HomeMy WebLinkAbout1000-56.-6-4 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS• �2 SV Qa_ •
RICHARD G.WARD jY pCQ�� Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
Gym P.O. Box 1179
Chairman
GEORGE R.ITCHIE LATHAM,JR. c Southold, New York 11971
.4 Southold,
BENNETT ORLOWSB I,JR. w 2 h Fax (516) 765-3136
WILLIAM J.CREMERS "A Telephone(516) 765-1938
KENNETH L.EDWARDSQ!
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
February 27, 1996
Garrett A. Strang
P.O. Box 1412
Southold, NY 11971
Re: Proposed site plan for Port of Egypt Enterprises - Swimming pool
SCTM# 1000-56-64 & 6.1
Dear Mr. Strang:
The following took place at the February 26, 1996 Planning Board public meeting:
The final public hearing for the addition of an accessory swimming pool at Port of
Egypt Enterprises, Inc., was closed.
WHEREAS, Port of Egypt Enterprises, Inc. is the owner of the property known and
designated as Port of Egypt Marina located at Main Rd., Southold, SCTM# 1000-56-
6-4 & 6.1; and
WHEREAS, a formal application for the approval of this site plan was submitted on
November 10, 1994; and
WHEREAS, the site plan consists of placing a 30 x 50 swimming pool adjacent to
two existing non-conforming buildings (as to set backs); and converting one building
to a cabana and snack bar (vending machines); and
WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to the State Environmental
Quality Review Act, (Article 8), Part 617, conducted a coordinated review with the
Suffolk County Department of Health Services, the New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation, Southold Town Board, Trustees, and Building
Department, declared itself lead agency, and issued a Negative Declaration on
January 9, 1995, subject to the regulations that were in effect at the time; and
WHEREAS, the swimming pool will be used only by a membership club consisting of
present and future marina slip users; and
Page 2
Proposed site plan for Port of Egypt Enterprises - swimming pool
February 27, 1996
WHEREAS, the marina and accessory swimming pool have been determined to be
consistent with the purposes in the Town's Comprehensive plan for the Marine II
District, which this property is zoned; and
WHEREAS, the use of buildings with pre-existing non-conforming set backs on the
subject site for the swimming pool will not significantly expand any of the uses of
these buildings; and
WHEREAS, the adjacent property known and designated as SCTM# 1000-56-6-3.4,
The Terning Point Motel, is a separate parcel owned by the Suffolk County
Development Agency; and
WHEREAS, Town Code 100-254 (4) gives the Planning Board authority to vary or
waive parking requirements; and
WHEREAS, Planning Board and its staff have made inspections of the parking
conditions at the site, and have determined that the swimming pool for marina slip
users will not require additional on site parking; and
WHEREAS, the 251 existing and/or proposed parking spaces have been determined
to be adequate for all existing and the proposed use of the site; and
WHEREAS, this site plan was certified by Thomas Fisher, Senior Building Inspector,
on February 26, 1996; and
WHEREAS, all the requirements of the Site Plan Regulations of the Town of Southold
have been met; be it therefore
RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board approve and authorize the
Chairman to endorse the final survey dated February 7, 1996 subject to a one year
review from date of building permit.
Enclosed please find a copy of the survey which was endorsed by the Chairman.
Please contact is office if you have any questions regarding the above.
ncere
R' a ar
hairman
enc.
cc: Thomas Fisher, Senior Building Inspector
Scott Russell, Board of Assessors
SITE PLAN
Presubmission conference
(within 30 days of written request)
Complete application received
J (within 4 months of presub. conference)
0
Application reviewed at work session "O1
(within 10 days of receipt) pro. a
V
Applicant advised of necessary revisions
\ ,%C, D (within 30 days of review) --
1 �
Revised submission received
F T
1� s n CK
T p Lead Agency Coordination Oil
SEQRA determination - �-
v q Uegdv
C= o REFERRED TO:
V o
Zoning Board of Appeals
o N (written comments within 60 days of request) ❑ �sr
o H Board of Trustees
Lir v
__0A FL OK
O
� a
F Building Department (certification)�„ .�3_'6
SCOW
L D w Suffolk County Department of Planning T oK caR
Department of Transportation -State ,ro.` oK
v vza
C,- o ; �+ Department of Transportation - County ,o,L oK
�a
Suffolk County Dept. of Health
1� fir, Fire Commissioners =—i ro� oK
Sent:
H f Received•
RECEIVED:
� 3
Draft Covenants and Restrictions
Filed Covenants and Restrictions ro.` oK
L Landscape plan
i ro� OK
Lighting plan
in°D0ro E OK
Curb Cut approval
Inco, CK
Health approval ,m.�i
nro. OK
Drainage plan J
in.� OK
Reviewed by Engineer
P-2-11
- Q inro. OK
Approval of site plan
-with conditions
Endorsement of site'plan
a
Certificate of Occupancy inspection wao i
�� iero. OK
e year review
.m
SITE PLAN
Presub mission conference
(within 30 days of written request)
Complete application received
(within 4 months of presub. conference)
Application reviewed at work session '"`ai-
,` „ro.
(within 10 days of receipt)
0
Applicant advised of necessary revisions
z
(within 30 days of review)
0 •� D
In
"cot
rt Revised submission received Xf° ox
unt GK
�c
Lead Agency Coordination - z-
SEQRA determination �- `1- q Uegdec
z J
v o REFERRED TO:
C: o
Ilz o
J Zoning Board of Appeals se tsr
zo (written comments within 60 days of request)
jH Board of Trustees
4- v
HBuilding Department (certification),__, r6 ox
Ik x w Suffoll: County Department of Planning ro.` oK csR
t! Department of Transportation -State "fO
z 5 not DK
Department of Transportation - County "ro
i
o Suffolk County Dept. of Health 0 W.` oK
Fire Commissioners Sent:
�V f Received-
!t `r RECEIVED:
3 "`°` ox
Draft Covenants and Restrictions "ro
Filed Covenants and Restrictions
71
Landscape plan �j/� T ox
v ,cat
Lighting plan „ro, OK
P357L oK
Curb Cut approval 1X2j
Health approval
Drainage plan ro.` oK
'AIC L,
Reviewed by Engineer
0,<
„ro. °x
Approval of site plan
-with conditions
Endorsement of site plan a
Certificate of Occupancy inspection ro.` oK
"ie year review , n
PLA N.NT NG'BO,ARD
TOWN O 'SOU HOD
SL'EEOLK� 0U -Y
NOV 101994 :
Southold, N.Y. 11971 SOUTHOLD TOWN
PLANNING BOARD
(516) 765-1938
APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF SITE PLAN
Date of Application Filing Fee Date Recd
New Use Change of Use Re-Use—Extension of Existing Use
Revision of an Approved Site Plan (Date of Approval )
Other Specify
Name of Business or Site Port of Egypt Enter rises Inc .
Location of Site South Side of _Main Road 1483 East of Bay ome
Address of Site, if available 62800 Main Road & 300 Old Main Rd. bouthold
Name of Applicant Port of Egypt Enterprises Inc .
Address of Applicant 62800 Main Road
Southold. New York 11971 Telephone 516-765-2445
Person to be responsible for Construction William Lieblein
Telephone Some
Applicant' s interest in site-check one: Owner of Land X
Under contract to purchase_
Owner of Fee Title to Land Port of Egypt Enterprises Inc .
Address Main Roaa, Southold, New York Telephone 765-2445
Site Plans Prepared by G -A _ Strang License No. 15244 - Architect
Address Main Rood , Southold New York Telephone 56-765-5455
Total Land Area of Site 216 . 05a Sq.Ft. Zone District M-II
Existing Use of SiteBoot Sales/Marina Proposed Use of SiteSame w/ Pool
Gross Floor Area of Existing Structure( s) 39 , 960 sqft. sqft.
Gross Floor Area of Proposed Structure(s) 7 , 734 sqft. sqft.
Percent of Lot Coverage by Building( s) 22 %
Percent of Lot for Parking (where applicable) 55 %
Percent of Lot for Landscaping(where applicable) i3
Datum(Specify)U.S.G.S. Other M.5 . L .
Has applicant been granted a variance and/or special exception by
Board of Appeals
Case Number 3770 Name of Applicant Port of Egypt Enterprises Inc .
Date of Decision 3/29/90 Expiration Date None
Will any toxic or hazardous materials, as defined by the Suffolk County
Board of Health, be stored or handled at the site? Yes-Fuel Storage
If so, have proper permits been obtained? Yes
Number and Date of permit issued 4/2/86
NO ACTION (EXCAVATION OR CONSTRUCTION) MAY BE UNDERTAKEN UNTIL APPROVAL
OF SITE PLAN BY THE PLANNING BOARD.
a
APPLICANT' S AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
William H . Lieblein being duly sworn, deposes
and says that he resides at Greenport, New York
in the State of New York, and that he is the owner of the above property,
or that he is the prPCident of the
(Title) (Specify whether Partnership
Corporation which is hereby making application; that the
or Corporation)
owner or his heirs, successors or assigns will, at his own expense,
install the required site improvements in accordance with Article XIII
of the Code of the Town of Southold for the area stated herein
and that there are no existing structures or improvements on the land
which are not shown on the Site Plan; that title to the entire parcel,
including all rights-of-way, have been clearly established and are
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 adopted by the
Planning Board for the filing of Site Plans and will comply with
same; that the plans submitted, as approved, will not be altered or
changed in any manner without the approval of the Planning Board;
and that the actual physical improvements will be installed in
strict accordance with the plans submitted.
Signed �
(Owner)
Sworn to before me this
day /of U VWhkrlg
(Notary Public)
Signed O-Z�Z&� �Z_A&
RUTH A.poUWODA ( Partner or Corporate Officer and Title)
4jM Rhk Btaia d Nwr Yak
Nm 1982130
QUdfi dM&M* ra9S
Commission E*w
1416-2 (2/87)-7c . •
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 of the broader concerns affecting
the question of 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 of three parts:
Part 1: Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic project
data, it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3.
Part 2: 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 1 and Unlisted Actions
Identify 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
information, 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, therefore 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 measure44escribed 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 he prepared.
A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions
Name of Action
Name of Lead Agency
Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Tide of Responsible Officer
Signature of Responsible Officer in Le.id Agency Signature of Preparer(If different from responsible otticer)
Date
1
PART 1—PROJECT INFORMION
Prepared by Project Sponsor
NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant effect
on the environment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E. Answers to these questions will be considered,
-as part of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additionaik
information you believe will be 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 involve
new studies, research or investigation. If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specify
each instance.
NAME OF ACTION
Accessory Swimming Pool and Cabana for Port of Egypt Marine
LOCATION OF ACTION(Include Street Address, Municipality and County
62800 Main Road & 300 Old Main Rood, Southold, Suffolk Co . , New York
NAME OF APPLICANTISPONSOR BUSINESS TELEPHONE
Garrett A . Strana . Architect for Port Of Egypt Ent . Inc (516) 765-5455
ADDRESS
P .O. Box 1412 Main Road
CITY/PO STATE ZIP CODE
Southold NY . 11971
NAME OF OWNER(If different) j BUSINESS TELEPHONE
Port of Egypt Enterprises Inc . (516) 765-2445
ADDRESS
62800 Main Road
CITY/POsNYE �11197s1
Southold
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION
Construction of new accessory swimming pool, terrace & decks .
Alteration of existing building for Cabana use .
Installation of sub-surface sanitary system for Cabana and drywell�s
for swimming pool filter waste. Fill for pool terrace elevation to +8 '
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: ❑Urban ❑Industrial %)Commercial Elkesidential (suburban) ❑Rural (non-farm)
❑Forest ❑Agriculture ❑Other
2. Total acreage of project area: 4.96 acres.
APPROXIMATE ACREAGE PRESENTLY AFTER C MPLETION
Meadow or Brushland (Non-agricultural) 0 acres acres
Forested 0 acres 0 acres
Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland, pasture, etc.) 0 acres 0 acres
Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24, 25 of ECL) 0 acres 0 acres
Water Surface Area 1 . 8 acres 1 • 8 acres
Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill) 0 acres 0 acres
Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces 2 . 2 acres 2 .4 _ acres
Other (Indicate type) Lnndseaoed 0 . 9 acres 0 . 9 acres
3. What is predominant 5011 type(s) on project site? Sand, Silt Gravel
a. Sol) drainage: IRWell drained __ AQ— % of site tAModerately well drained 40 % of site
171I'oorl} drained ?/ of site
b. If any agricultural land is involved, how many acres of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the NYS
Land Classification System+ N/A acres. (See 1 NYCRR 370)
4. Are there bedrock outcroppings on protect site? ❑Yes 1$1No
. What is depth to bedrock? NZA (in feet)
2
5. 'Approximate percentage of pr sed project site with slopes: iu0-109'-* 100 °5 ❑10-15% %
015% or greater _ _ %
6. Is project substantially contiguous to, or contain a building, site, or district, listed on the State or the National
Registers of Historic Places? ❑Yes ®No
7:-Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural Landmarks? ❑Yes %No
8. What is the depth of the water table? 5 (in feet)
9. Is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aquifer? Eyes ONO
10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? XY'es ONO
11. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered?
❑Yes EANo 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)
❑Yes EANo Describe
13. Is the project site�y-�presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area?
❑Yes &No If yes, explain
14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community?
EMYes ONO
15. Streams within or contiguous to project area: None
a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary
16. Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area:
a. Name Budd ' s Pond b. Size (In acresl 12+/-
17. Is the site served by existing public utilities? 1a Yes ONO ,y,
a) If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? ❑IYes ❑No
b) If Yes, will improvements be necessary to allow connection? ❑Yes &No
18. Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA,
Section 303 and 304? Dyes [gNo
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 ONO
20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wash? ❑Yes LINO
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 4.96 acres.
b. Project acreage to be developed: 4. 96 acres initially; 4. 96 acres ultimately.
c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped 0 acres.
d. Length of project, in miles: NSA (If appropriate)
e. If the project is an expansion. indicate percent of expansion proposed 19 %;
f. Number of off-street parking spaces existing 251 proposed L51 .
g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour 15 (upon completion of project)?
h. If residential. Number and type of housing units:
One Family two Family Multiple Family Condominium
Initially _
Ultimately
i. Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure 4height; 65 ' width: _ 130 ' length
j. Linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy is? 150 ft
3
2.' How much natural materia., rock, earth, etc.) will be removed fro4he site? 0 tons/cubic yards
3. Will disturbed areas be reclaimed? 93Yes ONo ❑N/A
a. If yes, for what intend.- purpose is the site being reclaimed? Landscaped areas
b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? MYes ❑No
-- c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? )Oyes ONo
4. How many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site? 0 acres.
5. Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this project?
L]Yes gNo
6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction Six 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? Oyes ONo
8. Will blasting occur during construction? Dyes ®No
9. Number of jobs generated: during construction 0 after project is complete 0
10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project 0
11. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? Oyes $INo If yes, explain
12. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? Oyes &No
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? GYes ONo Type CnaS tnxy R Rnol knr kw.,sh
14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? Dyes X7No ~-
Explain
15. Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain? Eyes ONo
16. Will the project generate solid waste? $3Yes ONo
a. If yes, what is the amount per month 0. 20 tons
b. If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used? ®Yes ONO
C. If yes, give name Southold Town Solid Waste locatt*lbn Cutchoaue
d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? Oyes XlNo
e. If Yes, explain
17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste? Oyes I&No
a. If yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal? _ tonslmonth.
b. If yes, what is the anticipated site life? years.
18. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? Dyes IXNo
19. Will project routinely produce odors (more than Ono hour per day)? Dyes IXNo
20. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels? Oyes MNo
21. Will project result in an increase in energy rne? ®Yes ONo
If yes , indicate type(s) Electric and ins
22. It water supply is from m•dh. uviicate purnpnig capdcay gdllonslminute.
23. Total anticipated water usage per day 1600 _ gallon,2lay. E
24. Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding? GYes )ONo
It Yes, explain
't
4
25. Approvals Required: • Submittal
•
Type Date
City, Town, Village Board Dyes ONO
City, Town, Village Planning Board ®Oyes ONO Site Plan 11 /8/94
-City, Town Zoning Board ❑Yes ONO
City, County Health Department fRYes ONO Sanitary11 /15/94
Other Local Agencies ❑Yes ONO
Other Regional Agencies ❑Yes ONO
State Agencies Eyes ❑No DEC. Wetlands t/-11 / 15/94
Federal Agencies ❑Yes ONO
C. Zoning and Planning Information
1 . Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision? $)Yes ONO
If Yes, indicate decision required:
❑zoning amendment ❑zoning variance ❑special use permit ❑subdivision Nsite plan
❑newirevision of master plan ❑resource management plan ❑other
2. What is the zoning classification(s)of the site? Morine 11
3. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning?
30%
4. What is the proposed zoning of the site? Same
5. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning?
Same
C 6. Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? Eyes ❑No
7. What are the predominant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a % mile radius of proposed action?
Marine, and General Business
8. Is the proposed action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses within a Y mile? ®Yes ONO
4. 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'7ewer or water districts? ❑Yes ®No
11 . Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police,
fire protection)? Dyes )UNo
a. If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? Dyes KNo
12. Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? ❑Yes ONO
a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? ❑Yes ENO
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 such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or
avoid them.
E. Verification
I certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge.
Apphcant5ponsor N Garrett A. So tZrariq for Port of Egypt Ent . Date 11/8/94
Signature tie Architect/Agent
If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment form before proceeding
with this assessment.
'� 5
Part ?PROJECT IMPACTS AND THEWAGNITUDE
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 riot 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 simply
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 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 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. 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. 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 reduction is not possible. This
must be explained in Part 3.
1 2 3
Small to Potential Can Impact Be =�
Moderate Large Mitigated By
IMPACT ON LAND Impact Impact Project Change
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 ❑No
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 ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONO
3 feet of existing ground surface.
• Construction that will continue for more than 1 year or involve more ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ENO
than one phase or stage.
• Excavation for mining purposes that woufcl remove more than 1,000 ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONO
tons of natural material (i.e., rock or soil) per year.
• Construction or expansion of a sanitary landfill ❑ ❑ ❑1'es ❑No
• Construction in a designated floodway. ❑ ❑ IJ1'es ONO
• Other impacts ❑ u [--])'es []No
2. Will there be an effect V. _ .ry u::.que or unusual land forms found on
the site?(i r., cliffs. dunes. geological formation,, etc )I-]NO UYES
• Specific land forms ❑ ❑ Eyes ONO
6
• 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)
ONO OYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
• Developable area of site contains a protected water body. ❑ ❑ []Yes ❑No
• Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
protected stream,
• Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
• Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland. ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No
• Other impacts: ❑ ❑ Dyes []No
4. Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body
of water? ONO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
• A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑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: ❑ ❑ Eyes El No
5. Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater
quality or quantity? ONO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
• Proposed Action will require a discharge permit. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
C • Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does not ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No
have approval to serve proposed (project) action. w
• 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 ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No
supply system.
• Proposed Action will adversely affect groundwater. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
• Liquid effluent will be conveye.1 off the site to facilities which presently ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
do not exist or have inadequate capacity.
• Proposed Action would use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No
day.
• Proposed Action will likely cause siltation or other discharge into an ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No
existing body of water to tho extent that there will be an obvious visual
contrast to natural conditions.
• Proposed Action will require the storage of petroleum or chemical ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No
products greater than 1,100 gallons.
• Proposed Action will allow residential uses in areas without water ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No
and/or sewer services.
• Proposed Action locates commercial and/or industrial uses which may ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No
require new or expansion of exi-ting waste treatment .ind/or storage
facilities.
• Other impacts: _ ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
6. Will proposed action alter drainage flow or patterns, or surface
water runoff? ONO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
• Proposed Action would change flood water flows. ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No
7
• 1 2 3
Small to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
• Proposed Action may cause substantial erosion. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No i
• Proposed Action is incompatible with existing drainage patterns. ❑ ❑ 11 Yes ❑No
• Proposed Action will allow development in a designated floodway. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
• Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
IMPACT ON AIR
7. Will proposed action affect air quality? ❑NO ❑YES
Examples that would apply to column 2
• Proposed Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips in any given ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
hour.
• Proposed Action will result in the incineration of more than 1 ton of ❑ ❑ ❑yes ❑No
refuse per hour.
• Emission rate of total contaminants will exceed 5 lbs. per hour or a ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour.
• Proposed action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
to industrial use.
• Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ON
development within existing industrial areas.
• Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS
8. Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered �•
species? ❑NO ❑YES
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 ` ❑ ❑ ❑1'es ❑No
than for agricultural purposes. '
• Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
9 Will Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or
non-endangered species? ❑NO ❑YES
Examples that would apply to column 2
• Proposed Action would substantially interfere with any resident or ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
migratory fish, shellfish or wildlife species.
• Proposed Action requires the removal of more than 10 acres ❑ ❑ ❑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?
DNO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
• The proposed action would sever, cross or limit access to agricultural ❑ ❑ ❑yes ❑No f
land (includes cropland, hayfields, pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc.)
ti 8
• 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 ❑ ❑ ❑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 ❑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 runoff)
• Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES
11 . Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources? ❑NO ❑YES
(If necessary, use the Visual EAF Addendum in Section 617.21,
Appendix B.)
Examples that would apply to column 2
• Proposed land uses, or project components obviously different from ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
or in sharp contrast to current surrounding land use patterns, whether
man-made or natural.
• Proposed land uses, or project components visible to users of ❑ ❑ E)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 ❑ ❑ ❑Ye{, ❑No
screening of scenic views known to be important to the area.
• Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES
12. Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure of historic, pre-
historic or paleontological importance? ❑NO ❑YES
Examples that would apply to column 2
• Proposed Action occurring wholly or partially within or substantially ❑ ❑ El 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 opportunrties?
Examples that would apply to coltunn 2 ❑NO ❑YES
• The permanent foreclosure of a suture recreational opportunity. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes 0N
• A major reduction of an open space important to the community. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
• Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
9
1 2 3
IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION Small to Potential Can Impact Be
14. Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems? Moderate Large Mitigated By
ONO DYES Impact Impact Project Change
Examples that would apply to column 2
• Alteration of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes 0N
• Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems. ❑ ❑ 11 Yes ❑No
• Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
IMPACT ON ENERGY
15. Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or
energy supply? ONO 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 ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑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: ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No
NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS
16. Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or vibration as a result
of the Proposed Action? ' ❑NO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
• Blasting within 1,500 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive ❑ ❑ Dyes ONO
facility. 2
• Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day). ❑ ❑ ❑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 ❑ ❑ El Yes ❑No
noise screen.
• Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
c _
IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH
17. Will Proposed Action affect public health and safety?
ONO []YES
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 ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
gas or other flammable liquids
• Proposed action may result in the excavation or other disturbance ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑N0
within 2,000 feet of a site used for the disposal of solid or hazardous
waste.
• Other impacts: ❑ ❑ [Dyes ❑No
10
IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHARACTER 2 3
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 Impact Project Change
ONO OYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
• The permanent population of the city, town or village in which the ❑ ❑ Dyes ONO
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. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
• Proposed action will cause a change in the density of land use. ❑ ❑ 0-yes ❑No
• Proposed Action will replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures ❑ ❑ ❑Y'es ONO
or areas of historic importance to the community.
• Development will create a demand for additional community services ❑ ❑ 0-yes ❑No
(e.g. schools, police and fire, etc.)
• Proposed Action will set an important precedent for future projects. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONO
• Proposed Action will create or eliminate employment. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
• Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes CIN o
19 Is there, or is there likelv to be, public controversy related to
potential adserse environmental impacts? ONO []YES
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 poterttrally 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, including permanently lost resources of value
• Whether the impact can or will be controlled
• The regional consequence of the impact
• Its potential divergence from lural needs and goals
• Whether known objections to the project relate to this impar t.
(Continue on attachments)
11
14-1411 Q'97)-9c 617.21 SEAR
Appendix B .
vtute Environmental Quality Review
Visual EAS' Addendum
This form may be used to provide additional information relating to Question 11 of Part 2 of
the Full EAF.
(To be completed by Lead Agency)
Distance Between
Visibility Project and Resource (in Miles)
1. Would the project be visible from: 0-N /4-'/z 1/2-3 3.5 5+
• A parcel of land which is dedicated to and available ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
to the public for the use, enjoyment and appreciation
of natural or man-made 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 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
Registers of Historic Places?
• State Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
• The State Forest Preserve? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
• National Wildlife Refuges and state game refuges? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
• National Natural Landmarks and other outstanding ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
natural features?
f • National Park Service lands? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
`• • Rivers designated as National or State Wild, Scenic ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
or Recreational?
• Any transportation corridor of high exposure, such ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
as part of the Interstate System, or Amtrak?
• A governmentally established or designated interstate ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
or inter-county foot trail, or one formally proposed for 4%,
establishment or designation?
• A site, area, lake, reservoir or highway designated as ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
scenic?
• Municipal park, or designated open space? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
• County road? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
• State? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
• Local road? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
2. Is the visibility of the project seasonal? (i.e., screened by summer foliage, but visible during other
seasons)
❑Yes ❑No
3. Are any of thr resomtes checked m question I used by the public during the tirne of year
during which the project will be visible?
EJ Yes ❑No
-t 1
DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING VISUAL ENVIRONMENT
4. From each item checked in question 1, check those which generally describe the surrounding
environment.
Within i
"A mile *I mile
Essentially undeveloped ❑ ❑
Forested ❑ ❑
Agricultural ❑ ❑
Suburban residential ❑ ❑
Industrial ❑ ❑
Commercial ❑ ❑
Urban ❑ ❑
River, Lake, Pond ❑ ❑
Cliffs, Overlooks ❑ ❑
Designated Open Space ❑ ❑
Flat ❑ ❑
Hilly ❑ ❑
Mountainous ❑ ❑
Other ❑ ❑
NOTE: add attachments as needed
5. Are there visually similar projects within:
*'/z mile Dyes []No
"1 miles Dyes ❑No
*2 miles ❑Yes ❑No
' ~ r
3 miles Dyes ❑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 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
Routine travel by residents ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
At a residence ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
At worksite ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
Other ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
7 2
S�bl���g senmc�ua�uwo0
4 van
0 1 /ION a z"IM10°�
VOA MON w"Ms J W nen
NOSS30tl309'M N3Uvm
Maox MaN IA aqe;S 'otTgnd dae-4oN
' 1,661 ' 72F730 dep N�
sigq am 93o3aq of uaoMS
NI3'IH3I'I *H WYI/'I/'II/b
•sastmaad
peoua3a393 aaoge aqq o-4 pae6a3 gllm dau96V Te4u9mu39noO aaq-4o
due ao pToq-4noS 3o umoy 'd-unoZ) XTo33nS 'a,4e-4S 5I3oE maN
o-4 uoT-4eoTTdde 6utxem uagw 3iegaq dm uo joe o4 4oejTga3V
' JNVH.iS '`i ZLs*d-af) ezTaogpne 'uTaTga1'I 'H meT1TTM ' I
1' 9' 1,' £' £' Z'£-9-9S-000T#
PUe Z' £T' TT' T' 0T-1,--9S-0001# WZJS 'sastmaad PToq-4noS
o-4 sunt-4eaaaTV pue suoT-4TPPV 'Tool 6uTmmtwS pasodoad :au
NOIILVZ IZIOHtLnv d0 H3113'I
PE
SOUTHOLD TOWN
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
JUNE 23,1998 4;30 P.M.
The ARC met at Town Hall. Members present were:
Robert 1. Brown, Co-Chairman
Garrett A. Strang, Co-Chairman
Robert W. Keith, Secretary, Mattituck
John Greene, Landmarks Preservation Committee
Edward A. Dart, Southold
Yen Rieger, Orient
Sanford Hanauer, Mattituck
Also attending were Mrs. Donna Dzugas-Smith, Bernard Heinisch, G. Ritchie
Latham and William Leiblein.
JIMBO REALTY COMPANY. (Garrett Strang recused himself). The Committee
recommends the use of architectural design devices to relieve the mass of the
roofs and the sidewalls as well as to seek a more barn-like appearance. Only
two of the possibilities are varying the roof lines along each building and
making each of them a different design. Windows, real or simulated, ought to
be rectangular with shutters.
The recommended siding finish is board and batten, real or simulated, to
relieve the length of the buildings. Doors and siding ought to be the same
shade of gray and the standing seem roof a dark green.
It is recommended that the landscaping on the North Road be moved
forward to the proposed line of trees and planted on an undulating berm. A
double row of evergreens, 8 to 10 feet high, planted on 10 foot centers is
proposed. The East, West, and Southerly boundaries should be landscaped
with a single row of 8 to 10 foot evergreens planted on 10 foot centers and
placed outside the fence.
A sprinkler system for the landscaping is included in this
recommendation.
PORT OF EGYPT (Garrett Strang recused himself).. ,William Leiblein
described a 40' by 260' building, 35' high, to be used for winter boat storage in
racks two or three boats high. The front, facing Route 25 and just East of the
Sea Shell Restaurant, would be sliding doors.
The Committee recommended the use of two smaller buildings, varying
roof lines, etc. but thought that in Its location and use it could be true to its
function.
&&W tal"V^ D
Robert W. Keith, Secretary
Southold Town
Planning Bood
• Ut'�g11fF0(�-C
L
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
1 Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. o P.O. Box 1159
m
Chairan Neb ,
2
vrr Southold, New York 11971
WILLIAM J. CREMERS � '1Far (516) 765-3136
KENNETH L. EDWARDS �0 _:_
GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM,JR. 1 `�__ Telephone (516) 765-1938
RICHARD G.WARD
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
October 7, 1997
William Lieblien
Port of Egypt Marine, Inc.
Main Road, Southold, NY 11971
RE: Request for Planning Board review of continuing use of State land
for boat storage
Dear Mr. Lieblien,
The Planning Board has reviewed your request to continue the use of
State land for boat storage and parking.
As you had indicated, the State is currently leasing this land to Port of
Egypt with a possible purchase option.
The Board has no objection to your continuing this use.
If you have any additional questions, please contact this office.
io
nit^ly
. Kassner
Site Plan Reviewer
cc: Edward Forrester, Director of Code Enforcement
� _ q - 11
�1"
111z .
STATE OF NEW YORK
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
STATE OFFICE BUILDING
250 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY
HAUPPAUGE, N.Y. 11788-5518
CRMO SIRACUSA, P.E. JOSEPH H. BOARDMAN
ACTING REGIONAL DIRECTOR COMMISSIONER
October 03, 1997
PORT OF EGYPT MARINE, INC., AND WILLIAM LIEBLIEN, INDIVIDUALLY
MAIN ROAD
SOUTHOLD, NY 11971
Attention: William Lieblien
S/S MAIN RD., 2,150 FT E/O BAV HOME RD., SOUTHOLD
RENTAL ACCOUNT P01772
Dear Mr. Lieblien:
Phis letter is a follow-up to your recent Conversation with S. Lauer of this office regarding the
above-noted location. We are now providing you with six copies of your Interim Permit for Use
of State-owned Property. Please transmit to our Hauppauge office the following:
1. Five originals of the signed permit.
2. Otte copy of your liability insurance certificate covering the location,
and naming "The People of the State of New York" as an additional insured.
3. A check for $570.00 covering the rental fees for the first month. (Any
amount that has been already remitted for October, 1997 will be credited to
your account.)
4. A cheek for $570.00 covering the security deposit. (Your original
security deposit will be returned.
The two signs, not related to Port of Egypt are not covered by this permit. Therefore, we will
need to correspond directly with (lie sign owners. Any information that you can provide on the
ownership of these signs will be greatly appreciated. Additionally, please be advised that your
request for a purchase of this property is now tinder review. You will be notified as soon as a
determination has been made.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. If you have any questions, you may contact Steve
Lauer at (516) 952-6091.
Very
ptrr Iy yours,
CLIFFORD R. WINTER
Regional Property Manager
enclosures
SKETCH OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
, s
P
� L
'l
Ila �\
v
Page 5
9 abed
(oiTgnd AsegON)
-uoTgeaodaoo pees 30 ssogoaala 3o pzeog aqg 3o sapao Aq ogazaga aweu aTagg
pau6Ts Aagg gegg !guawnzgsuT 6uTobaso3 agg pagnoaxa goTgm pue ui pagTaosap uoTgesodioo aqg
3o aqg ST aqs/aq gegg
le sapTsaa aqs/aq gegg Aes pue asodep PTP 'u2Oms ATnp buTaq 'ogM 'umoux aw og
aweo ATTeuosaad aw aao3aq 6T ' 3o Aep agg up
simumDOH'IMONNJY N0I.LVV0dH03 Hod
:ss( do A.LNIIOO
( XHOA MHN d0 HSHSs
(OTTgnd AaegON)
•awes aqg pagnoaxe Aagg gegg paspolmoux0e pue
auawnzgsuT bucO6as03 aqg pagnoaxa oqM pue uT pagTzosaP (s) TenpTATPuT aqg aq og uMoux aw og
aweo ATTeuosaad aw 6ao3aq 6T ' 30 Aep agg u0
sj.KxxxDaagmomxav uvaaIAIONI HOd
SS( d0 A.MoD
( )RIO[ MHN d0 HS7SS
paub.S ON 'O'j 'Pad
paub.S -ON -oas -DOS
•suoTsTAoad pue suoTgTpuoo 'swzag
anoge aqg 3O ITe sgdaooe pau6Tssapun aqg 'gTwzad agg 3o buTguezb agg 3o uoTaezaPTsuoo uI
aJNV.LdaJJY
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
y�VOS �C��.T Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
RICHARD G. WARD
Chairman RICHARD
y '^ P.O. Box 1179
GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM,JR. " Southold, New York 11971
BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. }�, �,�)y� Fax(516) 765-3136
WILLIAM J. CREMERS �+ O Telephone(516) 765-1938
KENNETH L.EDWARDS ��f� a� ?
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
MINUTES
February 26, 1996
Present were: Richard G. Ward, Chairman
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
G. Ritchie Latham
William Cremers
Melissa Spiro, Planner
Martha Jones, Secretary
Robert G. Kassner, Site Plan Reviewer
Absent: Kenneth Edwards
Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner
Mr. Ward: Good evening. I'd like to call the February 26, 1996 Southold Town
Planning Board meeting to order. The first order of business is the setting of the
next Planning Board meeting. Board to set Monday, March 18, 1996 at 7:30 p.m.
at Southold Town Hall, Main Rd., Southold, as the time and place for the next
regular Planning Board meeting. Is there a second?
Mr. Orlowski: Second.
" Mr. Ward: Motion seconded. All in favor?
Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Ward.
Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Site Plans:
Mr. Ward: 7:30 p.m. - Port of Egyot. Enterprises. Inc. - This site plan is for the
construction of a swimming pool at an existing marina on Rt. 25 in Southold.
SCTM# 1000-56-6-4 & 6.1. Is the applicant here that would like to address the
Board?
Southold Town Planning Board 2 February 26, 1996
Garrett Strang: Good evening. The application speaks pretty much for itself. The
Board, in 1993, approved a site plan at this facility for the construction of about, I
believe, 25,000 square feet of storage building. The owners of the facility decided
that it would serve their interests better, given the fact that the nature of today's
marinas are such that people are looking for other amenities, specifically swimming
pools, and that it would serve their interest better, were they to forgo that building
that had been approved and put a swimming pool in place of that.
In October of 1994, we made the application that is before you to amend the
previous site plan, substituting the swimming pool facility for the previous storage
building. Again, I think it's pretty straight forward and we're here to address any
questions the Board may have along those lines and our concern at the present
time is that it did get a little behind schedule and we are looking to get this facility
up and running for this coming season, so it is our hope that the Board will be able
to proceed with this in a timely fashion, so that we can move ahead with the
construction of this facility. If there are any questions, certainly either myself or Mr.
Leiblein would be available to answer them.
Mr. Ward: Thank you. Anyone else like to address the Board on this particular site
plan. Mr. Flynn?
Frank Flynn: I'm F.M. Flynn, a resident of the town of Southold and I had intended
to make more extensive remarks this evening, but due to the complexity of what I
encountered, I think I will just express some general opinions with respect to this
application and provide the Board with a written analysis of the site plan as I see it.
I'm shocked that the approval process for this parcel has proceeded to this point.
The subject's site plan is so disingenuous and so based on false and misleading
data and calculations that a child could see through it. The arrogance of this
r submission seems to expect complicity on the part of this Board. The fact that this
Board issued a Negative Declaration prior to this hearing, and the actions of others,
without public notice, smacks at least to the question of due process.
The planning process and the question of what constitutes the entire contiguous
parcel should be raised. The question of whether this particular parcel and the one
to the west of it, the hotel site, are in constructive contiguous ownership, and
should be a matter of some concern to the Board in it's planning decisions. This
planning presumes that the site of the motel, etc., is owned by the Suffolk County
Industrial Development Agency, and it's so described in the legal notice. The
agency says no. They have emphatically told me that three times. The agency
spokesman, the deputy director, states that this property, referring to the motel site
previously identified as lots 3.2 and 3.3, is in the beneficial ownership of C & L
Realty, Inc., whose principals are William Leiblein and George Cottral.
Southold Town Planning Board 3 February 26, 1996
The contention that the property is owned by the SCIDA probably arises from the
deed dated 11/27/84 in the assessor's files. Were it examined, there was no
monetary consideration at that time and it was not considered by the agency to be
an arms length transaction. It is my opinion that this contention that the entire
property consists of 4.96 acres, rather than 7 acres, is akin to a house of cards
supported by a slender reed. I challenge this Board to research the recorded
instruments pertaining to this property in 1984. I did. I encountered well in excess
of one hundred pages of filed documents in the Town of Riverhead. I will provide
entre to these documents for the Board's consideration, and I believe that a
definitive legal determination is required.
Now, much took place about this property on November 1, 1984. Four and a half
years after this purported conveyance of the westerly portion, this 3.2 and 3.3, the
Port of Egypt is still flaunting and advertising it's ownership of the entire 7 acres.
That's four and a half years after this property was supposedly conveyed to the
agency. The deputy director of the SCIDA concedes that the agency's participation
represents a legal method of tax avoidance. The motel portion is now on the tax
exempt roll in the Town of Southold.
My opinion of what has happened with this property is subject to legal
interpretation. I believe that Messrs. Cottral and Leiblein ended up with a
$400,000.00 payment based on a bond which permitted them to buy and improve
this property. That this money eventually reverted to themselves and is now,
according to the instruments on file, a purchased money and building mortgage,
guaranteed by a so called lease.
Now, in my opinion, the owners of the Port of Egypt have constructive ownership of
the entire 7 acre parcel. The plot plan itself is hardly worthy of comment. It
displays a contempt for any reviewers intelligence. The legend surreptitiously and
stealthily attempts to intrude district 1000, section 56, block 4, lot 10.1, as part of
the approval sought. There's no planning for that parcel, nor is that parcel the
object of this public hearing.
The plan, as submitted, is the equivalent of choosing one from column A and one
from column B, in this instance, survey by Roderick Van Tuyl, and a plan by Peconic
Associates. It is difficult to decide on the most egregious aspect of this plan.
According to code requirements, the planned parking for the present uses
constitutes 131 spaces less than what the code requires, that's approximately 1.05
acres in land area. We have here a plan that locates so called parking spaces in a
public r-o-w within a building devoted to other use and with spaces within 2 or 3 feet
of mean high water. How can this Board even keep a straight face when examining
a plan that provides 10 spaces for what are probably more than 165 dry stored
Southold Town Planning Board 4 February 26, 1996
boats on the property.
The storage is so intensive that boats are now stored on the property of others.
The question of more intensive storage of stored boats and dry stored boats, by
reducing parking requirements, was long since faced by the Town Board and no
such change was allowed. The plan was based on other outrageous and specious
assumptions which I do not have time to discuss in detail on this occasion.
Obviously, I wouldn't be granted the time to discuss it in the detail that they
deserve.
For this reason, I submit to the Board a more detailed report, written remarks and
opinions, the jist of which I am prepared to examine and explain to the Board's
staff.
Now, in conclusion, I had mentioned that there was a Negative Declaration on this
property. This property is in a critical environmental area on a flood plain, and as
such requires a long environmental assessment form. I haven't seen anything such
as that. The end result of all this is it probably insults the Board's intelligence, this
site plan. And it certainly insults mine. I'm concluded for this evening, and I'd be
glad to provide a more detailed set of calculations and the background for some of
these remarks that I've made. Thank you.
Mr. Ward: I know Mr. Leiblein is here. I don't know if he would like to at this time
just address the differences in your ownership between the two parcels, on the
record, I'd appreciate that.
William Leiblein: About 50 years ago this month, my father and my uncles bought
the original Port of Egypt property from Carl Rider, and over the years purchased
adjacent lots, up to and including the lots on which the Port of Egypt property now
-stands. As well as some property across the street. They owned it in-a
partnership at that time. In 1969 when I got out of the navy and came back into
the business, it changed to a corporation so that my father could share his interest
with his two sons and over the years the percentage of the shares varied between
my father, by brother and I and my two sisters.
At the present time, the Port of Egypt Enterprises property is owned by myself, my
wife, my five children and my brother. Specific shares are 33, 32, the children
each have five shares and my brother owns 15 shares. In 1984, we had the
opportunity to purchase the property adjacent to the Port of Egypt. My brother and
sisters had no interest. My brother-in-law George Cottral, my wife's brother, and I
and our wives decided that it was a good investment. We purchased the property
from the Morris family in November of 1984.
At that time we opted to use the Suffolk County Development Agency with
developing agency bonding, what at that time certainly appeared to be a very
Southold Town Planning Board 5 February 26, 1996
advantageous rate of 11%. You may recall in the 1980's interest rates were up in
the 20's. We borrowed $400,000.00. $250,000.00 was used to pay for the
property. The remainder was used to improve the property, specifically the motel
and fish market which were in a horrible state of disrepair.
The conduit for using the SCIDA allowed for tax abatement on the improvements
only. It's not a tax dodge. It was an opportunity that the county made available .
At the present time we pay a very small tax upstairs, and then we go downstairs
and we make a payment in lieu of taxes, which at the present time the combined
total is approximately $30,000.00 a year. So it isn't like we're getting off scott
free.
My brother-in-law has absolutely no interest in Port of Egypt property, nor his wife.
My wife and I combined have a 50% interest in C & L Realty, and it is presently on
the market and has been on the market. Unfortunately we bought when prices were
high and now prices are down and we don't have a taker, so we're just hanging in
there. The Port of Egypt property is totally separate, there is no connection
between the two. There was a time when we thought about developing the whole
complex and putting condos in along with the marina, back when condos were the
thing to do and at the time we had considered getting a SCIDA loan for both C & L
Realty and Port of Egypt combined, and we were going to borrow $4,000,000.00.
(inaudible) And we decided not to do that at the time, and I can't remember what
year we started with the application to put up the storage building and Garrett has
addressed the reasons for switching over to the swimming pool. There is no
connection between the two properties and as the Board well knows, we're not in
collusion with you. Are there any other questions that were brought up?
Mr. Ward: Any of the Board members have any questions at this time? (None) Mr.
-Flynn, we're always interested in the public input in our process and we, appreciate
you actually coming in to see Bob a few days ago, or last week, whenever it was,
and a lot of the things you brought up we did check into and will be part of the
resolution that we are prepared to present tonight. It may not totally satisfy you in
terms of it, but we did look into many of the items and this Board was very much in
favor of this particular project in lieu of the storage building. And we're in the
process now where we'll probably call a vote on it in a resolution, if there is
anything else that you would like to add before you do that.
Mr. Flynn: Yes, I most certainly would like to add something. You say I had met
with Bob. The (inaudible) of the situation was such that for one thing there was very
limited public notice of this and it was also over a holiday week-end and it's a very
complex problem. Now, this hearing is for the purpose of the Board securing
information on which to base it's deliberations. I assure you that if you go through
those remarks which I submitted this evening, you will find no reason to grant this
application in accordance with the Town Code and I presume you are operating in
Southold Town Planning Board 6 February 26, 1996
accordance with the Town Code.
This plan, as I said, provides for 10 parking spaces. Has this Board inspected this
property? It is literally covered with boats. There are so many boats, that they also
are stored off the property. Every one of those boats, according to the code,
requires a parking space. And the question is not simply one of parking. This
battle was fought long ago, and the Town Board came to the conclusion that the
only control they had to regulate the density of use, per parcel, was via parking.
They cannot very well administer - although they should - the number of boats on a
property. The Town Board concluded that were they to reduce these parking lots
to one quarter the current requirement, it could result in additional thousands of
boats being placed in town waters. So the end result of this is any plan which
provides for such limited parking, and which provides for parking in a public r-o-w
and which provides for parking within two or three feet of mean high water and all
these other things which have been apparently overlooked either by the Board or by
its staff, in reviewing this parcel are such egregious violations of the code that there
is no logical or equitable basis for just ramming this thing through.
Now, I presume I have consumed about 10 minutes previously in speaking about
this thing. There have been undoubtedly countless meetings between the applicant
and this Board, or staff members, etc. in the past. I can't possibly explain all the
deficiencies in this plan verbally in such a short time frame. So I merely say that
based upon my analysis of that plan, if you approve it, you are violating the Town
Code.
There is another issue involved here. There are 4.96 or 8 acres supposedly
involved. Has anybody counted the uses on this? They may be non-conforming
uses, but by my calculations the uses on this property call for a minimum of six or
more acres. Now, there aren't six acres, but there are uses on this property where
it would be possible to apportion this lot into the required 80,000 square foot lots
or plots, without over-intensively developing the property. This is not a pure vacant
parcel of land that is being developed. This is a parcel of non-conforming uses
which it is possible to some degree to make conforming. And I believe that's also
a function of this Board, and one which they should analyze, undertake and carry
through.
There is much about this application that wouldn't stand the light of day and it is
unbelievable to me that this Board would rush through such an application replete
with so many errors, miscalculations and other egregious statements that don't
meet the light of day.
Now, with respect to this change of title on this property, obviously I don't
(inaudible) to a change of title. However, the referenced deed in November of
1984, again, was not an arms length deed. It was in the corporate transaction
where the two of the owners, Mr. Cottrel and Mr. Leiblein, and this whole contract
Southold Town Planning Board 7 February 26, 1996
was conditioned upon the granting of this $400,000.00 bond issue which through a
whole series of transactions became a purchased money mortgage and bond. The
lease referred to constitutes a situation which my analysis at least indicates, is that
it serves to pay off the mortgage. It serves as security or the mortgage. Over a
period of 15 years, at the end of which the current owners, C & L can purchase this
property and are obligated to purchase this property, for one dollar.
Now, it is my contention that there is a distinct relationship between the ownership
of these parcels. Mr. Leiblein's actions indicates such, inasmuch as he pays taxes
on both of these parcels. He advertises, or at least lists with brokers, certain
aspects of the C & L property. The mortgage sites boat slips on the mortgage
property, which I presume you will find to be in a unity of use with the marina
property. There are also a line of sheds between the hotel and the main metal
building on the so called marina property.
Consequently, there is evidence, circumstantial but worth investigating, that there is
still a unity of use between these parcels. So, for you to say on a notice that
appeared a week ago that this Board is prepared to rubber stamp this application
with the objections I've raised, to me constitutes not only lack of due process but
rather high handed action. Thank you.
Mr. Ward: In relation to the parking, Mr. Flynn, it's been this Board's policy for a
number of years to handle the dry storage of boats, out of water (change tape) the
standard of care that we've been using as a Board for a number of years is one
care per four out of water slips, not only at this marina but others within the town.
That's been our policy for a number of years so it hasn't been on a one to one
basis. This particular project has been to us a number of years. There's a lot of
complexity to it, I agree with you. But, we did carefully look through, I believe, all
the issues you've raised.
Mr. Flynn: You haven't. I've raised additional issues based on my research.
Mr. Ward: I listened to you. You have to listen to me now. What I'm saying is that
we did due diligence in our research and efforts to look at this particular project.
We've had an extended review with the applicant on this. We, as a Board, look to
this project as a far superior project to the community than the storage building that
was going to go up. I think that this is a much better benefit to that particular site
and to the project. We see this in that case as a benefit. I don't really have at this
point...you've raised a number of issues, I think that what we will go through tonight
will answer some of them, probably not all of them but the ones at least we felt we
would have to address.
Mr. Flynn: You raised an issue right now, pertinent to the Board's actions in
allocating a quarter space for a dry stored boat. I call your attention...I don't know
it off hand, it's in my notes, to that section of the Town Code which says you may
Southold Town Planning Board 8 February 26, 1996
have the right to waive parking requirements, provided they don't affect the health,
safety and welfare of the inhabitants and further, if they are not different or in
conflict with the intent of the Town Code and it stated conditions.
Now, here you have a real dichotomy between what you're doing and what the Town
Board permits to be done. Do you really consider...have you seen this property? I
would guess that there are an excess of 200 boats there. Do you really believe
that 10 parking spaces for dry stored boats constitutes any equitable solution to
what is dictated by the Town Code? I don't. I'm sure if there were more people
aware of what's going on here, they would agree with me. Thank you.
Oh incidentally, may I raise one other issue? This application is not to put in only a
swimming pool. You'll note there is a cabana plan there which in incidentally on the
site of the non-conforming building, and there is a playground. To me, this has all
the aspects of a beach club, which is provided for in the Town Code provided that
you have 80,000 square foot land area to go along with it.
Now, to have an associated use for this parcel, it has to be the type of use that
prevails throughout the community. The only similar use that I know of, and it's in
close proximity, is at Young's Marina. Young's Marina was required to dedicate
80,000 square feet of its site for its swim club. Now, there are definitions as you
well know in the Town Code as to what constitutes a club. In most instances, these
clubs are supposed to be non-profit. Where it is on a property which is operated
for profit, the criteria applicable are those for a swim club. And it is hardly to be
put on that property without the prospect of profit. Therefore, this is another area
where you have obfuscation as to what the real intent here is. And by the way, just
to emphasize the fact, if this is to be construed as a swim or beach club, there are
additional parking requirements. Notably, one parking space for every two...in other
words, two thirds of a parking space per member of the club. So, all and all, this
-_application, this plan, raises more questions than it answers. And again I state, that
for this Board to approve this site plan in no way reflects well on the ability. Now,
this question of parking, leaving a lie aside, this question of dry boat parking, how
about the question of in-water slips and the boats therefore. That plan calls for 122
boats.
Mr. Ward: The in-water slips are accounted for by a one to one basis on site.
Mr. Flynn: Yes, but the plan calls for 122. Do you realize Mr. Leiblein has
advertised a capacity of 150? And this is more or less confirmed by a survey
conducted by the North Fork Environmental Council which not only confirmed the in-
water storage situation but also found a much higher number of dry storage boats
than were previously shown.
You are getting, I believe, into the question of the operation of a business here,
when your remarks are this is better than that, etc. I long since learned that when
Southold Town Planning Board 9 February 26, 1996
you value a property, you do not value it in accordance with the owners business or
fluctuations therein. You value it based upon the maximum utility of the property. I
presume that the Planning Board acts in the same fashion. If so, this property as it
exists is over-improved and cannot provide the facilities specified for in the Town
Code.
I find, in conclusion, that I'm up against a stone wall here, when there has been a
decision made prior to the public hearing. And I thought the purpose of this public
hearing was to elicit facts reflecting on an analysis of the site plan. Now I'm told
you know everything that I know. Frankly, I doubt it. And you have not taken the
time to go over my statements, my calculations, etc. I find this a very strange
hearing. Thank you.
Mr. Ward: There are a couple of other marinas that have pools. Matt-A-Mar in
Mattituck, Stirling Harbor, Greenport. We felt we had done due diligence on this,
but I'll leave it up to the Board at this point. Mr. Leiblein?
Mr. Leiblein: I'll try to remember some of the remarks Mr. Flynn made and I'll
address the C & L issue one more time. The manner in which he's presented it
makes it sound like there was some sort of sneaky deal and at the end I get to buy
it for a dollar. There's no question that we're making mortgage payments to a bank
because that's the way the SCIDA set it up, they held title, they get the tax bill, they
send it to us, we pay the tax bill. And we're running the place for a profit.
That's why we bought it and at the end of the mortgage payments to the bank and
the note is paid off to the bank, the SCIDA signs it over to us and then it's ours.
And if we wanted to sell it now, if we could find a buyer now, we can sell it now, pay
off the mortgage and that's it. The SCIDA has no direct say in what we do on the
property, what we charge for the rooms or anything of that nature. And when that
r place is sold, my brother-in-law gets half the money and his wife and my wife and I
get the other half, if we sell it. And if the Port of Egypt property were sold, I would
get my share and my brother would get his share. There is no connection between
the two other than I am a shareholder in both corporations, and so is my wife.
There are more than 200 boats stored at the Port of Egypt, but it's the middle of
winter and that's what we do in the winter time in order to earn the money to pay
the taxes and pay the health and all the other things that have to go on. None of
our boats are stored on any state r-o-w. And if anyone thinks that the boats that
are just across from The Barge on that little tongue of land between Old Main Rd.
and the Main Rd., those boats belong to Club Wave. And they are being sold by
Club Wave and we have absolutely nothing to do with that piece of property. In
fact, it was originally owned by Armando, and is now owned by Club Wave.
In the summer time, the boats that are on land go into the water. Some of them go
to the people's homes or go to other marinas and the ones that are docked at our
0
Southold Town Planning Board 10 February 26, 1996
place go into our docks. So, there is no parking problem as the Board knows from
surveys that were done over the years. If anything, the parking is underutilized.
The primary purpose of this swimming pool is to provide additional amenities to the
customers in our marina. And when I made this application I was told by
Mr.Kassner that we would only be able to allow people in our marina to use the
swimming pool; we couldn't sell outside memberships. It really wasn't our intention
to sell outside memberships. So in our view, the same people are going to walk
from their boat in the marina over to the swimming pool and then get in their car
and go home, so it doesn't require any additional parking.
The cabana, which is the term that Garrett has applied to the building with the
showers, you have to have showers and bathrooms if you have a swimming pool
and apparently the common term is to call it a cabana. It's not a big fancy place,
it's just going to be a place with bathrooms and showers and there's going to be a
washer and dryer in there and a little place to sell sandwiches, the same as they do
down at Brick Cove. They have the cigarette machines and things of that nature.
There is a piece of property in front of the restaurant, a triangular shape piece of
property which we do not have title to, which we lease from the state and pay rent
for. Perhaps that's what's referred to when some of our boats are on that
triangular piece of property and we have a lease with the state of New York and we
pay for that on a monthly basis. I guess that's all I can add.
Mr. Ward: Are there any further comments? Anybody else that would like to
address the Board? Mr. Strang?
Garrett Strang: I would just like to go on record taking exception to the point that
was made about the accuracy of the calculations on the site. I believe that they are
accurate. The acreage was defined by a survey. The amount of area that we used
a_an calculating lot coverage was based on that survey and the actual size of the
structures on that site. And in fact they show as per the plan that we're
considerably under the allowable 30% lot coverage as far as that goes. I think
what's neglected to be mentioned is the fact that the parking calculations based on
use is required 199 parking spaces and we have, as shown on the drawing, 251.
So, we have provided more parking than is in fact required. Again, I just wanted to
make it a point to be on record that the accuracy of the site data stands on its
merits. I'd be glad to answer any other questions that the Board may have.
Mr. Ward: Mr. Flynn?
Mr. Flynn: A couple of issues have been raised here. This could pretty well get to
be an election debate. With respect to the so called leased area by Old Main Rd.,
I'd like to see that lease, and I presume the Board should like to see it as well.
Because I'm certain that the lease does not give exclusive rights to the use of that
property to the Port of Egypt Marina, for the simple reason that it serves on many
Southold Town Planning Board 11 February 26, 1996
occasions to divert traffic. It also serves as a means of access to the other
parcels to the east. Consequently, I don't believe they have the exclusive rights to
it and I question rather they have the right to construct improvements on it or any
other leased parcel. If you were to look at that site and compare it to the survey,
you would find that the Port of Egypt has constructed improvements on what was to
use your phrase, now or formerly Main Rd.
Now, with respect to coverage, this is the same problem that came up before. And
incidentally, the two maps sited, the site plan and the Van Tuyl survey, showed
different improvements. But more to the point, is what they don't show in the
calculations. Section 100-13 of the Town Code, as you well know, states that
structures or buildings consist of anything above-grade, constructed of any
materials so that the ground underneath cannot be used for any other purpose.
There is a huge slab, which the Board of Appeals and the Trustees refuse to
consider in terms of prior applications, or hearings rather. And also, you have a
number of perimeter walks and other situations here which add up to the coverage.
And finally, this is a parking lot proposition as much as anything else. And a parking
lot in the Town Code as you well know is defined as a grade level paved area for
the temporary parking of motor vehicles. Now, the question of pavement here
doesn't enter into this situation at all. And another thing which has not been shown
in any form on the site plan is the requirement for landscaping. Now, surely this
property if any property should have landscaped screen. And as a matter of fact,
one of the previous consultants to the Town in one of the surveys he made for the
Town said that the upland storage of boats was an eyesore.
How much more of an eyesore is it to have towering racks filled with boats and yet
this Board has evidently not seen fit to provide a single plant of landscaping on this
entire property. Previous approved properties also required landscaping along the
i_bulkhead line. And how can you maintain that there is proper parking here. Is it
proper parking to park within two or three feet of mean high water, in a flood plain?
This is ridiculous. I might just as well walk out of here now. There's no way I can
penetrate the pre-conceived and obvious bias of this Board. Thank you.
Mr. Ward: Anyone else like to address the Board? If not, all is in order to close the
hearing. Is there a second?
Mr. Orlowski: Second.
Mr. Ward: Motion seconded. All in favor?
Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Ward.
Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried. What's the pleasure of the Board?
• Su,j,4
To: Southold Town Board
._..._,.-
From: F. M. Flyaa 11�
U
Re: Proposed Port of Egypt Site Plan � FEB 27 0%
Date: 2/26/ 96 _.
S0�7Nt1LD
PLANKju 50Ak0
I would like to address, in the limited time available to
me, certain aspects of this Site Plan application.
In view of the complex nature of the background of this
matter, I consider the Public Notice precip$tate. It is
apparent that there were protracted negotiations leading up
to this hearing of which the public is not aware and I do
not have the complete data available to me. Therefor, I can
only touch upon certain matters which, I believe, warrant
further investigation by the Board.
I would like to preface my remarks by stating that I do not
know Mr. Leiblein, nor do I bear him any personal animus.
My interest in this matter is solely that Town Code
provisions and the Code' s stated purposes and intent be
applied equitably in this instance,as they presumeably would
be to other property owners in Southold.
My remarks are entirely my opinions and observations
whichare , of course, subjects' to the interpretation and
decision of the Board.
While my remaL may be somwhat lengthy, this is a complex
matter, and they are as nothing as compared to the actions
with rspect to this property of which the public had no
knowledge. I believe they will prove to be of interest to
the Board and/or others.
In my opinion, this entire property is subject to SEQRA
review due to the nature and intensity of its use, its
location in both a Critical Environmental Area and in a
flood plain.area. As such, it is my opinion , iJ
Qpjm4. *+ that a Long Form Environmental Assessmen is required
as a minimum, for the entire property.
It is my understanding that this Board has issued a Negative
Declaration on this property prior to this hearing. It is
disturbing that such an action be taken prior to a hearing
where certain mat ers militating against such a decision
may well be raise
As to the Public Notice, I find that it does not accurately
reflect the ownership of the abutting properties, a matter
of some importance. The propz�ztY is a6 uo iaay
bounded on the west by land now or formerly of the SuffV_11
County Industrial Development Agency (SCIDA) . I submit that
former ownership is not germane in this matter. It may
formerly have been owned by an Indian tribe. The obvious
question is one of who owns it at this time.
I have, on three seperate occasions asked the SCIDA if it
owned t e property. On each occasion I was told emphatically
that they did not' My most my last conversation with the
Agency' s Deputy Director was as recent as last Tuesday,
2/20/96. He again denied ownership by the Agency. According
to his account, the Agency was involved in a complex bond
issue and mortgage agreement which he conceded was a legal
method of tax avoidance. Simultaneously the Agency conveyed
it Bond and Mortgage agreements to the North Fork Bank and
Trust Co. (NFB&T)
As a result of the Agency' s actions the tax assessment for
this part of the property was placed on Southold' s Tax
Exempt Roll, with a payment to be made in lieu of taxes.
According to the Suffolk County Treasurer ' s office, the
total taxes reported to it for the last tax year were
$2495. 49. The payment in lieu of taxes was made to the
Southold Comptroller.
When pressed the Deputy Director of the Agency offered his
opinionm that, presently, "beneficial" ownership of this
property was vested in C&L Realty,Inc. subject to a mortgage
held by the North Fork Bank
Also, in relation to the Public Notice, that the Tax Lot
numbers concerned were: District 1000, Sec.56, Blk. 6, Lots 4
& 6. 1 . These are the lots with which the subject Site Phn is
puportedly concerned and which are the subject of this
hearing. I note that the legend of the Site Plan also
incorporates District 1000, Sec. 56, Blk. 4, lot 10. 1 . Are
we supposed to infer that this latter property is part of
this Site Plan approval process. It obviously is not,00r
should not, be.
My specific questions and remarks relate primarily to two
facets of this Site Plan approval process, to wit:
1) The question as to what consttutes the total contiguous
property in the applicant ' s ownership '
2) The details of the Site Planwith particular emphasis on
both the calculations employed ^and the present and proposed
uses depicted.
-QUESTVION OF OWNERSHIP
At the time of the original application for the proposed
development of the easterly portion of this property the
applicant included ownership of Tax Lots District 1000, Sec.
56, Blk. 4, Lots 3 .2, 3. 3, 4, & 6. 1 . In the current
application he disclaims ownership of Lots 3.2 and 313 thus
reducing what was previously an entirety of approximately 7
acres to the present claim of approx. 4.96 acres.
Further, the Long Form Environmental Assessment submitted at
that time confirmed this&Mership, stated the area as 7
acres and stated that the planned site was 2 acres of vacant
land with an additional 5 acres available for development.
If this is the Environmental Assessment relied on by the 440W-b/
it obviously does not conform to the present Site Plan and
can' t serve as the basis for any present action contemplated
by the Board Further the various governmental agencies
involved hadOn sinformed by the original Long Form
Envirommntal Assessment.
At the time of the original application, I, among others,
pointed out that the density of improvements existing on the
7 acres was such tht under the current zoning the land
requirement would be some 11 acre and that additional
density was not permissable. Further, the site could not
provide the required parking and most, if not all the
structures on the property were nonconforming.
In any event, the original project was abandoned and the
applicant now claims ownership of anly 4.96 acres. He denies
what I, at that time, maintained was likely "beneficial"
ownership pf the entire 7 acres . In essence he was claiming
he had no ownefrship in Lots 3.2 and 3. 3. , the site of the
motel buildings, boat sales room and shop, fishing station,
fish store, slips etc.
While I cannot reach a legal conclusion as to the actual
ownership of lots 3.2 and 3.3rfdid encounter some
information,which may be of some
interest to the Board resulting from my,necessarly brief
survey of instruments recorded in the County Clerk' s Office
at Riverhead
I encountered a veritable morass of documents totalling
more than a hundred pages. The complexity of the documents
servedd to obfuscate clear answers, particularly in view of
the constrictions imposed by the time frame. I did , however/
ascertain enough facts to raise what I beleive are real
questions as to the ownership of lots 3.2 and 3.3 arid, as a
consequence , the ownership of the entire contiguous 7 acre
parcel which includes the 4 .96 acres which are the subject
of the instant Site Plan.
01>
I beleive it is incumbent on this Board t.o
have determined, the actual ownership of IGta` - . �.+-+.. .:. 3
before ruling on a Site Plan which may effectively sever, or
segment, anAoverall contiguous property.
Some of the documentation which I beleive is part of the
relevant ownership history of the lot 3.2 and 3. 3 property
follows:
1) A Contract of Sale dated 2/17/84, amended 7/26/84, and
recorded in Liber 9632 Pg. 464.
Seller is 8 Southold Marine Center Land Holding
Company.
Purchasers are William H. Leiblein and George A. Cottral
Messrs Leiblein and Cottral were both principals in Southold
Marine Center Holding Corp.
Recited purchase price is $ 250,000 .00
Contract was conditioned on the issuance by he SCIDA of an
obligation in excess of $ 300,000.00 to purcise the property
and rehabilitate and reconstruct a marine facility including
a fish market, retail builings and and attendant structures
on the property for the purpose of harvesting and marketing
fishing items, retail marine activities and related
activities.
Contract was also conditioned upon the North Fork Bank ' s
written commitment to purchase industrial development bonds
in the amount of $ 400,000.00.
2 ) A deed dated 11/27/84 and recorded in Liber 9686 Pg. 366
Deed purportedly conveys property from C & L Realty, inc. to
the Suffolk County Development Agency.
There was no monetary consideration involved. The
Deputy Director of the Agency stated this was not an
arm' s length sale and that the Agency did not asquire
fee title.
Nove�er 1, 1984 produced a flurry of activity.
1 ) A mortgage dated 11/1/84, recorded in M Liber 10481
Pg. 345 .
Mortgage was between the SCIDA and the North Fork Bank
and in the amount of $ 400,000 .00.
Mortgage identified the (Port of Egypt Facility)
The bank has loaned the ,issuer (SCIDA) $ 400. 000. 00.
(4/
The Issueer has acquired, renovated, constructed and
equipped , or is acquiring renovating , constructing and
equipping real estate facilities for a 22 unit motel, boat
slips, fishing station and fish marketand has leased the
facility (Port of Egypt Facility)to C&1 Realty, Inc.
pursuant to a lease agreement dated 11/1/84.
Mortgage is described as a Purchase Money and Building Loan
Mortgage.
In consideration of the purchase of a bond, the issuer
grants to the Bank a present and continuing mortgage on the
property.
In the event of default by C&L Realty, Inc. , William H.
Leiblein, Kae A. Lieblein, George A. Cottral and Carolyn
Cottral are coi0lectively the Guarantors.
It may be deduced that the Liebleins and the Cottrals are
the principals of C&L Realty, Inc, and that they have ended
up as guarantors under a ler5urc#ase Money and Building Loan
Mortgage against Lots 3.2 and 3. 3 and the strouctures
thereon.
R) There is a Memorandum of Lease dated 11/1/84 and recorded
in Liber 9686 Pg. 351 .
Lease is between SCIDA and C&L Realty, Inc. with an office
located at the Port of Egypt. Lease is for a period of
fifteen years and and 216 days.
Lessee has the obligation to puree the leased premises and
equipment for One Dollar ($1.00) upon the expiration of the
lease.
3)Also dated 11/1/84 and recorded in Liber 9686, Pg. 340 is
a Pledge and Assignment between the SCIDA and the Nort4 Fork
Bank with an acknowledgement by C&L Realty, Inc. .
Pledge and Assignment refers to the(Port of Egypt
Facility) .
This instrjument effectively assigns the SCIDA interest in
the lease to the North Fork Bank
C&L Realty, Inc. agrees to pay the Bank all sums due under
the lease.
Acknowlegement is by William H. Leibein.
The above breif summary of some of the documents involved
seem to indicate an ongoing interest in the property by the
4eibleins and Cottrals. While ,the property is subject to a
�v
lease ],jbjSe, the lease may also be considered a device to
pay off a a Purchase Money and Building Loan Mortgage. The
principals certainly have acquired equity in the property
over the period of the lease and the reversion to them at
the end of the lease period certainly has value.
Further evidence of the combined ownership of all seven
acres
Ais provided by a Property Plan prepared by Peconic
Associates for Port of Egypt Enterprises, Inc. , as amended
to 4/18/89, some 4 1/2 years later than the prevfrioury
complicated, instruments cited. The propperty Plarkdelineates
the entire 7 acres and describes it as being District 1000
Sec. 56, Blk. B , Lots 3. 2, 3. 3, 4 and6. 1 .
Certainly, Peconic Associates did not draw up the plan for
the Port of Egypt at its own volition and and without
compensation therefore.
The plan is mute evidence that some 4 1/2 years after the
paper trail of transactions cited, the Port of Egypt still
considered itself to be the owner of the entire 7 acre
parcel .
Colatteral support for this contention is provided by the
map prepares by Roderick Van Tuyl, P. C. and amended to
4/4/89 on which he depicts the entire 7 acres and identifies
ti& as being Tax Map District 1000, Sec. 56, Blh. 6, Lots
OA'f OVtrb/i ��3.2, 3.3, 4 and 6 . 1 . He labels lots 3.2 and 3. 3 as being C&L
prW.dy Realty, Inc. which we have established to be Mesrs ' Leiblein
and Cottral .
Aside from the technical considerations cited there exists
collateral, practical and circumstantial evidence that what
are now represented as being two parcels in seperate
ownership actually constitute one parcel of 7 acres.There is
the fact that William H. Leiblein pays the taxes on both
parcels constituting the entirety. Certainly, as a
businessman he is not paying taxes on parcels in which he
doesn' t have a vested interest.
Mr. Leiblein has listed the motel property for sale with
local brokers.
In addition there is a unity in marina use between what is
maintained to be two properties since the mortgage mentions
boat slips which are apparently operated by flag Port of
Egypt. Further, sheds straddle the line thatmaintained
to sever the parcels. 11
Finally, in this regard, I quote an advertisement published
in the Suffolk Times Business Review of 2/15/%Q:
" Port of Egypt Marine, Main Road Southold, 765-244.5.
Established as a small fishing station over 40 years ago bj
C� )
the Leiblein Brothers, Port of Egypt now offers dockage for
150 boats, the first and largest "high-and-dry" storage
facility on the North Fork, a launching ramp, the Terning
Point Motel, a fish market, a bait and tackle s op, an
Armando ' s Seafood Barge. The marina also sells and services
new and used boats and carrys Grady-White, Cape Dory,
Privateer, Steiger Craft, Johnson and Yamaha outboards and
Float-On trailers. William H. Leiblein Awns the marina
together with Elisa Thomas and Ace Cottral . Tom Corwin is
the sa—Ies manager, Skip Baker is service manager and Sal
Lofredo is parts manager. Last year the basin was bulkheaded
anmd new landscaping was completed. Continued moderniz ation
is planned this year"
It can hardly be concluded that the Suffolk Times prepared
this copy without the cooperation of the Port of Egypt.
In view of all epf the factors cited above, it cannot be
assumed bli thft that the " 'r"{nK
gg y, �is rho �o ownership of what are
maintained t2S be two seperate parols.rather than a 7 acre
parcel in some kind of common ownership.
I beleive it is incumbent on the Board, before taking
further action on this plan, to determine the principals in,
, and the nature of,the ownership in what are claimed to be
two parcels. Taken together they are identified as Tax Map
District 1000, Sec. 56, Blk. 6. Lots 3.2, 3. 3, 4, and 6. 1 .
C71
CRITICISM OF THE SUBJECT SITE PLeu:
Subject pian is Ior Lots 4 & 6. i, DUL a16v lit iii�t Ji Y CS
refereneeto District 1000, Sec. 56, Blk. 4Lot 10 . 1 . WHY? Is
the purpose to include this extraneous lot by inference and
set a precedent that its inclusion was already approved in
this Site Plan.
The subject Site Plan was prepared by Garrett Strang
purportedly based on a survey by Roderick Van Tuyl dated
4/4/89 and a Site Plan by prepared by Peconic Associates,
Inc. and purportedly approved on 9/13/90.
I scarcely know where to begin my cfiticism.
If there is an approved site plan, why was it necessary to
prepare a subsequent site plan prepared by Peconic Associate
for Port of Egypt Enterprises, Inc. and amended to 12/21/90
and submit same to the Planning Board. Is this not
indicative of the fact that the pla�f 9/13/90 had been
superceded?
I beleive that Mr. Strang based his perimeter survey lines
on the maps to which he refers. Is he not aware that there
are significant differeces between these two maps?
This is not a case where an important decision should be
based on one from Column A and one from Column B.
Improvements on the subject Site Plan are mostly, if not
entirelyi nonconforming to one degree or another.
There are three, or more, seperate uses on the property. The
Code requires 80,000 SF for each such use, or a total of
280,000 SF.
The propety area cited in the instant Site Plan is 216,
058SF. Thus by Code requirements , the property is already
overdeveloped. Yet, it is proposed to add another use.
It is my contention that, if sufficient areaa exists to
conform to the Gode requirements, these requirements should
apply regardleq§ of any arbitrary apportionment by the
property owner, Fertainly there is not enough land area to
acommodate yet other use
In essence th proposed site plan is based on three major
misconceptions:
1 ) That there is sufficient land area for additional
development.
( 00)
2 )That there is sufficient parking area for the present
uses, let alone the proposed expansion.
#) That the proposed pool area, cabana and playground
constitute a customary accessory use.
PARKING
The subject Site Plan provides for a a purported 251 spaces.
Of these 10 are provided fo dry boat storage. HAS THE BOARD
VISITED THE SITE ?
122 spaces are provided for in-water slips and 24 for marina
employees.
The total provided for marina use is 156 spaces.
In,�my opinion, were it not for the seriousness of the matter,
these calculations are ludicrous.
As to the matter of in-water slips the owner has stated in
both the North Fork Boat Guide and the Suffolk Times
Bisiness review that there are 150 slips.
With respect to dry storage use, the referenced North Fork
Boat Guide cites 130 slips. Further, in a study conducted
by the North Fork Environmental Council, under the aegis of
the Town BOard, the dry storage count is cited as 165 boats.
On this basis, the parking requirement for marina use is 339
spaces, or 88 more spaces ban the plan provies for the
marina alone '
Add 43 spaces required for restaurant use plus an
indeterminate amount for retail use. .
These calculations reveal a Code requirement for 382
parking places, or k#4 more than provided for in the subject
Site Plan. 4PI
In terms of area, this indicates a defficiency of 45,850 SF,
or 1 .05 acres.
This a tire question of parking requirements is important
since 4represents the only control the Town exerts over the
number of boats lauched in Critical Environmental Areal The
requirement of one parking space per boat is in general
accordance with the requirements of other towns with Peconic
Bay frontage.
The entire question of boat count in any given marina,
versus available parking, is something that should be
checked and verified by the Town.
M
In the case of the subject property, the present boat count
may well exceed that previously cited. Currently, the
property is virtually covered by stored boats, with some
being stored on property of others.
The planned provision of 10 parking spaces for dry storage
boats is incomprehensible to me in view of the capacities
already cited.
It may be that the Board has taken it upon itself to reduce
parking requi'ements for dry store boats to 1/4 space per
boat. This btttle by marina operators has long since been
lost.
The Town Board refused to make this changebased in part on
the logical conclusion that such a change would probably
quadruple the number of boats in Town waters, a potential
increase of thousands of boats '
If the Planning Board permits such arrevision in parking
requirements, I call its attention to Sec. 100 - 254 B
(4 )whichpffectively prohibits such waivers if they effect
the public' health, safety or welfare or have the effect the
effect of nullifying the intent and provisions of the Zoning
Code, ,zS Cv.r/'ro.�/ 4y t4C ro nw Ba a,��/% ams..? o./soh lk-cat
I might add that, with respect to capacity, I long since
learned that property is not to be valued based upon any
changes in the business conducted by the owner, but upon the
property' s maximum legal utility. It follows that planning
decisions be based on the the same consideration.
Taken as a whole, the parking to be provided constitutes a
,*Parking Lot which Sec. 100 - 13 of the Code defines as:
"An off street, ground level area, surfaced and improved for
the temporary storage of motor vehicles. "
The subject Site Plan provides for the parking of 28 motor
vehicles within the main metal building. Were these spaces
outside, they would require an additional 9800 SF of plot
area.
I submit that this use is defined in Sec. 100 - 13 as a
Public Garage.
It appears that the metal building is to be used as a
veritable "expansion tank" when the pressure for conformin9l
parking cannot be met.
In my opinion, the proposed use of the metal building as a
parking garage is antithetical to the presen useand
A
C/Ui
represents a dual usage. Thee. i� ..c, iiv.ioi a: fcz a rutlil-
:yo dye in ..
m1`.8 planned parking places appear to be placed randomly.
Some are in a public ROW and others within 2 -3 ft. of MHW.
Finally, with respect to parking, the provisions reflected
on the plan may very well have been as the result on either
erroneous information or statements provided to the planner.
PROPOSED POOL, CABANA, PLAYGROUND AND RELATED SATRUCTURES
Plan is apparently based on the premise that such a use,and
the structures planned thereon, constitute an accessory use'
In my opinion , such a conclusion represents a far stretch.
je
The proposedtures consisting of a pool, cabana,
playground etc. bear all the earmarks of a beach cxlub as
provided for in M II zoning.
I am tempted to state: : If it walks like a duck
Obviously, such a use requires a 80,000 SF plot and this
Pie re ,,k9errtiea�a an attempt to bypass this requirement.
In addition, the plan calls for a change of use, from
storage shed to cabana, for a blatantly nonconforming use.
Not only is a change of use proposed, but its physical
appearance would almost certainly bpe changed.
AccesAry an Structures are defined in the Code as
those., from a `� uilding located on the same lotand
customarily incidental and subordinate to the principal
building.
I submit that the proposed 4- .prcvaments are not customarily
incidental to a metal, boat storage building.
I also submit that the proposed use, on an undefined plot
area,is not the incidental use customarily encountered in
the Town of Southold. .
The converse appears to be the case. The sole similar
combination of uses that I am aware of in the Town of
Southold is at the nearby Young' s Marina where the owner was
required to set aside 80,000 SF for a like operation.
LANDSCAPING
The proposed Site Plan is conspicuous for its lack of
provision for landscaping. This, despite the fact that a
(/j
consultant retAined by the T.. i!. LrYJ 1G..uGicu c..G
1p 111 J ♦ liL1Yt l41J14G yV41JaVvz4gG lV_lJ 11 1Y1ed 4_Tt "G= GJV_G .
iihat car. ie said of towering boat storage racks?
CONC IL'U oS
It is ny opinion that the proposed Site Flan represents an
egregious addition to a property which is already
overdeveloped and overutilized.
In effect this property has been unsuperviseclby authorities
and has been permitted to operate like the proverbial "
Topsy" .
I can only speculate how this plan has gotten this far in
the approval process.
I remain available to explain my calculations and provide
the bases for other conclusions expressed herein.
(12)
r
(NJ� Noldingo Corp
Jamrlicq hre- .
U-Un5 v� ►Ian , ,vy
Suf�C,IIC Cot�ni� �,�elopmev�t �rx�c�sf tial ��n
It Lee e,09
Z L36 197 496
Receipt for
Certified Mail
No Insurance Coverage Provided f 0
Do not use for International Mail
(See Reverse)
send to
O�
t aN�agt t
istate antl ZI
O
� Postage y
$
Certified Fee o
N S ial Delivery Fee
a
P trctea Deevery Fee
Return Receipt Snawmg a
to Whom&Date Delivered
Return Pec
Data,a
TOT ostaBs
&F
Po ark or Dat4_ j
TO� ge
P stmar4 or
ri
�6 J L FEB 2 7 IM
�'�� 11cil"ti
PS
au �r;
r
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS OFFU(� '?
RICHARD G.WARD (1'0�� C� � Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
ChninnnnP.O. Box 1179
GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM,JR.
p Southold, New York 11971
rn
�.. BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. ,y T Fax (516)765-3136
WILLIAM J. CREMERS Telephone(516) 765-1938
KENNETH L.EDWARDS y�O� x TQt'jl
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
LEGAL NOTICE
Notice of Public Hearing
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to Article XXV of the code of the
Town of Southold, a public hearing will be held by the Southold Town Planning
Board, at the Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York in said Town on the
26th day of February, 1996 on the question of the following:
7:30 P.M. Public hearing for the proposed site plan for Port of Egypt, in
Southold, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, State of New York. Suffolk
County Tax Map Number 1000-56-6-4 & 6.1
The property is bordered on the north by Main Road; on the east by land now or
formerly of WJI Holding Corp.; on the south by Budd's Pond; and on the west by
land now or formerly of Suffolk County Industrial Development Agency.
Dated: February 13, 1996
BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD
Richard G. Ward
Chairman
PLEASE PRINT ONCE ON THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1996 AND
FORWARD ONE (1) AFFIDAVIT TO THIS OFFICE, THANK YOU.
COPIES SENT TO:
Traveler-Watchman
Suffolk Times
er } �3}
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
This is to serve notice that I personally posted the property known as
Poli of EG X e i L� rNL
and have sent notices, by certified mail, to the owners of record of
every property which abuts and every property which is across from
any public or private street from the above mentioned property on
Fe-b0 , 1996
by placing the Town's official poster notice within 10 feet of the front
property line facing the street where it can be easily seen, and that I
have checked to be sure the poster has remained in place for seven
days prior to the date of the public hearing.
W I LL I AM Fl I,ke.la t vX
Your name (print) ` (
f�
Signature
V11 rptN IQ JJ £Si9t�LY x—O P ?-71
Address
ala � �� �
Date
-b
Nbta6 Pu
MARY E.TMORNHIIl � 1
Votary Public,State of Now York ��I���
No. 5003291 � r II
Qualified in Suffolk Countttt /��g/� �LI LI C FEB 2 T 10
Commission Expires Oct. 19, 97P I
For Planning Board use only
Re: Po(f of Egret -5W mmina pool
SCTM#:_i000-
Date of Hearing: ig�
0
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
STATE OF NEW YORK ss:
Joey Mac Lellan, being duly sworn, says that
L10GAL, z he is the Editor,of the TRAVELER-WATCHMAN,
TOFllT�tpLD a public newspaper printed at Southold, in Suf-
. lit e , rhI9 folk County; and that the notice of which the
NOTICE IS fHE"BY annexed is a printed copy, has been published
Gly p, 9qt pili"t td As in said Traveler-Watchman once each week for
tick XXV of the code of the
Townof Southold,'It public .............................................. ......I..........wt�eeks
heaft *in,* held by the :
.SoatMM :John planning successively, comme ting on the ... :............
Board,atd*Town Hall,Main
RorA SouhoK Naw York hr day of........... .... ... ..:c :P ..............,19.x :
NW tewwoa,the 76th day of
February, 1996the quaitilm . ...
� `..� .....................
ofthe follow.�'Qg•
7:30 p,aa Publichewing for
ofPortTtift Sworn to beforr me this.........../..5 .........day of
cif FaK hi SoudwK County of sutif'oBc ........................1. ,-AI . ..... ......................19.� .
SWE of Nero York. Stiftfo6r
County Tax N60 Ttutbber
}f�36f6�4�$Y.
Theproperty4boMwedop ............... ��n £ r ............
�'�� Notary Public
eat t}y now or foimerly
of W11 H Cotp:;oh ft BARBARA A. SCHNEIDER
SIX - �fid;and on NOTARY PUELIC, State of New York
the waft by had now of for- No. 4zf"�S 6
> d �e3ihow QuaLf*.J in Sufialk County
DevelopmentA Comnfission Expires 8/31/5`6
Dated:February 13, i9%
RY0KWQF1W
SOUTH9LDTOWN
M=.0.Row
Ward,
Chainnan
1X=21131W6)
t R
GQ
PLANNING BOARD MEMBAA rttiOSU 0
C
RICHARD G.WARD Town Hall, 53096 Main Road
,r O OG
Chairman P.O. Box 1179
GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM,JR. � o= Southold, New York 11971
BENNETT ORLOWSHI,JR. '� H Fax(516) 765-3136
Z
WILLIAM J.CREMERS cpTelephone(516) 765-1938
KENNETH L.EDWARDS :.,--Cl
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
TO: Thomas Fisher, Senior Building Inspector
FROM: Richard G. Ward, Chairman i v;\
RE: Port of Egypt, Swimming Pool
Main Road, Southold
SCTM# 1000-56-6-4 & 6 . 1
DATE : February 13, 1996
Please review the attached for certification.
Attachments :
Garrett A. Strang
Architect
P.O. Box 1412, Southold, NY 11971
(516) 765-5455 Fax (516) 765-5490
February 9, 1996
Mr. Robert Kassner
Southold Town Planning Board
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re : Port of Egypt Enterprises, Inc . f 131996
SCTM #1000-56-06-4 & 6 . 1
Dear Mr. Kassner:
Enclosed are the following for the Board to take appropriate
action regarding amendments to the existing approved site
plan on the above referenced matter:
1 . Six (6) copies of Amended Site Plan
2 . One copy of the Site Plan bearing an
Original Health Dept . approval stamp.
3 . Copy of Board of Trustees Permit .
With respect to your letter of November 1994 (undated) , the
information requested as items 1 thru 5 have been indicated
on the plans . Additionally the answers to your questions are
as follows :
1 . Paved surfaces will be continuous from
handicapped parking to the pool terrace area.
2 . The existing Office and Shop is actually
Storage and a small office which may be used as
required for the marina operations .
3 . The four handicapped parking spaces refered to
have been relocated to more convenient location
4 . The handicapped space next to the boat ramp has
been existing for some time and consists of
compacted gravel .
5 . The pool will be for use by the marina patrons
only, not the general public.
Mr. Robert Kassner
Page Two
January 9, 1996
You will recall the application to amend the original site
plan was filed with your office on November 9th 1994 . We
encountered some difficulties in receiving the Health Dept .
approval in a timely fashion, thus the delay in forwarding
their approved drawing to you.
It is my understanding that everything was in order for final
approval of our application with exception of the health
dept . approval which is now enclosed. Accordingly, I
respectfully request that the Board consider adopting a
resolution to endorse the amended site plan with or without
conditions at the February 20th meeting. Your cooperation in
this matter will be greatly appreciated inasmuch as it is my
clients intention to start construction in early March given
the fact the project is one year behind schedule and the pool
must be in service for the 1996 season.
If you have any questions or require additional
documentation, please contact my office immediately.
Very truly yours,
GAS/g Garrett A. Strang
Encs . Architect
C : Mr. W. Lieblein
�h
Board Of Southold Town Trustees ;
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
l PERMIT NO. —/ / 3 I DATE: .. 3/30/95 t
k y
ISSUED TO .... PORT. OF EGYPT ..
Aut4arizatinn
�I Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 615 of the Laws of i
the State of New York, 1893; and Chapter 404 of the Laws of the j.
V' + State of New York 1952: and the Sou+hold Town Ordinance en- ;
d +i+led "REGULATING AND THE PLACING OF OBSTRUCTIONS
l\ IN AND ON TOWN WATERS AND PUBLIC LANDS and the
REMOVAL OF SAND, GRAVEL OR OTHER MATERIALS FROM
1 ?' LANDS UNDER TOWN WATERS;" and in accordance with the _
4j! Resolution of The Board adopted at a meeting held on 3/30/95 .
19 9� and in consideration of the sum of $ 150.00 paid by
j _ k PORT OF EGYPT .. . .. .. .. .. . 9i ,�
of .. . Southold .. N. Y. and subject +o the �, ,+ •`.`
t Terms and Conditions listed on the reverse side hereof,
of Southold Town Trustees authorizes and permits the following: y
Constr. anew access. swim. pool, terrace & decks, alteration
of exist. bldg. for cabana use, install. of sub-surface san. sys.i.
for cabana and drywells for pool, & constr. of access sidewalks.
\ all in accordance with the detailed specifications as presented in
� the originating application. �
gg +� IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The said Board of Trustees here- E
3 `�! by causes its Corporate Seal to be affixed, and these presents to i.
be subscribed by a majority of the said Board as of this date.
1 eek:
0 0
Submission Without a Cover Letter
Sender: ���cfiCtt �tr�nq,
Subject: ( (f J Egypt - swLmm ()� Poo/
SCTM#: 1000- SL- �-L{ t �,
Comments: Z Plans
L
FEB 91996
p,
Board Of Southold Town Trustees
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK c
' PERMIT NO. —/ —/ 3 I DATE: .. 3/30/95
ISSUED TO .. PORT OF EGYPT
,�ufl�nri�tttinn
Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 615 of the Laws of
the State of New York, 1893; and Chapter 404 of the Laws of the E.
State of New York 1952; and the Southold Town Ordinance en- e.
titled "REGULATING AND THE PLACING OF OBSTRUCTIONS
IN AND ON TOWN WATERS AND PUBLIC LANDS and the i
REMOVAL OF SAND, GRAVEL OR OTHER MATERIALS FROM
LANDS UNDER TOWN WATERS;" and in accordance with the
A! Resolution of The Board adopted at a meeting held on 3/30/95 I
19 95, and in consideration of the sum of E 150.00 paid by 7
PORT OF EGYPT
_ of . Southold N. Y. and subject to the
t Terms and Conditions listed on the reverse side hereof, A
of Southold Town Trustees authorizes and permits the following:
Constr. a new access. swim. pool, terrace & decks, alteration `
of exist. bldg. for cabana use, install. of sub-surface san. sys.is�
for cabana and drywells for pool, & constr. of access sidewalks.
all in accordance with the detailed specifications as presented in
'd the originating application. f?
/ s IN WITNESS WHEREOF, The said Board of Trustees here-
by causes its Corporate Seal to be affixed, and these presents to i
be subscribed by a majority of the said Board as of this date. '
yN OPVGCS-Y. -7
F
O � ees G
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Richard G. Ward, Chairmany �, Z Y Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
George Ritchie Latham,Jr. 0 T P. O. Box 1179
Bennett Orlowski,Jr. ,•,, < ` �Ir' Southold, New York 11971
p%! O� Fax (516)765-3136
Mark S. McDonald � �•/A-g ';����` Telephone (516)765-1938
Kenneth L. Edwards -
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
FORM FOR THE PUBLICATION OF NOTICE OF:
L:1 ISSUANCE OF NEGATIVE DECLARATION
❑ ISSUANCE OF POSITIVE DECLARATION
❑ COMPLETION OF DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
❑ PUBLIC HEARING ON DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
❑ COMPLETION OF FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
Type of Notice: ❑Unlisted L.IType 1
Project Title: PO(4 of Egypt !E-nterprises , ,Z,,�
SCTM#: 1000- 5('-6- `(• t � • I
Location (Street, Hamlet): mo-in PJ-, Soutrlold
Lead Agency: Southold Planning Board
Address: 53095 Main Rd., Southold, NY 11971
Project Description: Propo�e-d s;}e plan s for {tic cont(( r.t-icn
sw mmirxs pool 67-f 0-n Zxishnq mo rfKa .
Date of Acceptance of DEIS/FEIS:
Contact Person: R,&,i- Kassne✓
Address: Planning Board Office
53095 Main Rd., Southold, NY 11971
Phone: (516) 765-1938 Fax: (516) 765-3136
For Draft Environmental Impact Statement indicate:
Final Date for Comment Period:
For Public Hearing indicate:
Date and Time:
Location:
i •
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
J Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
Richard G. Ward, Chairman
George Ritchie Latham, Jr. :> . .-� - ly�i;; F. O. Box 1179
Bennett Orlowski,Jr. Southold, New York 11971
Mark S. McDonald - ? Fax (516) 765-3136
Kenneth L. Edwards - ; Telephone(516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
January 10, 1995
Garrett A. Strang
P.O. Box 1412
Southold, NY 11971
Re: Proposed site plan for swimming pool
Port of Egypt Enterprises, Inc.
SCTM# 1000-56-6-4 & 6.1
Dear Mr. Strang:
The following resolution was adopted by the Southold Town Planning Board
at a meeting held on Monday, January 9, 1995:
BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the
State Environmental Quality Review Act, establishes itself as lead agency,
and as lead agency makes a determination of non-significance and grants a
Negative Declaration.
Enclosed please find a copy of the Negative Declaration for your records.
6,n?el4�1
/t
chard G. and
Chairman
enc.
aa)) CZ CZoc � 0
J E
O v
c En
ECL c __
cif c's = o W
azr> c � cE 'a La
N U � CDo � ,.
Cl) WyN0 � N a.
� � n�C � o m
0 C:uj
Osco76
o
N cc$ coO +, o mE
+r i LL O v a) 4::, a
cz
co E a) 3 w
c O C FD O O N
G � Uo � c� � ?
i C: Wy . X a. 0 o
-� O c 0 0 a) m
C = "a "O 34-.,
W "� 'O- CZ C N 0) ui
U Z O C 0 0 � O � = � �
W CC 7 a) ca 1
_O co U cz o � C
C y C) C U cOj
O Cm, cc z. O
cz
Q. N E co
O "C t C C .�.
O �- icz '—
'3 o� 0 � L0oa z
n4- COcn
_
m �
o
CD x
N
CL W
A
TGA s r _
------------
72
- 7
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ✓. ',;
Richard G. Ward, Chairman 171 - � Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P. O. Box
George Ritchie Latham, Jr. :, York
Bennett Orlowski,Jr. Southold, New Yoork 11971
Mark S. McDonald - ^� . ',, -` Fax (516)765-3136
Kenneth L. Edwards _ Telephone(516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
State Environmental Quality Review
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Notice of Determination Non-Significant
January 9, 1995
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations
pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act) of the
Environmental Law.
The Southold Town Planning Board, as lead agency, has determined that the
proposed action described below will not have a significant effect on the
environment and a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will not be prepared.
Name of Action: Proposed site plan for swimming pool for
Port of Egypt Enterprises, Inc.
SCTM#: 1000- 56-6-4 & 6.1
Location: Main Rd., Southold
SEQR Status: Type 1 ( X )
Unlisted ( )
i Conditioned Negative Declaration: Yes ( )
No ( X )
i
j Description of Action:
i
Proposed site plan is for the construction of a swimming pool at an existing
marina.
Page 2
SEQRA Negative Declaration - Port of Egypt Enterprises, Inc.
January 9, 1995
Reasons Supporting This Determination:
This project involves the construction of a swimming pool at an
existing marina. A swimming pool is a permitted use in this Marine
II zone (M-II), thus the proposed action is consistent with zoning.
An Environmental Assessment Form has been submitted and reviewed,
and it was determined that no significant adverse effects to the
environment were likely to occur should the project be implemented
as planned.
There has not been any correspondence from the New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation in the allotted time.
Therefore, it is assumed that there are no comments or objections
from that agency.
The applicant will have to comply with the requirements of the Suffolk
County Sanitary Code (SCSC) and all relevant standards of water supply
and sewage disposal systems. Design and flow specification, subsurface
soil conditions and site plan details will have to be approved by the Suffolk
County Department of Health Services (SCDHS). This impact is not
considered significant due to the anticipated project compliance with
established requirements of the SCSC and the SCDHS and the required
relevant permits.
For Further Information:
Contact Person: Robert G. Kassner
Address: Planning Board
Telephone Number: (516) 765-1938
cc: Langdon Marsh, DEC Albany
Suffolk County Dept. of Health
New York State Dept. of Transportation
Judith Terry, Town Clerk
Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals
Building Dept.
Applicant
ENB
New York State Department JjEnvironmental Conservation
Building 40—SUNY, Stony Brook, New York 11790.2356
Telephone (516) 444-0365
Facsimile (516) 444-0373 _
Langdon Marsh
Commissioner
December 23 , 1994
Mr. Garrett A. Strang
P.O. Box 1412 I
Southold, NY 11971
Re: NYSDEC Application 1 1-4738-00099/004-0
Port of Egypt Ent. , Inc. 11
Proposed swimming pool
Dear Mr. Strang:
The Town of Southold Planning Board has requested and been
granted lead-agency status on this matter.
Please contact the lead agency, if you have not already done so,
to learn what needs to be done to satisfy the SEQR requirements
on this matter.
When the lead agency has provided this office with a final
determination, the DEC will resume processing of this
application.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Very truly yours,
Zvi-
Robert N. Thurber
Environmental Analyst I
RNT:nw
cc:, , Town of Southold Planning Board
o �
EPSLOAAUNTN1'NLGG
1991
OWN
OARD
1
C,j printed on recycled Papa
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Regulatory 2- y ZI l y/
Rog►on 1 . 3idg_dg. 4 40 BONY f�eC �
2: -`7 L
itopY geoolc, N.Y. 11790-2-356
jo v Svui-tr�sJJ t laHH g t3oa✓cP
I1g71
V ICA s3 �✓ Re: LEAD AGENCY COORDINATION RESPONSE
S - 5 : � a sxe CS "l�
Dear Z °�fOZ� Ma Sc
This letter responds to your communication of De -e tA- v (o,IHA, regarding
lead agency coordination for the above-noted project, under Article 8 (State
Environmental Quality Review - SEQR) of the Environmental Conservation Law
and 6 NYCRR Part 617. The Department has the following interest in this
project:
DEC Permits (if any) :
DEC Contact Person: G 'oV1 N lluV/"_w KPLNING
SEQR Classification: NJ Type I [ ] UnlistedC 2 8 W4DEC Position: UTHOLDTOWN
NBOARD
Based on the information provided:
[� DEC has no objection to your agency assuming lead agency status for
this action.
[ ] DEC wishes to assume lead agency status for this action.
[ ] DEC needs additional information in order to respond (see comments) .
[ ] DEC cannot be lead agency because it has no jurisdiction in this action.
Comments: [ ] see attached [ ] none
If you do not concur with the DEC position indicated above, please contact
this office to resolve designation of lead agency within the time allowable under
Part 617.
Please feel free to contact this office for further information or discussion.
Sincerely. ni.f
cc: (attach distribution list)
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Q ; :
'�
Richard G.Ward, Chairman t; 'n t "_ : rX rY
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
George Ritchie Latham, Jr.
Bennett Orlowski, Jr. c-, '-"� '+- Southold,New York 11971
Mark S.McDonald „"-> "it 'a >;,; Fax (516)765-3136
Kenneth L. EdwardsTelephone(516)765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Re: Lead Agency Coordination Request
Dear Reviewer:
The purpose of this request is to determine under Article 8 (State Environmental
Quality Review Act-SEQRA) of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR
Part 617 the following:
1. Your jurisdiction in the action described below;
2. Your interest in assuming the responsibilities of lead agency; and
3. Issues of concern which you believe should be evaluated.
Enclosed please find a copy of the proposal and a completed Environmental
Assessment Form (EAF) to assist you in your response.
Project Name: r �n�
Requested Action:
SEQRA Classification: Type I
( ) Unlisted
Contact Person: (�N . ZAl
(516) 765-1938
Page 2
Lead Agency Coordination Request
The lead agency will determine the need for an environmental impact statement (EIS)
on this project. Within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter, please respond in
writing whether or not you have an interest in being lead agency.
Planning Board Position:
(� This agency wishes to assume lead agency status for this action.
( ) This agency has no objection to your agency assuming lead agency
status for this action.
( ) Other (see comments below)
Comments:
Please feel.free to contact this office for further information.
Sin�erely
Chairman
cc: -Beard of Rffpea+s_
Board of Trustees
-*Building Department
Southold Town Board
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
NYSDEC - Stony Brook
NYSDEC - Albany
-Suffolk-County-Department-of Public-Works
U:S-Army-Corp-of Engineers -
--New York State Department-of Transportation-- -
'Maps are enclosed for your review rev. 4/94
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ' ✓. .
t :�4% ,
Richard G. Ward, Chairman ; _�r Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
George Ritchie Latham, Jr. 3 �+ ' P. O. Box 1179
Bennett Orlowski, Jr. :' Southold. New York 11971
Mark S. McDonald -_ ��; �'_ Fax(516)765-3136
Kenneth L. Edwards - Telephone(516)765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
December 13, 1994
Garrett A. Strang
P.O. Box 1412
Southold, NY 11971
Re: Proposed site plan for swimming pool
Port of Egypt Enterprises, Inc.
SCTM# 1000-56-6-4 & 6.1
Dear Mr. Strang:
The following resolution was adopted by the Southold Town Planning Board
at a meeting held on Monday, December 12, 1994:
BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the
State Environmental Quality Review Act, start the coordination process on
this type one action.
Please contact this office if you have any questions regarding the above.
Sindrely
Richard G. Ward
Chairman
(IoM 02)
m
�S�A Nj
NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION ��' yi• `�� rr� % r'i'
DIVIMN OF REGULATORY AFFAIRS
1 STOW BROOK
BURY C NY
SUNY CAMPUS.BLDG M.ROOM 219 2I'.NOY•,: ' (( `.'—':'�!
STONY BROOK NEW YORK 11790-2368
GARRETT A STRANG
PO BX 1412
SOUTHOI p NY 11971 i 7 `7
r1
'. L. NOV 2 9 I39
P
rs
iw)If1, .111i1,inlLnllI1,111 � _
u9a.n .Mw�
• S
NOTICE OF RECEIPT OF APPLICATION
The Division of Regulatory Affairs has received the application referenced below. The material submitted is being
reviewed by staff, and you will be advised in writing regarding the Department's findings. In all future communications,
please refer to the Application ID number.
ication ID: 1-4738-00099/00004-0
Dale eceived: 11/16194
Applicant: PORT OF EGYPT ENT.,INC.
Facility: PORT OF EGYPT MARINA & RESTAURANT
Description: CONSTRICT SWIMMG POOL,TERRACE DECK,SEPTC SYSTM;FILL
DEC Contact: ROBERT N THURBER
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
4
Richard G. Ward,Chairman Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
r 4 Rr�y P. O. Box 1179
George Ritchie Latham,Jr.
Bennett Orlowski,Jr. Southold, New York 11971
_ -'•, ^r ti'
Mark S. McDonald �! y e o�1i%' Fax(516)765-3136
Kenneth L. Edwards Telephone(516)765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Garrett A. Strang
P.O. Box 1412
Southold, NY 11971
RE: Port of Egypt Enterprises, Inc.
SCTM# 1000-56-6-4 & 6.1
Zoning District: Marine II
Dear Mr. Strang,
The Planning Board has received your letter of November 9, 1994, in
relation to the proposed swimming pool at the above referenced project.
The following changes/additions are required before the Board can proceed
with its review:
1 . Location of filter system and pump.
2. Landscaping details.
3. Any proposed outdoor lighting, including type of fixture
and wattage.
4. Material of walkway.
5. Type plantings on Berm.
The following questions need to be answered:
1 . Is the paved surface continuous from the handicapped parking to
the pool terrace area?
2. What activity is taking place in the existing office and shop?
nr rG
3. What are the four handicapped half spaces at this location, are
they paved?
4. Is the handicapped space next to the boat ramp paved?
S. Who will be allowed to use the pool; will this be a membership
club? Will the restaurant to the east be able to use the
pool?
In addition to the above, review by the Suffolk Qepartment of Health and
Town Trustees is required.
If you have any questions, or require further information, please contact
this office.
Vbintt Kassner�
Site Plan Reviewer
cc: Thomas Fisher Senior Building Inspector In Charge
Garrett A. Strang
Architect
P.O. Box 1412, Southold, NY 11971
(516) 765-5455 Fax (516) 765-5490
November 9 , 1994
Mr. Robert Kassner
Southold Town Planning Board
Main Road
Southold , New York 11971 Gl
Re: Port of Egypt Enterprises, Inc .
SCTM #1000-56-06-4 & 6.1
Dear Mr. Kassner :
As requested by the Board at our recent meeting, enclosed are
the following to amend the existing approved site plan for
the above referenced matter :
1 . Application with Full EAF
2 . Nine (9) copies of Amended Site Plan
3 . Letter of Authorization
4 . One (1) copy survey
5 . Check # 17647 for Application Fee
You will note that this application substantially reduces the
scope of the project by deleting the boat storage facility
and substituting swimming pool, terrace and cabana as shown.
If you have any questions or require additional
documentation, please do not hesitate to contact my office.
Very truly yours,
GAS/BS Garrett A. Strang
Encs. Architect
c: Mr . W. Lieblein
NOV 10 ` "
[ E CEM3 Millwork cor
Whol®sale Distributors Of Building Materials
600 Brighton Street FO. Box 5332 Bethlehem. PA 18015 POoj�+M.
Office: (215) 867-6111 Home/Fax: (516) 369-1903
Tom Pisaneschi - Architectural Representative
DATE: ¢- JOB:- d27- 41/=
EJ;-<<,
NOV 10 i
s Setting the Standard in Selection and Seruicef
REQUIREMENTS FOR SITE PLAN ELEMENTS & CERTIFICATION
i �
SECTION-BLOCK-LOT TAX MAP NUMBERS
, NAME & ADDRESS OF OWNER OF RECORD
NAME & ADDRESS OF PERSON PREPARING MAP
,/
1DATE, NORTH POINT AND WRIT"lEN & GRAPHIC SCALE
4--<, DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY & INFORMATION TO DEFI14E BOUNDARIES
,O , LOCATIONS, NAMES & EXISTING WIDTHS OF ADJACENT STREEq'S & CURBS
v' �
�'iLOCATION & OWNERS OF ALL ADJOINING LANDS , AS SHOWN ON TAX RECORDS
LOCATION & PURPOSE OF ALL EXISTING AND PROPOSED EASEMENTS
-- COMPLETE OUTLINE OF EXISTING DEED RESTRICTIONS APPLYING TO PROPERTY
(oI/�""EXISTING ZONING /
AREAS SUBJECT TO FLOODING OR STORM WATER OVERFLOWS
.iWATER COURSES , MARSHES, WOODED AREAS, TREES 8" IN DIA-IETER OR MORE
ANY BUILDING WITHIN 100 ' OF PROPERTY
r/PAVED AREAS, SIDEWALK9, VEHICULeAR ACCESS TO PUBLIC STREETS
--: EXISTING SEWERS, CULVERTS, WATERLINES WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO PROPERTY
FENCING LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING
i
PROPOSED BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURAL IMPROVEMENTS
OF•F STREET PARKING AND LOADING AREAS
OUTDOOR LIGHTING OR PUBLIC ADDRESS SYSTEMS
OUTDOOR SIGNS-
239K SIDEW(ALKS LOCATION'S WIDTHS:
SIZE OF WATER AND �SEWER
JgLINES
C� ���,�C�� �� �j�s_ �. ,���mss- s��•� c� �
u, 0
';7," s�
LASER FICHE FORM
Planning Board Site Plans and Amended Site Plans
SPRe Type: Approved
Project Type: Site Plans
Status: Final Approval
SCTM # : 1000 - 56-6-4
Project Name: Port of Egygt Enterprise-Swim. Pool
Address: Main oad
Hamlet: Southold
Applicant Name: Liblien
Owner Name: Liblien
Zone 1: MII
Approval Date: 2/26/1996
OPTIONAL ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
A date indicates that we have received the related information
End SP Date:
Zone 2: Zone 3:
Location: Southold
SC Filing Date:
C and R's :
Home Assoc:
R and M Agreement:
SCANNED
ED C 2 1 2005
Records Management
SCAN Date:
` V-1 '
41
(_ 7/
1,114
00-�av5lv
.007, plop
r�
a . .
.j`"W E","" R`
-0
„ r
TITLE
�. - .a
V GARRETT A STRANG �
' -- :` �s -_v�na - .as 1t_r tivGIFlh�tk.T1FST7i.Tt-- _ f
t�r.��J'
rsa cry rrasNnt �iT c� -Ca °f ly NY is T ri 1
_
LOCATION
t -
. -. ... ..
architect
�
SCALE- •y- REVISED DRAWING No
. . T 'Y.aT1,M_7A. - Yz'+JL 'I` ,s{fi iyy F✓ -
Main Road P.O. Bax 1412 Southold N.Y. 11971 DATE t- as �-
516 - 765 - 5455 ORAWN.YY - K. y
i Co _
D
I
i
I,
I
TITLE -f�Y tjy�L y A.�j AGGi.�5,71��C /d.P]� �Y'ta ti-t
GARRETT A . STRANG
LOCATION ✓/A�I'•�� � .� ����
® architect
SCALE Al P4 -fl- REVISE. .PAWING N9
®® Main Road P.O. Box 1412 Southold N.Y. 11971 .ATE
516 - 765 - 5455 J DRAWN RT
' PROJECT N9
,'- r -
, i , t•., ,
1 s.
I. i rril"" r
G> _
' I'F' I:jY'A�iF' r r rt :,t. . r "a>1' r ,° ,. �, 1„ i ' ' $ ,\ , �'i
ay1l' _ 7 n - ',� , a „ I
r'`i �I �` `� ', 'v.� ' ' ' -; 3 k, ur- . V v r I i J , if S .4t 4''QQ�Ci II II
y - $. yfl t., '^ v t �i.�' r" ry. ', \5,J r,,,i 1 i J;, zfryy T 1 t' , .,':. i'- t'e f-c ji^ 'i m'r a:, .,,'-' p9 % ; I
a+fi, r . F t r ! I, z ti. 4 a-sT \s tt.., "l , aft V 5,;,, ;� , ,"f
'A. s laet r, 7' ": -1 ',.-'., a I, 1 �„
: . -:, {p{r �ih]t f fiAr ,I t. eh , 1 .1 d pry .}k:,;', . t� fr j,iu '„ Y., '.r".,+
Ii i. ,y �#- J „ :rrj`; ifr �.ym i .- ' p Y -9 a,r a, .. i r\3+1 'A, a .}� }r r .1 h .,a. ,:k, �I `� � - -
.�-. _.-,- __ �. �',',yi'FY,. ( y�y} f\ ::}: 1}f:. y Y' 1} : �Y,' V :dYa rt` ' 4r�1 *\s _t,} "�` - Y P „ . 'I`�J(�
rte, ''�i�':1^!'^,""_--w �� -y 1 'i y f 2C. U'Ir, « y Irl 4 ",� 4� ? W,i,'rNJ' a i -:,fi :.p_'.<,�,. .r Y� }7 1 r :VY^ - y(�. / ,
I, : 1 '�� E ''�tl s `r? , - 'i n : ' R�iI . .. I nl a Iry ;:P�,!e�trp 1 �'M h' 1 4 x .Ir '4 r ,�- r"
jr..,, „f1Y 1}j r :r tt nry a 0:p'I'^' f1 ,YY,yrl . d�s' rv:' S"✓r '34 efi`'i F " . ,I;�, fr y ' '
f r - 1 .,{ y - t - d`. 1+ Iv . v ,+ ',4.�., ;r''b r" .,.j. p'is" : 'r�•t 7 JI,,, nl .{ r .! f ''1
rrj f. �. ? x "i" u" 'rk Nr?^. 'yN�^F�r ', ',', P,r 1 , t r n'', .Y .} y} r''�(
I - I14 1, , ! , ,- •� ,r,, 't jl v e ,i,aJn.4 , •t.r .P r v } /9 , �N Y
� r : _ I 1 ',:!' pq� t .a, ,. yi;u.. ht x1tiR-'I' '" r x:'•- , f f/ leo
;T', :I V . L� ,fit I ,, `it I;, Apr qtr 1 �f' iyy._"'"is �h� x a r rl .n ley � t,,,n { r J?' 'I 'Y YElli I , '? IT Y,`! I ,�
is % 61""A„ 1'' �'^ 4 '42 h ., ry} 1' r x L4W`?t,r iy %"YP L ^ .-1 L �. `'1 ;rR 1 '�a V - J
^jyJ j}J. �'{,�}, 'srl � �. , R �t, a.,�.^- :t'' a^J c.; :.h )}':'1t. ,Yl Y3.ti`�,:1 S 1Ar,r lly" ' 4 r : p I }- ,i -1
- p .11 11
•�, . :gid " 1„ F''. ;"e$t• :L;°t1 Y'' ,yE';." y} :"' >1 .P f+. 4?i'c a , I:-: 4•,- ,a
`'q }�'. -.+1 �� e ': F ,i' ,iy2.lyd'4 , n, 4 a ,' »�- ' yYr ]'; "}1 x!' , ti:,�, //'� PT J9
r a II �I r }•• Nr, AV '1 j, y P;, ?F " :y. f' ,I,,., �{9r{•y r�,n ui t r5 ,9 ,r+ ��„ 4IL ! , 4S�. c .ti'. 'd - /l(K '� J.
�� I'e I� Y r "11 :11 h t']t1' I I} l r, Yi ,T 1 ten -
t {j� :.I'. .p, 1 ' J` I`+ 5 ,.Y,y 'y 3F'�F`'' "vl "r}. ,. ,q , C"I 'm, h 'yr. ' I'TMMe `� /// , \„
- ",{ 1 rf f 4A S! 'F �, }:� r, W!i„ yr"ri nA n. '<.' X,+`N JLV- w,!',� - - {
�� .r : - 1 " . .:." , .' . . ',Fl- G ,rw t s:l�;:' ,ter w r''Ir ..,, f nL,.0 W{ J: 1Sy r"" -I I �{ - I
I , _ t ..r1 , r " �,"p - � 14: ' r., . ' 'r .,,: r9 .x(.,57. 1,: ,! I, , •I 1:1 ' ','i�' �t� 1 ! N ,, ';_ Y /''J ii' , 14tl rI, T i - 1
" : ' .. I �r 7.' ,9 . it
.F �" iC i,r `ta r'fM1i f+ `?, `.>_ " yrR,;+q ' M „'. 9 ' �j ��Rr'/� , �`. ,� 11f, t:i'i" r '4 a i ,' , r:,q' - \, a tw..4 .-`r""y5?u14"yP '`fY''n"....a.»•N ,G ,`+rf' G`1!.
.. ' ,`: i , .. - rr patl \` >:,e , V;1 s it f a fiiY "''c:j 1"}t 3�`Mr 4r afi. .,fir _ .,:r �e �'�'L
,t i� .,-_. {',�, P,� "' I ro I 1 f •;r �° ,. PaL °A'rl"", k1. -W r :IT 7 A••L
' Py.,: . - yl+---�- --T 4 fZJ. 1 "' dF qRS J ., k'+' : ^ P-Chw �y� (((
I 1.,,�i �, -1-- I - ,b ".S,r q„ " I'I;kl wrt r e- ' y�f tr#�°3 1j %j i t b r -4::, ', -S r tS`
N- i .� IV ' 1' .,1}. �.�t r 4 ,lr e} } A .d,l tr'' 1 n '• 0
��
.r...--..,-tiT ° , 11 'F�' dt 4 jut f `J ' , : n Ie, ./"
{, v Q;, �1 t'. n n� �.. a '' , F ., k
. , III
T "I .a . b r - n` � ,_,. VA
"I. p��p - ;i 11 �y� T Y . �J fY�_ T;y.- �t " ...n9..� r -a ` '0
11
a' :� '" v`i- '
L y �a I ,� r' '1'«
�^ �y < f1
t VN} L
Y
'N"
a1 �
_ ---
` =3104m,w ' FSS :'� it. iv`.
"1
" ,, yy11
III b
: ( W+
I 11 ''' � �% 4�' h i
w10111' ,
.
4
I h
W
",
5y� Ij ' Ur' xr "�+ •,
Lb .(
d
I p{
i i" r� 1r 1� e } � 1 1 � � � it V
tryL4 1 '
ti4 IS5�11
%" : il .- T
li
+ ` I \ ' i
D�'
A.w P r , , ,
f,.
4JI
. ,�� \ ;,.
Y1
kYY H �� ; �11 � 441
'+' j .. .. } I.
Nr, . i"'; f� # '.i t - r'k ,,I, . }I Q - .j, ' "�-.-..,yam �P '{1 ( �,, 1.', Y, .:
;, jv
I,, ' a 4 / i; �� f I
s V, -4T NQS '
�dr ix, �,,
I � 'I " t " t„ / '\ / I-e � \ r '.?� r"IID ' I" I
j ,j,
I �� V ,I I � C� I - I icrl, ,I
ij r Q T - v, pL III
3° fir^ __"'Jr ,
Ir Ir , �c
{ w f i
1TT I If N , 1 ,, r, •4 _ , "lr, p : 'i
' r I; d-I� v �� - � :'0' r
.7 lo'li 14
I 1,11
F t :
L it 'A
. 4it,v I
/� $ T L < , `
1.1 (� / �� J I A It
j I
I �`' k ,I
'��� Q yr
I ,IIT 11
11
r
`* / //
•,{ , V" / / to - � / ,/ \ \ 1
�'� i" l
.pl ,: , - -r ,-.� ',\ sty �,,.,,, �,.1-� \, ,
i q E �. i � assn \� � A�:
:, ,� +t „ : � ,e,
Ali II 'aI 1,, � 1 R_ AA
4� �3
�i. j i r A , 1 -r*r t t ^tr P �� \
_ ,�(�;;,'1 yr 7"� s1, gyp{' '!]" \ \ -.,�� z",yr'7,. /� I
F•I I .J \� Al �'• O "
�. J^, �rrrr,`" I{ �I, ,
iPy - \IT \ J/fir
"iI
i _
{ ;f 1 % fI
i� j� _ 7 �' ky v , v - 1
{. I �F
'r �' 1 i I -� F y 4q
r � \ % n \
,�III l
i' FPP11111; Etc} i 4 6TI , ' ` ft XT R ' glC, vR, r -✓ aI
I l" 4 I I 0 -YT, -'< \ \ /� . 'r. �+
//
�1 KK "4i
, � I � �
yd, . ,- . Z- I ... ,r,• AR
;j i t 11 t, . 1-1
u II ',II , � - : -i , \ a � a s "� - ZeI4�1 31' ' ,�
I 1 ,> I* ,I II711PI,
I i4' , - -p v � O a I1. u � i� 3 � Y�ggpgr i 1. %// � � � .I
R` k1 I ' ' I k o i , V 9 ..'':k _µLL 'mY 7 C, y O y\\ '`,u o.� 3 KSI 4 0 � `' pM� p , ✓' - / .•r 'b r" - I
I -,,"� - `I .il O m \ e 1 m i i j's' A I rYYIPS-- %�" " � I
I !_ g m
, ' � , + I rr � , "• i+l _ '��` � Z \! \'', ,.; iY O o ". v, `;` - 1 4 '' r r'h A .'� q .. J ,l 01 AS: •*� l{
iI�i ' v "t v it `..b e. + o�" v VV '* : r'1,i "yT3', �" 'r y'' '
f�" < '", � -` aan m \\1\ v( �'� �_T- 1 T� + " ' v,Fq ^ 5 4 I uWC, y d L
� N A �• 1 q F � Nma �wwa J1. 1 f
y nma a ^ sa a aQ, �Lj��" C I, /f � �
_ 3 a `
1 i ? 7N 24 �. r .
I
M z _ a : N A'-
.,fi ' �'I.v - y C �m t�,n;' " I� .yg ` ��$.1 ¢ ' '� .I "�,,'y(} - '. '1---,µ . 14 y �'"� r _ Le' i `„' �� 't�. '.'^S.Vyf
V- 3Zm A mas "I a 1nr C o® i r yi ,t,, '7?' t I ,.x, ,v?at rpt I ' 4r i' ' 'k ,'� � 4 1
, ' , m 9� 5 `,� o -< _ - 'r. - ,eo 2 S" m err :;.M1 ' Cr v \ X� Cr,
-r r, a w .- - a ,i'. .., , .,l- ,. i V
F\
tl o sem . e
r �:
c.
j 11
.b0 ' W o' - �. v -a$ yCd 1' - s"'":!t 'Nf,', , X11 ri '," . , '.\ �'
'"�c S' '•S Ir.d' fi '
-n' @8' 4 ,
g d
II �/ \
T1111 yy
J ,;' , r},, C» 1 - . I �, .y1�7 .1 ,,, •fir,r 'I ,' �ya T. {.. -r`":'" .., q1. '�
.a'(:.ii r f^ It --'- jl ' r1;' ,Id Y"ar � n ..I ' ba; le 1 { r '.v: - '` T11 1
if - { +[ ul. 1h Gp ^j. N ' ' "` ^1,. 1- ,Y.. . I
F,
4. r
1
9
I
"it :II
` 8
,x i''' ' , ,:, a � 3,' _
u
1 1 a h. '.r ai 41 1�
r 'i' 1. .J / .
!� d 'FI Y l 3 F l W
I M1
t' F
n'1 #r'
q `'
I ' 7 '
1
1 � L
r f.r'le!,v
v
J . [
,f
i LLi � I �'.
(, V
I
® J ,
s ti f
b . �
}} Z � f t
rI t. '
I o c .."
4
n' �
e•:
F.:
}
I d � I
r-* i ^.i
5 Y ,
d
N r
„r
� .
o y,, t
�� 1 �I .r. t
I
yr't1 ' �Yi
ki
� ' 4
a
�N N'
I
-1
l�
"I II
�" I
°� F
�+
I""' a
:.;
A
�j Qe kl' n n n
1,128l 'b7
,. 4 " . ' n h l /,, �' �'
'�f/ .- . .,r., y 7, 1r q �y t. / 1� G. $ �A : - 14 �,� - Ra. ., ,v d : ; f : t
�.. ,.p U V .5 1 I •�
1.
It
?�1 yry� .I S' 0. { Z b >b o c - a" . , k" v, , off;: .� `!,/ �'- 'p
., ' "]l ' I, .1 4 , i , �' v i _ T „, ,'rc.. �;: �' r4.r, G , t 'f :f: r _ �ifi
k.' �� ' I-e, I� , n C (n y k I, e A ,✓ y ,..,y.- .f•! :Y - /'.' .
r a l _ I - _ lIf 11 J �M- -
4 � .. .
{{ ,�� µ[ y�' �;' " N n , 1I '. � -, t 'y,,. �.},., „ f;, ,r„ >} „ � ' ,� ,, �'f -,r'Yf'1, I a:::'. G
1, ' 11
,I � -j ', �j ;U9 . tMN r�:p, % . 1�' n yy�fie o a I. - a F .. r,: a." ,:,,r : '� 'IT r` '. f
`'i::li: tH Y, til '\ - .I '.l ., w .., ',
'� . 1C� lr
- I: � `i& •11 Iii ' nr , }:P� ✓': �,�,+,
11
" iR ` V ��ff l^ .!:\ J 1" Fes'' iK•
�L•,,�` ';1i ' " �Y" . ruW'. Xis
" '. N N y J ,A. 'I Y'
r '� $
!.r I - "' i1 • �, " .r (p '(� �` \ - I " 'Ft- : ''+� '.Y' v .7%' ylp,�-.%':: ' ,. , '•, : f7' ` ���� I ,
41
�. .., :"1.-, : Q I ! «h r q � - y \ � h\ R �,r�''� gyw \II ,��,,",I ,.+R' }7 ('(,1et 0:
'' , lA, - > ; q 14 .[ ./ V r 1 ;.Vt""" a. L'I ,'Ir ,T' � "' I `r`4
i r '. .V ' ' .� '!Frt p ,N ,i;l 1' Z Ct 41 I - ` ::y 4. „�,' {,/ 9I , .,.�,
y. .,
''yf 1' ' !, �� .�,� " l' .+M � I� ggni p G 4 I k, ' r ' " 7 ...1 .IT, "j
5 qv F ? a
` .,
p ✓
6 ti \. '
r t
r �
- a
r a'
r:
� � " . tfpR �R c� a „ :
M ., A ,Yr' " - ,`' '� I
f„ \ li R, ,* ,- � d . tie J
i, In N, I Sr T'. .
m $
t � >RR ,
:
>:. B - if , � � ,�, "i � , .a ..4,. #
. . ` m
n #^ K'
'i 5 i if �� � � ,
T I-
_ 0 7 - :y r
,`+ �y ' bi+G r�. S :r'• � a � +P',..; - .1 :'6P M. 't;" ) ,' :'3}- - I � 'i�` �}..
`�f �J
- I.l., -y t,. .Qr , rA O wi
1.. `f - A.�S P ' i
'f _I, '
�r -r
n
1.. Y- \f.
I
I
it �,
riT" � �
`i . aNt ,
„
1i. - rf. , r, ,.LT, ,.a "Y, „ - .,.V . , ii , .} � - -
r 5n � Ji N J
,T _ li
' 1 tv
f ,k 1"w
.I ' i w iE� -
Le, ,M..
l'i� F
Rr'� � r.1' G'�
A
r.
, . 1
X
q � e a J
v
fo
J
z
", 4` 1 w
1
t
:,1 r
r
'
I , �y I v 1 ,
"
I .p - - f
1 !aa" I F I 3 t
Ir
i� W
II' ' a \' 1 ,,:I
R' t
i � .
I r
F I
„ s
N'r �' .
kl S�
�t , ° '
'c Y � 'I ll ' x. �lt,lfws
u t �r
r
f'
j
p T r:
, t
,, . ; rry '," „ ,. � Y� a '�'b,. ,� � .:.i, , :, ,. r � ' � f>i ., 'r. 'Sk,-. -�''�. r v '",r�. 1 v : a
�r w '�
: :
ii
.v S: ,a. I ,r I,Vii;t' d
:76` "I IT
c
k.
�..
- .�� -d J• -rr:�l
. 1�1." li.' 4
h ' 1
M
r}q
"moi '.G� . I,
r
II
f � " 1 ,j
I
rye., ..9� 5,
a
r 1 :I: I
Ar " y h '.
%
.m
'i I: ,1
3 i t
„ CP I lr?i «.:
s '3 ,.
I IT 13, "+
" .
k , i' 4
lIl
,1,
a :'
, , . , : t .,.t , f 1.
'I
•
:
I ,
I's 1
,
"T-" '! - ¢ iii l r
I 1 , �'i. + 't 1
i µ ))
Af P
jj I 'j'i.d. N 'A. I'.
1 I M 4 ;
� ,}r Huff 1 �#
W*.,. IY -, .F
[
l ,
y$ ty rf )
: .A�Msp : . . ,J ': .a .I .'! ,1 Ur , ,'� S ,4"^ :C.. t^. ". , ' Y F 9 "I .
{ ,, h i I m \ P 'M 'r 4, 3,t+ �1'r M1L. 1 .{ faT
I', r4Wa it 5.' (. Ir' ^1* /yy� „s4 .eN4* v vi:IF -,v. ..>„ f
.im '. a :. . 'F:� i.': ` .J' l � .. , 't,, � ��Y1 1 � 1-, C'„•1 '''{.. .i1:P ' .•d': [ 1
Irri. 5
.a � t
fir;
11 . M
\
I { ,,
•i
>u 1 : f ,
':v .R,
d
I' i,
I .t'1�((; 1 �r
.�� it 1 �� 1 ' J„
r � � . . I � t
� ' I
iy � 1.
,fi M
R.,. , I• n u. 1
�'
'1 1 5 !'h.'
I
1 � n yy�%1 y.
IN Y i. R, I =1,. �Y Y r., .i h, 1:L .i�
il^ ,:y I,I rt r r1 it
� '� IA 14 NI.. \ x 'a�1 I.h
Y "t r 'I ry r .r..
i �'' " .N {i'a 'W .
j
1 .
I, . I.
M nr ' nr . t>x, '� .
y ff
f.
i� `� 'A.� l r r f
t� }}
�:
ITL-Ta, a � l a � , , r
� IT ,�G
f ' r' r
:(ti'. :�., _- :' A fI '" \ ,� wi, ,� 1 v e i:."' . J}_" •� .I .e ,". .-.::V II' !:.": ' r1
1',11 I .ori ';^„�' t� 1. - .. y ''T. �'� - :;� "i ,, 6- t ry I ,S' !'I,,? 1 ;,!,
f��1 1 "S_Y L ' l}
11 ,I
r.
r
' : V' - _ IA ,a gym , r= '"
F ,
a' to
i,r a I # .,
( l R`y
" IT .,{: i'Q �. " s^ I' ' p r - i 1. {V {,. i } :Y. ^c,4 , ` 4 S , „ .,+"'
.� i '' . � �,' #, A �`.� /' I ("lug. . "�, IV- '^'Z � ,, �, f.; `�' 41 I , k 1
4 \
? X
:. .
. 111 �. w. '
m o � � �/ �" � � r Ir, �
i h� .'I
I' �, � rA 4
I: J�
�yaL � a(I',,t( p .,� ,.
fit „ a r 1^ , . }: (.. f �R
w. I 'll ,-+ +,�+ Y � ,#•" 1 I�
Al,
, �IV,y��4/�fjl
,
1
If i :G p f'!, . '"; ", :: . ! ' '+ C\'r „ ,, '�R 4 `I-I I'It , IJ ^Y . _ �'�'y f,: -' + ,I a. I fit,
.I .: : '' " t' : J 'Ilr,,l \ '.' 4"' {: - + S ' r,, . A, ' 1, , ti' ` 1 I r �' M � .
A. , . . . ,r' - { ,,, 1,4� i Ili, Nay :I I� 'tF.: I , .�, ''r' . C , 1 - %'I{I moi' ' , 'e, , ,. ,, , 11 w
.�Y'1 J ' 1„ • ' F .rfi - "rl, _ "1- r .,1.,, u,. 7 'I : .t. ,1 11;' ' F` t ' Ii, I '
- e' r ., '�' . 1. . �"• i_l *(� h r t .I.1 tm 'S
I m
I
{{ll
� ,� .. �' 1 � � . . :' ,"' is T\ � ` f':, �'+.f �".I
nk A. ,� I,I� f r � I ' � ' � S+:' '�.'1 � x- ��'a"' ".�i, f I f l1.
tk
f
1y �.
Y
�r n ' ' I �`r -
Y r
„' ''. , �i �:, . i. y. . . rR, � � Iii,. pp32' .. r 'pa . . , I '� I ''. i J' "'(��} 4 , � L
' , �[a,.i9 yg y y et Ij�+, ` V .'., ,",,,, .a 1 , y t {' "1
:1. I t � n
Z
, ' w P. i
`v V r:
tt�� I;� I
11KK�� T"� ii .t.'
"
F � 6 T L
{: 1,
f" yy /
( i } 1,
L, O"' i V
`F'
1 M" {
4
r
i I! , r
'�' 1' Nv l' ,s`}
m , ,
r
$ � rrZL' \
T L
I
x
� ,
,
r.' h
'r
.,t I Qr'.
11 ? f m "
.� r 1
F;' �, '
kT' s ,
, .ti
w 1
" \ f '
+, x 1
o'
1
,
�1,
f r
t
f I
. , r
y"
I �'
L (' I
f
N
1 ' , 1
r i r . '4� ,
F 1
r �d �j1
4 • pr' s ` ' F In
Zn rt �.,
r �:
':s . 1 , .1 }�,
,
t
t. 1
c i
r
I,
�" fr
i!
Y'
I Y
.1 1'I !' gtyu
�1 f
. � f I w y�
{'
l' Y..
r. Y
1' ''1 F i
is
R
I h r f.
r/ i9 �� i" ,-,E k..
F `
u � p
I t ,
� I ' " s
r
�� .r ��' :ru''
1, � i
n
P
� I II .-h,- l�.i"
M r
k � ' � i i
"
7 ,
1 E � -
a: r �. i
r ." ,
1' tai., m I Y' I'.'' v' - " j" 'r �`l Ll ! ,.i .�,:', 's\ '9:. ` s i '.I .1': '/
AT.
I r �� ICS
i'f, N, V � "�' � l-R V . R`e (yl" Tl1^ �' � � , f ,�, :+, I' r/. Fi
� �
�1 I :.
v �'rr m , . � 1 �';r i' 1 , ��
I
G, d' a :� ti - .
a o ' :
-°e. a- �t ' � - � N4;4�Lr ry or � :" 'Q, tiK, .t �;'� „� � .b . @, � 1- Cl ' I ,1':r, f �'�„ �:�
t o y y '
u, Pli f ; ,f t,w '�,, 1 'N' 7 �` - ::ta. sy., 'Z "� �' '-r a_ ,� e - , ,J .:I' rah j
( N:. 1. O.A R ti '9i , };'al , , „ I 1 o-,
S' � „i �h '�� 4 6G ' '�, !1' �. �' �' _ �p ., 5» , 1 , -".<�1' rr�'." r1 t�'� ' I
i "1 �'IRR' :q k ,V '.�l I ,., '\. 7?.. V'' 0 �(( aC-. Cl . I :} '{.r 'a , ;I' i ,> : t . +I. :,:p
1 �N' f _ . X Y „K F F 1M . ,rX ;N� - ,R '. p \ , , �
,• , f ,!N � 4'f G - 1 I' V �� '?�'' 1 f �. ( :p i
' h3' 11'�, y'., h Gds, t 'l": t ' i' ''f'' :q'�a . G. ' s ! f 'r<. + '' ,
1' x a'' p S' C� �/ 1�
v H
W rt s _
J
� '� . 'NIt' M1. ..i•
4,, ( ,, K. ''I 0 1 - `3 . ''��(1 �,� rI . `;;.t 4 }'v' -r # �+.kr c� <�,..
'r 'S 'i I Q t 11{g�. ,1(pq�, pqy�{�' < 1 91a„� j- i ,,,,,�.,' -lpr�i'r a. ' a J; `
1`,' '� 'f,� , A I -NI' , 'A ,M, '11 ' f ��"�iN 1, 1:'q. ,1r , ,nl A
�' `e
AN, r r p, �wy `!' iii . 1 � h
p
'IF: r , d+ , i� {� p N- 11 j (� 1uP -� '.'Wk', : . pAt., l la' t 8 . I4•(f'S I,
h n. NL ' � � � {��[Y Irl .UI pW y�,} ' t� -0Sl (� � O ��", - � ya.. �.R A)S! �1 {{�� V [ t _� P$rY.. "[f 3 :�', ;,E't ' �l 1 . J'v` .ia
Slk' C. • q :�I. ;N V {A }., q•, y� "A A- ' �' � �- r O Aa` , ri,l -Y :"M A+Y,.. sd
o f F h -4 I � r , „T '-'1„ l'i '{L S-` , i.I - 1 �, ry
.r,. V. - .4411111' i ' •ni ,IY'' 1111 A' A µth'
Ir ,,: , i�:'^ M1 . 1 '4 � t C � r as "a , '� }fi$: � i �,.... " �" , `
_ N % 1p J,4 'A '�� 1 :��� r '.r .i n,k , -r ,. `r
" : , � R'
4 , ,,I r, �, "S, ..n �' W, I : {'` V '}9 : ': �I '" v`. �ir, _ .er ! ' ;LI,�: 5r, t:" le,�o-,; :f .,1„�
",' :,Y:"� is ry - -� �. r . fi ,. `1:. 'I' ` .R
ry y}, N A .('fir "N"T :`r�. ; , )7 A n- a.. " '
1 ,,'^ir,, Y :,,,r' ':,1F, 11V' A G " _ ,VR`' .IA'r i+iTt'- a r� '.rc",
irr ,I
N L' '
, .
Vii'' �'i A . , ,
ry� 4 R 'n ",':
� , i , , . ,.,., r
- 4' . �� b' � . fly' '�.�' pp �. v. r` , ..; :1 t "Y ,j .a6, Pi i'v:,,
.r. .,5"'p .a` ;A ,N. '7 .D � } I : V i 't' d l SF �.v
t' n V` r I t� 1F.T nC " ul
. 5 1 : },. i
v I r
'"
A
i:L
JA II l3 i�' '{ �.t,
i r
p n i
r
�V`
r
��� Ir � 1 ,
a ' ,
I J, �� 1 ,;st
;� a i
i.
r '` i;-' c,'` IP
S
{���j t
:
1 '. ' ''; :r S b ' r 1 `u 1.. '!�
t F �,
�, it
p 4 2 's 7 °{i� w ��:Ph..
.r, � -i` � 4v '�
} '. C 1 1 . .:..�' r , f, •111- 1 .
�' '�. t' 'jr yy r Ir, "�n, r ^I
I ' y Z] , I�Y 4f 11 • r I^•-Y-"" l.r V +.Vf •ulr .
r
-
':} i �, A '
-y d _ 'C- , 1. � p �+� e � ,- , 1, „+, r it
Tll� "It .GN ':fr � .� � � c+'Y : l� ( _ " 'r '�``� . t. . . . ,.,� / ,;Y
u 5Q' I .: ' I p .rOFt, Y P
f , r .J
f W
i .:. . f C,:
,. 9 . 1 '� A \/ � .
t q' 1 P 7 } ] „ 1 -1 - . t 1'� j :`--'r - I is - J - k 1 ; 1
11
I,, , fiy„ 4" I:w it „1y { 7 I r� : C - .0 I ,Irl .I
�`' S Ili ' iei a ]l,^ ., y' r C' 11 , } - il, ,}
"
,
d�
Q
. , _ �� G1 � - _ ._ ,
' > � I . _ -
le' - - -
+. - I
Pi
-
1
z
' S
xjIL ilger/
t
ILL
is
w:. -, a t'. e �v , - • a-.,. '^� ',:rJ ., :' 's - � . r^" ,y - ,'kms �,-� _ , I g '"
- ,tV to '. - r i , ': - - - •' ,! / - '
y
w
�
�" � - ' - • ��/ � � � - , \ \1 `� „-°'� � " r \ - " • , - - i ,.rig
r
I
i
`�;Ili,, � � � � �� •' �`� \ \� �� '� n4 - V
LL-
is
td
- A
o-In
1 y
ILL
NN
I
/ �M1
IL
� r
. I A
t - k. -A
r 8
41
I
✓ " ILL
dry, i ii M . f
�
ifLFILLis
N, oil st
13
ILL
\ � h
t
' \ y
�+�• _ {A6Sa VV'- �� v� •V .u' a* Edi �6 f
�- \
ct )
v , '4- • i t
�,IlL!,` ' _ - �1 � -i � � P' �� -1r, b .Y' � -� � `V1�4 �� y�y ., r � , Q • _ ' wy, � '_ �,! g]F
Y z 1C1'� �1 - � � � Q � �` � �j`, � 'I '�'�' •"'�`\ �� �' y. i .�� � 1. 74p ' .'� R�u� y�I
J, L p
' 1f .,� � „ � � � )tl _ OA. � � C � ,• �l VTS1 � _U \ �' S... V• � a> e ,�
ITS,
1f 4�,V 0 Say �T S• }}> f �� � ' �'
\ p p " I� ` -� �" t r=}.• :i- .1 , • ;t Zt 7 U �� D -1:�_ 1 �, ( � •ysz cel � ;
N z � �' w � � CS � \� — �\tel\ �, v �Z �' }� - �1` ? �'`a',ti � P• " I ' I .'I
Ilk
lk
IS
. h � 1t
r.�ui .e+•i......n .,-w..)memnr ...-+w .n.•er+w. w. -.nw•.+mn.M ...n.,...,..,,..u.n...e..-,....=..nw.w,.,.,i+m ...-..-. .re ... .+,+......mm .w.,.y..•.-canna. n„w.+.-sn-r+..,nnm+m,emwi.n.....n - -" _' \..�.- ...... ......... ., _ � �F -�.', . _. �INY�:�.. . }`