Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-4306Albert J. Krupski, President Town Hail John Holzapfel, Vice President 53095 Main Road William G. Albertson P.O. Box 1179 Martin H. Garrell Southold, New York 11971 Peter Wenczel Telephone (516) 765-1892 Fax (516) 765-1823 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Office Use OnlY: DATE REC.: ~_~Coastal Erosion Permit Application ~ Coastal Erosion Variance Application ~r~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~[~ __Wetland Permit Application ~ Waiver from Chapter 97(Application/perm _~Trustee Lands Permit Application ~2 4~ ~randfather Permit Application ~6mpleted Apps. Date: ~%~ ~0~¥~ @F $0U?~©[[ {.-Inspection date: ........... ~.AC comments-Date: Sent~/D~J~)Rec.~/~7 ~ariance Required: (Y/N~~*~ ~eighbors notified-Date: SEQRA TYPe O~ Coord,: Date sent __SEQRA Determin./date:~o~-'~--/q~'~& ~ __Public Hearing/date: ~.~ &~ ~ ~t ~ Findings: Approved (Y/N) Po~i:~3~I~ Special Conditions: (Y/N) (see file) Application Fee: __Permit(s) issued-date: Application Number;SCTM%1000-~--~--Qo~ Date:~-~4 Applicant: OJg~q[~q4~ 6~2~D~-~ Address: ~ ~ ~.~l~ :~ Phone (~)~-~ Interest: (owner, consultant,lessee,etc.)~~ ~ner of Property: ~ Address Phone ( ) S~ject Property Location: (Provide LILCO Pole ~, Distance to cross Streets if not on location map) THIS IS NOT A PERMIT Yds. to be excavated: ~ Yds. to be filled: Manner in which material will be removed or deposited: Width of canal, creek or bay fronting property: Depth at low tide: ~i~- Aver. rise in tide: Distance to nearest channel: ~ Distance project extends beyond similar projects in area: Area zoning: Land area in acres: Is project for private or business use: Intended use of property: ~-~V~c Describe known prior operations conducted on premises: Has any prior license or permit been issued to erect structures, dredge, or deposit fill on said premises: Y~-~ ~5~ Has any license or permit ever been revoked or suspended by a Governmental Agency: ~ Project Description The project description must also include plans for reclamation of land disturbed during construction of the principle and accessory structures and underground structures (i.e., pipeline and septic system; make additional attachments if necessary). THIS IS NOT A PERMIT 14-16-2 (2/87)-- 7c 617.21 SEQR Appendix A State Environmental Quality Review FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM Purpose: the full EAI is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an orderl,, manner, whether a project or action mav be significant 1lie question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to,answer, Frequent- ly, there are asj]ects of a prolect that are subjective or unmeasureable It is also understood that those who determine significance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may be technically expert in environmental analysis In addition, man'y who have knowledge m one particular area ma~, not be aware of the broader concerns affecting tile question of significance 1 he full [AF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination process has been orderly, comprehensive in nature, vet flexible to allow introduction of information to fit a project or actio~ Full EAF Componenls: The full EAF is comprised of three parts: Purl 1: Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic project data. it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3. Part 2: Focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action. It provides guidance as to wh~'ther an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially- large impact. Tile form also identifies whether an ~mpact can be mitigated or reduced. Part 3: f any ~moact in Part 2 is identified as ootentiaJly-large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not tile impact is actually important. DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE--Type I and Unlisled Actions Identify lhe Portions of EAE completed for this proiect: [] Part 1 [] Part 2 ~Part 3 Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF (Parts 1 and 2 and 3 if appropriate), and any other supporting information, and considering both the magitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the lead agency that: [] A. The ~)roject will not resull in any large and important impact(s) and. therefore, is one which will have a ~ignificant impact on the environment, therefore a ne§ative declaration will I~e la~,~are~J. [] B. Although the proiect could have a s~nificant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been required. therefore a CONDITIONED negative cleclarafion will be prepared.* [] C. Tile project may resolt in one or more large and important impacts that may have a significant .~npact on the environment, therefore a positive declaration will be prepared. * A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Achons Name of Action Name of Lead Agency Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agencv Title of Responsible Officer Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer Ill different from responsible officer} Date 1 PART 1--PROJECT INFORMATION Prepared by Proied Sponsor NOTICE: Thisdoct~ment is designed to assist in determining whether t~eaction proposednray havea significant effect on tim environment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E. Answers ~o these questions will be considered as part of d~e apphcatim~ for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additional information you heheve will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3. It is expected that completion of the full EAF will be dependeut on information currently available aRd will not involve new studies, research or investigation. If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specify each instance. NAME OF ACTION LOCATION OF ACTION (~nc~ude Street Add~ess, Municipality and County) NAME OF APPLICANT/SPONSOR ~ ~~ ~ BUSINESS TELEPHONE ADDRESS CiTY/PO . ' STATE ~ ZiP CODE NAME OF OWNER (If diff~ent) BUSINESS TELEPHONE ADDRESS CITY/PO I STATE ] ZIP COD[ DESCRIPTION OF ACTIO~ Please Complele Each Questlon--lndicale N.A. if not applicable A. Site Description Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas. 1. Present [and use: [~]Orban [~hrdustrial [:2Commercial [~Residential (suburban) ~ura[ (nonLfarm} ~Forest EJAgriculture E~Other 2. Total acreage of project area: ~ acres, APPROXIMATE ACREAGE PRESENTLY AFTER COMPLETION Meadow or Brushland (Non agricultural) acres acres Forested acres acres Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland, pasture, etc.) acres acres Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24, 25 of ECL) acres acres Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill) acres acres Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces , · acres a~res Other (Indicate type) ' ' acres acres 3. What is predominant soil type(s) on proiect site? a. Soil drainage: [~ell drained [(~o % of site [~Moderateiy well drained % of site E~Poorly drained % of site b. If any agricuitoral land is involved, how many acres of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the NYS [.and Classification System? __ acres. (See I NYCRR 370). 4 Are there bedrock outcroppings on proiect site? E3Yes [~o a What is depth to bedrock? (in feet] 2 5. Approximate percen[age of proposed project site with slopes: % ~]10-15% % [~F1~% or greater % 6. Is prolect substantia]iv conpguous to. or con).a~in a building, site. or district, listed on the State or the National Registers of Historic Places? L~Yes 7 Is project substantially contiguous to a s~te listed on tile Register of National Natural Landmarks? E]Yes [~o 8. What is the depth of the water table? O (in feet) 9. Is site located over a tlrimarv, principal or sole source aquifer? []Yes 10 Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities ~resentlv exist in the project area? [~es UNo 11 Does project site,~m any specms of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered? [~]~ e. LeT"No According to Identif'. each species 12 Are ttmre any unique..or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, other geological formations) CJYes [~o Describe 13 Is the project site. presently used bv the cornmunity or neighborhood as an open space or recreation a~ea? [Yes ~'o If' yes, explain 14. Does th, e p/r. esent site include scenic views known to be important to the community? [~No 15. Streams within or contiguous to project area: a Name ot Stream and name of River to which it is tributary 16 Lakes. ponds, wetland areas within or co~ntiguous to project area: a Name ~ ~ (.ia~'v~:~i'4~:t-~O~ b. Size (In acres) 17. Is the site served bv existing public utilities? E~es [~No a} If Yes. does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? [~Yes ~No b) If Yes. will improvements be necessary to allow connection? [Z]Yes [~o 18 Is the site located m an agricultura[~trict certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA. Section 303 and 304? E3Yes 19. Is the site located in or substantially~:/~ntiguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 of the ECL. and 6 NYCRR 6177 [~Yes ~lNo 20 Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes? J~Yes J~o B. Project Description 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project sponsor IV'A-- acres b. Project acreage to be developed: 't,/'.~_ acres initially; Ig~. acres ultimately. c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped klA. acres d. Length of project, in miles: l~. (If appropriate) e. If the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed [ Number of off-street parking spaces existing ~,A. ; proposed g. Maxm~um vehicular trips generated r)er hour q~4~ (opon completion of project)? h If residential: Number and type of housing units: One Family Two Familv Multiple Family Condominium Ultimately ~',A. ~.A-_ W.A-.. i. Dimensions (in feet] of largest proposed structure ~ height: ~"i~' width: ~:~'~- length, j. Linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy is? gr~_ ft. 3 2. How mnch natural material {ie., rock, ~rth, etc) will be removed from the site? N'~ tons/cubic yards 3. will disturbed areas be reclaimed? ~Yes ~]No [~/A a. If yes, for what intended purpose is the site being reclaimed? b. Will topsoil he stockpiled for reclamation? [~Yes ©No c, Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? [~Yes [~No 4. How many acres of vegetation [trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site? ~r~ acres. 5. Will any matu? f/orest [over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this project? OYes ~No . 6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction ~ ~ months, [including demolition). 7. If mnlti-phased: a. Total number of phases anticipated [number). b. Anticipated date of commencement phase 1 month year, (including demolition). c. Approximate completion date of final phase month year. d. Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phas/es? ~]Yes ~No 8. Will blasting occur during construction? E3Yes ~No 9. Number of jobs generated:"during construction g~' ; after project is complete 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project ~'~' 11. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? ~Yes ~ If yes, explain 12. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? E3Yes a. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) and amount b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged 13. ls subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? I~Yes [~o Type 14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? ~Yes E~o Explain 15. Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain? C/Yes 16. Will the project generate solid waste? ~Yes a. If yes, what is the amount per month tons b. If yes, will an exis{ing solid waste facility be used? I~Yes ~No c. If yes, give name ; location d. Will any wastes no! go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? r~Yes ~]No e. If Yes, explain 17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste? [~Yes a. If yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal? tons/month. b, If yes, what is the anticipated site life? years. 18. will project use herbicides or pesticides? ~Yes [~o / 19. will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day]? [~]Yes [~o 20. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels? E~Yes [~No 21. Will project resLdt in an increase in energy use? {~Yes ~No If yes , indicate type(s) 22. ]f water supply is from wells, indicate pumping capacity '~ gallons/minute. 23. Total anticipat¢d water usago per day ~'~ gallons/~ay. 24. Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding? L~Yes ~No If Yes, explain ~t~ ~ ~,-l~r-t~ ~ tg~-g_,z..ed' ~'~,~fi~ ~ 4 25. Approvals Required: Submittal : Type Date City Town. Vilhl. P*c, ard IL~Yes rJNo ~ P~5~.TT-(m~ Cji5 Town. Village t'lamling Board ~Yes [~o City, TowJ~ Zumtm Board gYes ~o City, Countx IIc,,,}d] Deoartment ~Yes Other Local Agencies EJYes [~o Other Regiunal Agencies ~' ~~ ~ S~ate Agencies ~es ~No ~, ~5 ~ Federal Agencies ~es ~No ~ ~ ~ ~ O. Zoning ~nd Planning Information ~ Does proposed action involve a planning or zon ng decision~ ~Yes If Yes indicate decision reouired: L3zonin~ anaendment ~zoning variance ~s~eciat use permit ~subdivision ~site plan ~new revision of master plan ~resoorce management plan ~other 2. What is the zoning classification(s~of the site~ 3 What is lbe maximum ~otential development of tbe site if developed as permitted by the present zoning~ What is the proposed zoning of the site~ 5 What is the maximum ~otential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning~ 6. Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans~ ~s ~No 7. What are the predominant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a ~A mile radius of proposed action~ 8. Is the proposed action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses within a ~ mile~ ~ ~No ~. If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed~ a. What is the minimum lot size proposed~ 10 Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of sewer or water districts? ~Yes ~o 11 Will tbe proposed action crea~demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police, fire protectionJ? gYes L~o a. If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? ~Yes ~No 12. Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? ~Yes ~o a. If ~es, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? ~Yes ~No D. Informational D~t~ils Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarif~ vour project. If there are or may be any adverse impacts associated with vour proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or avoid them. E. Verifia~tion I certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge. A pplica n t/S ponsor~ ~ m~~ ~ Date Signature / ~ ~~ t~- Title ~ ~ ~~ If Ihe action is in lhe Coasta'J ~rea, and ~ou are a state agency, complete the Coaslal Assessment Form before proceeding wilh Ibis assessment. Part 2mPROJECT IMPACTS AND THEIR MAGNITUDE Respm~sibility of Lead Agency General Informalion [Read Carefully) In ((m~pl~'ling ~he form dm r~'view~r should be ~t~i(h~d by the question: Have my respo ~s .* aqd determinations been identi[ymg that an impact will be potenti~d[y la~ge (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessarily significant, Any large impa( t must be evalt~ated in P,~,R [ 3 to determine significance, ider~tifying an m~pact in '(~iumn 2 simply asks that it'be [o()ked at furtbm ~be Examples provided are to assist the r(vi(,wer by showing types of impacts and wherever possible the threshold of magnitude that would trigger a response in column 2. ~be examples are generally applicable thtough~ut the Sta~e and lot most situations. But, for any specific pro~ect or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be appropriate for a ~otentia[ Large Impact response, thus requiring evaluation in Part 3. The impacis of eacb proiect. (m each site, in each locality, wi]] vary. Therefore, the examples are illustrative and bare been offered as guidance They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each question. The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question. In identifying impacts, consider long term, short term and cumlative effects. Inslrudio.s (Read carefn]ly) . a. Answer each of the 19 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there will be any impact. b. Maybe answers should be considered as Yes answers. c. If answering Yes to a question then check the appropriate box (column I or 2) to indicate the potential Size of the impact. If impact threshold equals or exceeds any example provided, check column 2. If impact will occur but threshold ~s lower than example, check column 1. d If reviewer has doubt about size of the impact then consider the impact as potentially large and proceed to PART 3. e. I[ a potentially large impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated by change(s) in the project to a small to moderate [mpac(, also cheek the Yes box in column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction is not possible. This must be explained in Part 3. 1 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By IMPACT ON LAND Impact Impact Project Change Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site? ~NO ~YES [xamples that would apply to column 2 Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise per 100 ~ ~ ~Yes ~No foot of length), or where the general slopes in the project area exceed 10%. Construction on land where the depth to the water table is less than ~ ~ ~Yes ~No 3 feet. Construction of paved parking area for 1,000 or more vehic[es. ~ ~ ~Yes ~No Cons/ruction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally within ~ ~ ~Yes ~No 3 leer of existing ground surface. Conslruction that will continue for more than 1'year or involve more ~ ~ ~Yes ~No Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than 1,000 ~ ~ ~Yes ~No tons of natural materia[ {ie., rock or soi[) per year. : Construction or expansion of a sanitar~ landfill. ~ ~ ~Yes ~No Construction in a designated floodway. ~ ~ ~Yes ~No O~her impacts ~ ~ ~Yes ~No 2 Will there be an effect to any unique or unusual land forms found on the site? (i e. cliffs, dunes, geological formations, etc.)~NO E~YES · Specific land forms: [] [] {~]Yes []No 1 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be IMPACT ON WATER Moderate _arge Mitigated By 3 Will proposed action affect any water body designated as protected? Impact Impact Project Change (Under Articles 15 24.25 of the Environmental Conservation Law. ECLI LqNO LqYES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Developable area of site contains a [)rotected water body. [] [] []Yes []No · Dredging nrc)re than 100 cubic vards of material from channel of a [] [] []Yes I~No protected stream. · I:xtension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body [] E~ []Yes []No · Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland [] [] []Yes []No · Oflmr impacts: [] [] []Yes []No 4 Will proposed action affect anv non-protected existing or new bodv of water? [~NO E3YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · A 10% inerease or decrease in the surface area of any body of water [] [] []Yes []No or mo~e tha~r a 10 acre ncrease or decrease. · Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area [] [-J []Yes []No · Other impacts: [] [] []Yes [~No 5. Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity? C]NO E]YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action will require a discharge permit. ~ [] []Yes []No · Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does not [] [] []Yes []No have approval to serve proposed (project] action. · Proposed Action requires water supply from wells with greater than 45 [] [] ~]Yes []No gallons per minute pumping capacity. · Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water [] [] []Yes E]No supply system. · Proposed Action will adversely affect groundwater. ~ [] []Yes []No e Liquid effluent will he conveyed off the site to facilities which presently [] [] []Yes []No do not exist or have inadequate capacity. · Proposed Action would use water in excess of 20.000 gallons per [] [] []Yes []No day. · Proposed Action will likely cause siltation or other discharge into an ~ [] []Yes []No existing bod~ of water to the extent that there will be an obvious visual contrast to natural conditions. · Proposed Action ',,,'ill require the storage of petroleum or chemical [] E []Yes []No products greater than 1,100 galtons · Proposed Action will allow residential uses in areas without water [] F- []Yes ~No and/or sewer services. · Proposed Action locates commercial ahd'or industrial uses which may [] [] []Yes []No require new or expansion of existing waste treatment and/or storage facilities. · Other impacts: [] ~ E]Yes []No 6. Will proposed action alter drainage flow or patterns, or surface water runoff~ E]NO E]YES Examples that wouk] apply to column 2 · Proposed Action would change flood water flows. [] [] []Yes []No 1 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact impact Project Change · Proposed Action may cause substantial erosion [] [] []Yes []No ~' Proposed AcJion is incompatible with existing drainage patterns. [] [] []Yes []No · Proposed Action will allow development in a designated floodway. [] [] []Yes []No · Other impacts: [] [] []Yes []No IMPACT ON AIR 7 Will proposed action affect air quality? [~NO E]YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips in any given [] [] []Yes []No hour. · Proposed Action will result in"the incineration of more than 1 ton of [] [] []Yes []No refuse per hour. · Emission rate of total contaminants will exceed 5 lbs. per hour or a [] [] []Yes []No heat source producing more than 10 million g1U's per hour. · Propose(] action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed [] [] []Yes [] No to industrial use. · Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial [] [] E]Yes [~JNo development within existing industrial areas. · Other impacts: [] [] EJYes E]No IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS 8. Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered species? UNO E3YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Reduction of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal [] [] []Yes []No list, using the site, over or near site or found on the site. · Removal of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habitat. [] [] []Yes []No · Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other [] [] []Yes []No than for agricultural purposes. · Other impacts: [] [] E]Yes []No 9. Will Proposed Action substantially affect non threatened or non-endangered species? E3NO EdYES Examples that would apply to column 2 ~ · Proposed Action would substantially interfere with any resident or [] [] []Yes []No migratory fish, shellfish or wildlife species. · Proposed Action requires the removal of more than 10 acres [] [] E]Yes []No of mature forest (over 100 years of a~e) or other locally important vegetation IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES 10 Will tile Proposed Action affect agricultural land resources? E]NO E]YES Examples that w~uld apply to column 2 · The proposed action would sever, cross or limit access to agricultural [] [] []Yes []No land (includes cropland, hayfields, pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc.) 8 I 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change · Construction activity would excavate or compact the soil profile of [] [] []Yes []No agricultural land. · The proposed action would irreversibly convert more than 10 acres [] [] []Yes []No of agricultural land or, if located in an Agricultural District, more than 2.5 acres of agricultural land · The proposed action would disrupt or prevent installation of agricultural [] [] ~]Yes []No land management systems (e.g., subsurface drain hnes, outlet ditches, strip cropping),.' or create a need for such measures {e.g. cause a farm field to ({rain poorly due to increased runoff) · Other impacts: [] [] []Yes []No IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES 11 Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources? ~NO []YES (if necessary, use the Visual EAF Addendum in Section 617.21, Appendix B,) Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed land uses, or project components obviously different from [] [] []Yes []No or in sharp contrast to current surrounding land use patterns, whether man-made or natural · Proposed land uses, or project components visible to users of [] [] []Yes []No aesthetic resources which will eliminate or significantly reduce their enjoyment of the aesthetic qualities of that resource. · Project components that will result in the elimination or significant [] [] []Yes []No screening of scenic views known to be important to the area. · Other impacts: [] [] []Yes []No IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 12. Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure of historic, pre- historic or paleontological importance? ~NO []YES I:xamples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action occurring wholly or partially within or substantially [] [] []Yes []No contiguous to any facility or site listed on the State or National Register of historic places. · Any impact to an archaeological site or fossil bed located within the [] [] []Yes UNo project site. "Proposed Action wi[l occur in an area designated as sensitive for [] [] []Yes ~]N~ archaeological sites on the NYS Site Inventory. · Other impacts: [] [] []Yes []No IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION 13 Will l'roposed Action affect the quantity or quality of existing or future open spaces or recreational opportunities? Examples that would apply to column 2 ~NO ~]YES · The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational opportunity. [] [] ~[~]Yes []No · A major reduction of an open space important to the community. [] [] []Yes []No · Other impacts: [] [] []Yes []No 9 1 2 3 IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION Small to Potential Can Impact Be 14. Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems? Moderate Large Mitigated [3y [~NO E~YES Impact Impact Project Change Examples that would apply to column 2 · Aheration of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods. [] [] []Yes []No · Proposed Action will result in maior traffic problems. [] [] []Yes []No · Other impacts: [] [] [~Yes []No IMPACT ON ENERGY 15 Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or energy supply? [Z]NO [~YES Examples that wouid apply to column 2 · Proposed Action will cause a greater than 5% increase in the use of [] [] ~lYes []No any form of energy in the municipality. · Proposed Action will require the creation or extension of an energy [] [] E]Yes []No transmission or supply system {b serve more than 50 single or two family residences or to serve a major commercial or industrial use. · Other impacts: [] [] []Yes []No NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS 16. Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or vibration as a result of the Proposed Action? E3NO E3YES I~xamples that would apply to column 2 "Blasting within 1,500 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive [] [] []Yes []No facility. · Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day). [] [] []Yes []No · Proposed Action will produce operating noise exceeding tile local [] [] []Yes []No ambient noise leveis for noise outside of structures. · Proposed Action will remove natural barriers that would act as a [] [] []Yes. []No noise screen. · Other impacts: [] [] []Yes []No IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH 17. Will Proposed Action affect public health and safety? E]NO E3YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action may cause a risk of explosion or release of hazardous [] [] []Yes []No substances (i.e. oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) in tile event of accident or upset conditions, or there may be a chronic [ow level discharge or emission. · Proposed Action olay resul't in the burial of "hazardoas wastes" in any [] [] []Yes []No form (i.e. toxic, poisonous, highly re.active, radioactive, irritating, infectious, etc.) "Storage facilities for one million or more gallons of liquified natural [] [] []Yes l~No gas or other flammable liquids. · Proposed action may result in the excavation or other disturbance [] [] E~]Yes []NO within 2,000 feet of a site used for the disposal of solid or hazardous waste. · Other impacts: [] [] []Yes []No 10 I 2 3 iMPACT ONGROWTH'AND cHARAcTER Small ~o Potential Can Impact Be OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD Moderate Large Mitigated By 18 Wil proposed action affect the character of the existing community? Imeact Impact Protect Change liNe ~]YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · The permanent noDulation of the cltv town or village in which the [] ~ ~Yes []No pro;act is located is likely to grow by more than 5% · The mumc pal budget for t:apital expenditures or operating services [] [] []Yes []No will increase by more than 5% per year as a result of this project. · Proposed action will conflict with officialiv adopted plans or goals. [] ~ ~]Yes []No · Proposed action will cause a change n the densitv of and use. [] [] []Yes I-INo · Proposed Action wi}l replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures [] [~ []Yes []N ~ or areas of historic importance to the community. · Development will create a demand for additional community services [] [] []Yes []No (e.g schools, police and fire, etc./ · Proposed Action wilI set an important precedent for future prelects [] [] E~Yes []No · Proposed Action will create or eliminate emplo', merit [] [] []Yes []No "' Other impacts: [] [] []Yes []No 19 Is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? E3NO {3YES 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 Part 3--EVALUATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS Responsibility of Lead Agency Part 3 must be prepared if one or more impact[s) is considered to be potentially large, even if the impact(s) may be mitigated. Instructions Discuss the following for each impact identified in Column 2 of Part 2: 1. Briefly describe the impact. 2. Describe (if applicable) how the impact could be mitigated or reduced to a small to moderate impact by proiect change{s). 3. Based on the information available, decide if' it is reasonable to conclude that this impact is important. To answer the question of importance, consider: · The probability of the impact occurring · The duration of the impact · Its irreversibility, including permanently lost resour~:es of value · Whether the impact can or will be controlled · The regional consequence of the impact · Its potential divergence from local needs and goals · Whethe[ known ob)ections to the project relate to this impact. {Continue on attachments) 11 DOCK-ASSOCIATED TIDAL WETLAND CREATION A Proposal to the NEW YORK STATE WATER RESOURCES INSTITUTE COMPETITIVE GRANTS PROGRAM 115 Wing Hall Cornell University BY THOMAS H. WHITLOW, PhD Physiological Plant Ecologist and Assistant Professor Urban Horticulture Institute Department of Floriculture and Ornamental Horticulture Cornell University 20 Plant Science CHRISTOPHER H. PICKERELL, MS Wetland Plant Materials Speicialist (Technician) Cornell Cooperative Extension, Suffolk County Marine Program Riverhead, NY CI-IRISTOPHER FIELD SMITH, MS Fisheries and Aquaculture Specialist (Agent) Cornell Cooperative Extension, Suffolk County Marine Program Riverhead, NY Critical Watec Problem: The Pecanic Bay system is an interconnected series of shallow coastal embayments located between the north and south forks of Eastern Long Island, New York. Due to the economic and environmental s~maifieance of this area and the increased threat of eutrophication, it has recanfly been included in the National Esta~y Program. Historically, these bays have supported a healthy shellfish industry (SCDHS, 1992).. In thc last decade, however, water quality in the estuary has declined due in part to changes in land me, increases in shoreline development and population growth, which have all lead to an increase in point and nonpoim pollutant discharges to the bays. In 1985 a nuisance algae bloom occurred which killed off large portions of the existing Ealgrass (Zostera marina) beds and dedmated shallfish populations. With the onset of what has been called the ~Brown Tide," the recreational and aesthetic value of the estuary has also declined. The exact cause of the bloom is not known, but a study initiated by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services entitled the "Brown Tide Comprehensive Assessment and Management Program" (BTCAMP) has identified various sources of point and non-point source pollution to the bays, and recommended remedial actions (SCDHS, 1992). Tlzis study found that in addition to the obvious point sources of pollutants including sewage treatment plants and a duck farm, tidal creeks are a major source of nitrogen and coliform bacteria influx due to land use within the surrounding watersheds. In many cases the natural surface drainage patterns and subsurface groundwater movement carry pollutants from homesites and the surrounding roads and other/mporvious surfaces, directly into the creeks. This pollutant insult is significant considered alone, but the problem is further exacerbated by the fact that these creeks have a reduced capacity to assimilate and treat contaminants due to the loss of fringing tidal marsh to filling, road coustnmtiun and bulkhead and ckx:k iustallatiom One promising way of restoring the recreational and commercial value of this estuary would involve improving the water quality entering the system through the numerous tidal creeks. To achieve this goal, an effort to prevent contaminants from entering these water bodies by reducing, collecting, retaining and treating stormwater and/or inermsing the natural filtering and buffeting capacity of the creeks themselves through wetland creation and restoration is needed (SCDHS, 1992). Traditional techniques such as retention basins and other land-based stormwater treatment systems are not pmcfieal in most of eastern Long Island due to the high property values and lack of suitable open space. One workable approach would be the creation and restoration of fringing tidal wetland area in these creeks, tn this case, if the existing private and commercial dock strnctllres could be used as a framework for tidal saltmarsh creation, a net gain in saltmarsh habitat may be achieved, and improved water quality, realized. ~xisting docks are of little threat to coastal water qus~ity. The associated boat activity they facilitate however, including boat main tgnance, washing and re-fnaling, has been identified as a major source of coliform bacteria. nutrients, heavy metals and hydrocarbons to surface waters and sediments, especially in areas with reduced tidal flushing (Eldredge, 1989; McMahon, 1989). In addition, the physical proximity of docks and bulkheads at the waters edge has directly reduced the amount of intertidal wetland area. For the above reasons, guidance issued under the authority of §621(g) of the Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 entitled "Guidance Specifying Management Measures For Soum~ of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters" has identified restorat, i. 'on of wetland and riparian habitats and construction of artificial wetland areas as a means of controlling noupornt sources of pollution in marinas and other developed coastal areas (USEPA, 1993). Attempts to associate wetland erention efforts with existing dock facilities could serve the dual function of mitigating for dock- associated impacts and helping to gradually increase the quantity of tidal wetland area in estuariue creeks. This proj.ect proposes to demonstrate the fessibility of creating peninsular tidal wetlands below and adjacent to existing marrne structures. Results and Benefits Expected: .Because the loss of tidal wetlands has been a chronic problem ocom-ing in small increments over many decades, it zs realistic to include small-scale, incremental mitigation as part of a plan for recovery in the estuary. The proposed zesearch offers a relatively low-cost, low-teclmology alternative to other methods of compensatory mitigation and pollution abatement, utilizing a combination of recycled (recycled plastic lumber) and traditional (wood) materials. We hypothesize that the creation of new tidal wetland adjacent to existing dock and access walks will mitigate for loss of wetland resulting from the presence of these structures and will contribute to improved water quality and shellfish habitat in the Pecouic Estuary by: 1) providing soil conditions hydrologically similar to the bank~ of tidal drainage channels which support vigorous Spartina growth, characterized by high stem density and taller plants; 2) actively filtering suspended and dissolved solids fomz tidal water as it chains through the wetland modules; 3) promoting nutrient uptake by Spartina and opportuulstic epibetuhic flora and microbes; and 4) serving as a vector for shellfish (e.g.,Mercenarta mercenarta, Crassostrea virginica mad Argopecten irradians) seed resulting from spawning of adult animals placed in the constructed areas (Smith and McMahon, 1987; Rheault and Rice, 1989). Wetland restoration and creation has been identified as one effective way of improving coastal water quality ill areas where wetlands have been t'ffled, degraded and severely impacted (NRC, 1992). Restoration efforts are normally attempted on existing coastal beaches or on dredge spoils when suitable areas are present (Broome et al., 1988). However, the lack of suitable degraded and restorable sites in most of these creeks precludes these "traditional" techniques. Therefore, a innovative concept which utilizes existing dock and bulkhead strum as the physical framework for wetland creation efforts is appropriate in this unique situation. These methods would also apply to other areas around Long Island and the Northeast where development and urbaniTation ]lave elimlnated native saltmarsh habitats and where surrounding shoreline featares preclude wetland creafiom With proper planning, design and construction, there would be no disruption of unvigation or disturbance of normal recreational and boating activities. Dock-assodated sal tmnrsh creation would facilitate a significant increase in sattmarsh area and improve the aesthetic appearance of marine structures. The goal of this project is to determine if it is logLstically and physically feasible to establish Cordgrass ($partina alterniflora) in native substrate supported below and adjacent to existing dock stmctares; the assumption being that plant establishment is the first stap in creating a biologically and geochemically functional wetland Methods, Procedures and Facilities: Creation of tidal wetlands under and adjacent to doc'ks is a new concept that has not been attempted in the past. The only other work relating to beneficial, dual-use of manue structures involves the use of space below marina docks for the culture of commerelally valuable shellfish [Smith and McMahon, 1987; Rheanlt and Rice, 1989; Tanski and Rivara. 1992). As such. there is no directly applicable literature base to work from. On the contrmy, marsh grass establishment for the purposes of shoreline stabilization, wildlife habitat enhancement and water quality improvement, is extensively documented and commonplace (Broorae et al., 1988). Therefore, the major research problem associated with this project involves coupling weflmad creation and revegetatiou technologies with the physical constraints of the dock environment including light, wave energy and space. However, these constraints should not be considered limiting. On the contrmT., this "contrived" environment necessitates a more functional and interesting approach to wetland creation involving finite dimensions and a limited floristic diversity. Therefore. we will not attempt to create every aspect of the coastal marsh system (e.g., mudflats and high marsh),just the portion of the marsh that lies between mean low water and mean high water (i.e., the Spartina dominated habitat). Iu addition, the exper/muatal units will be of the same scale as the real- world application of this technology; a amque situation [or most ecosystem creation studies. Simply f'flhng in the space under docks with sand or other suitable substrate in not desirable in this case, as it reqmres obtaining, moving and containing excessive amounts of material. More importantly, such activities would fall under the jurisdiction of the United States Army Corp of Engineers and require an individual § 404 petit as promulgated by the Clean Water Act which regulates the disposal of dredged and f'zll material in navigable waters. Therefore, we have decided to use limited amounts of sand and create a "shelff' below and adjacent to dock structures that is physically connected to the existing shoreline at a point where the shelf and beach intersect. We have elected to use freestanding strum instead of existing docks to avoid interference from users not associated with this study and to mair~taln closer control on the experiment. The experimental units for this study will consist of temporary constant height peninsular platforms perpendicular to the shoreline of an existing manmade low-energy lagoon located at the Suffolk County Marine Environmental Learning Center located in Southold, New York. These platforms will support 30 em deep trays collrainlng Ilatnral substrate (recovered from a dredge operation independent from the current study) and will be bathed by the natural semidiumal tides. We will plant seedlings of Cordgrass (Spratina alterniflora) and add adult bivalves to each of the replicate peninsulas. The sJaading effect of docks will be simulated by suspending commercially available horticultural shade cloth above the mays. Additionalinventodas and sampling will be conducted in undisturbed marsh plots adjacent to the hanging marsh trays. Since the ultimate weight of these structures will determine Whether this technology is feasible, we will be testing two depths of sand on the platforms. It is not known whether there is a Ininlmnm depth below wkich Cordgrass ceases to grow normally. We will also test two methods of holding the sand in place; stability of sand is crucial to plant establishment. Momtoring and observation of the installations will involve: 1) qualitatively determining substmte stability; 2) monitoring plant growth by determining percealt survival, stem density and height; 3) monitoring epibenthic recruitment and colonization through periodic identification (to the genus level) and quantification (number of individuals and pement cover); 4) monitoring of bivalve survival and recraitme~t; and 5) monitoring the C:N ratio, eleclrical conductivity and biochemical oxygen demand of the interstitial water collected form beth the hanging trays and the native marsh plots. Training and Education Potential: Due to the location of the project at the Suffolk County Marine Environmental Learning Center this work has the potential to reach thousands of school children and private citizens. In 1993 over 7,000 school children participated in outrcach and on-site program~ at the Center. Any group visiting the center is given a tour of the facility and grounds including all research projects. In addition, the Suffolk County Comell Cooperative Extension Marine Program holds a Marine Forum which atWacts private citizens, baymen, town officials and regulators. Results of this work will be presented at this meeting. Budget: Salaries Grant Match Whitlow (10% time) 1,000 6,000 Smith (10% time) 1,000 6,000 Pickemll 4,000 1,050 Equipment* 0 5,000 Materials 2,200 0 Travel 500 1,000 Communications 300 750 9,000 19,800 Administration for 10% 900 0 Grand Total 9,900 19,800 * Use of equipment Diving Gear Boat Time Power Tools Shellfish Hatchery and personnel