Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWALSH PARK AFFORDABLE HOUSINGAugust 22, 1988 Larry Penny/John Aldred Environmental'Consultants For Fisher's Island 1453 Noyac Road, Sag Harbor, N.Y. 11963 Mr. Benjamin Oriowski Chairman~ Southoid Town Planning Board Town Hall' 53095 Main Road P.O. 'Box 728 Southold, N.Y. 11971 Attn: Walsh Park Affordable Housing Project Fisher's Island, N.Y. (SCTM No. 1000-6-2-3.1) Dear Mr. Orlowski Please find enclosed copies of correspondencelwith the Solid Waste office of the New York Statci~EC, Stony Brook, N~Y. It will be germane to your review of the Walsh Park Affordable Housing subdivision for Fisher's Is!and~ It would appea~ that the state DEC response to our letter indicates that if certain minimal pre- cautions are taken as outlined in the correspondence,the landfill history for a portion of the site should not present a major obstacle to the design and implementation of the proposal. We would also advise that the representation of the wetlands(swamp forest type) as sho~ on the Chandler, Palmer and King "Su~¢ey Map" revised July 25, 1988, showing yieid, accurately represents~our !ine'of~pink ribbons tied in the field earlier in the year. Consequently, with respect~ to wetlands, we feel that the Board should now have a good idea of their magnitude with respect to the~project. It would seem to this observer that the map can be designed based on current yield in such a Way that the wetlands will be protected, while the lots and their building areas will be sufficiently removed from them. Please don't hesitate to call on us should you require further information with respect to the wetlands and the natural resources on the site Incidentally, while I was on the site during my last visit to the island, I exa~Lined it for endangered and threatened species. I found no rare species of plants on the site~(perhaps, owing to its ~isturbed nature). The'nesting osprey on Crescent Avenue was obvious. (About which I believe you have already heard from the DEC). LTP:lp Sincere ly, LarrY enny , ~ Ellcl. ~ccl. Town Trustees New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Building 40--S.UNY, Stony Brook, New York 11794 (516) 751-7900 July 28, 1988 Thomas C. Jorling Commissioner Mr. John Aldred Environmental Consultants to Fishers Island for Southold Town Board 1453 Noyac Road Sag Harbor, NY 11963 Re: Housing project on the old dumping site on Fishers Island Dear Mr. Aldred: We have completed our review of the letter and the s',-ve¥ map submitted on June 27, 1988. Generally we have no ob3ection regarding the housing project on the old dumping site on Fishers Island, but we would like you to work in accordance with the following reservations. 1. No building, or permanent structures, can be built over landfill in Lots 2 and 3. Reason: possible settlement problems and/or gas generation. 2. Bi-annual sampling for methane is required to continue for 2 years after people inhibit homes built on site. 3. In property deed for lots 2 and 3, and open space, let us add a paragraph advising future owner that former landfill is on site. To that end, it is requested that you inform the undersigned or Paul Roth, in writing, of your steps to follow up the above reservations. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me~ Very truly yours, AP:mz cc: P. Roth S. Farkas Anit Patel Junior Engineer Larry Penny/ John Aldred Environmental Consultants to Fishers ~Island for Southold Town Board 1453 Noyac Road S~ag Harbor, N.Y. 11963 June 23, 1988 Mr. Paul Roth Division of Solid Waste N.Y. Depto of Environmental Conservation Bldg. 40 State Univ. of New York Stony Brook, N.Y. 11794 Dear Mr. Roth, Pursuant to our conversation several.weeks ago regarding an old dumping site on the grounds of the Walsh Park Benevolant Association's proposed affordable housing project on Fisher's Island, I am forwarding the material you requested. The site was bought by Island residents from a developer for the express purPose of providing affordable housing for a dwindling year round local population4 Walsh Park Benevolant has been established to implement and oversee the plano A notarized affidavit by Judge Raymond2Edw~rds (also a Southold Town Councilman) outlining the history of~,use of the site is included. A survey of the property was prepared by Chandler, Palmer & King, engineers and surveyors from NorWich_S, Connecticut and is also included. The area of debris is noted on the survey. A personal communication with Mr. Richard Strauss of Chandler, et. al. revealed that the area was discovered while digging test holes to determine sub-surface conditions. The debris consisted predominantly of metal cans and small scrap. Holes were dug to determine the limits of the debris. Holes at the periphery were dug to the full limit of the machine,, ten to twelve feet deep, and only sands were encountered. The soils in the area as mapped by the U.S~ Dept. of Agriculture (Suffolk County Soil Survey) would indicate a Carver-Plymouth Sand and Riverhead and Plymouth Very Bouldery Soil (unique to Fishers Island) to be found here. The soil map is also included. The attached site location map shows the property to be located in the north- western portion of the Island. It should be noted that this site, as well as virtually all of Fishers Island,is served by public water. The~ spurce of water is a reservoir located in the middle of the Island (see also site location map). A test for methane gas was performed on May 28, 1988 by Larry Penny. Two weeks prior to this date a slotted four inch PVC pipe was sunk in the center of the area of debris to seven to eight feet below grade. A Surveyor, Model 1238 Paul Roth NYDEC page 2 methane detector was used to perform the test. When testing for lower explosion limit, nothing registered on the meter. When testing for pPm methane, two readings were taken, five minutes apart. Readings were 75ppm and 80ppm respectively. We hope this information is Sufficient to allay any concerns ,and that we may be notified as such shortly. Should you need additional information or wish to discuss this matter in any way please feel free to contact either of us at 329-1449 or 725-4521. One of us will be visiting the island within the next few weeks ,and I would appreciate hearing from you, if only preliminarily, before then,in the event something from there may be needed. Thank you for your considerate attention to this most important matter to all Fishers Islanders. Very Truly Yours, John ~ldred Enclosures cc: John 'Clavin ,Walsh Park Benevolant Robert Villa, Suffolk County Dept. Health Town of Southold Planning Board Larry Penny/John Aldred Environmental Consultants To Fisher's Island For Southold Town Board 1453 Noyac Road Sag Harbor, N.Y. 11963 Mr. Frank A. Kujawski, Jr. President Board Of Town Trustees Town Of Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728' Southold, N.Y. 11971 Attn: Walsh Park Affordable Housing Crescent Ave. Fisher's Island, N.Y. (SCTM No. 1000-6-2-3.1) Dear Mr. Kujawski Regarding the proposal of Walsh Park Benevolent Corporation we have the following preliminary comments. We flagged the freshwater wetlands on the parcel several months ago so that they could be placed on a survey for review by involved agencies and boards during the application process~ with respect to meeting setback requirements. We have recently received verification of our flagging by Mr. Charles Hamilton of the DEC. He also informed us that the freshwater wetlands office of the DEC had received a survey with a partial wetland line and would require a completed line in,order to begin their review of the application for this project. Mr. John Clavin of Walsh Park Benevolent Corporation has informed us that he is aware of this omission on the survey and that the surveyor is in the process of completing the line. I might add that the portion of the line that is on the survey seems accurately placed and that on our trip to Fisher~s Island next week we will be rechecking the flagged line and replacing any ribbons that may have been obscured or removed. Once we have a chance to review the completed wetland line onz the revised survey we will send along our comments in satisfaction of your request. Sincerely, J~hn Aldred y Penny lI 1453 Noyac Road Sag Harbor, N.Y. 11963 March 17, 1988 TO: John Bredemeyer, III Board of Town Trustees Southold, N.Y. FROM: Lar. ry Penny Environmental Consultant On Fisher's Island Southold Town. RE: Wetlands Application No. 613 Wil!ard S. Mahood, F.I. (SCTM No. 1000-6-1-4.3) Please be advised that we have examined the Mahood parcel on Fisher's Island with respect to the above-captioned application on Saturday, March 12, 1988, pursuant to your request. We have the following ~omments concerning it for your consideration. A. The site is located on the northwest coast of Fisher's Island near Hay Harbor. It consists of tidal and freshwater wetlands plus an ~a~a of up~and adjacent to Crescent Avenue, an unpaved road served by public water. Waf~h Park, an area of some 20 acres recently purchased by Island residents and slated fo:? affordable housing lies across Crescent Avenue. The Mahood parcel is the southerly lot of a recent~ 3-lot subdivision of almost 10 acres. A house was recently built on the northernmost lot~ The lot immediately to the north of Mahood'a parce~ undeveloped. B. Based on the Suffolk County Soil Survey the upland soils are / a mix of Riverhead-Plymouth very bouldery soils , Carver-Plymouth sands and Havens loam. The wetland area which comprise approximately 40 to 50% of the parcel consist of organic soils composed of decomoosed herbaceous materials. Considerable disturbance appears to have occurred in the genera-1 upland vicinity and the area may at one time have been mined for sand and/or gravel. Large boulders found on the site attest to the Rivezh6ad-Plymouth soil type which is unique to Fisher's Island. C. The vegetation now dominating the disturbed upland area consists almost excl~;s~vely of clusters of bayberry interspersed with bluestem grass and bare areas, some of which are being used as substrates for lichen growth. Interestingly, in some parts of the disturbed, area a wetland indicator plant, sweet pepper bush, is dominant. In fact, the hill indicated on the survey as elevation 20~ is almost exclusively covered with sweet pepperbush. It appears that more poorly drained surface soils ~yere in the past pushed into the wetlands in an attempt to create filled land. These soils are now holding water, allowing wetland plants to dominate at elevations where they would not normally be so prevalent. D. The freshwater wetlands accurately depicted on the Chandler, Palmer and ~iing survey as marked by the N.Y.State DEC consist of red maple and tupelo trees, sweet pepperbush, cinnamon fern and wild grape (Vitis sp.) vine. Phragmites has invaded in low spots that have been disturbed and in which drainage patterns have been altered. E. In order to maximize septic and house site setbacks and thereby minimize potential impacts on the adjacent wetland, we would recpmmend that the septic location be moved to within 10' of the northeast property line and the house location be moved to within 40' of the line (see attached sketch on survey). Setback requirements for structures migbt be given variances in order to accomodate further wetland protection. F. We have also identified a more environmentally acceptable clearing limit which protects undisturbed vegetation between upland and wetland. Five (5) orange ribbons placed on vegetation in the field on March 12 identify our recommended clearing limit. The approximate position of this line is shown in red on the antached sketch. A snow fence and staked hay bales should be positioned along this line before grading work begins. Grading of the small hill behind this. line should be gradual. Adhering to this mitigation in terms of clearing and fencing will limit surface runoff into the wetland. G. Planting should be limited to native species with minimal fertiliza- tion and spray needs. Plants such as eastern redcedar, bayberry, black cherry, Chokeberry (Pyrus) and sumacs would occur naturally.. Ideally the bluestem grass would be allowed to reintroduce itself through a nurse crop of fescues planted as a groundcover. H. Finally, we would have indicated some impacts in Part 2 of the EAF. Even though this project is proposed on a disturbed site and the structures fall outside or at the jurisdictional limit re the wetlands as per the provisions of Southold's Town Code, nevertheless, it is our contention that there are impacts to be addressed. Specifically, 1. Under "1" the answer should be "yes", the site will be regraded and a small hill will be altered; 2. Under "3" the answer should be "yes"; a potential for siltation into the wetland exists during construction as a result of rain runoff; mitigation has been provided above to address this impact; 3. Under "6", the answer should be "yes"---same mitigation as provided under 2 above; 4. Under "8" the answer should be "yes". An active osprey nest exists directly adjacent to the project site. Construction noise and activity wili~affecn breeding and fledging behaviour. Mitigation should include a construction window outside of the time of the nest's occupation, design of structure, limiting height, minjmiz_ing exterior lighting., driveway location, and the provision of tall screening between house and nest. Mahood / penny.-- o 5. Undar "11" the answer should be"yes"---the proposed house will eliminate an unbroken vista to Long Island Sound from the road; 6. Under "19" the answer might more probably be "yes"--because of the osprey nest there is likely to be controversy. Attach. FRANK A. KUJAWSKI, .IR., 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 Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 June 28, 1988 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 Mr. Larry Penny 1453 Noyac Road Sag Harbor, New York 11963 Re: Walsh Park Affordable Housing Project Fishers Island - 1000-6-2-3.1 Dear Mr. Penny: May we have your written comments regarding the above project as requested in our letter of June 8th? We have been advised that the D.E.C. has staked the property. Will you kindly look at those stakes and make your comments on them as well? Very truly yours, FAK:ip cc: file Frank A. Kujawski, Jr. President Board of Town Trustees FRANK A. KUJAWSKI, JR., President ALBERT J. KRUPSKI, JR., Vice-President JOHN M. BREDEI~EYER, III JOHN L. BEDNOSKI, JR. HENRY P. S~IITH BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 June 8, 1988 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 Mr. Larry Penny 1453 Noyac Road Sag Harbor, New York 11963 Re: Walsh Park Affordable Housing Project Fishers Island - 1000-6-2-3.1 Dear Mr. Penny: Transmitted herewith for your review and information, is a Long Environmental Assessment Form and a copy of the proposal for the above project. Please forward your written comments to this office at the earliest possible date. Very truly yours, Frank A. Kujawski, Jr., Pres. Board of Town Trustees FAK:ip Attachment cc: Conservation Advisory Council file Southold, N.Y, 11971 (516) 765-1938 Environmental Analysis Unit DEC, Building 40, Room 219 SUNY Stony Brook, NY 11794 RE: Walsh Park Affordable Housing Project SCTM ~ 1000-6-2-3.1 Gentlemen: Enclosed please find a completed Long Environmental Assessment Form and a copy of the map of the major subdivision of Walsh Park Affordable Housing Project. This project is unlisted and an initial determination of nonsignificance has been made. We wish to coordinate this action to confirm our initial determination. May we have your views on this matter. Written comments on this project will be received at this office until June 10, 1988. .We sh~ll interpret lack of response to mean there is no objection by your agency in regard to the State Enviro.nmental Quality Review Act, and our agency will assu~e the status of Lead agency. Enc: cc: Department of Health Services Very truly yours, BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. CHAI R_MAN TO~N OF SOUTHOLD EAF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ' 'PART · P_roject Inforntation ~OTICE: This Oocu~nt ~ desk?ned to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significa effect on the er,v(rc-,.~nt. Please com~lete the entire Data Sheet. Answers to these questions will be consi as oart of the a-po)ication for approval and may be subject to further verification and~ublic review. Provi any additional information you believe will be needed to comolete PARTS 2 and 3. It is ex:ecteo that comoIetion of the EAR will be deoendent on information currently available and will not involve new studies, research or investiqation. SO indicate and s~ecify each instance. ADD2ESS AND NAME OF APPLICANT: (P.O.) .... ~--. ' (State~ (Zip) If information requiring such additional work is unavai~abl~, NAME ARD ADDRESS OF OWMER (If Different~ '('Name ~ (Street~ BUS~I NCSS PHONE: DESCRIPTION Or PqOJECT: (Briefly describe type of mroject or action) . (State) (Zip} (PLEASE COMPLETE EACH QUESTION - Indicate N.A. if not applicable) SITE DESCRIPTION {Physical settin~ of overall Project, both develoned and unoevelo~ed areas).. ). G~nera) character of the land: C~nerally uniform slope_~ Generally uneven and rollinq or irregu)e Present land use: Urban , Industrial , Co~nercial Suburban _.~___.., ~ural Forest .. , Agriculture , Othe'------r (~.. ~----T'= " ' - -' Tote] acreage of Project a~ea:2q,~acres. Aoproxtmate acreage: Presently After Comnletion .eadow or rushla d acre /& ~'" __acres Forested . 0 _acres _O_acres A~ricultura) 4~) _acres C~.acres 'Iht)eno {Freshwater or - Tidal as net Articles 24, ~ ar c.C.L.) _(~)~acres ~ acres '~ra: IS "~eoomlnant soil tyPe(S) on oro)ect site? ~ Lre :nerm ~PdrocK Outcro~o~nos On ~rnloc~lte? ~. ~-a: ~$ Oe~tn to bedrock? y&Jl~k ...................... (~n ~eet) 'Hater Surface Area Unveget~ed ~rock, earth or fill) Roads, buildinqs aha other pave~ surfaces Other (indicate tyne) ..... .......... Presently After Comple Oacres 0 acres dC> a ~ acres ~ ~ __acres .~a~ 6. Approximate ~ercen:age of proposed oroject site with slooes: O-10S _L%; greater__%. %; 15: or 7. Is ~roject contiguous to, or contain a buildinq or site listed on th~ National Register of Historic Places? Yes _~No 8. What is the depth to the water table? feet 9. Do hunting or fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? Yes ..X No lO. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endanoered - ,Yes .~ ~Io, according to - Identify each species 11. Are there any unioue or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e, cliffs dunes~other geological formations - Yes _~ No. (Describe ' 12. Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area -.Yes X No. 13.__Yes Does the present..~k~Nosite offer or include scenic views or vistas known to be important to the community) 14. Streams within or contiguous to project area: _. a. Name of stream and name of river to which it is tributary 15. 16. bo Lakes, Ponds, ~etland areas within or contiguous to project area: a. Name : b. Size (in acres) What is the dominant land use and zoning classification within a 1/4 mile radius of the project {e.g. Single family residential, R-2) and the scale of development (e.g. 2 story). PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) a. Total contiguous acreage owned by project sponsor ~2~, ~ acres. Project acreage developed:_~. acres initially; acres ultimately. Project acreage to remain undeveloped. Length of project, in miles: ~Jl~k .{if appropriate) If project is an expansion of existiqg, age,...t~ ; developed, acreage M/~ indicate p~rcent of expansion proposed: Muter of off-strut parking soaces existing 0 Maximum vehicular trios generated per hour If residential: Number and type of housing units: . One Family Two Family Initial Ultimate i. If: Orientation '::e~gnoornood-City-Regional Co,nl~lercla] _ Industrial '...~l~ J. Total he~gn~ of tallest nronosed strucCure building s~uare foot- (upon comp)etlon of project) Multiple Family Condominium Estimated Emo)oyment feet. How much natural material (i.e. rock, earth, etc.} will be removed from the site - tons ___Lcub i c yard: How many acres of veqetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) ~ill be removed fro~ site - (~ acres. Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important veaetation be removed by th~s project? Yes .~(. No - Are there any plans for re-vegetation to replace that removed during construction? Yes X If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction ~ months, {inCluding demolition). If multi-phased ~roject: a. Total number of phases anticipated No. ~/~/,~ b. Anticipated date of commencement phase I month demolition) ~ _ c. Approximate completion date final phase month d. Is phase 1 financially dependent on subseouent phases? 8. Will.blasting occur during construction? Yes ~ No .- 9. Nu~nber of jobs generated: during construction ~; after project is.completJ O. lO. Number of jobs eliminated by this project ..(~) . ll. Will project require relocation of any projects or facili'ties? Yes (~) No. If yes, explain: year (including year. Yes No 12. a. Is surface or subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? Yes .~/(, No.' b. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) c. If surface disposal name of stream into which effluent will be discharged 13. Will surface area of existing lakes, ponds, streams, bays or other surface waterways be increased or decreased by proposal? . Yes _.~ No. 14. Is project or any portion of project located in the 100 year flood pl'ain? Yes ~-, No 15. a. Does project involve disposal of solid waste? Yes ~ No b. If ~es, will an existing solid waste disposal facility be used? Yes No c. If yes, give name: : location d. dill any wastes not go into a sewage disposal sys~em~r into a sanitary landfill? Yes If yes, indicate type(s) 16. Will prnject use herbicides or pesticides? Yes ~ No 17. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour Der day)? ' Yes )~ ~No 18. Will project produce operating no~se exceeding the-local ambience noise levels? lO. Will project result in an increase in energy use? Yes X No. 20. If wa~er supply is from wells indicate pumo~ng capacity 21. 22. Tota) anticipated water usage per oay Zoning: gals/minute. ~ J~ ~als/day. a. i/hat ~s dominant zen}no classification of site? b. Current specific zenana classification of si:e c. !s oroeosed use co-s~sten: ,v~tq Present zon~nq? d. If no, indicate aes~rec Zon~na ~k[J~ 26. Ap~rov~ 1 s: a. Is any Federal permit required? Yes .% No b. Does ~roject involve State or Federal funding or financing? c. Local and Regional approvals: AD~roval Required {Yes, No) (Type) Submittal A~oroval {Date) (Date) City, Town, Village Board City, Town, Village Planning Board City, Town, Zoning Board City, County Health Department Other local agencies Other regional agencies State Agencies Federal Agencies C. INFORPATIONAL DETAILS Attach any additional information a~may~qFm~oeeded to clarify 'your project. If there are or may be any adverse impacts associate~h tJ~i~posal~ ~lease discuss such impacts and the ~asures whic~ taken to mitigate or av~i~he~/ / ~/ ~ ~ . can be PREPARER'SSI ~NATURE :~~ ~... .-. ///' TITLE: ~4Z~' ~/J~&~ ~ m -4- EAF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSHEN~ - PART II P__roject Impacts and Their Magnitude ~9'-s ..... ~ Careful ly) - In completing :ne form the reviewer should be guided by' the question: Have my decisions and determin~ been reascnZole? The reviewer is not expected to be an exoert environmental analyst. - Identifying that an effect will be potentially large (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessar A~?ificant. Any large effect must be evaluated in PART 3 ~o determine significance. ~Y ~den~fying e~tec~ ~n celumn 2 simply asks that it be looked at further. - The Examoles provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of effects and wherever mossib!e the of magn~-E~-~e that would trigger a response in column 2. The examples are generally apolicable through: State and for mos~ situations. But, for-any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thre~ may be more appropriate for a Potential Large Impact rating. - Each project, on each site, in each local'ity, will vary. Therefore, the examples have been offered as They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each nuestion. - The nuttier of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question. INSTRUCTIONS (Read Carefully) a. Answer each of the 18 questions in PART 2. Answer Ye___~s if there will be any effect. b. Maybe answers should be considered as Yes answers. If answering Yes to a ouestion then check the appropriate box (column 1 or 2) to indicate the ooten size of the impact. ~f impact threshold equals or exceeos any example provided, check column 2. impact wi]l occur Put threshola is lower than examole, check co]umn 1. If reviewer has doub~ about the size of the impact ~en consider the imoact as ootentially large ant procee~ to PART 3. - If a potentially large impact or effect can be reduced by a change in the project to a less than magnitude, place a Yes in column 3. A No response indicates, that such a reduction is no: Possible. ~_. SMALL TO : POTENTIAL ~' CAN IHPAC MODE~TE LARGE REDUCED IMPACT !MPAC¥ PROJECT C S ) NO YES ®( Any constru.~tion on slopes of i5% or greater, (15 foot rise oer lO0 foo~ of leng~!l), er where the Qeneral slooes in the project area exceed 10%. - Construction on Land where t~e deoth'to the water table is less ~han 3 feet. IMPACT O~ LAND ~ILL TNERE BE A~; EFFECT AS A RESULT O? A PHYSICAL CHANGE TO PROJECT SITE? ' ~xamo?es that Would APPly to Column 2 ~ rons~ruc~ion of oared narkinq area ~nr l,~9 or more vehicles. -~ C~ns~ruc~ion on land where bedrock iS exoosed or qeneral]y w~n~n 3 fee~ of existing ground surface. ~ ConsZruc%~o~'cna, will continue for more ~han I year or involve m~e ~han one q~.ase or s~age. ~ ExCavation ~or m~n,ng 9ur~oses that would r~gve more than l,O00 .2OHS o£ matural m~terlal {~.e. rock or soil)=per year. _~ Csns%ruct~on of any new sanitary landFiIl. Construction in a designated floodway. Other impacts: 2. WILL THERE BE AN EFFECT TO ANY UNIQUE OR UNUSUAL LA. NO FnRMSy~ FOUND ON THE SITE? {i.e. cltff~, dunes, oeoloqical forma- ~ tions, etc.) ' ' ~ Specific land forms: - I¥!_~PACT ON WATER " '' '. NO WILL PROJECT AFFECT ANY WATER BODY DESIGNATED AS ...... PROTECTED? {Under Articles 15, 24, 25 of the Envir- onmental Conservation Law, E.C.L.) E×am~les that Would A~ply to Column 2 Dredgino more than 10g cubic yards of material from channel of a protected stream. Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland. Other impacts: 4. WILL PROJECT AFFECT ANY NO~-PROTECTED EXISTING OR NFFt NO YES BODY OF tlATER? Examples that Would Apply to Column 2 ~ A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water or ~x~re than a l0 acre increase or 'decrease<~ ~ Construction of,a body of water that exceeds lO) acres of surface area. Other imnacts: WILL PROJECT AFFECT _URF~CE OR GROUND~¢ATER nUALITY? Examot~ that !.!ou)d Apply to Column 2 Prnj~ct will require a discnarge permit, Project requires use of a source of water that does not nave approval to serve proposeo project. Project reou~res water suDoly from welts with greater t~an d5 Qa))ons Per minute pumo~ng capacity. Construction or o~eraC~on causing any cont2m~ration Of ~ Public water supply system. Pro,oCt will aOversely affect grounowater. L~:u~u effluent w~)l be Conveyeo off the site to fac~ It~es wn~cn presently dO not ex~st or nave Inadequate capacity. _ . Pro]eOt reQu~r~ng a facility that would use water in excess of 20,qOO ga)/ons ~er ~av. ~Pro]eC~ ~1]] J~keJy cause Siltation or other d~scnarqe ~nto an e~st~ng :::y of water to the extent that Chore w)l) ~e an eOvtous visual Contrast tO natural Con~lt~ons. .K:(ALL TO POTE.NTIAL I CAN I'IP~CT 8E ~gERATE LARGE REDUCED BY )~PACT IMPACT P°ojrrT C~ANGE ~ES ES :S ) S ) YES ®© ~t~er Imoact$: 6. '.¢ILL PROJECT ALTER DRAINAGE FLO, r, PATTER~IS OR SURFACE UATER ,NO YES RUNOFF? ........................................ .......... ®0 ExamQle Anply to Colurm 2 that '~ould __ Pro)ect wnuld impede flood water flows. ~ P~.iect is likely to cause substantial e~sion. -- P~ject i~ incompatible with existi~ drainage patte~s. Other imnacts: 7. PILL PROJECT AFFECTAIRQUALITY? ........... ~ ........... IlO YES F×a*oles that Hould Ap¢ly to Colum 2 ~ PmJect will induce l,gO0 or ~ vehicle trips in any given hour. ~ PmJect will result in the incineration of ~ than ~ ton of refuse per hour. ~ P~Ject emission rate of all contamtnan:s will exceed 5 lbs. mcr hour or a heat source P~ouc3ng ~re than lO million BTU's per hour. Othmr tn~oacts: 8. WILL PROJECT AFFECT ANY THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES? Examoles that Would Apoly to Column 2 ~ Reduction of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal list, using the site, over or near site or found on the site. ~ Removal of any ~ortion of a critical or sionificant wild- life hab~C. ~ Aonlicatinn of Pesticide or he,~icidJ over more than L~'ic~ a yea)' o~nem t~n ~or~.~:¢~ur~l p~rl~c~es' ~ Other impacts: .NO YES ®0 S~tALL TO PflTENTIAL £A;t I~IPACT ~DEP~TE LA;~GE REDUCED I;4PAC7 I"P~CT PROJECT CH; S .: ) ) 9. !tILL P~OJECT SUBSTA:iTIALLY AFFECT t!ON-THREATE;IED OR NQ YES ENDA~(GERED SPECIES? ....................................... Prolect ~ould substantially interfere w~tn an,, resident or m~grator¥ flS~ or wrld)lfe species. ProJecc reoulres the ~o~oval of more than lq acres ~ f ~ature Forest (over tO~ years in ane) Or OtOer Iocal;v ~mportamt vegetatlon. -7- J'~II.L TH~ P~aJF£T AFFECT VIEUS, ~ISTAS gR THE VISUAL NO CHARACTER gF TIlE NEIGHBQRNF)QD OR C ~'~TTw Examnles_ that Pould Apply to Column 2 . An '~ncompatible visual affect caused by the intromuctinn of new materials, colors and/or fo~ms in contrast to the surroundin? landscaoe. A oroject easily visible, not easily screened, that is obviously different from nthers around it. - Project will result in the elimination or major screening of scenic views or vistas known to be important to the area. Other impacts: .IMPACT ON NT~TOIIC RESOURCES ll. WILL PROJECT I~PACT ANY SITE OR STRUCTURE OF HISTORIC, NO PRE-UIST~PIC AR PALEONTOGICAL II~POPTANCE? .............. _'" Examoles that Mould ADoly to Column 2 ~l~ ~ Pr~.iect occurina wholly or martially within or contiguous to any facility or site listed on the National Renis~er of historic places. ~ Any impact to an archeological site or fossil bed located within the project site. Other impacts: IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE & RECREATION 12. MILL THE PRnJECT AFFECT THE OUANTITY OR OUALITY OF EXISTING NO OR FUTURE OPE~ SPACES OR RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES? ...... Examoles that ~lould Aoply to Column'2 Q ~ The permanent foreclosure of a future recreQtional'opoortunity. ~ A major reduction of an open space important to the comunity. ~ Other imoacts: 13. !'ILL TNERE ~E AN EFFECT TO EXISTING' TRANSPORTATION SYSTF"~ ~xamo)~s ~ Alteration oF presenc PatCerns of ~ve~en~ of neoPie and/or __ Prolect will resu]t in severe :raffle grobJems. ~ 3ther ~rPacts NO -R: ~ALL Tn mOTE~'(TIAL CA;I I;tPACT ~E I MODERATE LARGE REDUCED ~¥ _~P~CT ['m~CT PRqJECT C?~NGE YES ) YES YES 14. 15. 16. S~ALL TO POTE.~TIAL CAi( IHPACT C~ ;~DEPJTE LARGE REDUCED BY ~ IMPACT IqPACT PROJECT CMAN~ ES JS ) I~P~CT ON ENERGY $1ILL PROJECT ,AFFECT THE COMMUNITIES SOURCES OF FUEL OR NO ENERGY SUPPLY? ........................................... Examples that Would Apply to Column 2 Project causing Qreater than 5% increase in any form of energy used in municipality. Project requiring the creation or extension of an energy transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 sinqle or'two family residences. Other impacts: WILL THERE BE OBJECTIflXABLE ODORS, NOISE, GLARE, VIBRATION NO YES or ELECTRICAL DISTURBANCE AS A RESULT.OF THIS PROJECT? .... Examoles that ~ould Aooly to Column 2 Blasting within 1,SOO feet of a hospital~ school or other sensitive facility. Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day). Project will nroduce ooerating noise exceedin, the local ambient noise levels for noise ou~sioe of structures. Projec~ will remove na;ural barriers that would act as a noise screen. Other impacts: ~MP~CT 0~] HEALTH & HAZ.ARfl~ !'IILL PROJECT AFFECT PUBLIC IIEALTH AND SAFETY? ....... ...... ~N~ YFS Examples that t¢ould Apply to Column 2 Project will cause a risk of exglosion or release of hazardous substances (i.e. oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) in the event of accident or uose~ conditions, or there will he a chronic lo~,~ level discharge or emission. Project that will resul: in the ~ial of "hazardous wastes" (i.e. toxic, pnisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritating, infectious, etc., includinn w~stes that are solid, semi-solid, liquid or contain gases.) Storaoe facilities for one million or more gallnns of li~uified natural gas or other liquids. Other ~moacts: 17. WILL PROJECT AFFECT THE CHAPACTE~ nf THE EXISTING NO YES COX~NITY? ................................................ ®C) Example that Would Apoly to Column 2 __ The population of the City, Town or Village in which the project is located is likely to grow by more than 5% o~ resident human :opulation. __ The municipal budgets for capital expenditures or opera- ting services will increase by are than 5% per year as a result of this project. ' __ Will involve any de.anent facility of a non-agricultural use in an agricultural district or remove prime-agricultural lands f~m cultivation. The project will reolace or eliminate existing faciliti~s, structures or areas of historic importance to the community. Develo~.~ent will induce an influx of a ~articular age grouo with special neeos. Project will set an important precedent for future proiects. Project will relocate 15 or more employees in one ormore businesses. 18. Other impacts: IS THERE PUBLIC CONTROVERSY CONCERNING THE PROJECT? ....... NO YES Examples that Would Apply to Column 2 0 Either government or citizens of adjacent COnTnunities nave expressed opposition or rejected the pro lect or nave not been contacteO. Objections to the pro,~ect from within the comraunity. IF ANY ACTION IN PART 2 IS IDENTIFIED AS A POTENTIAL LARGE IMPACT OR IF YOU CANNOT DETERMINE '-' THE MAGNITUDE OF IMPACT, PROCEED TO PART 3. - PORTIONS OF EAF COMPLETED FOR THIS PROJECT: DETERMINATION PART I ,, PART II , PART 3_ Si'tALL F(1 POTE~TtJc CAb iHPACF 2E IODERATE LARGE- REDUCED BY IM. PACT IIIPACT PROJECT CHANGE S ) Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF (~arts 1, 2 and 3) and considerinq both the maqnitude and imoortance of each impact, it is reasonably determined that: The project will result in no major impacts and, therefore, is one which may not cause significant damaoe to the environment. B. Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been included as part of the proposed project.' C ....The project will result in one or more major adverse imoacts that cannot be reduced and may cause significant damage to the env,ronm PREPARE A NEr-ATIVE DECLARATION C) -' PREPARE A NEGATIVE DECLARATION " C) PREPARE POSITIVE DECLARATION PROCEED WITH EIS ~ignature of R~spons~Oie Offic~ai ,n Lead Agency ~r~r~t or ty~e nare of responsloie official in Lead Agenc~