Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984_10_30 Coastal Zone Management Commission Minutes VILLAGE OF LARCHMONT TO;VN OF MAMARONECK .:oF. .. COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 0C. '1s 1rOki 2 :724,. `:� Y 4 o p :? =, :: y: E^E �/Ep z 1 : ' la 16 1984 i f . A. N.y. , DOROTF{YS MILER • FOUNDED 1561 • . NM ROCK Larchmont, NY 10538 N.Y. Mamaroneck , NY 10543 MINUTES of the Regular Meeting of the Committee , Larchmont Village Center, Tuesday, October 30 , 1984 Members Bruce Allen Howard McMichael Jr. Present: June Allen Elaine Price Elinor Fredston Abe Rosenfield Wallace Irwin Jr. , Co-Chairman Robert S . Schoenberger Mary Anne Johnson Shirley W. Tolley, Arthur A. Katz Co-Chairman James Killilea Joseph F . Vandernoot Lawrence Lowy Robert E . White C . Alan Mason Leo Wilson Others Sydney Astle, Trustee, Village of Larchmont Present: Paul H. Kean, Liaison Trustee , Village of Larchmont Daniel Shuster, Consultant 1 . The meeting was called to order at 8: 15 p.m. , Mr. Irwin in the chair. The minutes of the October 2 meeting were approved without change. 2 . Management Structure: Discussions with Trustees Anderson and Astle It was recalled that the Committee had decided at its October 2 meeting, on Mr. Lowy' s suggestion, that a further effort be made to reach a meeting of minds with Messrs. Anderson and Astle on the problem they had raised about the "management structure" provisions of the draft LWRP (Section V-C) . Trustee Astle , who had come to the meeting at Mr. Allen' s suggestion to discuss this matter, was invited to speak. He said that although he was not prepared at that time to make a written proposal, he did want to make clear the nature of his objections. He was opposed to the idea of assigning implementing responsibility to a commission working under guidance from the heads of the two municipal governments and wielding, as he saw it, excessive power over zoning and recreation. The proposal would be less objec- tionable , he said, if the implementing body were a committee instead of a commission. Several members disagreed with Mr. Astle' s interpretation of the provisions in the draft. Mr. Lowy and others again proposed that the matter be talked over in a small group to include the two Trustees concerned and several Committee members. Mr. Astle suggested a meeting the following Saturday. It was agreed that Mr. Allen and Mr. Irwin would confer on an exact time and place. The chair expressed appreci- ation to Mr. Astle for his constructive participation at the meeting. Mr. Astle left the meeting at that point. I VILLAGE OF LARCHMONT TOWN OF MAMARONECK OF COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 0c* lcrw , .` ± p �:' w m • y` �� 16 1984 r A_ 1Y.Y• DOROTHY§.Mt�l.ER • PauNaE3 ,sei • 7-4:,AIN CLERK" Larchmont, NY 10538 NA. Mamaroneck, NY 10543 MINUTES of the Regular Meeting of the Committee , Larchmont Village Center, Tuesday, October 30 , 1984 Members Bruce Allen Howard McMichael Jr. Present: June Allen Elaine Price A 1.... D.-. .r.fi c1 A Notice November 15, 1984 Forthcoming meetings of theLar__chmont_-M_amaronec__k_Coastal Zone ___ _ Management Committee --- _ -_- -_- 1 . A special Public Meeting of the Village of Larchmont-Town of Mamaroneck Coastal Zone Management Committee will be held on Tuesday evening, November 27, 1984, at 8 p .m. in the Village Center, Larchmont (behind the Public Library) . The purpose will be to explain and discuss with the public the draft program for the Larchmont-Town of Mamaroneck coastal zone , recently submitted for comment by the Department of State in Albany. Residents and other interested persons are invited to attend, to ask questions and express their views. Members of the Committee will be present to explain and dis- 1 cuss the draft program and answer questions on it, and will be assisted by the Committee ' s consultant Daniel Shuster. A 10-page "overview" of the draft program will be distributed in the community in advance, and copies will be available at the meeting. 2 . The next regular meeting of the Coastal Zone Management Com- mittee will be held on Tuesday, December 4, at 8 p.m. in the Village Center, Larchmont. 11onauLe, zie 00.,,,, -- —.. --r-------- of a commission. Several members disagreed with Mr. Astle' s interpretation of the provisions in the draft. Mr. Lowy and others again proposed that the matter be talked over in a small group to include the two Trustees concerned and several Committee members. Mr. Astle suggested a meeting the following Saturday. It was agreed that Mr. Allen and Mr. Irwin would confer on an exact time and place. The chair expressed appreci- ation to Mr. Astle for his constructive participation at the meeting. Mr. Astle left the meeting at that point. - 2 - 3. Progress on the LWRP Mr. Irwin and Mrs. Tolley reported on the visit of Secretary of State Gail Shaffer to the area on October 12 , in which they rode with her on a brief tour of the Larchmont shoreline including the Manor Park area. She was handed a map, based on Dan Shuster' s map no. 1 for the draft LWRP, showing the municipal boundaries and drainage basins, with the Committee-proposed Coastal Zone Boundary clearly shown; and she listened to our explanation of why the draft LWRP recommends that the State-drawn boundary be changed. Mr. Shuster reported that Charles McCaffrey expected to forward Albany' s comments on the draft LWRP by about November 9. Meanwhile Mr. Shuster will be working on the remaining sections except Section VIII , "Public Commitment, " which will be written locally. He thought it possible for the Committee to produce its revised draft of the LWRP before the end of 1984. 4. Public Information and Intermunicipal Liaison It was noted that Committee members had recently participated in two meetings, both covered by The Daily Times, and both bearing on the importance of intermunicipal cooperation in watershed manage- ment. On October 11 the public hearing held in Larchmont by County Legislator Diane Keane, on the theme of County policy on stormwater management, had been addressed by Mrs. Fredston for the Federated Conservationists of Westchester County, by Dr. Mason for the CAC , and by Mr. Irwin for the Committee . All emphasized the leadership role of the County in achieving intermunicipal cooperation. Among those present were Peter Eschweiler, head of the County Planning Department, and Laura Tessier, director of the County Soil and Water Conservation District. On October 18 , CZMC members Tolley, Mason, Lowy and Irwin had participated, along with four speakers from the Village of Mamaroneck, in a League of Women Voters forum on coastal zone management entitled "What ' s Ahead for Long Island Sound? " The proceedings had been reported in The Daily Times and were also covered by cable TV for later local-access broadcast . Also , on October 17 The Daily Times had published two columns opposite the editorial page , one by Trustee Jim Anderson and one by Mr. Irwin, stating their respective views on the management structure issue ( see item 2 above) . There was discussion of plans for the Committee ' s second Public Meeting, to be held during November. Mr. Irwin reported that he would shortly circulate to the Committee a draft of an "Overview" paper on the draft LWRP, designed for distribution to interested residents and others in advance of the meeting. He asked for help in arranging distribution for the paper and advance publi- city for the meeting. Mrs. Price and Mr. Rosenfield volunteered. No conclusion on a date for the meeting was reached. (Note: Sub- sequently the meeting was fixed for Nov. 27 at 8 p.m. in the Village Center. ) 5 . Current Land Use and Development Issues On a question raised by Mrs. Johnson, there was discussion of the Committee ' s proper role in current land use issues such as those concerning a proposed new service station near the House of Pancakes on the Post Road, another near Palmer Avenue and Harrison Drive , and other development projects previously discussed in the Committee . The consensus was that the Committee as such ought not to be diverted - S - its primary planning task, but that members should use their own judgment in registering their views ; and that members of the Con- servation Advisory Commission and other informed persons who are 4:) also members of this Committee could usefully point out in appropriate cases the provisions of the draft LWRP that have a bearing on the land use issues being considered by the planning boards and others. 6. The next regular meeting of the Committee was set for Tuesday, December 4, at 8 p.m. in the Village Center. 7 . There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9: 45 p.m. Wallace Irwin Jr. Nov. 15, 1984 4 TOWN OF MAMARONECK v' �. t,S VILLAGE OF LARCHMONT 740 WEST BOSTON POST ROADE�.E``v°' MUNICIPAL BUILDING MAMARONECK, NEW YORK 10543 tOV 16 1984 LARCHMONT, NEW YORK 10538 OOROTHVS.M -LEl, T' ` P CLERK fdwMARO'tE(.K N.Y. November 1984 • AiiInvitation Dear Neighbors in Larchmont Village and the Unincorporated Area: This is to invite you to participate in a community planning effort which can benefit all our futures for decades to come. Like other nearby areas, we have long faced a chronic dilemma: how to achieve the right balance between new development and the health and integrity of our existing natural and "built" environment. In recent decades, development near the Westchester Sound shore, including Mamaroneck as well as upstream communities, has been quite rapid. More and more woods and fields have been turned into settled communities, roads, shopping malls and parking lots. The Thruway was cut through our midst; now the Hutch is being widened, and future traffic can only increase. All of us welcome wise development, not only for its material benefits but also because it enlarges the tax base and eases our tax burden. But develop- ment has not always been wise, especially in its impact on the environment. Rain-absorbing woods and fields are turned into rain-rejecting hard surfaces. Rapid runoff of rain or thawing ice and snow from new streets, roofs and parking lots increases flooding in low-lying residential areas downstream. The flood waters erode stream banks, and silt up stream beds. Meanwhile, waste oil and other pollutants from highways and airways, industry, heating oil spills, etc. invade our water and ground. And in heavy rainstorms, backed-up raw sewage appears in quite a number of our streets and basements and in our coastal waters--mainly the result of long-standing interconnection, much of it illegal, between underground storm drains and sanitary sewers. All these things together affect not only many of our residential areas, but also the remaining wetlands and marshes which are vitally important to fish, birds and other living species in our natural environment. Both Town and Village have shown their concern over these trends in various ways--notably, in the work of the Conservation Advisory Commission, the Planning and Zoning Boards, and the L.I.F.E. Center and, most recently, in Larchmont's decision to dedicate the Larchmont Reservoir property as permanent open space. But our two municipal governments, after much dis- cussion with knowledgeable residents and experts, concluded that a broader and more systematic approach was called for. So we decided in 1982 to write a local waterfront program under New York State's Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act of 1982. The "Overview" attached to this letter explains the nature of this important planning work and the main provisions of the draft program - dealing with residential, recreational, environmental and other values - which has been written by our bi-municipal Coastal Zone Management Committee. The program is not in final form. You have an opportunity to study it and express your -2- views on it. That is the purpose of the public meeting scheduled for e Tuesday evening, November 27th at 8 p.m. in the Larchmont Village Center (behind the Larchmont Public Library) . We cordially invite you to study the enclosed paper, come to the November 27th meeting, and give us the benefit of your views. Sincerely, c4 LfruLt Dolores Battal Supervisor Town of Mamaroneck • M riam Curnin Mayor Village of Larchmont WI:dbj P.S. Additional copies of the "Overview" may be obtained from the Town Clerk (corner of Halstead and Ward Avenues, Mamaroneck) or the Larchmont Village Clerk, Municipal Building, Larchmont. _ .. VILLAGE OF LARCHMONT TOWN OF MAMARONECK :. OF c:• 1) COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE /407,14, 114 13 • RE � }OV 16 1984 rL l —t DOPoTHYS ;OUNDEJ t561 Tw'WN C' Larchmont, NY 10538 �rHnnAor�f Mamaroneck, NY 10543 OVE Ry Ew of the VILLAGE OF LARCHMONT-TOWN OF MAMARONECK DRAFT LOCAL WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION PROGRAM A briefing paper for the second Public Meeting of the Coastal Zone Management Committee, November 27, 1984 * * * * On October 2, 1984 the Village of Larchmont and the Town of Mamaroneck forwarded to the Department of State of the State of New York, for review and comment, a draft of a local program which can have great significance for the future quality of our coastal area. The program is known under State law as a "Local Waterfront Revitalization Program" (LWRP) . Its broad purpose is to protect and improve residential, environmental, recrea- tional, historical and scenic resources in Larchmont Village and the Unincorporated Area of the Town. The writing of such local programs by New York State' s coastal communities was authorized by the Waterfront Revitali- zation and Coastal Resources Act of 1981. Under State planning grants, local governments may fashion their own waterfront pro- grams within broad State guidelines, but with each program adapted to fit conditions in the local coastal zone. Such a local program, once it is approved by the State government, will have the force of State law within the municipality' s coastal boundary, as will local laws and regulations enacted pursuant to it; and actions by State or Federal agencies within that boundary must, to the maximum extent practicable , be con- sistent with it. Several Westchester Sound shore communities have undertaken to write LWRPs. The first, that of our neighbor the Village of Mamaroneck, is expected to go into effect during November. Our own LWRP planning reached its first major milestone with the October 2 draft whose highlights are described in this paper. The full text of the draft may be examined in the office of the - 2 - Larchmont Village Clerk or of the Administrator of the Town of Mamaroneck. The Planning Process The Village of Larchmont established in September 1982 a Coastal Zone Management Committee to apply for a New York State LWRP planning grant and to formulate a local program. The Town of Mamaroneck also applied for a planning grant. Each received $5,000 for this purpose on a 50-50 matching basis. Since the two municipalities share environmentally sensitive waterways and wetlands in the Premium and Hommocks areas, and have other en- vironmental concerns in common, the Coastal Zone Management Com- mittee was asked to draft a single LWRP for both areas. The Town appointed a number of residents of the Unincorporated Area to the Committee , which now consists of 23 members.* Planning got under way in earnest in summer 1983. The first major section of the program, "Inventory and Analysis" (Section II in the draft program) was produced in January 1984. In March the Committee engaged Daniel Shuster, a professional planner who had assisted Saugerties , N.Y. in the successful drafting of an LWRP, as its planning consultant. On April 26 it held its first Public Meeting to acquaint residents with the planning process and invite their comments; some 75 people attended. Public input has also been obtained through responses to a ques- tionnaire published by the Committee; through attendance by residents at meetings of the Committee and correspondence received from them; and through the widely representative character of the Committee' s membership. Through the spring and summer the Committee and its consultant worked intensively and completed drafts of the five main sections of the program in September. On September 19 the Town Council, and on October 1 the Village Board, approved forwarding of these drafts to the Department of State in Albany for review and comment in accordance with the agreed work program. A revised and completed draft, reflecting Albany' s comments as well as further views and knowledge developed in our own com- munity, is expected to be submitted to Albany before the end of 1984. More extensive review by New York State agencies, plus formal public hearings locally under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, should lead to final approval and enactment of the LWRP by the municipal governments during 1985. *Members of the CZMC from the Village of Larchmont area Bruce Allen, June Allen, William Eipel, Elinor Fredston, Mary Anne Johnson, James Killilea, Lawrence Lowy, Robert E. White , Wallace Irwin Jr. (Co-Chairman) , Edward D. Riley, Robert S . Schoenberger, Joseph F. Dorsey, Joseph F. Vandernoot, Abe Rosenfield. From the Town of Mamaroneck: C. Alan Mason, Leo Wilson, Howard McMichael Jr. , Elaine Price , Shirley '4. Tolley (Co-Chairman) , Gary Hirsch- berg, Arthur A. Katz . From nearby New Rochelle: Alex Buchman, James Lotto . Committee meetings, open to the public , are normal- ly held the first Tuesday of each month at 8 p.m. in the Larch- mont Village Center; but since schedules may vary those inter- ested should call the Town Clerk, 698-2007, or the Village Clerk, 834-6230 , for current information. - 3 - HIGHLIGHTS OF THE DRAFT PROGRAM The purposes to be served by the LWRP, as reflected in the October 2 draft, can be summed up under four headings: 1. To reduce and control flooding, erosion and siltation, mainly from storm water runoff upstream but also from coastal storms and high tides. 2. To eliminate raw sewage overflow, and control chemical pollution and litter, in residential areas, streams, and coastal waters; and by these and other means to protect critical environmental areas and important wildlife habitats. 3. To maintain existing water-related recreational resources and access thereto; to keep the harbor dredged for recrea- tional boating; and to assure that, if opportunities should arise to increase such recreational facilities, actions to that end will be compatible with environmental and neigh- borhood values . 4. To protect historical and scenic resources. The highlights given below are organized under these four headings. 1. Control of Flooding, Erosion and Siltation A key element in furthering this set of purposes is the pro- gram' s proposal on the Coastal Zone Boundary (I , page 1-2) .* The statewide boundary established by New York State for the coastal zone crosses our area along the Boston Post Road. However, State planning guidelines permit a municipality to propose a revised boundary. Our draft program proposes that the boundary include the entire area over which the two municipalities have jurisdiction or ownership: i. e. , the entire Village of Larchmont, the Unincorporated Area of the Town, and that part of the Larchmont Reservoir property lying within the boundaries of New Rochelle. (The Reservoir property is owned by the Village of Larchmont. ) *References are to sections of the complete text of the draft LWRP. The prescribed organization of that document is as follows: Section I : Coastal Zone Boundary. Section II: Inventory and Analysis of local conditions. Section III: Local (municipal) policies and applicable State policies relating to the coastal zone. This is the heart of the LWRP. From the State ' s list of 44 coastal policies the Committee found 31 applicable to this area, in many instances writing new language to reflect local conditions. In addition, 7 supplementary policies were included to fill gaps in the State list where local conditions require special measures. (These 7 are identifiable by a letter following the policy number, for example , Policy 7A. ) Section IV: Uses and Projects. This covers (a) land use regulations and (b) physical ( engineering) projects and feasibility studies. Section V: Techniques of Implementation. This covers existing or new laws, ordinances and regulations necessary to carry out the above policies ; also, a "management structure" to assure implemen- tation of the entire program. (Tables on pages 9 and 10 below show how projects and actions in Sec- tions IV and V relate to policies in Section III. ) 7 - 4 - We consider this wider boundary essential if we are to control flooding, siltation, and other evils which damage our residential areas, wetlands, wildlife habitats and coastal waters. Moreover, the intermunicipal cooperation needed to control flood waters ori- ginating upstream beyond our borders ( see below, page 5 ) can best be obtained if the flood control and land use provisions of our own program are applicable throughout the bi-municipal area. The chief spurce of damage to our area, and of further threat of damage, is upstream flooding from an overbuilt flood plain (II , page 1) . Remaining areas of open space--96 percent of which in the bi-municipal area is accounted for by parks, conservation areas, and 428 acres of private golf courses (II , page 7) --are therefore of critical importance as absorbers of storm water, limiting down- stream flooding in periods of heavy rain or melting snow. Moreover, since the watersheds in our area originate wholly or partly beyond our municipal boundaries, the remaining open space in neighboring municipalities , to the extent of those shared watersheds, is also of great importance to us. Section II of the draft program describes the combined effects of these upstream factors in three watersheds (also called drainage basins) : Pine Brook-Premium (p. 11-13) , Sheldrake (13-14) , and East Creek-Hommocks (14-16) ; and in the Larchmont Harbor area (16-17) . In addition, equinoctial storms and high tides cause periodic coastal flooding and erosion in the Premium-Pryer Manor and Hom- mocks-Little Harbor Sound areas (12 , 16) . Numerous policy provisions and preventive or remedial measures to deal with flooding problems are included in Sections III and IV. The majority are concerned with upstream flooding. Policy 14A calls for a new zoning requirement that all new de- velopments on properties over 10 ,000 square feet in area must be designed to prevent any increase in storm water runoff beyond the property. A still stricter zoning formula for the Ronnie Friar and Winged Foot golf courses , and some undeveloped land between them-- these together make up the largest remaining area of open space in the Town' s portion of the Sheldrake basin--calls for measures to reduce storm water runoff by 10 percent (IV, pages 1 and 3) . A similar rule is proposed for the Town portion of the Hampshire Country Club golf course next to the sensitive Hommocks marsh and Little Harbor Sound. In the upper Sheldrake drainage basin, which includes the Larchmont Reservoir property, a wide-ranging flood control strategy is outlined, involving land use controls, engineering projects, and cooperative arrangements with neighboring municipalities which share the Sheldrake basin. (Policy 12A.) To select the right mix of projects, technical research and feasibility studies are pro- posed (IV, page 7) , drawing on a pioneering hydrological study of the upper Sheldrake now being completed by the County Soil and Water Conservation District. Among possible steps to be studied are an early flood warning system; restoring the disused Carpenter' s Pond , upstream from the Reservoir, for flood control use ; dredging and deepening the upper reservoir to increase its water retention capacity; modifying the upper dam for more rapid drainage in ad- vance of flood waters ; etc . Farther downstream, the draft calls - 5 - for a new retention basin to retard flood waters in the Sheldrake' s east branch, and excavation of the river channel and construction of a stilling basin in the steep area above Gardens Lake (the "Duck Pond") . (IV, pages 7-8) . Also, as further elements in a broad flood control strategy, Policy 12A suggests the need for similar technical studies of the Pine Brook-Premium and East Creek-Hommocks drainage basins. Finally, throughout the bi-municipal area, control of flooding and siltation is to be further advanced by installing and maintaining large silt traps above the Premium and Hommocks marshes and by im- proving the design and maintenance of catch basins in Town and Village streets (IV , page 8) ; and by requiring construction projects of significant size to conform to Westchester County' s "Best Manage- ment Practices" guidelines in order to minimize runoff, erosion, siltation and pollution during construction (Policy 14B) . For many of the above measures, the draft program proposes cooperative action with New Rochelle, Scarsdale , and the Village of Mamaroneck. Cooperation would cover zoning regulations, "best management practices" in construction, and engineering feasibility studies. (Policies 12A , 14A , 14B; see also II , p. 9-10 , and V, p. 4) Coastal flooding and erosion, a result of coinciding storms and high tides especially in spring and fall, constitute a significant problem in the Premium-Pryer Manor area and in Little Harbor Sound. The program calls for physical actions to stabilize erosion-prone stream banks and beaches , and for application of up-to-date flood damage prevention standards under the Federal flood insurance program (Policies 11, 12-14, 17) . 2. Control of Sewage, Chemical Pollution and Litter; Protection of Wildlife Habitats Sewage problems: The Inventory (II , p. 9-16) discusses numerous locations (Larchmont Hills, Pine Brook Drive , Park Avenue, the Sheldrake area near the confluence of the two branches, and the harbor area near Cedar Island, among others) where raw sewage over- flows into streets, basements, and open coastal waters in periods of heavy storm water runoff. Defective sewer lines are partly to blame , but the primary cause (II , p. 18) is the long-standing prac- tice of illegally connecting residential and municipal storm drains into sanitary sewers which were not designed to, and cannot, handle the added burden. The draft LWRP calls for a bi-municipal program, in cooperation with the County government (which has recently iden- r tified an extensive list of such illegal connections in our area) to eliminate these connections. Other recommended steps are repair of defective sewer lines; elimination, where feasible, of on-site sanitary systems such as septic tanks ; and strict enforcement of State effluent standards applying to watercraft and marinas. Chemical pollution and litter: The Inventory (II , p. 20) lists numerous sources of pollution from waste oil and other chemical substances: illegal, clandestine disposal into storm drains; broken or leaking underground fuel tanks in buildings; runoff of salt, fertilizer, pesticides, etc. --occurring both within and beyond our municipal boundaries. Since a considerable burden of pollution in - 6 - this highly developed area is probably inevitable, it is all the more important to control the sources that are controllable if we are to protect and revive the Premium and Hommocks tidal wetlands as wild- life habitats. Policies and actions proposed for this purpose include: designating the two tidal wetlands as "critical environmental areas" under State law and giving them added protection against adverse de- velopment and pollution (Policies 7A , 44A) ; improved monitoring and enforcement against hazardous and bioaccumulative pollutants (Poli- cies 8, 10A , 30) ; "best management practices" in street cleaning, pest control, soil erosion control , etc . (Policies 33, 37) ; better control of illegal dumping of solid waste, and elimination of the leaf disposal site at the foot of Flint Park (Policy 39 ; IV, p. 5) ; and conversion of the polluted open section of East Creek , north of Flint Park, into a protected nature preserve (IV, p. 5) . In addition, the best existing techniques should be researched and applied locally to strengthen control of the pervasive problem of litter (Policy 39A) . 3. Recreation and Public Access The Inventory (II , p. 3-5) lists properties on or near the Sound shore and waterways leading to it that are open to the public: among theca the privately owned Larchmont Manor Park; five Town-maintained conservation areas; Flint Park and other public parks , mainly in the Village ; and the ends of a number of Village streets. Water-related recreation in these places is largely limited to "passive" forms-- walking, bird-watching, nature study, photography, etc . For "active" water sports, swimming is available to Larchmont Village residents, first-come-first-served, at the Manor Beach, owned and managed by the Larchmont Manor Park Society; and boating and swimming are available to members of the Larchmont Yacht Club, the Horseshoe Harbor Yacht Club, and the Larchmont Shore Club. The Inventory and Policy sections both point out (II , p. 22-23; III, Policies 19 and 21) that land use patterns severely limit present possibilities for creating public facilities for active water sports along the shore. The Inventory observes in this con- nection that recreational use of waterfront property either muni- cipal government might in future acquire would be desirable , but would require careful weighing of relevant factors such as public demand, costs , and environmental impact. Similarly, Policy 19 says that future increase in active , water-dependent recreational resources should be considered only if the impact on adjacent neighborhoods can be mitigated and adverse effect on the water environment avoided. It adds that priority should be given to retaining and, if necessary, enhancing access to existing facilities. In similar vein, the section on land use (IV, p. 3-4) , in dis- cussing possible future public acquisition or use of waterfront property for recreation, lays down limiting criteria to preserve the residential character of the neighborhood and the natural and man-made environment. It also calls attention to the exclusive authority of each municipal government over zoning and land use within its geographic jurisdiction, i. e. , the Village of Larchmont and the Unincorporated Area of the Town of Mamaroneck. A major theme in the passaces on recreation is the need to prevent reduction or impairment of existing recreational facilities. Public parks suitable for passive water-related recreation are to be re- tained in public ownership (Policy 20) . If any water-dependent • .M f) J`G+`P-/ 1 .. •P+1.4 •t Cx . .. 0,0•� • ••,♦ < '�DS•`a <,:' ��/� L.E.o.• I• ♦ t /". . 7-/ .'''''-'''''......:'::4".11*-:::: ::.:: ::.:'...:..,...:,$ : i Pwsre J S ......r SALOO ya 01 rc. �l — , • ::,i:'::::*::::. E o rwOpo ��h f / � . :::::r• •' � , • -uNr •RISE •J• ,Ji. 4 " •, `.\ r<r - ' • Ili suaE \' ';'S (1 les °S Oar • ::.::::::: :::• s f •� • ' _ ,. n / ' 1`Icgy .•:4 ' - ' :ii •••iffe.::::c1.1-*7.'•:.:&: 1: 1 ,,e",- I . ••c A tc__, • 4,, , „„. . , . . c Li 40 ,„„,, , / ,0/, Mira.:...;.'. .Ef S Ii V `+�/L✓ \/ aV•. .. f ...: _ 01 , ,, ,i /..,::,.:-...,,:.:.:.:..•-..:.:,,,...5,,, ..:. „. :, ,.. „. ,), 40---y-T,.. , tie I ,qM p . , , .'r ., pi �EOYUO' + .. I < `.•�i ` ARONE •:( I to a °1' • • ' ,. • f Aith`° ,� w'E\��ie,.i u ~`` �'a'`w^ is�� L :� ° """ ' '' '<O c / i` • .,.® oir,,,,.. . � / • 4Y"1iw {•; }' '•. ` -°��P•%O',ar _� p. �,� •w/4"W, - e ,.v' . � ,<L 1• - 1. • • WO: ' • 4GyL if �r :„ il" I : • *° ....!' i�.P, •• h' • ,a'° a .•.,�. it \ L YD �• s.`Of, ,. ockw D /�-=i `�'•o � +% I. �,` - 'how M- ...r / (, �'O �P r / ♦ TT 1 °rE •`� �' °o ;r• '•fir /-w• ovO wCa / L �n� / � . ._o • 1 �. -� Legend b. s oc^,,. yY�.r V'' _ • . '`% t(i3i` ``7. P'.;,, a` - •f ., FEABILITY STUDY : .: 1 • Premium Area P (J7---r, ,,c:•: I J =/ �`G,• .. .e . / � 2. I�archmont Res. Off'. EO. ET pi f, �p : • ,��f�: �� ©!,, i � P ' ,°Pa °'�, m■�■ REZONING TO REDUCE ter , `,' // ; . , _ •°./wE/ ° �,, .°E` ,,i �� �� ..00 °, ._ °.7 ,..• �°• R-30 DENSITY :En ;'_ \ i) ,a' ,t-:,- •I _•P' �4 SHELDRAKE RIVER '' ^[pN ,,...• P E `,o,.'i *. �'+. "'`f�P CHANNEL IMPROV Ofw G 4°+,'�N.4E e'tN,P\°°° w ,,�,--. P1+, • ''.I...,,. = ° , O SHEI DRAKE RIVER RE— ,r~• TENTION BASIN /, - "� � ��•.( ' t '' • LARGE SILT TRAPS if ` 'r PO E.°° r '+ r1unni1 REPAIR CEDAR i AND J` OUTFAII 1r 7 \000E NOT • °O E.LDNIN,~• •fj, PO� , l Off.' • . i O. P y a © ` • /, ,; o ° , >. ��- PEP ;, �';: RESTORE• Z EA F D I S- • ( ` �J'<\�\, I` ,,..- POSAI� SITE ' 'w c� .+n i� </�7 T.1' °'J P# \ 1 V`O Xw'f J i ooi ®J� - \� ...0•'"E" .;` 'r ' ,I • • .'w �,a:. 1140, '�,,\ ••° �,� f /t o o HARBOR DREDGING �(] 2� . lE 00� \h J� r�asl�' � , + �/ �v� ',�.�+d�/.K' �.sW o ,,,'' \ D+ -r M � + %� \\\ �° ��° �� AMA NOTE: See text for ,VE — I /., d' Niir ,,,•�////, •'`mow. ;%�c ?� ` ... t ,�) ,�. / . , �A �+ ...-.7:--. other actions in- r 4 /,P/ �' } • ~` r�•0111S \'"®'� ",� 't, eluded in recommend- < 'f� '''',•,. f,-<*. -c.= ,, ,,a, , ed action program. 0‘0,\\ •� E I 0 {� wf 'y.�� • � , 0 OOk `JJ • LEYit '. '' . °' o f\ft ,,• Oiv ,� °' \r oC.r D: ) i _ . • .�' / P 4iLo ` I }' L�Nw-N R °J? cy 4.°'� n/' J L 00 Nfr .n ` ° , a r � r fE' Po c � IS a�� %' o j.+'. .o s,. %p S - I^ `L ' i q,r° \, +� ••.nrE...v 4Tr ... 00 ° çc '\O ..' .�Y.NO' ONE..T PVC n !" //- —' � / rLY i� PVE' �y� E f O '. o� 1 "Q' a�1 CHESTNUT '` • ° , w•. l .E "'T, ei. . Dwa • e�s,a,-1 L ily_e,z, ® V . o --_ ; ,44 iel : — 1 Mrs ,_. IllimoR la. a' ©A, �'_! '� I�"�- O **, (- 4.+ is licii .-' +ewzwr O Eo on` l , • sANks till*rt.° ttiiiI,-;-.) \;\ 1 /1-400-':'::::•. :: t'ET„.„'"- /111 wOL'Ep• .. • f T• i If'.. Y,RE • O• riiroc31 OTRTNi <' - ( • v ' , ♦.k+� 0 0°O w\ ,~ O��r 1 O 7 / r 0.v...,,,,..„. 0 .::,•:::•.:.::::.:......., re. .:,- ,,.. ..e, ,, :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:::,:.. : T- ISLAND -4 ;.,.;-. L p N i =i600 ' 7- N/�N 47- pp •„,,r ,,T O • Ir Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Map No. Village of Larchmont - Town of Mamaroneck ACTION PROGRAM 8 Shuster Associates Planning Consultants - 7 - recreational facilities are in danger of conversion to other use , the local governments should consider assuming ownership or a share of ownership in order to maintain them (Policy 21) . Also, the muni- cipal governments should take appropriate additional steps in regard to land use in order to prevent reduction of existing waterfront recreational facilities or of access thereto (IV , p. 4) . To prevent navigational obstacles to recreational boating, the program further proposes ( IV, p. 9) participation in a County-sponsored cooperative harbor dredging program for the Long Island Sound shore. 4. Historical and Scenic Preservation The Inventory ( II , p. 6, 23) and the Policy section (Policies 23, 25) list a number of sites of historical and scenic importance and call for their protection and preservation pursuant to State policy. Among those mentioned are the Larchmont Manor Park; the Premium Mill Pond ; the Larchmont Reservoir property; the Manor House at the head of Prospect Avenue , Larchmont; the Larchmont Public Library; an Indian rock shelter adjoining Pine Brook Park; Fountain Square ; the Larchmont Yacht Club and the Larchmont Shore Club. C uidelines are laid down under Policy 25 for protection of scenic values. One provision on land use (IV , p. 4) calls for rezoning along the Larchmont shoreline in cases where subdivision of larger properties , permissible under the present zoning ordinance , might impair the scenic character of the waterfront and obstruct views of the water from adjacent streets. In implementation of these policies, the municipal governments are called upon (V , p. 2) to designate specific historic , architectural, cultural and scenic sites for special protection. Implementation and Management Structure Numerous legislative, regulatory, organizational and admini- strative steps will need to be taken by the two municipal govern- ments in order to implement the program set forth in sections III and IV. These steps, provided for in Section V-A , are listed in Table 2 below. In addition, it will be necessary to have in place an adequate management structure, whose job will be to see to it from day to day that the many implementing actions are carried out in a coordinated way and in keeping with the municipal governments' priorities. For this purpose the draft program proposes (V , p. 5-7) a two-level structure. At the governmental level, a Joint Coastal Zone Committee (JCZC) , consisting of the Supervisor of the Town and the Mayor of the Village, or their deputies, will coordinate decisions by their respective governing bodies on coastal zone matters, and will over- see, and give policy guidance to , a 10-member Coastal Zone Manage- ment Commission. The latter body, with five members appointed by each municipality, will monitor and coordinate implementation of the entire program--subject to the JCZC ' s policy guidance--by muni- cipal departments, boards and commissions; be alert to assure con- sistency of planned State and Federal actions affecting the local program; maintain liaison with neighboring municipalities and County and State agencies on intermunicipal drainage basin matters; apply for State, Federal and other funds to aid the program; and make reports and recommendations to the two municipal governments through the JCZC . The commission' s meetings will be held monthly and will be - 8 - open to the public . Subject to budgetary limitations, it may engage professional and clerical help. Its members will be unpaid. Intermunicipal Cooperation for Watershed Management Because flood control is a main theme of the LWRP, a closely related theme also receives strong emphasis--namely, cooperation among the municipal neighbors sharing our three drainage basins. The municipalities involved are: For the Pine Brook-Premium system: City of New Rochelle , Town of Mamaroneck, Village of Larchmont. For the Sheldrake system: City of New Rochelle , Village of Larchmont, Town of Mamaroneck, Town-Village of Scarsdale , City of White Plains, Village of Mamaroneck. For the East Creek-Hommocks system: Town of Mamaroneck, City of New Rochelle, Village of Larchmont, Village of Mamaroneck. As the Inventory points out (II , p. 10) , "Overbuilding of housing, streets , shopping malls, parking lots, etc . , in recent decades has been a general practice through most of the geologically shallow flood plain whose downstream coastal section our two municipalities occupy. Our community consequently receives the brunt of flooding, siltation, and pollution from a wide area of overbuilding upstream. " This bi-municipal area, however, is not unique in that respect-- nor is the present draft LWRP the only current approach to a solution. The Village of Mamaroneck LWRP gives equally strong emphasis to the upstream flooding problem and the need for intermunicipal solutions. New Rochelle and the City of Rye are in earlier stages of LWRP draft- ing; both have similar flooding problems. Meanwhile, the Village of Mamaroneck and neighboring municipalities have begun work with the County Soil and Water Conservation District on the question of joint management of the Beaver Swamp Brook watershed. And the hydrological study of the upper Sheldrake ( see page 4 above) will provide an im- portant foundation for an intermunicipal flood control strategy in the entire Sheldrake watershed. Finally, legislative efforts have been made at both the New York State and Westchester County levels to support and strengthen such intermunicipal flood control projects. In this perspective , the flood control emphasis in the Larchmont- Town of Mamaroneck LIaRP can be seen as part of a `rowing pattern of efforts in our region, especially along Vestchester' s Sound shore and in nearby inland communities, to achieve a better balance between development and the environment--a balance which is vital to the long-term quality and economic viability of these communities. (For references in the draft LWRP to intermunicipal cooperation, see pages I-1; II-1, 9-10 , 19; III , Policies 12A , 14A, 14B ; and V-4 and 7. ) - 9 - TABLE 1 Data on Physical Projects in Section IV-B Suggested Timetable* Related Year # Project Policies 1 2 3 4 5 Premium River and Mill Pond 7,9,12 , s� s� ssssssss Feasibility Study 44, 44A Upper Sheldrake/Larchmont Res- 12A , 13, _� s- ____-_-- ervoir Feasibility Study 14A , 17 s Sheldrake River (Nest Branch) 12A , 13 Channel Improvements m.s MI la ELM•M& Sheldrake River (East Branch) 12A, 13 Retention Basin MIIIIIMENMEMMID Large Silt Traps at East Creek , 4, 7, 8,10A Premium River and Pine Brook 30 , 32A, MMOIMMEMMEMMEMb 33, 44A Repair of Defective Sewer Lines 4, 7,10A , 30 , s s s s s s s s s111 32A, 33,44A Selective Harbor Dredging 4,15, 35 MMIMIIIMMIM1111111114 Catch Basin Improvement and 4, 7,8,12 , Cleaning Program 17, 33 sss_sss • sssssssss) Elimination of Storm Drain Con- 4,7,10A ,30 , nections to Sanitary Sewers 33,33A,44A sssss • ••sasss Relocate Leaf Disposal Facility 9,19 ,20 , 39 and Restore Existing Site * = continuous or con- centrated activity = staged or intermittent activity Source: Draft LWRP , p. IV-10 - 10 - TABLE 2* Summary of New Municipal Legislative, Regulatory and Administrative Actions Required to Implement the LWRP To implement 1. Amendments to Existing_Laws Policy # Zoning of golf courses and nearby properties for 12 , 12A flood protection and open space preservation Zoning of Post Road locations to protect Premium- 12, 12A Pine Brook area Zoning of Waterfront district to maintain low 25 density and scenic quality Zoning amendment to prohibit increased storm water discharge rates in development projects 14A Designation of Critical Environmental Areas under 7A State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) 2 . New Legislative and Other Actions Erosion and sedimentation control ordinance 14B ( "Best Management Practices") Elimination of storm drain connections to sani- 33A tary sewer system Participation in intermunicipal drainage basin 12A , 14A , management discussions and programs 14B Participation in intermunicipal/County harbor 19 maintenance ( dredging) program Systematic program to improve monitoring of 30 pollution and enforcement of anti-pollution laws Designation of historic and scenic sites 23, 25 *Adapted from part 2 of the table on pages V-2 and V-3 November 16, 1984 Note to readers of the OVERVIEW: A revision in the "Management Structure" Since this Overview paper was produced, the Coastal Zone Man- agement Committee has approved, and recommended to both municipal governments, a revision in the "Management Structure" provisions of the draft Program ( see summary on page 7 of the Overview) . This revision has removed a point of disagreement within the Larchmont Village Board, opening the way for full support of the draft Program by all members of the Village Board as well as by the Town Council. Nature of the revision: The revision retains most features of the management structure in the October draft, but makes two significant changes. 1. Instead of a joint committee consisting of the Super- visor and Mayor, the revision provides that coordina- tion at the municipal government level will be the responsibility of a liaison member of the Town Council and a liaison member of the Village Board. They will help the Council and the Board coordinate their re- spective policies and actions on matters that concern the LWRP, and will serve as channels for policy guid- ance from their governments to the Coastal Zone Management Commission. 2. The revision also makes clear that the only powers of the Coastal Zone Management Commission will be those explicitly given to it by the "management structure" provisions of the LWRP; also, that nothing in the LWRP affects the existing powers of planning, zoning, and other municipal bodies. The text of the revision may be examined in the offices of the Town Clerk and the Village Clerk. It will be reflected in the next draft of the LWRP , expected to be produced shortly.