Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1000-86.-1-9 (2) .---:J ----.. '. .t k~_____ fl/mr,~mtd.,tJiUtl;ft ~ 1It'4lNI~ (;r~jJ ~, ""D b'; . ,Hol . \'!"\\\.!~ 1.....ii\IW\\1 U \\..,.., POB /j01, PECONIC, L. I., N.Y. 11958- r ':. ';)\lI)\\il>\.\l JU~Ea~ July 17, lCli37 TO\'Ifl P lallner f..'; ? lannin. ,-joard Tov:n ltall io';,::dn i~oad :3ou-tholo, L.I. l'lY 11971 d.e: Hichrnond Creek Farms Froposal for cJeveloprnent CentlciTlen: It has come to our attention that parties connected '~.ri th this project ha.ve stated that there are no endan:-;erej species in the area of Richmond Creek. Flease note the 8ttacheri letter from the '-)f~C shoc!dn~~ (3 lJreA'njown of terns an~ plovers. In 8.c1r1i tion, 1h'8 3rt? pttachH'J.:>~ a photo of signs in the a. -,-'aa. Also, ','J8 I->_ave on file affidavits from various inrii viduals e.Dcl 'J!il:-llife organizations statin;~ that they have seen the terns feedinn and restin;:r in t~e entiri? cree'<: area. ?leasc reconsider recorn;ileflliing clenial of the project. ?erha,r;s there will be a possibility of partial acc;uisi ti01-:' c:mci./or cO~lservation easements as surDl,et:'te.u n~ the UEC. Letter is attachedCo.... {)'~,~V- l).(..tU'!.J.fIO-t.J1 ~'OL~~ Vilma Louis8''-:a.rston President : '3 Encls. '" . . New York State Department of Environmental Conservation SUNY, Bldg. 40, Stony Brook, NY 11794 e ~ Henry G. Williams Commissioner June 4, 1987 Vilma Louise Water, Land, P.O. Box 159 Peconic I NY Marston, President Wildlife Protection Group 11958 Dear Ms. Marston: Thank you for your concern about the Endangered and Threatened wildlife at Richmond Creek. I hope the infonnation contained herein is useful to you. 1. Nesting Data (pairs) 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 Least Tern Piping Plover 10 o 1 o o o o 30 2 2. Management Efforts. Colonial waterbird nesting sites are managed cooperatively by DEC, The Nature Conservancy, and numerous other private groups and individuals. Generally, we protect active nesting sites by posting the perimeter of the colony; inactive nesting sites are not so protected. Where conditions warrant stronger protection, temporary fencing may be placed to preclude intrusion by humans, pets and vehicles. 3. Regulatory Actions. The State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) directs that impacts to endangered species be avoided through careful planning. It is the purpose of the Environmental Impact Statement process to ensure that this occurs. We will provide this information to the Town of Southold. Thank you for your interest in this issue. Please let me know if we can help you further. Sincerely, ~~cL~ 0: Steven Jay S Sr. Wildl' e 'ologist SJS:ki cc: H.D. Berger ....,.~ . . , " ~~.::<~ , " "',',.f {;7~ ..~:...~. '.'>;:'" ,I ..., ., . . ~ .... ~ New York State Department 01 Environmental Conservation Bureau of Marine Habitat Protection Bldg. 40 - SUNY Stony Brook, New York 11794 Henry G. Williams Commissioner March 30, 1987 . Ms. Vilma Louise Marston President Water, Land, Wildlife Protection Group Box 159 Peconic, New York 11958 Dear Ms. Marston: I am in receipt of your recent correspondence requesting consideration of a parcel of property for inclusion as a funded acquisition under the 1986 Environmental Quality Bond Act. When properly submitted to the Bureau for evaluation, a parcel will be judged on many factors including the natural resource value of the wetlands and vulnerability of the site. Due to the fact that a relatively small ampunt of money will be available for the acquisition of tidal wetlands and adjacent area proportional to the large amount of land suitable for acquisition, it is possible that some nominations may not be funded. However, the Bureau will investigate other means of pr~ction, such as partial acqUISiitlons and conservation easements. Please be assured that the site recommended by you will be evaluated, and I thank you for your interest. Sincerely, k~ .;J. k ~ h t>"- ':f{J KLK: fb Kenneth L. Koetzner, Chief Ik~:r~rfw ~"""J'L /I"" ; f Will j, '" ~ . . . :-'}::'l'~ . "'I'lORIs.. II . ., UIIIIl.fIllIlII.... .,'.---.-....... .. : ,"...IlIT......1I111._'-WII_ if'~1i;.,"i,~I:..=I...-a=::::.. ~.,>/.,,1fc;r;t;i..~...,. !!""'" . ;"'P"'""'-'-._--!!IIIIIIIIiI.. '" ':. '-';.;"';,..._-.........___.co,,, ....~.. ,'" '-: 1'-';':.l1li...........11..... .........~_t~!i fi-:, it.:~~'::~~~::.-::.~ :~~~X ~. I ' ~ ~ '. < '~ ' '- ;;;::;:"~.........~...,lIU_..-.:.L; . -.' " - '-(!i~.' ,<!f.;j\jlllll___ ''"'''''''. - - - ~ :-....~._- ", '- .: ,.Il -''''''''-;;l'..(.''w I~ --. . '~. :'~1"!~," IIIIr . _ ;" ~,,_ ." ... r di"i~"""'ll;P- ,-..-. -'-,'-';'i'~&4 ": r~,:~:'..;,':G~)I.:..': ,,~~,j(;~: ~ .. . ; ~\"-::<~ .....c "', . . . ~ -.. ~ New York State Department of Environmental Conservation .Bureau of Marine Habitat Protection Bldg. 40 - SUNY Stony Brook, New York 11794 Henry G. Williams Commissioner March 30, 1987 . Ms. Vilma Louise Marston President Water, Land, Wildlife Protection Group Box 159 Peconic, New York 11958 Dear Ms. Marston: I am in receipt of your recent correspondence requesting consideration of a parcel of property for inclusion as a funded acquisition under the 1986 Environmental Quality Bond Act. When properly submitted to the Bureau for evaluation, a parcel will be judged on many factors including the natural resource value of the wetlands and vulnerability of the site. Due to the fact that a relatively small ampunt of money will be available for the acquisition of tidal wetlands and adjacent area proportional to. the large amount of land sui table for acquisition, it is possible that some nominations may not be funded. Howeyer, the Bureau will investigate other means of p~~~ction, such as partial acquisitIons and conservation easements. please be assured that the site recommended by you will be evaluated, and I thank you for your interest. Sincerely, k~..;J. k~hf^-W3 KLK: fb Kenneth L. Koetzner, Chief /k .11 . ).4" ,.$Izrt, /JJ X' 11 <:;Ci/~ jlvu I.J~} ~n-f.j . -." !I/J1.{ i J- wi/(? ~ ~I . , ATTORNEYS AT LAW RECEIVED BY" S"u'iTHnlD T'." . i . :\. '~Ion ,u U (;/.11 I..". f,;;] VI} ;;iU G'~ ~ fJ8A<aM< MAIN ROAD SQUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971 J U fIL-.L-'1d987 LEFTERTS P. EDSON RUDOLPH H. BRUER {51 6176S~ 1222 (S 1 6) 76S~2S00 June 16, 1987 Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Town Hall Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Re: Richmond Creek Farms peconic, N.Y. Dear Mr. Orlowski: We would appreciate the Planning Board's comments with regard to the Draft Environmental Impact statement submitted for its review on April 20, 1987. Thank you in advance for your prompt attention to this matter. Sincerely, ,-) . '" 7k~BttffW-(~ L/:~B/df f' ,,-R~ ...---:J --" -Y' I g:, 'lJ Fl4.i k~~ . . tPmr, ZIZNi., tJil41ffe J! l'r"l<<liNl (;r""p ~=~, ~\l\l\\iU\l) r '.~' . \,,::D r ",l ~-,"i~~& li.i'il ~\;ru. h;..l...I.....\1 . POB /"1, PECONIC, L. I., N.Y. 11958- JU~.3~ ,July 17, 1CJ87 'l'O"'fl ~18Jlner v .-J larlnin ,-';0 a.r d TOll!n Hall j.;ain Hoad ~outhola. L.!. ~y 11971 he: i-i'ichrnond Creek F'arr:ls Proposal for development GentleI";'",en: It has come to our attention that parties connecterl '.'Ii t 1 this project h2ve staten that there are no endan?ereJ s~)eCie8 in the area of J.ichr.lOrl.j Creel.-:. ?leRse note the 8.ttached letter :rom tlT3 '-\i~C shO',rin'''' :1 ;)r(!A1"c3o',vn of' terns ar.j :")lov~r~~. In 8.cirii tion, ",'8 '3r:", pt::t8chin',,; a photo of sL~ns in t~e a. ..L'a2. ,:\lso, ','.Te :~ave 0-:1. fil,:'} 2.ff.'iciavits frOi'1 various inriividu8.1s 2_n-: '.'dl..-llifc or;~caniz8.tions statin,'~ that they have seen t::-.c terns fcedin'~ and restirL: in t:18 entir8 creel<: arC2. ?lease reconsider reC01~];:1endin~': denial ot~ the project. Perhap~ there ll.:ill be a possibility ai' partial acqui~i tj on 2nci/or cO;:-lservation easements as GU'!.,-;e~t<=:d l1:( the DEC. Letter is attacncdC&Jr iJl-~<,- ()..GtU'SJ+i01.J,. > >> very, truly YO~'r) . (Q ~~>p~~ ']ilmR LouL:.lp- a.rston ?residcnt ':ncls. . . New York State Department of Environmental Conservation SUNY, Bldg. 40, Stony Brook, NY 11794 e ~ Henry G, Williams Commissioner June 4, 1987 Vilma Louise Wa ter I Land, P.O. Box 159 peconic, NY Marston, President Wildlife Protection Group 11958 Dear Ms. Marston: Thank you for your concern about the Endangered and Threatened wildlife at Richmond Creek. I hope the information contained herein is useful to you. 1. Nesting Data (pairs) 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 Least Tern Piping Plover 10 o 1 o o o o 30 2 2. Management Efforts. Colonial waterbird nesting sites are managed cooperatively by DEC, The Nature Conservancy, and numerous other private groups and individuals. Generally, we protect active nesting sites by posting the perimeter of the colony; inactive nesting sites are not so protected. Where conditions warrant stronger protection, temporary fencing may be placed to preclude intrusion by humans, pets and vehicles. 3. Regulatory Actions. The State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) directs that impacts to endangered species be avoided through careful planning. It is the purpose of the Environmental Impact Statement process to ensure that this occurs. We will provide this information to the Town of Southold. Thank you for your interest in this issue. Please let me know if we can help you further. Sincerely, SJS:ki cc: H.D. Berger ~~cL o:~ Steven Jay S a Sr. Wildl' e 'ologist Si:j~ SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES INC. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS . .. St", <.,'.!," fJ"', ."., ..: ''''. , I . " MEMORANDUM TO: Southold Planning Board FROM: Szepatowski Associates, Inc. RE: Richmond Creek Farms DEIS DATE: July 8, 1987 We have reviewed the above mentioned DEIS and find deficiencies serious enough to warrant the publication of a supplement before full public review of the project is appropriate. The document now offered does not fully cover the issues and lacks pertinent data. Our comments are keyed to the page numbers in the DEIS. Page 7 An existing and growing demand for residential construction sites is sited as a"public need". This may be a need for a private landowner, but it is not a public need. If this is all that is being fulfilled, then this project does not fulfill anv public need. Page 14 No subdivision plan is included in the DEIS to assist the reader in following the discussion. No objective evaluation of the assessments presented can be made with out a subdivision plan in the document. Page 14-15 How will the pond/basin be designed to create a "natural wetland system", etc.? Page 15 A feasibility study for the extension of water to serve this project is underway but not complete. Feasibility is assumed, but not concluded. Suppose it is not feasible, can this project proceed? The authors say it cannot, but are proceeding with it anyway. We would recommend that the DEIS include in it the results of the feasibilty study or else there may not be a project. RECEIVED BY soumow mWN PlANNING BOARU JUL 10 1987 DATE 2} ~ ~\rr<1g<lflSe([ Ave. kUl1e.stown, P.I 02835 {-;OIJ 423-0430 . .. Page 16 A fifty foot wide vegetative buffer "along the Richmond Creek shoreline" is proposed, but no evidence is given that this is sufficient, nor where this buffer will be measured from, nor how it will be maintained. A seventy five foot structural improvement setback is also proposed. Does this mean septic tanks as well? Will designs meet SCDHS criteria re depth to groundwater? Turf limitations likewise are not specified. Wetlands on the plan in the Planning Board office do not correspond with field conditions. Page 17 Table 1 shows a conversion of agricultural lands to roads, but no residential lots being created; this Table needs to be reworked. Page 18 How will construction activities be regulated? Soils on the site have been disturbed already by the applicant and not regraded or planted. Page 24 & Exhibit 21 The locations are not shown in the DEIS. Page 62-65 Stormwater management systems are mitigation measures, not beneficial impacts. Pesticide/nitrate concentrations are not calculated. They should be to substantiate the claims made. Preservation of significant vegetative communities are not documented. How is the creation of a pond/wetland area and incoporation into a stormwater management system a beneficial impact? It is not shown how the municipal cost/benefit impact will benefit the town. This needs to be calculated. How will areas of archaelogical significance be preserved? , .~~/;L", i :_../ !.J SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES INC. UWIRONMENj,\1 CON\Llll,\', I', ,C, "~I """" " '-..,.,./"- "j .-, Page 68-70 Page 71 Page 72 . \Je Sanitary system envelopes must show on the proposed subdivision plans in order to meet proposed setbacks. How will property owners be "encouraged" to utilize native vegetation? It has not been demonstrated that a fifty foot buffer is sufficient. How will the recommendations of the L.I. Archaeological Project be adhered to? Who will monitor construction activity? What if erosion takes place? There is no erosion/ sedimentation control plan presented in the DEIS. One is needed. Also, stockpiled topsoil will erode unless checked. Simple seeding of disturbed areas composed of Riverhead, Plymouth and Carver soils will not insure revegetation. Docks and moorings are not unavoidable' adverse . impacts. They can and shoUld be precluded by convenants and restrictions against any new docks and moorings in Richmond Creek, which has been designated a significant fish and wildlife habitat. Denitrification is not mentioned as an alternative. It should be addressed. Alternative designs including one with smaller lots and one with more protection to Richmond Creek, its associated wetlands, and floodplain should be shown. "'" . ,~(. SZEPATOWSK/ ASSOCIATES INC. L'JVIRONMLN1AI C()~,!1l r", I', (~. :; ~ "'-,,- '--/ ,. .,. Page 16 A fifty foot wide vegetative buffer "along the Richmond Creek shoreline" is proposed, but no evidence is given that this is sufficient, nor where this buffer will be measured from, nor how it will be maintained. A seventy five foot structural improvement setback is also proposed. Does this mean septic tanks as well? Will designs meet SCDHS criteria re depth to groundwater? Turf limitations likewise are not specified. Wetlands on the plan in the Planning Board office do not correspond with field conditions. Page 17 Table 1 shows a conversion of agricultural lands to roads, but no residential lots being created; this Table needs to be reworked. Page 18 How will construction activities be regulated? Soils on the site have been disturbed already by the applicant and not regraded or planted. Page 24 & Exhibit 21 The locations are not shown in the DEIS. Page 62-65 Stormwater management systems are mitigation measures, not beneficial impacts. Pesticide/nitrate concentrations are not calculated. They should be to substantiate the claims made. Preservation of significant vegetative communities are not documented. How is the creation of a pond/wetland area and incoporation into a stormwater management system a beneficial impact? It is not shown how the municipal cost/benefit impact will benefit the town. This needs to be calculated. How will areas of archaelogical significance be preserved? S41 SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES INC. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS S41 ". \ . ( .. Page 68-70 Sanitary system envelopes must show on the proposed subdivision plans in order to meet proposed setbacks. How will property owners be RencouragedR to utilize native vegetation? It has not been demonstrated that a fifty foot buffer is sufficient. How will the recommendations of the L.I. Archaeological Project be adhered to? Who will monitor construction activity? What if erosion takes place? There is no erosion/ sedimentation control plan presented in the DEIS. One is needed. Also, stockpiled topsoil will erode unless checked. Simple seeding of disturbed areas composed of Riverhead, Plymouth and Carver soils will not insure revegetation. Page 71 Docks and moorings are n21 unavoidable adverse impacts. They can and should be precluded by convenants and restrictions against any new docks and moorings in Richmond Creek, which has been designated a significant fish and wildlife habitat. Page 72 Denitrification is not mentioned as an alternative. It should be addressed. Alternative designs including one with smaller lots and one with more protection to Richmond Creek, its associated wetlands, and floodplain should be shown. S41 SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES INC ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULfANTS S41 \ -' <::2.. I 9 . RECEiVED BY . C)\O - I - ~GUlHOLD lUr,ii rLAi\:;liill ~UAi." ~QQ7 The Incorporated Long Island Chapter. DATE '-.JV/ New York State Archaeological Association P.o. Box 268, Southold, N.Y. 11971 Organized 1925-Incorporated 1943 516-765-5577 June 14, 1987 Southold Town Planner Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, NY 11091 Dear Sir; We have been made aware of a plan to subdivide Richmond Creek Farms, Town of Southold, Main Road opposite Depot Lane, Peconic, Long Island, bordering on Richmond Creek. We would like to comment on the above plan. On Long Island's North Fork, all land which is by or near a body of water (creek, pond, seasonal run-off, etc) is considered archaeological sensitive. We understand that Indian material has been recovered from this site and that bulldozing has been done (despite a violation having been issued for same). We strongly encourage you to re-think approval for this subdivision. Long Island's Indian heritage is precious to all and should not be destroyed. " Yours truly, IA)&IJ.~ - Walter Smith, ~ / Ellen Barce , Member, Board of Trustees cc Southold Town Supervisor Murphy V. M. Marston, Water, Land, Wildlife Protection Group '\ ~~ ~'$:. I"~J-' \D- ( Introduction ( The following checklist of topics is intended as a starting point for developing a detailed scope for a project.specific Draft Environmental Impact Statement. Typically, no one project will require a discussion of all the topic areas contained in this document. Through the scoping process, this list of topics should be refined to reflect issues unique to the proposed project. Topic areas may be deleted, added, or elaborated upon, to arrive at the final seoping document. The purpose of the checklist format is to identify the basic topic areas for the Draft EIS. This is accomplished by reviewing the list and placing a check in the box located to the left of those topics which should be discussed. The model scoping checklist can also be used as a worksheet, including comments, suggestions and identification of the particular example(s) that are relevant to a detailed discussion of the topic or issue that has been check. ed. Conversely, those topics which are not checked, are issues not associated with the project, and may be eliminated from discussion in the Draft EIS. Minimum requirements for any Draft EIS are already checked for convenience. The next step is to expand the list to include or elaborate on those topics unique to the proposed project. A blank sheet is included at the end of the checklist for such additional information. The scoping process involves several steps in addition to compiling a list of topics. Scoping also includes discussiors on the quantity and quality of information required and the methods for obtaining that data. NOTE: This checklist was designed to be used in conjunction with the section on seoping con- tained in the SEQR Guideline.Draft and Final EIS's. It is also important to emphasize that this checklist should serve only as a model to assist in the seoping of a Draft EIS. It should not be used as a substitute for actively scoping a Draft EIS for a specific pro. ject. ( ....... Cover Sheet All EIS's (Draft or Final) shall begin with a cover sheet that indicates: A. Whether it is a draft or final statement B. Name or other descriptive title of the project C. Location (county and town, village or city) of the project D. Name and address of the lead agency which required preparation of the statement and the name and telephone number of a person at the agency to be contacted for further in. formation E. Name and address of the preparers of any portion of the statement and a contact name and telephone number F. Date of acceptance of the Draft EIS G. In the case of a Draft EIS, the deadline date by which comments are due should be in- dicated I. Table of Contents and Summary A table of contents and a brief summary are reo quired for Draft and Final EIS's exceeding ]0 pages in length. However, one should include these features in any size EIS to provide the review agency with easy reference to EIS topics. The summary should Include: A. Brief description of the action B. Significant, beneficial and adverse impacts, (issues of controversy must be specified) C. Mitigation measures proposed D. Alternatives considered E. Matters to be decided (permits, approvals, funding) Ill. Description of the Proposed Action Place a check in the box to the left of those topics to be included in the draft EIS. B" A. PROJECT PURPOSE AND NEED ]. Background and history 2. Public need for the project, and municipality objectives based on adopted community development plans 3. Objectives of the project sponsor C.] " I WB. LOCATION 1. Establish geographic boundaries of the project (use of regional and local scale maps is recommended) 2. Description of access to site 3. Description of existing zoning of propos- ed site 4. Other: 1M' C. DESIGN AND LAYOUT "" I. Total site area a.) proposed impervious surface area (roofs. parking lots, roads) b.) amount of land to be cleared c.) open space 2. Structures a.) gross leaseable area (GLA), if ap' plicable b.) layout of buildings (attached. enclos. ed, separate) c.) site plans and profile views 3. Parking a.) pavement area b.) number of spaces and layout 4. Other: g- D. CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION I. Construction a.) total construction period anticipated b.) schedule of construction . c.) future potential development. on site or on adjoining properties d.) other: 2. Operation a.) type of operation b.) schedule of operation c.)other: o E. CLOSURE AND POST CLOSURE PLANS (for projects of planned limited life such as landfills) II;} F. APPROVALS I. Required changes or variances to the zon. ing regulations 2. Other permit approval or funding reo quirements . h. E . ~ I V. nVlronmental Setting Place a check in the box to the left of those topics to be included in the Draft EIS. ( Natural Resources Ii6 A. GEOLOGY ~ I. Subsurface a.) composition and thickness of subsurface material examples: -depth to, and nature of. bed- rock formations and imperme- able layers -occurrence of an extractive mineral resource -usefulness as construction material b.) earthquake potential M 2. Surface ... a.) list of soil types "'" b.) discussion of soil characteristics examples: -physical properties (indication of soils hydrological (infiltra. tion) capabilities) -engineering properties (soil bearing capacity) ""c.) distribution of soil types at pro. ject site ... d.) suitability for use examples: -agriculture -recreation -construction -mining e.) other: I iM'" 3. Topography ~ C4n\Gur -a.) description of topography at pro- ject site examples: -slopes -prominent or unique features .... b.) description of topography of sur. rounding area ~ B. WATER RESOURCES ~ I. Groundwater ....,a.) location and description of aquifers and recharge areas examples: -depth to water table -seasonal variation -quality -quantity -flow ( ~ C.2 . ~ Human Resources . I!?" A. TRANSPORT A TION D 1. Transportation services a.) description of the size, capacity and condition of services examples: -roads. canals, railroads, bridges -parking facilities -traffic control b.) description of current level of use of services examples: -a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic flow -vehicle mix -sources of existing traffic volume D 2. Public transportation a.) description of the current availability of service b.) description of present level of use D 3. Pedestrian environment D 4. Other: ~ B. LAND USE AND ZONING D 1. Existing land use and zoning a.) description of the existing land use of the project site and the surrounding area examples: -commercial -residential -agricultural -business -retail -industrial -vacant b.) description of the existing zoning of site and surrounding area D 2. land use plans a.) description of any land use plans or master plans which include project site and surrounding area b.) discussion of future development trends or pressures D 3. Other: ErC. COMMUNITY SERVICES (for this section in. clude a list of existing facilities and a discus. sion of existing levels of usage and pro. jected future needs) D 1. Educational facilities D 2. Police protection D 3. Fire protection D 4. Health care facilities D 5. Social services D 6. Recreational facilities D 7. Utilities D 8. Other: I3'D. DEMOGRAPHY D 1. Population characteristics a.) discussion of the existing popula- tion parameters examples: -distribution -density -household size and composi- tion b.) discussion of projections for population growth D 2. Other: ~. CULTURAL RESOURCES ~ 1. Visual resources a.) description of the physical character of the community example: -urban vs. rural b.) description of natural areas of significant scenic value c.) identification of structures of significant architectural design ~. Historic and archaeological resources .........) location and description of historic areas or structures listed on State or National Register or designated by the community ""'b.) identification of sites having potential significant ar- chaeological value C-4 ( - -b.) identification of present uses and level of use of groundwater examples: -location of existinR wells -public/private water supply -industrial uses -agricultural uses [J;l.oo 2. Surface water ft~ ({~ ....... a.) location and description of sur- face waters located on project site or those that may be in. f1uenced by the project examples: -seasonal variation -quality -classification according to New York State Department of Health b.) identification of uses and level of use of all surface waters examples: -public/private water supply -industrial uses -agricultural uses -recreation ....c.) description of existing drainage areas, patterns and channels ... d.) discussion of potential for flooding, siltation, erosion and eutrophication of water sources r!3- C. AIR RESOURCES o t. Climate a.) discussion of seasonal variations and extremes exam pies: -temperature -humidity -precipitation -wind '- o 2. Air quality a.) description of existing air quality ievels examples: -list the National and State Air Quality Standards for the pro- ject area and the compliance status for each standard b.) identification of existing sources or pollutants. fixed or mobile c.) identification of any sensitive receptors in project area examples: -hospitals, schools, nursing homes, parks d.) description of existing monitor- ing program (if applicable) 0""D. TERRESTRIAL AND AQUATIC ECOLOGY ~ t. Vegetation . ~.) list vegetation types on the pro- ject site and within the surround- ing area ...... b.) discussion of site vegetation characteristics examples: -species present and abundance -age -size -distribution -dominance -community types -unique, rare and endangered species -value as habitat for wildlife -productivity ~. Fish and Wildlife .......) list of fish and wildlife species on the project site and within sur- rounding area, including migratory and resident species ...-1>.) discussion of fish and wildlife population characteristics examples: -species present and abundance -distribution -dominance -:-unique, rare and endangered species . -productivity 1!3" 3. Wetlands .....a.) list wetland areas within or con- tiguous to the project site ......n.) discuss wetland characteristics examples: -acreage -vegetative cover -classification - benefits of wetland such as flood and erosion control. recreation C.3 . . (\ ( o 3. Noise a.) identification of existing level of noise in the community b. identification of major sources of noise examples: -airports -major highways _ industrial/commercial facili. ties o 4. Other: ~4{+ lr*11L ... f--v. Significant Environmental Impacts Identify those aspects of the environmental set. ting in Section IV that may be adversely or beneficially affected by the proposed action and reo quire discussion. .... 111. MitigatlolblMenures fO Minimize. Environmen- tal Impact ~ JJ~ Describe measures to reduce or avoid potential adverse impacts identified in Section V. The follow. ing is a brief listing of typical measures used for some of the major areas of impact. l Natural Resources o A. GEOLOGY 1. Subsurface a.) use excavated material for land reclamation b.) use facility wastes (ash. sludge) for land reclamation c.) other: .....--2. Surface a.) use topsoil stockpiled during construction for restoration and landscaping b.) minimize disturbance of non. construction sites c.) design and implement soil ero. sion control plan d.) other: ........ 3. Topography a.) avoid construction on areas of steep slope b.) design adequate soil erosion devices to protect areas of steep slope c.) other: 1Jd-13. WATER RESOURCES a.-1-- Groundwater a.) design adequate system of treat. ment for stormwater runoff prior to recharge of groundwater b.) maintain permeable areas on the site c.) institute a program for monitor. ing water quality in adjacent wells d.) other: ..........2. Surface water a.) ensure use of soil erosion control techniques during construction and operation to avoid siltation examples: -hay bales -temporary restoration of vegetation to disturbed areas -landscaping b.) design adequate stormwater con. trol system c.) restrict use of salt or sand for road and parking area snow removal d.) avoid direct discharges to surface water resources e.) other: o C. AIR RESOURCES 1. Air quality a.) assure proper construction prac. tices examples: -fugitive dust control -proper operation and maintenance of construction equipment b.) design traffic improvements to reduce congestion and vehicle delay c.) install and ensure the proper operation of emission control devices d.) initiate a program for monitoring of air quality e.) other: C.5 ~. TERRESTRIAL AND AQUA TIC ECOLOGY a--1. Vegetation a.) restrict clearing to only those areas necessary b.) preserve part of site as a natural area c.) after construction, landscape site with naturally occurring vegeta- tion d.) purchase open space at another location and dedicate to local government or conservation organization e.) other: ..,.2. Fish and Wildlife a.) provide adequate habitat (shelter and food) for remaining wildlife species b.) schedule construction to avoid sensitive periods of fish and wildlife life cycles c.) other: Human Resources B" A. TRANSPORTATION ....t. Transportation services a.) design adequate and safe access to project site to handle pro. jected traffic flow b.) install adequate traffic control devices c.) optimize use of parking areas d.) encourage car pooling and opera- tion of facility during non.peak traffic times e.) design special routing and restricted hours for delivery truck traffic f.) other: 2. Public transportation a.) adjust public transportation routes and schedules to service the faci Iity b.) encourage use of public transpor- tation by using incentive pro- grams for employees or by sell- ing tickets in facility c.) other: ( lid-1t. LAND USE AND ZONING 1. Existing land use and zoning a.) design project to comply with ex- isting land use plans b.) design functional and visually ap- pealing facility to set standard and precedent for future surrounding land use c.) other: o C. COMMUNITY SERVICES 1. Police protection a.) minimize local police protection responsibilities by providing private security force b.) provide security systems, alarms for facility c.) provide equipment, funds or ser- vices directly to the community d.) other: 2. Fire protection a.) use construction materials that minimize fire hazards b.) incorporate sprinkler and alarm systems into building design c.) provide equipment, funds or ser- vices directly to the community d.) other: 3. Utilities a.) install utility services undergrolmd b.) incorporate water saving fixtures into facility design c.) incorporate energy.saving measures into facility design d.) other: ~D. CULTURAL RESOURCES \,.--I. Visual resources a.) design exterior of structure to physically blend with existing surroundings b.) minimize visual impact through thoughtful and innovative design of lighting and signs (consider: height, size, intensity, glare and hours of lighting operation) c.) design landscaping to be visually pleasing and to serve as a buffer between surrounding land uses. parking areas, operational equip- ment and facilities d.)other: ( E? C-6 .... , J . ( ( t--2'. Historic and archaeologic resources ......., a.)allow historical and ar- chaeological officials access to the project site during excavation b.) devote space within project site 0...-.-- to a display of historical and ar. chaeological artifacts of local in. terest c.) preserve architecturally signifi- _ cant structures and make a photographic and statistical record of those that must be destroyed d.) other: 3. Noise a.) schedule construction/operation to occur during "normal business" hours minimizing noise impact during sensitive times (early morning, night) b.) assure adherence to construction noise standards c.) design berms and landscaping to block and absorb noise d.) other: "'""'ITII. Adverse Environmental Effects that Cannot be Avoided if the Project is Implemented Identify those adverse environmental effects in Section V that can be expected to occur regardless of the mitigation measures considered in Section VI. l .... 'VIII. Alternatives This section contains categories of alternatives with examples. Discussion of each alternative should be at a level sufficient to permit a com- parative assessment of costs, benefits and en. vironmental risks for each alternative. It is not ac. ceptable to make simple assertions that a particular alternative is or is not feasible. Identify those categories of alternatives which should be included in the EIS by placing a check in the box located to the left of the topic. ff A. ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES ...-1. Site layout a.) density and location of structures b.) location of access routes, park- ing and utility routes ~. Orientation a.) compatibility with slope and drainage patterns b.) site size and setback re- quirements 3. Technology a.) pollution control equipment b.)innovative vs. proven technologies 4. Mix of activities a.) addition of businesses which would affect the operational nature of the facility DESIGN AND o B. ALTERNATIVE SITES 1. Limiting factors a.) availability of land b.) suitability of alternate site to ac- comodate design requirements c.) availability of utilities d.) suitable market area e.) compatibility with local zoning and master plan f.) compatibility with regional ob. jectives g.) accessibility of site to Vansporta. tion routes and the service population g-c. ALTERNATIVE SIZE 1. Increase or decrease project size to minimize possible impacts 2. Increase or decrease project size to correspond to market and com- munity needs I!3-"D. ALTERNATIVE CONSTRUCTION/OPERA-' TION SCHEDULING 1. Commence construction at a dif. ferent time 2. Phase construction/operation 3. Restrict construction/operation work schedule C-7 ( 13-E. ALTERNATIVE LAND USE · ~I. Effects on the (lse and Conservation of Energy 1. Suitability of site for other uses Resources a.) other types of commercial uses Identify the energy sources to be used, an- b.) other types of industry ticipated levels of consumption and ways to reduce c.) different types of housing energy consumption. The examples listed below are d.) other: typical issues to be considered when addressing this 2. Public vs. private use topic. ~. NO ACTION 1. Impacts of no action a.) effect on public need b.) effect on private developers' need c.) beneficial or adverse en- vironmental impacts o G. OTHER: ... ...,X. Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources Identify those natural and human resources listed in Section IV that will be consumed, converted or made unavailable for future use. X. Growth Inducing Aspects Describe in this section the potential growth aspects the proposed project may have. Listed below are examples of topics that are typically af. fected by the growth induced by a project. o A. POPULATION 1. Increases in business and resident population due to the creation or relocation of business 2. Increases in resident population due to the construction of housing o B. SUPPORT FACILITIES 1. Businesses created to serve the in- creased population 2. Service industries created to supply new facility o C. DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL 1. Introduction or improvement of in- frastructure (roads. waste disposal, sewers. water) to service proposed project 2. Creation of further growth potential by construction of improved in- frastructure o D. OTHER: o A. PROPOSED ENERGY SOURCES AND ALTERNATIVES o B. ANTICIPATED SHORT.TERM/LONG-TERM LEVELS OF ENERGY CONSUMPTION o C. INDIRECT EFFECTS ON ENERGY CON- SUMPTION 1. Increased dependence on automobile use 2. Increased levels of traffic due to pro. posed project o D. ENERGY CONSERVATION MEASURES 1. Design methods to reduce fuel use for heating, cooling. and lighting a.) conventional technology examples: -insulation -thermopane windows -use of low wattage lights b.) innovative technology examples: -heat pumps -solar panels -wind energy -use of waste heat from an in- dustrial plant c.) efficient layout examples: -orientation of structures in relation to summer and winter sunlight -clustering of structures to maximize common walls -shortening of utility runs -shared insulation and heating 2. Indirect energy benefits a.) location and design of facility to accomodate mass transit b.) use of shuttle buses c.) location of facility to minimize travel distance ( L t: o E. OTHER: C.8 ( ( l . . , "-XII. Appendices Following is a list of materials typically used in support of the EIS. A. List of underlying studies. reports and infor. mation considered and relied on in preparing state. ment B. List all federal, state, regional, or local agen. cies, organizations, consultants and private persons consulted in preparing the statement C. Technical exhibits (if any) at a legible scale D. Relevant correspondence regarding the pro. jects may be included (required in the Final EIS) Addltlollal Draft EIS Scoplng Topics Indicate any additional topics for discussion in the Draft EIS. Attach additional sheets if necessary. C-g 10'80 - eto - , -q ... RECEiVED BY . ~UU1HOLO lO\'iii i'lJ\idJiG ~UA JUN 16 1OOf-~. The Incorporated Long Island Chapter DATE I New York State Archaeological Association P.O. Box 268, Southold, N.Y. 11971 ./. Organized 1925-Incorporated 1943 ~~ ~ 516-765-5577 ----pt-J . I (/q__I.,,~1 Planner 'Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, NY 11091 ~ June 14, 1987 Dear Sir; We have been made aware of a plan to subdivide RichmOnd Cre.ak..FiU"JRS, Town of Southold, Main Road opposite ~1~~erQt Lane, Peconic, Long Island, bordering on Richmond Creek. We would like to comment on the above plan. On Long Island's North Fork, all land which is by or near a body of water (creek, pond, seasonal run-off, etc) is considered archaeological sensitive. We understand that Indian material has been recovered from this site and that bulldozing has been done (despite a violation having been issued for same). We strongly encourage you to re-think approval for this subdivision. Long Island's Indian heritage is precious to all and should not be destroyed. '\ Yours truly, ~.,j.'~ - ~- Walter Smith, ~ / Ellen Barce , Member, Board of Trustees '\ ~~ ~~ cc Southold Town Supervisor Murphy V. M. Marston, Water, Land, Wildlife Protection Group . ATTORNEYS AT LAW . APR 3 0 7987 ~~ ad f!84<aM< MAIN ROAD SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971 LEFFERTS P. EDSON RUDOLPH H. BRUER (S 1 Eo) 765-1 222 (516) 765-2500 April 28, 1987 Southold Town Planning Board Town Hall Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Re: Map of Richmond Creek Farms Peconic, N.Y. Dear Sirs: Please advise this office whether you have completed your review of the Draft Environmental Impact statement, submitted to you in connection with the above referenced subdivision. If so, have you found the DEIS to be satisfactory and can the SEQR process move forward. Sin.c.-~te ~y, :~. I.. . '. ~- ({~~lPh . Bruer RHB/df cc: Mr. Daniel Marcucci ~S\U\~7 . . eX - '3 -81 Frank Mrs. Adele Groben, a resident of Wells Road, Peconic called yesterday (2/2/87) and asked me to refer this information to you. Mrs. Groben's son, Paul, spoke at the DEC meeting on January 29 and he stated that the Richmond Creek Farms proposal has 100 acres. He later realized that the application has 49 acres not 100. Mrs. Groben asked that you make note of the correct acreage of the project since this has a bearing on the impact of the proposal. ~~~ fES 9. ~ ~ cf~ ~ fl84<ae?< ,. ! ATTORNEYS AT LAW MAIN ROAD SOUTHOLD,NEWYORK 11971 LEFFERTS P. EDSON RUDOLPH H. BRUER (516) 765.1222 (516) 765-2500 February 26, 1987 Southold Town Planning Board Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Richmond Creek Farms Peconic, New York Dear Sirs: On behalf of our clients, the developers of Richmond Creek Farms, we submit herewith twelve (12) copies of the preliminary layout of this major subdivision, with road profiles. We respectfully request that this submission be reviewed at your earliest meeting date. Sincerely, a~ ~/V Rudolph H. Bruer ~ RHB/df Encs. cc: Mr. Daniel Marcucci Mr. Thomas J. Canavan, Jr. Mr. John DeReeder Young & Young, Land Surveyors Land Use Co. . . cf~ ad fJ8/1<aML ATTORNEYS AT LAW MAIN ROAD SDUTHOLO, NEW YORK 11971 LEFFERTS P. EDSON RUDOLPH H. BRUER (516) 765-' 222 (516) 765-2500 January 15, 1987 Southold Town planning Board Town Hall Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Re: Richmond Creek Farm peconic, N.Y. Dear Sirs: The purpose of this letter is to keep you apprized of the current status of the above subdivision. Our clients are in the process of obtaining, and will very shortly have, an Environmental Impact Statement. In addition, they continue to work with the Village of Greenport regarding the water supply for this proposed development. Please be aware that we are making every effort to move forward with this division of property. Sincerely, ~;~; "OJ ~l~.. ~, (. ~ 7. Brl~~~ R B/df Ene. cc: Mr. Thomas J. canavan, Jr. Mr. Daniel Marcucci Mr. John DeReeder Young & Young Land Use Co. Y' ~~~ '-' ~~ () J- Q ;gB? ~ ..... ~ New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Regulatory Affairs Unit Bldg. 40, SUNY, Rm. 219 Stony Brook, NY 11794 (516) 751-7900 Henry G. Williams Commissioner January 5, 1987 Mr. Glenn E. Land Use Co. P.O. Box 361, hTading River, Just North Country Rd. NY 11 7 92 Re: 10-85-1561 Richmond Creek Assoc. Dear Glenn: The technical staff has field inspected this proposal and reports the following: 1. Except for lots 19 and 22, the lots' building envelopes along the creek do not meet the 75' setback. Staff measurements are as follows: Lot 18 center of building envelope is 58 ' from high marsh. Lo t 20 NW corner of building envelope is 69' from high marsh. Lot 21 center of building envelope is 69' from high marsh. Lot 23 SW corner of building envelope is 66' , NW corner is 46' Lot 24 SW corner of building envelope is 51 ' , NW corner is 57' Lot 25 SW corner of building envelope is 55' . Lot 26 SW corner of building envelope is 54' . Lot 27 SW corner of building envelope is 67' . Lot 28 SW corner of building envelope is 62 I , NW corner is 62' . Please consider moving the building envelope back to meet 75' . Where the NI-,T corner is no t given, it should be in line with the nearest corner (as adjusted to be 75' back). 2. A 50' naturally vegetated buffer should be maintained along land- ward side of the tidal wetlands. 3. Each house should have dry wells to contain roof runoff or a 5 year storm. 4. No more than 20% of the upland area of each lot should be covered by inpervious structures/material. 5. There is to be no dredging of Richmond Creek. A revised plan (in triplicate) moving the building envelopes landward and other features as indicated above will need to be submitted and reviewed by DEC technical staff. Please reply within 90 dayS. If the revised plan is verified as acceptable, DEC will forward copy of said plan to the Town of Southold Planning Board, lead agency on this matter. ~r151 . . Glenn E. Just January 5, 1987 Page 2 Thank you for your anticpated cooperation. Very truly yours, M~ 11i(H,^-fL" Robert N. Thurber Senior Environmental Analyst RNT: j f ~,..~"u. ce: Bennet Orlowski ~ Hen r y P. Sm i t ~ - . );:;~~;r::,p;,r--~::-,:_-. ./ -A ~ I;,'; ;;::;'~;": zr::- '" 1..........7. Ps. December 20, i986 Paul V. Groben \ 3705 Wells Road . Peconic, New York G' ^ \./ v'/ - t-,- II, Y y(') i ,,r 1I If Honorable Paul Stoutenburg Southold Town Board Main Road Southold, New York Dear Mr. Stoutenburg: Please find enclosed a copy of a notice recently published in the Environmental News Bulletin re- garding a proposal by the Department of Environ- mental Conservation to designate certain areas as significant coastal fish and wildlife habitats. One of these areas is Richmond Creek, which borders my house on Wells Road, Peconic. A residential subdivision of approximately forty homes has been proposed for Wells Road. This sub- divis~on would border, and in some areas intrude, into the wetlands and wildlife habitat of Richmond Creek. In light of the DEC proposal, I respectfully ask that the Town of Southold take a closer look at the pro- posed subdivision and reconsider it insofar as it may impact on the priceless natural resources of Richmond Creek. Very truly y'ours, ?~ ( :.l)M-M Paul V. Groben .~ Enclosures cc: Supervisor, Town of Southold, Main Road, Southold New York State Division of Coastal Resources and Waterfront Revitalization, Attention Tom Hart, New York State D.O.S., 162, Washington Avenue, Albany, New York 12231 PVG/ms ~~~ ~\~ @~,,~~~ C~/.:;e l T 6., LD Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 August 14, 1986 '- Edson and Bruer Attorneys at Law ATTN: Diana Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Richmond Creek Farms Dear Diana: In accordance with your request, enclosed is a copy of the minutes for the scoping session on the above mentioned proposal. Very truly yours, ~iV Lt ')v\. ~ ~ +v.-- ~~e M. Schultze, Secretary Southold Town Planning Board enc. ~ :!J . . . J .. . - LAST OF A-rrI3-JDEts,. 2latUcND C(Z~'~5' d- /Jus~) 'DAVtD ~ILtLurA ,) , ~, (Y€L, ':::.,f')r.:u ?&n Lq/:5~ ~:&> T~ 'P1~Y' 7t:Y-/93'b " 4- " "c ---,"1 i/",I( "''; ;;t:fs-f~e- -'6 . ~ (" .1 ...;- ,/, ,,> '," L" cf' 71s< /'ffy; b.. ~." ,,) '"-.J' '."-~'- t..' ,?. c; fj o/~~~.~ I-~ ~~9'~J)JlJh, .~.~~ .76Q.-<<7~') ~vv~~ L..0~..'(.U> ,-u~..IJ.~' lc;,.5:-;L..~L7 - 'z{!~~ ./7~"'Pf 7,l-.//- 2, ?-01 ~t ~.d4.~ 71.fcA:. 73.i/-5}? ! , ,/JJ1C e - '.Q~ 1UzJ'Jk, J-:rf 5J?/ j;2. ~~ 160(/<<~fi~:'1 7~1~d-:4CJ9. /)1~ ~ ~ Jz~ .. 2:1'7'- -d,~a~. ,- -~~91aJ~...~ .2.,<3-01F~.. ?Jt'iL"",-\ IJ Z-'1~ -'r!L(:J .$!(E;"" It; 'h~ ') ~( - / ~ 0 ~ fl~N~ 7&'1- J9~ . ..... .~: ,.' -" ".' . . "~- -" ': ,- 1'0 ..." ~ ~ I? &.t ~. ~ 7~ L/__S7~ ~. ~~~~~/f . ....l~la~ "'I"I!!t1 ._--,,_._.~---_.-+. "--...,----.-. "---~-'- 'It.... .l,~-t-"'~.."." ,..~. - - ~ -. - . ~,-J: ~~ rCVVw~ ~ ~ 'I,! ~ ?~- iP -y V .~z a-v /(~ ~~ ff /~ L &i ,C; - f l~? ~ ~ ~. ~~. f ~;,f h' ~ h~~~ sF I tJ}~J-4 ct cJ ___ Iii ~ ti/J ~ ~~- - \ Q . pJ V~ ~~~~.~ n J/J lJ I v I- / ~~4/P"- j/Ld( ~ ~. ~~~i ,h~ t?~ h~ ' I ?;/azh ~ /~ ~ ~) ~. - ; 7~ ~ , '-1. j-o ~ :::: ~ ~~~ ~ ~~- s~ ~~//j' . ~r,~~~~ ~7~ //~_ 0,_ . vDr ~ // /~IJ '<-<-c..k . ~ . /V"~ L~ y: {i1c-&&!v /~d _ ~ ' ~ i' /..dj~ .-.:/ 7L ! ,/~ L/ ~ /S~ ;4/ : ! ! I I , I ~ ~'"~"-"~' ~ -~~ ~ -. ~;;/..~ 0~ ~ RECEIVED BY ~ ~ SOUTH~OJ~NJlANNI~~~gO ~ S'~,' J* ~~ a:; ~ f ~ h 'Ib-- [;4l! 'ir..,(, M1f J L ~ 1M ~~",,~~~ ~d. ~~ M. ~~~ ~ ~~/ ~ ~A...:.-- "'t ~~ CLI'? ' ~d1 ~~ J;7; r ~ItJ 1/901 my.. ~ 0J-? FRANCIS J. MURPHY SUPERVISOR AUG ... RVISOR MAIN ROAO SOUTHOLO, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1800 (516) 765-1939 August 4, 1986 Mr. and Mrs. Ben Kowalchuk Wells Road peconic, New York Dear Southold Towners; I appreciate you taking the time out of your day to write to myself and the Town Board. I have made copies of your letter opposing the proposed Richmond Creek Project and distributed them to the Town Board, Planning Board and The Board of Trustees. We will take your letter into consideration. Thank you again for your interest in Southold Town. FJM:btr VI, C\~~ tb\lo\ ~ t . ,- . . T D LD y Southold, N. Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 The Southold Town Planner, David Emilita, held a scoping session for the major subdivision of Richmond Creek Farms, at the Town Hall, on August 4, 1986 at 2:30 p.m. Present were: David Emilita, Town Planner Melissa Spiro, Planning Intern Ellen Larsen, Trustee Paul Stoutenbourgh, Councilman Vilma Marston, President Water, Land, Wildlife and resident Joan Kowalchuck, resident Ben Kowalchuk, resident Lura Krueger, resident Pat Lawther, resident Lance Lawther, resident Annette Knoblock, resident Marian James, resident Margaret Hallden, resident John deReeder Victor Lessard, Executive Administrator James Bryer, Planner Daniel O'Conner, resident Patricia C. Moore, legal assistant from Edson and Bruer Dan Marcucci, Principal Charles Bowman, Land Use Co. Howard Young, Land Surveyor (see attached list for signatures of attendees) * * * * * * * * * Mr. Emilita: I have to start off with apology for the postponed time of the scoping session, itwas to have been at 10:30 a.m. this morning and last week I was on vacation and unbeknownst to me Dr;'Koppleman scheduled an appointment at which I was requested, shall we say, to attend, so we had postponed this until this afternoon. I am sorry for the inconvenience but it was the only way we could get this underway the same day. For the record, I am passing around an attendance list so that we have a record of who was here today, and for the record I will quickly read the relevant notices for the tape. I would ask you that when you speak, since we do not have a secretary or stenographer, first time you speak would you "~ ~~ . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 2 8/4/86 kindly identify yourself so that when the minutes are transcribed the typist will know who the speaker was. Okay, thank you. We are here today, as a result of two processes, the subdivision rview process under the subdivision regulations, Town of Southold and the State Environmental Quality Review Act which brings us to this point, we have a sketch plan here dated March 7, 1986 which was approved by the Planning Board on March 24, 1986. And, at that time, the Planning Board requested that as a part of the application for preliminary, which would be the next step that a long environmental assessment would be prepared by the applicant. This was done so and submitted and was dated on the first of May, I believe. Yes, first of May. It was reviewed together with the application and on the first of July we completed a part II and Part III of the Long Environmental Assessment Form. Okay, on July 14, pursuant to the provisions of ARticle 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, Part 617 of Title 6 of the NY State Code, Rules and Regulations, which are the SEQRA regulations, and Chapter 44 of the Southold Town Code which implements SEQRA on the Town level, the Planning Board, as lead agency in the process does hereby determine that the action described below is a Type I action under SEQRA and is likely to have a significant effect on the environment. Also, on July 14, the Board took the following action and this is expreseed in a letter to Mr. Bruer who is the agent and representative of the group which is to develop this subdivision. Dear Mr. Bruer. Please let this confirm the following action taken by the Southold Town Planning Board, Monday, July 14, 1986. Whereas, Thomas Canavan, Brian Boehm, RW Group, Inc. and Long Shore Development Corp as contract vendees have heretofore applied to the Southold Town Planning Board for a cluster subdivision of 42 lots on 49.6 acres located at WElls Road and Main Raod, Peconic, Now therefore be it resolved as follows: 1. That pursutnat to the provision of Article 8 of the Environmental ConservationLaw; Part 617 of Title 6 of the New York State Codes, Rules and REgulations, and Chapter 44 of the Southold Town Code, the Southold Town Planning Board as lead agency, does hereby determine that the action proposed is a Type I action and is likely to have a significant effect on the einvironment. 2. That the Planning Board shall file and circulate such determination as required by the aforementiond law, rules, and code. 3. That the Planning Board immediately notify the applicant, Canavan, Boehm, RW Group, Inc. and Long Shore Development Corp., of this determination, and further request said applicant to prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) in accordance with the scop and contents required by the Planning Board and Town Planner, all in accordance with said law, rules and code. That in accordance with Chapter 44, SEction 20, the applicant is required to defray the cost of reviewing the DEIS, which includes the scoping session. The Planning Board determines that a deposit of $2,000 should be paid tothe Town prior to the date of the scoping session. 5. That a scoping session has been for August 4, which brings us up to date. What we will do is follow a pretty standard procedure using Appendix A, of the Model Scoping Checklist put forward by the DEC. What we will do is actually form the contents, this outline forms the contents of the Environmental Impact Statement. I will ','. ,',' . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 3 8/4/86 keep this or allow this to be a fairly free form discussion, for those of you who have not attendted one of these, probably want todiscuss these items as they first come somewhat out of context, but the reason we have the tape here is we will be able to put these all together and utilize the minutes and preparers of the impact statement will be able to utilize the minutes, will be albe to utilize the appendix form, will be able to utilize part II and part III which will all comprise some guidance as to what the impact statement will consist of. The next step following this will be obviously the preparation of the statement, it will be submitted to the Plannin Board as lead agency, they will review it and determine if it is complete and sufficient to review, inother words have all the subjects and all the subject matter that was requested, put in. If all that is in the statement then it will be open for formal public comment. That will be the next following step. Okay, Let's get right into it. First off, obviously, I'm going to read right from the outline so all these impact statements have some consistency. One, the first item, is the cover sheet and the applicant is guided by what exactly is outlined. Two table of contents and summary, three description of the proposed action. Item A, project purpose and need, one - background and history. Like any subdivision, this one has a peculiar and pertinent as to why it appears in the form and density it does. I think it will help explain to everyone who doesn't know why this particular concept is before us at this time., a description of this particular chain of subdivision will be helpful. Points two and three, the public need for the project and the objectives of the sponsor of the project should be explained. B. Location - geographic boundaries of the project shall be established. It appears to be fairly well depicted on the plan. ONe question that will come up and I would like to clarify this as soon as possible is what if any involvement in Richmond Creek itself, including the bottom are proposed as part of the project. In other words, will you be doing any dredging, any piling, any docks, any piers, any thing at all that is going outside of either the tie line or the approximate high water mark, conclude that in the statement. Item C - design and layout of the subdivision. In order to properly assess the impact, we would like to have a description including calculations, of which there are some already in the plan of the impervious surfaces to be created, the amount of runoff to be created and of course this will lead to a design which will hopefully minimize the amount of runoff which may evenually get into Richmond Creek. The next item involved, construction of the propoed development. We would like to know how many construction seasons are involved, if in fact, this application is striclty for a subdivision or whether the appliccant also intends to build a horne, which will also be relevant. We are looking at constructioninan environmentally, probably it is a sensative area and we do want to minimize to the utmost the adverse impacts on the areas ecology as we go from construction of any dwellings, roadways, drainage, septic and water supply, if any. I don't know the proposed method of water supply specified in Part I. I think we would have to know that. The last item ,'. . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 4 8/4/86 in that section involves approvals. We are talking about approvals of Town agencies as well as county, state, DOT, DEC, will have to review this proposal. I am not sure what other agencies would be involved at this point. Is there any questions at this point. Councilman Stoutenburgh: IN reference to location. line of this area, can we Dave, Paul Stoutenburgh, How are we locating the define that. Councilman. actual marsh Mr. Bowman: I believe it has been defined. Councilman Stoutenburgh: Who defined it? Mr. Bowman: It has been located. Councilman Stoutenburgh: By who? Mr. Bowman: By myself. Councilman Stoutenburgh: By yourself. Mr. Bowman: It has also been located on the ground by Howard. Mr. Emilita: Is that flag in the field? This flag, are the stakes out there. Councilman Stoutenburgh: The flags are there. Mr. Bowman: I believe they are. Ben Kowalchuck: Excuse me, my name is Ben Kowalchuck and I live on Wells Road and we walk in that area. There are flags there up to yesterday, there is a roadway there and flags are approximately 50' apart. Mr. Emilita: Okay. Mr. Kawalchuck: I don't know if that is marshland. Mr. Emiltia: That would have to be clarified. Mr. Young: Howard Young, land surveyor, I recently staked the building envelopes, landward, pardon me, the seaward end of the building envelopes. And, maybe those are the stakes there. Mr. Kowalchuck: Those aren't the marshland stakes. Mr. Young: NO. Mrs. Larsen: The seaward end of the building evnvelopes are staked. Mr. Young: They were a couple of weeks ago-. , ~ . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 5 8/4/86 Mr. Emilita: So, then we have.... Mrs. Larsen: the building are proposed Ellen Larsen, Town Trustee, the seaward envelopes are staked so all the building to be of the 75' landward mark. end of envelopes Mr. Young: Yes, and they marked by the lot numbers on the... Councilman Stoutenburgh: On the stakes. Mr. Young: Yes. Mr. Bowman: Chuck Bowman, Land Use Company: All the staking an~ of course, the verification of the wetland line per the NY State, DEC request and they would have to come out and actually re-verify, they have already made the inspection, they have already accepted the line, the stakes as Howie has set them now are just to make sure that we have them 75' from the line. Mrs. Larsen: Ellen Larsen, Trustee. There was an on-site inspection done by the DEC? Mr. Bowman: That is correct. Mrs. Larsen: What is this line being based on for tidal wetlands? Mr. Bowman: It is being based on what is on the ground. Mrs. Larsen: What is on the ground. Mr. Emilita: Have they issued a report, Chuck, or some kind of letter? Mr. Bowman: We've had, the last correspondence was really just to ask that the projects, that the lots and the building envelopes along Richmond Creek be staked so that they could pull their tape and make sure that the seaward side of the house were 75' from the line that has already been located. Okay, we have located the line to their satisfication but they want to see that the stakes now are 75' away. Mr. Emilita: Okay. Please state your name. Mrs. Maarsten: Vilma Marston. I'm a resident and President of the Water, Land and wildlife Group. WE are in the process of obtaining a map from Guildi's Office. It seems as though the configuration of the creek has changed since 1978-1979. There was a major dredging done in 1983, however, this creek ended about Spring Lane, now, it's three or four city blocks wide and long. So, I don't know how you are basing... Our concern here is, we have many concerns and as far as the boundaries goes, there is no existing map for whatever happened to that creek since 1979, we would like a full investigation and evaluation. WE have gone to the Engineering Corp. their maps do not agree ", . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 6 8/4/86 Mrs. Marston: , as far as we are concerned. This gentlemen just did some work. Mr. Lawther: My name is Lance Lawther and I am also a resident of Richmond Creek. I have been in contact with Suffok County Planning Board and I am in the process of now compiling aerial photographs starting in 1975 to the present. It is my observation that the N. en~reek has been extended 200-300 feet and I think that would ot the make (inaudible). Mr. Emilita: Okay. Maybe you could clarify the point. Mr. Bowman: For the residents, we are not proposing any additional in the creek. We are going by existing conditions as they are, we are not changing the shoreline or the creek at all. There is no dredging, there is no bulkheading. There is nothing going to be disturbed of the shoreline ares of the creek. Mrs. Marston: Well, we understand that. What we are concerned with is the fact that the creek it's configuration. Mr. Bowman: No, the maps that we are working with and that Mr. Young has just prepared this year. Mrs. Marston: The state does not have it neither does Koppleman's of ice. Mr. Bowman: The state does, Koppleman's wouldn't. The state DEC has applications in front of them, with the map and the map that's right there that Mr. Emilita has on the front table.... Mrs. Marston: Does not agree with the physical inspection and aerial photographs that were taken. We, when we were children, we used to go down that creek and a few years ago it was a narrow creek just down to Spring Lane, all of a sudden it becomes biogger. A map cannot agree with that. You can not change a state map without permits. And, there were no permits obtained I checked the State office, I checked the County, I checked the Board of Trustee office and they have no permits for extending that creek and changing. Whatever your plans, I don't know what you are basing the boundary line. In other words, it's a different configuration, where does it appear, where does the configuration of this creek appear on a legal map? Mr. Young: If they would lIke to a specific question regarding the surveyor the map that I'm preparing I would be glad to answer it, but I am really confused by the question, number one. And, of the observations that people have made in the past. And,I would like to make clear that I have not as yet prepared a survey for this property and if you read the map, this is the sketch plan stage and you can see that there is a procedure that we have to go through before we can file the map. And, we have to get past what we are doing now so that I can prepare my survey to continue with this project. So, I can't put the cart before the horse. In other words, I " . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 7 8/4/86 Mr. Young: have to survey it to locate the creek, I have to do alot of things. But, I can't do that for this municipality until they approve the sketch map. And, therfore,~the creek has I know changed, I know there has been dredging there over the years. Mrs. Marston: It wasn't dredging, it was deep scooping. Mr. Young: I don't care if it was deep scooped or shallow scooped or what, but I am a surveyor and I can only present this project to the Town as they request it to be presented. We are in the sketch plan stage and we prepared a sketch plans based on the best available information we have. I know that the bounds of the creek have changed slightly. But,.... Mr. Emilita: Okay, let me address this issue and decide how we are going to handle it. Okay, this plan has sketch plan approval, we are now developing the preliminary application. You said this does have sketch? Mr. Young: Right. Mr. Emilita: Okay, the required contour interval, if I am not mistaken, is two feet. And, you will need a survey of the high water mark and the other requirements that are contained int he subdivision regulations. The fact that there may have been past dredging in the creek, whether it had approval or not, is no involvement proposed in that same area at this time. I cannot see what relevance that has right now. Mrs. Marston: The relevance it has is that houses will be built and have waterfront property behind and that configuration goes back and people who have bought waterfront property will demand deep scooping of the creek... Mr. Emilita: Well, we can't be presumptious, this is not a process that can look forward and anticipate what some future occupant may want to do if there is another permit that needs to be gathered at that time, then that review will take place at that time. Mrs. Marston: Well, I am basing this on your state regulations. I have read the State Law and we can look into the future. In the outline it states any change in the community, any change in the fauna, any change in actual building, what will happen in the future. The proposed project will have in the future. That is a secondary impact statement in your State Regulations. I have followed the State guidelines. Mr. Kowalchuck: It certaintly would be silly not to think about the future when you develop it now. Mr. Emilita: I agree, but the project as proposed has no involvement .,' . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 8 8/4/86 Mr. Emilita: with the creek bottom itself. The fact that there was dredging at one point in the past presumedly was done correctly and legally and can't presume otherwise. Mrs. Marston: (inaudible) Mr. Emilita: How is this to be handled in the impact statement, it is not related. If you wish to submit your own evidence relating to the creek, we will consider it as a new development, but I am saying that because the applicant apparently has no wish to do anything in this creek. Mrs. Marston: The point I am trying to make now is you brought up the boundaries and the boundaries are not the natural boundaries as.... Mr. Emilita: They mayor may not be. High water mark in any shoreline continually changes, wetlands continually change. Mrs. Marston: I know they do. Mr. Emilita: They are not solid forever or .... Mrs. Marston: I know, I have a minor in ecology. Mr. Emilita: Okay, then we have to look at this are at the time of the applicationwas submitted. will be changes over time. WE have no.... as if they We know there Mrs. Marston: How do you... (inaudible). I know you think there will be no relevancy, are these houses... but we are concerned as taxpayers that when the people start demanding, as the Deep Hole Creek people are demanding, the dredging and the deep scooping because they are filled in... Mr. Emilita: Okay, then you have tovigilant at that time. You can't presume that they will do this. I don't see how that can be part of this application, presuming that future residents will want to have this creek dredged. How can you possiblly say that. Mrs. Marston: I can say that from past experience that people want the creeks dredged for their boats and they won't be able to get their boats out and if you sell 10 houses to people who think they have waterfront property and the waterfront is no longer their then they are going to demand that theis Town pay for it and Mr. Koppleman's office told me that in no way will the State of Suffolk County, will deep hole dredge, they will deep hole dredge as far as Spring Lane, but if the rest becomes swamp land, it is our problem here. According to the impact statement, that I feel this is part. Mr. Emilita: Creek, is not to be part of on its own at Proposed dredging at some unknown point of Richmond a part of this development and does not have this impact statement. That would be handled the time it is proposed. Okay. . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 9 8/4/86 Mrs. Marston: I did want to make this point to the developer. Speaker from the audience: According to Mr. Young's statement, he did not make an accurate survey of that Richmond Creek area. Is that correct Mr. Young? Mr. Young: That is correct, I am in the process of doing, this is the process now and I will have a map submitted to thePlanning Board at the proper time which depicts the creek as it exists today and depict the wetlands. This map as it says on the notes on the map was prepared from a topographic map of the five eastern towns, topographic survey , this was prepared from a map which Mr. Van Tuyl furnished to me which he had originally surveyed. This was a sketch plan to get started to have a meting of the minds withthe Planning Board. I have been retained by this developer to prepare the necessary subdivision map. I have done some of the field work, I have done some of the mapping but it is not them ap that you are looking at here. That map will be submitted and if it is not accurate, I'll shoot somebody... Speaker from the audience: Okay, my question is how would the stakes compare? Mr. Young: The stakes were put in by measuring back from the wetland 75'. It is a crazy thing that the NY State DEC doesn't understand. I can go out there and put a stake 75' form the wetlands, they measure the same 75' to see if I did it alright I guess. And, then we proceed from there, but you can't talk to the beauracy they have up there to explain the fact to them. Speaker from the audience: Excuse me, the technical point, is that 75' the closest point from the sidewall of the house that will be built, or is that the closest point where they can do any kind of development of impervious materials. Mr. Bowman: structure. That is the seaward corner of the most seawood Struction is defined as anything over 100'. Mr. Emilita: Okay, we are hitting upon the subject matter of the next section which is environmental setting of the site. And, let me go through the list of items which we should probably have addressed here. First of all, geology for which there are three subheadings. One is subsurface and that references to bedrock. I don't believe we need too much of a deep discussion here since bedrock is at least several feet under the surface. The second subheading is called sufficial geology and here we need a discussion of the soils that are on the site, the characteristics, the physical property, a perhaps a since we do apparently have a variety of soil on the site a mapping using the sCS soil survey would assist us in determining where the wetland and ares of high groundwater are. And the suitability for the proposed uses that these soils represent. Again, using the Soil Conservation surveys. Okay, the third subheading under . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 10 8/4/86 Mr. Emilita: geology is topography. You will be guided in depcition of topography by the subdivision regluations and I think we will let it go at that. The next major area is water resources and the first catagory is groundwater. You will need to know the location and description of any recharge or groundwater areas under the site and that description shall include the depth to the water tables, seasonal variations, quality, and okay,then we ask the question at this point; is an on-site supply anticipated. Mr. Young: I believe we are working both ways right now, Dave. For municiple and for individual, we are exploring both possibilites for wells and sanitary and water. Mr. Emilita: If you arrive at the conclusion that on-site water, with either method applied, we'll have to have the approval of the health department. Mr. Young: We have test wells on the site and we have some results. Mr. Emilita: Groundwater quality and direction of flow will be most important since it is possible that there may be some underflow into the creek directly from the site and we will need to know what it is. Mrs. Larsen: (inaudible) Mr. Emilita: If on site water is to be used, we will have a question of the dynamics of the interface what will happen. Once that decision is made by the applicant, that will have to be addressed. Mrs. Marston: This is from the US Department of Soil and Conservation Report, 1980, discussed the swales, and the groundwter and what would happen to the creek and to the wells of the people water supply, people on Wells Road. The people on Wells Road already have contamination... inaudible.. there is bacteria in the water. I think that there would have to be another United States Department of Agriculture Report, because in their old report they are actually very much against progress. They say there are environmental impacts and on the water of creek for the fishing industry and on the drinking water. Mr. Emilita: Could you summarize precisely what your comment is. Mrs. Marston: Number one, as far as the water goes, I have spoken to the department of Health and they have not issued any kind of permit for the water and they will not issue permits for wells, but they will have to hookup is what I was told by the director, (inaudible). According to this United States Department of Agriculture and Soil Conservation Report, they have their doubts that the, I 'm not a geologist, but they have doubts that the underground water, the surface water, polluted water, contaiminated water, will go into the groundwater and go into the soil and evenutally go into the creek. And they have the tidal marshes located along the creek and they . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 11 8/4/86 Mrs. Marston: stablize the vegatative cover, but they are very concerned about the proposed .... (inaudible) Mr. Emilita: Well, the health department would have jurisdiction over water supply, sewage questions. The soil conservation service gives no approval over water supply and septic systems. Mrs. Marston: I know they don't but as an impact it does have a bearing on what happens to the creek. Right now, we are seeing detergents in the creek, we are seeing fecal matter in the creek, right now. Speaker from the audience: We've seen it. Mr. Emilita: Okay, that is quite possible, but again that is a Health Department matter and not an Agricultural Department matter. Mrs. Marston: Well, it is on Agricultural Department stationery right in the file of the Planning Baord. Mr. Emilita: Okay then they will be given a copy of the impact statement to review. Mr. Bowman: Chuck Bowman, Land Use Company, we will be useing Soil Conservation surveys of the soilsin the area, as you mentioned you wanted us, and we will go into the suitablility of the site to support a residential subdivisionand the types of soils. So that will be included in there by Soil Conservation data. Mr. Emilita: Okay, should be again under groundwater, subsection groundwater. Should be identification of the present uses and levels of groundwater in this vicinity. And, that includes, private wells, public water supplies, if any, if there are any in the vicinity and any agricultura~ on-going agricultural us~ of groundwater that would be affected by the supply and disposal of septic waste. Okay, the second subheading under water resouces would be surface water and here we would be asking the applicant to address Richmond Creek itself. I will read from the outline. The description of the surface water located on and near the project site and in that discussion there will be included the following characteristics of the creek itself, greater flow, tidal rains, classification according to the State. Description of the drainage patterns and channel waves which wind up speeding into the creek. We need a discussion of the potential for flooding on this site. The potential for erosion, siltation and other types of effects given the fact that there will be an upland distrubance. Does anyone else have any comment? Mr. Kowalchuck: Just for the record, some of the residents on Wells Road now have temik filters on their water wells, so temik is one of the problems. Mr. Emilita: It is a problem everywhere. . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 12 8/4/86 Speaker from the audience: Perhaps a study should be made of the cost impact on the Town as a whole as a the installation of a fresh water delivery station, as well as the environmental impact of the septic which are right now, or can't be very far away from the already bad wells. Mr. Emilita: Let me see if I understand this, a cost impact study, what is that? Speaker: In the future, how much would it cost the Town of Southold residents to subsidize delivery of fresh water to a 40 home area. Mr. Emilita: Well, if public water is proposed as part of the subdivision, that question is.. there is no question. Speaker: As long as it is addressed, I am very worried about the waste material... Mr. Emilita: That will be addressed. Speaker: May I ask a question. Mr. Emilita: Your name is. Mrs. Hallden: Margaret Hallden. I am wondering, when you talk about community water supply.... (inaudible). Mr. Emilita: I can't say at this point, I can't say where the franchise area exists or where current service exists. Mrs. Hallden: If you know the groundwater is polluted. Mr. Young: We have had discussions with Greenport water, if that answers the question. Mrs. Hallden: (Inaudible comment) Mr. Young: I just said we had discussions. Mrs. Hallden: Keep your comments to the issue. Mr. Young: I tried to help the lady to answer the question. Mrs. Hallden: (Inaudible comment) Mr. Emilita: Again, that is not the subject of the impact statement. Mrs. Hallden: (Inaudible comment) Mr. Emilita: The problems with Greenport Utility are not part of this impact statement. Mrs.Hallden: But where the water is coming from, isn't that an issue for us? . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 13 8/4/86 Mr. Emilita: In the statement, but we are not asking the applicant to discuss the future of the Greenport Water System. Mr. Bowman: Perhaps I could answer the question. We are going to have to look into the water resources of the area right now, we are going to have to address whether the wells have problems, the quality and quantity of the groundwater resources. Also, if it looks to us and further discussions with the regulatory agency that public water is what is needed, we have to look at that . And, we have to contact the water authority and we have to provide information that will say yes we are going to use public water or no we are not and here are the reasons for that. And, that will all be outlined in the impact statement so you will have a chance to look at it. Mrs. Marston: What are the minimum lot areas and square footage? Mr. Emilita: For what? Mrs. Marston: For building. Mr. Emilita: Right now it is a cluster subdivison. Mrs. Marston: What does that mean for lot area. Mr. Bowman: The lots are varied between acre and half acre. Mrs. Marston: Is it 40,000 square feet? Because that is the DEc regulation. Mr. Bowman: Some of them. Mr. Emilita; That has a net, not the actual. Mr. Bowman: That is based on the yield of the land. Mrs. Marston: Do you have something from DEC.... (inaudible). Mr. Young: The waterfront lots are all 40,000 square feet, some of the inland lots are not shown on the map. Mrs.Marston: they go 300' The DEC pointed out how far the inland..go, do in? Mr. Bowman: DEC regulations call for the waterfront lots to be 40,000 square feet and that is adjacent area beyond that, okay. Adjacent area, they encourage cluster to preserve open space and preserve ..... Mrs. Marston: I know why they cluster. Mr. Emilita: The been determined. this along on the final design of this subdivision has not It simply has sketch map approval to move design and process. . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 14 8/4/86 Mrs. Marston: You must remember that we... you are all such experts and we would like some patience... would you bear with us because people have lived in this area for years and years and some of the people who are from Jersey and Southampton and out of Town don't have our concerns because they don't know what we have to live with for many, many years. We must request your kind indulgence of this point to let you know our concerns because we are very concerned about this creek. Mr. Young: I've been trying to answer your questions, I am not sure that you have any problem. Mr. Marston: I am talking to the Town Planner. Mr. Emilita: Okay, next topic, air resources. This is not anticipated that this project will have a major impact on the air quality of the region, Town or neighborhood. We do not need a detailed discussion of the existing air quality. However, in the next section, we will. This is entitled terrestrial and aquatic ecology. It consists of three major areas, the first one is vegetation. We will need a list as well as a depiction on the plan of the major vegetative types on the site and immediately surrounding the site particularly on the side of Richmond Creek. You will need a discussion of, I will just go through the list here so you will understand what should bein the statement, a description, including the species and their abundance, relative age, size, distrubution, dominance, community types represented, any unique, rare or endangered which are on the site and the value of the site, particularly the wetlands and areas of high groundwater as a their value as habitat for wildlife and productivity of the wetland areas as food sources for wildlife. Second subject under this heading is called fish and wildlife, we will need an inventory of existing fish and wildlife species on the site and again in the immediate surrounding area, including migratory and resident species, this may take a little time to develop. Again, as with vegetation, we need to know the types of species present and abundance, distribution of their residence across the site and again any unique, rare, or and angered species and the productivity of these species of fish and wildlife. Mrs. Larsen: This concerns the.... at the mouth of the creek, ... (inaudible)...adverse effects to the shellfish which will decrease the population... (inaudible). Mr. Emilita: Okay, this section, which we are still going through, is environmental setting. We'll get into the impact shortly, I hope. Mrs. Marston: I would like to inform the gentlemen that the creek, the northern end, is a flyway for migrating ducks, all types of rare birds and a feeding area for all these ducks and birds. Right in the flyway. . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 15 8/4/86 Mr. Bowman: If I could ask you a question, when you say rare birds, do you mean rare, meaning endangered? Mrs. Marston: Well, you have the terns and they have DEC signs allover the place on the south end of the creek, but they do go see. Mr. Lawther: And, recently, a great blue heron was spotted, along the... Mr. Bowman: They are not rare and endangered. The reason I ask you is this. Mrs. Marston: The tern is. Mr. Bowman: The tern area at the south end. information... is that is correct, and there is a nesting The reason I'm asking is if you do have Mrs. Marston: I'm trying to help you,I'm not.. (inaudible). It is right in the flyway, when the birds migrate, there is where they all go rightin that area. Before that area was flooded, the wetlands was used as a resting place. Now, for some reason, they have to go on the fringe area of the creek, where the houses will be developed and they will be disturbed. But, to make your life a little easier, we will be happy to tell you. I'll give you a list of birds, I will give you everything. Mr. Emilita: Any other questions? Question: I have a question. Since we are not proposing any dredging, or any activity in the creek itself, are you going to require us to do a shellfish survey and actual populations? Mr. Emilita: Yes. We have a potential impact as a result of stormwater runoff, septic system effulent, household chemicals and pesticides and the normal runof things we flush down the toilet and we would like to know what is in the creek now that we may endanger. Question: As far as the populations and statistics itself do you have any parimeters for us, do you want the whole creek surveyed or within 500' of the project site or some sort of parimeter so that we know the direction to take. The reason I ask that is, it is a fairly large creek. Mr. Emilita: Perhaps, if I look at the location map. Councilman Stoutenburgh: Dave, I don't know if it will be of any help, but there was a man who did live on that creek years ago and he is a bayman and on the Conservation Advisory Council. And, he might be able to give these people a fair amount of information as to what goes on in that creek and I think he is the best local authority you could get. . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 16 8/4/86 Councilman Stoutenburgh: Ralph Condit. Mr. Bowman: That would be acceptable to me. Councilman Stoutenburgh: His father lives there, but he used to live there. Mr. Bowman: Does Ralph have any data as far as population in his experience. Councilman Stoutenburgh: He is a bayman he clams in the creek, so he knows what is in there. Mr. Bowman: We would be happy to, I mean if we could save ourselves from going out there that would be terrific. If is acceptable to everybody. Councilman Stoutenburgh: I think he is a worthy source. Mr. Emilita: I would say, yeah. Question: ... (inaudible) I would like to know his qualificiations other than... (inaudible). Councilman Stoutenburgh: I believe he is also a marine biologist at Southampton College. Speaker from the audience: Fine, I was just in contact with Southampton College. Mr. Bowman: man has the be terrific At this point we are looking for data, if this data, and if you have a list of species it would if you would give that to us. Mrs. Marston:I know, the only thing I would like to tell you is that crabs are coming back, they were almost destroyed a few years ago, and they are coming back... (inaudible). Councilman Stoutenburgh: Dave, is it proper at this time, to suggest to the people who composing this development use certan technics as far as runoff goes as far as lawns. One of the big problems I find, with developers is they put their lawn rigt down to the actual edge of the marsh and some place in your planning, if you could have that a natural area, kept back so that youhave a buffer area between so called green lawn, manicured area and the marsh. Mr. Bowman: Paul, in the inpact statement itself, jumping ahead, mitigtion, we are going to be suggesting things just like that. Councilman Stoutenburgh: in. I'm just putting that informatin Mr. Bowman: Limitation of turf areas, buffer areas along the shoreline, all that type of thing so that we can say fertilizer . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 17 8/4/86 Mr Bowman: would be a problem, at least mitigated to a great extent by putting the subdivision with covenants and restrictions. Councilman Stoutenburgh: That is what I am looking for. Speaker from the audience: Who would enforce this, say if you did have an impact statement that you wouldn' have lawns within 45' of the high water mark and the next year a person buys a home and says so what, who would enforce that regulation. Mr. Emilita: Well, that would become a part of the conditions of approval of the subdivision and like many Towns experienceing rapid development, it becomes a problem with enforcement. And, you are right, you can write all the rules and regulations, all the zoning laws, all the covenants and restrictions you want, but if not properly enforced, they won't do the jOb. And, if the Town, as I said all the other Towns on the East End, are serious about these conditions and the way we review plans and approve them, they're going to have to provide the manpower necessary to see that they area carried out and that is the bottom line. Mr. Bowman : I think it is also important to look that we are in the stage now, the planning stage and we can impose restrictions on the subdivision that the Town of Southold can enforce, but in view of the neighbors who are interested in preserving the creek, I know if I go along Wells Road right now, I will find numerous lawns going right down to the creek and there are individuals who buy fertilizer to keep their lawns nice and green and those fertilizers go right to the creek. So I think besides this type of forum you should also concern yourself with conditions that are there and are polluting the creek already. Mrs. Marston (inaudible) has now evolved into a more civilized point in disturbing the land. Mr. Bowman: Still, if you have a neighborhood group, which you seem to do, you certainly can put pressure on those neighbors to establish buffer areas, to cut down on their fertilizing. And, I think that would be a very good idea, too. Mr. Emilita: Any other comments (none). under terrestrail and aquatic ecology is and we have touched on the subject pretty will just ask the applicants to be guided requirements of the outline. Okay, the third area entitled wetlands extensively so I by the information Mr. Bowman: can use the I would like to clarify the last point that we inaudible. Mr. Emilita: I would say, at this point, don't assume it will be the sole source of data. Mr. Bowman: If the data is good, I am saying. Mr. Emilita: Okay, it appears that it will be a significant . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 18 8/4/86 Mr. Emilita: addition to your own research. Okay, let's try to finish up environmental setting here. Subject of transportation should be addressed and basically we should be concerned with of the subdivision roads to the Town road system. And, the state road system, Route 25, I am not sure that you have applied for a permit yet. That the subdivison itself, it doesn't appear in terms of volume will have a major impact on Route 25, however, we have an intersection and a typical intersection problem with the subdivision road and a Main State Highway, which should be addressed. Mrs. Marston: Launching of the boats. There will be 42 houses and there is the potential for 42 boats and at the end of the road, Wells Road, there is a very small area where the fisherman put there boats and we are concerned about the expansion of that area the disturbance of all the flauna and vegetation there. We are disturbed about the noise from the traffic coming down Wells Road, we are also concerned about the 42 boats that will be zooming on the creek, even though there is a five mile speed limit, we don't have people to enforce and 30 miles an hour people go. We are very, very concerned about how all the people will get their boats down there and we don't want a marina.And I think environmentally it will have a severe environmental impact, noise, the noise of the cars, boats and theey will have to have to dredge to expand that area if people are going to launch 10 boats. Mr. Bowman: All I can say right now is at this point, that is a Town road that dead end but ny resident in the entire Town of Southold can utilize that road. They are not proposing, nor is the Town, a boat launching ramp. Nothing is changed as far as the existing condition, but we are doing is a man is putting up a subdivision at Orient, those people would be able to use the end of Wells Road, also, if they wanted to. Mrs. Marston: According to the secondary impact statements of that State Law there would be an impact on the character of the Wells Road community, therefore, Richmond Creek, not in the way to the public who live here, but the people who will occupy those homes the character of the Wells Road community will change. And the boats coming down that road and if it is public than the 40 people become public too. That is in that State regulation, I read it very thoroughly, I memorized it. And, I would like that addressed. Mr. Bowman: But, the State also says, and you have to keep in mind, is there is no telling how many of those homes will have boats. But, if they were to use that and if they wanted to have a mooring for their boat a dock for their boat, that will all have to come in for a permit again to the Board of Trustees and they would have the exercise of control of the use of that road, Town road. Am I correct, Ellen? Mrs. Larsen: Yes, you are absolutely correct. . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 19 8/4/86 Councilman Stoutenburgh: One of the hopes, and this is a little off the record, one of the hopes I would see in the future for our Town would be that we would be thinking more of portable boats and launching ramps and a person would use his boat on Wednesday, or Thursday, or whenever he wanted to go fishing he would put it in and then take it back to his yard and thereby someday we are going to eliminate this idea that every house has to have a boat in front of it. It is really the only solution we have, people came out here for boating, they want boating, they deserve boating , they are paying taxes for boating. You have two ways of doing it, put them all out in the water, keeping them on land and have a launching area. Mrs. Marston: I agree with you Mr. Stoutenburgh. We are now working on an impact statement that will disturb the environment that is why I am bringing up this point. I think it is a beautiful idea, but right now we have to work with what's happening and what will happen with all those you know....inaudible. Mr. Emilita: Okay, since we are looking at Wells Road and we have an open space are designated, will you describe what your intended use of that open space area is. The next subject area, again under environmental setting, is existing land use in the vicinity and existing zoning. And include a discussion of how this fits in, how the proposed development fits in to the proposed zoning code in to the Town and Master Plan for the town. We also need a description of existing community services that residents of this site will utilize and that will include school, police, fire, health care, social services, other town recreational facilities and utilities. End of tape one Mrs. Marston: We are not only a local organization, we have member~ we started as a local organization, a Creek organization, but now our members go as far as Laurel. That is why we took the general title of Water, Land, wildlife Protection. We have a committee of this organization which is the Richmond Creek Assoication and the Wells Road Association. This is bigger than just the creek, it is a bigger concern. Mr. Bowman: The only reason I mentioned it, maam, is that, believe me, I have belonged to lots of conservatin organizations, I've worked V over Long Island and the East Coast and I found with them all many times that people are very quick to criticize something new and turn around and look in their own backyards and find that same... Mrs. Marston: But we are not here to discuss that. Mr. Bowman: But, it is. It is a good way to also work. You are all here to protect the environment if we can and if there are things that you see that can be corrected even though they are, have been done for years that doesn't make it right. .' . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 20 8/4/86 Mrs. Marston: I agree with you and I think most of the people who are ... (inaudible) of the environment are trying to correct inequities within the environment. But, we don't want the same thing to happen with a few dense projects, we are concerned about the density of this project. We feel there should be fewer houses and it is too dense, there are too many houses and we don't feel that the soil and water can support these houses. Most of the people who have one house on two or three acres, you say they are lucky, but they have been here many, many years. Mr. Bowman: I think I was addressing my remarks to was the fertilizer of the lawn which a great problem with our creeks. Mrs. Marston: I will bring it back to anybody I know. Mr. Lawther: If I may sugget another look at the project, the condominium project just north of Long's Creek. Long's Creek in Southold, where some high density houses were put up and the bayman are now complaining about the creek has gotten (inaudible). Councilman Stoutenburgh: Are you talking about Arshamomaque? Mr. Lawther: Yes. Councilman Stoutenburgh: The head of the creek of Arshamomaque? Mr. Lawther: Yes. I had conversations with several of the bayman and they seem to be of the intention that even though they went through the entire process that we are going through now, they were assured by the Planning Board, the Town Board and everything that the quality of the creek will not be affected, several years down the qualityof their life has been affected severely. Mr. Emilita: That has no relevance to this particular project. Mrs. Marston: However, I ask that it be indulged, these are the people's feelings, they are not scientists. Mr. Emilita: Okay, but that is another project, in another location. Mrs. Marston: But, it does relate. Scientifically, the things do relate, scientifically, you have a premise and you have to prove all these theories with something that has already happened. Last night a fisherman's wife called me up crying saying Richmond Creek is the last source of income, her husband wants to go someplace else. Alright, that is an emotional thing, I know, but you have to listen to the heart and sole of the people. They have seen it happen all around them. We are trying to be as logical as we can but we have to bring some emotion to it and you being conservationists, I think you understand the feeling of wife and children. . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 21 8/4/86 Mr. Bowman: I do and that is why I also strongly believe that we will incorporate the best mitigation measures we can in this project and it will be up the Planning Board to approve or deny it, but I also very strongly believe that the people in the nieghborhood have to start policing themselves as well, because there are problems there are well, without any development there now, there are problems in Richmond Creek. Where do those problems come from, they come from you people who live there. Mr. Emilita: Let us continue. The next subject under environmental setting is demography and again this need be relatively brief since we are talking about 42 homes. And, be guided toward what the inpact of 42 homes on the greater community would be. The next subject area and the last one in the environmental setting is entitled cultural resources comprised of two subheadings, one visual resources, it will be introduced a totally new visual element on to this landscape and you will need to know the description of the present visual character of the area and the applicant should heavily rely on photographs in this regard. A description of the natural areas of significant scenic value and here I am sure the neighbors would be able to be a great assistance and again with the eye toward minimizing the visual impact of this development on the site and on the surrounding area. Second subheading under cultural resources involved historic and archeologic resources. We will need a documentation by the appropriate state agencies as to the location of any historic or archaeologic resources on the site. I would strongly suggest that a on-site investigation of potential archae logic resource be done and I will do it for one particular reason. This area appears to have a number of characteristics that would lead us to suspect a prior habitation and if you are familiar with the subdivision Red Creek over in Southampton, the whole thing was held up because there was no field investigation of the areas archaelogy. So you might be savings yourself a lot of time and headaches to go out and do it now. Councilman Stoutenburgh: You can probably get that right locally here. Mr. Emilita: Quite possibly. Okay, the next major section is entitled Significant Environmental Impacts and we should be guided here by not only the discussions of right now of this session here, but also of Part II and III of the Long Environmental Assessment Form. And, I will go through those points. One, there will be construction in areas of shallow ground water. And, you will need to know what the potential impacts on the ground water may be. Mr. Young: What is shallow, Dave? Mr. Emilita; What is shallow. I would say less than a 4' depth to ground water would be considered a shallow groundwater situation. Mr. Young: The property certainly has.... Mr. Emilita; I am not sure, again, without having some monitering . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 22 8/4/86 Mr. Emilita: here, I am not sure what the gournd water contour is and how it seasonal varies. If you are getting into.... Mr. Young: But, if we are above four or six.. Mr. Emilita;If you are getting into a near ground water situation you are going to have an impact. Both right at that impact at that point, and obviously on the creek. Okay, there will be construction near wetlands, there will be septic systems near wetlands, again we have touched on this. Okay, there will be increased impervious surfaces near wetlands and Richmond Creek. Obviously important to the subivision design, the drainage plans will have to be developed, I think as soon as that can be accomplished for the purposes of SEQRA, we could expedite both review processes. In other words, we are looking to avoid any runoff, any surface runoff in to the Creek. There may be depending on the result of the vegetation and wildlife service, there may be possible adverse impacts to those species. There maybe an impact on prehistoric settlements. Okay, that was part II, let me read Part III. Construction disturbance, building and structure location, septic leaching fields will all be located in areas of high groundwater or in proximaty to tidal wetlands. Development disturbance needs to be located a way from sensative areas in a cluster. Area covered by lots 18 through 28 contain one more lot in the cluster concept than could be contained int he convential R-40 subdivison. It is contrary to the philosophy and intent of the cluster plan as proposed to place the development closer to more sensative area rather than farther from them. Project as proposed will adversly affect groundwater flowing under it through to Richmond Creed due to septic leaching field effluent, lawn fertilizer, pesticides, herbicides, and other household chemicals. Source of wate supply has not been proven. On site groundwater may not be acceptable. Un regulated construction will cause terbitity, siltation, erosion and sedimentation each having an adverse effect on groundwater. Specific measures of eliminating or reducing these adverse impacts need to be detailed. Impervious surfaces will be created near wetlands. This will increase runoff of relatively poorer quality waters into a wetland currently undisturbed. Impervious surfaces need to be reduced and located as far as feasible from these wetlands. The project as proposed will have an adverse impact on indiginous and migratory wildlife in the creek. Threatened or endangered species may also be involved. Methods to minimize the negative impacts need to be incorporated into the project. Due to the location, next to a relatively calm creek side, prehistoric habitation may be a possiblilty. This needs to be determined and addressed in a manner consistent with the quality of the resources discovered. Those were the part III assessment form comments, which lead the Planning Board to deem this action one of environmental significance and again which triggered this impact statement. Speaker from the audience: Excuse me, Dave. Are those related to that particular map, those statements, are they related to that particular map or to a prior map. . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 23 8/4/86 Mr. Emilita: No, this to this map, March 7, 1986. That is why I said, what we see here may not be what is finally approved. Okay, the next major section of the impact statement is entitled mitigation measures to minimize environmental impact. The outline contains many subject areas, I won't go into each on of them, because we will, as the review process evolves, determine the type and character and detail and tightness of specifically what these mitigation measures will be. So, I won't go into that one at this point. Unless someone has anything to add. Councilman Stoutenburgh: I would like to just suggest that perhaps at the end of Wells Road where it meets you road there be some wayof correcting the problem that is now there, with water running down into the creek. By your development, you might improve that situation and enhance that area. That is part of it, yes. That is just one of the requirements. I didin't know you had that letter. Mr. Emilita: Okay, there is a letter dated May 30 from the Trustees to the Planning Board with certain requirements expressed in the resolution. That the contents of that resolution should be addressed. That will be in the record. Mr. Bowman: May I have a copy. Mr. Emilita; The Planning Board has a copy. Mrs. Larsen: I will read it. It says Town Trustees recommend to the Town Planning Board that any drainage and runoff on the road in Richmond Creek Farms subdivision shall not first runoff into the Creek but shall be diverted in catch basins designed to filter some of the pollutants and there is a 50' right of way for public use. Mr. Emilita; Okay,any other disucssiononthat topic. Okay, next section is entitled adverse enviormental effects that cannot be avoided if the project is implemented. What this section is following the application of all mitigation measures, there will be some residual adverse environmental impacts. And, we have to determine, the purpose of this SEQRA, whether the that adverse impact is significant or not significant. So that's what that section will address. The next section is entitled alternatives and for this particular project we will probably limit that discussion to alternative designs and ... go ahead Paul. Councilman Stoutenburgh: Can I make a suggestion there, Dave. I don't know if the applicant is familiar with the proposed subdivison that is going up at the head of the creek, called the Waddice Estate, it is a much spread out, much larger tracts of land using less housing, less density and in their minds getting the same return. I think this might be a concept of an alternative, it might not be financially viable in your case, but it should be at least looked into. I think that . , . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 24 8/4/86 Councilman Stoutenburgh: is what some of these people are looking for, is an alternative plan that perhaps could give more open space, more, less housing units. Now, whether or not that can be feasible financially, I don't know. But, I do know that at the head of the creek, they are doing it and it is a financially, lawful way of going about it. It is the Emerson Estate, if you come into the creek, you run right into it. Mrs. Marston: Minimizing all the impact by moving the houses away from the wetland. Councilman Stoutenburgh: quite well. It is a different concept and done Mrs. Marston: It is beautiful. Councilman Stoutenburgh: It should be thought of as an alternative, and I don't know if it can be financially done, but it is an alternative. Mr. Emilita: Okay, those comments would be taken into the context of the heading entitled alternative size, which would be asking the applicant to look at an alternative of a less dense nature and at this point, I can only suggest one particular alternative and that is one that would apply if current zoning or current proposed zoning were applicable to this site. In other words if two acre density versus the retention of the one acre designation on the site. I think that would be appropriate for us to look at. The addition to that would is always, of course, the no action, not developing the site at all. And, again, as this process and this impact statement process developes, we may well be looking at different designs, configurations of the streets and lots. I know this is your preferred design at this time, we may in the review of the Draft come up with other, perhaps better, alternatives than this. Mrs. Marston: The Soil Conservation states more that, this was years back, more than 40 acres of the property is presently under cultivation. This entire area is classified as prime farmland because of its high productive capability. We are obliged to discourage the conversion of such valuable farmland for residential use. I just wanted to through that out and maybe there are alternatives that are there. Mr. Bowman: I think what David has just said, we do have to address that, what would happen if it was left as farming. The no actionalternative. Councilman Stoutenburgh: You might also add to that, that if it were put in the farmland conservation program, results of it. Because that is now being opened up. Mrs. Marston: (inaudible) Councilman Stoutenburgh: Well, I've been out sick for a while, but I know it was, Dave, how long is that open for. . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 25 8/4/86 Mr. Emilita: I don't really know, Diane would be able to... Councilman Stoutenburgh: But, I do think there is a possiblity, at least it is worth looking into. Mr. Emilita: Under alternatives, again we don't know whether the applicant intends to physically build this subdivision or simply to obtain an approval at some point and have someone else develop it. There will have to be some discussion of the construction, potential construction of the road,drainage system, again in order that any impact, negative impact due to construction, be minimized, whether the applicant intends to do it, or whether some future party intends to do it. The next major section Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources. This is a requirement of SEQRA which is not particularly relevant to single family, residential subdivision, but it does need to be addressed. Likewise, Growth Inducing Aspects, unless someone can think of another topic, I think the only potential discus ion point here, would be the introduction of public water or an extension of public water which may make adjacent land more developable because of the presence now of public water. The last substantive section of the impact statement is entitled Effects on the Use and Conservation of Energy Resource. Again this is a requirement and some discussion on this point needs to be included. And, then finally, of course, are all your techinical appendices and resource studies and those kinds of thing. I've V - thP requirements of the outline. Is there Coverea any other comment or additional request that anyone wishes to make. Speaker from the audience: I think only that we should keep informed as to the meetings with the Planning Board with the developers so that we can have productive input at the meetings as well. Mr. Emilita: Okay, let me again review what is the next step. The applicant prepares the impact statement, submitted to the Planning Board, Board reviews it together with the record of this section to make a determination whether that impact statement is complete and sufficient for public review and comments. As I said before, is there something that addresses the subject matter, which was requested to be addressed. If it complete for review, notice will be filed and copies of the impact statement will be available for public review. At some point in time, during that time period, depending on the completeness of the subdivision application there will be one or more public hearings on either or both the subdivisonand the impact statement. Again these will be public meetings, notice will be posted on the Board and you are advised to keep in touch with the Planning Board as to when these meetings take place. Speaker from the audience: Thank you. Mrs. Marston: statement. I would like to submit this as part of our impact " . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 26 8/4/86 Mr. Emilita: Part of the record. You want to submit that now, or .... Mrs. Marston: Well, with the letter, that you didn't think was relevant, but I hope it can be... (inaudible).. about the configurationof the crrek which has changed on the plan. Mr. Emilita; If that is a past, something that has occurred in the past like that, it is difficult for me to see how this fits into a review of the subdivison, which as proposed has not physical involvement, direct physical involvement in the creek. Even though there may be an impact as a result, all of this subdivision, all of the occupancy of th dwellings, the project as proposed right now has no disturbance to the creek. Mrs. Marston: No, I understand. I feel that it has for this reason. They are basing their map on something that shouldn't even exist. Mr. Emilita: Fait accompli. That is all I can say. Mrs. Marston: It is illegal. Mr. Emilita: If an authoritative... Mrs. Marston: In other words, if you are going to build a office on a piece of ground that was for (inaudibleland never existed and it is right next to your house, and all of a sudden the said pushed the soil there it is going to have some impact, therefore, if they are, these lots. I can see you are scratching your head. Mr. Emilita: I don't see the connection. Mrs. Marston: There is a connection. You've made concections that I don't see either. You said, made statements, I have to compare. As far as I am concerned, as far as many of us are concerned, if this creek has been extended and widened and there is no permit for this. And this is according to your boss, Koppleman's office, according to the engineering corp., their maps are totally different. Mr. Emilita: I have no idea. Mr. Bowman: Would you have the developer fill that creek back in? Mrs. Marston: NO. What I am saying is the whole thing is illegal then. Mr. Bowman: What I am saying is if it was and we don't know, because we go by what is on the ground now. Mrs. Marston: We are bringing this to your attention because in the future, if those peopte on that creek who are advertised " . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 27 8/4/86 Mrs. Marston: waterfront properties say we want a reduction of taxes because the Town will not.. (inaudible) become a swamp and that is, I'm tell you, it becomes a swamp. Mr. Bowman: What we are saying is that the creek is there now, and you don't want it filled it back in and we don't want it filled back in and we are going to be dealing with the conditions that exist on the property right now. Mrs. Marston: Alright, I spoke to an attorney and he thought it was a good thing to bring up and he thought I should offer it. I may not be logical as an attorney. Mr. Bowman: If I could just give you my card, because if you have input and if you have data and information on the neighborhood, that is what we are trying to put together. Mrs. Marston: If we tell you that is not fair, because we are helping you (inaudible). Mr. Bowman: We have to do a natural resource inventory and that natural resource inventory is going to be the same whether you prepare it or I prepare it. Mrs. Marston: No. Mr. Bowman: Well, if you don't want to give it to me, that is fine, let the record show. Mrs. Marston: We are simply trying to minimize the impact on the environment. Mr. Bowman: What I'm requesting, again, is if you did have observations that you made about the natural resources in the area, we are not asking you to support the project at all. If you, endangered species, for example, if you observe. Mrs. Marston: The tern, he is there all the time, flying down. Mr. Bowman: Then tell us that, species of birds you have. We are not asking you to support the project, but if you have data that you feel in pertinent to the environmental impact statement. Mrs. Marston: Have you walked down to the end of the creek. Mr. Bowman: I have been there many times. So, I say, it is up to you, I am just giving you the opportunity that if you want to provide that information.. (inaudible.) Mrs. Marston: I certainly appreciate it and would like you to observe the wildlife itself by going down and looking, it is so beautiful and delicate that if you see it, it makes you cry to know that they may not have a place to go and also that the water may impact on them, and other people. . ' 40. t ~. . . . . Scoping Session Richmond Creek Farms Page 28 8/4/86 Mr. Bowman: If you have observations that you feel are important. Mrs. Marston: What is your position, Land Use Company, Incorporated, (inaudible. ) Mr. Emilita: Okay, is that is, thank you. This meeting was recorded by Melissa Spiro, Planning Intern, and transcribed by Diane M. Schultze, Secretary. Resrectfully ~b~itteg, ~Q.L1J.~ D(dne M. Schultze, Secretary Southold Town Planning Board T . LD Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 July 21, 1986 Mr. Rudy Bruer Attorney at Law Main Road Southold, NY 11971 RE: Richmond Creek Farms Dear Mr. Bruer: Please let this confirm the following taken by the Southold Town Planning Board, Monday, July 14, 1986. . WHEREAS, Thomas Canavan, Brian Boehm, RW Group, Inc. and Long Shore Development Corp, as contract vendees, have heretofore applied to the Southold Town Planning Board for a cluster subdivision of 42 lots on 49.6 acres located at Wells Road and Main Road, peconic, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: 1. That pursuant to the provision of Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law; Part 617 of Title 6 of the New York State Codes, Rules and Regulations, and Chpater 44 of the Southold Town Code, the Southold Town Planning Board, as lead agency , does hereby determine that the action proposed is a Type I action and is likely to have a significant effect on the environment. 2. That the Planning Board shall file and circulate such determination as required by the aforementioned law, rules and code. 3. That the Planning Board immediately notify the applicants, Canavan, Boehm, RW Group, Inc. and Long Shore Development, Corp., of this determination, and further request said applicant to prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) in accordance with the scope and contents required by the Planning Board and Town Planner, all in accordance with said law, rules, and code. . . Rudy Bruer Page 2 7/21/86 ----------------------------------------------------------- 4. In accordance with Chapter 44, Section 20, the applicant is required to defray the cost of reviewing the DEIS, which includes the scoping session. The Planning Board determines that a deposit of $2,000. should be paid to the Town prior to the date of the scoping session. 5. That a scoping session has been set for Monday, August 4, 1986 at 10:30 a.m. with the Town Planner at the Town Hall. Please advise us if that is convenient for you. Please contact this office if you have any questions. Very truly yours, :B.-c-~-cL Qy-LoWD\U-, pcLnvY BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR., CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Diane M. Schultze, Secretary enc. . .. ~~ k~~ ttlalrl ~1Z1VI., tJiUlit1 Jt l'r#l<<lUm GriWjJ r-,R~~< POB /j'l, PECONIC, L. I., N.Y. 11958- August 1, 196(=; Flannin~:; Board Tovm Hnll Southola, L.I. ,~e: Richmond Crec~. Peconic. L.T. Attachn:ent to letter on Ti',ichmonj Creek l:"e.r:.i:'; G~n.tlemen: Pro)Josal. r,JeAati ve ISnvironmcntal I!i1~act 1"t is requesteci that a full scale investi::;ation be made on the dreat~in2, and lanu based scoopinG of Hichmond Creek--the jlJorthern t:nd. It appear~ that this creek was deep scop~ed, extenued, and widened beyond its natural configuration. The scoop~n.G \'Jas done either in the late 1970's or early 1980 IS. The wetlands that were breeding and feedin6 grounds for birds \'lere scooped out and flooded by the extension of the creek. Now in ado.i tion to the above ltlaterfront acvelppoeet, there is a potential for further water front development on both sioes of the creek thus havin,,; a further nec1.ative environmental impact. /...5 of today, accordin.rr to the ~,j. Y. C. Corps of ~~~n.:,.;ineers a permit does not exist for the: widening, dredging, and deep scoopin(~ of the creel<: on the :\lorthern r.:nd. '\ccordin'}: to the Suffolk County Waterworks a norrn8.1 dredging and rnainten8.nce vIas none in lS'83. Also, there has not been any Engineering Corps hearin;::; on the enlar,!,inp, extension, e:.nd neeD scooping of the creek; neith.er has there heen r:;,' nEe hearin;~s or To'.\,n :~2111 r":earin.;;::s on any type of permit to alter the natural confi'_~ur2"tion of the creek. ?Gfore t!iere is implementation of this propose(j project a full scale investi';2tion sl-jould be made. The F:ngineerin,(; .Corps wi 11 provide the rcinforceJ:le!1t ::J.~{cnt as furt~er evidence is secured. Very truly yours, ~~~~ch-.- Vilma Louie,e j..:arston Presiaent cc: ~:lupervisor f':lurphy 'fawn Council, !3d. Of Trustees '<o1'J~: Eventually, the creek "will revert to its l1Htural course. Futu:,c in)lahi tants or th(3 creel~ vla:nerfront ':Jill most certai:'-lly demand dreclsir.i.s ',\Thich \,Jill :-lot L)(~ eiaile by the cO:Jnt:;:. There '.'rill be a demRnd of' cX;ienditure of local public funds as is now ha;Jpenin~; \'!i th Deep :-iole j{esidents who are JeJllarICin;: 8. lJ.ecrease in tax~s. " . . ,. '.I~ ~, --'" .~ .....-;"\ ..--:"> ttlA1 ~1ZNd., tJiUliAG 4 1'r4l<<ti<<l GrtnJjJ POB /~1, PECONIC, L. I" N.Y. 11958- August 1, 1986 Planning Board Town Hall l-'Iai:l. Road Southo1d. L,r; NY 11971 Re: Richmond Creek Farms Proposal Peconic, L.1. ENVIHorWiENTAL mPACT OF THIS PROPOSED PROJEr:T Gentlemen: as designated in TH~ SEQRA The density of the proposed housing will affect ground and creek water; thus affecting the quality of drinking water of other residents on the creek and the quality of water on the creek; affect fishermen I s Ii v..lihood; affect shellfish, sea life; water birds, migrating birds; rare endangered speci .es; breeding grounds: and feeding grounds of fish and birds. With increased. boating there will be a likelihood of more erosion, destruction of fauna and vegetation; disturba.nce on the Wells Roan Community (which is a very narrow strip) by increased noise level of traffic; increased noise level on creek, disturbing fishermen, fish and birds. Later, there will be a demand for further dredginq; increased demand for more stores, public services, roads, sewers, water mains all pf which will affect the ecological makeup of the ?econic Hamlet and creek which land cannot support additional service building, dense housing projects, increased boating, ann/or economic stress. ".18 request a strict and full environmental and economic evaluation as it is felt that there will be a serious detrimental environmental and economic impact as follows: l. and ~ee separate letter ~~:~~d pertaining ta the confiduration of the creek (scooping dredging - North of PJLane. 2. Hichl1lOnd Creek is certified by the state as a fishermen's creek. The high density of homes both on the creel< and inland with storm runoff, pollutants. contaminants. water seepage into the creek and ground will further contaminate and pollute the soil, ground water, wetlands, and creek water; thereby having serious detrimental effect on the mussels, clams, crabs, and other sea life which are significant to the quality of life --of fishermen citizens, and breeding and feeding grounds for all types of water and land birds. 3. This creek is on the flyway and there will be a sigITficant im~act on migrating birds and ducks which use the water, wetlands, and surrounding creek area to rest and fe~. Ih addition the wetlands surrounding the creeks are a breeding and feeding grounds for fish, shellfish, water birds such as egrets, swans, herons, kin~fishers, some ducks, and other water birds. Also, on the South end of the creek there is the rare and endanger( speci".es --the tern. They certainly vlill be affected by the increased boating an~ ';mter quality. Dept~ of Environmental signs have been placed in strategic locations. /1.11 boats will have to pass the breeding and feeding grounds of the terns to enter Peconic Bay. c~^(/'1 ~\\)~ Page 1 (Can't Page 2) ~ , ~ _....-., , k~~ ttlaU~ ~1ZNd. , tJiUI!fe · 1'r"t<<IUw GrtnijJ POB /5~i, PECONIC, L. I., N.Y. 11958- To ?lanning Board Pg. 2 d. Substantial increase in a potential for erosion that may be caused by .boats where there is public access at the end of Wells Road. I~asmuch as at the present tiQe the accesS point is small, the potential and demand for greater access to the creek will lead to the destruction of large quantities of vegetation and fauna to provide ~ for the launching of Doats. In addition, there will be increased emphasis on dredging at the end of Wells Road beoause of greater demand by the public for access to the water as the project's inhabitants take space once used by the public. As a result, there will be the impairment of the character of the existing community on Wells Road because of the increase in the proposed project inhabitants. There will also be increased auto traffic and noise on vie lis Head thus changing the character of the community. ./ 5: The high density of housing along with the proposed development of the adjacent sod farms will increase significantly the local population and thus increase the needs for stores, public services and eventually create a demand for roads, sewers, \I!ster mains. The ecological makeup of this small hamlet 1t\a:.1)I' not be able to support the physical structures necessary for the increased populatcion' ""-"'.1\ J' c-h:; will be created by the dense housing. In addition, the quality of life of permanent full time residents will be affected as there will be an increase in the tax base in order to support all the necessary services. ~J~ClJ;~~ Vilma Louise Marston President Important letter attached 2 " . tPahft, ~1Z1VI., tJiUlijIt ~ 1't'4&<<1i<<l GrtnJ}J ~, .....~ ~-.--.>' . ~~...--:-> POB Ij~f, PECONIC, L. I., N.Y. 11958- AU,71lst 1, 19<'::'.6 Plannin,~i; ~),oard TOi'm Hall :::~outholo, L.T. \. ge: Hichmond Creek, Peconic. L. I. .\tta.chfl~ent to letter on :\ichTl'.onj Creei( FE'"r;'l~ (:r)r.tlemen: Proposal. !"-Je;::;ati ve EnvironlT!cntal Im;;act i-c is requested that a full scale in.vesti,:;atioJI be made on the cJreQi:.~in6 anci land based scoopinG of Hichrnond Creef.;:--the J\;orthern l~:ncl. It appear~ that this creek was deep scopped, extenoed, and widened beyond its natural configuration. The scooping was done either in the late 197018 or early 19.:30 IS. The wetlands that were bre-eding and feedine;; grounds for birds \.oJere scooped out and flooded by the extension of the creek. Now in adcli tion to the above ltlaterfront acvelppmEJot, there is a potential for further ,,'rater front develoi")ment on both si::1cS of the cre~k thus havin,~ a further ne,lative environmental impact. 4"" ,'\5 of toda;y, according to the ~"l. Y. C. Corps of ~;:n,:__;ineers i":t permit does not exist foT' th2 ',I/idenini~ t dredging, and deep scoopiw~ of the creel<: on the;\Jorthcrn Snr.. !\ccordinr~ to the Suffolk County ;A1aterworks a normal dred,c_~ing and JIl8.intenance vIas none in 19[:;3. Also, there has not been any Engineeri:1g Corps heari.n;:; on the enlar;;in;--::;, extp.l1sio!1, 2nd cteen f".cooping of the creek; neither has there heen c, nEe hearin;J,s or TO'lm r~811 Hearinzs Oil any type of permit to alter the natural confi'}~urption of the creek. ;'cfo1'e t:-,ere is implementation of this proposed project a lull seele inv~sti~~2tion sl10uld be Ir1ade. T!1e !\n.],ineerinr, "Corps "-.I.Ii 11 provide the rcinforcerl~nt '1,~!cn.t as furt~er eviderlce is secured. Very truly your~, ~_~~ch.- Vilma Louille l.'larston President cc: ~')upervisor Hurphy Town COUJlcil, Ud. Of Trustees -, <Ol'E: Eventually, the creek will rqyer:L1.Q__.,.i tE__lb~tl;:lT.a).:._G(:(l~~;~:e_. Future in) JElbi tants of the creek wa:tmrfront :./ill most cer.:ta,inly__dillTJ.9.1JIL"Qrs_Q.J._.bnS which \'Jill :lOt be aOile by t!-le cO'.1nty. There will be a de:TIRnd of~ eXfJe:1Jiture of local public funds as 1s now ha~'penin~; vd th Deep 1101e he~idents who are derllarjCin.;~ a uecrease in taxes. ~ . 'J (?o .'- U (t Kc; (CJ., ~.Q(DA"(J ;Jf. \\<:t~-Y vky.,y-,;,,~ \~O(Lr L ']'OW", ,*1\ ~ P. ",~ {C.6 <;OU.'~"'D ( J. iN. 'l ' J\)L ~ 0 '98~ 0-.a-,.,+11lL h~ '. --it,lL ~...9-r<c;, /.~ ' '^ ~~ ' So 6. Y' ~ U ~ ~ ~ f.2 " c.t. jIJI<.p- L (n_l..oL ~o..- ~ r r (... ~..ILeA ? (0 lA.1.l h. lt~ Ci.... .1 ~+ i('<'-h'~ 4.. ( ct. 'r~)~<4..-i; ~ '\ ~ s'" \ Cc",-~ (}..9 c...-\...Q.s, 6~-r E)v~ C r~K'S A~ ~ t'~,,-L }--rtcJ-V~, S~ +e.cs' ~J.~ r\oc.o b.Q.~VS-.Q.. d"'-.5<4~'oy., o-t ~A.AQH1-+a~ ~ lVI ~ 0 \" fA. S UV <l --t-\t-<\ ~ -+- {WSL~ lu:\\ i9Cc.t-L-r. ps, -- lud~S f(lS-u.i sk IL v~ ~~ ~ '\ !JVV'> --t-'r-v ( 'i l CJ(.4 "t fJ-rJ ~~u.~";:"..L C~~ o~ -+-k''S pr-". \9-<7\- . . . T D LD Y Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 M E M 0 RAN DUM TO: Building Department Town Trustees Supervisor Murphy FROM: Planning Board DATE: July 31, 1986 RE: Richmond Creek Farms This is to advise you that there will be a scoping session on the above mentioned subdivision proposal on Monday, August 4, 1986 at 2:30 p.m. in the Southold Town Hall, with the Town Planner. . ~rf .- ~ ~ [. )~tilMj.I1J' [)-UMJ ~; V'" ~ dJ .c/uP.0~ 76 J.M~ ~ ~,U( ~~ ~~ -1:/ A()4/1~,~ ~~~. ;jf'~~ :1b~ --~ 1m- ~ kJ~ ~d ~~w ~ 'M -~di~~~~ ~ OU'- (UALi~~<4- . Jv,_-r~. 1tI~ ,JflIl UL/... ~ A<. r--~ - . :tf~ 71.<<f ~.4a< b P( ~JPU ~ ~ ~ ~-dJ w,AGJtq<<}-4 if.flu>.v ~ iN. /J.P1~ Tk.~ ~04~ (J6 ~ '~f (j ~ Zu-R- c:v-vt ~tle ~ .~ - M Jr/..R tW2-cJk~~ - ~~tJz<tv~(lQ~ /1_ ~lJD- ~ ~L{!Jff~f}i<<~7Ji- ~~ ~~-d2f~~ ,~ ~ )f;~ M~ A-.,d>>4~~~ . ~e-- a. ~~-I;::5f~ ' - r ~ JP'f1<> ~ J1&; 1.., ,~ ~O 1386 jc1 . A'" (flbr Ju~ ~(~r ~~~r1t · ~UL te 1986 . ~ ~c>-lq~ kJ.-e-ell ~ I c?~ h ~ ~J ~)l ~~-cl-t ~ ti~ '11-~~ ~~ ~ CVv~~~~Jh-4.iJ'u~eeX - 01<. O<uy q "I q tb. .9 <lAM- ~ ~ .if2-916tM':tL C'u _ ~~l...-kT~~lt~~ IJ.R,~! lv~aiR ~ ~,R.-""'V~i!.tr-f1<uu, JI-t M- r ".$;In. r-J """'~ ~ r.MJ ~ ~.k~/ 1ij~~fb~~~~~r~F ,&1-,...J dA- ~ ~ ~ ~'\,;[ cf& ~~ - crJl.. "'" w.e.~ ~"'" ~ IJ- ~ ~ d..v-. -j;,~:.;(1 ,9-fM-w"'.4~~-r;"cw<< . ~rfL.~~~ "-~,M.d:~,~~-:J;.I . ~..e>~I>-t. !]J.<au fzT .M-~ iW<!h..J aM. -P,w.R <V- tPu.ud-~ ~~ ~04~ ~ -- ~ 512 Ashland Avenue Baldwin, New York 11510 28 July 1986 Honorable Francis J. Murphy and Town Council Members Town Hall Southold, New York 11791 Subject: Richmond Creek Farms Richmond Associates Project on Richmond Creek, Peconic, L.I., N.Y. Gentlemen: Vie have purchased land and are preparing to build our retirement home on Richmond Creek directly opposite the proposed subject project. We looked for several years to find a location on a Peconic Bay inlet where we could enjoy the natural wetlands and associated wildlife. Richmond Creek is one of the few remaining areas not affected by overdevelopment and marinas. After consulting with environmental engineers, it is evident that the dens i ty of houses in the proposed project wi 11 have a seri ous environmental impact both on the wildlife and on the quality of life on the creek. The wetlands surrounding the creek provide refuge for migrating birds and are also breedi ng and feedi ng grounds for fi sh and many water bi rds. The increased boat i ng whi ch woul d be generated by the hi gh den s ity of homes wi 11 d is turb the vii 1 d 1 i fe and also the endangered species such as the terns at the mouth of the creek. Any dredging or modification to the creek will result in the destruc- tion of one of the few wildlife breeding grounds left on Eastern Long Island. It is a credit to the Town Council that up to the present time they have maintained this natural status in spite of external pressures. ~'Je hope you will reject the proposed project as presently submitted so that future generations may enjoy the beauty of nature which you have so carefully guarded in the past. Andr R. Hallden Margaret Hallden ~ 1>>1\ ~??:yd'~;---. 1'.. ;' f.. ///. ~lI7. ?/;{/rt: ,W-- j/~. ~ /ftj ~/., /'" !i r (J. . {. . W.~ {)./t/ )~tI:ti ~. )/Jj<l~ .-tf7vj (ulV ~h h I .-ti~, A ~~{ 131116 ~d ,1-U&i//t:/t7 A{OJJ '- ~ .it ~/~~~~ '1 /!tv.7 ~- f! /u p r,tb )::/du~ ,~ (?~, 11 B~ I~ Civ.l3~ \\jCO~ J'U\.. ~ ~ c-reffl 11J-g . JU\~"I\q~ flaml"8 Boar-of 'JUL 2. 8 \~1bg To Whom 1:+ MMy CooW"n: R,."h... 611 A G--c-"/( ~... noS. 'P~~j~G--=r 1: 108 () properly ou>ner on Richmon:l Creek, om oppo.'2d -to +he. build',r:xJ of -the, prop05ed moi\nQ.an~ ck"s;--b 0+ hO~- '7 Mrs. "9rteS Combs ~~.~ lQ~15 ':Indian NttX lw1(. PeAbn\C I W'/ C- -(\'7 yv\ (J ~\v~ cp..'Cf'\ C' \'l,..<\ 1\ . . Wood Lane Peconic, NY 11958 July 2'3, 1936 JUL 29 1986 Planning Board Town Hall Main Road Southold, 1~ 11971 SUBJECT: RICt.J:MOND CREEK FAfu'1S Gentlemen: l~ husband and I are greatly opposed to the Richmond Creek Farms Homes. The density is much too high. We are opposed to increasing recreational boats on Richmond Creek which is a fisherman's creek. The increased density will pollute the Richmond Creek and will have a detrimental environment impact on fish and wildlife. Thand you for your interest in preserving the environment. ~'ncerelY' '.. Q.' J.(, .1~'1fJ"'-4 .'~ ~~ , ames Hutes -Reeda J.1. Hughes' CC: Supervisor Murphy Council Board of Trustees JUL 25 1986 . . __ fJiUtli . ~ ~~k~~ fIImrl~" ffe A~~ 1'1'1IiN'li<<l Grl1lJjJ ~ "- POB 159, PECON1C, L. I., N.Y. 11958- ,Jul:r ?5, 1()86 _'12.Yl:.1iE:- .::::)< r" To:,:'1; ::~::.ll ~,'~(:ir.. i\:. :-;outhc<l. -I L. =: . , ~ 11971 :]er:tl€:~~.1en : ~e: Additional Recom~end3tions Rnd Consideratlo~s on ~ropos21 Bich~nond Creel\: .-'2.rl~G - :-:lc~nond Creel~ ~:;econic, i...I. ~'lV irC1L'~,en ~~" 1 il'~jl~aC t of Gre8. t lmport2.nce reI;:;: tine; to the 2l:'ove proj eat '0-re <?~~-, follo~J[:3: The hi Ilensi t;:i of ho:nes Qoth on the cree1( and inland T,.!i th storm z~nd. ot:v::r !'unoff 2_nrl ,pollut2,nt ,-rater ~;eep3:3e into the creek 2Tvl c;round \,Ti11 further .;,~'o11~lte the soil, grou:'1d T,~2.ter, TJetlands ar-1 creel( T,!S,ter thereby h~~inG 3 serious detrimental effect on the quality of life; also, Oi': c18.L'l~:, cr2.bs. 2.~d other seC. life Hhich are a source of e~l1!)loY'TIent for fis'Jerm[,)1 rend other residents. In ",44i ticn, the inlet is " 8:c-eec1in;; ;::..~:(3 fee-iin.::; gro:~r1 for all types of fish 2nd birds. In :<3c~itioD, \78 brinG to your attention that the lend 2t trle ;::o!Jthern e~~ of ~lchmond Creelr at the entrance to the b2Y is G nesti~3 cro~n~ for r2~e terns (endansered species). ~ZC s13ns have been place~ by the ~ept. of ~);ViY'olj'T!.ent[:'.l Conse:rvation s.t str2.tegic )oints. The incre8r;ed boatir.:; 'mlC" "ill be :c;ener8terl by the hi,C;h densi ty of h.oln:inc:: -.1111 have 2, ne c'.ti VE: i'Up2ct O~ the nestinG srounrls of an enOETIc:ererl 2flrl,protecter} s)ecie.'] . I;:. is felt that it is aelviseable to decre"se the pro1)()sed r:'ulber of houses siCnificantly -inland and on the creek in order to i.nsu:c-e the fll~ure viability of 3ichmo~d Cree}r, the tret1ands, nestine .,rounds, sea life ''co ter Zir'" IJ,nrj birc.s, and fishermen's jobs. Accordim"ly. therefore",,+-9f;li1';pre co, l' "relioin2r'Y permits are Granted a full scale environmental i:npac t F'Ul r rad 1,; th the inou 0_ e 1.\r2~ er authorit', CaroB of Encinee~s, DEC, tJ1e elat2 of this 2nd other conservation and economic ~TOUpE:. 2n" reSl ents. The:nl, .yot! for your consideration in preserving the e1Vironm~mt for the )!"eser:t 21";.1 f1).ture generatlo~s. ~~~~~s0L Vi 1m2:.. Louise l'larston, ?resident CG: Eonorable ~urphy CO'JYlcil., B~. of Trustees C'716, "-i. -r Ol.S - OJ- . , (i"~ . . \i-:'l \;\ ~'.D ~ :'Jo: [\: :s; ~'O~ ')..'>- ~'0 \; COUNTY OF SUFFOLK PETER F. COHAL.AN SU""OLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES ~ ~ v1 .Jpu:tl.$-W TO:(JA~~ r;30q~ ~+r, ~ ~_di~[i I J./-I /Ill 7/ RE: e~clw<U'7c-t': ~ ~ Dear ~'-. (!J~.a..L I We are in receipt of your letter dated above referenced project. DAVID HARRIS. M.D.. M.P.H. COMMISSIONER DATE: 7- 't ~gCt 'Vh1 #- I~' - ~{R - /- q c.; -/?- f&- concerning the Ol. o 2. o 3. This Department has no objection to your designation of lead agency status. Insufficient information is available for technical comments. There is no record of an application to this Department. CJ A more accurate project location is needed. (Suffolk County Tax Map No.) III 4. This Department has received an application and it is: CJ Complete CJ Incomplete . Other: j)u. (Fw.-urL? tl'n i>>J o 5. It appears that the project can be served by: Sewage Disposal System CJ Sewer System and Treatment Works CJ Subsurface Sewage Disposal System(s) CJ Other: WWM-067 COUNTY CENTER R.....t.RHEAO,l'ol.Y 11801 (OVER) (516) 548-33L C"-';:j ,i! -,! II \t Ie, c:J 5. (cont'd) Water Supply System [] A Public Water Supply System [] Individual Water Supply System(s) [] Other: . 6. Comments: The Health Department's primary environmental concern pertaining to development is that the applicant comply with the requirements of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code especially Articles V and VI, and relevant construction standards for water supply and sanitary sewage disposal. These considerations are to be reviewed completely at the time of application. Full considera- tion in placement of water supply wells and disposal systems is given to State and Town wetland requirements. The Health Depart-' ment maintains jurisdiction over final location of disposal and well systems and the applicant should not undertake to construct any water supply or disposal system without Health Department approval. Other portions of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code also apply to commercial development such as Articles VII and XII. The Lead Agency is requested to forward a copy of this form to the applicant wi th its findings. '3:-Ae S CL)/f S ../~ fi...e<:.e~ ~ ~ c.m.vc.c~Wnff ..fk '-I ;2 - ~ Ac:.~" / ~~"" ~ ~, )('e<<~ f1~ -c{;;,t #-e.a ;;519 ~'u -/ Ckh ~~../~. ~&/ ~ /#C.U #?/ c~ ~ (n.5" fly/L) ~ ~~A~6fp/,,6 ~..t ~. qjP~ ~}.~; ~ ~ ~ ~7~" ~ ~~ ~~ ~..kJ./U~U,;CI. Pn ~-t--I ~ ~ ~ ~...,. ~ . ~ a /'I<LiMV.) ~ ~z du<~-..,&' ~ ./U~{c:t~,,-,c....p ~()<'+.). 5~ /~ ~ a ~'tI'rL~ _/2..c-6-U~<.J ~ ~ -/~ ,fi,~ . t vI/XC tv~ ~ t1Vi.. u~<e-t./ a ~ u,~ ;ae.~ eP-'(. {.~~e, a-r<-d a.. Sf Qt..U1- ;..L,*___'__'?~.. ~ ~~ ~ ~/~ ~ ~d2.. Further co nt mayJb~ed upon c~pl[etion of the application ~eview. ~ Name "7 Phone S-)t)~YR- -~~/7 / .~ ,. ~ .'IOIW OF SOUTHOLD \ ' .. ',~ ..... .... . I }1C~ . , . . '''' ( -..:", ::. " - ~ ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - PART PROJECT I~~Om1ATION ~OT:CE; ir.is ~CC~T~~t '5 de51Cned to JS3;~t in dete~lni~9 ~net~!r ~~e !ction p~pose~ Toay ~ave ! ~fgnificant !ff~~: In tne !!:!lvin:nment_ Ple~se c:lr.;cla~~ t:-:~ ~n'tir~ 'Ja~J. 5r:e~c. .:.ns....~r'S:o ~~esa .~uest.ions ~nl Je c::msla~1""'! :.5 :Jar: or ';.~e a-Q!Jt fCJ.ticn for apo",va1 !ncl iTl3.y be 5uaj~: to fun:hel'" '/ertfic3tion !nd ;Juetic r!view. Provid~ 3ny ~aait;anal informacion JOu Jelieve will ~e neeaed :~ ::~olete ?ART3 Z ana J. :: is !xce'!:::!'!1 :~a~ :::no1"et'ian of t."e =:AF '.ill ~e depenc:!!T't -:::In infonna~1cn c:urr!nc:t., av!f1able -!r.d ....ill not ,n.,olv~ :'Ie... ituc1~e$..,:e5ear::::'I.or fnvestiqa1:ion. If t:1fO~~:lon n~uir-'n9 such !adi~ional "lIork ;s~unaYi1:~cle.' i~ :nd,tC:J.t.a ana soe':l.:! ~!.c.., Ins.."tancC!a . . " . .... --" . ....;.......,..-.... ~.:....- --' .~._..~..:.... ;;.1,'" '1F ooCJECi: --- -., . ,. -RICHMOND'CREEICFAroC -. ", 'ljlj~:!! :::0 :rA:~E OF .1~O'-!'=.t~IT: ~Thomas Canavan, -../ 'ii;.".: c/o Canavan & Boehm "29-'park-- Averiue.-" ---... l5.:ra~,=~ _,_-~,_'_-_"'_";----'--~-_. -'-.-..-'---":" Manhasset. N.V! 11010 1".0. i l tata) ll.i~J 't~~E ~~IO .~CC~:SS uF ~~m:~ , rr 01 ff~l""!nt1 -Anna Fiore, Michael Longo '&' ars.. (l'lame, 75 Down East Lane . lS~r'e.~~; (f"'\"+-n~"'r.f..~T"l ,.J.; . "1 v J 1 qhR ,Stato=J. l.;.:P' 3US'!NESS ?HmIE: A 42 lot subdivision I)'E!::~P~!'::~! I1F OOIJJ~':7: (9rf!ny d:scrtbe ti'pe of ;H"'Ojac-: ~r ac~ion) Ppr.rm;r' 'N V - desianed under the -(C111Rte,r (Concept. i'lt Mi'l; T1 Rn"n A. Sl-:-~ ~;S,~I?T!a11 :,...'t1'l!?-::-:"__,_"__~,,-:,,,:-,,_. (?LE.'\SE CO~PLEi:; E.'\CH ~uES7,a~1 - tndie:te ,'I.A. If not 'Dolle:ol.) " ......,.. .: ...~.:.,:.:"!.'. (~f'!ystaJ if!t::~:i'; or o~er1Jt ,roj4!c,:._ bOth develoce-: 1. G~ner!l c.'arac~~r of the land: Gene~ailt unif~~ , . . ':- '-:.:": ;~~:.~ '~:::"'::""!'~':;~.':::j~!.:'''''''':;~'' ~- ".;;i',:';l~':i:~~~~ :'J.~~!",: -;,;'~,~ .... .. . . -' ~'. .. !nci :.ind!ve 1 coed ~I"~!S) ~..~--.:;"!:.~;,+~~~:: ~;;jC;t-i;.i.:f.:'~'::'~;,..' . slooe L G.eneraily !.:I1eV!n and roil fn9 "1".J.r~'illlar , . .__:....> s~c.uroa~-.=~ ~u:"~ l' .~~:.~or~s't .!a !2~san1: ~and :.lSe: Urban . [ndustr'tal , Corrmer"c~aI ":..':'::;';: :..-:l~.'""," _. Aql";c:ultur~ _. l)t.'1er VAz:::'A;tf~.....:....- .... . J. joell .1c::,~~ge ~7 ~roje~t !rea:~acr!.s~ ApcroximaC2 !c~~ge: :'resancly Af":!r Complc!'C~"n "- IJ-lcr~s ~c:-'!s --- ......- " _!...~_)Ci~S ~!<;:-~s 4~" ~,<"., " ~e~dcw Qr 3rusnIand F'cr'!s ::~~ .~9r~c:.:i ':~n.J ~e~I!r.c: (~~~sn~at~~ or rf:~! !S :~r ~r~~:~!S :e, ~5 ~r !..:.!..} I.A. !cr'!s I~.z.!-=:-~"! ". :ihJ: is 'H''!,:cr.r:n.!n,; soli ty,,"!{s) ']n 'Jro;~: 1~-:~: ;. -t. .~,..'! ::.":'!:,,'! Jec:r:c:< :ut:~::~i:1iS :n ~~jE:': s~ ':!? ....._~ .-,... ~. .~~~ is ~~~t~ -:~ :ed:-:cX? 1/'.173 . - ~ *- , .~~. ., ::'."" .,......-.... '.- ," , ": ......- ......... ~resent~y.~ft2r ~cmolet '- d -!c:"~s ~Tc: ~at.ar SU~3ca ':-~.a 'Unv~-;':!tJ. e~d ~ :"'::ClC.. e~r:." ~r fill; - t) -,e"" ~-!!..::::..le ':d<~' & buildings .J'" .- '::::..>>"', ,.r', _di: ~ ~!<:~~S 2-1C: ~~PC~-Jr:~y"ei ~!e"" a!:..le -<....J/J/h (0 - 3/J ) .,J/'lfJ1) -I- &~RrJa (3 - /3 P _~~S ~'ro (r., 3~,!,=} ... ::,'.. .~ .'--:-:-."- ..~ :~~..;-.~. -f~?'L~f:.i_i~r ;--...t:- :~':;:"~~~;:!.~': --~,;~;. ~.~::;:.'!, . ". '. .-' -~,...: .".:" .: . ~~[.)J~ '" . . " - , . , ; 6. Approximate pereent.,e of proposed project site with slopes: 0'10~/ot> ~; 10-15: --'~; 15: or greater ~..~ . 7. Is project con:iguous to. or cont.in a building or site listed on the National Register of Historic Places? _Yes -t-NO , , 8. What is the depth to the water table? d7-~ feet 9. D? hunting or fishing opportunities presentiy exist in the project area? _Yes ~IO 10. Does project site contal')(ny speCies of plant or animal life t.~at Is identified as threatened or . en~~nce!"~d - _Yes ~IOt according to - Identify each species 11. Are there any unique or unusual land fo~s on the project site? (I.e. cliffs. dunes. other geologi. fonnaticns - _Yes -X-.:~o. . (Describe 12. ~~~h:p;"'je~;:i~~/r~~~ntlY used by the co~unit:,~rne.igh,b~~~~Od asanope~.space or-rec~at:.~n . ....... .. -,- Does ~~~ pr~n~osite offer or,lnclude scenic views or vistas known to be Important to ,th~ .ccmmunlt 13. 14. . . Streams within or contiguous to project area: . . ""?i//{ --. I .. a. Narr.e of stream and name of river to which it is tributary /. 15. lakes, ?onds, Wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: a. Nar..e )?,C.WMO;()O {l.JeE.f' k' ; b. Size (in acres) . 16. What Is the dominant land use and zoning classificat~on within a 1/4 mile radius of the project (e. Single~.~ mily residential~ R-Z) and t.~e sc~le of ~eyelopment (~.g. ~ story). , . /F/o 'V:5,,kA--"I'ayt2'1'..~~,,)~~ ,~r-f~ 1"07 ~'7/1L"-<-,{...;.a.,,ff~ .. e. PROJECT DESCRIPTIO:I '. .. .. . 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) a. Total contiguous acreage owned by project sponsor -sir. c; acres. b. Project acreage develcpedr -f2.: acres Initially;~ aCres ul timately. .~ ...' . ., ""'. ,'. .'-:,;.";.'.\. ...~ . " c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped d. length of project, In miles: ------ (If .ppr:priate) . ___._, e. If project is an expansion of existing, indicate percent of ex~ansion proposed: building 'squ~re age ----; developed acreage ~ . . f. Ihm:ber of off-st....t parking spaces existing- C) ~ ; proposed -" .- g. Maxi~J~ vehicuiar trips generated per hour ----- (upon completion of project) h. If residential: Nur.~er and type of housing units: ~/;l One 'Family Two Family Multiple Family Ccndcminium Initial Ul t;r:tl.t! 1. ,N/I/1 Orientaticn (' Nei,h~ornood-Cltl-'egional Cc,"""ci a I Estimated Employment If: Induseri a I j. Total height of tallest proposed structure ;/I;:r- feet. ~~ . ~":'-~..~~.t;'. -- .<- .. . . q"-"'.' ..::-;\~~:;'~. " .' . . . . " . . ;2. Haw much natu~Jl mJt~rial (i.e. reck. e~rth, etc.) will be re~ov~d frem the site. GJ -tons /' d -Cubic ~ ., ~ ~ .. .. " -'-.- . . 3. Hew many acres of vegetation (trees. shrubs. ground covers) will be removed frc~ site -~!? ~cres. . 4. Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or ot~er locally-Important vegetation be removed by thi project? ~Yes -,A..JiO . . A~~ . s. A~e theTt! any plans for re4v<:!'.;etation to replace that rer.:oved during construction? ~~ 6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction ~months. (inclUd~~9 .demolition). ''''_. 7. l.f multi-phasad project: a. Total number of phases anticipated ~1I0. . _~'.-.I.((,.'i'.-~. 19". b. Anticipated date of co~encement phase 1 _month ~ear (includ r' demolition) . c. Approximate completion date final phase ...onth ---year. ._Yes -,........ d. Is phase 1 financially dependent on subsequent phasas? No N / fr N;""'- 8. Will blasting occur during constrJction? _yes 9. 10. 11. Number of jobs generated: during construction _____; after project is complete _____. lIurrber of jobS eliminated by this project _' )/ / It" . Will project require relocation of any projects or {a~ilitieS? _yes ;>(~ No. If yes, explain 12. a. Is surface or subsurf.ace liquid waste dis~osal involved1 ______yes i. No. ~ b. If yes. indicate type of waste (sewage. industrial. etc.) c. If surface disposal name Of streem into which effluent will be discharged ~ill surface are! or existing lak~s~;ponds, stre~s. bays or other surface wa~arAays be increased 0 decreas!:d by ;Jroposal? _Yes ~No. _ 14. Is proj~ct or any portion of project located in the 100 ye3.r flood plain? _Yes _No 15. a. Ooes project Involve disposal Of solid west.? _yes ~NO 13. b. If yes, will an e.~isting solid wast. disposal facility be used? _yes _No c. If yes, give name: ; location d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? ~Yes . 16. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? ______yes ~~o 17. Wf11 project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? _yes ~NO 18. Will project produce cperating noise exceeding the local ambience noise levels? _yes ~"o 19. Will project resul~ In an Increase in energy use? ______yes ~~o. If yes. indicate type(s) ~~ . 20. 21. If water supply is fro::1 \'/el]S indic~te pur.:pinq c~:;:lacit;y gals/minute. Total anticipate; water usasa ~er day _{Ill- galS/day, II d / Zoning: a. :.Iha~ 1s dC:=11nant 'zoning c1.lssific~ticn of site? Il XPSI/Y);'7j-'lJ..-;'!I6-KlClli-7'{,'/i!.,.,L- I b. Curr~nt s;eclfic zonir.g cl~$sifiCJ~ion of 51:.e /1 /~ 22. c. rs ;Jrt:pos~d u'Se ,=:~sjs:2nt wit!'! j1reiant zoning? d. If no, inc:!icJ~~ desired Zoning '/h I .- .' ~. -3- -- '.- -:. '-~:',..;-:.?- ~ , c,:~~;;~~- . - -,-, ~;i[4~~.~ . . " . .-'~ 26. Approval s: a. Is any Federat permit re,"ired? Yes L~~ " . b. Does project involve State or Federal funding or financing? ______yes ~No c. local and Regional approvals: , Approval Recuired (Yes, 110) (Type) Submit tal (Date) Appro' (Oat' City, Town, Village Board ~ ...:i..I/jilt VI.s/t') N' laND'/. City, Town, Village Planning Soard h/lY5" City, Town, Zoning Board , City, County Health Depart~ent 'II3S 7lKr:a. 'S~Mli":'Ier,bf' '''1/8'., UN!),; Other loc.l agendes , Ot~er regional agencies ~ ()F('_ W"5Jr'1> /z/tfS " St.te Agendes N'(S IlbJD,." Federal Agencies 'td''' I ". '::'; C. lNFOR.'!ATICNAL DETAILS " ...... .. Att.ch any additional info""..ticn as l1'..y be needed to clarify your project, If there are or may be a. adverse fm;>ac'ts aS3oci2.ted..- the" proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures \vhicit can _ taken tQ ~itigat! or avoid th .. PREPARE,,'S SIGl:ATURE:' k REnES<:!lTING: A1Itornev Thomas Canavan i " TITLE: . CAT~: 5/1/86 "."." .:'-'.;--~_. ;.,. " :':;.::~_:....t;...:"!,~, '.:::....":.::;:..~:" _. '.. ~" " ....... '.. --' . ."".: ','..~::";.t:. ..-..,,..~..,- .... ~.v~ , ...-=-! * .' , 0' ~-.. .-~:., . ;-;." OFFICE . RVISOR FRANCIS J. MURPHY SUPERVISOR MAIN ROAD SOUTHOLD. L.I.. N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-,aoo (516) 765.1939 July 17, 1986 Vilma Louise Marston, President Water, Land, Wildlife Protection Group P.O. Box 159 peconic, New York 11958 Dear Ms. Marston; We are in receipt of your letter dated July 14, 1986. Copies of the letter have been made and distributed to members of the Planning Board, Town Board and Board of Trustees along with a =py to Judith Terry, Town Clerk for their information. However, this is a Planning Board matter and all =rrespondence should be directed toward the Planning Board. The Supervisor's office will be given =pies by the Planning Board. Thank you for your interest in this matter. Sincerely yours, ) cc: Planning Board - FJM:btr FRANCIS J. MURPHY SUPERVISOR . . OFFICE RVISOR TELEPHONE (516) 765-1800 (516) 765-1939 MAIN ROAD SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 July 17, 1986 Mrs. Dorothy Lueckoff PO Box 211 Spring Lane Peconic, New York 11958 Dear Mrs. Iueckoff; We are in receipt of your letter dated July 14, 1986. Copies of your letter have been made and distributed to members of the Planning Board, Town Board and Board of Trustees along with a copy to Judith Terry, Town Clerk for their information. However, this is a Planning Board matter and all correspondence should be directed toward the Planning Board. The SUpervisor's office will be given copies by the Planning Board. We appreciate your interest and concern in this matter. 1y yours, J cc: Planning Board ancis J. Murphy upervisor Town of Southo1d FJM:btr .__-v ----' k ~ ~ tt!4U" ~1ZNd. , tJiUlift ~ ~ 1'r#l<<Ii<<l Gr<<JjJ -----/"- POB ~, PECONIC, L. I., N.Y. 11958 . In/t. r;~/,Icz..' ?4 1(,/ Iff~ t~ _ e d,.,dnd cZu ~ I~ ~ C?,? /r-7,d!m?rtct ~- /~ j..J, ~~t -h; k~~- 7/~7<'. / ~~ 0< & F~VlJ )744 '- lYe, :10 da k Ttu l' /4-..- ~e&, .~ -?-e-4-, ~4 ~ ~ h..- ~ ~//:t/ ~ ~ ~~--- ~/~ ~~ ~.~~ Jh..~~~~ ~~ fi: l).fc. <?} * n- ~_ A "~/I _ (J Arf'~ ,4, ~ ~ j , /s~7 ~ ~ ~ Cua~ Ph ~ ~~~.~ - ~-d~ ~/ p- ~-..fI _ ~"-' au~- /~- ]If ~7 . ..., . ~rs. Dorothy Lueckoff PO Box 211, Sprinf' Lane Peconic, ~.Y. 11958 .J r;j IT" (:~; -, c.... '-1') 'I ~1~:(L'- :..:J~\.:'.,-~,in; Pi" .;I~ 1 51935 U ,i 1!i! F W' . .u4,;~ ~~ Ju y ra;;v,-,JLgE5:Cur;";CLD Supervisor i.J. Murphy Southolt Town Hall Main Rei. Southolt, N.Y. De~r Sir; I regret th~t I have wfl.itei so long to express my concern re- g".rliing the proposal of the Developers Marin,,- on Richmond. Creek. " We have been ye,,-r-round resilients in peconic on Richaoni Creek for the past 16 ye"lrs. Our "EDSN" with 220' .of w"lterfront on this naturfil unaisturbei w~t,'rfr~nt we share with the native Flora & Fauna, wllterbiris, shellfish, fish ani eels, I'Illskrats ani frienlis, etc. 'tie iiscover we lIIust be labelet in toi,,-ys vernacul~r, "Environ- .entalists". Our .dJ!lerican In4ii"ln likely never had. a word. in their tongue to equal it as they knew instinctivly th"lt Man & N,,-ture must live in h"-rmony. A b,,-lance of each Eiving to the other. Therefore, what we took for grantei ,,-11 these ye~rs must now be defentei. It "-ni they cannot tefeni themselves! We 2uSt take siies ani some lIIust become the KEEPERS. Those who w~h to destroy this natural environment are only looking to profits. Over these M"-ny years there has been very little use of the creek by zotornoats "lnd the beds of mussels prove it. The proposed dredLing anli Mfl.rin"- will ~estroy one of the last cle~n, natural breeiing '...atprw~ys for all the sppcies of the \{etlalllLs we 'ire blessea with on the E~st En.. Please consider "Jecoming a "Keeper" of an irreplaceable wP.ter- W'l.y that will continue to tive to the future sOllie of the quality we 'l.ll calle to the ERst End f~ . Yours truly, <2.C 1!;~ &<-rt~ ~ ~QEC {~~ d-7~~LC~~J C~L <:J Y cd vvz..,a--./L~r--yyu<-y.J ~'1'~ ~ u:tC0.:J" 4 )~4 ?~ .~7~ ~ c1?d/~ ~:ttL f 4ft ' ~ r~~ f 'rr/f/t, ~7- . fL~ r - . . filmy, ~IZNd , tJiUlift --- 1't'4l<<1~ Ur#IJp _....._ "- _ ;t~, ~>.., r:"~ ~ ~;~~":'-""""''',,,,,,,, POB t:f:1, PECONIC, L. 1., N.Y. 11958-'<~11't.:.L:.,: -: P . 'r;..:~,l !!~ '-~--";"'.,-,,' ;;': ''''0 . , I ' " ' 'u. .' iJ"~ <v' i /'i ' :. ; , : f f l t " J !f,I .;-':.<) :: [JLi OJ:' -..--- . ,I ..".....'~,' ~ .~.. -'...............-.._c._~.-...." . ~ JV-';/:;li (.;~ :;;CU[HC-;LO , ~ .~~~k--:'l~ , /...J hw,),~) . .. ~~~ - . . kim" ZIDtA., (JiUt/ift 1't'4lNl- (;r<<J.J' - ----- /if:: ~ u l . ......." ~ k ~ ~ POS 1~1. PECONIC. L. I., N.Y. 11958-0111 July ll~, 1986 ;Superv i !lor Franc is J. i~ ur phy & TOlm Council l~e.nbers TOl"11 Hall Southo11, l.I., N.Y. Re: Hich'nonrl Creel( Farms 3ichmonrl Associates Project on Richmonrl Creel(, Peconic, L.I., New Yorl( Honorable ;'lurphy & Council .,.emberl:l: We oppose the proposed project in its present state as there will be a serious detrimentRl effect on the envioonment, 1. flichmond Creel( is certi fie,j for conmercial f1 shing anrl its wetlands provide breeding grounds, protection, and food for unique water birds. 2. There must be strict covenants and restrictions against enlarginl the narrow section of the creek where the proposerl 11 houses are to be built as this area provides shelter and foorl for migrating birds. In fact, there should be fewer houseu (2 to J acres per house on the creek side as 1 acre is overrlevelopnent and will have a negative environmental i~pact on birrls, fiuh, clams, and other wilrllife. J. There must be strict covenants anrl restriction that a marina wilJ not be built. 4. There mu~t not be an expansion near the wetlands at the end of Wells Road for recreational boats. ..... 5. The hi~h density of home!l will eventually affect the ground wate:, and' the creelf--dra,llfage, ::;torm!l, and other runoff will certainly aff' the creek. In addition, to date, there has not been Dept of Health water approval because of soil conditions. 6. The entra1ce of the cree1{ into the bay is very narrow; therefore restricting the exchan~e of lfaters in the creek. For this reason th' creek could be easily polluted. /Special Note: I visited the Army Corps of Engineers, NYC which has not approved any plans including a marina as was submitterl by Richmond Associates. There il:l a ereat conCern by the Corps for'the wetland s and for the creek./ Very truly yours, -:J ~;... ... .;(,......;... 9/Ja.-w/rP-., /4.Il,y. Vilma Louise Marston, President HiP0ilTAr,T NU'l'E: ,Ie can guarantee a minimum of 65 signatures of indi vi who we knOll are concerned about this issue. However, there lias not sufficient time to secure the signatures. Crig, ""..>" ~ ,.; ;,..." ~ ~ Atty. /,V/O /\(!z. D::~c File?t:--- (;;; ~'. ~~<;;. , Mrs. Dorothy Lueckoff PO Box 211, Spring L 'ine Peconic, ~.Y. 11958 i ~ (:~"\ ,n- ~o '-1) !\. ','" ~ i:.:~~~,:~~.~~-(~.t,::;___~~ ~ n ~ , ~ > i j , liT:' .I/ij I 5 i986 i; i,. 'llt; . i.J' t---_.~___ ___~ Ju y TlIJ~,.IJ:rgB5:DUlliCLD Supervisor i.J. Murphy Southol. Town Hall M'iin Rli.. SouthoH, N.Y. De::t.r Sir; I regret thRt I h'ive waitej so long to express my concern re- garjing the proposal of the Developers M'irinR on Richmonj Creek. We h'ive been yeRr-round resi.ents in Peconic on RichBonj Creek for the past 16 years. Our "EDHIf" with 220' of waterfront on this n'l.tur'il unjisturbe. w!l.t,'rfr')nt we shqre with the n'l.tive Flor!l. Ii: Faun'l., w'lterbinls, shellfish, fish an. eels, llIl\skr'its 'l.nj frien_s, etc. We jiscover we IIUSt be l'l.belej in tOjRYS vernRculA.r, "Environ- aentalists". Our American Inji'in likely never hall. a worj in their tongue to equ'l.l it as they knew instinctivly thRt MRn &: Nature IIUSt live in harmony. A bal'l.nce of each giving to the other. Therefore, wh'l.t we took for grantej all these ye'lrs must now be _efen_ej. It anj they cannot jefenj themselves: We must take sijes anj some IIUSt become the KEEPERS. Those who w~h to <<estroy this natural environment are only looking to profits. Over these l'IIany ye"lTS there hAs been very little use of the creek by Ilotor;)oats "m<< the beds of lIIussels prove it. The proposed dre&fing anj Marina will .estroy one of the last cle~n, natur'l.l bree.ing '.;aterways for all the species of the wetl'1.n_s we are blesse<< with on the E'1.st En.. Please consio.erlJecomine a "Keeper" of an irrepl'1.ceable wRter- W!l.y th'l.t will continue to ~ive to the future sOllie of the quality we all coae to the E'l.st Ene f~ . Yours truly, T . . LD Southold. N. Y. 11971 (516) ~65-1938 NOTICE OF SIGNIVICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRIONMENT Dated July 14, 1986 Pursuant to the provisions of Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, Part 617 of Title 6 of the New York State Codes, Rules and Regulations, and Chapter 44 of the Southold Town Code, the Southold Town Planning Board, as lead agency, does hereby determine that the action described below is a Type I action and is likely to have a significant effect on the envirionment. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION Proposal of Richmond Creek Farms is for 42 lots on 49.6 acres in the cluster concept at Main and Wells Roads, peconic. Further information may be obtained by contacting Diane M. Schultze, Secretary, Southold Town Planning Board, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New YOrk, 11971. Copies to: Robert Flack, DEC Commissioner NYS, DEC at Stony Brook Suffolk County Department of Health Services Suffolk County Planning Commission Francis J. Murphy, Supervisor Rudy Bruer, esq. ~ . - - July 14, 1986 Supervisor Francis J. ~urphy and Kembers of Southold T9~m Board Town Hall - Main street Southold, liew York 11971 Honorable Nembersof the Southold TO'..m Board - Greetings! Regarding the Richmond Creek Associates Plan which will be voted on this evening, This is an urgent appeal to you to disapnrove the plan of Richr10nd Creek Associates for housing and a marina to be develoc.ed on Wells Road, ?econic, N.Y. The Creek (Richmond Creek), at its north-west end is very narrow and it is heavily fringcdwith pre~ious wetlands. Housing in large nur.:;bers would destroy these wetlands...... Density of houses near the Creek ~~d houses ~ the Creek can c~use water nolution a5 we ~now it to have hannened on other"Creeks in SouthClld To\"n. - A ~oat sliD or ~arina of proportions s~ch as indicat~din thi3 particular ~lan WQuld ';:Jollute the wate!'s, destroying the breed ing and feeding gro:mds of the abundant and g Dmetmes rare ~ild life which abound3 en this Creek. It is also possible that sw~pland would emerge such as has happened in parts of New Jersey. ?lease, pleasesave one of the finest Creeks in the east end by voting NO on this issue of density of housing and the marina. Thank you. ("';l~~i ) J-k-t './...:" Joc!J<t-6.w-4.v '3~ Z; /.....;.--..""1./ L}.;I-I"", .1",,,,,,")/ JO" "ff 'J [ -eu,-,,,,,"v A L "'""",> ~rr. ~~ _ Ok, .?n1VYW',.., i-~.,.( Sa--..-" ~, d.,,~ 9;'~ f'-- Jti~" u~'- . . .,' FIELD REPORT _ POLICE DEPT., TOWN Of SOUTHOLD, N,Y, Centr" eomp.... ~. ....... of Occ. o ~a.-., P Ill' ,_ Or c._ Addr_ TimeOut J(Jt , .' ~E.e&.IVIU:> ~<<'Po~" OF Of) I.C """' I 0 I'l/'!> 154. t Ne. COtV b V (. T'Il..J::) ON ~,.~ ""''''''Hl'''' 7$ F"r OF "'" 4. T(.""Vl) '!> . SPO....L <.V'l'H A M't.,. 1:)~ OlIO CAN",,,/IIo'foJ 'r ~OL#P\ "'-I ~ ~ At.oPU-TY OW'N€Al~. ~ ~"m'rED TH4tV ~ <:OlVbvc-l"'N'- ~Aac.~t.61 S'rv't>'( . A'bvl S E.l:. HI,", CI F- WCT'(t'Wb t.,.,w. No VIO(IItr.OtV A;- 'r"'!a -r,,,,,ll".. ... POTS 2 - COntl....lon R_rt A_I C V.. Aeportine Officer Shield No. "pervilOr "15. ,?c. ~c.. ------ FOfm POTS I T . . Southold. N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 NOTICE OF SIGNIVICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRIONMENT Dated July 14, 1986 pursuant to the provisions of Article 8 of the Environmental conservation Law, Part 617 of Title 6 of the New York state Codes, Rules and Regulations, and Chapter 44 of the southold Town Code, the southold Town planning Board, as lead agency, does hereby determine that the action described below is a Type I action and is likely to have a significant effect on the envirionment. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION proposal of Richmond Creek Farms is for 42 lots on 49.6 acres in the cluster concept at Main and wells Roads, peconic. Further information may be obtained by contacting Diane M. Schultze, Secretary, southold Town planning Board, Town Hall, Main Road, southold, New YOrk, 11971. ....... Copies to: Robert Flack, DEC commissioner NYS, DEC at stony Brook Suffolk County Department of Health services suffolk County Planning commission Francis J. Murphy, supervisor ./ Rudy Bruer, esq. \ , , ~ ~ k -:-..-.-. , . .~ ttlJw, ~-, tJiUtlift 1't'4lNli<<z (;r(1tJ.J' ,- o....-tu..:-<.,'-"--"--- !'t ~/, Honoracle Francis ,J. .'fturphy & Tom1. Council :cembers T01m lIall South old , L.I., N.Y. 11971 POB /5"1, PECONIC, L. 1., N.Y. 11958-';::;'i~. rmrR (E F;~ n~?r;:,~ II~j! JIl14re; i~1 Uu;2J I ~ TOWN CF SCUTHCLO ,July 14, 1986 Re: Richmond Creek Farms Richmond Associates Project on Richmond Creek, Peconic L.I., N.Y. Honoracle :';ur,Jhy & Council Benbers: We oppose the proposed project in its present state as there will be serious detrimental effect on the environment. 1. :1ich,nond Creek is certified for c01unercial fishinG and its Ivetlands provide breeding Grounds, protection, and food for unique water birds. 2. There must be strict covenants and restrictions ao;ainst enlarging the narrow section of the creek where the proposed 11 houses are to be built as this area provides shelter and food for 'TIio-ratina; birns. In fact, there should be fewer houses 2 to J acres ~er house on the creele side as 1 acre is overdevelopment ann will have a negative envioronmental impact on bir'ls, fish, cla!:ls, and other \.fildlife. J. There must be strict covenants and restrictions that a marina ',ill not be built. 4. There must not be expansion near the wetlanns at the enn of ells Road for recreational boats. 5. The hiGh densi ty of homes "'lill eventually affec t the ground liB ter and the cree](--drai!1age, storms, and other runoff lvill certainly affect the creek. In addition, to date, there has not been Dept of Health 'later ap~roval because of soil conditions. 6. The entrance of the cree}( into the bay is very restrictin::; the exohange of waters in the creek. creek could be polluted very easily. '7 ( Special :';ote: I visitwl the Army Corps of Engineers, i'lye, which has ;--,ot ,-'p~)roved any ,Jlnns includin,,; 8 T:larlna as Ims submltted by :Uchmond ,i~s.sociate8. There is :J. ''.:;reat concern by the Corps for the Hetlanrls and f'or t~e creek. narro~; therefore For thls reason the Orig. ra~i:;s -r I., ~ Mty, ~~:;~ '1ibl8. Louise ;.:arston, ~:r'~s~ ""..~ J\__.j' L.i...,... . File t: v . / - ~/ . . . " July 14, 1986 Supervisor Francis J. Murphy and Members of Southold Town Board Town Hall - Main street Southold, New York 11971 Honorable Membersof the Southold Town Board - Greetings! Regarding the Richmond Creek Associates Plan Which will be voted on this evening, This is an urgent appeal to you to disapprove the plan of Richmond Creek Associates for housing and a marina to be developed on Wells Road, Peconic, N.Y. The Creek (Richmond Creek), at its north-west end is Tery narrow and it is heavily fringedwith pre~ious wetlands. Housing in large numbers would destroy these wetlands...... Density of houses near the Creek and houses on the Creek can Cause water polution as we know it to have happened on other Creeks in Southold Town. A boat slip or marina of proportions such as indicatedin this particular plan would pollute the waters, destroying the breeding and feeding grounds of the abundant and sometimes rare wild life which abounds on this Creek. It is also possible that swampland would emerge such as has happened in parts of New Jersey. Please, pleasesave one of the finest Creeks in the east end by voting NO on this issue of density of housing and the marina. Thank .you. I I / , / t-----. - ,!{ ~ >>1y n~"",'-Z- e ~(N" tlrJi;L c&.~.~. ~7 ~~.~ . / I . ).../) Ii - ( c~ ,,,- "z:. Ivi Lt1G~~ti1- 3r'~ ~~ ,) r'}, ~iV~~ ~/'-.-L ~~ / :~ ~ ~ \ . . . ~ Annette Knoblock P.O. Box 127 Peconic, New York 11958 (516) 734-6609 July 14, 1986 SUnerYisor Frank J. Hurphy Members of Southold Town Board Main street Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Honorable Members of the South old Town Board Greetings! Before you vote on the proposed development plan of the ~ichmond Creek Associates, may I enter my plea: I have been a resident and taxpayer of Southold Town for 37 years: 30 years as a part-time, "holiday" resident and 7 years Full-time. \~en I bought my cottage on Richmond Creek in 1949 I had a fine beach and could swim in the Creek off my own private beach. I cho~ to sacrifice this and let the wetlands take over, to prese e ~v.little part of this beautiful inland body of water -- "n~s was long be ore any ~aws were passed requ~ring preservation of wetlands. Now I know people have a right to build houses but not at the riskof destroying the fragile beauty of our Creeks and polluting the waters -- no one has this right. This rare land that we have in the east end is special and we do not want it to end up like the Hamptons or Middle Island or Commack, do we?? My plea is to vote no on this development and its marina because it will affect the wetlands and the water and have a terrible impact on the wildlife \\hich, after all, is an important part of tte charm and beauty of SoutholdTown. ZinzrelY~' , ,,~ I./.- (;/fttw:7fl;-N/ Annette oblock ~'_. ..~ --:> . \ . ~ J\lL 14 19M July 14, 1986 C o p y Supervisor Francis J. Murphy and Members ot Southold Town Board Town Hall - Main Street Southold, New York 11971 Honorable Members of the Southold Town Board - Greetings: Regarding the Richmond Creek Associates Plan which will be voted on this evening. This is an urgent appeal to you to disap~rove the plan ot Richmond Creek Associates for housing an a marina to be developed on Wells Road. Peconic, N.Y. The Creek (Richmond Creek). at its north-west em is very narrow and it is heavily fringed with prelltious wetlands. Housing in large numbers would destroy these wetland...... Density of houses near the Creek and houses.!!!!. the Creek can cause water polution as we know it to have happened on other Creeks in Southold Town. A boat slip or marina ot proportions such as indioated in this partioular plan wculd polute the waters. destroying the breeding and feeding grounds of the abundant and 8) metimes rare wild life W1 ioh abounds on this Creek. It is also pouible that swampland would emerge suoh as has happened in parts of New Jersey. Please. please save one of the finest Creeks in the east end by voting NO on this issue of den.ity ot housing and the marina. Thank you. {)/f-nd\ - J a~4/ I~ C~~ j, /4"v-!.u, ,J:~0V .U~~ 'YVta..... ?naU/:,.cT T u{ ~~ k lt~o c~rL{ (V~ J fu' rvL., F' ~a e~-uv @. :i ~1'tt c:~ t~ X, . I, . . Ju L i 4 198b ~ Annette Knoblock P.O. Box 127 Peconic, New York 11958 (516) 734-6609 July 14, 1986 SuoerYisor hank J. Murph7 Members of Southold Town Boar4 MaiD Street Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Honorable Members of the Southold Town Boartl - Greetings I Before you Tote en the proposed dllTelopment plan of the Rioblllond Creek Aasoeiata, lIay I enter my pleal I haTe been a resident and taxpayer of Southold Town for 37 years I 30 years as a pan-tille, "holiday" resident and 7 years Full-time. ....'hen I bought my co1:tage on Richmond Creek in 1949 I had a fine beach and could swim in the Creek oft my own priTate beach. i Cli" to sacrifice this and let the wetlands take over, to w;~er -~ ti11ai~lle18~bifoniln}eti~i~rP~6i~<>Hqflfrinl preserYation of wetlands. Now I know people haTe a right to build housss but not at the r1skof destroying the fragile beaut,. ot our Creek. and pollut1n1 the waters -- no one bas th1s right. Th1. rare land that we haTe in the e..t end 1s snecial and we do not want 1t to end up like the Hampton. or Middle I.land or Cammack, do we?? My plea i. to Toh no on this dllTelopllent and its .arilla because it will aftect the wetlands and the water and haTe a terrible impact on the wild11te llbiah, after all, 18 an important part ot tllt charlD and beauty of Southold rown. l.i,.-erelY ~ _ \4ttlu;4~;;ti~~ . /' Annettyn~locJt / ~~~ ~ . .__UL 14 1986 VilUr, ZIlNIl., rJiUtlift. 1'r4lw-1i<<1 6r4IJjJ. ~ -'" k .---:'\ ...-.-. POB /;01, PECONIC, L. I., N.Y. 11958-~~;~ .July 14" 1986 Honorable Francis .J. Murphy & TOT\,,11. Council "'1embers T01m IIa 11 Southold, L.I., N.Y. 11971 Re: Richmond Creek Farms Richmond Associates Project on Richmond Creek, Peconic L.r., N.Y. Honor,.bJ e ",!lr ,'l1y & COlmc 11 r'iembers: ,'fe O,'po:;e the propo.sed project in its present state as there will be serious detrimental effect on the environment. 1. ,Uchmond Creelr is certified for commercial fishing and its wetlands provide breeding Brounds, protection, and food for unique water birds. 2. There must be strict covenants and restrictions against enlarging the n8rrow section of the creel{ where the proposed 11 houses are to be built as this area provides shelter and food for migrating birds. In fact, there should be fewer houses 2 to J acres per house on the creek side as 1 acre is overdevelopment and lvill have a negative envioronmenta1 impact on birds, fish, clams, and other wildlife. J. 'l'here must be strict covenants and restrictions that a marina will not be bull t. 4 There must not be expansion near the wetlands at the end of ~ells Road for recreational boats. 5. The hiBn density of homes lvill eventually affect the ground water and the creek--drainage, storms, and other runoff lvill certainly affect the creek. In addi tion, to date, there has not been Dept of Heal th ''Iater 8pproval because of soil conditions. 6. The entrance of the creek into the bay is very restricting the exahan/:5e of lvaters in the creele creek could be polluted very easi ly. narrow: therefore For ~his reason the '7 ( Special !'jote: I visi terJ the Army Corps of Engineers, NYC, l~hich has not approved any plnns includine B marina as was submitted by Richmond Associates. There is a Great concern by the Corps for the wetlands and for the creek. Ver~ truly ~ ~7:~Narston, Pres~ ~~k~~ w.lr,~~,wil4,t#"-:~~ S2~~ 1'r#l<<Ii<<l GrtnJ.fJ ---:/, POB~, PECONIC, L. I., N.Y. 11958 ~" . 117/t, c;~/,ICL: r4 I?/ NtL t~- t:cL,<n?d CZu~k" ~I C?7 ;f,'dm~ct ~- /~ ,t,.} ~~ J~ k~r{.- 7/~ 7<../ ~~ d<c:. h~J /~4 ~ lye. :10 da-k /lz..e T /4-x- --d'a..., ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ h..- cd~ ~//71 ~ ~ ~- ~,.~cz~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~ /z:. l).I="c" .." * /A- ~_ flu II ~ ~ _ (<-1 "'7je>k A, ~ ~ j , /s ).-<-e.7 ~~--d- ~ ~ ~ t?'h 7lu- ~~ <:;--&1- 9f---e;1~ kr p--<- ~f _ ......-7// ~, ,{/~ ; a-14 k7 - )~. . JU~ ~ 1986 _ ~-,",k~~ tJaUr,~IZHd.,fJiUliftf ~:- 1'r#l<<lim Gr,",,'p r--/"- POBill-, PECONIC, L. 1., N.Y. 119SB .. . m/l.. r;~/,ICL: ~ /"1 IfF' t~ _ e cL,&/?'?d c:Zu ~ /~ ~4 C?7 ~dmPYI~ ~- /~ ~.J. ~~ ~ k~rc-- -z/~ 7.('../: ~~ ~ ~ /:e~J ;'744 >- rtye. :10 da k Ttu f 14-...... .-tfcv, ~ ~ ~-,.e/ ~ w-d{.h.. ~~J/7/ ~~ ~- ~/'~~~ ~~~ n.. ~~~~~ ~~ Iz;. 7}.Ec. ~ ~ n... ~_ /lu f'~4 _ (../ ~~ 4 ~ ~j , /S ~ ~-d- ~ ~ ~ t?'h ~ ~~ ~~- 9t--~:t.-t kr p--<-- ~-P _ ./7/,/ 1., ,!/~ ,~k-,- )~. Q~~\'~ , \ 6"'l{l' ~ ?\. \"\\'>.'-- . ., . JU^, 1 7 1986 <;' - '---- from VILMA LOUISE MARSTON June 7, 1986 Honorable Francis Murphy and All Members of the Town Board and Board of Trustees 1. Please reconsider the Richmond Associates Proje( 2. Who are the principals in this project? 3. Was a permit issued by DEe in view of the proximity of wetlands? 4. Was there a public hearing? or any public input Encl. See attached letter to DEe Orig. {'\::~.:_cs ~^ 1.-..." and location map. 'N \ \ ;.-;. vui ~~~,ir ~. ~ s:.....J File --.'-' . , __-",1 f . . , CREEJ{ AND WATER l'R07EDION qROIl7' ."...,c".....'"""'-._-c.. June 5, 1986 '-'Vl~ i .. "J Dept. of Environmental Conservation Bldg. 40 Room. 219 SUNY Stony Brook, New York 11794 t L. ~. '...,"-~._'"","-'._.' .,.", ! "~ t... ~ , ",~. ..... ,."..,~-~,.__._---_._~..~- Gentlemeo: Re: Richmond Associates Project on Richmond Creek, Peconic, L.I. Many of us have called DEC to no avail. There are always busy signals and when we manage to reach the switchboard and leave messages there are no return phone calls \>Ie were a committee a nd now have expanded to a very large group. \'le feel that it. is the responsibility of the DEe to intercede on this project because of the detrimental environmental impact and because of the controversal reports regarding same. We hope that you can assist us and do what is positive to protect all creeks, wetlands, and water bodies on the East End. Richmond Associates intend to build on(4i~ci\acres near Wells Road opposite Peconic Lane on the northwest end of the clean and ~au~ful Richmond Creek, where there are approximately 49.6 acres. There will be 31 houses on 1/2 acre plots; in addition there will be 11 houses on creek (1 acre). I believe the Planning Board approved these small plots as a trade off for 17 acres of open space. At the present time, the Master Plan calls for two acres). OriginallY there waS supposed to be a marina but it \'!as not approved. HovJCver, who knows what ',.Iill happen in this regard later on. Richmond Creek is certified for commercial fishing and is a feeding and breeding grounc for many sea and water birds. There has not been approval of the Health Dept. becaus, of soil conditions so that there has to be a separate water system. However, in futur' years sewage dra~nage will affect the ground water and creek according to knowledgeabl, sources. In addition storm water runoff into the creek with the high density of homes will certainly affect shell fish, breeding grounds, and feeding grounds for water bird, There are egrets, herons, swans, ducks who use this area. Among other items, there should be an increase in square footaz€ of the dwelling units There should be convenants and restrictions of the open laqd area stipulating that a marina cannot be built. There should not be an expansion near the wetlands at the end of Wells Road for recreational boats. At the present time, fisherman sometimes use this area for their boats which is a small section. The wetlands and land surrounding the creel< should not be disturbed by dredging alar" margin of the creek for boats as right now in the area of the proposed housine comple~ there is a very narrow stri!) 01~ creek \'Ihich will not accommodate boats. In order to h2ve recreational boats there most certainly have to be dredging and there are many W[ birds "'ho feed in that ar~?. ~'lrite to ~y yruly yours ~ (/~ oz:.~ -/7}&W ~ V1.11:1a Lou1.se j',jarston POB 111 Peconic, L.I. 11958 ~e hope to hear from youlsoon. y , . . . \lJ'I \ ,~ \ "0' \ \ <;0 '_ " 0" \. --'\ \ \ \ nit '" B Dace Thomas Gratlan ~ rn S13052'40"E 146.00' N13052'40"W 252.35' \ - \ --- \ - Subd \ \ now Or formerly John B. Brush, Jr. a Helen Pirog \I. Wf'.'ccs , j' Or ~:!) 3,\C.. .,,- n(E~ , , INOIA N J NF~~ -."' -{ IANF ':.>J' ~,;r -'f~ 0'1 M/'.;:- LOCLTI I . I" ~ FiOO T , . D LD Y Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 June 13, 1986 Mr. Rudy Bruer Attorney at Law Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Richmond Creek Farms Dear Mr. Bruer: Enclosed, for your review, is a copy of a resolution from the Town Trustees with regard to the above mentioned subdivision. Please contact this office if you have any questions. Very truly yours, '"' . -6.e-t1Jt(;tt OrwwA l0..., 9v-(~ BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR., CHAIRMAN SOUTH OLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Diane M. Schultze, Secretary enc. . HENRY P. SMITH, President JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, Vice-Pres. PHILLIP J. GOUBEAUD ALBERT KRUPSKI, JR. ELLEN M. LARSEN :J\lN 2 a~ -..../ TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 BOARD OF TOWN TRlJSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 Hay 30, 1986 Hr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Richmond Creek Farms Dear Mr. Orlowski: Pursuant to your request for recommendations regarding the above captioned matter, please be advised that the following resolution was adopted at the regular Board meeting on May 29, 1986. RESOLVED that the Town Trustees recommend to the Southold Town Planning Board that any drainage and run-off on the roads, in the Richmond Creek Farms SUbdivision, shall not run into the creek, but shall be diverted into a catch basin first, which will filter some of the pollutants, and that there is a 50' R.O.W. for public use for the inland residents. Very truly yours, Henry P. Smith, President Board of Town Trustees ~ P~/(.L0'-9 Ilene Pfiffer~n~,~~lerk ~ HPS:ip cc: Trustees file ~'?l'tl\ Co' ~ \--+~l .-..--- . ' . . . RICHMOND To Follow Part CREEK FARMS. I dated 1 ~ 1986 EA~ ENVIRONMENTAl ASSESSMENT - PART II Protect Imoaets and Th.i~ Maqr.itude Gen_ral r"f:'l~~ti,)~ {~,,-t~ Cir!fully) . In comole~i~g tr.e fo~ tn~ ~v;ewer Should be guided by the question: Have my decisions and determinations been reasonzDlt: The rev1...~ 1s not expected to be an exnert en~iro"me"tal analyst. . Identifyfn9 that In effect wfll be potentf,lly 11'ge (column 2) doe. not mel. thlt ft s1on1f1cant. ~r.y l.rg~ efftct must bl evaluated 1n PART 3 to determine signif1cance. erfect 1" CQ1~ Z si~ly asks that it bl looked at fu~her. is also ~~essarilJ By ;aent.fyin9 an . Th, Examales ~ravided are to ass1st thl reviewer by showin9 tyges of effects and wnerever cossi~1e the 'h~- of mlgnltUGI that would trigger I response 1n colynn 2. Thl ex~les are generally aDolicaole t~rOU9"out tl Stat. ana for mast situations. But, for any SglC1f1C project or site other examgles and/or lower t~~esnold: may ~. more ao=rooriate for a Potential Large Impact rating. . Each proj~t, on each site, in elch locality, wiTT vary. Therefore. ~e examales nave o~n offered as 9uid~ They do not constitutl an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer eacn nuestion. . Th. n~lr of .xamales per question daiS not indicat. the importance of ei~ Question. IHSTRUCTIONS (Reid C,...ful1y) I. Ans....r each of the T8 questions in PART 2. Answer.!!!. if there will ~e .!!!I. efftet. b. "'.vbe Inswers should be consid.1"'td as !!!. answers. c. If answerin9 ves to a ouestion then check the approoriate box. (column 1 or Z) to indicate tHe oo:ent1!l size of the tmoact. If t~act threshold equals or exceeds any !x4mOle provided. check cclumn Z. If i~lct will occur but threshold is lower than examale, cneck column 1. d. If r~'t1ewer hIS doubt about the size of the illltla~t ~21en consider t~e imoact as I)Otentially large and greCeed to PART 3. t. If a oot'"t1a11y large imoact or effect can be reduced by a chan9! in the groject to a less than large N9nitud.. place a Yes in co!t.r.m 3. A No resoons. indicates. tnlt such a r-e<Juction is not coSSio1e. 1 2. 3 1. WILL THERE 3E AN EFFECT AS A RESULT OF A PHYSICAL CHAIlGE TQ PRQ';ECT S nE? NO yeS OQ ~ n S~ALL TO POTENTIAL CAN I~PACi 3E MOOE;t&TE LARGE REOUC;:O 3Y IMPACT I~PACT ='QOJECT C~ANGC: - - - -1'... - - - - - i - - - - - - - - - - - - r~PACT ON LANa Examal!s that Woula .o\Cic1.i' to Column Z ...li Any :onstru.:t+M ,,, ~l:::oes of 15': or gre,Her, (15 foot rise I)er 1 CO foot of 1 enot~:. C~ ~he!"'e tne gener3.1 s looes i" tne proJ e~t area eXceed 10:: ....I2. CO"struct~O" on Lanci wneP"'! the deDth to tne water tacTe 1s less enan 3 feet. ...li ...J\l. I"onstruc:ion cf l1aved lJartdno a~a ~",. 1. ""l"" 0" mnre vl!nicles. c"n'5tP"'1Jct;on on 1.]"1 ",ne,.e oeo:lr?CJc is eXl')osed or qene~ally _it~in J feet of ~xi~t~n9 1round surface. ...li '=Jns:r'JC<;:':'~ !;r'a. ..,1 11 continue for '1lOr"! tMn 1 V'!:!r" O~ irwobe ~"e :nan ~r.~ ~~as~ O~ S!;lge. ...ll ::.t=~vo!,=~on ~".,. .......''"'0 :~~":oses :.'ut ...oulj P"''!'''Ove :-:Ol",! :~an 1.:C:: :Qns :f ~a:~"l: ~~:e;'al (l.e. ~oc~ 0" S011) :er wear. N ::;:'1s:....Jc':':::I'l O. ,1r.y ~e'" ~,HnU...:1 lanaf-:1. .5- < .~. '-,< """" ., ,. " f . N CO,,,,""'O, " . d."""., 1100.....'. De!'!er ;1T!1'ac:ts: z. ~ y~s \JILL THE.~E aE AN EF'F!Cr Tf.! "HY UNIQUE 1)11 UHtlSUAL LAM Ft'lR11S ~ FOU~O ON THE SIT!? (f.e. clfff~. dunes. aeoloQ1cal fo~. ~ t;ons. etc.) . Sneeific lano fo~: I~'O.c; C~ \oi"rr~ 3. "" 'E5 WILL pqOJECi ,\FF::Ci. ,1"l(Y .ATE? SOOY OEsr~TtO..s.S ..........0 pII:On~EO? (Under Arttc1es 15. 24. 2S of the E~'lY1r.. onmental C~nservat'on Law, E.C.L.) Examol!s tnat ~ould ..s.o~11 to Column 2 '~d91na ."'()re than 1Q1l Cutlde yar-ds of ~U,.hl f!"Oll c~annel of a prot:cted st,.~~~. Construction in a designated fl"eSl'IwaUr or tidAl wetland. 0"., 'mmts: CONSTRUCTION NEAR WETLAND SEPTICSYSTEHS NEAR WETLAND ~. wILL ~ROJEC7 ..s.F~ECT ANY NCH..~~OTEC~E~ EXISTtN~ OR Nr~ NO YE! SeDY OF l'!.~iC:R? ............................................(] 0 :xa~oll!s tnat -auld ..s.~pll to C~l~~ Z J. 10': 1nc~ase 01'" d!~l"'e!u in the surfac! area of any ~Ody of ,..ater 01'" "'Ore than a 10 acre lnCI"'''!!Se 01'" decruse. c~n$tr~e:~on of a body of ,..at!~ tnat exceeds In acres of surf.c! UH. !:ltht!" hnac:s: ----------- ~. '~:lL. ;l'lCJEG J.rrE'cr SU.'lF'~C::: ':)q r,il:C(J"OI.j"TE~ I1IIAL!7P '10 l'ts o :x.!,"'ol'!s ~.".t !,joul:;:! J."ly I:~ Cclurrn Z Y :)M]'!ct "il: ~"lUlre a dlsen,"ge pe~1to .::L .J...,:!!:~ "'!~Ul~! 'JSo! of j seu"!:! "f ''''Hal''' ~~at dees "0: l"!a'I" locrov' j ~::: se..v! :r-:l:osed ~"01'!ct. ..N. ,..,.,?-:~ "!':~'I"!S "ol~el" 5\Jc:l:, from ,..eiis ",itJ'l Clr!!~~!" ':.'an ".~ al~ons :11" ,'lll"Ut~ ",u:':!clnq <:.10.1C1':"j, ..ll :~I"S:I""';C:'::" ~I'" .:l:e"J:10n '::JuSl:'l~ any ContJI"l1l":'C1on o~ 1 .:l~clTc ~a:el" 5ucoly s!s:e~. ....E. '''::e-:: ..,ij aC'/el"'sel/ af.t~=: ;I"'~I.l:'1a..a:~I"" N _':~..'J ~H";e": .01;; :<! :::/1\Ieye1 oH :.~e Sl':~ _~ ""1:0] . -::. e~ ..n T ::., :"!$~'l: 1)' -:0 '0'.: el1 $ ': 01'" 'a'/e ... aC~::Jd -::e :J::JC ~ ':;. -N Y ~..:: e: ': "'!':'J"" ~': I tIC"'~;r :"a ': 'Jse .... ~ ".. .... ..tJu:.: ~'::' ~~; :,0",,,:;.; ;J,"-:or:$ :e" ::J. .. . " . < e". :J'_~ e ':J'.:' " : "-a" . , aJ"-;! ~~.. .. "". " ... :"! .-...... :"::-\s : .. . , ..:"J . -., .- ~'.5:'-1 ~::! :- ~ ': " :.. ~ .',..4" 1. l:;~''''U.. :'1'1 OEiUTE 'WO!r"!" ~ 1L .x -X -X x ;lM'::,'ii:':'l L'~~CiC: ~\oll"l!C~ ~. . ~. ';','1 :",".l,C 3E ~E:!J::Z:: 3Y ::!'j"; :'::' ~:':"";r;: - , , . ")t".,. 1/l'IDlcts ~ 5. :/IU PIOlJECT Al,TU OAAlllAJ;E Ft.!l", PAm'".lS O~ StJRFA<:r ~JAT(R:Ill YES A'JlI'lFFY' ............ .... ................................... 00 !!!!!:!l.!. tltat "'Iould A"91y to Col1111 2 'roject "uld t.,ed, flood .,U" fTOW$. P~ject 1s llt'ly :0 eluse SUbstAntial 'PaSiO". P""ilCt Is tnco.olttbl. w1tft .ststt", drat".qe "attlrns. Otll... """Cts: IJIlCP<'" "<'n Il1l?ERVIOUS NEAR WETLANDS AND STREAM fM'ICT ,." lT~ S~CES III YES 7. WIU PADJECT AFFECT AIR OUALITY?..........................~ 0 F.'UJlalts tI'llt Would Ap~ly to Cot..... Z Project .111 fftduca 1,m. or ID" .,.,.lcl. trtps 'n 1ft, 9'''''' hour. ~ '",JKt .111 I"'ISIItt tft tM tncfrterltlOft of "'N U1M , ton ~1 ,..fun ~r MU,.. p",Ject IWrisston ..ate of ill CCfttlPrinlnts w111 .zc~ 5 lbs. oer "our or . h,ac sayre. 1"''Ochlclng ,.,,.. tJ'lln 1~ .'111on 8ru's pel:' naur. Otn.,. ''''''leu: tllO!l~ I"I~ Of ~NT1; ~..", !IH"" ': 8. WIU PROJECT AFFECT ANY THREATENEO OR E1tQAHf;EREil SPECI!.S? :lll YES 00 E~IMQ1.s thlt Would Aoaly to Col~ Z Rl!ductlon of on. or 1I'Dr-e species lhtld Oft th. Iltw 'torte 0,. 'td....1 Ttst. 1..slng t1Ie SHI, 0.,." 0,. "e.r sH, or found on tn_ s1te. Rtlll:lv.1 of In., !)Ortion of a critfcal or SfGniffcant wOd.. l1f-e /'I.llbl(J,(.. .o.,11clt1nn of I'!sttctd. or "I!l"bfc1 de over more tnlft'" b"C!.. :,e.rot1'lepo t:ndn 1'~~!c.,'t.&I.r.al pW~"S. -P "!.""''' ir::c..c':s; PQ..aT~T l;" TMDZ'1f"'rp 9. !.Ill p~JECT SU!S"l'1:n'UlI.Y AFF"e:cr r~OH...illAEATE;IC OR NO YES E'OAHr,EREO SPECIES? ...... ................. .............. "0 Q ~ t.'lat '.tould '\001:0' to Colum :: r~Ject -ould 1uCsta"t1~11y int!r~!re .;t~ ln~ ~Sl~!nt or 'l1qratory fts.' or wIldlIfe SJetl'!'1. P~~ec: I"'!'~~;r!s :~e l"~v41 ~f ~r! t~4n l~ jC~!1 ~f ~.ltu"! 'e"est (ovlr ;~n ;<!!U"S r" !rJI) ,,. ,:~~~ !::CJllv illleor':lnt "~e:atlon, POSSIBLE IMPACT , . '~LL T(' OERA?E r~p.C',:, ...x.. ~ ..:t 1. b PnTE'fTIAL LAAGf !""T . - L- ~. I r.,,; UIPACT - at AEOUC!'iJ OY p~JEcr C}lMlGE . t'""^Ci C': ':rS~'''L ;~~~~'l:!Ct 1~. l!ILL. T!-IE U('l.JrCT ,U''!c:' '1Ii:;tt!. "tSr..\S '=' T!lf ""5l'.1. CI'AqACTE~ OF THE ::FtGH8flR~O OR CO-"ItTV? .............. bJmnle! Chit l'ould A:tply to Colunt 2 An inccJl'Cllttbh V151,111 Ifflct cAused by t.."\. 1ntrorluct1"" of "eM ~te~tils. colo~s Ind/o~ fOrm1 ;n c~nt~lst to tn. surrounQi"~ landsCI~'. ~ oroject east17 vtst~l.. not IIs11y scree"ed.t~lt is OOv1ously different f~ "th~r1 around ft. p",ject .,,111 ,",sutt 1n tn. @1tr-inlt1on 01" l'IIjor scretning of scentc views 01" vistas known to b, .tll'l!)Ol"tlnt to tl'll 11"'11. ~ Otll.,. flllOlcts:' 1. ...L. !'IALL r" oCTE~ITi"L ~-~EAATE LAMer: !WP4Ci T"r~c; ~_.'--~ 'l'! YE~ GO t~~cr O~ Ht~TO~re ~ESnUQC!S 11. WILL P'flJECT Im'ACT ANY SIn 0' ST'UCTURE OF HISm'le. NO YES P'E-"I~n'le nR PALEnnTOr,IC'L 1~.T'NCE? .................O~ Examoles tnat '1ould Aoolv to Colunn 2 Prt'.ttct occurino wnoll.>' 0" 1)1!"t1l11y ..1tl11" or eonttClUOUS ~ an1 facilitv or sit. listed on the ~ation.l Ree1si.r of hhtoric ,1ICts. . An~ imolct to In Ircneatagicll site or fossil b-.d lacltld within tn. project site. t)ther ~~ICU: PO~~TRT.R I~PICT ,~ ~p~~ SPICE ~ ~Ee~t~TT~H lZ. WILL THE p,nJECT 'FFECT THE CU'NTlTY OR OU'L1TY OF EXISTlllG NO Yr.S OR F1J"ruRE OPEII SPACES OR REeR~\TlOnAL OPP(lRTU~lTlES?...... 0 0 EJamoles tn.t Would ~oOlv to Col~ 2 T~e peF"'l"lan.nt foreclosure of I futu.... recre..t1onll OOOOl"'tunlt:,. .4 ~jor r"1'!duction of an aoen spacl! 111lOortlnt to tn. COll'r.lun1ty. I)tMer imoac-:3: r~04~~ n~ r'A~~~~'T~ir~~ 13. ~'!Ll. THEil~ 3E ~,., ~F::'~C1" ~O E:XISi!~IC iAANS?O~niir,N SYSiM? :J~Ol~S :~at ~Oyl~ ~~~lv to Column Z ~lte,.!tlC" ~f '~ese"t ,atterns of nove~e"t of "eople ,1ndlor ;:::oC:s. -'''~~ect ",,11 "~'ult 1,. seve"~ :r~"";c:: '7"'":lol~!Il', _ ::."':I!"'-:ac:s: .,. "0 rES 00 -' ~ . ~ Co\.': WP^CT :IE. _~ECUC;:l :1Y ~q~~~!.~I1:: . --~ ~ . . 1 2. ~ Other impacts: S~LL Tn MTt~T1.~L I CAj~ [MPACT C, ~DEIl.'TE LA~GE REDUCED ay I~PACT !'~PACT PROJECT CHANG, . - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - -. - - - - - - - - - - - - IWPACT ON ~~!RGY 14. WILL PROJECT AFFECT THE CO>foIUNITlES SDURCts OF FUEL OR NO YES ENERr,y SUPPLY? ...........................................1'""\ 0 Examul.' thAt Would Apply to Coluno Z . ~ Project causing ql"eltlr thin 5: incrus. 1n 'ny fol"!ll 01 energy used 1n municipality. Project r-eQufr1ng thl cr'Htfon or extension 01 an energy transmission 01'" supply syste. to S.rvl mare thin 50 st"qt. or two 'Iaily residencls. Oth.. illlllACts: _ I~PACT eN NOISE 15. WILL THERE BE OBJECTIONABLE O!lORS. NOISE. GLARE. VIBAATlON NO YES o. ELECTRIt:.\l. OIS71JRBAIlCE AS A RtsUlT OF THIS PROJECT? ....G) 0 Ex...l.. that Would Aooly to Column Z Blastlng wlthln 1.500 foot of . hospltAl. school o.oth.. sensitive facility. Odors .111 occur routinely (mar& than on, hour per day). Project will oroduce oDer~ting nofse exceedf,," the 10c:a'- all'Citnt noise levels for notse outside of structures. Project .11' ~ye nltura' barri~rs thlt would act as I noise icreen_ 16. J""'CT eN HEALTH \ "A7'ROS ~ILL PROJECT AFFECT PUBLIC IlEALTH AND SAFETY? E'xamol~, that 1~ould ~pply to Coll.n'l Z Proj~t will cause a risk of ex~los;on or re!ease of hlza~ous substances (i.e. oil, gestic1dr.s, cnemiC11s. rarliat10n.'etc.) in tn! event of accident or uoset conditions, or tnere w;11 be a cnranic low level discharge or enission. 1111 YES .............00 I'rojl!ct that -,,';11 ~sult in the burial of "Jo\aun:lous wastes" (1.~. toxic, :::oisonous. l'lllJl'lly N!ac~ive, radioactive, irritating. infectious. etc., includiM wastes that are solid, sef!l;..solid. li~u;d or contain gases.) Storace faciliti~s for on! million 01'" more Qallnns of liauified natural gas ar otne!'" liouidS. r')':;/le" im~acts: <'0 ". . IUOAc; ~~l ~::::C'.r.1.f ~~o -::JA~J.C7;::~ .~~ C:::~"J'lr':"v ':'~ .t:r,;;.n~~?I.I("'\/'\ 17. W!LL ?~~JEcr AF~:CT iHE C~A~^crt~ ~F iHE EXISit~G ~O YES C:'"'I;N!TY? ................................................00 Exil~ol~ t~at Would AColy to Cohll!ln 2 Tne ,oQYlation of the City, Town O~ V1111~e 1n ~hlCh t~e ~rOJect is located is likely to ~~ OY more than 5~ o~ resident hl.o'1l'.an ;Iooulatfon. The munict,al budgets for caoital "oendttures Qr o~erl. t1n9 services will tncrease Oy mere than 5: oer leal'" as a result of this oroje~t. ~111 involve anv :e~anent facility of a non.,gricultural ~se in an aqricultural distric~ or remove nr;~e a9rlc~lturll lanas 'reM cui thaeicn. The Pr";)jKt will !'"eollc! or elfminate existing facilities, struc:~res or a~as of nlstoric fmoOrtance to the c~unlty. CeveloolT".ent ..,i11 1nduc. an tnflux of a parttc:.tlal" age grouo with soecial nee~s. Projl!ct '.d11 set an important OI"Kede"t fOI" future projects. Pl"Oj~t .ill relocate 15 or more emloyees in one Or' I"'lOre businesses. rJt~!,.. il'l:'O!cts: 18. is THEitE PUSUC CONTitC'InSY c:lNCEitNING THE PRt)JECT? .......QO ~Ja~ol!s t~at ~ould AcOly :0 Colwmn Z Eitner ;ove~~nt or-cit;z!"s of adjac!~t c:~unlties ~4ve !x,rI!SSed oo~ositiGn or reJec:ec tne ara1!ct or ~ave no: oeen c~ntacted. 8~Je~:'ons to tne nro:!~t f~m ~;t~in t~e co~nl:v. . NO YES ~A...ia ;.. ;o.~;r;-j,..L C':',', ...,......, 5~ CE.V,TE l)RiiC: _il:~~IJC.:J 3Y =~'Ot.Cj rr~P4C~ pOOJ::C";" ::-r':'~GE - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I tF ANY AC7!C,'4 l~ ~a,RT 2 !S U:mrIriE;j :'SJ. ~'lTE:lTtAl lA.ii.r.c: I~PAC';' ~n IF Y~U C;','lSOT CE'jE~I~IE THE ."'.AGNlnJDE OF :/"PAC7. P~OCEE::l TO ?A~r J. PljRT:CNS "F ~F C:m';.r7EJ FOR 7HIS ~~O";E:7; OETE;l~I~ATI1JN !..:eon reV1!'101 of t~e infOl"'!\atton r!<;:or-:e-J on t,.,is DF (Parts 1, Z and Jl and CQnsiCerinq ootn tJ":e ~!Qn1t:Jde and 1mnorUnc! of ti!C,"! ~~4ct. 1t 1s r'!uonaolv de'::enrnnea ':.:1at: '. 7~e :lM;e-:~ '...111 f"~slJlt iM no :T!ajor' ir"!~ac:ts and. ~ne!"!fo"'!. 'S on! ...n1::::1 "'av not :Juse si;n1fiC3nt :amace ~:l :.~I" O!~v~I"'O,..~nt. 3. ~~'!'""lJcro ..,. ..r......". ~-~la -a V" a s'cni"iCJnt .;,,~,.. .n .roe '!M~"~~~~':.: :.~;~;-;lil "c: '=e~~ Sl~nlfi.::!n: '!;~e;:.~~ :~i's CJse ~e:~llJS! :,~! ~'tiS'Jcon ~eHlJr-~s .:escr'::e1 In '''",:':':'' J .'ave :een ~~Chce-:l H :ar-: ~f ~.~e ~I"o::.jsea :".,;e<;::. . >e :r,>~:: ..,;' "'!!ult .., ::'\.e or ~ore "'Ta::r !C'''~''!~ ....:3.c::3 :~3.: :J.'lnct :e -e':'..:~e': 3."0 .-.a1 :::JUSo! Slltn1 '''::3.'': :.!~J~o! :: :~e e'lVl "",:,..r-e"':.. '~fr~~,-, . ~ ::..;.:::~.. -I.:"' PART I _ P,H1T rt _ P"RT ~_ :qE.::I.'j:!~ , 'IE,':~7!1I! JECL.:'~i!C,'l 0 -. ;~!:"l~"E , 'lE'':.~ T:',! ;E::';'~,:"~: :.'1 0 ?q!:~?~ 'CS:7:1E :!::.:~~7::~ ) Q ~~~\::f" Q--\ ~':-J:.re :.; ;'"!::~:.' ~ : ;~:~::: '..:-:" :::5 \0" 1V6 ~::!"::I ~ :,::! . ,-,. -~! ::::r ; . ~ . ~ ' _ ~~c: : :;~..: . . . . . PART III RICHMOND CREEK FAffi1S . 1,3 Construction disturbance, building and structure location, septic leaching fields will all be located in areas of high groundwater or in proximity to tidal wetalands. Development disturbance needs to be located away from sensitive areas in a cluster. The area covered by lots 18-28 contain one more lot in the cluster concept than could be contained in a conventional R-40 subdivision. This is contrary to the philosophy and intent of the cluster concept in that the plan as proposed places development closer to more sensitive areas rather than farther from them. 5. The projects as proposed will adversely affect groundwater flowing under it through to Richmond Creek due to septic leaching field effluent, lawn fertilizer, pesticides, herbicides and other household chemicals. The source of water has not been proven. On site groundwater may not be acceptable. Unregulated construction will cause turbidity, siltation, erosion and sedimentation each having an adverse effect on groundwater. Specific measures of eliminating or reducing these adverse impacts need to be detailed. 6. Impervious surfaces will be created near wetlands. This will increase runoff of relatively poorer quality waters into a wetland currently undisturbed. Impervious surfaces need to be reduced and located as far as feasible from these wetlands. 8,9 The project as proposed will have an adverse impact on indigenous and migratory wildlife in the creek. Threatened and endangered species may also be involved. Methods to minimize negative impacts need to be incorporated into the project. 11. Due to the location next to a relatively calm creek side prehistoric habitation may be a possibility. This needs to be determined and addressed in a manner consistent with the quality of the resource discovered. , . . /' HENRY P. SMITH, President JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, Vice-Pres. PHILLIP J. GOUBEAUD ALBERT KRUPSKI, JR. ELLEN M. LARSEN TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 May 23, 1986 Suffolk County Department of Health Services Wastewater Management Section County Center Riverhead, New York 11901 Re: Proposed Subdivision of Property Richmond Creek Farm Dear Sir: Please be advised that the Trustees do not have jurisdiction over the proposed subdivision referenced above until the construction plans are submitted to the Building Department for a Building Permit. The Trustees will have jurisdiction over any proposal for construction which will occur within seventy-five (75) feet landward of the most landward edge of a tidal wetland or water as defined in 97-13, A (3). If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate calling this office at the telephone number above. ~'YYO~ ~ H nr~, President Boa;~ ~~~~nTrustees HPS:ip cc: Rudolph H. Bruer, Esq. Daniel Harcucci Thomas J. Canavan J Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Zoning Board Southold Town Building Dept. Trustees file . . rff~ and' (Ja~ · -C"C0T"9J . ',' ....'_.... .."d I . S{--;;7~'L: ATTORNEYSATLAW MAIN ROAD SDUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971 LEFFERTS P. EDSON RUDOLPH H. BRUER (516) 765-1222 (516) 765-2500 May 21, 1986 Southold Town Board of Trustees Town Hall P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 Re: proposed Subdivision of Property Richmond Creek Farm Dear Sirs: Thank you for your letter of May 13, 1986. For your reference, I enclose herewith Notice of Incomplete Variance Request from the SUffolk County Department of Health Services, which notice predicated our initial request to your board by our letter of 4/28/86. This project is a proposal to subdivide property at Peconic, N.Y. There is no proposal for construction at this time. The enclosed notice states that the Health Department will not schedule a hearing of this matter until it is in receipt of a Town Wetlands Permit or waiver from your board. Will you kindly advise the Suffolk County Health Department that, at this time, your board is not immediately concerned with this project, although you are reserving jurisdiction over this property as it is developed, including any construction. Your cooperation in this matter is greatly appreciated. dolph RHB/df Ene. cc: Mr. Daniel Marcucci Mr. Thomas Canavan . . SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT SECTION COUNTY CENTER RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK 11901 NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE VARIANCE REQUEST BOARD OF REVIEW . TO: ez>.s",.-v ~ .o.JE:.t.t..E ~ ;;,Ifl/# ~ t?".".D S,n,,;Yt?.t.;)./ ,v; Y. //J''7/ DATE: I/-.;2']-1r6 FILE REF: 7<lcP",Al2:> cReL"/- ~ O? S,e,77V"~Z> The request for a Board of Review hearing has been received. Prior to scheduling a hearing, this office will require the following to be submitted: c=J Public water availability/cost letter. . NYSDEC Wetlands Permit or waiver. , . Town Wetlands Permit or waiver. ~;.'__ ~~r"eL; '-D-T~st l1~le data: c=J Test well results: . SEQRA determination letter from Town/State. c=J Proposed sewage disposal o Location [] Grading plan (plan view and cross section) D Completed application. o Other: A hearing will be scheduled at the earliest available date as soon as all requested information is completed. Please do not call this office with requests for earlier scheduling. PLEASE RETURN THIS FORM WITH YOUR RESUBMISSION. SUFFOLK COUNTY ~............................., u.,..,..... ...c..".......,., . . T y Southold. N. Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 May 16, 1986 Environmental Analysis Unit DEC, Building 40, Room 219 SUNY Stony Brook, NY 11794 Gentelmen: Enclosed find a completed Long Environmental Assessment For, and a copy of the map of the major subdivision of "Richmond Creek Farms" located at peconic. Tax Map No. 1000-86-1-9. This project is Type I and an initial determination of environmental significance has been made. We wish to coordinate this action to confirm our initial determination. May we have your views on this matter. Written comments on this project will be received at this office until May 30, 1986 We shall interpreet lack of response to mean there in s no objection by your agency in regard to the State Environmental Quaity Review Act, and our agency will assume the status of lead agency. Very truly yours, ~.bt ()r~j \JvOlw BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR., CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Diane M. SChultze,Secretary enc. cc: Department of Health Southold Town Trustees T . / Southold. N.Y. 11971 (516) 765- 1938 M E M 0 RAN DUM TO: Southold Town Trustees FROM:Southold Town Planning Board DATE:May 16, 1986 RE: Richmond Creek Farms Transmitted, herewith, is a letter under SEQRA for lead agency coordination and comments, on the above mentioned subdivision proposal. Due to the withdrawal of the application before the Town Trustees, we are assuming that your Lead Agency designation has also been rescinded based upon this withdrawal. However, we are coordinating with you since we feel that you may have comments with respect to this application. Please advise us as to your comments and/or recommendations. , . I,. .'/: ..... .O\ill OF SOUTHOLD . .. :1If'"1 . ~ .' .1\ t, ....,-' ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - PART I ~ PROJECT I~~Oro~TION ~OT:C~; ir.ls ~ae~T~~t ;~ de~l~ned to !S3i~t 1n deta~lni~g ~net~!r :~e le:io" ~ropose~ T.ay ~ave ! 1fgnificant If:=~~: In ttle ~:1Vlr"Cnment_ Ple:!se cor.:olet.i! t:'!!! ~ntir! .:lat..! 5r:e~t. ).nS~oi!r'S -:0 ~:;esc .~uestjons ...i11 ~e c~nsla2r~. .!5 ::Iar::: of :''1e CY.)olic.Jt1on for aocl"'Oval ~nd;nay be' ~ucj'!':,: to further- 'Je~tficJ.tion Ind ;Jubtic r~v;~e Provid.e lny ~Q4itiortal information you Jelieve will ~e nee~ed :~ ::~Qle~e ?ART3 Z an~ J. . := is !~cee:e: t~at =:moleticn of the EAF ~~ll oe depenc~~t 1" informaeion eurr!ncly available !nd ~il1 not .nY?IY~ new s...ud.eS'.r:esear:::t.or fnvest1qa't1on. If fnfo~~:lon r='Juir-ing such aClci-:il]nal '..oril: is~unava:tacle,' . ". i:J .nalC,J';! and swe~l.y ~=c., Ins;anCi:!. . -,,".- . .'. ~.'.". "-'" . ~ .-.~. --' ;;.1','~ "'F oqOJE~: ~~':."'E ~NO .~CC~;:SS uF n~NE~ , r f 01 ff:!l"''!nt 1 'Anna Fiore, Michael Longo '&' brs-,. (,'lama) " --- !l.IcHM:oNti.- CRE"ik--PAID.(' 75 Down East Lane (Stl"'~~~: . " AQO~~1$ .l~JO :tAr~E OF .~~c". !'=-~~IT: .Thomas Canavan I"..::e: c/o Canavan & Boehm '29','Park- Avenue. ..c' 0_,.. (f"+-h~TT1r+-r)n .:J. ~ . '-1 V 1] qf\R \Sc.ati2.J. lZ~p) 3US'!NESS ?HC1IE: {S~re~~; , , . - .---.-.- ..-......--.-...--;.-------..-.-.-..-,----:... Hanhasset. N.y! 11010 I".'J.; ( C'C.) (Ll~) 1J~:~~!?~!'~~! '1F OOIJJe':7: (9r1!f1y descrt!:le type of ;H"Oj~C: ~r ac:ion) A 42 lot subdivision desianed under' the 'cluster ",o;,,,,ept. at MClin RnCliJ Pt=>i'nn i i' ''''1 V . (;Jt!.;S~ CO~PlEi~ EACH C:UE!nO~~ - rndic~t; .'1...\. if not Joo1ic3ol~) , "--.' A. 'SI7! ~~SCaIPr!ON ;.....~.bv::.. .'.- '..".._..~;;;.~_ .>";.~.,:~:!:.. ..;'-;:. ;"";'I'~_; ...'):-..;::....!':.:#~.:;:~~~.~~..'~~..;.. )_,.;.t,;;:l~.:Di~::~ _,'J;~~.~~ -;".;~~':~ - . --. (i=hysiaJ iat:~r.; af oven11 proj!c-=._ both <1eveJoc~ !nd :Jnd!vetcceci 3r!3s) '~~'~~-~;~+:"~~~~<:F~r:.:'~~.." 1. GlI!ne!'~l c.,arac-:ar or the lane: (jene!'ail~' uniTom i'toce.L Gl!neraily '.:nev!n and roi11n9 l3r.).rre:9utar ~. ~r:!sant ~a"d ~se: Urban , . ~qricultur~ .~r - - i"onl 4Cr;!qe 07 ~roject irea:~I!.C~S~ tnc!us-:r'iaJ . CQrrmerl:~al --.:..~. Sucur:1an ~, ~uraJ" vJ "'~:'::or!,S1: VAC...9Al~~ .c- ~....:z.:: :,.;~I~"..._.. ......,-.... 3. Fgr~s:.;;~ :'r-e!antr~ ~ft2r CQmpl~t~on ~ {)-!er~s ~c:'''!s ,~c~~s ~ ~~!5 ~~.. .2M..,cc" .... .... ".' .....;.-,. i'''ese!1t~y .~ft;!r ~cmolet1r .- c:;) -!c:-~s ~Tcr- .. AporCXlmaca lCr~!ge: ~e~1cw or 3rusnlana ~at~r SU~3ca ~~3 ..\9r~c:.:i,,;:.:r!1 Unve1~~3t~d ~~cx. e!r"::1 ~r f111; - t) - !c:"~s r-- d -- fer- ~e~l!r.c {~-~SM~at~r or 1'f.:::!J !S ;'!r ~r"';-::;2S :t. 2S ~r !.:.~.} I.:l. ler.. /,..<.~c:"!~ ,C."' & buildings ~~,:r ....,... ,.<S;cm' 1ft ler ~~q::'t'f,~~/'ei .::Q..::)er.s a.::....er -<AJ/7/h (0 - 3 ~ ) -S/"#JO -.F G~CL'(3-/3 ~ ) _~'!S +,'10 d. ~hJ: is ~l"'~~Cmin~n~ scii tY~~{5} ~n Jr:1;ec: ~~~~: ;. ~. ~r! ~~!~~ 'ec!~c~ :ut:~~~;~~s :n ~~j~~~ i::!? ~. "'h.! t f ~ .:~, t."': :-' ':ed:"':c:<? (!."t .t~'!':} . -. ;...: ,~ U~/1a .-.~-- ~'.. .. _..~.-..:. -"":-. t;~$:t::tt~;:~ ..'~i;t~~ .: "-: ~ *. . .1:~. .. . - .' ~.. " . 6. Ap~roxi"'ate percentage of proposed project site with slopes: 0-10: /0() :: 10-15: ~~: 15: Or greater ~~. . .~ 1. Is project contiguous to. Or contain a building or site listed on the National Register of Historic Places? _Yes -t--No . . S. What is the dept.~ to the water table? ,f-IO feet 9. D? hunting or fishing opportunities present'y e~ist in the project area? ______yes ~10 10. Does project site contaflX:ny species of plant Or animal life that is identified as threatened or end3nCer!d - ______yes no, according to - Identify each species 11. Are there any unique Or unusual land forms on tho project sita? (I.e. cliffs. dunes, other geologica formaticns - _Yes -2L.:~0. .(Descrioe 13. Is "the' project sityresently used by the cornunit1 or neigh.borhood as an open space or'rec~ation. .. area - Yes No. .' " ."..- . .......~ ..... "_' . ....,~.. C"_'.""._." ......_..... ..... .........,..: Coes ~~: pr~~osite'offer or,include scenic views or vistas known to be important to .th~ .community? Streams within or contiguous to project area: . ;i/,tf I i 1Z. 14. "I. HilI1'.e of stream and name of river to which it is tributary I, "S. 15. Lakes. Ponds. lIetland areas within or contiguous to project area: a. Na!r.e K,Gf-#.(O/JD fur; k ; b. Size (in acres) 16. \/hat Is the dominant land use and zonlng classification within a 1/4 mile radius of the project (e.g~ single~ily residential~ R-Z) and the sc~le of ~yel~pment (~.g. ~ story). ~ ~F/o "'B,~"'I,aflt29""~.}~l' ~t~ /v':; ~ /lL,,~a_~;", PROJECT DESCRIPTIO!l .. . I 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensi~ns ~s app~opriate) a. Total contiguous acreage owned by project sponsor -<,If. C. acres. b. Project acreage developed, ~ acres initially;~ Icres ultimately. c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped . . d. Length of project. in miles: --- (If appropriate) . . _...._._. e. If project is an upansion of existing. indicate percent of ex~ansi.on proposed: age ----; developed acreage ~ . building'square f. f. Ihm:!>er of off-str<et parking spaces existing- 0 ~ --- g. Maxi~Jm vehicular trips generated per hour ; proposed - 0 '.- (upon completion of project) h. If residential: NuoPer and type of housing units: ~~ One'Family Two Family Multiple Family Ccndo:ninium Initial Ultlr.l.ate f. If: ;'1/11 Orientation (' NeiShoorhood-Clt,-Regionat Estimated Employment Coma rei a I Indus tri a 1 J. Total hellht of tallest proposed structure .... ;//k , .:-~ '. -:~ ..~-': ~;.~.~~ . . ...:.;.:.::..;....," ~.. ;~:.~::'~" ..-~.;~t~\i~ feet. ';,.' .... . . . ~ ..~.. ( .. ..:t. .. ~2. How much natu~Jl mJt~~ial (i..e. roc~. e~rth. etc..) will be r~T.ov~d frem the site. (j ~ons --- (! -Cubic. y 3.. How many acres of vegetation (trees. shrubs. 9round covers) will be removed fro~ site -~cres. .. . ., " -'-" . . 6. Will any mature forest.>o~er 100 years old) or ot~er locally-Important ve~etation be removed by this project? _Yes ~~o . ^~~ . s. A~e thp.r~ any plans fer re.v2~etation to replace that re~oved during construction? ~~. ~~ If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction ~months, (Includ~~9 .demolition). If multi-phased project: a. Total number or phases anticipated ~No. . ,_'.','.-.;v,.'./.';:. 'It. b. Anticipated date of co"",ence;::ent phase 1 _month ~ear (includi '/. c1emolltion) 4. "-. 7. c. Approximate completion date final phase C'.onth --year. ._Yes c1. Is phase 1 financially dependant on subsequent pnas.s? r/ / /9- ;/rr 8. Will blasting occur during constrJction? _Yes _No 9. Number of jobs generated: during construction _____: after project is complete _____. 10. NUll"ber of jobs eliminated by this project _____. )/ / If' . 11. Will project require relocation of any projects or {a~i1itieS? _____yes f' No. If yes. explain: 12. a. Is surface or subsurf.ace liquid waste dis~osal involved? ______yes i. No. b. If yes. indicate type of waste (sawage. industrial. etc.) c. If surface disposal name of stream into which effluent will be discharged Will surface are! of existing lakes~)ponds. streams. bays or other surface watar~ays be increased Of decreased by proposal? _____yes ..L-No. , . 14. Is project or any portion oi project located in the 100 year flood plain? _Yes _No 15. a. Does project In.ol.e disposal of solicl waste? ______yes ~NO 13. b. If yes. will an ~,isting solid waste disposal facility be used? ______yes ______No , . c. If yes. give name: ; location d.. Will any wastas not go into a sewage disposal systsm or into a sanitary landfill? -L----Yes . 16. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? ______yes ~~o 17. Will project routinely produce odors' (rore than one hour per day)? _Yes ~o 18. Will project produce operating noisa exceeding the local ambience noise levels? ______yes ~NO 19. Will project resul~ in an Increase in energy use? ______yes ~~o. If yes. Indicate type{s) __0 . 22. If water supply Is fro::! wells indicate pumping capacity gals/minute. Total anticipatad water usage per day _~;lA> galS/day. I( 1'1 I Zoning: a. ~hat 15 dcminant 'zoning c1assiff"ticn of site? II f{f-z,d)E./iTl"'J'./~lCLu-nvel9L- I b C t S. cl f,'c ' I . ... . 4. /1 /1' .. urr~n ~e zonlr.9 c a~Slr'CJtlon or Sl:2 20. 21. c.. [s prr::pos~d use C::"l$ 1s..ant ''''1 t~ "re:icnt zoning? '/c'S I d. [f no. incicat~ des1r~d zoning *, -3- "0 ....'. , -;: < ;;'j.'i:;i.~; ,::. ....:,.\j}~-ij] -.1 ~ .:. . -'-'- 26. Approva 1 s: a. Is any Federal permit reG";red? Yes L~o -' . , , . b. Does project involve State or Feder.1 funding or financing? ______yes ~No c. Local and Regional approvals: City, Town, Village Board City, Town, Village Planning Soard City, Town, Zoning Board City, County Health Depar~T.ent Other lac.l agencies Other regional agencies " State Agencies Federal Agencies " . ..-,. .... -'.. C. IN FO R.'!A TlGNAL DETAILS , Approval Required (Yes, 1/0) (Type) p.;: ~ ~ . , Submit ta 1 (Da tel Approva j (Date) /Y~N",;i(i nfMj,Ne I' CA1I> oj? ~V/.S.N')N to!",?:;> , 7/iri:$. ...SliliiltKyCclJ~ '~/~..r , Attach any additional infa~ation adverse fmpacts associate taken to mitigate or avo ,as ~ay be needed to clarify your project, If there are or may be any proposal. please discuss such impacts and the measures which can be PREPARER'S SI~;A~JRE: " TITLE: RE?RESWTING: , DATE: Ailtornev Thomas Canavan NIf" /lh', Idft~;f Io/.f~ " .'.... '" 5/1/86 , .",' .;1 _~:_~_. , . :'::.::;-,'.,...t;...:~.!.... ~_:~:".~';':'.":. ,,' ~. " ....... ....~'.:... . .'~~" 't'..~7:~;.t:. ,''''-'''-.. ..... ~;.. ~ * . '". .~h.,-;-/.~ . '\ . ;.~/;.;.: .,~i'/;'::' . . G'~~fJ8~ ATTORNEYS AT LAW MAIN ROAD SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971 LEFFERTS P. EDSON RUDOLPH H. BRUER (516) 765.1222 (516) 765-2500 May 1, 1986 southold Town planning Board Town Hall Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Re: Richmond Creek Farm Dear Sirs: Enclosed please find, as you requested, a long environmental assessment form completed by this office with reference to the above project. We would appreciate being advised of any comments received as a result of your referrals. Sincerely, {2Lt;pL c)/{lJtld ~. Rudolpi{ H. Bruer RHB/df Enc. ~\~\'&~ ~~~ . . G'~-d{J8_ ...TTORNEYS AT LAW Mt\'f G - '\986 MAIN RCAD SOUTHOLO, NEW YORK 11971 LEFFERTS P. EDSON RUDOLPH H. BRUER (516) 765-1222 (516) 765-2500 May 2, 1986 New York State D.E.C. Regulatory Affairs Unit Building 40, SUNY - Rm. 219 Stony Brook, New York 11794 Southold Town Planning Board /' Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Suffolk County Department of Health Wastewater Management Section County Center Riverhead, New York 11901 Services Re: H.D. Ref.: Richmond creek Farm (T) Southold DEC Ref. : 10-85-1561 STPB Ref.: Richmond Creek Farms /' Dear Sirs: Application for approval of the above referenced subdivision project is currently under your consideration. This office represents the applicant, Thomas Canavan. We ask for your attention and indulgence as we set forth hereinbelow a description of the bureaucratic stalemate that has been created. The necessary governmental approvals for this project (N.Y.S. DEC, Suffolk Co. Health Dept. and Town of Southold) are being pursued simultaneously, as must be. However, the Suffolk County Dept. of Health has notified us that they will not move ahead with our application until the DEC has given their approval. The DEC, in turn, has indicated that they will not be in a position to approve our application until the Town of Southold has approved this subdivision of property, as the Town has declared itself lead agent under SEQRA (State Environmental Quality Review Act). Completing this circuit, the Town will not schedule a public hearing on this matter until such time as we can submit the approvals of both the DEC and the Health Dept. On the basis of the above, our client's project is This situation is not merely counterproductive, it Something, or somebody, has to -give- somewhere. this regard would be more than appreciated. at a complete standstill. is totally unacceptable. Your pertinent suggestions in Sincerely, Rudolph H. Bruer RHBldf cc: Mr. Thomas Canavan Mr. Daniel Marcucci Mr. John DeReeder Young & Young, Land Surveyors Land Use Co. \ I HENRY P. SMITH, President JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, Vice-Pres. PHILLIP J. GOUBEAUD ALBERT KRUPSKI, JR. ELLEN M. LARSEN . . TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 May 13, 1986 Mr. Rudolph H. Bruer Edson & Bruer Attorneys At Law !'lain Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Proposed Subdivision Richmond Creek Farms, Cutchoque, New York Dear Mr. Bruer: Pursuant to your letter of April 28, 1986 regarding the above captioned matter, please be advised that each lot will have to be properly staked as to the actual plan for construc- tion, and in accordance with the application for a building permit. Once this is complete the Trustees will make an on site inspec- tion for a determination on the need of a wetland permit. Each lot requiring a permit should be submitted on an individual lot bases. The Trustees would like to know what aside for? Please clarify this question. recommend that if the road system will be that a 50' R.O.W. be set aside for public the "Open Space" is set Also, the Trustees would taken over by Southold Town access. Attached for your information is a copy of the section of the Town Code regarding the definitions of "Wetlands." If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate contacting this office at the telephone number listed above. C;t'6t-\ S\\~\~ ~erY truly ..yours~_..~ / .. /' vctJ n~ smi~~resident Board of Town Trustees HPS:ip Attachments cc: Planning Board'~ Bldq. Dept. ~ . . '-'-~'-.,7":.--"--'~" G'~ad:J8__ s (?{ gt;i t.'-' ATTORNEYS AT LAW MAIN ROAD SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971 LEf'"FERTS P. EDSON RUDOLPH H. BRUER {S151765-1222 (515) 765-250D April 28, 1986 Southold Town Board of Trustees Town Hall P.O. Box 728 southold, New York 11971 Re: proposed Subdivision of Property Richmond Creek Farm Dear Sirs: The above referenced proposed subdivision is under consideration by the Southold Town Planning Board, the N.Y.S. DEC, and the Suffolk County Dept. of Health. We have been directed by the Suffolk County Dept. of Health to provide them with a Town Wetlands Permit or waiver. We understand that you do not get involved with the subdivision process, but apparently the Health Dept. does not. I enclose herewith a copy of the prepared sketch plan for your reference and respectfully request that you provide me with your letter setting forth your position on this matter. Thank you for your kind assistance. ~ . APR 1 1986 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 April 1, 1986 Mr. Glenn E. Just The Land Use Company Route 25 A P. O. Box 2521 Wading River, New York 11792 Re: Richmond Creek Associates Wetland Application No. 343 Dear Mr. Just: The following action was taken by the Board of Trustees at a regular meeting held on March 27, 1986 regarding the wetland application above referenced. RESOLVED that the application submitted by the Land Use Company on behalf of the Richmond Creek Associates be and hereby is WITHDRAWN WITHOUT PREJUDICE. If you have any questions, please give me a call at the telephone number listed above. Very truly yours, Henry P. Smith, President Board of Town Trustees ~h~7~1 ~~~ic:YZ Ilene Pfiffer~n~,Clerk. ~- HPS:ip dVr^\ cc: Planning Building Trustees file Board j Dept. . T . u D LD y Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 March 26, 1986 Mr. Rudy Bruer Attorney at Law Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Richmond Creek Farms Dear Mr. Bruer: The following actions were taken by the Southold Town Planning Board, Monday, March 24, 1986. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board declare itself lead agency under the State Environmental Quality Review Act for the major subdivision of Richmond Creek Farms, located at Peconic, 42 lots on 49 acres. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant sketch map approval for the subdivision to be known as Richmond Creek Farms located at peconic for 42 lots on 49.6 acres in the cluster concept; survey dated as last amended March 7, 1986. Please refer to SA106-23 and SA106-42 for the requirements and procedure for filing the preliminary plat. Also, enclosed is a long environmental assessment form which we ask be filled out and returned for this proposal. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact our office. Very truly yours, &N1Jrt ~HiG{)hkl) ~Y(11tvV BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR., CHAIRMAN SOUTH OLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Diane M.Schultze, Secretary enc. . .~'" (' w ~,~ / I 0' hI N_ York State Department of Environmental Conservation Regulatory Affairs Unit Bldg. 40, SUNY, Room 219 Stony Brook, NY 11794 APR 2 (516) 751-7900 March 25, 1986 Mr. Henry P. Smith, President Board of Town Trustees Town of Southold, Town Hall 53095 Main Rd., P.O. Box 728 Southold, NY 11971 Dear Mr. Smith: Re: Richmond Creek Association DEC Application No.10-85-1561 The DEC technical staff objects to the creation of the six (6) undersized lots (less than 40,000 square feet) along the waterfront. Any proposed "clustering" should be made "...to encourage the main- tenance of undeveloped areas in or adjoining tidal wetlands" pursuant to 6NYCRR661.6(a) (6). Although the project has been revised to delete dredging and a boat basin "...at the present time..." from this application these actions should still be considered as a likely result of the project (pursuant to SEQR regulations 617.11b(2)). Alternatives and/or mitigations (possibly through restrictions made.in the subdivision decisions) should be considered now regarding mooring of up to 42 more large boats in Richmond Creek. Further comments by DEC technical staff will be sent to you as additional information and/or revisions are received. In response to your letter of January 29, 1986, DEC recognizes your agency as lead agency. Therefore, DEC will not be able to pro- ceed to any complete notice until you send me a final determination or have sent me an acceptable DEIS, if one is required. Thank you for your cooperation. Very truly yours, ~. /V{~'- Robert N.Thurber Senior Enviornmental Analyst RNT : rw enc. ~ cc:B.Orlowski Southold Town ZBA J . McMahon C. Bowman F. Mushacke J. Redman A. Terchunian ~~ 4'01--8\.0 Q~1::>e' """'f"\e l:JbO ~ .-~...~... ... Henry G. Williams Commissioner ~ ~y . . ~/2{iRt, . fJhe 1!and 'U1-e Compan!} N. COUNTRY RD. . BOX 36. WADING RIVER. N.Y. "792 (5,6) 9293575 March 18, 1986 Board of Town Trustees Town of Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P. O. Box 728 Southold, N.Y. 11971 Attn: Mr. Henry P. Smith Re: Richmond Creek Associates Wetlands application no. 343 Dear Mr. Smith: Please be advised that at this time we are withdrawing the application that we submitted for Richmond Creek Associates. Syould you or any member of the Board have any questions or comments with regards to the matter, kindly contact this office at your convenience. Thank you for your continued cooperation. Very Truly Yours, ~E.~ Glenn E. Just GEJ/te cc: D.S.D.G.A. N.Y.S.D.O.S. N.Y.S.D.E.C. \ ~ /' L_l_ ./Je;..~-~:;z C~~.-, ~,.~< ~ FEB 3 REC'D BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 January 29, 1986 Mr. Robert N. Thurber New York State D.E.C. Regulatory Affairs Bldg. 40, SUNY, Room 219 Stony Brook, New York 11794 RE: Richmond Creek Associates - 10-85-1561 Lead Agency Coordination Request Dear Mr. Thurber: Pursuant to your letter of January 10, 1986 please be advised that the Trustees do not have a complete application before them for review at this time. We ask for your cooperation in this matter, as we have had correspondence from residents in that area who are quite concerned. I have forwarded copy of this letter to you, under separate cover. Please table any further action on this application until such time as the Town has a completed application for review. The Town does have the most jurisdiction and therefore, would like to take the Lead on this application. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation in regard to this matter. We await your response. HPS:ip cc: Planning Board Zoning Board Building Dept. C.A.C. Trustees File Very truly yours, ~'/ /'..L/ .~ ~ enry P. Smith, President Board of Town Trustees 0151--1. d~2>-~ . JAN 31 REC'O ,;?~&ou/( Rf:<:~I\!'m J1lU "1 '011: nc' tl, iv'::':".-J) Box 1100 Cutchogue, N.Y. 11935 January 30, 1986 Trw", C~fK ~:;:';Ut~.l~t'; Southold Town Board Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Southold Town Board, I am opposed to the Richmond Associates Creek Development plan and marina that was recently put forward in the Town of Southold. Richmond Creek will most certainly be adversely affected by the proposal. The creek is one of our few invaluable resources, and breeding ground for fish, shellfish, and various birdlife. It happeness to be one of the Towns shellfish transplanting areas. Richmond Creek and its surrounding j wetlands is a fragile environment and need not be disturbed but preserved. 'Please help to protect it from all the dredging, , bUlkheading, development, and use of the RiChmond Associates Plans. Sincerely, Nancy Sawastynowicz '-1Jcv~ xlCLUYIV~:qr~3 <I . . . ~ -... ~ New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Regulatory Affairs Bldg. 40, SUNY, Room 219 Stony Brook, New York 11794 JAN 14 REC'U (516) 751-7900 Henry G. Williams Commissioner January 3rd, 1986 Mr. Glenn E. Just The Land Use Company P.O. Box 361 North Country Road Wading River, New York 11792 RE: 10-85-1561 - RICHMOND CREEK ASSOCIATES WELLS ROAD, PECONIC, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD (TAX LOT NUMBER NOT GIVEN) EXCAVATE AND PREDGE TO 3' DEPTH BELOW M.L.W.; BULKHEAD AND DOCKS TO CREATE MARINA FOR 42-LOT SUBDIVISION ON 50 ACRES; PARKING Dear Glenn: Richmond Creek is currently open to shellfishing for commercial purposes. Shellfish have been transplanted to it and will probably be considered for such future trans- planting programs as long as its waters remain open for commercial purposes. I It has been noted that water quality becomes degraded in the vicinity of marinas having boats requiring dredging as indicated in your proposal. For these reasons DEC staff will likely object to any dredging within this creek. Since this shoreline is mostly natural (unbulkheaded), staff will also likely object to any timber bulkheads. Gabions or other rock structures would be preferable. Construction of docks for the launching of small "car-top" boats would be more favor- ably considered provided acceptable plans are submitted. If a parking area is still included, it should be a minimum of 75' from the existing (or proposed) wetland edge. For other information requested, please refer to the enclosed "Incomplete Notice" and long EAF, Part I. A meeting with DEC staff can be arranged, should you request it. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation. Very truly yours, -?~ 11~~,- C!~- ,-/Io-x.. Robert N. Thurber Senior Environmental Analyst RNT/l ... Enclosures cc: ~enry P. Smith, President, Southold Town Board of Trustees, w/enclosures Bennett Orlowski, Chairman, Southold Town Planning Board, w/enclosures James McMahon, Director, Southold Town Department of Community Development James Redman Fred Mushacke Kevin Cross, Department of State, w/enclosures ptJf3 ~/II ;Y~ k<f' ~/:t~rl!/Yt . ~~ ~~A~ ! 141f,)fi~~". __J ~ no, . - ". ~ ~k.t~4 IrJdtddJOWh (3~ I~i At 1/97/ ~k: t- ~c14~P~_ J hv" 1" .J~,f1- ur/u-,~ ~ -I.." -t~. ~ JV ~ ~~ 5 07 In.z... J-r:...., j7~- L.~ ~_ //~ ..eL-;P~ ~~ ~ ~k,d&d,",;~ "r'7~ 0.L-.4~ ~_ h ? to-v ~ ftvI ~~ ~ r~'~ ~~t' Cve;;T ~J~ ~~.... ~., - ~~~Ld:~~ ~/ ~"t'7 ~r~~ ~~~~7~ UJpk~ ~,- . ~~.~ ,J a.- 4~;f 9tr"t.4/ C-a-..- ~) / V.I-. ~ I ~ _ ~/ n-k..e. - ~~~ ~~h~_~~~~~ J7~ ')v,'(( & Tr -/? ~~ ~ - CAoo a. - ~ ?~ ~~h:U-- ~hu!~-I /Z ~~~ ' - ~~ rt~ ;1U-d~~ -'" ~~:'; i?'~ ~ ~h~~V~<'e~ - ~~.......... ~L...~ ~ '" . Vk '----",,>"7_ --.." ...f.l - ___. ( . ~;:~(~ Al FRED INDIA J. MARSTON PECON~C ~ECK LAND ,I 11958 . N.Y. i I ~cSA ~ 1;!:L4. 't:~ i'fl ~~ ,~~.;.~ ~~ J/_A /{?_ ~~ft~- ....:7:- /Jj~ ~ 14<- /,.~~ '/0// -? ~~ ~ fj (:tIJ~~7 ;i() .._...._. ,:CJ ; ~ ~ ~ / k :v-.-"Le.----.L, , .5' ~ ";na 6 Y> ~~~ ~ ~~~2,.c s- -- 5 41~ ~ ~IL ~LJ />-1 ~ ~ ~~ ~ f' cJ- d-t'( -j~/ ~ ~ p,:^,---,,! a.-.- ~ /~ ,/,d4;(.- ~ ~~ -.4. ~ . _~~_P" /~ "k4 ~ ~ ~f:S- A- ' 6t> .~~ ~dJ?~, ./- ('<? . cC /- ~ . h=-' ~--;3'-::"':'-rL.~;p~~'r-....,..R..._ . ~ _. '~'.'. ~. n_ - <-.?~,~" . . _.# - J2ICI-fMONI::;' C~t:...C...X. t:tEe.M"", 24 MAbC;H 8i..P \':"Jt:e-,CH At->P=VAl.- =N MAP 1;:;cA'l;:.O M.Ae.cI..\ \0, Iqe,LP l~ 0.1<:'. \?'e..e pe, Ma'l!~ -wfjICH DI'GGUSStc.D -rtIL GlJ~Ge.- IN -r1l!:.. 120,0.1:> l-6You-. "-.u _ _ _~-c ~1t/ 180~i chMY1d CWL JoArtLJ} : rJI, ~ \/if.h: /-( -r/?- / ~ /'" ubo ( c..-I r7 <Q..J / //.~ f; ~_--! ~ 0 2- ~ (; 9 0 2( /"l - ~ r 4(/ rnoAu,--~ ev-dj or.---< ~ t ~f ) I, CbcL'f:owrYlCtn " / ~ f'. (' (V).e u '-.-..I ;; ~ ~ -r:' ,rT /--"Y / cj ~ cr-/ ~ ,,-/ / C A. h-11)/LvJ~f~~ -P-<7' _ ie. // ')0 Iz- -. '1zrt. ~J .1' 1/ )KJMu ~----P' / ~ '. ~ :t 1i3.0 ~d ~ cY e, t)-/ --.:J c:_ 1e~ -l~dst) r//~~~ -J ~ ~ /1' ~ / /i' / tfY ) (/~ /' t, ~ / r /4/~ G/r ty_. W,t...O){. JXr;!. h, ;r A )....{ ~ J ~../"--' rJAsncArLLOL / / /U:J.~ -Ud ,fJ / -/, ~ _ c1 b{j:);-kM / ) c1) ~ ~ P--OJ rr;~~' 3~ fJ / Y> ---c> /l ,j~ (" /) ~ ':p /.01-, l~r ~~~J-;/ t.t, ?.-J L[. e-r r ~,-- /,8~ Y .-u(;/dJ-JJ< ~....~ Ciu.nr-t : ot _ ~ ~~,-;/~ Bn~ .~ ~.~ OfJd- ~ / 8y/rr~9' 'fa; /nU)u~n~~ )- eL/~ //n-If.rrtJ ~ ' ,IIY" boat /IV /d / ---J, ~y~ :-::' ~, ~ y ( (; c/ ~ ~ / ~6 I-IA ~ U ,/?, ;n , A '( Y c/ t I( .J C-/t9/ J/{j)[;v//, 1C!b: / ~ ~ ~ . tf' ' YehtU/J &sxAf .HY,' ;.0. ,/7 --v ~ ~,~ / ~ / l~~. )0 v/4.,"~~, )J~// CLef. ----J ~ 120/ ) C--v ~ ~ CB'-u V ~ ~-utJ&~J~/ /1' / /( &/JfQ& ~ '""W.';---~ ~. <6( ~ ' cB: /l C) ;L ~ '/ ;Lo~c ~_). rn~ c- ,~. f.lY' ~ ~~ ~ 111~~ ) ~y rr&/;q~. rY~T 0~ V ~ ~ ~- - _ 'P ...... 7 Pv ~'. ~ ~,..,7 rY) '\ _,/'" ~ /Q cP ') 6/l-df u-r ]0 ~ DP-I:6~ ~ / '1 <----> 1j:Y: /,( V"l ~ 4: ~ /'e--; ~U);~A~~r~) ;) '')/~<J E)---z/X r=</~~ Gr 4r4 I'ffip>/ 17" ~. : () ~(/ f) /'V/ ft wa~ Y/)~:J/~ ) ~~. )~/~ IJv,' ~ f ---z;/ va F Co: 1/ .) ~ -J (rlQ9) /I, J;p: f77)T ""--./ "-?-~/Y a~ );9 /7' Y~/cJHG-\ 1?W:)Qhs0 .7J Z G) / b 'fJ /) ~ /4 p~, #y/. ,)t ~ ~ ~ ~ u 7z- ~, ~W (3--'/l( )&- V /I v_ ~ :fr~-- t? C-f. Yi1 &- / )-:/ cy v ~ flY: Cf.-- ~L~\ r 5, ~D. cPfLt - ~ I >01 C9- ~ 'fu:~ -C ~ () ~ / f;/ (~v (--J~ /Ued ~ 2'/-(' '9- Z(f q, < ~- ;(ichYr\or)d ~- LUm: (/2 a ~ ~ \ (210: c;.--J~ _, ~ 0,(~cit )~ h 010', wm.' ~Qhq. 0 ~, 115: tAJ (~./ V _ /l- LO, ~: (;L -...J ~ ~ \ -J /L.-.-I' -; /' &J (j&, ~W.' n h -::( r t te \ / r/ /I ~ r ~ ;)-fi ;J \ 'r ~ ---.-J'---r/, J /")-1 rv 5-- cWC~ //WVe t 7f: ~ '~, ~6,'}-j rN /UJ, d 0 Q, tD.'3/3 ) DQue - \-..\~ CQ.nnot b~~spa.aJL. Ou.ult h.- ~ Ou.:C of lot-, 'Whe-n fuOJ\d ~9mv8e> oren~paC'O J o 0J\.QfL LX c.a..nr\ot be.. move.d . . Supervisor Francis J. Murphy Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Vilma Marston Indian Neck Lane Peconic, New York 11958 March 24, 1986. fA f'? ('.~'''''. py:::.. ~.-, c~,"'\ li';"-~~ '. '.." i! I, ' , ';;, MAR 241S96 i I) L,~ . ./ i _.......,...........'-,.,......~_c..,...-.--'I r:'~::_,.,' ..,.... " J \......."'__~.._ . ..' .~' ~.: ""wLU Dear Supervisor Murphy: I stopped in to see you today. You were at a meeting. I had sent several letters to Supervisor Murphy opposing tichmond Creek Marina - 2 letters contained signatures. None of these letters are in the Supervisor's file. The Board of Trustees does have one letter that I wrote directly to them' What happened to the other letters that certainly must have arrived here. Further - please - there should be covenents and restrictions on the open land area that a marina cannot be built. Please consider increasing lot ac~eage for each building on creek, as too many homes will increase boating and thereby make more pollution in wetlands area and breeding grounds for fish. I will also be chairperson of the Richmond Creek and Creek Conservancy Organization, as soon as it will be legally pulled together, which will be shortly. Sincerely yours, ~~~Cl~~ (~.) Vilma Marston CC: Planning Board Ruth Oliva . March 17, 1986 . - Mrs. Wilma Maarsten would like to go on record with Supervisor Murphy as being opposed to the proposed marina at Richmond Creek. A Richmond Creek and Creek Conservancy is being formed to oppose marinas in all creeks. Richmond Creek is a breeding ground for shell fish. Also, there are breeding grounds for birds and a public beach at the mouth of the Creek. A marina would be very bad for these things. 1-212-962-2178 '. ----7n / V ~ . . ~ /pfO 27 1".."--- !",_J J--,,- p/"3 . ~~~~ ~ \ V/~ , ~u....'cJ \'-J,>v \:...,tY"-V-U., C. 0- t.A..(V",' ~",-<_:~~ ~\ 1_', C'-.,;~- ~~ --"-'" ~.- r", /"~ lj,,~ .t -.1. \ . . - March 17, 1986 Mrs. Wilma Maarsten would like to go on record with Supervisor Murphy as being opposed to the proposed marina at Richmond Creek. A Richmond Creek and Creek Conservancy is being formed to oppose marinas in all creeks. Richmond Creek is a breeding ground for shell fish. Also, there are breeding grounds for birds and a public beach at the mouth of the Creek. A marina would be very bad for these things. 1-212-962-2178 -.~~.T V v0, ~ u;:O .., --'" ~ .2-;- ,r.,.'...... :,-,-,) ..,,- ri:~Cv-Z/? --:72-1'~~-;' --\" \ t//~ . . '-.X.-',-L'J \.....(, \.V 'uYu)...(.A_ Co 0.... \.A..(.""........' \ j)l~ <'G~:";!.... \).........:....k.. o~ .' ., . March 17, 1986 . Mrs. ~ilma Maarst~n would like to go on record with Supervisor Murphy as being opposed to the proposed marina at Richmond Creek. A Richmond Creek and Creek Conservancy is being formed to oppose marinas in all creeks. Richmond Creek is a breeding ground for shell fish. Also, there are breeding grounds for birds and a public beach at the mouth of the Creek. A marina would be very bad for these things. 1-212-962-2178 ~ ~ ~.~~ ~ t.L- ~aA r-- ju-,~~ ~ ,~.jZ ~' ~tL-~~~~ l' ~-S !!:~.t~~ ?/h ~ >v-,/( ~ fo/I&{~ ~ t.-~ ~.ftc . --- - --- . . ~~R \. \) \9'6u P. O. Box 558 Southold, New York 11971 Harch la, 1986 Southold Planning Board Town Hall Hain Road Southold, New York 11971 Dear Sirs: Hr. Thomas Canavan has asked that I deliver new maps to you for his Richmond Creek Farms subdivision in peconic. Enclosed please find twelve copies of the map, as revised Harch 7, reflecting Hr. Canavan's decision to forego a small boat docking basin for subdivision residents. Please note, as requested by the Planning Board, that the current map relocates the open space to the area adjacent to Wells Road. Hr. Canavan hereby requests that the Board takes action on this newly revised sketch map at their regular meeting scheduled for Harch 24, 1986. Please do not hesitate to call on me if I can be of further help to you in any way regarding this subdivision. ly, X~ e Reeder c. Thomas Canavan, Esq. Rudolph H. Bruer, Esq. Hr. Daniel Harcucci Hr. Howard W. Young Hr. Charles Bowman ffi_'(Y OVy\O . . TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 March 6, 1986 Mr. Glenn E. Just The Land Use Company Route 25 A P. O. Box 2521 Wading River, New York 11792 Re: Richmond Creek Associates Wetland Application No. 343 Dear Mr. Just: The following action was taken by the Board of Trustees at a regular meeting held on February 27, 1986 regarding the wetland application referenced above. RESOLVED that the application submitted by the Land Use Company on behalf of Richmond Creek Associates be and hereby is Tabled pending receipt of a survey and topographical map with contours at one-foot intervals, showing the area from' which the removal or in which the deposit of materials is proposed, or in which the structures are to be erected, certified by a registered land surveyor or registered professional engineer, licensed by the State of New York. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate contacting this office at the telephone number listed above. Very truly yours, Je;~ P~n~Llv @ Henry P. ~mith, President Board of Town Trustees HPS:ip cc: Attorney Rudolph Bruer Charles Hamilton, D.E.C., Stony Brook Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Building Dept. AAJ\ Conservation Advisory Council //j'{lbv. j ,... C/\ ,... Trustees V' -c;,-,,' Q'+' File . . R'1<::.HHO"\b Crza:." n.t2-H~ ~4rr.u8(, ANsuJS!:e~ Mu::., ~ /i?ZC/~g:o or::::. 01b~100S. ~110~ ~Aecf~~ \Jf.l~"T 0&111& ".'-~ (~ 0(' -reoS"M!i'~ I::' Jl..ll:!:" ~IZ -ro ,fAcr c:>>./ . 6"~~ Y84<<<M< fE"S 0.:" 10' {.,J V .V',-' ATTORNEYS AT LAW MAIN ROAD SOUTHOLO, NEW YORK 11971 LEF"F"ERTS P. EDSON RUDOLPH H. BRUER (515) 755-1222 (516) 765-2500 February 14, 1986 Southold Town Planning Board Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Richmond Creek Farms Dear Sirs: We understand that, subsequent to today's informal meeting, Mr. John DeReeder delivered the requested maps to your offices. We, therefore, respectfully request that the matter of the reinstatement of sketch plan approval for Richmond Creek Farms be scheduled for your March 3, 1986 meeting. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, (l~r~~~ RHB/df cc: Mr. Thomas J. Canavan, Jr. Mr. Daniel Marcucci Mr. John DeReeder Young & Young ~~ ';>-010 - 'is(, . fES 6 HEC'D . LAW OFFICES OF CANAVAN 8 BOEHM 29 PARK AVENUE MANHASSET, NEW YORK 11030 516 627- 8660 THOMAS J. CANAVAN, JR. BRIAN B. BOEHM ROBERT J. MULVEY OF COUNSEL February 4, 1986 Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Town Hall, Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Dear Mr. Orlowski: Re: Richmond Creek Farms We have just learned about your recission of sketch map approval on January 27, 1986. We understand that this action was taken because of our application with the Department of Environmental Conservation for the approval of a docking facility at the subdivision, which came to your attention indirectly. No decision has been made to go ahead with this facility, which is still in the preliminary stages. Please be assured that it would have been brought to your attention at the next meeting at which we appeared before you, if we had decided to go ahead with it. We thought we were in compliance with all procedures, and apologize that the matter was not brought to your attention more promptly. We would appreciate the opportunity to explain this to you at your earliest convenience. Our attorney, Rudy Bruer, will be in touch with you to arrange an appointment. TJC: j g cc: Rudolph H. Bruer, Esq. Mr. Howard Young Mr. Charles Bowman Mr. John de Reeder Mr. Daniel Marcucci R.W. Group, Inc. , /'1 ~k 01-10-8<0 . . -2- . DEC Position: >Ix>! DEC has no objection to your agency assuming lead agency status for this action. [] DEC wishes to assume lead agency status for this action. fd Other. (See comments below) Comments (optional): Since NYS Department of Environmental Conservation jurisdictional authority is limited to impacts on wetlands and water quality, it would be preferable that an agency having a broader range of authority (i.e., traffic, noise, land use, and other environmental :.ireas) be desi.gnated lead agency. The lead agency will determine the need for an environmental impact statement (EIS) on this project. If you have an interest in being lead agency. thel' please contact this office within 30 <.lay s of the date of this letter. If no response is received. it will be assumeo that your agency has no interest in being lead agency. Please feel free to contact this office for further information or discussion. Sincerely. --g~ -'11 ':7Cu'-'~' Robert N. Thurber Senior Environmental Analyst Enclosures, ... Short E~ application plan and letter, dated January 3rd, 1986. , . . . . New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Regulatory Affairs Bldg. 40, SUNY, Room 219 Stony Brook, New York 11794 .. ~ ~ (516) 751-7900 January 10th, 1986 TO Mr. Henry P. Smith, Southold Town Board Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, New York President of Trustees and Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 11971 Dear Sirs: Re: LEAD AGENCY COORDINATION REQUEST Richmond Creek Assoc., Wells Rd., Peconic, Southold - Tax Lot Number not given. Excavate and dredge to 3' below mean low water Bulkhead and docks, 42-Lot subdivision, parkinf The purpose of this request is to determine under Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review - SEQR) 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. 1 have enclosed a copy of the permit application and a completed Environ- mental Assessment Form to assist you in responding. DEC Project #: 10-85-1561 DEC Permits: Tidal Wetlands, Protection of Waters, Water Quality, are needed. SEQR Classification: [ ] Type I (exl' Unlisted (under DEC regulations) rh~s may be dltterent under Town rules; please advise. DEC Contact Person: Robert N. Thurber over ... j-/ / u-.- ,'---- /' ) 1..--"'" . L/ - /") " A +.-::-( }-()--\/I7'-tL--k .,:.c"flh - tI ?.J ::0 f? !v ,-.-- '-------- '.-- . Box 1100 Cutchogue, N.Y. 11935 January 30, 1986 Southold Town Trustee Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Southold Town Trustees, I am opposed to the Richmond Associates Creek development plan and marina that was recently put forward in the Town of Southold. Richmond Creek will most certainly be adversely affected by the proposal. The creek is one of our few invaluable resources, and breeding ground for fish, shellfish, and various birdlife. It happeness to be one of the Towns shell- fish transplanting areas. Richmond Creek and its surrounding wetlands is a fragile environment and need not be disturbed but preserved. Please help to protect it from all the dredging, bulkheading, development, and use of the Richmond Associates plans. Sincerely, Nancy Sawastynowicz .1 7?~(/' J<J~d- ',' - :J)-1 C '- . 0-,'7 . ,/ :c-;~( -(-,-,,-,:-~-/lfl... '- -/-"_,~/ "Z. DR . ,,'l, _,) . fEB 3 ai-t/O BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York JI971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 January 29, 1986 Mr. Aram V. Terchunian Coastal Processes Specialist State of New York Dept. of State Albany, New York 12231 RE: F-86-011 - Richmond Creek Associates Dear Mr. Terchunian: Pursuant to your letter of January 21, 1986 please be advised that the Town does not have a complete application before them for review. May we have your cooperation in this matter by tabling this application at this time. Please forward any communication submitted for this project. Your anticipated cooperation will be greatly appreciated, as this is a large project, and we have had comments from neighbors in that area who are quite concerned. Very truly yours, 7ffL~/ ~r/ Henry P. Smith, President Board of Town Trustees HPS:ip cc: Trustees Planning Board Zoning Board Building Dept Mr. Robert Thurber, D.E.C. Stony Brook ~ d. -B-87.., - Southold. N. Y. 11971 (516) 765" 1938 January 29, 1986 Mr. Rudy Bruer Attorney at law Main lOa d Southold, NY 11971 Re: Richmond Creek Farms Dear Mr. Bruer: The following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning Board, Monday, January 27, 1986. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board rescind the resolution of sketch map approval dated November 20, 1985 (survey dated October 15, 1985) for the major subdivision of Richmond Creek Farms located at Peconic. The Board requests that amended surveys be submitted indicating the applicant's intent regarding the development of a marina for the proposed lots within this subdivision. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact our office. Very truly yours, ~~tk: Orlcw~~~~~ BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR., CHAIRMA~" SOUTH OLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Diane M.Schultze, Secretary . ~.1:l:0 ,'"- .\\c!:D"(~ j;~", \...,J1l '~, l'l.~ ~fJNN~Nt~<t4~D T~~ 9f! S~,~QLD s'by~).\ 9,~.'~~~N~Y . . '/:./'1 .~<r ';'0 . _. ....... . ~ I' .? . Southold. N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 November 20, 1985 Mr. Rudy Bruer Attorney Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Richmond Creek Farms Dear Mr. Bruer: Please let this confirm the action of the Planning Board, Monday, November 18, 1985. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approve the sketch map dated October 15, 1985 for the subdivision to be known as "Richmond Creek Farms" for 42 lots on 49.6 acres in the cluster concept at Main Road, peconic subject to: 1. Revising the layout for a continuation of Wells Road eliminating the "T" intersection. Please refer to Sections 106-23 and 106-42 on the procedure and necessary documents for the preliminary filing. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact our office. Very truly yours, U{U..Ltt ()r~ IU., (kd" BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR., CHA~N SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Diane M.Schultze, Secretary .e; "r~1 Uli?i' ._, :1 YOUNG 'I/o YOUNG 400 OSTRANDeR" VENUE RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK llllO' . "LDEN W. YOUNG p,.,r...ionoI &.q;n.. ~ L.nd S...wyoo 516-727-1S03 HOWARD W. YOUNG 1AUWI. &aw.yo. October 29, 1985 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PLANNING BOARD Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Attn: DIANE SCHULTZ, SECRETARY Re: Subdivision Sketch Plan - RICHMOND CREEK FARMS (85-543) Peconic, Town of Southold Dear Diane: At the request of Diane at the office of Rudolph Bruer, Esq., I am submitting to you an additional seven (7) prints of the above captioned sketch plan. Please schedule this for discussion as soon as Possible. Very truly yours, ~d HOWARD W. YOUNG HWY~ Encl. cc: EDSON & BRUER, ESQS. + print attn: R. BRUER, ESQ. . . G"~-a'!J#____ ATTORNEYS AT LAW OCT 3 0 1985 MAIN ROAD SQUTHOLD. NEW YORK 11971 LEF"FERTS P. EDSON RUDOLPH H. 8RUER October 29, 1985 (516) 765.1222 (516) 765-2500 Southold Town Planning Board Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Richmond Creek Farms peconic, New York Dear Sirs: We respectfully request that the sketch plan, last amended 10/15/85, prepared and submitted to you by Young & Young, Surveyors on 10/16/85, be placed on your 11/18/85 meeting agenda for consideration of sketch plan approval / In accordance with your requirements, Young & Young will be forwarding seven (7) additional prints of this sketch plan, which, together with the five (5) prints submitted on 10/16/85, will constitute the necessary twelve (12) copies. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, ~7 1/ f11n, ,d o #tier '.YCg R B/ f cc: Mr. Daniel Marcucci Celic Realtors (John DeReeder) aP riP" I~ leA (\ ~ - - CClfud 03:, Co', Go l%~.-:' 3 IW. m~ OY) <~+<-'>11~ h; -fa o.-~ \f' r '^J<0/c f;(CQ, G:,ol:S' b"J; ,,+:I), ~0sn '\o"'J' CQ"6"a~ I ,",c cl D(~ ~J~ ') rJk~ -t 0 :Sc.h~J e tcsv' r-~V')9.-"~) ~j I (J { V0 ~~ +e\J ~/ Cc, ~ YY--0- -8.( -If;~ ) J II (~ TI",,,,,,) l)oa~J "'~+0 ,( rc~(;(S<""c~ Cr,~~ ~/"" s), I r ~y ~ cl~"_ (L <RS6~ )0"'\ ey../L ,^;-"~~9-- +-6 ~_)J~ ,,^,J to/ -)-0e;"" J r \<ZA~ 3'V.'-- Vh"- C\ C4. tl 0--+ l(7) -7lfoO (~;+h<:.....-- \'1/ OU".r",~ <:l/*,~ ~O-cl0e ~'0'~~ -th;, e"<~:^J' ), ~ ~,~f2>~ OTeri ,^J+-.<+.~ h ;z-+ 0~~~,tdO~ <s" ---thIS s/, s-~"----+~ r6do<./,~~~J {-cd./' '..P ~ oJ h (]'I. ~~ " <:\ +f'>-l-I ( ) () //j 6f' IVI<2... I ",C6^,)G"'\C.~Cl:. , ---,--~ -~_.. -~ SOUTH~ TOWN'S 40TH 9N IVERSARY CELEBRATION OF THE UN ITED NATIONS Recreation Department sponsors: UNITED NATIONS BUS TRIP OCTOBER 29, 1985 INCLUDES: 10:30 A.M. GUIDED TOUR OF THE UNITED NATIONS LUNCHEON OPTION: LUNCH IN THE COFFEE SHOP OR LUNCH IN THE DELEGATES DINING ROOM (by reservation only, jackets are required) 1:15 P.M. SECRETARIAT BRIEFING ON GENERAL ISSUES REGARDING THE UNITED NATIONS OPPORTUNIITY TO VISIT THE U.N. BOOK SHOP, STAMP SALES COUNTER AND GIFT SHOP DEPART: 7:15 A.M. FROM THE SENIOR-YOUTH CENTER IN PECONIC RETURN: APPROXIMATELY 5: 00 P.M. COSTS: (lunch NOT included in price, reservations must be made to be seated in the delegates dining room) ADULTS: $13.00 STUDENTS grades 1-9: $11.25 grades 10 and over: $11.75 CHILDREN UNDER 5 YEARS OF AGE NOT PERMITTED ON TOURS --------------------- HOME PHONE BUSINESS PHONE NAME ADDRESS ADULTS STUDENT (grade 1-9) (grades 10& ()ver) AMOUNT OF CHECK RESERVATIONS FeR LUNCH IN DELEGATES DINING ROOM PLEASE MAKE MAKE CHECK PAYABLE TO "TOWN OF SOUTHOLD" MAIL TO: SOUTHOLD RECREATION DEPARTMENT P.O. BOX 267, PECONIC LANE, PECONIC, NEW YORK 11958 '" < , . . YOUNG 'I/o YOUNG 400 OSTRANDBR "VENUE RIVERHE"'-D. NEW YORK 1I1lO' I1I8-TI1-13Oll "LDEN W. YOUNG """.....ionol ~...... Land S......,."" HOW....ao W. YOUNG Land s.-- October 16, 1985 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PLANNING BOARD Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Attn: BENJAMIN ORLOWSKI, CHAIRMAN Re: RICHMOND CREEK FARMS (85-543) Peconic, Town of Southold Dear Benny; I was very pleased to sit in \Iith the Board and discuss the above captioned subdivision. It appeared that your major concern was the length of the cul-de-sac and the amount of open space between the lots in this subdivision and the lots in the proposed subdivision of CHARLES ACRES being prepared for the Estate of Charles Simon. We are enclosing, for your review, five (5) prints of the subdivision sketch plan which has been amended to create more open space between these subdivisions and to eliminate the cul-de-sac. This plan also indicates two (2) "T" intersections within the subdivision which will benefit the subdivision by decreasing vehicular speeds. We feel that this is a very attractive subdivision and solicit sketch plan approval so that we may proceed with the next phase. Should your Board wish to further discuss this sketch plan, I would make myself available to meet with you at any time. Very truly yours, rtJfc;uJard W. LfCUrY-J HOWARD W. YOUNG HWY:f!!) Encls. '. ~ . . - 2 - TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PLANNING BOARD Attn: BENJAMIN ORLOWSKI, CHAIRMAN Re: RICHMOND CREEK FARMS (85-543) cc: EDSON & BRUER, ESQS. + print Main Road Southold, NY 11971 attn: RUDOLPH BRUER, ESQ. MR. DANIEL MARCUCCI + print 4400 Ventnor Avenue Atlantic City, NJ 08401 CELIC REALTORS + print POB 640 Greenport, NY 11944 attn: JOHN DE REEDER *Alsoenclosed for the Board is a print showing the two (2) subdivisions next to each other to give a better visual idea of the area involved. . . 6'~~ {J84'UM' JUN 26 1985 ATTORNEYS AT LAW MAIN ROAD 50UTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971 June 25, 1985 (516) 765-1222 (516) 765-2500 LEFFERTS P. EDSON RUDOLPH H. BRUER Southo1d Town Planning Board Town Hall Main Road Southo1d, New York 11971 Re: Proposed major subdivision of Thomas Canavan Peconic, New York Dear Sirs: Enclosed please find my affidavit, in compliance with Article IV, Section A106-40(B). as referred to in my letter of June 24, 1985. S.i?~. 1y, /~/u/~~. iudo1p~.~:er ~~- RHB/df / Ene. ( ) . .. ~ G'~44td' [J8A<aM< JUN 2 4 \Sa~ ATTORNEYS AT LAW MAIN ROAD SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971 LEFFERTS P. EDSON RUDOLPH H. BRUER June 24, 1985 (516) 765-1222 (516) 765-2500 Southold Town Planning Board Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Proposed major subdivision of Thomas Canavan Peconic, New York Dear Sirs: On behalf of our client, Thomas Canavan, we submit herewith twelve (12) copies of a sketch plan showing his proposal for a major subdivision of property he has contracted to purchase at Peconic, New York. ~18e QU- Gloeed. is nT ~-Ffida'?it" i[~ ('6r.l~lid..t.u_e. with .\rticle lor.?, 3c~Llvu AlOe (IQ(B).. It is my hope that the board will entertain a review of this proposal at its July 8, 1985 meeting. Please advise. ;~re~y, 1 AI / fi (flLhi/d N-It;1l((,4- Rudolph H. Bruer 4--" RHB/df Encs. , /P'S, ,.CJt;~jd,<,r~~-<~..-.d r aT IYS(-e /);C6-1(/.3) ~A'""'Lel /<Ld'~'~"~'~<I!{ Z 7'<~/h)-yc,"~"--h;J &/02~ . ( ~ .~. - 1(z(8<5 CANAVAN P~IIIOUGL-1 f<1,/oW"l AS,.~CIWOND C~ -FAeus " ) CC-(}.s~e- CO/vl&7\( .s;1<:~--n::'" .).pP/i!t7I/Ai- .fJtJD F>fZ;;suwfMJeY' 71I~~ VAs GeANOFA~ ~ 1 AC2'C: As .. ClO1HCJ~D ~ fieM.:5 " r:) Apf't-ICA~ lIPs CllAlltC,iOV l-A'''-ov, dF SU~lulS.loN <::>t-\o ,,- ~~ /-r /05 ;{.1::17' ~G" ~e: cNo.or" t..;;l'-" G,A~'" t:>f'P!2.<:NN- --tV ~ ~'-I? '1-10-1 ~ CON"" ~~ 0>lO~ 1- p~ '2oN ,'''''' U'N'--E"~ ~ -If1'1't-/c.A1..Ir c;.~.s ~ -TV OlZl"'\'N~'- Ci.-"'::'~ :::'''''''''''''')~''''C>r-.I. ., ~lal 1'hZW<l4 -rrJ~ Ui-lo 1{As. OI,A.NC,.I2\:::> l-i./WO.s (11-I/~-t?H;c 1- L!Cee;- ~1NC.. DUNS LO'''-'. -n-\I"e::. L~ ,AS'" J-<::9'IG, .A5 -,:Te ~(6'N Of;' -mE ~/v'~loNs 12JCM~\),\S As l='e1,[!J\~'--'r .l:.p.pedk:o 11l=1rs ILlA'r tl<'Ive -TV ~ CCll-\A1Z.41.!:1:> ~, -.T~l4 ~ Lot-- s 1B-2B ~l-l::,l-IlUc.ld~ Os 4 ~ . too' ~+~ 40 ()C;6 Sf: "&,ldcUe "A ~ I I PV' LJl:Uld ~~elJ OV> elJ.~ 0<<k ~f-(,+ ~fD~ JCJ:16. n ~ ~ . , 1,.....1~(9/64l NEW YORK STATE QEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION DIVISION OF RECULATORY AfFAIRS PROJECT 1.0. NUMBER SI.I. Envlronm.nl.1 Qu.llly R.vl.w SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only PART I Proj8Cllnform.llon (To be completed by Applicant or Project sponsor) , Applic.nl/spon$Ol Richmond Creek ASSOciateSt~, ProjtctName by Glenn E. Just of the Land Use o. Richmond Creek Associates 1. Project location: Municipality Peconic County Suffolk ... Is proposed .clion: Kl N_ O ExINnston o Modification/lilteration S Describe project brieflv: Applicant proposes to sub-divide a 50 acre parcel of land into 42 single family lots with associated roads, drainage, and a 42 ,1 i p docking facility. Area to be dredged will necessitate the removal of approximately 900 c. y. of material. Spoil shall be placed in an upland section of the subdivision. Docki~g will meet 6. Precise location (road intel'JftCtions. prominent lAndmarks. etc. or provide map) existing chanel. "{a in Rd. , Peconic (map enclosed) 7. Amount of land .ff~ted: 50 InitiAllv . 0 ACres Ultimately ACres 8. Will propoHd action comply with existinl zoninl Of other eaistin, land use restrictionsJ a Yes 0 No If No, describe briefly 9. W~t is present land use in ...icinity of project' r?,' D 00..". '--. o Resident~1 0 Industrial 0 Commerci.1 GJ Aaricultura 0 P"'I.ndlopen~. :, Describe: ,. Does .ction In...ol.... a permit/.ppro....1. Of fundine. now Of ultimately. from .ny other acwemmental 'aencv (Feder.I, .state Of loealll [il Yo, o No If yes, list ...ne,(s) .nd permit/.pptOYll. ,. N.Y,S'~~i'~~~p<mding Southold Town Trustees - pending ...~, ..r,,"..>,,' '.' '., . U.S.D. .A. -.~.n~1~F~~ , Southold Town Planning Board - pending 11. Does any aspect of the action h.ve . currently ....Iid permit or .pprov.1l o Ves 1] No If yes. Ii$t ...,.cy name.nd permit/approval type 1l As result of proposed actton will ellistifll permit/.ppro....1 require modificationl o Ve, ~ No I CERTifY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEOCE Richmond Creek Associ.ates by Glenn E. - ,""''-~' AppUCAn~'pon"" ~ _ J 11 S t of thp- Land Usp- l.nmp;=tnv D.te: /4-- i--F"''''', i \ O~ . 'A1 J) Sip.ture: ./ - ....... ".-..... ,. r I ., .-/ If the .ctlon I. In the Co..t.1 Are., .nd you .... . .t.t. .g.ncy, compl.t. the co..t.a A.....m.nt Form lIefo... proceadlng with thl. ......ment OVER , j~ i y...: I ~-tUI "" YORK ITA.ART"''' OF ENVIRON""TAl CO'SER,^TlON -,TI'" 'LMBER APPLICATION FOR PERMIT Read Instructions on back before completing this application. Please type or print clearly In ink. Use separate addenda and exhibits to pro\'ide all data and explanations for which space on this form ls inadequate. o "RTICLE 15, TITLE 3 (CONTROl OF "QU"TIC INSECTS, WEEDS" OR UNDESIRABLE FISHI o "RTICLE 15, TITLE 5 !PROTECTION OF WATERSI o For the construction, reconstruction. or repair of a DAM or other impoundment structure. D For the disturbance of a STREAM BED or excavation in or fill of navigable waters. o "RTICLE 15, TITLE 15 0 WATER SUPPLY 0 lONG ISLAND WEll o ARTICLE 24 (FRESHWATER WETlANDS) 0 Permit 0 Letter of Permission ~RTICLE 25 (Tidal Wetlands) 1 NAME Of APPLICANT: Rl.chmond Creek Use Company '. 2. APPLICANT 15 AlAN 0 k-v' Individual Ill'! Partnership ] NAME AND TITlE OF OFFICIAL SIGNING A,pll~TlON Glenn E. Just of the Land Assoclates by Glenn E. Just ot the Lana o Association o Corporation o MuniCipality 0 Governmental Agency I PHONE (516)-929-357'5 Use Company STREET ADDRESS/POST OFFICE P.O. Box 361-N. Country Rd., Wading River, POST OFFICE STATE N.Y. IZIP CODE I 11792 4. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER (Jf nOI applicanO Richmond Creek Associates STREET ADDRESS/POST OFFICE 29 Park Avenue, I PHONE Manhasset, POST OFFICE STATE N.Y. IZIP CODE 11030 6 WILL PROJECT UTILIZE STATE. OWNED LAND? 5. PROJECT LOCATION a! City or Village Peconic ....AME OF STREAM OR OTHER WATER BODY It appropr;ate: if un-named, show on map-See Item 5bJ Town Southold Richmond Creek o Yes fit No County Suffolk b! SpeCliic project SitE' or area is markl"d on U,S.C.S or eqUivalent map, attached as El(hibit Number 7. PROPOSED USE o Public "f5<('Privale U'Commercial 8. PROr?S~FTARTING DA.TE 9. APPROXIMATE COMPLETION DATE ASAP 10. FEE OF $ 50.00 Enclosed 11 PROJECT DESCR!PTlON Feet of rip-rap new channel cubiC yards of material to be removed: draining. dredging, iilling and location of disposal sites: type of structure to be installed: height 01 dam; size of Impoundenl: capacities of propsed water !>Ources: ell;tent of distrlbullon system: elc A p P 1 i can t pro p 0 s est 0 sub _ d i v ide a 50 acre parcel of land into 42 single family lots with associated roads, drainage, and a 42 slip docking facility. Area to be dredged will necesslta the removal of approxim~tely 900 c.y. of material. Spoil shall be placed in an upland section of the subdivision. Docking area will meet existing channel. 12 THIS PROjECT WILL REQUIRE ADDITIONAL PERMITS. APPLICATIONS FOR WHICH ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF OTHERS' none o Dam 0 flll,"<ltiuPl 0 Stream Disturbance 0 SPDES/NPDES 0 Water Supply 0 l.l. Wells 0 Freshwater Wetland 0 Tidal Wetlands 13 NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER OF LOCALITY WHERE PROPOSED WORKS ARE LQCA TED Long Island Traveler-Watchman, Southold 14. IS ANY PORl!...O~F THE ACTIVlTY FOR WHICH A PERMIT IS SOUGHT NOW BEGUN OR COMPLETED? o Yes ~ No If YES, explain in addenda, giving reasons and dates, and show el(isting work on drawings or map. IS CERTIFICATION I hereby affirm that under penality of pequry that information provided on this form and all allachments submitted herewith is true to the besl of my knowi",dge and belief. False statements mad", her",in ar", punishable as a Class A misdem",anor pursuant to Section 210.45 of the Penal law. As a condItion to the issuance of a permit the applu..:ant acc"'pts full responSibility tor all damage direct or Indirect of whatever nature and by whomever suffered anSlng out of the prOjeCI de~crlbed hm~o "d :'''';''demmfY "d ,,,. h"mle>>:he St"e Imm '"'t~o 7),m,.e, "d com o\e*y "~'lOd de;i'P"oo~e'UI'''' Imm ~,d pm,e" l~-'t-)oo-S - I,-~ r hd7r OA'IE ":; _SJ<;J'iATURE -SEE REVERSE SIDE- PERMIT ADMINISTRATOR -,.- 1" L ............, '" ,,'- -....I ~ ~ ~ -r' a II- .3-J. '1' 'E- h ~'11t~,:e,\ ?p..1"'-e"C:. . ~r---I ~~t> ~I:::'N'" P~of'O::.~D 4t2. 61..1f' ~'6 0 ~E. 'D'LI!O,,"EO TO $'€ ,..,,1L.w.WI\.L. \"\o~'D "\1.-10' "'LoO ~"i~.~&O"" I e.cP.e" "c. 11." r'~.~,Af!'t.D){, 1~o' or l'1xeo '\?O,\:.~,...~ I' o' tl F fl.Oo'l 170"1<::>, I +')(Ie.' tv-.Ml", D~'Dc.~b ....n.o. ,. "","ox. ..od "u,""("O~. N oT L~ ~llr~ ~t\,,1.L 'J!:le u.e,p ~X'-L.U:loiVe.L..,.. 1!r'r 1!ioU~- ~""=-'ow r~orl:~ ~ ,- ~ ...rolo. (..",,-,-r ""....c.wt- 1"'\....'" '1'1o".:o"",,,I..e.: I": 11000' " '-\"f~ ~-\- ) ''\( .1.'- - ,.e)(I:>TI'N~WETLA.~D~ 6~""~~ I"e, 001 l,': '~"TO~:"""~,,I.lN~l~::'~ I r l " ,,' - -"'- C> IaO IDe '_ - -' - rL.aOD '2 ~2>~ ~o~t) rLO.....1 '00," ~Mf ~01"'='.LP 1"1 pDt..IC. ~ -..u\.l(.t1~ 100,' "v.,'W - - ;:O-L."'- , , - ....R~.... 'TO eE - PR~O,,"C'D ,0 ~'€ML..W ",.. " .. " : 'ttl~lI.iG - ", . . """"l0 ", . '. .' ~ -':' ~. ,'--.-<;", --.- ~/ --- =6 DRet>,,"~D "'To MeEi . A J!.X\~TIN" ~'€ MI.W 1-.. 'D '::"'REE.I<. .",. .... _ ~ I (.. H \.....A 0 , ' ,'. . M\olW . ' ' ~p(.,e f"tl:Op.::.-e.E'D 1b01'TC>1"lI1 V~I~T~~ ,,,'-0" ~O'_O'I 10'-0" ~""~I~~ 'To'tolte:. '6 E. t.-:r I C> r-I A - A ~""'L.~~ "'.101-0" ~o'Po~~ 1""".....~I1'4..... IN ... .........p......10rc.. ~""I1b- 'OIVISIOl'o.l IN RI'-'i"\N\C:>N"O c::.'2.~e.\c:. ~i p~(..o N 1~,"'o'W''''''' "I" ~Y'T+-tOLD,"ou\oo.l"""'\'" df" :!SUl'"roLIC.., ~.,. A-T1~, N~"'" ""'r01t-\C... ....?TLlc::......,.IO~ 'Cr(: 'll,;.lt..l\ON'Dc::.US\c: "",,~~oc.. O......,l!.' I'Z.' ,~, 51!!> ~ ..l, +- -r HE LAND USE (,,0. \JADIN6 R\VER ~~E1' I ot"" 2. -IS _x~ - ~x ~ e~ - 'II ~ or e ~\i t~ p:( ~~ . ~i . , ....--. ~ ~ Dill ~yj Z ~ Co t.r- " ~---'-" " -- r -- Q '-- I - - 1----- , ~ t:- ' ;;.. \J ------- ~ .'---------- --- ~- 7 --- ~ -- z -~ pj,{ 2~ ill! ~)( ~... 0....- .J-' 'J- ~ -4 to- ~ ) --- u_ -,.-.. ,......~.~-=-. -.-.- ---..-- rJ IL. o tJ 1 - Ij) ~ P1 ~ 11.1 ,~ J ~ - rO I ~ uJ > - (k ~ 1 - o ~ ~ - 21 '" 0:- _ 1I1 .J h~ ~ ~ IJ \f) . C) ..J u.1 if) ::5 o z .( J uJ ::c r . . New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Regulatory Affairs Bldg. 40, SUNY, Room 219 Stony Brook, New York 11794 ,;;\l~ \) ~ (516) 751-7900 Henry G. Williams Commissioner January 3rd, 1986 Mr. Glenn E. Just The Land Use Company P.O. Box 361 North Country Road Wading River, New York 11792 RE: 10-85-1561 - RICHMOND CREEK .\&88EJIA'fll'S F ar!e'''; " WELLS ROAD, PECONIC, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD (TAX LOT NUMBER NOT GIVEN) EXCAVATE AND DREDGE TO 3' DEPTH BELOW M.L.W.; BULKHEAD AND DOCKS TO CREATE MARINA FOR 42-LOT SUBDIVISION ON 50 ACRES; PARKING Dear Glenn: Richmond Creek is currently open to shellfishing for commercial purposes. Shellfish have been transplanted to it and will probably be considered for such future trans- planting programs as long as its waters remain open for commercial purposes. It has been noted that water quality becomes degraded in the vicinity of marinas having boats requiring dredging as indicated in your proposal. For these reasons DEC staff will likely object to any dredging within this creek. Since this shoreline is mostly natural (unbulkheaded), staff will also likely object to any timber bulkheads. Gabions or other rock structures would be preferable. Construction of docks for the launching of small "car-top" boats would be more favor- ably considered provided acceptable plans are submitted. If a parking area is still included, it should be a minimum of 75' from the existing (or proposed) wetland edge. For other information requested, please refer to the enclosed "Incomplete Notice" and long EAF, Part I. A meeting with DEC staff can be arranged, should you request it. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation. Very truly yours, -~~11~~~ Robert N. Thurber Senior Environmental Analyst RNT/l ... Enclosures cc: Henry P. Smith, President, Southold Town Board of Trustees, w/enclosures Bennett Orlowski, Chairman, Southold Town Planning Board, w/enclosures ~ v1ames McMahon, Director, Southold Town Department of Community Development Cr\J7 (. JG". James Redman r~ Fred Mushacke , Kevin Cross. Deoartment of State. w/enclosures ~>-- kJ,- /\ .....-:- . /J / ,/, .t, ~ "'~, ,/,/;, ' . ........ -;, j' ~/,-<...-r-y '.C-'7'i.~'c' C.'. C.L ~,. ~LQ.. ~5 tA ' . _ 1 t ,j . :, . . "u '-'m'"'' '\J .~.,~, "', ,.' "C'''';. "I i/2. ~ 1'l'6 -\ STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF STATE ALBANY. N. Y. 12231 GAIL S, SHAFFER SECRETARY OF STATE January 21, 1986 Mr. Glenn E. Just The Land Use Company P.O. Box 361, North Country Road Wading River, NY 11792 Re: F-86-011 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers/NY District Permit Application - Richmond Creek Associates, Town of Southo1d Request for Additional Information Dear Mr. Just: The Department of State has reviewed the documentation that you submitted on January 6, 1986 and, pursuant to 15 CFR 930.58, has determined that the following additional information is necessary to enable the Department to complete its re- view of your Federal Consistency Assessment Form and certification for the above- referenced project: 1. Please discuss the compatibility of the proposed marina with the surround- ing area both in an environmental and social context. In addition, outline the overall use of this area as a small harbor (CMP Policy #4). Is the infrastructure of the area adequate for marina development (Policy #2)? Are public services and facilities essential to the smooth functioning and maintenance of the marina available to marina users, either on-site or nearby (Policy #5)? Examples include on-site parking, pumpout facilities and transportation, boat repair and fuel services. 2. What provisions have been made for access by the general public to the waterway (Policies #19 & #20)? 3. How will stormwater runoff be contained on the site (Policies #30, #33, & # 37)? 4. Explore vegetative erosion control methods (Policy #17), and any other alternatives to the proposed activities which would minimize the loss of the area's tidal wetlands, namely intertidal and high marsh, and their values (Policies #7 & #44). 5. Please submit color photography of the site including views to the north, south and east. Sketch outline of proposed changes directly onto the photos. ~ 0-" 8t.e ~ '. . Mr. Glenn E. Just Jan uary 21, 1986 Page 2 . The Department would appreciate recelvlng a copy of any other information which would, in any way, facilitate its review of this proposed project. ,.~ Please provide the infromation requested above to the Department of State within thirty days from the date of this letter. If this information is not pro- vided, the Department of State may, pursuant to 15 CFR 930.64(d), be forced to object to your consistency certification based on the grounds of insufficient information needed to determine consistency of the proposed activity with the New York State Coastal Management Program. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is being notified of this information request by copy of this letter. If you have any questions on this matter, please contact me at (518) 474-3~~ -' Sin.~relYC'?/. //.,: (La.. r::, <cf</' Aram V. Terchunian Coastal Processes Specialist 30'-/-/-. AVT:KAC:dlb cc: M. Greges, COE/NY District B. Thurber, NYS DEC/Region I ,)Klwn of Southold (E. Tfferling) &"-rCL_C~/ 0'.( Cl/ /j '" /) ~ '"\--t;77 , C-",.,,/-"-' '--'"1 ,__"---1' , . '7 ,.-1 }" L,,(-,.7. i'-J..,L {.<. (~("t ~ -/l'l G-11e-- .' ," LL O'p/ . i/ . / ..... ROBERT W. TASKER TELEPHONE Town Attorney (516) 477-1400 . APR 5 1985 - . 425 MAIN ST. GREENPORT, L.I., NEW YORK 11944 April 1, 1985 Hon. Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Richmond Creek Farms Major Subdivision Dear Sir: This is in reply to your March 26, 1985 letter relative to the above subdivision. In reviewing the Planning Board records, I find that on June 15, 1982, the Planning Board granted preliminary approval of this subdivision. Section 100-31 B(2) of the Zoning Code, as enacted on August 9, 1983 by Local Law No. 9-1983, provides that the bulk requirements set forth in Column A- 40 of the Bulk Schedule (40,000 sq. ft. lots), "shall apply to the following lots:" "(2) All lots shown on major subdivision maps upon which the Planning Board has held a hearing for preliminary map approval prior to May 20, 1983." Since the Planning Board granted preliminary approval of this map on June 15, 1982, it must have held a hearing thereon prior to such preliminary approval, and also prior to May 20, 1983. Therefore, the above provisions of Section 100-31 B(2) apply and the lots shown on such map may be developed with lots having a minimum area of 40,000 square feet. It would be my opinion that since this subdivision was automatically pursuant to Section 100-31 B(2), no application for relief from the two-acre requirements was required under Section 100-31.1 of the code. ~<;-t:,-5' , f -2- I am also of the opinIOn that the Planning Board may entertain an application by the owner to amend the preliminary map from a cluster concept to a conventional one-acre layout. A public hearing should be held on the amended map prior to action thereon by the Planning Board. Yours very truly, ~o.kd- tV, y~~ ROBERT W. TASKER R WT : aa cc: Richard T. Haefeli . [; D Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 March 26, 1985 Mr Robert W. Tasker Town Attorney 425 Main Street Greenport, NY 11944 Re: Richmon& Creek Farms major subdivision Dear Mr. Tasker: The above mentioned subdivision, which is proposed in the cluster concept, received relief from the two-acre zoning from the Town Board pursuant to 100-31.1 of the Town Ordinance. As you may know, the cluster concept under one acre permits lots of \ acre, which are below the standards for the SuffOlk County Department of Health Services. The applicant has been inquiring if he may change the subdivision layout from a cluster to a conventional one-acre subdivision to avoid a problem in obtaining Article 6 approval. The Planning Board would like your opinion as to wheth~r the map must remain in the cluster concept since that was the proposal which was granted relief, or if it could be changed to a convential one-acre layout. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Very truly yours, ~~tf GY UJuj(,7u-~ (),dJUY BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR., CHAlk~N SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Diane M. SChultze, Secretary