Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1000-45.-1-1 (2) i' I I ELIZABETH A.NEVILLE,TOWN CLERK RECEIPT 68632 Town of Southold Southold, New York 11971 Phone: --765-1800 i / DATE - (._L.— "RECEIVED OF: ` $ FOR: 3 a� ❑ CASH U / NE-CK BY: I/C/ ELIZABETH A.NEVILLE,TOWN CLERK RECEIPT 69346 Town of Southold Southold,New York 11971 q q c Phone:516-765-1800 DATE /--19 / o RECEIVED OF: FOR: 7#3 ❑ CASH j U8 CK ff",30� BY: ELIZABETH A.NEVILLE,TOWN CLERK RECEIPT 70950 Town of Southold Southold,New York 11971 19— Ph e:516-765-1800 DATE .-- RECEIVED OF: Cel FOR: �-� call HECK gL�(Ll' BY: 'I 'i _ —---------- S1TE PLAN Presub mission conference (within 30 days of written request) Complete application received (within I months of presub. conference) !Lr l ❑ Application reviewed at work session cx (wittlin 10 days of receipt) hro• ox Applicant advised of necessary revisions (within 30 days of review) D not Revised submission received 6-fs aky C-r,. TA7- s�Tss4 A, Apr VAN AS, ead Agency Coordina tio S'r 99 j EQRA determination /2Sb o REFERRED TO: �tdrf5 a Z�� ,, • ,p Q � �t�clr� oning Board of Appeals zo N (written comments within 6o days of request) oBoard of Trustees SfltF(3-Wolf %° /rir /}Rd�fi ro` aK 0 Building Department (certification) oK p r Suffolk County Department of Planning ro.` oK cam " )#41_ c. A-4 Aa 44&AP6Ae.VK ra �,6Lf !2 ­4department of Transportation -State I flsfr a /,Deartment of Transportation - County pro.WAr,eL4-S,2--,K eorirh&er�Wt�' aotolk County Dept. of health �- - nro. ox tre Commissioners o ?. Senti t>'�AnIN6 �-�/�' i Received: RECEI VED: -rf" Draft Covenants and Restrictions roJ. ` ox File Covenants and Restrictions o t� Odvi/v "'IP R� ao t Landscape Plan 1 r-o ax �4PP<rd��t' ❑❑ tgllting plan 1 OK ;,-." rb Lit approval(,-oul� �f uvnro. j ltlt .I b h nova IJj��/✓;J,//- P` ROM Eny eviewecl by Engilnceer ,roJ. ` oK AI)f)FoVL,ll of site plan -with conditions Endorsenrenl 01 site plan Certificate of Occupancy inspection ,,r.` oK ;- �• \�.. / One year review un tin SU>jj. � kew\ PLANDiING BOARD MEMBEO SUUrTI( e' • Town Hall,53095 Main Road l;47 HJ RICARD G.WARD Chairman C)1ti`Z�� OGS P.O.Box 1179 L ,i � GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM,JR. ` y Southold,New York 11971 2 Fax(516) 765-3136 BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. WILLIAM S.CREMERS � ' -y Telephone(516) 765-1938 KENNETH L.EDWARDS ��© Date Received Date Completed PLANNING BOARD OFFICE Filing Fee TOWN OF SOUTHOLD APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF A SITE PLAN _New C iea( 'h _Change of Used 8S3 00 Re-use Extension _Revision of Approved Site Plan Name of Business or Site: Location: 1000 - 45 - 1 - 1 6145 County Road Address: Greenport. NY 11944 Name of Applicant: Breezy Sound Corp. Address of Applicant: 38 Oak Street, Patchogue, NY 11772 Telephone: (516)475-0745 Owner of Land: Same Agent or Person responsible for application: Richard T. HaefeIi , Esq. Address: 48G Main St. , Box 1112, Westhampton Beach, NY 11978 Telephone: (516)288-5455 Site plans prepared by: Douglas P. Herrlin, Architect License No.: 8089 Address: P.O. Box 428, East Hampton, NY 11937 V Telephone: (516)267-6178 V MAR 16 1998. Southold Town Planning Board Page 2 Planning Board Site Plan Application APPLICANTS AFFIDAVIT STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK Neil Esposito �- being duly sworn, deposes and says that he resides at in the State of New York, and that he is the owner of the above property, or that he is the President of the Breezy Sound Corp. (Title) (specify whether Partnership or Corp.) which is hereby making application; that there are no existing structures or improvements on the land which are not shown on the Site Plan; that the title to the entire parcel, including all rights-of-way, has been clearly established and is shown on said Plan; that no part of the Plan infringes upon any duly filed plan which has not been abandoned both as to lots and as to roads; that he has examined all rules and regulations ad pted by the Planning Board for the filing of Site Plans and will comply with same; that the plans or a( d, as approved, will not be altered or changed in any manner without the approval of the Planning Boa,d; and that the actual physical improvements will be installed in strict accordance with the plans submi d. B7zy SoCor.. Signe (owner) y: /Neil ffspos11_to, President Signed (Partner or corporate Officer and Title) Sworn to me this day of March, 19 98 (No Public) �— JEAN ANN ROC :t6 b1a�Y public,Store of New pout plo.A791821,Suffolk County Tssion expires/ I • PART 1—PROJECT INFORIIOON Prepared by Project Sponsor NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant effec on the environment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E. Answers to these questions will be considerer -as part of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additions information you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3. It is expected that completion or the full EAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not involve. new studies, research or investigation. If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specir. each instance. NAME OF ACTION Cliffside LOCATION OF ACTION (Incivae street AaareSS, Municipality ana coune(I 61,17; Cnimty Road 48, Grepnpnrt,_NY NAME OF APPUCANTlSPONSCR BUSINESS TELEPHONE Breezy Sound Corp. ' (516 ) 475-0745 ACORESS 38 Oak Street CITY/PO STATE ZIP COCE Patchogue, NY 111772 NAME CF OWNER (II caferenp ! 3USINESS TELEPHONE 1 AOORESS CITYIPO STATE LIP COLE OESCRIPTION OF ACTION 68 unit resort motel in five buildings plus a pool house, office, manager apartment, swimming pool and 2 tennis courts on 7+ acres adjacent to Long Island Sound. Please Complete Each Question—Indicate N.A. if not applicable A. Site Description Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas. 1. Present land use: OUrban ❑Industrial OCommercial GBesidential (suburban) tRurai (non-farm 0Forest ❑Agriculture OOther 2. Total acreage or project area: 7' 132 acres. APPROXIMATE ACREAGE PRESENTLY AFTER COMPLETION Meadow or Brushland (Non-agricultural) 1 .5 acres 1 .5 acres Forested _ -0__—_ acres —_-0- acres Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland, pasture, etc.) acres acres Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24, 25 of ECI.) acres -0- acres Water Surface Area __ —_ acres _____. acres Unvegetated (hock, earth or fill) acres acres Roads. buildings and other paved surfaces -0- acres 5 acres Other (Indicate type) Landscaping- -0- Acr15 1 acres 3. What is predominant soil type(s) on project site? a. Soil drainage: OWell drained 45 of dte �Mrulerately well drained 100 0". of site OPCorlp dralni d L ref site b. If any agricultural land is Involved, how in.inY ar.ros or soil are ( lasslried .vithm poll group 1 (1110wh I Of the NY5 Land Classification SYstenlf acres. (See I NVINR 370), 4. Are there bedrock outcroppings on project silo? ❑Yes C�No `a. What is depth to bedrock? (in reef) 2 S. 'Approximate percentage or I)(( d project ,ite with slopes LIU 109L �5" o I Ili)-15"'0 22 715°o or eater 14 6. Is project substantially contiguous to, or contain o building, site, or district, listed on the State or the National Registers of Historic Places? Oyes CXNo 7..Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural Landmarks? Eyes X N o 8. What is the depth of the water table? 30+ (in reel) 9. Is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aquifer? Oyes ttNo 10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? Lyes ONo 11. Does project site contain any species or plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered? ❑Yes UN According to Identify each species 12. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e.. cliffs, dunes, other geological formations) Oyes tNO Describe 13. Is the project site,�r-. presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area? Oyes tNo If yes, explain 14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community? ❑Yes tNo 15. Streams within or contiguous to project area: N/A a. Name or Scream and name of River to which it is tributary 16. Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: a. Name N/A b. Size (In acres) 17. Is the site served by existing public utilities? (31Yes ❑No a) If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? tYes ❑No b) If Yes, will improvements be necessary to allow connection? tYes CNo 18. Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and ,Markets Law. Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 3042 ❑Yes CNNo 19. Is the site located in or substantially contiguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 of the ECL, and 6 NYCRR 617? ❑yes XNo 20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wash?_ Oyes CXNo 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 7. 132 acres. _ b. Project, acreage to be developed: 6 arses initially; 6 acres Ultimately. c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped 1 .5 acres. d. Length of project, in miles: (If appropriate) e. If the project is an expansion, indicate per, ,nt of rspansmo prnposed 4L: f. Number of off-street parking spaces existing 0 proposed 80 g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour 56 (upon completion or project)? h. If resulcnual: Number and type of housim: units: Onc Family Two Iamil; ,vi"luple Family Condominium Initially Ultimately I. Dimensions (in reet) or larges propnsod structure -�1� height: _.74..61_ svu Iih. 1251 length. j. Linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughrare project will occupy is? 601 it 3 2. How much natural maieri.ti•, ruck, earth, etc.i will b,r rernov,•d fro,•e sae? tons/cubic yards 1 Will disturbed areas be reclaimed? r'Us CNo CN(A a. If yes. for what intend..- purpose is the site beim; reclaimed? motel b. will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? LXYes CNo - c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? (XYes CNo 4. How many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site? 5 acres. S. Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this project? Oyes IXNo 6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction 18 months, (including demolition). 7. If multi-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 phases? Dyes ONO 8. Will blasting occur during construction? Oyes CNo 9. Number or jobs generated: during construction 50 ; arter project is comolete 5 10. Number or jobs eliminated by this Project 0 11. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? 0-yes CCA No If yes, explain 11 Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? GYes 't N0 a. If yes, indicate type or waste (sewage. industrial, etc.) and amount b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged 13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? Oyes tXINo Type 14. bvill surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? GYes 1LNo , Explain no effect 15. Is project or any portion or project located in a 100 year flood plain? Oyes F':N0 16. Will the project generate solid waste? xL (Ayes ONO a. If yes, what is the amount per rp�& 408 tons b. If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used? EMYes GNo C. If yes, give name Greenport Sewer location d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? GYes No e. If Yes, explain 17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste? OYcs AN 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? Cyes No 19. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? GYes J�:No ,Xy,, 20. Will project produce operating, noise eaceeduu; the local ambient noise Icvuls? CYes L"l,N0 21. W61 project result in an increase in emvgy it w? 93yes CNo If yes , indicate types) _electric & heat 22. If water x,ppiy is from Walt", Mchc.lir punlpm ; capd,.icy N/A {;a lunsimunttf. 23- Total ancicipated water usage per day 17,000 gallons/day. 24. Does protect involve Local, St.,te or IOdCfal lundinu? GYcs ENo If Yes, explain 4 •r 25. Approvals Required: Submittal • 9 Type Date City, Town, U1,19e Board Dyes CASN0 City, Town, Village Planning Board IXYes ❑:No site plan -City, Town Zoning Board Dyes CAN, City, County Health Department qYes ❑No water and sewer Other Local Agencies Dyes IJNo Greenport water & sewer Other Regional agencies ❑Yes CANo State Agencies Dyes LXNo Federal Agencies ❑Yes CIQvo C. Zoning and Planning Information 1 . Does proposed action involve a planningor zoning decision? AYes ONO If Yes, indicate decision required: ❑zoning amendment ❑zoning variance ❑special use permit ❑subdivision site plan ❑new/revision of master plan ❑resource management plan ❑other 2. What is the zoning classification(s)of the site? R R 3. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning? 70 motel units 4. What is the proposed zoning of the site? RR 5. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning? 77 motel units Co. Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? Eyes ❑N 7. What are the predominant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a 'A mile radius of proposed action? motel_, condominium, nursing home, residential d. Is the proposed action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses within a SG mile? tyas CNNc 9. If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed? N/A a. What is the minimum lot size proposed? 10. Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of Sewer or water districts? Dyes KINc 11 . Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police fire protection)? glYes ❑No a. If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? NYes ❑No 12. Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? Dyes [j No a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? Dyes ❑No D. Informational Details Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. If there arc or may be any adverse impacts associated with your proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or avoid them. E. Verification I certify that the infonnation_� rovided it is true to ,ho best ,f my koosvledpe. /f �Npplicant/Spoosor, . me /G'� . I R Date Signature iitle If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with (his asses smenl. \ $ •w 617.21 SEAR Appendix A State Environmental Quality Review FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM Purpose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine. in an orderly manner, whether a project or action may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer. Frequent- ly, there are aspects of a project 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, many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware or the broader concerns affecting the question or significance. " The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination process has been orderly, comprehensive in nature, yet flexible to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action. Full EAF Components: The full EAF is comprised or 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: 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 identifies whether an, impact can be mitigated or reduced. Part 3: 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. DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE—Type 3 and Unlisted Actions Identity the Portions of EAF completed for this project: ❑ 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 mrormation, and considering both the magitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the lead agency that: ❑ A. The project will not result in any large and important impact(s) and, therefore, is one which will not have a significant impact on the environment, thererore a negative declaration will be prepared. ❑ B. Although the project could have a significant 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 declaration will be prepared.` ❑ C. The project may result in one or more large and important impacts that may have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a positive declaration will be prepared. A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions Name of Action Name of Lead :\gency Print or Type Name of Responsible(Aficer o Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer Signature of Rrsponsihlc Othwur in Le.ul Afp,ncy Sign.itureOr Preparer(lf different from respomloleotrlcer) Date 1 Part 2—PROJECT IMPACTS AND THEIR MAGNITUDE • Respunsihilily of Lcad ,xgenc10 General Information (Read Carerully) • In completing the form the reviewer should be guided by the queshonHave my responses and determinations bee reasonable? The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst. •, Identifying that an impact will be potentially large (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessarily significant. Any large impact must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine significance. Identifying an impact in column 2 simpi asks that it be looked at further. • The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of impacts and wherever possible the threshold c magnitude that would trigger a response in column 2. The examples are generally applicable throughout the State ane for most situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be appropriat, for a Potential Large Impact response, thus requiring evaluation in Part 3. • The impacts of each project, on each site, in each locality, will vary. Therefore. the examples are illustrative ane have 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. Instructions (Read carefully) 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 1 or 2) to indicate the potential size of the impact. It impact threshold equals or exceeds any example provided, check column 2. If impact will occur but thresholc is 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. If a potentially large impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated by change(s) in the project to a small to moderate impact, also check the Yes box in column 3. A No response indicates that such a reauction 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 1 . Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site? ❑NO ❑YES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise per 100 ❑ ❑ ❑1"es ❑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 ❑ ❑ F_-Yes L1 No 3 feet. • Construction of paved parking area for 1,000 or more vehicles. ❑ ❑ 11 Yes ❑No • Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally within ❑ Cl ❑Yes Cl No 3 feet of existing ground surface. • Construction that will continue for more than I year or involve more ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ON than one phase or stage. Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than 1,000 ❑ ❑ ❑1'es ONO tons of natural material (i.e., rock or soil) per ye,ir. Construction or expansion of a sanitary Limlfill ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No Construction in a designated floodway. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No Other impacts ❑ ❑ C''Yes ❑No 2. Will there be an refect b. . y u; µ,Q or unusuel land (runts found on the site? (i a. cliffs, dunes, gLoIoL-tcif ioimation,, etc )[-'NO DYES Specific land forms. ❑ <1 ❑Yes ❑No �i 0 • 7 2 3 IMPACT ON WATER Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large 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, ECL) ❑r4O ❑YE5 Examples that .would apply to column 2 • Developable area of site contains a protected water body. ❑ Cl []Yes ❑No • Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a ❑ ❑ EI Yes ❑No protected stream. • Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland ❑ Cl E:Yes ❑No • Other impacts: E. ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 4. Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body of water? ONO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No or more than a 10 acre increase or decrease. • Construction of a body or water that exceeds 10 acres of surrace area. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Other impacts: Cl U —Yes ❑No 5. Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity? ❑NO ❑YES Examples that would apply to column 2 Proposed Action will require a discharge permit. U U ❑Yes ❑No C • 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 ❑114 gallons per minute pumping capacity. • Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water ❑ ❑ []Yes ❑No supply system. • Proposed Action will adversely affect groundwater. ❑ Cl ❑Yes ❑No • Liquid effluent will be convey.-.1 off the site to facilities which presently ❑ ❑ _7 yes ❑No do not exist or have inadequate capacity. • Proposed Action would use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per ❑ Cl Cl Yes El No day. -, Proposed Action will likely cause siltation or other discharge into an Cl ❑ ❑Yes ONO existing body of water to the extent that there will be an obvious Visual contrast to natural conditions. Proposed Action will require the storage of petroleum or chemical ❑ Cl ❑Yes ❑No products greater than 1,100 gallons. • Proposed Action will allow residential uses in areas without water ❑ ❑ Dyes Cl No and/or sewer services. • Proposed Action locates cominvrcial and/or industrial uses wlueh may ❑ Cl ❑Yes ❑t'lo require new or expansion of exl5ong wa+te tre.mnem ,uui;or JOGIgQ facilities. _ Other impacts: ❑ ❑ !'Yes �No 6 Will proposed action ,Ater drainage ilo+w or pattorns, or ,uriacc Wall'f runoff? ANO �—Y1-5 Examples that would oplrly to column 2 • Proposed Action would change flood water flows. ❑ r' ❑Yes ❑No 1 7 :w • 9 3 mall1 to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change • Proposed Action may cause substantial erosion. _ []Yes ❑No • Proposed Action is incompatible with existing drainage patterns. J ❑Yes ONO • Proposed Action will allow development in a designated floodway. O ❑Yes ON • Other impacts: 'J ❑Yes ❑No IMPACT ON AIR 7. Will proposed action affect air quality? ONO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips in any given ❑ L_.J ❑Yes LINO hour. • Proposed Action will result in the incineration of more than 1 ton of ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONO refuse per hour. • Emission rate of total contaminants will exceed S lbs. per hour or a -]NO❑No heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour.' • Proposed action will allow an increase in the amount or land committed - ❑Yes ❑No to industrial use. • Proposed action will allow an increase in the density or incustrial iN0 development within existing industrial areas. • Other impacts: Yes ❑No IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS ©. Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or end::ngered species? ❑NV G1'ES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Reduction of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal '! Oyes ❑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. ❑ iJ OYes ❑No • Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other ❑ J Oyes ❑N than for agricultural purposes- • Other impacts: ._ ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 9. Will Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or non-endangered species? . ONO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action would substantially interfere with any resident or ❑ ❑ Oyes ONO migratory fish, shellfish or wildlife species. • Proposed Action requires the removaln of more than 10 acres ❑ ❑Yes ONO y of mature forest (over 100 years or age) or other locally nwortant vegetation. IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES 10 WIII the Proposed Action affect agrtculwral Lind resources! 17NO LYES 17-mples That would apply to column 3 • The proposed action would ;ever, cross nr limit access to agncniltural ❑ i`, ❑Yes ONO land (includes cropland, hayfields, pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc.) 1 8 • 1 2 3 Small to Potential Can Imoact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact I 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 ❑ O ❑Yes ONO of agricultural land or, if located in an Agricultutal District. more _ than 2.5 acres or agricultural land • The proposed action would disrupt or prevent installation of agricultural O ❑ Dyes 11 No land management systems (e.g., subsurface drain lines, outlet ditches, strip cropping); or create a need for such measures (e.g. cause a farm field to drain poorly due to increased (unoff) • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONO IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES 11 Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources? ❑NO . OYES (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 ❑ El ❑Yes ONO or in sharp contrast to current surrounding land use patterns, whether man-made or natural. • Proposed land uses, or project components visible to users or ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ENO aesthetic resources which will eliminate or significantly reduce their enjoyment or the aesthetic qualities or that resource. • Project components that will result in the elimination or significant ❑ O OYes. ONO screening or scenic views known to be important to the area. • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ E'Yes ONO IP41PACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 12. Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure or historic, pre- historic or paleontological importance? ONO OYES rt, Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action occurring wholly or partially within or substantially ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONO 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 ❑ O ❑Yes ONO project site. • Proposed Action will occur in an area designated as sensitive for ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONO archaeological sites on the NYS Site Inventory. • Other impacts: ❑ O ❑Yes ONO IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION 13. Will Proposed Action affect the quantity or quality of existing or future open spaces or recreational opportunities? Ex.implcs that would apply to column _' CINO DYES • Thr pefmanont torncl Os Ute of a future rocreatlonal opportunity- ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑NO • '\ major rvduction of an open space important to the community. ❑ O ❑Yes ❑No Othcr imp;icts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 9 IMPACT CWRANSPORTATION2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be 14 Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems? Moderate Large Mitigated By ❑NO =YES Impact Impact Project Change Examples that would apply to column 2 • Alteration of present patterns of movement of people andlor goods ❑Yes ❑No • Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems. ❑ �: ❑Yes ONO • Other impacts: ❑ E ❑Yes ❑No IMPACT ON ENERGY 15. Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or energy supply? CNO LYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action will cause a greater than 5% increase in the use of ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONO any form of energy in the municipality. • Proposed Action will require the creation or extension or an energy ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two family residences or to serve a major commercial or industrial use. • Other impacts: ❑ Cl Yes ❑No NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS 16. Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or vibration as a result of the Proposed Action? ' ONO EYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Blasting within 1,500 feet of a hospital, school or ocher sensitive ❑ ! ❑Yes CIN o facility. • Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day). ❑ ❑Yes ❑N • Proposed Action will produce operating noise exceeding the local ❑ ❑ ❑Yes CIN o ambient noise levels 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? ONO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action may cause a risk of explosion or release of ha�ardous ❑ ❑ 01 Yes ❑No substances(i.e. oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) in the event of accident or upset conditions, or there may be a chronic low level discharge or emission. • Proposed Action may result in the. burial of "ha iardous wastes" in any ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ON form (ie. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritatini;, infectious. etc.) • Storage racilities for one million or more gallons of liquified natural ❑ (] ❑Yes ❑N gas or other flammable liquids. • Prnf,osed action may result in the es,-:,vacioo ur other disiurbancc ❑ L ❑Yes ❑N0 within 2,000 feet of a site used for the deposal of solid or haiudous waste. • Othrr impacts. ❑ LJ ❑Yr.s O,-4o 10 w 1 2 3 IMPACT ON GATH AND CHARACTER Small to Potential Can Impact Be OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD Moderate Large Mitigated By 18. Will proposed action affect the character of the existing community? Impact Imoact Project Change CNO ❑YES Examples that would apply to column 2 • The permanent population of the city, town or village in which the ❑ ❑ C1 Yes ❑No project is located is likely to grow by more than 5% • The municipal budget for capital 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 officially adopted plans or goals. Cl ❑ ❑Yes ONO • Proposed action will cause a change in the density of land use. ❑ ❑ CJ-Yes ❑No • Proposed Action will replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No or areas of historic importance to the community. • Development will create a demand for additional community services Cl Cl ❑Yes (:]No (e.g. schools, police and fire, etc.) • Proposed Action will set an important precedent for future Projects. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 1 • Proposed Action will create or eliminate employment. ❑ C. ❑Yes ❑No • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes F-1 No i 19 Is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? ❑NO =YE`> 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 potcrttFally 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 project 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, mcludin); permanently lost re,ourcc> of valor • Whcther the impact can or will be controlled • The regional consequence of the impart • Its potential divcn;encc from local not•ds and t:oils • Whcther known objections to the prop•ct reldtc to th" impar 1. (COntl(aw on attachments) II b 17.2 1 SEQR Appendix 13 0 • _te Environmental Quality Review This form may be used to provide additional information relating to Question I I of Part 2 of the Full E.-\F. (To be completed by Lead Agency) Distance Between Visibility Project and Resource (in Miles) 1- Would the project be visible from: 0-!4 /4-1/z /2-3 3-5 5 + • A parcel of land which Is dedicated to and available ❑ ❑ Cl �❑ to the public for the use, enjoyment and appreciation of natural or manmade scenic qualities? • An overlook or parcel of land dedicated to public ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ observation, enjoyment and appreciation of natural or man-made scenic qualities? • A site or structure listed on the National or. State ❑ ❑ _ C' ❑ Registers of Historic Places? • State Parks? ❑ • The State Forest Preserve? C C C ❑ ❑ • National Wildlife Refuges and state game refuges? ❑ C ❑ Cl • National Natural Landmarks and other outstanding ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ natural features? • rational Park Service lands? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • Rivers designated as National or State Wild, Scenic LJ L✓ _ ❑ ❑ or Recreational? • Any transportation corridor of high exposure. such ❑ ❑ _ ❑ ❑ as part of the Interstate System, or Amtrak? • A governmentally established or designated interstate ❑ ❑ C' ❑ Cl or inter-county foot trail, or one formally proposed for establishment or designation? • A site, area, lake, reservoir or highway designated as ❑ Cl C' Cl ❑ scenic? • Municipal park, or designated open space? ❑ Cl ❑ ❑ ❑ • County road? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • State? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • Local road? Cl ❑ _ ❑ Cl 2. Is the visibility of the project :casonal? (i.e., :.creencd by summer foliage, but vi,:ible during other seasons) ❑Yes ENO 3. Are any of thr. res01:t­_S Lhi:cked .n quc! lion I used by (fie Imblic during the time of yo.ir during which the project x-nl be visible? ❑Yes ❑No \ 1 DESCRIPTION OF OSTING VISUAL ENVIRONMENT d. From each item checked in question 1. check those which generally describe the surrounding environment. Within *'/. mile * I mile Essentially undeveloped ❑ ❑ Forested ❑ ❑ Agricultural ❑ ❑ Suburban residential ❑ Cl Industrial ❑ ❑ Commercial ❑ ❑ Urban ❑ ❑ River, Lake. Pond ❑ ❑ Cliffs, Overlooks ❑ ❑ Designated Open Space ❑ ❑ Flat ❑ ❑ Hilly Mountainous ❑ Other I ❑ NOTE: add attachments as needed 4 5. Are there visually similar projects within: ' 1/2 mile Di Yes ❑No "1 miles Ell Yes No 2 miles 11 Yes EJ No '3 miles ❑Yes []No Distance from project site are provided for assistance. Substitute other distances as appropriate. EXPOSURE 6. The annual number of viewers likely to observe the proposed project is . NOTE: When user data is unavailable or unknown, use best estimate. CONTEXT 7. The situation or activity in which the viewers are engaged while viewing the proposed action is FREQUENCY Holidays/ Activity Daily Weekly Weekends Seasonally Travel to and from work ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Involved in recreational activities ❑ ❑ Cl ❑ Routine travel by residents ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ At a residence ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ At worksite ❑ ❑ ❑ Cl Other ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ i i r i 2 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 Chairman �� � P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 WILLIAM J. CREMERS N Z KENNETH L.EDWARDS Telephone (631) 765-1938 GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM,JR. Fax(631) 765-3136 RICHARD CAGGIANO PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD August 15, 2001 Charles J. Voorhis, CEP, AICP Nelson Pope& Voorhis, LLC 572 Walt Whitman Road Melville, NY 11747-2188 RE: Breezy Sound Motel CR 48, Greenport SCTM# 1000-45-t-2.2 Dear Mr. Voorhis, r As discussed, enclosed is a revised plan of the above project showing the wet area and the Costal Erosion Line. The applicant has indicated that they are unable to show the top of bluff line! Also enclosed are are marked copies of two plans, one dated 1989 showing the top of bluff and the steep contours south of the bluff line, and a plan dated August 7, 2000, showing the 1989 top of bluff line and the steep contours. It seems obvious that there has been erosion landward since 1889. It would appear that the new top of bluff is south of the original 1989 line. If this is so, the existing foundations are not 100' from the bluff line. This is shown on page two of seven of the August 7, 2000 plan. Also shown in the southwest corner on page two of seven of the August 7, 2000, plan is the wet area. It is unclear who flagged this area. I would appreciate your continued review of this project and your opinion of whether the bluff line should be shown on the plan. I would also appreciate knowing if the wetland area is adequately mapped and requires a Trustee permit. If you have any questions, please contact this office. 3dSinc re rt . Kassn r Site Plan Reviewer Ends. PLANNING BOARD MEMB Q$UffOJtC ��. Q Town Hall, 53095 Main Road BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. �� Gym P.O. Box 1179 Chairman o Southold, New York 11971 WILLIAM J. CREMERS W T Fax(516) 765-3136 KENNETH L.EDWARDS Telephone(516) 765-1938 GEORGERITCHIE RICHARDG.WARD J8 d PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD August 25, 1999 Patrica C. Moore, Attorney at Law 51020 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 RE: Cliffside CR 48, Greenport SCTM# 1000-45-1-1 Dear Mrs. Moore, The Planning Board has received your letter of August 5, 19990 regarding the expiration of the site plan for Cliffside. As approved on December 18, 1999, the plan had no outstanding permits or approvals pending. The stairs down the face of the bluff were not included in the approval and thus a DEC permit was not required. The site plan approved on December 18, 1999, has expired as per 100-255 of the Town Code. If you have any questions, or require additional information, please contact this office. ic el beri/G. Kassner Si e Plan Reviewer PATRICIA C. MOORE Attomey at Law 51020 Main Road Southold,N.Y. 11952 Tel: (516)765-4330 Fax: (516)765-4643 Margaret Rutkowski Secretary August 5, 1999 Bennett Orlowski, Jr. , Chairmanr-;*. Southold Town Planning Board Town Hall a 53095 Main Road P.O.Box 1179 AUUG Southold, NY 11971 ")ut�iold IOwn Re : Site plan for Cliffside Planning Board CR 48 , Greenport, NY Dear Chairman and Board: The developer of "Cliffside" , Breezy Sound Corp. , asked me to review his previously approved site plan. The developer wishes to build the identical project in accordance with a site plan which the Planning Board thoroughly reviewed and approved in 1989 . This site plan is for construction of 69 motel units, each unit is less than 600 square feet (enclosed is Mr. Douglas P. Herrlin' s letter with specific square footage calculations : end units are 591 .2 sq. ft. , and interior units are 593 . 3 sq. ft. ) . The project approved in 1989 remains the same project proposed today. The developer has vested rights in the existing plan, the foundations were poured, and large investments in water and sewer contracts were made . You advised the developer that the site plan approval had expired, thereafter, the site plan was treated as a new application and forwarded to Nelson, Pope & Voorhis, LLC for review and the Fire Department for comment . The comments to date are unreasonable because they would require a revised site plan and improvements which would threaten the existing foundations . After a review of the site plan and the Southold Town Zoning Code, the site plan has not expired and is in full force and effect . The approved site plan is valid for a period of three (3) years from the date of such enactment, but the code states that "this period will begin when all governmental approvals have been obtained" . The access to the Long Island Sound shown on the Site Plan requires DEC approval , this approval is pending, consequently the site plan continues until "all governmental approvals have been obtained" . The DEC permit has not been obtained. As soon as all the approvals are obtained, a building permit from the building department should be issued without further site plan review. If you wish to discuss this further, please do not hesitate to contact me . Very truly yours, Patricia C. Moore cc : Breezy Sound Corp. DOUGLAS P. HERRLIN Architect Box 442, East Hampton, L.I., New York 11937 516-324-6148 L�%� G t5 L,a c� i I IYPE p utii>-� uiJi I^ n1t2�Rl�jc� usrt cF"�'� ?�`�alt 1�/1 sod_ o� �� g�l�r►�5'A''p' �� c' = 3�, urv� =21,333.(, �U1�UIrvClS� (���'Gl Q� yrs 3 41" x 5�i� LS oiU�i 7S` i3' � �P�j -n,l Cry, oi�,��� '7�Z •2 �� RICHARD T. HAEFELI ATTORNEY & COUNSELOR AT LAW 4BG MAIN STREET P.O BOX 1112 WESTHAMPTON BEACH NEW YORK 11978 516-2 8 8-545 5 E-MAIL ADDRESS TELECOPIER nhofficeOworldnetattnet 516 2 8 8-54 74 December 14, 1998 Robert G. Kassner Southold Town Planning Board P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Re: Breezy Sound Site Plan Main Road, Greenport SCTM# 1000-45-1-1 Dear Mr. Kassner: With reference to the above application, I am enclosing herewith six (6) copies of the elevations and floor plans for the units. I believe that the elevation contain all of the information that the Architectural Review Committee needs for its review. In the event that it needs additional information please let me know. As to the enclosed floor plans you will note that none of the units exceed 600 square feet. These are the same floor plans approved by the Planning Board in 1989 and the same floor plans used to obtain the prior Building Permit. Mr. Voorhis, in recommending that the size of the buildings next to C.R. 48 be reduced, did so to insure that the 600 square foot limitation would be complied with. Since the floor plans do comply with the 600 square foot requirement, there does not appear to be any reason to reduce the size of the building. Very truly yours, Richard T, Haefeli RTH:nh Enc. DEC 15 1998 Southold Town Planning Board PLANNING BOARD MEMBER gpFFOL t Town Hall, 53095 Main Road BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. oto Gyp P.O. Box 1179 Chairman Southold, New York 11971 WILLIAM J.CREMERS H Z Fax (516) 765-3136 KENNETH L.EDWARDS W GEORGE CRIITTCH G L ATRHD,JR. O� Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD November 4, 1998 Richard T. Haefeli, Esq. 48G Main Street Box 1112 Westhampton Beach, NY 11978 RE: Proposed Site Plan for Breezy Sound Main Road, Greenport SCTM# 1000-45-1-1 Dear Mr. Haefeli, The Planning Board has received a report from its environmental consultant concerning his review of your LEAF, DEIS & FEIS. The Board has reviewed this report and has accepted the recommendations of its consultant. Town Code Section 100-61 B. 2 (d) limits transient motels & resort motels to six hundred (600) square feet per guest unit. The guest units on your plan exceed this limit. As previously indicated in the Board's letters to you of August 25, 1998, and June 12, 1998, and the consultants reviews of June 5, 1998 and October 6, 1998, the following changes/additions must be made before the Board can proceed with its review: 1. All guest units must be six hundred square feet in area. Revised floor plans must be submitted. 2. A current traffic study is required. 3. Contracts for public water and sewer. 4. Revised grading and drainage plans. 0 0 5. Revised erosion control plan. 6. Wooden walkway on pilings for beach access, DEC permit required. 7. Irrigation well should be shown on plan. 8. Landscaping plan showing native plantings in 30 and 50 foot buffers along side and rear yards. Low evergreen plantings along C.R. 48. 9. Reduction in the height of the two buildings located near the road. This may be accomplished by the decrease in unit size. 10. Incorporate requirements of the Greenport Fire Department in revised site plan. 11. In addition to the above, elevation drawings are require for review by the Architectural Review Committee. A listing is enclosed of additional data required by the ARC. A review is required by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services and a curb cut permit from the Suffolk County Department of Public Works. Nine copies of the revised site plan and four copies of the floor plans and elevation drawings showing the square foot area of the units are required. If you have any questions, or require further information, please contact this office. re , �- er G. Kdsaner Site Plan Reviewer Encls. cc: Charles Voorhis, Nelson, Pope & Voorhis Gegory Yakaboski, Town Attorney • �P CENVINELSON, POPE & VOORHIS, LLC 1 'I RONMENTAL PLANNINGCONSULTING CHARLES J.VOORHIS,CEP,AICP•ARTHUR J.KOERBER,PE.•VINCENT G.DONNELLY.PE. •VICTOR BERT,PE.•JOSEPH R.EPIFANIA,PE-ROBERT G.NELSON,JR,PE. •CHRISTOPHER W ROBINSON,PE. October 6, 1998 Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman -t q' Southold Planning BoardFOCT Town Hall, 53095 Main Road 0 6 1998 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Southold Town Planning Boarwe: Review of Long EAF Breezy Shores Route 48, Mattituck SCTM No. 1000-45-1-1 N&P No. 98106 Dear Mr. Orlowski: As per your request, we completed a preliminary review of the above referenced action on June 5, 1998. The site plan originally received by NP&V (dated May 1989) was not the approved version (dated June 1989), which included grading, erosion control and landscaping plans. This letter is intended to update the review letter based on this additional information. There are only slight differences between the two site plans, and most of the issues discussed in the review letter remain to be resolved. The overall lay-out of the proposed project is the same under the two plans, with only a slight shift to the northeast and minor revision of the building footprints. The "buffer" along the southwestern property line setback has been increased from 20 to 30 feet, while the "buffer along the northeastern boundary is decreased from 25 to 20 feet. These buffers will not consist entirely of natural vegetation, and grading will occur up to the property line along the northeastern boundary. The review letter of June 5, 1998 recommended several site plan improvements prior to final approval of the proposed project, in order to better conform to the "findings" contained within the Final EIS. The following text restates each of the recommendations of the initial review letter, followed by a brief discussion which considers the additional information provided in the full site plan. Several issues remain to be resolved. Page 1 572 WALT WHITMAN ROAD, MELVILLE. NY 11747-2188 15181 427-5885 FAX 0518) 427-5820 • Breezy Shores fa, Southold LEAF Part 1 Review 1. Revised grading and drainage plans should be submitted to insure that runoff is contained within the upland portion of the site and is nut directed toward the blgff. These plans should be reviewed by the Town Engineer prior to construction. A grading plan is included with the full site plan and drywell locations are depicted, however, drainage calculations are not provided. Drainage calculations should be shown on the final site plan prior to approval. As was suggested in the FEIS, the system should be sized to accommodate a six inch design storm with no increase in runoff. Partial grading of the site occurred prior to the aborted construction in the early 1990's, and the existing grade is a combination of artificial and native topography. Thus, the proposed grading plan is somewhat outdated, however, it is expected that the final grading of the site is generally reflected in the plan. Artificial slopes of 30 to 50 percent are proposed along the northeastern property line, as well in the western corner of the proposed development area and in several smaller areas elsewhere on site. These areas have high potential for erosion, and some type of soil stabilization should be shown on the erosion control plan if these steep slopes cannot be avoided. The grading plan also shows grading up to the northeastern property line, with no preservation of natural vegetation. Although this area was largely cleared during the previous construction, natural vegetation is becoming reestablished if possible, an undisturbed buffer should remain along this property line as suggested in the FEIS. This might be accomplished by a reduction in unit size, or by to reducing the driveway to allow only one-way traffic along the property boundary. 2. A revised erosion control plan should be developed to minimize losv of soils during construction, particularly near the bh�ff. The erosion control plan included with the site plan shows a silt fence to be installed along the bluff before construction. Soil would be stockpiled in the southern portion of the site, and the stockpile would also be fenced. Haybales are proposed for installation around the dry well inlets until groundcover is established. Dry wells will be located at low points along the bluff, which should minimize erosion of the bluff face due to runoff These measures should offer substantial mitigation, however, more detailed plans for soil stabilization in areas of steep slopes should be developed prior to construction. Measures for control of fugitive dust should also be outlined. 3. A wooden walkway on pilings should be constructed to allow beach access with minimal erosional impact to the bluff. This would require separate approval from the NYS Department of Fnvironmenial Conservation. The site plan proposes installation of a walkway within the existing swale, which should conform to NYS Department of Environmental Conservation recommendations. This area is shown as unvegetated on the plan, however, shrub vegetation has recolonized. As was Page 2 • • Breezy Shores w,, Southold LEAF Part t Review stipulated in the NYSDEC letter, clearing for the proposed walkway should be the minimum necessary for installation of the pilings. 4. A well should be installed on site.for irrigation, air• conditioning and pool use, as was recommended in the Final EIS in order to minimize the impact of the project on the local water district. No well is shown on the site plan. This should be resolved prior to approval. 5. Where possible, the vegetation along the boundary of the site should be augmented by native plantings to allow the recommended buffers of 30 and 50 feet along the side and rear yards, respectively. A landscaping plan can be required as part of the final review to ensure that this occurs. A landscaping plan is presented with the proposed site plan. Relatively few native maritime species are included, and revision of the plan might be considered. In particular, the area along the northeastern boundary of the site, which would be graded to the property line under the proposed plan, should be naturalized. Some type of slope stabilization will also be necessary in this area, as has been discussed above. Although the site plan shows areas of vegetation to be retained along the borders of the site, the recommended 30 and 50 foot buffers of native vegetation are not provided under either plan. In addition, the clearing which occurred during construction removed some natural vegetation which might have been retained, particularly along Main Road. These areas should be revegetated to allow the maximum buffer possible. The building set-back along the southwestern property line was increased from 20 to 30 feet under the June 1989 site plan. This will allow a minimum vegetated buffer of at least 25 feet along this property line, and a 30 foot buffer is possible along most of the boundary. The buffer along the northeastern property has been reduced, with a setback to the road of 20, rather than 25 feet. A buffer of natural vegetation is shown to remain on the adjacent property, which is misleading, as clearing is proposed to the property line This area should be planted with maritime shrubs or similar species following final grading, and if possible, the plan should be revised to allow a wider buffer Along Main Road, a natural buffer of up to 50 feet is shown to remain, however, only a narrow strip was retained in some areas during clearing. As the primary function of this buffer is to provide visual screening, the proposed planting of non-native evergreens is desirable, and a berm might be considered, as was discussed above. 6. 777e proposed project exceeds the maximum unit size of 600 s.f under 1 bwn Code, which is intended to discourage conversion of motel units to condominium time share units. Although foundations have been completed for two of the buildings, the unit size within the remaining buildings could be reduced if desired by the planning Board in order to Page 3 • 6reez) Shores a. Southold LEAF Part I Review allow more open space and wider vegetated buffers, cis well as reducing the likelihood that the units would he converted to condominium use. There is no reduction of the unit size in the proposed site plan. Reduction of unit size was recommended within the "findings", and would allow wider buffers and reduction of areas of steep slopes on the grading plan. Unit size should be reduced in the buildings where foundations are not already poured, or, at a minimum, the approval should preclude installation of kitchens in the units as did the 1989 approval. 7. Construction of.a berm along C.R. 48 with evergreen vegetation is recommended to minimize visual impacts. In addition, reduction in the height Qf the two buildings located near the road is suggested, and might be accomplished through a decrease in unit size. The proposed landscaping plan does not show a berm, although the topography along the road is higher than the remainder of the site. Evergreen trees and shrubs are shown on the landscaping plan, which will provide mitigation of the potential impacts of the proposed motel. Reduction in building size would still be desirable, and would also help mitigate visual impacts from Long Island Sound. As was discussed in our initial review, the potential impacts of the proposed project will be substantially mitigated if these measures are incorporated into the site design through an amendment of the site plan. if you have any questions or wish any further input with regard to this matter, please do not hesitate to call. Very truly yours, Ntas . , or o e'LC Charles I. Voorhis, CEP, AICP Page 4 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERA glaff0l t C� Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Chaairman BENNETT iman KI,JR- -Z l/,y P.O. Box 1179 WILLIAM J.CREMERS y - Southold,New York 11971 KENNETH L.EDWARDS u• Fax(516) 765-3136 GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM,JR. Gy �'F Telephone(516) 765-1938 RICHARD G.WARD PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 15, 1998 Charles Voorhis Nelson, Pope & Voorhis, LLC 572 Walt Whitman Rd. Melville, NY 11747 Re: Review of EAF for proposed site plan for Breezy Sound SCTM# 1000-45-1-1 Dear Mr. Voorhis: The Planning Board is in receipt of the $350.00 review fee, as per your cost estimate on the above mentioned proposal. Please proceed with your review, and contact this office if there are any questions regarding the above. Purchase order will be sent under separate cover. erel , ob G. Kassner Site Plan Reviewer Submission Without a Cover Letter Sender: C� Y - HrAe- P4 l _ L 88-�hSS Subject: � (eeZ� S D k n d SCTM#: 1000- C�Iati Date: Comments: _ SSS Piers SEP 9 1998 Southold Town Planning Board PLANNING BOARD MEMBER gUFFO(,� • Town Hall, 53095 Main Road CD BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. o.�.� rk%, P.O. Box 1179 rm Chaian Southold,New York 11971 WILLIAM J.CREMERS CA Z Fax (516) 765-3136 KENNETH L.EDWARDS Oy • Telephone(516) 765-1938 GEORGERICH 'JR. ARD G.WARD PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD August 25, 1998 Richard T. Haefeli, Esq. 48G Main Street Box 1112 Westhampton Beach, NY 11978 RE: Proposed Site Plan for Breezy Sound Main Road, Greenport SCTM# 1000-45-1-1 Dear Mr. Haefeli, In the Planning Board's letter to you of June 12, 1998, we requested nine copies of a revised site plan reflecting the changes recommended by the Town's consultant, together with four copies of the elevation drawings and floor plans showing the square foot area of the units. As indicated in your letter dated July 10, 1998, to Mr. Voorhis you had sent a revised plan to him. However, no plans have been received in this office. Mr. Voorhis is requesting an additional fee to review a plan which has not been submitted to the Planning office. This has caused confusion and has delayed the Board's review of the revised plans. Please submit the revised plans to the Planning Board's office as requested in the Board's letter to you of June 12, 1998. In addition, the Board has received a letter from the Greenport Fire District requesting additional site plan changes. The Board asks that you incorporate the Fire District's request into your site plan. However, please note that any physical intrusion into the Coastal Erosion Hazard Zone will require a permit. It may be advisable to pull the subject buildings back, away from the Hazard line. If you have any questions, or require further information, please contact this office. nc y� o r G. Kassner Site Plan Reviewer Encl. cc: Charles Voorhis, Nelson, Pope & Voorhis RUG-24-1998 1�:24 NELSON a POPE.LLP 516 427 5620 P.01i02 NELSONr POPE & VCIORMISr LLC I, EN V IRONMENYA L . PLANNING 00N5ULT ING CHARLES J.VOORH IS,Cf P.AICP•ARTHUR J KOEREER,PE. •VINCENT 3.CONNELLY,PE. •VICTOR BERT,Pf,•JOSEPH R.EPIFANIA,PE -ROBERT.G.NELSON.JR,PE. •CHRISTOPHER W.ROBINSON,PE To: Bob Kassner From: Chic Voorhis Date: August 13, 1998 e s „� Re: Breezy Sound nJp�• , Aka Cftffsido Associates/GreenportASG � � I,, �ay r North Highway, Greenport • Site Plan Review 1 ****BY FAX ONLY-(516)765-1823**** Dear Bob: Attached, please find a cover letter from Richard Haefeli, attorney for the applicant on the above referenced project When Mr. Haefli transmitted this plan, I assumed the Board would request a cost estimate to review same, If you would like us to update our review to be consistent with the Planning Board approved site plan of December 7, 1989, the cost of these services is$350 00. Please indicate if you wish us to proceed based on this cost estimate. I have staffavailable for this project, and would expect to complete the review within a few days of authorization to proceed. Thank you for your attention to this matter, and please call if you have any questions t Very truly yours, I Cc: Richard Haefeli Valerie Scopaz 572 WALT WHITMAN ROAO. MOLVILLE. NY 1 1 747-21 88 (5161 427-5665 FAX [5161 427.5620 AUG-24-1498 1324 QELSOH 'u: POPE,LLP 516 42? 56204,02-02 RICHARD T. HAEFELI ATTORNEr C COLINSCLOR AT LAW 440 MAIN STREET 0 O 90a IIIE WESTHAMFTOR SEAGN. NEW YORK 11978 916. 268 9499 E-MAIL AOORESS ItLECOFIER nhafGeeiwoldnetO.net 516 e9O.5474 July 10, 1998 Charles 1. Voorhis ( � Nelson, Pope & Voorhis,LLC pieoe BUIUUefd (v N1 r+ 572 Watt Whitman Road uMoj p1041noS Melville, New York 11747.2188 ..1 Re: NrAssociates/Greenport North Al orth Highway,Greenport Dear Mr. Voorhis: Pursuant to our recent telephone conversation, I am enclosing herewith a copy of the site plan for the above project which was approved by the Planning Board on December 7, 1989. I believe that this plan contains all or at least most of the items you suggested in your report to the Planning Board dated June 5, 1998. If there is anything else I can do to assist you in this matter, please contact me. I am advising 14r. Kassner that I have sent this plan to you. Very truly yours, Richard T, Haefeli RTH:nh RUG-24-1998 11:22 NELSON 8 POPE,LLP 516427 5620 P.02i02 RICHARD T. HAEFELI ATTORNEY 6 COUNSELOR AT LAW aBG MAIN STREET C.O BO% 1113 WESTHAM►TON BEACH, NEW YORK 11978 516-268 5a55 E-MAID ADDRESS TELECOr1ER nha(IiH9WMWrAtAt n,g 516 268-5a7a July 10, 1998 Charles J. Voorhisl Nelson, Pope & Voorhis,UCN ' 572 Walt Whitman Road Melville,New York 11747-2188 Re: Cliffside Associates/Greenport North Highway,Greenport ?h Dear Mr. Voorhis: Pursuant to our recent telephone conversation,I am enclosing herewith a cop of the site plan for the above project which was approved by the Planning Board on December/?. 1989. 1 believe that this plan contains all or at least most of the items you suggested in your report to the Planning Board dated June 5, 1998. If there is anything else I can do to assist you in this matter,please contact me. I am advising Mr. Kassner that I have sent this plan to you. Very truly yours, Richard T, Haefeli RTH:nh TOTAL P.02 RUG-24-1998 11.21 NELSON 8 POPEILLP 516 427 5620 P.01i02 NP(L&ON, POPE & ,VOORHIS, LLC 1 Gn v I NON MENTAL • PLANNING '• CC E LILTING CHARLES J.VOORHIS.CGP,AICP•MTHVNJ KOERBER,RE•VINCENT G.DONNE"Y.PE •VICTOR BERT.RE.•JOSEPH R.EPIPANIA,P.E.•ROBERT G.NELSON.JR.P.E. •CHRISTOPHER W,ROBINSON.RE To: Bob Kassner From: Chic Voorhis Date: August 13, 1998 Re: Breezy Sound AkaCliffside Associates/Greenport North Highway, Greenport Site Plan Review ****BY FAX ONLY-(516)765-1823•••• Dear Bob: Attached, please find a cover letter.from Richard Haefeli, attorney for the applicant on the above referenced project. When Mr. HaeAi transmitted this plan, I assumed the Board would request a cost estimate to review same. If you would like us to update our review to be consistent with the Planning Board approved site plan of December 7, 1989, the cost of these services is $350,00. Please indicate if you wish us to proceed based on this cost estimate. I have staff available for this project, and would expect to complete the review within a few days of authorization to proceed. Thank you for your attention to this matter, and.please call if you have any questions. Very truly Yours, Cc: Richard Haefeli Valerie Scopaz 572 WALT WHITMAN,ROAD. MELVILLE, NY 117A7.2188 (51 6) Y27-5555 RAX C5153 427-5520 eENPO CHIEF WARREN JENSEN 9l E.Maif grBBnport-fd@juno.com 1sT ASST.THOMAS R.WATKINS Sr. (516)477-9801 -STATION 1 2N ASST.WAYDE T.MANWARING (516)477-1943-CHIEFS OFFICE TREAS.K.LANGONE (516)477-4012-FAX/MESS P.O.BOX 58 SECRETARY C.CAPRISE THIRD STREET CHAPLAIN C.KUMJIAN GREENPORT,NY 11944 /Ri, pEpt.. Organized 1845 August 18, 1998 Chairman Bennett Orlowski Southold Town Planning Board PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 RE: Breezy Sound (formerly Cliffside), SCTM#1000-45-001-1 Dear Chairman Orlowski: The Board of Wardens of the Greenport Fire Department has reviewed the map for the above mentioned parcel, and finds that the 3 hydrants as located on the map are sufficient for fire protection. No additional firewell will be required. However,the Board of Wardens would like to request that the following be done: • Install a 10"main to feed all hydrants, not an 8" main as shown on the map. • That standpipes be installed for all sprinklers at buildings. • That the Board of Wardens be notified with regard to the level of each building, specifically how many stories each building will have. • That a road or path access of 15'x 15' be made to the back of buildings"B" and "C", specifically so that a piece of fire apparatus could go behind both of the buildings noted. It these items can be attended to,the Board of Wardens approves the map as submitted. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions concerning this matter. Thank you. Sincerely, //}i///�,���'�' CC n�M rlsel I� Y p Secretary AUG 18 1998 Southold Town Planning Boar,' o�gOFF01/( O PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS y� Richard G.Ward,Jill n t x Town Hall,53095 Main Road George Ritchie Latham,Jr. p� �,F P. O. Box ork 1179 Bennett Orlowski,Jr.p�{pcy,.rsr Southold, New York 11971 Mark S. McDonald �Oj ��� Fax(516)7653136 Kenneth L. Edwards Telephone(516)765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD / UL Anthony Volinski, Chief Greenport Fire District Third Street Greenport, NY 11944 Dear Mr. Volinski: Enclosed please find two (2) urveys for Please notify this o rice as to whether any firewells are needed. Please specify whether shallow wells or electric wells will be needed. Please reply by %2 19*'/Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Of /01 R�har.1 � Ward Chairman PLANNING BOARD MEMBERO gOFFOt,( • BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. CQUO COG Town Hall,53095 Main Road Q Chairman y� P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 WILLIAM J.CREMERS y Z Fax(516) 765-3136 KENNETH L.EDWARDS Oy Telephone(516) 765-1935 GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM,JR. Q RICHARD G.WARD 'llpl �a PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM TO: James Richter, Town Engineer FROM: Robert G. Kassner, Site Plan Reviewer k DATE: July 17, 1998 RE: Review of drainage for Breezy Sound Main Road, Greenport SCTM# 1000-45-1-1 Please review the attached for drainage. cc: Raymond L. Jacobs, Superintendent of Highways RICHARD T. HAEFELI ATTORNEY 6 COUNSELOR AT LAW 48G MAIN STREET P.O. BOX 1112 WESTHAMPTON BEACH. NEW YORK 11978 516-2a8-5455 E-MAIL ADDRESS TELECOPIER nhoffice®worldnet.att.net 516286 5474 July 10, 1998 Robert G. Kassner Southold Town Planning Board P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Re: Breezy Sound Site Plan Main Road, Greenport SCTM# 1000-45-1-1 Dear Mr. Kassner: I reviewed the environmental report from Mr. Voorhis and spoke with him about it. It appeared to me that he did not review the plan that was finally approved by the Planning Board. I sent him a copy of that final plan and asked that he review it, since I believe it contains the information set forth in his report. I would hope that he will issue a revised report shortly. Very truly yours, Richard T, Haefeli RTH:nh o � D JUL 14 1998 Southold Town Planning Board PLANNING BOARD MEMBEP gUFFO(,f BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. QUO CSO Town Hall, 53095 Main Road c� Chairman y` P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 WILLIAM J. CREMERS y Z Fax (516) 765-3136 KENNETH L.EDWARDS W GEORGE CHRITCHIEDA HH,JR. y� • �`F Telephone(516) 765-1936 G.WARD PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD June 12, 1998 Richard T. Haefeli, Esq. 48G Main Street Box 1112 Westhampton Beach, NY 11978 RE: Proposed Site Plan for Breezy Sound Main Road, Greenport SCTM# 1000-45-1-1 Dear Mr. Haefeli, The Planning Board has received a report from its Environmental Consultant concerning his review of your Long Environmental Assessment Form (LEAF), and review of the previously prepared Draft EIS and Final EIS for Cliffside. The Board accepts the consultant's report, and mitigation measures one through six. Mitigation measure number seven recommends a berm along C.R.48. The Board feels additional low vegetation landscaping instead of the berm would give cars entering and exiting the property better line of sight for oncoming traffic. Nine copies of the revised site plan together with four copies of the elevation drawings and floor plans showing the square foot area of the units are required for further review. The Board also requires an updated traffic study. If you have any questions, or require further information, please contact this office. b t Kas� rGtiL�LY�� Site Plan Reviewer Encl. cc: Charles Voorhis, Nelson, Pope & Voorhis NELSON, POPE & VOORHIS, LLC 1 ' ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING CONSULTING 'I CHARLES J.VOORHIS,CEP,AICP•ARTHUR J.KOERBER,PE•VINCENT G.DONNELLY,,PE. •VICTOR BERT,PE.•JOSEPH R.EPIFANIA,P.E.•ROBERT G NELSON,JR,PE. •CHRISTOPHER W.ROBINSON,PE. June 5, 1998 Mr, Bennett Orlowski, Chairman Southold Planning Board Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Re: Review of Long EAF D Breezy Shores Route 48,Mattituck JUN 4 1998 SCTM No. 1000-45-1-1 N&P No. 98106 Southold Town Dear Mr. Orlowski: Planning Board As per your request, we have completed a preliminary review of the above referenced action, which is an Unlisted action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act. Tasks and completed activities are identified as follows: 1. Review Part I LEAF The parcel has been field inspected by NP&V. The LEAF has been reviewed and minor revisions were made as necessary. A copy of same is attached. 2. Prepare Part II LEAF The Part II LEAF checklist has been completed and is also attached. Additional information concerning our findings is included below. 3. Review History of the Application The proposed action involves construction of a 68 unit motel complex with a manager's apartment, which is a permitted use within the existing zoning district. The project is currently known as Breezy Shores, although the original application was made under the name of Cliffside. The site consists of 7.13 acres of land in the hamlet of Southold in the Town of Southold. The subject site is located on the north side of North Road (County Road 48) approximately 200 feet Page 1 572 WALT WHITMAN ROAD, MELVILLE, NV 11747-21813 [51 el 427-5665 FAX (516) 427-51320 • • Breezy Shores(0)Southold LEAF Part 1 Review east of Chapel Road. The property is roughly diamond shaped, and both the shoreline and C.R. 48 are oriented southwest-northeast in the vicinity of the site. NP&V has reviewed the past SEQRA documents prepared for the subject application, which was originally submitted in the early 1980's. A Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was submitted in July, 1985, with a final revision in October 1987. A Supplemental Draft EIS was then completed to further address specific concerns, and the documents were accepted as a compete Draft EIS on October 18, 1988. A consultant to the Town of Southold prepared the Final EIS in February 1989 responding to separate written comments on the Draft EIS and testimony from a November 14, 1988 hearing. No findings statement was adopted by the lead agency, however, the Final EIS contained several recommendations which were referred to as the "findings" of the lead agency. The"findings" included in the Final EIS were as follows: The Lead Agency would find an alternative that, a) increases the amount of natural buffer to a minimum of thirty feet along Middle Road and on the east and west sides of the property; b) that reduces the unit count to 58 or reduces the individual unit size to 450 sf at a maximum of 74 units c) reduces the buildings facing on Middle Country Road to one story, and d) incorporates the findings on the subjects of traffic, visual impact, water supply and sewage disposal, recharge, and shoreline and erosion control, will minimize environmental impacts to the greatest degree practicable. The latter general statement would appear to include the following recommendations from the body of the Final EIS: As sight distance is of concern at a curve immediately west of the site, a reduction in the number and size of the units is suggested to mitigate traffic impacts; Greater set-back of the buildings along C.R. 48 is recommended, and a berm with coniferous trees (other than black pines) should be provided to minimize visual impacts. As potable water supplies are limited a separate well for irrigation, pool use and air conditioning is recommended. Use of drought-resistant vegetation and an automatic sprinkler system activated by soil moisture are also suggested. Due to the presence of soils with low permeability on site, redesign of the drainage system to accommodate a six inch design storm with no increase in runoff was Page 2 • Breezy Shores Q Southold LEAF Part 1 Review requested to minimize erosion of the bluff. A reduction in the impervious surfaces on site is suggested to aid in accomplishing this. The proposed concrete walkway to the beach should be replaced by an elevated wooden walkway to minimize disturbance of vegetation and erosion of the bluff: Silt fencing must be installed prior to removal of topsoil on site, and runoff must not be allowed to pool on site during construction. Runoff should be recharged near C.R. 48 or near the center of the site rather than along the bluff. Reduction of the proposed unit size from 911 sf. and 1042 sf. to 450 sf is suggested as more reasonable for a motel unit to minimize the likelihood of long-term residency. A final site plan was then approved on December 18, 1989 which incorporated some, but not all, of the recommendations outlined in the Final EIS. The number of units was reduced to 69, but the building height remained the same and unit size was only reduced slightly to approximately 825 s.f. A 50 foot buffer was provided along most of the C.R. 48 frontage, although less than 25 feet is provided in the southern corner of the property. Setbacks of less than 20 and 25 feet were Iprovided along the western and eastern property lines, respectively. No walkway to the beach was included in the resolution granting approval of the site plan, as a permit from the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation would be required first. NP&V was not provided with final grading and drainage plans to determine if the concerns about runoff and erosion were addressed by the approved site plan, however, these issues should be considered in approval of a renewed site plan. C� Construction was initiated following approval of the site plan, but the work was never completed. The site was cleared and preliminary grading was undertaken, with topsoil stockpiled near the proposed tennis courts. Foundations were poured for the two proposed buildings nearest the bluff which are still present. A small frame cottage also remains on the property from an earlier use, but the garage has been removed. The applicant now wishes to resume construction of the proposed motel, however, the approval has expired and a new SEQRA determination is necessary. 4. Environmental and Planning Considerations The parcel has been inspected and environmental references concerning the site and area have been consulted. The property is zoned Resort Residential (RR), which would permit the project at the proposed density. The site plan meets the requirements for minimum lot area and yard 7 setbacks within the zone, however, the maximum permitted unit size of 600 s.f will be exceeded. , The project involves construction of five 2-story buildings oriented to maximize the number of rooms with water views. A manager's apartment/pool house, apool and two tennis courts would also be included. The property would be accessed by a single drive, which would loop to serve Page 3 • Breezy Shores @ Southold LEAF Part 1 Review the proposed units. Eighty parking spaces are provided, including one per unit and 10 employee spaces as required by code. The project site is located on a bluff overlooking Long Island Sound, and steep slopes of over 15 percent are present along the bluff as well as in the interior of the site. Under existing conditions, the bluff is vegetated with a variety of maritime shrub species. Much of the remainder of the site was cleared when construction was initiated in the late 1980's, and grading and filling has altered the original topography of the site. This grading has created a wet area in the southwestern corner of the site which supports a limited number of wetland plant species. The following text will discuss the existing conditions and potential impacts of the proposed project in more detail. Geologic Resources There is a potential for erosion impacts as a result of the proposed project. The project site is located on a bluff overlooking Long Island Sound, and steep slopes of over 15 percent are present along the bluff as well as in the interior of the site. Alteration of the topography of the property occurred in conjunction with preliminary construction activities, and a low, wet area with steep slopes was created in the southwestern portion of the property. The bluffs along the north shore of Long Island typically experience ongoing erosion due to wind and wave action, and the Town Code requires a 100 foot setback from the top of a bluff for new construction. The Town delineated the edge of the bluff for the original application, and a 100 foot buffer will be maintained from this line to minimize erosion impacts. The height of the bluff is approximately 30 feet, with lower elevation at a slight swale to the northeast. The proposed setback is expected to provide adequate protection of the bluff, although revised grading and drainage plans should be submitted to insure that runoff is contained on site. In addition, a revised erosion control plan should be developed to minimize loss of soils during construction. Some erosion of soils occurred following clearing of the site for construction, as is evidenced by runoff channels within the exposed soils on the southern portion of the site. The bluff does not appear to have been significantly impacted, and soils and run-off appear to have been largely contained on site as two foundations required excavation below the existing grade. If the applicant wishes to seek approval for beach access, a wooden walkway on pilings would be preferable. This structure should be designed to minimize erosion of the bluff by retaining as much vegetation as possible. It is likely that if access is not provided, motel guests will create informal paths to the beach, resulting in more substantial impacts. Thus, a walkway is recommended consistent with the Final EIS. As is shown by the topographic contours within the Draft EIS, the original topography of the site was complex. A plateau was present in the southeastern portion of the site which sloped to the southwest and north, as well as toward Long Island Sound. The maximum height of the plateau was approximately 58 feet near the original C.R. 48 access. The topography dropped to a minimum of 34 feet in the southwestern corner of the parcel, and the southwestern face of the Page 4 • Breezy shores( Southold LEAF Part 1 Review plateau had steep slopes in excess of 20 percent. This original topography has been altered by grading in preparation for construction. Fill was deposited to raise the elevation of proposed buildings A and D to obtain better views and create more gradual grade within the developed portion of the site. The southern portion of the site was not filled, and some excavation may have occurred, creating a smaller, more contained low area which collects temporary pools of water. The northern and western boundaries of the depression increase abruptly at the edge of the fill, but slopes rise only slightly to the south and east. The original grading plan contained in the Draft EIS proposed a retaining wall in this area at the edge of the tennis court, and it is expected that one would be necessary for the currently proposed plan as well. As extensive disturbance has already occurred, completion of the project is not expected to result in further impacts, as long as sediment and run-off is contained on the upland portion of the site. Updated drainage and grading plans should be required, and erosion control measures employed as discussed in the Draft EIS. Water Resources The elevation of groundwater beneath the subject site is approximately 0 to 1 foot above mean sea level (msl) according to the 1997 SCDHS map, and the topographic elevation is ranges from 0 to approximately 58 feet above msl in the northeastern portion of the site. Thus, the depth to groundwater is approximately 0 to 57 feet below the surface, although the minimum depth within the proposed development area is more than 30 feet. This should not present constraints on the proposed project. In addition, the project will be served by the existing water and sewer districts, and no wastewater discharge to groundwater is anticipated. It is suggested that a well be used for irrigation, air conditioning and pool use, as was recommended in the Final EIS for the original project. This will minimize the impact of the project on the local water district. The are no natural freshwater features on the subject site, although a vernal wet area was created by the grading of the site in conjunction with grading of the site. Significant impact to Long Island Sound is not expected as a result of the proposed project. Ecological Resources At the time the Draft EIS was prepared, the habitats found on the subject site included successional woodland on the upland portion of the property and maritime shrubland along the bluff. The shrubland along the bluff remains intact, but most of the remainder of the site was cleared and the topsoil stockpiled in preparation for construction. As described in the Draft EIS, this portion of the site originally contained a successional woodland habitat dominated by locusts, cherry and other early successional tree species. The cleared areas are now characterized by early successional herbaceous species and scattered shrubs, and there are barren areas where erosion has not permitted recolonization. Although wider setbacks are shown on the site plan, only 10 to 15 feet of natural vegetation were retained along the borders of the property, with a slightly wider buffer to the south. Honey locust, sassafras and other trees are found in this edge habitat, except along the eastern border of the site near the bluff, where shrubs are predominant. These buffer areas should be augmented by native plantings where possible to allow the recommended Page 5 Breezy shores(g Southold LEAF Part 1 Review vegetated buffers of 30 and 50 feet along the side and rear yards, respectively. A landscaping plan is recommended as part of the final review to ensure that this occurs. Preservation of the recommended buffers will not be possible in some areas where the setback to buildings and paved areas is significantly less. As was discussed above, a small wet area was created in the southern portion of the site by grading activities. This area had small pools of standing water, and both facultative and obligate wetland were observed intermixed with upland species. Although an extensive inventory was not performed, species which were present in this area include pussy willow, marsh elder, bayberry, gray birch, fox grape, locust, common reed, bluestem grass, fox sedge, and soft rush. This area is too small to be regulated as a wetland by the NYSDEC under Article 24, which only regulates wetlands of less than 12.4 acre if they are deemed of "local significance". As the wet area was recently created, it does not appear to meet the criteria for local significance. In addition, the Southold Town Code regulates only those features included under Article 24. Although this area does have limited value and might develop into a true wetland over time, there are extensive natural wetlands in the area. Thus, revision of the site plan to preserve this area does not appear warranted. Land Use The land use in the vicinity of the site is a mix of residential uses, motels, vacant land, and a nursing home. The uses immediately abutting the site include a small single family home and an estate with several buildings to the west, and a motel complex to the east. The nursing home is located south of the site across C.R. 48. There are other motel uses along the Sound, as well as a condominium complex further to the west of the site. There are vacant lands in the area, including a large parcel owned by the Village of Greenport which encompasses a wetland system associated with Moore's Drain. The project site is zoned for Resort Residential development, as is the entire area north of C.R. 48 for approximately '/2 and '/4 mile west and east of the site, respectively. To the south of C.R. 48, the zoning is Residential-80 to the west of Chapel Lane, and Hamlet Density to the east, with the exception of the parkland with the Village of Greenport. Thus the proposed use is consistent with Town land use goals as reflected in the zoning map. As was discussed above, the proposed project meets the dimensional requirements within the Code, with the exception of maximum unit size of 600 s.f. This regulation is intended, in part, to discourage conversion of motel units to condominium/time share units. Based on the overall building footprints and number of units, the average size of the proposed units appears to be approximately 800 to 825 s.f. This unit size was permitted by the previous approval, although it is in conflict with the findings outlined within the Final EIS. Although foundations have been completed for two of the buildings, the unit size within the remaining buildings could be reduced if desired by the Planning Board. This would allow more open space on site and wider vegetated buffers, as well as reducing the likelihood that the units would be converted to condominium use. Page 6 • Breezy Shores @ Southold LEAF Part 1 Review Traffic The traffic study contained with Draft EIS indicated that the proposed project was expected to increase traffic generation on C.R. 48 by approximately 10 percent. Existing traffic levels on C.R. 48 have increased since the Draft EIS was completed, therefore the percent increase to be generated by the proposed project would have decreased. Traffic generation and the resulting impact remain a concern with regard to the project. The subject site is located just east of a sharp curve, which is the location of frequent accidents and limits sight distance to the west. In order to minimize traffic impacts, the site access has been located away from the curve, and right turns only out of the site would be permitted. The Town may wish to request an updated traffic study, although the proposed plan appears to offer substantial mitigation. Visual Resources The proposed project meets the building setbacks required under Town code, although the buffer areas recommended within the Final EIS to minimize visual impacts have not been provided. The proposed plan is a slight improvement over the plan described in the Draft EIS, which proposed grading to the property line, relying on vegetation on adjacent parcels to provide a visual buffer. The existing edge vegetation should be augmented to maximize screening of the proposed development. Although the residential parcels to the west of the site are wooded and the homes are not visible, a buffer is necessary in the event that the properties are cleared in the future. Views from the motel complex to the east are less crucial, but at least some visual screen should be provided. Preservation of the rural character of Southold is a high priority within the Town, and thus views along C.R. 48 should be retained as much as possible. The Final EIS suggests construction of a berm along C.R. 48 with evergreen vegetation, as well as reduction in the height of the two buildings located at the highest portion of the property near the road. A vegetated berm would partially screen the proposed development from the road, and a reduction in building height would offer additional mitigation consistent with the Final EIS. This might be accomplished in part by reduction of the unit size to 600 s.f as required under Town Code, although redesign of the buildings would be required. Other Resources Impacts on community services such as police, fire and school districts are expected to be minimal. Although a slight increase in demand for services is expected, tax revenues generated by the project should more than offset this demand. There will be a beneficial impact on local schools, as tax revenues will increase without a corresponding increase in demand for services. Page 7 • • Breezy Shores(;§Southold LEAF Part 1 Review In summary, the primary concerns related to the proposed project are the potential for erosion, land use impacts, visual impacts, and traffic impacts as a result of the proposed project. The vegetation on site has already been cleared, although a small vernal wet area was created by filling on site. This review together with the Long EAF Part I& II and the information contained within the EIS should be sufficient to allow the board to make a determination of significance. The conditions on site and in the vicinity of the project have not substantially changed, and the EIS provides a complete record of environmental review which takes a hard look at the proposed project. In addition, the project was previously approved and construction commenced. At this time site plan improvements can be made so that the final approval conforms as much as possible to the findings statement contained within the Final EIS, particularly those intended to reduce erosion and visual impacts. The following is a summarized list of mitigation measures included as findings within the Final EIS and identified in this review. 1. Revised grading and drainage plans should be submitted to insure that runoff is contained within the upland portion of the site and is not directed toward the bluff. These plans should be reviewed by the Town Engineer prior to construction. 2. A revised erosion control plan should be developed to minimize loss of soils during construction, particularly near the bluff. 3. A wooden walkway on pilings should be constructed to allow beach access with minimal erosional impact to the bluff. This would require separate approval from the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation. 4. A well should be installed on site for irrigation, air conditioning and pool use, as was recommended in the Final EIS in order to minimize the impact of the project on the local water district. 5. Where possible, the vegetation along the boundary of the site should be augmented by native plantings to allow the recommended buffers of 30 and 50 feet along the side and rear yards, respectively. A landscaping plan can be required as part of the final review to ensure that this occurs. 6. The proposed project exceeds the maximum unit size of 600 s.f. under Town Code, which is intended, to discourage conversion of motel units to condominium/time share units. Although foundations have been completed for two of the buildings, the unit size within the remaining buildings could be reduced if desired by the Planning Board to allow more open space on site and wider vegetated buffers, as well as reducing the likelihood that the units would be converted to condominium use. 7. Construction of a berm along C.R. 48 with evergreen vegetation is recommended to minimize visual impacts. In addition, reduction in the height of the two buildings located near the road is suggested, and might be accomplished through a decrease in unit size. Page 8 Breezy shores(g Southold LEAF Part 1 Review If these measures are incorporated into the site design through an amendment of the site plan, and if the board is in agreement with this review, we believe there is an adequate basis on which to issue a Negative Declaration. If you have any questions or wish any further input with regard to this matter, please do not hesitate to call. Very truly yours, NELsoN,,POPE&VooRms,LLC L L / �� les J. Voorhis, CEP, AICP Page 9 ART 1—PROJECT INFORMATO1 Prepared by Project Sponsor NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant exec on the environment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E. .\nswers to these questions will be consideree: -as part of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review Provide any additiona information you believe will he needed to complete Parts 2 and 3. It is expected that completion of the full EAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not involy; new studies, research or Investigation. If information requiring such additional work Is unavailable, so indicate and specie. each instance. NAME OF ACTION Cliffside A4 REFL %54e-as' LOCATION OF ACTION Ilnetude street Address, Municipality and county) 61479 County PnArf 4P i7irpinnport , NY NAME OF APPLICANT/SPONSOR 8USINESS TELEPHONE Breezy Sound Corp. (516 ) 475-0745 ADDRESS 38 Oak Street CITY/PO ZIP 1772 ue STATE Patchogue i NY 1 � 11772 NAME OF OWNER (u different l BUSINESS TELEPHONE 1 ADDRESS LCITYIPO STATE ( LIP CCOE DESCRIPTION OF ACTION 68 unit resort motel in five buildings plus a pool house, office, manager apartment, swimming pool and 2 tennis courts on 7+ acres adjacent to Long Island Sound. Please Complete Each Question—Indicate N.A. if not applicable A. Site Description Physical setting of overall project. both developed and undeveloped areas. Present land use: ❑Urban ❑industrial CCommercial C$esiden�tia� l-(s^uburban) Rural (non-farm ❑Forest ❑Agriculture *QOther fAeTtil) l A COF-FD 2 Q Total acreage j 7"132 of project g area: acres. APPROXIMATE ACREAGE PRESENTLY AFTER CONIPLETION Meadow or Brushland (Non-agricultural) -1 acres -a--� 7 acres 1,N C"'0+`5 BF-ACN $GUFF ED4E+r-DLD F(H[./) -�- _0_ Forested acres � acres Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland, pasture, etc.) acres acres Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24. 25 of ECI.I acres -0- acres Water Surface Area acres 0_ acres Unvegemted (hock, earth or fila O.S acres acres Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces '0- - 5, 1 acres -1, acres Other (Indicate type) Landscaping- -0- Acres 1 7- 3 acres What is pfedominant soil types) on project sitc4 M"`"rrFUK 4:::�nIGL SAAIIw/ 2-OAA4 a. Soil drainage: C4Vell drained a of cite Utooderately well drained t00 Po or site CPoork drain, (I ",;, of Sit(. WELLTaL40oriP4T-E, b. If anv agricultural land is involved, how Many acres of soil are rl,lssiirud .vithm god group 1 throU�h 1 Of the NYS Land Classification System? N/A arses (See I .NY( RR 370). (9 Are there bedrock outcroppings on project site? Eyes I No r tea. What is depth to bedrock! t 160 (in feet) 2 i. A0proxnlice percEctaqu Of prnpos•rojecz srte with dupe. CU 1091, 6 90 17 1 o-15 0"0 22 �0 X15% or greater 14 6. Is project substantially contiguous to, or contain a building, site, or district, listed on the State or the National Registers of Historic Places? Dyes CXNO 7.-Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Requter or National Natural Landmarks? DYes GN What is the depth or the water table? 30+ (in feec) /All Dq/ELDPA4e97— 4•,2eA ) Or 4r SHoeE. MN site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aquifer? 1i 'es 10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? tYes DNo - t(D Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered? Dyes EN According to dA$/TAT_`s P.2E£6A/T- Identify each species QAre there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e., cliffs. dunes, other geological formations) �es t� Describe /�' LOEESL���L .T�Sr+�� 13. Is the project litex-. presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area? Dyes L••N If yes, explain 14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community? Dyes CNo 15. Streams within or contiguous to project area: NSA a. Name of Scream and name of River to which it is tributary © Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: a. Name -N-A LOAc 1c5L NO (SOU e) l. Size (In acres) r2Tr FrGI L ET-W Fi Srlf_ 17. Is the site served by existing public uti ices? (,DYes G N o ti a) If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? Lyes DNo b) If Yes. will improvements be necessary to allow connection? tYes GNo 18. Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and ,Markets Law, Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 304? Dyes '•-INO 19. Is the site located in or substantially contiguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 of the ECL, and 6 NYCRR 617? Oyes 00NO 20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wasta5? Dyes EXNo B. Project Description 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controllr:d by project sponsor 7. 132 acres. b. Project. acreage to be developed: 6 acres initially; 6 acres ultimately. c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped 1 .5 acres. d. Length of project, in miles: (II appropriate) e. If the project is an expansion, indicate pet, -nt of -xpan,mii proposed %, If Numbor of off-street Larking spaces cxtstinr; 0 propo,ed 80 C. ,Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour 56 (upon (:ompk-tion or project)? h. If residential. Numbcr and type of hnusinq units. Oni• Family Two farad; ,�I.Jnj le I .unily Condonunnun Imually Ultimately i. Dimem.ons (in ieet) or largest LrOI)O-d structure IS, heighC 74 6' w.,IIh. 1251 length. I. Linear feet or irontage along a public thoroughfare prolect will occupy is? 601 ft ? How much natural waieri.ti (iUruck. each, etc-i will In• removod from the >,n:' 0 tons/cubic yards PACT LL'/ Will disturbed areas be reclaimed? KJYes C,No CNIA a. If yes, for what intend.._ purpose is the site beim; reclaimed? LuLL5e+4Fr b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? (NYes CNo c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? (3Yes CNo 4. How many acres or vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from Site? / acres. MLtcu uiAS a2EVi0J5C'l GII�AtZf�, )40 J Ot-o F-ijn-4b 5. Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation oe removed by this project? CYes CX-No 18 6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction months, (including demolition). 7. If multi-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 phases? ❑Yes CNo 8. Will blasting occur during construction? CYes IINNo 9. ,Number of jobs generated: during construction 50 after project is complete 5 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project 0 11. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? CYvS IN No If yes, explain 12. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? Ci-Yes 'tNo a. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) and amount b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged 13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? CYes CNp Type Nv?E: SAAm Mie I 7a e_,94�P6,ZT SE.LJE.rz. DtSTeic.Y 14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? CYes CNo Explain no effect 15 Is project or any portion or project located in a 100 year flood plain? Yhes 9MM 'I P4 c, DcuE[ ,p LIV1A] 4 Will the project generate solid waster?? Ayes CNo Zon/E. 6VCF_P7- PosSr*-QLE 8Et1Gf1 a. If yes. what is the amount per rM _ Z4c ss �s5 b. If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used? GSYes CNo c. If yes, give nameIocatibn CcctCF110Er0F_ o, ji,f 6F 007WDLD T2Rl(Sa<'6 STA776TJ d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a Sanitary landfill? CYes No e. If Yes, explain 17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste? oyes AN a. If yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal? tons/month. b. If yes, what is the anticipated site life? yoars. 18. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? ❑yes (' Nu 19. Will project routinely produce odors (more thin on,- hour jwr daylr ❑Yes J(.No ..�Y 2n Will project produce operatim; noise exceedim; the iucal ;,n,bient roue Icvuk? LYNo 21. Will project result in an increase in i!rwrgy u,a? I93yes CNn If yes . indicate type(s)—electric & heat 22. If wafer Supply 1% from w­ik. imi,c.l U' Punlj;uu3 capm ity N/A g•,Ilunsinimute. 23. Total anucipated %vatcr usage per day 17,000 gallu,„Way . ?; Does prosect involve local, State or Yoderal lundim;! ❑yes ENn If Yes, explain 4 -25. Approvals Required: • • Submittal Type Date City, Town, Village Board ❑Yes 121N0 City. Town, Village Planning Board IXYes ❑No site plan -City, Town 7cmng Board ❑Yes MNo City, County Health Department gYes ONO water and sewer Other Local Agencies $4e5 Greenport water & sewer Other Regional Agencies ❑Yes 5N0 State Agencies ❑Yes LX?No Federal Agencies Oyes Cklo C. Zoning and Planning Information -+ Does proposed action involve a planning.or zoning decision? -RrM �40 If Yes, indicate decision required: ❑zoning amendment ❑zoning variance ❑special use permit ❑subdivision Msite plan ❑newirevision of master plan ❑resource management plan ❑other 2. What is the zoning classiiication(s)of the site? R R' ©. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning? "7-7 39 motel units 4. What is the proposed zoning of the site? RR �SAwIE) What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning? 'v7-m, *'mace) uni" X10 C,+44FfrfaC C 6. Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? liiyes 7. What are the predominant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a Y. mile radius of proposed action? motel condominium nursing home, residential a. Is the proposed action compatible with adjoininourrounding land uses within a S: mile? tyes ❑N: 9. If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed? N/A a. What is the minimum lot size proposed? 10. Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of sewer or water districts? Oyes K:N,: 11 . Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police fire protection)? ((lyes ONO a. If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? QYes ONO 12 Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? Yes 4R;oo a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? `zyes ❑No D. 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 your proposal, please discuss Splll impacts anel the measures which YOU propose to mitigate or avoid them. E. Verification I certify that dui m fomrauoQ_�uovided abpvr ii true to tho best of my knowledge. ( 1pplican[;Sppn>or ,. ne / iC// 7 1 D.ue Signature If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a ,Iate agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form hefore proceeding with this assessment. � 5 Part 2—P 01JECT IMPACTS AND THEIR ANITUDE Responsibility of Lead Agency General Information (Read Carefully) • In completing the form the reviewer should be guided by the question: Have my responses and determinations been reasonable? The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst. • The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of impacts and wherever possible the threshold of magnitude that would trigger a response in column 2. The examples are generally applicable throughout the State and for most situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be appropriate for a Potential Large Impact response, thus requiring evaluation in Part 3. • The impacts of each project, on each site, in each locality, will vary. Therefore, the examples are illustrative and have 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. Instructions (Read carefully) a. Answer each of the 20 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 1 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 is lower than example, check column 1. d. Identifying that an Impact will be potentially large (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessarily significant. Any large Impact must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine significance. Identifying an impact in column 2 simply asks that It be looked at further. e. If reviewer has doubt about size of the impact then consider the impact as potentially large and proceed to PART 3. f. If a potentially large Impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated by change(s) in the project to a small to moderate impact, also check 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 IMPACT ON LAND Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change 1 . Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site? ONO DYES Examples 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 ONO 3 feet. • Construction of paved parking area for 1,000 or more vehicles. ❑ ❑ [-]Yes []No • Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally within ❑ ❑ El Yes ❑No i 3 feet of existing ground surface. • Construction that will continue for more than 1 year or involve more �9- ❑ ❑Yes Wo than one phase or stage. • Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than 1,000 ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No tons of natural material (i.e., rock or soil) per year. • Construction or expansion of a sanitary landfill. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONO I • Construction in a designated floodway. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes []No • Other impacts ❑ ❑ []Yes ONO 2. Will there be an effect to any unique or unusual land forms found on the site?(i.e., cliffs, dunes, geological formations, etc.)1*0 DYES • Specific land forms: o Ah FS[acp ❑ ❑ ❑Yes Elo �2ot�GrEA 1 2 3 IMPACT ON WATER Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large 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, ECL) 15N0 DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Developable area of site contains a protected water body. ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No • Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONo protected stream. • Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body. ❑ ❑ Dyes ONo • Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland. ❑ ❑ F-1 Yes ONo • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 4. Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body of water? ONO (YES Examples that would apply to column 2 • A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water ❑ ❑ [Dyes El No or more than a 10 acre increase or decrease. • Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Other impacts: N16.7 gQfA r_"A=D BV P4S - ( ❑ Dyes RNo 6P—ADi&I C-4 7-p Sr—. 01-2-.C-n 5. Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity? 'SNO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action will require a discharge permit. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONo • Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does not ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑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 ❑ ❑ El Yes ❑No supply system. • Proposed Action will adversely affect groundwater. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Liquid effluent will be conveyed off the site to facilities which presently ❑ O E3 Yes ONo do not exist or have inadequate capacity. • Proposed Action would use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per ❑ ❑ Dyes ONo day. • Proposed Action will likely cause siltation or other discharge into an ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONo existing body of water to the extent that there will be an obvious visual contrast to natural conditions. • Proposed Action will require the storage of petroleum or chemical ❑ ❑ ❑Yes 0N products greater than 1,100 gallons. • Proposed Action will allow residential uses in areas without water O ❑ Dyes ONo and/or sewer services. • Proposed Action locates commercial and/or industrial uses which may ❑ O ❑Yes ONo require new or expansion of existing waste treatment and/or storage _ facilities. • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONo 6. Will proposed action alter drainage flow or patterns, or surface water runoff? ONO KYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action would change flood water flows. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 7 • 2 3 Sm to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change • Proposed Action may cause substantial erosion. ❑ R [%Yes MO • Proposed Action is incompatible with existing drainage patterns. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Proposed Action will allow development in a designated floodway. ❑ ❑ Dyes []No • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No IMPACT ON AIR 7. Will proposed action affect air quality? 1$INO DYES 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 ❑ ❑ 11 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 BTU's per hour. • Proposed action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed ❑ ❑ C]Yes ❑No to industrial use. • Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial ❑ ❑ El Yes ❑No development within existing industrial areas. • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ C-1 Yes ❑No IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS 8. Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered species? D�NO (DYES 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 ❑ ❑ Dyes []No than for agricultural purposes. • Ofher impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 9. Will Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or JO NO species? NO ❑YES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action would substantially interfere with any resident or ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No migratory fish, shellfish or wildlife species. • Proposed Action requires the removal of more than 10 acres ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No of mature forest (over 100 years of age) or other locally important vegetation. IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES 10. Will the Proposed Action affect agricultural land resources? WO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • The proposed action would sever, cross or limit access to agricultural ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No land (includes cropland, hayfields, pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc.) I 8 khip.. _ • • 1 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 ❑ ❑ 1:1 Yes ❑No of agricultural land or, if located in an Agricultutal District, more than 2.5 acres of agricultural land. • The proposed action would disrupt or prevent installation of agricultural ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑N land management systems (e.g., subsurface drain lines, outlet ditches, strip cropping); or create a need for such measures (e.g. cause a farm field to drain poorly due to increased runoff) • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES 11 . Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources? ❑NO 11015 (If necessary, use the Visual EAF Addendum in Section 617.20, 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 ❑ 0 ®.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? JKNO ❑YES Examples 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 ❑No project site. • Proposed Action will occur in an area designated as sensitive for ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No archaeological sites on the NYS Site Inventory. • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION 13. Will Proposed Action affect the quantity or quality of existing or future open spaces or recreational opportunities? Examples that would apply to column 2 IZ(NO ❑YES • The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational opportunity. ❑ ❑ EJ Yes ❑No • A major reduction of an open space important to the community. ❑ ❑ C3 Yes ❑No • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 9 .. 1 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change IMPACT ON CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS 14. Will Proposed Action impact the exceptional or unique character- istics of a critical environmental area (CEA) established pursuant to subdivision 6 NYCRR 617.14(g) ? 19NO ❑YES List the environmental characteristics that caused the designation of the CEA. Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action to locate within the CEA? ❑ ❑ ❑Yes [:]No • Proposed Action will result in a reduction in the quantity of the resource? ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Proposed Action will result in a reduction in the quality of the resource? ❑ ❑ Dyes []No • Proposed Action will impact the use, function or enjoyment of the ❑ ❑ ❑Yes No resource? • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes No IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION 15 Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems? El NO RYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Alteration of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems. ❑ ❑ [--]Yes ❑No • Other impacts: 1AJez6ASE Iril ❑ IkYes ❑No -Ake-4 WITH LLMtTF-1-1 Si4ll� IMPACT ON ENERGY 16 Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or energy supply? {KNO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action will cause a greater than 5% increase in the use of ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No any form of energy in the municipality. • Proposed Action will require the creation or extension of an energy ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two family residences or to serve a major commercial or industrial use. • Other impacts: _ ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No i i 10 kid-r NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS S1 2 3 mall to Potential Can Impact Be 17. Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or vibration as a result Moderate Large Mitigated By of the Proposed Action? t9NO DYES Impact Impact Project Change Examples 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). ❑ ❑ C1 Yes [-)No • Proposed Action will produce operating noise exceeding the local ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures. • Proposed Action will remove natural barriers that would act as a ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No noise screen. • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ El Yes ❑No IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH 18. Will Proposed Action affect public health and safety? RNO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action may cause a risk of explosion or release of hazardous ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No substances(i.e.oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.)in the event of accident or upset conditions, or there may be a chronic low level discharge or emission. • Proposed Action may result in the burial of "hazardous wastes" in any ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No form (i.e. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritating, infectious, etc.) • Storage facilities for one million or more gallons of liquified natural ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No gas or other flammable liquids. • Proposed action may result in the excavation or other disturbance ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑NO within 2,000 feet of a site used for the disposal of solid or hazardous waste. • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHARACTER OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD 19. Will proposed action affect the character of the existing community? 6dN0 DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • The permanent population of the city, town or village in which the ❑ ❑ El Yes ❑No project is located is likely to grow by more than 5%. • The municipal budget for capital expenditures or operating services ❑ ❑ El Yes ❑No will increase by more than 5% per year as a result of this project. • Proposed action will conflict with officially adopted plans or goals. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Proposed action will cause a change in the density of land use. ❑ ❑ C3 Yes ONo • Proposed Action will replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No or areas of historic importance to the community. • Development will create a demand for additional community services ❑ ❑ Dyes El No (e.g. schools, police and fire, etc.) • Proposed Action will set an important precedent for future projects. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes 0 N • Proposed Action will create or eliminate employment. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ C3 Yes ❑No 20. Is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? $NO DYES 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 11 S„b- RICHARD T. HAEFELI ATTORNEY 6 COUNSELOR AT LAW 48G MAIN STREET P.O. BOX 1112 WESTHAMPTON BEACH. NEW YORK 11978 516- 288-5455 E-MAIL ADDRESS TELECOPIER rthuffice®worldnet.att.net 516 288-5474 May 15, 1998 Southold Town Planning Board P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Attn: Robert G. Kassner Re: Breezy Sound Site Plant North Highway, Greenport SCTM 1000-45-1-1 Dear Mr. Kassner: Pursuant to your request, I am enclosing herewith a check in the amount of$950.00 as the Environmental Consultants fee. Very truly yours, Richard T, Haefeli RTH:nh rIAt 18 1998 Southold Town Planning Board PLANNING BEN ETT ORLOWMEMB SKI,JR. O��SQFFO(,�CCG • Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Chairman o`Z y� P.O. Box 1179 SSouthold,New York 11971 WILLIAM J.CREMERS W Z Fax (516) 765-3136 KENNETH L.EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM,JR, • '� Telephone(516) 765-1938 RICHARD G.WARD PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD May 19, 1998 Charles Voorhis Nelson, Pope & Voorhis 572 Walt Whitman Road Melville, NY 11747-2189 RE: Environmental Review for Breezy Sound Route 48, Southold SCTM# 1000-45-1-1 Dear Mr. Voorhis, The Planning Board has received your cost estimate for the above project. The applicant has paid the Town the review fee of $950.00 for the preparation of an environmental review of the above project using available information contained in the Draft and Final EIS. The purchase order will be sent to you under separate cover. If you have any questions, please contact this office. ince obe t Kassner Site Plan Reviewer PLANNING BOARD MEMBER gpffol'- • 0049, Town Hall, 53095 Main Road BENNETT ORLOWSHI,JR. 0.1� G,y� P.O. Box 1179 Chairmen Southold,New York 11971 WILLIAM J.CREMERS y Z Fax(516) 765-3136 KENNETH L.EDWARDS L GEORGE RITCHIE ATHAMATHAM,JR. • �� Telephone(516) 765-1938 RICHARD G.WARD PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD May 15, 1998 Richard T. Haefeli, Esq. 48G Main Street Box 1112 Westhampton Beach, NY 11978 RE: Proposed Site Plan for Breezy Sound Main Road, Greenport SCTM# 1000-45-1-1 Dear Mr. Haefeli, The Planning Board requires six (6) additional copies of the site plan for its review. VS' ce el o er Kas er Site Plan Reviewer PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS• gpFFO(,� • Town Hall,53095 Main Road BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. =`t`� Gy� P.O. Box 1179 Chairman Southold,New York 11971 WILLIAM J.CREMERS y Z Fax(516) 765-3136 KENNETH L.EDWARDS Gy �.1C Telephone(516) 765-1938 GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM,JR. RICHARD G.WARD PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD May 5, 1998 Richard T. Haefeli, Esq. 48G Main Street Box 1112 Westhampton Beach, NY 11978 RE: Proposed Site Plan for Breezy Sound Main Road, Geeenport SCTM# 1000-45-1-1 Dear Mr. Haefeli, The Planning Board has received a cost estimate of $950.00 from their Environmental Consultant for an environmental review of the above project. This review will be made using available information contained in the Draft and Final EIS of the previously approved site plan. The above mentioned sum must be paid in full by your client before we can authorize our consultant to proceed with the review. The check should be made payable to the Town of Southold. When the consultants complete their review, the Planning Board will consider their findings in making a determination of whether the project will have a significant environmental impact. As mentioned in our letter of April 10, 1998, we have not received the additional information and elevation drawings for review by the Architectural Review Committee. S c 1 , o rt G. Kaner Site PI n Reviewer P1RY-04-19% 09:21 *HELSOH '. POPE,LLP X16 4� 5620 P.02, 03 � /ex NELS)ONy POPE 6 VOORHIS, LLC EN V IA 0 N `AE NY A L • 0 L A N N IN ❑ .. CONSWL T , NG kii CHARLES J VOORnb,CEP AIBP•ARTHUR J.VOEREER, >E •ONCENT G.OONNELLY,PE •ViC.OR BERT.PE •_OSEPH R EPIFANIA PE-R DSERT C NELSON.JA.PE, •CHRISTOPHER W ROBINSON.PE To: Robert G. Kassner Site Plan Reviewer Town of Southold Planning Board From: Charles J. Voorhis, CEP, AIC Managing Partner Nelson, Pope& Voorhis, LL Date: May 4, 1998 Re: Breezy Shores, formerly Cliffside at Southold Main Road, Greenport; SCTM # 1000-45-1-1 Proposal for Services; Environmental Review Dear Bob: As per your request, this memo provides you with a proposal for services for the above referenced project. This office is able to complete an environmental review of the above referenced project. The review will be based on a Planning Board action to issue a dec;cion on a previously approved site,plan. Utilizing available information contained in the Draft and Final EIS, and an appropriate set of plans for the project, we will prepare an EAF Part I, inspect the subject parcel, provide an environmental/planning review of the project, and provide additional narrative discussion as necessary to support a Determination of Significance. The fee for these services is $950.00. Thank you for the opportunity to present you with this proposal, and please feel free to contact me should you have any questions. Please advise if you wish us to proceed. 1VJ3'!JMAY 0 4 Southold Town Planning Board 572 WALT WHITMAN ROAD, MELVILLE, NY 11747-2166 (51 6) 427.566$ CAX (518) 427-5820 hiHY'-U14-1 x+58 u9 1 �EL'U 1 PIDPE,LLP �.L �� =xtl .cI_ L� nr NBL.50N, POPS 6 VOORNIS, LLC P*1 E P4TA V I A O N E N T A L • i L A N N i N O •. C O N S LI L T i N ::hARLE3 J VOORHIS,CEP AICP•ARTHUR V VOERBFR,PF •VINCENT G.CONNEL,T,PE •MOTOR BERT.PE JOSEPH R.EPIFANIA PE• ROBERT O NELSON.JR.PE •CHRISTOPHER w ROBINSON.PE To: Robert G. Kassner Site Plan Reviewer Town of Southold Planning Board From: Charles I Voorhis, CEP, AIC Managing Partner Nelson, Pope&Voorhis, LL Date: May 4, 1999 Re: Breezy Shores, formerly Cliffside at Southold Main Road, Greenport, SCTM# 1000-45-1-1 Proposal for Services; Environmental Review Dear Bob: As per your request, this memo provides you with a proposal for services for the above referenced project. This office is able to complete an environmental review of the above referenced project, The review will be based on a Planning Board action to issue a decilsion on a previously approved site plan. Utilizing available information contained in the Draft and Final EIS, and an appropriate set of plans for the project, we will prepare an EAF Part 1, inspect the subject parcel, provide an environmental/planning review of the project, and provide additional narrative discussion as necessary to support a Determination of Significance. The fee for these services is $950.00. Thank you for the opportunity to present you with this proposal, and please feel free to contact me should you have any questions. Please advise if you wish us to proceed. 572 WALT WHITMAN ROAD, MELVILLE, NY 117,47-2158 1516] 427.5665 FAX (5161 427-5620 pLANNING BOARD MEMBER0 FFO(,( 0 O� C� Town Hall, 53095 Main Road BENNETT ORLOWSHI,JR. oQ, r/ P.O. Box 1179 Chairman Southold,New York 11971 WILLIAM J.CREMERS y Z Fax(516) 765-3136 KENNETH L.EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM,JR. Telephone(516) 765-1938 RICHARD G.WARD PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD April 14, 1998 Charles Voorhis Nelson, Pope & Voorhis 572 Walt Whitman Road Melville, NY 11747-2189 RE: Cost estimate for environmental review for Breezy Shores, formerly Cliffside at Southold Main Road, Greenport SCTM# 1000-45-1-1 Dear Mr. Voorhis, On December 18, 1989, this Board approved a 76 unit motel site plan. The foundations were poured and then the work stopped. The applicant now wishes to proceed with the project as originally approved. As part of the original environmental review a positive declaration was made and a EIS prepared. I am enclosing a copy of the EIS and site plan in order for you to develop a cost estimate to review this project. Please send a facsimile of your cost estimate to this office. If the Planning Board wishes you to proceed with the review, it will send a facsimile of a purchase order authorizing the work to be done. The actual purchase order will be sent through the mail. 0 If you have any questions, please contact me at this office. n r ly, J � R Bert . Kassner Site Plan Reviewer Encls. .kRCIITcy'URAL RSYIEw t.uMMl e= f QSy, ra�Il iotle� , 3 a.n O� COG Town Hall, 53095 Ntain Road P.O. Box 1179 :asapnine 3oye p _ =� Southold, Now York 11971 Hamlet .'AemtlM: •, h ; -:soon :nano Fax(516) 765-3136 Telephone (516) 765-1938 3ernaeeae '.vaisn orvrc!3a: 'Y,!an/Cleenaert �_Ol��___.�ra'� "m UeSer oians 'Ian 3unn �aumoitl/PSCnIC ?s m ZZ 3r"e PLANNING BOARD OFFICE Recur .w,. Su,mik/Ccctieaco TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Howare Aeinke :Ai L:itLCt!L.�eel . wyw imr-..iab April 3 _ .Rcoer. :te,m p , 1998 5 Robert G. Kassner, Site 'Plan Reviewer i Planning Board Office Town of Southold APR 7 19na 98 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Southold Town RE : Architectural Review Committee Meeting Planning Board 4 : 30 P.M. , Wednesday April 1, 1998 Dear Bob; The Architectural Review Committee held a meeting as indicated above and submits the following report of it' s findings : Matt-A-Mar Marina, Restaurant Addition Tax Map # 1000-114-03-01 This application is approved as submitteded provided that exterior finish materials match the existing as indicated on the drawings filed. Cliffside Tidemark Main Road, Greenport, New York Tax Map # 1000-45-01-01 This application is incomplete and will be reviewed upon receipt of the "check list" information: Mattituck Presbyterian Church Main Road, Mattituck, New York Tax Map # 1000-141-04-32 . 1 & 26 This application is approved as submitteded provided that all exterior finish materials match the existing and no existing trees will be removed as indicated on the drawings filed. PLANNING BOARD MEMBE# _Town Hall, 53095 Main Road BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. _� �/y� P.O. Box 1179 Chairman Southold, New York 11971 WILLIAM J.CREMERS e/2 Z Fax(516)765-3136 KENNETH L.EDWARDS �y • �� Telephone(516) 765-1938 GEORGE RD G L ,JR. RICHARD of ,� Sao PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD April 10, 1998 Richard T. Haefeli, Esq. 48G Main Street Box 1112 Westhampton Beach, NY 11978 RE: Architectural Review for Breezy Sound Main Road, Geeenport SCTM# 1000-45-1-1 Dear Mr. Haefeli, The architectural Review Committee is prepared to review your elevation drawings for the above project. We were able to locate one copy of the elevation drawings, however additional information is required for the ARC review. Enclosed is a listing of these additional requirements. If you have any questions, please contact this office. no e Kassn Site Plan Reviewer Encl. Information to be submitted or included with submission to Architectural Review Committee . * Site Plan. * Type of Building Construction, Occupancy, Use and Fire Separation. * Floor Plana Drawn to Scale - 1/4"=1' preferred. * Elevation Drawings to Scale of all sides of each Building, 1/4"=1'preferred including the following information: Type and color of roofing - include sample. Type and color of siding - include sample . Type of windows and doors to be used, material and color of all windows and door -frames - include sample . Type and color of trim material - include sample . * Type of heating/cooling equipment to be used. Show exterior locations of all equipment i . e. , heatpumps, air conditioning compressors, etc . on plane and/or elevations . * Type and locations of all roof-mounted mechanical equipment. * Type and locations of all mechanical equipment and/or plumbing venting through roof or building sidewall . * Type, color and style of proposed masonry material for chimneys or accent walla - include samples or photos . * Details, color, type and style of any proposed ornamentation, awnings, canopies or tents . * Photos of existing buildings and/or neighboring properties from four directions of project site . * Type, Color and Design of all exterior signage, both building-mounted and free standing. t ARCAITi.TVRAL REVIEW CCMMI�m • '�o��SUFFr)(,f-c= � ��G FILA ager- ,. 3ror'n 00 Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 :esepnine 3eye p Southold, Now York 11971 P.amlex .'Aemaen: ' h '; :eners :abna 0 Fax(516) 165-3136 Raynalq _uhn<. :r. �` ley ,•7 Telephone (516) 765-1938 Jr!enxl Eas. Marian/Craenoart �• "an Rtegar yJy' Diana /an iuren �aMSniC/PscniC ?-xxix PLANNING BOARD OFFICE lacer. Ne,. s.,fbik/Grte.oaue TOWN OF SOUTHOLD m.w.M 'Ain" Ann 'Aa G'SI1Cf(Lla,rel ' Irl• Sxurriala P A ril 3, 1998 _ Raeer- MM Robert G. Kassner, Site 'Plan Reviewer Planning Board Office Town of Southold APR 7 1998 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Southold Town RE: Architectural Review Committee Meeting Planning Board 4 : 30 P.M. , Wednesday April 1, 1998 Dear Bob; The Architectural Review Committee held a meeting as indicated above and submits the following report of it' s findings : Matt-A-Mar Marina, Restaurant Addition Tax Map # 1000-114-03-01 This application is approved as submitteded provided that exterior finish materials match the existing as indicated on the drawings filed. Cliffside Tidemark Main Road, Greenport, New York Tax Map # 1000-45-01-01 This application is incomplete and will be reviewed upon receipt of the "check list" information: Mattituck Presbyterian Church Main Road, Mattituck, New York Tax Map # 1000-141-04-32 . 1 & 26 This application is approved as submitteded provided that all exterior finish materials match the existing and no existing trees will be removed as indicated on the drawings filed. PLANNING BOARD MEMBEBS46 SUFFO(/( C BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. QUO CSG Town Hall, 53095 Main Road� y� P.O. Box 1179 Chairman Southold,New York 11971 WILLIAM J.CREMERS h Z Fax(516)765-3136 KENNETH L.EDWARDS • Telephone (516) 765-1938 GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM,JR. ,L RICHARD G.WARD y'IJOl �aQ� PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD March 18, 1998 Garrett A Strang 1230 Travelers Street Southold, NY 11971 RE: Review of Proposed Site Plan for Cliffside Tidemark Main Road, Greenport SCTM# 1000-45-1-1 Dear Mr. Strang, On December 29, 1993, the Planning Board approved the above project for a 68 unit transient motel across from the San Simeon nursing home. This approval has since expired. The applicant has re-applied for the identical plan as was previously approved. Elevation drawings for your committee's review are in the ARC's box at the Planning Board office. Call me if you have any questions. zt yi's nerCLVL22 �/ Site Plan Reviewer - - - - - 3R -- - -- - - - - --- -- - --- t os ISS. s1��I/N.2 s - `n � 9 0 \ It Alk < iso •, \ ..\� \ � . . j ck,13 E �_ �� \,O v S\ct-(-� :,. ,�`. -555 _ V`✓,-±� \ Y ^ / \ / < _ - _ xzl -4 / CL1Q_hl o f ? \ I 'Li`��51\ 12o pEt'<:� i✓1'��r VEI''� - - \ '\'r7�\I • .fln\ \ - w ichnisoco P that the site Plan of C11fEside/fidemazk tlotel ri.ived b9v a site _ L \ p \ + mposed of the followin * \ \ \_ � \ 7 �•- y the(dated . plan (dated as ' \ �;=,�'9�) �, \ - - drainage plan Planning Board an Deiheeepl13,anni 19e 9) and a O'/ 1 j \ / \ , (dated as received b Planninr 10, 1989 December q Board on I i I' 1 and a floor - - \\ \\ , Bplan (dated as received b the _ \ r /� \'- _ '���>R _ � • _ be a 7, 1989), y - �• fj� `�� \\ _ � / 1 \\ - - - \ �� - i \ /n\ approval; following The following conditions aze included in this V / / \ None of the individual he units- ` _ may exceedthe ' y � sv_uase-footage-noted on the Y /` \� \ (1 as Received by the Planning Plans � - •' -- � - n_ �'��C �' _ `\\ - \ \ (Dated attached floor J /� px \ ) 1989 png card an Dec \ S/,� A . `\ .`-:- \,\ - \ - _ 'F,' \ 1 of individual hotel �e1 U V PPraved site he J - 1 ' \\ '[_ \ �/k - Z' °cookingone Of tfacilities", - - -' �� - , '\ \ - \\ �` \\ \ / 0 \ G.p K I 3 •.1 \ _ �' \,��� 1. Tho stairs down the face of thelbluff aarehN have included in this approval. NOT _X1 A separate amended a , \ oncesthe swill haveptoibetmaOn defor approval for aPProprlate permit is obtained from the •% �6 ' / \ ` \ \ - S '-• ` \, '. , / ' y, I Bureau e, Marine Habitat Protection of the New York State Department a£ Enviia omental protection. \0 4 \z \ 6" APP( d�/E $ ,PLQtdNiP?G BOARD \ S O ♦ \ /' / TOWN Or 5OUJi HOLD - J DATE EC 181989 I, I ` . %\ GOAT tom, \ S€€ ® 995 \ 339`\ \ \� \J'� cJ ( T 9 i-H N OCT i s rsss � �" 2p' .. i ' ebb „ /� - \ - / - �. I !`�, �J __'.I ` r , l i--�_) �.� Cir( _ �1: ; 1: Z S �i�)I}�•y �fv{ I i� En't__ �C-i_ r -- 1+ .'� / i�.-_ �,� T`F[•p�J�f LT�FJ� II.I- �� � �� n�J��r�_�1 ISr.0 � - •� IT � -r'� , I-��=- -���; 120 NO fZT[ l ES �Z N - _� N,�. i �:, LA l C L. I � S , 'ry 1� L ,. ffI sE�rN}a�[�7E��d•T MdTCa 1 �1h1E 6T (11�t�r FJJI� O� J� IN h� \/L1,i M6f�_ ' {HIS II44 1/.l- ISL ` {-_ �YfF_ a4 '� \ \ "TCT. ��fl �- ...1 .1 SYY \ rII I".'rl '� 1C - i / . C� VN lS f�N: iu, �1 NNN X.r: -s,, , q 9 )+ - _ �'\ �\ � ` ,�Ii/ice ^011^"r�'x'.'"�1 _ .•l �,"'!r-:}T :• �V`.""•'�.-�-'1-� G \\ \\ \ LS2G ► `I 'r - - - -- - - R VE : N AN - CONSTRUCTION STAGING SCHEDULE - - - - - - - - • - - - - -- - 1) Stakeout woods clearing. - - - - - - 21. Pence off trees to be saved with snow fence. - - - 3) Remove trees c under brush (trees shouli be chipped if - - possible, remainder of debris to be, removed from site by - - - - - - - - private carter to approved land fill). - _ - /) Topsoil is to be stripped from entire site and- stogkpilea - - in tennis -Court area and along woods line adjacent to - - - the Sound. - - L - - - - 5) Silt-fence will be installed along bottom edge of _ topsoil pile to hold back sedimentation from erosion. FS I D E 6) Additional Erosion control measures are to be - F ! J - implemented. - - - 7) Perforin building, road and utility stake out. - - - - - - 8) Perform site grading and utility installation (Drainage - - - Sanitary and Water Systems) . 9) Install concrete curbs and walkway to beach. - - 10) Construci- building foundation. - - 11) Construct buildings, office and pool (framing, sheathing SITUATED I N ' interiors, etc. ). 121 Install roadway pavement. TOWN OF SOUTHOLD 131 Pine grade and respread 'tapHoi1. ls) Construct tennis court and retaining wall.. - ' 115) Implement landscaping plan- SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW �.YORK 161- Remove erosion Conte ol measures. I 1 PARK PREPARED BY r SHEET INDEX HENDERSON AND BODWELL � • � DESCRIPTION SHEET No. COVER SHEET. ► �j CONSULTING ENGINEERS i GRADING PLAN 2 P• �, ; ; _ 120 EXPRESS ST . PLAINVIEW , N . Y. , 1 1 803 UTILITY PLAN 3 DRIVEWAY PROFILES 4 Ae '► Omaw.r TEL . N o. ( 5 1 6 ) 935 - 8870 PLANTING PLAN 5 J ' �• 1 1 DETAIL SHEET 6 EROSION CONTROL PLAN 7 Green �g \� -�' 25 V - o D Torun r D ar • - ' / N Tbslu ; 01 I - MP M T LOCATION MAP SCALE: I"= 800' _J DRAWER No. _ - DATE SCALE NO SCeLE - p� �� DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING N.. - J REVISIONS nv6/-O/3 SKEET - - a9TEYE/✓ 9AMET' /V. Y.PE./YQS39Q� C��Fj�'j�Q " af• 7 _ _ .vi��iz•¢� � N/F �.T. B.4N�svr' E�STATEs \ \\ \\�\\\\\ \\\ \\ \\ \\ \\' o 01061 AIR, 16 AA 3 ILL • \ .D 4i � � _� � _�� . - �. ? _ ,fir � z / 13LUF� C//✓E - \ \ \ I \ �W {/Fje 7�/c �✓A \ � � �. , l �� ����_ �- \ �\ � , - � ��� �� � I � SII I I I \ \ \ \ \ \ ,a �\\ W o pAEM \ \ ' i �N� I \ - vvv \ \ r - .ter- I I ` SII I ► I \ \ t% - /Z9�yb \ \ 4 JF'z' : - 4 } 1 _ \ \ , -vi_+•••^yWc v S I \ \ \ v \ \ 491— pad E1— - I t \ \\ \\ I _ I P i � ,�( �= �- zg r.,�,�-� �� /eek BUiGOiN� FB.oi�KF.�+'✓l R� ���, ��r _��� 1� \ \ \ \ \ \ \+ 15 \\ k1�(pl�i �� X06 ah b Q > ! I —`� \' � - p PN + W ♦\� \ \ \ I �/ / //// // / dd9 �� hMd° 'a� , I I " r \ 1 �� + B d�t� \ d,l ,�� / d - O O •A a \ \ QA � 60 ♦ \ \\ + .eE 9i�,ii✓G sY.9LL \ \_— + /' �♦ r+� 0 96\ \� \\\ °636 \\ \ \\ \\ \ \\\ \ \ \ U \ I;a z ~ I 1 I \ I \ y1 \ 7 :�f==____��� ==tet– �Wiz=. 1 / \ �� a - _ - _ _ - - / � �,• / _ _ \ I _ - _- _ _ _ I I \ •POLY"AGW 1' 0 WAR Q. 2 - - `�— �s-"-,-r- _„i.-.-��'�_;_��m� �r,_ w .a. =-o_ - _ - '-�:-w,=�'�•-�__ __-_ -y.= -'Yas :>ta t=--- 311 rl- TT m / 0 \ \ \ \ ��\ � � \ \ 00 \ \ -_ �'� ����� s `+�+act- \ P� I -{ I I I I x -{'r•;, - h � 'r I \ \\ \ \ came � � 1p - I � •�'y`�'"i*.� �+w t�F��; tr '�" \ �' � _ \ \\ ]wta \ \ I - '.� i�� 4 \ \ \\ /—�\ \\\ v \ P \ �• I d 61 d x9 \ \\ \ 5b' ' / gsivves >dNMR! yl' 91 rLs G,- ; - - � � \ _ \ \ ,-` ��� o.✓c. oavlc�cro,� 04 Leen is cv�xr A \\ \ \ \ \ _ \ at ZA P •� o _Si*"rl-7r;ud; ^_r_ipr""tin3�e = __- - -_ ' d —i / �\\ 1"15CTTCR Me TIGA CIA lzbY4T \ - — IL'GRNau�2 MaTEl�1aL.� ATDo SPw7µGRE� IS W&LeAI.E. PIC,6L WALL OeTAI \ 1 O� �\ PLANNING GOARD S�CTI�N Qa ";:Z1 m �e c9s � /- r \ T y \ 44� \ 1 /' A4 Ream N/1 B"xE•.CANOSCAPP (_MIN TWD FeK T1E) l \\- -��/i// MOYEG --�— E•eisriv� covrove \\\\ � \\\ \\ � I 5 � I i - /�/� , 1 IL \� ---� 00� i —► FLOW yeeoW \\ �N \\ s: / ILL ALL ""WIGM/FTI[5 ARE To f X4"PGtST/7YP.� \\\ \ \\ / / BF_ &o4. GA W. u611S. OO @-N41LE� TOGCTL E.R OFbEF W H NDERSON AND BODWELL �,pq0//I/a�LIJ/V CATE � ¢ CONSULTING ENGINEERS 9 r: 120 EXPRESS ST., PLAINVIEW, NY. , 11803 //-Tl� F6✓ENI•fN-✓!F✓'�. ilT F2.P-1C.O.O.M. � SCALE TEL. Nb.(516/ 935 -8870 /FFv^/OE A � ZG• CL u./C.61 oE0 du/S NG He.Of Oe✓F✓FYs " rj .1 V . ✓avo-!A ff✓ as v�.� maw,✓ e� =o��„o� SIGN . DRAWING Na DATE DESCRIPTION Ne 9cALE p� - \ ® X $ /� ��— SITUATED IN T/OE-/-O•!j REVISIONS r-ir-B9 e�✓As Pe¢ rowN E✓6 /( WU+m TOW✓3H/R OF 30UTiSOGO SHEET ME MISS ..... ....; -- NONE ommosommons sommm MEN a ME age .......... a smami maniina iiiiiiiiiIiiiiiiiiiiii!!!g!g! iiiiiiiamigii:mz IN ;;;;III;; ME EMENEEN !!!IN 100111: imam nomanisiiii Sig on mommosommommosomon limmmmmmmo ....... ll::Mmlmmmmm MENNEN HUM 0 mommoso I: ...... illissummommosommod nommummosoms mommoommandoomm uunn a Moommommemomme 110MUNifficii: HUH11:111iiiiiii moon MOM 01 is 1111:1111111110 MENEM a!III us ::Nmummmwmmgmxwmmau a a MEMO :::Emmmmmmmmm mmusammmazimmummil 0 MEMO nommmonswom smoomm mossmoi III, a no I: MMOM I'MUCHOUNHIIIIIII mommumommomen....III;:: M01000:1000 a 0 Mim IMMUNE a::::a is ON nommusommosionii a 2 Him liommsmosommo imill a mannsmsommonnnmmm am mmm:mmmm WO"i IddI:MIMm Mom M210305 on ON so me Me on 00 on will ON ME 00 00 ME unuld is 1:01:11 miss onsummondion mmonmmmm 111911111MIUME AW 0 ::Rlllmmlllumlmmlnmllll Emommomomenommom MENEM Me ME asommummommumasom I so moommons will a )1 0 IN SOMEONE Emonsommaniisomom Noun MliIIIii1im US ...IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm:ll 111:101111MUMIN nomommoomm MESON!::!! insommonsmommoun oun irvilliliM ii imigonsm SMUME H moommoommommemom MUMMUNIsi 1111MUSH111 on milimmommosomm a 0 MMOM some mmmmiiiiimamm a on ME mom a ommsommummommoon on NONE 0 0 HISCIZIMISMIMUR f4iiiiiiii isiIiiiiii mommoommas MEMNON: 0 MENKE a on will 00 HIMMUMMI11 D Noun so sommoommoommso MiNiUm 0 0 on a mmmmmummom OMMmainummon OMMOOMMaiiiinnin a Ed :11 a ion ii ilili 82:11" mommom all! :N:lmllllll CAMMUNS INHIUMMINHIMM minissinalmmmlu::Unlllll:nmll MIMMUSHE mmmmzlimmmmmmnm so on SEEN 0 Onsonsm so SOONER a 0 a somosongaii 0 MENEM OEM EMENE 0 MEMNON nommoommans men Milsoloommon a a a Emma ME BONN Emommon 0 0 a sommongs a 111111110 mmimi!summmnmmmm :00:21061 : ME 1131COMMUC 'INS immiimmiimomnosmmmmm 0 a SEE ON go SM MR RM an no ON on 1 0 IS I on on on ON I Me on 00 no ON 05 ON Me I M1 on Us 0 IME a nowilick, 4 a a SEEN ON ok4l, Alone 0 IS someoR��4 son mmmimm:ll:llmmlllmmim: 11 1411 111 11010101111 moinummmommom NEESE MENEM KINSEEMEENElkilE 0 a Ommmooiiiiin on a a a Rd III,, IIHIMN Ir 0 a 0 0 001:0 NEESE a INS 111,3io MMMMMUMMMMMML%I[FgSMM in a Q Run a MUMIN! I IIIIIII 0611HIMINIUMN MonoonnNEMONEEN 0 0 SIMMMUSIMES. MEMBERS: MHUMMIM111 2 mom MUMMOMMOSOMMOSOMI 020MEL'IIMMMMMMEMM L NEW summomommums 0111111111 0 on omoummmmmimiii so n:zisiiisiono mom so sommom aINEENOMMONMEEN an on on 28:00iffn MEMO 0 1100 L113IMN immonari pPM1II0m MINE sonomm a moommum mom is massummoso I2 0 mom kiln KNEE mooKla mimmoummuma.%NOR woommosoms monommon MEN 1100086 !is MI M now WEEMBEENNESEWS aImm aONEEN OMNI ME migoommol moommommossom ONESEEMENEMENEEME a OEM OEM all,LEE:: ........MEMEREMEMENE: a 0 0 --- aMe IM on a H a on wommonommom MISSION NIFEWHON 0 HIMMUM me MEN 0 ol IWE aaIMiMisill aaeaown a 111 n .......Emommom momom mmmwqommmo MENEEMM MEN Mae sillimmmenommani Mom I a 0 am In Me 0 0111111111111 a won 0 mom 0 a M011 0.me me.0 illmm:lllwl 0 moon 00 ONEMINE mossmom 0 us nommoom Ell MKINUUMME ME go a Me Me ON 00 ZM.mnn unsmoso Me a no: 0 a ON 40 : 0 MOM mom 0 01108 M.1100 000 aaN 111 MENEM 72 0 mom ME --------- a aa 0 mom 0 r- am a 00 NNEEMENERNIENNE !XM rp no asommumm[MIN e MEMNON ----- -- v I 0 MENEM a RESE None ME a on' ilmmonnow NIKKEI mommo omeame�i @so SEEME somnamlx SEEN offlow"ImMom NEEL, s a no anmomm BEEN IWIIIM; I MEN 0 a 0 a a0 Mae ME as ommomm MEN on mommo so a 010111ion 00020 0 a0 a6211 am as 0 illimognmog0kr� OMMOMMOVESS N aso mommus BNN on m momonniiii NEESE wiloomon no wommmum now mpr a S 0 MOM m II L a0 :00 ame ON or 0 ommmus so ON MEMO 0 =zr so 9 1 MENEM a on on Me no no III, now a Ono 0 o III OHIO on on MI no on SM Samoa wasom,!Smnm !me Illin,11111'm'm'm'm'm'mm MEN I S a MENEM omon III III I a MMMnffi SOMME moomm NEU am 101 loommussamil ins 011116m memo aENRON Mommon 'a aaaaaIIII&M. a 0 aaManommonswo aan a a .......... 0 w BNN aENE win MOM a a Now moomm momms a1111L- osomm ma: a a mur aON a I No MEMOS MONOMER m n a on MENEM MEN 01 E 0. NE 0 a a ME ommommon a somasoommi NONE l 0 a lmm:ommlmmmmmmomm 001111 an SMEREEMENNI I M1 aON sons osol l E.E. M.N..0.0 ae a mom MIN 00mm aME Ron me Zvr.m Ai?-mummommomang, a moms a 0 pool 0 0000 Enwom BONN mom 0 NUNN am ME no EM 0 wounommo I a mom a i N nommm a ,Mmmmmmmmn, WWII on a N ------ a' a ff 0 m ME :Man in Rol II L noommumnsmoJIL am mm a OEM mom 1IF EMEMEMEMONCE EMIJUL loommuns Emill�momomon OEM go 'OMNI NEESE mommoonsommoms a0 IIImommo"mmm MENEM MENOWEBE:Nlmmmm MENNEN OEM a I 'All. MMOMMOMMMI iloomommm NEON". oulloommommorll a me a 0 a NIIa a 11M Illsom onnummi SOME wommon e ... ........ 0 mommosommon' INNESE III'm somommmoonsom MIIIIIIIIMMI mom soon moll k monomo MOMoklIm ounwoommommmoom MEN no allimmoommoommommoLomm 0 n 0 a so ME is Emommommommommom momommons 0 mo E,*Ilmxnmmmm nuarLAMENo,Nommso,ii ISO mosommommme sommommosom MEMO as on sommmosamm Mommommoommorli;: us r. 6 mossoms 0 aMENESSEENS61110ME MEN 111 0 a 00111116 SEE 00 IS so on me on on on on a ON Mo 11 Mo Mo Me me On ME ME on o ENSEEME owl lmommoom MEESE 0 itummoomms a ON!low [now a on on On ON on ON ON 1111 no Kill no us ommon 0 0 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIILm�1 ON Mo Mo as no on I ON on ON MM i 11 on on we Mo Mo Mo ON I ON Mo log no on Mo ON me on so 0 0 1 0011 00 nommummusummmmumm nommasom man BOB mosom:1155 son u II as-= undigns MEN mommoss MEMENSEENNINEMS a IBM a a I mmeno aaMENEM a a Emma on on 111111 memommom 00 a a a 0 0 Olson man a a a 1101 moos!imago MIIIIIM Ill NEON a a MEMO is onsomma 0 'Mo a a aa 0 no 0 00 moommo 0 In Now on a no no 1111111"ILi ilimm�ommEmsms an L:7.JF-RE ON MUCIU: aNi.inommom mom no no 1a so 0 a wommonom Mo 8011:111 No a 00 0 son IMo mom a ON a ME MOOMMORME SEMEN mosommmemi mom a monommume MMMOOMMIMMOM OMMOM a a0 a on a om a 0 somem a 0 so immm Old ONES Mo a no" amosmo IIIIaago Nsmon 00 a a R 0 8 Q a mom 0 MEMBER : aM M0111 :0 man as Naon a ------ MINES a KOMM216iiiIN! now mumn rff a NESOMME m on a moss 0 0 NONE 0 Oman 0 MEMNON ROME BEEN sommummonswom 0111 moo no MEN no no on ON I mom no on me Mo ON i",NM. MEMNON 0 ommommommoolmons! MINIM IIIMENEM g00 aMMOMOMMOM Mo 00 aSol No 04110 0 No on some a Me M1IIIII sea.1 wommomm, ommummosommomi momonsindis a0MI 0 IBONN I a 0 OMMOM MIN ME INS 0:0 - --------- MOMMOMOROMM IS I MEMO 'Arl%do a BEENE so numms Mo on ,a a arammummovon mn M 11 a 00 MEMO so o a Mo ME a Mo 0 mo aMMI. O a NONE ma no a a NONE mom a a0 0 INS a 0 0 0 aa 0 a- a so On ION a momom a won so ME 0 0 Mo mom Mo Mo mmm Mm SUMMON 00 MMOMOM a 0 I a0 m 0 SOMME wms I a now mmmzmmmum mm ONEEMMEIIII - WINE now WOMEN tum Mo Mo no a I 0 0 mom II 1111111111105 MEMNON LL' 0 I'll 0 a 0 lag E 0 on lammmsmommon I MOMMOO" 11 21 i mom a L�I am I one Emma sommoso now V, 0 IIIIN a on a aown 1�. less I an 0 m 0 MEN&" I IR!EEN 0 Illin BN MEMO L. aon Mo mono I I I aIII Ems I'mosommommenommo Emom aa 'ONE a no a ommsmommoomma OMMOMOMMENEEN 0 I MEMO Mo a MEESE r 0 ma a a a I I Emom mom NESEEMSEENER'lli4lMM NEON on a Is Oman MMIIMI MOO ON n aa s on mono 11 0000 - I MEMO sommommoom no --No MO sonomm onmmommOL!19 MEN so on ME M ONEENNI, MEN moosomoslo a Ion MENNEN MEN ME MEN a CHOSE no Mo I I mlimmooLl memo omenommosm 0011111110 0 no illon mo ol Simon on 1a F a imam 'VPZWIENEEN IF MICRO MENEM EMMIN �. �om MEN INII KIN No m onominn ENE a a nowns a mmmmiimuq No Emmons no 00 on moos limmonslown No ENESOMMONEENEE s F&ERIEW-Aing NEMESES milmomimmmol low NEON ERB Mann I moommoom ......................................1 mom E ---- Milano womms ---------onommo zoom a a a a UIIIII =. or 64, 11n 111100 1 mom mom 028 mom 00 Mo Ion ON 00 Mo on am no no Forwrorwr9!M4 11111MMMMSSSS no 00000000 IMEMEMEMEM 1 1111 MMMEMEMEME MIMIMIMIMM � oil aa:Ammmmm I a ammim MEN- a a a mmmmmmmm ME a am OEM am aa mi ON 00 on Me I MISS 666111 COMMON Mo 111 a a MEN a a a a aa] an Emoomm a a a a il 1116 low------- moms aaso On 00 MENEM smoss NE a0 M IIH 2 1 mom 1 HIS MS -MM o11111.d mm ,��nffi Sd.,Emuum III a I SMOOMMUNUMENNOMME ON Mo Me no as on 00 1 NEESE NEESE s m Ia om I ON no no no on 0 a woo a momemm m I I on Me Me no Mo on 0.0.0.0.me a.no 0.So 111 on 111 ml III Mo mom own a IIIIsIa 00 no on 00 00 so mmom I mom NONE 0 1 a a a mo IIIImommisomm MENE MI n on No no no wi a 0 nowl Ion 00 ON so on .0.0 so NONNI won one s mom I NJ a a 0 00 a 0 mmm I om 00 Mo 20 11 11ON ON immums s KENN 0 a a 0 soon I Mom 00 'a a no 0 In 11:1111 In a mom mommoninamonsi ISO 0 a40001m ommo on MEN WEENI :Oman mommm a on 0 NOME Emmomommom slim a 00 a IEEE a so an an a (I won aaaaaI aNEW a -Mir a a aaa am a ME IN aaME NONE 0 0 a MEN a 0 a a IN a 0 a 0 IN a on a MEN 0 0 MEN a0 0 ONE a a a 0 ONE 0 a 0 MIN 0 a a a a a FIFO a --Mae-BONN moos BONN a none a 0 0 BONN a a lneom BENZ Ns I ao EMEMEN 22 'namannan a Ms. a ss as is on 0 INNNOI.I. aaism MIM Na 0 an 0 0 00 a111111 0 ISaaaaaaaaaaR-0 ONE 0 aaac 0 a aMo a MOM 0 0 00 ON aaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaa0 Ems 0 a 0 0 No No ME on aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa 0 a0 0 eaa0 a 0 0 NONE a a no a a a 2 a MEN a 0 0 aaaaa aa00 a aaaaaaon a 0 aa10 a am, No ON go ME 0 a a 0 a 0 0 0 a ME I=U Mo ON so Mo i a a a 0 a a 0 a 5 moll No a a 0 0 0 aaaa,! "am maliono aa, 0 am, LIN 0 a on 0 16002 0 0 ---IENN a a 0 111 a 0 0 a a a0 a 9 a a 0 aaa 0 a, ME aME am mli No a 00 a no on Ell a a I a so 0 a0 a aon, 0 a111 a is 00 00 Na an a old mom a 0 1 aa0 Mo a 0 0 0 0 0 no low on 0 0 0 0 a 0 IN 0 0 -s I I I Mo logo L A a a 0 0 a 0 a 0 a on a ON 0 a ME Nos a Mo no ME a am ain no ME -0 aa No on aaME aaaaaaaaaaaaaaon momon No 0 n mmmmffi a moomm No 0 no 0 MENEM 00 on a HENDERSON AND BODWELL CONSULTING ENGINEERS 120 EXPRESS ST., PLAINVIEW, NY , 11803 TEL.JI 935 -8870 SITUATED IN N V _ I I / x \\\ x � N . J\ % --�-/ F � � �'� � �\��e'*�-v *� r t �a�_t ;„LL \ 'k _�� t ti � �`�.tl �:�¢k � � _ � I I ` I✓ I I \ 1 \ \ \ \ \ \1\ Q S ;k \ O ) X11 \ \ ,QOSE \ �—' l I I X x M + a \ I I \\ \ a %,\\ \ I \ k ! fii �, r p r \ \ \ t 5s+ ''� ` `»� s \ I I `I I I 1 \ \\ - \ kY lrt Fi�l -+ r ra>,i d,lrw i, \ f •y If I I I I I r I j \ \ � \ \ \ \ \ Om I4 L4 yl€�}�a'� rr y„�11fJ' N .€4r' k X + a " '``� �•F. SIR fl., -__`--yx#;•v�e,y a�,�',-sE `-:"" - /— —\ \ 1 / / B — OJT \ I x .r \ C \\\ xo \\ I \� �x- ` '""-4F '- _',' �'K-',rT»�,'Myrxt,,,-, 1 I \ - i _ l 9F "? OH/4Lj'/ ,, 44 VAR 01 3/4 _-__��-�'Y-`�--�.�-'-_�'� __._,.v-�-='t-z�-`--_�LL����_�' // x I - ��- ( I \ 111 I B/� �•, �t _ NOTE: ALU l UlnlSEh 1 x ` x ",� �a. (1!/ CCI \ \ 1 f'{ ����� .0�' �`4�' �•T_ J� . Z`t °FACE BORR05 (o - 9'�Yt' 7e51 - � �. - x \ T � •_ �.,� `«� n,„ '*fit L'"'���y��; s ,�� \ - .�z� t N \ \ •![/ 110` `4 Z I TE rO - - Co,+k.+ on Ea7uw� "� � r �lyia '�trii is v� i ti+xlufd iv h4 _ r ILII 'II � 1111 0• G. � err Y'T`*} ,� ,+ � �+ Pd�"�fl�-' \ A� / fr3�i I dt X BOA/C'OH'.4tC.e SECT1U 1 fj 3'O.O,fly-/Hd JY!lCE.• /" = /'-O• - S1Y 1 x X \ `�'� TLL"�� � x a \ —� 1 h ' `� - .src. �?� 1 3C `.41 II';. —r X KEY Y - BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME 5I2E ROOT REMARKS / k 1 1 '�` ,P 4. / L}a✓L7/x7� \ x54 - LARGE DECIDUOUS TREES - 1/2" cal. Full Nead Straight Leader . - I I - 1 /�/J'O O •� 1I ' AP 12 - Ace[ platanoides 'Crimson King' Crimson King Maple 3'-3 1/2cal. 0LB - _ \ � /_ \\ _ X _ / \ x X /0�2 I /=✓' - - LS 12 Liquidambar styraciflua Sweet Gum 3--3 1/2' cal. B&B Full Bead, - Straight Leader FP 12 -Fraxinus pennsylvanica Green Ash 3' 3-1/2' cal. B&B Full Bead, - Straight Leader Y TC 19 Tilia cordata 'Gceenspire` Gceenapire Linden 3'-3 1/2' cal. B&B Full Head, — } i - 1 - � . NOTE: THIS SHEET - TO BE USED Straight Leader - } ,,/ ORNAMENTAL TREES - \\ \\ �a \ - _ �I - - Cornus- Florida Flowering Dogwood 6--10' -ht. B&B Fall, Clump Form : FOR PLANTING : ONLY-: 10 31 Ilex opace American Holly 9'-10' ht. BLB Full, Heavy \\ AC 12 Amelanchier canadensis Downey Servicebeccy 8'-10' ht. B&B Full, Clump Form CC 13 Carrie canadensis Eastern Aedbud B'-l0' ht. . B&B Full, Clump Form DRAWER w \\ / H NDERSON AND BODWELL PG.4/V77"a OLA/V EVERGREEN TREES \\ \ / , DATE JV 19 $unlperua vi[giniana Eastern Red Cedar 6'-8' ht. B&B - cull to Ground - \ �� - / CONSULTING ENGINEERS 9-ao-89 PP 31 Picea rung enc EastColoern ed Cee 6'-10' ht. B&H Full to Ground \ `— 140 EXPRESS S7. PLAINVI-8 NY. , 11803 F�� SCALE/1 P6 66 Pinus atrobus White Pine B'-10' ht. BLB Full to Ground i/ // TEL.Nb.(516/ 935 -8870 F / +.ZO' PR 12 Pinus rigida Pitch Pine B'r10' ht. BLB Full to Ground \ ��/�- /O� onAr1%e w TO 16 Thuja occidentalis nigra Dark American Arborvitae 5'-6' ht. BLB Plant 3' O.C. - \ "na-/y "Et✓o 9s /sem s+w"v,/•Mr of SodlNO%O f��' -��/7 D ��- SITU4TED IN sREET DATE DESCRIPTION REVISIONS - PG 33!43 suv<roc reauvrY, ni�w Yoee sof 7 I I i i I i HT� g140 - P�.my,�rcoY� �EER:P.V� , �• •• J. , � p obi 10, / - - Z'Y6ZGC ✓qC✓E . CM HJER A • _ 7W1 2 vdN - \ . _ O. E/s>EE,PGE Y.9TL+P.OI,..E 1;1 - i' gCPWP.P -M/UEC lr pP N ry ♦ /,1/✓r�/-O/ __ - - wPgrNEP p.Paxl� NN/J/Ni qs PBMEQS/BCE - - _ - - Mgr✓�gl'/vgEo er>Le••roa.[.rrs. - GeiNOEP o - - SPECIFICATIONS FOR NATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM - BLxwe.? �a BP Art rgTFO BY (Z•2EQp SPECIFICATIONS FOR - NgTCN fN/>CH. e•' AT DUPLEX SEMAGS PUMPING STATION H'1CN ACCESS I - DiEN/NG C/IOOE.2 Q . CLI!lSIOE TOWN OF 60UTHOLD, MEN YORK General - - Furnish and Install a complete pumping system as manufactured PL.ON '! ^• .•e• DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM - by HYDR-O-MATIC Pumps, Ashland, Ohio. System shall include . _ two sewage grinder pumps, four 3900 mercury switch level S>rdL-E%=/=0' - Mains controls, discharge plumbing with hyd aullcally sealed discharge flange, pump mounting pi a tam with bottom rail Nater mains shall consist of E inch cement lined ductile icon supports, upper rail supports, lifting chain, pedestal mount pipq, thickness Class 52, meeting the requirements of ANNA and cord waling plate for panel. Specification C-150-74, t-104-74 and Installed in full Control box shall be supplied for mounting ier the Fier _ accordance with the requirements of Suffolk County Health .Saurc - Department and the Village of Greenport. Operating Conditions ., Valves Each pump shall have a capacity of 35 qpm against a total One-eight inch valve is to be installed at the connection to dynamic head of 45 feet. Pump mato[ shall be 3 hp, single the existing Village of Greenport 12• water main. All valves ' Phase, 230 volt., and 3450 rpm. Pumps to be model SPGN-300. ars to be of an approved manufacturer and Installed in Sump Level Controls accordance with the rule, and regulations of Suffolk County - _ _ - EXPCOS/�N v.POOF46N> - Health Department and the Village of Greenport. - To gE /Jif/✓gTEO BY Sealed float type mercury switches shall be supplied to geomew O/Y/T w/TN N9TCH SwiTL•N - Hydrants control sump level and alarm signal. The mercury switches _ - 3ir5".41. oae> - - shall be sealed Ln a ,olid polyurethane float for corrosion _ FCoiKNBtI /vwoty Q�GOwf'E NECK✓FN> ' and shock resistance. The support vire shall have a heavy - - eo✓E.¢ ~;-w Loci' W/rw /NSCCT SfPEFN - Thee. an, All are t° De installed ft Me locations shown re p,PI✓/OE q[eMiNUM Neoprene jacket. A weighs shall lac be attached to cord above - TYPP 6/z-// the Plan. All b cants are to be he an approved manufacturer of FLOCKHo.2T.f,PdUE PP the floe[ f hold switch in place in stop. weight shall he ,dr Gyy i.-7 E>u/EGL gCCESG CABOEB BE>riRaN lC - end installed in y Health D with the rules and regulations of 4: <o✓<.E pvMPs BvvEo fa.germs C�i/E,e lfu/.YLaaP - Gthele Suffolk County Health Department and the Village of abode the flea! to effectively prevent sharp bends Ln the CONl.CE7E gCOC.0 LO/o'- • ao✓se Fva.'x TY�E6/L-H Greenport. Hydrant threads to be in accordance velt4- the Cord a when the float operates. The float switches shall hand wAlLt sv'iYN EG ¢/gp +4'6/9667 /E[. ¢LOf Village of Greenport Fire District requirements. In the sump d t supported only by the cord. Three float switches shall G used to control level. One Coc Dump turn-on, one Rouge 6strieefor pump turn-off, and one for lag or both pumps turn-on. A - fourth ari[eh shall be provided for alarm. float witches g o z•L4N e, Houas service to Se 1 1/2 inch nominal size copper netting shall be Model No. 3900. mV V words exv< NOTE.'FO.eAOYUXiG gp�U.9TT - - the requirements of Suffolk County Sea1tA Department and the - LGGAT/OH 0F/N1L11EiV7 High Mater Level Alarm C//1F-EFFLUG'NT--KENT O.PO. LY/TN a, Village of Greanport. _ p••pareE peon ETC.-SE6OLdq/ r,Clr4sa/✓,PjY Alarm light and bell to be supplied in separate NEMA III Mq/N ` ✓^'/e^' pyo yE.vTJ NOTE: Service connection to the B inch main shall be made with tap ¢" .�EC.4STCn✓C. enclosure for mounting at the control box. Alarm bell shall _ H' 4` Bac/Y 4'0119 .SEE.'YBN FO•P and corporation cock. have silencing switch with automatic reset. /z- c<ntt dares - EXTENT/Otho/Ps5 ♦ CUN7.COL PA/✓NEL To BE IeAw peas U•y�•eL' /'vim MO✓N>EO /N ,o00L .VO✓SE Meters _ . .._ rs•; ,; gL09. qLL CONT.POC Operation of System t BroCC- G INFLUENT /ou'E.P Go?CES TO dE ' Each house service shall include a water mete[ and meter pit. On sump level rise lover mecca cy switch shall flat he - �NOCgT I /thy ECS. W4 330 /�"GONG. /N callov/r BF�wCEN r:. Meter and meter pit shall be of an approved manufacture[ and energized, then upper level switch shall next energize and ✓gZee •g��O.. $ eQ'�j>B�ai l?: J✓PT wsLL /' Peal -✓�dsE. meet all requirements of the Suffolk County Health Department - G/y/J �6.O.a Bs•.YAY ` H1Hft 162d PUMP; With lead pump 91mfating, Hump IsYs1 Shl1l .. �• _ and the Village eC G[eenpor t. _ lower to low switch turn-off setting and pump shall atop. sroeo�E :, Alternating tarty shall lode: an stopping o . pump so that lag Internal Hack Row Prevention Deduce pump will start as lead le nest operation. IL sump level- ° /O O•r.' �'S - cwith s4- to rise when lead pump is operating, override ids N,WG.aCdeM toethe P ol.prevention devices shill be installed on o [he service switch shawl energize and start lag Pump. both lead and lag - - ZB 50'7 to the pool, and any lmay bed proposed. system or community pump shall operate together until low level switch turns off _ laundry facility that may be prepowd, EC- Z.oe o /thy-29.70 EG= ZC.9¢ both pings. If level conclnuas to dee when both pump, are LOG PUMP ONS EU Z9.DD• � �7 FLOaT3'HNriNES .TW.�_. - '. W;a.• • ..? - • operating, alarm switch shall anec9lse and signal the alarm. L MPo .EL• _ a (¢IEQDJ F/lCr3' BOT- All backflow preventers shall M of an approved manufacturer If ono pump should Lail for any reason, the second pump shall OUMF�S OFF•ECi Z7.0 ` ! SUBM6.PS/BG6'G2/NOS and installed In accordance with the rules and regulation, of operate on she override control and if level rises above J O .P B"SOL/O CO/UC. EMEJPBEJyCY STo,4?J�GE the ECHD and Village of Greenpoxt. override control, alarm shall signal. All level witches --- — - ' — F//'rPS- Z.EEIJ 50 BOl SL,dB _ - - .nail be adjustable for level .string, from one surfers. EL.+26.00 CLi✓C. C-2c' V.E.S/" " C.OPIr4e Y la.e.Ilaeima - - - - , _ -.� F/LLer CROSSSEL'T�O/l� Ea.�saYJ wET H/FGL 773 CqL. Electrical Contcol Panel 'T—` '' .SCdGE-'/ All rater mains shall be installed to a depth of 4'-6•. Control panel shall h,e/ara/ed /n +er par J..cal. 'x¢Rte�9 7207W4e 7W1 7 -vis• Maine and wcvlcas shall be connected and installed in A lock hasp shall be provided on door. A circuit breaker location, shown on the plan. Trench bedding shall conf$rm to shall be provided for each pump and a magnetic starter with 3 the Uni-Bel standards. Devatecing of the trench when 1e9 overload protection for three phase operation, or 1 leg necessary shall be accomplished through the use of pumps overload protection of, single phase operation, shall be - and/Gr any ether practical and acceptable method to maintain ,applied for each pump. An alternating relay shall be T a dry traneh m.a Ing Inatallation. All nater lines shall - y /f/� 4//q�iO" maintain a 10' separetlen from any sanitary line. "hen, provided to alternate pumps on each successive cycle to crossing • sanitary Ilea, the rater line will cross over the oparatump n overt shall have aual74a Iy contact to operate - sanitary line with a minimum vertical Separation of III both pumps on override condition. An Interlock relay shall Installation procedures- shall_bs_ in accordance with the rules in provided to automatically re-Connect the control circuit and re ulatloas of the Suffolk Count Health Department and - in- tae of circuit breaker trip on ono pump. N-0-A switches 9 7 P and run lightslb ,hall be supplied con for ng p pump: S control the Village of Gceenpoc t. - ' strip -shall be provided Lo[ connecting pump and control The installation of a water main in a vet trench L a wins. Additional terminals shall provideto connect violation of Section S-1.26 of the new York State Sanitary alarm. A transformer shall be supplied to give 24 volt Coder control Circuit. ?sating - Check Valve and Piping - a. Disinfection of water .&Ina In accordance with AMA The discharge piping shall include ball check valve With Standard C-601-81, or latest revision. hydraulically sealed discharge flange and a gate valve for - each pump. Discharge from station •hall 4a fitted with two b. Bacteriological analysis of rater samples collected MPT couplings. _ after disinfection at locations specified by Suffolk County Department of Health Services. /.VSECT 4' W47E•B P,2L>OF C.STLPON c. Pressure .testing of the Installed mains shall be In iBEENP05>'�� SET/--.4,9n1FE GL accordance with the appropriate AMA standards or - LIP G2AL[EO UO TO. manufacturer's recommendations. IAIV"T SJ/AGtr BE - pQ NJ.dN//OLE - - - - /N✓G2T P/R� TO BE el - /Je0!/C LYITGET P/PE 8-e,,P.r/✓TA.PY V P/PE COSSIIV49 DeZV14 _570AIA oedO 4&, Sa /TAY.l44rV/,�GL/E AreJ SC+YCE _ NO SCgLE , GNAWER Nr HENDERSON AND BODWELL r9eZ41Z9 /¢O GATE - CONSULTING ENGINEERS FO.Q /O-/44'B7 - - 120 EXPRESS SL, PLAINVIEW, NY. , 11803 SCALE /e L TEL.No.(516) 935 -8870 C'L/FFS/OG A.41 E,VOJ✓ - - DRAWING No - � A 7:..ems - 3,x 3� SITUATED IN TOWN.SH/P 06 60//>NOLO SHEET sNEET ,Oot//F '001!p. 8.4N�sS - E•5'Ti9TE_v� \ \\ \\\\\\\ \� \ \ \ — \\\\\\\\\\ �L as Ix � \ � � _ I ► VIII 1 \ \ \ \ \ \ m � w - _ \ z_ \\ /P9 db x,, \ \ � .S/LT FE,tlCE \ • a§. \ // I "�/ Qlabb Irl. \\ • \\ �� ��\— i/ \\ 1 1 \\ � � / \\\ �1\\\ \\ hie • \ � �� goo I �� \ \\ �a \ \ \ \ \ �� � \\ \\\� _-- _�-�-_—� � \ \ t . \\\ TL _--_ \\ \ \ \\ I / •o ag a a \ � X� �\ • . \ aqy %4ao I ag i • \ S/LT FENCE 44 @w - ZT , \ - � - No \ -�, � ��� -- - / /� / � w ' / "' � moi - I g I \ • I 3527 /l � \ \\ \\ \ �/ G� Y' \ y y �1 / /� I �R w s w I I \ • I I \ \ ' v it \ e \ \ l\ � ""..� • .. /�� ,. � P .yam s \ I 3qL \ - � • I // \ \ \ �// c , - 1 <\ IT Q \ Q\ xv 56699 \ \ IS �\ I \\ /A•�,� N°TEs : V \ \ \ \ \\ 9ti Z 9 \ \_/ \ V \ )S/GT FENG6 To B1/NSTACG60 By ~10 10 To cO.vsrzr./criov \\ C I \ \ fes(// ANO MA/NTA/N6o q'1Q/Ny GLYVBr?ucTYCiV. 4B \ I /• O \ !�S/CT F6NCE To gG M/R4F/ /ooX EN4/RO- pp / °b9y / 1 -54, /T5/..E - I i I I AO / - /NSTKUGTio.0 PG ANUFACTURe2S 44 _ W _ FENC6 O.G AVP,�o✓6o EAUgL ANO _ /NSTFJLC6o qs .¢ M '/ / // \ — — / /�/ / 7J,f \ ( \ \ s A� � I •j�N"OY.BAL6 O/.�Q$ "9R6 TO OE G'M/ST?UCTEO !f gROUNO ALL /NGE79 ANO MA/NTA/NCO aw7na F/N4L PA✓LrMQNT me Lgn/N /s 1 / EN✓/,E•OFENCE rM - - BY CELANESE FiOE2S -- ' / _ /IM \ \ N \\ TPENC,S� MFTE•PiNL - — m \\\\\ \ / / 4151, 40 t2 M,YEN Ne 5d �S' // HENDERSON AND BODIWELL E.eOS/ON CONT.eOG PLF/X/ o,.�¢a CONSULTING ENGINEERS 140 EXPRESS ST. PLAINVIEW, NY. , 11803 A'Q� 9-20.89 SECrioN A-A PL 4N �74-1 \\ TEL. Ne./5161935 -8870 CL�FFv^/OE .EL 's 4:7 , S/G T FENCE .49C74- 1.1 - ` ,(�J _-- ),� - ��W�N� Ma DATE DESCRIPTION • oru�c�in��o „ __ _ - � ���"'��'` Nw„' ' SITUATED �N TOH/.✓.4ff/P OF 30UTifOLO s/OB-/-O/9 L tD in- 1 r : JIB: ID LQ LQ I IqvgpmpmppulLniNG f�' f�UdLDING '�' f'�buI )INCL C' fSUILAlA1G F' hu1l�ING 7 1 tau I LfJ I NG LA Els'[T�E �Y Ir; Tt='JJNIS �C�S F,SWIMMII.IG (bd-. MIfJl7LE 20AD ELEVATION - h 4' E d t LII M ' ~� N — ri r I k11Dt�l--E 1245f��cR48� TEN N l 5 cou(2T S N22TN ELFV,/STlONrU • � �wLgING A, f�ulL�ItJCiS C � � `�^-- , i _ LONG 15LG1SD 50U®] ^-� , I �g �....�' ^ti "•"k J' -__ ^f __ ..�`, �"'. "'„_r 1'” _ "r�^�``„ .-,.. J"'•' `"'`. ' I �\ r•� ��J�\�J � _ �` "�.l 4 r r �� ,. .,r-� - _ — 1 y fir' I I Ell ®l771 ti I3 Ell OWN r �- , - 1 �. — I 4 /.lel� _ .I � I�.M„^ a'�(, /� -�-_-.,-yW(j/�._,.- _J.,, _.�v ._.lM�-��z��M..� - _ _i,_I� _. .,� I- I�rr.��i I `-..- � L,. - J. -- _._ 4""'_ _" 1... _" ..J.^ r ...,.-. ...-, -. __.�W_JW�.� �Vk:....,.. 1 -. -_ - �-�.__ .--_J-.w....- JM'•--- ,.4....-- .._...w-r/' r 1'�UILI�IN� �' (Sull SING E' �UILI�ING 'C" - f�lllLt71NG �� dull .D(NG A jlY� (3UILf�ING C wA-FF 2 ff2 o NT E LEVAN` I ON --- � I r' :' -�L