Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017.12.21 Revised Draft DEIS ScopeDRAFT 1 12/21/17 900 King Street Redevelopment DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline 12/21/17 Introduction The Applicant proposes to redevelop the Project Site, located at 900 King Street in the Village of Rye Brook (the “Village”) (see Figure 1 and Figure 2). The Proposed Project would include removal of the existing, largely vacant, office building and surface parking lot and the construction of an age-restricted residential community consisting of approximately 160 one-, two-, and three-bedroom units within a three- and four-story Independent Living (IL) facility in the center of the Site; approximately 85 units of Assisted Living / Memory Care (AL) in a four- story structure in the northeast of the Site; and 24 two- and three-bedroom residential townhouses in the western portion of the Site (see Figure 3). All of the units would be age- restricted to residents 55 years of age or older and 10 percent of all dwelling units would be made affordable in accordance with Section 209-3F of the Village Code. The Site would continue to be accessed from Arbor Drive. The Proposed Project would remove the existing underperforming commercial office building and surface parking lot currently located on the Project Site. To allow for the redevelopment of the Project Site, the Applicant has petitioned the Village Board of Trustees to add a new site-specific section to the Rye Brook Zoning Code as Section 250-7(E)(6), entitled “900 King Street Planned Unit Development.” The Proposed Zoning Amendment would modify the existing density requirements of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) regulations with respect to the site’s proposed senior living facilities, allow a building height of 45 feet/ 4 stories for the proposed senior living facilities, establish 55 years of age as the minimum age for the proposed senior living facilities, and establish site-specific bulk and area requirements. Pursuant to the rules and regulations of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA, Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law and its implementing regulations at 6 NYCRR 617), the Village Board of Trustees (the “Board of Trustees”), acting as Lead Agency has determined that the Proposed Project and Proposed Zoning (together, the “Proposed Action”) have the potential to result in one or more environmental impacts. To identify the magnitude of the potential impacts, identify appropriate measures to mitigate potential impacts, and allow the public the greatest opportunity to comment on the potential impacts of the Proposed Action, the Board of Trustees resolved (December 18, 2017) that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) shall be prepared by issuing a “Positive Declaration”. This draft Scoping Document was prepared to guide in the preparation of the Draft EIS (DEIS), and describes the Proposed Action, the approvals required for implementation of the Proposed Action and the proposed scope of analysis for the DEIS. Description of the Proposed Action The Proposed Action being evaluated in the DEIS includes (1) the Applicant’s petition to amend the zoning text by adding a new section, 250-7.E(6), to the Village’s existing PUD Zoning District regulations (the “Proposed Zoning”), and (2) the approval of the physical 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 2 12/21/17 redevelopment of the Project Site in accordance with the PUD Concept Plan and Preliminary Site Plan inclusive of all State, county and local discretionary approvals necessary for the proposed redevelopment (the “Proposed Project”). As both actions are interrelated, the potential environmental impacts of both actions shall be evaluated in the DEIS pursuant to Section 617.3(g) of the SEQRA regulations. Proposed Zoning On June 5, 2017, the Applicant petitioned the Board of Trustees for certain zoning amendments to facilitate the adoption of a PUD Concept Plan. Based on comments made by the Board of Trustees, Planning Board, Village staff, and consultants, the proposed Local Law has been revised since its original submittal (see Attachment 1 for the Applicant’s current proposed zoning). The Proposed Zoning would:  Make “senior living facilities” the only permitted use on the Project Site;  Change the minimum age of senior living facilities from 62 years to 55 years;  Establish a separate density standard for the proposed “senior living facilities”;  Establish additional site-specific setback and area requirements for the Project Site;  Establish a maximum gross land coverage for the Project Site; and  Increase the maximum permitted height of senior living facilities from 35 feet to 45 feet. Proposed Project The Proposed Project would include removal of the existing office building and surface parking lot and the construction of an age-restricted residential community consisting of approximately 160 one-, two-, and three-bedroom units (approximately 301 bedrooms total) within a three- and four-story IL facility in the center of the Site; approximately 85 units of AL in a four-story structure in the northeast portion of the Site; and, 24 two- and three-bedroom residential townhouses (approximately 60 bedrooms total) in the western portion of the Site (see Figure 3). All of the units would be age-restricted to residents aged 55 or older. The existing vegetation in the western portion of the Project Site, between the Project Site and The Arbors, would remain. The center of the Project Site would be improved with a three- and four-story IL building, with 160 age-restricted units. IL is senior housing for able-bodied, healthy seniors who can care for themselves located in a setting that provides enhanced support and recreational services. Each IL unit would contain a full kitchen and full bathroom. The building would have approximately 43 one-bedroom units, 93 two-bedroom units, and 24 three-bedroom units for a total of approximately 301 bedrooms. The IL building would also contain a full commercial kitchen that can provide three meals a day. (As discussed below, this kitchen would also serve the AL building.) It is anticipated that the IL building would provide one or more meal plans for the residents. In addition to the formal dining room, it is anticipated that the IL building would provide an informal bistro and/or bar. Other amenities within the IL building are likely to include an indoor fitness center, multipurpose room (which can be used for Zumba/aerobics or cultural/movie presentations), card rooms, and a library/computer area. There is also likely to be a small clinical space within the building for visiting medical professionals. A personal care suite that includes hair salon, manicure/pedicure, and/or massage therapy, may also be provided. The IL building and the larger age-restricted community proposed for the Project Site, would promote health and wellness. As such, the grounds around the building would have pathways for walking within the overall landscaped Site. The rear courtyard of the IL building would contain a terrace, as well as spaces programmed with active and passive recreation areas. 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 3 12/21/17 Attached to the northeast portion of the IL building is proposed a four-story AL building with 85 units/beds. AL provides care for individuals who need help with one or more tasks of daily living, but who do not require skilled nursing care. The AL units would not have a kitchen and, therefore, do not meet the definition of a “dwelling unit” as set forth in the Village’s Zoning Code. Some of the AL units would be reserved for “memory care,” which provides services to those with some form of dementia. The AL building would share back-of-house spaces with the IL building. Specifically, it is anticipated that the AL building would share the same mechanical equipment and spaces, housekeeping, kitchen, and receiving facilities. In the rear of the AL building would be a secure “wandering garden” in which AL residents could safely and securely access the outdoors. To the west of the IL building would be three clusters of four townhouse buildings, each of which would contain two dwelling units. These 24 townhouses would be age-restricted to residents aged 55 or older. Each townhouse unit would feature a one-car garage and driveway space for at least one car. In addition, each townhouse cluster would have four dedicated off- street parking spaces for visitors. The townhouses would be two and two-and-a-half stories in height and would be a mix of two- and three-bedroom units. As with the other components of the Proposed Project, it is anticipated that these units would be rental units. As required by §209-3.F of the Village Code, 19 dwelling units (10 percent of all dwelling units proposed for the Project Site) would be provided as affordable units in accordance with the requirements of §250-26.1F(3)(d) of the Village of Rye Brook Zoning Code. The Project Site is anticipated to be owned by a single entity. There is no plan to subdivide the Project Site. The IL, AL, and townhouse units are all anticipated to be rental units. A managing agent and/or operator may be retained to manage and operate the Project, and that party may be an affiliate of the owner. Purpose and Need The Proposed Project would return the Site to productive use for the owner and the Site’s various property taxing jurisdictions. According to the Applicant, the Proposed Project would also serve a market need by providing additional senior living options in the region. Required Approvals The Proposed Action requires the approvals listed below. The agencies responsible for those approvals are considered “Involved Agencies” pursuant to SEQRA. 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 4 12/21/17 Table 1 Required Approvals Reviewing Agency Approval Required Village of Rye Brook Board of Trustees Zoning Text Amendment PUD Concept Plan Approval PUD Site Plan Approval Tree Removal Permit Village of Rye Brook Planning Board Wetland/ Watercourse Buffer Disturbance Permit Steep Slopes Permit Village of Rye Brook Architectural Review Board Architectural Review Approval Village of Rye Brook Department of Public Works MS4/ SWPPP Approval New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) 5-acre waiver New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) Signal retimings New York State Division for Historic Preservation (SHPO) Section 14.09 review Westchester County Department of Health Water and Sewer main construction Pursuant to Chapter 239 of the General Municipal Law and the Westchester County Administrative code, the Proposed Zoning and Site Plan must also be referred to the Westchester County Planning Board. Potential Environmental Impacts The SEQRA Determination of Significance adopted by the Board of Trustees found that the Proposed Action, when compared to the SEQR criteria of environmental effects listed in Section 617.7 of the SEQR regulations, may have significant impacts on the environment by virtue of the following, which potential should be assessed in a DEIS. 1. Land: The Proposed Action may have a significant adverse environmental impact as a result of physical change to the project site. • Construction will occur on land areas where the depth to the water table may be less than 3 feet. • Construction will occur on steep slopes or create approximately 2.71 acres of slopes greater than 15%. • Construction will continue for more than 1 year. • There may be erosion from grading, filling, slope disturbance and removal of vegetation, including the removal of 209 trees that are 6-inch to 34-inch DBH, of which 131 trees are regulated by the Village Code at 10-inch DBH and greater with 6 classified as “significant” trees. The plan would raise the grade of the eastern half of the site by at least 2 feet to as much as 14 feet and reduce the grade of the site adjacent to Wetland A by 3 to 8 feet. The grading plan would require the importation of at least 9,000 cubic yards of fill. 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 5 12/21/17 2. Surface Water: The Proposed Action may have a significant adverse environmental impact on surface water quality or quantity. • Upland erosion or run-off may cause turbidity to streams or wetlands. There is a concern the significant grade alterations proposed may affect the hydrology and functionality of at least two of the wetlands and streams on the lot. • Construction may cause soil erosion or create stormwater discharge that may lead to siltation. • Water quality downstream or on the site may be affected. 3. Groundwater: The Proposed Action may have a significant adverse environmental impact on groundwater quality or quantity. • There is a potential for blasting or other forms of rock removal during construction. • There is a potential for dewatering and/or processing of excavated materials on the site during construction. 4. Flooding: The Proposed Action may have a significant adverse environmental impact on flooding. • The project may result in or require modification of existing drainage flows or patterns. 5. Vegetation: The Proposed Action may have a significant adverse impact on vegetation. • Grading and filling operations will disturb 13.17 acres of the 17.77-acre site leaving only 4.60 acres undisturbed. 3.36 acres of the undisturbed area are wetlands, which leaves only 1.24 acres of existing upland vegetation undisturbed after construction. • The layout and grading plan will require removal of at least 209 6-inch to 34- inch DBH trees from the site. 131 of the trees removed are regulated by the Village Code, and 6 of these trees are considered “significant” trees. The removal such a large number of trees may cause significant adverse impacts to the existing vegetation, the stability of soils, wetland and wetland buffers. 6. Aesthetic Resources: The Proposed Action may have a significant adverse environmental impact on aesthetic resources. • The project may be visible from the Hutchison River/Merritt Parkway, a designated scenic highway. • The project may diminish public enjoyment of the scenic resource. 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 6 12/21/17 • The project may be visible from other publically accessible vantage points. 7. Transportation: The Proposed Action may have a significant adverse environmental impact on transportation. • The project may alter the present pattern of movement of people or goods. • There will be an increase in traffic volume and a change in traffic patterns during construction. The grading plan will require the importation of at least 9,000 cubic yards of fill that will add a substantial number of trucks to the vehicles entering and leaving the site during construction lasting more than one year. • The office building has been significantly underutilized for many years. The project may significantly increase traffic levels above existing conditions. 8. Energy: The Proposed Action may have a significant adverse environmental impact on energy. • The project involves heating and cooling more than 100,000 square feet of building area. The buildings proposed in the PUD concept plans have a combined total gross floor area of approximately 445,000 sq. ft. 9. Noise: The Proposed Action may have a significant adverse environmental impact as a result of objectionable noise. • During and after construction the project may produce sound above typical noise levels for nearby residences. After construction, the HVAC systems of the project may increase noise emissions from the site. • The project may increase noise levels at the Blind Brook High School campus during construction. 10. Human Health: The Proposed Action may have a significant adverse environmental impact on human health.  The project is located adjacent to the Blind Brook High School campus and Harkness Park.  Demolition of the existing building may cause the release of hazardous materials into the environment during construction, including but not limited to asbestos. 11. Consistency with Community Plans: The Proposed Action may have a significant adverse environmental impact because it is inconsistent with some of the adopted community plans. 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 7 12/21/17 • The project may cause the Village population to increase by more than 5%. • The project is partially inconsistent with local land use plans. The proposed zoning amendments increase the allowable gross floor area in the PUD from 9,000 sq. ft. to 26,000 sq. ft. per acre, and the density from 6 residential units per acre to 10.4 independent living units plus 4.8 assisted living units per acre. While the Village Comprehensive Plan calls for adjusting the existing density requirement for residential uses to be less restrictive, the recommendation limits the density adjustment to one that “maintains Rye Brook’s low-density character.” The project is not consistent with this policy and the deviation may create a significant adverse impact on community plans and character as a result. • The project is inconsistent with existing residential zoning in the PUD district and other residential districts. The proposed zoning amendments increase the allowable gross floor area in the PUD from 9,000 sq. ft. to 26,000 sq. ft. per acre, and the density from 6 residential units per acre to 10.4 independent living units plus 4.8 assisted living units per acre. The project would allow a building size and scale that is not consistent with the other residential buildings in the Village. • The increased allowable gross floor area and density proposed may induce secondary residential development elsewhere in the community. 12. Consistency with Community Character: The Proposed Action may have a significant adverse environmental impact because it is inconsistent with community character. • The project may cause a demand for additional community services, including but not limited to increased demand on emergency services. • The project is inconsistent with the predominant residential architectural scale and character of the Village. There are no large-scale, multi-family, apartment buildings in the Village comparable to the proposed project. The project, including the zoning amendments, may have a significant adverse impact on the community character of the Village. Required Elements of the DEIS The DEIS shall contain an analysis of environmental impacts in the subject areas outlined below, which shall include:  A description of the Proposed Action and its environmental setting;  A statement of the environmental impacts of the Proposed Action, including its short- and long-term effects, and typical associated environmental effects;  An identification of significant adverse environmental effects that cannot be avoided if the Proposed Action is implemented;  A discussion of the Alternatives to the Proposed Project; 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 8 12/21/17  An identification of irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources resulting from implementation of the Proposed Action; and,  A description of mitigation measures proposed to minimize or avoid significant adverse environmental impacts of the Proposed Action. Unless otherwise noted, the potential environmental impacts of the Proposed Project shall serve as the basis for the analyses in the DEIS. If the impacts associated with the Proposed Zoning within a particular environmental category have the potential to be meaningfully different from the impacts of the Proposed Project, the impacts of both the Proposed Project and Proposed Zoning shall be analyzed. For the purpose of addressing cumulative impacts to certain environmental impact categories, the Village has identified the following planned or potential development projects in the study area:  The Enclave  PepsiCo Project Renew Master Plan  Trinity Presbyterian Church  Sun Homes (Phase 3 Reckson Executive Park)  Senior Learning Community at Purchase College Where relevant, the potential environmental impacts of the Proposed Project shall be considered cumulatively with the impacts of these projects. In addition, the Village has determined that, where relevant, the impacts of the re-occupancy of the existing 900 King Street office building shall be considered as having the potential to occur in the future without the Proposed Action. Organization and Expected Content of the DEIS COVER SHEET AND GENERAL INFORMATION The Cover Sheet shall identify: the Proposed Action; its location; the name, address, and phone number of the Lead Agency; the name and address of the Preparer of the DEIS; the document as a DEIS; the Date of Acceptance of the DEIS by the Lead Agency; and the date of the Public Hearing and the closing of the Public Comment Period. Additional information, to be provided on pages following the Cover Sheet, shall list the name(s) and address(es) of all consultants involved in the preparation of the DEIS and their respective roles. The DEIS shall include a list of all Involved and Interested Agencies to which copies of the DEIS and supporting material will be distributed. A Table of Contents followed by a List of Tables and List of Figures shall be provided. 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1. INTRODUCTION, PURPOSE OF DOCUMENT 1.2. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION 1.2.1. Proposed Zoning Describe the existing Site zoning and the changes proposed. 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 9 12/21/17 1.2.2. Proposed Project Summarize the specific PUD concept plan and preliminary site plan developed for the Site. 1.3. STATEMENT OF PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED  Return Site to Productive Use for Owner and Taxing Jurisdictions  Identify Uses that Minimize Traffic Generation  Maintain Landscaped Buffers around Site, Especially to West  Implement Recommendations of Comprehensive Plan 1.4. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN EACH SUBJECT AREA 1.5. SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES PROPOSED FOR SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1.6. DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES ANALYZED 1.7. LIST OF ALL APPROVALS REQUIRED 2. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1. PROJECT IDENTIFICATION The introduction should identify the document as the DEIS for the Proposed Action, inclusive of the Proposed Project and Proposed Zoning, and should describe the location and main programmatic elements of the Proposed Action. 2.2. PROJECT SITE Identify and describe the current condition of the Project Site in text and graphics, including the Site’s location, access, improvements, and relationship to adjacent land uses. This section shall also describe the main environmental constraints of the Project Site, including existing vegetation, wetlands, and steep slopes. 2.3. PROPOSED ZONING Identify and describe the zoning text amendments being requested. 2.4. PROPOSED PROJECT 2.4.1. New Buildings and Uses Describe in text and graphics the Proposed Project, including the uses and buildings proposed. Site plans, floor plans, elevations, sections, and renderings should be included in this section. This section should also include the gross square feet (gsf) of development proposed for each of the components of the Site’s proposed senior living facilities. 2.4.2. Site Operation Describe the proposed method of ownership and control of the Site. 2.4.3. Parking and Circulation Describe the vehicular and pedestrian circulation of the Proposed Project. Included in this section should be a discussion of the proposed improvements to the existing on-Site pedestrian path. 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 10 12/21/17 2.4.4. Proposed Landscaping Plan 2.4.5. Grading, Drainage, and Stormwater Management Plans 2.4.6. Improvements to On-Site Water and Sewer Infrastructure 2.5. PURPOSE AND NEED Describe the Applicant’s purpose and need for the Proposed Action. 2.6. REQUIRED APPROVALS List the approvals required by Federal, State, County, and Village agencies. 3. LAND USE, PUBLIC POLICY, AND ZONING 3.1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Summarize the key findings of the consistency of the Proposed Action with existing proximate land uses and applicable zoning requirements as well as the consistency of the Proposed Action with applicable public policies. 3.2. ZONING AND LAND USE 3.2.1. Current Conditions Describe the existing zoning and land uses of the Project Site and study area within ¼-mile of the Project Site. Describe the consistency of the existing Project Site with the Village’s PUD Zoning District. 3.2.2. Future without the Proposed Action Describe known changes in land uses or zoning that would be expected to occur in the Future without the Proposed Action. 3.2.3. Potential Impacts of the Proposed Action Describe the compatibility of the Proposed Zoning with existing land uses within ¼-mile of the Project Site. Describe the compatibility of the Proposed Project with existing land uses within ¼-mile of the Project Site. Analyze the conformance of the Proposed Project with the legislative intent and specific requirements of the PUD zoning district. Analyze the conformance of the Proposed Project with other existing Zoning and Site Plan requirements, including recreation fees. Analyze the conformance of the Proposed Project with the requirements of the Scenic Roads Overlay District. 3.2.4. Mitigation Measures Describe the measures, if any, that are required to mitigate adverse impacts of the Proposed Project on zoning or land use. 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 11 12/21/17 3.3. PUBLIC POLICY Analyze consistency of the Proposed Project with the: 3.3.1. Village’s Comprehensive Plan 3.3.2. Village’s Affordable Housing policies 3.3.3. Applicable Policy Documents of Westchester County 4. GEOGRAPHY, SOILS, TOPOGRAPHY 4.1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Summarize the key findings of the existing site conditions, the analysis of the potential impacts of the Proposed Project, and measures proposed to mitigate impacts from the Proposed Project. 4.2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Identify the soil mapping units present on the Project Site using the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Soils Survey. Identify the topographical conditions on the Project Site using a site-specific topographical survey. Categorize the steep slopes of the Site pursuant to Chapter 213 of the Village Code. 4.3. FUTURE WITHOUT THE PROPOSED PROJECT Describe changes to the Project Site’s soils or topography that are expected in the Future without the Proposed Project. 4.4. POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT Describe the potential impacts of the Proposed Project on the Site’s soils and the suitability of Site soils for development. Describe the proposed grading of the Project Site as well as the impacts to the Site’s steep slopes pursuant to Chapter 213 of Village Code. Identify the preliminary cut/fill required for development of the Proposed Project. Identify the measures included in the Proposed Project (e.g., Erosion and Sediment Control Plan) to reduce the potential for adverse impacts to soils from construction of the Proposed Project. 4.5. MITIGATION MEASURES Identify the measures, if any, that are required to mitigate potentially adverse impacts from the Proposed Project. 5. WATERS AND WETLANDS 5.1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Summarize the key findings of the existing conditions survey, the analysis of the potential impacts of the Proposed Project, and measures proposed to mitigate impacts from the Proposed Project. 5.2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Identify and describe on-Site waters and wetlands meeting the definitions of Chapter 245 of the Village Code, and buffer areas thereto. 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 12 12/21/17 Describe the existing condition of the wetland buffers, including the current encroachments into those buffers. 5.3. FUTURE WITHOUT THE PROPOSED PROJECT Identify changes to the on-Site waters and wetlands anticipated in the Future without the Proposed Project. 5.4. POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT Describe the direct impacts of the Proposed Project to the on-Site wetlands, waterbodies, and wetland buffers. Describe the changes in the impervious area, “wooded” area, and mowed lawn area of the Project Site as a whole, and the wetland buffers in detail, as a result of the Proposed Project. 5.5. MITIGATION MEASURES Describe the permit(s) required for disturbance to the Site’s wetland buffers and analyze the consistency of the Proposed Project with the criteria for granting a wetland/buffer permit as defined in Section 245-8(A) of the Village Code. Using the mitigation requirements for wetland buffer disturbance contained in Section 245-9 of the Village Code, calculate the amount of wetland buffer mitigation that would be required as a result of the Proposed Project. Identify the feasibility of providing the required wetland buffer mitigation on-Site as part of the Proposed Project. 6. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT 6.1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Summarize the key findings of the existing conditions, the analysis of the potential impacts of the Proposed Project, and measures proposed to mitigate impacts resulting from the Proposed Project. 6.2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Identify, describe, and illustrate with one or more figures, the existing drainage patterns on the Site and within surrounding off-Site areas located within the same drainage basin(s), including the Village-owned properties that have an easement to discharge stormwater to the Project Site. 6.3. FUTURE WITHOUT THE PROPOSED PROJECT Identify changes to the drainage patterns, systems, and rates anticipated in the Future without the Proposed Project. 6.4. POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT Summarize the preliminary Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the Site, inclusive of the easements for Village-owned properties. Describe the green infrastructure included in the Proposed Project. Analyze the change in stormwater runoff rates and volumes compared to the existing condition. 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 13 12/21/17 6.5. MITIGATION MEASURES Describe measures, if any, which will be implemented to mitigate potentially adverse impacts resulting from the Proposed Project that would not otherwise be mitigated through implementation of the SWPPP. 7. VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE 7.1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Summarize the key findings of the existing conditions survey, the analysis of the potential impacts of the Proposed Project, and measures proposed to mitigate impacts from the Proposed Project. 7.2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Identify and characterize on-Site habitat types and typical wildlife. Prepare a tree inventory of the Project Site as to type, location, size, and condition as defined and described in Chapter 235 of the Village Code. Identify protected and specimen trees, as defined in the Code. The results of the EAF mapper for the Project Site and the IPaC report from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service indicate that there are no known rare, threatened, or endangered species, or species of special concern located within or adjacent to the Project Site. In addition, the EAF Mapper states that no known significant natural communities are present within or adjacent to the Project Site. No New York State- listed or federally listed plants or animals were observed on-Site during the wetland delineation and tree survey. Therefore, the Proposed Project would not have an adverse impact on rare, threatened, or endangered species, or species of special concern, nor would it have an adverse impact on significant natural communities and no further analysis of potential impacts is warranted. 7.3. FUTURE WITHOUT THE PROPOSED PROJECT Identify impacts to vegetative communities or wildlife habitat in the Future without the Proposed Project. 7.4. POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT Describe changes to on-Site habitat and potential impacts to wildlife from the Proposed Project. Identify impacts to on-Site surveyed trees, pursuant to Chapter 235 of Village Code. 7.5. MITIGATION MEASURES Using the requirements of Chapter 235 of the Village Code, calculate the number of trees that would be required to be planted to mitigate the impacts of the Proposed Project. Compare the number and types of trees required to be planted to the planting program included in the Proposed Project. Describe the measures to be undertaken to avoid impacts to on-Site trees that are proposed to remain. 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 14 12/21/17 8. VISUAL RESOURCES AND COMMUNITY CHARACTER 8.1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Summarize the key findings of the existing conditions survey, the analysis of the potential impacts of the Proposed Project, and measures proposed to mitigate impacts from the Proposed Project. 8.2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Describe and document with photographs the existing visual condition of the Project Site and its existing buildings. Representative photographs should be taken from the locations shown on Figure 4. Describe and document with photographs the current visibility of the Project Site from the vantage points shown on Figure 5, which have been identified as those that are representative of off-Site views of the Project Site. Photographs taken from of these locations must be taken during the “leaf off” condition. Describe with text and images other buildings and developments in the Village that are of similar size (including floor area or height) to the buildings of the Proposed Project. The description should include relevant context, including adjacent uses, zoning, and visibility from public places. 8.3. FUTURE WITHOUT THE PROPOSED PROJECT Describe potential changes to the Project Site or surrounding areas that would be expected to impact the relevant visual and community character in the Future without the Proposed Project. 8.4. POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT Describe and document, with renderings, elevations, and site plans as necessary, the visual character of the Proposed Project. Prepare photosimulations that depict the proposed condition of the Project Site with the Proposed Project from each of the vantage points identified in Figure 5 above in the “leaf off” condition. Photosimulations during the “leaf-on” conditions may also be presented, but do not obviate the need for the leaf-off analysis. Describe the changes in visibility of the Project Site from each of these vantage points. Analyze the potential impacts of the Proposed Project to visual and community character based on both the on-Site character of the Proposed Project and the visibility of the Project Site from off-Site locations. This analysis should also be informed by comparisons to other developments and buildings within the Village, in terms of size, height, proximity to other uses, and visibility. 8.5. MITIGATION MEASURES Identify and describe measures to avoid or mitigate significant adverse visual or community character impacts that may result from the Proposed Project. 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 15 12/21/17 9. SOCIOECONOMIC AND FISCAL IMPACTS 9.1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Summarize the key findings of the existing conditions, the analysis of the potential impacts of the Proposed Project, and measures proposed to mitigate impacts from the Proposed Project. 9.2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Describe the current relevant demographic characteristics of the Village. Identify the property taxes and fees attributable to the Project Site over the past 5 years. Document the current status of tax certiorari proceedings on the Site. 9.3. FUTURE WITHOUT THE PROPOSED PROJECT Describe the relevant demographic trends that are expected to occur in the Future without the Proposed Project that indicate the need for the proposed senior living facility. Qualitatively describe the changes in property and other taxes and fees attributable to the Project Site that would be expected to occur in the Future without the Proposed Project. 9.4. POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT Estimate the changes in property taxes and fees attributable to the Project Site as a result of development under the Proposed Project. This estimate should be based on the current assessed value of the Atria, located at 1200 King Street in the Village. 9.5. MITIGATION MEASURES Identify and describe measures to avoid or mitigate significant adverse socioeconomic or fiscal impacts that may result from the Proposed Project. 10. COMMUNITY FACILITIES 10.1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Summarize the key analysis of the potential impacts of the Proposed Project, and measures proposed to mitigate impacts from the Proposed Project. 10.2. EMERGENCY SERVICES RESPONSE 10.2.1. Existing Conditions Describe the recent call history of Police, Fire, and EMS to the Project Site and Atria, Rye Brook based on information provided by the Village. If information is not provided, the Applicant shall make use of publicly available information on Village websites with regard to staffing, budgets, and levels of service. 10.2.2. Future without the Proposed Project Describe and analyze changes to the service levels of the Village’s emergency service providers that are expected to occur in the Future without the Proposed Project based on information provided by the Village. If information is not provided, the Applicant shall assume that conditions similar to the existing conditions shall continue. 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 16 12/21/17 10.2.3. Potential Impacts of the Proposed Project Through consultation with the Police, Fire, and EMS departments, determine the potential impact of the Proposed Project to the departments from the Proposed Project as well as the ability of the departments to respond to the Proposed Project. Information from the call histories, described above, would inform this consultation and analysis. The Applicant may include information regarding the call-histories of other similar facilities in this section. If information is not provided by the Village’s emergency service departments, the Applicant shall use publicly available information and other information it may collect to estimate the potential impact of the Proposed Project. 10.2.4. Mitigation Measures Describe the measures required, if any, to mitigate significant adverse impacts of the Proposed Project to the ability of the Village’s emergency services to respond to the Project Site. This section shall compare the potential municipal costs that may be incurred to serve the Proposed Project to the increase in taxes and fees previously estimated to be generated by the Proposed Project. 10.2.5. Fire Department Access Demonstrate adequate access to all on-Site buildings for fire apparatus. Analyze the feasibility of providing a secondary access to the Project Site for emergency vehicles, as requested by the Village. 10.3. SCHOOLS 10.3.1. Existing Conditions Based on publicly available information, and supplemented with information directly provided by the School District, if any, describe the current capacity of the Blind Brook School District (BBSD). 10.3.2. Future without the Proposed Project Based on publicly available information, and supplemented with information directly provided by the School District or other Village staff or consultants, if any, describe expected changes to the enrollment and capacity of the School District that are expected to occur in the Future without the Proposed Project. 10.3.3. Potential Impacts of the Proposed Project Evaluate the potential for school-age children to live in the Proposed Project based on information provided by the BBSD, if any, relevant case-study data of similarly age-restricted projects, and/or information provided by potential operator(s) of the Proposed Project’s senior living facilities. 10.3.4. Mitigation Measures Identify and describe measures, if any, needed to avoid or mitigate significant adverse impacts on the BBSD as a result of the Proposed Project. 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 17 12/21/17 10.4. OPEN SPACE 10.4.1. Existing Conditions Identify and describe the parks, recreation and open spaces in proximity to the Project Site. Using size and design guidelines published by the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, describe the sufficiency of the existing public park resources proximate to the Project Site for the existing population of the area surrounding the Project Site. 10.4.2. Future without the Proposed Project Based on publicly available information and information provided by the Village staff or consultants, if any, describe any relevant changes expected to occur to the open space resources described above in the Future without the Proposed Project. 10.4.3. Potential Impacts of the Proposed Project Describe and locate on a figure the on-site open space and recreation areas included in the Proposed Project. Using size and design guidelines published by the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, describe the sufficiency of the proposed open space resources to serve the needs of the population anticipated to be generated by the Proposed Project. Analyze the consistency of the amount of open space and recreation areas provided by the Proposed Project with the requirements of both Section 209-15 of the Village Code and Section 250-7E(2)(f) of the Village Code. 10.4.4. Mitigation Measures Describe the measures required, if any, to mitigate significant adverse impacts of the Proposed Project on open spaces and recreational areas. 10.5. SOLID WASTE AND RECYCLING 10.5.1. Existing Conditions Describe the generation and collection of solid waste and recycling from the Project Site in the current condition. Describe existing Village solid waste and collection services. Based on publicly available information, identify the transfer station and Westchester County Refuse District to which solid waste is transported from the Project Site. 10.5.2. Future without the Proposed Project Based on publicly available information and information provided by the Village, if any, describe planned changes to Village or Westchester County solid waste and recycling handling and disposal practices. 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 18 12/21/17 10.5.3. Potential Impacts of the Proposed Project Estimate the amount of solid waste and recycling that would be generated from the Proposed Project using multipliers from the CEQR Technical Manual. Describe potential impacts to Village or Westchester County solid waste services from the Proposed Project. Describe how solid waste and recycling would be stored and collected at the Project Site with the Proposed Project. Describe how solid waste and recycling vehicles would access and maneuver on the Project Site with the Proposed Project. 10.5.4. Mitigation Measures Identify measures required, if any, to mitigate significant adverse impacts from the Proposed Project’s generation of solid waste. 11. INFRASTRUCTURE AND UTILITIES 11.1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Summarize the key findings of the existing conditions survey, the analysis of the potential impacts of the Proposed Project, and measures proposed to mitigate impacts from the Proposed Project. 11.2. WATER SUPPLY 11.2.1. Existing Conditions Describe the current usage of potable water on the Project Site. 11.2.2. Future without the Proposed Project Using the multipliers published by NYSDEC in 2014, estimate the potential potable water usage that could occur in a future condition in which the existing office building was fully occupied. 11.2.3. Potential Impacts of the Proposed Project Using the multipliers published by NYSDEC in 2014 that account for the required low-flow fixtures that would be installed in the Proposed Project, calculate the estimated demand for potable water from the Proposed Project. Calculate the incremental increase in water usage of the Proposed Project from the condition in the Future without the Proposed Project. Using information provided by the water system operator, determine the adequacy of the existing off-Site water infrastructure, combined with the proposed on-Site water distribution system, to serve the Proposed Project. 11.2.4. Mitigation Measures Describe measures, if any, that are required to mitigate potentially adverse impacts from the Proposed Project. 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 19 12/21/17 11.3. SANITARY SEWER 11.3.1. Existing Conditions Describe the current generation of sanitary waste from the Project Site. 11.3.2. Future without the Proposed Project Using the multipliers published by NYSDEC in 2014, estimate the potential generation of sanitary waste that could occur in a future condition in which the existing office building was fully occupied. 11.3.3. Potential Impacts of the Proposed Project Using the multipliers published by NYSDEC in 2014 that account for the required low-flow fixtures that would be installed in the Proposed Project, calculate the estimated generation of sanitary waste from the Proposed Project. Calculate the incremental increase in sanitary waste of the Proposed Project from the condition in the Future without the Proposed Project. Determine the adequacy of the existing sanitary sewer infrastructure to serve the Proposed Project using relevant information from recently completed sewer flow monitoring conducted by the Village’s consulting engineer, if any; and, record drawings of the relevant portions of the sanitary main serving the Project Site. 11.3.4. Mitigation Measures Describe measures, if any, which are required to mitigate significant adverse impacts of the Proposed Project on sanitary sewer service. 11.4. ENERGY USAGE (ELECTRICITY AND GAS) 11.4.1. Existing Conditions Describe the existing electricity and gas service and infrastructure, including location and condition, that serve the Project Site. 11.4.2. Future without the Proposed Project Using information provided by the Village, if any, identify improvements to the electric or gas systems planned or expected to be undertaken in the Future without the Proposed Project. 11.4.3. Potential Impacts of the Proposed Project Estimate the anticipated electric and gas demand from the Proposed Project. Based on information received from the electric and gas providers, if any, determine if the capacities of the electric and gas systems are adequate to meet the projected demand of the Project. 11.4.4. Mitigation Measures Describe measures, if any, which will be implemented to mitigate potentially adverse impacts from the Proposed Project. 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 20 12/21/17 Describe the potential use of environmental building and mechanical equipment design technologies as part of the building design of the Proposed Project to maximize energy efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. 12. TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION 12.1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Summarize the key findings of the existing conditions survey, the analysis of the potential impacts of the Proposed Project, and measures proposed to mitigate impacts from the Proposed Project on the traffic and transportation systems. 12.2. METHODOLOGY Describe the methodology used to evaluate the potential impacts of the Proposed Project on Traffic and Transportation. 12.3. EXISTING CONDITIONS Existing traffic conditions will be documented for the Weekday AM and PM peak hours by turning movement manual counts at the following intersections:  King Street (Route 120A) and Anderson Hill Road  King Street (Route 120A) and Hutchinson River Parkway/Merritt Parkway SB Off Ramp  King Street (Route 120A) and N. Ridge Street (Hutchinson River Parkway/Merritt Parkway SB On/Off Ramp)  King Street (Route 120A) and Glen Ridge Road (Hutchinson River Parkway/Merritt Parkway NB On/Off Ramp)  King Street (Route 120A) and Hutchinson River Parkway/Merritt Parkway NB On/Off Ramp  King Street and Arbor Drive  King Street (Route 120A) and Blind Brook Middle/High School Right Turn Entry Driveway  King Street (Route 120A) and Glenville Street / Blind Brook Middle/High School  Arbor Drive and Existing Office / Proposed Site Driveway Conduct capacity analysis (Level of Service) for Existing Conditions at each of the above intersections (SYNCHRO Analysis) as well as SimTraffic model. Summarize the existing Levels of Service in tabular format. 12.4. FUTURE CONDITIONS WITHOUT THE PROPOSED PROJECT (NO BUILD CONDITIONS) The Existing Traffic Volumes will be projected to a future design year (2025) utilizing a background growth factor based on historical data. In addition, traffic from other pending or approved projects in the area, as noted earlier in the Scope, will be estimated and added to the roadway network and combined with the Projected Traffic Volumes to obtain the Design Year No Build Traffic Volumes. The No Build traffic volumes will also assume full occupancy of the existing office building on the Project Site. 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 21 12/21/17 Conduct capacity analysis (Level of Service) for No Build Conditions at each of the above intersections (SYNCHRO Analysis) as well as SimTraffic model. Summarize the No Build Levels of Service in tabular format. 12.5. FUTURE CONDITIONS WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT (BUILD CONDITIONS) Estimates of site generated traffic will be based on information published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) as contained in their report entitled Trip Generation, 9th Edition, 2012. The Site Generated Traffic Volumes will be assigned to the roadway network based on the anticipated arrival and departure distributions. The Site Generated Traffic Volumes will be combined with the No Build Traffic Volumes to obtain the Build Traffic Volumes for each of the peak hours. Conduct capacity analysis (Level of Service) for Build Conditions at each of the above intersections (SYNCHRO Analysis) as well as SimTraffic model. Figures shall be prepared showing the Existing, Projected, No Build, Site Generated, and Build Traffic Volumes for each of the peak hours. 12.6. MITIGATION MEASURES Based on the results of the traffic analysis, identify improvements to the roadway network, if any, necessitated by the Proposed Project. 13. AIR QUALITY 13.1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Summarize the key findings of the existing conditions survey, the analysis of the potential impacts of the Proposed Project, and measures proposed to mitigate impacts from the Proposed Project. 13.2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Describe existing ambient air quality using information from the closest NYSDEC Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Network stations to the Project Site. 13.3. FUTURE WITHOUT THE PROPOSED PROJECT Qualitatively describe the relevant potential cumulative impacts to air quality from the No Build projects included in the Traffic Impact Analysis. 13.4. POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT Analyze the potential for stationary sources of air emissions (i.e., HVAC systems) to have a significant adverse impact to air quality. For elevated sources, potential impacts to NO2 should be qualitatively evaluated using project experience and screening procedures outlined in the CEQR Technical Manual. For ground level and lower elevations, impacts to NO2 and PM2.5 should be analyzed using the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) AERSCREEN model and should conservatively assume that all Proposed Project emissions would exhaust from a single stack on the top of the four-story IL building. 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 22 12/21/17 Analyze the potential for Project-generated mobile emission sources (e.g., Project- generated traffic) to have an adverse impact on air quality using the procedures outlined in NYSDOT’s The Environmental Manual (TEM). 13.5. MITIGATION MEASURES Describe measures, if any, which are required to mitigate significant adverse impacts to air quality. 14. NOISE 14.1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Summarize the key findings of the existing conditions analysis, the analysis of the potential impacts of the Proposed Project, and measures proposed to mitigate impacts from the Proposed Project. Describe the fundamental effects and characteristics of noise as they relate to the noise analysis. Noise levels shall be reported in A-weighted decibels (dBA) and the maximum 1- hour equivalent sound level (Leq(1)) shall be used as the noise descriptor in the impact evaluation. The impacts of mobile sources of noise shall be determined the using proportional modeling techniques widely used in the industry. 14.2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Determine existing noise levels at the locations shown on Figure 6. These locations represent the noise-sensitive land uses that would be most likely to experience noise level increases due to the Proposed Project because of their proximity to the Site. Existing noise levels shall be measured during the AM and PM peak traffic hours by conducting field measurements (Leq(1)) and, where necessary, supplementing those measurements with mathematical model results. 14.3. FUTURE WITHOUT THE PROPOSED PROJECT At each receptor location, determine the noise levels without the Proposed Project using existing noise levels and proportional modeling techniques. Compare existing noise levels and future noise levels without the Proposed Project, as analyzed in the Traffic Impact Study, with various noise standards, guidelines, and other noise criteria. 14.4. POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT At each receptor location identified above, determine the noise levels with the Proposed Project using existing noise levels and proportional modeling techniques to account for changes in traffic volumes due to the Proposed Project. Compare the future noise levels with the guidelines issued by the NYSDEC, which considers a significant adverse noise impact to occur when Project operations result in more than 6.0 dBA in ambient Leq(1) noise levels at receptor sites and produce ambient noise levels of more than 65 dBA at residences or 79 dBA at an industrial or commercial area. 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 23 12/21/17 Qualitatively analyze the potential for stationary sources of noise generation (i.e., HVAC systems) to have a significant adverse noise impact. Compare the predicted noise levels at the proposed new residential uses, including noise generated by the Hutchinson River Parkway, to generally accepted noise level standards for residential uses. 14.5. MITIGATION MEASURES Describe measures, if any, which are required to mitigate potentially adverse impacts from the Proposed Project as identified in the analysis above. 15. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 15.1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Summarize the key findings of the existing conditions survey, the analysis of the potential impacts of the Proposed Project, and measures proposed to mitigate impacts from the Proposed Project. 15.2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Using data compiled from recently completed Environmental Site Assessments (Phase I and Phase II), identify potential or known locations of contamination and types of contaminants likely to be found on the Project Site. This should include the potential for hazardous materials to be present within structures to be demolished and the potential for hazardous materials to be present in subsurface areas where new development would occur as part of the Proposed Project. 15.3. FUTURE WITHOUT THE PROPOSED PROJECT Describe potential impacts of hazardous materials that are expected to occur in the Future without the Proposed Project. 15.4. POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT Identify potential impacts of the Proposed Project with respect to hazardous materials as a result of the Proposed Project, both during Project construction and during the Proposed Project’s operation. 15.5. MITIGATION MEASURES Identify and describe measures, if any, required to avoid or mitigate potential significant adverse impacts from hazardous materials that may result from the construction or operation of the Proposed Project. 16. CONSTRUCTION 16.1. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Summarize the major phases of construction, potential significant adverse impacts expected to result from construction, and measures proposed to mitigate those significant adverse impacts. 16.2. CONSTRUCTION PHASING Generally describe the construction schedule and timeline by phase of construction. Identify preliminary construction staging areas and areas for construction worker 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 24 12/21/17 parking. Discuss the potential for rock removal, blasting, or material processing activities on-Site. 16.3. CONSTRUCTION PERIOD IMPACTS AND MITIGATION 16.3.1. Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Summarize the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. 16.3.2. Traffic and Transportation Qualitatively analyze the potential for construction traffic to have a temporary adverse impact on the surrounding road and pedestrian network. 16.3.3. Air Quality Qualitatively analyze the potential for temporary air quality impacts from mobile source emissions from construction equipment, worker and delivery vehicles, and fugitive dust emissions. Discuss how potential air quality impacts during construction will be avoided or mitigated. 16.3.4. Noise Qualitatively analyze the potential for temporary noise impacts from each phase of construction activity and describe the Village’s requirements and limitations on hours of construction work in residential areas. 17. ALTERNATIVES SEQRA requires a description and evaluation of a range of reasonable alternatives to the Proposed Action that are feasible, considering the objectives and capabilities of the Applicant. The description and evaluation of each alternative should be at a level of detail sufficient to permit a comparative assessment of the alternatives discussed. This Chapter should provide a narrative description of each alternative listed below and should include schematic development plans for each alternative. For each alternative, this Chapter should evaluate the potential environmental impacts of each impact category addressed in the DEIS. If the impacts of the alternative for a given environmental impact category are expected to be the same as the Proposed Action, a description of why should be provided. Detailed, quantitative analyses of each environmental impact category for each alternative are not required; rather, the level of analysis should be sufficient to characterize the relevant relative difference in environmental impacts from the Proposed Project. 17.1. NO ACTION This alternative analyzes the environmental impacts of not approving the Proposed Action. In this case, not approving the Proposed Action would result in the Proposed Zoning not being adopted, the Proposed Project not being implemented and the Project Site not being redeveloped. 17.2. RESIDENTIAL (NON-AGE-RESTRICTED) DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE EXISTING PUD REGULATIONS This alternative develops the Project Site with residential uses in accordance with the existing PUD regulations. 900 King Street DRAFT DEIS Scoping Outline DRAFT 25 12/21/17 17.3. SENIOR LIVING FACILITY DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE EXISTING PUD REGULATIONS This alternative develops the Project Site with AL, IL, or a combination thereof in accordance with the existing PUD regulations. 17.4. REDUCED SIZE PROPOSED PROJECT This alternative develops the Project Site with a senior living facility at a density greater than permitted by the current PUD zoning but less than the Proposed Project. The components of the senior living facility may be similar in proportion to those of the current project, or they may contain a different proportion of age-restricted components. 18. UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS Identify those adverse environmental impacts that cannot be avoided or adequately mitigated if the Proposed Action is implemented. 19. IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES Identify irreversible and irretrievable commitments of environmental resources that would be associated with implementation of the Proposed Action. 20. GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACTS Identify growth-inducing aspects related to the Proposed Action. Elements not Included in the DEIS The scope of the DEIS has been drafted to exclude those environmental categories for which, based on information available, there is no potential for significant adverse impacts. The following environmental category has been specifically excluded from this Draft Scoping Outline based on the Applicant’s opinion that the Proposed Project would not have a significant adverse impact in this category. If information is presented during the public scoping process that indicates there is a potential for the Proposed Project to have a significant adverse impact in this environmental impact category, the Lead Agency will modify the Scope accordingly.  Cultural Resources – As described in the draft Technical Memorandum, it is the opinion of the New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) that the Proposed Project would have “no impact on archaeological and/or historic resources listed in or eligible for the New York State and National Registers of Historic Places.” This opinion was based on information submitted to SHPO and summarized in the Technical Memorandum. 