Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Comments on Lundy Environmental Impact Statement

The Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Assocation today filed the comments below in response to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Lundy Property. The Oyster Bay Town Board heard the application to rezone the property on March 27.

To: Aldona Lawson, TOB TEQR Division, 150 Miller Place, Syosset, NY 11791

Fr: Patrice Benneward, President, Glenwood / Glen Head Civic Association, PO Box 23, Glenwood Landing, NY 11547

Re: MARCH 27 HEARING – Z-3-04 To consider the application of DUMOND ENTERPRISES, LLC, contract vendee, and TRANSTECHNOLOGY, CORPORATION, fee owner, for a Change of Zone, from an “LI” District (Light Industry) and “R1-7” District (One-Family Residence) to an “RMF-16” District (Multi-Family Residence) and “R1-7” District (One-Family Residence), to allow the development of 15 new single-family residences and 41 new townhouse units, which would replace an existing 112,135 square foot one-story industrial building on property located at One Robert Lane, Glen Head, New York. (M.D. 2/13/07 #22).

---------------

I understand that the hearing on the above application may be closed but that comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement may be submitted through today. The civic association wishes to add the comments below to the comments made at the hearing by Karen Greene.

• Traffic: Turning right or left onto Glen Head Road from Dumond Place is difficult due to poor visibility. In addition, when traveling eastbound on Glen Head Road, making a left turn onto Dumond Place (as well as onto other side streets in the vicinity) can backup traffic to Glen Cove Avenue. The problem is frequently exacerbated by trains at the Glen Head Station. The proposed subdivision cannot help but worsen these conditions. We believe these traffic issues require more thorough study and that they must be effectively mitigated if the subdivision moves forward, particularly since the only way to enter or leave the subdivision would apparently be via Dumond Place.

• Sewer Line: We question the wisdom of approving a privately financed sewer line without examining the sewer needs of the properties in the surrounding area. We think the public interest would best be served by examining whether hooking up specific areas in the vicinity of the proposed line would improve groundwater quality or water quality in Hempstead Harbor, as well as whether such hookups would help to mitigate any flooding that may occur on some properties. If such an evaluation determines that sewering specific areas would be beneficial, we think the public interest would best be served if the engineering specifications of the sewer line were rethought and mechanisms for funding such hookups were fully explored. We are under the impression that the proposed subdivision and sewer line are in the Hempstead Harbor drainage basin and that at least a portion of the sewer line runs through the special groundwater protection area. But even if this were not the case, we believe the concerns we have outlined relative to sewering would remain valid. Note that a sewer feasibility study is underway in Glenwood Landing, prompted at least in part by a privately funded sewer line that may be constructed along the Glenwood Landing Waterfront.

• Open Space: The density of the proposed subdivision is far greater than in any other subdivision in Glen Head, perhaps with two exceptions. As the area approaches build out, open space has become increasingly important to the public good. We think the community interest requires that the site plan include a generous amount of public open space, as well as private open space that is visible to the public. We urge that at least one single family building and one multi-family building be dropped from the plan with no corresponding increase in lot coverage. We urge open space to be maximized in areas visible to the public, such as front- and side-yard setbacks, particularly at corners. We urge the inclusion in the site plan of public green spaces and the use of creative and innovative architectural, design, and planning techniques that promote a walkable neighborhood ambiance and that minimize the bulk of buildings and the features (such as garage doors) that frequently detract from the perception of open space.

Finally, we thank the Town of Oyster Bay for requiring an environmental review and appreciate the opportunity to comment.