Appendix A

Resident questionnaire evaluated by Dr. Lee Koppelman’s office.

Resident Questionnaire

More than 100 responses were received to a twenty-three point survey distributed throughout the community. In addition to the check-off answers relating to satisfaction and concern, there was room for personal comment. The responses were detailed and provided positive and negative emphasis on the residents concerns and attitudes.

Table 1 contains the numerical tabulation of the check-off responses.

Table 2 contains the translation of the numerical responses into percentages.

Table 3 is a consolidation numerically and percentage of satisfaction and concern. Obviously, as satisfaction increases, concerns decrease. There is, as expected, an inverse relationship.

One overall conclusion is that the citizens are overwhelmingly satisfied with Brookhaven Hamlet as a place to live (82%), and as a place to raise children (73%). They are also pleased with shopping (78%), proximity to jobs (71%), and garbage pickup (66%). Yet, the response relative to the Hamlet as a place to grow old clearly indicates a strong concern for the future.

The school system evoked a strong negative reaction (26% satisfaction). Waste management and water pollution, vandalism, litter, taxes and LILCO rates were overwhelmingly negative, ranging from 2% to 17% satisfaction, or conversely as high as 94% concern.

These views were corroborated by their detailed written responses. The positive features shared by the residents stress the bucolic, scenic and historic ambience, and the proximity to the marine environment. One should also note the strong expression of appreciation for friendly and community conscious neighbors.

The negative views were strongly against the high level of school taxes which is reflected in their negative attitudes towards the school system.

The Brookhaven landfill was also criticized – not an unusual response.

The balance of the complaints were less generally expressed and are identified in the Summary of Comments following Table 3.

Pages

Title Page
i • Prologue
ii • Prologue
iii • Prologue
iv • Committee
Table of Contents
1 • I. Introduction
1a • Plate 1
2 • II. Overview
3 • II. Overview
4 • II. Overview
5 • II. Overview
6 • II. Overview
7-8 • II. Overview
9 • III. History
10-11 • III. History
12 • IV. Land Use
12a • Plate 2
13 • IV. Land Use
13a • Plate 3
14 • IV. Land Use
15 • IV. Land Use
15a • Plate 4
15b • Carmans River
16 • V. Land Use Issues
17 • V. Land Use Issues
18 • V. Land Use Issues
19 • V. Land Use Issues
20 • V. Land Use Issues
20a • Plate 5
21 • VI. Other Issues
22 • VI. Other Issues
23 • VI. Other Issues
24 • VI. Other Issues
25 • VI.Other Issues
25a • Plate 6
26 • VI. Other Issues
27 • VI. Other Issues
28 • VI. Other Issues
29 • VI. Other Issues
30 • VII. Summary
31 • VII. Summary
32 • VII. Recommendations
33 • VII. Recommendations
34 • VII. Recommendations
35 • A. Questionnaire
36 • A. Questionnaire
37 • A. Questionnaire
38 • A. Questionnaire
39 • A. Questionnaire
40 • B. Community Comments
41 • B. Community Comments
42 • B. Community Comments

——+——

Brookhaven Town Zoning Requirements