The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSMITH, THORNTONKUHN, SMITH g HARRIS, c.' BUILDING CONTRACTORS 8 CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS 352 SEVENTH AVENUE, NEW YORK, N. Y. I0001 (212) 564-4983 October 24, 1988 Mr. Paul Carella New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Building 40 - SUNY Stony Brook, NY 11794 RE: DEC No. 10-g8-0963 SCTM No. 1000-121-1-1 Property of Thornton E. Smith Dear Mr. Carella: In confirmation of our telephone conversation on Friday, October 21, 1988, enclosed herewith are documents pertaining to the issue of potential wetlands on the above referenced project. With specific reference to our letter to Mr. Panek of the DEC dated September 19, 1988, we would appreciate your early action in determining the geographical areas of your interest in this matter and your guidance as to design. In particular we are interested in drainage area "B" and our ability in order to meet the wishes of the Town of Southhold Planning Board to have a road access to the property on our eastern boundary. If for any reason this access were denied, the entire plan for this subdivision on which we have been working with the Planning Board for several years would be killed. You have indicated that this matter falls under your personal jurisdiction; we look forward to your early action on it. KUHN SMITH g HARRIS,~sc. Mr. Paul Carella October 24, 1988 Page 2 If there is any thing you require from me to assist your determination, please do not hesitate to call me. Very truly yours, Neil H. Smith NHS/nm Encl. Letter from Planning Board Town of Southold dated 10/30/86 Letter of Transmittal dated 4/13/88 Letter from Neil H. Smith dated 4/13/88 Copy of Liber 6094 - Page 518 Letter from N.Y. State Dept. of Environmental Conservation dated 4/22/88 Memorandum from Board of Town Trustees, Town of Southold dated 4/28/88 Transmittal from Thornton E. Smith dated 4/29/88 Map Letter from Board of Town Trustees, Town of Southold dated 5/9/88 Letter from Board of Town Trustees, Town of Southold dated 5/9/88 Map stamped 5/10/88 Memorandum from Alfred T. Kellar Letter from County of Suffolk dated 5/12/88 Map Four page handout Re: Soil Letter from Planning Board, Town of Southold dated 5/27/88 Letter from N.Y. State dept. of Environmental Conservation dated 7/28/88 Letter from Neil H. Smith dated 9/19/88 Subdivision Map dated 10/27/87 cc: W/O Encl. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Frank A. Kujawski, Jr. /~ President Board of Town Trustees Town of Southold Howard Young, L.S. Daniel C. Ross, Esq. Wickham, Wickham & Bressler, P.C. Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) '765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM The following information is for your records on the-proposed subdivision of Thcrton Smith. SCTM #100C-121-1-1 CC: Trustees j CAC Building Dept. Sidney B. Bowne New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Building 40--SUNY, Stony Brook, New York 11794 (516) 75 ]-7900 Kuhn, Smith & Harris, Inc. 352 Seventh Ave. New York, NY 10001 July 28, 1988 PLANNING BOARD Cot =missioner Attn: Neil H. Smith l{e: DEC No. 10-88-0963 SCTM No. 1000-121-1-] Property of Thorton E. Smith Dear Mr. Smith: I refer to the letter you recently received from Mr. Alfred T. Kellar, Alternate Permit Administrator, indicating that the referenced property was · more than 100 feet from the Freshwater Wetlands. In early May, 1988, the Town of Southold Trustees informed us that sGall wetlands are present on the property in question. A field inspection by Depart- ment staff has verified this and that they are of "unusual local importance" in that they provide breeding habitat and. related benefits to wildlife. Con- sequently, these wetlands are being added to the final Suffolk County Freshwater Wetlands Maps and, as such, are now regulated by the Department. Although sub- division of the property, per se, is not a regulated activity under the Freshwater Wetlands Act, any construction or development of this property is regulated and will require approval by the Department. For information on the precise locations and boundaries of these wetlands, please contact Dr. Frank M. Panek, Regional Supervisor of Natural Resources, at the above address. Pursuant to 6NYCRR 62].(2)(4), the Department may reverse itself on a prior decision on the basis of newly discovered information. The recent physical confirmation that wetlands exist on the property of Thorton B. Smith is consistent with this and, accordingly, I hereby revoke Mr. Kellar's letter. I sincerely regret any inconvenience our ~earlier determination that no Freshwater Wetlands permit would be required may have caused you. Very truly yours, Robert A. Greene Regional Permit Administrator Region I RAG:j f cc: H. Berger F. Panek '~'-* - S San ford M. Shea Chairman, Town of file.~ Southold Planning Board MEMORANDUM To: From: RE: Date: Trustees, Frank A. Kujawski,Jr. President Planning Board, Bennett Orlowski,Jr. Chairman Thornton Smith-Major Subdivision SCTM ~1000-121-1-1,p/o19 May 27, 1988 Enclosed please find a review of the above mentioned subdivision done by the Suffolk County Soil and Water Conservation District ...... Enc. jt PI T~ Y Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 Neil Smith 352 Seventh Avenue New York, NY i0001 May 27, 1988 Dear Mr. Smith: RE: Thornton Smith SCTM ~1000-121-1-1.p/o19 -Enclosed please find a review of the above mentioned subdivision done by the Suffolk County Soil and Water Conservation District. As per the Town Trustee's suggestion, we have also asked for comments from the Conservation Advisory Council and the Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services, office of Ecology. If you have any questions, Please do not hesitatg to contact this office. Enc: jt Very ~Y yours, BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. CHAIRMAN Pi T~ Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 John Holzapfel Conservation Advisory Council P.O. Box 210 Southold, NY 11971 May 27, 1988 Dear Mr. Holzapfel: RE: Thornuon Smith SCTM $1000-121-1-1,p/o19 Enclosed please find the preliminary map for the above mentioned major subdivision. The Planning Board has asked for revisions to pull the lots~away from the steep slopes, but would like your input before asking the applicant to revise the maps. Thank you for your assitance. If you have any questions, please do not hesitat~ to contact this office. Very t~-~ly yours, BENNETT ORLOWSKI ,'JR CHAI RMANL Enc: jt Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 Louise Harrison Suffolk County Department of Health Services Office of Ecology County Center Riverhead, NY 11901 May 27, 1988 Dear Ms. Harrison: RE: Thornton Smith SCTM #1000-121-1-1,p/o19 Enclosed please find the preliminary map for the above mentioned major subdivision. The Planning Board has asked for revisions to pull the lots away from the steep slopes, but would like your input before asking the applicant to revise the maps. Thank you for your assistance -~ If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Enc: jt Very t~zzkl/~y yours B SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUFFOLK PATRICK G. HALPIN SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE 1 988 STANLEY A. PAUZER DISTRICT MANAGER May 12, 1988 Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman - Planning Board Town of Southold Southold, New York 119~1 Dear Mr. Orlowski: As per your request our office has reviewed the preliminary map for the THORNTON SMITH major subdivision and have several comments regarding the proposed plan. Specific concerns include: estimated storm water surface runoff, dissipation of stored runoff water, soil erosion from steep slopes and excessive cuts or fills from road grades. Storm water surface runoff calculations were based on a 6 inch rainfall. This would seem adequate in'this situation and represents a design storm of a 25 year return frequency. However, a coefficient of runoff of 0.25 was used for the entire watershed in both drainage areas. This proposed major subdivision is located on predominantly Haven, Riverhead, Plymouth, and Carver and Plymouth soils (see attached soil map and descriptions). Haven and Riverhead soils are in hydrologic Soil Group B whereas Plymouth and Carver and Plymouth soils ara in hydrologic Soil Group A. Hydrologic soil groups indicate the minimum rate of infiltration obtained for bare soil and transmission rates of the soils. Group A soils have substantially greater infiltration and trans- mission rates than Group B soils. This results in greater surface runoff on Group B soils. Therefore, the coefficient of runoff should be differentiated according to soil type, among other factors. Based upon a 6 inch design storm, the 0.25 coefficient for the proposed land use re~resents 1.5 inches of surface runoff water. Applying the soil cover complex method of calculating storm water runoff developed by the U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Servi~e, the same land use would produce 1.44 and 2.26 inches of runoff on hydro- logic Soil Groups A and B, respectively. Consequently, use of 0.25 as a coefficient of runoff for the proposed land use on hydrologic Group A soils agrees with the estimated runoff using the S.C.S. method; however, there would be a 66 percent difference in runoff calculations on Group B soils. PECONIC'PLAZA 164 OLD COUNTRY ROAD. ROUTE RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK 11901 {516) 727-2315 Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. -- 2 Storm water surface runoff calculation° ~__ ~ May 2, 1988 of 66 percent Group B soils., was estim~r ?r~lnage area 'A', which ~ at 433-50~ ~-~_ = · ~onsls~s plan estimated 287,000 cubic feet of water. This difference could obviously ~ ~ ~uo~u zeet of water.' The affect the required VOlume of storm water storage within a storage structure. In this subdivision, storm water surface runoff is proposed "kettle hole" depressions loca ~imates of existin~ s ..... yed on the wooded no ~ ~to be stored in oe suffficien~ ~.~ ~ge vo±umes in the -_[-~on of ~he property, s- ~ ~ume to store al~ ~ ~,- depressions indicate ~ .... E Even in drainage area 'A', with the calculated .... z zrom the design storm. ~ ~ ~ne surface ru~ = _~.~u ~nere would . greater amount of runoff water, the existing depression has adequate capacity. The high water mark would be zncreased from the reported elevation of 28 to approximately 30, There should b~ concern, however, regarding the infiltration and discharge of storm water from within the depression. A soil boring in the bottom of drainage area 'B' found from 0-6 inch~s depth, silt loam; 6-12 inches, loamy sand; 12-32 inches, silt; 32-38 incheS, organic matter and silt; and 38-60 inches, fine silt loam. In addition, ground water was found apProximately 6 inches below the ground surface. In drainage area 'A' the bottom of the depression contained water on the ground surface which was apProximately 4 feet above the water elevation12-18 inches deep. A soil bori approximately loam, and 48-50 inches fine sand~Ound from 0-48 inches below t~ surface, sandy ' loam. Due to the presence of surface water, shallow ground water and fine to medium textured soils in the bottom of the depressions, infiltration and percolation rates would be expected to be very slow. Development of the property will in- crease the volume of water and sedimentation entering the depressions. The effectiveness of the depressions as outlet structures or recharge areas for storm water runoff is questionable. ConSiderable documentation regarding soil profiles and infiltration rates should be evaluated by a professional engineer and a determination made. The remaining concerns regarding the proposed subdivision involve soil erosion. Most obvious are potential soil erosion problems on lots with steep slopes suCh as Lots 1, 24, 25, 33, 34 and 35. These lots have slopes ranging from 12 to 24 percent. During development of the lots, special precautions should be required to reduce soil erosion quest. ' Recommendations are available from this office upon re- A potential soil erosion problem could also arise from excessive cuts or fills from road grades Road cuts of 4.5 to 5[0 feet 'A~ at Stations 3+00, 24+50 a of 3-4.5 feet These whmie Statzons 6+00 and nd 31+00 have proposed ro 30+00 have proposed road fillsad · cuts and fills could cause steep road banks which may be- come an erosion problem if not graded and vegetated adequately. In addition, deep cuts on Plymouth and Carver and Plymouth soils will expose their very coarse sand hnd gravel subsoils. Stability of these subsoils for road banks is poor. I hope this information will be useful to you. If you require any additional information, please contact our office. Sincerely, Thomas j. McMahon, Senior District Technician Attachments -- SHEET NUMBER 16 R C HaB 2 400 000 FEET · ...HAVEN .SOILS (HaA~ HaB~ MaCy He). "Haven soils are deep~ well-drained,'medium-textured soils that formed in'a loamy or silty layer over stratified coarse sand and gravel. The texture from 0 - 19 inches is loam, silt loam, and very fine sandy loam. From 19 - 28 inches the range is silt loam, very fine safidy.Ioa~, and gravelly loam, while the texture from 28 - 55 inches'is gravelly sand, loamy sand, sandy loam or stratified sand and gravel. The permeability is moderate in the root zone (surface layer and subsoil) and rapid or ve.z~ rapid in the underlying 'layer. These $oil~ have'moderate to high available moisture capacities (see a~tached table).. Haven soils hmve 10w organic matter content and iow natural supply of plan~ nutrien~s~ but crops r~spond well to lime ' and fertilizer. When the soils are int~nsively cultivated t~e likelihdod of Crusting is great~ however the returning of cover crop residue decrease~ this problem. Generally, these soils are well suited'to crops commonly grown in .Suffolk County~ HaA Haven io~m~ 0 - 2 percent slope~j. These soils are usually large in area and nearly level with some areas of slight undulation. The erosion hazard of these soils is slight but erosion problems are likely to occur in undulating areas, Irrigation water should be a~plied at a moderate rate. Management concerns in- clude crusting after rain, maintaining tilth, and reduction of the plow pan. HaB Haven loa~, 2 - 6 percent slopes. Most small deposits of this soil have short slopes, but larger areas are undulating. Cultivated areas of ~his soil are 2 - 3 inches shallower to gravel than the representative Haven soil because of past erosion. The erosion hazard of this soil is moderate to slight. The number of consecutive years these soils can be safely cultivated depends on practices used for erosion control and water management. These soils should not be cultivated intensively unless adequate measures are used to help control erosion, tn addition to erosion control, management concerns include increasing the organic matter content to help keep the soil loose and crust free, and breaking up the plow pan. Irri- gation water can be applied at a moderate rate. Practices'that help control erosion greatly increase the effectiveness of natural rainfall and irrigation water. Areas of soil that are eroded have reduced water holding capacities. CARVER .and PLYMOUTH SANDS (CPA, CpC, CpE) These soils are deep, excessively drained and coarse-textured. Soils in these units can be made up entirely of Carver sand~ entirely of Plymouth sand~ or of a combination of the two soils. The texture of the Carve~ soils is fine sand and coarse sand 0 - 22 inches. Coarse sand and gravelly sand is found 22 - 60 inches. The Plymouth soils have textures of fine sand and sand 0 - 27 inches. The permeability of these soils is rapid or very rapid. Available ·moisture holding capacities are low to. very low. Natural fertility and organic matter content of Carver s.nd Plymouth soils is low. The crop response to lime and fertilizer applications is fair. If fertilizer is applied~ frequent applications of small amounts should be made to reduce nunrient loss by leaching. These soils are non well suited to crops commonly grown in Suffolk County. They are too droughty~ too steep~ too stony or too sandy for crops, pasture or nursery stock. These sandy soils severely limit installation and maintenance of lawns and land- scape shrubs. A permanent cover of plants should be maintained or restored on all soils in this unit to reduce erosion. CpE Carver and Plymouth sands~ 15 to 35 ~ercent slomes. These soils are almost exclusively on moraines except fo~ a few steep areas on side slopes along some drainage channels. The gravel content of these soils is up to 15 percent more gravel~ by volume, than the representative soils. On some moraines the gravel content can be as much as 30 percent, and can contain a few cobblestones. Erosion hazards of these soils is moderate to severe. A permanent cover of plants should be maintained or restored on these soils. Riverhead Soils (RdA~ RdB~ RdC). Riverhead soils are deep, well drained, moderately coarse-textured soils that formed in a layer of sandy loam or fine sandy loam over thick layers of coarse sand and gravel. The texture from 0 - 32 inches is sandy loam and fine sandy loam. Sand, loamy sand~ gravelly sand and gravelly loamy sand is found at depths of 32 - 65 inches. The p~rmeabitity is moderately rapid' in the root zone (surface layer and subsoil) and very rapid in the underlaying layer. Riverhead soils' have moderate to'high available moisture capacities (see attached table). Natural inter'al drainage is good, but in many places where these soils have been farmed a plowpan has formed. These soils have low organic matter contents and low natural supply of plant nutrients, but crops respond well ~o lime and fertilizer. 'Generally~ these soils are well suited to crops commonly grown in Suffolk County. i RdB Riverhead sandy, loam~ 3 - 8 percent slopes. Most small deposits of this soil have moderately short slopes~ but large areas are undulating. Cultivated areas are 2 - 3 inches shallower to coarse sand and gravel than the representative Riverhead soil because of past erosion. The erosion hazard is slight to moderate. Keeping cover crops on the soil in winter and returning crop residue will help to pro- tect exposed areas f~om erosion. Diverting runoff water from higher areas also helps to reduce erosion damage. Irrigation water can be applied at a moderate rate. Plymouth Soils (P~--P1B, P1C, PmB3, P sA, PsB) Plymouth soils consist of deep, excessively drained, coarse-textured soils that formed in a layer of loamy sand or sand over thick layers of stratified . coarse sand and gravel. The texture ~of Plymouth soils PlA, P1B, P1C, PmB3 and PmC3 from 0 - 27 inches is loamy sand, lo~y fine sand, gravelly loamy sand and sand. From 27 - 58 inches the texture is sand and gravel, coarse sand and gravelly coarse sand. The permeability of these soils is rapid. Available moisture capacity of these soils ranges from low to very low (see attached table). These soils are droughty during periods~.of low rainfall. Unless irrigation water is applied~ deep-rooted crops are better suited. Irrigation water can be applied at a rapid rate but frequent, small appli- cations should be made to reduce the amount lost to downward movement. The organic matter content and natural fertility of ~hese soils is low. Crop response to lime and fertilizer is fair. Maintenance of fertility is difficult because~of the s~ndy texture. Frequent applications of small amounts of ferti- lizer should be made to reduce nutrient loss by leaching. The sandy surface layer reduces the suitability of these soils for nursery stock. Because of the above limitations, these soils ~re only fairly well-~uited to crops commonly grown in Suffolk County. P1C Plymouth loamy sand~ 8 15 percent slopes. This soil is found on rolling terrain or on short side slopes. The texture is similar to that described as representative for the series except that in places it is a few inches shallower to coarse sand and gravel and con- tains as much as 15 percent gravel. The hazard of erosion is moderate to severe because of the slope and sandy texture. A cropping system that in- cludes several years of close growing crops is necessary to provide adequate protection from erosion. Farming on the countour and, where practical, diversions are practices that will help control erosion. Where such prac- tices are not used, this soil should be protected by permanent cover. This soil is not well suited to crops commonly grown in the County because of slopes and droughtiness. ProC3 .p. lymouth gravelly lqamy sand: 8 - 15 percent slqpes:, erode,]. The areas of this soil are usually small and slopes are short and uniform. This soil is shallower to loose sand and gravel than the representative Plymouth soil because of past erosion. The upper layer is only 10 - 12 inches thick. Soil material in this layer is 15 - 35 percent gravel, by volume, because of the loss of finer soil particles. All the surface soil and much of the subsoil has been lost through erosion. The hazard of further erosion is moderate to severe. Crops show signs of severe moisture deficiency after short periods of dry weather. This soil is not suited to crops commonly grown in the County because of past erosion damage and extreme droughtiness. A permanent cover of plants should be maintained or restored on this soil. FRANK A. KUJA~VSKI, JR., President ALBERT J. KRUPSKI, JR., Vice~President JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, III JOHN L. BEDNOSKI, JR. HENRY P. SMITH TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 May 9, 1988 Mrs. Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner Town of Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Thornton Smith - Major Subdivision 1000-121-1-1,p/019 Dear Valerie: The Town Trustees suggest that your good office refer the above referenced project to the Conservation Advisory Council and the Suffolk County Department of Healtk Services, Office of Ecology for review of this project. The Town Trustees and the Conservation Advisory Council may wish to comment on the road drainage despoiling the Kettleholes. FAK:ip Should you have any questions, please contact this office. FVra~k~krY truly yours,/ · Ku0awski, Jr. President Board of Town Trustees FRANK A. KUJAWSKI, JR., President ALBERT J. KRUPSKI, JR., Vice-President JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, III JOHN L. BEDNOSKI, JR. HENRY P. SMITH BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hail, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 May 9, 1988 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 Mr. Steven Sanford Senior Wildlife Biologist New York State D.E.C. Bldg. 40, SUNY Stony Brook, New York 11794 Re: Thornton Smith - Major Subdivision 1000-121-1-1,p/019 Dear Mr. Sanford: The Southold Town Trustees request inclusion of the kettle holes located at "Drainage Area A", "Drainage Area B", and Open Space Area A", on the enclosed Young & Young Preliminary Subdivision Map dated and revised October 27, 1987 on behalf of Thornton E. Smith at Mattituck, in the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Tentative Freshwater Wetlands Maps. Your consideration, of this request, will be greatly appreciated. ~ .~kk ~ry truly yoursfi ! ~'ran . K~jawsKi, ar President Board of Town Trustees FAK:ip Attachments cc: Planning Board Thornton Smith file 'l /' DA-FI