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