[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
1 wo Mama ne. @'dl' @@ f n 511, .2-Larc ro-- ro w n a C @@';aa r '7"". h1i a g RI. ?gOfflg ecre ic 1c, ta CELS1- STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF STATE ALBANY, N.Y. 1223 1 -0001 GAIL S. SHAFFER SECRETARY OF STATE July 18, 1988 Mr. James Burgess Acting Chief Coastal Programs Division Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 1825 Connecticut Avenue, NW Washing,ton,-DC 20235 Dear Mx" IAU*@6: Recently you were sent copies of several approved Local Waterfront Revitalization Programs (LWRPs), included in the package was the Town of Mamaroneck and Village of Larchmont LWRP. At that time, the standard binders for the program were not available. There are now available and are enclosed with this letter. If your staff has any questions, they may contact me at (518) 474-9201. Sincerely, Charles T. McCaffrey, Jr. Chief Bureau of Local Waterfront Revitalization Programs CTM:lc Enclosures Town of Mam aroneck and Village of Larchmont Local Waterfront Revitalization Program US Department of Commerce NOAA Coastal Services Center Library 2234 South Hobson Avenue Charleston, SC 2205-2413 Adopted: Town of Mamaroneck Town Board, June 30, 1986 Village of Larchmont Board-of Trustum, June 30, 1986 Approed by: NYS Secretary of State Gail S.Shaffer, October 28, 1986 Concurred: U.S. Of rice of Ocean and Coastal Resource Managements April 21, 1987 4 w 0 1 US Department of Commerce NOAA Coastal Services Center Library 2234 South Hobson Avenue Charleston, SC 29405-2413 0 Town of Mamaroneck and Village of Larchmont LOCAL WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION PROGRAM I 0 0 kA STATE OF NEWYORK DEPARTMENT OF STATE ALBANY. N.Y. 12231 GAIL S. SHAFFER SF-CRETARY OF STATE October 28, 1986 Honorable Dolores Batt:alia Supervisor Town of Mamaroneck Town Center Mamaroneck, NY 10538 Dear S It is with great pleasure that I inform you that? pursuant to the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, I have - approved the Town of Mamaroneck and Village of Larchmont Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP). The Town, in conjunction with the Village of Larchmont, is to be commended for Its thoughtful and energetic response aimed at correcting the adverse environmental impacts of past activities and preventing such impacts from future activities along its waterfront. I will shortly notify State agencies that I have approved the Town's joint LWRP and will provide them with a list of activities which must be undertaken in a manner consistent-to the maximum extent practicable with the Town of Mamaroneck and Village of Larchmont LWRP. Again, I would like to commend the Town of Mamaroneck on its efforts to develop the LWRP and look forward to working with you in the years to come as you endeavor to preserve and restore your waterfront. Sincerely, Gail S. Shaffer GSS:lc I*A, e A STATEOFNEWYORK DEPARTMENT OF STATE ALBANY. N.Y. 12231 GAIL S. SHAFFER SECRETARY OF STATE October 28, 1986 Honorable Miriam Curnin Mayor Village of Larchmont Municipal Building Larchmont, NY 10538 Dear Mayor Curnin: it is with great pleasure that I inform you that, pursuant to the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act, I have approved the Village of Larchmont and Town of Mamaroneck Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) . The Village,. in conjunction with the Town of Mamaroneck, is to be commended for 'its thoughtful and energetic response aimed at correcting the adverse environmental impacts of past activities and preventing such impacts from future activities along its waterfront. I will shortly notify State agencies that I have approved the Village's joint LWRP and will provide them with a list of activities which must be undertaken in a manner consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the Village of Larchmont and Town of Mamaroneck LWRP. Again, I would like to commend the Village of Larchmont on its efforts to develop the LWRP and look forward to working with you in the years to come as you endeavor to preserve and restore your waterfront. Sincerely, Gail S. Shaffer GSS:lc t A. cerely, ..,.I Of Ca,, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration V NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE ,4pcs of OFFICE OF OCEAN AND COASTAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Washington, D.C. 20235 APR 2 1 1987 - mr. George Stafford Director Division of Coastal Resources and Waterfront Revitalization Department of State 162 Washington Street Albany, New York 12231 Dear Mr. Stafford: The Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management has completed its review of your request to incorporate the Village of Larchmont/ Town of Mamaroneck Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) into the New York State Coastal Management Program (NYS CMP). We have received the adopted program which has been approved by the New York Secretary of State. We received comments from seven Federal agencies, none of which objected to adopting the LWRP as a routine program implementation change. You and my staff have discussed the problem of the need to clearly identify in the LWRP which of the 44 coastal policies listed in the NYS CMP apply to the LWRP area. The current use of "not included" is very confusing to the users of these programs. Because there is evidence in the documents, however obscure, that policies labeled "not included" do apply, we concur with your request that the Village of Larchmont/Town of Mamaroneck LWRP be considered as a routine program implementation. However, we expect the State to remedy the problem of clearly identifying which policies apply by eliminating the term "not included" as soon as possible. in accordance with the Coastal Management Regulations, 15 CFR 923.84, Federal Consistency will apply to the village of Larchmont/Town of Mamaroneck LWRP after you publish notice of our approval. Sincerely, e--- /6 /-@,) Peter L. Tweedt" Director .N'd 'L"t Or C01%, NITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NATIONAL OCEAN SERVICE OFFICE OF OCEAN AND COASTAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Sloes of Wash;n9ton, D.C. 2023S APR 2 1 1987 - Mr. George Stafford Director Division of Coastal Resources and Waterfront Revitalization Department of State 162 Washington Street Albany, New York 12231 Dear Mr. Stafford: The office of ocean and Coastal Resource Management has completed its review of your request to incorporate the Village of Larchmont/ Town of Mamaroneck Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) into the New York State Coastal Management Program (NYS CMP). We have received the adopted program which has been approved by the New York Secretary of State. We received comments from seven Federal agencies, none of which objectedto adopting the LWRP as a routine program implementation change. You and my staff have'discussed the problem of the need to clearly identify in the LWRP which of the 44 coastal policies listed in the NYS 01P apply to the LWRP area. The current use of "not included" is very confusing to the users of these programs. Because there is evidence in the documents, however obscure, that policies labeled "not included" do apply, we concur with your request that the Village of Larchmont/Town of Mamaroneck LWRP be considered as a routine program implementation. However we expect the State to remedy the problem of clearly identifying which policies apply by eliminating the term "not included" as soon as possible. In accordance with the Coastal Management Regulations, 15 CFR 923.84, Federal Consistency will apply to the Village of Larchmont/Town of Mamaroneck LWRP after you publish notice of our approval. Sincerely, e--- Peter L. Tweedt" Director EXTRACT FROM 'THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL REETING OF THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF @UURARONECK HELD JUNE 30, 1986 IN THE SENIOR CENTER OF THE TOWN CENTER, 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROAD, VILLAGE OF MAMARONECK. (MINqTES NOT YET APPROVED BY T014N BOARD.) WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Mamaroneck having con- sidered the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program drafted pursuant to the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal -Resources Act (Article 42 of the Executive taw of the State of New York) and recommended in March 1986 by the Coastal Zone Management Committee for adoption by this Town and by the Village of Larchmont; and WHEREAS, having further considered drafts of certain items of legislation recommended by the.said Committee and by the Town Attorney for adoption by the Town in implementation of the said LWRP; and WHEREASP having subjected all these proposals to public comment and public hearings pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act and Local Law #4 of 1985 and made appropriate modification in them in response to comments received, and pub- lished the substance of the said comments and responses in a Final Environmental Impact. Statement dated June 16, 1986; and WHEREAS, the Town has adopted findings and a decision pursuant to SEQRA and Local Law #4-1985, RESOLVED, that the said Local Waterfront Program with appropriate revision incorporating the aforesaid modification is adopted; and be it further RESOLVED, that the Supervisor is authorized and directed, on behalf of this Board, to convey to the Secretary of State of the State of New York- the text of this Resolution together with the text of all implementing legislation with a request that in view of these actions the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program be approved. State of New York County of Westchester Town of Mamaronech I do hereby certify that I have compared the annexed Resolution with the original on file in my office, and that the same is a true and correct transcript therefrom and of the whole of the said original Resolution, which was duly passed by the Town Board of the Town of Marnaro- neck, a quorum being present, an June 30 19 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Corporate Seal of said Town of Mamaroneck, this -9 t h-day of June MUNICIPAL BUILDING OFFICE air LARCHMONT. N. Y. 10536 TELt 834-6230 WAT!0. VILLAGE CLERK 91 Extract from the minutes of the Special Meeting of the Board of Trustees of the Village of Larchmont, New York, held at the Municipal Building on Monday, June 30, 1986: On motion by Trustee Forger, seconded by Trustee Kean and carried, the following resolution was adopted, to-wit: The Board of Trustees of the Village of Larchmont, Having considered the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program drafted pursuant to the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act (Article 42 of the Executive Law of the State of New York) and recommended on March 1986 by the Coastal Zone Management Committee for adoption by this Village and by the Town of Mamaroneck, and Having further considered drafts of certain items of legislation recommended by the said Committee and by the Village Attorney for adoption by this Village in implementation of the said LWRP, and Having subjected all these proposals to public comment and public hearings pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, and made appropriate improvements in them in response to comments received, and published the substance of the said comments and responses in a Final Environmental Impact Statement dated June 16, 1986, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the "Statement of Findings by the Board of Trustees of the Village of Larchmont" on the "Town of Mamaroneck-Village of Larchmont Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP)" presented to this Board by the Village Attorney pursuant to the requirements of the SEQR Law, is hereby adopted, and be it further RESOLVED, that the said Local Waterfront Revitalization Program, with appropriate revision incorporating the aforesaid improvements, is hereby adopted, and be it further RESOLVED, that the following local laws in implementation of the said program are likewise adopted: Local Law No. 4 - 1986 To create a Coastal Zone Management Commission Local Law No. 5 - 1986 Local Consistency Law Local Law No. 6 - 1986 To amend the Site Plan Approval-Law Local Law No. 7 - 1986 Designating Certain Critical Areas of Environmental Concern and be it further 2 RESOLVED, that the Mayor is hereby authorized and directed, on behalf of this Board, to convey to the Secretary of State of the State of New York the text of this Resolution, together with the texts of all the documents hereby adopted, with a request that, in view of these actions, the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program be approved. STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER SS.: VILLAGE OF LARCHMONT I hereby certify that I have compared the above resolution with the original on file in my office, and that the same is a true and correct transcript therefrom and the whole of said original resolution, which was duly adopted by the Village Board of the Village of Larchmont, a quorum being present, on June 30, 1986. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Corporate Seal of said Village of Larchmont this 7th day of July, 1986. Village Clerk The preparation of this report was financially aided through a federal grant from the Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972. as amended. This report was prepared for the New York Department of State under Federal Grant Number NA-82-AA-D-CZ0613. VMLAGE TOWN OF OF LARCHMONT M-A-M--A-R-ONECK A T LO WATERFRONT REVITALIZ.A."Ir. ION PROC-41RAM adopted June 30, 196t by the'Town and Village Boards pursuant to the Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act of the State of New York (Article 42 of the Executive Law) Prepared under the direction of the Town and Village Boards by: Village of Larchmont - Town of Mamaroneck and SHUSTER ASSOCIATES COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE planning Consultants VILLAGE TOWN OF OF LARCHMONT MAMARONECK Board of Trustees Town Council Miriam Curnin, Mayor Dolores A. Battalia, Supervisor James 1. Anderson Thomas R. Amlicke Sydney Astle. Stephen C. Chapin Han'Forger, Deputy Mayor Lawrence Lerman, CZKC Liaison Paul H. Kean, Caroline Silver.@tone, CZMC Liaison Deputy Supervisor Barbara Wood, Village Clerk Patricia A. CiCioccio, Town Clerk Coastal Zone Management Committee Wallace Irwin Jr., Co-Chairperson Shirley W. Tolley, Co-Chairperson (Village of Larchmo*nt) (Town of Mamaroneck) Subcommittee Heads: Elinor Fredston, Mary Anne Johnson, Lawrence Lowy, C. Alan Mason$ Howard McMichael Jr. Members: Bruce.Allen, June Allen, Alex Buc'.1iman, Joseph F. Dorsey, Villiam Eip!@I, Gary Hirschberg, Arthur A. Katz, Jar@es'Killileg, Jaines Lotto, Elaine Price, Edward D. Riley, Abe Rosenfield, Robert Schoenberger, Joseph F. Vandernoot, Robert E. White, Leo Wilson Acknowledgement and appreciation are due to all those, including officials of the Town, Village, Westchester County and New York State Governments, and pr%ivate-citizens in-the Villege and-Town and in neighboring municipalities,- who gave advice and assistance in the preparation of this Program and of implementing legislation. IN MEMORIAM 1@he Committee records with sorrow the loss of Paul M. Miller of the Village ,of Larchmont, who served as Co-Chairman from December 1982 through December 3.983 and earned the respect and friendshio of all members; and of Albert H. Blumenthal, also of the Village of Larchmont-,. a distinguished public servant who, like Paul Millerg was a member of the Committee from the outset. Both died in 1984. Their participation in this work is gratefully remembered. 24 a arF 0 _IF?RA 46A A 1407R,_:@ ib K's VILLAGE TOWN OF OF. LARCHMONT MAMARONECK IM io 0.1 Ilk XA J4 LOCAL WATERlu2L%ONT REVITALIZATION PROGRAM CONTENTS Page SECTION I WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION AREA BOUNDARY . . . . . . . . 1-3 A. Boundary Considerations . . . . . . . . . . 1-3 B. Revised Coastal Boundary . . . . . . . . . . 1-4 C. Description of Revised Coastal Boundary. 1-4 SECTION II INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-5 (see detailed contents on page 11-3) SECTION III LOCAL POLICIES AND APPLICABLE STATE POLICIES . . . . . . 111-3 Development (Policies 1-6) . . . . . . . . . . 111-3 Fish and Wildlife (Policies 7-10) . . . . . . . 111-5 Flooding and Erosion (Policies 11-17) . . . . . 111-9 General (Policy 18) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-17 Public Access (Policies 19-20) . . . . . . . . . 111-17 Recreation (Policies 21-22) . . . . . . . . . . 111-18 Historic and Scenic (Policies 23-25) . . . . . . 111-20 Agricultural Lands (Policy 26) . . . . . . . . . 111-24 Energy and Ice Management (Policies 27-29) . . .111-24 Water and Air Resources (Policies 30-44) . . . . 111-25 SECTION IV PROPOSED LAND AND WATER USES AND PROPOSED PROJECTS. . . IV-3 A. Proposed Land and Water Uses . . . . . . . . IV-3 B. Proposed Physical Projects . . . . . . . . . IV-9 MAPS 1. REGIONAL SETTING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-19 2. BOUNDARY MAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-21 3. LOCATION MAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-23 4. EXISTING OPEN SPACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-25 5. HYDROLOGIC FEATURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-27 5A. TIDAL WETLANDS AND COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREAS. IV-29 6. POLICY ISSUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-31 7. GENERALIZED ORIGINAL ZONING . . . . . . . . . . IV-33 8. ACTION PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV-35 9. PROPOSED LAND AND WATER USE . . . . . . . . . . IV-37 SECTION V TECHNIQUES FOR LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAM. V-3 A. Local Laws and Regulations . . . . . . . . . V-3 B. Other Actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-9 C. Management Structure to Implement the LUTRP V-12 D. Financial Resources Necessary to Implement the LWRP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-18 E. Summary Table: Relation of Policies to Other Sections . . . . . . . . . . .. . . V-19 SECTION VI FEDERAL AND STATE PROGRAMS LIKELY TO AFFECT IMPLEMENTATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VI-3 A: Federal and State Actions and Programs Which Should be Undertaken in a Manner Consistent with the LWRP . . . . . . . . . . . VI-4 B: Federal and State Actions Necessary to Further the LWRP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VI-23 SECTION VII CONSULTATION WITH OTHER AFFECTED STATE, REGIONAL AND LOCAL AGENCIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VII-3 A: Adjacent Municipalities . . . . . . . . . . VII-3 B: Westchester County Government . . . . . .. . VII-3 C: State of New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . VII-4 D: Resolution of Conflicts . . . . . . . . . . VII-4 SECTION VIII LOCAL COMMITMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VIII-3 APPENDICES A AND B 0 0 , SECTION I WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION BOUNDARY @SECTION 1: Waterfront Revitalization Area Boundary A. Boundary Considerations The original landward boundary of the coastal zone for this area deline- ated by the State of New York shows an inland boundary which follows the Boston Post Road all the way across the Town and Village from the New Rochelle border to the Village of Mamaroneck border. The area within this boundary includes those lands most frequently associated with the coastal waters in terms of use and impact from the coastal environment. However, it does not include lands and inland waters that are of major importance under one of the criteria established by the State for defining coastal boundaries. Section 3 of the State Coastal Management Program (State of New York Coastal Management Program and FEIS, August 1982, page 11-3-2) establishes as one of its criteria that the coastal boundary should "include all land and water uses directly impacting coastal waters ... such impact is defined as that which changes the physical, chemical, biological, littoral or aesthetic characteristics, or the social-economic values of coastal waters to the extent that the character, use or availability of its resources and/or the environmental quality standards of the coastal waters are so adversely affected that they can only be maintained or restored at high cost to society." As the Inventory and Analysis (Section II, below) makes clear, the pbys- ical, chemical, biological, littoral and aesthetic characteristics of our coastal area suffer significant damaging impact from pollution, siltation and f looding. The sources of much of this damage are the various watercourses carrying runoff from drainage basins which empty into Long Island Sound. All of these watercourses traverse northernly areas of the Town and Village well inland from the coastal zone boundary established by New York State. Not only do existing and long-standing conditions in these drainage basins adversely affect our coastal waters; we must also deal with the possibility of future changes in land use intensity and characteristics, drainage patterns, or land management practices, that could have a further adverse impact. Removing, preventing, or mitigating such adverse impacts is a principal objective of a number of policies, projects, and actions proposed in Section III, IV and V below. A further pertinent factor is the need for cooperation with neighboring municipalities. Every drainage basin that traverses the Village of Larchmont and/or the Town of Mamaroneck's Unincorporated Area begins or ends, or both, in another community (see Map 1). Thus, drainage basin management, with all its implications for the coastal zone, is necessarily an intermunicipal concern. This necessity is recognized, and provided for in succeeding sections of the present Program. At the least, c -unication and coordination between municipalities in the same drainage basin will be requirid, and the creation of formal drainage basin manage- ment entities may well be deemed more appropriate and effective. The Town of Mamarotteck and the Village of Larchmont can be far more effective participants in such intermunicipal arrangements if their Waterfront Revitalization boundary, and hence the reach of their LWRP policies 1-3 affecting drainage basin management, clearly extends throughout their area of jurisdiction and control. (See Section III, Policies 12A, 14A, 14B; Section V-B, Item I., and V-C, Item 3-d-6). Finally, it is pertinent to note another criterion laid down by New York State (State Coastal Management Program page 11-3-2, criterion 2) in establishing the inland coastal boundary; namely, that the boundary should I'confd= with the nearest cultural feature or political boundary." The explanation points out that a boundary that follows "known landmarks ... such as a road, railroad, utility right-of-way, or municipal boundary" simplifies determination of what lies inside or outside of the coastal zone. The boundary revision made below is consistent with this criterion. B. Revised Coastal Boundary In view of the foregoing considerations, a revision in the Inland coastal zone boundary is made. An excellent argument could be made on environ- mental grounds for extending the boundary to the limits of the drainage basins which impact the coastal waters. However, we make no such proposal because it is beyond the authority of any municipality to administer a boundary, or to implement policies and programs, beyond its area of municipal control. Our revision, therefore, is more limited. The coastal zone boundary is revised as shown on Map 2 to include the whole area within the boundary of the Town of Mamaroneck, including the entire Village of Larchmont, except that part of the Village of Mamaroneck which lies within the Town. Within this boundary, the Town and Village will be able to establish a management program under the LWRP for the maximum area over which they have jurisdiction, the uses of which have a direct Impact on the coastal waters. Moreover, they will be assured of an adequate basis for their role in building intermunicipal arrangements for drainage basin management. C. Description of Revised Inland Coastal Boundary The inland Coastkl Zone boundary is described as follows: Beginning at the southern (Long Island Sound) terminous of the boundary between the Town of Mamaroneck and New Rochelle; Thence inland along the Town boundary to the boundary of the Village of Mamaroneck; Thence south along the western boundary of the Village of Mamaroneck to the coast. The coastal boundary does not include any areas other than those in the unincqrporated area of the Town of Mamaroneck and in the Village of Larchmont. The Village of Mamaroneck has adopted its own LWRP, has its own coastal boundary, and is not a party to the present Program. No part of it is included in the coastal boundary here described. 1-4 0 .0 SECTION 11 INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS .0 Section II - Contents Page 1. Summary ............................................... o. U-5 2. Introduction: General Description- ... oooo.o.oo.o..o.qo 11-5 (a) Physical geography, (b) economic geography, (c) economy, (d) public access to waterfront 3. Resources..... ......... _oooo ........... oo ....... o..o.. JI-9 (a) Human resources, (b) residential real estate, (c) recreation, (d) historic buildings and sites, (e) scenic resources, (f) living resources, (g) open space, (h) water resources, (i) organizational resources, (j) conclusion 4o Fish and Wildlife Habitat Narrative... _ooo ... _oo ..... 11-19 S. Adverse conditions: Introductory observations, ....... ooo. 11-25 6. Problem Localities: The Pine Brook-Premium Watershed.. o. 11-26 (a) Larchmont Hills, (b) the Pine Brook area, (c) the Premium Marsh, River and Millpond,*(d) the.Upper Premium River 7.. Problem Localities: The Sheldrake Watershed ....... o.o ... 11-29 (a) Weaver Street-Bonnie Briar area, (b) Brookside Drive area S. Problem Localities: The East Creek-Cut Creek Watershed .... Il-.L.1 Fast Creek and Gut Creek, (b) the Hommocks Marsh, (c) Little Harbor Sound 9. Problem Localities: The Harbor Area ...... o_ .... o o o o o o - 41-613 (a) Navigation and dredging, (b) harbor security 10. Area-wide Sewage Problems.: ..... o ... II-j5 11. Area-wide Causes and Cures of Interacting Floo-d,...o.o.o.ojj-37 Siltation and Sewage Problems 22. Other Area-wide Pollution Problems: Water, Air, ........... I@E-37 Noise, Litter 23. Recreation: Possibilities and Limits......... ..... o.. o...II-40 14o Historic and Scenic Preservation.0 ........ 0 ... 0... 0 0.. 0 0 OJI-40 11-3 SECTION II: INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS 1. Summary The Village of Larchmont and the Unincorporated Area of the Town of Mamaroneck together occupy an attractive but environmentally vulnerable six-i'quare-mile residential area along the Long Island Sound shore of Westchester County -- a highly indented and beautiful coastline totaling some nine miles. Proximity to New York and the beauty and recreational values of the area have attracted a high-income business and professional population of some 20,000. The area support@ a prosperous economy based on residential real estate and including many retail and service establish- ments. Although most of the coastline is in private hands, there is wide access to the shore through private clubs and through public access to shoreline parks and conservation areas. Additional values include ecologically significart fish and wildlife habitats (primarily salt and freshwater wetlands) and.sites of historical importance and scenic beauty. These values, and the economy and way of life that depend on them, have already been damaged to some degree, and are further threatened, by en- vironmental problems -- chiefly upstream flooding from overbuilt watersheds with associated siltation and sanitary sewer malfunctions, and adverse impact on streams, wetlands, and fish and wildlife habitats. Siltation in the harbor area also periodically affects boating, a major recreational activity. Other problems include water pollution, which affects public health and sensitive wildlife habitats; occasional coastal flooding during storms and high tides; noise pollution and litter. A further long-range problem is how to assure future protection of places of historic or scenic importance. our geographic situation makes it obvious that many aspects of our communi- ty's environmental problems can only be addressed effectively with the aid of intermunicipal cooperation extending throughout the watersheds that terminate on, or transit, our coastal zone. In Section I we have proposed a change in the inland Coastal Zone boundary in order to maximize the ability of both municipal governments to deal with these problems; but since the problems follow geographic rather than political lines, and extend well beyond our political jurisdiction, the solutions must do likewise. Provision for intermunicipal cooperation, with reinforcing participation by agencies of the State and Westchester County governments, will therefore be an integral part of our Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. 2. Introduction: General Description This Local Waterfroni Revitalization Program covers the Village of Larchmont and the Unincorporated Area of the Town of Mamaroneck. The area covered is bounded on the west by the City of New Rochelle, on the north by the Village of Scarsdale, and on the east by the Town of Harrison and the Village of Mamaroneck. 11-5 Of the approximately 6 square miles in this bi-municipal area one square mile -- including about eight out of nine miles of highly indented coastline -- lies within the incorporated Village of Larchmont. The remainder consists of the unincorporated area of the Town, which borders the Village on all its inland sides and also includes parts of two ecologically important pieces of shoreline and major parts of the wateicourses that drain the area. Geography and patterns of development link the two municipalities in many ways. The Town-Village borders on both east and west run through ecologi- cally and hydrologically important stream h@eds and tidal inlets. Several of the two municipalities' functions, notably sanitation and conservation, are performed jointly. Town and Village residents share the same school district, post office, telephone exchange, and public library; many attend the same houses of worship and belong to the same local voluntary organiza- tions. Thus, the entire area shares an interest in the health of the same coastal zone. a. Physical Geography: Geologically, the area is part of the Manhattan Prong, the southernmost portion of the New England upland geological province. The underlying rock structure makes for great topographical variety and scenic beauty, with hills and streams running down to a sound shore made up of numerous small bays, inlets and promontories.' This advantage, however, is partly offset by environmental drawbacks. in many places the underlying rock is near the surface, limiting the capacity of the ground to absorb water and thus contributing to problems of flooding and siltation. These are serious problems for our community, most of which is drained by the Pine Brook, Sheldrake, and East Creek-Gut Creek Yatersheds flowing through such rocky heights for much of their length. b. our economic geography is likewise a mixed blessing. Our location in a great metropolitan region with a railroad and two interstate highways crossing our community, four large airports nearby (one major These three watersheds are the focus of drainage-related problems discussed in Parts 6, 7, and 8 of this Inventory. As the drainage boundaries shown on Map I make clear, a fourth watershed, that of the Mamaroneck River, drains an area of about I square mile in the northeastern portion of the Town, about half of it consisting of a part of the Saxon Woods County Park. Immediately downstream from this area is the Village of Mamaroneck, which has chronic problems of residential flooding in this watershed during rainy periods. Part of the Town area in this watershed is in a residential (R-20) zone in which further residential development is under way or planned. The zoning and topography of the area are such that i 't is not believed that this development, properly controlled, will aggravate downstream flooding. Town authorities are aware of the interest of the Village of Mamaroneck in this matter and take care to give that Village advance notice of all Town land use proceedings affecting this area. 11-6 including, Horseshoe Harbor. It is one of the great beauty spots of the Westchester shore. It has been owned and maintained since its establishment by the Larchmont Manor Park Society, whose enlightened management has preserved the park for nearly a century as an asset for the whole community. The Larchmont Manor Park Society is a nonprofit corporation whose membership is limited to residents of a designated area (Map 610) south of the Boston Post Road. Under a deed to the Society in 1892, the right to use the park is limited to residents of Map 610, their households and guests;'however, the society has also invited access to the park by residents outside that area, subject only to rules designed principally to preserve the park's peaceful atmosphere, beauty, and fragile environment (its soil is shallow and has occasionally suffered from overuse). The boating facilities in Horseshoe Harbor are managed for the society by the Horseshoe Harbor Yacht Club. The society itself manages the adjoining beach and swimming facilities, providing access and bathhouse space to Larchmont Village residents, first come first served, for a seasonal fee. The larger, landscaped portion of the park is used for passive recreation only. Over the decades the society, at its own expense, has erected seawalls and planted and maintained lawns and trees to preserve and maintain the park's appearance. The Horseshoe Harbor Yacht Club has conducted dredging operations three times in the past 30 years to improve the boating con- ditions in Horseshoe Harbor. The Manor Park is artfully landscaped and adorned with stately trees, three gazebos overlooking the Sound, broad lawns, wild thickets and winding walks, and a spectacular formation of ancient metamorphic rock skirting the shore. Flanked by Larchmont Harbor on one side and Horseshoe Harbor on the other, it commands a sweeping view of Long Island Sound and the Long island shore opposite. It is an important resource for natural history education and a favorite place for strolling and for watching the sailing and racing activity centered on the Larchmont Yacht Club nearby. Village of Larchmont Property: Flint Park, the largest, as well as Pine Brook, Lorenzen and Woodbine Parks, all touch the waterfront or streams near it. The total park area of about 37 acres is mainly accounted for by Flint Park (27 acres) . its mostly level ground contains tennis and paddle tennis courts and playing fields. It is a key facility in the Village's recreationai life. it is also the site of a small building used for meetings and cultural events. Its use for public access to the shoreline for passive recreation, however, is impaired by the location of a Village leaf disposal facility at the south end of the park adjoining the Hommocks Marsh. one being just across the Sound), and substantial small industry and commercial water traffic along the nearby Sound shore -- brings us important economic benefits; indeed, it is the basic source of employment for our residents. But this location also brings environmental drawbacks: pollution of water, air and soil by aircraft, vehicular and industrial wastes; noise pollution; and the flooding and other evils that result from residential overbuilding. C. Economy: The dominant business in both Larchmont and the unincorporated area is residential real estate. we have no manufacturing, and commercial enterpriies in the area exist mainly to serve local or nearby residents. The area's residential value lies partly in its ready access to New. York City - as well as to a widening array of suburban business, commercial and cultural centers - by both road and rail, but also in its physical beauty and the amenities and recreational advantages of its coastal location. Personal incomes cover a wide range, but the average level in the community is high. The resulting high residential real estate values, and the ancillary professional and business (mainly retail) establishments, provide tax support for a high-quality public school system and efficient municipal services. The residential development of Larchmont and the unincorporated area (most of which lies within the Larchmont postal district, zip code 10538) has proceeded steadily since thelate 19th century. Develop- ment of Larchmont Village took place primarily before World War 11, while that of ttie unincorporated area continued thereafter -- in both cases with subdivision of large properties into single-family homes and construction of numerous apartment houses near the major east-west thoroughfares. The population of the area grew from 14,500 in 1940 to about 20,000 in 1970. Of the latter number, about 7,000 lived in the Village. These figures remained approximately unchanged through 1980. This stabilization underlines a fact of major importance for local planning, namely, that property in the area is already almost fully developed except for the existing parks, golf courses, and con- servation areas described below. in fact, as will be seen below, overbuilding in recent decades, both in our community and in those up- stream, has caused some of our most serious problems -- flooding, siltation, pollution and malfunction of sanitary sewers -- which threaten the beauty and integrity of the coastal zone on which the community's property values, economy, and ecology all heavily depend. d. Public Access: The bulk of the Long Island Sound shoreline, including tidal estuaries and inlets, in our community is privately owned, either by homeowners or by private clubs and associations, to which many Village and. Town residents belong. However, a significant amount of public property, and one uniquely important private park, are open to the public, as follows (see Map 4): The Larchmont Manor Park (12.65 acres) winds along a twisting half mile of indented shore from Umbrella Point westward to, and 11-7 In addition, the dead ends of several Village streets abut the waterfront or the Premium estuary. Finally, it should be noted that the easternmost 50 feet of Premium Point, just inside the Village of Larchmont border, is unimproved Village property totaling about 0.1 acre. The use of this area for public recreation has been considered from time to time, but, as is noted later in this inventory, there are many drawbacks to such use. Town of Mamaroneck property: Two important waterfront areas are Town property under the management of the Conservation Advisory Commission. These are the 5-acre Hommocks Conservation Area, most of which lies in the Town (the rest is in the Village of Mamaroneck) and the 10-acre Premium River Conservation Area. Both include tidal wetlands with well-rooted marsh grasses which function as important wildlife habitats and, through their water-retention capacity, retard erosion in the tidal estuaries. Both are open to the public for passive recreation, with wood- chipped walk trails and dry ground and catwalks and foot bridges in marshy areas. The Premium Conservation Area has somewhat deteriorated in the past few years as a recreational facility, partly owing to insufficient interest among residents in the vicinity, but some residents have plans to reverse this trend. In addition, as will be seen below, both areas have chronic siltation and pollution problems. In addition, the south end of the 12.5 acre Hommocks athletic field abuts the Hommocks Marsh and Little Harbor Sound. The field is'owned by the Town, and its use is shared by the Town Recreation Department and the Board of Education whose property to the north of the field is the site of the Ho=ocks Middle School. The field was built on a sanitary landfill in the 1960's and early 1970's (in the process burying the lower ends of East Creek and Gut Creek in culverts). Defects in covering, grading, and seeding have severely limited its recreational use but are being gradually overcome. 3. Resources a. Human Resources. Our 20,000 residents include a high proportion of entrepreneurs, managers, professionals, artists, and skilled technicians working in the New York metropolitan area -- collec- tively, an important asset to the economy and culture of New York State. The Mamaroneck district's primary and secondary schools, supported by its strong tax base, have long been of high quality with a hig@ percentage of college-bound students -- a resource of great long-term importance. b. Residential Real Estate. Our relatively high-income population chooses to live in this area not only because of its strategic proximity to New York City but also for its amenities, especially U-9 the aesthetic and recreational value of its Sound shore. This fact helps to account for the high value of real estate in the area. ce Recreation. Recreational facilities, part public and part private, are substantial for both active and passive recreation, much of it water-dependent or water-enhanced. Many of these facilities, because of their size and location, also have great environmental importance as absorbers of flood waters and as wildlife habitats. Their recreational uses can be summed up as follows: (1) Active sports: In addition to the facilities of the Mamaroneck school system, active sport facilities for adults and children include public baseball and soccer fields, chiefly in Flint Park; a public indoor ice rink next to Hommocks School; tennis and paddle tennis courts in Flint Park, the Town's Memorial (Station) Park, and private clubs; and three private golf clubs, two of them wholly and one partly within the Town. As befits a coastal community, water-dependent sports are well developed, including: Boating: On the Larchmont shoreline are two yacht clubs, the Larchmont Yacht Club (11 acres) and the Horseshoe Harbor Yacht Club which uses the Larchmont Manor Park Society's boathouse in the Manor Park. Their combined fleets of sail and motor craft number over 450, have an estimated value of over $20 million, and provide recreation to thousands of residents. In addition, a few members of the Larchmont Shore Club (6 acres) moor their boats in club waters, and numerous boats are docked or moored at private residences along the shore. The Larchmont Yacht Club has made Larchmont famous as one of the most important yachting centers on the American east coast, increasing 'the attractiveness of this area as a place of residence for sailing enthusiasts. The area is also a market for a considerable nearby industry, especially in the Village of Mamaroneck and in New Rochelle, devoted to yacht building, maintenance and supply. There are no public boating facilities along the shoreline in Larchmont or the Town. Some resi- dents keep their boats at the Village of Mamaroneck facility in Harbor Island nearby, although it has a long waiting list and charges a substantially higher fee for nonresidents. Swimming: Facilities include the indoor Hommocks swimming 11-10 pool, shared between the school system and the Town, and open to the public; an open-air County swimming pool in Saxon Woods Park; and, for Larchmont Village residents, bathhouse facilities at the Manor Park Society's Manor Beach. Home- owners in the adjoining Map 610 area have priority rights in this facility, but the Manor Park Society makes room for hundreds of other Village residents for a season fee, first come first served. Up to 750 families have shared this facility in some recent years. In addition, the Shore Club and the Yacht Club have private beaches for members. No public outdoor swimming facility exists along the shore, but such facilities are available, at higher fees than for residents, in nearby Sound shore municipalities including the Village of Mamaroneck and New Rochelle. A chronic problem affecting all Sound shore swimming in recent years is the pollution of coastal waters by raw sewage after heavy rains, frequently causing the closing of nearby beaches by order of the County Health Department. Fishing: Both local and deep-water fishing is done in the Sound by many boat owners in the area. In addition, there is some fishing from the shore at private residences and, subject to municipal regulation, on public property in the Premium estuary and at the Larchmont Reservoir. Restoration of shellfishing along the Sound shore, for recreational as well as commercial purposes, will depend an future steps to upgrade water quality (see paragraph h below). (2) Passive Recreation: Much of the so-called passive recre- ation in parks and conservation areas -- walking, birding, sketching, painting, photography, nature study, etc. -- is enhanced by bodies of salt or fresh water and is in that sense water-related. The scenic beauty of the Larchmont Manor Park makes it a favorite public strolling place. For birders and students of ecology, the Premium and Hommocks Conservation areas, and on a smaller scale Horseshoe Harbor, incubate abundant fish, shellfish, and crustaceans and are nesting and feeding grounds for many species of waterfowl and shore birds. Farther inland, the Sheldrake and Leatherstocking Conservation areas (total 55 acres) and the 60-acre Larchmont Reservoir Conservancy all contain undisturbed woodland with a varied topography of open water, wetlands, and rocky heights, the habitats of abundant wildlife. d. Historic Buildings and Sites. Although no systematic survey has been made of historical and archaeological sites in this area, the Village and the unincorporated area have many sites of historical, architectural, and cultural interest, including a score or more of private houses a century or more old. A few of these date from the Federal period and many from late Victorian times. The oldest surviving structure in the area is a private house at 4 Pryer Manor Road, built in 1775 on the site of an earlier mill house. It has been recognized by the Daughters of the American Revolution as a historical landmark, as has the Larchmont Public Library, built 6n the site of the original Samuel Palmer house. The library building is one of 40 structures listed in the Westchester Architectural Heritage Tour Guide, due for publication in late 1986 under supervision of the County Historian. The Manor House, built in 1790 for Peter Jay Munro, still stands at the head of Prospect Avenue. Beside the Post Road outside Larchmont's municipal building is a milestone bearing the carved inscription "21 miles from New York", erected in 2804 along what was then the Westchester Turnpike. Nearby are two small cemeteries of early date, one of them established by Quakers in the early 18th century -- the oldest known relic of European habitation in our community. The house at 86 Weaver Street, now a private residence, was built prior to 1808 to house the first public school in the Town of Mamaroneck, organized under the New York State public education law of 1795. Many structures of late 19th century vintage are in a neighborhood known locally as the Manor. It is defined by Town of Mamaroneck Map 610, the area once owned by the Larchmont Manor Company, predecessor of the incorporated Village of Larchmont. in addition to private residences, notable structures in this area include the clubhouse of the Larchmont Yacht Club, built in the 1880's, a remarkable show piece of late Victorian design; and Fountain Square in Larchmont Manor, turned over to the Larchmont Manor Park Society in 1892 and redesigned by Larchmont architect Walter C. Hunting. It is a distinguished landmark and was once the center of the incorporated Village of Larchmont. The Larchmont Manor Inn, opened in the Manor in 1893, the year the Village was incorporated, has been nominated for listing on the National Historic Register. It is believed likely that traces of post-Revolutionary building sites remain on the Mamaroneck side of the Larchmont Reservoir property. This possibility is being investigated. Some other @ites in the area bear traces of prehistoric Indian habitation. Indians are believed to have built a weir at the site of the present Premium Millpond dam, which itself dates from 1801. A south-facing rocky cave adjacent to Pine Brook Park may have been used by Indians as a blind for hunting animals. Some 11-12 large erratic boulders in the area, including the one that gave Rockingstone Avenue its name, are believed to have been objects of Indian worship. e. Scenic Resources. The exceptional scenic value of the Larchmont Ranor Park is described above. In addition the Premium and Hommocks areas, aside from their other values, are scenically important. This is especially true of the Premium River, including the Premium Marsh and.Millpond. it is one of the most sought-after residential environments along our coast, with scenic waterscapes visible throughout its length as the Premium winds its way to the Millpond. On a smaller scale, the same values are found in the Hommocks area. In addition, numerous other sites not visible from the shore, including Fountain Square, Memorial (Station) Park, the Sheldrake River and Leatherstocking Trail Conservation area, the Larchmont Reservoir Conservancy, the three local golf courses (Bonnie Briar, Winged Foot, and Hampshire), and the Brookside Drive-Gardens Lake area, contribute significantly to the scenic quality of this portion of the Coastal Zone. f. Living Resources. Ou r2 land and waters nourish a wide diversity ;T fish and wildlife. Bird species are especially numerous owing to our coastal location and our transitional climate pattern caused by the meeting of the Labrador Current and the Gulf Stream. Birds, both resident and migrator;, and land' animals find food and shelter in the wide variety of trees, shrubs, lawns and rocky structures on private land and suburban streets, and in the more protected open space of our parks and conservation areas. Fish, shellfish, crustaceans, amphibians, and reptiles breed in the nutrient-rich ponds, salt marshes and watercourses, providing food for gulls, shore birds,- winter- sheltering ducks, geeser and swans, and land animals, as well as some recreational fishing. (See part 4 of this Inventory for details.) Development in recent years has impacted the region's wildlife in numerous ways: for example, with the shrinkage of open land, increasing numbers of crows, raccoons, and skunks have invaded suburban areas. As will be seen below, inappropriate or careless development poses serious threats to many of the valued species that breed and thrive in our area. This threat is especially significant in two saltwater wetlands located in the Premium and Hommocks Conservation Areas. These two areas; largely because of the importance of salt marshes as spawning grounds for fish and other aquatic species, were 2See wildlife inventories in Appendix A. 11-13 designated locally over a decade ago as conservation areas under the jurisdiction of the Town Conservation Advisory Commission; but this status cannot fully protect them from environmental damage -- in fact, they have already been substantially damaged by siltation, erosion, and pollution. The ecological and commercial value of the many species of fish, shellfish and crustaceans in these two areas, and the importance of the bird species that feed on them, would in our opinion justify designation of both these areas by DEC as "significant coastal fish and wildlife habitats" in need of protection, or, at a minimum, their designation for the same purposes under the present program as "locally important wildlife habitats." g. Open Space. (See Map 4) In the watersheds along the highly developed Westchester shore, open space serves several major purposes including wildlife habitat, recreation, aesthetic values, and -- of special importance in this area -- flood control by absorbing and retarding runoff in wet weather. Three jurisdictional citegories of open space are involved, totaling about 722 acres. (1) Within the Village of Larchmont, open space includes 34 acres of public parks; the 12.65-acre privately owned Larchmont Manor Park; and 17 waterfront acres occupied by the Larchmont Yacht Club and the Larchmont Shore Club -- a total of about 64 acres. (2) Within the Unincorporated Area of the Town, open space totals some 577 acres, as follows: About 109 acres3of Town-owned parks and conservation areas, namely: the Sheldrake River, Leatherstocking Trail, Hommocks, and Premi= River Conservation Areas; 3These figures do not include 187 acres of parkland in the northeast corner of the Town, which form part of the County-owned Saxon Woods Park. These three watersheds are the focus of drainage-related problems discussed in Parts 6, 7, and 8 of this inventory. As the drainage boundaries shown on Map 1 make clear, a fourth watershed, that of the Mamaroneck River, drains an a-rea of about 0.6 square mile in the northeastern portion of the Town, nearly half of it consisting of a part of the Saxon Woods County Park. Immediately downstream from this area is the Village of Mamaroneck, which has chronic problems of residential flooding in this watershed during rainy periods. Part of the Town area in this watershed is in a residential (R-20) zone in which further residential development is planned. The zoning and topography of the area are such that it is not beliived that this development, properly controlled, will aggravate downstream flooding. Town authorities are aware of the interest of the Village of Mamaroneck in this matter and take care to give that Village advance notice of all Town land use proceedings affecting this area. 11-14 the handsomely landscaped Memorial Park; the Gardens Lake; and the Hommocks playing field. In September 1983 all these open spaces were formally dedicated by the Town for parks and recreational use. The 12.76-acre Larchmont Reservoir Conservation Area, consisting of that portion of the Larchmont Reservoir - James G. Johnson Jr. Conservancy lying within the Town of Mamaroneck. Two large private golf courses and part of a third, totaling 428 acres. The Bonnie Briar and Winged Foot golf clubs are in northern part of the Town. A 6.74-acre portion of the Hampshire Country Club golf course extends west from the Village of Mamaroneck into the unincorporated area near the Hommocks Conservation Area. About 40 acres of private undeveloped land with devel- opment potential lying between the Bonnie Briar and Winged Foot golf clubs. The unique status of one of the above areas, the 60-acre Larchmont Reservoir James G. Johnson Conservancy, calls for further comment. It is owned by the Village of Larchmont but is located partly in the unincorporated area (12.76 acres) with the remainder in New Rochelle. In October 1984 this property was dedicated in perpetuity by the Village for specified public purposes including conservation, nature study, wildlife preserve, flood control, standby water supply, and environmental and historical education. Since 1975, when the Reservoir ceased to serve as the Village's regular water supply, the property, with the concurrence of the Village, has been maintained as a conservation area and flood control facility by the tri-municipal Town of Mamaroneck Conservation Advisory Commission and the Town conservation staff, with additional support since 1981 from the Friends of the Reservoir, Inc., a private nonprofit organization. Cooperation has been established with the City of New Rochelle in regard to recreational and educational use and policing of the property. Following the dedication of the property, the Village's oversight of these arrangements has been strengthened by creation of the Village of Larchmont Reservoir Committeet which makes recommendations to the Village Board on policy and projects relating to the property and works with the above bodies in the initiation and review of proposals concerning it. It is useful to see the flood-control aspect of open space in a wider perspective since political boundaries in our area cut across all the area's watersheds. Open space in New Rochelle and Scarsdale retards flooding in the Village and the unincorporated area, while open space in the unincorporated area helps to retard flooding of the lower Mamaroneck River in the Village of Mamaroneck; and conversely, open space on the Village of Mamaroneck side of the Hampshire Country Club retards flooding and erosion in the Hommocks Marsh. Intermunicipal cooperation in the preservation of existing open space is thus of high importance to all * these communities. Pressure for residential or commercial development in the Westchester Sound shore area's remaining open space cannot be wisely balanced against other important long-term considerations unless the municipalities concerned, in cooperation with the County government, develop common approaches to zoning, planning, public ownership, and other means of control. h. Water Resources (see Map 5). (1) Fresh water: A considerable network of lakes, small ponds, wetlands and watercourses in the unincorporated area, as well as the small but important remaining above-ground stretches of Pine Brook and East Creek in the Village, function as a wildlife habitats (see part 4 below) and as an important resource for quiet recreation. In addition, as noted in paragraph g-3 above, the Upper Reservoir (Sheldrake Lake), located in New Rochelle but owned by the Village, serves the important function of standby water supply in case of severe water shortage. it is classified by New York State as "A, suitable for all uses," while the Lower Reservoir (Goodliffe's Pond) is classified "C.", suitable for uses other than consumption and primary contact recreation. The Sheldrake River is classified D due to intermittent flow and inability to support propagation of fish. Gardens Lake is classified C. This community's water supply comes from the New York City system. However, recent reports by Westchester County authorities of increasing demand on the New York City system suggest that reactivation of the Upper Reservoir as an emergency water supply at some time in the not too distant future is a distinct possibility. Under County plans, filtration and other operational costs in such a contingency would be borne by the County. However, it is incumbent on, and in the interest of, the Village of Larchmont, as owner of the Reservoir property, to do its best, with the cooperation of upstream municipalities, to maintain Sheldrake Lake in its present water classification "A", not only for standby water supply purposes but also in order to avoid deterioration of the Reservoir property as a wildlife habitat and recreational and educational area. (2) Salt water: The deep waters of Long Island Sound off our shores are classified SA, suitable for a-11 salt-water uses; but several wide areas near the shore, including many shellfish beds, are classified SB, which excludes human consumption of shellfish. Shellfishing along these shores, once a significant commercial and recreational activity, has been banned for many years mainly because of organic pollution from sewage. The Premium Millpond is classified I, which excludes primary contact recreation (swimming) as well as shellfishing. A further threat to the quality of 11-16 these waters is the nonpoint discharge of organic nutrients-- fertilizers, animal wastes, decomposing leaves and grass cuttings, etc.--into coastal waters via stormwater runoff. These substances, together with sewage overflow, stimulate algal growth and deplete the oxygen in the water which is essential to fish and other forms of life. The above classifications do not reflect the frequent pollution crises described in later sections, caused by the flow of raw sewage into coastal waters after heavy rains, rendering these waters temporarily unfit for swinfiming; nor do they reflect the serious, though temporary, effects of oil spills such as those that have occurred repeatedly in the Premium-Pine Brook system. Organizational Resources. Larchmont and the Town of Mamaroneck can draw on a wide array of local organizational resources and programs in formulating and carrying out their joint Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. Among these are: (a) Official bodies: Town Council (Town Board) Village Board of Trustees Town Planning Board Village Planning Commission Town and Village Zoning Boards of Appeals Town and Village Engineering, Highway and Parks Departments Town Conservation Department Joint (village and Town) Sanitation Commission Town of Mamaroneck Conservation Advisory Commission (representing Town, Village of Larchmont and Village of Mamaroneck) Town Recreation Commission and Staff Village Recreation Committee Village Beautification Committee Village Parks and Trees Committee Village Reservoir Committee (b) Nongovernmental bodies: The LIFE (Local Involvement for Environment) Center, our main resource for environmental education and awareness. It is mainly supported by membership dues, but also receives budgetary contributions from the Town and the Villages of Larchmont and Mamaroneck. T@he Larchmont League of Women Voters The Garden Club of Larchmont Friends of the Reservoir, Inc. The Larchmont Manor Park Society 11-17 The Larchmont Yacht Club The Larchmont Shore Club The Horseshoe Harbor Yacht Club The Larchmont Historical Society The Mamaroneck Historical Society Local Boy Scout, Girl Scout, and Camp Fire Girl troops, active in anti-litter efforts This list is by no means complete. Various local organizations show an interest from time to time in local environmental, land-use, and@ other questions affecting the coastal zone, including the Larchmont Rotary Club, the Chamber of Commerce, the Larchmont-Mamaroneck Civic Association, and homeowners' groups in particular residential districts. (c) Educational and informational: Local public and parochial schools and their associated PTAs, active in environmental education and recycling programs The Larchmont Public Library Newspapers: (1) The Gannett Westchester Newspapers' Sound shore edition, edited in New Rochelle. It was substituted in summer 1985 for three long-established dailies of the Sound Shore including The Daily'Times of Mamaroneck, under whose logo it still appears locally. it provides limited coverage of local affairs. (2) The weekly Sound View News, distributed gratis. It often provides extensive local coverage for New Rochelle, Larchmont and Mamaroneck. (3) The monthly Tomorrow, a tabloid distributed gratis in this area and giving some coverage to local developments. Cable TV: LMC-TV, the local-access facility with studios in Mamaroneck High School, produces programs on local affairs for cable subscribers in the area. Conclusion concerning resources. Awareness of the social-economic, ecological, and institutional resources just described is essential to an understanding of the problems and possibilities of the La rchmon t -Mamaroneck Coastal Zone. Our success or failure in protecting and enhancing the quality of, and promoting access to, the Coastal Zone will go far to deter- mine the economic and demographic future of our community -- as well as of nearby communities which share in its economic and recreational life. on the one hand, excessive or poorly regulat- ed development can -- and in many ways already does -- threaten our waterfront and its resources with flooding and other destruc- tive effects. On the other hand, it is primarily the existence of a highly developed, high-value residential environment, of medium population density and with convenient commercial and TI-18 0 transport facilities, that has created a tax base sufficient to make protection of our scenic, ecological and other coastal values possible and affordable. What is needed is a prudent and sustainable balance among ecological, economic and social values and concerns. 4. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Narrative This narrative describes several areas which are proposed for designation as "significant coastal fish and wildlife habitats" orare "locally important wildlife habitats." a. Location and descri2tion of habitats. (see Map 3) Three habitats areas are described here, two centering on coastal salt marshes and the third on a network of freshwater wetlands and lakes and associated open-space, areas within the coastal zone. All three habitat areas, viewed environmentally, form parts of larger complexes straddling the borders between the unincorporated area of the Town and the neighboring communities of New Rochelle, Scarsdale, and the Village of Mamaroneck. Although geographically distinct, they are interrelated in that many species# especially waterfowl, "commute" among various feeding grounds in this region including these three. Thus they serve as links in a surviving chain of wildlife habitats in the highly developed Sound shore region extending along southeastern Westchester County from the New York City line to coastal Connecticut. (1) The Premium salt marsh complex lies at the downstream end of the Pine Brook-Premium, watershed. It centers on the Premium Marsh, where Pine Brook and the Premium River join, and extends downstream to the river's outlet to the Sound via the Premium Mill Pond. Ecologically, it also extends 4 south and west across the Town boundary into New Rochelle, but this description covers only the parts within our own coastal area. These include the open portions of Pine Brook and the Premium River within Town and Village boundaries; the Town's 10-acre Premium River Conservation Area, which embraces most of the marsh; the Town's share (nearly half) of the 40-acre Premium Mill Pond; sheltered waters in Echo Bay along the northwest shore of Premium Point; and about 4 acres of publicly owned land and water in and adjoining Pine Brook in the Village of Larchmont. The upstream end of this Village portion begins south of the Boston Post Road at the 4Adverse impacts on the Premium Marsh and the need for intermunicipal action to restore and protect it are discussed in some detail on pages 43-47 of the "Local Coastal Management Program" published in 1980 by the City of New Rochelle Department of Development. 11-19 lower portion of Kane Park, follows Pine Brook to just below its junction with th6 Premium at the foot of Oak Avenue, and includes Woodbine Park and the southeast margin of Lorenzen Park. The total area of this complex, including both Town and village portions, is about 32 acres. (2) The Hommocks salt marsh complex is located in and near the head of Little Harbor Sound, a tidal inlet in Larchmont Harbor. It straddles the boundaries of the Village of Larchmont and the unincorporated area of the Town of Mamaroneck, and is associated environmentally with adjacent lands in the Village of Mamaroneck. Its main component is the Town portion (about 3.5 acres) of the Hommocks Conservation Area, most of which consists of tidal wetlands. Entering the marsh at the northwest corner of the conservation area are the outfalls of East Creek and Gut Creek, which flow through pipes under the Hommocks athletic field and drain a watershed which is fully developed with residential and business properties and major thoroughfares. The complex also includes three other areas. One consists of some 5 acres of sheltered waters off the southwest end of the Hommocks peninsula, an important feeding area for migrating waterfowl. Another is a strip, about 2 acres in area, of partly marshy, partly wooded ground skirting the south end of Flint Park in the Village of Larchmont from the East Creek outfall to the western boundary of the park. This strip forms the north bank of Little Harbor Sound and is ecologically associated with the Hormnocks Marsh. The fourth component is the 6.74-acre segment of the eampshire Country Club golf course, lying within the Town east of Hommocks Road, through which Gut Creek flows on the surface. The total area of this complex is thus about 17 acres, all but about 2 acres of which are in the unincorporated area. Both of the above habitat complexes are rich in wildlife and include areas of open ground, woods, meadow edges, salt marsh, intertidal flats, and open water, either salt or brackish. Water depths are shallow. Tidal fluctuation is slower in the Premium complex because of the dam between it and the Sound. Both areas are surrounded partly by parks and playing fields and partly by residential and commercial development. As will be seen below, they have survived considerable adverse impact from their surroundings. (3) The Larchmont Reservoir-Sheldrake-Leatherstocking Freshwater i4ietland Complex is located in the Sheldrake watershed about two miles inland. its total area is about 520 acres. Extendi*ng eastward from the Town portion (12.76 acres) of the Larchmont Reservoir property across the unincorporated area to the Village of Mamaroneck boundary, it forms a network of large and small open spaces and connecting habitat corridors to the north and south of the 55-acre 11-20 Sheldrake-Leatherstocking trail system, which forms its main east-west axis. To the north are the Bonnie Briar and winged Foot golf courses, respectively 141.4 and 280 acres. Within and near the golf courses and the trails are important habitat corridors following the two branches of the Sheldrake River and its small tributaries. These include wetlands, springs, ponds, flood plains, and streams flowing into the Sheldrake's two branches. South of the Conservation Area, the Complex includes the Sheldrake and its two branches, the 7.4-acre Badger Sports Club, Gardens Lake, and the small Revere Road Conservation Area next to the Village of Mamaroneck border. (If defined solely in, ecological terms, this Complex would extend well into the Village of Mamaroneck downstream and into Scarsdale and New Rochelle along the upstream portions of the Sheldrake watershed. Only those sections within our coastal Zone boundary are included here.) The main components of this Complex are as follows: (a) Of the 60-acre Larchmont Reservoir-James G. Johnson Conservancy, 12.76 acres are within our Coastal Zone boundary, including the lower half of Goodliffe Pond, the lower dan and spillway, a section of the Sheldrake River (West Branch) belpw the spillway and west of Weaver Street, and surrounding woods and meadow. Although the larger part of the Conservancy lies in New Rochelle, the entire Conservancy (see part 3-g above) is owned by the Village of Larchmont, dedicated by it to public uses including wildlife preserve, and maintained by agencies of the Town under Village supervision and in cooperation with the City of New Rochelle. The Conservancy's two lakes (about 25 acres) and surrounding deciduous woods, rocky upland, marshy low ground and meadow, make it an excellent habitat for a wide variety of aquatic and land birds. In 1985 a fence was built across the base of the smaller peninsula near the south end of Sheldrake Lake, creating a protected nesting area for wild birds. Plans are well advanced for the erection of a nesting pole for ospreys on Goc>dliffe Pond. (b) The two golf courses, totaling over 421 acres, offer wide expanses of relatively undisturbed open space with varied topography and numerous ponds, streams, thickets -and groves of trees. With the Badger Sports Club property (7.4 acres), private open space in this complex totals some.428 acres. (c) The Sheldrake-Leatherstocking Conservation Area com- prises 55 acres of rocky, deciduous woodlands, of which 13 acres are freshwater wetlands. It is intersected by 11-21 both branches of the Sheldrake and by two tributaries to them, as well as by two tributaries to the main stem of the Sheldrake near the Village of Mamaroneck line. (d) All the habitat corridors connecting the above areas are centered on tributaries of the Sheldrake and include the wetlands and other features described above. Their total area is estimated at 24 acres. Note: In addition to the above, a fourth habitat complex merits description'in this inventory even though, because it is sufficiently protected under the State Tidal Wetlands Law, it is not formally included among the habitat complexes listed in this program. This is the intertidal and littoral zone extending from Larchmont Harbor westward along the Sound shore to and around Premium Point. Included in it are the shores of the Larchmont Manor Park, Horseshoe Harbor, the Larchmont Shore Club, and intervening private and public shoreline properties. This complex includes rocky coves in the Manor Park-Horseshoe Harbor area, several of which contain patches of salt marsh peat and grasses, as well as a small sandy beach called Pirate's Cove. Biologically rich rocky and sandy beach continues off the Shore Club and Premium Point Beach. This habitat nourishes a wide variety of fish including striped bass, bluefish, flounder, mackerel, blackfish, menhaden, alewives, eels, porgies, minnows, pipefish, and seahorses; also horseshoe crabs, lobsters, hardshell and softshell clams, oysters, mussels, and snails. Bird species include several species of gulls, herons, kingfishers, and shorebirds that feed on the above organisms, as well as swans, geese, ducks, and other species that feed on marine vegetation. b. Fish and Wildlife Values. In this narrow, densely developed region of southeastern Vew York State, between the fjord of the Hudson River and the arm of the sea that is Long Island Sound, all surviving patches of relatively undisturbed open space and wetland -- three of which, described above, are in our portion of the Coastal Zone -- are vitally important to a great diversity of fish and wildlife, both resident and migratory. Lists of bird, land and aquatic species found in these three habitat complexes are given in Appendix A. The discussion below deals only with some of thi more notable species. Unless otherwise stated, the species mentioned are found in all three habitat complexes. Fish: The Premium and Hommocks areas are nurseries and feeding areas for bluefish, winter and summer flounder, eels, blackfish, 11-22 mackerel, menhaden, weakfish, silversides, alewives, and cod. 0 Fish at the Reservoir include large-mouth bass, yellow perch, sunfish, eels (which migrate upstream from salt water), brown bullhead catfish, carp, and shiners. Other aquatic species: Diamond-back terrapin breed in the Hommocks Marsh, and snapping turtles in the Reservoir. Blue crabs also formerly bred in the Premium and were caught there for food; it is hoped that they may return as water quality improves. Among shellfish that breed in both areas are ribbed and blue mussels; hard, soft-shell, and razor clams; oysters and scallops. However, because of water pollution the waters of the Premium area have not been certified for shellfishing -- once a common activity there -- in recent years. Horseshoe crabs, now on the endangered species list, breed in the Premium River. Naiads, a freshwater mussel, breed in the lower Reservoir -- proof of the quality of its water, since this species is especially sensitive to pollution. Birds: Many bird species use these habitats as nesting areas, and still more use them as feeding grounds, either as residents or in migration or as casual visitors. Nesting species include, in all three areas, the black-crowned night heron, ring-necked pheasant, mallard, Canada goose mute swan, and killdeer. Also nesting at the Reservoir are t@e snowy egret, wood duck, and green-backed heron. Feeding species in all three areas include at least eight heron species: the cattle egret, snowy egret, great egret, great blue heron, green-backed heron, black-crowned night heron, yellow-crowned night heron, and American bittern; and another long-legged wader, the glossy ibis. Migratory visitors feeding in all three areas include large numbers of black ducks and, in recent years, at least one osprey in each area. Between late October and April, the following wintering waterfowl feed in these areas: common loon, American coot, greater scaup, lesser scaup, shoveller, mallard, Canada goose, mute swan, ruddy duck, bufflehead, American widgeon, common goldeneye, canvasback, common merganser, hooded merganser, and red-breasted merganser. Grebes and pintails are casual visitors. Use of these areas by waterfowl in winter is influenced by the extent of ice cover from year to year. Normally most feed in the open water of the Millpond in midwinter; then, with the retreat of the ice, larger numbers invade the wetlands before migrating north.. Other bird species seen in -- and in many cases nesting in -- one or more of these three areas include many of the passerine species common in the American East; the belted kingfisher; crows (black and @ish); blue jay; five hawks (red-shouldered, marsh, kestrel, merlin, osprey); four gulls (herring, great black-backed, ring-billed, laughing); six woodpeckers (common flicker, pileated, red-bellied, yellow-bellied sapsucker, hairy, and downy); three swallows (tree, bank, and roughwinged); four 11-23 wading birds (lesser yellowlegs, greater yellowlegs, spotted sandpiper, semipalmated sandpiper); meadowlark; and, as rarer visitors, the snowy owl, black skimmer, clapper rail, Virginia rail, and American pipit. On one occasion a Eurasian fieldfare appeared, drawing bird enthusiasts from near and far. Land animals: Aside from the common rodents, muskrats breed in the Premium area and are also found in the Re servo ir-She ldrake- Leatherstocking area. Among other mammals found in the Reservoir area are the short-tailed shrew, North American field vole, white-footed mouse, woodchuck, op7ossum, striped skunk, raccoon, and red fox. Uses of the above: The uses of the fish and wildlife species described above by people in our area, or nearby, include some commercial exploitation (mainly lobsters), but more important by far are recreational, educational, scientific, aesthetic and ecological values. There is some sport fishing offshore in addition to commercial fishing, the latter being based on nearby ports, not in our area. There is some land-based fishing from shoreline clubs and residences and from the "Red Bridge" between the Premium River and Millpond. Hunting is not allowed in Larchmont Harbor because of the proximity of residential areas, but there is some duck hunting offshore from Premium Point. Most important are those recreational uses classified as "pas- sive" -- birding, photography, nature study, etc. Much of this activity has educational value, and in some cases scientific value as well. LIFE Center naturalists conduct frequent nature walks in all three areas for school groups and adults. Annual Audubon bird counts are also conducted there. Several ecological studies of these areas, assigned as educational projects at the State University at Purchase, the City University of New York, and Mamaroneck High School, have had scientific value. One of these, a study of foraminifera in the Hommocks and Greacen marshes, led to an invitation to the student author to visit Dr. Ruth Patrick of the Philadelphia Academy of Science; and a Mamaroneck High School student's study of horseshoe crabs in the Premium River won a Westinghouse Science Award. Other studies of this type are planned at the College of New Rochelle. No less important, although difficult to assess, is the contribu- tion these three areas make to the balance of nature in this highly developed land and seascape at the western end of Long Island Sound. Spawning fish and lobsters (and, it is hoped, drabs and shellfish once again) not only contribute to the commercial catch in this part of the Sound, but provide food for many beautiful and useful species of shorebirds. Insect-eating birds that breed in these habitats help to control insect pests throughout the coastal area, reducing the need for chemical insecticides. 0 11-24 C. Sources of information. See Appendix B . 5. Adverse Conditions: Introductory Observations The problems of our coastal zone, unlike those in many industrial communities, are not primarily economic. There is no industry on our waterfront. There is little local unemployment: most of our employed residents commute to work elsewhere, and most of those who work in Larchmont's retail and service establishments reside elsewhere. Urban blight is not a serious problem, although some of our older apartment units have deteriorated and some comm4rcial structures along the Post Road and Palmer Avenue are in need of a face lift. Despite a normal degree of tax resistance, municipal and educational services remain strong, and there is a well-developed "safety net" of local governmental, County, and volunteer social services. Environmental constraints, on the other hand, are serious and increas ing. As in other highly developed areas, these problems result primarily from many decades of residential and commercial development without much thought being given to environmental impact. In many cases, inadequate provision was made for sanitary sewage disposal and storm water drainage, and for maintaining a prudent balance between the built environment and the remaining open space. Developers, while striving to produce "floodproof" structures in areas known to be flood-prone, gave little if any thought to the flooding that their alteration of the landscape could inflict on neighbors downstream; nor were such effects sufficiently considered by municipal planners. These conditions were aggravated by taxpayers' natural wish to broaden the tax base by more intensive zoning and exploitation of remaining open land. The price is now being paid in flooding, ero- sion, siltation, and pollution of ground, water and air, causing or threatening serious damage to property, to public amenities, and to local ecosystems, including the fish and wildlife habitats discussed in part 4 above. In addition, many adverse effects take place during the construction process. Land-clearing and building projects, lasting for months and sometimes for years, are important causes of erosion, siltation, and pollution, especially downstream from the construction site, due to inadequate management practices to control these side-effects. It cannot be too strongly emphasized that these conditions have arisen not only within the political jurisdiction of the Village and the Unincorporated Area, but also in nearby upstream communities -- parts of New Rochelle, Scarsdale, White Plains, and the Village of Mamaroneck -- w@ose waters flow through the Pine Brook, Sheldrake, and East Creek watersheds into the unincorporated area and the Village of Larchmont. Overbuilding of housing, streets, shopping malls, parking lots, etc., in recent decades has been a general practice through most of the geologically shallow watershed whose downstream coastal section 11-25 our two municipalities occupy. Our community consequently receives the brunt of flooding, siltation and pollution from a wide area of overbuilding upstream. A further intergovernmental dimension of our problem arises from the fact that the sanitary sewers in our community feed into the County -sewage treatment plants in New Rochelle and the Village of Mamaroneck. To succeed, therefore, our LWRP includes not only adequate pol- icies and programs within our own jurisdiction but also effective measures to obtain the cooperation of upstream and neighboring commu- nities, both directly and through the channels of State and County government, in order to cope with problems of storm water runoff, sewage, and pollution. In the sections that follow, discussion of these adverse conditions centers first on certain key localities in our community; then 'on general problems affecting the community as a whole (see Map 6). 6. Problem Localities: The Pine Brook-Premium watershed Of the three watersheds that drain our coastal zone, the most westerly one is drained by Pine Brook, which originates in northcentral New Rochelle, and flows south along Pine Brook Boulevard to Beechmont Lake. Thence it flows underground, passing beneath City Park; enters the Unincorporated Area at Fifth Avenue; crosses under the New England Thruway and the residential Fine Brook section in the Village of Larchmont; then surfaces south of the Post Road. From there it flows southward a quarter of a mile to join the Premium River, which also originates in New Rochelle. An extensive salt marsh surrounds the confluence of the two streams. The river then winds its way to the Premium Millpond and thence to the Sound. The Pine Brook-Premium watershed drains a considerable part of New Rochelle and of the western portion of our community, including several low-lying residential sections which are severely impacted by flooding. Other problems in these areas are sewage backup, siltation and oil pollution. Four areas in particular require c- lent: a. Larchmont Hills. This subdivision in the unincorporated area, bordering North Chatsworth Avenue north of the Thruway, overlies a covered eastern tributary of Pine Brook. Despite reconstruction of a faulty sewer in 1978 (a sag had developed due to settlement of marshy soil), sanitary sewers continue to back up during heavy rains such as those of Spring 1983, and basement flooding contaminated by raw sewage is common. The main causes have been described as follows: (1) long-standing illegal connections'of residential storm drains and basement sump pumps into the sanitary sewers (see Part 10 below); and (2) substantial leakage of storm water into sanitary sewers through broken pipes or vent holes. As a result, the New Rochelle treatment plant, despite its recent enlargement, cannot handle the storm-swollen 11-26 Sewage f low from Larchmont. Its managers often shut down the Fifth Avenue pumping station during heavy rains, leaving sewage to back up in the streets and basements of Larchmont Hills. b. The Pine Brook area. This residential neighborhood in the Village, overlying the covered portion of Pine Brook just north of the Post Road, has been subject to ever-increasing flooding and sewage backup in recent years. The problem has both upstream and downstream causes. Upstream, it stems from construction since World War .11 - some of it local but most of it in New Rochelle - which destroyed much of the open 'land in the Pine Brook flood plain. Downstream, the causes are several: siltation in the Premium River; erosion of the stream bank, further clogging a channel already narrowed by filling operations; and sluggish tidal cleansing of the river due to the dam at the mouth of the Millpond -- all resulting in a choking of the river by sediment at the confluence of its two branches, causing upstream waters to back up. The effect can be seen in Shadow Lane and Pine Brook Drive which become a lake during heavy rains, flooding nearby basements and yards; also in rear yards along Mayhew Avenue, where sewage backup is frequent in heavy storms. C. The Lower Premium River, Marsh, and Millpond. This area is the central focus, the most beautiful section, and the most ecologi- cally important part of the Premium Basin. It suffers from both siltation and chemical pollution. Some of the silt washes down from the Boston Post Road and from dead end streets abutting the east bank. Another source has been a large commercial nursery and garden supply establishment fronting on the Post Road and abutting the west bank. For years a high, inadequately secured vertical embankment within the nursery grounds eroded silt into the riverbed. This, and the visual blight seen by homeowners nearby, have given rise to many complaints. Some corrective actions have been taken in response to requests by the Village, but the potential remains for conflict between commercial and environmental and/or aesthetic considerations. The other main environmental insult in this area is pollution of the river by oil and gasoline. Two major incidents occurred in the summer of 1983. In one of these, several thousand gallons of heating oil entered Pine Brook, coating the river banks and severely polluting the marsh, with heavy damage to fish and other species. The source turned out to be an antiquated and leaking fuel tank in a New York State public housing project on Fifth Avenue in New Rochelle. The other incident was caused by dis- charge of waste oil from an apartment building in the unincor- porated area. Despite prompt assistance from the State Depart- ment of Transportation, which placed several oil booms across the waterway, much of the pollution made its way down the river to the Millpond, coating the banks and damaging fish and bird life as it went. The damage, both biological and visual, will take years to clear up. 11-27 Incidents of sewage backup have also been reported in this section, especially near dead-end streets abutting the Premium River. Some relief was reported in 1984 after supplementary pumps were installed. Many lesser pollution incidents have occurred in the Premium Basin over the years. Most have been traced either by DOT specialists or by our Town water quality consultant, Robert Hohberg. The main sources are leaking oil tanks in apartment houses; leaking gasoline or waste oil tanks in service stations and taxi companies; and surreptificus disposal of waste oil in storm drains. These problems exist in all three municipalities -- New Rochelle, the Town, and Larchmont Village. Although owners usually comply with orders to repair or replace faulty tanks after the damage is done, routine inspection to assure preventive maintenance has been grossly inadequate, and insta-nces of illegal disposal have been hard to trace. Two additional points should be noted. First, the condition of the Premium Conservation Area has deteriorated in recent years, whether because of inadequate neighborhood interest and support or a reduced priority in the Town conservation program, or both. An oil leak has been reported at the point where the Premium River enters the marsh. Litter has increased, the catwalk in the marsh is in disrepair and partly dismantled, and the area is less frequented than in the past. The deterioration can be reversed, and some interest in doing so has been shown recently by nearby residents. Finally, the natural barrier of Premium Point Beach at the narrow eastward neck of Premium Point provides important protection for the Millpond and adjacent residential areas against erosion and other storm damage during coastal storms. The beach itself, however, is vulnerable to erosion. It should not be built on, and will require careful monitoring and maintenance to preserve it. - d. The Upper Premium River, extending from Dillon Road to Pryer Manor Road and nearby streets along the Town's boundary with New Rochelle, is the fourth problem -location in the Premium watershed. Flooding of Pryer Manor Road during storm high tides has been a common experience for decades; but the water storage capacity of the surrounding marsh used to help to keep flood damage within narrow limits. In 1970, however, despite residents' protests, a part of this marsh lying within the Town of Mamaroneck was approved as a building site, destroying parts of the marsh on both sides of Dillon Road. Now, during storm high tides and heavy rains, the 36 homes in this area are completely cut off by floods from fire and ambulance service over either Dillon Road or Pryer Manor Road. 11-28 The above discussion is by no means a complete account of flood-related problems in and near the Premium estuary. Sewage backup, for example, occurs in a number of nearby places in the Village. Basements of homes near the dead ends of Chestnut, Willow, and Oak Avenues suffer from backed-up sewage whenever, during storms, the County sewage treatment plant in New Rochelle closes the intake valve in the sewer that drains that area. And near the west end of Park Avenue, it is reported that backed-up sewers sometimes flow with such force that they dislodge a manhole cover in the street. Raw sewage has also appeared in plumbing facilities in the Manor Vark bathing pavilion, requiring installation of a shutoff valve for use during rainy periods. Aside from sewage backup, leakage from defective sewer pipes may also be a problem in this area. Although we have no current information on the coliform count in the Premium Marsh, it is important to note that the sewer pipe draining the Premium area runs under the Premium River and the Premium Marsh. Its proper maintenance is highly important to the ecology of this area. 7. Problem Localities: The Sheldrake Watershed Covering portions of White Plains, Scarsdale, New Rochelle, and the Town and Village of Mamaroneck, the Sheldrake watershed is mostly developed but still has important areas of open space both in the Town and upstream. It is drained by numerous small streams which join to form the West and East Branches of the Sheldrake River. The West Branch rises in a residential area at the westernmost edge of White Plains near Cushman Road. It then flows south across Scarsdale into northern New Rochelle, entering the Town of Mamaroneck at the Larchmont Reservoir. The two main tributaries of the shorter East Branch rise in Scarsdale and flow southward into the Town between the Winged Foot and Bonnie Briar golf courses, then join south of Fenimore Road in the Sheldrake Conservation Area. The East Branch then continues southward to join the West Branch east of Weaver Street below Valley Stream Road. The river then flows southeast down a steep slope on Brookside Drive, through a series of small waterfalls to Gardens Lake (the "Duck Pond"). Thence it turns northeast, flows under the New England Thruway, then enters the Village of Mamaroneck to join the Mamaroneck River which empties into Mamaroneck Harbor. The Sheldrgke's problems thus affect our neighbors in the Village of Mamaroneck as well as residents of the unincorporated area. 5A Corps of Engineers proj6ct to divert part of the Sheldrake's waters through an underground pipe into the West Basin of Mamaroneck Harbor should help greatly to relieve flooding in that Village; but this project is not expected to be completed until the 1990s. 11-29 Two locations in the Sheldrake watershed present acute problems for our residents: a. The Weaver Street-Bonnie Briar area. Along Bonnie Way, Bonnie Briar Lane, nearby parts of Weaver Street, Sheldrake Place, Sheldrake Avenue, Brookside Place, and parts of Forest and Rockland Avenues, substantial flooding and sewage backup in homes has been common during periods of heavy rain in recent years. b. The Brookside Drive area. The same type of problems has been particularly acute for residents 'of this hillside a.rea. In addition, at the foot of Brookside Drive, Gardens Lake (widely known as the "duck pond") has been completely filled with silt from upstream erosion, a condition that further aggravates flooding and seriously impairs the beauty of this local landmark. In both cases, flooding results from the reduction of the flood plain upstream in recent times and from the emptying of storm drains from higher ground nearby. Some 'relief from these problems has been gained since the Larchmont Reservoir, after it ceased to be used for water supply in 1975, became available for temporary storage of runoff during heavy rains. A new valve was installed in 1981 in the upper dam so that the reservoir's water level can be rapidly lowered in advance of peak runoff. This proved especially helpful during the record spring rains of 1983 and 1984. However, the flood problem is far from solved, arising as it does from both branches of the Sheldrake. A hydrological study of the West Branch of the Sheldrake watershed, completed in 1985 by the Westchester County Soil and Water Conservation District at the request of the Friends of the Reservoir and the affected municipalities, is expected to be a major resource in planning a more adequate solution. The action of the Village of Larchmont, owner of the Reservoir property, in October 2984, dedicating the property in perpetuity to specified public uses including flood control, has made it possible to proceed with such plans with increased confidence. A full study and analysis of drainage in the entire Sheldrake basin, however, remains to be undertaken. The related problem of sewage backup would be alleviated by better flood control in the Sheldrake system, but a full solution may require other steps as well. Valley Stream Road, for example, is the site of a County-operated sewer trunk line. The storm-fed peak flow in that line and associated feeder lines exceeds capacity, so that during heavy rains sewage backs up into the road. The ejected sewage flows through the storm water system into the lower Sheldrake and Gardens Lake, creating a, considerable health problem. Residents have urged the County to budget funds to correct this problem, but no plans to do so have yet been announced. (For other causes of sewage backup, see part 10 of this Inventory.) 11-30 Problem Localities: The East Creek - Gut Creek Watershed a. East Creek drains a smaller, almost completely built-up watershed between the Premium and Sheldrake systems. Once an open waterway, it is now covered along nearly all its length. It rises in the lower Unincorporated Area between the Pine Brook and Sheldrake systems; flows under the Thruway, the railroad, Vanderburgh Park, Hall Avenue and the Post Road; reappears for about 100 yards as a highly polluted stream behind an automobile dealer's car park, then enters a large pipe which runs beneath the Hommocks playing field. There it is joined by Gut Creek, a smaller stream which also flows largely underground, drains areas to the north and east--lying partly within the Village of Mamaroneck--near lower Weaver Street, the Post Road, and the Hampshire Country Club golf course, then flows under the lower end of. the Hommocks field. The two streams empty through adjoining outfalls into the Hommocks Marsh and Little Harbor Sound. A monitoring report to the Conservation Advisory Commission in summer 1984 on East Creek and the Hommocks Marsh showed these waters to be severely polluted by fecal and coliform contaminants and waste oil. The oil pollution originates in street drains north of the Post Road; from County storm drains on the Post Road itself; and from an automobile dealership adjoining the open stretch of East Creek just south of the Post Road. An outfall pipe leads from the dealer's work area into the creek; moreover., the adjacent creek bank is saturated with oil. The fecal and coliform pollution arises mainly from the first two of the above sources plus purge drains leading from the nearby Hommocks swimming pool. The open section of the creek, in addition to these liquid pollutants, is chronically littered, although it is cleared of litter (as are other open-space areas in our community) by L.I.F.E. Center volunteers every April on Beautification Day. In addition to the adverse impact on the Hommocks Marsh, discussed below, the condition of this open stretch of East Creek is a small but typical case of urban pollution and casual litter turning a pleasant and ecologically valuable area into a small wasteland. Although not close to any residential area, the open section of the creek is on the edge of Flint Park and could be a pleasant place for leisurely walking, jogging, birding and nature study. Thus far it has had a low priority on the community agenda. More energetic efforts by municipal authorities to rehabilitate it would be desirable. b. Hommocks M@rsh. East Creek and Gut Creek take on added importance from the presence of a salt marsh in a sheltered tidal inlet. From 1972 to 1975, Hommocks Marsh and other salt marshes in the Larchmont-Mamaroneck area were the subject of intensive study by Drs. James Utter and Paul Steineck. Their findings 11-31 showed that the Hommocks Marsh had undergone major changes as a result of siltation and sanitary landfill in the construction of the Hommocks playing field, plus chemical and sewage pollution JP (the fecal coliform count exceeded state guidelines for bathing beaches); and that the production of algae and other organisms had dropped as the succession from low to high marsh proceeded. Still, however, they found the marsh functioning at a rate comparable to others more remote from suburbia, and making a net contribution to the ecosystem of Long Island Sound. As was exp lained in part 4 above, 'the Hommocks Marsh and adjacent areas merit recognition as a significant wildlife habitat. This area is also -- and, if properly managed, can increasingly be -- a pleasant setting for passive recreation. Moreover, the marsh and its ecosystem afford a superb educational resource convenient to the Hommocks School. Unfortunately, because Little Harbor Sound drains a residential area with unsolved sewage problems, and crossed by two major highways, the Marsh receives steady doses of biological and chemical pollution. Recent monitoring, for example, showed that the coliform count in East Creek is already high at the point where the creek enters the Village of Larchmont. The health of the marsh depends on effective steps to control all types of pollution in this watershed. C. Little Harbor Sound. This narrow tidal inlet from Larchmont Harbor extends eastward to the Hommocks Marsh. Its western end is the site of 32 attractive waterfront homes, most of them with dock facilities, along Quarry Road, Bishop Place, Shore Drive, Old Colony Road, Lindsley Drive, and Spanish Cove Road. In 1978 homeowners in this neighborhood financed a dredging project to remove silt and debris which had made Little Harbor Sound un-navigable. By arrangement with the Town, the dredge spoil was deposited as landfill to build the Hommocks School athletic field. . This locality suffers from several interacting problems: con- tinued siltation, tidal flooding, and pollution by raw sewage and other wastes. The siltation problem arises partly from normal tidal scouring of the banks of Honmocks Marsh, but mainly from silt and debris carried downstream to the East Creek and Gut Creek outfalls and by several large concrete storm drain outlets at the foot of Flint Park and the Hommocks playing field. There are no catch basins to trap this material, which consequently builds up to block the inlet. Since the 1979 dredging, re-siltation nearest the storm drain outlets has reached a depth of three to four feet, alreaay largely nullifying the effect of the dredging. The pollution problem has three main sources. The first is the runoff from commercial establishments and traffic along the Post Road which reaches this area mainly through the outfall pipes at 11-32 the foot of Hommocks Field. The second is runoff from the Larchmont Village leaf composting area at the south end of Flint Park adjoining the marsh -- an area that is inadequately main- tained and has often been used for illegal dumping. The third pollution problem, raw sewage, comes primarily from a County outfall pipe behind Cedar Island. It is an overf low relief pipe connected to a County-operated pumping station on Flint Avenue. During heavy rains the New Rochelle sewage treat- ment plant sheds part of its storm-fed overload by shutting off the pumps at Flint Avenue, allowing raw sewage to flow into the harbor. To make matters worse, the outfall pipe terminates near the shore in an area regularly used for swimming, boating and fishing; moreover, it is in a decrepit condition, riddled with holes and loose connections. Malfunctions in the pumping station are frequent. Recently, one such mishap caused raw sewage to flow onto Flint Avenue as well as into the Sound. A second suspected source of sewage pollution is a sewer line which crosses Little Harbor Sound between the Hommocks Marsh and the Hommocks peninsula. It is uncertain whether this line is still active, and if so, whether it needs repair. This locality's flooding' problem, like that along Pryer Manor and Dillon Roads, occurs mainly when extreme high tides coincide with high winds and rain. Water then comes over the seawalls, enters lawns and basements, and in some places isolates homes until it subsides. A short-term solution to these interacting problems would include some purely engineering steps such as installation and mainte- nance of catch basins upstream from the storm water outlets nearby; repair and relocation of sewage outfall pipes; and periodic maintenance and dredging of Little Harbor Sound. A full solution, however, should include more far-reaching steps, suggested elsewhere in this program, to control flooding, erosion, siltation, and sewage and other forms of pollution. 9. Problem Localities: The Harbor Area We have emphasized above the key value of Larchmont Harbor and its neighboring bays and inlets, both as a residential setting and as a recreational resource, especially for yachting, swimming, and fishing. Threats to swimming and fishing from water pollution are dealt with elsewhere in this inventory. We now turn to two problems that affect yachting. These are, first, siltation and other problems affecting navigation; second, inadequacy of harbor security arrangements to control vandalitm, recklessness, discharge of waste and litter from pleasure boats, and other irresponsible behavior on the water. a. Na . ation and dredging. in 1983 the Village of Larchmont D C @vi participated in a Westchester County study of dredging in Sound 11-33 shore harbors. In' addition, in June 1983 two members of this Committee made an on-the-spot survey, at extreme low tide, of conditions in Larchmont Harbor, Little Harbor Sound, and Horseshoe Harbor. Salient conclusions are: Large areas of Larchmont Harbor show definite silting, which has built up somewhat of a delta near Little Harbor Sound and other outflow areas. Maintenance dredging in some areas will be necessary to maintain the harbor's present standard of usage. Safe navigation would also be helped if a number of submerged rocks near the durface along the western shore were clearly marked for better visibility. Little Harbor Sound, as noted above, already shows heavy silting which has largely nullified the 1979 dredging. Construction and regular servicing of catch basins in the storm drains would greatly reduce, though it might not eliminate, the need for periodic dredging to keep the inlet navigable. in Horseshoe Harbor, which includes the sandy Manor Beach, the tidal drift from the beach to the yacht landing area requires dredging about every 10 years to allow deeper-draft boats to reach the dock. A recent 30-foot extension of the dock will not obviate this need. b. Harbor security. For most purposes, State law assigns responsibility for law enforcement in Long Island Sound to the State police. The Westchester County police also have jurisdiction as far as the County boundary, which runs parallel to the shore in mid-Sound. The U.S. Coast Guard is responsible for vessels in distress and for apprehending boats suspected of carrying illegal cargo. Coastal municipalities under the State navigation law have some police jurisdiction within 1,500 feet of the shore. These provisions of law do not quite fit the realities in Larchmont Harbor. The County police are not equipped to patrol the waters of the Sound. The nearest State police barracks is far inland in Hawthorne, a road distance of about 20 miles. There are no State police launches on duty along the Westchester Sound shore. State police response to calls for help in the harbor, not surprisingly in these circumstances" has been described as slow. Emergency calls to the Coast Guard station at Eaton's Neck (19 miles away at Northport, Long Island) also often bring a slow response. Thus the main burden of maintaining order and security, and dealing with all but the most serious violations in Larchmont Harbor, rests either on the Larchmont Village police or on the yacht clubs. The Larchmont police, whatever their legal jurisdiction, are not very well equipped for such duty. They respond to calls for help 11-34 in suspected crimes in the harbor, but have no launch and depend for water transportation either on private boats or on the Village of Mamaroneck police launch. As a practical matter, therefore, policing of all lesser violations, and the maintenance of security and order, rests with the two yacht clubs. Each has a Harbor Master appointed by the Village and empowered to issue summonses for littering, noise, or speeding. They have little or no police training, and no powers of arrest or capability to deal with violent crime; moreover, since both are also launch captains, they have little time for attending to minor violations. For example, they have been unable to stop the pumping of sewage into the harbor from yachts, some of them visitors from states where this practice is not prohibited (see discussion in part 10 of this inventory). Similarly, the security guards employed by both yacht clubs to watch the f leet at night are unarmed and have no powers of arrest. The Larchmont Yacht Club has developed a plan to deal with emergencies in its area of the harbor, and the Horseshoe Harbor Yacht Club intends to do the same for its area. The two clubs will keep each other informed on harbor security matters as a part of this process. The evident flaws in these arrangements have not thus far led to a serious disaster, but they might well do so in the future. Even now they tend to impair somewhat the climate of confidence that is an essential condition of recreational boating and swimming along the Larchmont shore. Better arrangements to clarify the responsibilities of all concerned, and to provide the necessary capabilities, should be vigorously pursued. 10. Area-wide Sewage Problems As has been noted in the discussion of specific problem areas, the frequent appearance of raw sewage in basements, streets and waterways, with adverse effects on both public health and aesthetic values, is closely linked to flooding during heavy storms. Four different ways in which this linkage occurs have been touched on at various points in earlier pages. They can be summed up as follows: a. It has been a frequent practice for decades in this and other communities for private builders and even municipalities in flood-prone areas to save construction costs by connecting sump pumps, roof drains, street catch basins, etc., not, as the law requires, with municipal storm drains but with the more accessi- ble sanitaky sewer lines. A newly completed Westchester County study of sewers in this and other communities has located many such illegal connections and estimated the cost of correcting them, and the Village of Larchmont has publicly announced a 11-35 corrective program; but the necessary work remains to be carried out in both municipalities. b. Many sanitary sewer lines receive storm water through unrepaired leaks and breaks, or (when laid close to or under watercourses, as some sewer trunk lines are) through sewer vent holes. C. The New Rochelle and Mamaroneck sewage treatment plants, unable to accommodate the storm-swollen volume entering their sewage trunk lines, respond during storm -s by throttling down pumping stations and intake valves from sewers in Larchmont and the unincorporated area, leaving the sewage-contaminated storm waters to back up into basements, streets, and open waterways. d. The growing number of sanitary sewer lines from upstream commu- nities, traversing our area on their way to sewage treatment along the Sound, further aggravate the problem. Despite instal- lation of pumps, piggyback lines and alternate routes, some of these "foreign" sewer lines are still unable to handle the peak flow during rainy periods, and back up into our streets. Not all our sewage problems, however, are related to stormwater. Three other problems are: e. Inadequate sewage treatment in the County's Mamaroneck treatment plant. This plant gives only primary treatment. Moreover, its capacity has become inadequate for the greatly increased volume in the district it was built to serve, so that it is frequently necessary to pump raw sewage into the Sound through bypass pipes during periods of peak flow. The plant is thus a significant contributor to coliform pollution in nearby coastal waters, as well as to the excessive nutrient loading of these waters which poses a serious threat to the local marine ecology. These problems can be relieved in considerable part by the planned upgrading of the plant to full secondary treatment; but an expansion of the plant's capacity - in addition to aggressive action to reduce stormwater infiltration and inflow into the sewer system throughout the Mamaroneck district - may also be necessary if the pumping of raw sewage from this plant into Sound waters is to be ended. f. Suspected leakage from on-site (septic) residential sanitary systems. Some homes in this community are still served by these systems even though the entire coastal area is within public sanitary sewer districts. Many such systems have been found to be unreliable and pollution-prone. g. Finally, it should 'be recalled that land-based human sewage is not the only source of biological pollution. Pleasure boats off-shore frequently discharge their sewage in nearby waters -- a practice which seems to result partly from ignorance of the law and partly from lack of a clearly located responsibility to see 11-36 that it is complied with. On another front, many local dog owners, in spite of Village and Town sanitary ordinances and the threat of fines (yet to be applied) , continue with impunity to leave canine excrement on streets, sidewalks, parks and conservation areas throughout the community. Enforcement of existing laws against this practice is long overdue. 11. Area-wide Causes and Cures of Interacting Flood, Siltation and Sewage Problems. The threats to different parts of our three main watersheds from flooding, siltation and sewage overflow can be relieved to some extent by specific steps -- many of them suggested in earlier sections -- tailored to each local problem. In other respects, however, these problems are so wide-based geographically, and so interrelated func- tionally, that they cannot be solved in separation or on a narrowly local scale. All have arisen over many years from the natural tenden- cy, here and in other communities, to widen the tax base through rapid development while economizing on tax-supported infrastructure. The risks of this course are not immediately visible; but now the invisi- ble risks are more and more becoming visible realities, threatening both the residential attractiveness and the ecological integrity of the Larchmont-Mamaroneck coastal zone. Effective action on these .interrelated problems, both within our two municipalities and in cooperation with neighboring municipalities and higher levels of government, is a major theme in later sections of this program. 12. Other Area-wide Pollution Problems: Water, Air, Noise, Litter a. Water pollution. Like communities in any metropolitan area, Larchmont and Mamaroneck receive water pollution -- other than raw sewage, discussed above -- from many sources. Most of these are either far distant, such as industrial sources of acid rain, or are diffuse non-point sources nearby, especially motor vehicle traffic on local streets as well as on the major highways that traverse this area. Pollutants from all these sources include some highly toxic compounds which only sophisticated monitoring can identify and quantify. At present our local monitoring resources do not cover such substances, nor do we receive regular information about their presence in this area from higher levels of government. This is a potentially serious gap in the flow of information needed to assure water quality in our area. Among the many nearby point sources of water pollution, there may be substantial room for improved control. These sources vary widely in magnitude and in the likely costs and benefits of control, include: Scattered incidents, such as the furtive and illegal dumping of waste oil, paint, etc., into storm drains and streams. 11-37 A number of antiquated septic discharge systems in our area which have a limited life expectancy and a high pollution potential. Drainage of chlorinated swimming pools. Underground fuel tanks and pipes subject to leaks. The use of sand, salt or other melting agents on icy roads. Use of fer-tilizers and pesti6ides on lawns, golf courses and trees on both municipal and private property. It should be borne in mind that the weakness of tidal flushing action in our sheltered coastal waters aggravates the damage done by pollutants, from no matter what source, to ecological, recreational and scenic values in this area. Since an irreducible minimum of pollution from highways and other nonpoint sources, and from small, hard-to-control point sources, is probably inevitable, it is all the more urgent to control all the sources that can be controlled cost-effectively, lest the total water pollution burden rise to unacceptable levels. b. Air and noise pollution. Control of water pollution requires attention to air pollution as well, since the latter -- aside from its direct damage to air-breathing.organisms -- also enters ground and water as precipitation. Air pollution in our area has many chronic causes, both near and distant -- most of them largely beyond our control or influence. Some local point sources, it is true -- notably illegal smoke emissions from building incinerators -- can and should be reduced by more energetic use of County Health Department police powers. A local monitoring network to spot and report violations would contribute importantly to enforcement. In our view, however, a more significant air pollution problem, and one which may prove accessible to our influence, comes from the heavy overhead traffic of aircraft approaching LaGuardia Airport. Since this same traffic is also a main source of noise pollution in our community, these two kinds of pollution can be considered together. The final approach to runway 22 at LaGuardia, a commonly used runway, carries aircraft directly over Larchmont Harbor. Many incoming flights follow this flight pattern. While passing over Larchmont, the planes are at an average altitude of 2,000 to 3,000 feet, and engines are cut back as the aircraft descend. Each plane, during its passage over our area, r 'eleases carbon and unburned kerosene pollutants, which fall on the harbor area and nearby homes. Their most visible manifes- tation is a blackish, oily film which gathers on docks, boat decks, lawn furniture, parked cars, and other exposed surfaces. They place an additional burden on human health and organic life in the area. 11-33 These same aircraft also make an inordinate amount of noise as engines are throttled back or forward during adjustment to the final approach pattern. When the weather is bad and runway 22 is in use, aircraft pass over Larchmont about every 40 seconds; moreover, heavy clouds in bad weather reflect and amplify the sound. At such times, conver- sations have to be suspended while aircraft are overhead. Residents have tried several times through our elected representatives to induce the FAA to re-route the airplanes over the Sound, which we understand is the normal approach route for LaGuardia Airport. Beyond making courteous replies, the FAA has brought us little or no relief. We intend to pursue this major problem of air and noise pollution in cooperation with affected communities nearby. other than the above, the main source of air and noise pollution in our community is the heavy vehicular traffic on the Boston Post Road and the New England Thruway, especially the latter. Noise from these sources can be acutely unpleasant for their nearest neighbors. Municipal efforts in past years have produced some action bythe State to mitigate Thruway noise, and plans for construction of new noise barriers along the Thruway in this area were announced in 1986. The progress of this project will be followed locally with much interest. Meanwhile, the noise problem remains. Many smaller sources of noise within our community, mainly from power machinery such as jackhammers, chain saws, power mowers, snow and leaf blowers, etc., add up to a considerable din at times, creating a widespread demand for stronger regi4lation. In 1985 the Village of Larchmont responded by enacting a law regulating noise from commercial gardening machinery. c.' Litter and Dog Waste. No pollution problems are more pervasive, or seemingly more deeply rooted in suburban and urban mores, than litter and dog waste in public places. Sources of litter in our area are various: children and adults, municipal garbage trucks and commercial vehicles, fast-food stores, wind-scattered newspapers, etc. ordinances decreeing fines for littering are widely ignored and only spottily enforced -- understandably, since there are seldom any witnesses to the act. Similarly, local laws requiring dog owners to clean up after their dogs are ignored in many cases and seldom enforced. Thus a minority of offenders creates a deteriorated aesthetic and public health environment which all must endure. Anti-litter efforts in the community have been substantial, led by the Village of @Larchmont Beautification Committee, the LIFE Center, and the Conservation Advisory Commission. A conspicuous community effort is the annual Beautification Day clean-up in April, with participation by students, scouting organizations, and neighborhood groups. Also, waste containers have been placed in parks and on sidewalks by civic organizations and by some businesses as a public service. A more wide-ranging approach to this complex of problems, with careful study of techniques that have succeeded elsewhere, should be an integral part of our coastal zone program. 11-39 13. Recreation: Possibilities an@ Limits As has already been made clear, this area has extensive resources for water-related recreation, both active and passive. Private shoreline facilities for boating and swimming are enjoyed by many residents, and are used at or close to capacity. Although many residents who now --lack access to such facilities would clearly like to have it, it is widely realized that possibilities for wider public access to boating and swimming along this part of the Sound shore are limited both by the pattern of ownership and by the nature of the publicly owned shoreline. Attempts in recent years tcF establish Village of Larchmont facilities for small boats, windsurfers, etc., in Little Harbor Sound at the foot of Flint Park, or at the dead ends of Beach and Magnolia Avenues, were abandoned as impractical. Discussion was renewed in 1984 between the Village, the Manor Park Society, and nearby residents about the future use of the Beach Avenue site, thus far without result. The possible use of Larchmont's small unimproved beach lot at the east end of Premium Point, just beyond the Larchmont Village line, has been discussed at times, but there too are adverse factors including an out-of-the-way location hard to supervise and police, difiiculty of physical access, limited parking possibilities, and opposition from nearby residents. In sum, the potential of existing public properties for creating new recreational facilities is very limited. If either municipality should in the future acquire, or obtain the use of, property on or near the shore other than what they now own, the adaptation of such property for public recreational use would-be desirable but would require careful weighing of relevant factors such as public demand, costs, environmental impact, andeffect on the residential neighborhood. Facilities for so-called passive recreation are more plentiful: birding and nature walks in the Town conservation areas and the Manor Park. Optimum use of the Premium Consex-vation Area for these pur- poses, however.will require more maintenance and community support. A potential also exists for creating additional small areas for passive recreation at the south end of Flint Park and along the open section of East Creek, as noted above in discussion of that area. The importa@ce of these public and private recreational resources, both in maintaining the quality of life in our community and in sustaining its economy, cannot be overstated. Whatever impairs or degrades or needlessly restricts recreational opportunities -- such as a ban on swimming at times of severe water pollution, or silting up of navigational channels, or unnecessarily limited public access, or littering and vandalism in parks and conservation areas -- tends to lower the quality of life, makes the area a less desirable place to live, and thus affects real estate values and the tax base. A major aim of this Program must be to prevent such conditions from arising and to correct them where they exist. 14. Historic and Scenic Preservation As was noted in part 3 above, our co=unity's resources include a considerable number of sites of historic and/or scenic value. Many such sites in the area deserve official protection, the absence of which may increase the likelihood of future actions needlessly damag- -ing to historical and scenic values in this area. 11-40 0 f SECTION III LOCAL POLICIES AND APPLICABLE STATE POLICIES .0 SECTION III: LOCAL POLICIES AND APPLICABLE STATE POLICIES DEVELOPMENT POLICIES 01 POLICY 1 RESTORE, REVITALIZE, AND REDEVELOP DETERIORATED AND UNDERUTILIZED, WATERFRONT AREAS FOR COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL, CULTURAL, RECREATIONAL AND OTHER COMPATIBLE USES. Not Applicable. POLICY 2 FACILITATE THE SITING OF WATER DEPENDENT USES AND FACILITIES ON OR ADJACENT TO COASTAL WATERS. Explanation of Policy: This policy applies to both water- jependent and water-enhanced uses, defined as follows: A water-dependent use is one that must be located on or adja- cent to coastal waters in order to function. Among such uses appropriate in this area are: 1. Recreational activities which depend on access to coastal waters (for example: swimming, fishing, boat- ing, wildlife viewing, scenic and nature walks); 2. Aids to navigation; 3. Flood and erosion protection structures (for example: breakwaters, bulkheads); 4. Non-commercial facilities needed to store and service boats; 5. Scientific/educational activities which require access to coastal waters (for example: certain meteorological, ecological and oceanographic activities); and 6. Support facilities which are necessary for the success- ful functioning of permitted water-dependent uses. * water-enhanced use is one that has no critical dependence on * waterfront location, but whose profitability or enjoyment is increased significantly by its proximity to, or visual access to, the waterfront (for example, a scenic waterfront park). Residential development, with associated recreational facil- ities, along the local waterfront is cohesive and of high quality. Undeveloped land adjoining coastal waters is scarce and envir6nmentally sensitive. Thus, few opportunities for new water-dependent or water-enhanced uses are likely to arise. 111-3 Therefore, emphasis under this policy will be placed an pre- serving appropriate existing uses that are water-related. Only such new water-dependent or water-enhanced uses or facilities will be permitted as are compatible with appropriate existing uses and with other coastal policies herein, including those that relate to protection of wildlife habitats and wetlands, preservation of historical, scenic and recreational resourcest and control of flooding, siltation and pollution. Priority in the use of any property adjacent to coastal waters that may become available for development will be given to a water-dependent use over an otherwise equally qualified water- enhanced use, and to either of these in preference to a use that is in no way water-related. POLICY 3 ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE STATE'S EXISTING MAJOR PORTS OF ALBANY, BUFFALO, NEW YORK, OGDENSBURG, AND OSWEGO AND CENTERS OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY, AND ENCOURAGE THE SITING, IN THESE PORT AREAS, INCLUDING THOSE UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF STATE PUBLIC AUTHORITIES OF LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT WHICH IS ESSENTIAL TO OR IN SUPPORT OF WATERBORNE TRANSPORTATION OF CARGO AND PEOPLE. Not applicable. POLICY 4 STRENGTHEN THE ECONOMIC BASE OF SMALLER HARBOR AREAS BY ENCOURAGING THE DEVELOPMENT AND ENHANCEMENT OF THOSE TRADITION- AL USES AND ACTIVITIES WHICH RAVE PROVIDED SUCH AREAS WITH THEIR UNIQUE MARITIME IDENTITY. Not applicable. POLICY 5 ENCOURAGE THE LOCATION OF DEVELOPMENT IN AREAS WHERE PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES ESSENTIAL TO SUCH DEVELOPMENT ARE ADEQUATE, EXCEPT WHEN SUCH DEVELOPMENT HAS SPECIAL FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS OR OTHER CHARACTERISTICS WHICH NECESSITATE ITS LOCATION IN OTHER COASTAL AREAS. Explamation of Policy: This policy is designed to assure that development in the coastal area is "encouraged to locate within, contiguous to, or in close proximity to, existing areas of 'concentrated development where infrastructure and public services are adequate, land) where topography, geology, and other environmental conditions are suitable for and able to accommodate development.m since this coastal area is almost fully developed, many of the above conditions are present and some undesirable types of action such as urban sprawl or "leapfrog" development are not concerns here. However, the 111-4 topography and geology of the drainage basins traversing the Town and Village set inherent limits on the intensity of development that is possible without overtaxing storm drainage facilities. As noted in Section II, these limits have already been exceeded, producing flooding, erosion, siltation, and other adverse impacts. Any future development in the area's remaining open space must be designed and regulated to minimize these impacts and assure adequate storm drainage both for the properties in question and for those downstream. Cooperation of upstream municipalities in controlling development in their part of these watersheds must kso be sought. Such steps, set forth under Policy 14 and in Section IV-A-1, will give effect to this policy. POLICY 6 EXPEDITE PERMIT PROCEDURES IN ORDER TO FACILITATE THE SITING OF DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES AT SUITABLE LOCATIONS. Explanation of PoliRy: When administering existing regulations and prior to proposing new regulations, every effort should be made to determine the feasibility of coordinating administra- tive procedures and incorporating new regulations in existing legislation, if this can reduce the burden on a particular type of development without jeopardizing the integrity of the regulation's objectives. FISH AND WILDLIFE POLICIES POLICY 7 SIGNIFICANT COASTAL FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITATS, AS IDENTIFIED ON THE COASTAL AREA MAP, SHALL BE PROTECTED, PRESERVED, AND, WHERE PRACTICAL, RESTORED So AS TO MAINTAIN THEIR VIABILITY AS HABITATS. Explanation of Poli5y: This policy is not applicable at this time because the habitats proposed for designation in this area have not yet.been identified on the State Coastal Area Map. Brief description of habitats proposed for designation: Three habitat complexes are proposed for designation, as follows: The Premium Salt Marsh Complex (total 32 acres) centering on the Premium River and including the Premium Marsh and two smaller tidal wetlands nearby; The Hommocks Salt Marsh Complex (total 17 acres) at the head of Little Harbor Sound next to the outfalls from East and Gut Creeks, comprising the Hommocks Conserva- tion area and some small adjacent habitat areas; and The Larchmont Reservoir-Sheldrake-Leatherstocking Freshwater Wetland Complex (total 520 acres) which includes the Larchmont Reservoir-James G. Johnson Jr. 111-5 Conservancy, three private open-space areas of which two are large golf courses, the Sheldrake-Leatherstock- ing Conservation Area, and connecting watercourses and ponds which function as habitat corridors. All three of these areas are nesting and feeding grounds for many bird species as well as fish, shellfish, crustaceans, reptiles and mammals. For details, see the wildlife habitat narrative in Section 11-4 and the inventory of species in Appendix A. Impact Assessment Most of the land and water in the Premium and Hommocks complexes is public property, much of it in Town Conservation areas. The same is true of a large part of the much larger Reservoir-Sheldrake-Leatherstocking complex. This fact, however, does not suffice to shield these areas from adverse impact. As is noted repeatedly in the Inventory and Analysis, the impact comes from outside the three areas themselves, mainly from upstream. Oil spills; raw sewage overflow; illegal waste disposal; pesticide and fertilizer residues from homes, parks, golf courses, and commercial nurseries; silt from soil erosion, construction sites, and dredging operations -- all these have already inflicted their share of damage, impairing the quality of all three areas as feeding and breeding grounds for fish and wildlife. The* effects have been seen, for example, in fish kills in the Larchmont Harbor area; in the near disappearance of blue crabs from the Premium area; and in the ban on consumption of shellfish taken from the waters of the Westchester Sound shore and its estuaries. A number of local steps are planned, either for execution or for study, in Section IV of this program, designed in part to repair past damage to these three areas and to enhance their viability and survivability as wildlife habitats. Also, new local legislation is called for in Section V-A-2 designating these areas as Critical Environmental Areas under the SEQR law and regulating land use and construction-related activities in or near them so as to limit flooding and erosion, protect freshwater wetlands, and preserve open space. Some of these steps are restorative or enhancing, to be taken within the areas themselves; others are protective, involving both physical projects and land use regulations upstream from these areas, and are intended to reduce future adverse impact from the outside. Any action that would cause or aggravate such impact, or adversely affect the preservation or restoration of the habitits covered by this policy, would be inconsistent with this policy. 111-6 Since all of these habitat areas are environmentally linked to neighboring jurisdictions, the cooperation of our municipal neighbors will be of great importance in accomplishing the purposes of this policy. The purpose of officially declaring these three wildlife habitat complexes to be "significant" (or, at the least, "locally important") is to strengthen the hands of the munici- pal governments in pursuing these restorative, enhancing and protective actions -- and in obtaining the cooperation of all, both within and beyond our munic'ipal borders, whose land use and other actions may determine the fate of these habitat areas for better or worse. Failure to take such steps would result in irretrievable loss. Note: Since all three of these habitats tenter on tidal or freshwater. wetlands, which are dealt with under Pol- icies 44 and 44A, the three policies will be considered together for purposes of implementation. POLICY 7A THE FOLLOWING LOCALLY IMPORTANT HABITATS: (1) THE PREMIUM SALT MARSH COMPLEX: (2) THE HOMMOCKS SALT MARSH COMPLEX; AND (3) THE LARCHMONT RESERVOIR-SHELDRAKE-LEATHERSTOCKING FRESHWATER WETLAND COMPLEX SHALL BE PROTECTED, PRESERVED, AND, WHERE PRACTICABLE, RE- STORED, SO AS TO MAINTAIN THEIR VIABILITY AS HABITATS. Explanation of Policy: See brief description and impact Assessment quidelines in Policy 7 Explanation of Policy. Note: As noted in Section 11-4, the intertidal and littoral zone extending from Larchmont Harbor westward to and around Premium Point has characteristics which qualify it as an important habitat. It is not so listed here since it is adequately protected by the Tidal Wetlands Law. POLICY 8 PROTECT FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES IN THE COASTAL AREA FROM THE INTRODUCTION OF HAZARDOUS WASTES AND OTHER POLLUTANTS WHICH BIOACCUMULATE IN THE FOOD CHAIN OR WHICH CAUSE SIGNIFICANT SUBLETHAL OR LETHAL EFFECT ON THOSE RESOURCES. Exi2lanation of Policy: The regulation of hazardous wastes is assumed by state and federal agencies. Other pollutants from point or non-point sources also cause substantial damage to fish and wildlife resources and are controlled by both state and local laws, the most important local laws in this con- nection being the Town's SEQR and Freshwater Wetlands laws. County and local government must be more effective in monitoring pollution as well as enforcing local regulations and reporting violations of state or federal law, which are a 111-7 serious problem especially in the Premium area, the East Creek-Ho=ocks area, and nearby waters of Long Island Sound. Pursuant to this policy, a regular program of monitoring and reporting of pollutants likely to damage fish and wildlife in the area will be conducted in cooperation with appropriate State and County agencies, and neighboring municipal agencies; and local regulations against such pollutants will be reviewed for adequacy and strictly enforced. POLICY 9 EXPAND RECREATIONAL USE OF FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES IN COASTAL AREAS BY INCREASING ACCESS TO EXISTING RESOURCES, SUPPLEMENTING EXISTING. STOCKS AND*DEVELOPING NEW RESOURCES. SUCH EFFORTS SHALL BE MADE IN A MANNER WHICH ENSURES THE PROTECTION OF RENEWABLE FISH AND WILDLIFE RESOURCES AND CONSID- ERS OTHER ACTIVITIES DEPENDENT ON THEM. Explanation of Policy: The limited fish and wildlife resources of the area, the fragility of their habitats, and dense sur- rounding settlement combine to preclude hunting or extensive shore-based f ishing. Hunting is prohibited throughout the area. Shore-based f ishing on public property must remain limited because of the small number and size of the f ew locations available. However, recreational uses of coastal fish and wildlife resources also include non-consumptive uses such as wildlife photography, bird-watching and nature study. In general, the latter category shall be given preference over the former in view of the limited size of the resources and their location in urbanized areas. The following additional guidelines should be considered by local, State, and Federal agencies as they determine the consistency of their proposed actions with the above policy. 1. Actions should not ixr@pede existing or future uti- lization of the State's recreational fish and wildlife resources. 2. Efforts to increase access to a recreational fish and wildlife resource should not lead to over-utilization of that resource or cause impairment of the habitat. Sometimes such impairment can be more subtle than actual physical damage to the habitat. For example, increased human presence can deter animals from using the habitat area. 3. The impacts of increasing access to recreational fish and wildlife resources should be determined on a case-by-case basis, consulting the significant habitat narrative (see Inventory, Section 11, part 4, and Policy 7/7A) and/or conferring with a trained fish and wildlife biologist. 111-8 POLICY 10 FURTHER DEVELOP COMMERCIAL FINFISH, SHELLFISH AND CRUSTACEAN RESOURCES IN THE COASTAL AREA BY: (1) ENCOURAGING THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW, OR IMPROVEMENT OF EXISTING ON-SHORE COMMERCIAL FISHING FACILITIES; (2) INCREASING MARKETING OF THE STATE'S SEAFOOD PRODUCTS; AND (3) MAINTAINING ADEQUATE STOCKS AND EXPANDING AQUACULTURE FACILITIES. SUCH EFFORTS SHALL BE IN A MANNER WHICH ENSURES THE PROTECTION OF SUCH RENEWABLE FISH RESOURCES AND CONSIDERS OTHER ACTIVITIES DEPENDENT ON THEM. Not applicable. POLICY 10A IMPROVE WATER QUALITY IN LONG ISLAND SOUND WATERS TO PERMIT THE TAKING OF SHELLFISH FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION. Explanation of Policy: The Westchester Sound shore, whose waters are accessible by boat to both commercial and recreational shellfishing, was once a major shellfish producing area. For many years, however (as was noted in Section II, part 3-h, and on map 5) most of its inshore waters, including those off the Larchmont-Mamaroneck coastline, have been in New York State classification SB, which forbids shellfishing for human consumption. Biological pollution, mainly from sewage, is the main cause. The municipal governments, in cooperation with other Sound shore communities and with concerned County and State agencies, will endeavor to raise the water classification from SB to SA with the goal of reopening-Western Long Island Sound for the taking of shellfish. More effective control of sewage pollution (see Policies 30 through 34) and organic nutrient runoff (Policy 37), as well as monitoring and regulation of heavy metals and other bioaccumulative substances entering coastal waters (Policy 8) will serve to promote this objective. FLOODING AND EROSION POLICIES POLICY 11 BUILDINGS AND OTHER STRUCTURES WILL BE SITED IN THE COASTAL AREA SO AS TO MINIMIZE DAMAGE TO PROPERTY AND THE ENDANGERING OF HUMAN LIVES CAUSED BY FLOODING AND EROSION. Explanation of Policy: The design and location of existing or proposed buildings in designated flood hazard areas are reg- ulated by flood damage prevention laws adopted by both munic- ipalities under the Federal Flood Insurance Program (see Map 6). These laws will assure compliance with this policy in such areas. Where recent flood experience, as in the Sheldrake watershed, shows a need to extend such regulation to wider areas than are shown on the current Federal map, such extension may be achieved by local adoption of a supplementary flood damage control map based on a qualified engineering survey. This policy also requires that in coastal erosion hazard areas, so designated under the New York State Coastal Erosion Hazard 111-9 Areas Act, buildings and similar structures shall, among other things, be set back from the shoreline far enough to minimize erosion. No coastal erosion hazard areas have been designated in this coastal area; however, under this policy, the standards applying to such areas will be applied wherever appropriate to Premium Point Beach, the Larchmont Manor Beach, and the tidal wetlands in the Premium and Hommocks estuaries, all of which are subject to storm and/or tidal erosion. This policy further requires that in areas designated under the Federal Flood Insurance Program as coastal high hazard areas ("V zones") , walled and roofed buildings and' fuel storage tanks shall be sited landward of mean high tide; and no mobile homes may be sited in such areas or in designated floodways. Areas within our coastal zone which have been designated in these two categories are shown on Map 5A. POLICY 12 ACTIVITIES OR DEVELOPMENT IN THE COASTAL AREA WILL BE UNDERTAK- EN SO AS TO MINIMIZE DAMAGE TO NATURAL RESOURCES AND PROPERTY FROM FLOODING AND EROSION BY PROTECTING NATURAL PROTECTIVE FEATURES INCLUDING BEACHES, DUNES, BARRIER ISLANDS AND BLUFFS. PRIMARY DUNES WILL BE PROTECTED FROM ALL ENCROACHMENTS THAT COULD IMPAIR THEIR NATURAL PROTECTIVE CAPACITY. Explanation of Policy: Only one natural protective feature of the types listed, i.e., Premium Point Beach, is present in the Larchmont/Mamaroneck coastal area. It will be monitored and maintained to preserve its protective function. However, major protection against upstream flooding and erosion is provided by a combination of other natural protective features, despite some impairment resulting from past development, namely: the flood plains in the Sheldrake and Pine Brook drainage basins; the flood protection function of the Larchmont Reservoir; and the tidal wetlands at the outflow of the Pine Brook-Premium and East Creek-Gut Creek-Hommocks drainage systems. The f lood protection value of these features will be protected against adverse impact from development or other activities, and further increased by physical improvements and by improved drainage basin management. To these ends, further development or other activities which could cause damage to the wetlands or other natural resources, or to buildings or other property, will be carefully monitored and regulated (see Policy 14). POLICY 13 THE CONSTRUCTION OR RECONSTRUCTION OF EROSION PROTECTION STRUCTURES SHALL BE UNDERTAKEN ONLY IF THEY HAVE A REASONABLE PROBABILITY OF CONTROLLING EROSION FOR AT LEAST 30 YEARS AS DEMONSTRATED IN DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS AND/OR ASSURED MAINTENANCE OR REPLACEMENT PROGRAMS. Explanation of Policy: Most of the Long Island Sound coastline is protected from erosion by permanent structures which, with periodic maintenance, provide long-term protection. The various rivers and streams flowing through the coastal area, III-10 however, are often subject to increasing erosion due to chang- ing upstream flow characteristics. Erosion protection struc- tures in these areas will be designed to give the long-term protection required by this policy while, at the same time, respecting considerations of the natural and aesthetic environ- ment (see Policy 25). For example, use of natural materials such as rock or wood is preferable to concrete or steel. POLICY 14 ACTIVITIES AND DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING THE CONSTRUCTION OR RECONSTRUCTION OF EROSION PROTECTION STRUCTURES, SHALL BE UNDERTAKEN SO THAT THERE WILL BE NO MEASURABLE INCREASE IN EROSION OR FLOODING AT THE SITE OF SUCH ACTIVITIES OR DEVELOP- MENT, OR AT OTHER LOCATIONS. Explanation of Policy: Application of this policy to local @conditions will require the development of an integrated flood and erosion control strategy for improved control of flooding, erosion, siltation, and associated problems in the three watersheds of this coastal area. The relevant facts and considerations are as follows: Erosion and flooding are processes that occur naturally. However, unwise actions can increase their severity, causing avoidable damage to or loss of property and danger to human lives. Such actions commonly include failure to follow proper drainage or land restorati.on practices, thereby causing runoff which erodes and weakens stream banks or shorelands and causes siltation of stream beds, wetlands and navigational channels; placing of structures in identified floodways so that the base flood level is increased, exposing otherwise hazard-free areas to flood damage; and filling of wetlands and marsh areas with or without related measures to prevent erosion. As was pointed out in the Inventory, actions of these and other kinds over many years in our three watersheds, both within and upstream from the Larchmont-Town of Mamaroneck coastal area, have resulted in serious aggravation of flooding, erosion, and siltation. As a result, substantial damage has been inflicted on residential areas as well as on recreational and ecological resources in the coastal zone; and further serious damage can be expected unless corrective actions are taken. In the Sheldrake watershed these effects are felt not only within the Larchmont-Town of Mamaroneck coastal area but also in densely developed sections of the Village of Mamaroneck downstream near where the Sheldrake joins the Mamaroneck River. I Important, but insufficient, protection against these problems is found in existing legislative and physical steps taken by the two municipalities. Existing local laws and regulations, listed in Section V-A and important in this context, include Flood Damage Prevention regulations; Freshwater Wetlands laws; certain provisions of the zoning laws; SEQR laws; site plan review laws; subdivision requ- lations; a Town law governing conservation areas; and a Village law dedicating the Larchmont Reservoir property. In several cases these laws are slated for amendment, partly to strengthen the means of implementing this policy. Physical mitigation has been obtained from a combination of natural and built features, the most important of which are the remaining open space in the Pine Brook and Sheldrake flood plains, lying partly,within the Town and partly in White Plains, Scarsdale and New Rochelle; the Larchmont Reservoir with its release valve, functioning as a retention basin; and the tidal wetlands at the foot of the Pine Brook-Premium and East Creek-Gut Creek-Hommocks watersheds. Some role in the latter watershed is also played by a portion of the Hampshire Country Club property, located partly in the Town and partly in the Village of Mamaroneck. So far as lies within the power of the two municipalities, the flood protection value of all these features will be preserved. To this end they will also seek the necessary cooperation of the upstream municipalities just mentioned. However, these existing laws and physical features, taken together, do not suffice to achieve effective flood and erosion control in this area and will not be relied upon to do so. Rather, they will be used as elements in an inte- grated flood and erosion control strategy which the munici- pal governments will develop for the three drainage basins pursuant to this policy. This strategy will include physical, legal, and administrative actions such as those described below, as well as the land use controls set forth in Section IV-A. It will be based on technical studies of the hydrology and physical characteristics of the three watersheds, and on feasibility studies, where necessary, of various physical actions under consideration to determine their combined effects in association with land use pat- terns and controls. In all aspects of this strategy the two municipalities will seek the cooperation of neighboring municipalities in the three watersheds. in implementation of this policy the following considerations will be kept in mind and actions taken: 1. Technical research: In 1982 at the request of the Friends of the Reservoir and the affected municipal- ities, a hydrological study of the West Branch of the Upper Sheldrake was initiated by the Westchester County Soil and Water Conservation District. This study, now completed, will be an element in a wider pattern of 111-12 0 research aimed at possible new flood and erosion control measures by the four jurisdictions involved, i.e., the Town of Mamaroneck, New Rochelle, Scarsdale and White Plains. Comparable studies of the East Branch of the Sheldrake, and of the Pine Brook-Premium and East Creek-Gut Creek-Hommocks drainage basins, remain to be undertaken. Such studies must be undertaken at the local, County, and/or State levels since these areas are not currently included in the .flood control program of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 2. Physical actions: A number of physical actions involv- ing the Larchmont Reservoir, the upper Sheldrake, and the Pine Brook-Premium area are listed in Section IV for execution or for feasibility studies. The most important physical facility now in service for flood control in any of these areas is the Larchmont Reser- voir, the operation of which to mitigate flooding in the Sheldrake is described in Section II, part 7. Timely operation of the new valve in the Reservoir's upper dam since 1981 has given important, though partial, relief to flood-prone areas downstream during runoff following heavy rains. Various engineering steps to protect and further improve the flood control value of the Reservoir have been initiated or are under consideration. in assessing such proposals, weight should be given not only to their cost-effectiveness for flood control but also to their potential impact on the Reservoir's important aesthetic and recreational value and on its value as an emergency standby source of municipal water supply. 3. Legal and administrative actions: (a) The value of the Larchmont Reservoir for flood control was a major consideration in the decision of the Village of Larchmont in October 1984 to dedicate the Reservoir property in perpetuity as open space for public use. This act assures, among other things, the permanent availability of the Reservoir as a key flood control facility in the West Branch of the Sheldrake. The policy of permanent preservation of the Reservoir for that use is hereby reaffirmed. (b) Appropriate local regulatory measures will be taken to assure that permitted rates of stormwater runoff in new developments are such as to prevent any increase in local or downstream flooding or erosion. Normally, except where a different solution will clearly better serve the purposes of 111-13 this policy in a particular site, this will mean zero increase in the rate of runoff from the site and zero descrease in the rate of runoff entering the site. In specific cases involving large properties upstream from flood-prone areas, an actual reduction in runoff rate from the site may be required. Such limits can be achieved by, for example, requiring maximum preservation of tree and ground cover, contouring of land, or construction of water retention devices, and/or by changes in zoning 'categories. In keeping with Policy 17, non-structural measures will be used wherever practicable in physical actions taken pursuant to this policy. (c) The cooperation of upstream municipalities in the Pine Brook-Premium, East Creek-Gut Creek-Hommocks, and Sheldrake watersheds, and of appropriate Westchester County authorities, will be sought with a view to adoption of comparable rules and standards on storm water discharge rates, pro- visions for preserving wetlands and other remain- ing open space in the shared watersheds, and making of plans for permanent organizational structures by which the municipalities sharing each watershed can manage it in cooperation. 4. Reappraisal and revision. ActiQns or projects de- scribed or referred to in this Explanation of Policy will be reappraised from time to time in the light of new knowledge and experience, and may be revised in order to better achieve the purposes of this policy. POLICY 14A CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS ON ANY LAND LARGER THAN 10,000 SQUARE FEET IN AREA SHALL BE CONDUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STAN- DARDS SET FORTH IN THE MOST CURRENT EDITION OF THE WESTCHESTER COUNTY BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES MANUAL ENTITLED "CONSTRUCTION RELATED ACTIVITIES: STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS." THE COOPERATION OF UPSTREAM MUNICIPALITIES AND OF COUNTY AGENCIES WILL BE SOUGHT IN APPLYING THESE STANDARDS THROUGHOUT THE WATERSHEDS ENI RING THIS COASTAL AREA. Explanation of Polia: Large construction operations, often lasting many months or even years, are a leading cause of increased water runoff and associated erosion and siltation. They also tend to disrupt community life in other ways by creating noise, pollution and traffic congestion. Some of these efflicts may be unavoidable, but they can be substantially reduced by high standards of management. The "Best Management Practices" publication proposes such standards, which are hereby adopted as policy in the coastal area. Compliance with them will be mandated by local law and monitored and enforced ill-14 by both municipal governments. As noted in the discussion of Policy 14, the cooperation of upstream jurisdictions is essential since this phenomenon, also transcends municipal boundaries in the drainage basins entering our coastal zone. The general guidelines which underlie the standards here cited, and which this policy requires to be complied with, are as follows: 1. The construction site, or facilities, should fit the land, particularly with regard to 'its limitations. 2. Natural ground contours should be followed as closely as possible and grading minimized. 3. Areas of steep slopes, where high cuts and fills may be required, should be avoided. 4. Extreme care should be exercised in areas adjacent to natural watercourses and in locating artificial drainageways so that their final gradient and resultant discharge velocity will not create additional erosion problems. 5. Natural protective vegetation should remain undisturbed if at all possible; otherwise plantings should compensate for the disturbance. 6. The amount of time that disturbed ground surfaces are exposed to the energy of rainfall and runoff water should be limited. 7. Runoff from upper watershed lands which would contribute runoff to areas subject to erosion should be diverted. B. The velocity of the runoff water on all areas subject to erosion should be reduced below that necessary to erode the materials. 9. A ground cover should be applied sufficient to restrain erosion on that portion of the disturbed area undergoing no further active disturbance. 10. Runoff from a site should be collected and detained in sediment basins to trap pollutants which would otherwise be transported from the site. 11. Provi@ion should be made for permanent protection of downstream banks and channels from the erosive effects of increased velocity and volume of runoff resulting from facilities constructed. 12. The angle for graded slopes and fills should be limited to an angle no greater than that which can be retained by vegetative cover or other erosion control devices or structures. 13. The length as well as the angle of graded slopes should be minimized to reduce the erosive velocity of runoff water. 14. Rather than merely minimize damage, the opportunity should be taken to improve site conditions wherever practicable. POLICY 15 MINING, EXCAVATION OR DREDGING IN COASTAL AREAS SHALL NOT SIGNIFICANTLY INTERFERE WITH THE NATURAL COASTAL PROCESSES WHICH SUPPLY BEACH MATERIALS TO LAND ADJACENT TO SUCH WATERS AND SHALL BE UNDERTAKEN IN A MANNER WHICH WILL NOT CAUSE AN INCREASE IN EROSION OF SUCH LAND. Explanation of Policy: There is little beach material in the coastal area which is supplied to the adjacent land via natural coastal processes. Mining does not exist in this area. Excavation and dredging shall be done so that both the natural and manmade shoreline are not undermined and so that natural water movement is not changed in a manner that will increase erosion potential (also see Policies 13 and 35). POLICY 16 PUBLIC FUNDS SHALL ONLY BE USED FOR EROSION PROTECTION STRUCTURES WHERE NECESSARY TO PROTECT HUMAN LIFE, AND NEW DEVELOPMENT WHICH REQUIRES A LOCATION WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO AN EROSION HAZARD AREA To BE ABLE TO FUNCTION, OR EXISTING DEVEL- OPMENT: AND ONLY WHERE THE PUBLIC BENEFITS OUTWEIGH THE LONG TERM MONETARY AND OTHER COSTS INCLUDING THE POTENTIAL FOR INCREASING EROSION AND ADVERSE EFFECTS ON NATURAL PROTECTIVE FEATURES. Explanation of Policy: The local facts to which this policy applies are as stated in the Explanation of Policy 13. Projects contemplated under Policy 14, involving construction to protect property against erosion from upstream flooding, will conform to the criteria laid down in this policy. POLICY 17 WHENEVER POSSIBLE, USE NON-STRUCTURAL MEASURES TO MINIMIZE DAMAGE TO NATURAL RESOURCES AND PROPERTY FROM FLOODING AND EROSION. SUCH MEASURES SHALL INCLUDE: (1) THE SETBACK OF BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES: (2) THE PLANTING OF VEGETATION AND THE INSTALLATION OF SAND FENCING AND DRAINAGE SYSTEMS; (3) THE RESHAPING OF BLUFFS; (4) THE FLOODPROOFING OF BUILDINGS OR THEIR ELEVATION ABOVE BASE FLOOD LEVEL. Explanation of Policy: This policy recognizes the potential adverse impacts of flooding and erosion, whether from coastal or upstream sources, upon development and upon natural protective features in the coastal area as well as the costs of 111-16 protection against those hazards which structural measures entail. This policy shall apply to the planning, siting and design of proposed activities and development, including measures to protect existing activities and development. To ascertain consistency with the policy, it must be determined if any one, or a combination of, non-structural measures would afford the degree of protection appropriate both to the charac- ter and purpose of the activity or development, and to the hazard. If non-structural measures are determined to offer sufficient protection, then consistency with the policy would require the use of such measures whenever possible. Application of the Flood Damage Prevention regulations, Best Management Practices guidelines for construction-related activities (see Explanation of Policy 14A) , and SEQR proce- dures, will be effective in many instances as preventive measures. For some purposes, however, such as improved protection against flood damage, sewage backup, etc., from upstream sources (see Section II, Parts 6, 7 and 8, and Policy 14), nonstructural methods will have to be supplemented in some instances by structural measures. (For application of this policy to methods of controlling storm water discharge, see Policy 14, paragraph 3-b of Explanation.) GENERAL POLICY POLICY 18 TO SAFEGUARD THE VITAL ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL INTERESTS OF THE STATE AND OF ITS CITIZENS, PROPOSED MAJOR ACTIONS IN THE COASTAL AREA MUST GIVE FULL CONSIDERATION TO THOSE INTERESTS, AND TO THE SAFEGUARDS WHICH THE STATE HAS ESTABLISHED TO PROTECT VALUABLE COASTAL RESOURCE AREAS. Explanation of Pol@Ey: Proposed major actions may not be undertaken in the coastal area if they will significantly impair valuable coastal waters and resources, thus frustrating the achievement of the purposes of the safeguards which the State has established to protect those waters and resources. Proposed actions must take into account the social, economic and environmental interests of the State and its citizens in such matters that would affect natural resources, water levels and flows, shoreline damage, and recreation. Review under the SEQR.process will allow a weighing of the costs and benefits of such actions to State interests. PUBLIC ACCESS POLICIES POLICY 19 PROTECT, MAINTAIN, AND INCREASE THE LEVEL AND TYPES OF ACCESS TO PUBLIC WATER-RELATED RECREATION RESOURCES AND FACILITIES SO THAT THESE RESOURCES AND FACILITIES MAY BE FULLY UTILIZED BY THE PUBLIC IN ACCORDANCE WITH REASONABLY ANTICIPATED PUBLIC RECREATION NEEDS AND PROTECTION OF HISTORIC AND NATURAL 111-17 RESOURCES. IN PROVIDING SUCH ACCESS, PRIORITY SHALL BE GIVEN TO PUBLIC BEACHES, BOATING FACILITIES, FISHING AREAS AND WATER- FRONT PARKS. Explanation of Policy: The Larchmont/Mamaroneck coastal area includes many water-related recreation resources to which the public has varying degrees of access depending on the nature of the facility and its ownership, as discussed in Section II. Balance between the type, capacity, and intensity of use of a facility, and the protection of the resource itself and of the adjacent environment, . must be maintained if the quality of these resources is to be preserved. In general the level of access to, and use of, recreational resources in this coastal area appears consistent with current needs and with the ability of the facility or resource to accommodate it. Therefore, retention of present levels of access to existing facilities ..will be given priority. Future opportunities to increase access to active, water-dependent recreation resources should be carefully considered only if the potential impact of increased traffic and intensity of use on adjacent neighborhoods can be mitigated and adverse effect on the water environment avoided. Such increases, where desirable and feasible under these criteria, should, if possible, be achieved by expanding access to existing facilities. POLICY 20 ACCESS TO THE PUBLICLY-OWNED FORESHORE AND TO LANDS IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE FORESHORE OR THE WATER'S EDGE THAT ARE PUBLICLY OWNED SHALL BE PROVIDED, AND IT SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN A MA14-NER COMPATIBLE WITH ADJOINING USES. SUCH LANDS SHALL BE RETAINED IN PUBLIC OWNERSHIP. Explanation of Policy: The principal publicly owned lands adjacent to the foreshore are five parcels of municipally owned land: the Premium and Hommocks Conservation areas, Flint Park, Lorenzen Park, and Woodbine Park. In each case except Flint Park, access is provided to the water's edge for passive recreation activities. All such lands will be retained in public ownership and the existing level of access will be maintained unless damage to fragile environmental features mandates temporary or permanent limitations on access. Access from Flint Park to the foreshore (Little Harbor Sound) is largely blocked by the presence of the Village of Larchmont leaf disposal facility at the south end of the park. Steps will be taken by the Village to work out new arrangements for leaf disposal and, as soon as this is done, to adapt this area for public passive recreation, bearing in zmind the need to protect the ecologically sensitive wildlife habitat in the adjoining Hommocks Marsh. RECREATION POLICIES POLICY 21 WATER DEPENDENT AND WATER ENHANCED RECREATION WILL BE EN- 111-18 COURAGED AND FACILITATED, AND WILL BE GIVEN PRIORITY OVER NON-WATER RELATED USES ALONG THE COAST, PROVIDED IT IS CONSIS- TENT WITH THE PRESERVATION AND ENHANCEMENT OF OTHER COASTAL RESOURCES AND TAKES INTO ACCOUNT DEMAND FOR SUCH FACILITIES. IN FACILITATING SUCH ACTIVITIES, PRIORITY SHALL BE GIVEN TO AREAS WHERE ACCESS TO THE RECREATION OPPORTUNITIES OF THE COAST CAN BE PROVIDED BY NEW -OR EXISTING PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SERVICES AND TO THOSE AREAS WHERE THE USE OF THE SHORE IS SEVERELY RESTRICTED BY EXISTING DEVELOPMENT. Explanation of Policy: Water-telated recreation includes such obviously water-dependent activities as boating, swimming, and fishing as well as certain activities which are enhanced by a coastal location and increase the general public's access to the coast such as pedestrian and bicycle trails, scenic over- looks and passive recreation areas that take advantage of coastal scenery. The Larchmont-Mamaroneck shoreline features a broad range of water-dependent and water-enhanced recreation facilities (see Section II-3-c and 11-13). The developed state of the shore leaves little scope for additional facilities. Therefore, the primary objective of this policy is to preserve those water- related facilities that now exist and to protect them against abuse, over-use, and physical deterioration (see Policies 19, 20, and 30 through 39A) . In the event that any private water-related recreational facilities are in danger of conversion to other use, the local governments, in pursuance of the above objective, will endeavor to find ways by which the facilities can be maintained in a manner consistent with this policy and Policy 19, including the possibility of municipal ownership, in whole or in part, of such facilities. Within the limits set by the developed state of the shore, and provided that additional water-related recreational facilities can be created in a manner consistent with the preservation and enhancement of other important coastal resources including fish and wildlife habitats, wetlands, aesthetically significant areas, and historical and cultural resources, and provided demand exists, water-related recreational development is to be increased and shall have a higher priority than any non-coastal-dependent uses, including non-water-related rec;eation uses; and water-dependent recreation uses shall take priority over recreation uses that are water-enhanced but not water-dependent. Recreation in the conservation areas will be confined to passive,'non-intensive activities such as bird watching, nature study, photography, etc. Swimming and boating on the Sound are to be encouraged, but not to an extent that will overtax the capacity of on-shore support facilities. Recreational 111-19 lobstering and s@ellfishing will be enhanced if water quality is improved (see Policy 10A) . The balance between use of the resource on the one hand, and on the other-hand the enjoyment and safety of users and integrity of the environment, must be constantly monitored. For example, additional moorings for boats should be encouraged only if on-shore parking and access facilities are available and if the new moorings will not inhibit safe navigation in the harbor. Conduct which degrades, endangers, or interferes with these activities, including vandalism and other unlawful or reckless conduct in the harbor, and unlawful discharge of sewage or litter or other pollutants from pleasure boats in municipal waters, will be controlled. To this end the Village of Larchmont will take steps to work out a clear sharing of responsibility for policing the harbor among the parties concerned (see also Policy 34). Action to control upstream or coastal erosion (Policies 11 through 17) will serve the purposes of this policy by retarding siltation of navigation channels used by recreational boats and by reducing siltation damage in natural areas suitable for passive recreation. POLICY 22 DEVELOPMENT, WHEN LOCATED ADJACENT TO THE SHORE, SHALL PROVIDE FOR WATER-RELATED RECREATION, AS A MULTIPLE USE, WHENEVER SUCH RECREATIONAL USE IS APPROPRIATE IN LIGHT OF REASONABLY ANTIC- IPATED DEMAND FOR SUCH ACTIVITIES AND THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THE DEVELOPMENT. Explanation of Policy. This policy calls for compatible inclusion of recreational facilities in new developments adjacent to the shore. Lands adjacent to the shore in this coastal area are already developed to their capacity and include a balance of residential and recreational uses. However, if new development adjacent to the shore should occur, recreation facilities in conformity with this policy will be required. HISTORIC AND SCENIC RESOURCES POLICY 23 PROTECT AND RESTORE STRUCTURES, DISTRICTS, AREAS OR SITES THAT ARE OF SICNIFICANCE IN THE HISTORY, ARCHITECTURE, ARCHEOLOGY OR CULTURE OF THE STATE, ITS COMMUNITIES OR THE NATION. Explanation of Policy: Among the most valuable of the State's manmade resources are structures or areas of historic, archeological, or cultural significance. Under State law, municipalities have the power to adopt regulations for the protection of these resources. In so doing they may designate, and provide for protection of, or in appropriate cases restora- tion and adaptive reuse of, specific sites or more extensive districts. New York State definitions of such significant resources include these categories that may be applicable to this area: 111-20 A local landmark, park, or locally designated historic district that is located within the boundary of an approved local waterfront revitalization program. A resource on, or nominated to be on, or potentially'eligi- ble to be on, the National or State Register of Historic places. A resource on, or nominated to be on, the State Nature and Historic Preserve Trust. A resource identified on the archaeological sensitivity model of the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Places or on the State Department of Education Inventory of Archaeological sites. While the program is concerned with the preservation of all significant resources, as here defined, within the coastal boundary, it gives priority to the preservation of resources having a coastal relationship. The following structures, districts, and sites, among others, in the Larchmont-Mamaroneck coastal area are of historic, architectural, archaeological, or cultural significance meriting protection under this policy: 1. Larchmont Manor Park, including the Horseshoe Harbor Yacht Club. 2. The neighborhood within Town of Mamaroneck Map 610, known as Larchmont Manor. 3. The Premium Mill Pond, dam, and associated structures, including the mill house. 4. The Larchmont Reservoir-James G. Johnson Jr. Conservancy. 5. The Winged Foot and Bonnie Briar Golf Clubs. 6. The Quaker and Barker Cemeteries. 7. The Manor House at the head of Prospect Avenue. 8. ihe Larchmont Public Library, site of the original Samuel Palmer House. 9. The Indian rock shelter and rock face next to Pine Brook Park.' 10. The former Weaver Street School house at 86 Weaver Street. 111-21 Structures, districts and sites designated pursuant to this policy shall be protected against significant adverse change and, where appropriate, restored or rehabilitated for adaptive reuse. In this context "adverse change" means, among other things, demolition or removal in whole or in part, or inappropriate alteration of or addition to the architectural, structural, ornamental or functional features of, a building, structure, earth work, or site that is a recognized historical, cultural, or archaeological resource or component thereof; or an action within 500 feet of such a structure, or anywhere within such a district, that wou'ld be incompatible by virtue of location, scale, design, color, texture, pattern, line, setback, landscaping or similar characteristics, with the preservation of the quality and integrity of the designated structure or district. In a historic district, adverse change may also take the form of incompatible improvements in infrastructure elements such as street and sidewalk paving, street furniture and lighting. Pursuant to this policy the municipal governments will estab- lish appropriate procedures for designating significant re- sources and for accomplishing their protection or restoration. In addition, contacts with the State Historic Preservation Office, already initiated by the Larchmont Historical Society, will be pursued with regard to listing of sites in this area on the National or State Register of Historic Places. Given the possibility that archaeologically significant sites may be found in the coastal area, any government agency proposing, permitting or funding a development action on any- site in the coastal area will contact the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Places for procedures to follow with respect to that site. This policy shall not be construed as preventing (1) the alteration or demolition of any structure when such action is certified by competent authority as necessary to avert an imminent danger to life or to public health; or (2) normal maintenance, repair, or proper restoration of a designated structure, not involving significant adverse change and in conformity with the U.S. Department of Interior "Standards for Rehabilitation" and "Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings." POLICY 24 PREVENT IMPAIRMENT OF SCENIC RESOURCES OF STATEWIDE SIGNIFICANCE, AS IDENTIFIED ON THE COASTAL AREA MAP. Not appli@able. POLICY 25 PROTECT, RESTORE AND ENHANCE NATURAL AND MANMADE RESOURCES WHICH ARE NOT IDENTIFIED AS BEING OF STATEWIDE SIGNIFICANCE, BUT WHICH CONTRIBUTE To THE SCENIC QUALITY OF THE COASTAL AREA. 111-22 Explanation of Policy: The Larchmont/Mamaroneck shoreline includes natural and historic features which in total comprise a diverse scenic resource of high quality. The pleasant blend of wetlands and marshes, landscaped parkland, geological forms of exceptional interest and beauty and attractive, water- oriented homes and recreation facilities, is unusual in the urbanized New York metropolitan area. Features of particular scenic quality on the shore include the Premium and Hommocks wetlands, the Larchmont Manor Park, the Larchmont Yacht Club, and the Larchmont Shore Club. Although not visible from the shore, Fountain Square, Memorial (Station) Park, the Sheldrake-Leatherstocking Conservation area, the Larchmont Reservoir-James G. Johnson Conservancy, the Brookside Drive-Gardens Lake area, and the Bonnie Briar, Winged Foot, and Hampshire golf courses all sig-nificantly contribute to the scenic quality of the entire coastal area. Given the generally high visual quality of the coastal area, action under this policy will be directed primarily toward protecting existing features, but will also seek to assure compatibility in the siting and appearance of new structures. These purposes are served to a great extent by exist 'ing con- trols in both municipalities. Industrial, commercial, and multi-family residential uses are not permitted outside of zones near the Thruway, Palmer Avenue, and the Boston Post Road. The appearance of new construction or remodeled struc- tures in both the Village and the Town is subject to regu- lation. In the Village, designs may be disapproved on grounds of (among other things) monotonous similarity to nearby structures, visual offensiveness due to poor design, visual discord in relation to the site or surroundings, or characteristics that prevent appropriate use of adjacent lands. Site plan review regulations provide comparable safeguards in the Town. The size, character, and location of all outdoor signs is also regulated, and property owners are required to keep their properties clear of brush, weeds and unsightly materials. This policy reaffirms the above legal protections. In addi- tion, the following siting and development guidelines will be used when reviewing' a proposed action that could affect scenic quality, recognizing that each development situation is unique and'that the guidelines will have to be applied accordingly. a. Structures and other development such as power lines, pump stations, lights, high antennae, and signs should be of appropriate design and/or should be sited back from the shoreline or in other inconspicuous locations so as to maintain the attractive quality of the shoreline and to retain views to and from the shore. 111-23 b. Structures should be oriented to retain views, save open space and provide visual organization to development. c. Existing structures of scenic or historical value, if structurally sound, should be retained and incorporated into the overall development scheme. d. Deteriorated or degrading elements should be removed or rebuilt. e. The original land form shou'ld be maintained or restored, except when changes screen unattractive elements and/or add appropriate interest. f. Vegetation should be maintained or added to provide inter- est, encourage the presence of wildlife, blend structures into the site, and obscure unattractive elements, except when selective clearing removes unsightly, diseased or hazardous vegetation or creates views of coastal wateri. S. other appropriate materials in addition to vegetation may be used to screen unattractive elements. h. Appropriate scales, forms and materials should be used to ensure that buildings and other structures are compatible with and add interest to the landscape. i. Actions should be avoided that would be out of keeping with the scenic character of a location because of intensity of use or potential for generating noise, visual annoyance, litter, traffic jams, or other nuisance. j. Where possible, erosion-protection structures in scenic or residential areas should be built of natural wood or stone materials that blend with their surroundings, rather than of manufactured materials (see Policy 13). AGRICULTURAL LANDS POLICY POLICY 26 CONSERVE AND PROTECT AGRICULTURAL LANDS IN THE STATEIS COASTAL AREA. Not applicable. L-NERGY AND ICE MANAGEMENT POLICIES POLICY 27 DECISIONS ON THE SITING AND CONSTRUCTION OF MAJOR ENERGY FACILITIES IN THE COASTAL AREA WILL BE BASED ON PUBLIC ENERGY NEEDS, COMPATIBILITY OF SUCH FACILITIES WITH THE ENVIRONMENT, AND THE FXCILITY'S NEED FOR A SHOREFRONT LOCATION. Not included in local progr : Federal agencies should consult the State of New York Coastal Management Program and Final Environmental Impact Statement for the explanation of this policy. 111-24 POLICY 28 ICE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES SHALL NOT DAMAGE SIGNIFICANT FISH AND WILDLIFE AND THEIR HABITATS, INCREASE SHORELINE EROSION OR FLOODING, OR INTERFERE WITH THE PRODUCTION OF HYDROELECTRIC POWER. Not applicable. POLICY 29 ENCOURAGE THE DEVELOPMENT OF ENERGY RESOURCES ON THE OUTER CONTINENTAL SHELF, IN LAKE ERIE AND IN OTHER WATER BODIES, AND ENSURE THE ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY OF SUCH ACTIVITIES. Not included in local progra. : Federal agencies should consult the State of New York Coastal Management Program and Final Environmental Impact Statement for the explanation of this policy. WATER AND AIR RESOURCES POLICIES POLICY 30 MUNICIPAL, INDUSTRIAL, COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL DISCHARGE OF POLLUTANTS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, TOXIC AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES, INTO COASTAL WATERS, WILL CONFORM TO STATE AND NATIONAL WATER QUALITY STANDARDS. Explanation of Policy: Excessive pollution of waters in the coastal zone is damaging to public health, the breeding and taking of edible fish, shellfish and crustaceans, water-related recreation, and (as noted under Policy 8) the ecology of wetlands and wildlife habitats. Effective adherence to the water quality standards invoked by this policy will prevent it. Pollutant discharges covered by this policy include "end-of-the-pipe" discharges into surface water and groundwater; r-unoff from plant sites; leaching; spillages; unlawful or damaging disposal of sludge, waste oil, and other polluting wastes; and drainage from raw material storage sites.@ Industrial discharges are covered if they empty directly into coastal waters or if they pass through municipal treatment systems before reaching coastal waters. All such discharges are governed by Federal and State laws and by regulations issued under them. Water quality standards are set for a wide range of toxic substances. To maintain these standards, a permit system limits rates of effluent discharge of specified toxic substances and other pollutants by indus- trial plants. These Fed@ral and State regulatory systems are supplemented locally by certain legal prohibitions, notably those of the Town Freshwater Wetland law which prohibits or limits certain categories of pollutants in controlled areas. The Westchester County Department of Health is responsible for monitoring 111-25 coastal waters for pollutants dangerous to swimmers, and has the power to forbid swimming when and where pollution is excessive. The Conservation Advisory Commission has a limited pollution monitoring capability which serves both municipal governments by identifying and tracing some common pollutants, including coliform pollution, as a basis for enforcement action. Taken together, these monitoring and regulatory activities at different levels of government go far toward assuring satisfac- tory water quality in the coa9tal zone. But constant and vigorous implementation of existing laws and regulations is essential, including adequate monitoring, identification and inspection of point sources, and prompt enforcement. In addition, further experience may show that new legislation is necessary. Therefore, government agencies will: 1. Take all practicable steps, both within their own juris- dictions and in cooperation with other jurisdictions including neighboring municipalities as may be necessary, to apply existing legal and administrative machinery for water pollution monitoring and enforcement and for preventive inspection and maintenance of potential point sources; and, where appropriate, to strengthen such machinery. Local citizen participation in these efforts will be encouraged both for public education and for enforcement purposes. 2. Seek to assure, in concert with neighboring municipalities, that retail sellers of motor oil comply with the State statutory requirement that they shall accept waste oil for recycling and shall make this fact known to their custom- ers. 3. Urge the responsible authorities to require installation as ,soon as possible of full secondary sewage treatment in all sewage treatment plants, without exception, along the Sound shore, in order to reduce organic pollution of nearby Sound waters. POLICY 31 STATE COASTAL AREA POLICIES AND PURPOSES OF APPROVED LOCAL WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION PROGRAMS WILL BE CONSIDERED WHILE REVIEWING COASTAL WATER CLASSIFICATIONS AND WHILE MODIFYING WATER QUALITY STANDARDS: HOWEVER, THOSE WATERS ALREADY OVER- BURDENED WITH CONTAMINANTS WILL BE RECOGNIZED AS BEING A DEVELOPMENT CONSTRAINT. Explanation of Policy: Pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act of 1977 (PL 95-217) the State has classified its coastal and other waters in accordance with considerations of best usage in the interest of the public and has adopted water quality standards for each class of waters. These classifications and 111-26 standards are reviewable at least every three years for possi- ble revision or amendment. Current classifications of fresh and saline waters in this area are given in Section II, part 3-h. Fresh-water classifications provide ample scope for proposed uses. Salt-water classifications are consistent with proposed uses except in the former shellfishing areas along the shore now classified SB. As noted under Policy 10A, efforts will be made to restore these areas to SA status. POLICY 32 ENCOURAGE THE USE OF ALTERNATIVE OR INNOVATIVE SANITARY WASTE SYSTEMS IN SMALL COMMUNITIES WHERE THE COSTS OF CONVENTIONAL FACILITIES ARE UNREASONABLY HIGH GIVEN THE SIZE OF THE EXISTING TAX BASE OF THESE COMMUNITIES. Explanation of Policy: Alternative systems include individual septic tanks and other subsurface disposal systems, dual systems, small systems serving clusters of households or commercial users, and pressure or vacuum sewers. These types of systems are often more cost-effective in smaller, less densely populated areas for which conventional facilities are too expensive. Although the entire coastal area is within public sanitary sewer districts, some homes are still served by on-site sani- tary systems. Where such homes cannot be connected to public sewer lines without unreasonable cost, the use of on-site systems will continue to be permitted provided that owners use those that are most effective and po1lution-free. However, see Policy 32A. POLICY 32A WHEREVER FEASIBLE AT REASONABLE COST, EXISTING ON-SITE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS SHALL BE ELIMINATED AND REPLACED BY DIRECT CONNECTION TO THE PUBLIC SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM. Explanation of Policy: On-site sanitary systems in this area (see Section II-10-f) have been found to be unreliable and pollution-prone in many instances. Therefore, in locations now served by such systems, where replacement of them by connection to public sewer systems would not be unreasonably costly, such action will be required. Otherwise the most effective and pollution-free on-site system will be required and will be closely monitored by municipal authorities to assure adequate performance. In all cases the objective will be the least risk of pollution consistent with acceptable cost. POLICY 33 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES WILL BE USED TO ENSURE THE CONTROL OF STORMWATER RUNOFF AND COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOWS DRAINING INTO COASTAL WATERS. 111-27 Explanation of Policy: The purpose of this policy is to improve the quality of coastal waters by minimizing pollution from stormwater runoff and combined sewer overflows. Best management practices applicable to this purpose include both structural and non-structural methods. In some cases struc- tural methods, such as construction of detention basins or replacement of combined sewer systems with separate sanitary and stormwater collection systems, are appropriate and will be used. In other cases, however, structural methods are inappro- priate or excessively costly. Moreover, such methods alone cannot achieve the stated purpbse as well as if they are combined with non-structural best management practices such as improved street cleaning, reduced use of road salt, and control of runoff from construction sites (see Policy 14A). Non-structural best management practices, therefore, will be required or encouraged to the greatest extent appropriate and feasible for the purposes of this policy. POLICY 33A TO ELIMINATE DISCHARGE OF RAW SEWAGE INTO COASTAL WATERS AND RESIDENTIAL AREAS DURING STORMS, ALL CONNECTIONS WHICH CARRY STORMWATER RUNOFF INTO THE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM SHALL BE PROHIBITED AND APPROPRIATE ADMINISTRATIVE, LEGAL AND PHYSICAL ACTIONS SHALL BE TAKEN AS EXPEDITIOUSLY AS POSSIBLE TO REMOVE ALL SUCH CONNECTIONS. Explanation of Policy: A principal factor contributing to pollution in the coastal area is the connection of public and private storm water drains, in many cases illegally, to the public sanitary sewer system. The increased flow resulting from this practice exceeds the capacity of the sewage treatment plant and leads to discharge of raw sewage into streets, basements, and coastal waters and the closing of beaches during periods of heavy rain. The elimination and prevention of such conditions is an especially important objective of the communi- ty and will be pursued energetically by the responsible governments and agencies. POLICY 34 DISCHARGE OF WASTE MATERIALS INTO COASTAL WATERS FROM VESSELS WILL BE LIMITED SO AS TO PROTECT SIGNIFICANT FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITATS, RECREATIONAL AREAS AND WATER SUPPLY AREAS. Explanation of Policy: The discharge of sewage, garbage, rubbish, and other solid and liquid materials from watercraft and marinas into the State's waters is regulated by State law. Priority will be given to the enforcement of this law in areas where such discharges may damage shellfish beds, fish and wildlife habitats, or waters and beaches used for swimming and other re6reation. Specific effluent standards for marine toilets have been promulgated by the Department of Environ- mental Conservation (6 NYCRR, Part 657). These standards, as well as other applicable laws and regulations concerning litter and pollution from vessels in coastal waters, shall be strictly 111-28 enforced by the responsible authorities. The municipal governments will keep this matter under review to assure fulfillment of this policy. POLICY 35 DREDGING AND DREDGE SPOIL DISPOSAL IN COASTAL WATERS WILL BE UNDERTAKEN IN A MANNER THAT MEETS EXISTING STATE AND FEDERAL DREDGING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS, AND PROTECTS SIGNIFICANT FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITATS, SCENIC RESOURCES, NATURAL PROTECTIVE FEA- TURES, IMPORTANT AGRICULTURAL LANDS, AND WETLANDS. Explanation of Policy: Periodi7c dredging in this area is necessary for several purposes, primarily for maintenance of navigational channels at sufficient depths for recreational boating. In addition, actions to counter the effects of siltation and erosion in the Premium and Hommocks marshes (see Policies 7A and 14), and thereby to restore and maintain their ecological, recreational, and scenic value, may include dredg- ing and also possibly some dredge spoil disposal within the area if technical studies show that environmental benefits, such as the creation of new salt marshes, can be gained there- by. However, dredging projects, including dredge spoil disposal, may adversely affect water quality, fish and wildlife habitats, wetlands, and other important coastal resources. Such effects can be avoided or minimized by careful design and timing and by proper siting of spoil disposal. Government agencies will assure that dredging operations in this area are in conformity with these principles and with State dredging permit requirements. They will also endeavor to bring about, and to participate in as appropriate, a coordinated dredging program for neighboring Sound shore communities as a means of obtaining high-quality service at acceptable cost. operation of any such program within this coastal area will be subject to this policy. POLICY 36 ACTIVITIES RELATED TO THE SHIPMENT AND STORAGE OF PETROLEUM AND OTHER HAZARDOUS MATERIALS WILL BE CONDUCTED IN A MANNER THAT WILL PREVENT OR AT LEAST MINIMIZE SPILLS INTO COASTAL WATERS; ALL PRACTICABLE EFFORTS WILL BE UNDERTAKEN TO EXPEDITE THE CLEANUP OF SUCH DISCHARGES; AND RESTITUTION FOR DAMAGES WILL BE REQUIRED WHEN THESE SPILLS OCCUR. Explanation of PoliSy: This policy shall apply not only to commercial storage and distribution facilities but also to residential and other users of petroleum pro-ducts and radio- active and other toxic or hazardous materials. Spills, seepage or other accidents which occur on or adjacent to coastal waters or which, by virtue of natural or man-ade drainage facilities, eventually reach coastal waters, are included under this policy. 111-29 Government agencies will act vigorously under the applicable laws and regulations (including the New York State Petroleum Bulk Storage Act of 1983 and regulations issued or to be issued thereunder) to prevent or control such discharges, to minimize damage from them, and to obtain full and prompt compensation for the damage and costs caused by them. To this end they will seek the cooperation of neighboring and upstream municipalities. POLICY 37 BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES WILL BE UTILIZED TO MINIMIZE THE NONPOINT DISCHARGE OF EXCESS NUTRIENTS, ORGANICS AND ERODED SOILS INTO COASTAL WATERS. Explanation of Polic Best management practices used to reduce these categories of pollution include, but are not limited to, encouraging organic gardening and pest management as alternatives to the use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides; soil erosion control; surface drainage control; and erosion and sediment control practices on construction projects as described under Policies 14A and 33. The municipal governments will conform to these practices in their own operations to the greatest practicable extent, and will encourage property owners, especially owners of larger properties, in the coastal area to do likewise. Also important for achievement of the purposes of this policy are the steps to be taken under Policies 33A and 39A. :POLICY 38 THE QUALITY AND QUANTITY OF SURFACE WATER AND GROUNDWATER SUPPLIES WILL BE CONSERVED AND PROTECTED, PARTICULARLY WHERE SUCH WATER CONSTITUTES THE PRIMARY OR SOLE SOURCE OF WATER SUPPLY. Explanation of Policy: The only water supply source to which this policy may apply is the Upper Reservoir (Sheldrake Lake) in the Larchmont Reservoir-James G. Johnson Conservancy. Although outside our Coastal Zone boundary, it is part of a property owned by the Village of Larchmont and dedicated by it to public use (see Section II, part 3-g-3 and 3-h-1) . It is no longer used as a regular water supply, but one of the uses specified in the October 1984 act of dedication is "standby water supply" in case of severe water shortage. Bearing in mind this use, the Village will make every effort to assure that the Upper Reservoir's water remains in State classification A (*all uses"), and will frame and enforce such rules as will promote this purpose. The necessary cooperation of upstream municipalities and of the Westchester County government will be sought in this connection. POLICY 39 THE TRANSPORT, STORAGE, TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTES, PARTICULARLY HAZARDOUS WASTES, WITHIN COASTAL AREAS WILL BE CONDUCTED IN SUCH A KANNER AS TO PROTECT GROUNDWATER AND SURFACE WATER SUPPLIES, SIGNIFICANT FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITATS, 111-30 RECREATION AREAS, IMPORTANT AGRICULTURAL LANDS AND SCENIC RESOURCES. Explanation of Policy: Federal and State laws provide a substantial base for regulation of the transport, storage, treatment, and disposal of solid wastes, particularly hazardous wastes. Strict enforcement of these regulations by the respon- sible authorities is extremely important to protect public health, the wetlands, fish and wildlife habitats, and water- related recreational resources of the coastal area. Especially important is adequate regulation of the transport of hazardous wastes through or near this coastal area, whether by land or on the nearby waters of Long Island Sound. Solid wastes in this area consist primarily of garbage and refuse from households and retail stores, and construction debris. As far as is known, no significant quantities of hazardous wastes enter the local solid waste stream. Patterns of garbage and refuse collection and disposal in the coastal area have generally been such as to have little impact on the resources enumerated in this policy other than some contribution to street litter (see Policy 39A). However, uncontrolled and illegal dumping -- a detriment to ecological and scenic values and potentially to public health -- continues in several locations including vacant lots, parks, and the Village leaf disposal facility at the south end of Flint Park. The replacement of this facility as soon as possible by a suitable alternative mode of leaf disposal for the Village, and the restoration of the site, will, among other benefits, help to eliminate this form of pollution in that scenically attrac- tive and ecologically sensitive location. Corrective action will be taken by the municipal governments in the affected locations in a manner that will satisfy the requirements of this policy. POLICY 39A LITTER AND DOG WASTE SHALL BE STRICTLY CONTROLLED IN THE COASTAL AREA Explanation of Policy: Litter and dog waste create pervasive problems of pollution and "uglification" along streets and shoreline and in conservation and recreation areas in the coastal area. The problem has numerous sources including: illegal dumping in vacant lots, roadsides, stream beds, etc.; inadequate containment of household and commercial garbage and refuse before and/or during collection; wind-scattering of unsecured newspa pers; casual discard of consumer items, chiefly containers and printed matter, by individuals; and failure of many persons walking dogs to clean up after them. Despite municipal laws against these practices and vigorous anti-litter 111-31 measures by co ncerned civic and neighborhood organizations, the problems remain. The municipal governments will work with concerned organiza- tions and community leaders in renewed efforts to deal with these quality-of-life problems more effectively. They will study the most effective control techniques in comparable communities including action programs, incentives, penalties, means of enforcement, and educational efforts at all levels. The most promising and appropriate techniques will be tried locally and their effectiveness j@eriodically evaluated. POLICY 40 EFFLUENT DISCHARGED FROM MAJOR STEAM ELECTRIC GENERATING AND INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES INTO COASTAL WATERS WILL NOT BE UNDULY INJURIOUS TO FISH AND WILDLIFE AND SHALL CONFORM TO STATE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS. Not included in local program. Federal agencies should consult the State of New York Coastal Management Program and Final Environmental Impact Statement for the explanation of this policy. POLICY 41 LAND USE OR DEVELOPMENT IN THE COASTAL AREA WILL NOT CAUSE NATIONAL OR STATE AIR QUALITY STANDARDS TO BE VIOLATED. Not included in local program. Federal agencies should consult the State of New York Coastal Management Program and Final Environmental Impact Statement for the explanation of this policy. POLICY 42 COASTAL MANAGEMENT POLICIES WILL BE CONSIDERED IF THE STATE RECLASSIFIES LAND AREAS PURSUANT TO THE PREVENTION OF SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION REGULATIONS OF THE FEDERAL CLEAN AIR ACT. Not included in local program. Federal agencies should consult the State of New York Coastal Management Program and Final Environmental Impact Statement for the explanation of this policy. POLICY 43 LAND USE OR DEVELOPMENT IN THE COASTAL AREA MUST NOT CAUSE THE GENERATION OF SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS OF THE ACID RAIN PRECURSORS: NITRATES AND SULFATES. Not included in local program. Federal agencies should consult the State of New York Coastal Management Program and Final Environmental impact Statement for the explanation of this policy. POLICY 44 PRESERVE AND PROTECT TIDAL AND FRESHWATER WETLANDS AND PRESERVE THE BENEFITS DERIVED FROM THESE AREAS. 111-32 Explanation of Policy: Freshwater wetlands include marshes, swamps, bogs, and flats supporting aquatic and semi-aquatic vegetation and other wetlands so defined in the New York State Freshwater Wetlands Act and the NYS Protection of Waters Act. Tidal wetlands include the following ecological zones: coastal fresh marsh; intertidal marsh; coastal shoals, bars and flats; littoral zone; high marsh or salt meadow; and formerly connect- ed tidal wetlands. These tidal wetland areas are officially delineated on the Department of Environmental Conservation's Tidal wetlands Inventory map. ' The benefits derived from the preservation of tidal and freshwater wetlands include but are not limited to: a. habitat for wildlife and fish and contribution to associ- ated aquatic food chains; b. erosion, flood and storm control; c. natural pollution treatment; d. groundwater protection; e. recreational opportunities; f. educational and scientific opportunities; and g. aesthetic open space in developed areas. Major portions of the wetland complexes in this area (see Map 9), both freshwater and tidal, are protected as Town conservation areas. Their designation, together with associated open space, as Wildlife Habitats under Policy 7 (or 7A) and as critical environmental areas will provide added protection against adverse impact from actions nearby. Further protection will be derived from the newly revised Town Freshwater Wetlands law. However, the problem of protecting these areas is complicated by municipal boundaries. In the Premium area, the wetland complex, which is a major factor in local control of flooding, erosion and pollution, extends beyond the local coastal zone boundary into New Rochelle. The same is true of the Larchmont Reservoir area. Moreover, as is noted in the wildlife habitat narrative (Section 11-4), all three wetland areas lie in . watersheds originating wholly or partly beyond our municipal boundaries and are thus vulnerable to upstream impacts beyond local control. Accordingly, the municipal governments will seek the cooperation of the upstream municipalities in the implementation of this policy. They will also consider des- ignating additional freshwater wetlands meriting protection. 111-33 In addition, since two small but important freshwater wetlands-the open sections of Pine Brook and East Creek-are in the Village, consideration will be given to revising the Village's outdated freshwater wetlands law. POLICY 44A RESTORE TIDAL AND FRESHWATER WETLANDS ALREADY DAMAGED BY EROSION, SILTATION, AND POLLUTION Explanation of Policy: Preservation and protection of wetlands from future damage, mandated by Policy 44, must be supplemented in this coastal area by measurei to restore, insofar as possi- ble, wetlands already damaged. This policy applies especially to the two tidal wetland complexes, which have suffered cumula- tive damage from upstream sources for many years; but damage to the Reservoir-Sheldrake-Leatherstocking wetland complex, and to the two Village of Larchmont freshwater wetlands referred to under Policy 44, has also occurred and requires restorative action. A staged program to correct damage from siltation, erosion, and pollution will therefore be combined with the protective measures under Policy 44 and with measures under Policy 7 (or 7A) concerning the wildlife habitats centering on all these wetlands. This program will be designed and carried out in appropriate cooperation with the City of New Rochelle and the Village of Mamaroneck, in whose jurisdictional control major parts of the three wetland complexes, and/or of the upstream sources of damage to them, are located. Specific implementation measures will be designed or revised in the light of, but need not in all cases await, the results of the technical, hydrological, and feasibility studies called for in Policy 14. 111-34 0 SECTION IV PROPOSED LAND AND WATER USES AND PROPOSED PROJECTS SECTION IV: PROPOSiD LAM AND WATER USES An PROPOSED PRoiEcTs A. Propos-ed Land and Water Uses The basic land use pattern in the Town and Village is well defined. Local zoning regulations and planning decisions have fostered a generally harmo- nious relationship between different types of uses (see Map 7, Generalized Orizinal Zoning). However, there are three situations in which changes in this pattern, or in the land use regulations that govern its future evolution, would serve the policy objectives of the Program. A fourth situation, in which an important recent land use decision calls for a complex of implementing actions, also merits comment. The areas involved are: 1. Some 428 acres, occupied by three private golf courses, which have substantial development potential and hence a potential impact on drainage patterns and open space preservation; also, certain other large properties with similar potential in the northern part of the Town. 2. Two commercial nurserie s side-by-side on the Post Road, adjoining the Pine Brook-Premium area. 3. The waterfront from the Hommocks peninsula west to the Larchmont Shore Club. In this district two problems require attention: a potential threat to scenic values if any.of the larger shorefront properties were to be subdivided, and a potential for reduction in private water-dependent recreational facilities. 4. The Larchmont Reservoir-James G. Johnson Jr. Conservancy, 60 acres of largely open space. It has recently been dedicated by its owner, the Village of Larchmont, in perpetuity to public uses including flood control, wildlife preservation, nature study, standby water supply and other compatible uses. Complex planning and other actions will be necessary for full and timely implementation of this important ,decision. The proposed treatment of these situations is set forth below. Otherwise, the LWRP contemplates no changes in the existing land and water use pattern (see Map 9, Proposed Land and Water Use). 1. Substantial Areas of Open_Space The importance of open space in the implementation of coastal policies has been stressed in the Explanations of Policy 14 (control of upstream flooding and erosion), 7/7A, 44, and 44A (protection of fish and wildlife habitats and wetlands) , 21 (passive recreation) and 25 (scenic preservition) . in view of the limited amount of public open space in this coastal area (see Inventory, part 3-g), remaining privately owned open space takes on critical importance. IV-3 No substantial areas of privately owned open space remain in the Village of Larchmont except for the Larchmont Manor Park and the two shoreline clubs, whose location is not relevant to problems of upstream flood control and whose value for the other purposes just referred to is provided for elsewhere in this Program. --The unincorporated area, however, contains a number of undeveloped private properties of significant size whose development under existing land use laws could frustrate or prevent fulfillment of the critically important purposes of flood and erosion control set forth in Policy 14, as well as the other pol-icies and purposes referred to above. To a lesser extent, the same is true of the potential development of smaller undeveloped parcels in flood-prone or environmentally sensitive locations in both the Village and the Town. Most important in this regard are the largest of the remaining properties, all of them in the Sheldrake drainage basin. The Bonnie Briar and Winged Foot golf courses occupy some 420 acres. Lying between them are other undeveloped properties of significant size totaling about 40 acres. Taken together, these properties comprise well over half of the unincorporated area's R-30 zoning district. Also of key significance, although on a smaller scale, are three contiguous parcels flanking Hommocks Road. near the Post Road: the 6.74-acre portion of the Hampshire' Country Club golf course lying within the unincorporated area (the remainder of the property is in the Village of Mamaroneck); the Hommocks Middle School property owned by the Board of Education; and the Town-owned athletic field next to it. These three properties, measuring some 28 acres, make up the great bulk of a contiguous area zoned R-7.5. This zoning is inappropriate. The area is bounded on three sides by Flint Park, the Hommocks Conservation Area, and the main part of the Hampshire golf course, zoned R-20 by the village of Mamaroneck. Moreover, it lies just upstream from the environmentally sensitive Hommocks Marsh, whose restoration and protection from flooding, siltation and pollution are important ob5ectives provided for elsewhere in this Program. Were any of these properties, or other parcels of substantial size in sensitive or flood-prone locations, to be developed without adequate control--repl acing open land with roads, parking areas, roofs and other bard surfaces, altering land contours, covering stream beds, removing trees and thickets, further burdening sewage facilities and increasing traffic and noise--the result could be a substantial alteration,for the worse in drainage patterns, runoff rates, flooding, erosion and pollution, with consequent deterioration of residential, wildlife, recreational and scenic values which are already threatened by existing conditions. The golf clubs 'are appropriate uses which, in addition to their ecological, recreational, architectural and scenic value, provide open space and natural water retention. They should remain in their present use if possible. Should any portion of them, or of other similarly significant properties, be developed, land use and site IV-4 development decisions concerning them must, at a minimum, avoid aggravating downstream flooding, and should where practicable contribute to its mitigation in those areas presently most affected. This means that decisions on the regulation of stormwater runoff from specific sites in this and other flood-prone areas must give major weight to the policy objective of better flood and erosion control --both at the site "and at other locations." Such regulations will be a key element in the strategy for management of our three drainage basins, a strategy which should be further developed in the light of the studies called for in part B-2 of this section. As a second objective, almost as important, any development in such locations must maintain to the maximum extent possible the few remaining open spaces in the Town which serve as habitats for wildlife and offer visual relief in an otherwise highly developed area. To achieve these objectives, the applicable land use regulations of both the Town and the Village will be amended to provide as follows: a.6 As provided in Policy 14, paragraph 3-b, development on a parcel exceeding 10,000 square feet in area shall normally be so designed as to prevent any increase in the rate of runoff from the site, or any decrease in the rate of upstream runoff into the site, as determined prior to development. This rule may be varied where expert advice clearly indicates that a different rule would better serve the purposes of flood and erosion control laid down in Policy 14. b.6 In case of -development of any parcel of 5 acres or more, a reduction in the rate of runoff not exceeding 20 percent, to be achieved by contouring of land, water retention measures, or other means, may be required as a condition of development if expert advice shows such reduction to be the most appropriate means of implementing the flood and erosion control purposes of Policy 14. C.6 The Town zoning map will be amended to redesignate approximately 28-acre area now zoned R-7.5, lying on either side of Hommocks Road southeast of the Boston Post Road, as part of the R-30 zone in order to conform to adjacent land uses and to afford protection to the Hommock's Marsh against adverse development. d. The Town will urgently request the Federal Emergency Management Agency, to resurvey the unincorporated area and bring the Flood Insurance Rate Map for the Town up to date in the light of recent local flood experience. These -provisions were enacted into law by the Town and, where so indicated, the Village, on June 30, 1986. IV-5 e. Pending the revision of the Flood Insurance Rate Map, the Town, in order to assure timely and adequate control over development in and near flood-prone areas, will make the Town's Flood Damage Prevention Law applicable to all areas delineated by the Town as flood plains, flood hazard areas or floodways on an interim map based on a professional engineering survey and on the most reliable and current data concerning actual flood experience. f To assure timely and adequate control over development in and near freshwater wetlands, the Town will incorporate in its revised Freshwater Wetlands Law, a complete and accurate Freshwater Wetlands Map showing the wetlands and other controlled areas to which the Freshwater Wetlands Law applies. This 1976 law, described in Section V-A-1--when revised to include such a map and when further revised, as planned, to conform with and give effect to current State law on the subject--will provide an adequate basis for controlling development in or near freshwater wetlands (including river overflow areas), rainfall drainage systems, and ponds, lakes and reservoirs. in the absence of the required Freshwater Wetlands map, the law by itself can have little effect. Similarly the Village, with a view to restoring and protecting its small but important Pine Brook and East Creek freshwater wetlands, will consider appropriate legislation to replace its present outdated freshwater wetlands law. 2. Post Road Locations The two nursery properties along the Post Road, both in the Village of Larchmont, are nonconforming uses in an area zoned R-7.5. Operation of a commercial nursery adjoining a high bank along Pine Brook has led to chronic problems of siltation and visual degradation. Should this property or its neighbor, or both of them, be developed for residen- tial use, the environmental impact on the Pine Brook-Premium area, including the adjacent Premium River and marsh, must be closely monitored and proper regulation applied. In order to promote environ- mentally sound use of these properties, Village authorities, in any future lana use decisions concerning them, will apply such conditions and procedures, including site plan review requirements and environ- mental impact statements, as are appropriate in the light of policies in this Program concerning wildlife habitats, wetlands, flood and siltation/erosion control, and protection of scenic quality; and will bear in mind the status of those portions of the Pine Brook-Premium area, adjacent to and downstream from these properties, that are designated as Critical Environmental Areas and/or significant or important wildlife habitats pursuant to this Program. 3. The Waterfront District A number of objectives for the waterfront area are stated in Section III: to preserve water-dependent uses (Policy 2); to limit develop- ment in flood hazard areas (Policy 11); to assure that development protects natural protective features (Policy 12); to maintain IV-6 water-related recreational facilities and access thereto (Policies 19 and 21) and, to the extent consistent with 'other policy objectives and stated criteria, to increase such access (Policy 19); to protect historic structures and sites (Policy 23); to preserve scenic quality (Policy 25); and to protect and restore wildlife habitats and wetlands (Policies 7/7A, 44, 44A). In applying land use regulation to the furtherance of these objec- tives, it is useful to deal with private and public properties as separate categories. a. Private Properties of the private waterfront in this coastal area that touches the open water of Long Island Sound or its bays and inlets, nearly half of that lying in the Village, and all of that lying in the unincorporated area, is occupied by single-family residences which benefit from the use and view of the water. In addition, this category includes three important nonresidential uses in the Village: the Larchmont Yacht Club, the Larchmont Manor Park (including the Larchmont Manor Beach and the Horseshoe Harbor Yacht Club) , and the Larchmont Shore Club. These three prop- erties provide recreational access to, and use of, the waterfront to many Village and Town residents, as well as residents of other communities, as explained in Section II. Moreover, their use is compatible with ecological v 'alues in the wetlands and fish and wildlife habitats nearby, and they have notable historical and architectural value. The primary means of controlling land use in this district is zoning. All private properties fronting on the open waters of the Sound, in both the Village and the unincorporated area, are zoned R-30. The same is true of properties in the Village bordering the Premium Millpond and the lowest portion of the Premium River, and in the unincorporated area along the north (Little Harbor Sound) site of Hommocks Road. Although this classification is generally appropriate, in two respects it can frustrate attainment of the stated policies. First, more than a dozen single-family residences in the R-30 zone each have more than double the required 30,000-square-foot lot area and could be subdivided. In other cases, where several adjoining properties each substantially exceed the 30,000-square foot minimum, an additi'onal lot could be assembled from portions of them. Any such action would impair the scenic low-density character of the shoreline and views of the water from adjacent streets. It would also tend to impair the beauty of the shoreline as seen from boats on the Sound, and would place additional burdens on the sensitive ecology of the coastline. In some locations it might also aggravate coastal erosion. Second, in the Village of Larchmont where all three of the nonresidential waterfront properties are located, any of them could, insofar as Village law is concerned, be converted to R-30 residential use, thus greatly IV-7 reducing the present degree of recreational access in addition to damaging the scenic and ecological values just referred to. (In the case of the Larchmont Manor Park, a substantial bar to such conversion exists in deed restrictions.) Accordingly, in order to adapt land use controls more fully to the policy objectives referred to above, the following steps will be taken: The zoning regulations in both Village and Town will be reviewed with a view to reducing the p6tential density of development of properties, hitherto zoned R-30, fronting on the Sound and its inlets and estuaries in the lower Premium and Hommocks areas. (2) The two municipal governments will take such additional steps in regard to land use, in the light of the foregoing discussion, as may be appropriate to prevent reduction of existing waterfront recreational facilities or of access thereto, and to implement the provisions of Policies 2, 7/7A, 11, 12, 19, 21, 25, 44, and 44A. b. Public Properties near the Waterfront As noted in Section 11, the only publicly owned lands of significant size near the shore are those adjacent to the East Cr6ek-Hommocks and Premium tidal estuaries. in the former case these consist of the Hommocks Conservation Area, the adjoining Hommocks playing field, and Flint Park, which abuts the open stretch of East Creek at its northern end and the Hommocks Marsh on the south. In the Premium area, the main public lands are the Premium Conservation Area, the smaller Lorenzen, Woodbine and Kane Parks further upstream, and a small patch of tidal marsh at the foot of Oak Avenue. Since all these areas contain or adjoin vulnerable wetlands and wildlife habitats unsuitable for any high-intensity use, appro- priate limitation of activity in them is essential to implement Policies 77A, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 25, 44 and 44A. In fact, such limitation, with two exceptions to be corrected by physical projects (see IV-B-10 below) , now prevails. Incompatible activ- ities, including active non-water-dependent recreational facil- ities (tennis, baseball, etc.) are located at a distance from the wetlands, and the latter are either maintained in their wild state or adapted for low-intensity passive recreation only. No change in land use categories is necessary in these public waterfront properties. All of them will be retained in public ownership and confined to conservation and such quiet recreation or other activity as is compatible with conservation. The use of public property could.in future play a larger role in water-related recreation in the waterfront district than it does IV-8 now. However, as Section II makes clear, properties now in public ownership in this district that are suitable for passive recreation only are already in use for that purpose, except for the two sites discussed in IV-B-10 below. AS for active water-dependent recreation, the only existing public property that could be considered for such use consists of small patches of shore at the ends of Village streets, whose recreational potential is small at best. If in the future either municipal- ity, through bequest, gift, easement, or otherwise should ac- quire, or obtain the use of, significant waterfront property in this area suitable for recreatiorr, the adaptation, regulation, and management of such property for recreational purposes should give due weight to all relevant factors, including the supply of and demand for recreational facilities in the community; the residential character of the area; and the need for enforceable regulation and effective control to protect the natural and manmade environment. In this connection, it is understood explicitly that zoning and land use determinations for the unincorporated area are exclusively the province of the Town Council and zoning and land use determinations for the Village of Larchmont are exclusively the province of the Village Board. 4. The Larchmont Reservoir-James G. Johnson Jr. Conservancy The nature and functions of. the Larchmont Reservoir Conservancy were described in Section II. In October 1984 a solid legal basis was laid for further realization of the potential of this property for public benefit when its owner, the Village of Larchmont, dedicated it in perpetuity as a conservation area for the public purposes described in Section II, part 3-g-3. This act of dedication, unless revoked by an act of the New York State Legislature, will prevent development of the property and pre- serve it permanently for the stipulated public uses. The use and further improvement of the Reservoir property for flood control, wildlife protection, standby water supply, historic preservation, and passive recreation will be considered an integral part of this Program. Appropriate and timely steps to develop these functions will be given priority, and those actions relating to flood control will be integrated into the strategy for management of the Sheldrake watershed (see Policy 14 and item B-2 below). B. Proposed Physical Projects The physical projects which are part of this Program are described below; legal and administrative measures to implement the program are set forth in Section V (see also Map 8). The ten projects described in this subsection are the result of a careful selection process. The Inventory and Analysis, plus subse- quent discussion and research, identified an extensive list of IV-9 potential physical projects addressing particular issues and objectives. An "issues and actions matrix" was then used by the Committee to evaluate the extent of benefit and feasibility of each suggested project. The final list includes only those which the Committee feels can be justified under these criteria. The projects described below are summarized in Table 1 on page IV-10. The table also gives a preliminary cost estimate for each project and indicates the policies to which it relates. A suggested timetable for completion of each project appears below the list. 1. Premium Feasibility Study The residential and conservation area centering on the Premium River, Marsh and Millpond has great ecological, scenic, and recreational value. Its problems, discussed in Section II, are many -- among them being flooding, siltation, erosion, pollution, deterioration of the conservation area, lowered water quality, and a potential for damage to the protective barrier of the Premium Point Beach. Among possible measures to be studied are dredging of the Premium River to increase stream flow, with possible use of the dredge spoil to build a salt marsh at the edge of the pond; stabilization of river and marsh banks with gabions and/or vegetation; and repair of seawalls and bridges. Prior to undertaking specific improvements, a detailed feasibility study must be made to assess the hydrological, water quality, and other physical characteristics of this area, evaluate the advantages and drawbacks of particular actions or combinations of actions, and weigh alternatives, staging, pri- orities, costs and impacts., Such a study, in addition to its immediate value, will provide important information for subse- quent development of the intermunicipal flood and erosion control strategy for the Pine Brook-Premium watershed proposed in Policy 14. Since a large part of the Premium area and most of the Pine Brook watershed are in New Rochelle, this study will require the cooperation of that municipality. Based on this study, appropriate physical actions can proceed in the most logical and beneficial fashion and will be considered a part of this Program. 2. Upper Sheldrake and Larchmont Reservoir Feasibility Study A long-term strategy for flood and erosion control in the Sheldra.ke watershed will make maximum use of existing resources, especially remaining open space and the water-retention capacity of the Larchmont Reservoir. Some steps to enhance these re- sources can be taken without further study, as soon as financing is arranged: for example, automation of the valve in the Upper Reservoir clam and repair of weak spots in the lower dam and spillway. However, the strategy is also likely to include other actions, some of them extensive and costly, the advantages and drawbacks of which, separately and in combination, can only be established by a well-designed feasibility study. such a study IV-10 will be undertaken and will include a hydrological study of the 0 East Branch of the Sheldrake to complement that already made. of the West Branch. Since such a hydrological study will cover areas upstream in New Rochelle and Scarsdale, the cooperation of those municipalities will be sought. The feasibility study should consider a variety of physical actions to improve f lood control and prevent the accumulation or silt and litter, such as: installation of improved early warning facilities in coop- eration with Westchester County; installation of trash traps in the best locations and adoption of an adequate program for keeping them cleaned out; restoration of the dam and valve at Carpenter's Pond for use as an additional flood control facility; periodic cleaning out of Dickerman's Pond to maintain its value as a silt trap; periodic dredging of the Upper Reservoir (Sheldrake Lake) in order to increase its retention capacity and/or to limit siltation downstream; construction of an orifice in the face of the upper dam at the Reservoir to provide maximum drainage in flood con- ditions without exceeding the downstream capacity of the Sheldrake River. All such measures will be evaluated in the light of the analysis of the hydrological studies referred to above. They will be carried out only to the extent that, in addition to meeting other relevant criterial they are (a) compatible with the standby water supply, fish and wildlife, aesthetic, historical, scenic, and recreational values of the Reservoir property; and M found to be valuable elements in a strategy which will include the physical improvements described in paragraphs 3 and 4 below as well as the land-use and other legal and administrative measures contained elsewhere in this Program to protect the Sheldrake floodp@ain and reduce rates of storm water runoff. 3. Upper Sheldrake River (West Branch) Improvements For many years improvements to the Sheldrake River (West Branch) stream bed,' from the Sheldrake Conservation Area downstream to its confluence with the East Branch, have been proposed to relieve flooding of adjacent streets and properties. once included in a proposed Corps of Engineers project, this section has since been deleted; but the problem still exists. A IV-11 scaled-down prioject has been proposed by the Town staff, including excavation to deepen the channel and remove ob- structions, stabilization of stream banks with gabions, underpin- ning of bridges as required, and construction of a stilling basin at the downstream end of the project in order to mitigate flood- ing further downstream. This project will be designed to achieve its purpose with the least practicable disruption of natural features and scenery, retaining features which do not impede water flow and using natural materials wherever possible in new construction. It can be undertaken in stages as financing and manpower permit. An annual allocation will be placed in the Town budget to initiate this project, and other funding sources will be pursued. 4. Upper Sheldrake River (East Branch) Retention Basin In order to regulate storm runoff, a County - sponsored drainage plan as long ago as 1945 recommended creation of a retention basin on the east branch of the Sheldrake just above Rockland Avenue. This plan still has merit, although its size has been limited by subsequent development in the area. A dam will be built at Rockland Avenue, causing storm water to back up into the Sheldrake Conservation area, and thereby delaying the arrival of runoft at the junction of the two branches. It may be possible for this project to be designed and constructed by Town staff. 5. Large Silt Traps Silt, trash, and other pollutants, as was noted in Section II, enter the Premium and Hommocks marshes from upstream sources. To prevent this, large silt traps, equipped with oil collars and trash racks, will be installed at the outlets of the Premium River, Pine Brook, and East Creek. Appropriate participation by Westchester County agencies in this project will be sought. 6. Catch Basin Cleaning and Improvement Throughout the Town and Village, catch basins collect sand, silt and other debris carried by storm water. Unless catch basins are adequate in size and design and are cleaned frequently enough, they cannot function properly to prevent these solids from being carried through the storm drainage system into Long Island Sound and its inlets and marshes. The cleaning and maintenance program of thi@ important "first line of defense" against siltation and pollution will be upgraded to a semi-annual schedule and moni- tored regularly; detailed records of this work will be kepti and, where necessary, more adequate catch basins will be installed. 7. Elimination of Storm Drain-Sanitary Sewer Connections As noted in Section II and under Policy 33A, the widespread illegal connection of storm water drains to the sanitary sewer 0 V-12 system is a major cause of the discharge of raw sewage into streets, basements and coastal waters. Policy 33A calls for elimination of such connections, and some initial steps for this purpose have been taken. Accordingly, the two municipal govern- ments, in cooperation with the County Department of Environmental Facilities, will carry out a program to eliminate all storm drain connections to sanitary sewers now existing within their munici- pal boundaries. The program will be based on the Sewer System Evaluation Study recently completed by Westchester County for the New Rochelle Sewer District, in which illegal connections in the area were located. Private owners will be encouraged to comply in a timely manner by appropriate incentives and penalties, and maximum local involvement of property owners will be sought through an energetic campaign of public education on the necessity of this program for public health and well-being. Full advantage will be taken of Federal financial assistance available for this project. 8. Repair of Defective Sewer Lines As indicated in Section II, broken or defective sanitary sewers are a significant factor in the sewage pollution problem. Repair of these defects wherever they exist in the coastal area should have high priority. in particular, (a) the outfall pipe at.Cedar Island should be repaired and extended, and maintained until the need for it has been eliminated by the actions called for in paragraph g. above; and (b) the sewer line crossing Little Harbor Sound from the Hommocks Peninsula should be investigated and, if it is still active# any necessary repairs made to avoid pollution of the marsh. 9. Selective Harbor Dredging Periodic dredging is essential to a major objective of Policy 21, namely, to prevent physical deterioration of facilities for recreational boating. There has been no public dredging in Larchmont Harbor in recent years. Property owners in Little Harbor Sound sponsored dredging of that area in 1979; however, the channel has already silted in above its previous level. Dredging for navigational purposes has also been conducted from time to time in Horseshoe Harbor by the Manor,Park Society. Projects 1 through 6 above will in time reduce, but cannot eliminate, the siltation that necessitates continued maintenance dredging. A "Feasibility Study of a Cooperative Harbor Mainte- nance Prc4ram," recently prepared for Westchester County, projects dredging needs for the five Sound shore communities and proposes several alternatives for joint inter-municipal/County harbor maintenance management. The estimate of annual maintenance dredging required for Larchmont Harbor, as projected IV-13 by that study, is 23,600 cubic yards about a third of the total estimated non-federal dredging requirements for the five communities. Efficiency and economy of scale would be best served by this community's participation in such a program, operated by a joint harbor management agency. Accordingly, the two municipal govern- ments will encourage the County to adopt a joint program such as is recommended in the study cited above, and will plan to partic- ipate in the program. In order to mitigate adverse effects, dredging will conform to all state and federal procedures; dredge spoil will be disposed of only in designated areas; and dredging activities will be coordinated with adjacent communities and with Westchester County wherever possible. 10. Flint Park: Restoration of two Deteriorated Sites Section IV-A-3-b above refers to the need for corrective physical action in two places on public waterfront property in order to protect vulnerable wetlands and wildlife habitats. These are: a. The open stretch of East Creek between the Post Road and the north end of Flint Park. This small area has been subjected to pollution for many years from adjacent commercial enter- prises along the Post Road. It is also chronically lit- tered. It should be made into a nature preserve and passive recreational area, and physical and administrative measures taken to stop pollution and littering. The project should benefit by reduced chemical pollution from upstream through the steps called for under Policy 30, and by reduced siltation as a result of the catch basin program. Additional steps in the immediate locality should include fencing and visual screening; constructing barriers to, and closing off any conduits for, polluted runoff now entering the creek along its banks; and stabilization of the creek banks against erosion. b. The area at the east end of Flint Park now used as the Village of Larchmont leaf disposal facility. The park in this area abuts the Hommocks marsh and its margin is designated by the Village as a Critical Environmental Area. As soon as alternative arrangements are found for the Village's leaf disposal, as called for under Policies 20 and 39, this scenic and ecologically sensitive location adjoining the Ho cks Marsh can be adapted for conservation and pissive recreation. Accordingly, the Village will make a priority effort to find alternative means of leaf disposal and, that being done, will clear the site of waste materials now accumulated there and restore and adapt it for the purposes here stated. V-14 11. Premium Conservation Area Restoration Pursuant to Policies 7/7A and 21, the'Town government, under the coordination of the Conservation Advisory Commission and in -cooperation with concerned neighborhood groups, will develop a program for restoration and maintenance of the Premium Conserva- tion Area as a wildlife habitat and, to the extent consistent with that function, as a facility for passive recreation. This project, designed to reverse the deterioration of this area noted in Section II, part 6, will include rebuilding and improvement of the catwalk and measures to correct and discourage littering and chemical or biological pollution. IV-15 Table I Data on Physical Projects in Section IV-B Preliminary Cost Related ProJect Estimate* Policies 1. Premium Feasibility S 25,000** 7/7A, 9, 12, 141 Study 44, 44a 2. Upper SbeldraXe/Larcbmont s 15,000** 7/7A, 13, 14, 17 Reservoir Feasibility Study 3. Upper Sbeldrake River $900,000 13, 14, 16 (West Branch) Improvements 4. Upper Sbeldrake River S 30,000 13, 14, 16 (East Branch) Retention Basin 5. Large Silt Traps $ 40,000 7/7A, 8, 10A, 30, 30, 32A, 33, 44, 44A 6. Catch Basin Cleaning and Annual: to be 7/7A, 8, 12A, 33, 44, Improvement Program be supplied 44A 7. Elimination of Storm Drain Village: $215,000 7/7A, ICA, 30, 33, 33A, Connections to Sanitary Town: to be 44, 44LA Sever System supplied S. Repair of Defective Sever to be supplied 7/7A, JOA, 30, 32A, Lines 33, 44, 44A 9. Selective Harbor Dredging $230,000 25, 35 per year 10. Restoration of two Flint to be supplied 7/7A, 9, 19, 20, 21, 30, Park Sites 33, 39, 44, 44A 11. Premium Conservation Area to be supplied 7/7A, 8, 19, 20, 21, Restoration 30, 44, 44A *Costs to be shared as appropriate in each case among the public and private agencies and persons involved. **These preliminary estimates do not include the cost of hydrological studies and watershed models which may be undertaken in these two areas. IV-16 Suggested Project Timetable Year Action (see above) . . ....... .213 4 1. Premium River Study and Imorove. MMMt!M=MM@MwMMwMMM 2-. Larchmont Res. Study and Improve. 3. Sheldrake (W. Branch) Improve. MMMMEKMMMMM 0MMMMMIMMMME -.1 4. Sheldrake (E. Branch) Improve. 5. Large Silt Traps 6. Repair Defective Sewers MMEOMMUMMUMMMMMOMM 7. Harbor Dredzing 8. Catch Basin Cleaning 9. Eliminate Storm Drain Conn. MMwM.MMwMM"MMMMM. I.O.Restoration of Flint Park Sites 1 1 ll.Premium Cons. Area Restoration - Continuous or concentrated activity - Staged or intermittent activity MMMM MMMM" Simi= imm M @ww M M IV-17 -A' e h 0 6 t (411 tta' L tj Swa kv HA A V Ce 4, tJ') -9C (Irv I !N e 4. DA4 buARSDALE 14 MA kO TSER v X Quo k@' L@ ;@dge aSh W :0) 8 M -,6 q10 0 @K, yy 0 C n, k\ N J1 1, X \3 t I C 0 'op W ;r 129 '\\,Ged6e7 C UNINCORPORAT D OP VILLAGE OF TOWN OF MAMARONECK 6 @e AMARON E C K@'-- // 211" ivtd es -A U B zewakF --DISP IWB-, IT % 'lA NH a, L C, West s, Sbootfly N A" -;U rienta Poi n t @Iat iddle S -'arab NEW ROCHEI,LE Fli@nr--Prk .0 iF@iand P TJ 17 wD I VILLAGE OF @01.@-. y CHMON ","o in eclar r 0 V 7' N. H rbor Edgewater 'Point A @@a 1 2,000' 158 01 e 4 M ella Point \Light Worseshoe Pre M Ha rbo r F M7, ONild ar % Clifford Oa Municipal Boundary Q able Rock 04%*# Drainage Divide P edjM"---'@e'cht C!ub Harrison Existing Coastal Bdry. "Wort 4 Bea Lt Echo remIUM P, t* Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Map No. Village of Larchmont - Town of Mamaroneck REGIONAL SETTING @2 Shuster Associates Planning Consultants This map was prepared for the New York State Department of State Coastal Manageinent Program with financial assistance from the Federal Grant Number: NA-82-AA-D-CZ068 Office of Ocean and Atmospheric Administration, provided under Date of Preparation: February 198r:) the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended. NOTE: The Coastal Boundary f0110WS the Toun Bmmdary throughout, the area north of this map. See Tom Boundary on Map 1. X. SANG. cc U4 P, Z' 3 b C7 fr Ci TO W OF 41A 4fAP0VECj(, S 'N"! Ni w y/j A .*w4 -11604f _,A 46 OF 41AMAnOkE7CK RR A-6 4G S47-AjVS 7'0, Cz C- NA so 0 S L A N LEGEND 111-1600, COASTAL BOUNDARY IN ADJACENT COMMUNITIES Mwo BOUNDARY OF LOCAL WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION AREA Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Ki p N o. Village of Larchmont - Town of Mamaroneck BOUNDA"ARYMAP M& map was prepored far tfw-- Mw Tark State Mmawtmeat of State cmistat nnugamnt ftearm with ftma=ial assistamm frm t -he Federal Grant Hwaber: FIA-92-AA-D-CZ068 T ice of Oman and Atumateric Adninistiratiam. vrmwidw =der Date of Preparation: February 1%66 f -% 7- M-0 -C To" @ 40 ...... Z., 21 S-0 .@p Jr S4 Ar LOCATION OF SELECTED SITES' REFERENCED IN THE INVENTORY 4 AND ANALYSIS 16 1. Manor Park 2. Flint Park @o 3. Pine Brook Park 4. lorenzen Park ro wtv 0 5. Woodbine Park MA 6. Sheldrake-Leatherstocking &1AROA, E'CK Conservation Area Station Park 15, 8. Premium Marsh oo 9. Hommocks Marsh 10. Larchmont Reservoir W y k4GYL acht Club 1. ROc- 11. larchmont Y' 12. larchmont Shore Club 13. Fountain Square 14. Premium Mill Pond A, Ix 15. Bonnie Briar Golf Club e N 16. Winged Foot Golf Club 17. Hampshire Country Club L 18. Pine Brook .t5@@ 41. 19. premium River ID. 20. Sheldrake River (East) 21. Sheldrake River (West) 22. East Creek 2 3. little Harbor Sound 24. Horseshoe Harbor 25. Cedar Island 26. Larchmont Harbor E p .1 Z @fl N_ o.; UO VQ L4GC OF- MQ44,,@OJVJ@7CK C -E .4 -C 719@; lo, N 'o S4 r4/VS 7*oe 0 11E 26 E- %.Dl@ VU E oo Idt, S L A N D 111-16001 Map No. Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Village of Larchmont - Town of Mamaroneck LOCATION MAP 3 Shuster Associates Planning Consultants this Pop was. prepared -for the New York state bepartment of State coastal management Program with financial assistance from the Federal (irant Nionber: IIA-82-AA-D-CZ068 Office of Ocean and Atmospheric Administration, Provided under Date of Preparation: February 1986 - -s lnlj - -A-A J J All- -K IT A 5 'a. N s4 cc S -miW, w n - P 7F, JA'", o. I Z Ell 61 X ell, 2 F.- L@ C.. @s vo 1 Awl,. lo P 7 RY-L + IL01 G 'F1 4A4,4A?0jVjF CK are! ofi@ 51. M Village or Town Park -n Space or Ope. Public School P riva te Park E Cour)ty Park I P a-r- -i e <i - F-F r" Private Club Ln oI Conservation Areas J L A 111-16001 A"! Local Waterfront Revitatization Program EXISTING Map No. Village of Larchmont - Town of Mamaroneck OPEN SPACE Shuster Associates Planning Consultants This map was prepared for the New York State Department of State Coastal Management Program with financial assistance from the Federal Grant Nuffber: IIA-82-AA-D-CZ068 Office of Ocean and Atmospheric Administration, provided under . Date of Preparation: February 1986 the Coastal Zone Manaaement Act of 1972. as amended. t I I, V. IL d, a 7 LEGEND N WATER FEATURES Streams Lakes 1@ J Y: 4- DRAINAGE DIVIDES 4 f, Major divides separate gro Goloilia) Act ups of basins Minor divides separat individual basins ..,P YA X_ C @4 14 CLASSIFICATION Of WATERS F fv%h Vq.11r-r Saline Water [[email protected] USACl. 1101@ Human Coiv.tsniot.on 'A' 47 Z2 P fTTI'l f y(,n I j r-r I (,I) 01,N.UWK (V S St.( C(!1,1-'_! 44t'! CS Pr i(w, (.1 A.,juai.(. Lot, o,@ k .4 1109 @@J . C',.@ 1. k [!@J.@ A. I R Gro-"tl) o! Aqua-,;c. LA(, J, If I 4#1 Surv,v,j? if Aquat,c lav YS _711 Protml:at,t)n (it 1 0) Lile Stir 4 !"Irn-A I w, t 00, Trout .1. Swv,vol L r It r ?Aar ket Put jvifo 4) 51 c i, -,,i:,,,n o,,o ds S,,c 1, st.c. ,oi & 7C)2 rJY( Fo@ ior ';tandar 142 mmin!E 0 0 @A Q, N TIDAL WETLANDS ef: J Formerly Connected FC Ch Coastal Fresh Marsh FM v,-- High Marsh or Salt Meadow HM U Interticlal Marsh C @,y7 145 Coastal Shoal, Bar, Mudflats SM Littoral Zone LZ L4F,' rL@D' X, IP "A' FLOOD HAZARD AREAS n HUD Phase 11 100 year HUD Phase I or other 7 frequency flood efev- P X 0 Preliminary study ation established V V-7@@l f L 71 @;( ", "I I . N noodway ::A, 4 % 'Y Av 7 4 Limit of A. L detailed study 4 10 ZAL- 4 A, T led delinea- NOTE: See Map 5A for more detai tion of Coastal High Hazard Areas and X" Tidal Wetlands. 41 B A 4 i-ia Source: Westchester Planning Department c Environmental Atlas" 4 Y X M L -@i r 01 4 ,f0T LZ M A Sm Point L eacen Poi nt o @m r sm eclar 1A, 10 J C 3 82 Ch tno-A .,7, La- 'H ONT a rV11 \ @ I", Ha lbor A 't.agewater QP@17@i v0jp IM aint P SB mn2 u 0mbrell' T. Point C hn, S A 084 Q1V1 rbo'v@ I N11 SM @i. ill ) O'n r _J LZ ! TMS IM -LOLZ I M 1M LZ SB L) A t", acht f, I M L A eaufort SB Ech04 Pr n i rn r L k Pt Pt 3ay Echo t em SA Local Waterfront Revitalization Program HYDROLOGIC Map No. Village of Larchmont - Town of Mamaroneck I ShUster Associates Planning ConsultantS FEATURES This map was prepared for the flew York State Department of State Coastal Management Program with financial assistance from the Federal Grant t;umber; MA-92-AA-D-CZ068 Office of Ocean and Atmospheric Administration, provided under Date of Preparation: February 1986) t@- in,cknl 7- Maninpt%@nt Art of 1972- as amended. 6Z-AI T- - r oz A 0 -@,:x A CD C3 coo rD c -3 > @o Fi 4 M N ST CD C, BE MONT AVE. C) rn 0 CD :r- --3 tz) -4 --. -1 :2-1 7 -3 0 t7' 4 ul MAIN AR CL e.J Jo M 0 sw Ln C-- N I t"I juj MANOR 0 0 C) M tz; N POST 411 0 (D F-1@ @-3 CL., W g. AVE. G rD 0 C) LL; AVE Ck 0 'j. 0 D0G)NO0( PL AVE@ rD WILLOw 0 AVE. C, C) ui 71- 0 LZ 0-0 0 C) 'U C) 0 C "VrRAL t) CL 4 4 ULWUJ LU X 'D AVE. INDE C@ CEDqq -T < C^ 'LIA A C) M C) CD -JL- LZ C@vl 10 AVE AVE 04r kRK 2.11 : (.- LIJFF -C A. 1w A. J, VE. sounsill A LZ Bogus 411kr v E %Realm so LZ LZ S44 0. 4M10 eN m w a m 5cv -i rp CD -1 Sp D -1 0-$ IIL -h (D -S CL 0 so Vi2 P-0 m w OL ,on cr A Y@7 GO OR Cl) Cf) co (D @-3 ',Id @-xj 0 (D c) td @d @-3 @MJ H Imi t1i 'o 0 L7zd C-- @?.o Cf) @-3 t.7j' F (D n c+ cn F-3 0 tTj (n P4 tj C7+ CD 0 [1) t--j CD m 0 cn CO 1@ lp 00. ID C+ @7j b @-3 i34: c @-4 F-3 b Q;E cr, J@ rb "=r CL 41 k a, tA NI & rD \ft 0.3- =i tu CL uw Z G) t 4Kq MM, 'o -Q 1@ -,I@i m cr C@ c" @ooooo Cu I 0 ,I',' 1@ @olc 1 C@ 1 c-) 00 o c TWE &c@ 2m ON ]son 0 C- tj 0 f @@3+ P. 0 0 n 77 (1) (D F-L :E@ if @5, (D C+ fl 0 (D -A C+ t:5 7' (D m Cl) P. C+ c+ (D +I :i-) ft*4 P- CD + C+ 401 S.- i;,:: is .. ..... ... ... . . . . ... S cov*"'Oas r % .... .......... . 4." 0 .......... Or '-M4RON CC % 40 4- % S 'A, FEASIBILITY STUDY .0 1. Premium Area A 2 . larchmont Res.. R EZONE TO R-_30 '61 SHELDRAKE RIVER CHANNEL IMPROY. SHELDRAKE RIVER RE- TENTION BASIN LARGE SILT TRAPS L REPAIR CEDAR ISIAND ........I OUTFAIL RESTORE LEAF DI,S- POSAT, SITE 9, 0 0 HARBOR DREDGING 4, WATERFRONT ZONE NEW LOW-DENSITY 4 NOTE: See Section IV for other actions in- cluded in program. 0@ 0 0 0 0 0 4; 0 TOE 0 0 W 0 X X :: X: 0 00 S L A N D 111-16oo, Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Map No. Village of Larchmont - Town of Mamaroneck ACTION PROGRAM Shuster Associates Planning Consultants This map was prepared for the New York State Department of state Coastal Management Program with financial assistance from the federal Grant Number: IIA-82-AA-D-CZ068 nrnvidpd undpr Date of Preparation: February 1986 "0 ('000 0 0 000 00000000 0D0000 00000000co 006 "ffoo 10 Do 0000 0 0,00000000 a 0000000 0 0 .0 0@ 0- 0-0 0 0 0 0 -0@ 0 0 31 67-006000 RESERVOIR-SHELDRAKE-LEATHERSTOCKING NO 01X C 'j 00 00 0 @3@0 0 0 ?OOJ Freshwater Wetland and Fish and Wild 0 00 0 0 0 0000 life Habitat Complex, including conn- 0 000 0 , 00'. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00000 000 -_ O@ ecting stream corridors 00 '0 60 0- do 'If 0 '0 CsAtDA' P -0 0 '0@0 C )0 0C 0 C, 0 C ."o 4N 0. 41 P t Winged Foo '00 Golf Course Bonnie Briar J0 0 Golf Course 0 0 C.. 1010, 0 -000 U4 ........... ........ ... -HAMPSHIRE HOMMOCKS Fish and Wildlife Habitat Complex, including Hampshire Freshwater Wet- land and Hommocks Tidal Wetland re ourse L 2! 0 DO 6_9 Single Family Res. gr Very low Density . ..... Do, low Density "s, 2f ........... .0 Moderate Density High Density _N 0 C Mi i I + i _'P n rn 4 1 -x r P c, 0 Tidal Wetland and Fish and Commercial Wildlife Habitat Complex Industrial Public and Private Recreation Critical Environmental 0 Areas (CEA) v S L A N D ill,--16001 Local Waterfront Revitalization Program PROPOSED LAND Map No. Village of Larchmont - Town of Mamaroneck AND WATER USE 9 Shuster Associates Planning Consultants Wis map was prepared for the New York State Department of State .Coastal Management Program with financial assistance from the Federal Grant Number: NA-82-AA-D-CZ068 Office of Ocean and Atmospheric 'Administration, provided under Date of Preparation, February 1986 .6- r-t.i 7nnA Manaaenent Act of 1972. as amended. Maps: Westchester County Environmental Management Council, Department of Planning: Environmental Management Council, Department of Planning: Environmental Constraint Series; Nos. 14 and 15, Mount Vernon and Mamaroneck, 1982, Lower Long Island Sound Basins. Article: Regional Plan Association Annual Report, 1982-83, *Open Space." Articles: Mamaroneck Daily Times, "Nature's Trails," weekly 1966-1980, with field notes, by many local observers, naturalists and staff writers, and in addition special series 1979-1981 on 10 years of the Conservation Areas, and on Our Coastal Area, Rye to New Rochelle. Article: Federated Conservationists of Westchester County, April 1985, "Which Way Westchester 2000? - Water Resources and Development," Carol Coggeshall. Map: Calligraphy of Larchmont-Mamaroneck Waterways by Ann Gunsalus Correspondence- To Mr.. Louis M. Concra, Office of Environmental Analysis, 50 Wolf Road, Albany, New York 22233, 8-9-76, comments on 7-27-76 Tidal Wetlands hearing at SUNY-Purchase about Pryer Manor and Premium Marshes and Mill Pond area. From: George Danskin, then Regional Permit Administrator, Environmental Analysis, Region 3, 10/19/76 about revisions and from Rob Greene on field check visit 10/19/76. To: Eon. Basil A. Paterson, Secretary of State Robert C. Hansen, Program Manager, Coastal Management Program 162 Washington Avenue, Albany, New York 12231, 5/4/79, Comments on GAPC 27-A-8, Westchester County map, on the Premium Marsh Complex. To; Mailgram: Secretary of State Basil Paterson, Robert Hansen, 5/7/79, addition to above comments, on erosion hazards, silt problems, flood control and ice problems. To: Supervisor Leo Goldsmith and Members of the Town of Mamaroneck Council, 5/6/80 to push for passage of strong Coastal Management Program at that session of the Legislature. To: Village Manager Armand Gianunzio, Village of Mamaroneck, 8/5/80, Thanks for invitation to Village Coastal Zone Study Cormittee meeting of 7/16, congratulations on work done on boundaries, cXitizal flood sources outside the land boundary and proposed critical Environmental Areas, with emphasis on need for intermunicipal cooperation to reduce individual and municipal costs and maintain healthy balance of land and water uses. To: Superv'isor Leo Goldsmith and Members of the Town Council, 7/9/82, for Premium River Basin Committee, concern on Tower Apartments (Garfield) EIS that adequate measures to prevent sediment M.A. Johnson 4/85 B-3 .0 SECTION V . TECHNIQUES FOR @ I LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION variances, appeals, etc. Village Code (p. 349-71) establishes comparable zoning patterns and procedures for the Village. Application: Essential to land use controls in Section IV-A and to the policies to which they relate regarding flood control, protection of habitats and wetlands, scenic values, especially 7/7A, 11, 14, 25, 44, 44A. b. Subdivision regulations Town and Village regulations for ;pproval of subdivision plats, issued by Planning Boards, require developers to (among other things) provide for drainage, water, sewerage, traffic, parks and playgrounds. Application: Same as for zoning laws (item a above). C. Site plan approv I Town (Local Law No. 3, 1984) requires that a plan for any proposed development and use of land be submitted to the Planning Board demonstrating that such action is consistent with standards of traffic, parking, screening and landscaping, environmental quality, drainage and sewage disposal, as set forth in the law, and is in harmonious relationship with adjacent uses. Village Code (p. 221-227) requires applicants for building permits to s@bmit detailed site plans to the Planniog Commission, and sets criteria for approval including drainage, preservation of natural features, screening and landscaping, etc. Application: Same as for zoning laws (item a above). d. State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Laws Town Docal Law, No. 4, 1985, provides for environmental quality review, under procedures laid down in the State SEQR law, of actions that may significantly affect the environment. (Repeals and replaces original local SEQR law of 1977). Village Code includes (p. 101-114) a SEQR law adopted in 1976. It antedates recent State SEQR amendments and cannot be effectively involkid without revision. Application; As supplement to State SEQR law, Town law provides local criteria for processing permit applications for projects t.hat could produce runoff, siltation, pollution, etc. damaging to natural or built environment. (Policies 7/7A, 11, 14, 18, 23, 25, 30, 44, 44A, among others.) e. Freshwater Wetlands Laws Town Law, Chapter 88, as enacted in mid-1970's declares wetlands, V-4 SECTION V: TECHNIQUES FOR LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAM This section specifies the local techniques or means -- legal, administrative, managerial, and financial -- by which the LWRP is to be carried out. Part A describes legislative means in both municipalities, including (1) pre-existing local laws that can be used in implementing the Program and (2) laws or amendments ne'wly enacted, or scheduled for early enactment, as a result of the LWRP planning process. Part B lisis planned implementing actions other than legislative. For each item listed in Parts A and B, an explanation is given of its @P_Plication to particular policies, land uses or projects in Sections III and IV. Part C outlines a proposed management structure to monitor and coordinate the implementation of the Program under the joint authority of the two municipal governments. Part D discusses the financial resources that will be provided locally or sought elsewhere to implement the projects in Section IV-B and the other actions with financial implications listed in the present section, including the costs of management. Part E summarizes in chart form the relation between implementing actions in Parts A, and B of this section and the background (Section II), policies (Section .III) and land and water uses and projects (Section IV). A. Local Laws and Regulations . 0 7 1. Pre-existing laws and regu-1ations a. Zoning laws Town law, Chapter 89, establishes land use and density controls in specified zones in accordance with a comprehensive plan to guide the growth and development of the Unincorporated Area, and prescribes rules and procedures regarding nonconforming uses, 7 In addition to laws and regulations listed, note should be taken of the Comprehensive Master Plans written for the Village and the Unincorporated Area in 1966 and reviewed in 1976. Among subjects in that document relevant to the LWRP are open, space and recreation areas. The plans have never been adopted formally by either municipal government, but recommendations in them have been drawn on in decisions on land use, parking, traffic, etc. As this was written in June 1986 a joint Town-Village committee was preparing to submit its review of the Master Plans with recommendations for bringing them up to date to deal with current conditions. Overlapping membership between that group and the Coastal Zone.Management Committee, as well as shared professional planning support, has helped to assure that the two planning processes will be mutually compatible and complementary. V-3 Architectural Review Town zoning law, Chapter 89, requires application to the Town Board for special use permits to change architectural design or landscaping in specified respects. (See also subparagraph c above.) Village Code (p. 7 to 10) , creates a Board of Architectural .Review with power to deny permits for building or alteration that would, if granted, result in monotonous similarity, visual offensiveness or discord, or impair enjoyment or value of proper- ty. Application: Scenic values (Policy 25). Protection of Trees. Town, Law No. 10, 1985, prohibits destruction of any tree above specified size without a permit; creates a Tree Preservation Commission with power to grant permits under specified criteria and procedures. Application: Policies 7/7A, 14, 14A, 25. j. Satellite Earth Stations Village Law No. 7, 1984, sets standards for size, position, color, etc. of satellite earth stations (dish antennae) and requires special permit for such devices exceeding 18" diameter. Purpose is to prevent eyesores. Town zoning ordinance limits on size and height of structures can apply to dish antennas. Application: Policy 25. k. Signs Town Law, Chapter 14, Article XIX (building code) regulates appearance of signs and makes them subject to approval of build- ing inspector. Chapter 3 prohibits posting of bills, placards, etc. on public property. Village Code (p. 211-220) regulates appearance of signs in business district and, with minor exceptions, forbids all signs in residential areas. Application: Policy 25. 1. Litter Town Law, Chapter 30, prohibits littering on public property and on private property adjacent to public places. Village Code (p. 155) makes similar provision. V-1 0 rainfall drainage systems, and ponds, lakes, and reservoirs, as well as adjacent lands at specified distances or levels, to be "controlled areas" in which certain types of actions are prohib- ited (debris, chemical wastes, etc.) and others are regulated by permit (building, excavation, diversion of flow, etc.). (For 1986 revision, see 2-e below.) Village Code (p. 139-146) is outdated by recent amendments to State law. Revision is under consideration (see 2-e below). Application: Policies 7/7A, 13, 14, 44, 44A. f. Conservation Area Regulations Town Law, Chapters 16 and 17, creates a Conservation Advisory Commission (on which the Town and both Villages are represented) designates certain Conservation Areas under the Commission's supervision, and directs that these be maintained in their natural state. A resolution adopted in September 1983 dedicated these areas as permanent parkland. Application: Conservation areas are important for wildlife (Policy 7/7A), flood control (Policy 14), passive recreation (Policies 19, 20, 21) and scenic quality (Policy 25). g. Flood Damage Prevention Laws Villa5e Law No. 2, 1984, sets building standards and permit and appeal procedures for building in areas of special flood hazard as shown on Federal flood insurance rate map of 1984 for the Village of Larchmont. Flood hazard areas shown on the map are those subject to coastal and tidal, not upstream, flooding. New structures in mapped areas must meet standards to qualify for Federal flood insurance at regular rates. Town Law, Chapter 28, provides for controlling the alteration of natural floodplains, streams, channels, and natural protective barriers, which help or accommodate channel floodwaters; prevents or regulates the construction of flood barriers which will unnaturally direct floodwaters or which may increase flood hazards in other areas; designates special areas of flood hazard within which are located two floodway areas (extremely hazardous areas,due to velocity of flood waters which carry debris), and prohibits any encroachment that results in any increase in flood levels during times of flood discharge. Controlled areas, however, are defined by a 1978 Federal map which does not fully reflect recent experience with flooding in the Sheldrake watershed. Application: Policies 11 and 14; also 7/7A, 44. V-5 Town and Village each to enact a law creating a bi-municipal Coastal Zone Management Commission to monitor and coordinate implementati 9n of the LWRP under direction of the two municipal gover=ents. Application: Entire LWRP. b. Local consistency Town and Villaae to enact laws requiring that local government actions, including granting of permits, be consistent to maxim= extent practicable with the policies and purposes of the LWRP, and establishing procedures to assure such consistency.8 Application: Entire LWRP. C. Stormwater control Town and Village to amend site plan approval laws pursuant to Policy 14, paragraph 3-b, and Section IV-A-1, paragraphs a and b, to control and regulate rates of stormwater runoff in new developments in furtherance of the purposes of Policy 14.8 ?i,pplication: Policies 5, 11, 14. d. Waterfront zoning Town to amend its zoning ordinance pursuant to Section IV-A-3-a in order to preserve the scenic low-density character of the shore- line and minimize impact on local ecosystems. Village to consider similar action for its shoreline. Application: Policies 7/7A, 25, 44 e. Freshwater wetlands Town to revise its Freshwater Wetlands law to conform with, and give effect to, current New York State law on this subject in order to protect defined wetland areas under its jurisdiction from adverse impact and to help limit flooding and erosion in the affected watersheds; and to incorporate in the amended law a Freshwater Wetlands Map.8 Village to consider similar revision of its Freshwater Wetlands law. Application: Policies 5, 11, 14, 44, 44A. Enacted June 30, 1986. V-8 Application: Policy 39A. M. Dog Waste Town Law, Chapter 6, Article II, requires dog-walkers to immedi- ately remove feces and forbids putting feces in storm drains. Village La No. 5, 1981 is similar. Application: Policy 39A. n. Parks Town Law, Chapter 55, prohibits littering or inflicting harm on wildlife, birds or plants in Town parks. Application: Policies 7/7A, 25, 39A. 0. Larchmont Reservoir Village Law No. 4, 1984, dedicates in perpetuity the Larchmont Reservoir property to public uses as conservation area, wildlife, preserve, nature study area, reservoir, standby water supply, flood control, education area, and other compatible uses. Application: Policies 7/7A, 14, 19, 2 1, 38, 44, 44A. p. Sewers Town Law, Chapter 60 (Plumbing Code) : Article VIII requires that liquid wastes from any plumbing system be discharged into public sewers; Article XII prohibits any connection with any storm water drain or with any stream or watercourse within the Town for the removal of sewage from any premises; and prohibits surface water from the ground, or from the cellar or roof of any building, to enter any pipe or drain that discharges into any fixture or trap connected with the public sewer; and Article XIV mandates that such drainage shall be discharged into a storm drain. Village Code (p. 206) forbids connection of roof leaders, water drainage pipes or storm water drains to the sanitary sewer system and requires that those so connected shall be disconnected and drainage rearranged as directed by the Village Engineer. Application: Policy 33A. 2. New Legislation a. Management structure v-7 2. Intermunicipal watershed cooperation. Town and Village to initiate and participate in intermunicipal mechanisms for better control of flooding, erosion, and siltation through coordinated planning and management of shared watersheds, and work with the County Soil and Water Conservation District and other concerned agencies to that end. .Application: Directly to Policies 14 and 14A; indirectly to Policies 5, 7/7A, U, 44A. 3. Intermunicipal and County cooperation against pollution. Town and Village to initiate and participate in cooperative efforts with neighboring municipalities and concerned County agencies to control chemical and organic pollution affecting this coastal zone, including timely repair -of County sewers and construction of adequate sound shore sewage treatment facilities. Application: Policies 7/7A, 8, 10A, 14A, 30, 31, 33, 33A, 36, 37, 38, 44, 44A. 4. Pollution monitoring and control. Town and Village to develop, with 'Eounty agencies, a systematic program to inspect, monitor, and report on water quality and pollution sources and incidents; improve compli- ance with regulations including safe disposal and/or recycling of polluting wastes; and apply pollution guidelines set forth in County Best Management Practices Manuals on Construction"Related Projects and Stormwater Management. @2plication: Same as preceding. 5. Elimination of storm drain-sanitary sewer connections. Town and Village to give high priority to elimination of illegal connections of storm drains to sanitary sewers, whether on private or municipal property, in cooperation with State and Westchester County agencies. Application: Policy 33A. 6. Litter and dog waste. Town and VillaSe to study effective approaches to control of these nuisances with a view to new legislative, adminis- trative, and/or community action. Application: Policy 39A. 7. Scenic protection. Town and Village to enhance protection of scenic values by applying the siting and development guidelines. in Policy 25, and by appropriate emphasis on preserving open space for its scenic value, as noted in Section IV-A-1. Application: Policy 25. 8. Recreational fishing. Town and Village to review their laws and policies regarding recreational fishing on public property with a view V-10 f. Critical Environmental Areas Town to amend its local SEQR law to designate, with map and description in each case, three Critical Environmental Areas: the Reservoir-sheldrake-Leatherstocking Freshwater Wetland Complex; (2) the Town portion of the Premium Salt Marsh Compley; and (3) the Town portion of the Hommocks Salt Marsh Complex. Village likewise to designate under State SEQR law the Pine Brook-Premium Border and the Hommocks Border (the Village portions of, respectively, the Premium and Hommocks Salt Mardh Complexes) as Critical Environmental Areas.9 Application: Policies 7/7A, 11, 14, 44, 44A. g. Flood damage prevention map Town to amend its Flood Damage Prevention Law to apply standaras and procedures set forth in that law to additional flood-prom areas to be shown on an Interim Flood Damage Prevention Map, prepared on the basis of a qualified engineering survey to supplement the current Federal flood map for the Town of Mamaroneck. A2]21ication: Policies 5, 11, 14. h. Erosion and sediment control Town and Village to enact laws applying to construction projects within their jurisdiction the standards and procedures set forth in the most current edition of the Westchester County manual entitled "Best Management Practices --Cons truc tion Related Activities." Application: Policy 14A. i. Hampshire-Hommocks rezoning Town to rezone the Hampshire-Hommocks area from present R-7.5 to R-30 as provided in Section IV-A-1-c. Application: 7/7A, 14, 44. B. Other Actions Necessary to Implement the Local Program 1. Fish and Wildlife Habitats. Town and Village, in consultation with New York State authorities to make appropriate designation of the Fish and Wildlife Habitat Complexes described in the narrative in Section Application: Policy 7/7A. 9Enacted June 30, 1986. V-9 15. Standby water supply. Village to frame and enforce rules, and seek necessary cooperation of upstream municipalities and County government, in order to maintain Sheldrake Lake water quality classification "A" required for standby water supply. Application: Policy 38. 16. Illegal dumping. Town and village to upgrade enforcement of laws forbidding dumping on or near public property. Application: Policy 39. 17. Freshwater wetlands. Village to consider revising and updating its Freshwater Wetlands law in order to protect Pine Brook and East Creek. Application: Policies 44, 44A. C. Management Structure to Implement the LWRP Design of an effective management structure for the implementation of this Program must take into account its bi-municipal character, as well as the fact that no existing municipal or intermunicipal body in this area has overall responsibility for the wide range of activities covered by the policies in Section III and the actions in Sections IV and V. Physical operations affecting the Coastal Zone are dealt with primarily by the municipal engineers and public works departments of the two municipalities, supported by various committees responsible for recreation, parks and trees, beautification, etc. Land use and related functions are primarily the responsibility of the two municipalities' respective Planning Boards and Zoning Boards, each functioning within its own municipal boundaries. The conservation areas, water quality monitoring, and protection of the freshwater wetlands are the responsibility of the Townwide Conservation Advisory Commission and Water Control Commission, assisted by the Town Conservation Department. All these bodies, as their duties require, work in cooperation with local'nongovernmental groups (see list in Section II) and with the local schools. Since no part of this pattern fitted the unique requirements of LWRP planning, a Coastal Zone Management Committee (CZMC) was created by the Village of Larchmont in September 1982 to undertake the drafting of an LWRP under a State planning grant. Soon after, the Town of Mamaroneck also received an LWRP planning grant. Recognizing the extensive interdependence of the two areas, the Town and the Village thereupon began working togeth- er. The Town Council appointed several Town residents to the CZMC, includ- ing a co-chairman. Under the authority of both municipal governments, the CZMC undertook to draft a single LWRP for the Village of Larchmont and the Unincorporated Area of the Town. In its drafting work the Committee and its planning consultant have con- ferred with many of the bodies mentioned above. Moreover, its membership includes chairmen or members of a number of them, notably the Village Planning Commission and Zoning Board and the Conservation Advisory V-12 to encouraging such f ishing under suitable regulation in appropriate locations. Application: Policy 9. 9. Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas, High Hazard Areas, Etc. Town and Village to apply State coastal erosion hazard standards to three areas named under Policy 11 and to apply applicable State standards to siting of structures in coastal high hazard areas ("V zones") and floodways so identified on Flood Insurance Rate maps. Application: Policies 11, 17. 10. Recreational facilities. Town and Village, pursuant to Section IV-A-3-a-2, to take such steps regarding land use as may be appropriate to prevent reduction of existing waterfront recreational facilities or of access thereto. Application: Policies, 2, 11, 12, 19, 21, 25. 11. Historic sites. Town and Village to take steps to provide for protection and/or appropriate restoration, adaptive re-use or rehabilitation of sites and districts designated under Policy 23 as of special historical, architectural, cultural or archaeological significance, and for establishing criteria and procedures for such activities and for further designations of such sites by local and/or State authority. Application: Policy 23. 12. On-site sanitary systems. Town and Village to require (a) replacement of on-site sanitary systems by connection to public sewers wherever possible without unreasonable cost; otherwise, (b) use of the most effective and pollution-free on-site system, with post-installation monitoring by municipal authorities to assure performance. Application: Policies 32, 32A. 13. Vessel waste discharges. Town and Village to keep the problem of waste discharges from vesi-ei-s in coastal waters under continuing review and take any necessary steps to assure compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Application: Policy 34. 14. Pollution from nutrients, etc. Town and Village to follow best management practices on municipal projects to greatest practicable extent, and encourage property owners to do likewise, in order to minimize pollution of coastal waters by runoff of excess nutrients, organics, and eroded soils. Application: Policy 37. V-11 policies and projects, including physical, legislative, regulato- ry, administrative, and other actions included in the Program. In pursuance of this task the Commission will: (1) Advise the municipal governments on implementation pri- orities, work assignments, timetables, and budgetary re- quirements of the Program. (2) Consult with the appropriate departments and professional staffs of the two municipalities concerning the matters in subparagraph (1), obtaining reports from them as necessary to assure implementation of the Program and consistency of local actions with it. (3) Maintain liaison with related municipal bodies, including but not limited to the Planning and Zoning Boards and the Conservation Advisory Commission, and with concerned nongov- ernmental bodies, in order to further the implementation of the LWRP. (4) Monitor in timely fashion the planned actions of State and Federal agencies within the Coastal Zone in order to assure consistency of such actions with the LWRP, and recommend appropriate action where necessary. (5) Provide to any board, commission, or other agency of the Town or Village (including, but not'limited to, the Planning Board or Planning Commission and the Zoning Board of Appeals), in such manner as may be prescribed by law, its opinion as to whether and in what respect, a proposed action by, or subject to the permission of, such body, may be inconsistent with the policies of the LWRP. (6) Subject to the approval of the municipal governments, make application for funding from State, Federal, or other sources to finance projects under the LWRP. (7) Develop and maintain liaison with neighboring municipal- ities, and with State and the County agencies concerned, with a view to strengthening and developing cooperation in, and common management of, shared drainage basins for flood and pollution control and other purposes. (8) Make an annual report to the municipal governments on progress achieved and problems encountered during the year, and recommending such actions as the Commission considers necessary for the further implementation of the LWRP. (9) Make or prepare such reports and comznunications concerning the Program to the Department of State and other agencies of the State of New York, by or on behalf of the municipal governments, as may be appropriate or required. V-14 Commission. Thus the CZMC has developed a unique overview of the problems and possibilities facing the two municipalities in their shared coastal zone. This overview function is extremely important and is provided for in the implementation phase in order to facilitate coordination between two neighboring munici- palities working together in a single Program. 1. Lead Agency and Responsible Official To serve as lead agency, the municipal governments will jointly establish upon the entry into force ot the Program a Coastal Zone Management Commission of 11 members. The Chairman of the Commission will be designated as the local official responsible for overall management and coordination of the LWRP. Simultaneously with the establishment of the Commission, the present Coastal Zone Management Committee, a planning body, will be dissolved. To assure timely and coordinated implementation of the Program at the local government level, the two municipal governments will coordinate their policies and actions as necessary, taking into account the advice and recommendations of the Commission. For this purpose each municipal government will appoint a liaison trustee or council member to work with the Commission. The liaison members will serve as channels for guidance to the commission from their respective govern- ments. They will consult as appropriate with each other, and with their respective governments, on the work of the Commission, the implementation of the Program, and any questions 'arising in that connection that may require action by or guidance from one or both governments or coordination between the two governments. 2. Coastal Zone Management Commission The Commission will be constituted as follows: a. Appointment. Five members will be appointed by the village of Larchmont and five by the Town of Mamaroneck. The chairman, to serve a one-year term, will be appointed jointly by the Supervisor of the Town and the Mayor of the Village. The other ten members will normally be appointed for a term of three years and will be eligible for reappointment. b. Qualifications. Each member serving on appointment by the Village wtst be a resident of the Village, and each member serving on appointment by the Town must be a resident of the Unincorporated Area of the Town. Members will be chosen for their demonstrated knowledge, ability, and readiness to serve the Commission in the functions described below, and with due regard to maintaining among the membership a range of special aptitudes and expertise relevant to the Commission's work. C. Functions and powers. The Commission's basic task will be to monitor and coordinate the implementation of the LWRP, its 7-13 Authority or Agency* with primary responsibility for Initiating Action or Enacting Operating (a) Physical Projects (See Section IV-B) 1. Premium Feasibility Study CZM CZM 2. Upper Sheldrake/Larchmont Reservoir Feasibility Study CZM CZM 3. Upper Sbeldrake River (West Branch) Improvements TB TE/TPW 4. Upper Sbeldrake River (East Branch) Retention Basin TB TE/TPW 5. Large Silt Traps VB/TB VE/VPW/TE/TPW 6. Repair of Defective Sever Lines TB/VB CSD/TE 7. Selective Harbor Dredging VB/B JHM 8. Catch Basin Cleaning and Improvement Program VB/TB VFW/TPW 9. Elimination of Storm Drain Sanitary Sever Connection TB/VB VVCSD/VPW/TE/TFW 1O.Flint Park: Relocation of Leaf Disposal Facility and Restoration of Two Sites VE CAME 11.Premium Conservation Area Restoration CAC TPW 11.(b) New Legislation (See Section V-A-2) 1. Local consistency laws TB/VB CZM and all agencies 2. Substantial areas of open space TB TPB 3. Waterfront zoning TB/VB TPB/M 4. Wetlands and habitats TB/VB TPBPFC 5. Erosion and sediment control (Best Management Practices) TB/VB TPB/VPC/CAC 6. E1imination of storm drain-sanitary sewer TB/VB TE/TPW/VPW 7. Historic sites VB/TB MR, TBAR (c) Other Actions (See Section V-8) V-16 (10) Perform such other functions regarding the Coastal Zone as the Village Board and the Town Board may assign to it from time to time. d. other provisions (1) Members of the CZMC will serve without compensation. They will be entitled to reimbursement for necessary expenditures in the performance of their work, subject to budgetary limitations. (2) The Commission may engage such professional and clerical help and purchase such supplies and services as are neces- sary for its work, subject to prior budgetary approval by the two municipalities as the latter may direct. (3) The Co=ission will meet not less than once a month. Its meetings will be open to the public. It will keep and distribute minutes of its proceedings. A majority of its me@mbers will constitute a quorum. e. Limitation. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Program, no powers, duties, or functions are conferred by it on the Coastal Zone Management Commission other than those set forth in paragraphs c. and d. above; and no provision of this Program shall be construed as altering the powers, duties, and functions of the existing municipal planning and zoning boards or com- missions of the Village of Larchmont or the Town of Mamaroneck. 3. Summary of issignment of specific responsibilities for implementation and management of the LWRP Initiating or enacting authorities, and principal operating officials or agencies, are provisionally indicated in the table below for (a) physical actions, (b) new legislation, and (c) other actions. V-15 primarily responsible for ensuring compliance with and implementation of LWRP policies. It will inform all agencies, boards, commissions, and officials of the two municipalities, as well as relevant nongovernmental organizations, whose work may be affected by the LWRP policies, concerning the requirements of the policies affecting them; and it will confer with them to determine what new actions, if anyl, are necessary in order to assure fulfillment of such requirements. Problems or questions that arise from these discussions will be referred as appropriate to the Town or Village government for decision or action. 4. Description of procedures to be used for review of Federal and State actions for consistency with the LWRP For State agencies' consistency with the LWRP, the municipalities will rely primarily on the consistency procedures laid down on page 14-16 of "Guidelines for Local Waterfront Revitalization Programs" (Depart- ment of State, Albany, October 1982). The Coastal Zone Management Commission will evaluate promptly all proposed State actions of which it receives notice, and will give timely notice to the Secretary of State of any potential conflicts between such actions and the LWRP. For Federal agencies' consistency with the LWRP, the municipalities will rely primarily on the principles and procedures described in "State of New York Coastal Management Program and Final Environmental Impact Statement," U.S. Department of Commerce, August 1982, pages 11-9-11 and 12, in which the Department of State, State of New York, declares that it "will consult with other State agencies and local governments before providing its official comment on all Federal actions and that the basis for all consistency review will specifical- ly include "local waterfront revitalization programs." The Coastal Zone Management Commission, on being informed by the Department of State of any Federal action likely to affect the LWRP, will promptly evaluate and comment on the likely effect of such action. In this connection, note is taken of the provision of Department of State Regulation 600.4, regarding initial review of actions by State agencies under Article 42 of the Executive Law, that "for purposes of this part, planning or rulemaking actions which affect land or water in the coastal area shall be deemed to be located therein." (Emphasis added.) Because of the topography of the Westchester Sound shore, actions inland and upstream, beyond the coastal area of the two municipalities, can seriously affect land and water in this coastal area. Consequently, such proposed actions by State agencies, when likely to produce such an effect, should be made known to the Coastal Zone Management Commission in a timely fashion for its evaluation and comment. D. Financial Resources Necessary to IM21ement the LWRP Although preliminary cost estimates have been made for some of the physical V-18 I. Use of Post Road sites VB VPB/CAC 2. Intermunicipal drainage basin cooperation TB/VB CZM 3. Intermunicipal-County cooperation against pollution TB/VB CZM 4. Pollution monitoring and control CZM CAC 5. Litter and dog waste CZM CZM 6. Vessel waste discharges VB CZM/CAC 7. Scenic protection VB/TB VPB/TPB 8. Recreational fishing TB/VB CAC 9. Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas CZM CZM 1O.Recreational facilities TB/VB ll.Noise abatement CZM TE/VE 12.0n-site sanitary systems TB/VB TE/VE 13.Pollution from nutrients,etc. TE/VB TPW/VPW 14.Stand by water supply VB CAC/TE 15.11legal dumping TB/VB CZM *Key to abbreviations: CAC - Conservation Advisory Commission CSD - County Sewer District CZM - Coastal Zone Management Commission JHK - Joint Harbor Management Agency TB - Town of Mamaroneck Board TBAR - Town Board of Architectural Review TE - Town Engineer TPB - Town Planning Board TPW - Town Public Works Dept. VB - Village of Larchmont Board VBAR - Village Board of Architectural Review VE - Village Engineer VPC - Village Planning Commission VPW - Village Public Works Dept. 3. Description of procedures to be used to ensure that all local actions comply with the policies of the LWRP As lead agency, the Coastal Zone Management Commission will be V-17 LWRP POLICIES: BACKGROUND AND IMPLEMENTING OR RELATED ACTIONS Policy Subject Sec. II* Background Sec. IV Actions Sec. V* Laws, Actions 2 Water-dependent uses Part 2, 3b,c,i A-3-a-2 B-10 5 Locating Development: Part 2 (physical A-1 throughout B-2 infrastructure con- geography, economy); straints (see also 3-9; 11 Policy 14) 6 Expedite permit - A-2-b procedures 7/7A Fish and wildlife Part 3-f; Part 4 A-1-c,2,3a,3b,4; A-l(a,b,c,d,e,f,g,i,n,o) habitats and Appendix A B throughout A-2(e,f); B-1,2,4 8 Protect fish and wild- Parts 4,5,6,8,12 A throughout;B-1, A-1 (d,e,f,h,l,m,n); A-2 life from pollutants 2,5,6,7,8,10,11 (c,e,b); B-3,4,5,6 9 Recreational use of fish Part 3-c-1; Part 13 A-3-b; B-10,11 B-8 and wildlife 10A Shellfish (water quality) ------------------------- See Policy 30 11 Flooding and erosion: Parts 6,8,9 A-1,A-2,A-3-a-2,1, A-1 (a,,b,c,d,e,g); A-2 Siting of structures A-3-b (c,e,f,q); B-9 22 Development must not Part 3-9; Parts 6 A-1,2,3-a-2 A-1 (c,d,e,f,,g); A-2 born natural protective through 9 (c,e,b) B-2, 9 features Criteria for erosion Parts 6,7,8,9 B-1,2,3,4 A-l(c); A-2(c,e,b); protection structures B-9 24** Actions must not in- Parts 2,3-g,5-8,11 A-1,2,3-b,A A-1 (a,b,c,d,e,f,g,i,o); crease erosion or flood- B-1,2,3,4,5,6 A-2 (c,e,f,b); B-1,2 ing at site or elsewhere 24A "Best management" in Part 5 B throughout A-l(c,d,e,1);A-2-b, B-2,3,4 construction 25 Avoid damage it dredging ------- -------- - ------ See Policy 13,35 - ------------- - 27 Prefer non-structural A-1,2,3 A-1 (c,d,g); A-2 measures against flooding (c,e,f,g,b) B-9 28 Safeguard NY State throughout A-1-d Interests 19 Access to water-related 2-d,3-c,13 A (3-a-2,b,4) B-18 recreation 8-9,10,11 V-20 projects listed in Section IV-B (see Table 1) , no overall estimate of annual budgetary requirements for the LWRP is possible at this stage. Costs beyond the f irst year will depend in part on the outcome of the proposed Premium and Sheldrake feasibility studies. Except for a few proposed actions in which private persons or organizations have a particular interest or responsibility and may bear a share of the cost, the program here proposed is in the public sector entirely and will be financed from public funds. Management costs and the costs of some actions can be absorbed in the regular budgets of the two municipalities and financed out of general revenues. Other actions, however, will qualify for, and require, financial support under State or Federal programs. Some potential sources of such support are listed in Section VI-B, "Federal and State Actions Necessary to Further the LWRP." The municipal governments, with the advice of the Coastal Zone Management Commission, will pursue all possible avenues of such support and, in this connection, will avail themselves of the advice and assistance of the Coastal Management Staff of the Department of State. E. Summary Table: Relation of Policies to Other Sections In Sections IV and V, discussions of each project, law, and other actions is accompanied in most cases by reference to the Policy or policies which it serves to implement or to which it is otherwise related. The table below presents essentially the same information in reverse, so that each policy can be traced to its background in Section II and to the laws and other projects or actions in Sections IV and V that serve to implement it or are conditioned by it. V-19 9 SECTION VI FEDERAL AND STATE PROGRAMS SECTION VI STATE AND FEDERAL ACTIONS AND PROGRAMS LIKUY TO AFFECT IMPLEMENTATION State. and Federal actions will affect and be affected by implementation of the LWRP. Under State law and the U.S Coastal Zone Management Act, certain State and Federal actions within or affecting the local wilterfront area must be "consistent" or "consistent to the maximum extent p-lacticable" with the enforceable policies and purposes of the LVIRP. This consistency requirement makes the LWRP a unique, intergovernmental mechanism for setting policy and making decisions and helps to prevent detrimental actions from occurring and future options from being needlessly foreclosed. At the same time, the active participation of State and Federal agencies is also likely to be necessary to implement specific provisions of the LUR.P. The first part of this section identifies the actions and programs of State and Federal agencies which should be undertaken in a manner consistent with the LWRP. This is a generic list of actions and programs, as identified by the NYS Department of State; therefore, some of the actions and programs listed may not be relevant to this LURP. Pursuant to the State Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act (Executive Law, Article 42). the Secretary of State individually and separately notifies affected State agencies of those agency actions and programs which are to be undertaken in a manner consistent with approved LUTRPs. Similarly, Federal agency actions and programs subject to consistency requirements- are identified in the manner prescribed by the U.S.- Coastal Zone Management Act and its implementing regulations. The lists of State and Federal actions and programs included herein are informational only and do not represent or substitute for the required identification and notification procedures. The current official lists of actions subject to State and Federal consistency requirements may be obtained from the NYS Department of State. The second part of this section is a more focused and descriptive list of State and Federal agency actions which are likely to necessary to further implementation of the LWRP. It is recognized that a State or Federal agency's ability to undertake such actions is subject to a variety of factors and considerations; that the consistency provisions referred to above, may not apply; and that the consistency requirements can not be used to require a State or Federal agency to undertake an action it could not undertake pursuant to other provisions of law. Reference should be made to Section IV and Section V, which also discuss State and Federal assistance needed to implement the LWRP. VI-3 A. FEDERAL AND STATE ACTIONS AND PROGRAMS WHICH SHOULD BE UNDERTAKEN IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH THE LWRP DIRECT FEDERAL ACTIVITIES AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE N';tional Marine Fisheries Services 1.00 Fisheries Management Plans DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Army Corps of Engineers 1.00 Proposed authorizations for dredging, channel improvements, breakwaters, other navigational works, or erosion control structures, beach replenishment, dams or flood control works, ice management practices and activities, and other projects with potential to impact coastal lands and waters. 2.00 Land acquisition for spoil disposal or other purposes. 3.00 Selection of open water disposal sites. Army, Navy and Air Force '-4.00 Location, design, and acquisition of new or expanded defense installations (active or reserve status, including associated housing, transprotation or other facilities). 5.00 Plans, procedures and facilities for landing or storage use zones. 6.00 Establishment of impact, compatability or restricted use zones. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 1.00 Prohibition orders. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 1.00 Acquisition, location and design of proposed Federal Government property or buildings, whether leased or owned by the Federal Government. 2.00 Disposition. of Federal surplus lands and structures. DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service 1.00 Management of National Wildlife refuges and proposed acquisitions. VI-4 INTERSTATE CO,ERCE COY.SSION 1.00 Authority to abandon railway lines (to the extent that the abandonment Involves removal of trackage and disposition of rigbt-of-way); authority to construct railroads; authority to construct coal slurry pipelines. NUCLEAR RECII-ATORY COY-XISSIOX 1.00 Licensing and certification of the siting, construction and operation of nuclear power plans pursuant to Atomic Energy Act of 1954, Title 11 of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 and the National Environmental Policy'Act of 1969. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Coast Guard 1.00 Construction or modification of bridges. causeways or pipelines over navigable waters pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 2455. 2.00 err-its for Deepwater Ports pursuant to the DeeRwater Prts Act of 1�74 (33 U.S.C. 1501). Tederal Aviation Adnistration 3.00 ?e=lts and licenses for construction, operation or alteration of airports. VI-5 DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 14.112 Mortgage Insurance - Construction or Substantial Rehabilitation of Condominium Projects 14.115 Mortgage Insurance - Development of Sales Type Cooperative Projects 14.117 Mortgage Insurance - Homes 14.124 Mortgage Insurance - Investor Sponsored Cooperative Housing 14.125 Mortgage Insurance - Land Development and New Communities 14.126 Mortgage Insurance - Management Type Cooperative Projects 14.127 Mortgage Insurance - Mobile Home Parks 14.218 Community Development Block Grants /Entitlement Grants 14.219 Community Development Block Grants/Small Cities Program 14.221 Urban Development Action Grants 14.223 Indian Community Development Block Grant Program DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR 15.400 Outdoor Recreation - Acquisition, Development and Planning 15.402 Outdoor Recreation - Technical Assistance 15.403 Disposal of Federal Surplus Real Property for Parks.- Recreation, and Historic Monuments 15.411 Historic Preservation Grants-In-Aid 15.417 Urban Park and Recreation Recovery Program 15.600 Anadromous Fish Conservation 15.605 Fish Restoration 15.611 Wildlife Restoration 15.613 Marine Mammal Grant Program 15.802 Minerals Discovery Loan Program 15.950 National Water Research and Development Program 15.951 Water Resources Research and Technology Assistance to State Institutes 15.592 Water Research and Technology - Matching Funds to State Institutes DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 20.102 Airport Development Aid Program 20.103 Airport Planning Grant Program 20.205 Highway Planning and Construction 20.309 Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement - Guarantee of Obligations 20.310 Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement - Redeemable Preference Shares 20.506 Urban Mass Transportation Demonstration Grants 20.509 Public Transportation for Rural and Small Urban Areas VI-6 OFFICE FOR THE AGING 1.00 Funding and/or approval programs for the establishment of new or expanded facilities providing various services for the elderly. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND MARKETS 1.00 Agricultural Districts Program. 2.00 Rural development programs. 3.00 Farm worker services programs. 4.00 Permit and approval programs: 4.01 Custom Slaughters/Processor Permit 4.02 Processing Plant License 4.03 Refrigerated Warehouse and/or Locker Plant License ALBANY PORT DISTRICT COMMISSION regional agency] 1.00 Acquisition, disposition, lease, grant of easement and other activities related to the management of land under the jurisdiction of the Commission. 2.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition. DIVISION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL/STATE LIQUOR AUTHORITY 1.00 Permit and approval programs: 1.01 Ball Park - Stadium License 1.02 Bottle Club License 2.03 Bottling Permits 1.04 Brewer's Licenses and Permits 1.05 Brewer's Retail Beer License 1.06 Catering Establishment Liquor License 1.07 Cider Producer's and Wholesaler's Licenses 1.08 Club Beer, Liquor. and Wine Licenses 1.09 Distiller's Licenses 1.10 Drug Store, Eating Place, and Grocery Store Beer Licenses 1.11 Farm Winery and Winery Licenses 1.12 Hotel Beer, Wine. and Liquor Licenses 1.13 Industrial Alcohol Manufacturer's Permits 1.14. Liquor Store License 1.15 On-Premises Liquor License 1.16 Plenary Permit (Miscellaneous-Annual) 1.17 Summer Beer and Liquor Licenses 1.18 Tavern/Restaurant and Restaurant Wine Licenses 1.19 Vessel Beer and Liquor Licenses 1.20 Warehouse Permit 1.21 Wine Store License 1.22 Winter Beer and Liquor Licenses 1.23 Wholesale Bear, Wine, and Liquor Licenses VI-7 DIVISION OF ALCOHOLISM ALCOHOL ABUSE 1.00 Facilities construction. rehabilitation, expansion, or, demolition or the funding of such activities. 2.00 Permit and approval programs: 2.01 Letter Approval for Certificate of Need 2.02 Operating Certificate (Alcoholism Facility) 2.03 Operating Certificate - Community Residence 2.04 0perating Certificate (Outpatient Facility) 2.05 Operating Certificate (Sobering-Up Station) COUNCIL ON THE ARTS 1.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition or the funding of such activities. 2.00 Architecture and environmental arts program. DEPARTMENT OF BANKING 1.00 Permit and approval programs: 1.01 Authorization Certificate (Bank Branch) 1.02 Authorization Certificate (Bank Change of Location) 1.03 Authorization Certificate (Bank Charter) 1.04 Authorization Certificate (Credit Union Change of Location) 1.05 Authorization Certificate (Credit Union Charter) 1.06 Authorization Certificate (Credit Union Station) 1.07 Authorization Certificate (Foreign Banking Corporation Change of Location) 1.08 Authorization Certificate (Foreign Banking Corporation Public Accommodations Office 1.09 Authorization Certificate (Investment Company Branch) 1.10 Authorization Certificate (Investment Company Change of Location) 1.11 Authorization Certificate (Investment Company Charter) 1.12 Authorization Certificate (Licensed Lender Change of Location) 1.13 Authorization Certificate (Mutual Trust Company Charter) 1.14 Authorization Certificate (Private Banker Charter) 1.15 Authorization Certificate (Public Accommodation Office - Banks) 1.16 Authorization Certificate (Safe Deposit Company Branch) 1.17 Authorization Certificate (Safe Deposit Company Change of Location) 1.18 Authorization Certificate (Safe Deposit Company Charter) 1.19 Authorization Certificate (Savings Bank Charter) 1.20 Authorization Certificate (Savings Bank De Novo Branch Office) 1.21 Authorization Certificate (Savings Bank Public Accommodations Office) 1.22 Authorization Certificate (Savings and Loan Association Branch) 1.23 Authorization Certificate (Savings and Loan Association Change of Location) VI-8 1.24 Authorization Certificate (Savings and Loan Association Charter) 1.25 Authorization Certificate (Subsidiary Trust Company Charter) 1.26 Authorization Certificate (Trust Company Braxich) 1.27 Authorization Certificate (Trust Company-Change of Location) 1.28 Authorization Certificate (Trust Company Charter) 1.29 Authorization Certificate (Trust Company Public Accommodations Office) 1.30 Authorization to Establish a Life Insurance Agency 1.31 LiceL;e as a licensed Lender 1.32 License for a Foreign Banking Cor?oyation Branch ZATTrKY PARK CITY AU'rHORITY [regional agency] 1.00 Acqjisition, disposition, lease, grant of easement and other activities related to the r-anage=ent of land under the jurisdiction of the Authority. 2.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation. expansion, or demolition. NEW YORK STATE BRIDGE AL71EORITY [regional agency] 1.00 Acquisition, disposition, lease, grant of easement and other activities related to the management of land under the jurisdiction of the Authority. 2.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition. BUFFALO AND FORT ERIE PUBLIC BRIDGE AUTHORITY [regional agency] 1.00 Acquisition, disposition, lease, grant of easement and other activities related to the management of land under the jurisdiction of the Authority. 2.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion. or demolition. CAPITAL DISTRICT TRANS?ORTATION AUTHORITY [regional agency] 1.00 Acquisition, disposition. lease, grant of easement and other activities related to the management of land under the jurisdiction of the Authority. 2.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition. 3.00 Increases in special fares for transportation services to public water-related recreation resources. V1_9 CENRAL NEW YORK REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY [regional agency] 1.00 Acquisition, disposition, lease, grant of easement and other activities related to the management of land under the jurisdiction of the Authority. 2.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition. 3.00 Increases in special fares for transportation services to public water-related recreation resources. CITY UNIVERSITY CONSTRUCTION FUND [regional agency] 1.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or de=olition or the funding of such activities. CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK [regional agency] 1.00 Acquisition, disposition, lease, grant of easement and other activities related to the management of land under the jurisdiction of the University. 2.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 1.00 Preparation or revision of statewide or specific plans to address State economic development needs. 2.00 Allocation of the state tax-free bonding reserve. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES 1.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition or the funding of such activities. DORMITORY AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 1.00 Financing of higher education and health care facilities. 2.00 Planning and design services assistance program. VI-10 EDUCATION DEPART?WT 2.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion,' demolition or the funding of such activities. 2.00 Permit and approval programs: 2.01 Certificate of Incorporation (Regents Charter) 2.02 Private Business School Registration 2.03 Private School License 2.04 Registered Manufacturer of Drugs and/or Devices 2.05 Registered Pharmacy Certificate 2.06 Registered Vholesaler of Drugs and/or Devices 2.07 Registered U"nolesaler-Repacker of Drugs and/or Devices 2.08 Storekeeper's Certificate ENERGY PLANNING BOARD AND ENERGY OFFICE 1.00 Preparation and revision of the State Energy Master Plan. NV^1 YORK STATE ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOP?MN'T AMORM 1.00 Issuance of revenue bonds to finance pollution abatement modifications In power-generation facilities and various en .ergy projects. IDEPARTKENT OF ENVIRONKENTAL CONSERVATION 1.00 Acquisition, disposition, 2ease, grant of easement and other activities related to the management of lands under the jurisdiction of the Department. 2.00 Classification of Waters Program; classification of land areas under the Clean Air Act. 3.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation. expansion, or demolition or the funding of such activities. 4.00 Financial assistance /grant programs: 4.01 Capital projects for lLmiting air pollution 4.02 Cleanup of toxic vaste du=ps 4.03 Flood control. beach erosion and other vater resource projects 4.04 Operating aid-to municipal vastewater treatment facilities 4.05 Resource recovery and solid vaste management capital projects 4.06. Wastevater treatment facilities 5.00 Funding assistance for Issuance of permits and other regulatory activities (Nev York City only). VI-11 6.00 Implementation of the Environmental Quality Bond Act of 1972, including: (a) Water Quality Improvement Projects (b) Land Preservation and Improvement Projects including Wetand Preservation and Restoration Projects, Unique Area Preservation Projects, Metropolitan Parks Projects, Open Space Preservation Projects and Waterways Projects. 7.00 Marine Finfish and Shellfish Programs. 8.00 New York Harbor Drift Removal Project. 9.00 Permit and approval programs: Air Resources 9.01 Certificate of Approval for Air Pollution Episode Action Plan 9.02 Certificate of Compliance for Tax Relief - Air Pollution Control Facility 9.03 Certificate to Operate: Stationary Combustion Installation; Incinerator; Process, Exhaust or Ventilation System 9.04 Permit for Burial of Radioactive Material 9.05 Permit for Discharge of Radioactive Material to Sanitary Sewer 9.06 Permit for Restricted Burning 9.07 Permit to Construct: a Stationary Combustion Installation; Incinerator; Indirect Source of Air Contamination; Process. Exhaust or Ventilation System Construction Management 9.08 Approval of Plans and Specifications for Wastewater Treatment Facilities. Fish and Wildlife 9.09 Certificate to Possess and Sell Hatchery Trout in New York State 9.10 Co=ercial Inland Fisheries Licenses 9.11 Fishing Preserve License 9.12 Fur Breeder's License 9.13 Came Dealer's License 9.14 Licenses to Breed Domestic Game Animals 9.15 License to Possess and Sell Live Game 9.16 Permit to Import, Transport and/or Export under Section 184.1 (11-0511) 9.17 Permit to Raise and Sell Trout 9.18 Private lags Hatchery Permit 9.19 Shooting Preserve Licenses 9.20 Taxidermy License VI-12 Lands and Forest 9.21 Certificate of Environmental Safety (Liquid Natural Gas and Liquid --Petroleum Gas) 9.22 Floating Object Permit 9.23 Marine Regatta Permit 9.24 Mining Permit 9.25 Navigation Aid Permit 9.26 Permit to Plug and Abandon (a non-cowmerci:,l oil, gar. or solution mining well). 9.27 Pe=it to Use Che=icals for the Control or Elimination of Aquatic Insects 9.28 Permit to Use Chemicals for the Control or El!zination of Aquatic Vegetation .9.29 Permit to Use Che--icals for the Control or Extermination of Undesirable Fish 9.30 Underground Storage Permit (Gas) 9.31 Well Drilling Permit (Oil, Gas, and Solution Salt Mining) Y.arine Resources 9.32 Digger's Permit' (Shellfish) 9.33 License of Menhaden Fishing Vessel 9.34 License for Non-Resident Food Fishing Vessel 9.35 Non-Resident Lobster Permit 9.36 Marine Eatchery and/or Off-Botto= Culture Shellfish Pexmits 9.37 Pe=its to Take Blue-Claw Crabs 9.38 Pe=it to Use Pond or Trap 'Net 9.39 Resident Co=ercial Lobster Permit 9.40 Shellfisb Bed Permit 9.41 Shellfish Shipper's Permits 9.42 Special Permit to Take Surf Cl=s from Waters Other That the Atlantic Ocean Regulatory Affairs 9.43 Approval -.Drainage Improvement District 9.44 Approval - Water (Diversions for) Power 9.45 Approval of Well System and Permit to Operate 9.46 Pe=it - Article 15, (Protection of Water) - Dam. 9.47 Permit - Article 15, (Protection of Water) - Dock, Pier orWharf 9.48 Permit - Article 15, (Protection of Water) Dredge or Deposit Material in a Waterway 9.49. Pe=it - Article 15. (Protection of 'Cater) Stream Bed or Bank Disturbances 9.50 Permit - Article 15, Title 15 (Water Supply) 9.51 Pa=it - Article 24, (Freshwater Wetlands) 9.52 Permit - Article 25, (Tidal Wetlands) 9.53 River Improvement District approvals 9.54 River Regulatory District approvals 9.55 Well Drilling Certificate of Registration VI-13 Solid Wastes 9.56 -Permit to I Construct and/or Operate a Solid Waste Management Facility 9.57 Septic Tank Cleaner and Industrial Waste Collector Permit Vater Resources 9.58 Approval of Plans for Wastewater Disposal Syst s 9.59 Certificate of Approval of Realty Subdivision Plans 9.60 Certificate of Compliance (Industrial Wastewater Treatment Facility) 9.61 Letters of Certification for Major Onshore Petroleum Facility Oil Spill Prevention and Control Plan 9.62 ?err-it - Article 36, (Construction in Flood Fazard Areas) 9.63 Permit for State Agency Activities for Development in Coastal Erosion Eazards Areas 9.64 Permit Granted (for Use of State Maintained Flood Control Land) 9.65 State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) Permit 9.66 401 Water Qjality Certification 10.00 Preparation and revision of Air Pollution State Implementation Plan. 11.00 Preparation and revision of Continuous Executive Program Plan. 12.00 Preparation and revision of Statewide Environmental Plan. 13.00 Protection of Natural and Man-made Beauty Program. 14.00 Urban Fisheries Progr=. 15.00 Urban Forestry Program. 26.00 Urban Wildlife Program. n'VIROMMIN'TAL FACILITIES CORPORATION 2.00 Financing program for pollution control facilities for industrial fi=s and s=all businesses. FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 1.00 Tacilities construction, rebabilitation. expansion, or demolition or thi funding of such activities. VI-14 OFFICE OF GENERAL SERVICES 1.00 Administration of the Public Lands Law for acquisition and disposition of lands, grants of land and grants or easement of land under water, issuance of licenses for removal of materials from lands under water, and oil and gas leases for exploration and development. 2.00 Administration of Article 4-B, Public Buildings Law, in regard to the protection and management of State historic and cultural properties and State uses of buildings of historic. architectural or cultural significance. 3.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 1.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition or the funding of such activities. 2.00 Permit and approval programs: 2.01 Approval of Completed Works for Public Water Supply Improvements 2.02 Approval of Plans for Public Water Supply Improvements. 2.03 Certificate of Need (Health Related Facility - except Hospitals) 2.04 Certificate of Need (Hospitals) 2.05 Operating Certificate (Diagnostic and Treatment Center) 2.06 Operating Certificate (Health Related Facility) 2.07 Operating Certificate (Hospice) 2.08 Operating Certificate (Hospital) 2.09 Operating Certificate (Nursing Home) 2.10 Permit to Operate a Children's Overnight or Day Camp 2.11 Permit to Operate a Migrant Labor Camp 2.12 Permit to Operate as a Retail Frozen Dessert Manufacturer 2.13 Permit to Operate a Service Food Establishment 2.14 Permit to Operate a Temporary Residence/Mass Gathering 2.15 Permit to Operate or Maintain a Swimming Pool or Public Bathing Beach 2.16 Permit to Operate Sanitary Facilities for Realty Subdivisions 2.17 Shared Health Facility Registration Certificate DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL and its subsidiaries and affiliates 1.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition. 2.00 Financial assistance/grant programs: 2.01 Federal Housing Assistance Payments Programs (Section 8 Program) 2.02 Boutin& Development Fund Programs 2.03 Neighborhood Preservation Companies Program 2.04 Public Housing Programs 2.05 Rural Initiatives Grant Program 2.06 Rural Preservation Companies Program VI-15 2.07 Rural Rental Assistance Program 2.08 Special Needs Demonstration Projects 2.09 Urban Initiatives Grant Program 2.10-Urban Renewal Programs 3.00 Preparaton and implementation of plans to address housing and community renewal needs. HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY 1.oo Funding programs for the construction, rehabilitation, or expansion of facilities. INTERSTATE SANITATION COMMISSION [regional agency] 1.00 Adoption and enforcement of air and water pollution standards within the Interstate Sanitation District. JOB DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 1.00 Financing assistance programs for commercial and industrial facilities. MEDICAL CARE FACILITIES FINANCING AGENCY 1.00 Financing of medical care facilities. OFFICE OF MENTAL HEALTH 1.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition or the funding of such activities. 2.00 Permit and approval programs: 2.01 Operating Certificate (Community Residence) 2.02 Operating Certificate (Family Care Homes) 2.03 Operating Certificate (Inpatient Facility) 2.04 Operating Certificate (Outpatient Facility) OFFICE OF MENTAL RETARDATION AND DEVELOPMENT DISABILITIES 1.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition or the funding of such activities. 2.00 Permit and approval programs: 2.01 Establishment and Construction Prior Approval 2.02 Operating Certificate Community Residence 2.03 Outpatient Facility Operating Certificate VI-16 YXTROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY [regional agency] 2.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition or the funding of such activities. 2.00 Increases in special fares for transportation services to public vater-related recreation resources or facilities. DIVISION OF MILITARY AND EAVAL AFFAIRS 1.00 Preparation and implementation of the State Disaster Preparedness Plan. NATURAL HERITAGE TRUST 1.00 Funding program for natural heritage institutions. NL-61 YORK CITY HOrSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION [regional agency] 1.00 Financing of housing facilities. NEW TORY, CITY TPJLNSIT AUTEORITY [regional agency] 1.00 Faci lities constructions rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition or the funding of such activities. 2.00 Increases in special fares for transportation services to public water-related recreation resources or facilities. NIAGARA FALLS BRIDGE CO@MISSION [regional agency] 1.00 Acquisition, disposition, lease, grant of easement and other activities related to the management of land under the jurisdiction of the Co=issioa. 2.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion. or demolition. NIAGARA FRONTIER TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (regional agency] 1.00 Acquisition, disposition, lease, grant of casement and other activities related to the management of land under the jurisdiction of thi Authority. 2.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation. expansion, or demolition. 3.00 Increases In special fares for transportation services to public water-related recreation resources. VI-17 OGDENSBURG BRIDGE AND PORT AUTHORITY (regional agency] 2.00 Acquisition, disposition, lease, grant of eas ement and other activities related to the management of land under the jurisdiction of the Authority. 2.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation. expansion, or demolition. OFFICE OF PARKS, RECREATION AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION (including Regional State Park Co=issions) 1.00 Acquisition, disposition, lease, grant o! easement or other activities related to the management of land under the jurisdiction of the Office. 2.00 Facilities construction. rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition or the funding of such activities. 3.00 Funding program for recreational boating, safety and enforcement, 4.00 Funding program for State and local historic preservation projects. 5.00 Land and Water Conservation Fund programs. 6.00 Nomination of. properties to the Federal and/or State Register of Historic Places. 7.00 Permit and approval progrwa: 7.01 Floating Objects Permit 7.02 Yarine Regatta Permit 7.03 Navigation Aide Permit 7.04 Posting of Signs Outside State Parks 8.00 Preparation and revision of the Statevide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan and the Statevide. Comprehensive Historic Preservation Plan and other plans f or public access, recreation, historic preservation or-related purposes. 9.00 Recreation services progr=s. 10.00 Urban Cultural Parks Program. PORT AUTHORITY OF NEW YORK AND NEW JERSM tregional agency] 1.00 Acquisition, disposition, lease, grant of easement and other activities related to the management of land under the jurisdiction of the Authority. 2.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion. or de=lition. 3.00 Waterfront development project activities. VI-18 PORT OF OSWEGO AUTHORITY Iregional agency] 2.00 Acquisition, disposition, lease, grant of easement and other activities related to the management of land under the jurisiiction of the Authority. 2.00 'Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition. POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW TORK 1.00 Acquisition, disposition, lease, grant of easement and other activities related to the management of land under the jvrisdiction of the Authority. 2.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition. ROCHESTER-GENESEE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY [regional agencyl 1.00 Acquisition, disposition, lease, grant of easement and other activities related to the management of land under the jurisdiction of the Authority. 2.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition. 3 .00 Increases in special fares for transportation strrices'to public water-related recreation resources. 'NE:W 'YORK STATE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY FOUNDATION 1.00 Corporation f or Innovation Development Program. 2.00 Center for Advanced Technology Program. DEPARTMEN-1 OF SOCIAL SERVICES 1.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition or the funding of such activities. 2.00 Eameless Eousing and Assistance Program. 3.00 Permit and approval programs: 3.01 Certificate of Incorporation (Adult Residential Care Facilities) 3.02. Operating Certificate (Children's Services) 3.03 Operating Certificate (Enriched Housing Program) 3.04 Operating Certificate (Rome for Adults) 3.05 Operating Certificate (Proprietary Rome) 3.06 Operating Certificate (Public Rome) - 3.07 Operating Certificate (Special Care Rome) 3.08 Perzdt to Operate a Day Care Centir VI-19 DEPARTMENT OF STATE 1.00 Appalachian Regional Development Program. 2.00 Coastal Management Program. 3.00 Community Services Block Grant Program. 4.00 Permit and approval progra:ms: 4.01 Billiard Roam License 4.02 Cemetery Operator 4.03 Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code STATE NORTHEASTERN QUEENS NATURE AND EISTORICAL PRESERVE [regional agency] 1.00 Regulation and acquisition of lands STATE UNIVERSITY CONSTRUCTION FUND 1.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition or the funding of such activities. STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK 1.00 Acquisition, disposition, lease, grant of easement and other activities related to the management of land under the jurisdiction of the University. 2.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition. DIVISION OF SUBSTANCE ABUSE SERVICES 1.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition or the funding of such activities. 2.00 Per=it and approval progr=s: 2.01 Certificate of Approval (Substances Abuse Services Program) THOUSAND ISLANDS BRIDGE AUTHORITY [regional agency] 1.00 Acquisition, disposition, lease, grant of easement and other activities related to the management of land under the jurisdiction of the Autbority. 2.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition. VI-20 NEW YORK STATE THRUWAY AUTHORITY 1.00 Acquisition, disposition. lease. grant of casement and other activities related to the management of land under the jurisdiction of the Authority. 2.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition. 3.00 Permit and approval programs: 3.01 Advertising Device Permit 3.02 Approval to Transport Radioactive Waste 3.03 Occupancy Permit DEPARTKEN'T OF TRANSPORTATION .1.00 Acquistion, disposition, lease, grant of easement and other activities related to the management of land under the jurisdiction of the Department. 2.00 Construction, rehabilitation, expansion. or demolition of facilities", including but not limited to: (a) Righways and parkways (b) Bridges on the State highways system (c) Eighway and parkway maintenance facilities (d) Barge Canal (e) Rail facilities 3.00 Financial assistance/grant programs: 3.01 Funding programs for constructionlreconstruction and reconditioning/preservation -of municipal streets and bighways (excluding routine maintenance and minor -rehabilitation) 3.02 Funding programs for development of the ports of Albany, Buffalo, Oswego, Ogdensburg and Vew Tork 3.03 Funding programs for rehabilitation and replacement of municipal bridges 3.04 Subsidies program for zarginal branebline; abandoned by Conrail 3.05 Subsidies progr= for passenger rail service 4.00 Permits and approval pr6gr=s: 4.01 Approval of applications for airport improvements (construction projects) 4.02. Approval of municipal applications for Section IS Rural and Small Vrban Transit Assistance Grants(construction projects) .4.03 Approval of municipal or regional transportation authority applications for funds for design. construction and rehabilitation of omnibus maintenance and storage facilities 4.04 Approval *bf municipal or regional transportation authority applications for funds for design and construction of rapid transit facilities VI-21 4.05 Certificate of Convenience and Necessity to Operate a Railroad 4.06 Highway Work Permits 4.07 License to Operate Major Petroleum Facilities 4.08 Outdoor Advertising Permit (for off-premises advertising signs adjacent to interstate and primary highway) 4.09 Permits for Use and Occupancy of N.Y. State Canal Lands [except Regional Permits (Snow Dumping)] 4.10 Real Property Division Permit for Use of State-Owned Property 5.00 Preparation or revision of the Statewide Master Plan for Transportation and sub-area or special plans and studies related to the transportation needs of the State. 6.00 Water Operation and Maintenance Program--Activities related to the containment of petroleum spills and development of an emergency oil-spill control network. TRIBOROUGH BRIDGE AND TUNNEL AUTHORITY [regional agency] 1.00 Acquisiton, disposition, lease, grant of easement and other activities related to the management of land under the jurisdiction of the Authority. 2.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition. UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION [regional agency] 1.00 Acquisition. disposition, lease, grant of easement and other activities related to the management of land under the jurisdiction of the Corporation. 2.00 Facilities construction, rehabilitation, expansion, or demolition. URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION and its subsidiaries and affiliates 1.00 Acquisition, disposition, lease, grant of easement and other activities related to the management of land under the jurisdiction of the Corporation. 2.00 Construction, rehabilitation, expansion, Or demolition Of residential, commerical, industrial, and civic facilities and the funding of such activities. Including but not limited to actions under the following. programs: (a) Tax-Exempt Financing Program (b) Lease Collateral Program (c) Lease Financial Program (d) Targeted Investment Program (a) Industrial Buildings Recycling Program DIVISION OF YOUTH 1.00 Facilities construction. rehabilitation. expansion. or demolition and the funding or approval of such activities. VI-22 FEDERAL AND STATE ACTIONS NECESSARY TO FURTHER THE LWRP 1. Federal Actions and Programs a. Department of Defense, Army Corps of Engineers_ (1) Authorization of Dred&ing, etc: Will be important as part of the cooperative harbor maintenance program to improve nzvigation. Corps approval is a condition of federal financial support,as a complement to local and county efforts. (2) Selection of Opcn Water disposal Sites: Important to the same program since the proximity of such sites has significant impact on the cost and feasibility of dredging projects. Conversely such sites must be located and controlled so as to prevent damage to the environmentally sensitive shoreline. (3) Approval of Private Improvement Plans: Important for dredging, bulkheads, etc. undertaken privately to assure that such project consider environmental consequences. Dredge Spoil Disposal Approvals: May be required for the creation of a man-made salt marsh, one of the measures being considered as part of the program to restore the Premium Kill Pond. b. Department of Commerce (1) Sea Grant Support: Is important to sustain research and technical assistance to better understand and develop solutions to coastal problems. C. Environmental Protection Agency (1) Construction Grants for Wastewater Treatment Works: May provide assistance in increasing the capacity and effective- ness of the two treatment plants serving the Village and Town and Aid in relieving pollution resulting from their deficiencies. (2) State and Area-wide Vater Quality Management Planning Agency Support: Can help develop the inter-municipal programs and cooperation needed to develop drainage basin solutions of water pollution problems. VI-23 State Actions and ProEmmus* a* Department of Environmental Conservation (1) Beview and Approval or Federal Applications for Wastewater Treatment Facilities: Should consider the problems and policies set forth in the LWRP. (2) Approval of Protection of Waters Permits, Freshwater Wetlands Pernits and Tidal Wetlands Ferrits: Must be coordinated with local regulations and policies. (3) DrainaSe Improvement Districts: Approval may be one or the methods required to establish inter-municipal agreement on joint drainage basin management. State Pollution DischarSe Elimination System Permits: Should only be granted inconformance with the policies and criteria established in the LVRP so as to enforce Its objectives. (5) FundinE for Flood and Erosion Control Frojects: Funding for such projects identified in the LWRP could substantially further the objectives of the LWEP. (6) Construction Planarement FroEram for Wastewater Treatment Facilities: Can be a source of funding for sewer repair and improvement. b. Office or Parks, Fecreation and Iiistoric Preservation (1) Nomination to State and Federal Register or Historic Places: Can assist in the preservation of historic landmarks through both legal protection and funding eligibility. Oln addition to the State agency actions and programs listed above, Important technical support is available from the Westchester County Soil and Water Conservation District, an agency established by the Westchester County government under New York State law and deriving part of its funding from the State. In cooperation with the County Flanning Department, the District provides technical expertise on hydrological studies and racilitates municipal and inter-municipal drainage basin management programs. Its services are important for watershed management and flood and erosion control throughout the County's coastal regions. VI-24 0 0 SECTION VII CONSULTATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES 0 SECTION VII: CONSULTATION WITH OTHER AFFECTED FEDERAL, STATE, REGIONAL AND LOCAL AGENCIES A. Adjacent Municipalities LWRP planning in this bi-municipal area can affect, and be affected by, policies and actions of nearby municipalities both along the Sound shore and directly inland. Most important of these interactions for our planning are with three immediate neighbors; the City of New Rochelle, the Town/Village of Scarsdale, and the Village of Mamaroneck. Relations between our Coastal Zone Management Committee and the Village of Mamaroneck were established at the outset of the Committee's life in late 1982 and have remained active and useful throughout the planning period. Mamaroneck Village's earlier start in LWRP planning enabled its Coastal Zone Management Commission, chaired by Kathryn H. Clarke, to give our Committee valuable advice on many. aspects of the planning process. More- over, the two areas have important problems in common. Both suffer from upstream flooding involving other municipalities (including each other); thus, cooperation with each other and with neighboring municipalities for flood and siltation control has been a basic theme in LWRP planning for both, and a frequent subject of consultation. Our Committee has also initiated contacts with New Rochelle and Scarsdale, the two upstream municipalities whose cooperation is most important to the flood and erosion control, wildlife habitat, and anti-pollution elements in our LWRP. Copies of our draft Inventory and Analysis were sent to offi- cials of both municipalities in February 1984, as well as to the Village of Mamaroneck. In May 1984 members of the Committee, with its consultant Daniel Shuster, met with officials of the New Rochelle Planning and Devel- opment Department and their planning consultant for an exchange of informa- tion on our planning effort and on the new LWRP planning effort on which New Rochelle was then starting out. In the same month the Committee initiated an exchange of correspondence with officials of Scarsdale. These contacts have helped to lay a basis for future discussions of intermunici-. pal cooperation in shared watersheds. B. Westchester County Government The above contacts have been reinforced by parallel contacts with officials of Westchester County. The County Planning Department and the staff of the Westchester County Soil and water Conser-vation District, which is associ- ated with the Planning Department, have both been kept informed of the LWRP process and supplied with key documents, and have given useful advice on questions relating to the LWRP. Principles embodied in the County's "Best Management Practices" manuals have been incorporated in the draft LWRP. At the legislative level, County Legislator Diane A. Keane, who represents this district, has also been kept informed of LWRP planning progress and has made supportive statements at two public meetings (April 26 and Novem- ber 27, 1984) held by the Committee in the town and Village. Mrs. Keane and District Manager Laura E. Tessier of the Soil and Water Conservation VII-3 District have both encouraged the Committee to seek intermunicipal solutions to watershed problems in the coastal zone. In return, a representative of the Committee made a statement in public hearings conducted by Legislator Keane in October 1984 on County and intermunicipal aspects of stormwater management. The*dommittee has also kept informed on contacts between the governments of the Town and Village on the one hand, and County agencies on the other, concerning matters bearing on the LWRP, notably the program to eliminate illegal sewer connections. Governmental actions resulting from these contacts are reflected in the draft LWRP. C. State of New York 1. Contact with the Department of State, Coastal Management Staff has been continuous and constructive since the inception of the LWRP planning process. 2. Useful comments were received by the Committee, through the Department of State, from the Division of Regulatory Affairs, Department of Environmental Conservation, on several aspects of the October I draft of the LWRP. (Barbara Haines memo, 14 November 1984.) D. Resolution of Conflicts No conflicts between the LWRP and the policies or programs of the munic- ipalities and agencies referred to above are presently known to the Coastal Zone Management Committee. The consultative relationships here described will be helpful in resolving any such conflicts that may arise in the future. VII-4 SECTION VIII LOCAL COMMITMENT 0 SECTION VIII: LOCAL COMMITMENT 1. The first step in seeking public commitment in Larchmont to the LWRP was taken in the choice of individuals appointed by the Village to the Coastal Zone Management Committee when this body was first established in September 1982. In addition to several members appointed for their known interest and expertise in ecology, water management, and other relevant subjects, representation was also obtained from concerned private organizations in the Village including the shoreline clubs and property owners' groups. Subsequently, when the Committee became a bi-municipal body, the members appointed by the Town Council -- as well as @dditional members appointed by the Village -- included individuals with extensive experience in local government and community service. 2. All working meetings of the Committee, held at least once each month, are open to the public. Many have been attended and addressed by interested citizens. Prior notice of meetings is routinely sent to the local news media. The Daily Times (Mamaroneck) and the Soundview News have published numerous articles on the work of the Committee and the LWRP planning process. 3. In June 1984 the Committee published as a paid advertisement in The Daily Times a questionnaire designed to obtain residents' views on the merits and relative importance of various issues with which the LWRP was expected to deal. Responses were received from about 40 individuals and were taken into account by the Committee in its work. One respondent commented: "Bravol A survey like this is a very good idea ... why not do it every year?" 4. On April 27, 1984, and again on November 27, the Committee held well-publicized public meetings to acquaint interested residents with the program and to obtain their views on the issues involved. Attendance at the first meeting was about 75, at the second about 60. Committee members and the Committee's professional consultant addressed the meetings and answered questions. In advance of the November 27 meeting the Committee distributed widely throughout the community a 10-page "Overview" of the draft program. 5. The Committee has not shied away from controversy when it arose but has sought to deal with it through open discussion and debate. When disagree- ment arose in the Village of Larchmont on the issue of a permanent manage- ment structure for the LWRP, opposing views on the subject, written by a member of the Village Board and the Larchmont co-chairman of the Committee, were published by The Daily Times in adjoining columns. The issue was later resolved by negotiation. 6. Material about the LWRP, both for and against, has also appeared in the letters column of The Daily Times. A notable item in this category was a letter printed July 10, 1984, from Town Supervisor Dolores Battalia and Village Mayor Miriam Curnin, supporting the Committee's questionnaire project and calling the LWRP process "an unparalleled opportunity to plan VIII-3 with intelligence to nurture and protect the beautiful gift which is our coastal area." 7. Brief accounts of the LWRP process have been printed in the 1984 annual report of the Tri-municipal Conservation Advisory Commission and in "Facts of Life in Larchmont," a periodical information bulletin of the Village government. S. Members of the Coastal Zone Management Committee have participated as speakers and/or panelists in several meetings organized by local citizens, organizations: a Larchmont-Mamaroneck forunt on coastal zone planning organized by the local Leagues of Women Voters on October 18, 1984; a meeting of the Larchmont-Mamaroneck Civic Association, a property owners' group, on March 26, 1985; a Larchmont Rotary Club luncheon, July 12, 1985; and a League of Women. Voters forum, on the "Westchester 2000" report (a County-wide study of long-range issues) , November 14, 1985. Discussions have been held for a briefing of realtors in the Larchmont-Mamaroneck area. Candidates for the Mamaroneck Town Council were briefed on the LWRP in October 1984 prior to the November election. 9. In connection with the LWRP planning process, "Coast Week 1984" (October 7 to 14) was proclaimed officially by the Supervisor of the Town of Mamaroneck and the Mayor of the Village of Larchmont. 10. The local-access cable TV studio, LMC-TV, produced and broadcast early in 1986 an hour-long program on the LWRP with narrative by CZM C ommittee members and on-local access cable TV, with footage at locations critical to the program such as the Larchmont Manor Park, the Larchmont Reservoir, and the tidal marshes. VIII-4 APPENDIX A INVENTORY OF ANIMAL SPECIES IN FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITATS Ley: P = Premium Marsh Complex H = Hommocks Marsh Complex R = Reservoir-Sheldrake Complex *Casual 1. Birds P H Common Loon P H Common Tern P H Horned Grebe P Least Tern P R Pied-billed Grebe P* Black Skimmer H Double-Crested Cormorant P H R Mourning Dove P H R-S. Ring-necked Pheasant P,H R Rock Dove P H R Great Blue Heron P Barn Owl P H R Green-backed Heron P Screech Owl P Cattle Egret P R Great Horned Owl P H R Great Egret P Snowy Owl , P H R Snowy Egret P R Common Nighthawk H Glossy This R Chimney Swift P* Yellow-crowned Night Heron P R* Ruby-throated Hummingbird P H Black-crowned Night Heron H R Belted Kingfisher p H American Bittern P H R Common Flicker P H R Mute Swan R Pileated Woodpecker P H R Canada Goose P R Red-bellied Woodpecker P Snow Goose R* Red-headed Woodpecker P H R Mallard P R Yellow-bellied Sapsucker P H R Black Duck R Hairy Woodpecker P R* Pintail P H R Downy Woodpecker P R Wood Duck P R Eastern Kingbird P R American Widgeon P H R Eastern Phoebe P Gadwall P R Eastern Wood Pewee P* European Widgeon R Tree Swallow P Canvasback P R Barn Swallow P Lesser Scaup P R Bank Swallow P R* Greater Scaup R Rough-winged Swallow P Common Goldeneye P H R Blue Jay P R Bufflehead P H R Common Crow P R Ruddy Duck P Fish Crow P R Hooded Merganser P H R Black-capped Chickadee P R Commo@ Merganser P H R Tufted Titmouse P Red-breasted Merganser R Brown Creeper P R Turkey Vulture H R White-breasted Nuthatch P H R Marsh Hawk P Red-breasted Nuthatch R Broad-winged Hawk P R House Wren P H R Red-tailed Hawk P Winter Wren R Red-shouldered Hawk P Carolina Wren P H R Osprey P H R Mockingbird P H R American Kestrel P H R Gray Catbird P H R Ring-necked Pheasant P H R Brown Thrasher P Clapper Rail P H R American Robin A-1 Inventory of Birds (cont'd) P Virginia Rail P H R Song Sparrow P, H R* American Coot R Chipping Sparrow H Semi-palmated Plover R Wood Thrush P H Killdeer R Hermit Thrush P H Greater Yellowlegs R Gray-cheked Thrush P H Lesser Yellowlegs R Swainson's Thrush P American Woodcock R Veery H R Spotted Sandpiper H* Eastern Bluebird P Semi-palmated Sandpiper R* Golden-crowned Kinglet P* Dunlin R Ruby-crowned Kinglet P Great Black-backed Gull R Cedar Waxwing P H R Herring Gull P H R Starling P H R Ring-billed Gull R Red-eyed Vireo P H R Laughing Gull R Solitary Vireo R* Warbling Vireo P H R Black & white Warbler P Blue-winged Warbler R Tennessee Warbler R Northern Parula Warbler P R Yellow Warbler P, R* Magnolia Warbler R Black-throated Blue Warbler P H R Yellow-rumped Warbler R Black-throated Green Warbler R Blackburnian Warbler R Blackpoll Warbler R Chestnut-sided Warbler R ovenbird R Palm Warbler P H R Common Yellowthroat R Canada Warbler P H R American Redstart P H R House Sparrow H Bobolink H Eastern Meadowlark P H R Redwinged Blackbird R Rusty Blackbird P H R Northern Oriole P H R Common Grackle P H R Brown-headed Cowbird R Scarlet Tanager P H R Cardinal R Rose-breasted Grosbeak P* Evening Grosbeak R* indigo Bunting P H R House Finch@ P R Pine Siskin P,H R American Goldfinch P R Rufous-sided Towhee P H R Dark-eyed Junco P,R Tree Sparrow P H R White-throated Sparrow A-2 2. Land Species 3. Aquatic Species H R Short-tailed shrew P H R Damselfly P H R Vole P H R Dragonfly P H R White-footed mouse P H Mud Snail P H R Deer Mouse P H Marsh Snail P H-R Eastern Mole P H Fiddler Crab P H R Eastern Chipmunk P H Marsh Crab P H R Eastern Gray Squirrel P Horseshoe Crab (nesting) (also all black form) H R Eastern Cottontail Rabbit P H Ribbed Mussel H R Woodchuck R Naiad P H R Raccoon P H Jellyfish (comb) P H R Oppossum P H R Muskrat P H R Striped Skunk 4. Fish R Common Snapping Turtle R Painted Turtle P H Striped Bass R Spotted Turtle P H Bluefish R Box Turtle P H Porgy H Diamond-backed Terrapin P H Flounder (summer and winter) R Tree Frog P H R Eel R Wood Frog P H. Blackfish (Tautog) P H R Toad P H Mackerel P H R Green Frog P H Menhaden P H R Bullfrog P H Minnows (silversides, killifish) R Red-spotted Newt P H Alewives P H R Praying Mantis R Yellow Perch R Red Fox R Sunfish R Catfish R Carp R Shiner Note: Other important coastal species are found along the rocky shores, tidepools, beaches and harbors of Larchmont, as follows: Redbeard Sponge Mussels: Blue, Ribbed Deadman's fingers Atlantic Bay Scallop Comb and Moon Jellyfish Jingle Shell Sea Anemones Eastern Oyster Ribbon, Sand and Seaworms Cockle Starfish, Sea star Clams: Northern Quahog, Softshell, Razor A-3 Sandhoppers: Amphipods Shipworm Barnacles: Rock Sea Snails: Limpet, Moon Shrimp: Mantid and Brine Slipper Periwinkle: smooth, American Lobster rough, common Crabs: Hermit, Blue, Green, Mud Snail Rock, Calico, Fiddler, Atlantic Oysterdrill Horseshoe Crab Whelk, Knobbed, Channeled A-4 APPENDIX B SOURCES LIST FOR COASTAL ZONE HABITAT AREAS City of New Rochelle, Local Coastal Management Program, March 1980, Issues Areas: Premium Marsh, Raymond, Parish, Pine & Weiner, Inc., Tarrytown, New York Town of Mamaroneck Conservation Advisory Commission: Annual Reports 1980, 1982, 1983; Natural Resources Inventory Map, by Clifford E. Emanuelson and Morris Bufi, revised 1977; Robert Hohberg reports, Demise of An Estuary (premium, salinity and turbidity) and Pollution (Premium and Hommocks); Walk Books, Sheldrake River Trails, revised 1984, Hommocks, 1979, Reservoir revised 1984 (Birds by Thomas Burke and Andrew Vallely) and Fish and Wildlife Inventories. Westchester County: Marshlands Conservancy, Birds of, Thomas Burke and Andrew Vallely; Common Ducks and Geese, Fish, Mammals, Trees, Aquatic Insects, Hawks of Westchester County. New York State: DEC Tidal Wetlands Maps, #604, 528 and 604, 530; Conservationist articles and reprints on: Tidal Marshes, An Acre of Marsh is worth, Role in Estuarine Production, Natural Values, of Marine'Wetlands: Shuster, Perry, Odum, Taormina, and "Our Changing. Shoreline", Perlmutter. SUNY-Purchase: Utter and Steineck, Larchmont Harbor Ecosystems, 1972, 1973, 1975; Morein Cohen, Trends in Sediment Accumulation in Premium, 1975. White, Robert, The Premium, An Endangered Waterway - 1977. Johnson, Mary Anne, The Premium, An Endangered Waterway: Addendum, Pryer Manor Resources, and Bibliography, 1978. Johnson, M.A. and Phyllis Wittner, Premium Marsh Complex, 5/3/83 and Bibliography. Westchester Soil and Water District: Jim Cropper, 1978 and 1980, Review of Premium River; 1982, letter and copy of "Using Dredging Spoils to Build Tidal Marshes", University of Rhode Island, School of Oceanography, August 1981. Wittner, Phyllis, Pryer Manor and the Premium River Conservation Area, Second Draft, January 30, 1980. Connecticut College Arboretum: Tidal Marshes of Connecticut, 1968, Preserving Our Freshwater Wetlands, Bulletin #17, 1970, Niering, Goodwin, Thomson and Stengel; Connecticut's Coastal Marshes, A Vanishing Resource, Goodwin, Niering, Stengel, 1961, Bulletin #12. B-1 Ha@l John and Farb, Peter, The Atlantic Shore, Human and Natural History from "Long Island to Labrador, Harper-Colophon, New York, 1966; Hay, John, The @Undiscovered Country, W.W. Norton, New York, 1984 (Alewives and freshwater mussels) Carson, Rachel, The Edge of-the Sea, Houghton-Mifflin, Boston, 1955. McGraw-Hill, New York: Living World of Nature: Life of the Marsh, North American Wetlands, William A. Niering, 1966; Life of the Seashore, William Amos, 1966; Life of the Pond, W. Amos, 1967;,.Rivers and Stream Teaching Materials from Massachusetts Audubon "Curious Naturalist": Biomes, Water Environments and other. American Littoral Society: "Fish and man: Conflict in the Atlantic Estuaries," John Clark, 1967 (Highlands, N.J. 07732). U.S. Dept. of Interior, Fish and Widlife Service, "Ducks at a Distance", Bob Hines. Golden Field and Nature Guides, Golden Press, New York Audubon Field Guides, Doubleday, Peterson. 1001 Questions Answered about the Seashore, N.J. and Jacquelyn Berrill, Dover, 1976. New Field Book of Freshwater Life, Elsie Klots, Putnam, 1966. Geology of New York City and Environs, Christopher Schuberth, Natural History Press, 1967. Continental Collisions and Ancient Volcanoes: Geology of Southeastern New York, Educational Leaflet #24, Ingvar W. Isachsen, New York Geological Survey, 1980. Ecology and Field Biology, Second Edition, Robert Leo Smith, Harper and Row, 1974. Headstrom, Richard, "Nature in miniature" Knopf, 1968. Ricciuti, Ed, "Fish of the Atlantic", Hancock House, Killingworth, Connecticut, 1982; Dolan, Tom - "Know Your Fish," Sports Afield, Hearst, 1960. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mamaroneck-Sheldrake Study Area: Fish and Wildlife, 2;36a-2; 40. U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, Federal Insurance Administration, Flood Insurance Maps, Town of Mamaroneck, June 15, 1979; Flood Insurance Maps, Village of Larchmont, January 16, 1984; Flood Insurance Wave Height Analysis, July 16, 1984 B-2 Maps: Westchester County Environmental Management Council, Department of Planning: Environmental Management Council, Department of Planning: Environmental Constraint Series; Nos. 14 and 15, Mount Vernon and Mamaroneck, 1982, Lower Long Island Sound Basins. Article: Regional Plan Association Annual Report, 1982-83, "Open Space." Articles- Mamaroneck Daily Times, "Nature's Trails," weekly 1966-1980, with field notes, by many local observers, naturalists and staff writers, and in addition special series '1979-1981 on 10 years of the Conservation Areas, and,on Our Coastal Area, Rye to New Rochelle. Article: Federated Conservationists of Westchester County, April 1985, "Which Way Westchester 2060? Water Resources and Development," Carol Coggeshall. Map: Calligraphy of Larchmont-Mamaroneck Waterways by Ann Gunsalus Correspondence: To Mr., Louis M. Concra, Office of 'Environmental Analysis, 50 Wolf Road, Albany, New York 12233, 8-9-76, comments on 7-27-76 Tidal wetlands hearing at SUNY-Purchase about Pryer Manor and Premium Marshes and Mill Pond area. From: George Danskin, then Regional Permit Administrator, Environmental Analysis, Region 3, 10/19/76 about revisions and from Rob Greene on field check visit 10/19/76. To: Hon. Basil A. Paterson, Secretary of State Robert C. Hansen, Program Manager, Coastal Management Program 162 Washington Avenue, Albany, New York 12231, 5/4/79, Comments on GAPC 27-A-8, Westchester County map, on the Premium Marsh Complex. To: Mailgram: Secretary of State Basil Paterson, Robert Hansen, 5/7/79, addition to above comments, on erosion hazards, silt problems, flood cointroVcKnd ice problems. To: Supervisor Leo Goldsmith and Members of the Town of Mamaroneck Council, 5/6/80 to push for passage of strong Coastal Management Program -at that session of the Legislature. To: Village Manager Armand Gianunzio, Village of Mamaroneck, 8/5/80, Thanks for invitation to Village Coastal Zone Study Committee meeting of 7/16, congratulations on work done on boundaries, critizal flood sources outside the land boundary and proposed critical Environmental Areas, with emphasis on need for intermunicipal cooperation to reduce individual and municipal costs and maintain healthy balance of land. and water uses. To: Superv-isor Leo Goldsmith an@ Members of the Town Council, 7/9/82, for Premium River Basin Committee, concern on Tower Apartments (Garfield) EIS that adequate measures to prevent sediment M.A. Johnson 4/85 B-3 a 0 US Department of Commerce 'I NOAA Cc astal Services Commtcr Llbraqr ,-=4 South Hobson Avc:=- o Charlestonp SO 294,05-2413 NOAA COASTAL SERVICES CTR UBRARY l i i @illil@iiiiii@i,lgl,:@l@@ll[iiii,@ilill@i'lli@@ll@@,@ll@l@@lli@@ll@ll@ll@,@ 3 6668 14111513 1