The links on the left are to projects on this subsite only. For all project pages, go to EMPOAweb's main home page.
Sorry layout, text coloring and links are not all right. Google changed the way Sites pages work. Fixing things will take some time.
The 3/17/11 updates are mainly at the end and are highighted like this sentence.
To enlarge map, double click on it, and hten click again once it opens.
SCTM
0200-685-1-2, 4.1 & 7. Lot 7 (southern) is separated from most of the site by CR 91 (old RR right of way).
Acres
97.73
Current zoning
A-1 Residence (88.75 acres) and NH-H (8.98 acres)
Pine Barrens status
In Compatible Growth Area
Historic District status
Portion along Old Montauk Highway (roughly 1/3 of site) is in Eastport Historic District and its Transition Zone
School District
EM (eastern lot, # 2) & ESM (other lots)
Brookhaven log #
2004-171-PS
Application
For subdivision approval
Proposed use
70 single family homes on 39 acres (41%), 45 acres of open space (47%), 9 acres to be given to the Town for park use (10%), & 2 acres for a recharge basin (3%).
Hearing date. A decision was made March 14.
To view documents, click on the links in the text below.
This proposal is one of several that would change the East Moriches/Eastport area. EMPOA and residents presented a Petition signed by 1500 residents asking for a single environmental impact study on this and other pending and approved projects. The Town, however, has not acted on the Petition.
This site has had a number of plans proposed since 2004. A 2007 plan shows an early proposal.
Application for Preliminary Subdivision Approval.
On 11/23/09, a hearing was opened on the preliminary plan dated 11/13/09. Its layout is similar to the 10/13/09 Cluster Plan C, but it includes detailed measurements. It shows the proposed ballfields in the NE corner of the site, rather than on Old Montauk Highway as previously proposed.
At the 11/23 hearing, it was reavealed that a traffic impact study has been filed by the developer prior to the hearing. The report on it concludes that "the development 'Eastport Meadows' will have no significant adverse impact on the traffic operations of the local roadway network." The data and worksheets used to reach this conclusion and appended to the report are available for those who want to see how this conclusion was reached.
Prior to the hearing, EMPOA submitted a letter to the Planning Board dated 11/18/09 that 1) requested a site-specific Environmental Impact Statement under SEQRA and 2) requested certain specific changes in the currently proposed plan. It is below. At the hearing, EMPOA proposed that the recharge basis be moved from Old Montauk Highway next to the proposed entrance to a less conspicuous location as shown in the rough sketch it submitted.
For more detail, view the transcripts of the 11/23/09 hearing and the 12/21/09 hearing.
The developer filed a revised plan on 12/15/09, which is close to its 11/20/09 plan. Planning staff had filed their initial recommendations for the Planning Board, and gave the Planning Board modified recommendations on 12/15/09. The hearing was continued and closed on Monday, December 21. However, due to the record snow fall over the weekend, the Board agreed to accept written comments submitted to it by Thursday, December 31.
The Planning Board gave preliminary approval to the subdivision on 1/25. In doing so, it approved a "neg dec"; that means the Board found there was no possibility of its approval having a significant adverse effect. It decision was subject to numerous conditions as stated in the Board Chariman's 2/3 approval letter.
Application for Final Subdivision Approval.
In July 2010, the owner submitted an application for approval of its final subdivision plan. Of the plans submitted the one that best shows what is proposed is the Overall Drainage & Grading Plan. The Planning Board's hearing is on Monday, 2/11/11 at 4 pm.
The preliminary approval had left several issues open, and other issues have been raised. Aspects of these issues are described below.
Traffic Impact
The traffic study that the owner had submitted on its preliminary application had been criticized by residents. Even after the preliminary approval, Suffolk County Department of Public Works had asked for changes. Applicant submitted a Supplementary Traffic Impact Study dated 12/10.
Recharge Basin Location
At the Planning Board's work session on 9/22, staff asked the Planning Board for instructions regarding the location of the recharge basin. The developer had put it in the Historic District on the Old Montauk Highway right next to the proposed entrance to the development. In its letter approving the site plan preliminarily, the Planning Board had said that the developer should explore locating the basin in a triangular portion of the property that is located just northwest of the west end of Old Montauk Highway and south of the former railroad right of way (CR-91). (It's clearer if you look at the site plan.)
Planning Division staff seemed to being saying that moving the recharge basin to the triangle would not work; an Environmental Division staff member reported that that division saw reasons why the basin should not be in the triangle. One of the reasons was that the CR 51 Land Use Plan had recommended a 100' buffer along the Montauk Highway and Old Montauk Highway that would reduce the usable size of the triangle. The Planning Board asked that Planning staff look at the triangle and determine whether, including the 100' buffer area, it would be large enough for the recharge basin.
At a work session on 10/13/10, the issues was discussed again. Staff supported applicant's conclusion that the triangle was not large enough to hold the recharge basin.
Nonetheless, the Historic District Advisory Commission, in its recommendations dated 9/30/10, continued to recommend that the recharge basin be moved from the Old Montauk Highway and be buffered.
Pesticides on Site
Most of this property had been farmed. Residents had pointed out the risks of pesticides on families in the new homes. Applicant filed a Soil Management Plan in September. It reports on pesticides and pesticide residues found on the property and describes plans to remediate the risks from them. Soil was tested from 15 borings on this 98 acre site. The pesticides found were 4,4'-DDE, 4,4'-DDT, chlordane and dieldrin. In addition, arsenic, mercury and copper were found in levels exceeding recognized limits.
The management plan calls for removal of some contaminated soil and burying of other contaminated soil on site.
East Buffer for Adjacent Residences
The east side of the site abuts 11 homes that have been there for many, many years. The plans call for a vegetated buffer around the southernmost of these homes. As the plan show, currently there is vegetation along both sides of the east boundary, including many large trees. However, there is no requirement for the new homeowners to maintain the existing vegetated buffer for the 10 northern houses.
During the preliminary phase, the argument was made that there should be a non-disturbance buffer along the east boundary of the new houses to protect the current homeowners.
Location of the North Buffer
The current view of this property from the Sunrise Highway and its south service road is impressive--a huge meadow with trees around its perimeter. The proposed houses will take up a large part of the meadow, and impact the view from the highway and service road adversely.
A condition of the preliminary approval (# 32) called for a row of 7' evergreens along the service road. They would have blocked the view of the meadow from the service road but not screened the view of the new houses from the highway because it is higher than the service road.
In the 2/4/11 staff comments and recommendations on the final plan, the prior recommendation has been reversed (# 25). It now calls for 7' evergreens along the back boundaries of the new houses on the north side of the development so the houses will be screened without blocking the view of the meadow from the service road.
Planning Board Hearing, 2/7/11
Several residents had raised concerns in letters submitted to the Board. Residents had spoke against approval, raising issues regarding traffic, the need for a buffer on the east to protect current residents on Eastport Manor Road, the risks of pesticide on the property, the historic district, the proximity of the airport, and other issues. EMPOA's letter was submitted at the hearing.
When residents were done, the applicant's attorney asked for an adjournment so he could have his traffic and environmental expert attend the continued hearing and testify. The hearing is to be continued on March 14 at 4 pm.
Planning Board Decision, 3/14/11
At the continued hearing on March 14, 9 residents spoke on problems with the proposal regarding the north buffer, the lack of an east buffer, the location of the recharge basin, the risk of pesticides having been used on the site and the lack of a means of assuring the new residents would be safe, and problems with the applicant's traffic impact study and the absence of a plan to address increased traffic. The applicant's attorney spoke briefly and had an expert testify briefly.
At the end of the evening, the Board voted 6 to 1 to approve the final subdivision plan with staff recommendations. No member of the Board addressed any of the residents' concerns, or engaged in any discussion of the issues. Board member Doug Dittko cast the sole vote against approval.
The Southampton Press' article includes comments from residents, the owner's attorney, and Councilman Panico on the issues and the decision.
Below are links to early plans and documents on this proposal.
When viewing plans, use magnification to see detail.
But more recent documents are here.
Most recent documents are here.
For more info, contact EMPOA.
