Volume 1 - VHB.com

Comments

Transcription

Volume 1 - VHB.com
DRAFT GENERIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING CHAPTER OF THE
CODE OF THE TOWN OF ISLIP (CHAPTER 68 OF THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF
ISLIP), INCLUDING THE BUILDING ZONE MAP, TO ESTABLISH
A PILGRIM STATE PLANNED REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (“PSPRD”) AND
CHANGES IN THE ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS OF CERTAIN PARCELS, NOW
CLASSIFIED IN THE “RESIDENCE AAA” ZONING DISTRICT, THE
“INDUSTRIAL 1” ZONING DISTRICT, THE “INDUSTRIAL 2” ZONING DISTRICT
AND THE “GENERAL SERVICE E” ZONING DISTRICT,
SO AS TO INCLUDE SUCH PARCELS IN THE NEWLY-ESTABLISHED PSPRD, AND
REDEVELOPMENT OF THE RECLASSIFIED
PARCELS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PSPRD AS
HEARTLAND TOWN SQUARE
PROJECT LOCATION:
SUFFOLK COUNTY
TAX MAP NUMBERS:
APPLICANT:
452.0±-acre parcel located at the former Pilgrim State
Psychiatric Center, east and west of the Sagtikos State
Parkway, south of the Long Island Expressway and north of
the Heartland Industrial Park and 23.59± acres included in
the Islip Gateway Community Improvement Area, east and
west of Crooked Hill Road, south of the Long Island
Expressway, Hamlet of Brentwood, Town of Islip
District 500 – Section 71 – Block 1 – Lots 10.2 , 10.8 and
13.6 (former Pilgrim site) and District 500- Section 71Block 1 – Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8.1, 8.2, 9.1, 9.2, 14 and
15 (Gateway Area)
22-50 Jackson Avenue Associates, L.P.
and
Pilgrim East, L.P.
c/o 1 Executive Drive
Edgewood, New York 11717
Contact:
LEAD AGENCY:
Herbert M. Balin, Esq.
(516) 296-7018
Town of Islip Town Board
655 Main Street
Islip, New York
Contact:
Eugene Murphy, Commissioner
Department of Planning and Development
(631) 224-5450
PREPARER & CONTACT:
This Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement was
prepared by:
VHB Engineering, Surveying and Landscape Architecture,
P.C.*
2150 Joshua’s Path, Suite 300
Hauppauge, New York 11788
Contact:
Theresa Elkowitz, Principal
Gail A. Pesner, AICP,
Senior Project Manager
(631) 234-3444
*The operations of Freudenthal & Elkowitz Consulting
Group, Inc. were acquired by VHB Engineering, Surveying
and Landscape Architecture, P.C. in January 2009
with technical input from:
Joseph Baier, P.E.
Dvirka & Bartilucci Consulting Engineers
330 Crossways Park Drive
Woodbury, New York 11797-2015
(Sewer and Water Supply, Water Budget)
Robert Eschbacher, P.E.
VHB Engineering
Surveying and Landscape Architecture, P.C.
(formerly Eschbacher VHB/Eschbacher
Engineering, P.C.)
2150 Joshua’s Path, Suite 300
Hauppauge, New York 11788
(Traffic and Parking)
John Gosling, Senior Vice President
RTKL Associates Inc.
1250 Connecticut Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20036
(Master Planning)
Pearl M. Kamer, Ph.D.
Consulting Economist
11 Westminster Road
Syosset, New York 11791-6615
(Economics and Demographics)
Kenneth Skipka
RTP Environmental
400 Post Avenue
Westbury, New York 11590
(Air Quality, Odor and Noise)
Kevin Walsh, P.E.
Barrett, Bonacci, Hyman & Van Weele, P.C.
175A Commercial Drive
Hauppauge, New York 11788
(Site Engineering, Site Plan, Drainage)
DATE OF PREPARATION:
AVAILABILITY OF
DOCUMENT:
DATE OF ACCEPTANCE:
March 2009
This document represents a Draft Generic Environmental
Impact Statement (“DGEIS”) pursuant to a Positive
Declaration and a Final Scope issued by the Lead Agency.
Copies are available for public review and comment at the
offices of the Lead Agency, the Brentwood Public Library
and online at http://www.vhb.com/Heartland/DraftGEIS
April 14, 2009
DEADLINE FOR COMMENTS: July 28, 2009
Table of Contents
Page
1.0
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................. 1-1
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ........................................................... 2-1
2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 2-1
2.2 Brief History of the Property and Summary of Existing Site Conditions............... 2-10
2.2.1 Physical Characteristics of the Site ................................................................... 2-10
2.2.2 Urban Renewal Plan (Islip Gateway Community Improvement Area) ............. 2-11
2.2.3 Brief Site History and Current Levels of Site Activity ..................................... 2-16
2.3 Proposed Action. ...................................................................................................... 2-22
2.3.1 Proposed Pilgrim State Planned Redevelopment District .................................. 2-22
2.3.2 Proposed Rezoning ............................................................................................ 2-25
2.3.3 Smart Growth and Proposed Heartland Town Square Conceptual Master Plan 2-26
2.4 Purpose, Need and Benefits of the Proposed Action ............................................... 2-61
2.5 Demolition and Construction Activities .................................................................. 2-62
2.5.1 Demolition ......................................................................................................... 2-62
2.5.2 Construction Phasing Strategy ............................................................................ 2-68
2.5.3 General Construction Sequencing....................................................................... 2-73
2.6 Required Permits and Approvals ............................................................................. 2-75
3.0 EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS .......................................................... 3-1
3.1 Land ........................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.1.1 Land Use and Zoning ........................................................................................... 3-1
3.1.2 Subsurface Conditions and Hazardous Materials .............................................. 3-23
3.1.3 Geology, Soils and Topography ........................................................................ 3-43
3.2 Water Resources ...................................................................................................... 3-69
3.2.1 Groundwater ...................................................................................................... 3-69
3.2.2 Sewage Disposal ................................................................................................ 3-77
3.2.3 Water Supply ..................................................................................................... 3-82
3.2.4 Stormwater Runoff and Drainage ...................................................................... 3-85
3.2.5 Surface Water, Wetlands and Flood Plain ......................................................... 3-92
3.3 Air ............................................................................................................................ 3-95
3.3.1 Site Description.................................................................................................. 3-95
3.3.2 Sensitive Land Uses ........................................................................................... 3-96
3.3.3 Air Quality Standards ........................................................................................ 3-97
3.3.4 Existing Site and Area Characteristics and Air Quality................................... 3-100
3.3.5 Existing Air Quality Conditions ...................................................................... 3-105
3.4 Plants and Animals ................................................................................................ 3-108
3.4.1 Ecological Resources ....................................................................................... 3-108
3.5 Aesthetic Resources ............................................................................................... 3-126
3.5.1 Visual Resources .............................................................................................. 3-126
3.5.2 Historic and Archeological Resources ............................................................. 3-128
3.6 Open Space and Recreation ................................................................................... 3-130
Table of Contents (continued)
Page
3.6.1 Subject Property and Surrounding Area .......................................................... 3-130
3.7 Critical Environmental Areas ................................................................................ 3-131
3.7.1 Brief Description of Critical Environmental Areas ......................................... 3-131
3.7.2 Special Groundwater Protection Areas ............................................................ 3-131
3.7.3 The Long Island Comprehensive Special Groundwater Protection Area Plan 3-134
3.8 Transportation ........................................................................................................ 3-137
3.8.1 Traffic and Transportation ............................................................................... 3-137
3.8.2 Existing Roadway Deficiencies ....................................................................... 3-145
3.8.3 Existing Transit Facilities ................................................................................ 3-146
3.8.4 Accident History .............................................................................................. 3-152
3.9 Energy .................................................................................................................... 3-160
3.9.1 Subject Property ............................................................................................... 3-160
3.10 Noise and Odor .................................................................................................... 3-161
3.10.1 Noise .............................................................................................................. 3-161
3.10.2 Odor ............................................................................................................... 3-178
3.11 Growth and Character of the Community or Neighborhood ............................... 3-181
3.11.1 Community Character .................................................................................... 3-181
3.11.2 Socioeconomics ............................................................................................. 3-182
3.11.3 Community Facilities and Services ............................................................... 3-196
4.0
PROBABLE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION .............................................. 4-1
4.1 Land ........................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.1.1 Land Use and Zoning ........................................................................................... 4-1
4.1.2 Subsurface Conditions and Hazardous Materials .............................................. 4-18
4.1.3 Geology, Soils and Topography ........................................................................ 4-26
4.2 Water Resources ...................................................................................................... 4-29
4.2.1 Groundwater ...................................................................................................... 4-29
4.2.2 Sewage Disposal ................................................................................................ 4-31
4.2.3 Water Supply ..................................................................................................... 4-40
4.2.4 Drainage and Stormwater .................................................................................. 4-44
4.2.5 Surface Water, Wetlands and Floodplain .......................................................... 4-63
4.3 Air ............................................................................................................................ 4-64
4.4 Plants and Animals .................................................................................................. 4-69
4.5 Aesthetic Resources ................................................................................................. 4-73
4.5.1 Visual Resources ................................................................................................ 4-73
4.5.2 Visual Impact Assessment Methodology........................................................... 4-73
4.5.3 Analysis Results ................................................................................................. 4-74
4.5.4 Conceptual Master Plan ..................................................................................... 4-89
4.5.5 Architectural Features and Streetscape Elements .............................................. 4-90
4.5.6 Lighting ............................................................................................................ 4-101
4.5.7 Historic and Archaeological Resources ........................................................... 4-103
4.5.8 Adaptive Reuse ................................................................................................ 4-104
4.6 Open Space and Recreation ................................................................................... 4-106
Table of Contents (continued)
Page
4.6.1 Summary of Proposed Open Space Distribution in Heartland Town Square .. 4-106
4.6.2 Impact to Existing Open Space and Recreation............................................... 4-116
4.7 Critical Environmental Areas ................................................................................ 4-117
4.8 Transportation ........................................................................................................ 4-122
4.8.1 Future Traffic Growth and Other Proposed Projects ....................................... 4-122
4.8.2 Project-Generated Traffic ................................................................................ 4-125
4.8.3 Sagtikos Parkway and Ramps .......................................................................... 4-167
4.8.4 Internal Traffic ................................................................................................. 4-171
4.9 Energy .................................................................................................................... 4-177
4.9.1 LIPA Energy Analysis ..................................................................................... 4-177
4.9.2 Natural Gas ...................................................................................................... 4-185
4.9.3 Alternate Energy Sources ................................................................................ 4-186
4.10 Noise and Odor .................................................................................................... 4-187
4.10.1 Noise .............................................................................................................. 4-187
4.10.2 Odor ............................................................................................................... 4-192
4.11 Growth and Character of the Community or Neighborhood ................................ 4-194
4.11.1 Community Character .................................................................................... 4-194
4.11.2 Socioeconomics ............................................................................................. 4-195
4.11.3 Community Facilities and Services ............................................................... 4-266
4.11.4 Additional Considerations ............................................................................. 4-273
5.0
PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES ...................................................................... 5-1
5.1 Land ........................................................................................................................... 5-1
5.1.1 Land Use and Zoning ........................................................................................... 5-1
5.1.2 Subsurface Conditions and Hazardous Material .................................................. 5-2
5.1.3 Soils and Topography .......................................................................................... 5-8
5.2 Water Resources ........................................................................................................ 5-9
5.3 Air ............................................................................................................................ 5-13
5.4 Plants and Animals .................................................................................................. 5-15
5.5 Aesthetic Resources ................................................................................................. 5-16
5.6 Open Space and Recreation ..................................................................................... 5-17
5.7 Critical Environmental Areas .................................................................................. 5-18
5.8 Transportation .......................................................................................................... 5-19
5.8.1 Existing Roadway Deficiencies ......................................................................... 5-19
5.8.2 Roadway Mitigation Specific to Heartland Town Square ................................. 5-20
5.8.3 Mitigation Schedule ........................................................................................... 5-27
5.8.4 Other Mitigation Measures ................................................................................ 5-29
5.8.5 Other Access Considerations ............................................................................. 5-42
5.8.6 Regional Traffic Study ....................................................................................... 5-44
5.9 Energy ..................................................................................................................... 5-45
5.10 Noise and Odor ....................................................................................................... 5-46
5.11 Growth and Character of the Community or Neighborhood .................................. 5-48
5.12 Building-Specific Mitigation .................................................................................. 5-49
Table of Contents (continued)
Page
6.0
UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE EFFECTS ....................................................................... 6-1
6.1 Short-Term Impacts ................................................................................................... 6-1
6.2 Long-Term Impacts ................................................................................................... 6-2
7.0 ALTERNATIVES AND THEIR IMPACTS .................................................................. 7-1
7.1 SEQRA-mandated, No-action Alternative (Site Remains as it Currently Exists) ..... 7-4
7.1.1 Land .................................................................................................................... 7-4
7.1.2 Water Resources .................................................................................................. 7-5
7.1.3 Air ........................................................................................................................ 7-5
7.1.4 Plants and Animals .............................................................................................. 7-5
7.1.5 Aesthetic Resources ............................................................................................. 7-6
7.1.6 Open Space and Recreation ................................................................................. 7-6
7.1.7 Critical Environmental Areas .............................................................................. 7-7
7.1.8 Transportation ...................................................................................................... 7-7
7.1.9 Energy .................................................................................................................. 7-7
7.1.10 Noise and Odor ................................................................................................... 7-7
7.1.11 Growth and Character of the Community or Neighborhood .............................. 7-8
7.1.12 Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 7-8
7.2 Redevelopment of the Former Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center in Accordance with
the Prevailing “Residence AAA” Zoning ................................................................. 7-9
7.2.1 Land ................................................................................................................... 7-12
7.2.2 Water Resources ................................................................................................ 7-12
7.2.3 Air ...................................................................................................................... 7-14
7.2.4 Plants and Animals ............................................................................................ 7-14
7.2.5 Aesthetic Resources ........................................................................................... 7-15
7.2.6 Open Space and Recreation ............................................................................... 7-16
7.2.7 Critical Environmental Areas ............................................................................ 7-17
7.2.8 Transportation .................................................................................................... 7-17
7.2.9 Energy ................................................................................................................ 7-18
7.2.10 Noise and Odor ................................................................................................. 7-18
7.2.11 Growth and Character of the Community or Neighborhood ............................ 7-19
7.3 Development Scenario under the Special Groundwater Protection Area Plan for
the Oak Brush Plains .............................................................................................. 7-24
7.3.1 Land ................................................................................................................... 7-28
7.3.2 Water Resources ................................................................................................ 7-29
7.3.3 Air ...................................................................................................................... 7-30
7.3.4 Plants and Animals ............................................................................................ 7-30
7.3.5 Aesthetic Resources ........................................................................................... 7-31
7.3.6 Open Space and Recreation ............................................................................... 7-31
7.3.7 Critical Environmental Areas ............................................................................ 7-32
7.3.8 Transportation .................................................................................................... 7-32
7.3.9 Energy ................................................................................................................ 7-33
7.3.10 Noise and Odor .................................................................................................. 7-33
Table of Contents (continued)
Page
7.3.11 Growth and Character of the Community or Neighborhood ............................. 7-34
7.4 Redevelopment of the Former Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center in Accordance
with the Preliminary Re-Utilization Master Plan for the Office of Mental
Health Pilgrim State Psychiatric Facility – 1996 .................................................... 7-37
7.4.1 Land ................................................................................................................... 7-40
7.4.2 Water Resources ................................................................................................ 7-41
7.4.3 Air ...................................................................................................................... 7-41
7.4.4 Plants and Animals ............................................................................................ 7-42
7.4.5 Aesthetic Resources ........................................................................................... 7-42
7.4.6 Open Space and Recreation ............................................................................... 7-43
7.4.7 Critical Environmental Areas ............................................................................ 7-43
7.4.8 Transportation .................................................................................................... 7-43
7.4.9 Energy ................................................................................................................ 7-44
7.4.10 Noise and Odor .................................................................................................. 7-44
7.4.11 Growth and Character of the Community or Neighborhood ............................. 7-45
7.5 Alternative to Phase III at the Former Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center – Industrial
Rezoning for Multi-Tenant Office/Industrial Uses ................................................. 7-52
7.5.1 Land ................................................................................................................... 7-55
7.5.2 Water Resources ................................................................................................ 7-55
7.5.3 Air ...................................................................................................................... 7-56
7.5.4 Plants and Animals ............................................................................................ 7-57
7.5.5 Aesthetic Resources ........................................................................................... 7-57
7.5.6 Open Space and Recreation ............................................................................... 7-58
7.5.7 Critical Environmental Areas ............................................................................ 7-58
7.5.8 Transportation .................................................................................................... 7-59
7.5.9 Energy ................................................................................................................ 7-60
7.5.10 Noise and Odor .................................................................................................. 7-60
7.5.11 Growth and Character of the Community or Neighborhood ............................. 7-61
7.6 Integration of Phase II into Phase I of the Former Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center
Development – Bring Office Development Closer to the Proposed Main Street ... 7-64
8.0 IRRETRIEVABLE AND IRREVERSIBLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES ........ 8-1
9.0
GROWTH-INDUCING ASPECTS ................................................................................. 9-1
10.0 USE AND CONSERVATION OF ENERGY .............................................................. 10-1
11.0 CONDITIONS AND CRITERIA UNDER WHICH FUTURE ACTIONS WILL BE
APPROVED .................................................................................................................. 11-1
12.0 AREAS OF DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN APPLICANTS AND LEAD AGENCY12-1
13.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................. 13-1
List of Figures
Page
Figure 2-1 – Regional Map .............................................................................................. 2-6
Figure 2-2 – Area Map ..................................................................................................... 2-7
Figure 2-3 – Excerpt of Tax Map .................................................................................... 2-8
Figure 2-4 – Aerial Photograph ..................................................................................... 2-13
Figure 2-5 – Local Area Map......................................................................................... 2-14
Figure 2-6 – Existing Conditions (Prior to Demolition) ................................................ 2-21
Figure 2-7 – Illustrated Development Plan .................................................................... 2-27
Figure 2-8 – Development Units.................................................................................... 2-33
Figure 2-9 – Typology Diagram .................................................................................... 2-39
Figure 2-10 – Detailed Development Typologies .......................................................... 2-43
Figure 2-11 – Proposed Roadway Network ................................................................... 2-51
Figure 2-12 – Proposed Road Sections .......................................................................... 2-52
Figure 2-13 – Existing Electricity and Telephone Utilities ........................................... 2-55
Figure 2-14 – Phase I ..................................................................................................... 2-70
Figure 2-15 – Phase II .................................................................................................... 2-71
Figure 2-16 – Phase III .................................................................................................. 2-72
Figure 3-1 – Land Use Map ............................................................................................. 3-4
Figure 3-2 – Zoning Map ................................................................................................. 3-6
Figure 3-3 – Tunnel Network ........................................................................................ 3-12
Figure 3-4 – Hazardous Materials and Subsurface Conditions ..................................... 3-25
Figure 3-5 – Excerpt of Hydrogeologic Zone Map ....................................................... 3-48
Figure 3-6 – Excerpt of USGS Topographic Map - Greenlawn Quadrangle ................ 3-52
Figure 3-7 – Slope Analysis ........................................................................................... 3-53
Figure 3-8 – Excerpt of Soil Survey .............................................................................. 3-55
Figure 3-9 – Soil Boring Location and Logs ................................................................. 3-68
Figure 3-10 – Excerpt of Water Table Elevation Map .................................................. 3-70
Figure 3-11 – Well Fields and Water Main Locations .................................................. 3-75
Figure 3-12 – Existing Utilities – Sanitary .................................................................... 3-81
Figure 3-13 – Existing Utilities – Water ........................................................................ 3-83
Figure 3-14 – Existing Utilities - Drainage.................................................................... 3-87
Figure 3-15 – Excerpt of NYSDEC Freshwater Wetlands Map .................................... 3-93
Figure 3-16 – Excerpt of NWI Map ............................................................................... 3-94
Figure 3-17 – Vegetation Map ..................................................................................... 3-109
Figure 3-18 – Oak Brush Plains SGPA Map ............................................................... 3-135
Figure 3-19 – Study Intersections ................................................................................ 3-140
Figure 3-20 – Town of Babylon Intersections ............................................................. 3-144
Figure 3-21 – Long Island Railroad System Map ........................................................ 3-147
Figure 3-22 – Suffolk County Transit Routes.............................................................. 3-151
Figure 3-23 – Excerpt of Long Island Bikeways Map ................................................. 3-153
Figure 3-24 – Noise Monitoring Sites ......................................................................... 3-170
Figure 3-25 – Community Services Map ..................................................................... 3-198
List of Figures (continued)
Page
Figure 4-1 – Proposed Utilities – Sanitary ..................................................................... 4-37
Figure 4-2 – Proposed Utilities - Water ......................................................................... 4-43
Figure 4-3 – Proposed Utilities - Drainage .................................................................... 4-46
Figure 4-4 – Viewpoint Locations ................................................................................. 4-80
Figure 4-5 – Viewpoint 1 ............................................................................................... 4-81
Figure 4-6 – Viewpoint 2 ............................................................................................... 4-82
Figure 4-7 – Viewpoint 3 ............................................................................................... 4-83
Figure 4-8 – Viewpoint 4 ............................................................................................... 4-84
Figure 4-9 – Viewpoint 5 ............................................................................................... 4-85
Figure 4-10 – Viewpoint 6 ............................................................................................. 4-86
Figure 4-11 – Viewpoint 7 ............................................................................................. 4-87
Figure 4-12 – Viewpoint 8 ............................................................................................. 4-88
Figure 4-13 – Rendering Location Key ......................................................................... 4-92
Figure 4-14 – View 1 ..................................................................................................... 4-93
Figure 4-15 – View 2 ..................................................................................................... 4-94
Figure 4-16 – View 3 ..................................................................................................... 4-95
Figure 4-17 – View 4 ..................................................................................................... 4-96
Figure 4-18 – View 5 ..................................................................................................... 4-97
Figure 4-19 – Site Sections ............................................................................................ 4-99
Figure 4-20 – Surface Permeability Diagram .............................................................. 4-110
Figure 4-21 – Open Space Typologies......................................................................... 4-113
Figure 4-22 – SGPA Land Use/Proposed Land Use .................................................... 4-120
Figure 4-23 – Heartland Transportation Model ........................................................... 4-130
Figure 4-24 – Portal Points .......................................................................................... 4-146
Figure 4-25 – Microzones ............................................................................................ 4-173
Figure 4-26 – Internal Trips ......................................................................................... 4-174
Figure 5-1 – Traffic Mitigation Program: Full Build-Out ............................................. 5-23
Figure 5-2 – Heartland Walking Map ............................................................................ 5-37
Figure 7-1 – Yield Map ("Residence AAA") ................................................................ 7-11
Figure 7-2 – Alternate Development under Oak Brush Plains SGPA ........................... 7-27
Figure 7-3 – Preliminary Re-Utilization Master Plan by the Empire State
Development Corp. ................................................................................... 7-39
Figure 7-4 – Phase III Alternative - Industrial Rezoning for Multi-Tenant Office/
Industrial Uses .......................................................................................... 7-54
List of Tables
Page
Table 2-1 – Existing Site Data: Heartland Town Square Property ................................ 2-15
Table 2-2 – Existing Site Data: Gateway Area .............................................................. 2-15
Table 2-3 – Existing Site Data: Overall Property .......................................................... 2-15
Table 2-4 – Proposed Development Build-Out Schedule .............................................. 2-32
Table 2-5 – Mix of Housing Types ................................................................................ 2-35
Table 2-6 – Estimated Monthly Rent at Base Year by Unit Type ................................. 2-36
Table 2-7 – Estimated Initial Sales Price by Unit Type................................................. 2-36
Table 2-8 – Site Data ..................................................................................................... 2-46
Table 3-1 – Building Summary...................................................................................... 3-26
Table 3-2 – Summary of Previously-Identified Environmental Conditions .................. 3-27
Table 3-3 – Soil Engineering and Planning Limitations ................................................ 3-66
Table 3-4 – Well Water Quality..................................................................................... 3-74
Table 3-5 – Well Susceptibility Summary ..................................................................... 3-77
Table 3-6 – Peak Hourly Flows ..................................................................................... 3-84
Table 3-7 – Existing Stormwater Runoff Data .............................................................. 3-86
Table 3-8 – Existing Recharge ....................................................................................... 3-88
Table 3-9 – National and New York State Ambient Air Quality Standards .................. 3-98
Table 3-10 – NYSDEC Air Monitoring Sites .............................................................. 3-102
Table 3-11 – Summary of Ambient Air Quality Data ................................................. 3-105
Table 3-12 – Existing Level of Service ....................................................................... 3-142
Table 3-13 – Existing Level of Service – Town of Babylon Intersections .................. 3-145
Table 3-14 – LIRR Parking Accommodations ............................................................ 3-148
Table 3-15 – LIRR Train Service ................................................................................ 3-149
Table 3-16 – Accident Summary (By Severity of Injury, By Intersection) ................. 3-154
Table 3-17 – Accident Summary (By Accident Type, By Intersection)...................... 3-155
Table 3-18 – Accident Rates (By Accident Type, By Roadway Segment) ................. 3-157
Table 3-19 – Accident Rates By Intersection .............................................................. 3-158
Table 3-20 – NYSDOT FHWA Noise Criteria............................................................ 3-166
Table 3-21 – Average Ability to Perceive Changes in Noise Levels .......................... 3-167
Table 3-22 – Community Response to Increases in Noise Levels............................... 3-168
Table 3-23 – Noise Monitoring Stations ...................................................................... 3-171
Table 3-24 – Hourly Leq Noise Levels by Location and Period (dBA) ...................... 3-175
Table 3-25 – Size and Age Distribution of the Population, 2000 Brentwood CDP*
Islip Town, Suffolk County .................................................................... 3-183
Table 3-26 – Number of Households, by Type Brentwood CDP Islip Town, Suffolk
County, 2000 ........................................................................................... 3-184
Table 3-27 – Tenure and Age of the Housing Stock, Brentwood CDP Islip Town,
Suffolk County, 2000 ............................................................................. 3-185
Table 3-28 – Value of Owner-Occupied Housing Units Brentwood CDP Islip Town,
Suffolk County, 2000 (Number of Housing Units) ................................ 3-185
Table 3-29 – Value of Owner-Occupied Housing Units, Islip Town &
Suffolk County, 2005 (Number of housing units) .................................. 3-186
List of Tables (continued)
Page
Table 3-30 – Monthly Owner Costs as a Percentage of Household Income, 1999
Brentwood CDP, Islip Town, Suffolk County
(Number of Owner Units) ....................................................................... 3-187
Table 3-31 – Gross Rent as a Percentage of Household Income, 1999 Brentwood
CDP Islip Town, Suffolk County, (Number of Rental Units) .............. 3-187
Table 3-32 – Monthly Owner Costs as a Percentage of Household Income, 2005
(Number of Owner Units) ....................................................................... 3-188
Table 3-33 – Gross Rent as a Percentage of Household Income, Islip Town, Suffolk
County, 2005 (Number of Renters) ........................................................ 3-188
Table 3-34 – Educational Attainment of Persons Age 25 and Older, 2000 Brentwood
CDP Islip Town, Suffolk County (Number of Persons) ......................... 3-189
Table 3-35 – Occupation of Employed Workers Age 16 and Older, 2000 Brentwood
CDP, Islip Town, Suffolk County (Number of Persons) ........................ 3-189
Table 3-36 – Industry of Employed Workers Age 16 and Older, 2000 Brentwood
CDP, Islip Town, Suffolk County (Number of Persons) ........................ 3-190
Table 3-37 – 1999 Household Income, Brentwood CDP, Islip Town, Suffolk County
(Number of Households)......................................................................... 3-191
Table 3-38 – 1999 Poverty Status, Brentwood CDP, Islip Town, Suffolk County
(Percent Below Poverty Level) .............................................................. 3-191
Table 3-39 – The Industry Mix of Business Establishments, Brentwood, Central Islip,
Bay Shore, Hauppauge, Suffolk County, 2004
(Number of Businesses) ......................................................................... 3-192
Table 3-40 – Establishments, Employment & Payrolls Brentwood, Central Islip, Bay
Shore, Hauppauge, Suffolk County, 2004 ............................................. 3-192
Table 3-41 – Fiscal Indicators, Brentwood Union Free School District, Fiscal
Year 2004 ................................................................................................ 3-194
Table 3-42 – Fiscal Indicators, Brentwood Public Library, Fiscal Year 2004 ............ 3-194
Table 3-43 – Fiscal Indicators, Brentwood Fire District, Fiscal Year 2004 ................ 3-195
Table 3-44 – Fiscal Indicators, Town of Islip, Fiscal Year 2004 ................................ 3-196
Table 3-45 – Capacity vs. Enrollment in the Brentwood Union Free School District 3-200
Table 4-1 – Phasing Summary of Uses ............................................................................ 4-8
Table 4-2 – Existing Versus Proposed Site Coverage ..................................................... 4-9
Table 4-3 – Sanitary Loading ........................................................................................ 4-36
Table 4-4 – Existing Water Supply Wells ..................................................................... 4-40
Table 4-5 – Stormwater Storage Requirements ............................................................. 4-44
Table 4-6 – Permeable Acres ......................................................................................... 4-52
Table 4-7 – Pervious Recharge ...................................................................................... 4-53
Table 4-8 – Impervious Recharge .................................................................................. 4-53
Table 4-9 – Irrigation Recharge ..................................................................................... 4-54
Table 4-10 – Pre- and Post-Development Recharge Conditions ................................... 4-55
Table 4-11 – Pre- and Post-Construction Vegetation .................................................... 4-70
Table 4-12 – Open Space Calculations ........................................................................ 4-107
List of Tables (continued)
Page
Table 4-13 – Permeability Calculations ....................................................................... 4-109
Table 4-14 – Other Planned Developments ................................................................. 4-123
Table 4-15 – ITE Trip Generation Summary - AM Peak Hour ................................... 4-131
Table 4-16 – ITE Trip Generation Summary - PM Peak Hour.................................... 4-131
Table 4-17 – ITE Trip Generation Summary - Saturday Peak Hour ........................... 4-132
Table 4-18 – Midday Peak Hour Trip Rates ................................................................ 4-132
Table 4-19 – Trip Generation Summary - Midday Peak Hour ................................... 4-133
Table 4-20 – Trip Summary by Zone - AM Peak Hour............................................... 4-137
Table 4-21 – Trip Summary by Zone – Midday Peak Hour ........................................ 4-137
Table 4-22 – Trip Summary by Zone - PM Peak Hour ............................................... 4-138
Table 4-23 – Trip Summary by Zone - Saturday Peak Hour ....................................... 4-138
Table 4-24 – Internal versus External Trip Generation Summary ............................... 4-138
Table 4-25 – Trip Allocation by Purpose .................................................................... 4-141
Table 4-26 – Summary of Travel Modes for External Trips ....................................... 4-143
Table 4-27 – Geographic Origin of Vehicles Entering Heartland ............................... 4-143
Table 4-28 – Geographic Destination of Vehicles Exiting Heartland ......................... 4-144
Table 4-29 – Portal Demand Model Summary - AM Peak Hour ................................ 4-147
Table 4-30 – Portal Demand Model Summary - Midday Peak Hour .......................... 4-148
Table 4-31 – Portal Demand Model Summary - PM Peak Hour ................................. 4-148
Table 4-32 – Portal Demand Model Summary - Saturday Peak Hour ........................ 4-149
Table 4-33 – Access Point Lane Configurations ......................................................... 4-151
Table 4-34 – LOS Summary - AM Peak Hour ............................................................ 4-155
Table 4-35 – LOS Summary - Midday Peak Hour ...................................................... 4-157
Table 4-36 – LOS Summary - PM Peak Hour ............................................................. 4-159
Table 4-37 – LOS Summary - Saturday Peak Hour .................................................... 4-161
Table 4-38 – LOS Summary for Town of Babylon Intersections - AM Peak Hour .... 4-163
Table 4-39 – LOS Summary for Town of Babylon Intersections –
Midday Peak Hour .................................................................................. 4-164
Table 4-40 – LOS Summary for Town of Babylon Intersections - PM Peak Hour..... 4-165
Table 4-41 – LOS Summary for Town of Babylon Intersections –
Saturday Peak Hour ................................................................................ 4-166
Table 4-42 – SimTraffic Travel Times for Sagtikos Parkway ..................................... 4-168
Table 4-43 – SimTraffic Maximum Ramp Queues for Sagtikos Parkway Exit Ramps
(Distance in Feet) ......................................................................................................... 4-170
Table 4-44 – SimTraffic Maximum Ramp Queues for Long Island Expressway/
Commack Road Interchange Exit Ramps (Distance in Feet) ................. 4-171
Table 4-45 – LOS Summary for Internal Intersections – PM Peak Hour .................... 4-176
Table 4-46 – Electric Demand and Savings Potential (452±-acre Property) ............... 4-180
Table 4-47 – Electric Demand and Savings Potential (Gateway Area) ....................... 4-180
Table 4-48 – Screening of Projected Increases in Traffic Noise Levels...................... 4-189
Table 4-49 – No Build AM Peak Leq Noise Levels (dBA) ......................................... 4-190
Table 4-50 – Build and No Build AM Hourly Leq Noise Levels (dBA) .................... 4-191
Table 4-51 – The Proposed Development Plan for Heartland Town Square .............. 4-196
List of Tables (continued)
Page
Table 4-52 – Proposed Uses, Submission Plan, Old Plainview ................................... 4-200
Table 4-53 – Distribution of Construction Costs, by Project Phase ............................ 4-207
Table 4-54 – Projected Number of Construction Jobs Generated Annually ............... 4-209
Table 4-55 – Output, Earnings and Employment Multipliers for The Construction
Industry .................................................................................................. 4-211
Table 4-56 – The Secondary Economic Impact of Construction Spending of
$1,065,593,442 For Phase I Of Heartland Town Square ........................ 4-213
Table 4-57 – The Secondary Economic Impact of Construction Spending of
$1,319,142,220 For Phase II Of Heartland Town Square....................... 4-214
Table 4-58 – The Secondary Economic Impact of Construction Spending of
$821,040,337 For Phase III Of Heartland Town Square ........................ 4-215
Table 4-59 – Secondary Economic Impact of Heartland Town Square, Phases I, II,
and III ...................................................................................................... 4-216
Table 4-60 – The Proposed Development Plan for Heartland Town Square .............. 4-218
Table 4-61 – Estimated Permanent Jobs at Heartland Town Square ........................... 4-219
Table 4-62 – Projected Industry Mix of Jobs and Payrolls at Heartland Town Square
Phase I ..................................................................................................... 4-220
Table 4-63 – Projected Industry Mix of Jobs and Payrolls at Heartland Town Square,
Phase II.................................................................................................... 4-221
Table 4-64 – Projected Industry Mix of Jobs and Payrolls at Heartland Town Square,
Phase III .................................................................................................. 4-222
Table 4-65 – Estimated Direct and Secondary Employment at the End of Phase III .. 4-224
Table 4-66 – Estimated Direct and Secondary Earnings at the End of Phase III ........ 4-225
Table 4-67 – Planned Rental Units and For-Sale Condominiums by Size and Market
Rate vs. Affordable Workforce Housing Units, Phases I Through III.... 4-226
Table 4-68 – Annual Income of Renters Based on Initial Rents ................................. 4-227
Table 4-69 – Estimated Disposable Annual Incomes of Renters at............................. 4-227
Table 4-70 – Estimated Disposable Annual Incomes of .............................................. 4-228
Table 4-71 – The Secondary Economic Impact of $295,063,215 ............................... 4-229
Table 4-72 – Planned Rental Units, Heartland Town Square ...................................... 4-229
Table 4-73 – Rental Units as a Proportion of the Total Housing Stock, Selected Areas,
2005........................................................................................................ 4-230
Table 4-74 – The Population of Potential Renters, Brentwood, Islip Town, Suffolk
County, 2000 ........................................................................................... 4-231
Table 4-75 – The Affordability of Rental Housing in Suffolk County and Islip Town
2005........................................................................................................ 4-231
Table 4-76 – The Affordability of Rental Housing in Brentwood, 2000..................... 4-232
Table 4-77 - Annual Incomes Needed for Affordable Units, Heartland Town Square 4-232
Table 4-78 – Median Annual Wages for Selected Long Island Occupations, Second
Quarter 2006 ........................................................................................... 4-233
Table 4-79 – Household Growth by Income in the Primary Market Area For Heartland
Town Square ........................................................................................... 4-234
List of Tables (continued)
Page
Table 4-80 – Projected Initial Rents of Market-Rate Units at Heartland
Town Square ........................................................................................... 4-235
Table 4-81 – The Median Sales Price of Long Island Homes, 1998-2006 .................. 4-235
Table 4-82 – The Percentage of Renter-Occupied Units in Brentwood ...................... 4-236
Table 4-83 – Long Island’s Office Market, Third Quarter 2006 ................................. 4-237
Table 4-84 – Projected Long Island Payroll Employment, 2006-2025 (000 Jobs) ..... 4-238
Table 4-85 – Per Capita and Total Personal Income, by Place of Residence,
2002-04 ................................................................................................... 4-240
Table 4-86 – Trends in Sales Tax Revenues, Nassau and Suffolk Counties, 1
995-2006 ................................................................................................ 4-240
Table 4-87 – Projected Household Incomes in Heartland Town Square’s Primary
Market Area ............................................................................................ 4-241
Table 4-88 – The Size Mix of Proposed Rental Apartments at Heartland Town
Square ..................................................................................................... 4-244
Table 4-89 – Persons Per Apartment Unit Rental Housing in 5 or More Unit
Buildings ................................................................................................ 4-245
Table 4-90 – Estimated Population at Heartland Town Square, by Phase of
Development Market-Rate Apartments ................................................. 4-246
Table 4-91 – Estimated Population at Heartland Town Square by Phase of
Development Affordable Apartments .................................................... 4-247
Table 4-92 – Estimated Resident Population at Heartland Town Square .................... 4-247
Table 4-93 – Persons Per Condominium Unit in Structures ........................................ 4-248
Table 4-94 – Estimated Population at Heartland Town Square, by Phase of
Development: For Sale Condominiums .................................................. 4-249
Table 4-95 – Estimated Population at Heartland Town Square, by Phase of
Development: Affordable Townhomes and Condominiums .................. 4-250
Table 4-96 – Total Estimated Population at Heartland Town Square ......................... 4-250
Table 4-97 – School-Aged Children Per Apartment Unit Rental Housing in 5 or
More Units Buildings.............................................................................. 4-252
Table 4-98 – Planned Rental Units, Heartland Town Square, by Size and Type ........ 4-252
Table 4-99 – Estimated School-Aged Children, Market Rate Apartments ................. 4-253
Table 4-100 – Estimated School-Aged Children, Affordable Apartments .................. 4-253
Table 4-101 – School-Aged Children Generated by Condominium Units in .............. 4-254
Table 4-102 – Estimated School-Aged Children at Heartland Town Square .............. 4-254
Table 4-103 – Estimated Full Market Value of Heartland Town Square, Phase I ...... 4-256
Table 4-104 – Estimated Full Market Value of Heartland Town Square, Phase II ..... 4-256
Table 4-105 – Estimated Full Market Value of Heartland Town Square, Phase III .... 4-256
Table 4-106 – Projected Tax Revenues From Non-Homestead Portion of ................. 4-257
Table 4-107 – Projected Tax Revenues From Non-Homestead Portion of ................. 4-257
Table 4-108 – Projected Tax Revenues From Non-Homestead Portion of ................. 4-257
Table 4-109 – Projected Tax Revenues From Homestead Portion of ......................... 4-258
Table 4-110 – Projected Tax Revenues From Homestead Portion of ......................... 4-258
Table 4-111 – Projected Tax Revenues From Homestead Portion of ......................... 4-258
List of Tables (continued)
Page
Table 4-112 – Projected Property Tax Revenues From Heartland Town Square........ 4-259
Table 4-113 – Allocation of Tax Revenues at End of Phase III to .............................. 4-259
Table 4-114 – Estimated Added Costs Verses Added Revenues to the ...................... 4-260
Table 4-115 – Capacity vs. Enrollment, Selected Schools, Brentwood Union Free
School District ..................................................................................... 4-260
Table 4-116 – Estimated Solid Waste Generation: Phase I ........................................ 4-270
Table 4-117 – Estimated Solid Waste Generation - Phase II....................................... 4-271
Table 4-118 – Estimated Solid Waste Generation - Phase III ..................................... 4-272
Table 4-119 – Total Projected Solid Waste (Pounds Per Day) .................................... 4-272
Table 5-1 – Water Conservation Data ............................................................................. 5-9
Table 5-2 – Traffic Mitigation Schedule ....................................................................... 5-27
Table 5-3 – Alternative Fuel Availability ...................................................................... 5-32
Table 5-4 – Town of Islip Zoning Code - Parking Requirements ................................. 5-39
Table 5-5 – ITE Parking Generation - Parking Requirements ....................................... 5-41
Table 7-1 – Comparison of Alternatives .......................................................................... 7-2
Table 7-2 – Overall Trip Generation Comparison PM Peak Hour ................................. 7-3
Table 7-3 – PM Peak Hour Trip Generation Summary - Yield Map............................. 7-17
Table 7-4 – Projected Tax Revenues, Development Under Existing “Residence AAA”
Zoning* ....................................................................................................... 7-20
Table 7-5 – Number of School Age Children, Single Family Detached Housing ......... 7-21
Table 7-6 – Projected Number of School-Age Children, 381 Single Family Homes.... 7-21
Table 7-7 – Estimated Added Educational Costs vs. Estimated Added Tax Revenues 7-21
Table 7-8 – Number of Persons per Unit, Single Family Detached Housing ................ 7-22
Table 7-9 – Projected Number of Persons, 381 Single Family Homes ......................... 7-22
Table 7-10 – Site Data Summary for Alternate Development Under the Oak Brush
Plains SGPA.............................................................................................. 7-26
Table 7-11 – PM Peak Hour Trip Generation Summary Senior Housing and
Institutional Use ........................................................................................ 7-33
Table 7-12 – Projected Tax Revenues, 1,358 Senior Units ........................................... 7-35
Table 7-13 – Projected Tax Revenues, Institutional Component
(Private Hospital Use) ............................................................................... 7-35
Table 7-14 – Site Data Summary for Redevelopment of the Former Pilgrim Property
Under Preliminary Utilization Master Plan for Office of Mental Health
Option C November 1995 ......................................................................... 7-38
Table 7-15 – PM Peak Hour Trip Generation Summary – Preliminary Re-Utilization
Master Plan for the OMH ......................................................................... 7-43
Table 7-16 – Proposed Uses of Site ............................................................................... 7-45
Table 7-17 – Projected Tax Revenues, Residential Component.................................... 7-46
Table 7-18 – Projected Tax Revenues, Offices and Commercial Services ................... 7-46
Table 7-19 – Projected Tax Revenues, Community Retail............................................ 7-47
Table 7-20 – Projected Tax Revenues, Sports & Entertainment ................................... 7-47
List of Tables (continued)
Page
Table 7-21 – Projected Tax Revenues, R&D, Light Industrial...................................... 7-48
Table 7-22 – Estimated Annual Property Taxes, Preliminary Reutilization Master
Plan Empire State Development Corporation ........................................... 7-48
Table 7-23 – School-Age Children Per Apartment Unit Owner Units in 5 or More
Units Buildings ......................................................................................... 7-49
Table 7-24 – Estimated Added Educational Costs vs. Estimated Added Tax
Revenues ................................................................................................... 7-50
Table 7-25 – Persons Per Apartment Unit, Owner Housing in 5 or More Unit
Buildings ................................................................................................... 7-51
Table 7-26 – Site Data Summary for Redevelopment with Phase III Alternative
Industrial Rezoning on the Former Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center
Property for Multi-Tenant Office/Industrial Uses .................................... 7-53
Table 7-27 – PM Peak Hour Trip Generation Summary - Phase III Multi-Tenant
Office/Industrial Development ................................................................. 7-59
Table 7-28 – Proposed Development Plan for This Alternative .................................... 7-61
Table 7-29 – Estimated Full Market Value of This Alternative .................................... 7-61
Table 7-30 – Projected Tax Revenues From This Alternative ...................................... 7-62
1.0 Executive Summary
1-1
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This document is a Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement (“DGEIS”) prepared in
accordance with the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) and its implementing
regulations at 6 NYCRR Part 617, and pursuant to the March 10, 2009 Positive Declaration issued by
the Town of Islip Town Board, as lead agency for the action contemplated herein. This DGEIS
evaluates the potential adverse impacts associated with the proposed action which consists of the
adoption of amendments to the zoning chapter of the Code of the Town of Islip (Chapter 68 of the
Code of the Town of Islip), including the Building Zone Map, to establish a Pilgrim State Planned
Redevelopment District (“PSPRD”); future changes in the zoning classifications of certain parcels,
designated as Suffolk County Tax Map (“SCTM”) parcels 500-71-1-10.2 and 10.8, and 500-71-113.6, and now classified in the “Residence AAA” zoning district, so as to include such parcels (to be
known as the subject property) in the newly-established PSPRD; and redevelopment of the aforesaid
parcels in accordance with a Conceptual Master Plan pursuant to the requirements set forth in the
PSPRD. The proposed Conceptual Master Plan embodies the development, to be known as
“Heartland Town Square.” The Town of Islip application identification number for the proposed
project is CZ2003-014.
Upon review of the application, the Town Board issued a Positive Declaration on September 9, 2003,
which required the preparation of a draft environmental impact statement. A formal scoping process
was conducted by the lead agency, the Town Board of the Town of Islip (hereinafter “Town Board”),
to identify impact issues that required evaluation in the draft environmental impact statement. These
impact issues were outlined in a Final Scope and are as follows: Land; Water; Air; Plants and
Animals; Aesthetic Resources; Open Space and Recreation; Critical Environmental Areas;
Transportation; Energy; Noise and Odor; and Growth and Character of the Community or
Neighborhood (a copy of which is annexed hereto as Appendix A).
The applicants submitted an initial DEIS to the lead agency in April 2005, and received various
comments from the Town of Islip’s Department of Planning and Development. A revised DEIS was
submitted to the lead agency in June 2007, and Department of Planning and Development provided
various comments on that DEIS.
Since the time of preparation of the last version of the DEIS (i.e., with a revision date of December
2008 [which includes the May 2008 Addendum to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for
Proposed Heartland Town Square (Redevelopment of a Portion of Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center)
Dated June 2007], the Town of Islip’s Department of Planning and Development continued to raise
technical objections with respect to the accuracy of the traffic generation presented. At this point,
there remain technical differences between the applicants and the Town with respect to this issue as
well as sewer discharge, etc. These differences are outlined in Section 12.0 of this DGEIS. The
applicants’ position is that it is not required that technical issues and/or differences in opinion with
respect to technical analyses be resolved as part of the lead agency’s determination as to whether the
EIS for the proposed Heartland Town Square is complete and adequate for public review. The
applicants support the aforesaid position through review of 6NYCRR 617.9(a)(2) and at pages 69
through 71 of The SEQR Handbook (NYSDEC, November 1992), which states, in pertinent part,
1.0 Executive Summary
1-2
“2. Is there a particular basis for determining the adequacy of a draft EIS?
Yes. The lead agency should rely on the written scope of issues, if one was prepared, and
the standards in 617.141-1 which cover the content of EIS’s. The lead agency should
ensure that all relevant information has been presented and analyzed, but should not
require an unreasonably exhaustive or “perfect” document. The degree of detail should
reflect the complexity of the action and the magnitude and importance of likely impacts.
A draft impact statement should describe the action, alternatives to the action and various
means of mitigating impacts of the action. It should discuss all significant environmental
issues related to the action, but it is not the document in which all such issues must be
resolved. Resolution of issues before acceptance of a draft EIS, in fact, defeats one of the
major purposes of a draft EIS; that is, to give the public an opportunity to comment on the
various alternatives regarding the action, so that such comments may be part of the final
decision making considerations.
7. Is there a limit on the number of times a lead agency may reject a submitted draft
EIS?
The SEQR regulations place no limit on rejection of a draft EIS, except that the lead
agency must identify the deficiencies in writing to the project sponsor. If a lead agency’s
request for the inclusion of necessary information is ignored or refused, the agency may
continue to reject the document.
However, the lead agency should remember that a draft EIS does not need to be perfect. It
should contain a discussion of information, including significant impacts, alternatives and
mitigation measures requested by the lead agency in a reasonable level of detail. The
purpose of the public comment period is to allow all involved agencies and the public to
review the draft EIS and comment on its inadequacies. These can usually be corrected in
a final EIS.
If there is a fundamental disagreement between the lead agency and the preparer of the
draft EIS about its acceptability, it is possible to simply disclose that disagreement in the
document itself and explain how the parties vary in their opinions. The public will then be
able to comment on this as well.
9. Must differences in interpretation between the project sponsor and lead agency
experts regarding a technical issue be resolved before determining a draft EIS as
complete?
No. It is not necessary to resolve these types of disputes before accepting the draft EIS as
complete. In cases where there are valid differences in the interpretation of a technical
issue, the lead agency should include both interpretations in the draft EIS. Providing both
positions allows a reviewer to reach an independent determination regarding the impact.”
(emphasis added)
1-1
The numbering of the sections in 6 NYCRR Part 617 was modified, based on revisions to the regulations that occurred
subsequent to the preparation of The SEQR Handbook. The referenced standards are now found in 6 NYCRR §617.9 and
not §617.14.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-3
At the request of the Town, and in order to further explain the applicants’ position, the applicants
prepared an Addendum to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Proposed Heartland Town
Square (hereinafter the “Addendum,” a copy of which is annexed in Appendix A of this DGEIS).
The Addendum was prepared, at the request of the Town of Islip, to address technical questions
relating to the traffic impact analysis, the proposed mitigation for traffic impacts and sewer discharge,
and the phasing. At the request of the Town, the applicants prepared another revised DEIS in
December 2008, which incorporated the Addendum into the body of the DEIS.
During the review of the various DEIS documents by the Town, discussions were held between the
applicants and Town representatives, and the proposed action was modified to (a) include the area
described above as the Islip Gateway Community Improvement Area as part of the Conceptual
Master Plan, and (b) provide for phasing. The DEIS prepared in December 2008 included both these
items, and upon review of that DEIS, the Town determined that the applicants should submit an
amended petition to address the inclusion of the Gateway Community Improvement Area and the
proposed phasing.
Based on the foregoing, the applicants submitted an “Amended Support Petition” to the Town Board
on March 3, 2009, and then submitted a “Further Amended Support Petition” on March 10, 2009
(hereinafter sometimes collectively referred to herein as the “Amended Petitions”). Upon review of
the Amended Petitions, the Town Board issued a positive declaration on March 10, 2009, which,
among other things, required the preparation of a generic environmental impact statement (“GEIS”)
(see Appendix A).
6 NYCRR §617.10(a) allows a GEIS when a proposed action consists of:
1. a number of separate actions in a given geographic area which, if considered singly, may have
minor impacts; but if considered together, may have significant impacts;
2. a sequence of actions, contemplated by a single agency or individual; or
3. separate actions having generic or common impacts; or
4. an entire program or plan having wide application or restricting the range of future alternative
policies or projects, including new or significant changes to existing land use plans,
development plans, zoning regulations or agency comprehensive resource management plans.
Thus, this DGEIS evaluates the impacts associated with the implementation of the PSPRD and
subsequent redevelopment of the identified parcels associated with the overall Heartland Town
Square development proposal, in accordance with the Conceptual Master Plan, as required by the
Positive Declaration adopted by the Town Board on March 10, 2009.
As this DGEIS is comprehensive, in accordance with 6 NYCRR §617.9(b)(5), this Executive
Summary is designed solely to provide a concise overview of the proposed action, a brief summary of
the potential adverse impacts identified and mitigation measures proposed as well as alternatives
considered. Review of the Executive Summary is not a substitute for the full evaluation of the
proposed action performed in Sections 2.0 through 13.0 of this DGEIS.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-4
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
This Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement (“DGEIS”) has been prepared for the proposed
action, which consists of the adoption of amendments to the zoning chapter of the Code of the Town
of Islip (Chapter 68 of the Code of the Town of Islip), including the Building Zone Map, to establish
a Pilgrim State Planned Redevelopment District (“PSPRD”); changes in the zoning classifications of
certain parcels, designated as Suffolk County Tax Map (“SCTM”) parcels 500-71-1-10.2 and 10.8,
and 500-71-1-13.6, and now classified in the “Residence AAA” zoning district, so as to include such
parcels (to be known as Heartland Town Square) in the newly-established PSPRD; changes in the
zoning classifications of certain parcels, designated as Suffolk County Tax Map (“SCTM”) parcels
500-71-1-1, 500-71-1-2, 500-71-1-3, 500-71-1-4 and 15, 500-71-1-5, 500-71-1-6, 500-71-1-7, 50071-1-8.1, 8.2, 9.1, 500-71-1-9.2 and 500-71-1-14 (see Appendix D) and now classified in the
“Industrial 1,” “Industrial 2,” “Residence AAA,” and “General Service E” zoning districts, so as to
include such parcels (known currently as the Islip Gateway Community Improvement Area) in the
newly-established PSPRD; and redevelopment of the aforesaid parcels in accordance with a
Conceptual Master Plan for Heartland Town Square pursuant to the requirements set forth in the
PSPRD. The Town of Islip application identification number for the proposed project is CZ2003014.
The proposed Conceptual Master Plan embodies the development, to be known as “Heartland Town
Square.” The parcels to be rezoned and redeveloped into Heartland Town Square consist of a 452±acre portion of the Pilgrim Psychiatric Center and the 23.59±-acre Islip Gateway Community
Improvement Area (hereinafter the “Gateway Area”). These properties collectively are hereinafter
referred to as either the “subject property” or “Heartland Town Square.” The 475.59±-acre subject
property is situated on both the east and west sides of the Sagtikos State Parkway, south of the Long
Island Expressway (“LIE”) (State Route 495), north of the Heartland Business Center, east of
Commack Road (County Road 4), and west of Crooked Hill Road (County Road 13), in the Town of
Islip, County of Suffolk, State of New York. It should be noted that a portion of the original Pilgrim
State Psychiatric Center that is owned and controlled by the New York State Office of Mental Health
(“OMH”) is proposed to remain. This 200±-acre property is proposed to be surrounded on three sides
by the proposed Heartland Town Square development.
The approximately 452 acres comprising a portion of the subject property consist of a major segment
of the former Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center (the “former Pilgrim site”), which was operated by the
State of New York. The main portion of the site (approximately 365 of the 452± acres) is generally
located between the LIE (to the north), Crooked Hill Road and the Sagtikos State Parkway (to the
east), the Heartland Business Center (to the south), and the Town of Huntington boundary (to the
west). An additional 87±-acre portion of the property is located on the east side of the Sagtikos State
Parkway, connected to the main site by Community College Road, which passes over the Sagtikos
State Parkway.
In conjunction with the subject Smart Growth initiative embodied in the proposed PSPRD, the Town
Board of the Town of Islip is pursuing the implementation of an Urban Renewal Plan for a 23.59±acre area along Crooked Hill Road, south of the LIE, and proximate to the 452±-acre portion of the
former Pilgrim site, to be known as the “Gateway Area.” This area was defined in The Town of Islip
report entitled Finding of Blight for the Islip Gateway Community Improvement Area (hereinafter
“Finding of Blight report”). The Town of Islip is considering a condemnation process, so that
portions of the Gateway Area, as identified in the Finding of Blight report, can be redeveloped and
1.0 Executive Summary
1-5
the blighted conditions can be eliminated. The applicants have offered to fund the condemnation
proceedings and to redevelop the Gateway Area in accordance with the proposed PSPRD zoning. As
previously noted, the proposed Conceptual Master Plan, pursuant to the PSPRD, would incorporate
the entire 475.59 (475.6±) acres, which would be known collectively as Heartland Town Square.
The 23.59±-acre Gateway Area is also included in the proposed rezoning and redevelopment. The
Gateway Area consists of two areas, one on the west side of Crooked Hill Road abutting the former
Pilgrim property, and another on the east side of Crooked Hill Road bounded by a New York State
recharge basin on the north and the LIE/Sagtikos Parkway southbound ramp on the east. An existing
hotel is located in the southern portion of the Gateway Area (SCTM parcel 500-71-1-9.2). This hotel
(the 111-room, 55,200±-square-foot Wingate Inn) and associated facilities (situated on a 3.16±-acre
parcel), although included within the 23.59±-acre Gateway Area, would remain unchanged.
At its peak, the Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center housed between 12,000 and 15,000 patients with an
unknown number of staff (estimated at hundreds, if not thousands). These numbers are similar to the
population that is being proposed to reside and work on-site in the proposed Heartland Town Square
development. Furthermore, Pilgrim, like many of the other psychiatric centers on Long Island,
essentially operated as its own city. This city-like, self-sufficient concept is the underlying premise
of the Heartland Town Square community.
The 452±-acre portion of the subject property is not used for any activities, at present. All of the
buildings that remain on the 452±-acre portion of the site are abandoned. As discussed later in this
DGEIS, most buildings within the subject property have been demolished, and most of the remainder
are proposed to be demolished. Several of the buildings (especially on the east side of the Sagtikos
State Parkway) are proposed to remain as part of the Heartland Town Square community.
The level of activity in the Gateway Area differs from that of the main portion of the Heartland Town
Square site. Existing, active businesses, including a newly-constructed hotel, occupy the Gateway
Area. According to the Finding of Blight report prepared by the Town, of the 23.59± acres, 10.14±
acres (43 percent) are all or largely outdoor storage. In addition, 11 of the 13 properties included
within the Gateway Area have minimal site improvements. The area includes a concentration of uses
that do not conform to the extant zoning regulations with regard to setbacks, parking and landscaping.
Furthermore, the uses create a perception and reality of blight within the Town.
A new planned development district has been proposed that would guide development within the
452±-acre portion of the Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center that is proposed to be redeveloped as well
as in the 23.59-acre Gateway Area. As outlined in the proposed zone, the intent of the PSPRD is to
encourage a mixed-use, “Smart Growth” redevelopment pursuant to a conceptual master plan to be
approved by the Town of Islip. The conceptual master plan has been developed based upon the
standards set forth in the zoning district and specifies the general locations of the proposed
subdistricts, representative types and general locations of land uses, and the general scale and
intensity of development within each subdistrict.
An important facet of the PSPRD is the ability to adapt specific development to market conditions,
given the size of the property and the 15+-year build-out. Therefore, it must be understood that, given
the long-term build-out and the scope of development of Heartland Town Square, it is not possible to
prepare and commit to precise site plans. Precise uses in any particular area would be dependent
upon various factors, the most significant of which is market demand. Accordingly, a conceptual
1.0 Executive Summary
1-6
development plan has been prepared to represent the likely development scenario, in accordance with
the proposed PSPRD. Moreover, the conceptual development plan that is evaluated herein represents
maximum potential development. This ensures a worst-case environmental analysis, pursuant to
SEQRA.
The PSPRD sets forth the objectives and characteristics of the subdistricts proposed to be located on
the site.
Planned Redevelopment District – Town Center (PRD–TC): This is the proposed Town
Center subdistrict that is designed to accommodate a range of compatible land uses, mixing
employment opportunities with housing, retail, entertainment, civic and cultural uses. The
objective of this district is to create a pedestrian-friendly public infrastructure that encourages
community and business activity as well public places and spaces that provide focus for
community life, special events, etc.
Planned Redevelopment District – Office (PRD-OF): The office district is intended to allow
predominantly office-campus development, but also accommodates business support uses
such as hotels, conference centers, retail stores, restaurants and rental housing.
Planned Redevelopment District – Residential (PRD-RES): This subdistrict is intended to be
primarily developed with a mix of housing types, but also accommodates residential support
uses such as mixed-use business service centers, neighborhood shopping, day care facilities,
houses of worship and similar establishments that support the internal needs of a residential
community.
The proposed PSPRD zoning district sets forth the principal and accessory uses that are permitted in
each of the subdistricts as well as indicating the maximum height, minimum setbacks and minimum
open space required. The details of the requirements of each subdistrict are contained in Appendix A
of this DGEIS. The overall open space requirement for all the subdistricts is 30 percent of the total
land area.
The mechanisms for site plan, subdivision and special permit approval are set forth within the
proposed PSPRD zoning district. Although the Town Board of the Town of Islip must approve the
Conceptual Master Plan and any amendments thereto, the Planning Board of the Town of Islip is the
agency responsible for granting site plan, subdivision and special permit approval. In making its
decisions, the Planning Board must consider the general health, safety and welfare of the Town,
whether the uses are consistent with the approved Conceptual Master Plan and whether the uses are
in harmony with and would promote the general purposes and intent of the PSPRD, among other
things. During the site plan, subdivision and/or special permit review process, landscaping and
lighting must be evaluated by the Planning Board. Thus plans, detailing these components, must be
submitted to the Planning Board. Permitted encroachments on required setbacks are also listed in the
PSPRD.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-7
The proposed action not only involves the creation of the PSPRD, but also includes the rezoning of
the 475.6±-acre subject property into the proposed PSPRD. Upon adoption of the PSPRD and the
approval of the change of zone of the parcels into such zone, the subject property is proposed to be
redeveloped into Heartland Town Square. The area to be rezoned includes 365± acres to the west of
the Sagtikos State Parkway (western segment of former Pilgrim site) and 87± acres to the east of the
Sagtikos State Parkway (eastern segment of former Pilgrim site). The proposed action also includes
the rezoning of parcels in the 23.6±-acre Gateway Area into the PSPRD.
According to RTKL Associates, Inc. (hereinafter “RTKL”), the master planners of the proposed
development, the goal of the 452±-acre Heartland Town Square development is to create a model for
Smart Growth community development in Suffolk County. Such developments are designed to
create an efficient, transportation-served, multi-use environment that mixes employment, shopping,
entertainment and housing. At the core of the Smart Growth development strategy for Heartland
Town Square is the recognition that sharing resources is often smarter than duplicating resources. The
evolution of a more integrative and efficient community-based planning strategy opens up significant
opportunities for maximizing the resources of the community as a whole. The efficiency that is
created when all of a community’s assets are integrated has an impact on the community’s physical,
cultural, social, economic and organizational resources.
The guidelines herein are designed to foster the development of the Heartland Town Square as a
viable mixed-use community with a range of land uses including office, housing and retail. The key
to sustaining a mix of uses of this type is to employ design control over the scale and urban form of
each building regardless of use, and provide a flexible, gridded development framework that can
accommodate a range of building types. Unlike the typical suburban development pattern where a
separate “stand-alone” building form is the norm, in the Heartland Town Square, the objective is to
create an environment with visual continuity and a user-friendly public realm.
The 475.6±-acre framework plan is divided into four sub-areas known as “Development Units” and
an additional sub-area known as the Gateway Area. Each Development Unit (including the Gateway
Area) has a different land use mix and is geared to attract different segments of the market. Three of
the Development Units are located to the west of the Sagtikos State Parkway and are connected by
the central feature of the plan -- a circular boulevard. The fourth Development Unit is an 87±-acre
tract located east of the Sagtikos State Parkway adjacent to the Suffolk County Community College
(“SCCC”) and connected back to the main portion of Heartland Town Square along Campus Road.
The circular boulevard serves two functions -- first, it provides an internal collector street to disperse
traffic in multiple directions, and second, it’s curvilinear alignment sends a signal that it is more
automobile dominant and, therefore, different from the rectilinear geometry of the pedestrian-friendly
street grid employed in each Development Unit. The other portion of the development involves the
Gateway Area. This 23.59±-acre tract, located on the east and west sides of Crooked Hill Road,
south of the Long Island Expressway would be connected to Development Unit #1, to the west, and
Development Unit #2, to the south, as explained below.
The urban form is created, in part, by the corridor street space framed by connected “street wall”
buildings, and in part, by the consistency of the street landscaping detail within the street space. High
quality street landscaping is an important feature for this type of urban neighborhood where the
public street space becomes, in effect, the place for the social interactions that builds a sense of
community.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-8
The plan is subdivided into four primary Development Units: PRD-TC (Development Unit 1), PRDOF (Development Unit 2), PRD-RES (Development Unit 3), and PRD-RES (Development Unit 4).
The Gateway Area would be seamlessly interconnected with Development Units #1 and #2. The
subdistricts indicated herein are defined above. The existing, adjacent cemetery is not included as
part of any Development Unit. Section 2.5.2 of this DGEIS provides additional narrative and a
graphic depiction of each of the three proposed phases.
Development Unit #1 has an area of approximately 179.6 acres and is planned as a mixed-use
development focused around an open-air “Life Style” retail center. The development framework is
composed of the rectilinear street grid and a system of parks and public plazas. In effect, the
development pattern is seen as a modern interpretation of a traditional small town urban form. The
target development program includes: 775,900 square feet (“sf”) of retail, 2,450 residential units,
80,000 sf of civic space, and 1,800,000 sf of office space.
Development Unit #2 has an area of approximately 88.4 acres and is also a mixed-use development
but with a much stronger emphasis on commercial development trading on its proximity to the
junction of the Sagtikos State Parkway and the LIE. The target development program includes:
198,500 sf of retail, 1,450,000 sf of commercial space, and 1,500 residential units.
Development Unit #3 has an area of approximately 87.1 acres and is planned as a traditional
neighborhood development with the emphasis on housing clustered around the adaptive reuse of the
existing power plant and workshops as a community arts center. The development program includes a
small amount of neighborhood support retail (10,000 sf), 2,650 residential units, 100,000 sf of
commercial space and 25,000 sf of civic uses.
Development Unit #4 has an area of approximately 79.9 acres and is also planned as a traditional
neighborhood development with an emphasis on housing. The plan is focused around a central
village green that is the centerpiece of an existing cluster of historic houses and cottages that housed
the hospital staff. The target development program includes 2,400 residential units, and 15,600 sf of
neighborhood supporting retail uses.
Gateway Area is approximately 23.59 acres in size and is planned to contain a mix of office, retail
and residential uses in the character as the other Development Units within Heartland Town Square.
The program for this area includes 800,000 sf of office development, 30,000 sf of retail development
and 130 residential units. The existing 111-room hotel would remain. Parking would generally be
located within several parking garages.
The following table presents the proposed build-out schedule.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-9
Proposed Development Build-Out Schedule
Development
Unit #1
Development
Unit #2
Development
Unit #3
Development
Unit #4
Gateway
Area1-2
Total Project
Use
Office SF
Retail SF
Civic SF
Residential
Units
Office SF
Retail SF
Civic SF
Residential
Units
Office SF
Retail SF
Civic SF
Residential
Units
Office SF
Retail SF
Civic SF
Residential
Units
Office SF
Retail SF
Civic SF
Residential
Units
Office SF
Retail SF
Civic SF
Residential
Units
Phase
I (Years 1 - 5) II (Years 6 - 10) III (Years 11 - 15) Total
500,000
990,000
310,000 1,800,000
440,000
240,000
95,900
775,900
80,000
0
0
80,000
2,450
0
0
2,450
100,000
120,000
0
817,000
40,000
0
532,500
38,500
0
1,450,000
198,500
0
1,050
200
250
1,500
0
0
25,000
50,000
10,000
0
50,000
0
0
100,000
10,000
25,000
0
1,050
1,600
2,650
0
0
0
0
15,600
0
0
0
0
0
15,600
0
0
2,000
400
2,400
0
0
0
400,000
30,000
0
400,000
0
0
800,000
30,000
0
0
130
0
130
600,000
560,000
105,000
2,257,000
335,600
0
1,292,500
134,400
0
4,150,000
1,030,000
105,000
3,500
3,380
2,250
9,130
The projected mix of studio, one-bedroom and two-bedroom apartments will have a significant
impact on the size of the resident population at Heartland Town Square as well as the number of
school-aged children likely to be generated. Of the 9,130 units planned for Heartland Town Square,
and based upon a request by the Town that the proposed action include owner-occupied units, 8,217
(90 percent) would be rental units and 913 (10 percent) would be owner-occupied units. Of the
overall units, approximately five percent will be studio lofts, 25± percent will be one-bedroom units,
65± percent will be two-bedroom units, and approximately five percent will be two-bedroom units
plus a den. This mix will apply in all three phases of the proposed development.
1-2
The square footage of the existing Wingate Inn (55,236± square feet) is not included in the Gateway Area figures or
the overall total square footage as it is already built and there will be no change to such hotel.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-10
The applicants have committed to providing workforce housing units as part of this development. A
total of 20 percent of the rental units to be developed (i.e., 1,643 units) will be set aside as workforce
housing. A total of 90 percent of the units would be rental units and 10 percent would be ownership
units.
Heartland Town Square will include approximately one million square feet of quality retail space.
Approximately 905,000 sf of this would be configured as part of a “lifestyle center.” Lifestyle
centers are upscale, open-air shopping malls roughly one-third the size of the traditional mall. Two
common features of lifestyle centers are their convenient layouts and the lack of a department store.
They typically consist of between 150,000 and 500,000 sf of leaseable retail area. They feature
upscale architecture and include specialty retailers and restaurants such as J. Crew, Ann Taylor,
Victoria’s Secret, Talbot’s, Abercrombie & Fitch, Williams-Sonoma and the Cheesecake Factory.
The parking spaces within a lifestyle center are usually steps from the retailers’ door. Sales generated
by lifestyle centers can be as much as $400 to $500 per square foot, significantly higher than sales
generated by regional malls, which average $330 per square foot for non-anchor tenants. Lifestyle
centers are particularly attractive to shoppers who dislike enclosed malls.
Approximately 20,000 sf of retail space would be developed within the residential communities of
Heartland Town Square as neighborhood support retail use. The remaining 105,000 sf of retail use
would be developed within the office/commercial portion of the development to support the offices
and the 1,500 residential units within this area.
As conceived, it is assumed that 870,000 sf of the retail space would be categorized as general retail
space, 100,000 sf would be restaurants, and 60,000 sf would be cinema.
The office buildings planned for Heartland Town Square will add approximately 3.8 million sf
3,000,000 sf of Class “A” office space to Long Island’s Class “A” inventory. It has been assumed
that 30,000 sf of the total office space would be medical office use.
One segment of Long Island’s hotel market remains underserved. There is a recognized shortage of
“destination hotels,” defined as hotels that will be used primarily by the complexes in which they are
located, on Long Island. The proposed 240,000-square-foot, 250-room hotel at Heartland Town
Square would be one such destination hotel. This type of hotel would be different from the existing
Wingate Inn, located in the Gateway Area.
In addition, the development would include 105,000 square feet of civic space.
A conceptual development plan has been prepared showing the location, sizes and heights of the
various development types that are described throughout this section.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-11
Development Unit #1 - the Town Center - is the focal point of the Heartland Town Square
development. It contains a complete mix of uses including hotels, offices, civic uses and residential
uses. At the center of this Development Unit is the retail center and “lifestyle” complex. This area is
generally surrounded by residential development, with the proposed hotel to the northwest and
southwest, and commercial development to the northeast and southeast, although there is no clear
separation among the uses. The retail uses are generally one story, going up to three stories in a few
instances. The office/commercial development is contained within buildings ranging from four to 16
stories, with the majority in the four-to-six-story range. The proposed hotel is shown at six stories in
height. The residential development is a mixture of townhouses, multi-story buildings and high rises.
Residential buildings range from three-story townhouses to eight-story high-rise apartment buildings.
The proposed civic uses are located within one to two-story buildings. The majority of the parking is
contained within three-to-four-story parking garages with a relatively minimal amount of surface
parking.
The uses in Development Unit #2 are also mixed, but not to the extent they are in Development Unit
#1. The northern portion of Development Unit #2 is generally non-residential, relating more toward
the Town Center in Development Unit #1, while the uses in the southern portion are generally
residential, relating more to Development Unit #3 to the south. The northern portion of Development
Unit #2 is essentially a continuation of the retail and commercial portion of the Town Center with
buildings ranging from one-to-four stories. There is a residential component in this area as well
containing mid-rise to high-rise apartments. At the middle section of Development Unit #2, which
forms one of the main gateways into the site (direct entrance from the Sagtikos State Parkway), is a
proposed commercial complex with buildings ranging from four to 20 stories. Several small civic
uses are contained within this entry area. To the south of this area is a residential community
containing a variety of residential units from three-story townhouses to an eight-story apartment
building. There is a small amount of commercial development at the southern extent of Development
Unit #2.
Development Unit #3 is located at the southernmost portion of the western parcel. This Development
Unit is almost exclusively residential, comprising existing structures as well as new townhouses and
multi-family buildings. These new residential structures are all mid-rise extending from two-to-four
stories in height. A small amount of commercial development located in the northern section of this
development unit is related more to the commercial buildings in Development Unit #2. It is also
proposed that the existing power plant in Development Unit #3 be adaptively reused as civic space.
Development Unit #4, which is geographically separated from the other development units, is a
residential neighborhood with some neighborhood support retail. Several of the existing buildings
would be retained for residential use and the new units would be situated in a variety of building
types ranging from townhomes to high-rise apartment buildings. The height of such structures ranges
from two-to-ten stories in height. Furthermore, the support retail would be contained within
buildings of two-to-three stories in height.
The Gateway Area, which is located adjacent to Development Unit #s 1 and 2, is programmed as a
mixed-use area, with an emphasis on office development. In addition, there would be 130 residences
and associated supporting retail. The existing 111-room, five-story Wingate Inn hotel would also
remain within the Gateway Area. The office space would be located within six-story buildings, while
the residential structures would be three stories. The support retail would be contained within onestory buildings.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-12
As noted above, it must be understood that, given the long-term build-out and the scope of
development of Heartland Town Square, it is not possible to prepare and commit to precise site plans.
Precise uses in any particular area would be dependent upon various factors, the most significant of
which is market demand. Accordingly, a conceptual development plan, on which the above numbers
are based, has been prepared to represent the likely development scenario, in accordance with the
proposed PSPRD. Moreover, the conceptual development plan that is evaluated herein represents
maximum potential development. This ensures a worst-case environmental analysis, pursuant to
SEQRA.
The internal circulation plan will accommodate vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists. Parking,
loading, bus and shuttle stops, and building access provisions are also an integral part of the traffic
and circulation plan.
All disturbed areas that are not planned to be part of the buildings, roadways or other paved surfaces
will be landscaped in an appropriate manner. Parks, yards and other softscape areas will be
landscaped with native plant materials, and lawn areas will be irrigated to ensure that they thrive.
Buffers and perimeter-disturbed areas will be revegetated with native materials and tree species to
enhance wooded buffers around the perimeter of the site.
The overall Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center site is served by an interconnected electric service
network that originates at a Long Island Power Authority (“LIPA”) substation located approximately
1,600 feet to the southwest of the property, according to BBVPC. It is anticipated that, with the
exception of the electric service to the remaining portion of the Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center site
to be maintained by New York State, all existing electric lines would be removed or abandoned, and
a new network of underground electrical facilities would be designed and installed for the new
development. It is assumed that the existing substation (off site) would remain. Improvements
required at the substation will be determined by the operator.
According to the applicants, there are KeySpan/National Grid natural gas mains located beneath the
Pilgrim site that are adequate for use by Heartland Town Square should it be decided that natural gas
would be used in the development. No such decision has yet been made. Since the time of
preparation of the initial DEIS, the applicants have consulted with KeySpan/National Grid.
KeySpan/National Grid has indicated, in correspondence dated March 2, 2007, that natural gas would
be available to serve the proposed development.
It must be understood, however, that the proposed build-out of the project is expected to take place
over a 15+-year period. Moreover, the applicants respectfully submit that it is not feasible to design
each building and to determine the source of heat for each building during this environmental review
process. It is expected that the buildings on the site would be heated by either natural gas or by oil
heat. If the buildings are heated using oil, the oil would be stored in either above-ground or
underground tanks installed and operated in accordance with Article 12 of the Suffolk County
Sanitary Code to ensure protection of groundwater.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-13
With respect to energy conservation, the applicants, as evidenced in Appendix “T,” have consulted
with LIPA, and LIPA has indicated that it will work with the applicants to ensure that the
development is energy efficient. However, as indicated above, the applicants respectfully submit that
it is not feasible to determine, at this juncture, given a 15+-year projected build-out, the specific
energy-conservation measures that will be incorporated into each building. The applicants are,
however, committed to constructing buildings that are energy efficient and will work with LIPA and
KeySpan/National Grid to identify and implement appropriate energy-conservation measures.
According to BBVPC, the subject property is served by an interconnected water distribution system
that is fed by multiple connections to the public water supply. According to available mapping, the
site water distribution system is connected to the Suffolk County Water Authority (“SCWA”)
distribution system in two locations. Separate 16-inch and 12-inch water mains (in easements owned
by the SCWA) feed the main distribution system at the site of the original power plant at the
southerly end of the subject property. The 12-inch water main continues east from the power plant (in
an easement) across the Sagtikos State Parkway, where it supplies the portion of the subject property
east of the Sagtikos State Parkway. In addition, the internal distribution system provides another
connection across the Sagtikos State Parkway to the abandoned facilities on the east side of the
Sagtikos State Parkway, completing a looped system and creating a second source of supply.
The second connection to the SCWA supply occurs at the northeast corner of the subject property, at
the access to Crooked Hill Road, where a 12-inch water main enters the subject property. In addition
to the SCWA connections, mapping indicates a connection with the Dix Hills Water District in the
northwest corner of the site, at Commack Road. The District engineer has indicated that the
connection to the Dix Hills Water District is an emergency connection that is normally closed. As is
the practice among the water suppliers, BBVPC anticipates that this emergency connection would
remain in place as part of the new water distribution system. Records indicate that there is also an
existing 12-inch SCWA water main on the west side of Crooked Hill Road. The existing hotel in the
Gateway Area is served from this main, and the remainder of the Gateway Area would also have
access to this existing water main.
The average water use for the project will be approximately 1.96 million gallons per day (“mgd”)
(including irrigation) after total build-out (15+ years). See Section 4.2 of this DGEIS for additional
information regarding the proposed water use.
The site infrastructure includes a storm drainage system that collects surface runoff from paved areas
and building roof areas and conveys the runoff by way of underground piping to a recharge basin to
the south of the portion of the subject property situated west of the Sagtikos State Parkway. The
underground piping varies in size and appears to generally follow the road network until it converges
at the recharge basin. Storm drain inlets located in paved areas and along the roadways are connected
to the main piping along the roadways.
The recharge basin is located on property to the south that is to remain in New York State ownership,
and consists of a small recharge basin and overflow piping which allows the recharge basin to
overflow onto vacant land to the east of the basin. Aerial photography (from various dates) and field
inspection indicate that the recharge basin has been holding water for a number of years, and suggests
that the overflow to the adjacent land occurs regularly during heavy storms. It is assumed that the
recharge basin was originally designed as a “dry” recharge basin, as is the standard practice in this
area, but has likely ceased to function as such due to siltation and lack of maintenance.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-14
The majority of the Gateway Area properties along Crooked Hill Road are unpaved, and no drainage
structures are apparent. Stormwater runoff on the properties that are improved with building and
paved parking areas is collected in on-site drywells.
According to investigations conducted by D&B, the existing sanitary sewers from the area
surrounding the proposed project include flows from SCCC Western Campus, The Wingate Inn (the
existing hotel in the Gateway Area) and the Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center. The existing pumping
station, located on the southeast corner of the Heartland Town Square property, pumps the existing
sanitary flows into a force main and ultimately to the Southwest Sewer District (“SWSD”) #3 Bergen
Point plant. With modifications, this pumping station would be used to pump sanitary flows from the
proposed project to the SWSD #3 Bergen Point plant. Total sanitary effluent flow for Heartland
Town Square (including the Gateway Area) is anticipated to be approximately 1.39 mgd. However,
the project received conceptual certification from the Suffolk County Sewer Authority for 1.6 mgd.
With respect to stormwater management, current Town and State requirements differ significantly
from those in effect at the time of construction of existing structures. BBVPC has been advised by the
Town Engineer that the project will generally be required to store the runoff from an eight-inch
rainfall. This will be accomplished by the construction of a combination of recharge basins, drainage
reserve areas and subsurface drywells, interconnected by a collection system of catch basins,
manholes and piping. The eight-inch storage requirement imposed by the Town will also satisfy the
various provisions of the federal and state Phase II Stormwater regulations with respect to volume
and water quality controls.
As part of the stormwater management and site design, development plans will include detailed
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans. In accordance with Phase II Stormwater regulations, the
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (“SWPPP”) will include detailed erosion and sediment control
measures as well as details of compliance with the various water quality requirements.
The main purpose of the project is to redevelop an underutilized and surplus property that was sold
by the State of New York, as well as to redevelop an area that has been deemed a blight by the Town
of Islip. After the consolidation of many of the Long Island psychiatric hospitals and the deinstitutionalization of patients from these hospitals, patient populations continued to decline. The
State of New York determined certain properties to be “surplus,” and has sold many of these former
psychiatric hospitals or portions thereof to private parties. In the case of the subject property, New
York State determined that approximately two-thirds of the overall Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center
property was surplus and it was sold to the applicants in 2002. A portion of the Pilgrim State
Psychiatric Center remains operational on a 200±-acre parcel adjacent to the subject property.
In redeveloping this significant property (which is advantageously situated in an area where major
east-west and north-south transportation corridors meet and where there is access to public
transportation in the form of the LIRR and bus service), the applicants have designed a community
that applies Smart Growth principles to achieve goals that have been touted by the community,
planners and government officials alike.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-15
Twenty-five buildings on the subject property have been demolished, predominately between 2001
and 2004. Eight of the structures were client and staff residences located on the property east of the
Sagtikos State Parkway. More specifically, the following structures have been demolished: Building
Nos. 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 96 and 97. The
following buildings are slated for demolition, but are still extant: Building Nos. 18, 22, 23, 24, 54,
62, 64 and 65. See Figure 3-4 for all the building numbers. A schedule of the demolition of the
extant structures cannot be determined at this time, as they are dependent upon the completion of the
SEQRA process and receipt of approvals, the timeframes for which are not under the control of the
applicants.
Based upon an inspection conducted by Freudenthal & Elkowitz Consulting Group, Inc. (“F&E”)1-3
in 2005, 17 buildings on the subject property located west of the Sagtikos State Parkway and eight
buildings on the east side were demolished between 2001 and 2005 (see Appendix G for a map
showing the demolished buildings). The C&D, consisting of bricks, concrete, re-bar and
miscellaneous building-related debris, is typically present within the respective footprint of the
former buildings.
The phasing strategy for Heartland Town Square is intended to promote balanced growth throughout
each Development Unit, and encourage each neighborhood to achieve a sense of completion at each
stage of development.
The projected phasing schedule for the Heartland Town Square project is outlined below.
Phase One (I): Years 1 - 5
• 560,000 sf Retail
• 3,500 Housing units
• 600,000 sf Office
• 105,000 sf Civic space
Development in Phase I would be located mostly in Development Unit #1, with some development
occurring in the northern portion of Development Unit #2.
Phase Two (II): Years 5 - 10
• 3,380 Housing units
• 2,257,500 sf Office
• 335,600 sf Retail
This phase would build on the critical mass achieved in Phase I and will extend the residential
neighborhoods and mix of office/commercial uses adjacent to the Town Center. Additional office
and residential development would occur in Development Unit #2, and additional residential
development (with neighborhood retail) in Development Unit #3 would occur around the existing
power plant. Much of the Gateway Area would be developed in Phase II. All of Development Unit
#4 would be built out in Phase II.
1-3
The operations of Freudenthal & Elkowitz Consulting Group, Inc. were acquired by VHB effective January 1, 2009.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-16
Phase Three (III): Years 10 - 15
• 2,250 Housing units
• 1,292,500 sf Office
• 134,400 sf Retail
This phase would provide a mixture of uses to infill the remaining development parcels throughout
the subject property, including office campus development, additional residential development and a
smaller amount of infill retail development.
In order to implement the proposed action, the following permits and/or approvals are required:
Permits/Approvals Required
Agency
Adoption of PSPRD
Town of Islip Town Board
Change of Zone of 475.59± Acres of
Former Pilgrim State Psychiatric
Center Property and Gateway Area to PSPRD
Town of Islip Town Board
Approval of Conceptual Master Plan for
“Heartland Town Square”
Town of Islip Town Board
Adoption of Urban Renewal Plan
and Condemnation for Gateway Area
Town of Islip Town Board
Site Plan Approval
Town of Islip Planning Board
Subdivision Approval
Town of Islip Planning Board
Sanitary Disposal and Water Supply
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
Sewer Connection
Suffolk County Sewer Agency
Suffolk County Department of Public Works
Public Water Connection
Suffolk County Water Authority
Curb Cuts/Highway Work Permits
Town of Islip Division of Traffic Safety
Suffolk County Department of Public Works
New York State Department of
Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
Referral
Suffolk County Planning Commission
Notification
Town of Babylon, Town of Huntington, Town of
Smithtown
1.0 Executive Summary
1-17
PROBABLE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
Land
Land Use and Zoning
The subject property is comprised of 16 tax lots. These tax parcels are proposed to be rezoned into
the proposed PSPRD. The inclusion of these parcels within the PSPRD would permit a currently
unused and degraded site to be redeveloped into a vibrant Smart Growth community offering a broad
spectrum of commercial, residential, business, cultural and recreational opportunities. At the same
time, areas of indigenous vegetation and landscape trees would be preserved and new communityoriented opens spaces and recreation areas would be established. Although included within the
subject property, the existing patient cemetery would be preserved.
The PSPRD has been designed to allow the creation of a new, efficiently-designed, transportationoriented and served, multi-use community that includes residential facilities, as well as shopping and
employment opportunities for residents and non-residents that is harmonious with the surrounding
zoning district and communities, and that minimizes adverse effects on the Town and larger
community. The proposed zoning incorporates the principles of Smart Growth, as defined by Suffolk
County.
As previously indicated, the PSPRD indicates that subdistricts must be depicted on a conceptual
master plan. It also sets forth the objectives and characteristics of the potential subdistricts to be
located on the site. The subdistricts include: PRD-TC; PRD-OF; and PRD-RES.
The Town Center subdistrict provides for a variety of permitted principal uses including retail
establishments, service business, offices, restaurants, hotels, cultural uses, entertainment and
recreational facilities, cemeteries, transportation facilities, houses of worship, medical offices, open
spaces and signature buildings (defined as a high-rise buildings that establish or foster a unique
“sense of place” or “signature” for the PSPRD community, and provide an architectural or visual
landmark or focal point for the PSPRD community). Residential apartments are permitted, but their
total floor area cannot exceed more than 50 percent of the total developed area within the Town
Center subdistrict.
The maximum height of any building shall not exceed 80 feet, with the exceptions that signature
buildings shall not exceed a height of 250 feet and hotels shall not exceed a height of 165 feet. A
minimum of 30 percent of the total land in the subdistrict shall be open space, as defined in the
PSPRD. Furthermore, the setbacks are as follows: minimum of 100 feet from the LIE or LIE South
Service Road; minimum of 100 feet from the Sagtikos State Parkway; minimum of 75 feet from
Commack Road; and a minimum of 75 feet from Crooked Hill Road.
Within the Office subdistrict, the permitted principal uses include offices and banks, medical offices,
signature buildings, hotels, open spaces and transportation facilities.
In addition, retail
establishments, services business, restaurants and cultural, entertainment and recreational facilities
such as those permitted in the Town Center, are permitted as long as the total floor area of such uses
does not exceed 25 percent of the total developed area within the subdistrict. In addition, residential
apartments are permitted as long as the total floor area of the residential development does not exceed
50 percent of the total floor area to be developed in the subdistrict.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-18
Buildings within the Office subdistrict shall not exceed a height of 100 feet with the exception that a
signature building may extend to 250 feet in height and a hotel may extend to 165 feet in height. The
open space and setback requirements in the Office subdistrict are the same as those of the Town
Center subdistrict.
The permitted principal uses within the Residential subdistrict include multi-family residences, senior
apartments, artist’s lofts, assisted living facilities, nursing homes, civic uses, transportation facilities,
open space and retail establishments, services business, restaurants and cultural, entertainment and
recreational facilities such as those permitted in the Town Center, are permitted as long as the total
floor area of such uses does not exceed 25 percent of the total developed area within the subdistrict.
Such uses are permitted to allow and encourage support neighborhood retail within the residential
communities.
In a Residential subdistrict no building shall exceed a height of 80 feet. The open space and setback
requirements are the same as in the Town Center and Office subdistricts.
Specific parking standards are also set forth within the PSPRD -- they are defined by specific use,
rather than by subdistrict. Since the Smart Growth character and transportation-oriented design of the
PSPRD reduces the need for on-site parking for individual uses, standard on-site parking
requirements for other zoning districts in the Town would provide an overabundance of parking
spaces and a reduction in the land available for open space, public space, landscaping, streetscapes,
etc. Therefore, the PSPRD sets for a special method of computing on-site parking needs.
The PSPRD also sets forth roadway design criteria. Four categories of roadways are defined -- they
are neighborhood roads (situated within Residential Subdistricts), Main Street (situated within the
Town Center), Commercial Access Roadway (situated within Office subdistricts) and Urban
Collector (Ring Road).
The land use of the site would change from an existing abandoned institutional use (that was formerly
part of a large, self-sufficient psychiatric center) and an area of identified blight into a mixed-use,
Smart Growth community. The original 650-acre Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center, at its peak,
housed over 15,000 patients as well as an unknown number of staff (estimated at hundreds to
thousands). It is anticipated that the proposed Heartland Town Square would house approximately
20,000 residents with thousands of employees. These numbers are of a similar magnitude to the
former peak population of the fully-operational Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center.
The Conceptual Master Plan known as Heartland Town Square has been designed to conform to the
requirements set forth in the PSPRD. All of the development shown in each of the Development
Units conforms to the height and setback requirements defined in each of the defined subdistricts.
The minimum open space requirement is 30 percent in each subdistrict. According to RTKL, the
approximate percent of open space in each Development Unit is as follows: Development Unit 1 =
33 percent; Development Unit 2 = 31 percent; Development Units 3 and 4 = 30 percent each; and
Gateway Area = 35 percent. Therefore, the proposed amount of open space is in compliance with the
proposed PSPRD zoning.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-19
The Town Center subdistrict contains the broadest mix of uses with 775,900 sf of retail development,
1,800,000 sf of office space, 80,000 sf of civic spaces and 2,450 residential units. As indicated, the
square footage of the residential units cannot exceed more than 50 percent of the total floor area
developed in the subdistrict
The main Office subdistrict is proposed to contain 1,450,000 sf of office space, 198,500 sf of retail
space and 1,500 residential units. The retail space is far less than the 25 percent of total floor area to
be developed within the district. The total floor area of the 1,500 residential units will not exceed 50
percent of the total developed floor space within the district.
The Office subdistrict within the Gateway Area is proposed to contain 800,000 sf of office space,
30,000 sf of retail space, 130 residential units and the existing 55,200± sf, 111-room hotel. As with
the main Office subdistrict, the retail space is far less than 25 percent of the total floor area to be
developed and the total floor area of the 130 residential units would not exceed 50 percent of the total
floor space developed within the district.
One of the residential subdistricts is proposed to incorporate 2,650 residential units, 100,000 sf of
office space, 10,000 square feet of support neighborhood retail, and 25,000 sf of civic space, while
the other Residential subdistrict is proposed to have 2,400 residential units and 15,600 sf of support
neighborhood retail. In both cases, the commercial development proposed would be far less than the
25 percent of the total floor area that is to be developed within each of the residential subdistricts.
Heartland Town Square is proposed to be developed in three phases. A summary of the uses within
each phase follows:
Phasing Summary of Uses
Use
Office SF
Retail SF
Civic SF
Residential
Units
Phase I
Phase II
600,000
560,000
105,000
2,257,000
335,600
0
3,500
3,380
Overall
Development
1,292,500
4,150,000
134,400
1,030,000
0
105,000
Phase III
2,250
9,130
Based upon geotechnical requirements of the project, the concrete of the tunnels and their interior
contents (e.g., pipes, electrical wiring, ACM [discussed later]) would be:
•
Removed in areas beneath the footprints of buildings or other load-bearing structures. All of
the excavated materials will be dealt with in accordance with prevailing regulations; or
•
Sealed in areas where load-bearing capacity is not an issue (e.g., landscaped areas, parking
lots, etc.). Any liquid-type wastes (e.g., transformer fluids) will be disposed of in accordance
with prevailing regulations prior to sealing of the tunnels. Any ACM present in the portions
of the tunnels scheduled to be sealed-off will be left in-place, thus in essence, encapsulating
same.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-20
According to OSHA, regulations allow ACM to remain in place in areas where same cannot come
into contact with humans. The mitigation measures section of the DGEIS (i.e., Section 5.1.2)
discusses the structural stability and ACM issues with respect to the out-of-service utility tunnels.
Those tunnels that will be impacted by site development activities will be evaluated for their
structural and geotechnical stability, as well as for the presence of ACM or other hazardous materials,
on an as-needed basis (i.e., any portion of the tunnel network to be disturbed during the development
will be evaluated). Any potential access points to extant tunnels not to be evaluated/impacted during
the development will be sealed and inspected in accordance with the NYSDOL-compliant ACM
O&M Plan. These tunnels would be evaluated/addressed on an as-required basis if same are to be
disturbed during future site activities. Again, the O&M Plan would address this specific issue. No
further use of the tunnels would occur as part of the proposed Heartland Town Square development.
Regarding the Town’s Finding of Blight for the Islip Gateway Community Improvement Area and
pursuant to a request by the Town of Islip, the applicants have integrated the development of the
Gateway Area into the plan for the proposed Heartland Town Square. As previously indicated, it was
assumed that the existing Wingate Inn hotel within the Gateway Area would remain (would not be
redeveloped) as it is in keeping with the character of the proposed uses and the spirit of urban
renewal. The plan for the Gateway Area contains three types of uses: office; retail and residential,
and ties into the proposed Heartland Town Square development. Overall, it is proposed that there
would be 800,000 square feet of office space, 30,000 square feet of retail 130 multi-family residential
units, and the existing hotel. The parking ratio would be four spaces per 1,000 square feet of office
space and two parking spaces per residential unit.
The 14 acres on the northeast side of Crooked Hill Road are illustrated as being developed with office
buildings and associated parking garages. The office buildings are proposed at a height of six stories,
while the parking garage would be three stories. The area would be extensively landscaped with two
“greens” on either side of the entry from Crooked Hill Road. Screening vegetation would be planted
along the border of the LIE entrance ramp to the Sagtikos State Parkway as well as along the two
property lines (with the recharge basin located to the north and the new hotel located to the south).
The southwest side of Crooked Hill Road (9.5 acres) would contain all the retail, all the multi-family
units and three office buildings, as well as several parking garages. There would be an extensive
sidewalk network and roadway network within this area connecting it with the Heartland Town
Square development. A boulevard-type entrance would extend from Crooked Hill Road into the
redevelopment area and continue through this parcel into the Heartland Town Square development.
Another proposed entrance off Crooked Hill Road, which is proposed as part of the Heartland Town
Square development, would also serve as a means of access for the new development within the Islip
Gateway Community Improvement Area. As with the northeast side, this parcel would be
extensively landscaped with street trees as well as buffer vegetation along Crooked Hill Road.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-21
The proposed plan meets the goals of the Town of Islip, as it has defined them in the Finding of
Blight report, by replacing the obsolete and, in some cases, dilapidated or physically-deteriorated
buildings that do not meet the zoning code; by redeveloping an area within the SGPA that contains
hazardous or detrimental industrial uses; by renewing an area that has been inadequately maintained;
and by providing suitable off-street parking. The proposed plan for the Gateway Area presents a
cohesive, aesthetically-pleasing and economically-viable alternative for development that will be
integrated into the overall Heartland Town Square redevelopment.
The Town of Islip Comprehensive Plan (Volume 7C, Brentwood) and Town of Islip Comprehensive
Plan Progress Report – Volume 1 are essentially between 15 and 30 years old and do not necessarily
reflect the current environmental, economic and demographic characteristics of the Town of Islip and
the Brentwood community. Furthermore, the site, although located within Brentwood, is not within
the downtown area. The aforesaid plans also did not contemplate the elimination of two-thirds of the
Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center from institutional use. This use has been part of the community for
75 years, and redevelopment of this area was not considered within these documents.
The 1989 Progress Report discussed future challenges, which included defining a community
identity. The Heartland Town Square development would provide the Brentwood area with a specific
identity. Revival of the economy and pride of place were significant elements discussed within the
aforesaid plans. The redevelopment of an underutilized, abandoned psychiatric center with a vital,
pedestrian-oriented community with new businesses and new residential communities will assist in
revitalizing the area and will allow residents to take pride in their community, thereby accomplishing
some of the goals of these earlier plans.
The Heartland Town Square development has been designed as a mixed-use, Smart Growth
community, incorporating the principles outlined both in the Smart Communities Through Smart
Growth and Smart Growth Policy Plan for Suffolk County reports. The Pilgrim State Psychiatric
Center has been designated by Suffolk County as a “redevelopment of regional significance.” As
previously discussed, such areas were designated as such to ensure that the mix of uses provide
therein takes advantage of existing infrastructure, strengthens the tax base, provides jobs and, in
general, improves the quality of life in the area. As indicated, the redevelopment of the Heartland
Town Square property will help to “reshape the developed landscape for generations to come.” The
reuse and redevelopment of this site of regional significance can assist in limiting the development of
undisturbed or less-disturbed areas for the type of high-density development that is critical in making
Smart Growth communities, such as Heartland Town Square, successful. Smart Growth principles
have been incorporated into the concept and design of the Heartland Town Square development.
Direct Development to Strengthen Existing Communities:
While not situated within the downtown hamlet area, the redevelopment of the subject property
would strengthen and revitalize an area that was an integral part of the Brentwood community for
over 75 years. While much of the subject property’s infrastructure would have to be replaced due to
its age and condition, the redevelopment of the Heartland Town Square property would take
advantage of the existing connections to the larger infrastructure systems present throughout the
community. Redevelopment of the subject property and the adjacent Islip Gateway Community
Improvement Area would also strengthen the identity of the community and give existing as well as
future residents and employees a renewed sense of place.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-22
Encourage Mixed Land Uses and Mixed Use Buildings:
The proposed Heartland Town Square development contains a wide range of land uses, including, but
not limited to, residences, office development, retail uses, civic uses, entertainment uses and various
types of open spaces. Although separated into distinct development units that generally emphasize
one type of use in each, all of the aforesaid land uses are integrated within each development unit.
One reason for the creation of the PSPRD was to allow for flexible zoning that would allow the
integration of residential and non-residential uses as compared with conventional zoning, which tends
to separate distinct use groups. The mixture of uses concentrated within the Town Center, for
example, would create a community where the automobile is de-emphasized and where the
pedestrian and social interactions are emphasized.
Take Advantage of Compact Building Sizes and Create a Range of Housing Opportunities:
The proposed Heartland Town Square project aspires to re-create the densities that allow the vitality
of traditional downtowns to flourish in newly-created environments. It is the density and the
presence of community support facilities that permit the development of a wide range of housing
types including luxury, affordable and workforce housing that are geared toward a wide range of
populations (e.g., young professionals, empty-nesters, artists), and that would be integrated into the
fabric of the new community.
Provide a Variety of Transportation Choices:
By providing a live-work-play environment, the proposed Heartland Town Square would deemphasize the need for the automobile. The integration of various land uses within a concentrated
area provides opportunities for people to live where they work, shop where they live, and play near
both work and home.
The proposed Heartland Town Square would be developed in a pedestrian-friendly manner, limiting
the size and magnitude of internal roadways and providing opportunities for mass transit (e.g., local
jitneys and shuttles). Specifically, a local shuttle bus system will be provided in order to reduce the
number of internal automobile trips by offering a convenient and reliable alternative for residents,
employees and visitors traveling between destination points within the proposed community.
Furthermore, provision of this shuttle would reduce the number of external automobile trips by
providing a direct connection between the proposed community and nearby external destination
points such as the Deer Park LIRR Station, the Heartland Industrial Park, the Hauppauge Industrial
Park, and SCCC. The applicants also intend to petition Suffolk County Transit to review the current
County bus service in the immediate area and to modify or extend the existing bus routes and
schedules to better serve Heartland Town Square.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-23
Create Pleasant Environments and Attractive Communities:
The design concept of the proposed Heartland Town Square is to create an environment that everyone
(existing and future residents, employees and visitors) can take pride in. According to RTKL, the
project’s master planners, the key to sustaining a mix of uses, such as those proposed as part of
Heartland Town Square, is to employ design control over the scale and urban form of each building
regardless of use, and to provide a flexible, gridded development framework that can accommodate a
range of building types. Heartland Town Square would provide for visual continuity and a userfriendly urban form. This urban form is created, in part, by the corridor street space framed by
connected “street wall” buildings, and in part, by the consistency of the street landscaping detail
within the street space. High-quality street landscaping and lighting are important features for this
type of urban neighborhood where the public street space becomes, in effect, the place for the social
interactions that builds a sense of community.
The proposed Heartland Town Square development would also incorporate a variety of open spaces
such as neighborhood parks, plaza, courtyards, etc. to complement to the built-environment and
enhance the live-work-play experience.
In addition to the new development, Heartland Town Square would also adaptively reuse some of the
existing buildings as residential, commercial and civic spaces. The retention of these structures
would preserve a piece of the historical fabric of the site and community and integrate the old with
the new.
Preserve Open Space and Natural Resources:
By permitting a concentration of higher-density development, such as that proposed in Heartland
Town Square, areas of a more pristine nature can be preserved. The Heartland Town Square project
would be preserving naturally-vegetated buffers and providing approximately 141 acres of open
space within the subject site’s boundaries.
Examples of Other Smart Growth Communities
The DGEIS examines three Smart Growth communities: The Atlantic Station project comprises 138
acres and consisted of the redevelopment and reclamation of the former Atlantic Steel Mill in
midtown Atlanta, Georgia; the Addison Circle development, designed by RTKL, is an 80-acre
planned development district situated 20 miles north of downtown Dallas, Texas; and Legacy Town
Center which is part of the larger Legacy Park, located in North Dallas (Plano), which is a masterplanned corporate campus designed in the late 1980s.
Although different overall style, the three Smart Growth communities examined share several
common characteristics. First and foremost, these developments have been designed to achieve a
critical mass of mixed-use activities that provides a live-work-play environment. Each of the Smart
Growth communities is divided into subsections or subdistricts, focusing on one particular use type,
though incorporating a variety of uses. The communities are comprised of medium-to-high density
residential development providing a mix of housing types to serve many populations. They also
provide a well-designed and accessible public open space system.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-24
Another significant concept embraced by the three communities analyzed is a decrease in the use of
the automobile. High quality infrastructure, availability of public transit, pedestrian-friendly design
and walkability, along with a mix of uses assists in making this concept a reality. Good accessibility
to off-site destinations through major highway systems and public transportation systems is another
shared feature. Heartland Town Square embraces these concepts and the design of this Smart Growth
community incorporates the aforementioned attributes.
Subsurface Conditions and Hazardous Materials
Meetings will be held with the NYSDEC spill engineer to discuss the proposed re-development plans
for this portion of the Heartland Town Square property. As the NYSDEC has strict guidelines to
determine when a site has been sufficiently remediated to be protective of groundwater (i.e., to meet
New York State Class GA standards and guidance values) and to comply with applicable soil
standards (i.e., Recommended Soil Cleanup Objectives [RSCOs]), the NYSDEC will not approve
closure of the spill file (i.e., concur that the remediation is complete) until it has been demonstrated
that soil and groundwater contaminants have been sufficiently remediated to allow for the intended
uses of this portion of the Heartland Town Square property.
A Facility Closure Plan will be prepared that will address the outstanding environmental concerns
such as: underground storage tanks; above-ground storage tanks; surficial soil staining; drum storage;
the refuse piles; coal/fly ash dump; greenhouse soils; PCB-equipped transformers; on-site wells;
steam/utility tunnels; asbestos-containing materials; and lead-based paint.
Furthermore, the applicants will comply with NYSDEC requirements to ensure that soil and
groundwater quality is suitable for the proposed uses.
Geology, Soils and Topography
The nature and scope of the development will necessitate regrading of the site in order to provide for
proper design of the roads, parking areas and building areas. As the site is currently mostly
developed, there are few areas of significant slope that will be disturbed. In areas where existing
vegetation can be preserved, construction fence will be erected to delineate the clearing limits and
protect wooded areas to remain. Slopes in graded areas will generally conform to Town development
standards (i.e., one percent minimum and five percent maximum in paved areas, and a maximum
slope for disturbed areas of 1:3).
All disturbed areas that are not planned to be part of the buildings, roadways or other paved surfaces
will be landscaped in an appropriate manner. Parks, yards and other soft-scape areas will be
landscaped with native plant materials, and lawn areas will be irrigated to ensure that they thrive.
Buffers and perimeter disturbed areas will be re-vegetated with native materials and tree species to
re-establish wooded buffers around the perimeter of the site. Accordingly, no significant grading
impacts are anticipated.
With regard to grading and removal of stockpiles that currently exist within the Islip Gateway Area,
suitable fill materials currently stockpiled on the site could be used for structural and non-structural
fill during the various construction phases. Unsuitable materials will be removed from the site and
disposed of in accordance with applicable local regulations.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-25
The slopes created during site grading will be stabilized with vegetation to further reduce erosion
potential and, as previously noted, detailed erosion and sediment control plans will be an integral part
of the final development plans. Generally, erosion and sediment control measures will include
vegetative slope stabilization, phased clearing, silt trapping (using silt fence, hay bales, etc.) and other
measures to prevent erosion and sediment migration onto adjacent properties.
In conjunction with these measures, the Phase II Stormwater regulations require that the erosion and
sediment control measures, as well as any water quality and quantity controls required under the
SWPPP prepared for the project, be inspected by qualified personnel on a weekly basis, and after any
significant rainfall event. Reports resulting from these inspections, including documentation of the
measures in place, maintenance performed and any revisions to the SWPPP required by field or other
conditions, must be maintained on site for inspection by NYSDEC or other personnel with
jurisdiction. All erosion and sediment control measures would conform to the New York State
Guidelines for Urban Erosion and Sediment Control. In addition, the SWPPP prepared for
compliance with Phase II Stormwater Regulations, would address measures to meet water quality
standards for runoff and safe accommodation of flow from extreme storm events.
Overall, changes to the topography of the subject property are not likely to be extensive. The existing
topography consists of relatively gentle slopes. Furthermore, due to the urban nature and density of
the proposed development, grading would be of a similar nature to what has already occurred
throughout the subject property.
Water Resources
In order to ensure the protection of groundwater resources, which is the principal goal of the 208
Study, the proposed Heartland Town Square will comply with the relevant recommendations outlined
in the “Highest Priority Areawide Alternatives” regarding Hydrogeologic Zone I.
There are several regional issues for discussion due to the generation of wastewater by the new
development and removing this material from the water budget, groundwater level declines, and
effect on streams and Deer Lake on the Sampawams River. D&B evaluated these issues and found
the following:
•
Groundwater impact from the ultimate loss of 443 mgy of water due to connection to the
sewer district was calculated to be less than 0.5 foot after 15 years. Normal water table
fluctuations in the area are 5 to 10 feet;
•
A similar analogy can be made for the streams. When maximum water use develops, the
water table decline will be less than 0.5 foot. This is less than the seasonal occurrence on
streams; and
•
During the scoping process, letters were received from community residents surrounding Deer
Lake, a series of lakes (Guggenheim Lakes) north of Southern State Parkway at the northern
end of Sampawams Creek. There was concern that the removal of groundwater from the
project, through sewering, would impact the lake levels. Their concern is heightened by the
fact that the lake has almost dried up in the past and the project is located north of the lake.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-26
Article 6 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code regulates permissible means of sanitary discharges.
As the Heartland Town Square development is proposed to be connected to the municipal sewer
system (conceptual certification has been received from the SCSA), the action will comply with
Article 6 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code. Additional discussion regarding sewage disposal is
contained in the following subsections.
The project has four primary sources of wastewater generation (including the Gateway Area) as
previously discussed: 4,150,000 sf of office space; 1,030,000 sf of retail space (including hotels
existing and proposed, restaurants and cinema); 9,130 residential units; and 105,000 sf for civic uses.
These uses will generate approximately 1.39 mgd of sewage and utilize the latest water conservation
devices. There will be no on-site disposal of wastewater. The project will have wet sewers for all
buildings. Wastewater will be conveyed to the existing pump station and pumped through the existing
force main to the Bergen Point sewage treatment plant.
Application was made to the SCSA for conceptual approval. The project received conceptual
certification on December 12, 2004 for 1.6 mgd. Final Agency approval cannot be considered until
the completion of the SEQRA process.
The site already has an existing connection agreement with the SCSA and has a permitted flow of
471,000 gpd. Conceptual certification has been granted by the SCSA for an additional 1.13 mgd for
a total of over 1.6 mgd. The SCDPW has recently announced that it is proceeding with a design for a
five mgd expansion of the existing Bergen Point Treatment Plant, according to D&B. This will allow
the ultimate projected buildout flow of 1.6 mgd for the proposed project to be easily accommodated
at the treatment plant. D&B anticipates that other developers who seek to have their wastewater
conveyed and treated at the plant will also be able to be accommodated due to this expansion.
The approximately1.6 mgd flow from Heartland Town Square will mix with 0.8 mgd of sanitary flow
with “average” concentrations from the Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center, SCCC and the Wingate Inn
(which is included in the Gateway Area). This mixture will be combined at the pumping station
located on the Pilgrim State Property and is listed in the table below. This flow of 2.4 mgd will then
combine with the other 22.7 mgd of “average” concentration sanitary flow that the SWSD #3 Bergen
Point plant receives.
According to D&B, a new sewer system will be constructed to convey the wastewater from all new
buildings to the existing pump station on the southern portion of the property. The existing pump
station consists of three pumps (two 700 gpm and one 1,300 gpm). The pumps can handle 1.25 mgd
and would need modification to handle the projected flow. The station and the force main are capable
of discharging the needed 2.38 mgd of project flow (15+-year construction). This includes
wastewater from existing sources other than Heartland Town Square (approximately 33 percent).
During the design stage of the project, discussions will be held with SCDPW on handling peak flows,
and the applicants will comply with all SCDPW requirements to ensure that no significant adverse
impacts will occur.
According to research performed by D&B, SCWA operates several existing wells in the area. In
addition to these existing wells, there is a proposed well site that will be situated on the north end of
the Heartland property and a developing site to the southeast.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-27
According to D&B, the average potable water use for the project will be 1.39± mgd after total buildout (15+ years). Irrigation was estimated to be 25 gallons per capita per day (“gpcd”) (Handbook of
Water Use and Conservation - Vickers - Waterflow Press, June 2002) based on the type of housing
projected (multi-family) for an average population of approximately 20,000 people. This yields
approximately 90 million gallons for a six-month season.
The daily maximum build-out water requirement for public supply (consumptive use) and irrigation
will be 1.96± mgd, according to D&B. The water required by phase is as follows: Phase I – 0.527±
mgd; Phase II – 0.694± mgd; and Phase III – 0.742± (including irrigation).
The SCWA has provided a letter of water availability for the proposed Heartland Town Square
development.
According to D&B, the new water lines and water users will not interrupt water pressure in the
surrounding communities. The SCWA presently maintains sufficient capacity to provide pressures
greater than 20 psi, even with full build-out. With the developing well-field site and planned wellfield on the property, water pressure will be maintained throughout construction and beyond. Thus,
no significant adverse water supply impacts are anticipated.
The SCWA wells are all deep Magothy wells, such that small change in the water level over 15 years
from the project will have no effect on the pumping wells, according to D&B. Furthermore, it is
anticipated that existing water supply customers in areas surrounding the project would not have
water pressure or water quality problems as a result of the Heartland Town Square development.
Accordingly, no significant adverse impacts relating to water supply infrastructure are expected.
Based on discussions with the Town Engineer, BBVPC has been advised that the project will
generally be required to provide storage for the runoff from an eight-inch rainfall, which is in excess
of the statistical 100-year, 24-hour storm. Storage of runoff will be accomplished in a combination of
recharge basins, drainage reserve areas and drywells, depending on topography and the configuration
of the individual development units.
Stormwater runoff generated on the site will be collected in a series of interconnected catch basins
located generally in the roads, and will be transported by subsurface piping to a combination of
recharge basins and drainage reserve areas throughout the site. Drywells may be used in isolated
areas (such as large parking lots or remote landscaped areas) where connection to the overall drainage
system is not feasible. As noted above, all stormwater storage facilities will be designed to store the
runoff from an eight-inch storm, which is in excess of the 100-year storm event. It is anticipated that
the stormwater collection system will follow the same general pattern (north to south) as the existing
system, in keeping with the natural topography of the site. Flow of surface runoff to off-site areas
(i.e., from undisturbed natural areas or open fields where no drainage structures were installed) will
likely be reduced as a result of the development, as a more comprehensive drainage system will be
installed.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-28
Required maintenance of the stormwater storage systems is expected to be minimal. When designed
properly, most sediment can be trapped in the catch basins, making cleaning of the system more
efficient and localized. Drainage reserve areas and recharge basins should require minimal
maintenance, which would include removal of sediment from the bottom of the basins. Where
subsurface leaching structures (drywells) are used, the structures are typically fitted with cast iron
covers to provide for access and cleaning, as necessary. As sediment control measures will be
employed during construction, leaching structures and recharge basins should not require
maintenance more often than every 10 to 15 years.
It should be noted that each of the development units or phases proposed for construction will require
the submission of detailed site plans, including detailed plans for grading, drainage and erosion
control. The Town will review each section or phase for compliance with local drainage
requirements, ensuring that the storage criteria are met. Accordingly, no significant adverse drainage
impacts are anticipated.
A series of soil borings were obtained for the property, consisting of nine borings located throughout
the property. Results of the borings are generally consistent with respect to the type of material,
consisting of varying types and combinations of sand and gravel. The materials encountered are
suitable and appropriate for recharge of stormwater by way of recharge basins, drywells and drainage
reserve areas. If localized pockets of unsuitable soils are encountered, recharge basins (or drywells,
as appropriate) will be over-excavated to reach soils more suitable for recharge. Grading for drainage
reserve areas typically requires excavation to a depth of four to six feet, with gentle side slopes that
are landscaped. To enhance the recharge capability of drainage reserve areas, diffusion wells are
typically installed in the drainage reserve areas to provide a more effective connection to suitable
soils. Recharge basins require significantly more excavation, as they tend to be 12-feet-to-15-feet
deep with 1:3 side slopes, requiring the removal of significant amounts of material. However, given
the nature of the soils found on the site, it is anticipated that the excavated materials can be used
throughout the site for fill as grading plans dictate.
As part of the development of the overall stormwater management system, BBVPC considered the
preservation of open space for recharge purposes. A preliminary analysis of stormwater management
needs conducted by BBVPC, and the configuration of the proposed development suggest that a
number of recharge locations would be appropriate. It is anticipated that infiltration of stormwater
runoff will be accomplished using a combination of small recharge basins dedicated specifically to
recharge, and a number of drainage reserve areas designed to serve as open space/park areas when
not needed for stormwater recharge.
As noted above, recharge basins are typically constructed to Town standards, which require
excavation of the basin with a maximum of 1:3 side slopes, and construction of a fence around the
perimeter for security purposes. Plantings for screening and erosion control can be incorporated into
the design. The drainage reserve areas will likely require extensive grading, as the natural topography
does not provide many natural low areas that could effectively store runoff. As such, it may not be
possible to retain natural vegetation within the boundaries of the drainage reserve areas, although
natural vegetation could be retained around the perimeter of the drainage reserve areas and native
species are typically used to re-vegetate the drainage reserve areas in conjunction with other
amenities (such as walkways, trails, sitting areas, etc.).
1.0 Executive Summary
1-29
Due to the nature and density of the proposed development of the Gateway Area, these developments
will be self-contained with respect to stormwater management. The two Gateway Area sites are at the
upper end of the overall watershed and, as they are currently fully disturbed, they lack any open space
that would be appropriate for recharge purposes. Developments of this density typically make use of
on-site storage of stormwater runoff in drywells.
Water budgets were performed for both the pre- and post-development site conditions. The table
below summarizes the recharge generated for pre-and post-development conditions.
Pre- and Post-Development Recharge Conditions
Pre-developed
Developed
Difference between pre- and postdevelopment
Recharge
(mgy)
324
Consumptive Use
(mgy)
0
Net Recharge
(mgy)
324
465
584
-119
141
584
-443
The project will have wet sewers for all buildings and all sewage will leave the site to be treated at
Bergen Point Plant with ultimate disposal in the Atlantic Ocean. Essentially, this wastewater is lost
from the total recharge on the site, hence the term consumptive use.
The consumptive use will increase as the project is constructed and, after 15 years, it will be
1.6± mgd or 584± mgy. This quantity can be reduced by 141± mgy net recharge resulting in a net loss
of 443± mgy to the aquifer.
The impact of this loss on the groundwater table must be considered. These wells will supply the
drinking water to the project and represent the impacted groundwater area. Using Plymouth Street as
the western boundary, the LIE as the north, Carroll Street on the east, and LIRR as the southern
boundary. The area is about seven square miles.
This area is the impact area for water table change. When applied to the consumptive use of 443 mgy,
a net loss of approximately 0.5 foot would occur to the water table. This reduction is minimal when
compared to the previously discussed short-term groundwater table fluctuation already occurring in
the area.
To further document the project impact on groundwater levels and to compliment the water budget
calculation, a groundwater for model was applied. Camp Dresser and McKee (“CDM”) was asked to
assist and to use the existing calibrated Suffolk County regional flow model run in steady state. The
model results are as follows:
“The simulated groundwater decline at the Heartland Village site ranges from 0.9 to1.5 feet.
The simulated decline in the groundwater level at Deer Lake range from 0.24 feet (northern
lake) to 0.17 (southern lake).”
1.0 Executive Summary
1-30
According to D&B, there are several items that need to be highlighted. The first is the fact that the
changes will gradually occur over 15 years. The model is run as steady state (not time dependent) and
just depicts the final result using average annual rainfall. The second item is the use of 2.5 mgd as the
withdrawal rate rather than 1.6 mgd (conceptual SCSA approved). This flow would represent a
safety factor of over 50 percent. Finally using a glacial well at the Bob Dassler site is the cause for
the greatest change in water table. Should only a Magothy well be used or portions of water be
delivered come from other surrounding wellfields (as should actually occur) a much smaller change
in water table will result. The model results mentioned above are a conservative worst case situation
and show a very minimum impact, one that is less than regional long- and short-term groundwater
situations.
As there are no surface water bodies or wetlands on or directly adjacent to the subject property, no
impact to such resources is expected. Since the site is not located within an area of special flood
hazard, there would be no associated impacts.
Air
The complete air quality technical report was prepared by RTP Environmental. The proposed project
has been evaluated on a preliminary basis for anticipated construction, traffic related and operational
air quality impacts. The basis for the evaluation begins with the site traffic assessment that has been
prepared and refined to mitigate traffic congestion at roadway intersections in the project area. The
estimated site generated traffic and NYSDOT analytical protocols are utilized to determine if any of
the selected intersections in the vicinity of the project site warrant an air quality analysis.
Traffic air quality impact analyses for year 2021 without the project (No Build) and with the project
(Build) were prepared at the same intersection as the existing analysis, to determine expected CO,
PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations at and around the site. The preliminary impact analysis results
indicate that CO levels for No Build conditions will be within established air quality standards for
both 1-hour and 8-hour averaging periods. The analysis also indicates that PM10 and PM2.5 impacts
associated with off-site traffic (without the project) are predicted to be within standards.
The same analytical protocols were used to evaluate year 2021 air quality levels including the traffic
from the proposed project (Build). The impact analysis results indicate that CO levels for Build
conditions will be within established air quality standards for both 1-hour and 8-hour averaging
periods. Additionally, the analysis shows that air quality levels are expected to improve from
existing conditions to No Build. From No Build to Build conditions there is no expected increase (or
decrease) in CO levels (including background) from project generated traffic. Although the traffic
volumes have increased in association with the proposed project, vehicle pollution control technology
is expected to lower CO emissions by project completion. The PM10 and PM2.5 analysis indicates that
project generated traffic is also expected to improve from existing conditions to No Build. From No
Build to Build conditions a 40 percent to 50 percent increase in PM levels is expected from project
related traffic. Since the predicted impacts are so low, the percentage increase from No Build to
Build conditions is insignificant, and therefore, will not result in exceedances of 24-hour and annual
particulate standards enforced by the NYSDEC.
Air quality impacts associated with the construction and operation of the proposed facilities will also
occur. These impacts result from the operation of equipment during construction, actual air pollutant
emissions from operating the proposed facilities.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-31
The air quality impacts associated with construction will be temporary in nature and, therefore, are
not strictly regulated. It is incumbent on the applicants to reduce these impacts to the maximum
extent practicable by minimizing vehicle use, mitigating fugitive dust sources and other steps that
minimize the construction impacts on the resident community.
The operation of the facilities will result in minor increases in the overall atmospheric air pollutant
burden. Heating and air conditioning systems, restaurants, commercial establishments, etc. may
release small amounts of air pollutants that when compared to the regional burden are insignificant
and should not cause an exacerbation of applicable standards or guidelines. In that the facilities are
in some portion replacing commercial/residential facilities, the net difference in total air pollution
burden is expected to be negligible.
The use of solar energy has been showing considerable promise and with new advances such as the
use of infrared collectors, improved efficiencies, generating power at or near the point of need will all
improve air quality in the areas in and surrounding the Heartland Town Square project. Wind
turbines are also being planned in the areas surrounding the project.
Green building designs have begun incorporating high efficiency heating and air conditioning
systems improved insulation, high efficiency window treatments, lighting systems, and other
amenities to assist in reducing building energy requirements.
Smart Growth community designs, by their nature, include many of the above concepts and,
therefore, the proposed action will result in reducing the impact on air quality well below those that
would occur if a non-Smart Growth design would be considered. The exact improvements that will
be realized will be dependent on the final design. A review of the potential alternatives to the various
accepted practices is part of the design process matrix. As such, each practice will be analyzed to
determine the most environmentally friendly, sensible, cost effective approach. Project management
will then weigh all elements and select the most appropriate approach.
The potential use of alternatives to currently accepted practices will be continually reviewed as the
Heartland Town Square project develops and grows into a functional community. There is significant
pressure on all societal activities to become more environmentally friendly by working towards the
concepts of sustainable development both in the United States and abroad. It is these developments
that will continually change and in time and reduce the environmental impacts of the project on the
local environment.
The proposed project will have an insignificant air quality impact on other air quality related values
such as visibility impairment, acid deposition, soils and vegetation. The relative air pollution burden
added by the construction and operation of the project is insignificant when compared to the current
and future background conditions.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-32
Plants and Animals
Except for the cemetery at the north end and existing buffer areas along the perimeter portions of the
subject property, the site will be entirely redeveloped. Consequently, while a part of one of the
"cultural" ecological communities (Mowed Lawn/Mowed Lawn with Trees) would be preserved, the
other three communities on the site would be substantially altered. These include Pitch Pine-Oak
Forest, Successional Old Field, and the second cultural community - Urban Vacant Lot. There are no
NYSDEC or NWI wetlands on the site, and consequently, none would be disturbed.
These losses of habitat will lead to the local removal of most of the plant species, three of which are
rare, and the majority of the animals (mammals, birds, herpetofauna, insects, including a rare one)
that occur on the site. However, the development and implementation of a landscaping plan, which
will include native species, would help to mitigate such impacts.
Moreover, most adult animals are highly mobile and most of these would, therefore, be able
physically to emigrate from the site as active development commenced. The surrounding area
consists mostly either of residential/commercial development or pine-barrens forest. Between these
two areas, most of the emigrant species would readily find appropriate habitat into which they could
be absorbed. This is especially true due to the proximity of the large Edgewood Preserve just to the
west and southwest of the site.
Using birds as an example, of the 36 confirmed breeders in the relevant breeding-bird atlas blocks, 81
percent are either common suburban species, pine barrens breeders, or introduced/nuisance species
(the last group being by definition adaptable). Similarly, of the 34 bird species actually seen on the
site, 74 percent fall into one of the above three categories. Of the remaining 26 percent of the birds
actually seen on the site, two-thirds are thought to have been migrants. Some mortality will occur
among those animals on the site that are immature, small, or slow-moving or a combination of these.
The single mature natural community on the subject site that would be eliminated, Pitch Pine-Oak
Forest, is classified as rare by the NHP. Historically, the original construction of the Pilgrim State
Psychiatric Center site itself produced the fragmentary remains of this community type that is found
there today. The loss of the Pitch Pine-Oak Forest community type to the overall ecology of the site
would be minimal since, as previously indicated, the forest is already so completely fragmented by
earlier development as to make attempts at its preservation as a robustly functional ecological unit
effectively too late. Prior to that construction, there is little doubt that the subject site, the larger
Pilgrim State property, and a more extensive now-residential/industrial area beyond, were part of a
more-or-less unbroken expanse of Pitch Pine-Oak Forest and other related natural community types
which together are referred to as "pine barrens." Fortunately, a large, nearby, fairly intact example of
this forest has been protected, and is maintained by the NYSDEC as the Edgewood Preserve. This
preserve supports many rare species and communities.
There are 360± acres of vegetated land on the subject site. According to BBV, approximately 90
acres of vegetation would remain on-site, including the existing cemetery area. However, this figure
does not include areas to be revegetated (24+ acres). As such, there would be more than 114 acres of
vegetated areas on-site upon implementation of the proposed action. It should be noted that the
applicants intend to incorporate native vegetation into the landscaping on the subject site.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-33
The two rare plant species that have individuals occurring in the Pitch Pine-Oak Forest (Slender
Pinweed and Little-leafed Tick-Trefoil), do not occur in the forest proper, but in disturbed areas along
the open edges of roads and in clearings within the forest. The same is true for the larval food plant
(Dwarf Sumac) of the one rare butterfly found on the site. Ironically, then, any attempt to preserve
these Pitch Pine-Oak Forest fragments by leaving them undisturbed would allow the habitat that
supports three rare species to disappear through natural ecological succession.
On the subject property, a single rare butterfly species and three rare plant species have been found.
The abundance of the Red-banded Hairstreak butterfly varies greatly from year to year, but it seems
to have generally increased in numbers during the past two decades. In good seasons, it is found in
large numbers in the adjacent Edgewood Preserve.
The Little-leafed Tick-Trefoil is relatively the most common of the three plant species, and has been
seen in several other places on Long Island even in the 2004 field season. It also has been reported
from the Edgewood Preserve.
The remaining two rare plant species, Showy Aster and Slender Pinweed, are relatively less common,
but both were found in more than one place on the subject site. Some individuals of the Slender
Pinweed, and all individuals of the third rare plant, Showy Aster, grow close to the edges of the
subject site. An effort will be made to protect these two occurrences. Overall, therefore, although
habitat will be removed by the development of Heartland Town Square, there is preserved wooded
area in the vicinity that provides habitat for the various species that would be impacted by this
development. Moreover, the implementation of a landscaping plan that utilizes native species will
further mitigate potential adverse impacts to ecological resources.
The potential impacts to the Gateway Area would be positive, as no ecologically significant
vegetation currently exists in any portion of the study area. The addition of landscaping materials
would enhance the ecological resources and possibly attract wildlife to the area, where little currently
exists.
Impacts to the Edgewood Preserve by the emigration of animals from the subject property would be
small and temporary. First, much of the subject site consists of two cultural communities: Mowed
Lawn and Vacant Lot, neither of which may be expected to supply much in the way of animal
immigrants. Second, the Edgewood Preserve is not contiguous with the subject site, whereas nearly
half of the Pitch Pine-Oak Forest examples on-site, as well as some of the Successional Old Field
examples, have directly contiguous off-site counterparts to which animals would be expected to
emigrate instead. Finally, any slightly-increased densities at the Edgewood Preserve (or any other
habitat that received emigrants) would soon be downwardly adjusted through further dispersal,
through natural mortality unrelated to density, and through actual adjustment in reproductive output.
In the meantime, there might be a modest increase in competition for resources such as space and
food.
Concerning other adjacent off-site areas, any impacts to their plants and animals that would result
from development of the subject property would be negligible, since most of the remaining adjacent
land use consists of major highways and their corridors or extensive, already-developed commercial
and residential areas. In sum, existing plant and animal resources in most off-site areas are minimal
and, therefore, any impact from on-site development would be minimal.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-34
Although the proposed action involves substantial clearing to accommodate development, the
proposed action also involves revegetation with native species, which would help to mitigate
potential impacts associated with the loss of on-site vegetation. It is the applicants’ intention that
safe and environmentally sensitive practices will be used in applying chemicals, both to fertilize
lawns and plantings and to protect these plants from pests.
Aesthetic Resources
A visual impact assessment was prepared for the project by RTKL and F&E. Eight viewpoints
located in an area covering 360 degrees around the site were chosen for analysis. Photographs were
taken in both the Summer and the Fall/Winter to depict viewpoints with leaves on and off the trees.
The visual assessment indicated that the proposed development would be visible from several
locations, and due to the scope of the project, would significantly alter the visual landscape of the
area. However, the visual impact would be mitigated by existing obstructions, particularly the
existing dense vegetation of the area (e.g., along the Sagtikos State Parkway). Other visual
obstructions in the surrounding area include utility poles, overhead wires, traffic lights and street
signage, which help to demonstrate that the surrounding area of the subject site is not a pristine visual
landscape.
The proposed development is designed to create an efficient, transportation-served multi-use
environment that mixes employment, shopping and housing. In comment letters dated June 21, 2005
and August 12, 2005, the Town requested, in pertinent part, that “the precedent and the uniqueness of
this project, its density and its location will be evaluated” and “the design of the Conceptual Master
Plan (including site layout, landscaping and buffering and consistency of the design with the
surrounding area and overall effects on community character…” should be discussed.
It is
respectfully submitted that the project is proposed, among other things, to enhance not only the
project site, but the surrounding area as well. Specifically, the subject property contains a mix of
industrial and other business uses (including a preponderance of outdoor storage much of which is
concentrated in the Gateway Area), which is proposed to be replaced with a Smart Growth
community that provides aesthetic enhancement, workforce housing, viable employment
opportunities for a live-work-play environment. Moreover, this proposed Smart Growth community
will help the Town Board achieve its objectives for the Gateway Area, which consist primarily of
upgrading the area with more appropriate uses in terms of assessed valuation, design and economic
synergy, according to the Finding of Blight report. Accordingly, this project is proposed to improve
and enhance community character and aesthetics as opposed to conforming to the existing character
of a partially-razed, unoccupied portion of a psychiatric center and an urban renewal area that the
Town has deemed in need of upgrade.
According to RTKL, in general, the proposed buildings will be located close to streets and to each
other as opposed to being campus plans with large front and side yard areas. This architectural
containment would give definition to the street as a public space, and create a comfortable sense of
place for pedestrians. The essential idea is to create a development pattern that avoids the fragmented
look of large “box” buildings sitting in a sea of parking. Instead, the emphasis is on visual continuity
taking the form of “street wall” buildings, connecting walls, and consistent tree planting.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-35
Proposed structures would respect the adjacent structures within the greater community while
allowing variety and interruptions in roof forms and skyline treatment that would enhance the visual
interest. The variation of building heights is part of the diversity of many attractive urban centers.
There will be selected opportunities for taller signature buildings that would stand above surrounding
buildings as prominent visual features within the large community fabric.
The Heartland Town Square plan includes provisions for a small number of high-rise buildings as
part of an overall urban design strategy designed to created landmarks that begin to project a new
“signature” for the property, one that is no longer dominated by a hospital facility (although large
hospital buildings remain adjacent to the subject property).
A signature office tower is proposed to be situated at the existing main entry off the Sagtikos State
Parkway. This new signature office tower would help to project a new identity for the area.
The aesthetic resources of the Gateway Area would be considerably enhanced upon redevelopment in
accordance with the Conceptual Plan. One of the “findings” for this area, made by the Town of Islip
Town Board, was the deteriorated nature of the buildings and the visual blight that characterizes the
area.
Redevelopment with a mix of residences, office buildings and retail shops, with the maintenance of
the existing hotel, would improve the visual image of the area and eliminate deteriorated structures
and the unattractive outdoor storage facilities that dominant the properties in this vicinity.
As stated earlier, due to the long-term build-out and the scope of the proposed action, it is not feasible
to commit to precise site plans, or to commit to the design of specific buildings. However, as the
buildings are individually designed, local airport authorities would be consulted regarding the height
and orientation of the proposed structures, so as to eliminate any potential conflicts or aviation safety
concerns.
The objective of exterior lighting design criteria is to establish an overall theme and standard of
quality while encouraging individual creativity, to express the hierarchy of pedestrian and vehicular
circulation systems, define building entrances and architectural features and to create a safe and
attractive nighttime environment. Luminaire styles should, therefore, be consistent and a single
grouping of lighting fixture and pole design shall be used through the Heartland Town Square.
Pursuant to the correspondence from OPRHP, “it continues to be the opinion of the OPRHP, as
expressed in 1998, that it is acceptable and appropriate to proceed with the sale of the Pilgrim State
Psychiatric Center unencumbered.” No additional correspondence has been received from OPRHP
regarding the additional letter sent by the applicants on February 16, 2007. Furthermore, as part of
the Heartland Town Square development, the existing water tower, power plant (and ancillary
facilities) and cemetery on the western segment of the subject property, and the staff cottages on the
eastern segment of the subject property, would be retained in order to preserve the historic character
of the site. The existing structures would be adaptively re-used for residential, commercial and civic
purposes. Moreover, as there are no known historic or archaeological resources located within the
Gateway Area, there would be no expected impact to such resources.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-36
The proposed buildings to remain on the subject property and be adaptively reused, are the power
plant (which is located in the southern portion of the larger parcel), the warehouse buildings that
flank the power plant and the water tower, located in the northern portion of the western parcel and
the staff cottages on the eastern segment (which was agreed to after a request by the Town).
The existing power plant is planned for use as a community center and gallery spaces, while the
adjacent warehouse buildings are proposed to be converted into artist loft-style residential units. The
water tower is proposed to be preserved as a landmark within the retail “main street” area within the
Town Center. It is possible that retail uses would be incorporated into or adjacent to the base of the
water tower.
On the smaller parcel, the existing cottages as well as the larger building located to the north are
proposed to remain. All of these structures are proposed to be converted into a variety of residential
units.
While the existing hotel would remain, none of the other buildings within the Gateway Area are
proposed to be adaptively reused. All of the existing buildings within this area are proposed to be
demolished and replaced with new construction, with the exception of the hotel.
It should be noted that with the exception of the water tower, none of the existing buildings that are
proposed to be retained and adaptively reused are visible from off the property. However, the
retention of some of the existing buildings would enhance the historic qualities of the site and provide
character to the new communities that would be developed around them.
Open Space and Recreation
Open spaces in the proposed Heartland Town Square development are provided in compliance with
the standards developed by the National Recreation and Parks Association (“NRPA”), as discussed
below. These spaces are designed to provide not only for the residents of proposed development, but
are proposed to be open to the general public. All public open spaces are provided within walking
distance of the people they serve. The open space program is hierarchical to encourage a range of
activities and many of the open spaces are multi-use, having a flexible design that can accommodate
a variety of different uses and user groups.
Heartland Town Square, as a model for Smart Growth, mixed-use development, differs from
conventional suburban developments in two ways: first, it is programmed to be developed at higher
densities than the typical suburban subdivision, second; it will have a population profile that includes
a much larger percentage of “renters-by-choice,” a sector of the housing market made up of timeshort professionals, singles, childless couples and retirees looking for a more convenient life-style. As
a result the ratio of open space geared to children’s needs is estimated by RTKL to be the equivalent
of 66 percent of a conventional suburban community.
Open spaces have been designed using the above-mentioned standards as follows. The total open
space provided is 124.46 acres (excluding surface parking lots and the existing cemetery) for the
projected 9,130 dwellings. Open space calculations were performed for a population of 20,000. This
amounts to 6.22 acres of total open space per 1,000-person population.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-37
Development Units 1 and 2 are programmed as mixed-use developments around the system of small
pocket parks and plazas that are proposed to be developed as active public spaces. They can be
programmed for tenant-based activities (lunch breaks, midday concerts, etc.), special events and
community-based activities (art fairs, farmers markets, festivals, etc.). Development Units 3 and 4 are
programmed primarily as residential developments and have considerably larger pockets of green that
can be developed into neighborhood and community parks. The open space strategy for the Gateway
Area includes buffer areas, plaza areas and pocket park areas.
Various courtyards provided within the residential neighborhoods are proposed to be developed into
children’s play areas and community spaces. Surface parking lots should also be integrated into the
landscape strategy by reducing impervious cover to the minimum. The buffer zones are large extents
of green that separate fast vehicular traffic of the parkways and the ring road from the slower internal
grid of streets and neighborhoods. These green buffer zones should include amenity spaces with
passive recreational facilities for hiking and bike trails and natural landscape areas. Community
recreational space for active sports is adequately provided by SCCC playing fields located within 500
yards of the development. Contributions could be made to improve the existing facilities at Suffolk
Community College for public use. Additional open space that would be accessible to Heartland
Town Square is provided by the Edgewood Preserve located to the southwest of the site offering
hiking trails and picnic areas to park users.
Where possible, the proposed project would incorporate an off-street bike path system. This system
would occur primarily along the perimeter of the site in the buffer areas, and would allow for
connections from the Heartland Town Square community bike paths to surrounding neighborhood
community bike paths. The off-street bicycle/pedestrian system would help to increase recreational
bicycling opportunities for the community. An off-street bicycle path network plays the crucial role
of recruiting novice bicyclists and non-bicyclists into becoming regular, confident bicyclists since
off-street paths provide a “training ground” that allows large numbers of untrained bicyclists to learn
the skills and the joys of riding in a safe, non-threatening, social environment.
On major roadways within Heartland Town Square development, as appropriate, in-street bicycle
lanes will be incorporated. In-street bicycle lanes are desirable to commuter bicyclists seeking to
find the fastest route to a destination when commuting. In addition, studies have shown in urban-type
areas where there are numerous crossing driveways and streets, in-street bicycle lanes are
significantly safer than sidewalks. However, in-street bicycle lanes are not generally appropriate on
low-speed downtown streets or neighborhood streets. The low speeds of neighborhood-scaled streets
allow them to accommodate bicyclists without providing a dedicated in-street lane. The plan for
Heartland Town Square envisions a bicyclist-friendly environment, providing both in-street lanes and
off-street trails, situated at appropriate locations.
It is anticipated that most of the open space and recreation needs of the future residents and
employees situated within the Heartland Town Square community and the Gateway Area would be
met by on site facilities. Furthermore, indoor recreational/cultural facilities would, in part, be
provided through the creation of civic spaces. Total open space would comprise 138± acres or
approximately 30 percent of the overall site. This does not include the 19.3±-acre cemetery in the
northwestern portion of the subject site.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-38
Critical Environmental Areas
The subject property is located in the Oak Brush Plains SGPA, which is designated a CEA. The
SPGA Plan Land Use Plan for the Oak Brush Plains depicts the subject property with a cemetery in
the northwest, high-density residential development in the northern portion of the site, institutional
uses in the southern and eastern portions of the site and commercial/industrial uses within the
Gateway Area. With the exception of the northern portion of the subject property, this essentially
illustrated the extant conditions at the time the SGPA Plan was published. Since the time that the
SGPA Plan was promulgated, New York State sold two-thirds of its holdings of the Pilgrim State
Psychiatric Center to a private developer.
Thus, the institutional use for the southern portion of the site is no longer relevant. It should be noted
that the cemetery is proposed to remain, and high-density residential development and commercial
uses have been incorporated into the overall Heartland Town Square development plan.
Overall, the primary goals of the SGPA Plan and the recommendations therein are the protection of
groundwater quality and quantity. The specific recommendations for the Oak Brush Plains SGPA
stress the connection of the area to the Southwest Sewer District and prevention of the intensification
of uses without such sewer connection. Furthermore, other recommendations include efforts to
preclude avoidable contamination and to reduce the impacts of former disposal and storage practices.
Finally, the recommendations also indicate the need to protect open space and undisturbed recharge
areas.
The renewal of the Gateway Area would assist in furthering the goals of the SGPA Plan by removing
uses that have the potential to be detrimental to the environment, including outdoor storage facilities,
contracting facilities and unchecked industrial development. Removal of these uses and replacement
with “clean” uses including residences, offices and retail shops, along with the inclusion of green
spaces, would minimize the potential for contamination of the groundwater and would generally be
more protective of the environment.
As previously noted, the applicants have secured conceptual certification from the SCSA to permit
the disposal of sewage effluent into the municipal sewerage system for the amount of effluent
contemplated by the development program. By obtaining this connection, the Heartland Town Square
can provide the density of development that the applicants respectfully submit is needed to make it a
Smart Growth community that is protective of the environment. Furthermore, no industrial uses are
proposed on the site, which minimizes the potential for associated contamination.
Furthermore, the stormwater management system has been designed to filter and recharge stormwater
from impervious surfaces. Prior to recharge into the ground, stormwater runoff would either be
filtered through drywells or leaching pools or through recharge basins placed throughout the subject
property. As contemplated by the NURP Study and Nonpoint Source Management Handbook, the
use of such stormwater management facilities would protect groundwater and ultimately surface
water resources, thus fulfilling the primary objective of the SGPA Plan.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-39
Transportation
A complete traffic analysis was prepared by Eschbacher VHB. The analysis of future conditions was
performed to evaluate the effect of the project on future traffic in the area. The three future conditions
analyzed are:
•
No Build: expected future traffic conditions without development at Heartland
•
Build without Mitigation: expected future traffic conditions with development at Heartland,
but without proposed mitigation measures A through P (the mitigation measures are
discussed in detail in the mitigation section of the report)
•
Build: expected future traffic conditions with development at Heartland, mitigation measures
A through P included.
With most projects, trips generated by a proposed development are computed using Trip Generation,
a widely utilized reference published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (“ITE”). The trip
rates in Trip Generation for a proposed land use and applicable time period are multiplied by the
appropriate independent variable (number of dwelling units, square footage of retail space, etc.) to
obtain the number of trips the proposed development can be expected to generate. These projectgenerated trips are then assigned to the surrounding road network based on existing travel patterns,
demographic and marketing data, and other relevant factors.
By adding this anticipated project generated traffic to the existing traffic volumes (increased by a
growth factor to account for the non-project related increase in traffic that will occur while the project
is under construction, as discussed previously) and other planned development volumes, a reasonable
estimate of the proposed project’s impact on the surrounding traffic can then be made using an
accepted analysis procedure.
The above methodology is adequate for most projects. The proposed Heartland Town Square
development, however, is unlike most projects. The proposed project is larger and more complex than
most projects and, more importantly from an analytical perspective, it is a major multi-use project
specifically planned and designed using the latest in Smart Growth principles to reduce the number of
vehicles traveling in and out of the site.
Heartland Town Square is envisioned to operate analogous to traffic dynamics found in a dense urban
environment, where large percentages of residents reside close to work, and where shops, other
businesses and civic uses all come together in an integrated neighborhood environment, minimizing
the need for single occupancy vehicles. The proposed project relies on a mix of retail, commercial,
recreational and residential uses to create a community environment with land use densities similar to
and approaching those found in urban downtown areas, with the aim of placing more people within
walking distance to destinations and transit service. Heartland relies on transit-oriented development
by combining traditional neighborhood design that incorporates transit accessibility.
The envisioned Heartland transportation system focuses on connectivity, accessibility, mobility and
multi-modal travel options that are reliable and efficient. The incorporation of these transportation
elements at Heartland will provide viable alternatives to single occupancy vehicles.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-40
At Heartland, an internal transportation system, consisting of continuously operating shuttle bus
service is envisioned to significantly reduce the need for automobile usage within the site. These
same shuttles are envisioned to operate to and from the Deer Park LIRR station, further reducing
commuter traffic in and out of Heartland. Expanded bus service by Suffolk County Transit is also
anticipated. Another concept to be promoted at Heartland is Car Sharing, which is an automobile
rental service intended to substitute for private vehicle ownership. It is estimated that each shared car
replaces ownership of up to six cars, which by extension, reduces the amount of parking needed.
The size, multi-use nature, and emphasis on transportation demand management programs to be
incorporated at Heartland necessitate a unique analytical procedure to produce a reasonable estimate
of the traffic impact of the project. Accordingly, a model specific to the traffic dynamics of Heartland
and the surrounding road network has been developed, as discussed next.
The Heartland Transportation Model approximates the traffic conditions on the local roadway
network and study intersections for the Build condition during the critical AM, midday, PM, and
Saturday peak hours, for the full build-out of Heartland. The model is dynamic in that it follows an
iterative process by which project generated traffic is assigned to the local roadways and
intersections, analyzed, and mitigation measures identified. Based on the mitigation measures, traffic
is then re-allocated and the above process is repeated until convergence to a final result, giving the
expected traffic volumes, proposed roadway improvements and operating LOS (intersection Level of
Service).
The Heartland Transportation Model is comprised of a series of individual models that consider the
transportation characteristics and traffic reduction techniques envisioned for Heartland.
The individual models were developed and combined to form the complete Heartland Transportation
Model. These models are the analysis tools used to estimate and distribute the project generated
traffic volumes. The four primary models that comprise the complete model are: Trip Generation
Model; Trip Allocation Model; Portal Demand Model; and Route Assignment Model.
The Trip Generation Model calculates the expected number of project generated trips by land use and
then classifies them according to purpose (journey to work or non-journey to work) and whether they
are internal or external trips. The internal capture rate is a key output of this portion of the model.
The Trip Allocation Model, using Census 2000 data, classifies the external trips by geographic origin
(or destination) and mode (vehicle, bus, or LIRR). The expected number of project generated bus
and LIRR riders are one of the results of this portion of the model.
For external vehicle trips, the Portal Demand Model determines the number of vehicles that can be
expected to pass through one of fourteen locations, or “portal points,” on their way into or out of the
project study area.
The Route Assignment Model assigns the external vehicle trips to specific routes on the local
roadway network that connect Heartland with the fourteen portal points on the boundaries of the
project study area. The model assigns vehicles to a specific route based on travel time and
intersection delays along possible routes, favoring routes with the lowest travel times. This portion of
the model gives the expected project generated volumes on the individual roadway segments in the
study area.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-41
For analytical purposes and in recognition of the large size of Heartland Town Square, the project
was divided into three distinct traffic zones:
Zone 1 - East of Sagtikos Parkway (Development Unit #4)
Zone 2 - South of Campus Road (Development Unit #3)
Zone 3 - North of Campus Road (Development Units #1, #2 &
Gateway Area)
For each of the three zones, project generated trips were initially computed using standard trip rates
from Trip Generation (Seventh Edition, ITE, 2003).
ITE Trip Generation Summary - PM Peak Hour
Entering
Trips
Exiting
Trips
Total
10,000 SF
100,000 SF
2,650 units
25,000 SF
1,004,400 SF
4,050,000 SF
4,080 units
80,000 SF
-
28
836
864
18
25
923
12
978
1,808
1,026
1,421
38
4,293
30
412
442
20
124
455
29
628
1,959
5,009
700
93
7,761
58
1,248
1,306
38
149
1,378
41
1,606
3,767
6,035
2,121
131
12,054
-
6,135
8,831
14,966
Size
Zone 1
Zone 2
Zone 3
Retail
Residential
Total
Retail
Office/Comm.
Residential
Civic
Total
Retail
Office/Comm.
Residential
Civic
Total
Total all trips
15,600 SF
2,400 units
For most projects, the trip generation calculations would be complete at this point. But for Heartland,
the multi-use nature of the project must be considered. Not all trips generated by the various project
elements in the three zones will have a start or end point outside the project. There will be trips
between the three zones and trips that take place, start to finish, inside a single zone. To estimate the
breakdown of internal versus external trips, twenty-six different project generated trip types were
incorporated in the model. These twenty-six trip types fall into two major categories: journey to work
trips and non-journey to work trips.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-42
Journey to work trips are, as the name suggests, trips to or from the workplace. There are eighteen
different journey to work trip types included in the model for Heartland Town Square. Each of the
“trip types” is actually a pair of trips: one exiting trip (origin) and one entering trip (destination).
Interim stops within Heartland Town Square, such as for coffee on the way to work or at the store on
the way home, are categorized with the journey to work trips. Each of these interim stops displaces a
non-journey to work trip that would otherwise have crossed into and back out of the project site. For
example, in a single-use project, everyone leaving work would produce one exiting trip by going
home. In a multi-use project such as Heartland Town Square, not everyone will head straight home.
A certain percentage of people will stop elsewhere within Heartland, thereby generating three trips
(leaving work, entering the interim stop, and exiting the interim stop), while only exiting the project
site once. And, for those who both work and live in Heartland, no external trips will be generated
during their travels to and from work.
The remaining eight trip types are non-journey to work trips. Examples of these types of trips are
residents making routine household errands (to locations inside or outside Heartland), non-residents
shopping or showing for an appointment within Heartland, attendees leaving a business meeting, and
residents going to a Long Island Ducks game, or other non-work activities.
In addition to the rates from Trip Generation and the size of the various project elements, nineteen
additional variables are also incorporated into the model. The variables are used to determine the
allocation of the project generated trips (calculated from Trip Generation) among the 26 trip types
described above. These variables include factors such as the percentage of employees in Heartland
who stop elsewhere within Heartland on the way home from work, the proportion of journey to work
versus non-journey to work trips for each of the four project elements types (retail,
office/commercial, residential, and civic), and the percentage of non-journey to work trips from the
outside that result in multiple stops within Heartland (for example, an office appointment followed by
a stop to shop). The Trip Generation Model computes the number of each of the 26 types between
the three internal zones, and between the three internal zones and the outside.
An example of how the factors are used can be seen by looking at the calculation of the expected
number of Trip Type 3. Trip Type 3 is the first leg of a journey to work trip by a Heartland Town
Square resident. It is comprised of both an exiting trip from a Heartland residence and an entering
trip at another, non-residential, location within Heartland. A typical example of this type of trip
would be a Heartland Town Square resident stopping elsewhere within Heartland to buy coffee or a
bagel (or both) on the way to work somewhere outside of Heartland. Trip Type 4 is the corresponding
second half of the complete journey to work trip.
Three of the 19 factors are directly involved in the calculation of the number of trips that are Trip
Type 3. The three factors are: 1) the percentage of exiting residential trips that are journey to work
trips (as opposed to non-journey to work trips); 2) the percentage of Heartland Town Square
residents that work outside of Heartland (as opposed to working within Heartland Town Square); and
3) the percentage of those who live in Heartland Town Square but work outside that make an Interim
Stop inside Heartland Town Square on their way to work outside (as opposed to those who travel
directly from their residence within Heartland Town Square to their outside workplace). Other
factors, such as the percentage of entering retail trips that are journey to work trips (as opposed to
customer entering trips), are used indirectly to get the geographic allocation of the type 3 trips among
the three internal traffic zones in Heartland Town Square. Some trip types, such as type 1 and type 2
do not have as involved calculations.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-43
The calculation and allocation of other trip types, however are even more intricate than for type 3 and
are dependent (directly and indirectly) on more factors and other trip types.
The net effect of trips that take place between the three zones and trips that take place, start to finish,
inside a single zone results in a significant reduction in the number of external trips generated as
compared to conventional trip generation methods. The reduction in external trips (internal capture
rate) derived from the Trip Generation Model correlates well with available published study results.
Additional discussion of the internal capture rates at Heartland Town Square and how they compare
favorably with experiences elsewhere in the country can be found in the “Addendum to the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement for Proposed Heartland Town Square (Redevelopment of a Portion
of Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center) Dated June 2007.”
There are a fixed number of points through which vehicles entering or exiting the Heartland study
area can pass. The following fourteen “portal points” were identified as the significant external points
through which vehicles entering or exiting the Heartland study area would pass: L.I.E. west; Northern
Parkway west; Commack Road north; Southern Parkway/Sunrise Highway east; Sagtikos Parkway north;
Wicks Road north; Islip south/east; L.I.E. east; Northern Parkway east; Commack Road south; Southern
Parkway/Sunrise Highway west; Pine Aire Drive south/west; Crooked Hill Road north; and Long Island
Avenue west.
Although some external Heartland trips will start or end inside the study area, it was conservatively
assumed that all external vehicle trips will pass through one of the identified portal points. Since the
external vehicle trips are destined to pass through a portal point, the portal points were assigned
reasonable usage percentages based on the geographic region of the origin/destination of the trip and
the likelihood that a particular portal point would be used on the trip to or from Heartland. For
example, it was estimated that for trips originating or ending in North Hempstead, 80 percent would
come through the LIE west portal and 20 percent through the Northern State west portal. There would
be no vehicle trips (0 percent usage) to or from North Hempstead passing through the other twelve
portal points.
By combining the portal point usage percentages of the eleven geographic regions with the results of
the Trip Allocation Model, the Portal Demand Model computes the expected project-generated
vehicle flows between the three internal zones at Heartland and the fourteen portal points.
The PM peak hour results of the Portal Demand Model are shown below.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-44
Portal Demand Model Summary - PM Peak Hour
Zone 1
Portal
L.I.E. west
Northern. Parkway west
Commack Road north
Crooked Hill Road north
Sagtikos Parkway north
Wicks Road north
Northern Parkway east
L.I.E. east
Islip south/east
Southern Parkway/Sunrise
Highway east
Southern Parkway/Sunrise
Highway west
Pine Aire Drive south/west
Commack Road south
Long Island Avenue west
Total
Zone 2
Zone 3
Totals
Exiting
Vehicles
Entering
Vehicles
Exiting
Vehicles
Entering
Vehicles
Exiting
Vehicles
Entering
Vehicles
Exiting
Vehicles
Entering
Vehicles
27
8
6
11
12
2
9
27
10
76
21
12
20
23
4
18
52
19
30
9
6
11
12
1
14
34
8
65
18
10
16
19
2
16
44
11
497
124
87
133
187
15
297
702
88
196
46
28
42
59
5
67
172
24
554
141
99
154
211
19
320
762
106
337
86
50
78
101
10
102
267
54
21
40
27
35
558
137
606
213
26
59
29
49
483
156
538
263
4
7
2
170
8
12
3
366
4
7
2
194
6
10
3
304
69
99
25
3,364
20
30
7
989
77
113
28
3,728
33
52
13
1,659
In keeping with good transportation planning, the proposed site access locations for Heartland were
developed considering the proximity of the project to the two major highways bordering the property
to the north and east, the Long Island Expressway and the Sagtikos Parkway, the proximity to mass
transit, namely the Deer Park LIRR station to the south of Heartland, and the existing travel patterns
on the local roadways in the area. The new access locations as well as the existing access locations to
remain are shown in the diagram to the left, in red and green, respectively. The proposed multiple
access points provide numerous route options for motorists traveling to and from Heartland, and
disperse traffic over a larger number of the local roads.
The PM peak hour results are shown below.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-45
LOS Summary - PM Peak Hour
EXISTING
2003
INTERSECTION
LOS
Commack Road/L.I.E. North Service
Road
Commack Road/L.I.E. South Service
Road
Crooked Hill Road/L.I.E North Service
Road
Delay
(sec/veh)
NO BUILD
2021
ICU
LOS
Delay
(sec/veh)
Build w/o Mitigation
2021
ICU
LOS
Delay
(sec/veh)
BUILD
2021
ICU
LOS
Delay
(sec/veh)
ICU
C
24
118%
F
92
163%
F
115
165%
F
112
145%
F
89
118%
F
274
163%
F
295
165%
F
205
145%
A
7
48%
A
8
59%
D
40
121%
C
32
90%
1.0 Executive Summary
Crooked Hill Road/L.I.E. South Service
Road
Commack Road/Pilgrim Site Access
1-46
A
9
48%
B
13
59%
D
45
121%
B
12
90%
B
11
70%
F
180
102%
F
177
66%
F
177
101%
Commack Road/Long Island Avenue
D
37
37%
F
165
108%
F
86
98%
F
86
98%
Commack Road/Grand Boulevard
C
30
71%
D
45
82%
D
44
85%
D
44
85%
Long Island Avenue/Executive Drive
C
26
26%
D
44
67%
D
36
70%
C
30
67%
Pine Aire Drive/Executive Drive
Pine Aire Drive/SB Sagtikos Parkway
Ramps
Pine Aire Drive/NB Sagtikos Parkway
Ramps
Pine Aire Drive/Fifth Avenue
C
22
55%
F
90
97%
F
122
99%
E
74
91%
F
92
77%
F
135
125%
E
140
128%
B
18
102%
D
41
79%
E
62
120%
E
73
122%
C
25
121%
D
41
81%
F
92
96%
F
110
99%
F
108
98%
Wicks Road/Suffolk Avenue
D
48
84%
E
132
99%
F
158
101%
F
157
102%
Wicks Road/Crooked Hill Road
C
20
43%
B
13
52%
B
13
55%
B
13
55%
Wicks Road/Community College Drive
Crooked Hill Road/Community College
Drive
Crooked Hill Road/Pilgrim Access
D
53
67%
D
52
80%
D
52
86%
D
52
84%
B
17
57%
C
28
67%
D
54
90%
D
40
78%
A
4
40%
A
6
48%
F
99
108%
B
17
79%
Wicks Road/Motor Parkway
C
34
82%
E
55
97%
E
66
100%
E
60
98%
Wicks Road/Express Drive South
C
32
68%
D
45
82%
E
62
85%
D
55
83%
Campus Road/New Zone 1 Access
-
-
-
-
-
-
B
13
77%
C
22
65%
Crooked Hill Road/New Zone 1 Access
-
-
-
-
-
-
A
7
42%
A
7
42%
Crooked Hill Road/New Zone 3 Access
Pilgrim Access at L.I.E. South Service
Road
-
-
-
-
-
-
B
13
77%
B
15
61%
-
-
-
-
-
-
B
11
52%
C
16
55%
1.0 Executive Summary
1-47
The same methodologies used for the key intersections were also used in the analysis of the Town of
Babylon intersections. For other planned developments whose traffic impact studies did not include
the Town of Babylon intersections, reasonable projections of project generated traffic from the other
planned developments were based on extending the distribution patterns used in those studies to the
Town of Babylon intersections. Estimates of project generated traffic were based on extending the
distribution patterns (as determined by the Heartland Transportation Model) from the key
intersections to the Town of Babylon Intersections.
A separate Build without Mitigation analysis for the Town of Babylon intersections is not needed
since the Babylon intersections and associated traffic patterns are sufficiently remote from Heartland
Town Square, and the proposed mitigation would be unchanged whether or not the proposed
mitigation measures are undertaken.
Intersections identified by the Town of Babylon for analysis are those intersections in Babylon
receiving the primary impacts from the proposed development at Heartland Town Square. Since the
impacts at these primary Town of Babylon intersections are minor, secondary impacts at intersections
not identified as needing study by the Town of Babylon will necessarily be even less than the minor
impacts that already have been identified.
The PM peak results for the Babylon intersections are shown below.
LOS Summary for Town of Babylon Intersections - PM Peak Hour
EXISTING
2003
INTERSECTION
LOS
Delay
(sec/veh)
NO BUILD
2021
ICU
LOS
Delay
(sec/veh)
BUILD
2021
ICU
LOS
Delay
(sec/veh)
ICU
Commack Road/Nicolls Road
B
16
55%
B
18
72%
B
19
73%
Commack Road/Bay Shore Road
E
65
88%
F
85
105%
F
92
106%
Commack Road /Burlington Drive
A
5
63%
F
192
91%
F
188
92%
NY 231/Bay Shore Road
D
46
83%
E
69
95%
E
72
96%
NY 231/Grand Boulevard
E
77
90%
F
119
104%
F
120
105%
NY 231/Nicolls Road
E
59
88%
F
111
103%
F
111
103%
Carlls Path/Nicolls Road
B
13
61%
B
13
70%
B
13
70%
Carlls Path/Grand Boulevard
C
25
73%
E
58
87%
E
60
87%
Carlls Path/Bay Shore Road
B
10
79%
B
12
91%
B
12
91%
Carlls Path/Long Island Avenue
B
15
79%
C
22
97%
C
26
99%
Note: The Town of Babylon intersections and associated traffic patterns are sufficiently remote from Heartland Town Square and
the proposed mitigation measures would be unchanged whether or not the proposed mitigation measures are undertaken..
Therefore, the Build without Mitigation and the Build intersection delays are the same.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-48
The number of trips to and from each microzone was computed based on the amount of development
proposed in each microzone. One of the results generated by The Heartland Transportation Model is
the internal to external trip ratio for each of the four general land use types (Retail,
Office/Commercial, Residential, and Civic) in each of the three primary internal traffic zones. These
ratios were applied to the respective microzones to estimate the number of project generated internal
and external trips entering and exiting each microzone. In addition to the proposed development, the
existing Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center (“PSPC”) will continue to generate trips on the internal
roadway network. Trips from PSPC, plus vehicles currently passing through the Pilgrim site to access
southbound Sagtikos Parkway, were added to the project generated traffic to estimate the total traffic
flows between each of the microzones and the seven external access points.
It should be noted that the internal roadway network analysis is very conservative in several ways.
Although trips to and from the outside do take into account reductions due to transit usage, for trips
that take place start to finish within Heartland, no credit was taken for the substantial reduction in
vehicle usage for internal trips that the pedestrian and transit friendly design of the project will
induce. It was assumed that all internal trips would be by automobile.
Also, the internal model overestimates the distance of each trip (increasing the number of
intersections passed through on each trip) because the internal model only partially accounts for the
tendency that drivers entering and exiting Heartland will use access points close to their start and end
points rather than traveling through Heartland to reach remote access points.
A summary of the LOS for the internal intersections is presented below.
LOS Summary for Internal Intersections – PM Peak Hour
BUILD 2021
INTERSECTION
LOS
Delay
(sec/veh))
ICU
Ring Road/South Service Road
A
3
39%
Ring Road/Uptown Boulevard
A
9
56%
Ring Road/Ramp Road
A
9
58%
Ramp Road/Uptown Boulevard
A
3
42%
Ring Road East/Crosstown Boulevard
B
17
67%
Ring Road/Sag Road
B
17
59%
Uptown Boulevard/Ring Road South
B
11
47%
Uptown Boulevard/Campus Road
A
9
47%
Wolkoff Road/Campus Road
B
14
61%
Uptown Boulevard/Sag Road
A
4
47%
Ring Road West/Crosstown Boulevard
A
9
41%
Wolkoff Road/Crosstown Boulevard
B
15
62%
Uptown Boulevard/Crosstown Boulevard
C
21
76%
1.0 Executive Summary
1-49
The PM peak period was chosen for analysis since it is the period when both the greatest number of
overall trips and the greatest number of internal trips will be generated. If it can be shown that the
proposed internal roadway network can readily handle the PM peak volumes, then the lesser volumes
that will be experienced during the other peak hours will also be readily handled by the internal
roadway network and intersections. As the analysis results below indicate, the internal roadways and
intersections will, in fact, readily handle the expected PM peak hour volumes. Consequently,
detailed analysis of the internal traffic network during the other peak periods was unnecessary.
The applicants have been and will continue to work closely with the Town, County and State
regarding transportation issues, including mitigation. Proposed traffic mitigation, including roadway
improvements, is discussed in the subsection below.
Energy
The applicants requested that LIPA provide an energy analysis for the proposed Heartland Town
Square project. The following is a summary of the report entitled Heartland Town Square – “A
Strategic Partnership.”
LIPA prepared a report to demonstrate its expertise and desire to provide state-of-the-art electric
service options for Heartland Town Square and to identify cost-effective options that benefit the
environment and Long Island in general. While the electric service infrastructure proposed would
include the latest technological advances to ensure premium reliability, it could also provide
opportunities for future technologies (i.e., fuel cells, solar, etc) with virtual “plug-in” capability as
they become more commercially and economically available. Furthermore, LIPA would partner with
the applicants to ensure that the energy component of this project is developed in the most
environmentally-friendly way possible.
LIPA’s Electric Planning Department has analyzed the proposed load additions at the subject
property and developed a detailed Electric Load Supply Analysis to determine the impact on the
LIPA transmission and distribution system. LIPA indicated that the addition of 5.4 to 11.8 MW of
new load will require the installation of a fourth 69-13 kV, 28 MVA transformer and three 13 kV
distribution circuits at the existing Brentwood substation. Once the fourth bank and 13 kV feeders
are installed, there will be no more space available for any type of future expansion at the Brentwood
substation. No transmission system reinforcements would be required to supply the additional 11.8
MW load.
A preliminary assessment prepared by LIPA indicated that these transmission reinforcements should
be adequate to supply the additional 48 MW required by Heartland Town Square plus the expected
growth. However, further studies would be required as the Heartland expansion plans evolve.
LIPA proposed to have direct involvement in the “smart” integrated development of the proposed
Heartland Town Square project in order to maximize energy efficiency opportunities and to showcase
the latest technologies commercially available to achieve environmental and Smart Growth goals.
LIPA is in the position to help facilitate a “conception to implementation” strategy for the
development of Heartland Town Square and welcomes the opportunity to be involved in such a
progressive project. LIPA involvement could potentially include third-party assistance from the
design stage through and including installation, implementation and commissioning of approved
concepts and technologies that would assist the project in achieving the energy savings goals.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-50
The maximum energy savings can be achieved through comprehensive design and implementation of
multiple energy savings technologies at each building, such as high performance lighting, and highefficiency HVAC, and includes energy savings from energy management systems, thermal envelope
improvements and other comprehensive energy savings measures.
The energy use and savings potential estimates are based upon current construction practice, the most
recent New York State Energy Codes and LIPA’s experience with similar, recently-constructed
facilities. Both demand and energy savings for each end-use represents technical potential assuming
100 percent penetration and implementation of energy savings technologies.
It is envisioned that the development of Heartland Town Square would encompass a wide array of
innovative energy use and savings options. Examples of such options include technical and financial
assistance to utilize energy-efficient technologies; the investigation of renewable energy sources, as
appropriate; and the development of a smart utility grid that could assist with the implementation of
distributed generated opportunities. These options, coupled with economic development initiatives
and innovative rate design approaches will help to ensure that the proposed project is developed in an
environmentally-friendly manner utilizing the most current and comprehensive resources.
LIPA would also work with the applicants to help address transportation issues by capitalizing on
alternative fuel vehicle technology options. Possible applications include alternative fuel shuttles to
the railroad station and trolleys within the community; promotion and education of the use of electric
and hybrid vehicles; electric charging stations at railroad stations and strategically-placed areas
within the community; and solar carports.
A formalized working relationship between Heartland Town Square’s developers and LIPA will
provide for the development of a sustainable, environmental-friendly, and energy-efficient
community that benefits the local residents as well as the neighboring communities. This goal will be
achieved by LIPA working closely with the developer to help maximize cost-effective, energyefficient opportunities; minimize the impact on the electric grid; and minimize the overall
environmental impacts of a development the scale of Heartland Town Square as the specific
development plans evolve.
Additionally, LIPA would assist the developer to create and maintain strategic relationships, and can
work with the developer to ensure quality performance in implementing the recommended measures.
Proper project management and the use of turnkey installation agreements can assist in achieving the
overall energy and environmental goals. The “commissioning” of installed efficiency measures will
help to maintain long-term benefits of the use of the technologies and energy strategies that can be
employed at Heartland Town Square. A formalized working relationship between Heartland Town
Square’s developers and LIPA would provide for the development of a sustainable, environmentalfriendly, and energy-efficient community that benefits the local residents as well as the neighboring
communities. This goal will be achieved by LIPA working closely with the developer to help
maximize cost-effective, energy-efficient opportunities; minimize the impact on the electric grid; and
minimize the overall environmental impacts of a development the scale of Heartland Town Square.
The applicants have also consulted with KeySpan/National Grid. KeySpan/National Grid has
indicated, in correspondence dated March 2, 2007, that natural gas would be available to serve the
proposed development.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-51
It must be understood, however, that the proposed build-out of the project is expected to take place
over a 15-year period. Moreover, the applicants respectfully submit that it is not feasible to design
each building and to determine the source of heat for each building during this environmental review
process. It is expected that the buildings on the site would be heated by either natural gas or by oil.
If the buildings are heated using oil, the oil would be stored in either above-ground or underground
tanks installed and operated in accordance with Article 12 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code to
ensure protection of groundwater.
With respect to alternate forms of energy (including fuel oil, solar power, etc.), it is not possible to
determine specific energy sources for each proposed building because it is not feasible to design each
building at the present time. The proposed action contemplates the development of 9,130 residential
units, 4,150,000 square feet of commercial/office space, 1,030,000 square feet of retail space, and
105,000 square feet of civic space, which is projected to be constructed over a 15+-year period.
However,:
“[i]t must be understood that, given the long-term build-out and the scope of development of
Heartland Town Square, it is not possible to prepare and commit to precise site plans.
Precise uses in any particular area would be dependent upon various factors, the most
significant of which is market demand. Accordingly, a conceptual development plan has been
prepared to represent the likely development scenario, in accordance with the proposed
PSPRD. Moreover, the conceptual development plan that is evaluated herein represents
maximum potential development. This ensures a worst-case environmental analysis, pursuant
to SEQRA.”
As, due to the long-term build-out and the scope of the proposed action, it is not feasible to commit to
precise site plans, or to commit to the design of specific buildings. Accordingly, use of “alternate
forms of energy” and/or specific energy conservation measures for buildings can only be defined at
the time of site plan review.
Noise and Odor
Noise
The results of the noise screening process conducted by RTP, using the future No Build and Build
PM Peak traffic volumes and the NYSDOT default traffic mix for Suffolk County indicate the traffic
locations with 3 dBA or greater potential increases are along Crooked Hill Road at North and South
Service Roads, Zone 3 Access, and Community College and Campus Road (G Road). More than 7
dBA increase is forecasted at Crooked Hill Road and Campus Road and as much as a 4 dBA increase
at Crooked Hill Road and Pilgrim Access.
The projected noise impacts are based upon the existing field data, projected traffic increases from
the No Build case and the initial screening using the Passenger Car Equivalents (“PCE”) method.
The results indicate that noise impacts associated with the general Heartland Town Square Project
could be significant. However, mitigation measures are being incorporated into the proposed project
to minimize potential significant adverse impacts.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-52
Since noise levels in the area around the intersection at Campus Road and Zone 1 Access (near
Sagtikos Parkway) were expected to experience an increase approaching three dBA under the
screening procedure, the TNM model was employed with detailed traffic data under both the No
Build and the Build alternatives to more precisely quantify the noise levels at Location N4 by the
SCCC building next to Crooked Hill Road.
Again, noise levels approaching (within one dBA) or exceeding the FHWA/NYSDOT NAC criteria
of 67 dBA for residences can be found immediately adjacent to the Long Island Expressway Service
Road, Campus (G) Road, Commack Road and Crooked Hill Road. However, of these locations,
residences are only located along Commack Road and their noise levels are expected to be unchanged
from the noise environment without the project.
Overall, the Heartland Town Square Project may introduce a generally insignificant one dBA
increase over and above the ambient noise levels without the project throughout the study area.
Therefore, it is concluded that the proposed Heartland Town Square Project will not have a
significant impact on the noise environment of the study area.
Odor
As the Heartland Town Square project is proposed as a Smart Growth community, project planning is
focused on the creation of an “efficient, transportation served, multi-use environment that mixes
employment, shopping and housing.” The project will integrate residential units with localized,
support retail in addition to areas of commercial space and larger area retail development, including a
grocery store and restaurants.
According to available information, the proposed project will not incorporate any industrial or
agricultural uses. Further, no large-scale waste disposal facility is planned for the subject property,
nor is a sewage treatment plant proposed at or in the vicinity of the site. Historically, industrial and
agricultural activities present the greatest odor potentials. However, odor sources will still be present
within the proposed community. Unfortunately, these potential sources are much more subjective
than say a hog farm or landfill and include sources such as coffee shops, restaurants, bakeries and the
like.
As an urban/suburban community with no additional industrial activities, the Heartland Town Square
project is expected to have relatively few potentially significant sources of odor when compared with
many communities, including rural areas that may have large, mechanized agricultural operations. In
addition, the proposed development will concentrate restaurant space in areas more closely associated
with business and retail. The proposed Heartland Town Square development will incorporate
localized mitigation measures (rather than project-wide measures), as necessary. An example may
include the installation of restaurant roof vents directed away from nearby residential areas.
Restaurants would also use odor control technology as part of their design especially for controlling
odors from grilling operations. Other activities would also employ hoods and exhaust stacks to
alleviate nuisance odors.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-53
Background odors may have enhancing or canceling effects on the Heartland Town Square project.
Integration of these with the proposed development will be on a case by case basis. As the design of
the Smart Growth community begins to solidify, areas will be designed for specific uses; each use
will be reviewed for the potential for causing nuisance odors. Each activity having a nuisance odor
causing potential will be required to mitigate the odors generated to a level that will comply with the
nuisance statutes. However, overall, implementation of the proposed action would not result in a
significant generation of odors.
Growth and Character of the Community or Neighborhood
Community Character
There is no doubt that the community character of the Brentwood/Edgewood area would substantially
change with the implementation of the proposed project. It is the applicants’ opinion that the
proposed change in character is in keeping with the desires of the Town to change the existing
character of a partially-razed, unoccupied portion of a psychiatric center and an urban renewal area
that the Town has deemed in need of upgrade.
Also, in addressing the concerns expressed in both the Brentwood Plan and the Finding of Blight
report, the proposed Heartland Town Square redevelopment would provide a sense of place and a
distinct positive community identity that has been lacking in the Brentwood area for decades. The
proposed development will provide diverse housing opportunities, including a significant number of
workforce (affordable) units (1,643).
The redevelopment of the subject property would strengthen and revitalize an area that was an
integral part of the Brentwood community for over 75 years. While much of the subject property’s
infrastructure would have to be replaced due to its age and condition, the redevelopment of the
Heartland Town Square property would take advantage of the existing connections to the larger
infrastructure systems present throughout the community. Redevelopment of the entire area would
also strengthen the identity of the community and give existing as well as future residents and
employees a renewed sense of place.
Rather than separating the Brentwood area, the proposed Heartland Town Square development is
designed to be integrated into the overall community. Proposed streets would tie into the surrounding
roadway network and the development would not be gated. The proposed zoning allows a mixture of
uses on the site and may incorporate existing uses that are located in other parts of Brentwood. As
noted, the proposed redevelopment would create thousands of new housing units for a range of
potential residents, including 1,643 workforce units. Thousands of employment opportunities
(26,000±) of all types and salary levels (as discussed below) would be created and would be available
to existing Brentwood residents as well as future residents of the Heartland Town Square
development.
Socioeconomics
A socioeconomic analysis of the potential impacts of the proposed action was prepared by Pearl M.
Kamer, Ph.D., Consulting Economist (hereinafter either “Dr. Kamer” or “Economic Consultant”).
1.0 Executive Summary
1-54
One of the major benefits of Heartland Town Square will be the creation of jobs both during the
construction phase and at full development, when all elements of the community become operational.
These new jobs will contribute to the economic well being of Brentwood residents and those of
surrounding communities. During the first phase it estimated that 878 jobs construction jobs will be
created annually. During Phase II and Phase III, 1,087 and 677 jobs, respectively, would be created
annually. As these figures indicate, development of Heartland Town Square will significantly
increase job opportunities for Long Island’s construction workers.
The number of jobs likely to be created during the construction phase of Heartland Town Square has
been computed based on the projected construction costs for each development phase. The developer
anticipates that total construction costs for Heartland Town Square will be approximately
$3,205,766,000. Given the 14,935,410 square feet of planned development, this is equivalent to an
average of about $215 per square foot.
It is assumed that most of the expenditures made during the construction of Heartland Town Square
will remain within the Long Island economy. This spending will undergo several rounds of
“respending” so that its ultimate impact is a multiple of the original expenditure. This is the so-called
multiplier or ripple effect. For example, construction workers spend their wages in local stores and
restaurants thereby creating additional business at these establishments. Retailers, in turn, purchase
goods and services from other Long Island businesses and the process continues. This secondary
impact can be quantified by using an input-output model of the Long Island economy.
When all three phases are completed, Long Island’s output of goods and services will have increased
by more than $8.7 billion, including the original expenditure of $3.2 billion. This is equivalent to a
net output increase of more than $5.5 billion. Long Island earnings will have risen by almost $2.1
billion and almost 51,000 additional jobs will have been created throughout the Long Island
economy.
Several caveats are needed to properly interpret the foregoing results. The results are expressed in
current dollars. In reality, construction costs will increase over the 15-year construction cycle. The
analysis also assumes that all construction expenditures will remain within the Long Island economy
and will, therefore, be subject to the multiplier process. In reality, some leakage occurs as when
construction workers spend their wages off Long Island or construction materials are purchased from
firms located outside Long Island. To the extent that this occurs, the secondary economic benefits to
the Long Island economy will be reduced. The failure to account for rising construction costs
understates the positive economic impact of the construction phase of Heartland Town Square. The
failure to account for leakages of development expenditures during the construction phase overstates
the positive impact of the proposed development. These factors tend to cancel each other out so that
the foregoing results are a close approximation of the economic impact of Heartland Town Square
during the construction phase.
Dr. Kamer estimates that approximately 5,465 full-time equivalent jobs will be created following the
completion of Phase I, that there will be approximately 12,904 additional full-time equivalent jobs at
the completion of Phase II, and that there will be approximately 7,379 additional full-time equivalent
jobs at the completion of Phase III. This amounts to almost 26,000 full-time equivalent jobs at full
development. To more fully demonstrate the impact of these jobs on the local economy, they were
allocated to the specific industries likely to be found in such mixed-use developments. New York
State Labor Department payroll data for the first quarter of 2006 were then assigned to this
hypothetical industry mix to estimate payrolls following each development phase.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-55
To more fully demonstrate the impact of these jobs on the local economy, they were allocated to the
specific industries likely to be found in such mixed-use developments. New York State Labor
Department payroll data for the first quarter of 2006 were then assigned to this hypothetical industry
mix to estimate payrolls following each development phase. At the end of Phase I, Heartland Town
Square could contain an estimated 5,465 full-time equivalent jobs generating payrolls of almost $220
million in 2006 dollars. At the end of Phase II, Heartland Town Square could contain approximately
18,369 jobs generating payrolls of almost $900 million in 2006 dollars. At the end of Phase III,
Heartland Town Square could contain almost 26,000 jobs generating payrolls of more than $1.3
billion in 2006 dollars. The $1.3 billion in payrolls shown below is expressed in 2006 dollars.
Assuming wage inflation of three percent annually over a 15-year period, the actual payroll figure
could be about $1.9 billion.
The almost 26,000 direct jobs projected for Heartland Town Square at full development could
support a total of more than 60,000 jobs throughout the local economy. That is, 26,000 direct jobs
would support an estimated 34,203 indirect jobs. Many of the direct jobs will involve professional,
technical or financial services, which have relatively large multipliers. This is why the direct jobs
will support so many indirect jobs; the estimated $1.3 billion in direct payrolls could support a total
of more than $2.4 billion in payrolls throughout the local economy. That is, $1.3 billion in direct
payrolls would support another $1.1 billion in indirect payrolls. If the payroll figures were inflated to
account for inflation, an estimated $1.8 billion would support more than $1.6 billion in indirect
payrolls; and all industries would benefit, but there would be particularly large employment and
payroll gains in professional and technical services, which is currently one of Long Island’s fastest
growing industries.
Residents of the proposed 9,130 residential housing units will bring significant purchasing power to
the community. This will provide additional support for existing local businesses and for the new
businesses likely to be created at Heartland Town Square. Of the 8,217 rental apartments, 80 percent
(6,574) will be market rate units and 20 percent (1,643) would be workforce units. All of the for-sale
condominiums (913) will be market rate units.
The disposable household income of potential renters at Heartland Town Square was estimated based
on projected rents, and, in the case of the condominiums, on the projected sales price. The initial
rents are expected to range from $990 to $2,530 monthly for the market rate units and from $821 to
$1,144 monthly for the affordable units.
The disposable incomes of condominium owners at Heartland Town Square were computed based on
the proposed sales prices of the condominiums. The studios are expected to sell for $200,000; the
one-bedroom condos for $240,000, the two-bedroom condos for $400,000 and the two-bedroom
condos with den are expected to sell for $480,000. Assuming that prospective purchasers would
spend no more than 2.5 times their annual household income for one of these condos, a long-held
standard within the real estate industry, their total annual income would range from $80,000 to
$192,000. To estimate the annual income of Heartland Town Square residents at the end of Phase III,
initial annual incomes were inflated by three percent compounded annually over a fifteen-year period
to account for inflation. Condominium owners would generate disposable household income of
about $66.5 million at full occupancy.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-56
When the disposable income of condominium owners and renters are aggregated, it appears that
slightly more than $295 million in additional purchasing power would be injected into the community
annually. This spending would, in turn, undergo several rounds of respending, thereby creating a
multiplier effect. Household multipliers from the RIMS II input-output model were used to estimate
this multiplier effect. These multipliers are summarized in the following table. They show that:
spending of $295 million by the residents of Heartland Town Square would cause Long Island’s
output of goods and services to increase by about $373.4 million, including the original expenditure.
This is equivalent to a net output increase of about $78.3 million. Long Island earnings would
increase by $101 million; and more than 2,800 secondary jobs would be created throughout the Long
Island economy, principally in the immediate vicinity of Heartland Town Square.
The developer proposes to build 8,217 rental apartments at Heartland Town Square. Of these, 3,150
will be in place by the end of Phase I, an additional 3,042 will be in place by the end of Phase II and
the final 2,025 will be in place by the end of Phase III. Twenty percent of these units, a total of
1,643, are expected to be “affordable” to most renters. The disposable household income of potential
renters at Heartland Town Square was estimated based on projected rents, and, in the case of the
condominiums, on the projected sales price. The initial rents are expected to range from $990 to
$2,530 monthly for the market rate units and from $821 to $1,144 monthly for the affordable units.
The number of proposed rental units, by bedroom mix, was multiplied by the estimated annual
income per unit at the end of Phase III to estimate the income of potential renters at Heartland Town
Square at the end of this Phase. The disposable income of these residents was assumed to be 33
percent of their total annual income. Assuming a seven percent vacancy rate, the aggregate
disposable income of renters at Heartland Town Square would be about $228.6 million at the end of
Phase III.
There is a severe shortage of “affordable” rental housing on Long Island and this is causing skilled
young workers to leave the area. As a result, Long Island lost almost 122,000 persons between the
ages of 25 and 44 between 2000 and 2006. Data from the 2005 American Community Survey show
that more than 33,000 Suffolk renters, including almost 8,500 in Islip Town, paid 30 percent or more
of their household income for rent. This is a level defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development as “unaffordable.” Unaffordable rental units accounted for more than 41 percent
of all rental units in Suffolk County and for almost 45 percent of all rental units in Islip Town. The
affordable units planned for Heartland Town Square will provide a significant number of affordable
rental units. Initial annual rents for the affordable units are estimated at $9,847 for the studio loft
apartments, $11,260 for the one-bedroom apartments, $12,672 for the two-bedroom apartments and
$13,728 for the two-bedroom apartments with den. These apartments should be affordable to renters
with annual incomes ranging from $32,791 to $45,714. Median wages for many Long Island
professional, technical, sales, service and blue-collar workers are in this range.
The fact that 90 percent of the proposed residential units at Heartland Town Square will be rental
units will help improve the balance between owner and rental housing in the community. At present,
the local housing stock is heavily skewed toward single-family, owner-occupied units. The 2000
Census shows that Brentwood had a significantly lower proportion of rental housing than similar
communities on Long Island and in nearby Westchester County. By increasing the supply of rental
homes in the community, a better balance of housing types will be achieved.
The developer also proposes 913 for-sale condominiums at Heartland Town Square. For most Long
Islanders, owner-occupied housing epitomizes the “American Dream.” The existence of owneroccupied housing in a community virtually guarantees that the housing will be well maintained due to
1.0 Executive Summary
1-57
the homeowner’s “pride of ownership.” There are also tax advantages to homeownership, since both
property taxes and mortgage interest is deductible on personal income tax returns. Homeowners also
have the opportunity to accumulate equity in their homes and they can benefit substantially from
increased real estate values over time.
The projected mix of studio, one-bedroom and two-bedroom apartments will have a significant
impact on the size of the resident population and the number of school-aged children at Heartland
Town Square. When the estimated population from the proposed condominiums is added to the
estimated population from the proposed rental apartments, it appears that Heartland Town Square
will be home to about 7,585 persons at the end of Phase I, 14,963 at the end of Phase II and 19,892 at
the end of Phase III, assuming full occupancy.
A 2006 Rutgers University study found that one-bedroom apartments renting for more than $1,000
monthly in buildings containing five or more apartment units generated only 0.08 school age children
per unit. Two-bedroom apartments renting for more than $1,100 monthly generated only 0.23 school
aged children per unit. Even three bedroom apartments renting for more than $1,250 monthly
generated only one school-aged child per unit. Lower-priced apartments tended to generate
somewhat more school-aged children. Coefficients from the Rutgers study were used to estimate the
additional school-age children likely to be generated by Heartland Town Square. They show that
1,902 school age children are likely to be generated by Heartland Town Square at full development.
Of these, 1,191 school-age children are projected from the market-rate rental apartments and an
additional 711 from the affordable rental units. Rutgers has also produced estimates of school-aged
children for condominium units in structures containing five or more such units. These coefficients
are shown in the table below. The relevant coefficients were applied to the proposed 913 for-sale
condominiums at Heartland Town Square. The findings show that the proposed 913 for-sale
condominiums could generate 154 additional school-aged children. When the school-aged children
projected for the market rate rental apartments (1,191), the affordable rental units (711) and the for
sale condominiums (154) are aggregated, it appears that 2,056 school-age children could be generated
by the proposed residential units at Heartland Town Square at the end of Phase III, assuming full
occupancy.
All of Heartland Town Square would be considered “non-homestead” for tax purposes, except for the
for sale condominiums. For tax purposes, rental apartments are regarded as a commercial venture.
According to the Town of Islip Assessor’s Office, the 2006-07 non-residential equalization rate for
the property is 11.98 percent. According to the Town of Islip’s Tax Receiver’s Office, the nonhomestead 2006-07 tax rate for the property varies from $201.23 per $1,000 of assessed value to
$201.53 per $1,000 of assessed value. In this analysis, an average of these rates or $201.38 per
$1,000 of assessed value was used. The 2006-07 residential equalization rate for the property is
10.29 percent. The 2006-07 homestead tax rate for the property is $147.04 per $1,000 of assessed
value.
When the homestead and non-homestead portions are aggregated, the findings show annual real
property taxes of $15.8 million at the end of Phase I, more than $36.3 million at the end of Phase II
and almost $51.0 million at the end of Phase III. Estimated property tax revenues at the end of Phase
III were allocated to each affected taxing district based on the most recent tax bill for the property.
These estimates are shown below. The Brentwood Union Free School District would receive the
largest share of total taxes, an estimated $35,891,739 annually at full development. The average cost
per student was used in estimating the financial impact of any additional students on the district.
With an average cost per student of $16,526, the cost of educating an additional 2,056 students at full
1.0 Executive Summary
1-58
development would be $33,477,456 This compares with additional tax revenues to the school
district at full development totaling $35,989,671. This would give the school district $2,012,215 in
excess property tax revenues, annually.
The Third Police Precinct would receive an additional $5.5 million in annual tax revenues from
Heartland Town Square, which should defray the additional costs of providing police services to the
development.
Brentwood Legion Ambulance could receive almost $483,000 annually in property tax revenues from
Heartland Town Square at full development. This should make it possible for Brentwood Legion
Ambulance to expand its operations in order to service Heartland Town Square and reduce its
response time to the site.
Whenever a project of this magnitude is proposed, there are questions concerning how the new
development will be linked both socially and economically to the existing community, in this case the
greater Brentwood community, and to what extent the businesses located within the new
development will provide competition for existing businesses in the community.
Establishment of social linkages with the Brentwood community will be relatively straightforward.
Heartland Town Square will include a lifestyle center whose facilities can be used by residents of the
greater Brentwood community. The town square itself will feature concerts and other forms of
entertainment as well as special holiday events. The lifestyle center, together with its cinemas,
restaurants, artist’s museum and other retail facilities will provide a venue for Brentwood residents to
socialize with friends and family and will provide them with a greater sense of community.
The land use implications of the submission plan within the project site were discussed above under
the section describing the benefits of smart growth, mixed-use communities. The proposed project
will also have a positive impact on the Town of Islip and the community of Brentwood. Existing
neighborhood merchants will benefit from the increased demand for personal and business services
by residents of Heartland Town Square and by the businesses located there. Community residents
will benefit from a broader choice of goods and services. They will have access to the restaurants,
entertainment and recreational facilities at Heartland Town Square. However, the land use
implications of the submission plan will extend well beyond the Brentwood community and the
Town of Islip. Its positive impact will be felt throughout the Long Island region.
Current land use patterns, which favor single-family, owner-occupied housing, no longer meet the
needs of a growing segment of the Long Island population. Whereas, the nuclear family was once the
norm, today Long Island has more singles, young couples who have not yet started a family and
senior “empty nesters.” These population groups often prefer rental housing, townhouses or
condominiums to traditional single-family homes. Long Island is also losing its young people
because they can no longer afford its high home prices. Between 2000 and 2006, the number of
Nassau-Suffolk residents between 25 and 44 years of age declined by more than 122,000 according to
the U.S. Census Bureau. These age cohorts form the heart of Long Island’s workforce. This is why
local employers are finding it difficult to obtain the skilled workers they need. It also explains why
Long Island has been gaining only about 6,000 jobs per year, well below its historical average of
12,000 to 15,000 jobs annually. If employers cannot find workers to fill available jobs, job growth
slows.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-59
Because of the growing scarcity of land suitable for residential construction, Long Island must resort
to higher housing densities in those communities that can reasonably support such densities. Such
communities may include some of Long Island’s older downtowns, which have lost their traditional
retail function. It also includes large tracts of land that become available for redevelopment,
including the tracts for which Heartland Town Square has been proposed. Increased residential
densities can unduly burden local school districts unless they are part of mixed-use communities. In
such communities, the tax revenues generated by the non-residential uses help to offset any additional
cost to the local school district to educate students generated by the residential uses. This is the case
at Heartland Town Square.
The submission plan for Heartland Town Square will bring new economic vitality to the community
of Brentwood, the Town of Islip and Suffolk County as a whole. The juxtaposition of apartments,
restaurants, offices and recreational activities will create a vibrant activity center whose economic
benefits will “spill out” into the general community. Existing area businesses will benefit from the
increased demand for personal and business services. The fact that 20 percent of the planned
residential units will be affordable to most residents will help to ameliorate the severe shortage of
affordable rental housing in the area. Finally, the additional tax revenues generated by the
commercial elements of the project should more than offset any additional costs to the Brentwood
Union Free School District and the other taxing districts that will provide services to the new
community.
Community Facilities and Services
Based upon consultations with the Brentwood Fire District and in order to minimize potential impacts
to the fire district, the applicants are willing to provide land for the construction of a fire substation.
Moreover, as requested by the Brentwood Fire District, as part of site plan review, the applicants will
provide the Fire District with site plans to ensure that the roadways and locations of fire hydrants,
smoke and carbon monoxide detectors, fire exits and sprinklers, are appropriate to facilitate fire
protection services. Furthermore, as requested by the Fire District, and subject to the approval of the
Town of Islip and prevailing Federal and State Law, the applicants are willing to set aside workforce
units for volunteers of the Brentwood Fire District.
At this time, the applicants respectfully submit that it is premature to determine how the workforce
units would be assigned. The Brentwood Fire District is anticipated to receive approximately $33
million (in current dollars) in property tax revenue from 2011 through 2021 and at build-out (2021),
the Fire District would be expected to receive approximately $2.2 million, annually.
Correspondence from Brentwood Legion Ambulance provided basic data regarding personnel and
facilities. The applicants will continue to consult with Brentwood Legion Ambulance to identify and
address potential impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed action. Brentwood
Legion Ambulance could receive almost $7.28 million in property tax revenue from the proposed
Heartland Town Square development between 2011 and 2021 (in current dollars) and over $483,000
annually at full build-out. According to Dr. Kamer, this should make it possible for Brentwood
Legion Ambulance to expand its operations to service the proposed Heartland Town Square
development.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-60
The Brentwood UFSD, in a letter prepared by then-Superintendent Les Black and dated January 8,
2002, stated that the Board of Education is supportive of the Heartland Town Square project and also
stated, in pertinent part, that there would be “numerous benefits for the Brentwood community as
well as the school district.” Construction jobs would be created and the project would provide a
“boon to the local economy.” Furthermore, “the eventual tax benefits to the district would assist us in
providing for our educational needs.” It would relieve the heavy tax burden and “revitalize the entire
community.”
In addition, in a letter dated November 1, 2005, then-Superintendent Les Black further indicated “we
support your proposed Heartland Town Square project with only one reservation. That reservation is
the possible influx of additional students to our district…. [t]he issue of capital construction may still
be a factor to accommodate these students. While the cost would be covered by additional revenue,
other issues (e.g., logistical and political) could still complicate expansion in our district.” According
to Mr. Black, “having said this, we still see the project as one that can be significant benefit to the
Brentwood community. From an economic perspective, the entire community stands to benefit from
this development. The creation of jobs, both during and after completion, would be a real ‘shot-inthe-arm’ for local residents.”
Based upon the analysis prepared by Dr. Kamer, 2,056 additional students would be generated by the
proposed redevelopment. Two schools (North Elementary and the Freshman Center) will be affected
by Heartland Town Square as they are already over their rated capacity. Enrollments in the district
have grown by an average of 400 to 500 students per year for the past six to eight years. Although
that growth is now slowing, the district may find it necessary to implement additional capital projects
even without any additional students from Heartland Town Square. The estimated property taxes to
be generated by Heartland Town Square at full build-out ($35.9± million annually, net $2.0 million
annually) should cover any additional capital and operating expenditures that the district may incur in
order to accommodate its normal enrollment increases and any enrollment increases stemming from
the planned rental apartments at Heartland Town Square. The applicants will continue to consult
with the school district to identify and address potential impacts due to the implementation of the
proposed action.
According to correspondence from the Suffolk County Police Department dated September 7, 2004,
the proposed Heartland Town Square project “could not be adequately serviced with the current
police resources. Unfortunately, there is no litmus to predict the future demand for police service in a
demography that exists only in a building plan. However, the Suffolk County Police Department has
a long history of adapting to the needs of the citizenry it serves and will continue to adapt to the
needs brought about by the concern for homeland security and the continuing increases in population,
business activity, and vehicular traffic.” According to the analysis performed by Dr. Kamer, the
Police Department will receive an estimated $5.5 million in property tax revenues from Heartland
Town Square annually, upon full build-out (in current dollars). This would increase the Third
Precinct budget by almost nine percent. These additional revenues should be more than sufficient to
cover any additional police costs associated with Heartland Town Square.
It should also be noted that private security would be provided throughout the Heartland Town
Square community, which would assist in off-setting the additional demand posed by the
development. Furthermore, the applicants would continue to consult with the service providers to
identify and address potential impacts.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-61
Due to the long-term build-out and the scope of the proposed action, it is not feasible to commit to
precise site plans or lighting plans, or to commit to the design of specific buildings. However, as the
build-out occurs, more specific lighting plans will be submitted to the Town for its review.
A general solid waste calculation was performed using factors from the National Solid Waste
Management Association (Technical Bulletin 85-6) and a solid waste study by Malcolm Pirnie, Inc.,
dated 1989. Projected solid waste, by phase, is as follows: Phase I: 50,396± pounds per day; Phase 1:
48,319± pounds per day; and Phase III: 33,378± pounds per day, for a total of 132,093± pounds per
day.
Solid waste generated by the proposed development will be collected and disposed of by a private
carting company to licensed facilities. It is assumed that most of the solid waste will be carted to
Town of Islip facilities.
The MTA and Long Island Railroad have indicated “your letter requests that MTA confirm that the
Deer Park Station of the Long Island Rail Road can accommodate future passengers generated by the
proposed Heartland Town Square Development. We are not able to provide such confirmation but
would be happy to review your Environmental Impact Statement which should include estimates of
transit and auto use for new trips generated by your proposed development.”
Due to the long-term build-out and the scope of the proposed action, it is not feasible to commit to
precise site plans, or to commit to the design of specific buildings. However, as the buildings are
specifically designed, local airport authorities would be consulted regarding the height and
orientation of the proposed structures, so as to avoid any potential impacts to air traffic.
Other Considerations
Based upon the Town comment letter dated June 21, 2005, several additional issues are considered
herein.
Integration of Proposed Project and Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center
When the applicants purchased the property from the New York Empire State Development
Corporation, no conditions were put in place that required any integration of the proposed
development with the remaining active areas of the Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center.
Notwithstanding this, and as previously explained, it is the applicants’ intention for there to be public
access to the development. An important goal of this smart-growth initiative is the ability of the
public to access many of the features of the development (e.g., retail, restaurants, open space).
Accordingly, all utilities, roadways and pedestrian access will be integrated. Moreover, as specific
plans are developed, landscaping will be integrated to ensure that access to Heartland Town Square is
inviting and serves to facilitate a vibrant community.
Placement of Phase III Residences in Proximity to Proposed Intermodal Facility
The Town of Islip comment letter of June 21, 2005 requested that the DEIS examine the placement of
future residences proximate to the proposed intermodal facility. As explained earlier, it must be
understood that, given the long-term build-out and the scope of development of Heartland Town
Square, it is not possible to prepare and commit to precise site plans. Precise uses in any particular
1.0 Executive Summary
1-62
area would be dependent upon various factors, the most significant of which is market demand.
Accordingly, a conceptual development plan has been prepared to represent the likely development
scenario, in accordance with the proposed PSPRD. Moreover, the conceptual development plan that
is evaluated herein represents maximum potential development. This ensures a worst-case
environmental analysis, pursuant to SEQRA.
The applicants respectfully submit that the conceptual plans show Phase III residences within 125
feet of the proposed intermodal facility. However, the applicants respectfully submit that such
location will not result in significant adverse environmental impacts relating to noise or any other
element of the environment. The applicants also respectfully submit that the DGEIS evaluated an
alternative in keeping with respect to the SGPA Plan in Section 7.3 of the DGEIS. In addition, the
DGEIS assessed an “Alternative to Phase III – Industrial Rezoning for Multi-Tenant Office/Industrial
Uses” in Section 7.5 of the DGEIS.
Based upon the statement above regarding the long-term buildout and scope of the development,
when specific site plans are prepared for the segment of the site adjacent to the proposed intermodal
facility, specific buffers, landscaping and building setbacks can be adjusted to minimize potential
impacts created by the adjacency of the two land uses. In addition, in the future, specific building
construction techniques or the use of barriers (other than vegetated buffers) can also be considered to
minimize potential impacts.
Assessment of Transfer of Development Rights (Pine Barrens Society)
Although the previously-adopted Final Scope indicated that the “Pine Barrens Society has requested
that the DEIS assess the transfer of development rights from an 88 acre parcel to the south of the
project site onto the Pilgrim parcel for drinking water protection purposes,” such evaluation is no
longer relevant as the aforesaid parcel is currently under development.
PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES
LAND
Land Use and Zoning
•
The redevelopment of the subject property into Heartland Town Square (including the
Gateway Area redevelopment) permits the re-use and revitalization of underutilized,
abandoned and blighted properties;
•
The development of the subject property into a mixed-use, Smart Growth community under
the proposed PSPRD zoning is mitigation from the existing zoning that completely separates
land uses and does not permit the density of development necessary to achieve Smart Growth
principles;
•
The redevelopment of the Heartland Town Square, including the Gateway Area, meets the
Town’s objective of eliminating the blight at the Town gateway and providing a sense of
place and a positive community character;
•
The proposed redevelopment of Heartland Town Square achieves the policies of New York
State in its disposition of surplus land;
1.0 Executive Summary
1-63
•
The Heartland Town Square development achieves the Suffolk County principles of Smart
Growth development;
•
The mix of uses permitted by the PSPRD zoning district will provide for a 24-hour
community;
•
The applicants have committed to providing workforce housing units as part of this
development. A total of 20 percent of the units to be developed (i.e., 1,826 units) will be set
aside as workforce housing. In addition, while the applicants are proposing the development
of all rental units, if the Town of Islip requires, the applicants would be willing to set aside ten
percent of the total number of units as ownership units;
•
Appropriate landscaping and lighting will be provided throughout the Heartland Town Square
development in order to enhance the aesthetics as well as safety of the residents, employees
and visitors; and
•
With regard to the tunnel network, based upon the geotechnical requirements of the proposed
project, the concrete tunnels, and their interior contents (e.g., pipes, electrical wiring, ACM)
will be:
-
Removed in areas beneath the footprints of buildings or other load-bearing structures:
All of the excavated materials will be handled and disposed of in accordance with
prevailing regulations; or
-
Sealed-in areas where load-bearing capacity is not an issue (e.g. landscaped areas,
parking lots, etc.): Any liquid-type wastes (e.g., transformer fluids) will be disposed of
in accordance with prevailing regulations prior to sealing of the tunnels. Any ACM
present in the portions of the tunnels scheduled to be sealed-off will be left in-place
thereby encapsulating same.
Subsurface Conditions and Hazardous Materials
NYSDEC Spill No. 9902514/Building No. 40 Underground Storage Tanks
As discussed in Section 4.1.2 of the DGEIS, the documented impacts to soil and groundwater in this
portion of the Heartland Town Square project are being addressed with oversight by the NYSDEC.
Thus, the NYSDEC will not approve residential reuse of the property (i.e., close the spill file) until
the remediation is complete and the soils and groundwater are appropriate for their intended uses.
During site development activities (e.g., soil scraping, excavation for footings, etc.), there is the
potential that PECs and RECs (such as undocumented out-of-surface USTs, stained soils, buried
anthropogenic debris, etc.) may be encountered. To mitigate this issue, a Facility Closure Plan will
be developed and implemented. The Facility Closure Plan will include the protocols and
methodologies to be used to address PECs and RECs, which may be encountered during the
development of the project site. All investigation and remediation work, as required, will be
completed with oversight provided by the appropriate regulatory agency.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-64
Building No. 23 Diesel Underground Storage Tank
As a contingency, prior to demolition of Building No. 23, the area of the former UST will be
excavated and the absence (or presence) of diesel contaminants confirmed through field observation
and collection/analysis of soil samples by NYSDEC-approved methodologies, in accordance with the
procedures included in the aforesaid Facility Closure Plan.
Building No. 35 Aboveground Storage Tanks
If information confirming that the former ASTs and associated soil and groundwater impacts were
addressed to the satisfaction of the NYSDEC and/or SCDHS is not available, a soil and groundwater
investigation will be conducted to confirm existing site conditions. Any potential impacts will be
addressed (with appropriate regulatory oversight) prior to development of this area of the subject
property. As the NYSDEC soil and groundwater standards and guidance values have been developed
to allow reuse of properties for residential purposes, any potential impacts identified in this portion of
the Heartland Town Square property will be required to be reevaluated by the NYSDEC prior to site
development. Further, implementation of the aforesaid Facility Closure Plan will ensure that any
previously unidentified PECs and RECs will be addressed prior to completion of site development
activities.
Building No. 37 Propane AST
The propane AST will be removed in accordance with prevailing regulations during re-development
of the Heartland Town Square project.
Building No. 39 Waste Oil AST
The soils underlying the stained floor in Building No. 39 will be inspected during the demolition of
the structure to determine if waste oil impacts have occurred and penetrated the concrete floor. If
such impacts are observed, same will be addressed in accordance with the aforesaid Facility Closure
Plan.
Building No. 35 Diesel and Waste Oil ASTs
Both ASTs (if present) will be emptied of their contents (if any), cleaned and removed, in accordance
with prevailing regulations during the demolition of Building No. 35. As previously discussed, the
soils underlying the floor in Building No. 35 will be inspected during the demolition of the structure
to determine if any impacts have occurred. If such impacts are observed, same will be addressed in
accordance with the Facility Closure Plan.
Building No. 35 Surficial Soil Staining
During site development activities (e.g., soil scraping, excavation for footings, etc.), there is the
potential that PECs and RECs (such stained soils, buried anthropogenic debris, etc.) may be
encountered. The aforesaid Facility Closure Plan will be implemented to mitigate potential RECs or
PECs observed during the development of this portion of the Heartland Town Square property.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-65
Building No. 33 Former Drum Storage
During site development activities (e.g., soil scraping, excavation for footings, etc.), there is the
potential that PECs and RECs (such stained soils, buried anthropogenic debris, etc.) may be
encountered. The aforesaid Facility Closure Plan will be implemented to mitigate any potential
RECs or PECs observed during the development of this portion of the Heartland Town Square
property.
Refuse Pile East of Building No. 33
During site development activities (e.g., soil scraping, excavation for footings, etc.), there is the
potential that PECs and RECs (such as undocumented out-of-surface USTs, stained soils, buried
anthropogenic debris, etc.) may be encountered. The aforesaid Facility Closure Plan will be
implemented to mitigate this issue.
Former Refuse Pile North of Building No. 15
If the review of the regulatory files indicates that the presence of the refuse pile represents an issue
related to the redevelopment of this portion of the Heartland Town Square property, a feasibility
study will be conducted to determine potential mitigation measures. These may include, but not
limited to:
•
Removal and appropriate disposal of the anthropogenic debris with oversight provided by the
NYSDEC; and/or
•
Use of passive building slab ventilation systems to address the potential presence of methane.
Coal/Fly Ash Dump
If the review of the regulatory files indicates that the presence of the coal and fly ash represents an
issue related to the redevelopment of this portion of the Heartland Town Square project, a feasibility
study will be conducted to determine potential mitigation measures, which may include, but not be
limited to:
•
Removal and appropriate disposal of the coal and fly ash with oversight provided by the
NYSDEC;
•
Use of alternative construction methods (e.g., piles) to allow for construction of the
contemplated infrastructure; and/or
•
Placement of a layer of clean fill over the coal/fly ash material to ensure that future on-site
residences and construction workers do not come into contact with impacted materials.
Building No. 17 – Greenhouse Soils
A soil investigation will be conducted to confirm existing site conditions. Any potential impacts will
be addressed (with appropriate SCDHS oversight) prior to development of this portion of the subject
property. As the SCDHS soil standards and guidance values have been developed to allow reuse of
properties for residential purposes, any potential impacts identified in this portion of the Heartland
1.0 Executive Summary
1-66
Town Square property will be required by the SCDHS to be completely addressed prior to site
redevelopment.
PCB-Equipped Transformers
The actions required to address PCB-containing, or suspected PCB-containing, transformers
encountered during the development of the Heartland Town Square project will be included in the
aforesaid Facility Closure Plan. Further, the actions required, including regulatory notification
procedures, to address stained soils associated with any leaking transformers will be included in that
plan.
On-Site Wells
The procedures required by the NYSDEC to properly abandon wells will be included in the aforesaid
Facility Closure Plan. Same will be utilized in the event that undocumented, out-of-service wells are
encountered during the development of the Heartland Town Square project.
Asbestos-Containing Materials
The identified ACM in the remaining buildings at the Heartland Town Square property will be abated
in accordance with prevailing NYSDOL regulations. Further, as discussed above, ACM present in
underground utility tunnels, which require removal due to geotechnical requirements, will be abated
in accordance with prevailing regulations. The ACM in sealed underground utility tunnels will be
essentially encapsulated. The locations of all sealed utility tunnels containing ACM will be identified
on as-built drawings and included in the facility’s ACM Operations and Maintenance (“O&M”) Plan.
The ACM O&M Plan will include:
•
The exact locations of any identified on-site ACM;
•
Annual inspection requirements to ensure the integrity of the sealing mechanism; and
•
Procedures, training and abatement requirements should entry into any sealed spaces known
to contain ACM be required in the future.
Lead-Based Paint
If disturbance of the LBP occurs during demolition activities, the following items will be addressed:
worker health and safety (personal protection, monitoring, etc.), and handling and disposal of
generated paint waste. Prevailing regulations require that workers involved with the disturbance of
lead-based paint be OSHA certified in lead and construction training, and that lead-safe work
practices be implemented. No notifications to County, State or Federal regulatory agencies are
required for lead-based paint disturbances.
For buildings located to the east of the Sagtikos State Parkway that will be renovated for residential
uses at part of the Heartland Town Square project, all LBP-covered surfaces will be abated in
accordance with prevailing United States Department of HUD regulations.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-67
Implementation of the above-described measures will ensure that no environmental conditions exist
that would (a) constrain the development of the property for its intended use, or (b) pose a threat or
hazard to future occupants.
Soils and Topography
Based upon the analysis presented in Section 4.1.3, no significant adverse impacts to soils or
topography were identified. However, as part of the development, the following mitigation measures
will be implemented:
•
Preparation of a detailed erosion and sedimentation control plan in accordance with the
practices established in the New York Guideline for Urban Erosion and Sediment Control
manual. All erosion and sedimentation control measures would be installed prior to
demolition and/or construction throughout the subject property, and would be routinely
maintained to ensure their proper functioning. Typical erosion and sedimentation control
measures to be installed include staked hay bales, temporary silt traps with drop inlets,
temporary retention ponds, silt fencing, truck cleaning pads using crushed stone at
construction entrances, stockpiling of topsoil, etc.;
•
Soil exposure time would be limited as construction is done in phases (within the broader
construction phases described in Section 2.6 of this DGEIS). This would allow for the rapid
(whether temporary or permanent) revegetation or construction upon exposed soil; and
•
Immediately following initial disturbance, exposed areas would be temporarily seeded or
mulched. Permanent vegetation would be installed as soon as possible after final grading.
WATER RESOURCES
•
The proposed Heartland Town Square will adhere, to the maximum extent practicable, o the
relevant recommendations of the 208 Study, the NURP Study, the Nonpoint Source
Management Handbook and the Suffolk County Sanitary Code;
•
The proposed Heartland Town Square development received Conceptual Certification from
the Suffolk County Sewer Agency during its meeting of December 20, 2004. Water
conservation devices (including those involved in sewage disposal) would be installed
throughout the community (see discussion below);
Within each development type (residential, commercial, etc.), the latest water-saving devices
will be used. A water-conserving device, the waterless urinal, will be used in all men’s
restrooms at commercial and retail buildings, saving another gallon per flush;
•
Landscaping will be installed at all buildings and along all of the roadways within Heartland
Town Square. Native plants would be used to the maximum extent practicable, thereby
minimizing maintenance (irrigation and fertilization);
•
Where necessary, irrigation will be installed as each building is constructed using the drip
irrigation method. Grass area will use standard in-ground sprinkler system. Given the size of
the project and number of building irrigation systems, demand is estimated to be 8.2± million
gallons for the normal six-month irrigation period. All systems will have timers indicating
day, time and duration of irrigation;
1.0 Executive Summary
1-68
•
A concern expressed by the SCWA regards the time of day to irrigate. The SCWA presently
experiences peak pumpage (irrigation demand) between midnight and 5:30 a.m., beginning
Memorial Day and continuing through Columbus Day. After discussing this matter with
production personnel and SCWA, it was decided to set the irrigation time between 9:00 p.m.
and 11:30 p.m. on an every-other-day schedule;
•
The contractor will be required to supply any temporary water distribution system that may be
required for construction. A potable water supply is required in quantities sufficient enough
to support those engaged in the construction of the project. In addition, water will be used
during construction for such activities as dust abatement. Although water will be required
during the construction phase of the project, the amount of water that will be required for
construction is minimal compared to the consumptive use after project build out. Active
water mains will be available to all buildings and may be used to provide water for dust
control, etc.;
•
The use of gray water or recycled water as a non-potable water source has been successfully
used in several communities. Gray Water is wastewater from any household sources other
than toilets. Major uses or reuses of recycled water include urban uses such as irrigation, fire
protection, and augmentation of potable supplies. Recycled water is also used in industry and
manufacturing, agricultural, environmental and recreational uses and groundwater recharge;
•
A recycled water system is a separate utility. It requires its own collection system, treatment
facilities, storage facilities, and distribution facilities. Water recycling facilities must provide
the required treatment to meet appropriate standards for the intended use. If the system is to
be used for fire protection it is important that it be non-interruptible. For the protection of the
public health it is also important to prevent improper operation of the system, prevent cross
connections with potable water lines and prevent improper use of non-potable water;
•
The use of recycled water to augment irrigation demand is not practical at Heartland Town
Square because of the limited duration of the irrigation season here on Long Island (six
months). Most applications of using reclaimed water for irrigation occur in climates where
irrigation takes place year round, and when other uses of recycled water can be utilized such
as for manufacturing. Also, the drip irrigation method uses only a minimum amount of water;
•
The use of recycled water as a groundwater augmentation is not practical because of the
extensive land area required for spreading basins and that the recharge may increase danger of
aquifer contamination. As mentioned, the Heartland site is within the SGPA. This designation
led to the abandonment of the old Pilgrim State sewage plant. It can be anticipated that the
same difficulty would occur with recharging treated wastewater on the Heartland Town
Square Property, and that land outside the SGPA would be needed. Because there is no
acceptable discharge for any recycled water that had exceeded the systems demand and
storage capacity remaining recycled water would have to be discharged into the sanitary
system for treatment off-site;
•
Gray water recycling within each individual condo, apartment or single-family home on a
small-scale individual basis can be achieved by the collection, storage and re-use of gray
water, similar to that of a large-scale, community-wide recycled water system. A separate
collection, storage and distribution system could be implemented to re-use gray water for nonpotable uses such as irrigation and flushing toilets. Drawbacks of such a system include large
space requirements for storage facilities areas, risk of potential cross-contamination, and
additional operation and maintenance cost;
1.0 Executive Summary
1-69
•
A SWPPP will be prepared and Notice of Intent will be submitted prior to construction on
each portion of the property. The SWPPP will incorporate the erosion and sedimentation
control measures outlined in Section 5.1.3;
•
As all stormwater generated by the proposed development is anticipated to collected and
recharged on-site through the use of drywells, leaching pools, catch basins and recharge
basins;
•
As not surface waters or wetlands are located on or adjacent to the site, the project would
have no significant adverse impact on such resources; and
•
The subject property is not located within a special flood hazard area.
mitigation measures are required.
Therefore, no
AIR
•
The air quality analysis of the proposed project, although preliminary, focused on various air
pollutant emissions associated with project development including project generated traffic
and facilities within the Heartland Town Square complex. The traffic air quality analyses
show that the existing conditions for year 2005 along with the No Build and Build conditions
for year 2021 are not expected to cause a violation of the current regulatory standards.
Therefore, no mitigation measures would be required beyond those anticipated in the traffic
analysis;
•
The traffic analysis performed by Eschbacher VHB at selected intersections contained a
variety of mitigation measures consisting of intersection roadway configuration modifications
and signalization changes. The air quality analysis at the selected intersection has not
included these proposed changes. However, these changes are expected to have very little
impact on air quality;
•
The construction of the proposed project will occur in phases. The Town has asked for
specific mitigation measures per phase of construction. Relative to air quality, each phase
will have the same mitigation measures concerning construction. The applicants are required
to mitigate construction impacts by reducing the amount of disturbed land to a minimum,
preventing the tracking of dirt and debris onto roadways and utilizing construction equipment
with emissions meeting applicable standards;
•
Typical mitigation for construction activity will be taken to reduce fugitive dust emissions and
mobile source emissions. Normally, wetting of disturbed soils, minimizing carryout of
materials and seeding or stabilizing disturbed soils are the typical mitigative measures to
avoid nuisance issues;
•
Operational impacts will be associated with the variety of facilities that are incorporated into
the project. Because of the Smart Growth concepts being employed, air pollutant emissions
are expected to be minimized typically below those associated with more traditional
facilities. The project is expected to see the use of Ultra Low Emission Vehicles (“ULEV”s),
where possible, such as the buses used to transport people to and from rail service. Where
possible, walkways and bicycle paths will be installed to minimize the use of air pollutant
emitting vehicles. From a construction perspective, Green Building concepts will be
employed wherever possible. This will reduce energy costs and usage and thereby benefit the
area by lower air pollutant emissions associated with these activities; and
1.0 Executive Summary
•
1-70
The applicants intend to provide an environmentally-protective project from both outdoor and
indoor environmental perspectives. The exact focus of those protections will be the subject of
numerous discussions and negotiations with involved parties as the project progresses and
individual site and building plans are designed.
PLANTS AND ANIMALS
•
Vegetated buffers would be maintained around the perimeter of the property;
•
Manmade open spaces such as parks and water features would be created. These features
would encourage some wildlife to return to the site upon completion of construction;
•
Native species would be used, to the maximum extent practicable, in the proposed
revegetation of Heartland Town Square. This would minimize impacts to groundwater
resources and would not introduce invasive species to the subject property. Moreover, it
would help to lessen potential impacts associated with the clearing of the subject site; and
•
It is the applicants’ intention that safe and environmentally sensitive practices will be used in
applying chemicals, both to fertilize lawns and plantings and to protect these plants from
pests.
AESTHETIC RESOURCES
•
As part of the proposed Heartland Town Square development, several of the existing
buildings would be retained and adaptively reused for residential and commercial spaces in
order to maintain an historic presence on the site;
•
Visually, the guidelines outlined by the Smart Growth plan for Heartland Town Square seek
to maintain a coherent visual environment where all the elements of the design are
interrelated;
•
On-site perimeter vegetation will remain intact (with the exception of the areas proposed for
site access), to the maximum extent practicable, in order mitigate the views from the
surrounding properties and roadways; and
•
The revitalization and redevelopment of the Gateway Area would eliminate visual blight from
this area and provide a coherent visual environment.
OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION
•
The proposed project would create a range of open space and recreational opportunities for
residents, employees and visitors to the Heartland Town Square community; and
•
The Heartland Town Square development is proposed to include approximately 105,000 sf of
civic space among other recreational uses that will be determined as specific users and site
plans are identified.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-71
CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS
•
The proposed development has received conceptual certification from the SCSA to connect to
the SWSD #3 Bergen Point sewage treatment plant and sewage will be directed to the public
sewer system;
•
The subject property will continue to received water from the SCWA;
•
All stormwater runoff is proposed to be collected and recharged on-site;
•
The development of Heartland Town Square encourages uses that have limited potential for
contamination of the soil and groundwater resources; and
•
Rezoning and redevelopment of the Gateway Area from industrial to PSPRD minimizes the
potential for new or continued potential contamination sources.
TRANSPORTATION
Existing Roadway Deficiencies
The existing roadway network surrounding the Heartland site is deficient in many areas. The
deficiencies will be exacerbated in the future by the continued private development in this area and
the increase of normal background traffic volume. The Existing and No Build analysis results reflect
this reality. Based on the traffic analysis performed for this study, we have determined that the
following roadway improvements will be necessary to mitigate the existing roadway deficiencies that
are not attributed to the development of Heartland:
•
•
•
•
•
•
The addition of a third lane in each direction on the Sagtikos Parkway from the Southern State
Parkway to the LIE Reconstruction of the Campus Road and CR 13, Crooked Hill Road
bridges over the Sagtikos Parkway, as a result of adding this third lane;
Reconstruction of the CR 4, Commack Road underpass at the LIE to provide additional left
turn capacity under the bridge (this project may be progressed shortly, as part of the “Arches
at Tanger” mitigation);
Additional through and turn lanes on the LIE Service Roads approaching CR 4, Commack
Road;
Reconstruction of the Sagtikos Parkway/Pine Aire Drive interchange;
Widening of northbound CR 4, Commack Road to two lanes south of the LIE; and
Construction of a new interchange on the Sagtikos Parkway between Pine Aire Drive and
Campus Road, as part of the CR 100, Suffolk Avenue connection with Long Island Avenue.
(The SCDPW is preparing a study in this vicinity which may address this improvement).
The need for the aforementioned improvements are well known by area drivers and are widelyrecognized by the various transportation agencies. It is anticipated that the necessary improvements,
identified above, would be funded through the appropriate anticipated Municipal Capital Programs
and/or as part of a public-private partnership with a combination of State, County and local resources
with appropriate contributions from the various developers whose projects will be impacting the
transportation network in this area. The developer of Heartland Town Square recognizes the
necessity of contributing a fair share to the funds necessary to construct the above improvements.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-72
Roadway Mitigation Specific to Heartland Town Square
The mitigation measures discussed herein are based on total build-out of the project and address
traffic deficiencies attributed specifically to the development of the Heartland property. These
mitigation measures will be implemented by the Heartland Town Square developer in a schedule that
will be acceptable to those municipalities/agencies whose roadways and facilities will be impacted by
these measures. However, all the proposed mitigation measures specific to the proposed project
would be constructed during Phase I (Years 1 to 5).
The following mitigation measures were identified through the iterative process used in the Heartland
Transportation Model as described in Section 4.8 of this DGEIS. Consequently, these mitigation
measures were included in the roadway network when performing the Build analysis, and the Build
LOS results reflect these improvements.
Mitigation A: Commack Road at South Service Road
Although Heartland’s share of the projected increase in traffic at this location is minimal,
construction of a northbound right turn lane on CR 4, Commack Road adjacent to the Park and Ride
lot will vastly reduce the delay experienced by northbound vehicles, especially during the PM Peak
period when traffic often backs up as far south as Pine Hill Lane. It is the understanding of EVHB
that SCDPW is contemplating a project on CR 4, Commack Road, which may include the
construction of the turn lane. The developer would accept contributing a fee to Suffolk County in
lieu of duplicating the construction effort for this turn lane.
Mitigation B: CR 4, Commack Road at the existing Pilgrim Site Access
In order to prevent Heartland traffic from using the existing CR 4, Commack Road entrance to
Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center, the developer proposes the installation of a card-activated access
controlled gate at this location. Access will only be available to workers, deliveries and visitors to the
Psychiatric Center. All Heartland Town Square traffic will be excluded. On-site mitigation to
preclude exiting traffic from Heartland Town Square to CR 4, Commack Road will be provided.
Mitigation C: CR 13, Crooked Hill Road Underpass at the LIE
Southbound traffic on this section of CR 13, Crooked Hill Road is expected to increase significantly
due to this project. Therefore, it is proposed to re-stripe CR 13, Crooked Hill Road under the LIE to
provide a second southbound lane. Any traffic signal modifications required, due to the new lane
configurations will be performed by the developer. There is presently sufficient room under the
bridge to accommodate the additional lane. Mitigation D: CR 13, Crooked Hill Road South of the
LIE
CR 13, Crooked Hill Road will be widened to four lanes plus turn lanes between the LIE and the
bridge over the Sagtikos Parkway. Additional ROW, if needed for this improvement, is available as
part of the Islip Gateway Community Improvement Area.
Mitigation E: CR 13, Crooked Hill Road at New Zone 3 Access
A new access point will be constructed at this location. In order to provide access from the eastbound
LIE to Heartland, it is proposed that a ramp from the LIE be constructed at this location. This new
1.0 Executive Summary
1-73
ramp will have the added benefit of functioning as a direct access from the eastbound LIE to CR 13,
Crooked Hill Road, without having vehicles destined for CR 13, Crooked Hill Road from having to
proceed through the CR 4/LIE intersection as they currently do.
Mitigation F: Crooked Hill Road at Existing Pilgrim Access
This existing intersection will be reconstructed and a traffic signal installed. The eastbound approach
will be expanded to two lanes exiting the site.
Mitigation G: Crooked Hill Road at Campus Road
It is anticipated that a large number of exiting project generated vehicles will pass through this
intersection to reach the northbound Sagtikos Parkway by making an eastbound left and traveling
north on Crooked Hill Road to the existing northbound Sagtikos Parkway entrance ramp. As a result
it will be necessary to add a second eastbound left turn lane at this intersection.
Mitigation H: Crooked Hill Road at New Zone 1 Access
This is a new signalized intersection to provide access to and from Crooked Hill Road from the
development planned on the east side of Sagtikos Parkway.
Mitigation I: Sagtikos Pkwy between Pine Aire Dr. & Campus Road
This location, at the border of the Heartland Property, the proposed Intermodal facility, and the
existing Heartland Industrial Park is an acceptable location to construct new ramps to and from
southbound Sagtikos Parkway. These ramps will serve all three of the above-mentioned properties
and ease congestion at the Pine Aire Drive interchange by providing an alternate route to the
industrial park. In conjunction with these ramps, a new intersection is proposed that will link the
roadways to and from the three sites, including Powerhouse Road --- the access road proposed by the
NYSDOT to the Intermodal facility.
Mitigation J: Northbound Sagtikos Parkway at Campus Road
Since this ramp will serve as the access to Heartland from northbound Sagtikos Parkway, it will be
necessary to widen and re-align this ramp as it approaches Campus Road.
Mitigation K: Campus Road at New Zone 1 Access
A new signalized intersection and access to the proposed development east of Sagtikos Parkway will
be constructed at this location, aligning with the ramp discussed in Mitigation J above. Westbound
left turns from Campus Road into the proposed development will be prohibited. Drivers on Crooked
Hill Road wishing to enter the planned development east of the Sagtikos Parkway will use the new
intersection discussed in Mitigation H.
Mitigation L: Southbound Sagtikos Parkway at Campus Road
To provide additional access to and from the southbound Sagtikos Parkway, new ramps and a
signalized intersection on Campus Road will be constructed on the west side of the parkway. This
improved access to and from the southbound parkway will eliminate the current practice of vehicles
1.0 Executive Summary
1-74
cutting through the Pilgrim property to access the parkway. This measure is shown on Sheets 5 and 6
in Attachment T-28 (see Appendix M).
Mitigation M: Commack Road at Long Island Avenue
Construction of a westbound right turn lane at the Commack Road/Long Island Avenue intersection
will improve operation of the intersection. Turning trucks in particular will be able to move through
the intersection with less difficulty. The additional turn lane will require a right-of-way taking and the
developer is receptive to providing fees to the County for this ROW acquisition and subsequent
construction of the right-turn-lane and signal modification.
Further south on Commack Road, it is anticipated that intersection improvements will be necessary at
Grand Boulevard. The improvements that are being considered are in conjunction with the proposed
Tanger Outlet Center. These improvements (to be undertaken by others) should be designed to
accommodate the additional traffic associated with the proposed action while mitigating or improving
current levels of service.
Mitigation N: Pine Aire Drive at Executive Drive
Addition of a second southbound left turn lane at this intersection will ease congestion experienced
by vehicles crossing south over the railroad tracks, a notorious choke point.
Mitigation O: Pine Aire Drive at Southbound Sagtikos Parkway Ramps
Improving the Pine Aire Drive/Executive Drive intersection, as discussed above, will not
significantly improve travel time for drivers headed east on Pine Aire Drive unless conditions are
mitigated at the Sagtikos Parkway ramps. Construction of an eastbound right turn lane on the
approach to the southbound ramps will significantly ease congestion by helping vehicles headed to
the southbound parkway to avoid waiting in through traffic queues at the signal. Presently, vehicles
wanting to turn right onto the parkway constitute a significant portion of the eastbound queuing
vehicles. A right-of-way taking will be necessary to accommodate the new turn lane. The developer
is willing to provide appropriate fees to the Town of Islip to fund the required property condemnation
and construction of this right-turn-lane.
Mitigation P: LIE South Service Road
A new access point to the Heartland property is proposed off the LIE South Service Road west of
Crooked Hill Road.
Benefits of Proposed Roadway Mitigation
These mitigation measures will reduce the volume of project generated traffic that would otherwise
pass through local, County and Town intersections by providing a more direct route to the Sagtikos
Parkway and mitigating the existing circuitous routes that vehicles have to travel to access the
Sagtikos Parkway and the Long Island Expressway.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-75
Mitigation Schedule
As noted earlier, all the proposed mitigation measures specific to the proposed project would be
constructed early in the development process, during Phase I (Years 1 to 5) of the project. The table
below resents this schedule in a tabular format.
Traffic Mitigation Schedule
Mitigation
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Commack Road at South Service Road
Commack Road at Pilgrim Site Access
Crooked Hill Road Underpass at the L.I.E.
Crooked Hill Road south of the L.I.E.
Crooked Hill Road at New Zone 3 Access
Crooked Hill Road at Existing Pilgrim
Access
Crooked Hill Road at Campus Road
Crooked Hill Road at New Zone 1 Access
Sagtikos Parkway between Pine Aire Drive
and Campus Road
Northbound Sagtikos Parkway at Campus
Road
Campus Road at New Zone 1 Access
Southbound Sagtikos Parkway at Campus
Road
Commack Road at Long Island Avenue
Pine Aire Drive at Executive Drive
Pine Aire Drive at Southbound Sagtikos
Parkway Ramps
L.I.E. South Service Road
Phase I
(Years 1-5)
X
X
X
X
X
Phase II
(Years 6-10)
Phase III
(Years 11-15)
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
The impact of these mitigation measures can be seen by comparing the Build without Mitigation
intersection delays with the Build.
Certain study intersections which are currently experiencing high delays will likely see delays
increase significantly in the future, due to normal background growth in traffic, traffic from the other
specific planned developments, and development at Heartland. Mitigation Measures A through P
above will minimally improve conditions at these locations. The specific locations and the
constraints to improvements are as follows:
•
Commack Road at LIE North and South Service Road: Although Mitigation A will result in
noticeably better conditions at the South Service Road, further improvement requires
extensive additional right of way and reconstruction of the LIE bridge over Commack Road
to make significant improvements at this intersection;
•
Commack Road at Long Island Avenue: Mitigation M will improve conditions at this
intersection. However, large improvements in the operation of this intersection are
constrained by its proximity to the LIRR tracks; and
1.0 Executive Summary
•
1-76
Pine Aire Drive at Fifth Avenue and Wicks Road at Suffolk Avenue – The LIRR tracks and
dense development at these intersections preclude large scale improvements. Suffolk
County is studying the extension of CR 100 (Suffolk Avenue) east over Sagtikos Parkway to
connect with Long Island Avenue. This would eliminate the zigzag movements many
drivers currently make from the north side of the railroad tracks to Pine Aire Drive, and then
back again to the north side of the tracks at the Deer Park LIRR station (or vice versa in the
eastbound direction).
Other Mitigation Measures
Using the latest in smart growth principles, the proposed project plans to implement new approaches
to transportation planning by coordinating land use and transportation, increasing the access to high
quality transit service, and by creating connectivity between pedestrian, bike, transit, and road
facilities.
Since the proposed project is designed as a complete live-work-play multi-use community, many
residents will find that most of their consumer needs can be met within the proposed development,
with its mix of housing, retail, entertainment, and civic/cultural uses in proximity to each other. Some
residents may realize that usage of their personal vehicles has been reduced to the occasional trip to
areas outside of the development not served by the proposed shuttle buses or Suffolk County Transit
services. For residents with significantly reduced dependence on personal vehicles, Car Sharing may
be an attractive alternative to car ownership. Car Sharing is an automobile rental service intended to
substitute for private vehicle ownership.
To that end, in addition to the above roadway mitigation measures, the applicants will incorporate onsite and public transportation elements into the overall project to further mitigate the potential traffic
impact.
On-Site Transportation
Since the proposed development is designed as a community where automobile use is de-emphasized,
an on-site transportation system is proposed. An important element of the system is shuttle buses,
which will be provided for residents and non-residents alike to take advantage of the multi-use
environment of the proposed community. The local shuttle bus system will be provided to accomplish
the following primary objectives:
•
Reduce the number of internal automobile trips by offering a convenient and reliable
alternative for residents, employees and visitors traveling between destination points within
the proposed community; and
•
Reduce the number of external automobile trips by providing a direct connection between the
proposed community and nearby external destination points such as the Deer Park LIRR
station, the Heartland Industrial Park, the Hauppauge Industrial Park, and Suffolk County
Community College.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-77
The shuttle services will provide mobility for non-drivers and residents who live and work in and out
of the proposed community. Shuttle trips will substitute for vehicle trips. Since the shuttles will be
provided at convenient times and in places where demand is high, they will reduce congestion on the
local street network within Heartland. In addition, shuttles will reduce parking demand, as each
shuttle would replace multiple vehicles.
Shuttle services will carry passengers for short trips along busy internal corridors, between the
various retail, residential and commercial outlets, as well as to external business districts and
employment and education campuses. The shuttles will also connect the proposed development with
the Deer Park LIRR station, further reducing or eliminating some vehicle trips, especially during AM
and PM peak commuting hours.
In order for the proposed shuttle bus system to be effective, the shuttles will provide high quality and
cost-effective transit service with numerous and convenient pick-up/drop-off locations. The following
features have been found to make shuttle service attractive, and will be incorporated into the
proposed shuttle system:
•
Frequent, high-capacity service that results in passenger waits of less than 10 minutes during
peak periods;
•
High-quality vehicles which are easy to board, quiet, clean, and comfortable to ride;
•
Pre-paid fare collection to avoid delays during boarding;
•
Integrated fare collection systems, allowing free or discounted transfers between routes and
modes;
•
Convenient user information;
•
Improved rider information such as signs, maps and guides;
•
High quality bus stops with transit oriented development in nearby areas;
•
Modal integration, with bus service coordinated with walking and cycling facilities, taxi
services, intercity bus, rail transit, and other transportation services;
•
Excellent customer service; and
•
Improved security and safety for transit users and pedestrians.
As development of the proposed community progresses, an evaluation of the travel trends that have
developed in conjunction with the expansion of the development in each phase can be used to
identify system needs as they evolve. By identifying and responding to the needs of the various
market segments that are users of the shuttles, the proposed shuttle bus system, in conjunction with
other smart growth principles to be incorporated into the project, will reduce parking demands and
result in significant reductions in automobile traffic.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-78
Alternative Energy Transportation Systems
Since the shuttle buses would be operating throughout the day, and would consume large quantities
of fuel, operators of the shuttle fleet may realize a significant cost saving by using alternative fuels
for their vehicles. Alternate fuels, as defined by the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (“EPAct”), include
ethanol, natural gas, propane, hydrogen, biodiesel, electricity, methanol, and p-series fuels. Many of
these fuels are being used in municipal bus fleets in the U.S., in a variety of vehicle applications, and
using these alternative fuels would generally reduce harmful pollutants and exhaust emissions.
The most common alternate fuels are compressed natural gas (“CNG”), liquid propane gas (“LPG”),
hydrogen, and electric power, however, there are only a limited number of alternative fuel types with
fueling stations in proximity to Heartland Town Square. The table below, prepared from data
compiled from the Alternative Fuels Data Center (“AFDC”), lists available alternate fuels and fueling
stations within a 20-mile radius of Heartland Town Square.
Alternative Fuel Availability
Facility
KeySpan/National Grid
Service Center
NYS OGC Duryea State
Office Bldg
NYSDOT Maintenance
Facility
KeySpan/National Grid
Headquarters
NYSDOT Maintenance
Facility
NYSDOT Maintenance
Facility
Town of Brookhaven
City
Brentwood
Hauppauge
Melville
Hicksville
Syosset
Hicksville
Coram
NYS Office of Park &
Recreation
NYSDOT Maintenance
Facility
MTA – Long Island Bus –
Mitchell Field
N. Merrick
Synergy Gas Corporation
Patchogue
Wantagh
Garden
City
Access Type
Public
card key - all times
Public
card key - all times
Private
Government only
Public
card key - all times
Public
card key - all times
Private
Government only
Private
access only
Private
Government only
Private
Government only
Private
Government only
Public
various hours
Notes: CNG – Compressed Natural Gas; LPG – Liquid Propane Gas
HYD – Hydrogen; ELEC - Electric
Distance
from
Pilgrim
(mi)
Alternate Fuel
CNG
2
X
3
X
10
X
15
X
15
X
15
X
15
X
16
X
19
X
20
X
13
LPG
X
HYD
ELEC
1.0 Executive Summary
1-79
According to the AFDC, there are no facilities within 20 miles of Heartland Town Square to supply
Hydrogen or Electric vehicles.
Since the location of the re-fueling stations are distant from the property and subject to various use
restrictions, an option to using the fuels and stations outlined above would be to incorporate a
centralized fueling facility at Heartland Town Square to service the shuttle fleet. This would also
afford an opportunity for other service providers, such as school bus, sanitation, and municipal bus
fleets, to use vehicles compatible with the fuel source chosen at Heartland Town Square.
Long Island Rail Road
It is anticipated that the greatest number of additional commuters, approximately 240, will use the
LIRR during the AM peak period, as a result of the development of Heartland Town Square. Based
on the ratio of passengers to parked vehicles from data provided from the LIRR for the Deer Park and
Brentwood stations, there are approximately 1.25 passengers (commuters) per parked vehicle, which
equates to an additional 192 vehicles, if all of these commuters used personal vehicles. However,
some if not most of these commuters will be using the proposed shuttle bus services to access the
Deer Park LIRR station, the closest station to the subject property.
According to Eschbacher VHB, a representative from the MTA/LIRR has indicated that there are no
planned LIRR parking improvements or expansions proposed at the Deer Park LIRR station.
However, the developer of the Tanger Mall has proposed to develop a three-and-one-half to fouracre municipal parking lot area on the west side of and adjacent to the existing LIRR parking lot. The
first phase of the project would make available an additional 220 parking spaces, with 300 more
spaces added in the second phase and final phase. Parking at the Deer Park station currently exceeds
the lot capacity by more than 150 vehicles, and the additional parking spaces to be provided as a
result of the Tanger improvements would alleviate the parking shortage as well as be able to
accommodate the additional parking resulting from the development of Heartland Town Square,
since it is unlikely that all of the additional commuters will drive to the station while there is shuttle
service available.
It is anticipated that a small number of commuters would also use the Brentwood station, in the event
that parking is not available at the Deer Park station. Based on data provided by the LIRR, there is
typically in excess of 250 spaces available in the parking lot. These spaces can accommodate any
additional commuters from Heartland. It is less likely that any commuters from Heartland would
utilize the Bay Shore station given its distance from Heartland Town Square, the availability of
parking at the Brentwood station, and the availability of shuttle bus service to the Deer Park station.
The Deer Park station is the closest and most convenient station to the subject property and a primary
destination/origin for the proposed shuttle buses. In order to minimize the number of Heartland
commuter vehicles using the station, the proposed shuttle bus system will provide a practical and
convenient alternative to personal vehicles.
To minimize the number of additional parking spaces required for Heartland commuters, extensive
marketing efforts will be undertaken to educate Heartland residents of the benefits of the shuttle
services. Numerous buses to and from Heartland and the Deer Park station resulting in minimal
passenger waiting times during the peak rush hour periods will be provided.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-80
In addition, Eschbacher VHB reports that according to a representative from the MTA/LIRR, the
expected additional commuters riding the trains during the peak periods can be accommodated by the
railroad using its existing and planned level of service equipment. Additionally, the LIRR has
asserted that no special actions, such as the addition of more trains and/or cars, will be necessary in
order to accommodate the expected increase in ridership on the LIRR as a result of the development
of Heartland.
Bus Service
There are expected to be over 1,600 commuters using Suffolk County Transit bus service as a result
of the development of Heartland. At present, the project site is served directly by two Suffolk County
Transit bus routes, the S33 route and the S41 route. These routes primarily serve the Pilgrim State
Psychiatric Center.
Representatives of Eschbacher VHB have discussed the project with Mr. Robert Shinnick, Director of
Transportation Operations for SCDPW, who indicated that Suffolk County Transit will respond to the
public transportation needs of the project as demand occurs. The additional bus service will likely be
geared toward the AM and PM peak hours, as routes are driven by ridership demand.
Since bus routes are determined by ridership demands, and are often underutilized outside of peak
periods on most routes, Heartland Town Square presents an opportunity for efficient utilization of
Suffolk County Transit buses serving the site, as Heartland is designed as a complete live-work-play
community where many residents can have most of their consumer needs met without leaving the
community. Bus service will be a practical means of travel between the housing, retail,
entertainment, and civic/cultural establishments within the Heartland community, thereby further
minimizing the necessity of personal vehicles.
Various incentive programs like pre-paid fare collection, that minimizes delays during boarding, and
integrated fare collection systems, that allow free or discounted transfers between routes and modes,
will be investigated to encourage the use of Suffolk County Transit buses by Heartland Town Square
residents.
Car Sharing
For Heartland residents, with significantly reduced dependence on personal vehicles, Car Sharing
may be an attractive alternative to car ownership. Car Sharing is an automobile rental service
intended to substitute for private vehicle ownership. The vehicles are rented by the hour and
typically, the gas and insurance costs are included in the rental fee. Car Sharing facilities are usually
located near residences, and minimal effort is needed to check vehicles in and out. This aspect is
different from most vehicle rental services, which are located at major transportation and commercial
centers, and price vehicles by the day.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-81
Car Sharing would offer convenience to residents and make the occasional use of vehicles affordable,
while providing an incentive to minimize driving and increase reliance on the alternative travel
options provided in the proposed development. Car Sharing has benefits in that it can reduce total per
capita driving and is considered a cost-effective alternative to owning an automobile that is driven
less than 6,000 miles annually.
Pedestrian/Bicycle Facilities
Heartland has been designed to be an interconnected and pedestrian friendly community, with a
layout that is intended to reduce the community’s dependence on automobiles. With its mix of
housing, retail, entertainment, and civic/cultural uses in proximity to each other, an environment that
fosters walking instead of driving is encouraged, resulting in lower automobile utilization.
Since Heartland Town Square provides an environment that encourages walking, a reduction in
traffic congestion and parking demand will be realized. This would result from reductions in short
motor vehicle trips, since short distance pedestrian or bicycle trips would replace automobile trips for
those that live and work in the proposed community, and for consumers who can choose to shop
within the property rather than driving to external shopping areas. Pedestrians will also have the
opportunity to use the proposed shuttle bus system to locations inside and outside of the proposed
development, as well as expanded Suffolk County Transit bus services.
As part of the pedestrian-friendly design of Heartland Town Square, pedestrians will have ready
access to the project perimeter. Off-site destinations, such as Suffolk Community College, that may
attract pedestrians from Heartland Town Square may require new off-site pedestrian facilities and the
developer will work with the appropriate agencies to ensure the necessary facilities are in place.
Potential off-site pedestrian facilities may include sidewalks along Crooked Hill Road, Community
College Drive, and the LIE South Service Road.
Additionally, the relative close proximity of the Deer Park LIRR station would make bicycle travel
an attractive alternative to vehicles, provided accommodations at the station are available that offer
suitable parking in secure and visible locations, with properly designed bike racks. Inadequate
facilities, lack of convenience, and fear of theft are major deterrents to bicycle transportation.
Other Options
The introduction of transportation options to reduce automobile trips would leverage the flexibility of
the proposed project’s multi-use design and multi-modal infrastructure to maximize the travel options
available to employees, retail patrons and residents alike.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-82
Options in addition to the proposed shuttle bus service could include vanpool programs, ridesharing
assistance, guaranteed ride home, special events shuttles and share programs where people can rent a
car by the hour for special needs. These programs could also include incentives and rewards to entice
people to use their vehicles less frequently, such as transit discounts, preferential parking, shared
parking, commuter rewards, and possibly transit and movie combo discount programs. An important
part of any of these programs would be monitoring and identifying those programs that are effective
at getting people to use their automobiles less and increasing use of the transit services provided in
the proposed Heartland Town Square.
In addition to the transportation facilities planned, the development team is working closely with the
NYSDOT concerning the proposed Long Island Intermodal Facility. Close coordination throughout
the planning process of both projects will lead to an integrated transportation plan for the area to the
benefit of all who work in, travel through and live in the area.
Providing a more direct route to the Long Island Expressway for truck traffic from the industrial
parks south of the subject property in Islip and Babylon, and alleviating the rush hour congestion
crossing the railroad tracks at Executive Drive adjacent to the Deer Park LIRR station are two of the
potential benefits of this coordination effort.
Parking Facilities
The table below summarizes the parking requirements for the various individual components of
Heartland Town Square based on Town of Islip parking requirements.
Town of Islip Zoning Code - Parking Requirements
Use
GFA or
Units
Retail
Office/Commercial
Residential
Civic
1,030,000
4,150,000
9,130
105,000
Parking requirements
per code
1/175 SF
1/200 SF
1.75/unit
1/300 SF
Total
Spaces
required
5,886
20,750
15,978
350
42,964
The Town of Islip Zoning Code requirements are based on stand-alone isolated facilities, with no
consideration given to the shared parking aspects of Heartland Town Square, a major feature of the
development.
The proposed number of parking spaces for Heartland was estimated at 27,650, as indicated in the
Environmental Assessment Form (“EAF”) dated April 4, 2003. The basis for this was the availability
and quality of the transit opportunities nearby, namely the Deer Park train station to the south, the
mix of land uses, land density, and the pedestrian-friendly design and transit oriented development
that are the cornerstones of Heartland Town Square.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-83
The parking requirements, as set forth in the proposed PSPRD ordinance, are based on the concept of
shared parking. Shared parking recognizes that that the overall parking demands in a mixed use
development are less than the demand which would result from combining the individual demands
for each of the various land uses components. Research has shown that the parking characteristics of
different types of land use vary by time of day and day of week, as well as seasonally. Since the peak
parking demands for the different land uses do not occur simultaneously, the same parking spaces in
a mixed use development can effectively serve more than one use, thereby resulting in the need for
fewer parking spaces overall.
The proposed parking requirements also take into consideration the transit-oriented design of the
proposed community. The development is being planned to minimize reliability on automobile
usage. In addition to the planned internal shuttle bus service that will be available to residents,
workers and shoppers, it is anticipated that the existing external public transportation system will be
extended and expanded as necessary to service the additional ridership demands of the new
community.
The parking that would be provided will be appropriately located throughout the development in
order to insure that it will be able to effectively serve the needs of the multiple land uses.
To further show that the estimated parking requirements for Heartland Town Square will be adequate
to meet the expected parking demand, the parking demand for Heartland Town Square was projected
using parking demand rates provided in the ITE reference Parking Generation, 3rd Edition, a
nationally-recognized and adopted methodology for forecasting parking demand.
The table below summarizes the parking requirements for the proposed project elements based on the
parking demand rates found in Parking Generation, for similar type facilities.
ITE Parking Generation - Parking Requirements
Use (ITE Code)
GFA or
Units
Parking requirements
per ITE
Spaces
required
Retail (820)
Office/Commercial (701)
Residential (230)
Civic (495)
1,030,000
4,150,000
9,130
105,000
2.97/1000 SF
2.40/1000 SF
1.46/unit
3.83/1000 SF
Total
3,059
9,960
13,330
402
26,751
Based on ITE parking rates, 26,751 parking spaces would be necessary to accommodate the expected
peak parking demand. This total is significantly less than the Town requirements. The ITE parking
rates are also based on stand-alone isolated facilities; shared parking, which will be a major design
aspect of Heartland Town Square, is not considered in the ITE rates. When the shared parking
aspects of Heartland Town Square are taken into consideration, the required number of parking
spaces should be significantly lower than that computed using the standard ITE rates and the Town of
Islip Code requirements.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-84
Other Access Considerations
North/South Route from Crooked Hill Road to Long Island Avenue
The proposed design does not lend itself to accommodate large volumes of off-site automobile and
truck traffic. Off-site through truck traffic in particular is contrary to the pedestrian-friendly design
of the proposed community. It is possible that a roadway could be accommodated within the right-ofway of Sagtikos Parkway, which is the subject of a study currently being undertaken by Suffolk
County.
Direct Access to Long Island Expressway and Sagtikos Parkway
The mitigation plan proposes:
•
•
•
The addition of an exit ramp from the eastbound LIE, providing access to Crooked Hill Road
and Heartland (“Mitigation E”);
New entrance and exit ramps on the southbound Sagtikos Parkway at Campus Road,
providing access to Heartland and Crooked Hill Road (“Mitigation L”); and
New entrance and exit ramps on the southbound Sagtikos Parkway at where the Heartland
Town Square, NYSDOT Intermodal, and Heartland Business Center properties meet,
providing access to all three properties (“Mitigation I”).
These five ramps are in addition to the existing ramps, all of which are to remain under the proposed
mitigation plan.
Suffolk Avenue Connection to Long Island Avenue
The SCDPW has proposed connecting Suffolk Avenue (CR 100) with Long Island Avenue. As part
of this proposal, approximately forty homes on the south side of Suffolk Avenue between Wicks
Road and Emjay Boulevard would be acquired for the necessary ROW. The study for this proposed
link has not reached the stage of public involvement and further details are not available at this time.
Connection to Heartland Business Center
Two roadway connections are proposed between Heartland Town Square and Heartland Business
Center. On the west side of the property, a new roadway would connect the proposed Ring Road to
the proposed Intermodal roadway layout. The Intermodal roadway plan connects to the new Wilshire
Boulevard currently under construction as part of the Heartland Business Center expansion. This
connection will also provide a link between the Heartland Town Square and the Deer Park LIRR
station.
On the east side of the property, Heartland Town Square and Heartland Business Center would be
linked via the new intersection proposed as part of “Mitigation I.”
Extension of Campus Road
The developer opposes any suggested proposal to extend Campus Road (also known as G Road) west
through the Edgewood Oak Brush Plains Preserve to Commack Road.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-85
Regional Traffic Study
The representatives of Heartland Town Square met with the Chair of the New York State Economic
Development Corporation (“EDC”), following which the EDC pledged to seek a grant of funds
towards a study of the widening of the Sagtikos Parkway. An initial grant of $500,000 was pledged
to be obtained by EDC. In addition, Suffolk County has secured $500,000 in federal funding through
the New York Metropolitan Transportation Council (“NYMTC”) to conduct an extensive congestion
mitigation and planning study for the area (Sagtikos Regional Development Zone Mitigation and
Planning Coordination Study), including impacts from the Tanger project, PJ Venture II, the
Heartland II Business Center Expansion, the NYSDOT Long Island Intermodal Facility, and
Heartland Town Square. This study is ideally suited for a large-scale study of the major roadways of
western Suffolk County. No single development project can equitably be expected to go beyond its
study scope to forecast future traffic conditions, identify potential mitigation, and allocate funding
responsibilities for improvements to all the major roadways in western Suffolk County necessitated
by all of the development projects in the Commack Corridor plus general growth in traffic not
associated with a specific project. Further, no single developer has the authority to compel other
developers to update and expand their traffic impact studies to encompass major Long Island
highways and roadways in western Suffolk County (specifically the Long Island Expressway,
Northern State Parkway, Southern State Parkway, Sagtikos Parkway, Commack Road, NY 231 (Deer
Park Avenue), Crooked Hill Road, Wicks Road, Long Island Avenue, Suffolk Avenue, Pine Aire
Drive, and other roadways that might be included in a regional traffic study). Only a government
agency has the authority and resources to undertake such a comprehensive planning study of the
regional transportation system, and to assign mitigation cost sharing among the projects.
ENERGY
•
The applicants will continue to work closely with LIPA as well as other energy providers to
ensure that energy conservation and reduction measures are implemented throughout the
Heartland Town Square development; and
•
The applicants have consulted with LIPA, and LIPA has indicated in correspondence of
March 2, 2007 that it requires land for the construction of a substation in order to meet the
requirements of the proposed development. The applicants have discussed this matter with
both Noah Stiles and Bruce Germano of LIPA and has been advised that LIPA is seeking
property from New York State for the construction of the required substation. The applicants
have indicated that, if LIPA cannot secure the necessary land from New York State, the
required area will be provided on the Heartland Town Square site.
NOISE AND ODOR
Noise
For those land uses where the noise environment is dominated by roadway traffic and where noise
levels approach or exceed the FHWA/NYSDOT NAC criteria, such as those adjacent to the Long
Island Expressway Service Road, Campus (G) Road, Commack Road and Crooked Hill Road, noise
abatement and mitigation measures availed by appropriate transportation authorities may be
considered.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-86
For the institutional and commercial land uses, 23CFR772 states that design noise levels apply to
areas that have regular human use and do not apply to parking lots, industrial areas, and open space
portions of the tract. Since the institutional and commercial structures are for interior office use, the
applicable criteria would be the interior design noise level of 52 dBA. With the building noise
reduction for a typical office construction over 27 dBA and the highest anticipated noise level at 71
dBA (such as at Location N4), maximum interior noise levels of 44 dBA as a result of traffic noise
can be expected. This meets the FHWA/NYSDOT NAC criteria of 52 dBA, and no further noise
abatement measures would be considered.
Alternative noise abatement measures may be considered and must be evaluated in individual cases,
at the time of building design, in terms of their effectiveness in reducing the projected exterior noise
levels to acceptable levels and reducing the noise impact at the impacted residential receptors. These
alternative measures are summarized below:
•
•
•
•
•
The proposed Heartland Town Square development would adhere to the Town of Islip Noise
Ordinance (Chapter 35 of the Town of Islip Code) that regulates noise generated during
construction (7:00 AM to 8:00 PM, weekdays) and operation of projects;
Construction and occupancy of the site will occur in phases, thereby lessening the level of
noise during construction and resulting in sound levels on site increasing gradually as
individual uses come on line;
Since potential increases in noise at and in the vicinity of the project are closely linked to
increases in area traffic, at this time it is expected that improvements to area roadways
suggested by Eschbacher VHB, the project traffic engineers, will also mitigate some of the
projected increases in noise;
Additional noise abatement options will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, as development
plans are finalized. For example, shields or other physical barriers can be used to restrict the
transmission of noise or to screen noise from off-site sources; and
The erection of soundproof housing or enclosures on rooftop HVAC equipment will also be
used to reduce noise levels in the operational phase of the project.
Odor
Presented below are some mitigation measures proposed for the subject site to reduce potential
impacts from odors.
•
•
•
The project will utilize cluster development techniques to provide some concentration of
restaurant space in areas more closely associated with business and retail;
The proposed Heartland Town Square development will incorporate localized odor
mitigation measures (rather than project-wide measures), as necessary. An example may
include the installation of restaurant roof vents directed away from nearby residential areas.
Restaurants would also use odor control technology as part of their design especially for
controlling odors from grilling operations. Other activities would also employ hoods and
exhaust stacks to alleviate nuisance odors; and
Each activity having a nuisance-odor-causing potential will be required, at the time of site
plan application, to mitigate the odors generated to a level that will comply with the nuisance
statutes.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-87
GROWTH AND CHARACTER OF THE COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD
Socioeconomics
•
•
As the proposed project would generate over $51.0 million in property taxes, annually, by
Year 15, no other mitigation is proposed; and
As noted in Section 5.1, above, the applicants are committed to providing workforce housing
units as part of the development. A total of 20 percent of the rental units to be developed (i.e.,
1,643 units) will be set aside as workforce housing.
Community Facilities and Services
•
•
•
•
•
The applicants will employ private security personnel on-site, which is expected to reduce
potential impacts to the Suffolk County Police Department;
The applicants will provide land for construction of a fire station;
During the site plan review process, the applicants will consult with the Brentwood Fire
District to ensure that roadways are properly designed and that the locations of fire hydrants,
smoke and carbon monoxide detectors, fire exits and sprinklers, are appropriate to facilitate
fire protection services;
Subject to the approval of the Town of Islip and prevailing Federal and State Law, the
applicants are willing to set aside workforce units for volunteers of the Brentwood Fire
District; and
The applicants will continue to consult with the various service providers to identify and
address potential impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed action as site
and building plans are developed.
BUILDING-SPECIFIC MITIGATION
Although requested in the previously-adopted Final Scope and restated in a comment letter dated
June 21, 2005, the applicants respectfully submit that it is not appropriate for a DGEIS, which has not
yet been subject to public review and comment, to set forth the appropriate number of building
permits to be issued in different segments of the development within each phase. It is the applicants’
position that it has offered sufficient mitigation to allow the requested adoption of the PSPRD, the
rezoning of the development of the subject property thereto, and the development of the subject
property in accordance therewith. Furthermore, the applicants respectfully submit that it is the
responsibility of the lead agency, after expiration of the public comment period on the accepted
DGEIS and completion and filing of the FGEIS, to set forth in its Findings Statement, the mitigation
measures that it has identified as necessary and feasible to minimize significant adverse impacts to
the maximum extent practicable.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-88
Moreover, as explained in Section 2.3.3 of this DGEIS:
“[i]t must be understood that, given the long-term build-out and the scope of development of
Heartland Town Square, it is not possible to prepare and commit to precise site plans.
Precise uses in any particular area would be dependent upon various factors, the most
significant of which is market demand. Accordingly, a conceptual development plan has been
prepared to represent the likely development scenario, in accordance with the proposed
PSPRD. Moreover, the conceptual development plan that is evaluated herein represents
maximum potential development. This ensures a worst-case environmental analysis, pursuant
to SEQRA.”
Accordingly, with respect to design issues for specific buildings, some mitigation measures, such as
potential energy conservation measures, would only be able to be identified during site plan review.
The applicants believes that this is appropriate, from a SEQRA perspective, as long as the applicants
identify the necessary mitigation measures to minimize identified significant adverse impacts
associated with the proposed action, and are also able to demonstrate that service providers, such as
KeySpan/National Grid and LIPA, have indicated that they can serve the proposed development.
CONDITIONS AND CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING FUTURE SEQRA REQUIREMENTS
6 NYCRR §617.10(c) and (d) state, in pertinent part:
“(c) Generic EISs…should set forth specific conditions or criteria under which
future actions will be undertaken or approved, including requirements for any
subsequent SEQR compliance…”
(d) When a final generic EIS has been filed under this part:
(1) No further SEQR compliance is required if a subsequent proposed
action will be carried out in conformance with the conditions and
thresholds established for such actions in the generic EIS or its findings
statement;
(2) An amended findings statement must be prepared if the subsequent
proposed action was adequately addressed in the generic EIS but was not
addressed or was not adequately addressed in the findings statement for
the generic EIS;
(3) A negative declaration must be prepared if a subsequent proposed
action was not addressed or was not adequately addressed in the generic
EIS and the subsequent action will not result in any significant
environmental impacts;
(4) A supplement to the final generic EIS must be prepared if the
subsequent proposed action was not addressed or was not adequately
addressed in the generic EIS and the subsequent action may have one or
more significant adverse environmental impacts.”
1.0 Executive Summary
1-89
Based on the analyses contained in this DGEIS, the following represents the applicant’s proposed
conditions and thresholds, which, if met, would eliminate the need for further SEQRA compliance.
•
Total development, upon completion of all three phases of Heartland Town Square, would
include a maximum of 4,150,000 square feet of office space, 1,030,000 square feet of retail
space, 105,000 square feet of civic space and 9,130 residential units;
•
Phase I would include a maximum of 600,000 square feet of office space, 560,000 square feet
of retail, 105,000 square feet of civic space and 3,500 residential units. Upon construction of
70 percent of Phase I, the need for further SEQRA review will be determined based upon the
accuracy of traffic projections and the effectiveness of the mitigation;
•
Phase II would include approximately 2,257,000 square feet of office space, 335,600 square
feet of retail space and 3,380 residential units;
•
Phase III would include approximately 1,292,500 square feet of office space, 134,400 square
feet of retail space and 2,250 residential units;
•
A minimum of 30 percent of the total land area shall be open space;
•
Of the overall proposed 9,130 residential units, a minimum of 10 percent shall be owneroccupied;
•
Not less than 20 percent of the rental units shall be affordable, workforce units;
•
Impervious areas shall comprise no more than 75.98 percent of the subject property;
•
The total projected sewage flow upon completion of all three phases of Heartland Town
Square shall be no more than 1.6 million gallons per day;
•
Heartland Town Square will operate a trolley-like shuttle bus to the Deer Park Long Island
Railroad Station;
•
The Applicants will adopt specific policies to discourage automobile ownership by residents.
Residents will be provided with one convenient parking space per unit. Those residents
seeking additional parking spaces will be assigned them in a more remote, satellite location,
and will be required to pay a fee for this additional space;
•
Heartland Town Square will have a concierge office that will include a transportation
manager who will provide information to residents with respect to public transportation, the
private bus within Heartland Town Square, bicycle options, “zip cars,” and will arrange car
pools for residents and employees within Heartland Town Square;
•
The Applicants have committed to provide $25,000,000.00 toward required roadway
improvements.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-90
In the event that any of the above conditions are contravened, additional SEQRA compliance may be
necessary in accordance with 6NYCRR §617.10(d)(2),(3) or (4), as would be appropriate, given the
actual development plan proposed and the associated potential environmental impacts associated
therewith.
ALTERNATIVES AND THEIR IMPACTS
The following are the alternatives to the proposed action that must be considered in this DGEIS:
•
•
•
•
•
•
SEQRA-mandated, No-action Alternative (Site Remains as it Currently Exists);
Redevelopment of the Former Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center in Accordance with Residence
AAA Zoning;
Development Scenario under the Special Groundwater Protection Area Plan for the Oak
Brush Plains;
Redevelopment of the Former Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center in Accordance with the
Preliminary Re-Utilization Master Plan for the Office of Mental Health Pilgrim State
Psychiatric Facility – 1996;
Alternative to Phase III at the Former Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center – Industrial Rezoning
for Multi-Tenant Office/Industrial Uses; and
Integration of Phase II into Phase I of the Former Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center – Bring
Office Development Closer to the Proposed Main Street.
The following table provides a comparison of quantitative impacts among the proposed action and
the alternatives.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-91
Comparison of Alternatives1-4
PARAMETER
Type of Development
Number of Units
(Gross Floor Area)
Vegetation Preserved
Total Population
(persons)
School-Aged Children
Sewage
Generation
Gross Tax Revenue
Generation
Traffic Generation
PM Peak Hour
1-4
PROPOSED ACTION
Retail
Residential
Civic Space
Office/Commercial
Office/Commercial (4,150,000 SF)
Residential (9,130 units)
Civic Space (105,000 SF)
Retail (1,030,000 SF)
NO ACTION
Institutional - abandoned
Industrial
Lodging
Mixed Commercial
Outdoor Storage
Institutional – abandoned
(1,028,887 SF)
Lodging in Gateway Area
(55,236 SF)
Gateway Area Mixed
Commercial and Industrial
Square Footages (unknown)
DEVELOPMENT UNDER
PREVAILING ZONING
(RESIDENCE AAA)
Residential
Commercial/Office
Retail
Residential (381 single-family homes
and 130 apartments)
Office/ Commercial (800,000 SF)
Retail (30,000 SF)
DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE
SPECIAL GROUNDWATER
PROTECTION AREA PLAN
FOR THE OAK BRUSH
PLAINS)
REDEVELOPMENT WITH
PRELIMINARY REUTILIZATION MASTER PLAN
FOR THE OFFICE OF
MENTAL HEALTH PILGRIM
STATE PSYCHIATRIC
FACILITY 1996
ALTERNATIVE TO PHASE III
– INDUSTRIAL REZONING
FOR MULTI-TENANT
OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL USES
High-Density Residential
Institutional
Office/Commercial
Retail
Sports/Family Entertainment
Retail
Office
Industrial/Research and
Development
Clustered Housing
Retail
Residential
Civic Space
Office/Commercial
Industrial
Residential (1,498 apartments)
Institutional (2,760,615 SF)
Office/Commercial (800,000 SF)
Retail (30,000 SF)
Sports/Family Entertainment
(1,000,000 SF)
Retail (40,000 SF)
Office (550,000 SF)
Industrial/ Research and
Development (360,000)
Clustered Housing (440 units)
Retail (1,020,000 SF)
Residential (6,480 units)
Civic Space (105,000 SF)
Office/Commercial (4,214,913 SF)
Industrial (934,510 SF)
90.5 acres
All Existing Vegetation
Unknown – Individual Single-Family
Lots
224 acres
120 acres
193 acres
19,892 persons
0 persons
1,824 persons
2,371 persons
1,093 persons
14,389 persons
2,048 children
0 children
514 children
33 children
99 children
1,493 children
1.4± million GPD
16,650 GPD1-5
208,650 GPD
678,512 GPD
284,650 GPD
1.2± million GPD
$50.9 million
$2.0 million
$12.7 million
$16.3 million
$14.9 million
$43.3 million
14,966 vehicle trips
01-6
1,757 vehicle trips
6,657 vehicle trips
4,577 vehicle trips
14,999 vehicle trips
As the alternative entitled “Integration of Phase II into Phase I of Former Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center Development” relates only to the integration of a use in another phase, it is not suitable for a comparison of quantifiable impacts. The
quantifiable impacts would be the same as those of the proposed action.
1-5
The No Action water use/sewage generation value includes the existing hotel only, it does not include the other privately-owned properties within the Gateway Area.
1-6
The traffic associated with the Gateway Area (under the No Action Alternative) has been included in the background traffic data.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-92
SEQRA-MANDATED, NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE (SITE REMAINS AS IT CURRENTLY EXISTS)
The SEQRA-mandated, no-action alternative would leave the site as it currently exists. The noaction alternative is inconsistent with the applicants’ right to develop, does not meet the objectives of
the applicants and, accordingly, is not viewed to be a feasible alternative. Moreover, with respect to
the Gateway Area, this alternative would not achieve the Town’s urban renewal goals.
The SEQRA-mandated no action alternative would leave the site in its present condition (i.e., with
partially demolished and abandoned buildings), and with its present zoning, which allows residential
development on lots of one acre or greater. Outside influences may impact existing conditions on the
subject property, and any unidentified potential environmental concerns would likely remain. The noaction alternative is not feasible, as it would not allow the applicants to develop the subject property
and would not allow the applicants a fair return on its investment. Moreover, this underutilized and
blighted site would not be revitalized. Based upon the no-action alternative, remediation of known
environmental conditions would continue to occur. However, if other unknown issues of
environmental concern exist on the site, they would not be identified or addressed under this
alternative.
REDEVELOPMENT OF THE FORMER PILGRIM STATE PSYCHIATRIC CENTER IN ACCORDANCE WITH
THE PREVAILING “RESIDENCE AAA” ZONING
The prevailing zoning of the former Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center property is “Residence AAA”
within the Town of Islip. The primary use permitted in this zoning district is single-family homes on
lots with a minimum size of 40,000 sf. Based upon the prevailing zoning, the 452± acres of the
former Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center property would yield a total of 381 single-family lots at or
just above 40,000 sf in size. An analysis of the impacts of development under prevailing zoning on
the former Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center property is presented below.
Development under this scenario would consist of lots on the former Pilgrim site designed to
accommodate a single-family dwelling which could result in a floor area equivalent to as much as 25
percent of the lot, but would more likely result in a 2,000-to-3,000 square foot building footprint.
Where the lots are located in wooded areas, approximately 50 percent of the lot would be cleared and
rough-graded in preparation for the construction of the dwellings. Upon completion of each dwelling,
the lots would presumably be landscaped and improved with driveways, decks, patios, etc. typical to
this type of development. Five percent of the subdivision area must be set aside for park purposes.
The Town may elect to accept payment in lieu of dedication of such property for park use. However,
for analysis purposes, the worst-case scenario of 381 lots with no park set aside is presented. In
addition, the regulations require that 20 percent of the property be preserved as open space, which is
integrated into the lots throughout the subdivision.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-93
The subdivision lots would be arranged around a network of new roads interconnected with the
existing Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center roads to remain, Crooked Hill Road and Community
College Road. The new subdivision roads would consist of 34 feet of pavement with curbs and
sidewalks and would include the installation of new utilities (electric, telephone, gas, cable TV)
throughout. Public water would be provided through interconnection with SCWA mains in the
surrounding area. Stormwater runoff would be collected in storm sewers installed in the roadways
and discharged to a number of on-site recharge basins design to store the runoff from an eight-inch
rainfall. A network of sanitary sewers could be constructed and connected to the existing pump
station to serve the subdivision, however, the size of the lots would meet SCDHS density restrictions
for the installation of conventional on-site sewage disposal systems. It is, therefore, more likely that
each lot would include the installation of a conventional septic tank and leaching pool(s) for sewage
disposal.
As with the proposed action, development under this alternative would result in substantial ground
disturbance associated with regrading and replacement of infrastructure (i.e., utilities). Utilities
serving the remaining Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center property (i.e., that which is not part of the
452±-acre portion of the subject property) would need to be integrated with the proposed subdivision
utilities and relocated, where necessary. As with the proposed action, a method of containing
stormwater runoff from the State property would need to be incorporated into the plan, most likely
requiring the construction of a recharge basin on the State property to serve the State facilities.
In the Gateway Area, development would remain as planned for the proposed action with 130
residential units, 30,000 square feet of retail space and 800,000 square feet of office space. The
existing hotel would remain.
REDEVELOPMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PREVAILING RESIDENCE AAA ZONING
DEVELOPMENT SCENARIO UNDER THE SPECIAL GROUNDWATER PROTECTION AREA PLAN
THE OAK BRUSH PLAINS
FOR
In the discussion of the Oak Brush Plains SGPA, the Long Island Regional Planning Board
developed a Land Use Plan for the area including the Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center property and
the Gateway Area. The SGPA “Land Use Plan” called for the northerly portion of the former Pilgrim
State Psychiatric Center property to be developed with a high-density residential use, the existing
cemetery to remain as open space, and the remainder of the property to continue as an institutional
use. The SGPA “Land Use Plan” recommends that the Gateway Area be developed with commercial
and industrial uses. In keeping with the SGPA recommendations, a plan was developed for a highdensity residential district, which would comprise approximately 114.5 acres of the former Pilgrim
property. The Gateway Area would be redeveloped as under the proposed action (office, retail, hotel
and residential), which would, in pertinent part, comply with the SGPA recommendations.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-94
Using the Town of Islip Residence C zone, which permits senior apartments at a density of 12 units
per acre, a conceptual plan was developed for the northern portion of the former Pilgrim State
Psychiatric Center. The plan depicts the construction of 57 buildings housing a total of 1,368 senior
apartment units. The plan complies with the Residence C zoning requirements with respect to
setbacks and buffers, and provides for a floor area ratio (“FAR”) of 0.21. In addition, the plan
depicts 2,394 parking spaces in accordance with Town Code requirements. The proposed buildings
are interconnected with a series of new roadways. The roadways would be 24 feet in width and would
contain new utilities (gas, electric, telephone, cable TV) and a storm sewer collection system, which
would be connected to a new recharge basin at the southerly end of the site. Storage would be
provided for the runoff from an eight-inch rainfall. The proposed apartment development would abut
the Gateway Area to the north and the institutional uses to the south. Public water mains would be
constructed throughout the site, and would be interconnected to surrounding SCWA mains. Due to
the density of the proposed development, there would be a need to connect to the Southwest Sewer
District, requiring construction of new sanitary sewers to serve the site.
The disposition of the remainder of the former Pilgrim property (approximately 338 acres), which
would remain as an institutional use under the SGPA “Land Use Plan,” is unclear. It is assumed for
the purpose of this analysis that the property would be sold or transferred to another entity for an
institutional use or uses. A hospital-type development similar to the former use was assumed for
traffic, sewage generation and economic analyses, among others. The only density restriction placed
on development of the property for institutional use in the “Residence AAA” zone is a maximum
FAR of 25 percent of the lot area. Allowing for a reduction in developed area of 25 percent to
account for roads, recharge basins, parking, etc., the allowable floor area for an institutional use can
be estimated at 2,760,615 square feet.
As noted above, the redevelopment of the Gateway Area would be as in the proposed action with 130
residential units, 30,000 square feet of retail space and 800,000 square feet of office space, with the
existing hotel to remain. Although a residential component is not suggested in the SGPA
recommendations, the remainder of the development would comply with the commercial
classification of the Gateway Area. The removal of the industrial uses (or the potential for industrial
uses), though not compliant with the SGPA recommendation, would minimize the possible impacts
to the SGPA by eliminating potential sources of contamination. Therefore, the proposed
redevelopment of the Gateway Area as proposed would comply with the intent of the SGPA Plan,
which is to minimize impacts to groundwater resources.
As with the proposed development of the Heartland Town Square, it is assumed that all of the
existing infrastructure within the proposed apartment development would be removed and replaced,
and the site would undergo substantial regrading in order to establish acceptable road grades and
create relatively flat pad sites for the buildings. Utilities serving the hospital facilities would generally
remain (on the State property), but would need to be integrated with the proposed utilities and
relocated where necessary.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-95
Parameter
Former Pilgrim
Site
Gateway Area
Lot Area
Total Number of
Residential Buildings
Total Number of
Residential Units
Zoning District
Residential Use
114.49 acres*
57
23.59± acres
3
1,368
130
Residence C
Senior Apartments
Proposed PSPRD
Multi-family
Apartments
148,200 SF
Gross Floor Area
1,025,114 SF
(Residential Uses)
Residential Floor Area
0.21
Ratio (Gross Area)
Number of Residential
11.94
Units Per Gross Acre
Total Commercial Gross
0
Floor Area
Total Institutional Gross
2,760,615 SF on
Floor Area
337.5± acres
*Does not include institutional area to remain.
**Including existing hotel
0.14
5.5
885,200 SF**
0
REDEVELOPMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PRELIMINARY RE-UTILIZATION MASTER PLAN FOR
THE OFFICE OF MENTAL HEALTH PILGRIM STATE PSYCHIATRIC FACILITY – 1996
Another alternate for development of the former Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center was based on the
Preliminary Reutilization Master Plan for the Pilgrim Psychiatric Hospital prepared for the Empire
State Development Corporation in 1995. The study was developed in conjunction with local input to
suggest appropriate mixed-use development of property to be excessed from State holdings. The
alternate plan presented herein is based on Option C (preferred option) from the report, which
outlines redevelopment of the site consisting of a mix of uses including:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Sports/Family Entertainment;
Retail;
Office;
Outdoor Sports and Recreation;
Industrial/ Research and Development (R&D); and
Clustered Housing.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-96
The alternative presented herein is based on the Master Plan included in the report, adjusted for the
actual size of the former Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center property transferred by the State. In
particular, Sector 2 of the Master Plan was reduced in size to reflect actual transfer of the property to
the former Pilgrim property to the subject property, thus the golf course was eliminated. In general,
the plan includes the demolition of existing buildings in the northern and central portions of the
former Pilgrim property in order to construct a sports and entertainment center located around the
existing water tower, office space along the easterly side of the site, and R&D/Industrial space in the
southern portion of the site. In Sector 3 (southern portion of the former Pilgrim property), the existing
buildings would be retained and converted as necessary. The portion of the site on the east side of
Sagtikos State Parkway would be developed as high-density housing with on-site retail, similar to the
plan for Heartland Town Square.
Under this scenario, the density of the Pilgrim development would likely require connection of all
phases of the development to the sanitary sewer system. Individual areas of the development would
require self-contained stormwater management in the form of recharge basins designed to contain the
runoff from an eight-inch storm.
Although less dense than some of the other alternative plans for the former Pilgrim property,
development under this scenario would still likely require removal of all existing infrastructure in the
north and east portions of the former Pilgrim property, and substantial regrading. More of the
existing woodland vegetation is retained in buffers and open space. In the southern portion of the
former Pilgrim property (R&D/Industrial), it is assumed that much of the existing infrastructure could
remain depending on the condition of the facilities. Clearing and regrading would be required in the
vicinity of the new ball fields. New utilities installed in the northern and eastern portions of the site
would have to be integrated into the existing utility network to the south. Given the age and condition
of the existing utilities, it is likely that the existing infrastructure, if retained, would require
significant improvements.
Lot Area
Floor Area – Sector 1
452± acres*
1,000,000 SF (Sports/Family Entertainment)
500,000 SF (Office)
50,000 SF (Commercial Services)
Floor Area - Sector 2
360,000 SF (mixed use/R&D/Light Industrial)
Floor Area – Sector 3
40,000 Sf (Retail)
440,000 (Residential)
Total Parking Provided
4,212 spaces
*Does not include the Gateway Area.
As the Gateway Area was not considered in the 1996 plan, this alternative assumes that it would be
developed as in the proposed action with 130 multi-family residential units, 30,000 square feet of
retail space and 800,000 square feet of office space. The existing 111-room hotel would remain.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-97
ALTERNATIVE TO PHASE III1-7 AT THE FORMER PILGRIM STATE PSYCHIATRIC CENTER –
INDUSTRIAL REZONING FOR MULTI-TENANT OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL USES
This alternative involves the substitution of multi-tenant office and industrial uses (configured in an
office/industrial park setting) for those uses currently planned for Development Unit #3 (10,000
square feet of neighborhood support retail, 2,650 residential units, 25,000 square feet of civic space
and 100,000 square feet of commercial/office space) on the former Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center
site. Therefore, the following would comprise Heartland Town Square (only on the former Pilgrim
site) in this alternative:
Development Unit #1: 775,900 square feet of retail, 2,450 residential units, 80,000 square feet of
civic space and 1,800,000 square feet of commercial space (office, hotel,
etc.);
Development Unit #2: 198,500 square feet of retail, 1,450,000 square feet of commercial space
(office) and 1,500 residential units;
Development Unit #3: 1,099,423 square feet of multi-tenant office/industrial space; and
Development Unit #4: 2,400 residential units and 15,600 square feet of neighborhood supporting
retail.
In addition, the Gateway Area would be developed as in the proposed action with: 130 residential
units, 30,000 square feet of retail and 800,000 square feet of office space. The existing 111-room
hotel would also remain.
The major difference between this alternative and the proposed action is the focus on industrial/office
space rather than residential development in the area south of Campus (College) Road and west of the
Sagtikos State Parkway. Furthermore, this alternative would bring an element into the overall plan
that does not currently exist, namely industrial development.
The 90± acres that comprise Development Unit #3 on the former Pilgrim property are divided into 25
separate lots. Based upon development under the Town’s Industrial 1 zoning, the floor area ratio
would be 0.279. The overall parcel would provide 2,392 parking spaces and 69 loading spaces. A
recharge basin would be developed in the southeastern portion of this development unit in order to
capture and recharge stormwater runoff from this portion of the proposed development.
1-7
In the case of this alternative, Phase III is actually Development Unit #3.
1.0 Executive Summary
1-98
INTEGRATION OF PHASE II INTO PHASE I OF THE FORMER PILGRIM STATE PSYCHIATRIC CENTER
DEVELOPMENT – BRING OFFICE DEVELOPMENT CLOSER TO THE PROPOSED MAIN STREET1-8
Through the design process, and since the previously-adopted Final Scope was promulgated by the
lead agency, the office development has been moved closer to the proposed Main Street. Therefore,
an alternative depicting this scenario has not been provided as the proposed action incorporates this
design. The concept plan incorporates office space into the Main Street in three main ways. First,
from the most general sense, the plan incorporates office development into Main Street by organizing
the entire development on a pedestrian friendly street grid. This serves to connect the office
buildings located throughout the project with the Main Street zone, and vice versa. Second, offices
have been located along the periphery of the Main Street retail zone. On the northern side of Main
Street, two office buildings have been located near the cinema located in the center of Main Street.
This location maximizes the potential for shared parking opportunities among the cinema and office
uses. Third, a signature office tower has been located in the heart of the Main Street district,
providing an anchor to the east-west Main Street spine. This tower also serves as a visual backdrop
to the existing water, which is preserved and used as a centerpiece for the plaza terminating Main
Street.
J:\27815.00\DOCUMENT\REVISED DGEIS MARCH 2009 CHANGES ACCEPTED\SECTION 01.doc
1-8
As this alternative relates only to the integration of a use into another phase of the Pilgrim redevelopment, the Gateway
Area is not addressed herein.
2.1 Introduction
2-1
______________________________________________________________________________
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
2.1
INTRODUCTION
This Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement (“DGEIS”) has been prepared for the
proposed action, which consists of the adoption of amendments to the zoning chapter of the Code
of the Town of Islip (Chapter 68 of the Code of the Town of Islip), including the Building Zone
Map, to establish a Pilgrim State Planned Redevelopment District (“PSPRD”); changes in the
zoning classifications of certain parcels, designated as Suffolk County Tax Map (“SCTM”)
parcels 500-71-1-10.2 and 10.8, and 500-71-1-13.6, and now classified in the “Residence AAA”
zoning district, so as to include such parcels (to be known as Heartland Town Square) in the
newly-established PSPRD; future changes in the zoning classifications of certain parcels,
designated as SCTM parcels 500-71-1-1, 500-71-1-2, 500-71-1-3, 500-71-1-4 and 15, 500-71-15, 500-71-1-6, 500-71-1-7, 500-71-1-8.1, 8.2, 9.1, 500-71-1-9.2 and 500-71-1-14 (see Appendix
D) and now classified in the “Industrial 1,” “Industrial 2,” “Residence AAA,” and “General
Service E” zoning districts, so as to include such parcels (known currently as the Islip Gateway
Community Improvement Area) in the newly-established PSPRD; and redevelopment of the
aforesaid parcels in accordance with a Conceptual Master Plan for Heartland Town Square
pursuant to the requirements set forth in the PSPRD.
The Town of Islip application
identification number for the proposed project is CZ2003-014.
Upon review of the application, the Town Board issued a Positive Declaration on September 9,
2003, which required the preparation of a draft environmental impact statement. A formal
scoping process was conducted by the lead agency, the Town Board of the Town of Islip
(hereinafter “Town Board”), to identify impact issues that required evaluation in the draft
environmental impact statement. These impact issues were outlined in a Final Scope and are as
follows: Land; Water; Air; Plants and Animals; Aesthetic Resources; Open Space and
Recreation; Critical Environmental Areas; Transportation; Energy; Noise and Odor; and Growth
and Character of the Community or Neighborhood (a copy of which is annexed hereto as
Appendix A).
2.1 Introduction
2-2
______________________________________________________________________________
The applicants submitted an initial DEIS to the lead agency in April 2005, and received various
comments from the Town of Islip’s Department of Planning and Development. A revised DEIS
was submitted to the lead agency in June 2007, and Department of Planning and Development
provided various comments on that DEIS.
Since the time of preparation of the last version of the DEIS (i.e., with a revision date of
December 2008 [which includes the May 2008 Addendum to the Draft Environmental Impact
Statement for Proposed Heartland Town Square (Redevelopment of a Portion of Pilgrim State
Psychiatric Center) Dated June 2007]), the Town of Islip’s Department of Planning and
Development continued to raise technical objections with respect to the accuracy of the traffic
generation presented. At this point, there remain technical differences between the applicants
and the Town with respect to this issue as well as sewer discharge, etc. These differences are
outlined in Section 12.0 of the DGEIS. The applicants’ position is that it is not required that
technical issues and/or differences in opinion with respect to technical analyses be resolved as
part of the lead agency’s determination as to whether the EIS for the proposed Heartland Town
Square is complete and adequate for public review. The applicants support the aforesaid position
through review of 6NYCRR 617.9(a)(2) and at pages 69 through 71 of The SEQR Handbook
(NYSDEC, November 1992), which states, in pertinent part,
“2. Is there a particular basis for determining the adequacy of a draft EIS?
Yes. The lead agency should rely on the written scope of issues, if one was prepared,
and the standards in 617.142-0 which cover the content of EIS’s. The lead agency
should ensure that all relevant information has been presented and analyzed, but
should not require an unreasonably exhaustive or “perfect” document. The degree of
detail should reflect the complexity of the action and the magnitude and importance
of likely impacts.
A draft impact statement should describe the action, alternatives to the action and
various means of mitigating impacts of the action. It should discuss all significant
environmental issues related to the action, but it is not the document in which all such
issues must be resolved. Resolution of issues before acceptance of a draft EIS, in fact,
defeats one of the major purposes of a draft EIS; that is, to give the public an
opportunity to comment on the various alternatives regarding the action, so that such
comments may be part of the final decision making considerations.
2-0
The numbering of the sections in 6 NYCRR Part 617 was modified, based on revisions to the regulations that
occurred subsequent to the preparation of The SEQR Handbook. The referenced standards are now found in 6
NYCRR §617.9 and not §617.14.
2.1 Introduction
2-3
______________________________________________________________________________
7. Is there a limit on the number of times a lead agency may reject a submitted
draft EIS?
The SEQR regulations place no limit on rejection of a draft EIS, except that the lead
agency must identify the deficiencies in writing to the project sponsor. If a lead
agency’s request for the inclusion of necessary information is ignored or refused, the
agency may continue to reject the document.
However, the lead agency should remember that a draft EIS does not need to be
perfect. It should contain a discussion of information, including significant impacts,
alternatives and mitigation measures requested by the lead agency in a reasonable
level of detail. The purpose of the public comment period is to allow all involved
agencies and the public to review the draft EIS and comment on its inadequacies.
These can usually be corrected in a final EIS.
If there is a fundamental disagreement between the lead agency and the preparer of
the draft EIS about its acceptability, it is possible to simply disclose that
disagreement in the document itself and explain how the parties vary in their
opinions. The public will then be able to comment on this as well.
9. Must differences in interpretation between the project sponsor and lead agency
experts regarding a technical issue be resolved before determining a draft EIS as
complete?
No. It is not necessary to resolve these types of disputes before accepting the draft
EIS as complete. In cases where there are valid differences in the interpretation of a
technical issue, the lead agency should include both interpretations in the draft EIS.
Providing both positions allows a reviewer to reach an independent determination
regarding the impact.” (emphasis added)
At the request of the Town, and in order to further explain the applicants’ position, the applicants
prepared an Addendum to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Proposed Heartland
Town Square (hereinafter the “Addendum,” a copy of which is annexed in Appendix A of this
DGEIS). The Addendum was prepared, at the request of the Town of Islip, to address technical
questions relating to the traffic impact analysis, the proposed mitigation for traffic impacts and
sewer discharge, and the phasing. At the request of the Town, the applicants prepared another
revised DEIS in December 2008, which incorporated the Addendum into the body of the DEIS.
2.1 Introduction
2-4
______________________________________________________________________________
During the review of the various DEIS documents by the Town, discussions were held between
the applicants and Town representatives, and the proposed action was modified to (a) include the
area described above as the Islip Gateway Community Improvement Area as part of the
Conceptual Master Plan, and (b) provide for phasing. The DEIS prepared in December 2008
included both these items, and upon review of that DEIS, the Town determined that the
applicants should submit an amended petition to address the inclusion of the Gateway
Community Improvement Area and the proposed phasing.
Based on the foregoing, the applicants submitted an “Amended Support Petition” to the Town
Board on March 3, 2009, and then submitted a “Further Amended Support Petition” on March
10, 2009 (hereinafter sometimes collectively referred to herein as the “Amended Petitions”).
Upon review of the Amended Petitions, the Town Board issued a positive declaration on March
10, 2009, which, among other things, required the preparation of a generic environmental impact
statement (“GEIS”) (see Appendix A).
6 NYCRR §617.10(a) allows a GEIS when a proposed action consists of:
1. a number of separate actions in a given geographic area which, if considered singly, may
have minor impacts; but if considered together, may have significant impacts;
2. a sequence of actions, contemplated by a single agency or individual; or
3. separate actions having generic or common impacts; or
4. an entire program or plan having wide application or restricting the range of future
alternative policies or projects, including new or significant changes to existing land use
plans, development plans, zoning regulations or agency comprehensive resource
management plans.
Thus, this DGEIS evaluates the impacts associated with the implementation of the PSPRD and
subsequent redevelopment of the identified parcels associated with the overall Heartland Town
Square development proposal, in accordance with the Conceptual Master Plan, as required by the
Positive Declaration adopted by the Town Board on March 10, 2009.
2.1 Introduction
2-5
______________________________________________________________________________
The proposed Conceptual Master Plan embodies the development, to be known as “Heartland
Town Square.” The parcels to be rezoned and redeveloped into Heartland Town Square consist
of a 452±-acre portion of the Pilgrim Psychiatric Center and the 23.59±-acre Islip Gateway
Community Improvement Area (hereinafter the “Gateway Area”). These properties collectively
are hereinafter referred to as either the “subject property” or “Heartland Town Square.” The
475.59±-acre subject property is situated on both the east and west sides of the Sagtikos State
Parkway, south of the Long Island Expressway (“LIE”) (Interstate 495), north of the Heartland
Business Center, east of Commack Road (County Road [“CR”] 4), and west of Crooked Hill
( [“CR”] 13), in the Town of Islip, County of Suffolk, State of New York (see Figure 2-1, Figure
2-2 and Figure 2-3.)
It should be noted that a portion of the original Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center that is owned
and controlled by the New York State Office of Mental Health (“OMH”) is proposed to remain.
This 200±-acre property is proposed to be surrounded on three sides by the proposed Heartland
Town Square development.
2.1 Introduction
2-9
______________________________________________________________________________
The DGEIS is divided into 12 sections, the first of which is the Executive Summary. This
section, Section 2.0, provides a description of all components of the proposed project including:
an explanation of the proposed zoning district; a complete description of the proposed conceptual
master plan -- Heartland Town Square; a history of the site; the project’s purpose, benefits and
needs; proposed demolition and construction; and the required permits and approvals.
Section 3.0 of this DGEIS provides a discussion of the environmental setting for the project,
broken down by topic. Section 4.0 of the DGEIS is devoted to impacts that are likely to occur
upon project implementation. Existing conditions, described in Section 3.0, are superimposed
with post-development conditions. Potential beneficial and adverse environmental impacts are
presented in this segment of the document. There is a corresponding impact analysis section for
each of the existing conditions sections. In addition, the cumulative impacts of the proposed
Urban Renewal Plan contemplated by the Town of Islip for an area along Crooked Hill Road,
proximate to the subject property, are evaluated within Section 4.0 of this DGEIS.
Section 5.0 of this DGEIS presents mitigation measures that reduce or eliminate those impacts
that were revealed in the analyses presented in Section 4.0. Section 6.0 enumerates those shortterm and long-term impacts described within Section 4.0 that cannot be mitigated. Alternatives
and their impacts are discussed in Section 7.0 of the DGEIS. Among these alternatives, is the
“No-action” alternative that is required to be discussed pursuant to the State Environmental
Quality Review (“SEQRA”) and its implementing regulations at 6 NYCRR Part 617. Section
8.0 presents a brief discussion of natural resources consumed as a result of project
implementation and Section 9.0 includes an analysis of potential growth-inducing aspects of the
proposed project. Section 10.0 of the DGEIS presents a discussion of the energy sources to be
used, expected levels of consumption and means to reduce consumption.
Section 11.0 of the
DGEIS discusses the conditions and criteria under which future actions associated with the
development of the subject property will be approved. Finally, Section 12.0 contains the list of
references used in the preparation of the DGEIS.
2.2 Brief History of the Property and summary of Existing Site Conditions
2-10
______________________________________________________________________________
2.2
2.2.1
BRIEF HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY AND SUMMARY OF EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS
Physical Characteristics of the Site
The approximately 452 acres comprising a portion of the subject property consist of a major
segment of the former Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center (the “former Pilgrim site”), which was
operated by the State of New York (see Figure 2-4). The main portion of the site (approximately
365 of the 452± acres) is generally located between the LIE (to the north), Crooked Hill Road
and the Sagtikos State Parkway (to the east), the Heartland Business Center (to the south), and
the Town of Huntington boundary (to the west). An additional 87±-acre portion of the property
is located on the east side of the Sagtikos State Parkway, connected to the main site by
Community College Road, which passes over the Sagtikos State Parkway. New York State will
retain a portion of the existing hospital facilities generally in the center of the main (westerly)
portion of the overall Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center, as described above (see Figure 2-5).
The 23.59±-acre Gateway Area is also included in the proposed rezoning and redevelopment.
The Gateway Area consists of two areas, one on the west side of Crooked Hill Road abutting the
former Pilgrim property, and another on the east side of Crooked Hill Road bounded by a New
York State recharge basin on the north and the LIE/Sagtikos Parkway southbound ramp on the
east. An existing hotel is located in the southern portion of the Gateway Area (SCTM parcel
500-71-1-9.2). This hotel (the 111-room, 55,200±-square-foot Wingate Inn) and associated
facilities (situated on a 3.16±-acre parcel), although included within the 23.59±-acre Gateway
Area, would remain unchanged.
2.2 Brief History of the Property and summary of Existing Site Conditions
2-11
______________________________________________________________________________
Portions of the perimeter of the main property are wooded, particularly along the Sagtikos State
Parkway boundary, which has a wooded buffer of a width of as much as 700 feet along the
boundary between the subject property and the Sagtikos State Parkway. Along the northern
boundary, the existing cemetery (which is part of the project site) abuts the LIE South Service
Road, and the remainder of the northern boundary abuts industrial and commercial properties
along Crooked Hill Road. Along the western boundary, the property abuts a residential
neighborhood located in the Town of Huntington, and vacant wooded property mostly controlled
by New York State. The southerly boundary abuts the original sewage treatment plant
constructed to serve the Pilgrim State Psychiatric center, as well as industrial buildings located
within a portion of the Heartland Business Center.
The 87±-acre parcel on the east side of the Sagtikos State Parkway is somewhat less densely
developed, with a significant portion of the perimeter of the property being wooded and
individual trees interspersed throughout the site. This portion of the site is generally bordered by
the Sagtikos State Parkway to the west, Community College Road to the north, Crooked Hill
Road to the east, and a residential neighborhood the south.
2.2.2
Urban Renewal Plan (Islip Gateway Community Improvement Area)
As stated above, in conjunction with the subject Smart Growth initiative embodied in the
proposed PSPRD, the Town Board of the Town of Islip is pursuing the implementation of an
Urban Renewal Plan for a 23.59±-acre area along Crooked Hill Road, south of the LIE, and
proximate to the 452±-acre portion of the former Pilgrim site, to be known as the “Gateway
Area.” This area was defined in The Town of Islip report entitled Finding of Blight for the Islip
Gateway Community Improvement Area (hereinafter “Finding of Blight report”) (see
Appendix D). The Town of Islip is considering a condemnation process, so that portions of the
Gateway Area, as identified in the Finding of Blight report, can be redeveloped and the blighted
conditions can be eliminated. The applicants have offered to fund the condemnation proceedings
and to redevelop the Gateway Area in accordance with the proposed PSPRD zoning.
As
previously noted, the proposed Conceptual Master Plan, pursuant to the PSPRD, would
incorporate the entire 475.59 (475.6±) acres, which would be known collectively as Heartland
Town Square.
2.2 Brief History of the Property and summary of Existing Site Conditions
2-12
______________________________________________________________________________
The specific parcels included within the Gateway Area are noted in Section 2.1, above.
Discussion of the Gateway Area has been integrated into the discussion of the overall Heartland
Town Square development, where possible.
The former Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center property, as it existed at the time of its transfer to
the applicants, contained numerous multi-story buildings, including, but not limited to, physical
plant facilities on the west side of Sagtikos State Parkway, and a series of residential cottages
and buildings on the east side of Sagtikos State Parkway. The buildings and other facilities are
interconnected by a grid of roadways within the main parcel, which also provide access to a
number of open fields and yards located throughout the subject property. The internal road
network is connected to the surrounding area at a number of locations, including:
•
Community College Road through the southerly portion of the site;
•
Crooked Hill Road to the east;
•
Sagtikos State Parkway to the east; and
•
Commack Road to the west.
The buildings and cottages on the 87±-acre parcel situated to the east of Sagtikos State Parkway
are interconnected with a meandering roadway throughout the site, with the only connection to
the surrounding area at Community College Drive to the north. The parcels comprising the
Gateway Area consist of various commercial and industrial uses, including outdoor storage and
stockpiling of materials and landscape supplies, with access by way of Crooked Hill Road and
the South Service Road of the LIE.
Approximately 16.9 percent of the 452±-acre portion of the Heartland Town Square property
consists of impervious surfaces such as buildings, roads and parking areas. Approximately 39.8
percent of the site is wooded, with the remaining 43.3 percent being cleared, open fields, grass
areas and other landscaped areas such as the cemetery, as well as unvegetated areas such as an
existing excavated area in the northeast corner of the site (see Table 2-1).
2.2 Brief History of the Property and summary of Existing Site Conditions
2-15
______________________________________________________________________________
Table 2-1 - Existing Site Data: Heartland Town Square Property
Site Coverage
Acres Percent
Woodland
179.89± 39.80±
Other Vegetation 177.84± 39.35±
Cleared Land
3.95±
17.79±
Buildings
5.23±
23.62±
Sidewalk
2.86±
0.61±
Other Pavement
50.00± 11.06±
Total
452.00± 100.00±
Approximately 36.7 percent of the Gateway Area consists of impervious surfaces such as
buildings, roads and parking areas. None of the site is wooded, with the remaining 63.8 percent
is cleared, open fields, grass areas and other landscaped areas as well as unvegetated areas (see
Table 2-2).
Table 2-2- Existing Site Data: Gateway Area
Site Coverage
Acres Percent
Woodland
0.00±
0.00±
Other Vegetation 2.68± 11.40±
Cleared Land
12.37± 52.42±
Buildings
3.20± 13.60±
Sidewalk
0.03±
0.01±
Other Pavement
5.32± 22.54±
Total
23.6± 100.00
The overall site data are shown on Table 2-3:
Table 2-3 - Existing Site Data: Overall Property
Site Coverage
Acres Percent
Woodland
37.8±
179.89±
Other Vegetation 180.52±
38.0±
Cleared Land
6.4±
30.16±
Buildings
5.7±
26.82±
Sidewalk
0.1±
2.89±
Pavement
11.7±
55.32±
Total
475.6± 100.00±
2.2 Brief History of the Property and summary of Existing Site Conditions
2-16
______________________________________________________________________________
The site coverage breakdown was prepared for both the 452±-acre and 23.59±-acre portions of
the subject property to provide a general overview of the existing conditions of the overall
subject property. As previously noted, where feasible, discussion of the two segments of the
subject property is integrated.
The previously-adopted Final Scope, promulgated by the lead agency, the Town Board of the
Town of Islip, requested a discussion of potential hazardous materials and hazardous wastes in
this section of the DGEIS. Investigations regarding same were conducted by Professional
Services Industries, Inc. (“PSI”) a firm specializing in environmental consulting and
investigations, and detailed discussions regarding hazardous materials and hazardous wastes are
contained in Sections 3.1.2 and 4.1.2 of this DGEIS.
Existing site conditions of the overall 475.59±-acre subject property will be discussed within the
various topics within Section 3.0 of this DGEIS, including land, water, plants and animals,
aesthetic resources, open space and recreation, critical environmental areas, transportation,
energy, noise and odor, and growth and character of the community or neighborhood.
2.2.3
Brief Site History and Current Levels of Site Activity
History
According to the Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center website,2-1 the following is a history of the
facility and the site.
In 1927, New York Governor Alfred Smith, with public support, pressed the legislature
to appropriate money to obtain a minimum of 10,000 beds needed to relieve
overcrowding and treat the increasing numbers of people who would need treatment in a
mental institution.
Such a big hospital had to be located out in the country where land was cheap. It had to
be as nearly complete and self-sufficient as possible, generating its own electricity,
pumping its own water and growing some of its food. One thousand acres in Brentwood
was [sic] chosen for this to be another farm colony.
2-1
The history was taken from the website entitled http://www.omh.state.ny.us/omhweb/facilities/pgpc/facility).
2.2 Brief History of the Property and summary of Existing Site Conditions
2-17
______________________________________________________________________________
Pilgrim State Hospital was created by the Legislature in 1929 and named for Dr. Charles
W. Pilgrim, Commissioner of Mental Health in the early 1900s. The hospital officially
opened for the care and treatment of patients on 825 acres with 100 patients transferred
from Central Islip State Hospital on October 1, 1931. Nine months later, 2,018 patients
were hospitalized at Pilgrim. The census rose to its peak in 1954, with 13,875 patients.
Pilgrim was the largest facility of its kind in the world when it was built. The hospital
community was independent in that it had its own water works, electric light plant,
heating plant, sewage system, fire department, police department, courts, church, post
office, cemetery, laundry, store, amusement hall, athletic fields, greenhouses, and farm.
Over time, as increasing numbers of patients were able to be discharged and greater
support and services became available in the community, the need for such large
facilities to treat the mentally ill was diminished. Following the trend, Kings Park
Psychiatric Center and Central Islip Psychiatric Center were consolidated and relocated
to the Pilgrim campus in the Fall of 1996. The following Fall, those facilities were
merged into Pilgrim Psychiatric Center under one name. Today, Pilgrim reflects the
history and best practices for care and treatment of all three facilities and has become a
modern health care delivery system serving the mentally ill adults of Long Island.
For a different perspective on the history of the Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center, The Farm
Colonies: Caring for New York City’s Mentally Ill in Long Island’s State Hospitals by Leo
Polaski was consulted. The history of this site, in pertinent part, is described below:
[Pilgrim] was designed to house and treat 12,500 patients, making it then and forever the
largest psychiatric hospital in the world. One thousand acres were purchased in the
hamlet of Brentwood near the main line of the Long Island Railroad. With some ninety
years of experience behind them the State’s Department of Mental Hygiene specified a
site layout and building plans which would be architecturally unified, efficient and
therapeutically beneficial…The last of the initially planned buildings were completed in
1941, but several years earlier, the Federal Works Progress Administration, the WPA of
the 1930s recovery era, began constructing three additional ward buildings which would
raise Pilgrim’s capacity to 15,000 patients.
By the 1930’s when most of the buildings at Pilgrim were built, the State had realized
that the great increase in the number of patients being cared for in their mental hospitals
on Long Island could only be met by the erection of large structures. Such buildings
were efficient, because all similar services could be placed together and staffed with
fewer employees than if they were scattered around the campus; and economical,
because one large structure costs less to build than several smaller ones of the same
aggregate size; and effective, because having the capacity of the large buildings would
allow the State to finally catch up, they believed, with chronic overcrowding.
2.2 Brief History of the Property and summary of Existing Site Conditions
2-18
______________________________________________________________________________
Doctors and their families lived in a separate village on-premises, which was located
approximately one-half mile from the nearest hospital building. The site contained a railroad
spur, which connected the site with points west. The site contained a sewage disposal plant
where sewage was chemically treated and then siphoned out to 18 acres of sand filter beds.
There was a powerhouse supplying heat and light, and the energy for pumping water. The
property included a water tower with a 300,000-gallon capacity. Other facilities on the site were
a bakery, carpentry, plumbing and machine shops, a vegetable farm, horse barn, piggery,
firehouse, laundry and cemetery (which still exists in the northwest portion of the subject
property).
Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center also had a very extensive outdoor recreation area of
approximately 50 acres.
There were regulation-sized baseball fields, courts for tennis,
volleyball, handball and basketball. The recreation area also contained a roller skating rink, a
dirt running track, horseshoe pits, miniature golf course, picnic ground, gardens, toilet facilities,
etc.
As can be seen in the descriptions above, the Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center housed between
12,000 and 15,000 patients with an unknown number of staff (estimated at hundreds, if not
thousands). These numbers are similar to the population that is being proposed to reside and
work on-site in the proposed Heartland Town Square development. Furthermore, Pilgrim, like
many of the other psychiatric centers on Long Island, essentially operated as its own city. This
city-like, self-sufficient concept is the underlying premise of the Heartland Town Square
community.
According to the Long Island Oddities Website,2-2 as with other psychiatric centers deinstitutionalization became a trend after the 1970s, and by the 1980s, the populations of Kings
Park Psychiatric Center, Central Islip Psychiatric Center and Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center
were dwindling. Patients were rapidly discharged to community-based housing. Many patients
would wind up living on the streets. As the patient population dwindled, New York State decided
to consolidate the Long Island intuitions into one at Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center. By 1996,
all the patients remaining at Kings Park and Central Islip were transferred to Pilgrim.
2-2
http://www/lioddities.com/asylums
2.2 Brief History of the Property and summary of Existing Site Conditions
2-19
______________________________________________________________________________
Based upon declining patient population, New York State determined that major portions of the
Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center property were “surplus,” and were made available for sale. A
competitive bidding process was undertaken, which invited the private sector to purchase a 460acre parcel of New York State surplus land located at Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center. The
parcel was operated and controlled by the Office of Mental Health. New York State, through
Empire State Development and its privatization efforts, issued a Request for Proposal in January,
2000 to sell the property. Upon ultimate conclusion of the bidding process, the applicants won
the right to redevelopment the 452± acres that comprise the subject property.
Current Levels of Site Activity
Currently, the Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center functions on a parcel of approximately 200 acres
(which is not part of the subject property). According to the Office of Mental Health website:
Pilgrim Psychiatric Center provides a continuum of inpatient and outpatient psychiatric,
residential, and related services with approximately 700 inpatient beds and six outpatient
centers throughout Nassau and Suffolk County. The campus includes several residential
agencies on the grounds such as Central Nassau Guidance Center and Transitional
Services, CK Post, a residential treatment center operated by the New York State Office
of Alcohol and Substance Abuse, and Phoenix House, a residential treatment center for
those with substance abuse diagnosis. Development of the surrounding acreage has been
planned for the near future.
Inpatient Services are located in three modern complexes and offer a wide variety of
treatment options. The focus of treatment is rapid recovery with symptom reduction,
access to programs which develop skills to manage psychiatric illness and better function
in the community, and active discharge planning and support for individuals returning to
community living. Treatment is provided by multi-disciplinary teams of professional and
paraprofessional staff offered in individual and group format. On-ward treatment spaces
reflect state-of-the art design and a therapeutic environment. Each ward includes private
and semi-private bedroom areas and bathroom facilities, a living room, program room,
activity area, and dining room. Off-ward program and recreational space are available
within each building.
There are 28 inpatient wards including 2 admission wards, 6 geriatric wards (1
admission), and 20 Psychiatric Rehabilitation wards which include 3 behavioral
treatment wards.
2.2 Brief History of the Property and summary of Existing Site Conditions
2-20
______________________________________________________________________________
The subject property is not used for any activities, at present. All of the buildings that remain on
the 452±-acre portion of the site are abandoned. As discussed later in this DGEIS, most
buildings within the subject property have been demolished, and most of the remainder are
proposed to be demolished. Several of the buildings (especially on the east side of the Sagtikos
State Parkway) are proposed to remain as part of the Heartland Town Square community (see
Figure 2-6).
A discussion of the buildings to remain and their anticipated future uses is
contained in Section 4.5.4 of this DGEIS.
The level of activity in the Gateway Area differs from that of the main portion of the Heartland
Town Square site. Existing, active businesses, including a newly-constructed hotel, occupy the
Gateway Area. According to the Finding of Blight report prepared by the Town (discussed in
detail in Section 3.1.1 of this DGEIS), of the 23.59± acres, 10.14± acres (43 percent) are all or
largely outdoor storage. In addition, 11 of the 13 properties included within the Gateway Area
have minimal site improvements. The area includes a concentration of uses that do not conform
to the extant zoning regulations with regard to setbacks, parking and landscaping. Furthermore,
the uses create a perception and reality of blight within the Town.
2.3 Proposed Action
2.3
2.3.1
2-22
PROPOSED ACTION
Proposed Pilgrim State Planned Redevelopment District
A new planned development district has been proposed that would guide development within the
452±-acre portion of the Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center that is proposed to be redeveloped as
well as in the 23.59-acre Gateway Area. As outlined in the proposed zone, the intent of the
PSPRD is to encourage a mixed-use, “Smart Growth” redevelopment pursuant to a conceptual
master plan to be approved by the Town of Islip.
The conceptual master plan has been
developed based upon the standards set forth in the zoning district and specifies the general
locations of the proposed subdistricts, representative types and general locations of land uses,
and the general scale and intensity of development within each subdistrict. A copy of the
proposed PSPRD is included in Appendix A of this DGEIS.
The PSPRD is intended to foster Smart Growth redevelopment of the abandoned and/or unused,
formerly State-owned portions of the Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center and the Gateway Area.
The PSPRD is designed to allow for the creation of a new efficiently-designed, transportationoriented and served, multi-use community that includes residential facilities, as well as shopping
and employment opportunities for residents and non-residents of the community, that is
harmonious with surrounding districts and communities, and that minimizes adverse effects on
the Town and the surrounding community.
The Smart Growth approach to community
development facilitates community interaction, interdependence and neighborhood spirit and
encourages owners and occupants in the community to continually reinvest socially and
materially in the community, thereby promoting the economic viability of the community.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-23
The PSPRD is designed to result in a community of interconnected streets, laid out according to
a master plan, which allows for continuing flexibility in adapting to changing market conditions
during the anticipated long-term implementation of the development plan. The said community
has been designed to be socially and economically interconnected and to be pedestrian-friendly.
Moreover, the layout of the roadways, public spaces and uses in the community, as well as the
intended development of shared parking facilities, and the use of traffic management programs,
including shuttle buses for short trips to local employment venue and nearby commuter rail
stations, is intended to reduce the community’s dependence on automobiles and will, therefore,
minimize potential traffic impacts from the new community.
An important facet of the PSPRD is the ability to adapt specific development to market
conditions, given the size of the property and the 15+-year build-out. Therefore, it must be
understood that, given the long-term build-out and the scope of development of Heartland Town
Square, it is not possible to prepare and commit to precise site plans. Precise uses in any
particular area would be dependent upon various factors, the most significant of which is market
demand. Accordingly, a conceptual development plan has been prepared to represent the likely
development scenario, in accordance with the proposed PSPRD. Moreover, the conceptual
development plan that is evaluated herein represents maximum potential development. This
ensures a worst-case environmental analysis, pursuant to SEQRA.
The PSPRD sets forth the objectives and characteristics of the subdistricts proposed to be located
on the site.
Planned Redevelopment District – Town Center (PRD–TC): This is the proposed Town
Center subdistrict that is designed to accommodate a range of compatible land uses,
mixing employment opportunities with housing, retail, entertainment, civic and cultural
uses. The objective of this district is to create a pedestrian-friendly public infrastructure
that encourages community and business activity as well public places and spaces that
provide focus for community life, special events, etc.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-24
Planned Redevelopment District – Office (PRD-OF): The office district is intended to
allow predominantly office-campus development, but also accommodates business
support uses such as hotels, conference centers, retail stores, restaurants and rental
housing.
Planned Redevelopment District – Residential (PRD-RES): This subdistrict is intended to
be primarily developed with a mix of housing types, but also accommodates residential
support uses such as mixed-use business service centers, neighborhood shopping, day
care facilities, houses of worship and similar establishments that support the internal
needs of a residential community.
The proposed PSPRD zoning district sets forth the principal and accessory uses that are
permitted in each of the subdistricts as well as indicating the maximum height, minimum
setbacks and minimum open space required. The details of the requirements of each subdistrict
are contained in Appendix A of this DGEIS. The overall open space requirement for all the
subdistricts is 30 percent of the total land area.
The mechanisms for site plan, subdivision and special permit approval are set forth within the
proposed PSPRD zoning district. Although the Town Board of the Town of Islip must approve
the Conceptual Master Plan and any amendments thereto, the Planning Board of the Town of
Islip is the agency responsible for granting site plan, subdivision and special permit approval. In
making its decisions, the Planning Board must consider the general health, safety and welfare of
the Town, whether the uses are consistent with the approved Conceptual Master Plan and
whether the uses are in harmony with and would promote the general purposes and intent of the
PSPRD, among other things. During the site plan, subdivision and/or special permit review
process, landscaping and lighting must be evaluated by the Planning Board.
Thus, plans
detailing these components, must be submitted to the Planning Board. Permitted encroachments
on required setbacks are also listed in the PSPRD.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-25
Specific parking standards are also set forth within the PSPRD.
Since the Smart Growth
character and transportation-oriented design of the PSPRD reduces the need for on-site parking
for individual uses, standard on-site parking requirements for other zoning districts in the Town
would provide an overabundance of parking spaces and a reduction in the land available for open
space, public space, landscaping, streetscapes, etc.
Therefore, the PSPRD sets for a special
method of computing on-site parking needs. The Planning Board will evaluate the sufficiency of
the parking provided and may grant waivers to the requirements, if warranted.
Public hearing notification and Conceptual Master Plan amendment procedures are outlined in
the proposed PSPRD. The Conceptual Master Plan may only be amended upon approval by the
Town Board of the Town of Islip.
However, the modification of use mixes within each
subdistrict is not considered an amendment for the purposes of the PSPRD and may be approved
by the Planning Board in the course of site plan review. Pursuant to Section 280-a of New York
State Town Law, the PSPRD is declared an “open development area” wherein building permits
may be issued for the erection of structures to which access is given by right-of-way or
easement, upon such conditions or regulations as may be prescribed by the Planning Board.
2.3.2
Proposed Rezoning
The proposed action not only involves the creation of the PSPRD, but also includes the rezoning
of the 475.6±-acre subject property into the proposed PSPRD that was described in Section 2.3.1.
The area to be rezoned includes 365± acres to the west of the Sagtikos State Parkway (western
segment of former Pilgrim site) and 87± acres to the east of the Sagtikos State Parkway (eastern
segment of former Pilgrim site). The proposed action also includes the rezoning of parcels in the
23.6±-acre Gateway Area into the PSPRD.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-26
The larger portion of the former Pilgrim site to be rezoned and redeveloped (“western segment”),
which consists of SCTM parcels 0500-071.00-01.00-010.002 and 010.008, surrounds the Main
Campus of the Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center, which will remain in its current use (and is not
part of the area proposed to be redeveloped). The western segment is irregularly-shaped, and its
general boundaries are as follows: Sagtikos State Parkway to the east, the south service road of
the LIE and light industrial uses to the north, portions of the remaining Pilgrim State Psychiatric
Center and single-family residences to the west, and other portion of the remaining Pilgrim State
Psychiatric Center and the Heartland Business Center to the south. The existing 19.3-acre
cemetery located in the western segment of the subject property, south of the LIE, will be
preserved.
The “eastern segment” of the former Pilgrim site proposed to be rezoned (SCTM parcel 0500071.00-01.00-013.006) has the following general boundaries: Crooked Hill Road to the east,
Campus Road to the north, Sagtikos State Parkway to the west, and a wooded area and singlefamily residences to the south.
The Gateway Area proposed to be rezoned (SCTM parcels 500-71-1-1, 500-71-1-2, 500-71-1-3,
500-71-1-4 and 15, 500-71-1-5, 500-71-1-6, 500-71-1-7, 500-71-1-8.1, 8.2, 9.1, 500-71-1-9.2
and 500-71-1-14) consists of two areas, one on the west side of Crooked Hill Road abutting the
former Pilgrim property, and another on the east side of Crooked Hill Road bounded by a New
York State recharge basin on the north and the LIE/Sagtikos Parkway southbound ramp on the
east.
2.3.3
Smart Growth and Proposed Heartland Town Square Conceptual Master Plan2-3
Upon adoption of the PSPRD and the approval of the change of zone of the parcels described in
Section 2.3.2 into such zone, the subject property is proposed to be redeveloped into Heartland
Town Square (see Figure 2-7).
2-3
The Heartland Town Square Conceptual Master Plan also includes the Gateway Area.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-28
According to RTKL Associates, Inc. (hereinafter “RTKL”), the master planners of the proposed
development, the goal of the proposed redevelopment is to create a model for Smart Growth
community development in Suffolk County (see Appendix B for a report describing the
objectives of the Heartland Town Square community. Figures supporting this text are contained
herein and within Appendix B).
Such developments are designed to create an efficient,
transportation-served, multi-use environment that mixes employment, shopping, entertainment
and housing. At the core of the Smart Growth development strategy for Heartland Town Square
is the recognition that sharing resources is often smarter than duplicating resources. The
evolution of a more integrated and efficient community-based planning strategy opens up
significant opportunities for maximizing the resources of the community as a whole. The
efficiency that is created when all of a community’s assets are integrated has an impact on the
community’s physical, cultural, social, economic and organizational resources.
The Smart Growth development format yields a connected, safe, pedestrian-friendly environment
designed for walking instead of driving, facilitating community interaction and neighborliness.
The goal is not total elimination of car use, but rather, the elimination of the use of the car for
every daily trip. As a result, a connected community development of this type has lower levels
of automobile utilization, can employ shared parking arrangements and traffic management
programs such as shuttle buses for short local trips to work or connections to commuter rail
stations.
The guidelines herein are designed to foster the development of the Heartland Town Square as a
viable mixed-use community with a range of land uses including office, housing and retail. The
key to sustaining a mix of uses of this type is to employ design control over the scale and urban
form of each building regardless of use, and provide a flexible, gridded development framework
that can accommodate a range of building types. Unlike the typical suburban development
pattern where a separate “stand-alone” building form is the norm, in the Heartland Town Square,
the objective is to create an environment with visual continuity and a user-friendly public realm.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-29
This approach to community development encourages owners and occupants to continually
reinvest economically and emotionally in their community. It is this reinvestment that will make
Heartland Town Square a sustainable development, harmonious with its neighbors and
compatible with Smart Growth policy goals of the county.
Key Elements of the Plan
The 475.59±-acre framework plan is divided into four sub-areas known as “Development Units”
and an additional sub-area known as the Gateway Area. Each Development Unit (including the
Gateway Area) has a different land use mix and is geared to attract different segments of the
market. Three of the Development Units are located to the west of the Sagtikos State Parkway
and are connected by the central feature of the plan -- a circular boulevard.
The fourth
Development Unit is an 87±-acre tract located east of the Sagtikos State Parkway adjacent to the
Suffolk County Community College (“SCCC”) and connected back to the main portion of
Heartland Town Square along Campus Road. The circular boulevard serves two functions -first, it provides an internal collector street to disperse traffic in multiple directions, and second,
it’s curvilinear alignment sends a signal that it is more automobile dominant and, therefore,
different from the rectilinear geometry of the pedestrian-friendly street grid employed in each
Development Unit. The other portion of the development involves the Gateway Area. This
23.59±-acre tract, located on the east and west sides of Crooked Hill Road, south of the Long
Island Expressway would be connected to Development Unit #1, to the west, and Development
Unit #2, to the south, as explained below.
The urban form is created, in part, by the corridor street space framed by connected “street wall”
buildings, and in part, by the consistency of the street landscaping detail within the street space.
High quality street landscaping is an important feature for this type of urban neighborhood where
the public street space becomes, in effect, the place for the social interactions that builds a sense
of community.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-30
Development Program
The plan is subdivided into four primary Development Units: PRD-TC (Development Unit 1),
PRD-OF (Development Unit 2), PRD-RES (Development Unit 3), and PRD-RES (Development
Unit 4).
The Gateway Area would be seamlessly interconnected with Development Units #1
and #2. The subdistricts indicated herein are defined above. The Development Units and
Gateway Area are depicted in Figure 2-8. The existing, adjacent cemetery is not included as part
of any Development Unit. See Table 2-4 for a proposed build-out schedule, of the Development
Units, by phase. Section 2.5.2 of this DGEIS provides additional narrative and a graphic
depiction of each of the three proposed phases.
Development Unit #1 has an area of approximately 179.6 acres and is planned as a mixed-use
development focused around an open-air “Life Style” retail center. The development framework
is composed of the rectilinear street grid and a system of parks and public plazas. In effect, the
development pattern is seen as a modern interpretation of a traditional small town urban form.
The target development program includes: 775,900 square feet (“sf”) of retail, 2,450 residential
units, 80,000 sf of civic space, and 1,800,000 sf of office space.
Development Unit #2 has an area of approximately 88.4 acres and is also a mixed-use
development but with a much stronger emphasis on commercial development trading on its
proximity to the junction of the Sagtikos State Parkway and the LIE. The target development
program includes: 198,500 sf of retail, 1,450,000 sf of commercial space, and 1,500 residential
units.
Development Unit #3 has an area of approximately 87.1 acres and is planned as a traditional
neighborhood development with the emphasis on housing clustered around the adaptive reuse of
the existing power plant and workshops as a community arts center. The development program
includes a small amount of neighborhood support retail (10,000 sf), 2,650 residential units,
100,000 sf of commercial space and 25,000 sf of civic uses.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-31
Development Unit #4 has an area of approximately 79.9 acres and is also planned as a traditional
neighborhood development with an emphasis on housing. The plan is focused around a central
village green that is the centerpiece of an existing cluster of historic houses and cottages that
housed the hospital staff. The target development program includes 2,400 residential units, and
15,600 sf of neighborhood supporting retail uses.
Gateway Area is approximately 23.59 acres in size and is planned to contain a mix of office,
retail and residential uses in the character as the other Development Units within Heartland
Town Square. The program for this area includes 800,000 sf of office development, 30,000 sf of
retail development and 130 residential units.
The existing 111-room hotel would remain.
Parking would generally be located within several parking garages.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-32
Table 2-4 - Proposed Development Build-Out Schedule
Development
Unit #1
Development
Unit #2
Development
Unit #3
Development
Unit #4
Gateway
Area2-4
Total Project
2-4
Use
Office SF
Retail SF
Civic SF
Residential
Units
Office SF
Retail SF
Civic SF
Residential
Units
Office SF
Retail SF
Civic SF
Residential
Units
Office SF
Retail SF
Civic SF
Residential
Units
Office SF
Retail SF
Civic SF
Residential
Units
Office SF
Retail SF
Civic SF
Residential
Units
Phase
I (Years 1 - 5) II (Years 6 - 10) III (Years 11 - 15) Total
500,000
990,000
310,000 1,800,000
440,000
240,000
95,900
775,900
80,000
0
0
80,000
2,450
0
0
2,450
100,000
120,000
0
817,500
40,000
0
532,500
38,500
0
1,450,000
198,500
0
1,050
200
250
1,500
0
0
25,000
50,000
10,000
0
50,000
0
0
100,000
10,000
25,000
0
1,050
1,600
2,650
0
0
0
0
15,600
0
0
0
0
0
15,600
0
0
2,000
400
2,400
0
0
0
400,000
30,000
0
400,000
0
0
800,000
30,000
0
0
130
0
130
600,000
560,000
105,000
2,257,500
335,600
0
1,292,500
134,400
0
4,150,000
1,030,000
105,000
3,500
3,380
2,250
9,130
The square footage of the existing Wingate Inn (55,236± square feet) is not included in the Gateway Area figures
or the overall total square footage as it is already built and there will be no change to such hotel.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-34
Mix of Housing Unit Types
The projected mix of studio, one-bedroom and two-bedroom apartments will have a significant
impact on the size of the resident population at Heartland Town Square as well as the number of
school-aged children likely to be generated. Of the 9,130 units planned for Heartland Town
Square, and based upon a request by the Town that the proposed action include owner-occupied
units, 8,217 (90 percent) would be rental units and 913 (10 percent) would be owner-occupied
units. Of the overall units, approximately five percent will be studio lofts, 25± percent will be
one-bedroom units, 65± percent will be two-bedroom units, and approximately five percent will
be two-bedroom units plus a den. This mix will apply in all three phases of the proposed
development.
Table 2-5, below, presents the types of residential units proposed within each Development Unit,
and the corresponding phase of development during which these units would be constructed.
Note that Phase I would proceed through years one through five of site development; Phase II
would proceed through years six through ten of site development; and Phase III would proceed
through years 11 through 15 of site development. The Development Typologies section below
discusses the types of housing structures in which these units would be located.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-35
Table 2-5 - Mix of Housing Types
Development
Unit #
1
2
3
4
Gateway
Area
Total
Development
Apartment
Size
Studio Loft
One-Bedroom
Two Bedroom
Two
Bedroom/Den
Subtotal
Studio Loft
One-Bedroom
Two Bedroom
Two
Bedroom/Den
Subtotal
Studio Loft
One-Bedroom
Two Bedroom
Two
Bedroom/Den
Subtotal
Studio Loft
One-Bedroom
Two Bedroom
Two
Bedroom/Den
Subtotal
Studio Loft
One-Bedroom
Two Bedroom
Two
Bedroom/Den
Subtotal
Studio Loft
One-Bedroom
Two Bedroom
Two
Bedroom/Den
Total
No. of Units,
Phase I
(Years 1 - 5)
120
720
1,490
120
No. of Units,
Phase II
(Years 6-10)
0
0
0
0
No. of Units,
Phase III
(Years 11 -15)
0
0
0
0
Total
No. of
Units
120
720
1,490
120
2,450
50
300
650
50
0
10
50
130
10
0
13
62
162
13
2,450
73
412
942
73
1,050
0
0
0
0
200
50
300
650
50
250
80
400
1,040
80
1,500
130
700
1690
130
0
0
0
0
0
1,050
100
500
1,300
100
1,600
20
100
260
20
2,650
120
600
1,560
120
0
0
0
0
0
2,000
6
40
78
6
400
0
0
0
0
2,400
6
40
78
6
0
170
1,020
2,140
170
130
166
890
2,158
166
0
113
562
1,462
113
130
449
2,472
5,760
449
3,500
3,380
2,250
9,130
2.3 Proposed Action
2-36
The applicants have committed to providing workforce housing units as part of this development.
A total of 20 percent of the rental units to be developed (i.e., 1,643 units) will be set aside as
workforce housing. A total of 90 percent of the units would be rental units and 10 percent would
be ownership units.
Twenty percent of the rental units are proposed to be workforce (affordable) units, as defined by
the Town of Islip. It was assumed that the 20 percent would be across all rental unit types.
Therefore, the breakdown of affordable units would be: 82 studios; 411 one-bedroom units;
1,068 two-bedroom units; and 82 two-bedroom with den units for a total of 1,643 affordable
units.
The remaining 6,574 rental units would be market rate (see Table 2-6).
condominium units would all be market rate (see Table 2-7).
Table 2-6 - Estimated Monthly Rent at Base Year by Unit Type
Market Rate Rental Units
Studio Loft Apartments
One Bedroom Apartments
Two Bedroom Apartments
Two Bedroom Apartments + Den
Total
Affordable Rental Units
Studio Loft Apartments
One Bedroom Apartments
Two Bedroom Apartments
Two Bedroom Apartments + Den
Total
Number
329
1,644
4,272
329
6,574
Base Year
Monthly Rent
$990
$1,210
$1,980
$2,530
--
82
411
1,068
82
1,643
$821
$938
$1,056
$1,144
--
Table 2-7 - Estimated Initial Sales Price by Unit Type
Condominium Units
Studio Loft Apartments
One Bedroom Apartments
Two Bedroom Apartments
Two Bedroom + Den Apartments
Total
Number
46
228
593
46
913
Sales Price
$200,000
$240,000
$400,000
$480,000
--
The 913
2.3 Proposed Action
2-37
Mix of Non-Residential Uses
The subsection of this DGEIS entitled Development Program discusses the proposed
development units and the locations where the residential and non-residential uses are proposed
to be located within the subject property. Heartland Town Square will include approximately
one million square feet of quality retail space. Approximately 905,000 sf of this would be
configured as part of a “lifestyle center.” Lifestyle centers are upscale, open-air shopping malls
roughly one-third the size of the traditional mall. Two common features of lifestyle centers are
their convenient layouts and the lack of a department store. They typically consist of between
150,000 and 500,000 sf of leaseable retail area. They feature upscale architecture and include
specialty retailers and restaurants such as J. Crew, Ann Taylor, Victoria’s Secret, Talbot’s,
Abercrombie & Fitch, Williams-Sonoma and the Cheesecake Factory. The parking spaces
within a lifestyle center are usually steps from the retailers’ door. Sales generated by lifestyle
centers can be as much as $400 to $500 per square foot, significantly higher than sales generated
by regional malls, which average $330 per square foot for non-anchor tenants. Lifestyle centers
are particularly attractive to shoppers who dislike enclosed malls.
Approximately 20,000 sf of retail space would be developed within the residential communities
of Heartland Town Square as neighborhood support retail use. The remaining 105,000 sf of
retail use would be developed within the office/commercial portion of the development to
support the offices and the 1,500 residential units within this area.
As conceived, it is assumed that 870,000 sf of the retail space would be categorized as general
retail space, 100,000 sf would be restaurants, and 60,000 sf would be cinema.
The office buildings planned for Heartland Town Square will add approximately 3.8 million sf
3,000,000 sf of Class “A” office space to Long Island’s Class “A” inventory. It has been
assumed that 30,000 sf of the total office space would be medical office use.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-38
One segment of Long Island’s hotel market remains underserved. There is a recognized shortage
of “destination hotels,”2-5 defined as hotels that will be used primarily by the complexes in which
they are located, on Long Island.
The proposed 240,000-square-foot, 250-room hotel at
Heartland Town Square would be one such destination hotel. This type of hotel would be
different from the existing Wingate Inn, located in the Gateway Area.
In addition, the development would include 105,000 square feet of civic space.
Development Typologies
One of the goals of the Heartland Town Square development is to create a model for Smart
Growth community development in Suffolk County. Such developments are designed to create
an efficient, transportation served, multi-use environment that mixes employment, shopping and
housing. Each of the subdistricts of the Heartland Town Square have different land use mixes to
attract different segments of the market. The housing strategy offers a varied mix of affordable,
middle income and luxury living choices. The town center offers varied retail and commercial
options. The following diagram shows the distribution of various development typologies
throughout Heartland Town Square (see Figure 2-9).
2-5
According to the project economist, “destination hotels” are defined as hotels that will be used primarily by the
complexes in which they are located.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-40
High-rise Living
Heartland Town Square offers a limited number of high-rise apartment and condominium
towers. High-rise typology provides a convenient opportunity for middle-income apartments as
well as high-end luxury living. Supporting amenities would include in house fitness facilities,
basement, podium2-6 or separate structured parking, valet or laundry service, 24-hour security
service, etc.
Mid-rise Living
The availability of affordable, quality housing is inextricably connected to economic
development and the ultimate health of the community. While the Town of Islip must ensure
affordable housing, it must also maintain housing choices for middle and upper income families
and individuals. To accomplish this, housing in all styles and at all price points must be
available. Diversity of housing allows people of different ages, cultures, races and incomes to
live in each neighborhood.
The majority of the housing program for Heartland Town Square is comprised of mid-rise,
medium-density apartment and condominium units. They would comprise of both rental and forsale units. Covered parking would be provided in the form of accompanied structured parking or
podium parking.
2-6
Podium parking typically provides a single level of parking for a building that is situated above. Podium parking
usually involves a building being situated directly on top of a parking structure or covered parking area that is
above-ground or partially buried.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-41
Low-rise Living
Townhomes and low-rise multifamily housing clustered around courtyards and neighborhood
parks constitute the low-rise typology concentrated mainly in the Development Units 3 and 4.
Varieties of individual, stacked and clustered townhomes are offered both as rental and for-sale
units. This also includes adaptive reuse of the power plant and warehouses around it as a
community art center and live-work units. This typology also includes various types of senior
housing.
Office High-rise
High-rise office towers are concentrated in Development Unit 2 and are integrated with mid-rise
office and mixed-use typology in the form of a commercial village.
Office Mid-rise
Mid-rise office buildings are integrated with mixed-use typology and high-rise office towers in
Development Unit 2. Parking is provided as basement, podium or separate structured parking.
Various retail uses could be integrated in the mid-rise office buildings at the street level.
Civic
The civic buildings in Heartland Town Square Town Center provide social, interactive public
spaces that become the “Central Place” of the development. Every urban setting needs unique
features that make it like no other place. These places derive character and meaning from local
sources: local history, local materials, local climate, and local culture.
Civic spaces in Heartland Town Square include cultural, leisure, and educational activities like a
civic space, as part of the Town Center. The existing power plant in the Development Unit 3
with the warehouse spaces provides a unique opportunity for an adaptive reuse of the building as
an exhibition space.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-42
Retail
Most of the retail activity in Heartland Town Square is concentrated in the town center. The
retail typology is designed with an aim of making “people places” and activating street life. It is
planned in the form of main street retail, neighborhood stores, event retail spaces like fairs,
farmer’s market, plazas, anchor buildings and sidewalk cafes.
The retail development is planned as a mixed-land-use district. The essential idea is to create a
development pattern that avoids the fragmented look of the large “box” building sitting in the sea
of parking. Instead, the emphasis is on visual continuity taking the form of “street wall”
buildings, connecting walls and consistent street planting, and pedestrian-friendly street and
sidewalk infrastructure.
A conceptual development plan has been prepared showing the location, sizes and heights of the
various development types that are described throughout this section (see Figure 2-10, below and
in Appendix X of this DGEIS.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-44
Development Unit #1 - the Town Center - is the focal point of the Heartland Town Square
development.
It contains a complete mix of uses including hotels, offices, civic uses and
residential uses. At the center of this Development Unit is the retail center and “lifestyle”
complex. This area is generally surrounded by residential development, with the proposed hotel
to the northwest and southwest, and commercial development to the northeast and southeast,
although there is no clear separation among the uses. The retail uses are generally one story,
going up to three stories in a few instances. The office/commercial development is contained
within buildings ranging from four to 16 stories, with the majority in the four-to-six-story range.
The proposed hotel is shown at six stories in height. The residential development is a mixture of
townhouses, multi-story buildings and high rises. Residential buildings range from three-story
townhouses to eight-story high-rise apartment buildings. The proposed civic uses are located
within one to two-story buildings. The majority of the parking is contained within three-to-fourstory parking garages with a relatively minimal amount of surface parking.
The uses in Development Unit #2 are also mixed, but not to the extent they are in Development
Unit #1.
The northern portion of Development Unit #2 is generally non-residential, relating
more toward the Town Center in Development Unit #1, while the uses in the southern portion are
generally residential, relating more to Development Unit #3 to the south. The northern portion
of Development Unit #2 is essentially a continuation of the retail and commercial portion of the
Town Center with buildings ranging from one-to-four stories. There is a residential component
in this area as well containing mid-rise to high-rise apartments. At the middle section of
Development Unit #2, which forms one of the main gateways into the site (direct entrance from
the Sagtikos State Parkway), is a proposed commercial complex with buildings ranging from
four to 20 stories. Several small civic uses are contained within this entry area. To the south of
this area is a residential community containing a variety of residential units from three-story
townhouses to an eight-story apartment building. There is a small amount of commercial
development at the southern extent of Development Unit #2.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-45
Development Unit #3 is located at the southernmost portion of the western parcel.
This
Development Unit is almost exclusively residential, comprising existing structures as well as
new townhouses and multi-family buildings. These new residential structures are all mid-rise
extending from two-to-four stories in height. A small amount of commercial development
located in the northern section of this development unit is related more to the commercial
buildings in Development Unit #2.
It is also proposed that the existing power plant in
Development Unit #3 be adaptively reused as civic space.
Development Unit #4, which is geographically separated from the other development units, is a
residential neighborhood with some neighborhood support retail.
Several of the existing
buildings would be retained for residential use and the new units would be situated in a variety of
building types ranging from townhomes to high-rise apartment buildings. The height of such
structures ranges from two-to-ten stories in height. Furthermore, the support retail would be
contained within buildings of two-to-three stories in height.
The Gateway Area, which is located adjacent to Development Unit #s 1 and 2, is programmed as
a mixed-use area, with an emphasis on office development.
residences and associated supporting retail.
In addition, there would be 130
The existing 111-room, five-story Wingate Inn
hotel would also remain within the Gateway Area. The office space would be located within sixstory buildings, while the residential structures would be three stories. The support retail would
be contained within one-story buildings.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-46
Table 2-8 indicates the proposed conditions after the full build-out of the Heartland Town
Square.
Table 2-8 - Site Data
Site Coverage
Existing
(Acres)
179.89±
180.52±
Percent
Proposed
(Acres)
35.52±
37.8±%
78.70±
38.0±%
Woodland
Other Vegetation
(including parkland and landscaping)
Cleared Land
30.16±
6.4±%
Buildings
26.82±
5.7±%
Sidewalks
2.89±
0.1±%
Pavement*
55.32± 55.32±%
475.6± 100.00%
Total
*Includes open spaces such as plazas and courtyards.
Percent
7.47±%
16.55±%
0.0±
0.0±
206.82±
43.49±%
49.91±
10.49±%
104.65±
22.00±%
475.6± 100.00±%
As noted in Section 2.3.1, it must be understood that, given the long-term build-out and the scope
of development of Heartland Town Square, it is not possible to prepare and commit to precise
site plans. Precise uses in any particular area would be dependent upon various factors, the most
significant of which is market demand. Accordingly, a conceptual development plan, on which
the above numbers are based, has been prepared to represent the likely development scenario, in
accordance with the proposed PSPRD. Moreover, the conceptual development plan that is
evaluated herein represents maximum potential development.
This ensures a worst-case
environmental analysis, pursuant to SEQRA.
Surrounding Land Uses and Roadway/Highway Network
This section provides a brief summary of the surrounding land uses and roadway/highway
network. More detailed information regarding these topics is included in Sections 3.1 and 3.8 of
this DGEIS, respectively.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-47
Land Uses
The land uses located in the immediate vicinity of the subject property are listed below:
North:
Just north of the northern property line is the South Service Road of the LIE
followed by the Expressway itself. On the north side of the LIE is the North
Service Road followed by several commercial uses including a hotel, gasoline
station, multiplex cinema and home improvement stores.
South:
South of the subject property is the Heartland Industrial Park and other industrial
uses as well as residential development, which is located to the southeast. Long
Island Rail Road (“LIRR”) tracks followed by Pine Aire Drive, with a mix of
industrial and commercial uses as well as limited residential development, are
situated south of the industrial areas.
East:
To the east of the former Pilgrim portion of the subject property is Crooked Hill
Road, which contains a mix of commercial and industrial uses. East of the
Crooked Hill Road properties (within the Gateway Area) is the Sagtikos Parkway.
East of the smaller portion of the former Pilgrim site (on the east side of the
Sagtikos Parkway) is the SCCC campus, Brentwood State Park and single-family
residential development.
West:
West of the subject property are remaining portions of the Pilgrim State
Psychiatric Center, the Edgewood Preserve (containing Oak Brush Plains), and
single-family residential development predominantly to the west of Commack
Road.
Roadway/Highway Network
The subject property has access points along Commack Road (Suffolk County Route 4), Crooked
Hill Road (Suffolk County Route 13), Campus Road, the LIE South Service Road and Sagtikos
State Parkway. The Sagtikos State Parkway is a restricted highway prohibiting truck traffic.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-48
The principal roadways are briefly described below.
Long Island Expressway (I-495) – The LIE is an east-west limited access Interstate facility with
three general use lanes and one High Occupancy Vehicle (“HOV”) lane in each direction. In the
vicinity of the project, the flanking service roads perform as collector-distributor roadways
facilitating the movement of vehicles to and from the LIE and the intersecting Sagtikos State
Parkway. The LIE is under the jurisdiction of the New York State Department of Transportation
(“NYSDOT”) and has a posted speed limit of 55 miles per hour (“MPH”).
Sagtikos State Parkway – The Sagtikos State Parkway is a north-south limited access parkway
that prohibits trucks and commercial vehicles. In the vicinity of the project, there are four lanes
(two in each direction) with a center median. There is direct access between the Pilgrim property
and southbound Sagtikos State Parkway. The Sagtikos State Parkway is under the jurisdiction of
the NYSDOT and has a posted speed limit of 55 MPH.
Commack Road (Suffolk County Route 4) – Commack Road travels in a north-south direction on
the west side of Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center. Approaching the LIE from the south,
Commack Road is a four-lane roadway (two lanes in each direction). South of that short section
near the LIE, Commack Road is a two-lane roadway (one lane in each direction). South of the
Oak Brush Plains Preserve, Commack Road widens to four lanes (two lanes in each direction).
The posted speed limit is 40 MPH. Commack Road is under the jurisdiction of Suffolk County
and is designated as CR 4.
Crooked Hill Road (Suffolk County Route 13) – Crooked Hill Road, on the east side of Pilgrim
State Psychiatric Center is a four-lane roadway (two lanes in each direction) with a flush median.
It runs in a northwest to southeast direction connecting Commack Road with Wicks Road
(Suffolk County Route 7). North of the bridge over Sagtikos State Parkway, it narrows to two
lanes. The intersection of Crooked Hill Road and the Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center access at
Campus Road opposite Community College Drive (Suffolk County Route 106) is signalized. The
posted speed limit is 40 MPH. Crooked Hill Road is under the jurisdiction of Suffolk County and
is designated as CR 13.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-49
Campus Road – Campus Road is a two-lane roadway and the westerly extension of Community
College Drive (CR 106) west of Crooked Hill Road. It provides access to the eastern portion of
the Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center property via Crooked Hill Road and an exit ramp from the
northbound Sagtikos State Parkway. Campus Road provides access to the still active portion of
Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center. In addition, the Northern State Parkway, a major east-west
highway, is located 1.25± miles north of the subject property and the Southern State Parkway,
the other major east-west highway is situated 3.5± miles south of the subject property.
Traffic and Circulation Plan including Roadway Typologies
The internal circulation plan will accommodate vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists. Parking,
loading, bus and shuttle stops, and building access provisions are also an integral part of the
traffic and circulation plan (see Figure 2-11 and Figure 2-12).
The collector ring road is the most prominent feature of the internal circulation plan. All the
major external access points connect to the ring road. The ring road will have two or more lanes
in each direction, separated by a wide median. Roundabouts, rather than traffic signals, are
planned at some of the key internal intersections.
Roadways inside the ring road will have no more than one lane in each direction, and sidewalks
for pedestrians on both sides. Curbside parallel parking is included on these internal roads.
Traffic calming features, such as raised crosswalks, raised intersections, and curb bump outs,
will be incorporated into the streetscape, especially in the pedestrian intensive Town Center core
area, where fifteen-foot-wide sidewalks will be the norm.
Parking in the Town Center will be provided for by a mixture of parking structures and at-grade
lots. On-street parking in this area will primarily be short term. Delivery access to buildings
will be via a separate class of secondary roadways. These access roadways will not have
curbside parking and by design and usage will prohibit or discourage through traffic.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-50
In the primarily residential areas outside the Town Center, roadways will also have not more
than one lane in each direction. Five-foot sidewalks with five-foot setbacks and additional traffic
calming features, such as chicanes and chokers, in addition to those incorporated in the Town
Center, will be included to extend the pedestrian-friendly streetscape throughout the project.
Grading and Landscaping
The nature and scope of the development will necessitate substantial regrading of the site in
order to provide for proper design of the roads, parking areas and building areas. As the site is
currently mostly developed, there are few areas of significant slope that will be disturbed. In
areas where existing vegetation can be preserved, construction fence will be erected to delineate
the clearing limits and protect wooded areas to remain. Slopes in graded areas will generally
conform to Town development standards, i.e., one percent minimum and five percent maximum
in paved areas, and a maximum slope for disturbed areas of 1:3.
All disturbed areas that are not planned to be part of the buildings, roadways or other paved
surfaces will be landscaped in an appropriate manner. Parks, yards and other softscape areas (as
defined in Section 4.6.1 of this DGEIS) will be landscaped with native plant materials, and lawn
areas will be irrigated to ensure that they thrive. Buffers and perimeter-disturbed areas will be
revegetated with native materials and tree species to enhance wooded buffers around the
perimeter of the site.
A list of native species proposed to be used in the ultimate landscaping of the site is included in
Appendix C of this DGEIS.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-53
Utilities and Infrastructure
Based on survey information and visual inspection by Barrett, Bonacci & Van Weele, PC
(“BBVPC”), the site infrastructure consists of a network of roads and utilities dedicated to access
and service to the former hospital. Geographic Information System (“GIS”) information provided
by New York State and information provided by New York State facilities personnel indicate
that the site is serviced by a network of utilities, some originating from public facilities
surrounding the site (such as electric, telephone and water). The description of utilities provided
by BBVPC follows:
Electricity
The overall Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center site is served by an interconnected electric service
network that originates at a Long Island Power Authority (“LIPA”) substation located
approximately 1,600 feet to the southwest of the property, according to BBVPC. The
interconnected electric network includes the portion of the subject property situated on the west
side of Sagtikos State Parkway as well as the smaller portion of the property on the east side of
the Sagtikos State Parkway (see Figure 2-13).
The properties along Crooked Hill Road
(comprising the Gateway Area) are served from the existing overhead utility lines along Crooked
Hill Road.
It is anticipated that, with the exception of the electric service to the remaining portion of the
Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center site to be maintained by New York State, all existing electric
lines would be removed or abandoned, and a new network of underground electrical facilities
would be designed and installed for the new development. It is assumed that the existing
substation (off site) would remain. Improvements required at the substation will be determined
by the operator. Where necessary, easements would be provided to the utility operator for access
in private roads. In addition to electric service, local providers of natural gas may decide to
provide service to the area.
Additional discussions regarding energy are included in Sections 4.9 and 10.0 of this DGEIS.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-54
Natural Gas
The properties within the Gateway Area have access to an existing gas main within Crooked Hill
Road. There are KeySpan/National Grid natural gas mains located beneath the Pilgrim site that
are adequate for use by Heartland Town Square should it be decided that natural gas would be
used in the development. No such decision has yet been made.
Since the time of preparation of the initial DEIS, the applicants have consulted with
KeySpan/National Grid. KeySpan/National Grid has indicated, in correspondence dated March
2, 2007 (copy annexed hereto as Appendix “U”), that natural gas would be available to serve the
proposed development.
It must be understood, however, that the proposed build-out of the project is expected to take
place over a 15+-year period. Moreover, the applicants respectfully submit that it is not feasible
to design each building and to determine the source of heat for each building during this
environmental review process. It is expected that the buildings on the site would be heated by
either natural gas or by oil heat. If the buildings are heated using oil, the oil would be stored in
either above-ground or underground tanks installed and operated in accordance with Article 12
of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code to ensure protection of groundwater.
Energy Conservation
With respect to energy conservation, the applicants, as evidenced in Appendix “T,” have
consulted with LIPA, and LIPA has indicated that it will work with the applicants to ensure that
the development is energy efficient. However, as indicated above, the applicants respectfully
submit that it is not feasible to determine, at this juncture, given a 15+-year projected build-out,
the specific energy-conservation measures that will be incorporated into each building. The
applicants are, however, committed to constructing buildings that are energy efficient and will
work with LIPA and KeySpan/National Grid to identify and implement appropriate energyconservation measures.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-56
Telephone
New York State GIS mapping indicates a complete network of telephone cable throughout the
subject property, according to BBVPC. According to the mapping, the subject property appears
to be connected to a telephone manhole in the Sagtikos State Parkway median.
Existing
overhead lines serve the properties along Crooked Hill Road within the Gateway Area.
It is anticipated that all existing telephone lines will be removed or abandoned, and a new
network of underground telephone facilities will be designed and installed for the new
development. In addition, the development will be provided with the necessary cable TV and
other telecommunications facilities typically provided in new developments. Where necessary,
easements will be provided to the utility operator for access in private roads.
Water Supply
According to BBVPC, the subject property is served by an interconnected water distribution
system that is fed by multiple connections to the public water supply. According to available
mapping, the site water distribution system is connected to the Suffolk County Water Authority
(“SCWA”) distribution system in two locations. Separate 16-inch and 12-inch water mains (in
easements owned by the SCWA) feed the main distribution system at the site of the original
power plant at the southerly end of the subject property. The 12-inch water main continues east
from the power plant (in an easement) across the Sagtikos State Parkway, where it supplies the
portion of the subject property east of the Sagtikos State Parkway. In addition, the internal
distribution system provides another connection across the Sagtikos State Parkway to the
abandoned facilities on the east side of the Sagtikos State Parkway, completing a looped system
and creating a second source of supply.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-57
The second connection to the SCWA supply occurs at the northeast corner of the subject
property, at the access to Crooked Hill Road, where a 12-inch water main enters the subject
property. In addition to the SCWA connections, mapping indicates a connection with the Dix
Hills Water District in the northwest corner of the site, at Commack Road. The District engineer
has indicated that the connection to the Dix Hills Water District is an emergency connection that
is normally closed. As is the practice among the water suppliers, BBVPC anticipates that this
emergency connection would remain in place as part of the new water distribution system.
Records indicate that there is also an existing 12-inch SCWA water main on the west side of
Crooked Hill Road. The existing hotel in the Gateway Area is served from this main, and the
remainder of the Gateway Area would also have access to this existing water main.
There are a number of water supply well fields in the area according to Dvirka & Bartilucci
Consulting Engineers (hereinafter “D&B”). The majority of these wells are operated by the
SCWA. These include the well fields on Emjay Boulevard, Carroll Street, Plymouth Street,
Industry Court and Third Avenue. The Dix Hills Water Department operates wells north of the
project site.
The average water use for the project will be approximately 1.96 million gallons per day (“mgd”)
(including irrigation) after total build-out (15+ years).
additional information regarding the proposed water use.
See Section 4.2 of this DGEIS for
2.3 Proposed Action
2-58
Storm Drainage
The site infrastructure includes a storm drainage system that collects surface runoff from paved
areas and building roof areas and conveys the runoff by way of underground piping to a recharge
basin to the south of the portion of the subject property situated west of the Sagtikos State
Parkway. The underground piping varies in size and appears to generally follow the road
network until it converges at the recharge basin. Storm drain inlets located in paved areas and
along the roadways are connected to the main piping along the roadways.
The recharge basin is located on property to the south that is to remain in New York State
ownership, and consists of a small recharge basin and overflow piping which allows the recharge
basin to overflow onto vacant land to the east of the basin. Aerial photography (from various
dates) and field inspection indicate that the recharge basin has been holding water for a number
of years, and suggests that the overflow to the adjacent land occurs regularly during heavy
storms. It is assumed that the recharge basin was originally designed as a “dry” recharge basin,
as is the standard practice in this area, but has likely ceased to function as such due to siltation
and lack of maintenance.
The majority of the Gateway Area properties along Crooked Hill Road are unpaved, and no
drainage structures are apparent. Stormwater runoff on the properties that are improved with
building and paved parking areas is collected in on-site drywells.
Sanitary Sewers
According to investigations conducted by D&B, the existing sanitary sewers from the area
surrounding the proposed project include flows from SCCC Western Campus, The Wingate Inn
(the existing hotel in the Gateway Area) and the Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center. The existing
pumping station, located on the southeast corner of the Heartland Town Square property, pumps
the existing sanitary flows into a force main and ultimately to the Southwest Sewer District
(“SWSD”) #3 Bergen Point plant. With modifications, this pumping station would be used to
pump sanitary flows from the proposed project to the SWSD #3 Bergen Point plant.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-59
Total sanitary effluent flow for Heartland Town Square (including the Gateway Area) is
anticipated to be approximately 1.39 mgd, and the project received conceptual certification from
the Suffolk County Sewer Authority for 1.6 mgd. See Section 4.2 for additional discussion
regarding sewage disposal.
Other Utilities
The investigations conducted by BBVPC found that, as with other state hospital facilities on
Long Island, the buildings on the site were also interconnected by a network of utility tunnels
that served to transport hot water/steam heat to the various buildings from the power plant at the
southerly end of the main portion of the property. The network of tunnels extends from the
power plant to all of the main buildings, and crosses under the Sagtikos State Parkway to serve
the main buildings on the east side of the Sagtikos State Parkway. It is anticipated that the entire
tunnel network will be abandoned and removed, as necessary.
Conclusion
According to BBVPC, in general, given the age, condition and configuration of the existing
infrastructure, it is unlikely that any of the existing infrastructure on the subject site will be
retained. Although the existing water distribution system for the hospital was updated and
reconstructed in the recent past, the demands and configuration of the proposed development will
not match the existing water distribution system, and will need to be redesigned and
reconstructed. Likewise, the sewage collection system will not adequately match the
configuration of the proposed development and will also be reconstructed. The same will be true
of the telephone, electric and other utility services. The properties along Crooked Hill Road will
be redeveloped in similar fashion, as the existing facilities will not be adequate or properly
located for the proposed development.
2.3 Proposed Action
2-60
With respect to stormwater management, current Town and State requirements differ
significantly from those in effect at the time of construction of existing structures. BBVPC has
been advised by the Town Engineer that the project will generally be required to store the runoff
from an eight-inch rainfall. As will be discussed in more detail in Section 4.2.4 of this DGEIS,
this will be accomplished by the construction of a combination of recharge basins, drainage
reserve areas and subsurface drywells, interconnected by a collection system of catch basins,
manholes and piping. The eight-inch storage requirement imposed by the Town will also satisfy
the various provisions of the federal and state Phase II Stormwater regulations with respect to
volume and water quality controls.
As part of the stormwater management and site design, development plans will include detailed
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans. In accordance with Phase II Stormwater regulations, the
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (“SWPPP”) will include detailed erosion and sediment
control measures as well as details of compliance with the various water quality requirements.
Site Operations Upon Development
The site operations upon development have not yet been determined. It is anticipated that the
entire development would be private -- meaning that the roadways and stormwater management
facilities would not be dedicated to a public entity. Water would be provided by the SCWA,
sewage would be disposed of via connection to the municipal sewerage system, and electricity
and natural gas would be provided by LIPA/KeySpan/National Grid.
However, other
infrastructure would remain under control of private entities.
It is expected that the Heartland Town Square development would be built by a number of
different entities, each having control over site operations.
2.4 Purpose Need and Benefits of the Proposed Action
2.4
2-61
PURPOSE, NEED AND BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
The main purpose of the project is to redevelop an underutilized and surplus property that was
sold by the State of New York, as well as to redevelop an area that has been deemed a blight by
the Town Islip. As described in Section 2.2 of this DGEIS, after the consolidation of many of
the Long Island psychiatric hospitals and the de-institutionalization of patients from these
hospitals, patient populations continued to decline. The State of New York determined certain
properties to be “surplus,” and has sold many of these former psychiatric hospitals or portions
thereof to private parties. In the case of the subject property, New York State determined that
approximately two-thirds of the overall Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center property was surplus
and it was sold to the applicants in 2002.
A portion of the Pilgrim State Psychiatric Center
remains operational on a 200±-acre parcel adjacent to the subject property.
In redeveloping this significant property (which is advantageously situated in an area where
major east-west and north-south transportation corridors meet and where there is access to public
transportation in the form of the LIRR and bus service), the applicants have designed a
community that applies Smart Growth principles to achieve goals that have been touted by the
community, planners and government officials alike.
The Heartland Town Square community would concentrate development on a previouslydisturbed and developed site that once supported a population density of similar magnitude that
is proposed (see Section 2.2 of this DGEIS). The objectives of the applicants are to achieve
Smart Growth goals, provide the type of community that exists nowhere else on Long Island, and
to provide an activity center and a destination that is not dependent on the automobile. The
applicants have designed a community where people can live, work, shop and be entertained.
In developing the Heartland Town Square, the applicants would also be providing approximately
1,643 affordable workforce housing units, fulfilling a significant need as indicated by Suffolk
County, among other agencies (see Section 3.1.1 of this DGEIS).
2.5 Demolition and Construction Activities
2.5
2.5.1
2-62
DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES
Demolition
Twenty-five buildings on the subject property have been demolished, predominately between
2001 and 2004. Eight of the structures were client and staff residences located on the property
east of the Sagtikos State Parkway. More specifically, the following structures have been
demolished: Building Nos. 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 87, 88, 89,
90, 91, 92, 96 and 97.
The following buildings are slated for demolition, but are still extant:
Building Nos. 18, 22, 23, 24, 54, 62, 64 and 65. See Figure 3-4 for all the building numbers. A
schedule of the demolition of the extant structures cannot be determined at this time, as they are
dependent upon the completion of the SEQRA process and receipt of approvals, the timeframes
for which are not under the control of the applicants.
Based upon an inspection conducted by Freudenthal & Elkowitz Consulting Group, Inc. (“F&E”)
in 2005, the majority of the construction and demolition (“C&D”) debris associated with the
eight client and staff buildings has been removed. The foundations of the buildings’ basements
are still extant.
According to the property owner, all Town of Islip building demolition
requirements included in Code of the Town of Islip Section 68-30, were followed during the
demolition of these structures. Further, the property owner has indicated that all asbestoscontaining material (“ACM”) was abated and disposed of in accordance with prevailing New
York State Department of Labor (“NYSDOL”) regulations.
Based upon F&E’s 2005 site inspection, 17 buildings on the subject property located west of the
Sagtikos State Parkway and eight buildings on the east side were demolished between 2001 and
2005 (see Appendix G for a map showing the demolished buildings). The C&D, consisting of
bricks, concrete, re-bar and miscellaneous building-related debris, is typically present within the
respective footprint of the former buildings.
2.5 Demolition and Construction Activities
2-63
The ACM in each on-site building that has been demolished was removed in accordance with
NYSDOL regulations. The ACM was also abated in extant Building Nos. 58 and 61. All future
demolition work will also be conducted in accordance with NYSDOL requirements.
The ACM abatement activities were overseen by J.C. Broderick, Inc. Environmental Engineers
(“JCB”). The ACM typically consisted of thermal insulation, floor tile, mastic, etc. All of the
ACM was abated by an appropriately-certified contractor, with third party air monitoring
conducted by JCB, and air-monitoring and post-abatement samples analyzed by appropriatelycertified laboratories. The summary packages, which include all NYSDOL-required information
(e.g., disposal manifests, air monitoring analytical results, NYSDOL forms, etc.) are included in
Appendix G. All Town of Islip demolition requirements and NYSDOL ACM requirements were
reportedly followed in support of this action.
As part of the Heartland Town Square project, several extant buildings located on the parcel to
the west of the Sagtikos State Parkway will be demolished in accordance with prevailing
regulations. The demolition of the underground utility tunnels, where required for geotechnical
purposes, is included in this task. The extant buildings are all out-of-use and appear to be vacant.
Many of the buildings have broken windows and broken/missing doors, and access to same by
trespassers reportedly is a common occurrence. Some of the extant buildings are still equipped
with use-related infrastructure (e.g. hospital beds, furniture, etc.). In a few locations, F&E
observed that building interior infrastructure was removed from the buildings through doorways
and windows, and has been staged alongside buildings pending removal and disposal.
Although not strictly a demolition issue, the various amounts and types of debris observed to be
discarded at many locations across the entire Heartland Town Square property are discussed in
this section of the DGEIS. Much of this debris is obviously non-hazardous in nature and
includes, but is not limited to:
•
Household trash (e.g., toys, bicycles, clothing, etc.);
•
Tree limbs and stumps;
•
Landscaping debris (e.g., brush, lawn clippings, etc.); and
2.5 Demolition and Construction Activities
•
2-64
Empty beverage containers.
Some of the debris could be potentially hazardous in nature or contain hazardous/petroleumrelated contaminants, including, but not limited to:
•
Discarded cars in poor condition;
•
55-gallon drums of unknown contents;2-7
•
Various small containers containing, or formerly containing, oils, anti-freeze, pesticides,
etc.;
•
Out-of-service fuel oil aboveground storage tanks (“AST”) and various propane tanks;
•
Soil, sand and gravel of unknown origin; and
•
Other miscellaneous debris of unknown origin and/or use.
The potential impacts associated with the proposed demolition fall into two categories -- the
removal of the C&D debris associated with the previously-demolished buildings and the
demolition and removal of several extant buildings, underground utility tunnels (when required)
and their related contents. The C&D debris associated with the buildings located in the portion
of the site west of the Sagtikos State Parkway are located within their former footprints (see
Figure 2-6).
Previously-demolished Buildings
The primary potential impact related to the previously-demolished buildings located on the
Heartland Town Square property west of the Sagtikos State Parkway is the on-site handling,
transportation and use/disposal of the C&D. Probable impacts will include, but not be limited to:
•
The generation of nuisance odors, dust and noise, as the C&D is either processed on-site
for reuse or loaded onto trucks for transport and disposal off of the property;
2-7
Please note that none of the drums observed by F&E in 2005 exhibited visual evidence of leaking.
2.5 Demolition and Construction Activities
•
2-65
Traffic issues related to the trucks which would be required for C&D that is transported
off-site for eventual disposal; and
•
Hazardous materials issues in the event that an item of concern (e.g., transformers, ASTs,
generators, unabated ACM, etc.) is encountered during the removal of the C&D.
Extant Buildings
The primary potential impact related to the buildings scheduled for demolition located on the
Heartland Town Square property west of the Sagtikos State Parkway include those referenced
above. Additional probable impacts would include, but not be limited to:
•
The removal, transport and disposal of interior infrastructure;
•
The abatement of ACM; and
•
Public safety related to the demolition of the building shells.
Discarded Debris
Currently, there do not appear to be any clean-up activities related to the discarded debris
observed across the entire Heartland Town square property. As same would be removed as part
of the proposed project, no adverse impacts have been identified as associated with same.
2.5 Demolition and Construction Activities
2-66
Demolition-related Hazardous Materials and Interior Infrastructure
Prior to the demolition of the buildings, the interiors of same would be thoroughly inspected. All
interior infrastructure such as hospital beds, furniture, office equipment, lighting fixtures, etc.
would be removed, containerized and disposed of in accordance with prevailing regulations.
Any issues of environmental concern such as transformers and ASTs, either observed in the
extant buildings or encountered during the removal of C&D, would be identified and addressed
in accordance with prevailing regulations. Protocols to address issues that could reasonably be
expected to be encountered would be addressed in a Facility Closure Plan, as described in
Section 5.1.2 of this DGEIS.
C&D-related Issues
The project sponsor will conduct a feasibility study to evaluate the options for addressing
project-related C&D including:
•
Setting up a centralized facility to process (e.g., sort and crush) the C&D. Suitable
processed materials (e.g., recycled concrete aggregate [“RCA”]) could be utilized as road
base, excavation backfill material, etc., while non-suitable materials (e.g., adulterated
wood, non-ferrous metals, etc.) would be sorted, containerized and transported to an
appropriate disposal facility;
•
On-site sorting of all materials with various waste streams transported to appropriate
processing and/or disposal facilities;
•
Loading and bulk transporting all of the C&D to an off-site sorting, recycling and
disposal facility(s); and
•
A combination of the above based upon the characteristics of the C&D materials, and the
schedule-specific project requirements for processed materials.
2.5 Demolition and Construction Activities
2-67
Industry standards and best management practices (“BMPs”) will be followed to address:
•
Nuisance Dust – This would be addressed through dust-suppression BMPs including
wetting down surfaces, monitoring/adjusting work practices based upon wind direction,
monitoring, etc.;
•
Nuisance Odors – This would be addressed by not allowing organic wastes to stockpile,
by use of odor-suppressing compounds, etc.;
•
Nuisance Noise – This would be addressed though limiting construction hours to 7:00
AM to 8:00 PM, weekdays as required by Chapter 35 of the Islip Town Code, ensuring
that all equipment has functioning mufflers, etc.; and
•
Roadway Impacts – These would be addressed by ensuring that each area where trucks
are loaded has a designated staging area. Drivers/operators will be required to inspect
their trucks and secure/remove materials that may fall from the loaded beds and/or fall off
of tires or chassis. All of the trucks will be equipped with tarpaulins that will be used to
cover the load bed during transport. Further, trucks will not be allowed on the facility’s
public roadways during high-volume commuting periods.
Public Safety During Demolition Activities
Temporary construction fencing and warning signs will be utilized to ensure that unauthorized
persons do not enter the work area.
Discarded Debris
As Heartland Town Square is developed, any observed debris will be collected and transported
to and disposed of at an appropriate facility.
The protocols to address encountered
hazardous/petroleum materials (including associated impacted soils, if any), if encountered,
would be included in the Facility Closure Plan, described in Section 5.1.2 of this DGEIS.
2.5 Demolition and Construction Activities
2.5.2
2-68
Construction Phasing Strategy
The phasing strategy for Heartland Town Square is intended to promote balanced growth
throughout each Development Unit, and encourage each neighborhood to achieve a sense of
completion at each stage of development. According to the Consulting and Marketability Study
of Heartland Town Square (hereinafter “Marketability Study”) prepared by Metropolitan
Valuation Services, Inc. - Real Estate Consulting and Appraisal, dated November 28, 2003
(annexed as Appendix E of this DGEIS), the proposed residential development program can be
absorbed at a rate of approximately 600 units per year (based on a 15-year delivery schedule).2-8
This rate of absorption represent approximately 10.3 percent of the projected annual demand for
luxury residential housing within the 10-mile radius primary residential market area, and is based
on an annual growth in households earning in excess of $75,000 annually of approximately 5,806
households per year.
According to the Marketability Study, while there is a fair amount of retail competition within
the five-mile radius primary retail trade area, Heartland Town Square benefits from its proximity
to the LIE and Sagtikos State Parkway. In addition, Suffolk County, as a growing center of
business with a generally favorable demographic profile, also encourages retailers to regard it as
an important retailing market in Long Island. According to the Marketability Study, overall, the
immediate area is considered relatively stable with population growth remaining fairly strong
and the primary trade area classified as a middle-to-upper-middle income community.
Consequently, Heartland Town Square should be able to capture at least its fair share of the local
market due to its superior location. The Marketability Study estimates demand for supportable
retail space at approximately 450,000 sf today rising to approximately 500,000 sf by 2008.
2-8
This study did not consider the redevelopment of the Gateway Area.
2.5 Demolition and Construction Activities
2-69
According to the Marketability Study, the Long Island office market is one of the strongest
suburban office markets in the country. Absorption within Suffolk County as a whole averaged
approximately 62,000 sf per month during the fourth quarter of 2003. Assuming a strengthening
economy and the fact that a well-planned, mixed-use development captures more than its fair
share of its market (say 15 percent), the rate of absorption can be estimated at approximately
112,000 sf per year in the initial years of development. This absorption rate may accelerate in
later phases as the advantages and amenities of the mixed-use development are more fully
recognized and appreciated in the marketplace. However, actual absorption will be based upon
actual market demand at the time the development is constructed. The applicants will, as
necessary, modify the development schedule to address market demand.
The projected phasing schedule for the Heartland Town Square project is outlined below and is
shown in Figure 2-14 through Figure 2-16.
Phase One (I): Years 1 - 5
• 560,000 sf Retail
• 3,500 Housing units
• 600,000 sf Office
• 105,000 sf Civic space
Development in Phase I would be located mostly in Development Unit #1, with some
development occurring in the northern portion of Development Unit #2.
Phase Two (II): Years 5 - 10
• 3,380 Housing units
• 2,257,500 sf Office
• 335,600 sf Retail
2.5 Demolition and Construction Activities
2-73
This phase would build on the critical mass achieved in Phase I and will extend the residential
neighborhoods and mix of office/commercial uses adjacent to the Town Center. Additional
office and residential development would occur in Development Unit #2, and additional
residential development (with neighborhood retail) in Development Unit #3 would occur around
the existing power plant. Much of the Gateway Area would be developed in Phase II. All of
Development Unit #4 would be built out in Phase II.
Phase Three (III): Years 10 - 15
• 2,250 Housing units
• 1,292,500 sf Office
• 134,400 sf Retail
This phase would provide a mixture of uses to infill the remaining development parcels
throughout the subject property, including office campus development, additional residential
development and a smaller amount of infill retail development.
2.5.3
General Construction Sequencing
As described above, build-out is anticipated to occur in three phases over a 15-year period. A
description of general construction sequencing is provided below.
Certain aspects of the construction sequencing will be unique to each of the phases. However,
construction in each phase will follow a certain generic sequence, as follows:
1. Clearing and rough grading, including demolition and removal of any remaining
buildings, roads or other structures;
2. In conjunction with clearing and rough grading, installation of erosion control measures;
2.5 Demolition and Construction Activities
2-74
3. Relocation of any utilities that need to remain to serve the remaining State facilities (e.g.,
sanitary sewers, water mains);
4. Installation of remaining utility infrastructure necessary to serve the specific phase of
development, e.g., sanitary sewers, storm drainage, water mains, etc.;
5. Building construction;
6. Paving of roads, sidewalks and plaza areas; and
7. Landscaping.
2.6 Required Permits and Approvals
2.6
2-75
REQUIRED PERMITS AND APPROVALS
In order to implement the proposed action, the following permits and/or approvals are required:
Permits/Approvals Required
Agency
Adoption of PSPRD
Town of Islip Town Board
Change of Zone of 475.59± Acres of
Former Pilgrim State Psychiatric
Center Property and Gateway Area to PSPRD
Town of Islip Town Board
Approval of Conceptual Master Plan for
“Heartland Town Square”
Town of Islip Town Board
Adoption of Urban Renewal Plan
and Condemnation for Gateway Area
Town of Islip Town Board
Site Plan Approval
Town of Islip Planning Board
Subdivision Approval
Town of Islip Planning Board
Sanitary Disposal and Water Supply
Suffolk County Department of Health
Services
Sewer Connection
Suffolk County Sewer Agency
Suffolk County Department of Public Works
Public Water Connection
Suffolk County Water Authority
Curb Cuts/Highway Work Permits
Town of Islip Division of Traffic Safety
Suffolk County Department of Public Works
New York State Department of
Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
Referral
Suffolk County Planning Commission
Notification
Town of Babylon, Town of Huntington,
Town of Smithtown
J:\27815.00\DOCUMENT\REVISED DGEIS MARCH 2009 CHANGES ACCEPTED\SECTION 02.doc