Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSebastian's Cove (2)HENRY P. SMITH, President JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, Vice-Pres. PHILLIP J. GOUBEAUD ALBERT KRUPSK[, JR. ELLEN M. LARSEN BOARD OF TO~'N TllUSTEE$ TOWN OF $OUTItOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 This is to certify that I, Ilene Pfifferling, Clerk to the Board of Town Trustees in said County of Suffolk, have compared the foregoing copies of correspondence from the Trustee Office file for Sebastian's Cove with the originals now on file in this office, and that the same is a correct and true transcript of such original correspondence and the whole thereof. October 7, 1987 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF $OUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 This is to certify that I, Ilene Pfifferling, Clerk to the Board of Trustees in said County of Suffolk, have compared the foregoing copies of correspondence from the Trustee Office file for Sebastian's Cove with the originals now on file in this office, and that the same is a correct and true transcrip of such original correspondence and the whole thereof. January 30, 1986 Ilene Pfiffe~i~/ Clerk TWIN FORK SIDING CO. July 8, 1985 Southold Town Hall Town Trustees Main Road, Southold, N.Y. 11971 Re: Sebastian's Cove Gentlemen: In our permit of April 22, 1985, we requested to put dredge spoil on island and wet lands area. At this time, you recommended that we file an environmental impact statement. My question is: if we put the dredge spoil on up land areas by diking, will you wave a draft environmental impact statement to an environment assesment? Along with this change, we are also re-assesing the amount of dredge spoil yardage. ehrely' ~ ~ e~ ~p~p~r r~ TWIN FORK SIDING CO. July 8, 1985 Southold Town ~11 Town Trustees Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Re: Sebastian's Cove Gentlemen: In our permit of April 22, 1985, we requested to put dredge spoil on island and wet lands area. At this time, you recommended that we file an environmental impact statement. My question is: if we put the dredge spoil on up land areas by diking, will you wave a draft environmental impact statement to an environment assesment? Along with this change, we are also re-assesing the amount of dredge spoil yardage. BOARD OF TO~'N TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 SIGNIFICANT DECLARATION NOTICE OF SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT Dated: May 29, 1985 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 Pursuant to the provisions of Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, Part 617 of Title 6 of the New York State Code, Rules and Regulations, and Chapter 44 of the Southold Town Code, 'the Southold Town Trustees, as lead agency, does hereby determine that the action described below is a Type I action and is likely to have a significant effect on the Environment. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Application of Twin Fork Fence & Siding Company and Sebastian's Cove, Ltd. to redredge existing channel to gain access to the Federal Channel in Mattituck Creek. Approximately 6,000 cu. yds. of dredged spoil is to be deposited on a diked area, using a hydraulic dredge. Property is located on the North side of Mill Road, East of Mattituck channel, Mattituck. Further information can be obtained by contacting Mr. Henry P. Smith, President, Board of Town Trustees, Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York 11971 or by calling 765-1892. Copies to: Charles T. Hamilton, D.E.C. Stony Brook/ Commissioner Williams, D.E.C., Albanyj Stephen Mars, Army Corps of Engineers~/ Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council ~ Southold Town Building Department~ Stephen Perricone, Pres. Twin Fork Fence & Siding~' Town Clerk's Bulletin B6ard/ Trustees/ File~ BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 May 29, 1985 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 Mr. Stephen J. Perricone, President Twin Fork Fence & Siding Company P. O. Box 41 North Road Mattituck, New York 11952 RE: Wetland Application No. 266 Dear Mr. Perricone: Pursuant to the provisions of Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, Part 617 of Title 6 of the New York State Code, the Southold Town Trustees, as lead agency, does hereby determine that the action proposed is a Type I action and is likely to have a significant effect on the environment and further request that you prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement all in accordance with said law, rules and code. Very truly yours, Board of Town Trustees Henry P. Smith, President Ilene Pfi ry cc: Trustees File BOARD OF TO~N TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 May 24, 1985 Mr. Stephen J. Perricone, President Twin Fork Fence & Siding Company P. O. Box 41 North Road Mattituck, New York 11952 Re: Wetland Application No. 266 Dear Mr. Perricone: The Trustees would appreciate your assistance in preventing run off into the creek, by placing hay bailes along the bulkhead until the necessary permits are secured and the intertidal area is stabilized. Your cooperation regarding this matter will be greatly appreciated. Very truly yours, ~mith, President Board of Town Trustees HPS:ip cc: Trustees File COMMUNICATION - MAY 29, 1985 New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Lead agency coordination for Sebastions Cove, LTD. A Long Environmental Assessment Form is Attached. Spoke to Steven Mars - Army Core of Engineers, 26 Federal Plaza New York 10278-0090 212-264-3912 Mr. Mars Advised that they are sending back the application for completeness. They will hold the application if the Town asks for an EIS. Would like to see alternatives for disposal on the fill. Suggests a reduction in the dredging to prevent slumping. Requested a letter from May 6, 1985 where the Board Declared the Lead on the application. Asked to be advised of the status. Copy of the Determination also. BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 May 6, 1985 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 Mr. Charles T. Hamilton Alternate Permit Administrator New York State Dept. of Environmental Conservation Regulatory Affairs Unit Bldg. 40, SUNY - Room 219 Stony Brook, New York 11794 Re: Sebastions Cove, LTD. - 10-85-0287 Dear Mr. Hamilton: Please be advised that the Board of Trustees have declared lead agency on the project above referenced by resolution adopted on May 1, 1985 in accordance with Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review - SEQR) of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6NYCRR, Part 617. Very truly yours, Henry P. Smith, President Board of Town Trustees Ilene Pfifferling Secretary to Board cc: Trustees File New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Regulatory Affairs Unit Bldg. 40, SUNY--Room 219 Stony Brook, NY 11794 Henry G. Williams (516) 751-7900 Commissioner April 26, 1985 Henry P. Smith, President Southold Board of Trustees P.O. Box 728 Southold, NY 11971 RE: LEAD AGENCY COORDINATION RESPONSE Sebastions Cove, LTD., 10-85-0287 Dear Mr. Smith: This letter responds to your communication of March 28, 1985, regarding lead agency coordination for the above-noted project, under Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review - SEQR) of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6NYCRR, Part 617. The Department has the following interest in this project: DEC Permits (if any) 10-85-0287, Tidal Wetlands, Protection of Waters, Water Quality DEC Contact Person Charles T. Hamilton SE~R Classification Unlisted DEC Position DEC has no objection to your agency assuming lead agency status for this action. Comments I have enclosed a copy of the Long Form Environmental Assessment form. If you do not concur with the DEC position indicated above, please contact this office to resolve designation of lead agency within the time allowable under Part 617. Please feel free to contact this office for further information or discussion. yours, / __ Very truly Charles T. Hamilton Alternate Permit Administrator CTH:co's EAF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM Purpose: The EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an orderly manner, whether a project or action is likely to be sig- nificant. The question of whether an action is significant is not al- ways easy to answer. Frequently, there are aspects of a project that are subjective or unmeasurable. It is also understood that those who will need to determine significance will range from those with little or no formal knowledge of the environment to those who are technically expert in environmental analysis. In addition, many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affect- ing the question of significance. The EAF is intended to provide a method whereby the preparer can be assured that the determination process has been orderly, comprehen- sive in nature, and yet flexible to allow the introduction of informa- tion to fit a project or action. FAF CO}~ONENTS: The EAF is comprised of three parts: Part I: 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: This phase of the evaluation focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action. It provides guidance as to whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially-large impact. The form also identi- fies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced. Part 3: Only if any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentially- large~ then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the impact is actually important to the municipality in which the project is located. Determination of Significance If you find that one (or more) impact is both large and its con- sequence is important, then the project is likely to be significant, and a draft environmental impact statement should be prepared. Scoping If a draft ElS is needed, the Environmental Assessment Form will be a valuable tool in determining the scope of the issues to be covered by the draft EIS. ~ APPENOIX A EAF ENVIRO;IMENTAL ASSESSMENT - PART I Project Information NOTICE: This document is desk?ned to assist in determining whether'the action proposed may have a significant effect on the environ~nt. Please complete the entire Data Sheet. Answers to these questions will be considered as part of the application for approval and n~y be subject to further verification and Public review. Provide any additional lnforntation you believe will be needed to complete PARTS 2 and.3. it is expected :nat como)etlon of the FAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not involve new studies, research or investtqation. If information reQulrina such additional work is unavat~ble, so indicate and specify each instance. AOORESS AND NAHE OF APPLICANT~t {Street) ~, ~A MaF~, ~ r, (P.O.) (State) (Zip) ~m~) /~ ~y~M ~, BU~NESS PHONE: ~/~ ~ ~' ~F~ (Street) ~.0. ) (State) (zip) DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT' (Briefly describe type of groJect or action) (PLEASE COMPLETE EACH QUESTIBN - Indicate N.A. tf not applicable) A. SITE DESCRIPTION (Physical setting of overall project, both develoned and undevelooed areas) General character of the land: Generally uniform slope ~/ Generally uneven and rolline or irreoular 2. P~sent land use: ~roan , Industrial , C~rcial , Subu~an / , Rural . F~rest 3. Total acreage of oroJect a~a: /~ acres. Aooroxi~te acreage: Presently After Completion Presently After Completion ~ead~ or Brushland ~acres ~ acres ~later Surface Area ~acres ~ ac~es Forested .~ acres ~acres Unveget~ted (~ck, earth or fill) ~ acres ~ acres ~oads, bui)dinqs !4, 2~ Or F.C.L.) ~ acres ~ acres Ather (indicate tyne) ~ acres 0 acres 6. Approximate percentage of proposed nroject site with slooes: O-lO~ /~ 1n-15) -~%; 15~ Or greater ~- 7. Is project contiquous to, or contain a buildin0 or site listed on the National Register of Historic Places? Yes 8. What is the depth to the water table? ~-/~feet 9. Do hunting or fishi~ opportunities presently exist in the project area? ¥/~Yes NO 10. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered - Yes ~ ]o, according to - Identify each species ll. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e. cliffs, dunes, other geological for~ations - Yes ~ No. (Describe 12. Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area ~ Yes / No. 13. Does the present site offer or include scenic views or vistas known to be important to t~e coca, unity? ._~Yes ~ NO 14. Streams within or contiguous to prOject area: a. Name of stream and name of river to whic'h it is tributary ,~'~'~7-/~ff) 15. Lakes, Ponds, ~etland areas within or contiguous to project area: a. ~(ame '/~ ~ ; b. Size (in acres) 16. What is the dominant land use and zoning classification within a 1/4 mile radius of the project (e.g. single family residential, R-g) and the scale of development (e.g. 2 story). ~(Y~-~ B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) a. Total contiguous acreage owned by project sponsor~. ]~9~ acres. b. Project acreage developed: / . acres initially: ~ acres ultimately. c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped .~ d. Length of project, in miles: ~,R, (if appropriate) e. If project is an expansion of existing, indicate percent of expansion proposed: building square foot age ~% ; developed acreage ~4'~ . f. Nunt)er of off-street oarking spaces exi~tinn ~.a, ; proposed g. Maximum vehicular trios generated per hour .~ (upon completion of project) h. If residential: Number and type of housing ~nits: ~ne Family Two Family Multiple Family Condominium Initial Ultimate 1A.~..,~ ~,~ ~ i. if' ~r~entation 'e~gh~orhood-C~ty-Regional Estimated Emoloyment Comercial ~,~', Industrial ~, ~ ¢ __ ~ _ j. Total ne~qht of tallest nronosed structure __-3~ _.¢eet. 2. How much natural material (i.e. rock, earth, etc.) will be removed from the site - tons cubic yards. 3. How many acres of veqetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers~ will be far,Dyed from site - ~,i~ acres a. will any mature forest (over lOP years old) or other locally-important vegetation be re,norad proiect? Yes w~'No 5. Are them any plans for re-vegetation to replace that removed during construction? ~Yes 6. If single phase ~roject: Anticipated period of construction _~nths, (includin9 demo litinnj. ?. '~ mul*i-nh~sed oroject: a. Total number of phases anticipated No. l~,A, b. Anticioated date of con~nencement phase i month year (including demoli rich) c. Approximate completion date final phase month .__year. d. Is phase I financially dependent on subseauent chases? Yes 8. Will blasting occur during construction? .Yes ~No 9. Numoer of jobs generated: d~ring construction ~- ; after project is complete ~ .. 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project ~ --~ ll. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? Yes ~No. If yes, explain: 12. a. Is surface or subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? Yes 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 increaseO or decreased by prooosal? ~Yes ~ No. 14 Is project or any portion of project located in the 100 year flood Plain? V~'Yes No !5. a. Does project involve disposal of solid waste? -- Yes ~.No b. If yes, wilt an existing solid waste disno~al facility be used? Yes No c. If yes, give name: : location O. t)ill any wastes not go into a sewage disoosa) system or ~nto a sanitary land fill? 16. Will prnject use herbicides or pesticides? Yes 17. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour Der day)? . Yes ~'.NO lB. Will oroject produce operating noise exceeding the local ambience noise levels? .,_Yes / NO 19. ~ill project result ~n an increase in energy use? Yes ~'No. If yes, indicate typels) __ 2D. If water SUDOly is from wells indicate pu~ping capacity '~, m, gals/m~nute. 21. Total anticinated water usage per day ~ ~als/dav. 22. Zon~ng~ a. ~lhat ~s dominant zoning classification of s~te? b. Current specific zoning classification of site /~:~'~/-~ /~J~',~/~--- 26. b. Does project involve State or Federal funding or financing? ___ Approval Required (Yes, No) (Type) Yes ~/~ NO Submittal Approval (Date) (Date) Ctty~ Village ~ Ctty,~, Village Planning Board · City, Town, Zoning Board City, County Heal th Department Other local agencies Other regional agencies State Agencies Federal Agencies ~y INFORMATIONAL DETAILS Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse impacts associated with the proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which can be taken to.mitigate or avotd~h~ The proposed project restores a navigable channel which was dredged under an Army Corps of Engineers permit originally issued in 1948 and still shown on USCG charts as late as 1969. The extent of proposed dredging is the same as before. No enlargement of the channel is requested. The project will not cause any permanent environmental damage. Dredge spoil will be placed on top of previously deposited dredge spoil. This area now supports fresh water vegetation, (cedars, poison ivy, other shrubs and upland grasses). The extent of the existing dredge spoil area will not be increased. Its elevation will increase by 3 to 4 feet. It can be reasonably expected that the leaching of the new spoil will occur by natural precipitation over 2 to 5 years and upland types of vegetation will re-establish themselves during this time. The topography is flat and negligible erosion is to be expected. The wetland surrounding the dredge spoil area will suffer no damage from the dredging operation since only temporary laying of pipe or passage of a vehicle over mats will occur. If done in winter, as planned, there will not even be a temporary visual degradation. The bottom of the newly dredged channel will be suitable for marine life immediately and is likely to be more fruitful than the present organic muck and silt which have filled the original channel. COMMUNICATION - MAY 29, 1985 New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Lead agency coordination for Sebastions Cove, LTD. A Long Environmental Assessment Form is Attached. BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 May 6, 1985 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 Mr. Charles T. Hamilton Alternate Permit Administrator New York State Dept. of Environmental Conservation Regulatory Affairs Unit Bldg. 40, SUNY - Room 219 Stony Brook, New York 11794 Re: Sebastions Cove, LTD. 10-85-0287 Dear Mr. Hamilton: Please be advised that the Board of Trustees have declared lead agency on the project above referenced by resolution adopted on May 1, 1985 in accordance with Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review - SEQR) of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6NYCRR, Part 617. Very truly yours, Henry P. Smith, President Board of Town Trustees Ilene Pfifferling Secretary to Board cc: Trustees File New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Regulatory Affairs Unit Bldg. 40, 8UNY--Room 219 Stony Brook, NY 11794 (516) 751-7900 Henry G. Williams Commissioner April 26, 1985 Henry P. Smith, President Southold Board of Trustees P.O. Box 728 Southold, NY 11971 RE: LF~ AGENCY COORDINATION RESPONSE Sebastions Cove, LTD., 10-85-0287 Dear Mr. Smith: This letter responds to your communication of March 28, 1985, regarding lead agency coordination for the above-noted project, under Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review - SEQR) of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6NYCRR, Part 617. The Department has the following interest in this project: DEC Permits (if any) 10-85-0287, Tidal Wetlands, Protection of Waters, Water Quality DEC Contact Person Charles T. Hamilton SEQR Classification Unlisted DEC Position DEC has no objection to your agency assuming lead agency status for this action. Co~ents I have enclosed a copy of the Long Form Environmental Assessment form. If you do not concur with the DEC position indicated above, please contact this office to resolve designation of lead agency within the time allowable under Part 617. Please feel free to contact this office for further information or discussion. yours, / ~ Very truly Charles T. Hamilton Alternate Permit Administrator CTH:co's EAF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM Pu~rpose: The EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, ' in an orderly manner, whether a project or action is likely to be sig- nificant. The question of whether an action is significant is not al- ways easy to answer. Frequently, there are aspects of a project that are subjective or unmeasurable. It is also understood that those who will need to determine significance will range from those with little or no formal knowledge of the environment to those who are technically expert in environmental analysis. In addition, many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affect- ing the question of significance. The EAF is intended to provide a method whereby the preparer can be assured that the determination process has been orderly, comprehen- sive in nature, and yet flexible to allow the introduction of informa- tion to fit a project or action. EAF CO}~ONENTS: The EAF is comprised of three parts: Part 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: This phase of the evaluation focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action. It provides guidance as to whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially-large impact. The form also identi- fies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced. Part 3: Only if any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentially- large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the impact is actually important to the municipality in which the project is located. Determination of Significance If you find that one (or more) impact is both large and its con- sequence is important, then the project is likely to be significant, and a draft environmental impact statement should be prepared. Scopin8 If a draft EIS is needed, the Environmental Assessment Form will be a valuable tool in determining the scope of the issues to be covered by the draft EIS. ~."~ APPENDIX A EAF ENVIRO;IHENTAL ASS£SSHENT - PART ! Project Information NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether'the action proposed may have a significant effect on the envlro~nt. Please complete the entire Data Sheet. Answers to these ouestions will be considered as part of the application for approval and ~y be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additional ~nforn~tion you believe will be needed to comoletP PARTS 2 and.3. it la expected :nat comoletion of the FAF will be dependent on tnfomation currently available and will not involve new studies, research or invesctoation. If information requirino SUCb additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specify each instance. ' NAME OF PROJECT: NAME AND ADDRESS OF ADORESS AND NAME OF APPLICANT:).' (Street) ( Nam ) /~ ~Y~ D~. BU~NCSS PHONE: ~/~ (street) [P.O.) (State) (Zip) DESCRIPTIOf( OF PROJECT' (Briefly describe type of project or action) /~'~'z~--~' (PLEASE COMPLETE EACH qUESTI(l~q - Indicate N.A. if not applicable) A. SITE DESCRIPTION (Physical setting of overall project, both develoned and undevelooed areas) I. General character of the land: Generally uniform slope I/' Generally uneven and rollino or irregular 2. Present land use: ~roan__, Industrial , Comtercial . , Suburban l/e., Rural _, Forest 3. Total acreage of oroject area: /~ acres. Aoproxtmate acreage: Presently After Completion Presently After Completion Peadow or Brushland _,~l~acres ~, acres l.)ater Surface Area _~,__acres ~.ac~es Forested ~ acres ~acres Unvegetated (rock, earth or fill) ~ acres ~ acres Aaricu)tural ~ acres o acres ~oads, buildinos ~letland (Freshwater or and other paved Tidal as net Articles surfaces ~:e acres o acees ~4, ,:5 or F.C.L.) ~ acres (~ acres ~t~er (indicate tyne) ~ acres 0 ~cres 6. Approximate percentaoe of proposed oroject site with sloues: 0-10~ /~; ln-l? -~; 15Z or greater ~ %. ?. Is project contiquous to, or contain a buildino or site listed on the National Reglster of HlStOrlC Places? Yes 8. What is the depth to the water table? ~./~ feet 9. Do hunting or f~shjn~ opportunities presently exist in the project area? I/~Yes No 1D. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered - Yes ~ :lo, according te - Identify each species II. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e. cliffs, dunes, other geological formations - Yes v~' No. (Describe ) 12. Is the project site presently used by the con~nunity or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area - Yes ~ NO. 13. Does the present site offer or include scenic views or vistas known to be important to the contnunity? Yes ~ NO 14. Streams within or contiguous to project area: a. Name of stream and name of river to which it is tributary ~'~'~1~7~/~ ~MT)'~YZ ! ~ 15. Lakes, Ponds,?etlaQd areas within or contiguous to project area: a. I4ame '/~ ~ ; b. Size (in acres) ~ 16. What is the dominant land use and zoning classification within a 1/4 nile radius of the project (e.g. single family residential, R-2) and the scale of Uevelopment (e.g. 2 story). ~7'~yQYV~ ~ ~Y~ ? ~g(~Yv7 B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropr)ate} a. Total contiguous acreage owned by project sponsor~. /Y'i/ acres. b. Project acreage develooed: / acres initially; ~ acres ultimately. c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped .~ d. Length of project, in miles: ~,~, (if appropriate) e. If pro~ect Is an expansion of existing, indicate percent of expansion proposed: building square foot- age ~/~ ; developed acreage /~'~y'~ . f. Muter of off-strut oarking soaces exi~tin~ ~,~, g. Maximum veh~cu)ar tries generated per hour ~ h. If residential: Number and type of housing.units: Initial (upon completion of project) ~ne Family Two Family Multiple Family If' Orientation e~ghbornood-Cqty-Peg~onal Estimated Ernoloyment Con~nercla! ~,~ ~ In~ustr:al ~, ~,' _ ~ Condominium 2. HOW much natural material (i.e. rock, earth, etc.) will be removed from the site - tons ~ cubic yaros. 3. How many acres of veqetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site - y~,~ acres. 4. Wi1) any mature forest (over 190 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed ky tn~s project? Yes ~,~No 5. Are there any plans for re-vegetation to replace that removed during construction~ ~Yes 9o 6. If single onase project: Anticipated period of construction ~ months, (including demolit~onj. 7. ? mul'i--hased oroJect~ a. Total number of phases anticipated No. ~,A, b. Anticipated date of con~nencement phase i month year ~includ~ng demolition) c. Aoproximate completion date final phase mOnth . year. d. Is phase 1 financially dependent on subseouent ohases? Yes No 8. Will blasting ~ccur during construction? __Yes ~"No 9. Number of jO~S generated: dyring construction ~, ; after project is complete ~ . 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project ~ . ..~ ll. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? Yes ~No. If yes, explain: 12. a. Is surface or subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? Yes 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 increase~ or decreased by proposal? Yes ~ NO. 14 Is project or any portion of project located in the 100 year flood plain? )/"Yes No !5. a. Does project involve disposal of solid waste? Yes b. If yes, will an existing solid waste disnosal facility be used? Yes ___NO c. If yes, give name: t location p. dill any wastes not go Into a sewage disoosal system or ~nto a sanitary landfill? Yes 16. Will Drnject use herbicides or pesticides? __Yes 17. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour oer day)? Yes 18. will project produce ooerating noise exceeding the local ambience noise levels? __Yes ~ NO 19. u~ll project result in an increase ~n energy use? __Yes V~'No. if yes, indicate typels} __ 20. If water SUODly is from wells indicate pumoing capacity "W, ~* gals/minute. 21. Total anticipated water usage per day ~:) ~als~dav. b. Current soecific zoning classification of site d. If no, indicate desired 26. a, Is an) Federal permit required? ~¥es No b. Does pro3ect involve State or Federal funding or f~nanc~ng? c. Local and Regional aoorova)s: ApprOval Required (Yes, NO) (Type} Submittal ApprovaI (Date) {Date) City Village ~ City,~, Village Planning Board City, Town, Zoning Board City, County Health Department Other local agencies Other regional agencies State Agencies Federal Agencies ~g~¥ INFORMATIONAL DETAILS Attach any additional inforr~tion as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may De any adverse impacts associated with the proposal, ~lease discuss such impacts and the measures wnich can be taken to,mitigate or avoid ~h~ TITLE: ~y, ~ ~/~N ~ ~ ,. ~X~ REPRESENTING: ~ ~ ~ ~P~/ ~A~ ~ I~ ~1 ~Z 5 ) ~ DATE: ~ /~, /~ ~-- The proposed project restores a navigable channel which was dredged under an Army Corps of Engineers permit originally issued in 1948 and still shown on USCG charts as la~e as !969. The extent of proposed dredging is the same as before. No enlargement of the channel is requested. The project will not cause any permanent environmental damage. Dredge spoil will be placed on top of previously deposited dredge spoil. This area now supports fresh water vegetation, (cedars, poison ivy, other shrubs and upland grasses). The extent of the existing dredge spoil area will not be increased. Its elevation will increase by 3 to 4 feet. It can be reasonably expected that the leaching of the new spoil will occur by natural precipitation over 2 to 5 years and upland types of vegetation will re-establish themselves during this time. The topography is flat and negligible erosion is to be expected. The wetland surrounding the dredge spoil area will suffer no damage from the dredging operation since only temporary laying pipe or passage of a vehicle over mats will occur. If done in winter, as planned, there will not even be a temporary visual degradation. of The bottom of the newly dredged channel will be suitable for marine life immediately and is likely to be more fruitful than present organic muck and silt which have filled the original channel. the BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF $OUTHOLD Town Hall, $3095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 APPLICATION I$ HEREBY MADE TO THE TOWN TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF APPLICATION NO. ~t¢~:~ DATE OF APPLICATION April 22, 1985 Co- TW~ Fork Fence & Siding Co., and IDENTITY OF APPLICANT Sebastian's Cove, Ltd. (516)298-5111 PHONE NO ADDR£SS OF APPLICANT P.O. BOX 41, North Road Mattituck, New York 11952 TAX MAP NO. 106.--4--1 and 100-3-11.4 '~ (516)298-5111 .... PHONE NO.___ PERMIT REQUESTED TO Redredge existing channel to ~ain access to Federal channel in Mattituck Creek. LOCATION OF PROPERTY FOR WHICH PERMIT WANTED North side of Hill Road., East of Mattituck Channel. HOME ADDRESS OF PERMIT APPLICANT IF DIFFERENT FROM AFORESAID LOCATION CREE~, BAY OR HARBOR FRONTING PROPERTY Sebastian's Gutter SIZE OF PROPOSED WOR~ LENGTH 800' WIDTH 30' Channel and a 75' x 75' basin in front of pier. HEIGHT ABOVE HIGH WATER not applicable YARDS TO SE EXCAVATED~P__prox 6000 CU. yds. of dredge spoil. YARDS TO SE FILuEDDredge spoil to be deposited on top of existing spoil. DEPTH AT LOW TIDE 2' at north end and +.5' at south end. AVERAGE RISE IN TIDE 5I DISTANCE TO THE NEAREST CHANNEL 800~ FT. DISTANCE PROJECT EXTENDS BEYOND SIMILAR PROJECTS IS THIS FOR PRIVATE OR BUSINESS USE? Private. AREA ZONING Residential-agricultural IN THE AREA N/A FT. MANNER IN WHICH MATERIAL WILL BE REMOVED OR DEPOSITED Hydraulic ~_g_e_p_~p_~_ into diked area made out of existing old spoil. INTENDED USE OF PROPERTY recreational DESCRIBE ANY KNOWN PRIOR OPERATIONS CONDUCTED ON THE PREMISE Commercial 3~ard with bulkheaded pier, boathouse and marine railway, all still there. AND WHETHER ANY PRIOR LICENSE OR PERMITS HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO ERRECT STRUCTURES OR TO DREDGE OR DEPOSIT FILL ON SAID PREMISES AND WHETHER ANY PERHITS OR LICENSES WERE EVER SUSPENDED OR REVOKED DY A GOVERNMENTAL AGENCy_U2~2_~_m~_ Corps of Engineers, Permit #800.6 approved lS Feb. 1948. ~_pected and certified completed as of 12 Sept. 1956. USCG Chart as late as 1969 shows the channel as "dredged to 6'". No record of any revocati~s DESCRIBE FULLY THE REHABILITATION AND PROPOSED CONDITION OF THE PREMISES AFTER THE WORK IS COMPLETED INCLUDE AN ADDITIONAL SURVEY OF THE PROJECT SITE IF NECESSARY The dreOqed channel will re-establish itself as ordinary marine bottom promptly. The dredge spoil area will be incr~s~ in elevation by 3 to 4 ft. and will regain upland vegetation in 2 to 5 WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, IF NOT THE SAME AS THE APPLICANT. All property affected by this work is owned by the co-applicant~ ~hen J. Perricone is authorized to act on behalf of the owners. BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM Project Information (To be completed by Applicant or Project sponsor) 1. Apphcant~sponsor ~ 2. Project Name Twin Fork Fence and Sidinq Co. I Sebastian's Cove 3. Project location: . TOW~ ~vtunicipaht¥ Mattituck, New York Southold County Suffolk [] New [] Expansion [] Mod,ficationlalte,ation Restoration 5. Descr,be project brmily: Redredge pre-existing channel in Sebastian's Gutter, of Mattituck Creek. a tidal tributary East side of Mattituck Creek, immediately north of Mill Road (see attached map). Initially 12 acres UIt,matelv 2 · 5 acres [] Yes [] No If No. describe briefly [] Industrial T~J Commercial [] Agr,culture [] Parkland/open space [] O[her ResidenbaJ Residential (vacant) & Parkland to East~ Wetland to Norfih~ Commercial to West and South. [] Yes [] No If yes. list agency(s) and perm,t/approvals US Army Corps of Engineers and NY State Dept. of Environmental Conservation. (permits, no funding) ~ Yes [] No If yes, I,st Agency name and permk/approval type Original dredging permit issued by US Army Corps of Engineers, 18 Feb 1948 and certified completed by inspection on 16 Nov. 1950. ~,~ [] ~o Reissue Sebastian's Cove, Ltd., G. Toumanoff, Pres. ~pph~n,~p0n~or n~e:T~4in Fork Fence & siding Coo~,S. Perricone, Pres. COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ) STATE OF NEW YORK )SS: Stephen J. Perricone BEING DULY SWORN DEPOSES AND SAYS THAT HE IS THE APPLICANT FOR THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PERMITS, AND THAT ALL STATEMENTS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE TRUE TO THE BEST OF HIS KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF, THAT THE WORK WILL BE DONE IN THE MANNER SET FORTH IN THIS APPLICATION AND AS MAY BE APPROVED BY THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, THE APPLICANT AGREES TO HOLD THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD AND THE TOWN TRUSTEES HARMLESS AND FREE FROM ANY AND ALL DAMAGES AND CLAIMS ARISING UNDER OR BY VIRTUE OF SAID PERMIT, IF GRANTED. vSIGN~TURE OF~PLICANT - SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS ~ NOTkRY ~UBLIC EX,%MINED (CHAPTER 32) APPROVED "WETLANDS" PERMIT (CHAPTER 97) APPROVED "BOAT.DOCKS, WHARVES" PERMIT (CHAPTER DISAPPROVED "WETLANDS PERMIT" (CHAPTER 97) DISAPPROVED "BOATS.DOCKS. WHARVES" PERMIT CONDITIONS. IF ANY EXAMINING BODY SIGNATURE OF CHAIRMAN COMPUTATION OF FEES Approved 2/27/85 IV~ r r~rvc t~ / A VOL. RESOLUTION - May 1, 1985 and Lead agency declaration for Twin Fork Fence Sebastian's Cove. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Trustees declare itself lead agency in regard to the State Environmental Quality Review Act in the matter of the application of Twin Fork Fence & Siding Co. and Sebastian's Cove, Ltd. for a Wetland Permit on certain property located on, the North Side of Mill Road, East of Mattituck Creek, Mattituck. BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 April 29, 1985 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 Mr. Frank Cichanowicz, III, Chairman Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council Southold Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Dear Mr. Cichanowicz: Transmitted herewith is application no. 266 for a wetland permit submitted by Twin Fork Fence & SeDastian's Cove, LTD. Please prepare a written report of findings and recommendations with respect to this application. Very truly yours, HENRY P. SMITH, PRESIDENT BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES Secretary to Board Attachment BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 Aprll 29, 1985 Charles T. Hamilton Alternate Regional Permit Administrator N.Y.S. Dept. of Environmental Conservation B~ilidng 40, SUNY - Room 219 Stony Brook, New York 11794 Dear Nr. Hamilton: Enclosed is application of Twin Fork Fence & Sebastian's Cove, Ltd. for a wetland permit. TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 Siding Co., and This project is unlisted and our initial determination of non-significance has been made and we wish to coordinate this action to conform our initial determination in our role as lead agency. Nay we have your view on.this matter. Written comments on this project will be received at this office until May 20,' 1985 We shall interpret your lack of response to mean there is no objection by your agency. Very truly yours, Enclosures HENRY P. SMITH, PRESIDENT BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES Ilene Pfifferling Secretary to Board cc: Commissioner Williams Southold Town Building Department BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 1197I Date: April 29, 1985 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 To Whom It May Concern: Attached hereto is a Short Environmental Assessment Form submitted by Co-Applicant Twin Fork Fence & Siding Co., Pres. Stephen J. Perricone and Sebastian's Cove, Ltd. in connection with their application for a Wetland Permit to redredge existing channel to gain access to federal channel in Mattituck Creek. Removal of Approximately 6000 cu. yds. of spoil and to be deposited on a previous spoil site. Property located on the North Side of Mill Road, East of Mattituck Creek, Mat~ituck. Henry ~. Smith, President Board of Town Trustees Posted: April 29, 1985 ~.~JECT PLAN VIEW 5 1 of 6 W~m~4s V~ PROPOSED BULKHEAD & BOAT RAMP AT. SEBASTIANS MtrrlxUCK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SUFFOLK COUtTrY N~w YOP.~ STATE DATE: SEPTF. U~ED 1995 FOR: SEBASTIAN COVE PROPERTY ASSOCIATION' BY: INTER-SCIENCE RESEA_~CH ASSOCIATES llqC. EXISTING BULKHEAD SECTION C - C' C Cap 11"x25' Butt Pile Countersunk Easher EL +2.8' M.H.W. Wales C~ EL 0+0 Shoreline EL -1.0' Exlstin~ Depth Depth of Penetration 14.0' 10' Horizontal Pile (16' Back) x20' Tongue & Groove Sheathing Existing Bulkhead in Disrepair 10' Dia. ~nber Pile 10' Length ~[pical Bulkhead Section 11' Butt Piling 6"x8" Top & Bottom Wales 3'xlO" Tongue & Grooove Sheathing 10" Backing ptltn~ 10" Horizontal Pilt-l NOTE:, Approximately 45 Lf. of timber bulkhead to be replaced in-ldnd/in-place to protect tidal wetlands veletation per plan vlaw. This section shows the bulkhead replacement in that location. 2of6 ~sav~w s, ieee NOT~ New proposed bulkhead to be installed within 15" of existing bulkhead, as shown on plall view, except where otherwise specifically noted. Cap ll"xZS' Butt Pile Counters,ink Eaeher EL +2.8' II. KW. Wales TYPICAL BULKHEAD SECTION Shoreline EL. -2.7 Depth of 12.3' 10" Horizontal Pile (16' Back) 3"xlO"x20' Tongue & Groove Sheatl~tng Existing Bulkhead in Disrepair 10" Dia. ~.mber Pile 10' Length Typical Bulkhead Section 11' Butt piling 6"x8" Top & Bottom Wales 3'x10' Tongue & Grooove $heaiht,~g 10" Backing Piling 10" Horizontal Pilt~5 3 of 6 [ en~ sm ~/~.l~ql,m~s/t~otn-DaA~'/sam~nw~ MATTrI't~OX CROSS-SECTION B - B' THROUGH RAMP BULKHEAD B Note: Existina boat ramp is a rate,mum of 18 feet in width (19 feet + maximum). Proposed boat ramp is a IDinimu~l of 15 feet in width after allowin~ bullhead replaoement within 18 lnohes of existin~ b~!ll~head (as 8ho~n above). Pas ~smo: P./trWhlm/"m~br/old-.d~v/mb4.dq 4of6 ] SCAI~ 1' . 10' HU110~an & LAUN~x~i'CI RAUP IlL'TAIL AT: S'~BA~TIAH'$ C0'~ TOWN 01P ~011~HOLD SUFFOLK COUNTY NEW YORK 9'FA'I'E DA'rE: Ii,friARY 3, 1998 FEBRUARY 8, 1996 (revised) FOI~ S~IlA~S'S COV~ PROPI~TY 01~R~ 1380CI~TION A C01~TROL JOINT~ AT 12' 0.C.  '~I I I I I I I I I1-1F1[1111][1[~ I I I I I I I I IUUUUUUI_I~ PLAN VIEW OF LAUNCHING RAMP ~ A 5of6 NOTE:The Ilope of ~he launch~,~= ~amp should Be Between L?.% & 15%. SECTION A-A' CROSS-SECTION OF LAUNCHING RAMP Area to be fradod (1:-~ slope) & area of relooated vegetation Edge of Fis~fed $0F6 &ppro'~r"-tely 925 s,f. of ex/stiu~ tidal wetlands ra~etetion to be relooatod, Proposed transplant area is approx~natoly 3?.5 ~f. (oolon~ed to Co~11~*fJon l~ed~ Phr~]~ oo~11~-) ~ ~ ~ded ~ ~loca~ ~ a~ e~ ~1 ~s ~ ~mo~ f~m boat ~mp a~ ~ phn~ ~d ~p~oe o~ar s~ of ~eobs ~ f~nal ~d~ ~t~ G~t~ comple~d ~t ~ ~ ~ p~e for 1:3 s~pe at pe~bw of p~p~ed Density of Planth~= Inter tidal marsh - ~parttna altor~iflora, 2 FL on oenteZ', High marsh - Spa~tina patens, I f~ on oenter, DLOtioI~LO epicata , ! fi. on Other speoiss (Lo. Blaok Grass) will be planted at appro~irnAto density exLsth~ at boat ramp. Method of T~nsplantin~ - By hand after contractor provides fradin{ Fertilizer - Not neoes~aFy as substrata wi~ be mo~ed with tr~nsplantod wetlands ~e~etetiol~ No e~btins tidal wetlands re~etation will be hnpacted as transplant area Lo Phra~m/tes Communus located above wetlands $ou.-dl~; Propart~ l~ne, Topography, lfetismls l~us ~nd TreeHue ~ Per January ~$, lg9$ Sur~ey By Peoonio Sur~yore. P.C. File Name. f:.~r~aphlc~/trunwfwr/oldraw/#b~.dw~ DETAIL OF wA-Et,ANDS VEGETATION Al':. ~ PBOpEBTY 0WI~E~S