add more commercial uses as non-conforming only shortly after a commercial rezoning town wide?

QUERY?Has notice to these property owners of this impending doom been adequate?

NOTE: These parcels have not been identified or evaluated in the DGEIS, nor have alternatives.

Several parcels have been identified for park or open space. In the event the hamlet centers have not been built, these open space parcels establish in the transition overlay zone to create green spaces between the hamlet areas must serve some other purpose.

QUERY? Have alternatives to acquisition been examined, such as cluster development and have other uses, such as more affordable housing been considered?

NOTE: The DGEIS is silent on alternatives or costs associated with preservation of these parcels as open space.

LAND USE PLAN FOR RIDGE

The same general comments above apply to Ridge. There is only one small hamlet center planned from Ridge to Riverhead. This new neighborhood main street district will only be approximately 1,800 feet long or .35 of a mile. The Ridge corridor is over half of the entire study area. (See Map 1.1)

The Plan calls for most of the existing individual site access drives along Middle Country Road to be eliminated. All primary site access should be via existing side streets. Parking facilities must be joined between individual sites and combined to create common parking areas. Like the other hamlet and transition areas, these recommendations would be more successful if you were starting from the beginning of the planning process in these areas. Some of the existing sites or vacant infill sites would be severely restricted by these recommendations.

The Draft plan recommends that sanitary requirements for the entire center should be handled by on-site septic systems. In cases where the sanitary requirement is exceeded, transfer of development rights can be used to satisfy these requirements. Relief of Pine Barrens Standards may also be offered through transfer of development rights program.

QUERY? How realistic is handling proposed development without sewers, drainage, etc.?

NOTE: The DGEIS is silent on details or alternative analysis for the capacity of on- site systems, the TDR program and alternatives.

The Plan states that some of the uses in the transition area should be discontinued because of their inconsistency with surrounding land uses. The areas between the Artist Lake Recreation Center and Ridge Neighborhood Center are designated as transitional areas to “separate the hamlet centers and establish a green space along Middle Country Road frontage…” A close look at the Land Use Map shows that the Middle Island hamlet center, where County Route 21 is located, is the last significant commercial center between Middle Island and Riverhead.
QUERY? Do the population growth projections and demand support this position?

NOTE: Again a silent DGEIS.

Between Wading River Hollow Road and Smith Road parcels have been identified for park or open space. These parcels are primarily vacant and currently provide the transition between Middle Island and Ridge.

QUERY? Is the only justification for open space purposes because these parcels are located at the border of two hamlets?

QUERY? Has clustering on these parcels or other alternatives to preserve open space been considered? Are they particularly environmentally significant?
NOTE: The DGEIS is silent on any analysis of alternatives.

As stated earlier, the plan states that any other multi-family sites beyond the hamlet centers and several designatedsites should be discouraged in the remaining areas of each hamlet. The result of this statement is that if the hamlet centers do not get developed within the next ten years, there will be a de facto moratorium on multi-family housing in Coram, Middle Island and Ridge.

NOTE: This significant adverse economic impact has not been studied and evaluated in the DGEIS.

The plan states that the proposed zoning will allow for an overall increase in developed square footage beyond that of the existing zoning. But, the hamlet centers will most likely not be fully developed anytime soon. Overcome must be the lack of sewer, drainage, incentives, and development and zoning restrictions. (Set backs, landscaping, buffers, parking, building coverage, etc.) The plan does not take into consideration the costs associated with TDRs for sanitary credit and clearing standards, road and site improvements and other recommendations required under the Plan. The Plan does not take into consideration the time and expense required to obtain the necessary approvals which will require cooperation between adjoining land owners, the Town, New York State, Suffolk County Health Department, DPW, etc. No expedited review process is in place to handle such a joint review approval process. None seems on the horizon.

The Draft Plan specifically states that TDRs for density and sanitary credit will come from parcels located in the transitional areas in the study. This will reduce the commercial and residential yield in these areas.

The new more restrictive development standards and review process will reduce the overall yield in the transition areas and the number of projects approved in these areas.

In this almost 300 page document, less than a half a page is specifically set side to address the sanitary issue:

The formation of local sewer districts is being considered by the town in order to accommodate the potential design density envisioned within the hamlets centers. Subdivisions that exceed Article VI sanitary design flow are required by Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services regulations to provide sewage treatment. The Town is considering coordinating such development projects to provide sewage treatment plans capable of fulfilling the design flow of the subdivision development projects, as well as, provide additional capacity to accommodate the Hamlet Centers. The sewer districts, once created, are expected to provide the mechanism to fund and extend the necessary sewers.

QUERY?How much will this cost and who will pay for it?

QUERY?How long will it take to establish the mechanism to fund and extend the necessary sewers?QUERY?Does the potential delay and added cost create an insurmountable obstacle?

QUERY?Why put overlay districts and rezonings in place before necessary infrastructure for centers and incentives are moving ahead?

NOTE: In the first example of a DGEIS on Long Island silent on impact on water resources, the DGEIS offers no discussion.

Two sentences are reserved for Drainage on page 147 as follows: “drainage should be handled on-site by leaching pools. A regional recharge basin should be considered to handle storm water runoff from the street network”.

With all the changes in the roadways, main street areas, and side roads and alleyways and other road networkdesigns and other site improvements contemplated under this plan, there are only two sentences about drainage. A recharge basin for a simple seven (7) lot subdivision can be over an acre.

QUERY? How big and where would a regional recharge basin be located?

NOTE: Incredibly, the DGEIS is silent on these matters.

The following statement is found on page 159 of the Plan:

For those areas identified as hamlet centers, Pine Barrens Credits or off site preservation within the Compatible Growth Area should be utilized in lieu of compliance with the clearing standards. This will allow for greater density desired within the Hamlet Centers while also meeting the preservation goals for lands within the designatedtransitional areas.”

QUERY?What goals for preservation in the transtion area?

QUERY?What effect will this have on the Pine Barrens Plan and receiving areas in the Compatible Growth areas?

The Plan talks about public assembly of small lots/acquisition on page 165:

The Town of Brookhaven can assist in the assembly of small lots using their powers of condemnation in order to further the goals of this plan. The assembly of small lots may be necessary to achieve the goals of this plan and to realize a more appropriate planned development along the Middle Country Road Corridor. A substantial private commitment would be necessary to facilitate and partially fund the assembly of small lots and provide infrastructure improvements, such as underground utilities, sewer system and local roadway improvements. The Town of Brookhaven can also use their powers of condemnation in the future event that the goals of this plan are not being met.

NOTE: This action is not evaluated in the DGEIS.

The Draft Plan on page 161, Section X, IMPLEMENTATION, states the following:

“IN ORDER TO IMPLEMENT THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THE LAND USE PLAN, A TOOLBOX OF PLANNING PROGRAMS AND INITIATIVES HAVE BEEN EXPLORED AND DEVELOPED.”

These planning programs and initiatives include the following: Commercial Corridor Incentives, Transfer of Development Value, Transfer of Development Rights Program, Pine Barrens Credit Program, Payment in lieu of Parking, Small business loans, Expedited Review and Approval, Relocation, Special districts, Public Assembly of Small lot/Acquisition, and Amortization Plan.

QUERY? Who will pay the costs associated with each program?

QUERY? What impact will these programs have on the Pine Barrens and other areas in the Town of Brookhaven?

QUERY? How will these programs affect school and town taxes?

NOTE: There is no analysis on these questions and on how and when such incentives may be implemented in either the Draft Plan or in the DGEIS.

CONCLUSION
LIBI loves the concept and appreciates the visionary thinking and boldness it represents.

LIBI is disappointed that in all these pages, after so long a moratorium, so little attention was paid to how the major recommendations of the Draft Plan could become a reality, or, to be perfectly frank, whether the economics of land development would allow them to proceed.

The Draft Plan remains a vision and its implementation a series of vague suggestions. Saying the Town will create sewer districts, TDR programs, a regional retention basin, architectural controls, zoning amortization and relocation programs, expedited reviews, etc, without some discussion of the scope, cost, and impacts of such programs is not enough.

The omissions and inadequacies of the DGEIS are many and serious enough to render it inadequate.

The adoption of this Plan and its recommendation should be delayed, until significant questions are answered.

LIBI, heretofore not consulted, is ready and willing to participate in the hard effort to bring this vision to fruition. Thanks for the opportunity to comment.