COUNTY OF ORANGE___ ___Department of Planning
124
Main Street
Edward A.
Diana Goshen,
New York 10924-2124
County Executive
Tel: (845)291-2318
Fax: (845)291-2533
www.orangecountygov.com/planning
David
Church, A.I.C.P.
Commissioner
ORANGE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
239 L, M
OR N REPORT
This proposed action is being reviewed as an aid in coordinating such action between and among governmental agencies by bringing pertinent inter-community and countywide considerations to the attention of the municipal agency having jurisdiction.
Referred
by: Village
of Florida Planning Board Reference/County
ID No.: FLV 03-07M
Applicant:
Jeffrey Rosenberg County Tax ID: 113-4-2
(FLV); 19-1-1 (WRT) Proposed Action:
Major subdivision of 94.96 acres into planned adult community of 210 units
Reason for
Review: Within 500 ft of NYS Route 17A and
adjacent to county-owned land and the boundary between the Village of Florida
and the Town of Warwick
Date of Full
Statement: September 19, 2007
Comments:
The County has reviewed this project several times as we
have received additional information from the Village Planning Board and the
consultants for this project. Following
receipt of our most recent letter, dated September 26, 2007, the consultant
provided County Planning with a copy of the habitat investigation report
completed in February 2007, which includes a study of the habitat necessary to
support the Northern Cricket Frog, an endangered species present along the
entire shoreline of Glenmere Lake. The
following is a modified comment letter that includes several comments that were
not previously addressed in our comment letters; they also include our concerns
regarding the methodology of this report.
Comment No. 1 was affected by new information from the Natural Heritage
Program of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation;
Comments No. 9 and 10 were not addressed by our previous letters. Our other recommendations are unchanged.
The
applicant requests approval of a 210-unit major subdivision of 94.96 acres, which
will result in the development of attached townhouse units and apartments for a
planned adult community (PAC). The Planning
Department has reviewed the materials submitted for the above-named project in
accordance with Section 239, paragraphs l, m, and n of the General Municipal
Law. Based on this review, we have the
following comments:
1. Impact to known northern
cricket frog population: Glenmere Lake is
known to support a regionally-significant population of the endangered northern
cricket frog. The New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) justifies its listing of the
northern cricket frog as endangered in New York as follows:
The cricket frog's range in New York has
contracted significantly over the past century. Dozens of known populations
have been extirpated, including all of those on Long Island and Staten Island,
as well as several on protected State Parks in southeastern New York. Only a
quarter of those that remain (11) are deemed to be of fair or better viability,
and only five of those appear to be healthy. All but one of these occurs on
private land, where ongoing and persistent threats continue to imperil this
species.
As referenced above, Glenmere Lake is one of
five healthy populations in New York that is publicly owned. Conservation of this resident population is
therefore of fundamental importance to Orange County, to New York State, and to
many other individuals and organizations.
While the applicant has provided an updated
habitat investigation report which found no evidence of the northern cricket
frog onsite, the methodology involved in this survey appears to be
inappropriate for at least the following reasons:
#1 - The only site visit noted in the previously-completed
habitat investigation report was conducted on September 8, 2006, but should
have been completed in frog-calling season, which typically occurs between the
last week of May and the second week in July.
#2 – While the project site may not contain appropriate
wetland habitat for the northern cricket frog, the project site is very likely
to be a wintering, or hibernating, habitat for the frog. The previously completed habitat
investigation report, however, did not address the winter habitat needs at
all. Winter habitat for the frogs are
upland areas surrounding the frogs’ primary habitat (in this case, Glenmere
Lake is the primary habitat) and can be as much as 450 meters away from the
wetland area. All portions of the
project site are well within the 450-meter range and therefore we strongly
recommend that a winter habitat investigation be completed in early spring and
fall.
We have consulted with the New York State DEC on
this issue (see attached letter from zoologist Jesse Jaycox) and they have substantiated
the above claims.
Destruction or significant alteration of the
frog’s habitat could have devastating consequences to this population of the
northern cricket frog. Such
consequences would impact the adjacent County-owned property, in addition to
natural (biological) resources in the Town of Warwick and Town of Chester. Careful research and mitigation are
therefore imperative to ensure that this significant resource is unaffected by
the proposed development (if approved).
We recommend additional
biological surveys be conducted on the project site during the appropriate time
of year, looking for the appropriate habitat.
We recommend that the applicant consult with the New York Natural
Heritage Program and the New York State DEC’s Endangered Species Unit, the
latter of which has surveyed the frog population at Glenmere in the past, to
determine the best methodology for these surveys. Findings from these surveys should be submitted to the Planning
Department as part of the full statement required under NYS General Municipal
Law 239.
2. Application Processing: The revised Expanded Part
III of the Environmental Assessment Form makes reference to a habitat
investigation report included in that document as Appendix D. Although Appendix D of that document is a
cultural resources assessment, and the habitat investigation report is not
included in that document at all, we have now received that report and we now
have a full statement as of September 19, 2007. Additionally, please note that the site plan is missing a legend
that would identify the meaning of the cross-hatching present on the plan,
although further conversation with the consultants indicates that the
cross-hatched areas indicate federal wetlands; additionally, Note 5 states that
something “requires a waiver from the Planning Board”, and though there is no
indication of what that something is, conversation with the consultant
indicated that the note refers to deck setbacks. The plans should be revised to reflect this information.
3.
Other
Biological Resources: Glenmere Lake and the area around it
comprise one of Orange County’s biological hotspots. At least eight wildlife species listed as threatened or
endangered or as existing only in vernal pools have been identified in the
immediate vicinity of the project site, according to the New York State Natural
Heritage Program and Metropolitan Conservation Alliance data available to our
office. Therefore:
·
We
recommend that the applicant redesign the site to cluster development closer to
the west and south property lines of the project site, away from Glenmere Lake,
in order to minimize negative impacts of this development on these
species.
·
We
further recommend that the applicant provide additional environmental
information for this project in order to completely analyze the effects of this
project on the area wildlife, as well as the impacts to local traffic and
community resources. This may be done
through a narrative attachment through the Environmental Assessment Form or
through a tightly-scoped Environmental Impact Statement.
·
We
also recommend that the applicant contact the New York State Natural Heritage
Program and our office to determine which rare species are likely to be
affected by the proposed development.
4. Clustering: In our view, the layout of
the 210 attached townhouse units and apartments is a misrepresentation of
clustering. The primary objective of
clustering according to state enabling legislation is to “… enable and
encourage flexibility of design and development of land in such a manner as to
preserve the natural and scenic qualities of open space.” While the plan as proposed avoids steep
slopes, drainage ways and other environmentally constrained land, these lands
would likely remain unutilized under conventional development anyway. The best examples of clustered development
have large tracts of common open space, but the proposed plan leaves little
useable open space of little public benefit. The overall design of the project could be improved by enhanced
clustering of housing on a smaller portion of the site, thereby decreasing the
environmental impact incurred to the landscape, the amount of road, utilities
and landscaping needed, as well as the potential amount of stormwater runoff
and erosion incurred. Such an enhanced cluster design would preserve a larger
piece of contiguous open space and, in doing, help mitigate the impact to
aesthetic and scenic resources as well as the impact to Glenmere Lake.
· We recommend that the applicant investigate
options for the contiguous open space, such as selling or donating it to the
County to be annexed into their current holdings between the lake and the
project site.
· We recommend that the applicant redesign the project to cluster the
units on a smaller portion of the developable area of the lot.
·
We further recommend that the applicant should contact the Town of
Warwick Conservation Board, the Warwick Conservancy, Inc., and the Orange
County Land Trust as soon as possible, so that those organizations may offer
their advice on designing the project to meet conservation objectives as well
as the needs of the applicant.
- Senior Citizen Parking: We recommend that the applicant reduce the
amount of parking on the project site.
In regard to parking, the provision requiring 2 spaces per unit is
excessive for senior citizen projects. While people of a certain age tend
to keep their cars in parking spaces longer and have more visitors than
the general public, they also tend to own fewer cars, thereby reducing the
need for a multitude of parking capacity. Typically, parking spaces for adult
communities are based upon the number and type of residential units
proposed. For example, efficiency units are usually required to have only
1 space per unit, while 1 bedroom units are required to have 1.25 spaces
and 2 bedroom units 1.5 spaces per unit.
If garages are a part of the project design, guest parking may be
the only parking element needed.
- Site Design and Layout: The site in question
is presently heavily wooded with many mature trees. The proposed plans for
the project would remove much of this natural vegetation with the
construction of housing, roads and utilities. To maintain the natural and
scenic qualities of open space that presently exist on the site, we
strongly recommend that as much mature vegetation as possible be preserved
through an enhanced cluster design and reduction in the number of housing
units. All mature trees to be
preserved should be marked in the field and mapped using GPS by the
applicant’s design professionals. These trees could then be included as
part of the landscaping plan to ensure that they are, indeed, preserved
and not clear-cut during construction. This will benefit not only
residents of the project, but also the developer and the surrounding
community by increasing the aesthetic and intrinsic value of homes and
open space planned.
7.
Low
Impact Development: We recommend that the applicant install low
impact development measures throughout the development. Low Impact Development Stormwater Management
involves decreasing stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces through
micro-scale, bio-retention facilities such as permeable pavement, rain barrels,
rain gardens, open drainage swales, curb-less parking areas in addition to
drywells. The purpose is to allow stormwater runoff to infiltrate the ground
close to where it originates rather than channeling it through pipes and
culverts to conventional offsite detention facilities such as detention ponds
and manmade wetlands. The benefits include a reduction in stormwater runoff,
erosion, and need for conventional stormwater detention facilities. Groundwater
recharge is also enhanced and natural aquatic habits also less impacted with
Low Impact Development stormwater management practices. For more information on
the subject, please contact our office.
8.
Traffic
Impacts: The applicant has proposed three road
connections for this project; one main access onto Route 17A, with two
secondary access routes (which may be full use or may be reserved for emergency
access) onto Glenmere Homesites Road and Scanlon Avenue. Glenmere Homesites Road has limited sight
distance at the proposed access point and is generally approximately one and a
half lanes wide.
·
We
recommend that the applicant improve Glenmere Homesites Road by removal of
vegetation, installation of curve warning signs, and widening of pavement to
create a full two-lane road along the entire length of the project frontage
from the intersection with the onsite easement road to the intersection with
Route 17A.
·
We
further recommend that the access onto Glenmere Homesites Road should be widened
to accommodate a full ingress and egress, and that the applicant should
consider all necessary improvements to Scanlon Avenue and the onsite road to
make the onsite road a full ingress and egress. These measures will improve emergency access to the site.
·
We
remind the Village that a state permit will be necessary for the proposed
access onto Route 17A, and that the state may impose other requirements on the
applicant.
9.
Water
Resources: Glenmere Lake is also a primary source of
drinking water for the Town of Warwick and the Village of Florida. The Village must consider the impact on this
resource of 210 additional housing units, particularly housing units that are
spread out in such a way as to cover most of the developable area on the
project site as is proposed here. The
increase in paved road and parking surfaces as well as the area covered by the
residential units will increase runoff from the site that flows directly into
the lake; this runoff will likely contain salt, sand, and automotive fluids
that have the potential to contaminate the drinking water for hundreds of
people.
·
We
recommend that the development should be concentrated in such a way that less
than fifty percent of the developable land is covered as a result of this
project.
·
We
further recommend that the tightly-scoped Environmental Impact Statement
recommended above should include effects to the drinking water supply and
mitigation for any potential negative impacts; alternatively, the applicant may
choose to explore the potential negative impacts and mitigation in a separate
narrative attachment to the Environmental Impact Form.
10.
Wastewater
Disposal: The proposal is unclear on the means of wastewater
disposal. The Village should determine
whether the existing pump stations have sufficient capacity to serve this
project, or whether additional facilities will be required.
Please note that New York State General Municipal Law 239-nn states that “It is the intent and purpose of this section to encourage the coordination of land use development and regulation among adjacent municipalities in order that each adjacent municipality may recognize the goals and objectives of neighboring municipalities, and as a result development occurs in a manner which is supportive of the goals and objectives of the general area.” Therefore please remember that due to this project’s location adjacent to the Town of Warwick municipal boundary, the Town of Warwick must receive copies of any and all public notices regarding this project.
County Recommendation: Approval, subject to adherence to Comments No. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9.
Date: October
19, 2007
Prepared by: Megan Tennermann, Planner David Church, AICP
Commissioner of Planning
"IMPORTANT NOTE: As per NYS General Municipal Law 239-m(6),
within 30 days of municipal final action on the above referred project, the
referring board must file a report of the final action taken with the County
Planning Department. A referring body which acts with a supermajority vote acts
contrary to a recommendation of modification or disapproval must set forth the
reasons for the contrary action in such report. For such filing, please use the final action report form attached
to this review or available on-line at www.orangecountygov.com/planning." 239reviewdecisionletters/239 Review Letter Template
