Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1000-112.-1-16 JUDITH T. TERRY TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 $outhold, New York 11971 FAX (516) 765-1823 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 July 13, 1989 Gentlemen: Transmitted herewith is a certified resolution of the Southold Town Board whereby they propose, on their own motion, to change the zone on the property owned by Richard Cart at New Suffolk Avenue and Camp Mineola Road, Mattituck, from Hamlet Density (HD) Residential District to Low Density Residential R-40 District. Please prepare an official report defining the conditions described in said petition and determine the area so affected by your recommendation, and transmit the same to me. Thank you. Very truly yours, $outhold Town Clerk Attachment cc: John J. Hart, Esq. JAMES A. SCHONDEBARE TOWN ATi'ORNEY ROBERT H. BERNTSSON ASSISTANT TOWN A~rORNEY OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD INTER-OFFICE MEMO FROM THE TOWN ATTORNEY'S OF[ Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1939 TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Town Board and Planning Board James A. Schondebare. Town Attorney April 10. 1989 Carr/Wanat change of zone I note that the Suffolk County Planning commision, by its letter of February 2. 1989. disapproved of the change of zone based on the applicant requesting a change from our old "A" zone to "M" Light Multiple Residence, I believe the Town's Planning Board also disapproved same based on the old application. If it is true that the applicant will now convenant and restrict the property in accordance with the Town's R-40 zone then perhaps it would be to everyone's advantage that the application be re-submitted to the Suffolk County Planning Commission and the Town's Planning Board for their opinion based on this new information. COVENANTS AND RESTRI( . ~OUTHOLD TOWN TI ONSPLANNING BOARD Dist. 1000 Sect. 122 Block 5 Lot 4 The undersigned, RICHARD T. CARR, residing at c]o Shamrock Properties, 350 5th Avenue, New York, New York. 10118 [hereinafter "CARR"), having filed a Draft Environmental Impact Statement [DEIS) for premises owned by him at Mattituck, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, bounded and described as shown in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part hereof [hereinafter the "Norris Property"), in connection with the development of such property zoned "M" Light-Multiple Residence District [presently Hamlet Density). And in connection with such DEIS, having shown as an alternative proposal use of the premises as amended by the owners to include a reduction in the number of residential units to be built on the Norris Property from Hamlet Density to that in accordance with Article Ilia (Low Density Residential R-L~0 District) ofT_the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Southold combined with a rezoning of premises owned by the undersigned, JOSEPH A. WANAT, residing at Bergen Avenue, Mattituck,.New York [hereinafter "WANAT") such property, containing approximately 107.6 acres, being bounded and described as shown in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and made a.part hereof [hereinafter the "Wanat Property"): said rezoning, which was. joined in by CARR as contract vendee, requested a change of zone (fora "A" Residential Agricultural District [now Agricultural Conservation A-C District) to "M" Light Multiple-Residence District [now Hamlet Density) and thereafter voluntarily amended to Low Residential R-40 District . AND the petition for Change of Zone having come on to be heard before the Town Board of the Town of Southold (hereinafter "Town Board") on March 14, 1989, and the Town Board having determined after due deliberation that the public health, safety and welfare of the Town of Southold and its residents, would be best served by the Wanat Property ~described in Exhibit "B") be rezoned to R-40 in accordance with Article Ilia (Low Density Residential R-40 District) of the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Southold upon the condition that the undersigned covenant to restrict the number of residential units to be erected on the Norris Property: Such covenants and restrictions to run with the land and to be binding upon the undersigned his heirs, successors and assigns: NOW THEREFORE the undersigned does covenant as follows: I. That the Norris Property, as described in Schedule "A", attached hereto and made a part hereof, be developed in accordance with Article Ilia Low Density Residential District. 2. That this covenant shall run with the ~a~d and shaii be binding upon the heirs, successors and assigns of the declarant hereto and may not be changed, except by a further agreement in writing executed by the then owners of the premises affected 'and by the Town Board of the Town of Southold. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the declarant have executed the foregoing covenants and restrictions this //~ day of April, 1989. STATE OF NEW YORK) ) SS. COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) On this //~ day of April, 1989, before personally me came RICHARD T.(~ARR, to me known and known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and he acknowledged to me that he executed the same. I: plot. piece or parcel of land. with the buildln~s and imPr°V~nent~ thereon erected. -;mate, ~ Nd _~-.~ ~ at Mattituck, Town of South~ld, Co%~nty of Suffolk and State of New York, bounded and described ~s follc~: B~GI~N/~G at a point on the eaSterly side of a twenty-five (25) foot right- of-w~y sometimes known as Reeve Avenue, distant thereo~ South 17" 41' 20" West 220.51. feet frc~ the oDrner fozn~d by the intersection of the southerly side of New Suffolk Avenue and the easterly side of said right-of-way; ~ THF~2~ along the easterly side of said right-of-w-ay the following three (3) courses and distances: (1) South 16" 7' 00" West 550.85 feet; (2) South 7" 32' 00" West, 519.57 feet; and (3) South 7" 7' 00" West 667.65 feet to land now or formerly of Reeve; TH~CE along said land, South 86° 47' 40" East 809.45 feet te other land or formerly of Norris: THENCE along said land th~ foll~ing tw~ (2) courses and distances; (1) North 7° 31' 10" West 423 feet; (2) North 7° 30' 20" East 1195.61 feet, more or less, to oth~r land of Bruce A. Norris; THS~CE along said land the follow~ng four (4) courses and distances: (1) North 73° 3~: 30" West 121.88 feet; (2) North 77" 53' 20" West 96.70 feet; (3) North 77© 45' 30" West 91.78 feet; and (4) North 76° 27' 30" West 312.78 feet to the point or place of BEGINNiNG. TOC~31t{ER with a non-exclusive r~oht-of-w~v 50 feet in width running fr~ the southerly side of New Suffolk Avenue .~]theriy along iands formerly of Georoe Brooks and along land being conveyed herein, a total d/stance of 400 feet for ingress and egress and installation of underground utilities, which, right-of-way is more particularly bour~ed and described as follc~s: BEGiA~;~G at a point on the southerly side of New SuffoLk Avenue at a mon%m~nt at the northeasterly corner of land now of Norris, formerly of Brooks; RU~-~G ~"~CE the fc!lo~ng ~o (2) courses and d/stances: (1) South 7" 42' West 224.34 feet; (2) South 7° 30' 20" .West 175.66 feet; RUN~/NG TH~CE in an easterly d~rection on a line dra%nn perpendicular tc the aforesaid course a distance of 50 feet; RUNNING TH~9~E northerly along a line which is 50 feet easterly of th~ first two oc~rses above m~ntioned approximately 420 feet to the southerly side of N~v Suffolk Avenue; RD~ING THENCE westerly along the southerly side of New Suffolk Av~._nue approximately 50 feet to th~ point or place of BEGINNING. Tc,.m af ~uthold, County of .l~ffolk and Stmt~ of ~ Yo~, ~ ~ ~r~ ~ ~ is ~t ~ 86' 4~' 40" ~st 300.00 f~ as ~ ~ ~e ~ ~ f~ ~id ~t or pla~ of ~, al~ l~d ~ or foely ALL that certain I piece or parcel of' land.~m~ith the buildings and improvements thereon erected, situate, lying and being at Mattituck. Town of' Southold. County of' Suffolk and State of New York, bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a point which connects the northerly side of' Bergen Avenue with the westerly side of land now or formerly of Joseph T. Macari and Louis F. Simeone and from said point of beginning: RUNNING THENCE along the northerly side of' Bergen Avenue. 67" 10' 40" West, 685.93 feet to an angle point in Bergen Avenue. South CONTINUING THENCE along the westerly side of' Bergen Avenue. on a course bearing South 20" 49' 50" East, 61.62 feet. CONTINUING THENCE along land now or formerly of' William and Tompkins D. Entenmann: 1. South 59° 49' 30" West. 200 feet; 2. North* 20° 42' 30" West. 49.99 feet; 3. South 56° 13' 50" West. 258.98 feet; 4. North 21° 50' 20" West. 429.45 feet; 5. North 22° 29' 50" West. 819.71 feet: 6. North 21° 14' 40" West, 643.02 feet: 7. North 22° 11' 50" West. 392.02 feet to a point and formerly of John and Rose Koroleski. land now or CONTINUING THENCE along said land of' John and Rose Koroleski: land 1. North 71° 23' 10" East. 95.00 feet: 2. North 21° 17' 50" Nest. 773.70 feet; 3. North 22° 03' 50" Nest. 305.71 feet to a now or formerly of William Charles Hees. point and CONTINUING THENCE along said land of William Charles Hees, North 22° 27-' 50" West. 925 feet to a tie-line along the approximate high-water mark of the Long Island Sound. CONTINUING THENCE along said tie-line of the Long Island North 69" 43' 18" East. 651.62 feet to a point and other now or formerly of' Joseph A. Wanat. Sound.- land CONTINUING THENCE along said other land of' Joseph A. Wanat. South 22" 31' 10" East. 770.38 feet. RUNNING THENCE partially along said other land of Joseph A. Nanat. and land now or formerly of Doris K. Brown and land now or formerly of Patri-ck Carrie and' Mark S. McDonald, North 84" 10' 30" East, 574.20 feet to a point and land now or formerly Of Joseph T. Macari and Louis F. Simeone. t~ence South 22" 31' 10" East, 2.228.31 feet. CONTINUING THENCE along said land of' Joseph T. Macari and Louis F. Simeone, South 65~ 45' 50" West, 139.16 feet. THENCE South 18° 03' 10# East. 522.42 feet. CONTINUING THENCE along said land of' Joseph T. Macari and Louis F. Simeone. South 20° 10' 10# East. 475.61 feet to the north side of Bergen Avenue and the point or place of BEGINNING. 0080U/1-2 LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE OF AMENDMENT TO TOWN CODE AMENDMENT NO. 129 dill I T IOBB SOUTHOLD PLANNING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that at a meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, held on the 11th day of April, 1989, the Town Board enacted the following amendment to the Town Code, entitled, "Code of the Town of Southold", together with the Zoning Map forming a part thereof, as follows, to wit: Amendment No. 129 amends the Code of the Town of Southold by changing from "A-C" Agricultural Conservation District to "R-40" Low Density Residential District (one acre minimum) the property of Richard T. Carr and Joseph A. Wanat, situated at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, and State of New York, bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a point which connects the northerly side of Bergen Avenue with the westerly side of land now or formerly of Joseph T. Macari and Louis F. Simeone and from said point of beginning: RUNNING THENCE along the northerly side of Bergen Avenue, South 67 degrees 10 minutes 40 seconds West, 685.93 feet to an angle point in Bergen Avenue, CONTINUING THENCE along the westerly side of Bergen Avenue, on a course bearing South 20 degrees 49 minutes 50 seconds East, 61.62 feet, CONTINUING THENCE along land now or formerly of William and Tompkins D. Entemann: (1) South 59 degrees 49 minutes 30 seconds West, 200 feet; (2) North 20 degrees 42 minutes 30 seconds West, 49.99 feet; (3} South 56 degrees 13 minutes 50 seconds West, 258.98 feet; (4) North 21 degrees 50 minutes 20 seconds West, 429.4S feet; (5) North 22 degrees 29 minutes 50 seconds West, 819.71 feet; (6) North 21 degrees 14 minutes 40 seconds West, 643.02 feet; (7) North 22 degrees 11 minutes 50 seconds West, 392.02 feet to a point and land now or formerly of John and Rose Koroleski, CONTINUING THENCE along said land of John and Rose Koroleski: (I) North 71 degrees 23 minutes 10 seconds East, 95.00 feet; (2) North 21 degrees 17 minutes 50 seconds West, 773.70 feet; (3) North 22 degrees 03 minutes 50 seconds West, 305.71 feet to a point and land now o~ formerly of William Charles Hees; CONTINUING THENCE along said land of William Charles Hees, North 22 degrees 27 minutes 50 seconds West, 925 feet to a tie-line along the approximate high-water mark of the Long Island Sound; CONTINUING THENCE along said tie-line of the Long Island Sound, North 69 degrees 43 minutes 18 seconds East, 651.62 feet to a point and other land now or formerly of Joseph A. Wanat; CONTINUING THENCE along said other land of Joseph A. Wanat, South 22 degrees 31 minutes 10 seconds East, 770.38 feet; RUNNING Page 2 - ~rr/Wanat ~I'~tCE partially along said other land of Joseph A. Wanat, and land now or formerly of Doris K. Brown and land now or formerly of Patrick Carrig and Mark S. McDonald, North 84 degrees 10 minutes 30 seconds East, 574.20 feet to a point and land now or formerly of Joseph T. Macari and Louis F. Simeone, thence South 22 degrees 31 minutes 10 seconds East, 2,228.31 feet; CONTINUING THENCE along said land of Joseph T. Macari and Louis F. Simeone, South 65 degrees 45 minutes 50 seconds West, 139.16 feet; THENCE South 18 degrees 03 minutes 10 seconds East, 522.42 feet; CONTINUING THENCE along said land of Joseph T. Macari and Louis F. Simeone, South 20 degrees 10 minutes 10seconds East, 475.61 feet to the north side of Bergen Avenue and the point or place of BEGINNING. Containing within said bounds an area of 197.6243 acres. DATED: April 11, 1989. JUDITH T. TERRY SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK PLEASE PUBLISH ONCE, APRIL 20, 1989, AND FORWARD ONE (I) AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO JUDITH T. TERRY, TOWN CLERK, TOWN HALL, MAIN ROAD, SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971. Copies to the following: The Suffolk Times The Long Island Traveler-Watchman Town Board Members John J. Hart, Esq. a/c Carr/Wanat Parish & Weiner, Inc. (Zoning Map) Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Building Department Town Clerk's Bulletin Board VALERIE SCOPAZ TOWN PLANNER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1938 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Francis J. Murphy, Supervisor Members of the Town Board Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman, Planning Board Members of the Planning Board James A. Schondebare, Town Attorney Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner April 7, 1989 Proposed Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions for the Norris Estate and Carr/Wanat subdivision proposals. I have just reviewed John J. Hart's letter to the Town Board regarding a proposed Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions for the Norris Estate and Carr/Wanat subdivisions. There are some items that should be taken into consideration when reviewing this proposed Declaration. In paragraph one of page one, the last two lines refer to; "a permitted density of 132 residential units; with 108 units being proposed." The 132 unit figure is not the permitted density. Rather, it refers to the number of units that were shown on the first site plan that was submitted with the application in 1985. The portion of the Norris property that is the subject of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement and this proposed Declaration incorporates a total of 28.147 acres. Twenty eight acres multiplied by four (as in four units to the acre where public water and sewer are provided) equals 112 units, not 132 units. Thus, the theoretical yield of the Norris property at the quarter acre density is 112 units. However, no subdivision proposal ever attains the theoretical yield because land must be excluded for roads, drainage and recreational purposes. The site plan that was eventually accepted as the "official" site plan for purposes of the environmental review showed a yield of 95 dwelling units. (It should be noted that the property area at that time was 27.01 acres, not the current area of 28.147 acres.) The "official" status of the 95 unit plan was buttressed by two letters from the firm of Pelletreau & Pelletreau dated January 27, 1986 and March 25, 1986, respectively. Copies of same are enclosed herein as Appendix A. Now, the site plan that was submitted with the Draft Environmental Impact Statement showed 108 units for the purposes of the environmental review. It does not necessarily follow that the Planning Board's acceptance of the 108 unit plan for the purposes of the environmental review automatically conferred acceptance of 108 units for site plan purposes. It may be that subsequent site plan review will reaffirm the Planning Board's previous determination on the 95 unit plan. In paragraph two of page one, reference is made to a yield reduction on the Carr/Wanat property from the theoretical one acre yield of 107 lots to 88 lots. However, the covenant fails to mention the acreage of the Carr/Wanat property upon which the 88 lots would be placed. This point should be clarified because the property deed for Carr/Wanat that is referenced in Exhibit B of the proposed Declaration indicates that "the Homestead premises of Joseph Wanat consisting of a house and out-buildings and ten (10) acres more or less, situate on the southwest corner of the premises as shown on the Subdivision Sketch Plan prepared for Richard T. Carr dated September 8, 1987 and prepared by Howard Young, Surveyor" are to be excluded from the whole. (A copy of this sketch plan is available in the Planning Board files.) It would seem from this deed that the acreage to be developed (with either the 107 19ts or the 88 lots) is not 107 acres in area, but, rather, about 97 acres in area. This item should be clarified~ because, if it is the case, then the remaining 10 acres that is the Wanat homestead and that is part of the change of zone application, will not necessarily be subject to the proposed Declaration. If it is not subject to the proposed Declaration, but is included in the zone change, can the Wanat homestead be further subdivided at the one-acre density in the future? RECOMMENDATIONS The proposed Declaration should be rewritten to eliminate points of confusion and conflict with the record, as noted above. Further, it would be prudent to ask that the ultimate zoning and disposition of the Wanat homestead be clarified. In other words, is it covered by the Declaration or not? Supporting documentation and maps are available in the Planning Board files for your review. If there should be any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. PELLETREAU & PELLETREAU ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS At LAW 20 CHURCH STREET - BOX IlO PATCHOGUE. NEW YORK 11772 TEl. 516 475-5656 January 27. 1986 Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Planning Board Town of Southold Southold Town Hall Main Street Southold, New York 11971 Chairman Approval of Site Plan for Premises Zoned M-Multiple at: New Suffolk Avenue and Camp Mineola Road, Mattituck, NY Dear Chairman Orlowski: Mr. Raynor and I appreciate having had the opportunity of meeting with the Board to discuss the proposal for the development of the 27 acres under contract to Richard Carr New Suffolk Avenue and Camp Mineola Road in Mattituck. at As you know, the preliminary site plan which we discussed with the Board included 95 units clustered in groups of 4 and 15 lots which were to be devoted to "affordable" housing. As a result of discussions had concerning this proposal following our meeting, a suggestion was made that the developer make a voluntary contribution of $150,000.00 to the Town, to be used by the Town, for the development of affordable housing within the Town. This is a fresh, new approach to a very important problem, not only for the Town of Southold. but for all of Suffolk County. It could set a precedent and serve as a model for other municipalities in ~uffolk County, the state and the nation. The offer of $150,000.00, in cash, is conditioned, of course, upon the approval by the Town of the 95 units on the 27 acres presently zoned multiple residential use. PELLETrEAU & PELLETrEau Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr.. Page 2 January 27, 1986 Chairman As we indicated, preliminary studies made by the H 2 M Engineering organization indicate that there is ample good water available to the site which would service not only the 95 dwelling units proposed, but would also serve as a source of good water for properties to the south and to the west of the premises. We feel that the Town is to be congratulated upon its imaginative approach to a very real problem, that is, providing affordable housing to those of its residents who want to continue to live in $outhold. but who cannot afford present housing prices. There is also a real opportunity here to help those residents to the south and west of the premises who now, or in the future, will need a source of potable water. We thank you for the opportunity of discussing this pro~ect with you and look forward to its successful completion. Very t, ruly yours, P~TREAU & PELLETREAU JJH: ma cc: Members of Planning Board Kenneth Edwards Richard Latham William Mullens. Jr. Frank Murphy, Supervisor Town of Southold Richard Ward Richard Carr Henry Raynor 0001C/16-17 PELLETREAU ~ PELLETREAU AttORnEYS AND COUNSELLORS At LAW 20 CHURCH STREET - BOX IIO PATCHOOUE. NEW YORK l[772 TEL. 516 475-565~ ROBERT HPELLETREAU OF COUNSEL March 25, 1986 Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman Planning Board Town of Southold Town Hall Southold, NY 11971 Re: Site Plan Submission of Richard T. Carr Dear Mr. Orlowski: We are the attorneys for Richard T. Carr who is the owner of a large parcel of property located in Mattituck, New York. Within the last two months, a site plan was submitted before the Planning Board of the Town of Southold in regard to this property which calls for the construction of 95 dwelling units. This site plan which calls for the construction of 95 dwelling units is the only plan which our client, Richard Carr, has submitted and no other site plan should be considered by the Planning Board. Should you have any questions, please feel free to call upon me or my partner, John J. Hart. BLH:gm Very truly yours, PELL.~~ETREAU Ben~jmin L. DOUGLAS J IEROSE BRIAN M¢CAFFREY JAMES G HYLAND · ALSO ADMITTED IN FLORIDA March 17, 1989 PELLETREAU & PELLETREAU ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORE~T LAW ROBERT S RELL£TREAU RD A SCHOENfELD PAtCHOGUE. NEW YORK Ii 7 Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Attn: Hon. Francis J. Murphy and Town Board Members RE: CARR/WANAT CHANGE OF ZONE Dear Supervisor Murphy and Town Board Members: We have had the opportunity to examine the petition submitted by the opponents to the property rezoning of the Wanat property. We would point out the obvious and. that is, the petition speaks of one hundred seven (107) units on 107 acres when there are, in fact, eighty-eight (88) proposed. The pressures of expansion would foreclose the possibility of keeping the Wanat property as farmland. Again, we thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, JFH:hmm cc: See attached rider. 1U/63 PELLETREAU & PELLETREAU March 17, 1989 Rider Hon. Bennett Orlowskio Jr. Hon. Raymond W. Edwards Hon. Jean W. Cochran Hon. Ruth Oliva Hon George L. Penny IV Hon. Ellen Larsen James Schondebare, Esg, Town Attorney Richard Ward, member of the Planning Board Richard Latham, member of the Planning Board William Mullen, member of the Planning Board Kenneth Edwards, member of the Planning Board David Emilita Judith Terry, Town Clerk Richard Cart Jean Celender Henry Raynor Holzmacher, McLendon & Murrell Att: Sam McLendon Dravo Van Houten. Inc Att: Clem Cameron Niego Associates Att: Sol Niego Dunn Engineering, P.C. Att: Walter Dunn B. Laing Associates Att: Michael Bont~e Saland Real Estate Att: David Saland Young & Young Att: Howard Young Yalerie $copaz. Town Planner 1U/64 PETER V SNYDER JOHN J ROE. IH March 15, 1989 Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, New York PELLETREAU & PELLETREAU ATTORNEYSANDCOUNSELLORSATLAW CHURCH STREET-BOX I10 PATCHOGUE, NEW YOR½1177~ TEL. 516 447-8900 44?-8906 OF COUNSEL 11971 Attn: Hon. Francis J. Murphy and Town Board Members RE: CARR/WANAT Change of Zone Dear Supervisor Murphy and Town Board Members: We appreciate the opportunity given to present the petition for the Change of Zone on March 14, 1989. The information now before the board is complete and the documents submitted address all the environmental questions raised. We regret that we did not have an opportunity to rebut some of the allegations made at the meeting, but we are sure that the answers to the questions posed are self-evident. First, it must be noted that the Master Plan adopted in the Town calls for Hamlet Density on the Norris property. The proposal for eighty-eight (88) units on 107 acres at Wanat is not inconsistent with the development shown on the enclosed tax map. Mr. Cart, who is, as you know, a part-time resident of Matt[tuck. despite the attempt to label him "an outsider", would hope that the Board would be able to render its decision at its next meeting on March 28, 1989. Thank you. Ve£y truly yours. JFH:hmm cc: See attached Encl. 1U/56 rider. Rider March 15. 1989 Hon. Bennett Orlowski. Jr. Hon. Raymond W. Edwards Hon. Jean W. Cochran Hon. Ruth oliva Hon George L. Penny IV Hon. Ellen Larsen James Schondebare, Esq. Town Attorney Richard Ward, member of' the Planning Board Richard Latham. member of the Planning Board William Mullen. member of the Planning Board Kenneth Edwards. member of the Planning Board David Emilita Judith Terry. Town Clerk Richard Cart Jean Celender Henry Raynor Holzmacher, McLendon & Murrell Att: Sam McLendon Dravo Van Houten. Inc Att: Clem Cameron Niego Associates Att: Sol Niego Dunn Engineering. P.C. Att: Walter Dunn B. Laing Associates Att: Michael Bontje Saland Real Estate Att: David Saland Young & Young Att: Howard Young Valerie Scopaz. Town Planner IU/57 $0O~O '!~?--~-~ I © COUNTY OF SUFFOLK I ,tl ,.~ ~.-.~-.,~ ~eal Property Tax Serv.ce RECEIVED FEB 6 lg8g Soulhold Tow,, ~ DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING COUNTY OF SUFFOLK PATRICK G. HAl-PIN SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE COPY FOR YOUll ..... 7 1989 February 2, 1989 Ms. Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk Town of Southold 53095 Main Road - P. O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 ?C~-/~/ Re: Application of "Richard T. Cart and Joseph A. Wanat" (~279) for a change of zone from "A" Agriculatural and Residential to "M" Light Multiple Residence, Town of Southold (SD-89-3). Dear Ms. Terry: Pursuant to the requirements of Sections A14-14 to 23 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, the Suffolk County Planning Commission on February 1, 1989, reviewed the above captioned application and after due study and deliberation Resolved to disapprove it because of the following reasons: It is inconsistent with the single family residence pattern of zoning in the surrounding area; It would alter the character of the area and tend to establish a precedent for further rezonings in the locale; It is inconsistent with the Town Land Use Plan which primarily designates this area for Agricultural/Conservation purposes including single family residences on two (2) acre lots; It would tend to impair the integrity and continuity of surrounding agricultural lands, portions of which are in the Farmland preservation program; There are no provisions in the zoning ordinance authorizing a defacto transfer of development rights; It would tend to establish an undesirable precedent for the continuance of such dwelling unit yield transfers without established criteria or standards; Applicant is seeking to transfer unconfirmed residential development rights; and, "Richard T. Cart and Joseph A. Wanat" SD-89-3 8. Premises can be reasonably developed in accordance with existing zonin~ requirements. GGN:mb Very truly yours, Arthur H. Kunz Acting Director of P ning (,__Gerald G. Newman Chief Planner ~UDITH T. TERRY TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 FAX (516) 765-1823 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD AT A REGULAR MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 10, 1989: Resolution No. 27b: RESOLVED that pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law~ State Environmental Quality Review, and 6NYCRR Part 617, Section 617.10, and Chapter 44 of the Code of the Town of Southold, notice is hereby given that the Southold Town Board, as lead agency for the action described below, has determined that the project, which is a Type I action, will not have a significant effect on the environment. Description of Action: Petition of Carr/Wanat for a change of zone from "A" Residential and Agricultural District to "M" Light Multiple Residence District on certain property located on the northerly side of Bergen Avenue, Mattituck, New York. The project has been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment based upon mitigation measures identifed in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. January 11, 1989 JUDITH T. TERRY TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 FAX (516) 765-1823 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD AT A REGULAR MEETING HELD ON JANUARY 10, 1989: Resolution No. 27a: RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby rescinds their Resolution No. 20, adopted on December 27, 1988 with respect to a negative declaration concerning the petition of Carr/Wanat for a change of zone · January 11, 1989 JUDITH T. TERRY TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town HaH, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 FAX (516) 765-1823 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD AT A REGULAR MEETING HELD ON DECEMBER 27, 1988: Resolution No. 20: RESOLVED that pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, State Environmental Quality Review, and 6NYCRR Part 617, Section 617.10, and Chapter 44 of the Code of the Town of Southold, notice is hereby given that the Southold Town Board, as lead agency for the action described below, has determined that the project, which is a Type I action, will not have a significant effect on the environment. Description of Action: Petition of Carr/Wanat for a change of zone from "A" Residential and Agricultural District to "M" Light Multiple Residence District on certain property located on the northerly side of Bergen Avenue, Mattituck, New York. The project has been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment because a draft environmental impact statement has been submitted which indicated that no significant adverse effect to the environment is likely to occur should the project be implemented as planned. January 3, 1989 This resolution was rescinded by Resolution No. 27a on January 10, 1989. A new resolution was adopted - Resolution No. 27b on January 10, 1989. Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD January 10, 1989 Judith Terry Town Clerk Southold, NY 11971 RE: Carr/Wanat Change of Zone SCTM ~1000-112-1-16 Dear Mrs. Terry: The following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning Board on Monday, January 9, 1989. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Rlanning Board recommend to the Town Board that the Change of Zone be denied. The Change of Zone is not in kee~ing with the proposed Master Plan that the Planning Board adopted with regard to density in the Bergen Avenue area. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. cc: John Hart Henry Raynor jt Very/~uly yours, ,' , CHAI~ ~,~ JAMES A. SCHONDEBARE TOWN ATI'ORNEY ROBERT H. BERNTSSON ASSISTANT TOWN A~rORNEY OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD November 28. 1988 Pelletreau & Pelletreau 20 Church Street. Box 110 Patchogue. New York 11772 Attention: John J. Hart, Esq. Ref: DEIS, Norris and Carr/Wanat Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1939 Dear Mr. Hart: I have reviewed the minutes of the public hearing together with your letters of November 17. 1988, to the Town Clerk, Town Planner and Planning Board. I must disagree with your opinion that the additional thirty day public comment period is limited to the Office of Coastal Zoning Management. A reading of the minutes indicate to me that the additional thirty days for comments is open to the public. Very truly yours, JAS:rbw cc: Town Board Planning Board James A. Schondebare Town Attorney P.~OJ Drawer A Jamesport, NY 11947 November 21, 1988 Ms. Yalerie Scopaz Southold Town Planner Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Dear Ms. Scopaz: RE: Wanat site plan In my discussion today with you and Melissa Spiro of you~ ffice, it is my understanding at this time there is no opinion for any suggested further redesign of this sketch plan presently under consideration by the Town Board for a change of zone. If at the work session board members feel we should go forward in the area of redesign, we would be more than happy to meet with time at any time. Thank you for the information pertaining to this matter. ~incerely, .~ HenryUE. Raw, nor, Jr. HER:ml cc: Richard Cart John J. Hart, Esq. J.A.C. Planning Corp. Sol Niego Young & Young Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 $outhold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOAI~D OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD November 15, 1988 John J. Hart Pelletreau & Pelletreau P.O. Box 110 Patchogue, NY 11772 RE: Norris/Carr/Wanat DEIS SCTM 91000-122-5-4 SCTM 91000-112-1-16 Dear Mr. Hart: The following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning Board on Monday, November 14, 1988. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board extend the comment period thirty days from November 19, 1988 to December 19, 1988. It is understood that there is an agreement with yourself and Joseph J. Onufrak, Attorney for Cando Committee, that, if the change of zone does not take place, another public hearing will be scheduled in regards to the Norris site. The public hearing on the DEIS of the above noted proposal was opened and closed at the meeting of Monday, November 14, 1988. . If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Very ?t~ ~ ~t~. y yours, BENNETT ORLOWSKI , JR. CHAIRMAN ~ cc: Town Board David Emilita Mike Corey, NYS Coastal Management Program jt SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES INC. ENVIRONK4ENTAL CONSULTANTS & PLANNERS July 28, 1988 John J. Hart, Esq. Pelletreau and Pelletreau Attorneys at Law 2g Church Street - ~ox 110 Patchogue, NY 11772 RE: Carr/Wanat/Norris Change of zone Dear Mr. Hart: Your letter dated July 15 referred to a memo from me dated June 24 relative to the above captioned change of zone application. For your information, the memo dated June 24 referred to the Marina Bay Club DEIS and supplements 1 and 2 and not the Carr/Wanat/Norris DEIS. Please review your files on these two projects. The Carr/Wanat/Norris preliminary DEIS is far from being complete. A memo to the Town is forthcoming on this matter. Thank you for your attention. Sincerely, ~B~ZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES INC. David J.S.~milita, AICP Principal Planner DJSE:dms CC: Francis J. Murphy, Supervisor Jean Cochran, Councilwoman Ellen Larsen, Councilwoman Ruth Oliva, Councilwoman George Penny, IV, Councilman Raymond Edwards, Councilman Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk Jay schondebare, Town Attorney ~alnett Orlowski, Planning Board Chairman erie Scopaz, Town Planner 23 Narra§ansett Ave. Jamestown, RI 02835 (401) 423-0430 SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES INC. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS & PLANNERS S/II MEMORANDUM SOUTHOLO TOWN PLANNING 80~R0 TO: Southold fown Planning Board FROM: David J.S. Emilita, Szepatowski Associates, Inc. RE: Preliminary Draft EIS - Norris Estate Development DATE: 22 July 1988 To facilitate the commencement of review of the above mentioned development, the preparer, JAC Planning Corporation, has submitted copies of a preliminary draft EIS. We have completed a review of the preliminary draft and find this to be a good way to begin a complicated project. Quite naturally, it being a preliminary draft, pieces of information are incomplete and as yet unavailable. The purpose of this memo is to inform you and the applicant of the major informational needs in order to complete an acceptable draft, and to point out areas of contention that may need to be revised for a draft to become acceptable. Our comments are keyed to the page numbers in the preliminary draft. Sections obviously missing or incomplete will not be noted here. Page 2.12 There are other approvals required (NYSDEC - LI Well Permit, Wetlands Permits, NYSDOS CZM Consistency Review) and the Suffolk County Planning Commission would also review the zone change. Page 3.58 CPWS-24 has been superseded by the Suffolk County Water Resources Management Plan and the North Fork Comprehensive Water Supply Plan, and should not be utilized as a primary information source. The concept of water budget area and permissive sustained yield must be updated with today's data. The North Fork Water Supply Study shows that most of the Norris site is outside of the water budget area. The text needs to be modified and detailed to include the two more recent reports. Pages 3.7 and 3.11 Allusions to other data are made without specific citations or copies of the other data. (e.g. "other research", second paragraph on p. 3.7 references to well logs, random samples of wells, etc.) Conclusions are drawn without showing the data. 23 Narragansett Ave. Jamestown, RI 02835 (401) 423-0430 Pages 3.12 and 3.13 The discussion does not correlate with the tabular data. The easterly well appears to have the worst water quality. The central well testing is incomplete. What are "aesthetic reasons"? What are "...a limited number of analysis from other studies in the area..."? A much more rigorous discussion of groundwater quality impacts is necessary. The discussion on pages 3.8 through 3.13 is totally unconvincing that there is sufficient water quantity of a quality that would cause no significant adverse impacts on groundwater in surrounding areas. Page 3.22 The discussion of the comprehensive plan should be brought up to date. The Southold Planning Board adopted an updated Master Plan in December of 1985 and amended it in August of 1987. The Zoning Ordinance Amendments have been and continue to be identified as the "Master Plan". This is a misnomer and should be corrected for the draft. Page 3.29 The discussion on water supply needs to be more detailed and maps of the salinity problem areas and Health Department waivers need to be shown. Page 4.2 The discussion on groundwater impacts needs to be rewritten entirely. The one paragraph conclusion presented can not be drawn from the earlier text statements. There needs to be a discussion on the groundwater quality recharged in the zones of concentration of all proposed well sites to begin to determine the long term viability of the wells. Page 4.7 The communication with the Mattituck Fire District needs to be shown. Page 4.8 Why was 79 gpd selected? 199 to 119 is a normal planning figure. The location of the proposed well and distribution system needs to be shown. Page 4.19 Where is the recharge for the treatment plant? Where is it in relation to the well recharge zone? Pages 4.15- 4.17 Surely a more accurate depiction of the municipal cost/benefit of multi-family developments can be found than a quote from the 1967 Comprehensive Plan. The impact on the school, fire, police systems should be detailed and verified with the local authorities. Page 5.8 The Heather Hills site plan has no topo. It MI should have a topo interval the same as the sketch plan. SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES INC. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS & PLANNERS Page 5.41 Pages 5.38 - 5.45 Pages 5.44 and 5.45 Page 5.46 Page 5.47 Appendix B Page 4 A bath and shower are shown on the plan but are not discussed in the text. This should be rectified. The impacts need to be shown on the site plan. There is no coordination between the plan and the impacts cited nor are mitigation measures shown. The proposed water treatment plant is shown to impact on Wetlands B, C, and D yet the text states that there will be no impact. This appears to be contradictory. In terms of environmental impact, the water plant could be placed in a better location. The water analysis to justify the equipment proposed is not included in the text. Evidence as to sufficiency of the storage and distribution systems from the Mattituck Fire District needs to be shown. Reference is made to the 2' contour in 1959 which is outdated information. This should be updated with current information. SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES INC. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS & PLANNERS S/II PETER V. SNYDER JOHNJ HART JOHN J. ROE, III FREDERICL ATWOOD J TIMOTHY SHEA BRUCE T. WALLACE KEVI N A. SEAMAN VANESSA M. SHEEHAN° BENJAMINL HERZWEIG RUSSELL C BURCHERI O DOUGLAS J LEROSE DENNIS D, O'DOHERTY, JR. °ALSO ADMITTED IN FLORIDA OALSO ADMITTED IN NEW JERSEY PELLETREAU & PELLETREAU ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW 20 CHURCH STREET - BOX I10 PATCHOGUE, NEW YORK 11772 TEL 516 447-8900 FAX 5i6 475-5651 ROBERTS PELLETREAU 447-8906 July 15, 1988 Hon. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Planning Board Chariman Town of $outhold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Hon. Francis J. Murphy Supervisor, Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Hon. Jean W. Cochran P.O. Box 285 Southold. N.Y. 11971 Hon. Ruth Oliva Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Hon. Ellen Larsen Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Hon. George L. Penny, P.O. Box 57 Greenporto N.Y. 11944 IV Hon. Raymand W. Edwards P.O. Box 511 Fishers Island, N.Y. 06390 RE: Carr-Wanat Application for Change of Zone Dear Planning Board Chairman Orlowski, Members of the Town Board: We are in receipt of Board from David dated June 24, 1988. the Memorandum addr~ Emilita from Szepat We would agree with Mr. Emilita's conclu~ Paragraph 3 that the Board accept the Dr~ Impact Statement together with Supplement satisfactory, and proceed with the public PELLETREAU & PELLETrEAU July 15, 1988 Page 2 As you are aware. §617.3 of the SEQR Regulations provides that: "Agencies ehall carry out the terms and requirements of this part with minimum procedural and administrative delay, shall avoid unnecessary duplication of reporting and review requirements by providing, where feasible, for combined or consolidated proceedings, and shall expedite all SEQR proceedings in the interest of prompt review." This process of review has been going on since August 17, 1987, when the DEIS was first submitted. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Very truly yours, jTREAU & PELLETREAU JJH: cc: Richard Cart Shamrock Properties Corp. James Schondebare, Esq., Town Attorney David Emilita Yalerie $copaz, Town Planner Judith Terry, Town Clerk Team Members: Jean Celender Henry Raynor Holzmacher, McLendon & Murrell Att: Gary Loesch Dravo Van Houten, Inc. Att: Clem Cameron Niego Associates Att: $ol Niego Dunn Engineering. P.C. Att: Walter Dunn B. Laing Associates Att: Michael Bont~e 1U/72-73 PETER V. SNYDER JOHN J. HART JOHNJ ROE. III FREDERIC L ATWOOD J tlhlOTHY ShEa BRUCE t. WALLACE KEVINA seAt4aN VANE SSA b4. SHEEhAN' RusseLL C BURCHERIO DOUGLASJ. LEROSe DENNIS DO'OOHErTY. JR *ALSO ADMITTED IN ~LORIDA ~)ALSO ADm ITTED IN NEW JERSEY PEllETREaU & PEILETREAU ATTORNEYS ANI~ COUNSELLORS AT LAW ROSERt S PeLLETREAU 20 CHURCH STREET - BOX IlO RICHARD A SCHOENFELD PATCHOGUE, NEW YORK 11772 TEL 516 447-8900 ROBErt H, PelLETREAU FAX 516 475-565l of COUNSEL DIRECT Dial 447-8925 July ll, 1988 Hon. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Planning Board Chairman Town of 5outhold Main Road $outhold, N.Y. 11971 RE: CARR-WANAT APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONE Dear Chairman Orlowski: On the morning of July 11, 1988, Henry Raynor advised the undersigned that the application for change of zone made by Richard Cart and Joseph Wanat had been removed from the agenda of the meeting scheduled for the llth at 7:30 P.M. I then called Mr. $chondebare's office and the office of the Town Planner to confirm this. As of this time, 5:15 P.M. on July llth, I have not heard from Mr. Schondebare. At 5:00 P.M. I was advised by Ms. Seopaz that the matter had been removed from the agenda but that it might be discussed prior to the meeting and that it might be put back on the agenda. She advised me that she had no way of knowing what would be done. I would like, at this forcefuly as I can my disappointment. time, to express as clearly and as client's suprise, chagrin and Mr. Cart has acted in reliance upon an understanding conveyed to him through Mr. Raynor that the following needed to be PELLETREAU & PELLETREAU Chairman Orlowski July 11. 1988 Page 2. supplied to the Planning Board before it would make its recommendation to the Town Board regarding the zoning: that is: Yield Maps with subdivision sketch maps for both the Wanat and Norris parcels: A site plan for the Norris parcel showing the condominiums: A set of maps showing present zoning for both parcels: and, finally 4. A letter from the Health Department. This has all been supplied to you. We understood that this was a complete list of items needed for the Planning Board to make its recommendation to the Town Board. It was understood, of course, that a DEIS would be needed on both parcels before the Town Board would act on the recommendation of the Planning Board. Our client has a constitutionally protected property interest which he cannot see impaired. It is hoped that the confusion is inadvertent and that a decision will be made shortly. Thank you. Very truly yours, PELLETREAU & PELLETREAU John J. Hart JJH:hmm cc: Hon. Francis J. Murphy. Suprevisor Hon. Jean W. Cochran Hon. Ruth Oliva Hon. Raymond W. Edwards Hon. Ellen Larsen Hon. George L. Penny. IV Richard Cart Shamrock Associates PELLeTrEAU & PELLETReAU Chairman Orlowski July 11, 1988 Page 3. cc: James Schondebare, Esq., Town Attorney David Emilita Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner Judith Terry, Town Clerk Team Members: Jean Celender Henry Raynor Holzmacher, McLendon & Murrell Attn: Gary Loesch Dravo Van Houten, Inc. Attn: Clem Cameron N~ego Associates Attn: $ol Niego Dunn Engineering, P.C. Attn: Walter Dunn B. Laing Associates Attn: Michael Bont~e 2192C/1-3 PIET£ R V. SNYDSR JOHN d. HART JOHNJ ROE:, Ill FREDERIC L ATWOOD RUSSELL C. BURCHSRI 0 DOUGLAS J. LEROSE DENNIS D. O'DOHERTY, JR. · ALSO ADNIITT[O IN FLORIDA OALSO ADMITTED IN N[W J[RSEY PELLETRE^U & PELLETR£^U ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW · 0 CHURCH STREET - BOX I10 PATCHOGUE, NEW YORK 1177Z 447-8925 July ll, 1988 Hon. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Planning Board Chairman Town of Southold Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 RE: CARR-WANAT APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONE Dear Chairman Orlowski: On the morning of July 11. 1988. Henry Raynor advised the undersigned that the application for change of zone made by Richard Cart and Joseph Wanat had been removed from the agenda of the meeting scheduled for the llth at 7:30 P.M. I then called Mr. Schondebare's office and the office of the Town Planner to confirm this. As of this time. 5:15 P.M. on July llth. I have not heard from Mr. $chondebare. At 5:00 P.M. I was advised by Ms. Scopaz that the matter had been removed from the agenda but that it might be discussed prior to the meeting and that it might be put back on the agenda. She advised me that she had no way of knowing what would be done. I would like, at this time, to express as clearly and forcefuly as I can my client's suprise, chagrin and disappointment. as Mr. Cart has acted in reliance upon an understanding conveyed to him through Mr. Raynor that the following needed to be PELLETREAU & PELLETREAU Chairman Orlowaki July 11, 1988 Page 2. supplied to the Planning Board before it would make its recommendation to the Town Board regarding the zoning: that is: Yield Maps with subdivision sketch maps for both the Wanat and Norris parcels: A site plan for the Norris parcel showing the condominiums: A set of maps showing present zoning for both parcels: and, finally 4. A letter from the Health Department. This has all been supplied to you. We understood that this was a complete list of items needed for the Planning Board to make its recommendation to the Town Board. It was understood, of course, that a DEI$ would be needed on both parcels before the Town Board would act on the recommendation of the Planning Board. Our client has a constitutionally protected property interest which he cannot see impaired. It is hoped that the confusion is inadvertent and that a decision will be made shortly. Thank you. Very truly yours, John J. Hart JJH:hmm cc: Hon. Francis J. Murphy. Suprevisor Hon, Jean W. Cochran Hon. Ruth Oliva Hon. Raymond W. Edwards Hon. Ellen Lateen Hon. George L. Penny, IV Richard Cart Shamrock Associates PELLETREAU & PELLETREAU Chairman Orlowski July 11. 1988 Page 3. cc: James Schondebare. Esg.. Town Attorney David Emilita Valerie Scopaz. Town Planner Judith Terry. Town Clerk Team Members: Jean Celender Henry Raynor Holzmacher. McLendon & Murrell Attn: Gary Loesch Dravo Van Houten. Inc. Attn: Clem Cameron Niego Associates Attn: Sol Niego Dunn Engineering. P.C. Attn: Walter Dunn B. Laing Associates Attn: Michael Bont~e 2192C/1-3 COUNTY OF SUFFOLK PATRICK G. HALPIN SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Planning Board Town of Southold 53095 Main Rd. P.O. Box 11971 Southold, NY 11971 June 29, 1988 _JL/L o 1988 DAVID HARRIS, M.D., M.P.H. COMMISSIONER re: Norris Estates/Carr Wanat Dear Mr. Orlowski, I am in receipt of your letter dated June 21, 1988 in which your request comments on development proposals for the above properties. I would first like to clear up an apparent misunderstanding. This office did not refuse to make a reco~endation based on a DEIS in our possession. This office has not received a DEIS for either project. A request was made by the applicant to have the department make (unsolicited) recommendations to the Town based upon an engineering report which discusses alternatives not presently before the department. This office does not prepare these types of reports on behalf of developers. The applicant was informed, however that a report discussing all alternatives would be be made within the framework of the SEQRA process, i.e. review of a DEIS which would be much more comprehensive than the engineering report submitted. Based upon the information at hand I can offer the following comments. The Department has applications pending for twenty four residential parcels for Norris Estates and ninety four residential parcels for the Carr subdivision. Review is in progress. A determination as to requirement to connect to public water has not yet been completed. Both proposals appear to be in conformance with the provisions of Article 6 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code allowing for individual disposal systems. This information was included in a letter to the town dated December 23, 1987. Increases in population density beyond this range would be a function of the availability of public water supply and submittal of yield maps indicating the ability to meet minimum lot sizes (20,000 sq. ft. with public water for the area under discussion) for installation of individual disposal systems. If a proposal cannot meet the density restrictions for individual disposal systems then Article 6 requires a community Letter to Bennett Orlowski June 29, 1988 p.2 sewerage system method of sewage disposal and public water. This condition would apply for the placement of 108 condominium units on the Norris property (parcel A in the engineering report). Actual approval of this concept, however, would depend upon approval in concept by the Suffolk County Sewer Agency and the ability to physically design a sewage treatment system on the property in compliance with County and State design standards. Approval of a map showing an increase in density on the Carr/Wanat property from 94 lots to 107 lots with individual disposal systems would depend upon the applicant submitting a proper yield map indicating that 107 40,000 sq. ft. lots could be placed on the site without intruding on wetlands, recharge basins, 50' roadways, etc. If public water is provided or required, the applicant need only show 20,000 sq. ft. lots. All of this could be modified, however, if the DEIS expresses other negative environmental impacts which require mitigation. I hope this letter gives you the information you require to consider the alternatives presented. This office and the Office of Ecology will further review the DEIS when received. Very Truly Yours, Step~en A. Chief Bureau of Wastewater Management cc: Robert A. Villa, Vito Minei, P.E. Dave Emilita P.E. PETER V. SNYDER JOHN J. HART RU$S£LLC.~URCHERID OOUGLASJ LE~OSE DENNIS D O'DOH£RTY, JR. *ALSO ADMITTED IN FLORIDA OALSO ADMITTED IN NEW JERSEY PELLETREAU & PELLETREAU ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW 20 CHURCH STREET - BOX I10 PATCHOGUE. NEW YORK tl772 TEL 516447-890o FAX 5i6 475-565~ '-8925 SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD August 9. 1988 Town Board Town of $outhold 53095 Main Road Southold, New York Gentlemen: 11971 Enclosed herewith please Wanat property. We would appreciate your Thank you. Very truly'yours. PEI~LETREAUi ' ~ · & PELL, ETREAU JoWad fl. JJH:ma Enc. cc: Town Board Members find in two volumes the DEIS prompt consideration of this. for the 0002C/46 August 9, 1988 ceE: Hon. Francis J. Murphy. Supervisor Hon Jean W. cochran Hon. Raymond W. Edwards Hon. Ruth Oliva Hon. Ellen Larsen Hon. George L. Penny IV James Schondebare, Esq, Town Attorney Hon Bennett Orlowski. Jr. Richard Ward. Member of the Planning Board Richard Latham. member of the Planning Board William Mullen. member of the Planning Board Kenneth Edwards. member of th~ Planning Board David Emilita Judith Terry, Town Clerk Valerie Scopaz Richard Cart Jean Celender Hetty Raynor Holzmacher. McLendon & Murrell Att: Sam McLendon Dravo Van Houten. Inc. Att: Clem Cameron Niego Associates Att: Sol Niego Dunn Engineering. P.C. Att: Walter Dunn B. Laing Associates Att: Michael Bont~e 1U/42 Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM TO: Supervisor Frank Murphy Town Clerk Town Board Town Attorney FROM: Planning Board Office %~ RE: Preliminary Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Norris Estates (and the Carr-Wanat Change of DATE: August 12, 1988 Zone) Enclosed please find a copy of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Norris Estates Subdivision. This document has just been received for review by the Planning Board and the Town Board to determinine whether it should be accepted as Complete. Comments as to the completeness of this document must be received within thirty days of the date of this memorandum. cc: David Emilita, Szepatowski Associates P. O. Drawer A Jamesport, NY June 24, 1988 11947 William Mullen, Jr., Member Southold Town Planning Board Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Dear Mr. Mullen: Please find e~closed a copy of memos from Pelletrsau & Pelletreau with regard to the Norris Estates and Wanant properties. HER:ml Enc. CC: William Mullen, Jr. Baybe£ry Road Cutchogue, NY 11935 H~ nc erely, January 30. January 31. 1986 MEMO ON NORRIS ESTATES SUBMISSIONS 1986 Letter from John J. Hart' to Bennett Orlowskl requesting the Town of Southold to pass a resolution designating the Planning Board as Letter from John J. Hart to Bennett Orlowski asking the proposed master plan be amended to show the Norris zoning of M Light Multiple Residence. February 5. 1986 A second letter from John J. Hart to Bennett Orlowski asking the Planning Board to be lead agency. March 3. 1986 The Planning Board declares themselves lead agency with regard to SEQR on the Norris Estates. April 1. 1986 The original site plan was submitted to Bennett Orlowski by Henry Raynor. July 21. 1986 Scoping session held for Norris Estates. August 8. 1986 Letter from David Emilita to John J. Hart regarding the submission of a $2.000,00 DEIS review fee. November 6. 1986 Richard T. Cart. John J. Hart and Henry Raynor appear at the Town Board meeting. Novembgr 12. 1986 Henry Raynor sent a letter to Bennett Orlowski regarding the Suffolk County Department of Health Services preliminary evaluation and approva~ of Norris Estates. November 15. 1986 Henry Raynor sent a letter to Bennett Orlowski with the recommendations from the Mattituck Fire District. December 16. 1986 A letter was sent from Bennett Orlowski to Henry Raynor stating the Planning Board is no,in a position to schedule a pre-submission conference until SEQR has been completed. January 7. 1987 John J. Hart sent a letter to the Town Board regarding density and water studies on the Norris site. Memo Norris ~.states Submissions Cont'd. Page 2. :..:. ..... January 16. 1987 Letter Was sent from John J. Hart to the Town Board regarding traffic study updates. March 5, 1987 John J. Hart sent a letter to Bennett Orlowski in response to Rene Eastin's letter to the Planning Board dated February 11, 1987 regarding hydrology and geology on the Norris Estates site and surrounding area. * November 30, 1987 Bennett Orlowski reguested the water results on the Norris Estates property. * March 10, 1988 The water results were sent to the Town Board. April 5, 1988 John J. Hart wrote a letter to the Town Board regarding the parallel applications both the Norris Estates property and the Wanat change of zone. * April 11, 1988 Bennett Orlowski sent a letter to John J. Hart regarding the Town's lead agency status. * April 18, 1988 David Emilita sent a letter to John J. Hart regarding lead agency status, the DEIS and "as of right" development of the Norris Estates property. * April 21, 1988 John J. Hart sent a reply letter to David Emilita regarding lead agency status. DEI$ and "as of right" development. April 26, 1988 John J. Hart sent a letter to David Emilita regarding the number of units referred to in the EIS (132 to 108). * May 16, 1988 David Emilita sent a second letter to John J. Hart regarding "as of right" development. * May 24, 1988 John J. Hart sent a second letter to David Emilita regarding "as of right" development property. .... Page 3. ' Memo Norris Estates Submissions Cont'd. '~ ......... ...... John J. Hart sent a. letter to Orlowski requesting that the lead agency be the proper authority to ask the Suffolk County Department of Health Services to make recommendation. a ,dune 8. 1988 3ohn 3. Hart sent a letter to Bennett O~lo~ski geguesting a recommendation on the change of ~one on tho Hanag parcel. June 8, 1988 Bennett Orlowski sent a letter to David Emilita with a copy of the resolution passed by the Town Board on June ~o ~988 stating that the DEIS would be sent to Mr. Emilita for his review. * Copies of these pieces of correspondence are also to be found in the Memo regarding the Wanat parcel. 0137U/2-4 October 22. 1987 MEMO ON CARR/WANAT CHANGE OF ZONE APPLiCATiON.~...~<. ~ii~ Change of Zone application was submltted to the Town of Southold. Included in package were 3 oopies of the E~vironmental Assessment form~ Part I. 3 copies of the .~.? ' petxtxon: 6 copxes of the survey; a check I;' ~ for $500.00 to cover the fillng fee and a check for $180.00 to cover David Emilita,s review of the EAF. November 30. 1987 Bennett Orlowski stated that the Planning Board woula not comment on the change of zone because it neeaed the information regarding the water on the Norris Estates property from the Suffolk County Department of Health Services. December 10, 1987 A letter from Henry Raynor to Judith Terry, Town Clerk, asking for a letter from the Town Board directed to the Suffolk County Department of Health Services since the Suffolk County Department of Health Services would not respond to an applicant's request for information. The Town was to pass a resolution to execute a letter to the Suffolk County Department of Health Services requesting information pertaining to lot density and water supply regarding both the Norris Estates and the Wanat parcels. December 18, 1987 December 23, 1987 A letter was sent from Supervisor Murphy to Roy Reynolds at the Suffolk County Department of Health Services requesting the above. A letter was sent from Roy Reynolds at the Suffolk County Department of Health Services to Supervisor Murphy regarding the applications on both Norris Estates and Wanat. January 22, 1988 A letter was sent from John J. Hart to Supervisor Murphy reguesting the Change of Zone application be entertained prior to the Suffolk County Department of Health Services' determination of water supply on the Norris~tates property. February 8. 1988 A letter from.Walter Hazlitt regarding the Captain Kidd Water Company's inability to supply water to the Wanat parcel was Memo Carr/Wanat Change Page 2. February 26. 1988 March 8, 1988 * March 10. 1988 * April 5. 1988 * April S, 1988 * April 11. 1988 * April 18. 1988 of Zone Application Cont'd. delivered to H2M to submit to the Suffolk County Department of Health Services. A letter from Judith Terry, Town Clerk. along with a resolution of the Town Board was sent to John J. Hart stating that the change of zone is a type 1 action for SEQR and a positive declaration of the Wanat parcel was declared. The applicant was requested to prepare a DEIS on the Wanar parcel. A letter from John J. Hart to the Town Board guoted David Emilita as saying that the Wanat parcel would be listed as an alternative project on the Norris Estates DEIS. No separate DEIS would be necessary for the Wanat parcel. Test results on the water on the Norris Estates property was sent to the Town Board. There was the Wanat applicant applicant. a Town Board scoping session on parcel which was attended by the and various spokesmen for the John J. Hart submitted a memo to the Town Board delineating parallel course of approvals for both the Wanat parcel and the Norris Estates parcel. Bennett Orlowski sent a letter to John J. Hart stating that the Town Board was lead agency on Wanat: the Planning Board was lead agency on the Norris Estates property and the Wanat parcel would be listed as an alternative in the Norris Estates DEI$. David Emilita sent a letter to John J. Hart regarding N~rris Estates and Wanat and their lead agency-status: the DEIS and "as of right" development on the Norris Estates parcel. Memo Carr/Wanat Change of Zone Application Cont'd. Page 3. April 21, 1988 May 10, 1988 May 13, 1988 * May 16, 1988 * May 24. 1988 June 1, 1988 June 1, 1988 June 3, 1988 * June 8, 1988 John J. Hart sent a letter to Davi4 Emilita regarding an answer to the "as of right,, development and ElS on both the Norris Estates and Wanat parcels. Judith Terry, Town Clerk, requested a $350.00 check for David Emilita's scoping session fee. check for $350.00 was sent from Pelletreau Pelletrean to Judith Terry to cover David Emilita's fee. A second letter from David Emilita was sent to John J. Hart regarding "as of right" development on the Norris Estates parcel. A second letter from John J. Hart to David Emilita regarding "as of right" development and its legal terminology. The DEIS on the Norris Estates parcel listing the Wanat parcel as an alternative was submitted to the Town Board by JAC Planning Corp. John J. Hart sent a letter to Bennett Orlowski stating that the Suffolk County Department of Health Services will not make any recommendation based upon an applicant,s submission. The lead agency must forward the DEIS to them with a request for a recommendation. We reguested them to do so. A letter and resolution from Judith Terry. Town Clerk, regarding a $2,000.00 payment for review of the DEIS on Wanat was sent to John J. Hart. $1,650.00 was due and payable since the scoping session fee of $350.00 had already been submitted. John J. Hart sent a letter to Bennett Orlowski stating that the DEIS: site plans: yield maps and Suffolk County Department Memo Carr/Wanat -: Page 4. Change of Zone Applicatioi.Cont.d. t'-~.....,.~...~/:.%~;.z~.., of Health Services. information reg~ SEQR has already been submitted to th~ Planning Board: therefore, a request was made for the Planning Board to give its recommendation on the change of zone application. .... June 15. 1988 A check for $1.650.00 was sent to Judith "~"' ;" Terry. Town Clerk. as had been requested to cover David Emilita's review of the DgI$. * Copies of these papers have also been included in the Memo regarding the Norris Estates parcel. 0137U/5-8 Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 John j. Hart, Esq. Pelletreau & Pelletreau 20 Church Street Box 110 Patchogue, NY 11772 April 11, 1988 RE: Proposed Major subdivision of Norris Estates Mattituck SCTM ~ 1000-122-5-4 Dear Mr. Hart: The Planning Board, at its April 7th work session, was informed of the results of the scoping session held before the Town Board on April 5, 1988. The Planning Board understands that it remains the lead agency on the above named subdivision propsal. It also understands that the Town Board's the lead agency on a petition to change the Zone of the Carr-Wanat property fro~%"A" Residential and Agricultural to "M" Light Multiple Residence. Furthermore, it is understood, that when the draft Environmental Impact Statement for Norris Estates is submitted to the Planning Board for ~ts review, the "Alternatives,, section of the DEIS will contain a detailed reference to the proposed Carr-Wanat petition as one of the possible alternatives. cc: Francis j. Murphy, Supervisor Councilwoman Cochran Councilwoman Oliva Councilwoman Larsen Councilman Penny Very truly yours, BENNETT ORLOWSKI, jR./~ CHAIRMAN Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk James A. Schondebare, Town Attorney David Emilita, Szepatowski Associates Henry Raynor, Representative, Richard T. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS & PLANNERS S/II April 18, 1988 Pelletreau & Pelletreau Attorneys & Counsellors at Law 20 Church Street Box 110 -Patchogue, NY 11772 Attn: Mr. John J. Hart Re: 5 April Memorandum on Carr/Wanat Dear Mr. Hart, We are in receipt of your 5 April 88 memorandum on the above change-of-zone application. On the second page of your memorandum you request advice on whether any incorrect statements may be contained in the memorandum. I believe my recollection of the scoping session differs from the memorandum in several respects: There shall be a single draft EIS covering both sites of a two sited project. The Wanat site shall be treated either as a project alternative or as the second site of a combined Norris/Wanat project. The Town specifically does not want, and should reject, two separate EIS's. The Norris property has acquired no "as of right" development yield. The whole original purpose of an EIS was to determine what density of development could be placed on that site with no significant environmental impact on the community. There was no mention of "simultaneous" approvals on 5 April. The Planning Board will assume Lead Agency status for the project, one site or two sites, however composed (the "parallel tracks" you mentioned). The Planning Board will be responsible for compliance under SEQRA. The Town Board under Chapter 100 of the Town Code, will then approve or disapprove a change-of-zone. Only then, can the Planning Board act on a final approval for a site plan on the Wanat parcel, should the zone be changed. To repeat, the Planning Board administers SEQR for both sites, the Town Board acts on the change-of-zone, and then the Planning Board acts on the approvals for the Norris and Wanat site plans. 23 Narragansett Ave. Jamestown, RI 02835 (401) 423-0430 I believe this accurately summarizes my points of difference with your memorandum and reflects the consensus agreement on 5 April. Please advise if this conflicts with your memorandum. Sincerely, SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES, INC. David J.S. ~ita Principal PlaNner, AICP DJSE:mt cc: Judith Terry, Town Clerk James Schondebare Esq., Town Attorney Valorie $copaz, Town Planner SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES INC. ENVIRONMEN1AL CONSULTAN]S S/II April 21, 1988 PE,LLETREAU & PELLETREAU ATTORNEYS ,AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW 20 CHURCH STREET - SOX HO PATCHOGUE, NEW YORK .772 TEL 516 447-8900 FAX 516 475-5651 DiRECt Dial 447-8925 David J.s. Emilita, Principal AICP SAI Limited 23 Narragansett Avenue Jamestown, Rhode Island 02835 Planner Re: April 18, 1988 Letter - Wanat - Norris Dear Mr. Emilita: This is in response to your letter to me dated April 18, 1988, which was received by us on April 20. 1988. From reading your paragraph numbergd. 1, we conclude that there will be a single draft EIS coverin~ both sites of a two-sited project. It'is our understanding that the Wanat site will be treated as a project alternative for the draft ElS for Norris. We disagree with the conclusions reached in your paragraph numbered. 2. The Norris property, by reason of the rezoning to multiple use, which was affirmed by the courts, has acquired a legal "as of right" development yield. This is subiect only to "legitimate" concerns regarding water, sewage, traffic and other items of legal impact. Your paragraph numbered 3 is confusing. I enclose herewith a letter dated April 11, 1988 addressed to me from the Planning Board of the Town of Southold. That letter indisates that a copy was also sent to you. The second paragraph of the April llth letter indicates that the Planning Board understands that the Town Board remains the lead agency on the change of zone of the Wanat property. This was my understanding. We do not disagree that the Town Board must approve or disapprove the zone change. ~ PELLETREAU & PELLETREAU David J.S. Emilita, Page 2 April 21,.1988 Principal Planner It is the intent of the developer to proceed in good faith to provide a draft EIS for the Wanat property as an alternative to Norris. In the event the change of zone on Wanat is granted, the developer will covenant with the Town as to the combined density on both parcels. In the event the zone change is not granted for Wanat, it is the intent of the developer to proceed with its "as of right" development of the Norris property. It is our understanding, assuming the zone change on the Wanat parcel, that the Planning Board will be considering .the site plans for both parcels. I realize that this is a first. I hope that we are able to iron out our technical difficulties and reach a conclusion that is in the best interests of the parties and the Town. Sincerely yours, ~n j.ETRE~AU & PELLETREAU , JJH:ma Enclosure cc: Judith Terry, Town Clerk James A. Schondebare, Esq., Town Attorney Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner P.S. It is my understanding that an informal meeting to iron out details will be set up with Henry Raynor and Janet Haeberle, from our o~fice. 0001C/41-42 Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 RECEIYEi APR 1 4 PELd:[R,.AU & PELLETRE, April 11, 1988 John J. Hart, Esq. Pelletreau & Pelletreau 20 Church Street Box 110 Patchogue, NY 11772 RE: Proposed Major subdivision of Norris Estates Mattituck SCTM 9 1000-122-5-4 Dear Mr. Hart: The Planning Board, at its April 7th work session, was informed of the results of the scoping session held before the Town Board on April 5, 1988. The Planning Board understands that it remains the lead agency on the above named subdivision propsal. It also understands that the Town Board's the lead agency on a petition to change the zone of the Carr-Wanat property fro.,"A" Residential and Agricultural to "M" Light Multiple Residence. Furthermore, it is understood, that when'the draft Envirop3,ental Impact Statement for Norris Estates is submitted to the Planning Board for its review, the "Alternatives" section of the DEIS will contain a detailed reference to the proposed Carr-Wanat petition as one of the possible alternatives. cc: Francis J. Murphy, Supervisor Councilwoman Cochran Councilwoman Oliva Councilwoman Larsen Councilman Penny Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk James A. Schondebare, Town Attorney David Emilita, Szcpatowski Associates Henry Raynor, Representative, Richard T. Cart RUSSELL C. BU RCH[ RI0 DOUGLAS J. L£ROSE DENNIS D, O'OOH£RTY, JR April 26, 1988 PELLETREAU & PELLETREAU ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW 20 CHURCH STREET - BOX I10 PATCHOGU£, NEW YORK ~177~ TEL 5~6 447-8900 447-8906 David J.S. Emilita, AICP c/o SAI 23 Naraganeett Avenue Jamestown. Hhode Island 02835 He: Norris Estate, Southold, New York Dear Mr. Emilita: Please accept this letter as a clarification of one point of our letter dated April 5, 1988, a copy Of which is attached. In paragraph 4 of page 2, we refer to the development of the Norris property with 132 units, which is the maximum "as of right" development of the property,. The Environmental Impact Statement for the Norris Estate's project will address the construction bf 108 multi-family units, not 132. We offer this by way of clarification. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly ~j. ~rtTREAU & PELLETREAU JFH: lyn Enclosure cc: Valerie Scopaz Town Planner Town of Southold olu(8) ~R£D[RIC L ATWOOD RUSSELLC BURCHERI~ DOUGLASJ LEROSE OBNNISD. O'DOHBRTY, JR. 'ALSO AD~,ITTED IN FLORIDA OALSO ADHITTED IN NEW JERSEY Agril 5. 1988 PELLETREAU & PELLETREAU ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS ,AT LAW ZO CHURCH STREET - aox uo PATCHOGUE, NEW YORK 11772 TEL 5~6 447-8900 DIRECT DIAL 447-8925 ROBERT $ PELLETREAU Hon. Francis J. Murphy Supervisor, Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road $outhold, N.Y. 11971 Hon. Jean W. Cochran P.O. Box 285 Southold, N.Y. 11971 Hon. Raymond W. Edwards P.O. Box 511 Fish(~rs Island, N.Y. 06390 Hon. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Planning Board Chairman Town of Southold Main Road Southo]d, N.Y. 11971 Hon. Ruth Oliva Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, N.Y. 119~;-/--- Hon. Ellen Larsen Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Hon. George L. Penny, IV P.O. Box 57 Groenport, N.Y. 11944 Re: Carr-Wanat Application for Change 9f Dear Supervi~or Murphy, Members Board Chairman Orlowski: of the Town Board and Planning I am writing th]~ letter to you Lo confirm my und{~rsLanding of the result of t. he "scoping, s(~ssion held at the Town Hall on Tuesday, April 5, 1988 w]i.l~-the Town Board. An Application for a Change of Zone from "A" Residential Agricultural Disl.£ict to "M" Light Multiple-Residence District for Richard T. Cart and JOseph A. Wanat was under consideration al. I.his meeting. PELLETREAU & PELLETREAU Supervisor Murphy and Members of Page 2 April 5. 1988 Town Board By Resolution adopted by the Town Board at a regular meeting he]d on February 23, 1988, the Board, as "lead agency,, requested Mr. Car~ and Mr. Wanat to prepare a draft Environmental Impact Statement (Exhibit "A"). Attached to the Resolution was a State Environmental Quality Review Positive Declaration bearing date January, 1988, prepared by Mr. Em~]ita which is also enclosed (Exhibit "B").' The Reso]ut. ion of February 23, 1988 was preceded oil November 6, 1987 by a letter addressed to the NeW York State Department of Environmental Conservation indicating that the Town Board was lead agency and requesting the. Department,s vi, ews on the project (F, xhibit "C"). On December 18, 1987. the Town Board wrote to' the Suffolk County Department of Health requesting information regarding the water supply at the "Norris" property. It is my forther Icad agency fo~ capackty. understanding that the Planning Board is the the Norris property and continues in that The applicant is. thnrefore, proceeding on parallel courses which will provide the following: a draft Env~¢)nmental Impact Statement to be presented to the Town Board for the 107 acre Carr-Wanat property, which w~]] furnish the ~nformation requested sh¢)w~ng the impact of 107 single family dwellings on the this parcel. We w]]] also fu~n]~h copies of the draft Environmental Impact Statement being..prepared for the Planning Board for the Norris property. Th~s will c'onsider the development of the Norris property "as of f~ght" with 132 units. In addition, there will be an altern~ive proposal which the Planning Board will rec~]ve which Will show 25 units on the Nor[is property, to be coupled with the 107 units on the Carr-Wanat property. If the alternatiw~ solution on the Norris property is adopted, it will requ]~'e action by the Planning Board to approve the site plan for No~ris and a change of zone by the Town Board with simultaneous site plan approval by the Planning Board for Carr-W~,at. It is .[y u~derstandlng that this action will proceed on parallel tracks and that the decision-making process will be simultaneous. In the event, for whatever reason, the change of zone for Carr-Wanat and the Norris 25 un],t site plan are not approved, it is the ~ntent of the applicant to pro,;ced with its "as of right,, application for Norris. which is already before the Planning Board. PELLI:'TIREAU 6: PELLETREAU Supervisor Murphy and Members Page 3 April 5, 1988 of Town Board The applicant, Richard Cart, is going forward on his understanding of the resolutions of both the Town Board and the Planning Board and is acting in reliance thereon. If this statement of our understanding of the determination of the Town Board and the Planning Board is in any way incorrect, please advise us immediately as the applicant is expending tens of thousands of dollars in reliance upon his understanding of the action taken by the Town Board and the Planning Board and statements made in connection therewith. We are hopeful that we will be in a po'sition over the next several weeks to furnish you with all the information that has been requested. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely yours, PELLETREAU & ~PELLETREAU · ~art JJH:ma cc: Richard Cart Shamrock Associates James Schondebare, Esq., Town Attorney David Emilita Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner Judith Terry, Town Clerk Team Members: Jean Celender Henry Raynor Holzmacher, McLendon ~Murrell Att: Gary Loesch Dravo Van Houten, Inc. Att: Clem Cameron Niego Associates Att: Sol Niego Dunn Engineering, P.C. Att: Walter Dunn B. Laing Associates Att:Michael Bontje 2163C/1-3 RUSSELLC BURCRERIO DOUGLASJLEROSE DENNISOO'DOHERTY, JR 'ALSO AOMITTED IN FLORIDA OALSO ADMITTED IN NEW JERSEY April 5, 1988 PELLETREAU & PELLETREAU ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW 2~0 CHURCH STREET - BOX I10 PATCHOGUE, NEW YORK 11772 TEL 516 447-890Q:. 447-8925 Hon. Francis J. Murphy Supervisor, Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southo]do N.Y. 11971 Hon. Jean W. Cochran Hon. Ruth CT[va P.O. Box 285 Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 53095 Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Hon. Raymond W. Edwards P.O. Box 511 Hon. Ellen Larsen Fishnrs Island, N.Y. 06390 Town Hall 53095 Main Road Hon. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Sou~hold, N.Y. 11971 Planning Board Chairman Town of Southold Hon. George L. Penny, Main Road P.O. Box 57 Southo]d, N.Y. 11971 Greenport, N.Y. 11944 IV Re: Carr-Wanat Application for Chanq9 of Zone Dear Supervisor Murphy. Members of the Town Board and Planning Board Chairman Orlowski: I am writing th.is ]etter to you 1. o confirm my l~nderstanding of the result of the "scoping" s{~ssion held at th(? Town Hall on Tuesday, April 5, 1988 w]t.h the Town Board. An Application fOE a Change of Zone from "A" Residential Agricultu[al District to "M" Light Multiple-Residence District for Richard T. Cart and Joseph A. Wanat was und(~r: consideration al. thi, s meeting. PELLETReAU & PeLLEtREaU Supervisor Murphy and Members Page 2 April 5, 1988 of Town Board By Resolution adopted by the Town Board at a regular meeting held on February 23, 1988, the Board, as "lead agency" requested Mr. Cart and Mr. Wanat to prepare a draft Environmental Impact Statement (Exhibit "A"). Attached to the Resolution was a State Environmental Quality Review Positive Declaration bearing date January. 1988, prepared by Mr. Em~]ita which is also enclosed (Exhibit "B"). The Resolution of February 23, ].988 was preceded on November 6. 1987 by a letter addressed to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation indicating that the Town Board was lead agency and requesting the Department's v%.ews on the project (Exhibit "C"). On December 18, 1987, the Town Board wrote to the Suffolk County Department of Health Services requesting information regarding the water supply at the "Norris" property. It is my further understanding that Icad agency for the Norris p~opeFLy capacity. the Planning Board is the and continues in that The applicant ~.s, therefore, proceeding on parallel courses which will provide the following: a draft En¥ironmental Impact Statement to be presented to the Town Board for the 107 acre Carr-Wanat property, which w]]] furnish the info~mation requested showing the impact of 107 single family dwellings on the this parcel. We w~]] also furnish copies of the draft Environmental Impact Statement being prepared for the Planning Board for the Norris puope£ty. This~w%ll Consider the development of the Norris property "as of ~']ght" with ]32 units. In addition, there will be an alternative proposal which the Planning Board will rec(?]ve which will show 25 units on the No~is property, to be coupled with the 107 units on the Carr-Wanat property. If the alternative solution on the No~ris property is adopted, it will requi~ action by the Planning Board to approve the site plan for Norris and a change of zone by the Town Board with simultaneous site plan approval by the Planning Board for Carr-Wanat. It is .~ understanding that this action w~ll proceed on pauallel tracks and that the decision-making process will be simultaneous. In the event, fo~- whatever reason, the change of zone for Carr-Wanat and the Norris 25 unit site plan are not approved, it is the intent of the applicant to proceed with its "as of right" application for No~ris, which is already before the Planning Board. PeLLETREAU & PELLETReAU Supervisor Murphy Page 3 April 5. 1988 and Members of Town Board The applicant, Richard Cart. is going forward on his understanding of the resolutions of both the Town Board and the Planning Board and is acting in reliance thereon. If this statement of our understanding of the determination of the Town Board and the Planning Board is in any way incorrect, please advise us immediately as the applicant is expending tens of thousands of dollars in reliance upon his understanding of the action taken by the Town Board and the Planning Board and statements made in connection therewi~h. We are hopeful that we will be in a position over the next several weeks to furnish you with all the information that has been requested. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely yours, PELLETREAU & .PELLETREAU J~hn J. Hart JJH:ma cc: Richard Cart Shamrock Associates James Schondebare, Esq., Town Attorney David Emilita Valerie S¢opaz. Town Planner Judith Terry, Town Clerk Team Members: Jean Celender Henry Raynor Holzmacher. McLendon & Murrell Att: Gary Loesch Dravo Van Houten. Inc. Att: Clem Cameron Niego Associates Att: Sol Niego Dunn Engineering. P.C. Att: Walter Dunn B. Laing Associates Att:Michael Bont]e 2163C/1-3 ~UDITH T. TERRY ?OWN CLERIC OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE ($16) 765-1801 February 26, 1988 Janet Haeberle Pelletrau & Pelletreau 20 Church Street - Box 110 Patchogue, New York 11772 Dear Ms. Haeberle: Enclosed is a certified resolution of the Southeld Town Board determining that the Carr-Wanat change of zone proposal is a Type I action and is likely to have a significant effect on the environment, as well as a copy of the Positive Declaration. The petition is hereby requested to prepare a draft environmental impact statement. Please submit same to me upon completion. Thank you. Very truly yours, Southold Town Clerk Enclosures .,'UDITH T. TERRY TOWN CLERK OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box I 179 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE ($16) '/65-1801 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD AT A REGULAR MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 23, 1988: WHEREAS, Richard T. Carr and Joseph A. Wanat has heretofore applied to the Southold Town Board for a change of zone from "A" Residential and Agricultural District to "M" Light Multiple Residence District on certain property located on the northerly side of Bergen Avenue, Mattituck, New York; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: 1. That pursuant to the provisions of Article 8 of the Environmental Conserva- tion Law; Part 617 of Title 6 of the New York State Codes, Rules and Regulations, and Chapter qq of the Southold Town Code, the Southold Town 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 Town Clerk shall file and circulate such determination as required by the aforementioned law, rules and code. 3. That the Town Clerk immediately notify the applicant, Richard T. Carr and Joseph A. Wanat of this determination, and further request said applicant to prepare a draft environmental impact statement, all in accordance with said law, rules and ~ode. February 26, 1988 617.21 Appendix E State Environmental Quality Review POSITIVE DECLARATION Notice of Intent to Prepare a Draft ElS Determination of Significance SEQR Ploject Number Date JAN B C This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article (State Environmental Quality Review Act) of the Environmental Conserv'ation Law. The , Southold Town Board , as lead agency. has determined that the proposed action described below may have a significant effect on the environment and that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will be prepared. Name of Action: Change-of-Zone from "A" Residential Agricultural District to "~l" Light -'lultiple-Residence District for Richard T. Carr/Joseph A. [';anat. SEQR Status: Type I Unlisted Description of Action: Change-of-Zone to allow the construction of 107 single f~Lmil~, dwellings on this parcel. oo Location; (Include. street agdres5 and lhl~ name of the munic~paldy,'counh, A Iocahon Scale is also ~'ecommended ) See Attached :,~ap map of appr(5~nate SEQR Negative Declaration Page Reasons Supporting This Determination: (See 617.6(g) for requirements of this determination; see 617.6(h) for Conditioned Negative Declaration) See EAF Parts II and III Attached. If Conditioned Negative Declaration, provicte on attachment the specific mitigation measures imposed. For Further Information: Contact Person: Judith Terry, Town Clerk Address~ Southoid Town Hall, I~ain'Road, Southol¢~, NY Telephone Number: (516) 765--1801 For Type I Actions and Conditioned Negative Declarations, a Copy of this Notice Sent to: Commissioner. Department ot Environmental Conservation. 50 Wolf Road. Albany, New York 12233-0001 Appropriate Regional Office of the Department of Environmental Conservation, Stony Brook, NY Off,ce of the Chief Executive Ofhcer of Ih6 polihcal subdivision in which the action will be princtpall) located Applicant (if any) Other involved agencies (if any) Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Building Department Suffolk County Department of Health Services Town Clerk's Bulletin Board - Suffolk County Department of Plannin9 · .*~ Part 2--PP~ECT iMPACTS AND THEIR M/~ITUDE Responsib;lity of lead A~ency Richard 'T'. · Joseph A. Genera! Information (Read Carefully) , ~ban~e-of-~ot · In completing the form the reviewer shoul~ be Eroded by the ~ues~ion: Have my responses and aetermina~ions beer ~e~son~ble~ The reviewer ~s no~ expected ~o be an exper~ environmental analys~ · Iden~ifyin~ that an impact will be potentially large (column 2) Odes no~ mean tha~ i~ is also necessarily significant. Any large ~mpact mus~ be eva~uated in PART 3 to determine significance Idenbfym~ an impact Jn column 2 asks that it be looked a~ further · The h~mples provide~ are to assist ~he reviewer by showJnR types of i~pac~s and wherever possible the threshol~ o ma~mtude~hatwould tri~eraresponseincolumn2 The examples are~eneral~yapphcablelhrou~hou~theSta~eam for most situations BuL for any specific project or site o~her examples and/or lower thresholds may be appropnat~ for a Potential Large Impact response, ~hus requ~rm& evaluation in Par~ 3. · The impacts of each projecL on each site, in each Iocaliw, will va~. Therefore. the examples are illustrative an~ have been offere~ as ~uidance They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impac~ and thresholds ~o answer each question · The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question. · In identifyin8 impacts, consider Ion~ ~erm, shor~ term and cumla~ive effect. Instructions (Read carefully) a. Answer each of ~he 19 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if ~here will be ~ny impact. b. M~ybe answers should be considered as Yes answers. c. If answerin~ Yes to a question ~hen check the appropriate box (column 1 or 2) ~o indicate the potential size of th; impacL If impac~ threshold e~uals or exceeds any example provided, check column 2. If impact will occur but threshoh is lower ~han example, check column 1. d. If reviewer has doubt about size of the impac~ then consider ~he impact as potentially large and proceed to PART 3 e. If a potentially large impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated by chan~s) in the project to a small to moderat impact, also check the Yes box Jn column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction is not possible Thi must be explained in Part 3. IMPACT ON LAND I. Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site? DNO ~YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise per 100 foot of length), or where the general slopes in the project area exceed 10%. · Construction on land where the del:ith't'o the water table is less'than 3 feet · Construction of paved parking area for 1,0,00 or more vehicles. · Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally within 3 feet of ex~sting ground surface. · Construction that will contmue for more than 1 year or involve more than one phase or stage · ~_xcavat~on for mmmg purposes that would remo~e more {hah 1.000 tons of natural mateual (~ e, rock or soil) per year · ConstruCtion or expansion of a sam[ar¥ landfdl · Construction m a designated tlood~ay · Other ,mpacts %%',lr there be an effect t ..,¥u::,queor unusual land forms iound on the slte~ (, e. chffs, dunes geological format,ohs, etc )r-NO · Specd~c land forms I 2 3 SmaU to Potential Can Imp; Moderate Large Mitigat~ Impact Impact Project C [] [] - ' r~Yes L--] [] I-lyes [] [] ©'res [] [] OYes [] [] ~¥es [] O OYes Be By Change [-1No []~o ~o [~No [~Xo I~xo IMPACT ON WATER .t. Wi'~ proposed action affect any water body designated as protected; [Under Articles 15.24.25 of the Enwronmental Conservahon Law. •NO Etamples that would apply to column 2 · Developable area of site contains a protected water body. · Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of protected stream · Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body. · Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland · Other impacts: 4 Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body of water~ I-iN• ~Y£S Examples that would apply to column 2 · A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water .or more than a 10 acre increase or decrease. · Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area. · Other impacts: Non-protected surface ponds exist on the parcel. 5 Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity~ •NO 50YES E:~amples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Actio, will require a discharge permit · Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does not have approval to serve proposed (project} action · Proposed Action requires v, ater supply from wells with greater than 45 gallons per minute pumping capacity · Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water supply system, · Proposed %orion will ad~,erse~ affect groundwater' · Liquid effluent will be conve¥,-d off the site to facilities which presently do not exist or have inadequate capacity · Propo~ed Action v, ould use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per day · Proposed ,act,on vvill hkeK c:u? siltation ot other discharge into an ex,st,ng body of waist lc ~, ,~ exlc-.~l that there v,,HI be an ob~ous visual · Pr•Hose• Action w,[I requ~r~ the storage o{ petroleum or chem,cal products greater than 1.100 gallons [~,, ~ples that v, ouhJ appl~ In column · Pr~ 1,' ~vd Action v, ould < hanR~, 1 2 3 ,Small to Potential Can Impact Moderate Large Mitigated Impact Impact Project Cha [] [] [-lYes [] Ft [] DYes [] [] [] OYes [] [] [] [~Yes [] [] n I~Ye5 C [] [] []Yes [] [] [] DYes C [] [] ~Yes [] [] ~Yes r- D [] I~'Yes ~ ~ ~Yes C Dye E By O O •No F1No ~,~o [DSo 0 · Proposed Action may cause substantial erosion · Proposed Action is incompatible with existing drainage patterns · Proposed Action will allow development in a designated floodway· · Other impacts: Proposed Action r~av adversely affect drainage. IMPACT ON AIR 7 Will proposed action affect air quality? ~NO DYES Eaamples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips in any given hour. · Proposed Action will result in the incineration of more than I ton of refuse per hour. · Emission rate of total contaminants will exceed 5 lbs. per hour or a heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour· · Proposed action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed to industrial use. · Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial development within ex~sting industrial areas, · Other impacts: IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS 8 Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered species? E}NO ~YES Examples that would appl,~ to column 2 · Reduction of one or more species hsted on the New York or Federal list. using the site. over or near site or found on the site. · Remove.' of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habitat. · Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other than for agricultural purposes · Other impacts' Endangered ~p~ ~ m~7 eY~ St on site. 9 Will Proposed Action substantialb,, affect nomthreatened or non-endangered species.~ J~ :"; 0 OYES E~.amples that ~.ouJd appl'~ to column 2 · Proposed Action wo~JJd subqantialJy interfere with any resident or migrator;, f~sh, shelJhsh or V, lld]de species · Proposed Action requl~es the removal of more than 10 acres o! mature forest {o~er 100 ',uars of age) or other Iocalh~ ~mportant IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES ~-NO ~[S land bncludes cropland ha',i,elds pasture wnevard, orchard, etc) Small to Moderate Impact [] O [] [] n O [] [] [] [] [] [] [] 2 P- lentiel 8~e Impact [] [] [] O [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] ,.! Can Impacl Be Mitigate0 By Project Change r~yes F'!No ['-lYes DNo E~Yes I-INo ~Yes I'-tNo I-lYes E~No [-]Yes f-'JNo OYes r-tNo OYes [--~No DYes ?Wes E~]Yes ~No r-lYes E]No J-]Yes [~Yes ~o [~','es ~No f-h'es ~Xo ~"¥es · Construction actwitv ~ould exca~,ate or compact the soil profile of agricultural land · 'l'he proposed action would irreversibly convert more than 10 acres of agucuhural land or. if located in an Agricuhutal District, more than 2.5 acres of ~gricuhural land. ' ' · The proposed action would disrupt or prevent installation of agricultural lard management systems {e g, subsurface drain lines, outlet ditches, strip cropping], or create a need for such measures (eg cause a farm field to drain poorly due to increased runoff) · Other impacts: IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES 11 Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources? •NO ~YE5 (if necessary, use the Visual EAF Adde0dum in Section 617.21, Appendix B) E~amples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed land uses, or project components obviously different from or in sharp contrast to current surrounding land use patterns, whether man-made or natural · Proposed land uses. or prolect components visible to users of aesthetic resources which wdl eliminate or significantly reduce their enjoyment of the aesthetic qualities of that resource · Prolect components that will result in the elimination or significant screemng of scemc we~s Lnov, n to be important to the area · Other ~mpacts IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEQLOGICAL RESOURCES 12 Wdl Proposed Action impac! an'~ sLt.e or structure of historic: pre- h~stouc or paleontological ~mportance? I-INO [zamples that v. ould apply to column 2 · Proposed Acbon occurring v, holh,, or parti~lk v, ithin or substant~all',. conhguOuS to an'¢ faciht~ or site hsted on the Siate or Nat,onal Register of h~stor~c places · Othtr m~pact; CaDnot be ~ssessed at p.resent, IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION [zamples t~-,.~t i ,H);)h' h, 'o[~l~n 2 1 2 3 Smell to Potential Can Impact SE Mnclerate Large Mitigetec~ By Impact Impact Project Chang~ [] [~ ['-lYes •No [] ~ DYes [DNo [] ~ ~Yes •No ~ ~ ~es ~o IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION 34 Wdl there be an effect to ex~sting transportation systems; DNO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Aheratmn of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods · Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems · Other ~mpacts: Traffic on Berqen Avenue increase significantly. IMPACT ON ENERGY 15 Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or energy supply? ~3NO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action will cause a greater than 5% increase in the use of any form of energy in the municipality. · Proposed Action will require the creation or extension of an energy .transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two family residences or to serve a major commercial or industrial use · Other impacts: NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS 16 Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or ,vibration as a result of the Proposed Action? [~NO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Blasting within 1.500 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive facility · Odors will occur rout,nel¥ (more than one hour per day) · Proposed Action will produce operat,ng no,se exceed,ng the local ambient no,se levels for nmse outside of structures · Proposed Action will remove natural barriers that v, ould act as a noise screen · Other impacts IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH 37 Wdl Proposed Actmn affect public health and safet~ Examples that ~ot.ld aD;dx tO column 2 · Propose~ Acbon ma~ cause a r~sk of explosion or re~ea5(' of hazardous substancesOe od. peq,odes (hem~(al~,rad~atmn e~c)mtheeventof acc,dent or upset cond~honL or there ma~ bce chrome Io~* level d,scharyu or em~s*~on · Proposed Acbon ~0 Small to Potential Can Impact Moderate Large Mitigated ' Impact Impact Project Cha [] [--t E-lYes [] [] [] {::]Yes ['~ E) [~ [~Yes C "~ [] DYes C [] [] [-]Yes E [-1 [] OYes E 0 0 ~ye~ E 0 0 OYes E ~ ~ ~es ~ m Be Y ge I'qNo E3No [:]No I'qNo E]No L_No ['qNo __%¢ IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHARACTER OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD 18 Will proposed action affect the character of the exisbng community.' DNO ~YE$ Examples that would apply to column 2 · '[he permanent population of the city. town or village in which the proiect is located is likely to grow by more than 5% · '[he municipal budget for capital expenditures or operating services will'increase by more'than 5% per year as a result of this project · Proposed action will conflict with officially adopted plans or goals · Proposed action will cause a change in the density of land use. · Proposed Action will replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures or areas of historic importance to the community. · Development will create a demand for additional community services (e.g. schools, police and fire. etc.) · Proposed Action will set an important precedent for future projects. · P~toposed Action will create or eliminate employment. · Other impacts: 1 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Char, ge [] [] I-lYes [] 1-1 r-lyes [~No r~ [] r~'lyes DNo [] [] ii]Yes [] [] I--lYes I'-iNo ~ [] []Yes []No [] [] J~Yes J['ql N o [] [] []Yes J~No r-J [] []Yes E~No 19 Is there, or is there likely to be. public controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? r'lNO EqY£S If Any Action in Part 2 Is Identified as a Potential Large Impact or It You Cannot Determine the Magnitude of Impact, Proceed to Part 3 Part 3--EVALUATION OF T. HE IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS .Responsibility of Lead Agency Part 3 must be prepared if one or more' impact(s) is considered to be pote..tially large, even if the impact[s) ma~ be mitigated. Instructions D,~cuss the follo~ing for each impact ~dent~fmd In CoJumn 2 of Part 2 1 [3r,etl~ descrloe the ~mpa(t Descr,be(d apphcabl()hov, th(, ~mpac~couJd Based on the mio~mat~on a',adable, dec,de d ~t ~ reasonable to conclude that th~ impact is important. ll PART III 1. IMPACT ON LAND The proposed development of 107 units of residential dwellings could take place in areas of high water table as there are several wetland and pond areas on the site. A careful siting of the structures, roads and open space could minimize their impact. Construction of the project may take more than one construction season. Therefore, impacts attendant to such a prolonged construction period such as erosion, drainage, construction staging, and the like, could extend to surrounding properties. Such impacts can be minimized through the development of a construction staging plan. It is possible that bluff erosion may be stimulated by the construction of the project or by occupancy of the dwellings. Once begun, bluff erosion is extremely difficult to stop. Prevention of bluff erosion is possible by an erosion and sedimentation control plan. 2. IMPACT ON WATER Protected wetlands exist on the site. Adverse impacts due to construction or occupancy of the dwellings on these wetlands is possible. Careful design can minimize these impacts. Non-protected surface ponds exist on the parcel. Adverse impacts caused by construction or occupancy of the dwellings may affect these ponds. Design of the project can minimize potential impacts. The project will require a discharge permit and well permit from the Suffolk County Department of Health Services as well as a Long Island well permit from the Department of Environmental Conservation. No public water supply or wastewater treatment facilities exist t6 service the proposed development. All of these factors mas, have an adverse effect on groundwater quantity and quality. These adverse effects can be mitigated, but need careful design consideration. The project may have adverse impacts on existing drainage patterns due to an increase in impervious surfaces, redirected drainage flows, increased rates of runoff and the presence of ponds, and wetlands on the site. Careful design can mitigate these impacts. ' 3. I_MPACT ON PLANTS & ANIMALS The presence of freshwater wetlands on the site indicate that threatened or endangered species may also exist on the site. A field inventory needs to be established by a competent authority before an accurate impact assessment can be made. 4. IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES The loss of some 100 acres of agricultural soils will occur. The proposed zone will effectuate a defacto transfer of development rights from the Norris Property on Camp Mineola Road in Mattituck to this site. This needs to be studied in a comprehensive environmental impact statement embodying both projects. The instant change-of-zone should be incorporated as an alternative to the project proposed for the Norris site to weigh the positive and adverse impacts within an overall SEQR review of the transfer. 5. IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES The proposed residential development will be a contrasting visual element on the landscape compared to surrounding land uses. Detailed design consideration needs to be given to minimize the adverse impact of such a development. IMPACT ON ARCHAEOLOGIC RESOURCES This impact cannot be assessed until a study conducted by a competent authority. has been 7. IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION Local street traffic will increase dramatically as a result of the proposed development. This needs to be studied and weighed against a possible decrease on the Camp Mineola Rcad vicinity. 8. IMPACT ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD The project proposed and the defacto transfer have no precedence in Southold's zoning ordinance. Aside from the legal questions involved, several community impacts need to be considered. Some of these have already been addressed, others include the impact of the increased density on adjacent properties in the Bergen Avenue area, both as existing land uses and future land use. There has been a great deal of p~blic controversy surrounding the development of the Norris property. There has been public controversy surrounding previous attempts at defacto transfer in the context of this project. One must expect there will be public controversy over this proposal as well. To properly structure, environmental and community impact issues, as well as public comment and legal review into an established procedure, this change-of-zone request and its relation to development on the Norris property should be incorporated into an overall environmental impact statement covering the two sites. JUDITH T. TERRY OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE 1.516) 765-1801 November 6, 1987 Robert A. Greene, Permit Administrator · N.Y.S. Dept. of Environmental Conservation Building 40, SUNY, Room 219 Stony Brook, New York 11794 Dear Mr. Greene: Enclosed is the petition of Richard T.. Cart and Joseph A. Wanat for a change of zone from "A" Residential and Agricultural District to "M" Light Multiple Residence District on certain property located on the northerly side of Bergen Avenue, Mattituck, New York. This project is unlisted and we wish to coordinate this action in our role as lead agency. May we have your views on this matter. Written comments on this project will be received by this office until November 25, 1987. We shall interpret your lack of response tO mean there is no objection by your agency. Very truly yours, Judith T. Terry Southold Town Clerk Enclosures cc: Commissioner Jorling Southold Town Building J~ept. Pelletreau & Pelletreau~' MEMORANDUM TO: Norris Estate subdivision File Carr-Wanat Change of Zone Application RE: SEQR Procedure FROM: David J.S. Emilita DATE: March 29, 1988 On 21 March 88 David Emilita met with Jay Schondebare and Valerie Scopaz to discuss SEQR procedure vis-a-vis the above captioned applications. It was decided that since both applications comprise essentially one project occurring on two sites, that a single EIS covering both sites is appropriate. The application's conditional change-of-zone plus the de facto TDR from the Norris to the Wanat site support this opinion. Since the Planning Board would be reviewing both sites, it would assume Lead Agency status on all matters. The Town Board would of course have discretionary authority over the change-of-zone application in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance. To have two separate EIS's could bring forth charges of segmentation and lead to procedural confusion at the very least. Whether the Wanat site is to be dealt with as a part of "The Project" or as an "Off-site mitigation" of density impacts on the Norris site would be left to the applicant, however it must be included as a part of the original DEIS for the entire action, and should be so detailed in the description of the project section of the DEIS. SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES INC. 5NVIRONMEN]AL CONSULTAN]'S S/il 617.21 Appendix D State Environmental Quality Review Scoping Checklist 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, the list of topics should be refined to reflect issues unique to the proposed project. Topic areas may be de- leted, added or elaborated upon, to arrive at the final scoping document. The purpose of the checklist format is to iden- tify the basic topic areas of the Draft ElS. This ~s accomplished by reviewing the list and placing a check in the box located to the left of these topics which should be discussed. The model scoping checklist can also be used as a worksheet, including comments, suggestions and identifica- tion of the particular example(s) that are relevant to a detailed discussion of the topic or issue that has been checked. Conversely, those topics which are not checked, are issues not associated with the project and may be eliminated from discussion in the Draft ElS. The next step is to expand the list to include or elaborate on those topics unique to the pro- posed 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 discussions on the quantity and quality of informaton required and the methods of obtain- ing that data. NOTE: This check list was designed to be used in conjunction with the section on scoping contained in 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 scoping of a Draft ElS. It should not be used as a substitute for actively scoping Draft ElS for a specific project. I. Cover Sheet All EIS's (Draft or Final) shall begin with a cover sheet that includes: 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 state- ment and the name and telephone number of a person at the agency to be contacted for further information 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 ElS G. In the case of a Draft ElS, the deadline date by which comments are due should be indicated 11. Table of Contents and Summary A table of contents and a brief summary are re- quired for Draft and Final EIS's. The summary should include: A. Brief description of the action B. Significant, beneficial and adverse im- pacts, (issues of controversy must be specified) C. Mitigation measures proposed D. Alternatives considered E. Matters to be decided (permits, approvals, funding) ii1. Description of the Proposed Action Place a check in the box to the left of those topics to be included in the draft ElS. [~ A. PROJECT PURPOSE, NEED AND BENEFITS 1. Background and history 2.Public need for the project, and municipality objectives based on ad- opted community developments plans 3. Objectives of the project sponsor 4. Benefits of the proposed action a.) social b.) economic ~ B. 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 proposed site 4. Other: [~ C. DESIGN AND LAYOUT 1 .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 applicable b.) layout of buidings (attached, enclosed, separate) c.) site plans and profile view d.) material storage e.) drainage plans f.) above/underground pipelines g.) staging area for material handling 3. Parking a.) pavement area b.) number of spaces and layout 4. Other: ~ D. CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION 1. Construction a.) tote! 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: ~ E. CLOSURE AND POST CLOSURE PLANS (for projects of planned limited life such as landfills) ~/F. APPROVALS 1 .Required changes or variances to the zoning regulations 2.Other permit approval or funding reguirements IV. Environmental Setting Place a check in the box to the left of those topics to be included in the Draft ElS. zl~u r a I Resource A. GEOLOGY ~ 1. Subsurface a.) composition and thickness of subsurface material examples: --depth to, and nature of, bedrock formations and impermeable layers --occurrence of an extractive mineral resource --usefulness as construction material E~ b.) earthquake potential 2. Surface a.) List of soil types b.) discussion of soil characteristics examples: --physical properties (indication of soils hydrological (infiltration) capabilities) --engineering properties (soil bearing capacity) --agricultural properties (soil profile characteristics) when agri- cultural land resources are involved c.) distribution of soil types at project site d.) suitability for use examples: --agriculture --recreation --construction --mining e.) other: [~ 3. Topography a.) description of topography at project site examples: --slopes --prominent or unique features b.) description of topography of sur- ~//B rounding area · WATER RESOURCES !. Groundwater a.) location and description of aquifers and recharge areas examples: --depth of water table --seasonal variation --quality --quantity --flow b.) identification of present uses and level of use of groundwater examples: --location of existing wells --public/private water supply --industrial uses --agricultural uses 2 C [~/ 2.Surface water a.) location and decription of surface waters located on project site or those that may be influenced by the project examples: --seasonal variation --quantity --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 --recreational c.) description of existing drainage areas, patterns and channels d. discussion of potential for flooding, siltation, erosion and eutro- phication of water supply [] C. AIR RESOURCES [] 1.Climate a.) discussion of seasonal variations and extremes examples: --temperature --humidity --precipitation --wind [] 2.Air quality a.) description of existing air quality levels examples: --list the National and State Air Quality Standards for the project area and the compliance status for each standard b.) identification of existing sources or pollutants-fixed or mobile c.) identification of any sensitive recepters in project area examples: --hospitals, schools, nursing homes, parks d.) description of existing monitoring program (if applicable) ]~ D. TERRESTRAL AND AQUATIC ECOLOGY 1. Vegetation a.) list vegetation types on the project site and within the surrounding area b.) discussion of site vegetation characteristics examples: --species presence and abundance --age --size --distribution --dominance --community types --unique, rare and endangered species --value as habitat for wildlife --productivity [] 2.Fish, Shellfish and Wildlife a.) list of fish, shellfish and wildlife species on the project site and within surrounding area, including migatory and resident species b.) discussion of fish, shellfish and wildlife population characteristics examples: --species presence and abundance --distribution --dominance --unique, rare and endangered species --productivity [] 3. Wetlands a.) list wetland areas within or contiguous to the project site b.) discuss wetland characteristics examples: --acreage --vegetative cover --classification --benefits of wetland such as flood and erosion control, recreation ]~E. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES 1. Soils a.) list soils by name, slope and soil group ranking within NYS Land Classification System (1 NYCRR 370) b.) number of acres within each group c.) location of site on soil survey map [] 2.Agricultural land management system(s) a.) inventory of existing erosion control and drainage systems examples: --subsurface drain tines --outlet/diversion ditches --strip cropping --diversion terraces b.) relationship of proposed action to existing soil and water conservation plans (if applicable) 3 [] 3.Associated operations a.) number and types of farm operations on and adjacent to site examples: --dairy --grain --orchard b.) type and proximity of farm related facilities examples: --storage units/barns --sorting/packing houses --refrigeration units --roadside markets c.) access to cropland (including detached fields) d.) access for farm equipment to public roads Human Resources gA. TRANSPORTATION [] 1.Transportation services a.) description of the size, capacity and condition of services examples: --roads, canals, railroads, bridges --parking facilities --traffic control --access/egress from site b.) description of current level of use of services examples: --a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic flow --vehicle mix --source of existing traffic [] 2.Public transportation a.) description of the current avail- ability of service b.) description of present level of use [] 3.Pedestrian environment [] 4. Other: ]~ 13. LAND USE AND ZONING [] I .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 existing zoning of site and surrounding area c.) description of any affected agri- cultural district or other farmland retention program boundary in and surrounding the site [] 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 [] 3. Other; ~C. COMMUNITY SERVICE (for this section include a list of existing facilities and a discussion of existing levels of usage and projected future needs) [] 1.Educational facilities [] 2.Police protection [] 3.Fire protection [] 4.Health care facilities [] 5.Social services [] 6.Recreational facilities [] 7. Utilities [] 8.Public water supply [] 9.Solid waste disposal [] 10.Sewage treatment facilities [] 11.Other: ~ D. DEMOGRAPHY .~ [] ! .Population characteristics a.) discussion of existing population parameters examples: --distribution --density --household size and composition b.) discussion of projections for popu- lation growth [] 2.Other: ~ E. CULTURAL RESOURCES ]~1 .Visual resources a.) description of the physical char- acter of the community examples: --urban vs. rural b.) description of natural areas of significant scenic value c.) identification of structures of significant architectural design /~ 2.Historic and archaeological resources a.) location and description of historic areas or structures listed on State or National Register or designated by the community, or included on Statewide Inventory 4 b.) identification of sites having potential sig,~ificant archaeological value include results of cultural resource survey, if conducted [] 3. Noise a.) identification of existing level of noise in the community b.) identification of major sources of noise examples --airports --major highways --indust rial/commercial facilities [] 4. Other: V. Significant Environmental impacts Identify those aspects of the environmental setting in Section IV that may be adversely or beneficially affected by the proposed action and require discussion. VI. Mitigation Measures to Minimize Environ- mental Impact. Describe measures to reduce or avoid poten- tial adverse impacts identified in Section V. The following is a brief listing of typical measures used for some of the major areas of impact. Natural Resource [] A. GEOLOGY !. 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 erosion 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: [] B. WATER RESOURCES 1. Groundwater a.) design/modify system of treatment for stormwater runoff of wastewater prior to recharge of groundwater b.) maintain permeable areas on the site c.) institute a program for monitoring water quality in adjacent wells d.) require secondary or tertiary con- tainment of products/wastes e.) contingency plans for accidental spills f.) 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 vege- tation to disturbed areas --landscaping b.) design adequate stormwater control system c.) construct/modify sewage treatment facilities d.) restrict use of salt or sand for road and parking area snow removal e,) avoid direct discharges to surface water resources f.) require secondary or tertiary containment of products/wastes g.) contingency plans for accidental spills h.) other: [] C. AIR RESOURCES ! .Air quality a.) assure proper construction practices examples: --fugitive dust control --proper operation and mainten- ance of construction equipment b.) design traffic improvements to re- duce congestion and vehicle delay c.) install and ensure the proper operation of emission odor control devices d.) initiate a program for monitoring of air quality e.) other: [] D. TERRESTRAL AND AQUATIC ECOLOGY 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 vegetation d.) purchase open space at another location and dedicate to local government or conservation organization 5 2. Fish, Shellfish and Wildlife a.) provide adequate habitat (shelter and food) for remaining wildlife species b.) schedule construction to avoid sensitive periods of fish, shellfish and wildlife cycles c.) other: [] E. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES 1. Soils a.) select/design project to avoid viable agricultural land b.) reclaim disturbed agricultural soil profiles for agricultural purposes c.) schedule activity when crops are off fields and soil is firm d.) other: 2. Agricultural land management systems a.) re-establish access drives, fence-- lines and any disturbed land management systems b.) re-establish any disturbed erosion control and drainage systems c.) install soil and water management practices to restore or enhance soil drainage and stability d.) preserve open space for agricultural use e.) develop lease back arrangements to allow continued agricultural use on all or portion of site f.) other: Human Resources [] A. TRANSPORTATION 1. Transportation a.) design adequate and safe access to project site to handle projected traffic flow b.) install adequate traffic control devices c.) optimize use of parking areas d.) encourage car pooling and oper- ation 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 facility b.) encourage use of public transpor- tation by using incentive programs for employees or by selling tickets in facility c.) other: [] B. LAND USE AND ZONING 1. Existing land use and zoning a.) design project to comply with existing land use plans b.) design functional and visually appealing facility to set standard and precedent for future surround- ing land use c.) other: [] C. COMMUNITY SERVICES !. 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 underground b.) incorporate water saving fixtures into facility design c.) incorporate energy-saving measures into facility design d.) other: [] D. CULTURAL RESOURCES 1. 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: 2. Historic and archaeological resources a.) Prepare a plan, including measures to mitigate impacts to historic/ archaeological resources through data recovery, avoidance and/or restriction of project activities b.) develop measures to convey cul- tural information to the community (e.g. through scientific/popular reports, displays) c.) preserve architecturally signifi- cant structures and make an adequate permanent 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 morn- ing, night) b.) assure adherence to construction noise standards c.) design berms and landscaping to block and absorb noise d.) other: VII. 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 regard- less of the mitigation measures considered in Section VI. Vlll. Alternatives This section contains categories of alterna- tives with examples. Discussion of each alternative should be at a level sufficient to permit a compara- tive assessment of costs, benefits and environmen- tal risks for each alternative. It is not acceptable to make simple assertions that a particular alter- native is or is not feasible. Identify those categories of alternatives which shculd be included in the ElS by placing a check in the box located to the left of the topic. [~ A. ALTERNATIVE DESIGN AND TECHNOLOGIES I. Site layout a.) density and location of structures b.) location of access routes, parking and utility routes 2. Orientation a.) compatibility with slope and drainage p~tterns b.) site size and set back requirements 2 .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 B. ALTERNATIVE SITES 1. Limiting factors a.) availability of land b.) suitability of alternative site to accomodate design requirement~ c.) availability of utilities d.) suitable market area e.) compatibility with local zoning and master plan f.) compatibility with certified agri- cultural districts g.) compatibility with regional objectives h.) accessibility of site to transporta- tion routes and service population [] C. ALTERNATIVE SIZE 1. Increase or decrease project size to minimize possible impacts 2. Increase or decrease project size to correspond to market and community needs [] D. ALTERNATIVE CONSTRUCTION/ OPERATION SCHEDULING 1. Commence construction at a different time 2. Phase construction/operation 3. Restrict construction/operation work schedule [] E. ALTERNATIVE LAND USE 1 .Suitability of site for other uses a.) other types of commercial uses b.) other types of industry c.) different types of housing d.) agricultural use e.) other: [] F. NO ACTION 1. Impacts of no action a,) effect on public need b.) effect on private developers' need c.) beneficial or adverse environmental impacts [] G. OTHER: IX. Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources Identify those natural and human resources listed in Section ~V that will be consumed, convert- ed or made unavailable for future use. X. Growth Inducing Aspects (if applicable) Describe in this section the potential growth aspects the proposed project may have. Listed on the next page are examples of topics that are typi- cally affected by the growth induced by a project. [] 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 [] B. SUPPORT FACILITIES 1. business created to serve the increased population 2. Service industries created to supply new facility [] C. DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL ! .Introduction or improvement of infra- structure (roads, waste disposal, sewers, water) to service proposed project 2. Creation of further growth potential by construction of improved infra- structure [] D. OTHER: XI. Effects on the Use and Conservation of Energy Resources (if applicable) Identify the energy sources to be used, anticipated levels of consumption and ways to reduce energy consumption. The examples listed below are typical issues to be considered when ad- dressing this topic. [] A.PROPOSED ENERGY SOURCES AND ALTERNATIVES [] B.ANTICIPATED SHORT-TERM/LONG- TERM LEVELS OF ENERGY CONSUMPTION [] C.INDIRECT EFFECTS ON ENERGY CONSUMPTION 1. Increased dependence on automobile use 2. Increased levels of traffic due to proposed project [] 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 Iuse of waste heat from an industrial plant --use of recycled materials 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 [] E. OTHER: XII. Assessment of Unavailable Information In certain situations involving major develop- ments (such as an oil supertanker port, a liquid propane/natural gas storage facility, a resource recovery facility or a hazarduous waste treatment, storage or disposal facility), information regarding reasonably foreseeable catastrophic impacts to the environment may not be available. Such informa- tion may be unavailable because the means to ob- tain it are unknown or the cost of obtaining it is exhorbitant, or because there is uncertainty about its validity. If such information is essential to an agency's SEQR finding, the ElS must: A. Identify the nature and relevance of such unavailable or uncertain information; and B. Provide a summary of existing credible scientific evidence , if available; and C. Assess the likelihood of occurrence and consequences of the potential impact, even if the probability is Iow, using the- oretical approaches or research methods generally accepted in the scientific community. This assessment should be applied only where reasonably foreseeable catastrophic impacts to the environment are possible and it is not intended to be applied in the review of such actions as shop- ping malls, residential subdivisions and commer- cial facilities even though the size and scale of some such projects may be extensive. XIII. Appendices Following is a list of materials typically used in support of the ElS. A. List of underlying tudies, reports and information considered and relied on in preparing statement B. List all federal, state, regional, or local agencies, organizations, consultants and private persons consulted in preparing the statement C. Technical exhibits (if any) at a legible scale D. Relevent correspondence regarding the projects may be included (required in the Final ElS) Additional Draft ElS Scoping Topics Indicate any additional topics for discussion in the Draft ElS. Attach additional sheets if necessary. 9 617.21 Appendix E State Environmental Quality Review POSITIVE DECLARATION Notice of Intent to Prepare a Draft ElS Determination of Significance SEQR Project Number Date JAN 8C This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act) of the Environmental Conserv'ation Law. The Southold Town Board ,, as lead agency, has determined that the proposeO action described below may have a significant effect on the environment and that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will be prepared. Name°fActi°n:change-of-Zone from "A" Residential Agricultural District to "~" Light Multiple-Residence District for Richard T. Carr/Joseph A. Wanat. SEQR Status: Type I Unlisted Description of Action: Change-of-Zone to allow the construction of 107 single f~mil~ dwellings on this parcel. Location: (Include street address and the name of themunic~pality/counb A location map of approDr~ate scale is also recommended) See Attached Map SEQR Negative Declaration Page ~ ' Reasons Supporting This Determination: (See 617.6(g) for re. quirements of this determination; see 617.6(h) for Conditioned Negative Declaration) See EAF Parts II and III Attached. If Conditioned Negative Declaration, provide on attachment the specific mitigation measures imposed. For Further Information: Contact Person: Judith Terry, Town Clerk Address: Southold Town Hall, l{ain' Road, Southold, NY Teleph~),ne Number: (516) 765~1801 For Type t Actions and Conditioned Negative Declarations, a Copy of this Notice Sent to: Commissioner, Departmen! of Environmental Conservation. 50 Wolf Road, Albany, New York 12233-0001 Appropriate Regional Office of the Department of Environmental Conservation Office of the Chief Executive Ofhcer of the poht,ca~ subdivision in which the action will be principally located, Applicant (if any) Other inv01ved agenoes (,f ar~,,~ Part 2--P( ~dl~ IMPACTS AND THEIR M~"NI~DE o *: ' Responsibility of lead Alenfy R/chard T'. Cart/ Joseph A. Wanat Gener'al Information (Read Carefully) . Chance-of-Zone · In completing the form the reviewer should be guided by the question: Have my *esponses and ~e~erminations been reasonablel The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst , Identifyin~ that an i~act will be potentially large (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessarily signllicant. Any large impact must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine significance. Identifying an impact in column 2 simply asks that it be looked at further. , The Examples provided are t6 assist the reviewer by showing types of impacts and wherever possible the threshold of magnitude that would td~ger a response in column 2. The examples are ~enerally applicable ~hroughout the S/ate and for most situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be appropriate for a Potential Large Impact response, thus requiring evaluati~ in Part 3. - The impacts of each project, on each site, in each locality, will va~. Therefore, the examples are illustrative and have been otfer~ as guidance. They do not constitute an exhaustive lis~ of impac~ and thresholds to answer each question. ,The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question. ~In identifying impacts, consider Ion~ term, shor~ term and cumlative effect. Instructions (Read carefully) a. Answer each of the 19 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there will be any impact. b. Maybe answers should be considered as Yes answers. c. If answering Yes to a question then check the appropriate box (column 1 or 2) to indicate the ~tential size of the impact. If impact threshold equals or exceeds any example provided, check column 2. If impact will ~cur but threshold is lower than example, check column 1. d. If reviewer has doubt about size of the impact then consider the impact as ~tent~ally large and proceed to PART 3. e. If a potentiaUy large impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated by changes) in the project to a small to moderate impact, also check the Ye~ box in column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction is not ~ssible. This must be explained m Part 3. IMPACT ON LAND I. Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site~ ONO ~YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise per 100 foot of length), or where the general slopes in the project area exceed 10%. :. · Construction on land where the depth'~ the water table is less'than 3 feet · Construction of paved parking area for 1.000 or more vehicles. · Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally within 3 feet of existing ground surface. · Construction that will continue for more than I year or involve more than one phase or stage · Excavahon for mmmg purposes that would remove mo~e than 1,000 tons of natural material (i e. rock or soil) per year · Construchon or expansion oK a san,tary landf,Jl · Construchon m a du~;gnated floodv, a¥ · Other ~mpacts 2 Will there be an eftect t: W u: ,qut. or unusual land forms found on the s~te~ (~ e. chifs, dunes, geological format,ohs, etc )~NO · Spec~hc land forms ~31uffs 1 2 3 Small to Potential Can impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact impact Project ChanGe ~] [] [~Yes I--Ino [] [] [-]Yes i--Ino [] [] []Yes I-'lno [] [] I~yes EJno [] [] f--lYes [-]No [] [] E]Yes Elno [] [] []Yes []No IMPACT ON WATER 3 Will proposed action affect any water body designated as protected? (Under Articles 15.24, 25 of the Environmental Conservation Law, ECL) r"lNO ~YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Developable area of site contains a protected water body· · Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a protected stream · Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body· · Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland · Other impacts: 4 Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body of water? nNO ~YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water or more than a 10 acre increase or decrease. · Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area. · Other impacts: Non-protected surface poqds exist on the parcel. 5. Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity? r*'lNO D~YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action will require a discharge permit · Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does not have approval to serve proposed (proiect) action · Proposed Action requires water supply from wells with greater than 45 gallons per minute pumping capacity · Construction or operahon causing any contamination of a water supply system. · Proposed ~,ction will adverse~ affect groundwater" · Liquid effluent will be conve¥,-d off the site to facilities which presently do not ;exist or have inadequate c, apa¢ity · Propo,ed Action v, ouId use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per day · Proposed achon wdl I,k~I', c. u',' ~.ih~tion OT o~het d~charge rotc an products greater than 1 100 gallons 7 I 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change [] [] []Yes •No [] [] DYes DE• [] [] DYes •No [] [] []Yes []No [] [] OYes []No [] [] []Yes []No [] [] ['-]Yes •No [] [] I~Yes •No [] [] []Yes •No [] [] []Yes •No [] [] DYes []No [] [] []Yes •No [] [] I~lyes []No ,. (' · Proposed Action may-cause substantial erosion. · Proposed Action is incompatible with existing drainage patterns · Proposed Action will allow development in a designated floodway. · Other impacts: Proposed Action r~av adversely affect drainage. IMPACT ON AIR 7. Will proposed action affect air qualityf I~NO i-lYES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips in any given hour. · Proposed Action will result in the incineration of more than I ton of refuse per hour. · Emission rate of total contaminants will exceed 5 lbs. per hour or a heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour. · Proposed action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed to industrial use. · Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial development within existing industrial areas. · Other impacts: IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS 8 Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered species? I-lNg ~'IyES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Reduction of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal list, using the site, over or near site or found on the site. · Remove,' of any portion of a critical or significant .wildlife habitat. · Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other than for a,gricultural purposes. · Other impacts: Endanq~r~d ~p~io~ m~y ~w~ ~ on site. 9 Will Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or non-endangered species~ [~NO i-WES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action would substantially interfere with any resident or m,§ratory fish. shellfish or wildlife species · Proposed Achon requires the removal of more than 10 acres of mature forest (over 100 years of age) or other locally ,mportant IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES 10Wdl thu Propo~.d Act,on atlc~t ag.cuhural land re~ource~ [xamples th,d ~ou~d a[)p[~ to column 2 land (,n(lude~ cropland ha~held~ pasture xmc~ard orchard, etc) 8 · 2 3' Small to Pote~ti~ Can Impac~ Be Moderate Lar0e ~itigated By Impact Impact Project Change [] [] []Yes ~'lNo [] [] []Yes •No [] [] OYes •No [] [] ~Yes •No [] [] [-]Yes f-lNg [] ~ ~Ves ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~o ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~ ~ ~Ye~ ~o : · Construction activity would excavate or compact the soil profile of agricultural land · The proposed action would irreversibly convert more than 10 acres of agricultural land or, if located in an Agricultural District. more than 2.5 acres of a~ricultural land. ' ' · The proposed action would disrupt or prevent installation of agricultural lard management systems (eg., subsurface drain lines, outlet ditches. strip cropping); or create a need for such measures (e.g. cause a farm field to drain poorly due to increased runoff) · Other impacts: IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES 11 Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources? r-IN• I~IyES (if necessary, use the Visual EAF Addendum in Section 617.21. Appendix B } Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed land uses, or project components obviously different from or in sharp contrast to current surrounding land use patterns, whether man-made or natural. · Proposed land uses, or proiect components visible to users of aesthetic resources which will eliminate or significantly reduce their enjoyment of the aesthetic qualities of that resource. · Pro~ect components that will result in the elimination or significant screemng of scemc views known to be important to the area · Other ~mpacts IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 12 Will Pfqposed Action impac! any sit.e or structure of historic~ pre* hist•nc or paleontological importance? I-IN• J~YES Ezamples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action occurring v,,holl~ or partially ~sithin or substantially conhguous to any facdm, or '~de hsted on the Siate or Nahonal Register of h~stor,c places · An'~ ,mpact to an archaeological s,te or to~sd bed Iocaled ~'.lthin the proiect s~te · ()th~ ,mp,~ct,__~qy~flQg~DC_~ssess~d at present. IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION g I 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change [] [] I-'lyes •No [] [] OYes E~No [] [] ~"'lYes []No [] [] DYes •No [] [] []Yes ~No [] [] r'-Iyes nNo [] [] DYes []No [] ID []Yes []No [] [] []Yes []~o ~NO I J IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION 14. Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems; DNO I~YES Examples that wc~uld apply to column 2 · Alteration of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods. · Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems. · Other impacts: Traffic on Beraen Avenue increase significant 1¥. IMPACT ON ENERGY 15. Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or energy supply? ~)NO r-lyES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action will cause a greater than 5% increase in the use of any form of energy in the municipality. · Proposed Action will require the creation or extension of an energy .transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two family residences or to serve a major commercial or industrial use. · Other impacts: NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS 16 Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or .vibration as a result of the Proposed Action? [~NO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Blasting within 1.500 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive facility · Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day). · Proposed Action will produce operating no~se exceeding the local ambient no~se levels for no~se outside of structures · Proposed Action will remove natural barriers that would act as a noise screen · Other :impacts' IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH 17 Will Proposed ^¢t~on affect public health and safety? ~NO ~Y[S Esamples thnt v, oL,id ap;,h, to column 2 · Proposed Achon may cause a risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances(~ e od, pest,c~des, chemicals, rad,ahon etc tm the event of I 2 3' Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change [] [] []Yes •No [] [] DYes nEo [] r~ ~Yes •No -~ [] []Yes []No [] [] []Yes DNo [] [] []Yes []No [] [] []Yes r"lNo [] [] DYes •No [] [] r-lyes •No [] [] DYes •No [] [] []Yes I-1No [] [] [-]Yes 10 IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHARACTER OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD 18 Will proposed action affect the character of the existing community? r"lNO ~YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · The permanent population of the city, town or village in which the project is located is likely to grow by more than 5%. · The municipal budget for capital expenditures or operating services will' increase by more'than 5% per year as a result of this project. · Proposed action will conflict with officially adopted plans or goals, · Proposed action will cause a change in the density of land use. · Proposed Action will replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures or areas of historic importance to the community. · Development will create a demand for additional community services (e.g. schools, police and fire, etc.) · Proposed Action will set an important precedent for future projects. · P. roposed Action will create or eliminate employment, · Other impacts' I 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be ' Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change [] [] []Yes •No [] [] []Yes •No [] [] F'~Yes •No [] [] I~Yes •No [] D []Yes ~o [] D []Yes D~o [] [] I~Yes [] [] []Yes [],o [] [] DYes •No 19. Is there, or is there likely to be. public controversy related to po.tential adverse environmental impacts? i"lNO E1yEs If Any Action in Part 2 Is Identified as a Potential Large Impact or If You Cannot Determine the Magnitude o! Impact, Proceed to Part Part 3--EVALUATION OF T~E IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS .Responsibility of Lead A~ency Part 3 must ~e prepared if one or rinse' impact(s) is considered to be potentially large, even if the impact(s] may be mitigated. Instructions D,~cuss the follo~',ing for each Lmpact identifmd in Columr. 2 of Part 2 Br~efhr describe thc, ~mpa,t 2 Deschbelif apphcable) ho~', the ~mpact could be mm~ated of reduced to a small to moderate impact by proiect change(s) 3 Based on the miormat~on avadable, dec,dr' d ~t JS reasonable to conclude that this impact is imporlant. To answf, r thc, queshon of importance cons,der · 'l'hu prohabd~t', of th(' m~pa(1 o((urrmg 11 PART III 1. IMPACT ON LAND The proposed development of 107 units of residential dwellings could take place in areas of high water table as there are several wetland and pond areas on the site. A careful siting of the structures, roads and open space could minimize their impact. Construction of the project may take more than one construction season. Therefore, impacts attendant to such a prolonged construction period such as erosion, drainage, construction staging, and the like, could extend to surrounding properties. Such impacts can be minimized through the development of a construction staging plan. It is possible that bluff erosion may be stimulated by the construction of the project or by occupancy of the dwellings. Once begun, bluff erosion is extremely difficult to stop.. Prevention of bluff erosion is possible by an erosion and sedimentation control plan. 2. IMPACT ON WATER Protected wetlands exist on the site. Adverse impacts due to construction or occupancy of the dwellings on these wetlands is possible. Careful design can minimize these impacts. Non-protected surface ponds exist on the parcel. Adverse impacts caused by construction or occupancy of the dwellings may affect these ponds. Design of the project can minimize potential impacts. The project will require a discharge permit and well permit from the Suffolk County Department of Health Services as well as a Long Island well permit from the Department of Environmental Conservation. No public water supply or wastewater treatment facilities exist to service the proposed development. All of these factors may have an adverse effect on groundwater quantity and quality. These adverse effects can be mitigated, but need careful design consideration. The project may have adverse impacts on existing drainage patterns due to an increase in impervious surfaces, redirected drainage flows, increased rates of runoff and the presence of ponds and wetlands on the site. Careful design can mitigate these impacts. 3. IMPACT ON PLANTS & ANIMALS The presence of freshwater wetlands on the site indicate that threatened or endangered species may also exist on the site. A field inventory needs to be established by a competent authority before an accurate impact assessment can be made. 4. IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES The loss of some 100 acres of agricultural soils will occur. The proposed zone will effectuate a defacto transfer of development rights from the Norris Property on Camp Mineola Road in Mattituck to this site. This needs to be studied in a comprehensive environmental impact statement embodying both projects. The instant change-of-zone should be incorporated as an alternative to the project proposed for the Norris site to weigh the positive and adverse impacts within an overall SEQR review of the transfer. 5. IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES The proposed residential development will be a contrasting visual element on the landscape compared to surrounding land uses. Detailed design consideration needs to be given to minimize the adverse impact of such a development. 6. IMPACT O~ ARCHAEOLOGIC RESOURCES This impact cannot be assessed until conducted by a competent authority. a study has been 7. IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION Local street traffic will increase dramatically as a result of the proposed development. This needs to be studied and weighed against a possible decrease on the Camp Mineola Road vicinity. 8. IMPACT ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD The project proposed and the defacto transfer have no precedence in Southold's zoning ordinance. Aside from the legal questions involved, several community impacts need to be considered. Some of these have already been addressed, others include the impact of the increased density on adjacent properties in the Bergen Avenue area, both as existing land uses and future land use. There has been a great deal of public controversy surrounding the development of the Norris property. There has been public controversy surrounding previous attempts at defacto transfer in the context of this project. One must expect there will be public controversy over this proposal as well. To properly structure environmental and community impact issues, as well as public comment and legal review into an established procedure, this change-of-zone request and its relation to development on the Norris property should be incorporated into an overall environmental impact statement covering the two sites. PETER V. SNY~)ER JOHN J HART JOHN J ROE. ;l~ FREOERICL ATWOOD January 22. 1988 1988 PELLETREAU & PELLETREAU ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW 20 CHURCH STREET - BOX ilo PATCHOGUE, NEW YORK i177~. TEL 516 447-69oo FAX 516/475-5651 DIRECT DIAL 447-8906 Hon. Francis J. Murphy Supervisor Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 RE: HEATHER HILLS Dear Supervisor Murphy: We have received the enclosed letter dated November 30, 1987, from the Planning Board. We feel that the position taken by the Department of Health Services in its letter of December 23, 1987, a copy of which is enclosed, saying.that "the proposed population densities appear to be in conformance with Article VI of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code" indicates that the zone change, which is a density function, can be addressed prior to the determination regarding water supply at the Norris property. As a matter of fact, it is our understanding that the Environmentalist employed by the Town has recommended that the proposal regarding the increase of density on the Wanat site be included in the alternative section of the Environmental Impact Statement for the Norris property. We, therefore, respectfully request the application for the change of zone On the Wanat property be entertained prior to the determination by the Department of Health Services of the water supply at Norris. PELLETREAU & PELLETREAU January 22, 1988 Hon. Francis J. Murphy Page 2. We appreciate your attention to this matter. Very truly yours. TR & PELLETREAU JFH:hmm cc: Counselwoman Jean W. Cochran Counselwoman Ellen Larsen Counselwoman Ruth Oliva Counselman George L. Penny, IV Justice Raymond W. Edwards Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman of the Planning Board of the Town of Judith Terry, Town Clerk of the Town of $outhold Mr. Richard T. Cart $outhold 1U/ll-12 Pk,.~N I NG].BO ~.ll D T O.iW..-~ Oi~'Tsou4IIOLD S UEEO-KK~¢O L~T Y $outhold. N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1935 November 30, 1987 Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk Sou~hold Town Hall Southold, NY 11971 Re: Richard T. Cart and Joseph A. W Change of Zone request Dear bfrs. Terry: The Planning' Board declines to comment on this change of zone requ because the applicant so far has not supplied it with crucial informa~i from the Suffolk County Depar=ment of Health Services regarding water supply at the Norris property. Consequently, there has been no decisio on the allowable yield for the Norris property. The Planning Board feels that the Norris yield figure must be determined before, it can realistically judge the proposed transfer of yield to this new site. When the applicant provides the requested information, the Plannin: Board will proceed with its review and send its comments on to the Town hoard. RECEIVED JAN- 61.988 cc: John J. Hart, Esq. ~Henry E. Raynor, Jr. Very truly yours, BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. C~AI~I SOUTHOLD TOWN.PLANNING BOARD P_ELLETRE,~U .&. PELL£TR.£A. LJ COUNTY OF SUFFOLk COPy FOP YOUl INFORMATION PETER F. COHALAN SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES DAVID HARRIS. M.D., M.P.H. TO: Francis J..~Lrphy Supervisor Tc~,~ Hall 53095 .~LRin P~. PO. Box 1179 Southold, N.Y. 11971 RE: Carr-Wanat - Change of Zone & Norris Estates SC73.~9 1000-112-].-16 & 1000-122-5-4 & 1000-123-6-2 DATE: DecOr 23, 1987 Dear ~ir. ~3rph.v: 2 9 ]987 We are in receipt of your letter dated above referenced project. December )8, ~987 concerning the 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. [] A more accurate project location is needed. (Suffolk County Tax Map No.) This Department has received an application and it is: [] Complete [] Incomplete [] Other: It appears that the project can be served by: Sewage Disposal System [] Sewer System and Treatment Works [] Subsurface Sewage Disposal System(s) [] Other: WWM- 0 6 7 (516) 548-331 (cont'd) °~a~er S.uppl¥ System [] A Public Water Supply System [] Individual Water Supply System(s) [] Other: 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 with its findings. Applications havebeen re~ived for boththecarrand Norris Estates Subdivisions. Twenty-five residential parcels are proposed for Norris Estates and 95 parcels for the Carr Subdivision. Individual water supply wells and sewage disposal facilities are proposed for both projects. This Depax'h~ent is awaiting test well and test hole results, prior to processing the application further. The proposed population densities appear to be in conformance with Article VI of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code. Further comment may be provided upon completion of the application review. Name ,? ,~ ~ ~', -> Phone 548-3312 DErAmT~IT OF HE~TH SERVXC~/ DKIHKIHG g&TK~ SU~LT SKCTION Date Requested (3) TEsT WELL Su bdivis io~- Nc-me (9) Stree Commu~ft¥ (7) Towns'hip Code TBA TBR TEH THU, TIS ' ~' ~0~ TRI TSH TSI - TSM &Dp.ointment Date ~-' / ~-'/__ Day ~-w~ Time (30) Map Coordinate Locatiqn (20) COMM NCOM- //~PR!V (14) District /000, (13) Section (16) Block (17) Lot -- ": -~7=~ (1) Test Well # ~ (23) Subdiv Lot t (31) Depth ........ (33) Depth to Water (42) Casing Size .. :,~KLL_ ~HFO.UMATIOB (51 (54 (11 (24) Sample Date Sample Tap Time Start Time Stop Elapsed Run Time Gallons Per Minute Depth Checked Sanitarian SANPLE INFORMATION Yes __ No Type Bact ~artial Ch~ + MBAS ~ ~Small SCO ~ ~ / SC Pest Other ' 288320 ~ NO. Field NO. Date:. Time: COL By:. (Name not initials) Date Received in Lab Public Water Private Water Other. Date Completed Examined By ~ SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES PUBLIC HEALTH LABORATORY FEB 22 )g88 FEB 2,:' )288 Complete [] [] 75 Spec. Cond. -- : ~.mho~/cm ~ ~' ~-~4, 73 pH ,~ / 82 T'Hardness(mg/lCaC03' 88 L I B7 Su)at~(~ll~4) } ~ i~ ~n~ (1) 101 M~a~e(mg/mMn) ~' ~.~ i~ admium (1) 02 ~r(mg/iCu) ~ ~ /~ 123; Lead (1) 124 ~cu~ (1} 121 ~m (~/I Director Partial (1) Results Reported as Micrograms Per Liter. Point of ColleCtion Remarks:/~~, CH~)MiCAL EXAMINATION OF WATER Name ~~ Owner or District Lab No. . Field No.~-~--/~ Da ce ~_.~ Time Col · By SUFFOLK DIVISION Public Water Private Water Other Date Completed Examined By COUNTY'DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES OF MEDICAL LEGAL INVESTIGATISNS & FORENSI'C SCIENCES PUBLIC HEALTH LABORATORY Point of Collection Remarks: TRAC~ ORGANIC ANALYSIS OF WATER 3O6 305 290 323 309 Compound , ppb Compound vinyl chloride - kl methylene chloride .... ~{ bromochloromethane .... -250 benzene ................ 251 toluene ppb 1,1 dichloroe~an~-,...~..~ 259_ .ethylbenzene ........ ... . 300 chloroform ............ 324 1,2 dichloroethane .... 321 1,1,1 trichloroethane 304 carbon tetrachloride... 294 1 bromo 2 chloroethan~ 405 1,2 dichloropropane ... 310 1,1,2 trichloroethylene 303 chlorodibromomethane .. 293 1,2 dlbromoethane ..... 420 2 bromo 1 chloropropane 301 bromoform ........... 311 tetrachloroethylene .~ ~ 308 cis dichloroethylene '' 320 freon 113 - 307 1,1 dichloroethylene .. ~f 302 bromodichloromethane .. ~[ 406 2,3 dichloropropene .... ~ r ~07 cis dlchloropropene ... ~I 408 trans dlchloropropene . ~ ' 322 1,1,2 trichloroethane . ~ 252 m-xylene ............... .4{ 253 p-xylene 257 bromobenzene ........... -~ 266 o-chlorotoluene ........ ~[ 267 m-chlorotoluene ........ 268 p-chlorotoluene · 265 total chlorotoluene - 4'19 1,3,5 trimethylbenze~'[ 418 1,2,4 trimethylbenzene . , 415 m,p~dichlorobenzene .... ~ 412 o-dichlorobenzene ...... ~ 432 p-diethylbenzene ....... ~ 435 1,2,4,5 tetramethylbenz' ~ ! 437 1,2,4 trichlorobenzene . %~ 438 1,2,3 trichlorobenzene ~ 409 1,1,1,2 tetrachl'oethane <'l 430 1,2,2,3 tetraahl'propane ~ 295 s-tetrachloroethane ..... 431 1,1,1,2 tetrachl'propane ~ 433 1,2,3 trichloropropane -I La b No. P- Field No. '(51) Date Time ~.-T-~-, -- /' /' C~l. B~- Rec'd in Lab Public Water Private Water Other Date C'~mpl eted.~jff~fi~ SUFFOLK COUNTY-DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH DIVISION OF MEDICAL LEGAL INVESTIGATIONS & PUBLIC.HEALTH LABORATORY SERVICES FORENSIC SCIENCES PESTICIQE ANALYSIS (4) Street No. (9) Street (8) Community /~.,,.~'~5 '~ .~! Mailing Address OF WATER (2) First .Sampli ng-'P'oi/'~'~ .C,./?.~?~"'~'...~",~.":~ (15) (30) (31) (57) Pub ..Ncom ./ Priv / Distance to Farm f't. / Map Coordinates / / / Well Depth ~7 ft. Resample? .ye~__.Ke~.~ ..No '(14) District (13) Section /...~..~ (16) Block (17) Lot Owner COMPOUND PPB / MG/L (223) Aldicarb ............. (425) Aldicarb Sulfoxide ... (426) Aldicarb Sulfone .... (224) Carbofuran .......... (427) 3-Hydroxycarbofuran (428) Oxamyl .............. (429) Carbaryl ............ (A3g) Met~omyl . . z) / (78) / / / / / / / -/ Nitrate SUFFOLK COUNTY DKPARTHKNT OF HEALTH DKINKXNG WATKK SUPPLY SECTION . Teac Well Sampling / Date Requested (3) TEST WELL (9) ($) Subdivision Name Street ~\, Community (7) Township Code TBA TBR TEH THU TIS JTOS TRI TSH TSI TSM Appointment Date Day Time (30) Location Map Coordinates (20) COMM NCOM ~ PRIV TAX MA~ NUMBER (14) District IOOo, (13) Section ~Zz. (16) Block ~, (17) Lot q. Well Driller Phone WKLL INPORKATION (1) Test Well # .. I ~, 2 ~ (23) Subdiv Lot # (31) Depth ........ ~ ~ (33) Depth to Water ~ ~O (42) Casing Size .. 3 4 (51) Sample Date ;~-~-~7 Sample Type (54) Sample Tap P~ \--~ Partial Time Start ~[~O ;~.'~ Time Stop /~ [~'0 I~/O~ (11) Elapsed Run Time /~-~,. /~/~ (24) Gallons Per Minute ~ ~ ~ ~ Depth Checked Yes ~No Sanitarian ~ Chemical + MBAS Other 5, t Remarks/ DEC 28 1987 Lab Ne. Date Received in Lab ? Field No. I J ~ ~ Public Water Date: /,.~.. ~,=~. c~ -~ 7 Private Water ~ Time: /~/'/~ Other Col. By: ti ~'/~. ~'~'/~_ Date Completed DEC 3 ~ 1987 (Name not initials) Examined By SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES PUBLIC HEALTH LABORATORY CHEMICAL EXAMINATION OF WATER Owner or ~ C,/..). J District Point of Collection I~ C) ~ p Remarks: (1) Results Reported as Micrograms Per Liter. Partial ~ Complete [] Metals Only [] S~c' C°nd' / ~,mhos/cm 7 ~, 84 T. Alkalinity (mg/I CaC03) 8t MBAS (rng/I) PR ~, '~ 82 T. Hardness {mg/I CaCO3) 88 To~al Hyd P N~trit~s f Nilrales (m~/I N} ~ 3 Z ~ Ca Rardne~ (mg/I Cae03) Free Ammonia (mg/I N) ~ ~ ~ Mg Hardne~ (~/I CaC03) ~ N~ (mg/I N) Chiorldes (mg/I CI} J ~ Sulfales(mg/ISO4) ~ ~ 1~ ~senic Iron {mg/I Fe) / ,3 / 5 ~lenium (1 Manganese (mg/I Mn) ~--~O ;22 Cadmium (1) Cop~r(mg/ICu) ,, ~ ~,/ ~ 123 Lead (1) S~ium(mg/INa} / d,/ 126 Silver (1) Zinc {mg/I Zn) // I~ Chromium 124 Mercu~ {1) ~21 Barium (mg/I Ba) Director. Lab No. Field No. Date Time ~,~ Col. By ~ Public-Water '/ ! Private Water Other Date Completed Examined By SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES DIVISION OF MEDICAL LEGAL INVESTIGATIONS & FORENSIC SCIENCES PUBLIC HEALTH LABORATORY TRACE ORGANIC ANALYSIS OF WATER Name ~Rl~ ~$T~ "~--/~- [ Owner or Dtetr~ct Location ~J ~d~-- ~q~'.. 7~/~TITO~ , Point of Collection ~ ~ ~ Remarks: J~ ~OrT~ Compound ppb__ Compound ppb__ 306 vinyl chloride ........ 305 methylene chloride .... 290 bromochloromethane ..... 323 1,1 dichloroethane .... 309 trane diehloroethylene. 300 chloroform ............ 324 1,2 dichloroethane .... ~ 321 1,1,1 trichloroethane ~' 304 carbon tetrachloride .... ~ 294 1 bromo 2 chloroethane 405 1,2 dichloropropane ... 310 1,1,2 trichloroethylene 303 chlorodibromomethane .. 293 1,2 dibromoethane 301 bromoform ............. ~I 311 tetrachloroethylene ... ~ 308 tis dichloroethylene .. ~1 320 freon 113 ..... xl 307 1,1 dichloroethylene 302 bromodichloromethane 406 2,3 dichloropropene .. 407 tis dichloropropene .. 408 trans dichloropropene 322 1,1,2 trichloreethane 250 benzene ................ 251 toluene ................ 258 chlorobenzene ........... 259 ethylbenzene ............ 254 o-xylene ................. 252 m-xylene ................ ~53 p-xylene ................ 255 total xylenes .......... 257 bromobenzene . ..- 267 m-chlorotoluene ........ ~f 268-p-chlorotoluene .... ~.. ~{ 265 total chlorotoluene .. ~ · 19 1,3,5 trimethylbenzene ~( 418 1,2,4 trimethylbenzene . ~( 415 m,p-dichlorobeuzene .... a~ 412 0-dichlorobenzene ....... ~ 432 p-diethylbenzene ....... Al 435 1,2,4,5 tetramethylbenz' ~l 437 1,2,4 trichlorobenzene . ~ ~ 438 1,2,3 trichlorobenzene ~ 409 1,1,1,2 tetrachl'oethane ~fl 430 1,2,2,3 tetrachl'propane - 295s-tetrachloroethane ..o. - 431 1,1,1,2 tetrachl'propane - 433 1,2,3 trichloropropane . ~ ~ II .ab fl Field No. {51 ) Dale Time Col. By 1387386 I~O~ Rec'd in Lab Public Water Private Waler Other Date Compleled, SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES DIVISION OF MEDICAL LEGAL iNVESTIGATIONS & FORENSIC SCIENCES PUBLIC HEALTH LABORATORY PESTICIDE ANALYSIS OF WATER (3) Last Name (4) Street No. (8] Community Mailing Address ,/"1,,,~' T" 7" ! 7' ~--I'~,... / Sampling Point (2) First (20) __Pub (15) Distance to Farm {30) Map Coordinates (31) Well Depth (57) Resample? Yes Last Result Ncom ~ Priv / ./ Key R No ,, (14) District (13) Section (16) Block (17) Lot Remarks Owner COMPOUND PPB MGIL (223) A d carb .......... f. ~ ..................... ~" I (425) AldicarbSulfoxide ...... ~' 1 (426) Aldicarb Sullone ......................... ~' (224) Carboluran ................................ (427) 3-Hydroxycarbofuran ...... ~' 1 4;~8) Oxamyl ................................... ~' ! i Carbaryl ................................. ~ · ! MeIhomyl ..............................Z 1 (431) Metham ......................... ~, {078) Nilrate ........ ~ Lab No. Field No. Date: Time: Col. By: (Name not initials) Date Received in Lab Public Water Private Water ~'"'"'"' Other Date Completed Examined By SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES PUBLIC HEALTH LABORATORY CHEMICAL EXAMINATION OF WATER Name J~ro/~.~.IS ~...,,~7--,,,~T~-~ ,.r..~.,,,~3' ~ Owneror District Location /'~/~'~'J ~'UF~"~--/~..- ~I"V~... ~.'l~-'r"7'"l~-C/~.-.~..~ Point of Collection P 0,,,~-1 ~ Remarks: (1) Results Reported as Micrograms Per Liter. Complete [] Metals Only [] mhos/cm ~ (~ 84 T, Alkalinity (mg/I CaC03) 81 MBAS (rng/I) -..G , 73 pH ',~i ? 82 T. Hardness (mg/I CaC03) 88 TotaJ Hyd P (rog/II II N~lriles ~' 78 Nitrates (m0/I N) ~,,/ 83 Ca Hardness [m9/I CaC03) 90 Fluodde (mg/I FI 76 Free Ammonia (mgll N) ~JO ~. M9 Hardness (mg/I CaC03) 77 N~ites(mg/IN) 90 Chlorides (mg/I CI) 87 Sullates (mg/I S04) 100 Iron (mg/I Fe) ~ ./~,~// ~ 125 Selenium (1) 101 Manganese (mg/I Mn) ~,~ ~)1;)~;~' 122 Cadmium (t) 102 Copper(mg/ICu) ~' ~ ~ O 123 Lead (1) 106 Sodium(mg/INa} ,~ ~,~f~ 126 Silver (1) 103 Zinc(mg/IZn} ~ ~' 104 Chromium (1) 124 Mercu~ (1 Director Lab Field No. Date ~ Time Col. By ~ Publt~ Water/-- ' Private Water ~ Other Date Completed ~-°~3'~'/ Examined By ~C~ ,,. SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES DIVISION OF MEDICAL LEGAL INVESTIGATIONS & FORENSIC SCIENCES PUBLIC HEALTH LABORATORY TRACE ORGANIC ANALYSIS OF WATER Location Point of Collection Remarks: Compound Owner or District .,4/-TI __ppb Compound 306 vinyl chloride ........ zl 305 methylene chloride .... z% 290 bromochloromethane ..... 323 1,1 dichloroethane .... ~ 309 trans dichloroethylene, z% 300 chloroform ......... .. 324 1,2 dichloroethane --. 321 1,1,1 trichloroethane 304 carbon tetrachloride .... 294 1 bromo 2 chloroethane 405 1,2 dichloropropane .... 310 1,1,2 trichloroethylene 303 chlorodibromomethane .. 293 1,2 dibromoethane ...... 420 2 bromo 1 chloropropane 301 bromoform ............. 311 tetrachloroethy7 .ne ... 308 320 freon 113 .............. ' 292 dibromomethane ......... 307 1,1 dichloroethylene .. 302 bromodichloromethane .. 406 2,3 dichloropropene .... 407 cis dichloropropene ... 408 trans dichloropropene 322 1,1,2 trichloroethane 250 benzene ................ z~ 251 toluene ................ zt 258 chlorobenzene ........... z~ 259 ethylbenzene ............ z/ 254 o-xylene ............... ~ t 252 m-xylene ............... zt g53 p-xylene ............... z~ 255 total xylenes ........... 257 bromobenzene ........... - 266 o-¢hlorotoluene ........ Xl 267 m-chlorotoluene ........ Zf 268 p-chlorotoluene ........ ~I 265 total chlorotoluene .... ~19 1,3,5 trimethylbenzene ~t 418 1,2,4 trimethylbenzene · ~ % 415 m,p-dichlorobenzene .... z~ 412 o-dichlorobenzene ...... z~ 432 p-diethylbenzene ....... ~{ 435 1,2,4,5 tetramethylbenz' z I 437 1,2,4 trichlorobenzene · ~ 438 1,2,3 trichlorobenzene · Z~ 409 1,1,1,2 tetrachl'oethane xl 430 1,2,2,3 tetrachl'propane 295 s-tetrachloroethane .... 431 1,1,1,2 tetrachl'propane 433 1,2,3 trichloropropane ~l Rec'd in Lab Public Water Private Water Other · Date Completed SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES DIVISION OF MEDICAL LEGAL INVESTIGATIONS & FORENSIC SCIENCES PUBLIC HEALTH LABORATORY (3) Lest Name (4) Slreet No. (8) Community Mailing Address PESTICIDE ANALYSIS OF WATER (9) Slreet ,/'J~: 4,,..) · 'r'. J,,u. ~ (2) First / Sampling Point ~ ~ ~ ~ (20) Pub (15) Distance Io Farm (30) Map Coordinates (31) Welt Depth (57) Resample? Last Result Ncom 4...-'""'~ Pr iv ~;)/ [1. ./ / Yes Key R No (14) District / ~' ~' ~ (13) Section I o~"~--~ (16) Block "~" (17) Lot ,'~ Remarks Owner COMPOUND PPB / MG/L (223) AIdicarb .......... :.~ .................... (425) Aldicarb Sulfoxide ....................... (426) Aidicmb Sullone ........................ (224) Carboluran ............................... (427) 3-Hydroxycarboluran ................ (4; ]} Oxamyl ................................... zl 9) Carbaryl .................................. Z' I ? ZI ~4) 1 -Naphthol ................. zl 0) Methomyl ................. / {431) Metham ....................... (078) Nitrate ....................... FRANCIS J. MURPHY SUPERVISOR TELEPHONE (516) 765-1800 OFFICE OF THE SUPERVISOR TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TOWN HALL, 53095 MAIN ROAD P.O. BOX 1179 SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971 March 25,1988 TO: Valerie Scopaz FROM: James A. Schondebare, Town Attorney REF: Norris and Wanat property I advised the Town Board on 3/22/88 of our conversation reference D~i~ on Norris and change of zone on Wanat. The Town Board wants lead agency on the zone change, and co-lead agency with the planningkon this total project. SUFFOLK COUNTY ~ DKPAB. TMKNT OF HKALTH SxKV'rC~ DR. INK't'NG gATNB. SUPI'LT SECTION Teat: ~'ell S-upi:lng 2.1 I Date Requested TEST WELL (3) Subdivisio~Na~ne Community (7) Township Code TBA TBR TEH THU TlS ~/'TOS TRI TSH TSI TSM Appointmen~ Date Day Time (30) Map Location ! iili Coordinatei ~[ . F-- (20) __ COMM __ NCOM ~/PRIV TAZMA~ NUMBER (14) District (13) Section /~. (16) Block (17) Lot q. Well Driller Phone ~7~- ~ (1) Test Well # .. (23) Subdiv Lot # (31) Depth ........ (33) Depth to Water (42) Casing Size .. ~ELL INFORMATION 1 2 (51) (54) (11) (24) SAHPLE XNFORWaTION Sample Date Sample Tap Time Start Time Stop Elapsed Run Time Gallons Per Minute fO~ Depth Checked /Yes No Sanitarian Type Bact ~artial Ch~ + MBAS ~Small SCO ~ / \ SC Pest Other 288,330 Lab No. Field No, ~"~'~ / Date: ~ Time: Col. By: (Name not initials) Date Received in Lab Public Water Private Water Other Date Completed Examined By SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES PUBLIC HEALTH LABORATORY CH~MICAL EXAMINATION OF WATER Name ! Owner or Dislricl Loca,,on .-,_,-:. // , Point o! Collection ,~,..y~'....~_X~ ~_~..?,~ {1 ) Results Reported as Micrograms Per Liter. Partial ~ Complete [] Spec. Cond. ,-.-.v Metals Only n 73 pH .,~j 82 T. Hardness (mg/I CaCO3J 88 Total Hyd P Nibiies + 76 Free Ammonia (mg/[ N) ) (J .-~ ~.- Mg Hardness (rng/[ CaCO3) 77 N,,,~ (mg/I N) L 87 Sulfates (rng/I SO4) '~lO~, 120 Nsenic (1) lO0 Iro~(mg/lFe) <~_ ~),/(~) 125 Selenium (1) 102 P-x)pper(mg/ICu) .~C ~i/~) l~J Lead (1) : 03 Zinc(mg/IZn) ] ~, '~ Chromium (1) 124 MercuQ, (t) 121 Badum (mg/I Ba) Director Lab No. Field No Time Col. By Public Water Private Water Other Date Completed Examined By SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES DIVISION OF MEDICAL LEGAL INVESTIGATIONS & FORENSIC SCIENCES PUBLIC HEALTH LABORATORY TRAC~ ORGANIC ANALYSIS OF WATER District Point of Collection Remarks: Compound ppb Compound 306 vinyl chloride A~ 305 methylene chlor~j~'~j~ Z{ 290 bromochloromethane .... 323 1,1 dichloroethane .... ~'l 309 trans dichloroethylene. Rt 300 chloroform ...... ~I 321 1,1,1 trichloroetha ~! 304 carbon tetrachloride... ~ 294 1 bromo 2 chloroethane z ~ 405 1,2 dichloropropane ... z( 310 1,1,2 trichloroethylene ~ ~ 303 chlorodibromomethane .. ~, 293 1,2 dibromoethane ..... ~ ! 420 2 bromo 1 chloropropane L ! 301 bromoform ............ 308 cis dichloroethylene .. ~( 320 freon 113 - 307 1,1 dichloroethylene .. ~I 302 bromodichloromethane .. ~ 406 2,3 dichloropropene ... ~ ~ 407 cis dichloropropene .. ~: 408 trans dichloropropene ~ 2'~ 322 1,1,2 trichloroethane . _ f ppb_ 250 benzene ................ 251 toluene ...... 259 ethylbenzene ............ 254 o-xylene ............... 252 m-xylene ............... ~{ 253 p-xylene 255 total 257 bromobenzene - 267 m-chlorotoluene ........ ~f 268 p-chlorotoluene ~ ~ 265 total chlorotolu~'~ '"_ 4'19 1,3,5 trimethylbenzene _ ( 418 1,2,4 trimethylbenzene , 415 m, P-dichlorobenzene .... 412 o-dichlorobenzene ...... 432 thylb " p-die enzene ....... 435 1,2,4,5 tetramethylbenz' 437 1,2,4 trichlorobenzene ~'. 438 1,2,3 trichlorobenzene . 409 1,1,1,2 tetrachl'oethane 430 1,2,2,3 tetrachl'propane 295 s-tetrachloroethane _ 431 1,1,1,2 tetrachl'pro~' 433 1,2,3 trichloropropane Lab No. P- 0 .88 47 Field No. (51) Date -.=,L/] ~/~ Time Col. ~y,_~-~.~ .,.~. ,-3 Rec'd in Lab Public Water Private Water" Other Date C'ompleted..~/4~.~E~- SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES DIVISION OF MEDICAL LEGAL INVESTIGATIONS & FORENSIC SCIENCES PUBLIC HEALTH LABORATORY PESTICII~E ANALYSIS OF , (3) Last Name/-~".L/~4.>.~ ~////~,/~,~,)/~,~1, (4) Street No. (9) Street lB) Community Mailing Address WATER (2) First (20) Pub Ncom ~/ Priv / (1~) District (15) Distance to Farm ft. / (13) Section (30) Map Coordinates /__ /__ / (16) Block (31) Well Depth ~? ft. / (17) Lot {57} Resample? Yes Key ~ No / Owner COMPOUND PPB / MG/L (223) Aldicarb .......... (425) Aldicarb Sulfoxide (426) Aldicarb Sulfone .. (224) Carbofuran ........ (427) 3-Hydroxycarbofuran ..zJ (428) Oxamyl ............... Z ~ (429) Carbaryl ............. L J (~43g) Methomyl . - · ~ I / / 1 / / / / / / (78) Nitrate ........... 18'1347:6/86 SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTNENT OF HEALTH SERV] DRINKING WATER SUPFLY SECTION. Tea~ Hell Samplins. /~ / Date Requested (3) (2) (9) (8) (7) TEST WELL Subdivision Name Street ~\, Township Code TEH THU Appointment Date I~/ Day TBA TBR Loca=ion (30) Map Coordinates TRI TSH TSI (20) COMM NCOM b/ PR1V- TAX NA~ NUMBER (14) District IOOo. (13) Section ~Zz- (16) Block ..... gl ...... (17) Lot ~, ~ Well Driller Sanitarian /to5: 'r. oo. 3 4 SAMPLE IIlFO~#ATION __Yes ~No- Bact Sample Type \ ~'1 Partlal Chemical + MBAS Other (51) Sample Date (54) Sample Tap Time Start Time Stop (11) Elapsed Run (24) Gallons Per Minute Depth Checked I~ELL INFORMATION (1) Test Well # .. 1 (23) Subdiv Lot # (31) Depth ........ (33) Depth to Water (42) Casing Size .. DEC 1987 DEC 1 987 Lab No. Field No. Date: "I've: Col. By: {Name not initials) Date Received in Lab Public Water Private Water Other Date Completed Examined By ~2..- SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES PUBLIC HEALTH LABORATORY CHEMICAL EXAMINATION OF WATER Owner or Name ~/O~0,.1~ I._~ ~' ~'~"~' I"~'.~ "I-7, fi.;), J District Point of Collection I~ (J ~1, p Remarks: (1) Results Repealed as Micrograms Per Liter. Partial [2K .... . _-. __~ _~ Complete-13 Metals Only 13 m~mhps/cm ,/7 2, 84. T. Alkalinity {rng/I CaCO3) 8t MBAS (rog/Il pH ~, '~ 82 T. Hardness (mg/I CaC03) 88 To{al Hyd P {rog/I) Nitril~s + Nil~ales {m$/I N) '~0 7 83 Ca Hardness {mg/I CaC03) 90 Fluoride (mg/I F) Free Ammonia (mg/I N) '-,) }~ ~p Mg'Hardness {mg/I CaC03) 77 Nil~l~(mg/IN) Chlorides (mg/I Cl) I ,-~ Sullalesimg/IS04) 3L -~120 Arsenic (1) Iron (mg/[ Fei / "'" '"" ~'~. ,,3 / 5 Selenium Mar~ganese(mg/IMnJ ~'- ~/ ~ $22 Cadmlurn (1) I co~qm¢cul .'~0,/ 2 ~3 Lead Sodium(rog/INa} ~/d / 126 Silver {t) Zinc{mg/IZn) / / 1{)4 Chromium (1) 124 Mercury (1) 121 Barium (mg/{ Ba} Director No. 7 Een'd at Lab Field No. I~O~ Public' Water Da~e 1~-~-~7 Private ~a~er Time ~ Other Examined By SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTHENT OF HEALTH SERVICES DIVISION OF MEDICAL LEGAL-INVESTIGATIONS & FORENSIC SCIENCES PUBLIC HEALTH LABORATORY TRAC~ ORGANIC ANALYSIS OF WATER Name ~IS ~$T~T~3 'T'--~O. [ Owner or District Location '~ ~&~O SU ~ ~'W.. ~V~".~,~z~W~ ITO~..,~f. Poin~ of Cdllection ~O ~-~" Remarks: ~ ~OYT~ Compound ppb Compound 306 vinyl chlorfde ........ 305 methyleae chloride .... 290 bromochlor omethane .... 323 1,1 dichloroethane .... 309 urans di:hloroethylene. 300 chloroform ............ 324 1,2 dichIoroethane .... 321 1,1,1 trtchloroethane 304 carbon ~e~rachloride .... 294 1 bromo 2 chloroethane 405 1,2 dichloropropane 310 1,1,2 trichloroethylene 303 chlorodibromomethane .. 293 1,2 dibromoethane 420 2 bromo 1 chloropr~;~ 301 bromoform .......... 308 cis dichloroethylene .. 320 freoo 113 .... 292 dSbromome=hane';~55~ 307 1,1 dichloroethylene .. 302 bromodichloromethane .. 406 2,3 dichloropropene ... 407 cis dichloropropene .. _ 408 trans dichloropropene ~ . 322 1,1,2 trichloroethane 250 benzene ................ 251 toluene z 259 ethylbenzene ............ ~{ 254 o-xylene ............... -. I 252' xylene 253. p-xylene ................ ~ 255 Coral xylenes .......... - 257 bromobenzene ....... o- b oroto uene . JJii2'l 267 m-chlorotoluene ........ z~ - '268 ' -p-chlorotoluene ........ ~( 265 total chlorotoluene .... ~19 1,3,5 trimethylbenzene . ~ 418 1,2,4 trimethylbenzene . ~{ 415 m,p-dichl benzene .... 412 6-dichlorobenze~e ....... thylb ' 432 p-die enzene ....... 43~ 1,2,4,5 tetramethylbenz' 437 1,2,4 trichlorobenzene 438 1,2,3 trichlorobenzene . ~ 409 1,1,1,2 tetrachl'oethane ~fl 430 1,2,2,3 tetrachl'propane - 295 s-tetrachloroethane .... - 431 1,1,1,2 tetrachl~propane "- 433 1,2,3 trichloropropane . ~ I ppb_ ' '[ 1387386 I~) abm Field No. I (51) Oa~ Time ,,~-.~ · CoL By Rec'd in Lab _ Public Water Private Water ~ Olher Date Completed, SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES DIVISION OF MEDICAL LEGAL INVESTIGATIQNS & FORENSIC SCIENCES PUBLIC HEALTH LABORATORY PESTICIDE ANALYSIS OF WATER (3) Last Name . (4) Slreel No.. {8) Community Mailing Address /uoA_At5 -F:-. I . ._{9) Streel ,/"1,,~' 7- 7' / 7' V¢-,-I,~_ / Sampling Point (2] First., ,~u~-. (20) Pub (15) Distance to Farm [30) Map Coordinates (31) Well Depth (57) Resample? Yes Last Resull Ncom ~ Priv ft. / / Key R / (14)District / (13) Section / (16) Block / (17) Lot No / Remarks / Owner COMPOUND 'PPB /' MG/L (223) {425) (426) (224) (427) (4; 8) Aldicarb Sulfoxide ................... ~' I Aldicafb Sulfone ......................... ~/ Carboturan ............. ~' I 3-Hydroxycarbofuran ................... ~' 1 Oxamyl ........... ~' ! Carbaryl ......................... ~ ' I zl 1 -Naphlhol ................................ Melhomyl .............. ~' ] Lab l~a Field N~. Date: Time: Col. By: (Name not initials) Date Received in Lab Public Water Private Water Other Date Completed Examined By ~ SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES PUBLIC HEALTH LABORATORY CHEMICAL EXAMINATION OF WATER Name /';~/z~-~;2'-1.5 ' ~',~.7'",~"/"~"-..~ .r../,4~. ~ Owneror Distdcl Location J~/~'/'CJ ~.,~F~--/~-.- ~'V~.. ,/'~l,~- T"ri 'Point of Collectio~ ~O fJJ~l j3 'Remarks: Results Reported as Micrograms Per Liter. Partia _--~ -- Complete 0 Metals Only I~mhos/cm ¢~ 84 T. Al~(a~inity[mg/ICaC03' , 81 73 pH '""(' '782 T. Hardness {mg/I CaCO3) 88 N,trltes t 78 NHates {m[l/I N) ~ J 83 Ca Hardness [mg/I CaCO3J 90 Ruodde (mg/I FI 76 Free Ammonia (mg/I N} ~ O ~ Mg Hardness (mg/I .CaC03) 77 Nil~es (mg/I 90 Chlorides {mgll Ct} '~ '---, ~ L-- 87 Sulfales (mg/I S04) ~ ¢ t20 Arsenic (1 100 I~on (mg/I Fa) Z. 9,,/O 125 Selenium (1) ~01 ~an~anese(mg~lbln) ~/' ;)~ ~- 122, Cadmium (1) 102 Copper{rng/ICu] ~/ ),/ 0 1231 Lead (1) 106 Sodium(rog/INa) ,~ ~".y 126I Silver ('1) IO3 Z,nc (mg/I Zn) ~) , ~" 104 Chromium (1) 124 Mercury (1 121 Beduin (mg/I Be) Director Ret'd, at Lab ~ Publi~ Water. PriVate Water Other Date Completed Examined By ~C SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES DIVISION OF HEDICAL LEGAL INVESTIGATIONS & FORENSIC SCIENCES PUBLIC HEALTH LABORATORY TRACE ORGANIC ANALYSES OF WATER Name IWOt~l~l~ ~S~W~'5 ~ ~.~-- ' Owner or District Point of Collection Remarks: Compound p~b Compound ppb__ 306 vinyl chloride ........ zl 250 benzene ................ 305 methylene chloride .... ~t toluene ................ 290 bromochloromethane ..... 258 chlorobenzene ........... 323 1,1 dichl0roethane .... ~] 259 ethylbenzene ............ 300 chloroform ........ ~ 252 m-xylene ............... 324 1,2 dichloroethane l[]:~.,/ 253. p-x, lene ............... 321 1,1,1 trichloroethane . ~5 255 total xylenes ........... 304 carbon tetrachloride .... ' 257 bromobenzene ........... - 294 1 bromo 2 chloroethane ~ 266 o-chlorotoluene ........ 405 1,2 dichloropropane ... 267 m-chlorotoluene ........ 310 1,1,2 trichloroethylene 268' p-chlorotoluene ........ 303 chlorodibromomethene .. 265 total chlorotoluene .... 293 1,2 dibromoethane ...... ' ~19 1,3,5 trimethylbenzene Mr 420 2 bromo 1 chloropropane _ ' 418 1,2,4 trlmethylbenzene · 301 bromoform ............. 415 m,p-dichlorobenzene .... 311 tetrachloroethylene ... 412 o-dichlorobenzene ...... 308 tis dfchloroethylene ... ~ 432 p-die:hylbenzene ....... 320 freon 113 .............. ' 435 1,2,4,5 tetramethylbenz' 292 dibromomethane ......... i 437 1,2,4 trichlorobenzene . 307 1,1 dichloroethylene 302 bromodichloromethane 406 2,3 dichloropropene .. 407 cis dichloropropene .. 408 trans dichloropropene 322 1,1,2 trichloroethane 438 1,2,3 trichlorobenzene Z~ 409 1,1,1,2 tetrachl'oethane xI 430 1,2,2,3 tetrachl'propane 295 s-tetrachloroethane .... 431 1,1,1,2 tetrachl'propane 433 1,2,3 trichloropropane ~i · ,I!' -1Z87387 Rec'd in Lab .,r,, _ODE Public Waler Private Water ~ Olher I ~ I~ I1~'~ RC ~ ~ Date Completed . SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES DIVISION OF MEDICAL LEGAL INVESTIGATIONS & FORENSIC SCIENCES PUBLIC HEALTH LABORATORY (3) Last Name (4) Streel No. (8) Communily Mailing Address PESTICIDE ANALYSIS OF WATER ,~JOAP..t5 ~$1",,~'r'~'5 1'".L,4J. ~ {2) First - I9) Street ',~J~: 4,0 .5' u~' ,~'O/..-- p~-- /0r~J~"" /-,/~ ?-7-/7"~.,/~ / Sampling Point !~ ~ ~ ~ (20) Pub (15) Distance to Farm 130) Map Coordinales {31) Well Depth (57) Resampte? Last Result Ncom ~"~"~'Priv / {14) District ./ ~' ~ O ~:) / ft. ! (13) Section I ~"~-- /. / ! {16) Block ~ ~- ~-~":-:_~-: ~-~-' ft. / (17) Lqt. ~7~ Yes Key R No / Remarks Owner COMPOUND ppB-' / MG/L (223) Aldicarb .......... :. ~ ...... (42~) Aldicarb Sulfoxide ....................... (426) Aldicalb Sullone ......................... (224) Carboluran ............................... /" I {427) 3-Hydroxycarboluran .... (4~ 8) Oxamyl ................................... Carbaryl ................... ~ I zl 1 -Naphthol .............................. 9) Methomyl .............................. / / / / / / (431) Metham ..................... (078) Nitrate ............ YOUR INFORMATION MEMORANDUM To: Judith Terry, Town Clerk From: Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner RE: Carr/Wanat Change of Zone Application Date: March 11, 1988 I am in receipt of Mr. John J. Hart's letter to the Town Board dated March 8, 1988. The letter states that they are preparing a statement which would be part of the Norris Estate DEIS. The Norris Estate DEIS is for a subdivision. The Carr/Wanat DEIS that the Town Board requested is for a change of zone. I do not think that the applicant can ,on his own, answer the Town Board's request for a DEIS by supplementing a DEIS that is before the Planning Board for another matter. Perhaps, the Town Board should consult with Mr. Emilita and the Town Attorney, then respond to Mr. Hart's letter so as to clear any possible misunderstanding Furthermore, the test well results should be sent to Mr. Emilita for his review a~ell. Enc. attached letter cc: Planning Board jt PETER~SNYDER JOHNJHART JOHN J ROE. Ill FREDERIC L, ATWOOD RUSSELL C BURCHERI 0 DOUGLAS J LEROSE DENNIS D, O'DOHERTY. JR. PELLETREAU & PELLETREAU ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW 20 CHURCH STREET '- SOX PATCHOGUE, NEW YORK .7?2 TEL. 516 447-8900 FAX 516/475-5651 DIRECT DIAL 447-8906 ROBERTh. PELLETREAI OF COUNSEL March 8o 1988 Hon. Francis J. Murphy Supervisor, Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Council Members: Hon. Jean W. Cochran P.O. Box 285 Southold, New York 11971 Hon. Raymond W. Edwards P.O. Box 511 Fishers Island, New York 06390 Hon. George L. Penny, IV P.O. Box 57 Greenport, New York 11944 Hon. James Schondebare P.O. Box ]018 Southold, New York 11971 Hon. Paul Stoutenburgh Skunk Lane Cutchogue, New York 11935 Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Planning Board Director Town of Southold Main Road Mattituck, New York 11952 RE: Dear February CARR/WANAT CHANGE OF ZONE Mattituck, New York Supervisor Murphy, Council Members and Mr. Orlowski: We are in receipt of a letter from Judith Terry dated 26, 1988, a copy of which is attached, requesting the PELLETRI='AU ~: PELLETRF__.AU Page 2 March 8, 1988 Re: Mattituck, NY petitioner to prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement on the above proposed Change of Zone property. We are presently accumulating the information necessary to prepare such a statement, however, a separate DEIS should not be necessary. At the request of the~Town's Environmental Consultant, David Emilita, we are coordinating the Wanat and Norris Estates' Environmental Impact Statements. The Wanat property will be presented as an alternative plan for the Norris Estates project. The DEIS on the Norris Estates property has already been filed with the Town. Should you have any questions regarding the above, please feel free to contact the undrsigned. Very truly yours, P%~ETREAU & PELLETREAU JFH: hmm Encl. 1U/29-30 JUDITH T. TERRY TOWN CLERK REGIS~fRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 February 26, 1988 Janet Haeberle Pelletrau & Pelletreau 20 Church Street - Box 110 Patchogue, New York 11772 Dear Ms. Haeberle: Enclosed is a certified resolution of the Southold Town Board determining that the Carr-Wanat change of zone proposal is a Type I action and is likely to have a significant effect on the environment, as well as a copy of the Positive Declaration. The petition is hereby requested to prepare a draft environmental impact statement. Please submit same to me upon completion. Thank you. Very truly yours, Judith T. Terry $outhold Town Clerk Enclosures MEMORANDUM To: Judith Terry, Town Clerk From: Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner RE: Carr/Wanat Change of Zone Application Date: March 11, 1988 I am in receipt of Mr. John J. Hart's letter to the Town Board dated March 8, 1988. The letter states that they are preparing a statement which would be part of the Norris Estate DEIS. The Norris Estate DEIS is for a subdivision. The Carr/Wanat DEIS that the Town Board requested is for a change of zone. I do not think that the applicant can ,on his own, answer the Town Board's request for a DEIS by supplementing a DEIS that is before the Planning Board for another matter. Perhaps, the Town Board should consult with Mr. Emilita and the Town Attorney, then respond to Mr. Hart's letter so as to clear any possible misunderstanding Furthermore, the test well results should be sent to Mr. Emilita for his review a~ell. Enc. attached letter cc: Planning Board jt PELLETREAU & PELLETrEAU Page 2 March 8. 1988 Re: Mattituck. NY petitioner to prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement on the above proposed Change of Zone property. We are presently accumulating the information necessary to prepare such a statement, however, a separate DEIS should not be necessary. At the request of the~Town's Environmental Consultant, David Emilita, we are coordinating the Wanat and Norris Estates' Environmental Impact Statements. The Wanat property will be presented as an alternative plan for the Norris Estates project. The DEIS on the Norris Estates property has already been filed with the Town. Should you have any questions regarding the above, please feel free to contact the undrsigned. Very truly yours. P~LETREAU & PELLETREAU JFH:hmm Encl. 1U/29-30 PETER V, SNYDER JOHN J, HART JOHN J. ROE, lU FREDERIC L ATWOOD RUSSELL C 8URCHERI 0 DOUGLAS J LEROSE DENNIS D. O'DOHERTY~ JR. PELLETREAU & PELLETREAU ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW 20 CHURCH STREET: 80X HO PATCHOGUE, NEW YORK ll772 TEL. 5~6 447-8900 FAX 516/475-5651 DIRECT DIAL 447-8906 ROBERTS PELLETREAU ROBERTH, RELLETREAU OF COUNSEL *ALSO ADMITTED IN FLORIDA OALSO ADMITTED IN NEW JERSEY March 8, 1988 Hon. Francis J. Murphy Superviso[, Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Council Members: Hon. Jean W. Cochran P.O. Box 285 Southold, New York 11971 Hon. Raymond W. P.O. Box 511 Fishers Island, Edwards New York 06390 Hon. George L. Penny, IV P.O. Box 57 Greenport, New York 11944 Hon. James Schondebare P.O. Box ]018 Southold, New York 11971 Hon. Paul Stoutenburgh Skunk Lane Cutchogue, New York 11935 Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Planning Board Director Town of Southold Main Road Mattituck, New York 11952 RE: CARR/WANAT CHANGE OF ZONE Mattituck, New York Dear Supervisor Murphy, Council Members and Mr. Orlowski: We are in receipt of a letter from Judith Terry dated February 26, 1988, a copy of which is attached, requesting the JUDITH T. TERRY TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE ($16) 765-1801 February 26, 1988 Janet Haeberle Pelletrau $ Pelletreau 20 Church Street - Box 110 Patchogue, New York 11772 Dear Ms. Haeberle: Enclosed is a certified resolution of the Southold Town Board determining that the Carr-Wanat change of zone proposal is a Type I action and is likely to have a significant effect on the environment, as well as a copy of the Positive Declaration. The petition is hereby requested to prepare a draft environmental impact statement. Please submit same to me upon completion. Thank you. Very truly yours, Southold Town Clerk Enclosures PETER V. SNYDER JOHN J HART JOHN J ROE, III FREDERIC L ATWOOD J TiMOThY She^ BRUCE t WALL^CE KEVIN A SEAMAN ~4arch 10, 1988 PELLETReau & PellEtreau aTTOrNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT 1AW 20 CHURCH streeT - bOX no PaTCHOGUe, NEW YORK ii772 TEL 516 447-8900 FAX 516/475-5651 DIRECT DIAL 447-8906 ROBERT S PELLETREAU RICHARD A SCHOENFELD ROBERTH, PELLETREAU OF COUNSEL Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Attn: Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman, Planning Board RE: CARR/WANAT - Change of Zone Dear Mr. Orlowski: Enclosed are the Suffolk County Health Services test results on the water on the Norris property as promised. We thank you in advance for your attention to this matter. Very truly yours, PELLETREAU & PELLETREAU Legal Assistant JFH:hmm cc: Hon. Francis J. Murphy Hon. Jean W. Cochran Hon. Raymond W. Edwards Hon. George L. Penny, IV Councilwoman Ruth Oliva Councilwoman Ellen Larsen Ms. Judith Terry 1U/29 ~E~FOLK COUFf~f DUNEIN~ W&TZ~ SUFPL! SECTION 2./ I~,/ Date Requested (3) TEST WELL (2) 0~ Subdivision~N~m~ Community Appointment Date '~-'/~"~"/__ Day ~6"~ Time (30) Map Coordinates (7) Township Code TBA TBR TEH THU TIS J TOS Location TRI TSH TSI TSM (20) COMM NCOM ~z/PRIV T~ MAP N~HBKR (14) District /000, (13) Section /~. · (16) Block ~ (17) Lot ~.- (1) Test Well ~ .. (2.3) Sdbdiv Lot ~ -. (31) Depth ........ (33) Depth to Water (42) Casing Size .. ~KLL INFORMATION I 2- 3 4' (51) Sample Date (54) Sample Tap Time Start Time Stop (11) Elapsed Run Time (24) Gallons Per Minute Depth Checked Sanitarian SAMPLE INFORMATION  Type Bact · ~artial Ch~ + MBAS \ Small sco \// sc est ~ O Other Yes No PETERV SNYDER JOHN J. HART JOHNJ ROE. Ill FREDERIC L. ATWOOD J TIMOTHY ShEA BRUCE t. WALLACE KEVIN a SEAMAN VaNESSAM SHeEHAN° BeNJAMiNL herzweiG RUSSELLC BURChERIO DOUGLASJ LEROSe DENNtS D. O'DOhERTY, JR PEILETrEAU & PEllEtREaU ATTOrNeYS AND COUNSEllORS AT LAW 20 CHURCH STREET - 80X i10 PaTCHOGUE, NEW YORK ii772 TEL 516 447-8900 FAX 516/475-5651 DIRECT DIAL 447-8906 ROBERTS PELLeTREAU RIChARDA SCHOENFEID March 10, 1988 Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Attn: Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman, Planning Board RE: CARR/WANAT - Chanqe of Zone Dear Mr. Orlowski: Yesterday our office mailed to you and the Town Board members a letter regarding the water results on the Norris property. The test results from the Suffolk County Department of Health Services were inadvertently omitted as an enclosure with that letter. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have created. Copies of the test results shall be delivered to each of the respective parties at the Town Hall by hand within the next few days. Please accept our apologies. Very truly yours, Ja~./_t F..Haeberle Legal Assistant JFH:hmm cc: Hon. 1U/28 Francis J. Murphy Hon. Jean W. Cochran Hon. Raymond W. Edwards Hon. George L. Penny, IV Councilwoman Ruth Oliva Councilwoman Ellen Larsen Ms. Judith Terry PETER V SNYDER JOHN J HART JOHN J. ROE, FREDERIC L ATWOOD J T~HOThYSNEA SRUCE T WALLACE KEVIN A. SEAMAN VANESSA M SHEEHAN' SENJAF~In L HERZWEIG RUSSELL C BURCHERI DOUGlas J LEROSe DENnis D. O'DOHERTY, Jr 'ALSO ADH~TTeD IN FLORIDA ~AISO ADMITTED IN NEW JERSEY March 8, 1988 PEILETReaU & PElLETrEau ATTORNEYS AND COUNSEllORS AT LAW 20 CHURCH STREET - @OX HO PaTCHOGUE, New YORK il772 Tel 516 447-8900 FAX 516/475-5651 DIRECT DIAL 447-8906 ROBERTS PELLETREAU RICHARD a SChOENFELD Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Attn: Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman, Planning Board RE: CARR/WANAT Chanqe of Zone Dear Mr. Orlowski: Reference is made to a letter directed to the Town Clerk, Judith Terry, from your office regarding the Planning Board's refusal to comment on the Change of Zone request without first reviewing the pertinent information regarding the water supply on the Norris property. (A copy of that letter is enclosed.) The Suffolk County Department of Health Services has concluded their testing of the water on the Norris property and we enclose a copy of those results for your review. As you can readily see, both the quantity and the quality of the water are excellent. With this information now available to the Planning Board, we believe that the Board should now be in a position to determine the Norris yield figure. Therefore, we respectfully request that the Planning Board proceed with its review and send its comments on to the Town Board for their immediate action. PELLETreAu 8: PELLETREAU March 8, 1988 Town of Southold Page 2 If we may be of any further assistance, undersigned. Very truly yours, ~jT.R~a~~LETREAU & PELLETREAU JFH:hmm cc: Hon. Francis J. Murphy Hon. Jean W. Cochran Hon. Raymond W. Edwards Hon. George L. Penny, IV Councilwoman Ruth Oliva Councilwoman Ellen Larsen Ms. Judith Terry please contact the 1U/24-25 S UEFO.L K' 0 U. TY Southold. N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 November 30, 1987 Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk Southold Town Hall Southold, NY 11971 Re: Richard T. Cart and Joseph A. Wan Change of Zone request Dear Mrs. Terry: The Planning Board declines to co~ent on this change of zone reques because the applicant so far has not supplied it with crucial tnformattor from the Suffolk County Department of Health Services regarding water supply at the Norris property. Consequently, there has been no decision on the allowable yield for the Norris property. The Planning Board feels that the Norris yield figure must be determined before it can realistically judge the proposed transfer of yield to this new site. When the applicant provides the requested iuformation, the Planning .Boar~ will proceed with its review and send its comments on to the. Town Board. cc: John J. Hart, Esq. ~Henr~ E. Raynor, Jr. Very truly yours, . BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. CNAII~N SOUTHOLD TOWN.PLANNING BOARD RECEIVED JAN- 6 .! 88 · ~JJ~TRE~U ~ ,PELL£T~E,!~.U JUDITH T. TERRY TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS OFF1CE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD AT A REGULAR MEETING HELD ON FEBRUARY 23, 1988: WHEREAS, Richard T. Carr and Joseph A. Wanat has heretofore applied to the Southold Town Board for a change of zone from "A" Residential and Agricultural District to "M" Light Multiple Residence District on certain property located on the northerly side of Bergen Avenue, Mattituck, New York; NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: 1. That pursuant to the provisions of Article 8 of the Environmental Conserva- tion 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 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 'Town Clerk shall file and circulate such determination as required by the aforementioned law, rules and code. 3. That the Town Clerk immediately notify the applicant, Richard T. Carr and Joseph A. Wanat of this determination, and further request said applicant to prepare a draft environmental impact statement, all in accordance with said law, rules and code. Southold Town Clerlr~/ February 26, 1988 617.21 Appendix E State Environmental Quality Review POSITIVE DECLARATION Notice of intent to Prepare a Draft ElS Determination of Significance SEQR Project Number Date JAN 88 This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act) of the Environmental Conservation Law. The Southold Town Board , as lead agency, has determined that the proposed action described below may have a significant effect on the environment and that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will be prepared. Name°fActi°n:change-of-Zone from "A" Residential Aqricultural District to "M" Light Multiple-Residence District for Richard T. Carr/Joseph A. Wanat. SEQR Status: Type I [] Uniisted [] Description of Action: Change-of-Zone to allow the construction of 107 single f~Lmil~ dwellings on this parcel. Location: (Include street a.dd~ess and !he' name.of the mL~niclpaldy/coum~, A Iocat,on map oi apprcpr~ate scale i's also recommended.) See Attached .qap SEQR Negative Declaration Page 2 Reasons Supporting This Determination: (See 617.6(g) for requirements of this determination; see 617.6(h) for Conditioned Negative Declaration) See EAF Parts II and III Attached. If Conditioned Negative Declaration, provide on attachment the specific mitigation measures imposed. For Further Information: Contact Person: Judith Terry, Town Clerk Address: Southold Town Hall, Main' Road, Southold, NY Telephone Number: (516) 765.~1801 For Type I Actions and Conditioned Negative Declarations, a Copy of this Notice Sent to: Commissioner, Department of Er~vironmental Conservation. 50 Wolf Road, Albany, New York 12233-0001 Appropriate Regional Office of the Department of Environmental Conservation, Stony Brook, NY Office of the Chief Executive Officer of the political subdivision in which the action will be prmc~pall,,. located. Applicant (if any) Other involved agencies (if ar~y} Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Building Department Su'ffolk County Del~artment of Health Services Town Clerk's Bulletin Board Suffolk County Dep~rtment of Planning ... 'art 2 3ROJECT IMPACTS AN q~'HEIF 'AGNITUDE Responsibility o( Lead Agency ,Jc?'.arci TL Car~: General Information (Read Carefully) !.;i,~!~r-~_r~ _.~h~ · In completing the form the reviewer should be guided by the question: Have my respons*,s and determinations beer~ reasonable~ The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst · Identifying that an impact will be potentially large (column 2) does not mean that it ~ 8iso necessardy significant. Any large impact must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine sigmficance. Identifying an ~mpact m column 2 smpiv asks that it be looked at further · The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of impacts and wherever possible the threshold of magnitude thatwou[d trigger a response in column 2 The examples are generally applicable throughout the State and for most situations But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be appropnate for a Potential Large Impact response, thus requiring evaluation in Part 3 · The impacts of each project, on each site, in each locality, will vary Therefore, the examples are illustrative and have been offered as guidance They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each question · The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question · In identifying impacts, consider long term, short term and cumlative effects. Instructions (Read carefully) a. Answer each of the 19 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there will be any impact. b. Maybe answers should be considered as Yes answers. c. If answering Yes to a question then check the appropriate box (column I or 2) to indicate the potential size of the impact. If impact threshold equals or exceeds any example provided, check column 2. If impact will occur but threshold is lower than example, check column 1. d If reviewer has doubt about size of the impact then consider the impact as potentially large and proceed to PART 2, e. If a potentially large impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated by change{s) in the project to a small to moderate IMPACT ON LAND I Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site? ~NO [~YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise per 100 foot of length), or where the general slopes in the project area exceed 10%. · Construction on land where the dep~h't'o the water table is less 'than 3 feet · Construction of paved parking area for 1,000 or more vehicles. · Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally within ~ feet of existing ground surface · Construction that wilt continue for more than 1 year or involve more than one phase or stage · Excavation for mimng purposes that would remove more than ~,000 tons of natural material Ii e, rock or soil) per year · Construction or expansion of a samtarv [andfdl · Construction *n a designated floodway · Other ~mpacts impact, also check the Yes box in column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction is not possible This must be explained in Part 3 1 2 Can 14act Be Small to Potential Moderate Large Mitigated By 1 Impact Impact Pro ect Change/ 2 Will there be an effectt, ..,y u;:.que or unu~ualland forms found on thes~te~(ie, chffs, dunes, geological format,ons, etc)~NO {~YES · Specific land forms Bluffs 6 Lr~Yes ~No IMPACT ON WATER 3. Will proposed action affect any water body designated as protected? (Under Articles 15.24, 25 of the Environmental Conservation Law, ECL) ©NO ~YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Developable area of site contains a protected water body. · Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a protected stream. · Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body. · Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland · Other impacts: 4. Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body of water? []NO ~YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water pr more than a 10 acre increase or decrease. · Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area. · Other impacts: Non-protected surface ponds exist on the parcel. 5 Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity? []NO [~YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action wile require a discharge permit · Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does not have approval to serve proposed (project) action. · Proposed Action reqmres water supply from we[is with greater than 45 gallons per minute pumping capacity · Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water supply system. · Proposed ~,ction will adverse~ affect groundwater' · Liquid effluent will be convev,-d off the site to facilities which presently do not exist or have inadequate capacity · Propo)ed Action v, ould use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per day · Proposed *ction wlJJ ]ikeI~ ccus' sittatio'n oT other discharge into an extstmg body of water tc u e extc-,~[ that there will be an obvious visual contrast 'o naturaJ conditions · Propose~ AcUon will require the storage of petroleum or chemical products greater than 1,100 gallons · Proposed Action wdJ allow residential uses m areas ~t~out water ~*alpr runoft~ ~NO ~'~ [ 3 [~,, ~pies that would apph,' to column 2 7 I 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change [] [] []Yes ~]No [] [] [:]Yes []No [] [] [-]Yes I--INo [] [] ~'~ Yes []No [] [] ~3Yes ~ D ~ves ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Ves ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~o ~ ~ ~Y~s ~o ~ ~ ~Yes ~o ~ ~ ~Yes ~o ~ ~ ~ ~No ~es ~es · Proposed Action may cause substantial erosion · Proposed Action is incompatible with existing drainage patterns · Proposed Action will allow development in a designated floodway · Other impacts: Proposed Action mav adversely affect drainage. IMPACT ON AIR 7 Will proposed action affect air quality? ~NO []Y£S Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips in any given hour. · Proposed Action will result in the incineration of more than 1 ton of refuse per hour. · Emission rate of total contaminants will exceed $ lbs per hour or a heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour · Proposed action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed to industrial use. · Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial development within ex~sting industrial areas · Other impacts: IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS 8 Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered species? DNO N1YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Reduction of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal list, using the site, over or near site or found on the site · Remove,' of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habitat. · Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other than for agricultural purposes. · Other impacts: Endangered ~c:i~ may P,wi S~ on site. 9 Will Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or non-endangered species? ~,NO E~YES Examples. that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action would substantially ~nterfere with any resident or m~grator¥ fish, shellfish or wildlife species · Proposed Action requires the removal of more than 10 acres ct mature f~rest lover 100 sears of age) or other IocaJ~-y m~portam IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES 10 Wdl the Proposed Action ~llfL, ct agricultural land r~'sourcus? []NO ~x~ YE S Examples that ~otdd apply to colunlrl 2 land hncludes (ropland, hasfields, pasture v~neyard, orchard, etc] 8 1 Small to Moderate Impact Potential [Can Impac~ Be Large I Mitigated By Impact lPr°ject Change [~ No ~No 5']No [5No ~No ~JNo ~No '-]No [.; N o ~No ~No ~No ~No [] N o '~'No :_2No · Construction actwity would excavate or compact the soil profile of agricultural land · The proposed action would irreversibly convert more than 10 acres of agricultural land or. if located in an Agricultuta[ District, more than 25 acres of a~ricultural land. ' ' · The proposed action would disrupt or prevent installation of agricultural land management systems (e g. subsurface drain lines, outlet ditches, strip cropping); or create a need for such measures (e.g. cause a farm field to drain poorly due to increased runoff) · Other impacts: IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES 11 Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources? I-1NO []YES (if necessary, use the Visual EAF Adde[~dum in Section 617.21, Appendix B} Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed land uses, or prolect components obviously different from or in sharp contrast to current surrounding land use patterns, whether man-made or natural · Proposed [and uses, or project components visible to users of aesthetic resources which will eliminate or significantly reduce their eniovment of the aesthetic qualities of that resource. · Project components that will result in the elimination or significant screening of scemc VleV~s known to be important to the area · Other ~mpacts IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEQLOGICAL RESOURCES 12 Will Proposed Action impac! any s~.t.e or structure of historic~ pre- historic or paleontological importance? [:]NO ~YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action occurring wholly or partially within or substantially cont~guous to any facilip, or sde listed on the State or National Register of hislouc places · An', ~mpact to an archaeological site or fossd bed located ~'.ithin the project s~te · Proposed Action '.~.ilJ occur in an area designated as sensmve for · Otht.r m~pact~ C~]5]2Q~_be as e~Dd _at present. IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE A~D RECREATION [~.amph's thai ~c~u]d a~pr~ t. ,ofllmn 2 ~NO ;~'~[ g I 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be Mnderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change [] [] [-']Yes ['qNo [] [] []Yes ~No [] [] J-]Yes r-lNo [] [] []Yes I--INo [] [~ r-]Yes [-~No [] [] mYes E3No [] [] r-]Yes []No g [] ~Yes r-lNo ~ ~ E~es E3No ~ G ~'S'es ~No _ ~ ~'~es ~No '-- ~ ~Yes F~No IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION 14 Will there be an effect to existin8 transportation systems? ~NO ~YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Alteration of present patterns of movement of people andJor goods · Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems · Other ~mpacts: Traffic on Berqen Avenue wil~ increase significantly. IMPACT ON ENERGY 15 Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or energy supply? ~]NO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action will cause a greater than 5% increase in the use of any form of energy in the municipality · Proposed Action will require the creation or extension of an energy ,transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two family residences or to serve a maior commercial or industrial use · Other impacts: NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS 16 Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or ,vibration as a result of the Proposed Action? ~NO []YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Blasting within 1,500 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive facility · Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day) · Proposed Action will produce operating no~se exceeding the local ambient no~se levels for no~se outside of structures · Proposed Action will remove natural barriers that v, ould act as a noise screen · Other impacts: IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH 17 Witl Proposed Action affect public heatth and safer`,? X2NO EYES Examples that ~,¢x,ld ap;,I,~ to column 2 · Proposed Action ma,,, cause a risk of e×plos~on or re[ease oi hazardous substances (i e oil, peq,odes chem~cal~ rad~ahon etc)mtheeventof 10 1 Small to Moderate Impact 2 3¸ Potential Can Impact Be Large Mitigated By Impact Project Change ~ []Yes ~No ~ ~Yes ~No [2~ F'~ Yes ~No [] ~, Yes ~2No [] ~Yes ~No ~ ~Yes ~No ~N m~ ~Yes ~, o rq, s ~Yes ~No IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHARACTER OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD 18. Will proposed action affect the character of the existing community? I~NO ~YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · The permanent population of the city, town or village in which the project is located is likely to grow by more than 5%. · The municipal budget for capital expenditures or operating services will'increase by more'than 5% per year as a result of this project, · Proposed action will conflict with officially adopted plans or goals. · Proposed action will cause a change in the density of land use. · Proposed Action will replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures or areas of historic importance to the community. · Development will create a demand for additional community serwces (e,g. schools, police and fire, etc.) · Proposed Action will set an important precedent for future projects. · Proposed Action will create or eliminate employment · Other impacts: I 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change [] [] l-lYes [] [] J--]Yes []No [] [] ~lYes []No [] [] J~Yes [--]No [] [] []Yes ~JNo [] [] []Yes []No [] [] I~JYes [-]No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No 19 Is there, or is there likely to be. public controversy rebated to potential adverse environmental impacts? r~NO []YES If Any Action in Part 2 Is Identified as a Potential Large Impact or If You Cannot Determine the Magnitude of Impact, Proceed to Part 3 Part 3--EVALUATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS .Responsibility of Lead Agency Part 3 must be prepared if one or more' impact(s) is considered to be pole. ntially large~ even if the impact(s) may be mitigated, Instructions D~scuss the follo~%ing for each impact identdied in Column 2 of Part 2 1 gne[15 describe the ~mpact 2 Describe(dapp~icable)h~wthe~mpactc~u]dbem~t~ated~rreducedt~asmai~t~m~derate~mpactbYpr~iectchange(s~ 3 Based on the reformation avadable, decide ~[ ~t ~s reasonable to conclude that th~s impact Is important. To ans~r the question ot importance,, consider · 7he prc~bahH~ts' of the ~mpact o(currm~ PART III 1. IMPACT ON LAND The proposed development of 107 units of residential dwellings could take place in areas of high water table as there are several wetland and pond areas on the site. A careful siting of the structures, roads and open space could minimize their impact. Construction of the project may take more than one construction season. Therefore, impacts attendant to such a prolonged construction period such as erosion, drainage, construction staging, and the like, could extend ~o surrounding properties. Such impacts can be minimized through the development of a construction staging plan. It is possible that bluff erosion may be stimulated by tMe construction of the project or by occupancy of thc dwellings. Once begun, bluff erosion is extremely difficult to stop. Prevention of bluff erosion is possible by an erosion and sedimentation control plan. 2. IMPACT ON WATER Protected wetlands exist on the site. Adverse impacts due to construction or occupancy of the dwellings on these wetlands is possible. Careful design can minlmize these impacts. Non-protected surface ponds exist on the parcel. Adverse impacts caused by construction or occupancy of the dwellings may affect these ponds. Design of the project can minimize potential impacts. The project will require a discharge permit and well permit from the Suffolk County Department of Health Services as well as a Long Island well permit from the Department of Environmental Conservation. No public water supply or wastewater treatment facilities exist to service the proposed development. Ail of these factors may have an adverse effect on groundwater quantity and quality. These adverse effects can be mitigated, but need careful design consideration. The project may have adverse impacts on existing c~a~nage patterns due to an increase in ~mpervious surfaces, redirected-drainage flows, increased ~ates of ~uncff an~ the presence of ponds and wetlands on ~he site. Careful design can mitigate these impacts. 3. IMPACT ON PLANTS & ANIMALS The presence of freshwater wetlands on the site indicate that threatened or endangered species may also exist on the site. A field inventory needs to be established by a competent authority before an accurate impact assessment can be made. 4. IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES The loss of some 100 acres of agricultural soils will occur. The proposed zone will effectuate a defacto transfer of development rights from the Norris Property on Camp Mineola Road in Mattituck to this site. This needs to be studied in a comprehensive environmental impact statement embodying both projects. The instant change-of-zone should be incorporated as an alternative to the project proposed for the Norris site to weigh the positive and adverse impacts within an overall SEQR review of the transfer. 5. IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES The proposed residential development will be a contrasting visual element on the landscape compared to surrounding land uses. Detailed design consideration needs to be given to minimize the adverse impact of such a development. IMPACT ON ARCHAEOLOGIC RESOURCES This impact cannot be assessed until a study has been conducted by a competent authority. 7. IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION Local street traffic will increase dramatically as a result of the proposed development. This needs to be studied and weighed against a possible decrease on the Camp Mineola Road vicinity. 8. IMPACT ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD The project proposed and the defacto transfer have ~o precedence in Southold's zoning ordinance. Aside from the legal questions involved, several community impacts need to be considered. Some of these have already been addressed, others include the impact of the increased density on adjacent properties in the Bergen Avenue area, both as existing land uses and future land use. There has been a great deal of public controversy surrounding the developmen~ of the Norris property. There has been public controversy surrounding previous attempts at defacto transfer i.~ the context of this project. One must expect there will be public controversy over this proposal as well. To properly structure environmental and community impact issues, as well as public comment and legal review into an established procedure, this change-of-zone request and its relation to development on the Norris property should be incorporated into an overall environmental impact statemen[ covering the two sites. FRANCIS J. MURPHY SUPERVISOR TELEPHONE (516) 765-1800 January 21, 1988 OFFICE OF THE SUPERVISOR TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TOWN HALL, 53095 MAIN ROAD P.O. BOX 1179 SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971 Mr. Royal Reynolds Division of Environmental Health Department of Health Services of Suffolk County County Center Riverhead, New York 11901 Re: Carr-Wanat Change of Zone Norris Estate SCTM #1000-112-1-16 1000-122-5-4 1000-123-6-2 Dear Mr. Reynolds: With reference to your letter of December 23, 1987, re- garding the above named Change of Zone Proposal (Carr-Wanat) and the development proposal, I wish to clarify the following points: 1. The Norris Estate development proposal has not been approved by the Town's Planning Board. No agreement has been reached on the density that will be allowed on that-parcel. 2. The Carr-Wanat Change of Zone Proposal has not yet received any approvals by the Town Board for either the concept or the'density. If there are any further questions, do not hesitate to cQntact my office. Very truly yours, ~"~o~d of S~thold FJM:cms DRAFT Royal Reynolds Division of Environmental Health Department of Health Services of Suffolk County County Center Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Carr-Wanat Change of Zone Norris Estate SCTM #1000-112-1-16 1000-122-5-4 1000-123-6-2 Dear Mr. Reynolds: With reference to your letter of December 23, 1987, regarding the above- named change of zone proposal (Carr-Wanat) and the development 'proposal, I wish to clarify the following points: ~ i.~ The Norris Estate development proposal has not been approved by the Town's Planning Board. No agreement has been reached on the.density that will be allowed on that parcel. 2. The Carr-Wanat Change of Zone Proposal has not yet received any approvals by the Town Board for either the concept or the density. If there are any further questions, do not hesitate to contact my office. Sincerely yours, Francis J. Murphy Supervisor MEMORANDUM To: Francis J. Murphy, Supervisor From: Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner Re: Carr-Wanat Change of Zone SCTM #1000-112-1-16 on the north side of Bergen Avenue to the Long Island Sound, Mattituck Date: January 19, 1988 This memorandum concerns itself solely with the Suffolk County Health Department's response of December 23, 1988 to your letter of December 18, 1987. The Planning Board had declined to comment on the proposed transfer of density for this change of zone because the density of the Norris property had not been resolved. A copy of the Planning Board's letter of November 30, 1987 ~s attached for your convenience of review. The Suff~k County Health Services Department responded to the Town's request for information. The Department's letter states that insufficient information is available for technical comments, and further, that the application before the Health Department is incomplete. The Department is awaiting test well and test hole results before pro- cessing the application further. The proposed density for the Norris property is 25 and for the Carr-Wanat property, 95. However, neither of those numbers have been recognized by the Planning Board. It is recommended that the Town Board ~wait the Health Depar~net's interpretation of the test well results before proceeding with its review of the change of zone application. ~ ' Valerie Sco~pa~ Town Planner COUNTY OF SUFFOLK PETEI~ F. COHALAN SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES TO: Francis J. _~urph~v DATE: Su?ervisor Tov.~ Hall 53095 .~in Pal. PO Box 1179 Southold, N.Y. 11971 RE: Carr-Wanat - Change of Zone & Norris Estates SC~3-~-? 1900-112-].-16 & 1000-122-5-a_ & 1000-123-6-2 Dear ~ir. Murphy: DAVtO HARRIS. M.D.. M.P.H. Dec,her 23, 1987 ucc 2 9 We are in receipt of your letter dated December 18, 1987 concerning the above referenced project. [] 1. This Department has no objection to your designation of lead agency status. 2. Insufficient information is available for technical comments. There is no record of an application to this Department. [] A more accurate project location is needed. (Suffolk County Tax Map No.) 4. This Department has received an application and it is: [] -Complete r~' Incomplete [] Other: It appears that the project can be served by: Sewaqe Disposal System '[] Sewer System and Treatment Works [] Subsurface' Sewage Disposal System(s) [] Other: WWM-067 (OVER) (516 548-331 (cont'd) Water Supply System A Public Water Supply System Individual Water Supply System(s) Other: 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 with its findings. Applications have been re~ived for both the Carr and Norris Estates Subdivisions. Twenty-five residential parcels are proposed for Norris Estates and 95 parcels for the Carr Subdivision. Individual water supply wells and sewage di _sposal facilities are proposed for both projects. This Department is awaiting test well and test hole results, prior to processing the application further. The proposed population densities appear to be in conformance with Article VT of the Suffolk County Sanitary Cede. Further comment may be provided upon completion of the application review. ~L~' ~/~'L ~) ~ Phone 548-3312 age 3 - Town Board 105/87 E__XECUTIVE SESSION 11:40 A.M. - The Town Board and Acting Town Attorney Yakaboski met with Engineer Robert Brown of Sidney Bowne Engineering, Raymond Dean, Inspector for Sidney Bowne, and Gary Taylor of Rogers and Taylor, Appraisers, to discuss the Sisu Development property, Norton Lane, Southold, the subject of a proceeding under the Eminent Domain Procedure Law. 1:15 P.M. - Recess for lunch. 2:30 P.M. - Work Session reconvened and the Town Board met with Joseph Fischetti, Jr. to discuss Mr. Fischetti's proposal to create a course in "Constructing Your Own Affordable Home"; a course to teach individuals, who are pre-selected by the Town as being in need, to act as their own general contractor in building their own home. The course would provide two or three affordable house designs, a detailed set of material take-offs and complete set of cost estimates, with the course teaching the students how to use them. The course could provide a preferred sub- contractors list (a point questioned by Councilman Penny) using local tradesmen who would be willing to work with the "students". Perhaps material supplies and subcontractors would be willing to give a discount to these special people. The Board agreed the proposal has merit and suggested Mr. Fischetti wQrk with Community Development Administrator Jim McMahon to prepare a list of qualified people for such a program. 2:45 P.M. - For Discussion Items: (1) Letter from Roger Burns, Superintendent of Schools, Mattituck-Cutchogue School District, requesting the Town Board to amend the Scavenger Waste Ordinance and Alarm Systems Law to exclude local tax supported organizations such as school districts, free libraries, and fire departments.--Under the Scavenger Waste Ordinance, a law which required State approval, exemptions are prohibited. With respect to the Alarm Law, exemptions will be discussed with Chief of Police Winters. (2) Letter from Henry E. Raynor, Jr., representing the Norris-Wanat change of zone, advising that the Planning Board cannot proceed further with the~ review of the zone change until certain information and determinations are obtained from the Suffolk County Department of Health Services, and Health Services will only supply the required information to a municipal agency. The Town Board agreed the Supervisor should forward a letter of request for the information the Planning Board desires. (3) Proposed resolution uring County Executive-elect Halpin ~o sales tax (see to rethink his position on the Town Revenue Sharing part of the ~o~ resolution no. 18). (4) Decision on the appeal of Charles Zahra (see 11:15 A.M.) (5) Recommendation from the Planning Board for the release of the performance bond for Paradise-By-The-Bay (see resolution no. 19). EXECUTIVE SESSION 3:00 P.M. - Town Board and Attorney Yakaboski discussed litigation and personnel. 4:00 P.M. - Assessors WaiSts, Gordon and Scott met with the Board to discuss personnel. 4:15 P.M. - Board reviewed regular .meeting. resolutions. 4:30 P.M. - Audit gf outstanding vouchers-. 5:15 P.M. - Work Session adjourned. November 30, 1987 Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk Southold Town Hall Southold, NY 11971 Re: Richard T. Cart and Joseph A. Wanat Change of Zone request Dear Mrs. Terry: The Planning Board declines to comment on this change of zone request because the applicant so far has not supplied it with crucial information from the Suffolk County Department of Health Services regarding water supply at the Norris property. Consequently, there has been no decision on the allowable yield for the Norris property. The Planning Board feels that the Norris yield figure must be determined before it can realistically judge the proposed transfer of yield to this new site. When the applicant provides the requested information, the Planning Board will proceed with its review and send its comments on to the Town Board. cc: John J. Hart, Esq. Henry E. Raynor, Jr. Very truly yours, BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD JUDITH T. TERRY 10\'~ N CLERK RE(;ISTRAR OI VITAL STATIS IICS OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 November 6, 1987 $outhold Town Planning Board Southold Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Gentlemen: Transmitted herewith is the petition of Richard T. Carr and Joseph A. Wanat requesting a change of zone from "A" Residential and Agricultural District to "M" Eight Multiple Residence District on certain property located on the northerly side of Bergen Avenue, Mattituck, New York. Please prepare an official report defining the conditions described in said petition and determine the area so affected by your recommendations, and transmit the same to me. Thank you. Very truly yours, Judith T. Terry Southold Town Clerk Attachments cc: Pelletreau & Pelletreau CASE ~40: /..../.. ...... STATE CF NEW YORK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD IN TPIF- MATTER OF THE PETITION OF 1987 PETITION FOR A Ci:LA.NGE, I%IODIFICATION OR AAIENDMENT OF THE BUILDING ZONE ORDL'q- ANCE OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK. TO TPIE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD: WE, RICHARD T. CARR (as Contract Vendee) and 444 East 86th Street, NY, NY 1002 / andc/o Leonard I. Ackerman,Es 1. /X~, ....J.0..S...E..P..H....A.......W...A~....A..T....(.a..s...~e..r..). ........... , residing at .... ]~..~{~.~.{~.6. .......................... t~'~"~pton, (ir~sert name of petitioner) Road, East NY 11937, respectively, ~i;.(fl~kx~I/xxw.['~Yx~ the undersigned, am the o'~vner of certain real property situated at ...... .N.a.~.t;.,.t,.t.V.~.k..,...N.....y.:.....l,l.,9..5.,2. ......... and more particularly bounded and described as follows: - SEE ATTACHED SCHEDULE "A" - 2. I do hereby petition the Town Board of the Town of Southold to change, modify and amend the Euilding Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, including the Building Zone !%iaps heretofore made a part lhereof, as follows: To permit a change of zone from "A" Residential Agricultural District to "M" Light Multiple - Residence District on the described property, to enable the erection of 107 single family residential units. 3. Such request is made for the followin~ reasons: That such zoning will provide a better use of the subject property when combined with the use for which tl~ Norris Estates property is zoned. ~r/ (L.S.) R~CHt~ ~T. CARR (as 'Contract Vendee) STATE OF NEW YORK, ) ) SS:- COUNTY OF SUFFOLK, ) ...... .R.I.C...H/)~..D..T.,..C..AB.R. ...................... , BEING DULY SWORN, deposes and says flat he is the petitioner in the within action; that be has read the foregoing Petiffon and knows the contents thereof; that the same is true to his (her) own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on informatlcn and belief, and that as to those matters he believes it to be true. Sworn to r~fore me/I_ ...... ~ y m ./..~/*. ................. 19.87. ........... JANET F HAER[RLE ~ Public, State of Now Yof~ NO. 4847631 Suffolk County ~m E~aa~ Fe~. 28. ~s_.7~ : RTATE OF NEW YORK. ) ) SS:- COUNTY OF SUFFOLK, ) JOSEPH A. WANAT .................................... ~.~ ......... BEING DULl' S\VORN, dcposes and says that he is the petitioner in the within action; that he has read the foregoing Petition and knows lhe contents thereo£; that the same is true to his (her) own knowledge, exccpt as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on informaficn and belie/, and that as to those matters he believes it to be true. (L. S.) Sworn to ~..~ore me ~ tiffs "~... da>' of ............ 19.8.7.. SCHEDULE ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, vith the buildings and improvements thereon erected, situate, lying and being at Nattituck, Tovn of Southold, County of' Suffolk and State of New York, bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a point which connects the northerly side of' Bergen Avenue vith the vesterly side of land nov or formerly of Joseph T. Nacari and Louis F. Simeone and from said point o! beginning: RUNNING THENCE along the northerly side of Bergen Avenue, 67° lO' 40" Nest, 685.93 feet to an angle point in Bergen Avenue. South CONTINUING THENCE along the westerly side of' Bergen Avenue, on a course bearing South 20° 49' 50# East, 61.62 feet. CONTINUING THENCE along land nov or formerly of William and Tompkins D. Entenmann: land 1. South 59° 49' 30' West 2. North 20° 42' 30# West 3. South 56° 13' 50' West 4. North 21° 50' 20" Nest 5. North 22° 29' 50" West 6. North 21° 14' 40" West 7. North 22° 11' 50' West, nov or formerly of' John 200 feet; 49.99 feet; 258.98 feet; 429.45 feet; 819.71 feet; 643.02 feet; 392.02 feet to a and Rose Koroleski. point and CONTINUING THENCE along said land of John and Rose Koroleski: land 1. North 71° 23' 10' East. 95.00 feet; 2. North 21° 17' 50' West. 773.70 feet; 3. North 22° 03' 50" Nest, 305.71 feet or formerly of William Charles Hees. to a point and CONTINUING THENCE along said land of William Charles Hees, North 22° 27-' 50' Nest. 925 feet to a tie-line along the approximate high-vater mark of the Long Island Sound. CONTINUING THENCE along said tie-line of the Long Island Sound. North 69° 43' 18' East, 651.62 feet to a point and other land nov or formerly of Joseph A. Wanat. CONTINUING THENCE along said other land of Joseph A. Wanat, South 22° 31' 10" East, 770.38 feet. RUNNING THENCE partially along said other land of' Joseph A. Nanat, and land nov or formerly of Doris K. Brown and land nov or formerly of Patrick Carrig and Hark S. McDonald, North 84° 10' 30" East, 574.20 feet to a point and land now or formerly of Joseph T. Nacari and Louis F. Simeone, thence South 22° 31' 10' East, 2,228.31 feet. SCHEDULE 'A# Cont'd. CONTINUING THENCE along said land of' Joseph T. #acari and Louis F. Simeoneo South 65° 45' 50= Nest, 139.15 f'eet. THENCE South 18° 03' 10# East, 522.42 feet. CONTINUING THENCE along said land of Joseph T. Hacari and Louis F. Simeone, South 20° 10' 10= East, 475.61 feet to the north side of' Bergen Avenue and the point or place of BEGINNING. 0080U/1-2 ?OWN OF SOUTHOLD EAF [NYIRO;IM£NTAL A$S[SSH£NT '-'PART Project Information IdOTIC£: This dOcu~ent 4o desk,ned to assist In deter~lntn9 whether the hctton pmposed may hive i signiFiCant is Dart of the aPPlication for approvil and may he subject to further verification and)ubltc roviev. Provide iny additional ~nfoeeation ~u believe will be needed to comoletn PARTS 2 Ind 3. :~AME OF PROJECT: HEATHER HILLS AND HA.HE OF APPLICANT: RICHARD T. CARR (as Contract Vendee~ {ha~e) 444 East 86th Street New York, NY {P.O.) 10028 ** (State) {Zip) NA~E ANO ADDRESS Or OWN£R (If Diffeeent~ JOSEPH A. ~ANAT c/o Leonard I. 'Ackerman, Esq. ($trnet ~' 34 Pantigo Road, East Hampton, NY 11937 {State) BU~IN:SS PHONE: 516-324-3942 **Please Contact: (516) 447-8900 Pelletreau & Pelletreau 20 Church Street, P.O. Box 110 D£SC~IPTICS Or Pa00ECT: (Srieflx describe type of projectPoarta~e' NY 11772 Attn: John J. Hart,E ~Realty subdivision of density no greater than 107 Units on entire parcel.) (PLEASE COMPLETE EACH ~UESTIflN - Indicate N.A. If not applicable) A. SITE DESCRIPTION (Physica] setting of overall project, both develoned and undevelooeO areas) 1. General character of the land: Generally uniform slope X Generally uneven and rolltno or irreoular 2. Present land use: UrOan , Industrial , Coranercial , Suburban Rural , Forest · Agriculture X o Other nppn ~i-~,~ " ' 3. Total acreage of oroject area:]O?.6acres. Aoproximate acreage: Hea~ow or Brushland Forested aoricultura) 'l~tlano (Freshwater or T~al As nar Artec)es ?4, :~ or c.C.L.~ Presently After Completion Presently After Completi 4J.~._acres ~1~ acres Hater Surface Area 3.0acres j.....O_ac~ .Q acres {)_acres Unvegetated (rock, earth or fill) 0 acres ~0 54.3 acres 0 acres Roads, buil~inos and other haven surfaces O_acres ~6 ±5~ 7___acres ±5.7acres Other (indicate ty~e) 0 acres · 0 act 6.,. Approainite Percentage of' proposed oroject $tte kith S?OOeS: ?. greater ..~Z. 0-10:,.~0 ~: ln-1~! 8 ~ IS: or ~s projec~ contiguous to, or contain o butldtnn or site 11sted On the Nattonal Register of Historic Places? . Yes ~T#O ' 8. What Is the depth to the water table? _~.~O__feet 9. i~o hunting Or fishing OppOrtunities presently exist in the project are~? Yes ~ No 10, Does project site contain~ny species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endanoered . .,, 'Yes , :to, locating to - Identify each species .,, 11. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (t.e. c~tffs, dunes~other geological far-arians . __Yes ~ Ho. COescribe ire~- Yes ~ No. Yes ~ No I. Na~ of Strea~ and na~ of river to w~ich ~t is tributary 15. Lakes, Ponds, Wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: mo r(ame N/A : b. Size (in acres) ± 6 acres 16. What is the dominant land use and zoning classification within a 1/4 mile radius of the project (e.g. single family residential, R-2) and the scale of development (e.g. 2 story). AR-80 PROJECT 0ESCRIPTION I. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) a. Total contiguous acreage owned by project sponsor 107.6 acres. b. Project acreage developed: 107.6 acres initially; .107.6acres ultimately. c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped 0 d. Length of project, in miles: N/A (if appropriate) e. If project is an expansion of existing, indicate percent of expansion proposed: age ; developed acreage _ f. lJu,~ber Of off-stre~t oarking spaces existino ~ g. Maximum vehicular trios generated per hour ±40 h. If residential: Number and type of housing units: ~ne Family Two Family Initial 107 0 Ultimate 107 0 i. If: Orlentatio~ "e~gnborhooo-City-~egional building square foot- ; pr0p0seda_s_~per the ordinance of the Town of Southol d (upon CornpTetion of project) Multiple Family Condominium o o 0 __ o - -=----feet. as per the ordinance of the Town of Southold. -2- #or ~uc~ nitural ma~Trtel (i.e. rock, earth, etc.) w111 be r~ved from the stte o Nov many lores Of veqetation (trees. shrubs, ground covers) ~tll be removed fro~ site - 0 tons 0 Will any mature forest (over 190 yeir$ old) or other locslly-tmportant vegetation be removed by project? Yes X No S. Are thorn any Plans for ~e-vegetation to replica that removed during construction? X ~es 6. If single Dbase project: Anticioated period o¢ construction 60 ~nths, (includin9 demolition). 7. If multi-phased oroject: i. Total number Of phases Snticipated No. b. &nttcioated date of con~encement phase ! - ~nonth - year (incluo~n~ demolition) c. Approximate comotetion date final phase - month. - yea~. d. Is phase 1 financially de~endent on subseouent ohases? - Yes - NO 8. Will blasting occur during construction? Yes ~ No g. Number Of jobs generated: during construction 25 ; after project is co.plate O - lO, Nu~nber Of jobs eliminated by this project O ll. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? Yes X No. If yes, exolmin: 1Z. i. Is surface or subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? X Yes No. b. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, X~, etc.) domestic se~a~e c. If surface disposal name of strea~ into which effluent will be discharged 13. Will surface area of existing lakes, ponds, streams, bays or other surface waterways be increased or decreased by prooosal? Yes ~ Ho, 14. Is project or any portion Of project located in the I00 year flood olain? Yes X NO 15. a. Does pro3ect involve disoosal of solid waste? Yes X No b. If yes, will an existing solid waste disposal facility be used? Yes NO c. If yes, give name: : location d. t;ill any wastes not go into a sewage disoosal syste~ ~r into a sanitary landfill? __Yes 16. Will prn3ect use herbicides or ~esticides~ Yes X No 17, Will project routinely produce Doors (nora t~an one hour ~er day)? Yes X NO 18. Will project produce ooerating no~se exceeding the local a~b)ence no, se levels? Yes X No 19. Will project result in an increase in energy use? X Yes No. If yes, indicate type(s) __ elect~ic±t¥ X h: 20. 21, 22. SCDHS specifications water suooly is from wells and)cate ~urro~ng capacity as per/ gals/m nule Total ant~cinated water usage per day ~6j~50 oals/d~y. d. AR/80 AR/80 NO If no. indicate desired :e-~nq M~i~_~_M~lti_p~lp (*~e_aF.t_agh~_note.) Approvals: · is any ir 1 ~er~tt ~Qutred? Yes NO b. Does project Involve State or Federal funding Or flnancing? - c. Local and Regional Approvals: Yes _~_No Approval Required (Yes. No) (Type) Submitta! Approval (Date) (Date) ~OCL~ Torn, ~:Pa~ya~cB~l~u~ Board YES x&~, Toy., ~b~k~(~ Ptannin9 Board "YES City. Torn, Zoning Board NO ~. County He~th Depart~nt y~ Other local egencies ~ Other regional agencies N~ Stmte Agencies ~ Federal Agencies N~ Chan~e of Zone ~u_b~ivision SCPC nEC C. INFORMATIONAL DETAILS Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse impacts associated with the proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which Can be taken to mitigate or avoid them. PREPARER'S SIGNATURE: TITLE: REPRESENTING: DATE: Pelletreau & Pelletreau Attorney for Applicant Richard T. Carr September 25~ 1987 * NOTE: In connection with this Change of Zone, the applicant will covenant, when granted, to reduce the density on the presently zoned M Norris Estates parcel to twenty-eight (28) units. TOWN BOARD, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD In the Matter of the Petition of to the Toxvn Board of the Town of Southold. TO: NOTICE YOU ARE HEREBY GIVEN NOTICE: 2. That the property which is the subject of the Petition is located adjacent to your property and is des- cribed as follows: .~ /d'25'~ L /~, ...f' I1~- [_6 / 3. That theproperl~, which is the subject of such Petition is Iocate41. in the following zoning district: 4. That by such Petition, the undersigned w, ill reques, t that the above-described..m2operty be placed in.thc follo~ving zone district classification: ,~/'~ , ~.~a_ ~ t~__A.4,.~r~r_C.o 5. That within five days from the date hereof, a written Petition requesting the relief specified above will be filed in the Southold Town Clerk's Office at Main Road, Southold, New York and you may then and there -- examine the same during regular office hours. 6. That before the relief sought may be granted, a public hearing must be held on the matter by the Town Board; that a notice of such hearing must be published at least ten days prior to the date of such hearing in the Suffolk Times and in the Long Island Traveler-Mattituck Watchman, newspapers published in the Town of Southold and designated for the publication of such notices; that you or your representative have the right to ap- pear and be heard at such hearing. Petitioner, ~ NAME PROOF QF MAll lNG OF :NOTICE ADDRESS Sworn to me this day of 0¢4ob,-,, STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF SUFFOLK: ss.: y ~ i{~ ,beingdulysworn, deposesandsaysthatonthe ~day of ~ ,19 ~, deponent mailed a true copy of tbe Notice set forth on the reverse side hereof, directed to each of the abov.-named persons at the addresses set opposite their respective names; lhA[ [he addresses set opposite the names of said persons are the addresses of said persons as shown on the cur- rent :sses~ent,roll of the Town of Southold; that said Notices were mailed at , ~~, ~/ ;that said Notices were mailed to each of said persons by (certified) (~cois~ered) mail. ,19 -- - - Notary Publi~k GLORIA G. O'MALLEY NOTARY PUBLIC, Slate of New York No. 4803137, Suffolk County ~rnission L~pires Februory 2 8, 19 8 9 P 679 475 092 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL (See P 679 475 084 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL (See Reverse) Sent to ~.t_Z~..,,~._ ~'~ P = '~9 47.5 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL P 679 475 090 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL (See Reverse) PO Sta~ea~.~z Code P 679 475 091 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL m and ZIP Code p 679 475 085 RECEIPT FOR CERTiFiED MAiL fSee Reverse) p 679 475 086 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL NOT FOR tNTERN&T~ONAL MA~L ~0 S aB de, TOTAL Postage and Fees n I, , 9 475 087 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL Postage TOTAL Poslage and Fees JAC PLANNING CORP. 8 Bond Street, Suite 300 Great Neck, NY 11021 · 516-487-4549 Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Planning Board Director Town of Southold Main Road Mattituck, New York 11952 Dear Chairman Orlowski: June 1, 1988 Re: JUN _L!9 8 DATE Norris Estates Draft Environmental Impact Statement We are submitting eight copies of a preliminary working draft of the above Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Planning Board's review. We are submitting this document in a rough draft form to enable the Board to work with us in fine- tuning the site plans and to incorporate any comments of the Board into the final version. Two versions of the Heather Hills development have been included in the report for you considera- tion in order to further assist you to comment more completely on these alternatives. Should you have any questions regarding the above or need additional copies of the report for your review, please feel free to contact our offices. We are also enclosing AR-80 yield maps for Norris Estates and Heather Hills as requested by members of the Planning Board. We look forward to receiving your input. JAC:da Enclosure Very truly yours, en PLANNINCz CO~. /7 A. Celender, President CC: Hon. Francis J. Murphy Hon. Jean W. Cochran Hon. Raymond W. Edwards Hon. George L. Penny, IV Hon. Ruth Oliva Hon. Ellen Larsen Ms. Judith Terry, Town Clerk D. Carr J. Hart, Esq. H. Raynor S. Niego H2M Group M. Bontje W. Dunn, P.E. JAC PLANNING CORP. Bond Street, Suite 300 Great Neck, NY 11021 ' 516-487-4549 Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Planning Board Director Town of Southold Main Road Mattituck, New York 11952 Dear Chairman Orlowski: June 1, 1988 RECEIVED BY Re: Norris Estates Draft Environmental Statement Impact We are submitting eight copies of a preliminary working draft of the above Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Planning Board's review. We are submitting this document in a rough draft form to enable the Board to work with us in fine- tuning the site plans and to incorporate any comments of the Board into the final version. Two versions of the Heather Hills development have been included in the report for you considera- tion in order to further assist you to comment more completely on these alternatives. Should you have any questions regarding the above or need additional copies of the report for your review, please feel free to contact our offices. We are also enclosing AR-80 yield maps for Norris Estates and Heather Hills as requested by members of the Planning Board. We look forward to receiving your input. JAC:da Enclosure Very truly yours, ean PLANNIN~ CO~. ~ A. Celender, President cc: Hon. Francis J. Murphy Hon. Jean W. Cochran Hon. Raymond W. Edwards Hon. George L. Penny, IV Hon. Ruth Oliva Hon. Ellen Larsen Ms. Judith Terry, Town Clerk D. Carr J. Hart, Esq. H. Raynor S. Niego H2M Group M. Bontje W. Dunn, P.E. JAC PLANNING CORP. 8 Bond Street, Suite 300 Great Neck, NY 11021 · S16-487-4549 June 1 1988 Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Planning Board Director Town of Southold Main Road Mattituck, New York 11952 Dear Chairman Orlowski: Re: Norris Estates Draft Environmental Statement Impact We are submitting eight copies of a preliminary working draft of the above Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Planning Board's review. We are submitting this document in a rough draft form to enable the Board to work with us in fine- tuning the site plans and to incorporate any comments of the Board into the final version. Two versions of the Heather Hills development have been included in the report for you considera- tion in order to further assist you to comment more completely on these alternatives. Should you have any questions regarding the above or need additional copies of the report for your review, please feel free to contact our offices. We are also enclosing AR-80 yield maps for Norris Estates and Heather Hills as requested by members of the Planning Board. We look forward to receiving your input. JAG:da Enclosure Very truly yours, eanPLANNIN~ CORP. A. Celender, President CC: Hon. Francis J. Murphy Hon. Jean W. Cochran Hon. Raymond W. Edwards Hon. George L. Penny, IV Hon. Ruth Oliva Hon. Ellen Larsen Ms. Judith Terry, Town Clerk D. Carr J. Hart, Esq. H. Raynor S. Niego H2M Group M. Bontje W. Dunn, P.E. JAC PLANNING CORP. 8 Bond Street, Suite 300 Great Neck, NY 11021 · 516-487-4549 Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Planning Board Director Town of Southold Main Road Mattituck, New York 11952 Dear Chairman 0rlowski: June 1, 1988 DATE Re: Norris Estates Draft Environmental Statement Impact We are submit/in9 eight copies of a preliminary working draft of the above Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Planning Board's review. We are submitting this document in a rough draft form to enable the Board to work with us in fine- tuning the site plans and to incorporate any comments of the Board into the final version. Two versions of the Heather Hills development have been included in the report for you considera- tion in order to further assist you to comment more completely on these alternatives. Should you have any questions regarding the above or need additional copies of the report for your review, please feel free to contact our offices. We are also enclosing AR-80 yield maps for Norris Estates and Heather Hills as requested by members of the Planning Board, We look forward to receiving your input. JAC:da Enclosure Very truly yours, ean PLANNIN~ CO~. /~ A. Celender, President CC: Hon. Francis J. Murphy Hon. Jean W. Cochran Hon. Raymond W. Edwards Hon. George L. Penny, IV Hon. Ruth Oliva Hon. Ellen Larsen Ms. Judith Terry, Town Clerk D. Carr J. Hart, Esq. H. Raynor S. Niego H2M Group M. Bontje W. Dunn, P.E. JAC PL^nnlnG CORP. 8 Bond Street, Suite 300 Great Neck, NY 11021 · 516-487-4549 Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Planning Board Director Town of Southold Main Road Mattituck, New York 11952 Dear Chairman Orlowski: June 1, 1988 Re: Norris Estates Draft Environmental Statement' Impact We are submitting eight copies of a preliminary working draft of the above Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Planning Board's review. We are submitting this document in a rough draft form to enable the Board to work with us in fine- tuning the site plans and to incorporate any comments of the Board into the final version. Two versions of the Heather Hills development have been included in the report for you considera- tion in order to further assist you to comment more completely on these alternatives. Should you have any questions regarding the above or need additional copies of the report for your review, please feel free to contact our offices. We are also enclosing AR-80 yield maps for Norris Estates and Heather Hills as requested by members of the Planning Board. We look forward to receiving your input. JAC:da Enclosure Very truly yours, eaCnPLANNINCz CORP. /~ A. Celender, President CC: Hon. Francis J. Murphy Hon. Jean W. Cochran Hon. Raymond W. Edwards Hon. George L. Penny, IV Hon. Ruth Oliva Hon. Ellen Larsen Ms. Judith Terry, Town Clerk D. Carr J. Hart, Esq. H. Raynor S. Niego H2M Group M. Bontje W. Dunn, P.E. JAC PLANNING CORP. B Bond Street, Suite 300 Great Neck, NY 11021 · S16-487-4549 Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Planning Board Director Town of Southold Main Road Mattituck, New York 11952 Dear Chairman Orlowski: June 1, 1988 JUN 1 1988 Norris Estates Draft Environmental Impact Statement We are submitting eight copies of a preliminary working draft of the above Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Planning Board's review. We are submitting this document in a rough draft form to enable the Board to work with us in fine- tuning the site plans and to incorporate any comments of the Board into the final version. Two versions of the Heather Hills development have been included in the report for you considera- tion in order to further assist you to comment more completely on these alternatives. Should you have any questions regarding the above or need additional copies of the report for your review, please feel free to contact our offices. We are also enclosing AR-80 yield maps for Norris Estates and Heather Hills as requested by members of the Planning Board. We look forward to receiving your input. JAC:da Enclosure Very truly yours, eanPLANNING~ CO~P. ~ President cc: Hon. Francis J. Murphy Hon. Jean W. Cochran Hon. Raymond W. Edwards Hon. George L. Penny, IV Hon. Ruth Oliva Hon. Ellen Larsen Ms. Judith Terry, Town Clerk D. Carr J. Hart, Esq. H. Raynor S. Niego H2M Group M. Bontje W. Dunn, P.E. MAJOR SUBDI VIS ION Complete application received Yield map received Application reviewed at work session Applicant advised of necessary revisions Revised subm:,ssion received Sketch plan approval -with conditions Lead Agency Coordination SEORA determination Preliminary maps received Preliminary maps reviewed at work session -revisions Road profiles/drainage submitted -revisions Road profiles/drainage reviewed be Engineer Sent to County Planning Commission Receipt of County Planning Report Review of SCPC report Preliminary hearing Preliminary approval -with conditions Sent to Fire Commissk/ner Receipt of firewell location Notification to applicant to include on final map Draft Covenants and Restrictions received Draft Covenants and Restrictions reviewed Filed Covenants and Restrictions received Bond estimate submitted Bond adopted by PB Bond adopted by TB Payment of bond Payment of inspection fee TOWN CLERK · ow~ o~ so~'~.o~o .-' Ju~ T. Ter~, Top'Clerk ~ OF SOUTHOLD PAR] .PROJECT INFORMATION Prepared by Proiect Sponsor NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant effect on the environment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E. Answers to these questions will be considered as part of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additional information you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3. It is expected that completion of the full EAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not involve new studies, research or investigation. If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specify each instance. NAME OF ACTION Heather Hills on the Sound subdivision LOCATION OF ACTION (Include Street Address, Municipality and County) Bergen Avenue, Matti~uck, New York, Suffolk County NAME OF APPLICANT/SPONSOR BUSINESS TELr:PHONI= Heather Hills Ltd. Partnership (212)868-4777 ADDRESS 350 Fifth Avenue CITY/PO New York STATE ZiP CODE NY 10118 NAME OF OWNER (If different) BUSINESS TEll=PHONE same ( ) ADORESS CITY/PO STATE ZIP CODE DESCRIPTION OF ACTION subdivision of real proper~y Please Complete Each Question-Indicate N.A. if not applicable A. Site Description Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas. 1. Present land use: []Urban I~lndustrial [-[Forest []Agriculture 2. Total acreage of project area: 107 acres. APPROXIMATE ACREAGE Meadow or Brushland (Non-agricultural) Forested Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland, pasture, etc.) Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24, 25 of ECL) Water Surface Area Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill) Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces Other (Indicate type) 3. What is predominant soil type(s) on project site? I-]Commercial ~]Other fqResidential (suburban) 66 4O top soil, [~Rural (non-farm) PRESENTLY AFTER COMPLETION acres 0 acres g~n~./miY a. Soil drainage: E~Weli drained _ ] 0C) % of site [~Moderately well drained __ % of sit~ ~Poorly drained % of site b. If any agricultural land is involved, how many acres of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the NYS Land Classification System? acres. (See I NYCRR 370). 4. Are there bedrock outcroppings on project site? [~Yes [~No a. What is depth to bedrock? (in feet) 2 3,..Appr°ximate percentage of propo.~ th slopes: []0-10% []10-15% % ~15% or g % 6. ts project substantially contiguous to, or contain a building, site. or district, listed on the State or the National Registers of Historic Places? E~Yes F~No 7, Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural Landmarks? I~Yes []:No 8. What is the depth of the water table? + 50.(in feet) 9. Is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aquifer? fqYes 10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? fqYes []No 11. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered? []Yes ~No According to u~)on information and belief Identify each species 12. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site.~ (i.e., cliffs, dunes, other geological formations) FqYes E~No Describe 13. Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area? fqYes ~No If yes, explain 14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community? [Yes E~No 15. Streams within or contiguous to project area: a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary 16, Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to proiect area: a. Name Ponds b. Size (In acres) 3 17. Is the site served by existing public utilities? [~Yes ~]No a) If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? [~Yes r~No b) If Yes, will improvements be necessary to allow connection? [~Yes [~No 18. Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 304? []Yes ~qNo 19. Is the site located in or substantially contiguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 of the ECL, and 6 NYCRR 6177 fqYes ~No 20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes? E~Yes ~No B. Project Description 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project sponsor 10'7 acres. b. Proiect acreage to be developed: acres initially; acres ultimately. c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped 0 acres. d. Length of project, in miles: (If appropriate) e. If the proiect is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed %; f. Number of off-street parking spaces existing ; proposed Der code g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour (upon completion of project)? estimate h. If residential: Number and type of housing units: One Family Two Family Multiple Family Condominium Initially per zoninq code Ultimately per zoning code i. Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure height; width; len~:th. j. Linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare proiect will occupy is? + 500 ft. 3 per code · 2.'How much natural material (i.e.. rod,. ~.,ll !tc.) will be removed from the site? _~_ 3. Will disturbed areas be reclaimed? [No [N/A a. If yes, for what intend,~J purp~e ~s lhe site being reclaimed? b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? [Yes l/No c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for ~eclamation? [Yes 4. How many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site? q~ acres. 5. Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this project? []Yes E~No 6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction 18 months, (including demolition). 7. If multi-phased: a. Total number of phases anticipaled (number). __ tons/cubic yards b. Anticipated date of commencement phase I month c. Approximate completion date of final phase month d. Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases? [Yes 8. Will blasting occur during construction? I-JYes I~No year, (including demolition). . year. 9. Number of jobs generated: during construction 20 P~ 40; after project is complete + lO 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project . 0 11. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? [~Yes f-INo If yes, explain expanded electrical service 12. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? I~Yes ~No a. If yes, indicate type of waste {s wage, industrial, etc.) and amount b. Name of water body into which e[fluent will be discharged 13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal revolved? [~Yes l/No Type 14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? Explain cleaning of ponds domestic sewerage ~Yes QNo 15. Is project or any port, ion of project located in a 100 year flood plain? I-lYes [~No ~.th except].on o[ gong Island $o3;nd Beach ~o l0 ~ con~o;r 16. Will the project generate solid waste? ~Yes ~-~No ~aomesr_~c wastze onJ. y) a. If yes, what is the amount per month tons b. If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used? I-lYes I-INo c. If yes, give name ; location d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? I-lYes e. If Yes, explain E~No 17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste? a. If yes, what is the anticipated ratn of disposal? b. If yes, what is the anticipated sile life? 18. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? []Yes F-lYes E~No tons/month years. ~No 19. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? ~lYes E~No 20. Will project produce operating nois~ exceeding the local ambient noise levels? ~]Yes 21. Will project result in an increase in energY use? r~Yes [Z]No If yes , indicate type(s) _ domm.~3;-i~ electricity 22. If water supply is from wells, indicate pumping capacity 23. Total anticipated water usage per day - 24~ 200 gallons/day. 24. Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding? I-rYes [~No if Yes, explain :J~]No gallons/minute, per SCDOHS standards estimate ~.5. Approvals Required: City, Town, Village Board [Yes ~No City, Town, Village Planning Board [~Yes [~No City, Town Zoning Board [~Yes []~No City, County Health Department [StYes ENo Other Local Agencies [~Yes [No Other Regional Agencies [~Yes []No State Agencies [Yes [~No Federal Agencies EYes C. Zoning and Planning Information Type subdivision Shld Trustees Review S.C.P.C Review 1. Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision? F;iYes []No If Yes, indicate decision required: []zoning amendment []zoning variance Especial use permit []]subdivision ~]site plan I~new/revision of master plan []resource management plan Eother 2 What is the zoning classification(s)of the site;? R-40 3 What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present 1 acre buildinq lots 4 What is the proposed zoning of the site? R-40 5 What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning? 1 acre building lots Submittal Date 6 is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans;? []Yes 7 What are the predominant land use(s} and zoning classifications within a ~/~ mile radius of proposed action;? R-80 A-C R-40 ENo 8 Is the proposed action compatible with adioining/surrounding land uses within a ~¼ mile? ClYes fUNo 9 If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed;? 88 a. What is the minimum lot size proposed? up to 40,000 sct ft 10 Will proposed action require any authorization(s} for the formation of sewer or water districts? []Yes [~No 11 Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police, fire protection)? {~tYes []No a. If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand;? ;[]Yes f~No 12 Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels;? IUYes a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? []Yes [No D. Informational Details Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your proiect If ther~ are or~.may be any adverse impacts associated with your proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures whi~}~ yob propose to mitigate or avoid them. E. Verification ] certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge. Applicant/S~o~or Name ~eather Hills Ltd. Partnership Date 4/23/90 Signature L~_ /~_.~ '1-,~ Title Aclent If the action is in the ~oastal Area, and you are a state agency complete the Coasta Assessment Form before proceeding with th s assessment. APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF PLAT To the Planning Board of the T0~vn of Southold: The undersigned applicant hereby applies for (tentative) (final) appFoval of a subdivision plat {n accordance with Article 16 of the Town Law and the Rules and Regulations of the Southold Town Planning Board, and represents and states as follows: 1. The applicant is the owner of record of the land trader application. (If the applicant is not the Owner of record of the land under application, the applicant shall state his interest in said land under application.) 2. The name of the subdivision is to be Heather Hills on the Sound 3. The entire land under application is described in Scherl,,l, ,,^,, , suggested.) ...... ~x nereto annexed. (Copy of deed 4. Tile land is beld by the applicant under deeds recorded in Suffolk County Clerk's office as folloxvs: . Liber :1.0986 ........................ Page . 536 ~ · ..... On 12/19/89 Liber ........................ Page ...................... On Liber ........................ Page ...................... On ..... Liber ........................ Page ...................... On Liber .... .................... Page .. .................... On as devised under the Last Will and Testament of ............................ ' or as distributee 5. The area of the land is ... 3.0.7+ ... acres. 6. All taxes which are liens on the land at the (late hereof have been paid except ............ 7. The la~d is encnmbered by Yasuda Trust Compan~ and Crossland Savin~s. mortgage (s) as follows: (a) Mort2'age recorded in Liber .............. Pa~e .................. in ori,q'ina amount of $ .............. unpaid amonnt $ · ..................... held by ........... .............. address (b) Mortgage recorded in Liber ......... Page . ........................ in orwinaI amonnt of "" ' onbaid amount 8.. .................... held by .. .............. address ....... (e) Mortgage recorded in Liber .............. Page ................ in original amount of .............. unpaid amount $ ...................... held by ...................... ...................... address 8. There are no other encumbrances or liens against the land o~cI~IX ........................ 9. The land lies in the following zoning use districts R-40 .2. 10. No part of the land lles uuder water xvbether tide water, stream, ipond water or otherwise, ex- cept ........ p.e.r., attached sketch maps II. The appl{cant shall at h{s expenseiustall ail required public improvements. 12. Tim laud (d~x~0 (does not) lie in a \Vater District or YVater Supply District. Name of Dis- trict, if within a District, is ..... 13. \Vater mains w/Il be lald l>y ..... l!/..a... and (a) (no) charge will be made for installing said mains. 14. Electric lines and standards will be installed by LILCO lines. · .............. and (a) (uo) charge will be made for installing said 15. Gas mains will he installed by ..... .n../.o;. .............................. and (a) (no) charge will be made for installing said mains. ' ................... 16. If streets shown on the plat are claimed by the applicant to be existing pnblic streets in tire Suffolk Coonty IIi,~hway system, aunex Schedule "B" hereto, to show same. 17. If streets shown on ~he plat are claimed by the applicant to be existing pnblic streets in the Town of Southold I li~hwav system, annex Schcdnle"C" · - - hereto to show same. 18. There are no existinR, bnildings or structures on the land which arc not located and shoxvll on tlre plat. ' 19. \Vhere the plat slmws in-olmsed str6cts which are extensions of streets ou adjoinin~ sub- dlx'~sion maps heretof~;re filed, there are no reserve strips at thc cml of the streets oll said existinff maps at their conjunctions with the propose{ st-cets. 20. In the cm~rse of these procecdi~gs, the al~plicant will ~Jfcr prt~J o~ tith: as required hv Sec. 335 ~>f the Ryal Pro )crty Law. . 21. ~t:bmit a cop)' ,~{ prnposed deed for lots showin~ all restr c i ,ns ~venants. crc. :Xnn~x Schedule "D". . 22. The applicant estimates that the cost of grading and reqnired pnblic improvements ~vill $ .......... as itemized in Schedule "E" hereto aunexed and requests that the maturity of the Performance Bond be fixed at .............. years. The Performance Bond will be xvritten by a licensed surety company nnless otherwise shown on Schedule "F" (Name/o~pplicant) _, /'9 ~-- / ~ ~X~3~gnatureandTitle) (Address) STATE OF NEW X ORK, COUNTY OF .... . ............... ss: On the ........ ~..t/ ....... day of ........ ~'~ ............ 19.. ~..0., before me personally came ........................................... to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that ............ executed the same. Notary Public ............... STATE OF NE\V YORK. COUNTY OF On the ................ day of ' ' ......................... , I9 ...... , before me personally came ...................... to me known, who helng by me drily sworn did de- pose and say that ......... '... resides at No. ............................. that .......................... is the .......... ......... Of the corporatioo described in and which executed thc fm'cgoin~ instrmuent; that ............ knows thc seal of said corporation; that tile seal affixed by order of the board of directors of said corporation. a~:,l :l~:tt ............ signed .............. name thereto by like order. Notary Pnblic Southold. N.Y, 11971 · (516) 765-I~38 QUESTIONNAIRE TO BE COMPLETED AND SUBMITTE~ ~ITH YOUR APPLICATIONS FORMS TO THE PLANNING BOARD Please complete, sign and return to the Office of the Planning Board with your completed applications forms. If your answer, to any of the following questions is y.~, please indicate these on your guaranteed survey or submit other appropriate evidence. 1. Are there any wetland grasses on this parcel? ~Yes~ (Attached is a list of the wetland grasses defined~ by the Town Code, Chapter 97, for your reference) 2. Are there any other premises under your ownership abutting this parcel? Yes 3. Are there any building permits pending on this parcel? Yes 4. Are there any other applications pending ~ concerning this property before any other department or agency?(Town , State, County, etc.) Yes 5. Is there any application pending before any other agency with regard to a different project, on this parcel? Yes 6. Was this pro~%rty the subject of any prior application to the Planning Board? Yes 7. Does this property have a valid certificate of occupancy, if yes please submit a copy of same Yes No I certify that the above statements are on the Planning Board in considering gnature pro,eft owner or true and will be relied- this appli~, tion. agent .NNING BOARD MEMBERS {ichard G. Ward, Chairman George Ritchie Latham, Jr. Bennett Ortowski, Jr. Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards Town Hall, 53095 Main R, P. O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 119 Fax (516) 765-3136 Telephone (516) 765-19: PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD April 12, 1994 Hen£y Raynor 320 Love Lane Mattituck, New York 11952 RE: Inquiry in regard to Minor Subdivision for Heather Hills Property SCTM~ 1000-112-1-16.1 Dear Mr. Raynor: The Planning Board reviewed your April 1, 1994 inquiry in regard to proceeding with a minor subdivision on the above mentioned property at the last work session. As you know, the property was the subject of a set-off and a subsequen% 4 lot minor subdivision approved by the Planning Board on November 2, 1992. Therefore, any further subdivision of the Heather Hills property would be classified as a major subdivision by the Planning Board. In order to create two 5 acre lots as described in your letter, the entire property would have to be shown. The proposal would be treated as a 3 lot major subdivision, requiring a major subdivision application fee. Road specifications for the proposal would be determined by the number of lots serviced by the proposed road as described in Section A108-15 of the Highway Specifications. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding the above. Sincerely, Melissa S~ Planner TO: FROM: RE: DATE: File Melissa Spiro, Planner SCTM# 1000-112-1-16.3 98.5 acre parcel N/S Bergan Avenue April 11, 1994 The above mentioned parcel is shown on the current zoning map as being within the R-40 Zoning District. However, the zoning designation of the parcel has been reviewed by the Town Attorney, and it has been determined that as per a decision by the Court, the parcel is within the Agricultural-Conservation (A-C) Zoning District. SERVI:~T/~ ,, JUU APR ~i994 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman George Ritchie Latham, Jr. Richard G. Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SCOTt L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 December 10, 1990 Henry Raynor 320 Love Lane Mattituck, New York 11952 RE: Heather Hills & Wanat Proposal SCTM# 1000-112-1-16.1 Dear Mr. Raynor: The Planning Board has received two different applications for the above mentioned parcel; the Heather Hills major subdivision, and the Wanat set-off. The Board can not review two different applications for the same parcel. Consequently, review of the major subdivision will be put on hold until revised maps are submitted reflecting the change in the property line that will be caused by the Wanat set-off. In addition, until such time that the Wanat set-off is finalized, the Planning Board will review only the yield map for the major subdivision. Please contact this office if you have any questions regarding the above. Very truly yours, Bennett Or ' , Chairman ~. ~, 1990 TO~ Southold Town planning Board From: ~enry Raynor Re: Heather Hills subdivision Enclosed herw[th are yield p}ans for your determination ,~ conformity and density- ,,ny questions concerning this submission will be answered · 'n day. wlthl the Very.~rulyy~r~' Henry Ra~nor$ PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman George Ritchie Latham, Jr. Richard G. Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SCOTF L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 July 30, 1990 Henry Raynor 320 Love Lane Mattituck, New York i1952 //~ - /' /~ RE: Proposed Subdivision for Heather Hills SCTM9 Dear Mr. Raynor: In accordance with the settlement of the Article 78 in reference to the change of zone for the above mentioned parcel, the Planning Board will not be continuing their review of the one acre density subdivision proposal. Please contact this office if you have any questions regarding the above. Very truly yours, Bennett Orlowski, Jr. ~ ~t~ Chairman TO: File FROM: Melissa Spiro, Planning Staff RE: Proposed subdivision for Heather Hills SCTM9 1000-122-5-4 DATE: July 10, 1990 The above mentioned subdivision was reviewed at the Planning Board's July 9, 1990 work session. The Board received a report from the Conservation Advisory Council, however, no official report from the Trustees has been submitted. Mr. Raynor was notified today that the following changes must be made to the Yield map: The building envelopes for Lot 34 and Lot 36 must be 150 feet at the building line setback. The envelopes shown are not 150 feet at the setback line. Lot 85 was not accepted by the Board due to the location of the sloped areas. The statement on the map as to the number of lots must be corrected. The EAF does not indicated that wetlands exist on site. I discussed this with Henry. He will update the form when he receives the DEC report. To: Southold Town Planni~ Board From Henry Raynor Re: Heather Hills Subdivision Enclosed six copies of yield maps amended to your quirements. Any cuestions please call me at 298-8420. Yours truly, Henry Raynor re- Telephone (516) 765-1801 SOUTHOLD TOWN CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. BOx 1179 Southold. New York 11971 To: Southold Town Planning Board From: Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council Dated: June 22, 1990 Re: Major Subdivision - Heather Hills SCTM #1000-112-1-16 The Conservation Advisory Council has inspected the above referenced site and makes the following recommendations The site appears to have no wetlands involved. The wetlands sited on the map appear to be correct. The survey is not correct. Wetlands need to be staked by the Southold Town Trustees. Additional Comments: Lots 49, 50, 51, 52 and 53 infringe on western wetlands, especially lots 50 and 53. Lots 18, 25 and 26 have similar problems. Suggest open-space recreation area to join all ponds. Suggest covenent and restrictions in deeds to require native vegetation buffers in wetland areas (no lawns in buffer areas). cc: Southold Town Trustees June 19, 1990 To: Southold Town Planning Board From: Henry Raynor Re: Heather Hills Subdivision - last communications Enclosed herewith are the necessary document changes requested for the yield maD. I would h ope the Planning Board would make a favorable decision on this yield; so we may finally commence a sketch plan map. As the CAC mhd Town Trustees have been involved with this prooerty for some months: I would recuest the Plan- ning Board to proceed to sketch so we may incorporate our input to them at that point. Very truly yours, Henry ~aynor~ 7 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman George Ritchie Latham, Jr. Richard G. Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SCOTT L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 June 11, 1990 Henry Raynor 320 Love Lane Mattituck, New York 11952 RE: Proposed Subdivision for Heather Hills SCTM# 1000-122-5-4 Dear Mr. Raynor: The Planning Board reviewed the Yield map dated May 1, 1990. Prior to making a determination on the yield for the parcel, the Planning Board needs the following information: A report from the Conservation Advisory Committee (CAC), verifying that the map discussed in the March 14, 1990, Board of Trustees report, and the CAC report that was attached to that report, shows the same wetland delineation as the current Yield map. Revised Yield maps Showing the following: The area of the upland area for all lots containing wetland areas. The area of the upland area for all lots located on the bluff. The area of all lots excluding the areas where slopes exceed 15%. (Areas containing slopes exceeding 15% should be marked as such on the map.) Building envelopes for the lots adjacent to the Sound. The Planning Board sent the Yield map to the CAC on May 10, 1989 for verification of the wetland delineation. You will be notified when the Board receives their report. Upon submission of the report from the CAC and revised Yield maps, the Planning Board will continue their review. Please contact this office if you have any questions regarding the above. Very truly yours, Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman ms Hay 29,1990 Ms. Melissa Spiro Southold Town Planning Board Town Hal1, 53095 Main Rd. P.O. Box 1179 Southold, N.Y. 11971 RE: Heather Hills Subdivision Project number 9003 Dear Ms. Spiro: Regarding the above referenced project, the yield map presents a layout intending to provide lots with an upland area of no less than 40000 square feet. However, due to its large scale and preliminary nature, some minor lot line manipulation may be required when and if the plat is actually computed, to insure that this requirement be fulfilled. In any event, ail lots wil! contain 40000 square feet or more of up]and area. If you requ!re addit!onal information, please feel free to contact this off]ce at your convenience. Sincerely, __ __~ cc: Henry Raynor May 29,1990 Ms. Meltssa Sptro Southold Town Planning Board Town Hail, 53095 Main Rd. P.O. Box 1179 Southold, N.Y. 11971 RE: Heather HIlls Subdivision Project number 9003 Dear Ms. Splro: Regarding the abOVe referenced project, the yield map presents a layout EntenUing to provide lots wit~ an upland area of no less than 40000 square feet. However, due to its Large ~cake and preliminary nature, some minor line manipulation may be require~ when and kf she plat is actua!ly computed, to Insure that ~hi$ requfrement be fulfiIled, in any event, all ~ots wkll contain 40000 squore feet or more of upland area. If you require ad61tional ~nformation, please feel free to contact this office at your convenience. Thomas J. Filial'zola, P.~ cc: Henry Raynor 1990 To: Southold Town Planning Board From: Henry Raynor Re: !teather Hills Subdivision Enclosad herewith are yield maps for the proDosed caDtioned subdivision. As soon as dtermin~tion has been ma~e we will forward sketch plans of same. If th~r~ are any ~uestions, please do not hesitate call me at 29R-8420 Yours truly, Henry Radnor PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman George Ritchie Latham, Jr. Richard G. Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: John Holzapfel, Chairman Conservation Advisory Committee Bennett Orlowski, Chairman DATE: May 10, 1990 RE: Proposed Major Subdivision for Heather Hills SCTM# 1000-112-1-16 SCO'IT L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York I 1 Fax (516) 765-1823 Attached please find the Yield map dated April 9, 1990 for the above mentioned subdivision. The Planning Board has received a copy of a report dated March 14, 1990 from the Board of Town Trustees. Attached to that report is a paragraph from the CAC in reference to the above mentioned property. The paragraph states that wetlands are present as shown on the submitted map. The Planning Board would like to verify that the map discussed in that report shows the same wetland delineation as the enclosed Yield map. Please review and comment as to the delineation of the wetland areas. Thank you in advance for your assistance. cc: John M. Bredemeyer III, President Board of Trustees TRUSTEES John M. Bredemeyer, III, President Henry P. Smith, Vice President Albert J. Krupski, Jr. John L. Bednoski. Jr. John B. Tuthill Telephone (516) 765-1892 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SCOTI' L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O, Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 March 14, 1990 Henry Raynor 320 Love Lane Mattituck, NY 11952 RE: Carr/Wanat Project Dear Mr. Raynor: Thank you for the opportunity to have the Board of Trustees meet with you at the Carr/Wanat site. To recap our visit today, I would offer the.following: 1. The Trustees would encourage wetland enhancement on the site provided that activity secure a NYSDEC and Trustee Freshwater Wetlands Permit. 2. Cite specific studies to enumerate existing flora and florna and the existence of any species of concern should be made in addition to the usual soil and engineering studies so that enhancement activities will be properly directed. 3. The Board requests that as much of the wetland areas, as possible, be included in one contiguous open space with adequate inter-connected areas provided as a buffer and wildlife corridors. The 75' jurisdiction should be considered a minimal buffer area between plot lines and wetland areas. 4. To maintain habitat diversity, the Trustees would prefer to see no action on the westerly-most pond, and varying amounts of enhancement on the other three ponds. We suggest Some consideration be given to water fowl nesting islands and recreational fishing for the subdivision residents. 5. Wherever possible, existing emergent fringing areas and mature trees should be left in tact. 6. In creating quality enhancements, modera~l~ severe land use practice controls will be necessary on ali Known over-land and sub-surface inflows to the ponds. This is largely ~ecause shallow perch water ponds are naturally eutrophic and a host of factors, such as nutrient-rich rainfall and naturally accumulated debris, tend to make them overly productive under the best of conditions. 7. Creation of new areas to handle road runoff is desirable. We believe these areas are outside Trustee jurisdiction until naturally vegetated. 8. Use of indigenous species is desirable for all sites. Unless you want them, care must be made in operations not to enhance conditions conducive to Phragmites growth. 9. The Conservation Advisory Council should be consulted for their advice in all these matters. 10. Slopes and depths of enhanced areas should be controlled by the advice of Fish and Wildlife personnel of NYSDEC in concert with their freshwater wetlands program people. In closing, I'd just like to thank you, again, for your cooperation ahead of an application. We will try to submit to you the most recent copy of sample restrictions and covenants as they would apply to wetland areas. Sincerely, C/President, Board of Trustees JMB:jb cc: GAG Page 4 Iv'ER REQUESTS In the matter of the Henry Raynor request on behalf of Carr/Wanat the CAC has determined that wetlands are present as shown on the submitted map. The Council questions the lot sizes when wetlands are present. It does not appear the wetlands total was taken from the total yield per lots, that is, the lots appear to be too small to allow for wetlands. REVIEW FOR COMMENTS Plannin~l Board ~Applications Doris Price Moeller - The C^C had stated previously that it considered the wetland line shown on submitted survey to be incorrect and should be shown as at least up to the 5' contour line. The property should be resurveyed using a corrected wetland line. -.,~ John Wickham - The CAC knows of no problem with this subdivision. TRUSTEES John M. Bredemeyer, III, President Henry P. Smith, Vice President AIber~ J. Kmpski, .Ir. John L. Bednoski, Jr. John B. Tuthill Telephone (516) 765-1892 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SCO'I-F L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Ro: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 1197 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 March 14, 1990 Henry Raynor 320 Love Lane Mattituck, NY 11952 RE: Carr/Wanat Project Dear Mr. Raynor: Thank you for the opportunity to have the Board of Trustees meet with you at the Carr/Wanat site. To recap our visit today, I would offer the following: 1. The Trustees would encourage wetland enhancement on the site provided that activity secure a NYSDEC and Trustee Freshwater Wetlands Permit. 2. Cite specific studies to enumerate existing flora and florna and the existence of any species of concern should be made in addition to the usual soil and engineering studies so that enhancement activities will be properly directed. 3. The Board requests that as much of the wetland areas, as possible, be included in one contiguous open space with adequate inter-connected areas provided as a buffer and wildlife corridors. The 75' jurisdiction should be considered a minimal buffer area between plot lines and wetland areas. 4. To maintain habitat diversity, the Trustees would prefer to see no action on the westerly-most pond, and varying amounts of enhancement on the other three ponds. We suggest some consideration be given to water fowl nesting islands and recreational fishing for the subdivision residents. 5. Wherever possible, existing emergent fringing areas and mature trees should be left in tact. · ,~,, t~' (.- Page4 ~ ~IVER REQUESTS In the matter of the Henry Raynor request on behalf of Carr/Wanat the i / has determined that wetlands are present as shown on the submitted map. The Council questions the lot sizes when wetlands are present. It does not · appear the wetlands total was taken from the total yield per lots, that is, the lots appear to be too small to allow for wetlands. REVIEW FOR COMMENTS Planning Board Applications Doris Price Moeller - The CAC had stated previously that it considered the wetland line shown on submitted survey to be incorrect and should be shown as at least up to the 5' contour line. The property should be resurveyed using a corrected wetland line. John Wickham - The CAC knows of no problem with this subdivision. ~ . In creat' g llty' enhancements, m rately severe land use practice controls will be necessary on all known ~ver-land and sub-surface inflows to the ponds. This is largely ~ec~use shallow perch water ponds are naturally eutrophic and a host of factors, such as nutrient-rich rainfall and naturally ~cu~.ulated debris, tend to make them overly productive under the best of conditions. 7. Creation of new areas to handle road runoff is desirable. We believe these areas are outside Trustee jurisdiction until naturally vegetated. 8. Use of indigenous species is desirable for all sites. Unless you want them, care must be made in operations not to enhance conditions conducive to Phragmites growth. 9. The Conservation Advisory Council should be consulted for their advice in all these matters. 10. Slopes and depths of enhanced areas should be controlled by the advice of Fish and Wildlife personnel of NYSDEC in concert with their freshwater wetlands program people. In closing, I'd just like to thank you, again, for your cooperation ahead of an application. We will try to submit to you the most recent copy of sample restrictions and covenants as they would apply to wetland areas. Sincerely, ~ntB,reBd~eor~ TIrIIu~Ze~e~ JMB: jb cc: CAC May, 3, 1990 To: Southold Town Planning Board From: Henry Raynor Re: }{esther Hills Subdivision Enclos,nd herewith are yield maps for the proposed captioned subdivision. As soon as dtermination has been ma~e we will forward sketch plans of same. If thera are any ~uestions, please do not hesitate to call me at 298-8420 Yours truly, __ or Aoril ~4, 1990 TO: Southold Town Planplmq Board From: ltenry Ra%~nor Re: Heather Hills Subdivision Enclosed herewith is submission for major sl~ivsion. All necessary data is enclosed pursuant to A1O6. Yie].(~ mags are also enclosed for determination of den- sity u~der the R40 zoning scetion of Al00. Please advise as soon as possible determination on the enclosed so that a sketch plan submission can be forthcoming. SHAMROCK PROPERTIES CORP. 350 FIFTh AVENUE ROOM 1 826 NEW YORK. NEW YORK 101 18 212-868-4777 RICHARD T. CARR PRESIDENT April 20, 1990 Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Town of Southold, Planning Board Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Dear Si rs: This letter is to advise you that I am the General Partner and Owner with Joseph Wanat in the subdivision Heather Hills On the Sound. Very truly yours, Richard T. Cart Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SCOTF L. HARRIS Supervisor Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 April 17, 1990 Henry Raynor 320 Love Lane Mattituck, New York 11952 RE: Proposed Subdivision for Heather Hills SCTM# 1000-122-5-4 Dear Mr. Raynor: Planning staff has reviewed the Yield map dated March 1990 for the above mentioned subdivision. Staff has advised the Board that the Yield map is not in conformance with the minimum requirements of the Residential Low-Density R~40 District. Upon submission of revised Yield maps and a complete application form with all the related application materials, the Planning Board will proceed with their review of the subdivision. Please contact this office if you have any further questions regarding the above. Very truly yours, Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman ms P[arch 26, 199~ To : Southold Town Planning Board From: Henry Raynor Re: H~ather Hills Subdivision Enclosed are yield maps for dtermining the conformity with subdivsion regulation, in determining density. I believe the enclosed submission is in compliance and would r~uest a reivew of aBme. This will enable us to complete a cluster sketch for your determination. Yours truly, 'i sITE. ~OCATIQN HAP SDALE~ 1"=60~ Of Dod8 Y" 66D or {°rme~\'j S\~e°ne , "' ..... " ' ~z Gl GO 3ose9~ 'f Sc, co,:\ e, i_ouls E $~meo~e -¸2 -I7 74 7D Z4 oPo~. ~7 ................................. y, or o\es~A or ~o~merW 3ohn ~ RoSe SITE DATA I. TOTAL AREA = 107.6243 AC. 2 ZONING USE DISTRICT: RESI DENTI A L - AG R IC~U LTU RA L "A" 3. TOTAL NO. OF LOTS- '~4~ . 4. LENGTH OF ROAD- ,:3750 t F'E NOTEr SUFFOLK COUNTY TAX MAP DIST. I000 SECT Il[ BLOI LOT 1~6 TOPOGRAPHY SHOWN HEREON IS FROM "TOPOGRAPHIC MAP-5 EASTERN TOWNS" PREPARED FOR THE SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS. 77 7~ 3--om~,lns SUBDIVISION PREPARED .FdR SKETCH PLAN RICHARD CARR AT ' MATTITUCK 'TOWN OF SUFFOLK SOUTHOLD COUNTRY, N.Y~ DEC. Il , 1987 DATE: SEPT. 8, 1987 SCALE: I% I00' NO. 87-0726 YOUNG 8 YOUNG 400 OSTRANDER AVE., RIVERHEAD~ N-Y* HOWARD W. YOUNG, N.Y,S. L.S. LIC. N~D.4589~ 8401 LKB ~¢ 8007~ O0 L0CAT~0N MAP 0 METHODS GENERAL NOTES /r MAP PREPARED BY PHOTO~RAMM£TRiC USING AERIAL pHOTO, DATED: FEB. 7~ r VERTICAL DATUM IS THF, F/~ [~ATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 19,~9 (MEAN SEA LEVEL), 3, HORIZONTAL IS N.Y,/STATE PLAN COORDINATE SYSTEM. / "l X 56,9 / 58,2 5T 3 X X 479 ,a,~.~:.A =, 7.5 +~ ~'EGEND PAVED ROAD BUILDING WOODED ,AREA' UTILITY POLE SPOT ELEVATION FENCE WETLAND5 L~E ^~ ,' ~'' ' '~", ~,. LAI~ A'~O~ ........ ,UNPAVED RO~D CONTOURS ,. 5'00 50 x 550 / / 39,5 -. IaD.IViSION SKETCH PLAN /HEATHER HILLS , AT 'MATTITUCK OIJTHOLD TOW~"'O'F,, , S'UFFO'"L:K, CO'UNTY , , N.Y:" X 53.2 X5B, / ~UI, O*G ENVELOPE // N/F ~ILLI,41~ C/~ARLES 45.$0D.· S.F. XISTING R.O,E 4~OO~S.K \,. 44700.~ 8.F.. EX/STING WETLANDS 300.~ 48,30O2 SA 7 40"300t 40"010t'~ (40,300-* ~ UPLAND) BUILDING SETBACK-~. 6402S.E 46.00O* ~.F.. ~ ?~5002 SZ ~oOo.-,s.~. 'UPLAND, h:, ,A' EX/STING 43~ 00o.. ENVELOPE EX/STING I~ETLANDS 50.4242 140"ooo; ' 40~$34 ~S.F PROPOSED PLAN 4~000 2 ~..E t 44~950 -$.E, / ? ¢-/ I SCALE: /'= IQ0' 40,900 *-S.~ PARCELS FRONTING ON THE S~UN0" AND SECONDAR~ / EMERGENCk\ ACCESS FOR THE HEATHER HI~L S SUBDIVISIQIV ~ 300-~SZ 40"G10.~ S.F. 41~OO t S. E @ 41,8B0.+'$,,~. 40" OflO~ S.K ? 40.2002 ~0~00-+ ~.~. eeo' 4PO' FUTURE TAP STREET IF ~EOU/RED N/F W/LLIA'~ G TO~S D. ENTENMAN/N / / / / /? x -- '~X ..... ~ ?/ '--' %,¸ PROJECT L OCA 7"ION - -,,, ] / SITE J)ATA TOTAL AREA OF PARCEI- ............................ ~07.62 ACRES TOTAL NUMBER OF LOTS MINIMUM LOT SIZE ............... .....,.1' ~ ............ 40,000 SF ZONING ............ . .................. ~ ....... : ........... R-40 LENGTH OF~PROPOSED ROAD ............. I ................. 6700 LF DISTRICT SCHOOL :,, ............... : .......... MATT/TUCK-CUTCHOGUE ,t GENERAL NOTES 1. THE APPLICANT FOR THIS ~ROJECT IS THE SHAMROCK PROPERTIES CORPORATION OF $50 FIFTH A V~., RM 1826, N.Y,, N.Y. 10116. 2. ALL PROPOSED UTILITIES SHAL~ BE UNDERGROUND, 3. ALL CONSTRUCTIOH SHALL CO, NFORM TO THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD. '; THE SURVEY DA TA WAS ?AKEN FROM A SURVEY BY YOUNG.AtVD YOU. N~ OFR/VERHEAD, N. Y. , AND WAS PREPARED ~Y PHOTOGRAIv~ETt~IC METHODS USING AN AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH DATED FEBRUARY 7, 1988. THIS SURVEY INFORMATION ~S ' IN THE NATIONAL ~GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM AND THE NE~ YORK STATE PLANE COORDINATE $YSTEM. D~IGNED TO PROVIOE THE STORMWA TER RECHARGE ~S I NS SHALL BE.(6 'I STORAGE FOR THE RUNOFF ~ROM A SIX INCH ) RAINFALL ON'THE TRIBUTARY AREA' ALL RUNOFF FROM THE PAVEp AREAS SHALL BE OlRECTEO INTO THE RECHARGE BAS I NS' UNDER NO ''C I RCUMS TANCES SYAL L';ROAD RUNOFF FL OW TO OR BE PIPED INTO THE E~I~TING EETLAND AREAS'~} 8' THE RECHARGE BASINS SHbL~ BE FENCED PRI''OR SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ~CCORD~NOE ~flTH ALL . AND SPECIFICATIONS. [;;' 9~ ALL PRECAUTIONS SHALL TAKEN DURING ;EROSION~ FLOCDING, OR ANY , :, sOaoi EXCAVATION AND ~OWN REPJ I REMENT,g o~ ro PR~E~r NOTE.. ~ INDICATED DOES NOT INCLUDE ACCE~WAY. LEGEND EXISTING PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION ................. ~$5.o CONTOUR LINE ..... ' ~.-~2.~ ~ C4~Ot NUMBER LiMIT OF WETLAND pROPERTY L/NE .... ASPHA~ / ROAD .... O IRT )90AD ....... 'pENCE. DATE REVISIONI REVISED LAYOUT TO PROVIDE/,BO' · 54-90 OR BLD~ L/NE; ALL LOI~ TO HAV~ ADDED LOT t~2.89 $40-9O COMMENT~ LOCATION MAP N, ,T. $. S.C.T.M. # I000-11~ -0146 HEATHER HILL ~ MA TTITUCK, TOI4~N OF ~OUTHOLD, NEI4~ YORK  ,~-'h;~ll J. J~pH~H ~] S~gI~S (516) 737-3378 consulting engineers 3505 Voteraqs Memoria[ Hwy., Suite M I Ronkonkoroa, N. Y. 11779' sCALE: i .(' EXISTING 42,5002 S..F. 40,4002 / / /A48;'IO, G~'G ~ X , / [ 44,600'$.K 4NiSUs S.F. 50O,-' S.E,.. 4o, 0oo.* S.6:. ] rO" W 30/5. 71' W N EX/sTING WETLANDS 44.600-+ (4o,~oo, ,I 40,300~ S,K 190' , 5£,,G40+_$.E ,?I q~,,4702£.6 4G.~O0.* $.F. ~ EX/STING PARCELS FRONTING ON THE SGUND. AND SECONDAR~ / EMERGENCY 4~ 000_~ J I/' ira, o oq - s : I /I,; / ~4o. oo0.* S..F.. , I i L ,_~,l ;' . , / / I / UPLAND) ~-~..?.~-.-.---.- 7:3 , " ./'"" ............ LIMIT OF FRESHWA~ER WETLA -~ZAGGED BY lOOT: 19~8] ..' . N PLAN SCALE: /" = 100' RECHARGE ' )_ .......... - .... ~. / / .... 8~[~ ~ Pa5' . / / / ~FUTURE TAP STREET IF REQUI~ED ...... .) I/ ',~ ,,, PROJECT LOCATION MAP N.T.S, S.C. T.M. # 1000-112-01-16 HEA THEE HILL $ MA TTITUGK, TOWN OF ~OUTHOLO, NEt4f YORK ,~h?l~H J, H!{IIIIl ll ~,~SlII~ilIIO,~ (51~ ) 737-3370 consulting engineers 3505 Veterans Memorial Hwy., Suite M / Ronkonkoma, N. Y 11779 SCALE: PROd NO.: DATE: 1"=100' 9003 MARCH 1990 SKETCH PLAN- YIELD MAP 000 $.F. M/N.) SHEET I OF1 SITE OATA ~ TOTAL AREA OF PARCSC ............................ /07.62 ACRES TOTAL NUMBER OF LOTS .................................... 8~ MINIMUM LOT SIZE ................... ' .............. 40,000 SF ZONING ........................................... R-40 LENGTH OF,PROPOSED ROAD ............................ 6700 LF SCHOOL DISTRICT ...................... MATTITUCK-CUTCHOGUE GENERAL NOTES 1. THE APPLICANT FOR THIS PROJECT IS THE SHAMROCK PROPERTIES "-* -~. CORPORATION OF 350 FIFTH AVE., RM 1826, N.Y., N.Y. f0118. 2. ALL PROPOSED OTIL/T/ES SHALL BE UNDERGROUND. 3. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHCLD. 4. THE SURVEY £4TA ~STA/<.~NFROMA SURVEYBYYOUNG AhOYOUYG OFR/VERHEA£ N.Y., AND l~$ PREPARED ~Y PHOTOGRAMMETRIC METHODS USING AN AERIAL PHOTOGEAPH DATED FEBRUARY 7, 1988. 5. THIS SURVEY INFORMATION IS IN THE NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM AND THE NEW YORK STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM, e, THE BTORMWATER RECHARGE ~ASIN5 SHALL BE DESIGNED TO PROVIDE STORAGE FOR THE RUNOFF FROM A SIX INCH (&') RAINFALL ON THE TRIBUTARY ARE~. 7. ALL RUNOFF F~OM THE PAVED AREAS SHALL BE DIRECTEO INTO THE RECHARGE BASINS. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL ROAD RUNOFF FLO~ TO OR BE pIPE~ INTO THE EXISTING WETLAND AREAS. 8. THE RECHARGE BASINS SHALL BE FENCED PR/OR TO EXCAVATION AND SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE ~ITH ALL TOWN REQUIREmeNTS AND SRECIFICATION~, ALL PRECAUTIONS SHALL BE TAKEN DURING CONSTRUCTION TO PREVENT EROSION, FLOODING OR ANY OTHER HAZARDOUS CONDITION. ~0. ALL LOTS iN THIS SUBDIVISION ARE 40,000 SF AND GREATER, AND ARE IN CONFORMANCE ,VlTH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 6 OF THE SUFFOLK COUNTY SANITARY CCDE. NOTE; ~ /NDICATED DOES NOT INCLUDE A CCESSWA Y. LEGEND EXISTING SPOT ELEVATION ................. LOT NUMBER ..................... LIMIT OF WETLAND ................ ' .... ' PROPERTY LINE .................. ASPHALT ROAD ................... e~ - WOODED AREA .................... PROPOSED DATE REV~SION 4-9-90 REV/SED LAYOUT TO PROVIDE LIN~ ALL LOTS TO HAVE 4D, 000.* &F,, DRY 5-/-90 EL/MINATED RECREATIO/Y AREA, ADDED LOT Na89 6-/8-90 PLANNING BOARD COMMENTS 7-/9-90 REVISED LOTS $6-43, EL,/M/RATE JOSEPH ,4. · : ./ N/F ~ILL/~M ChaRLES HgE.q /// 44,600~-S.F 196' (' F~ 4~S00.* '50" W / / 45,8002 $.F.. 54,600' S.F.. / / EXISTING WETLANDS '%\ 46,$OOtS. F. ~' ~'~ EUILDING 6d ./ N/.. . W [ 43, 0002 EX/STING \ Fl / I:' / -*S.F. 80OLde ~ 4o,~oot s.F. i / ? $ §O0-' $.E ENVEL OPE ~ %,,, '..b ~, ' 48,334 ~S.F 41, 44,950 -S.f· / 41~qOO-+S.E ® 40,383~S,F. PLAN SCALE: I' = I00' 4oJOOt S. f 41,0oot s.F. ~-. --- _4_2,300 ® 40, elm ~,F. PGF 41,550.* $.F. ~ 4~550-+ $.F. 50 -? / \ \ 40.050~ 44300t$.£ N/F' WILLI~IE S TC~KINS D. ENTENMANN' ¢/ EXISTING ROE SHALL PRO~OE ACCESS TO PARCELS FRONTING ON THE S~)UND, AND SECONDAR~ / EMERGENCY~N ACCE~ FOR THE HEATHER HI~LS SUED/VISION ® ® ' 40,B53~:~ F.. 40,211 -+S K I 4[,27G2 s·F·,\ '~I /' ~0,950-+ $.F, 4&5OOt, P$O' 43,500t S.F.. '- ~,o-oo'¢ s. F. 41,S82-+ S $1TE~)ATA TOTAL 'AREA OF PARCEL ........ . .,~. ............ I0F. 62 ACRES T~TAL NUMBER ' O'TB ..' ....... '~' ' MINIMUM '~ ' ' "' 40,000 SF LOT SIZE ............ ' '-'t ....... '~ ..... ~ ...... ZONING ................. ; ..... ,,**~.. ' ................. , ...... R-40, ~.> 6700 LF LENGTH OF"PROPOSED 60AD ................... .. .......... SCHOOL DISTRICT .............. ,'t:' ......... MATT TUCK-CUTCHOGUE GENERAL NOTE5 THE APPL I CANT FOR TH I S PROJECT I S THE SRAMROCK' PROPERT I ES CORPORATION OR GSO FIFTH A~. RM 1826, N.Y., bt. Y. /Of 18. ALL PROPOSED UTI/ITiES SHAL~!BE UNDERGROUND. 2. 3. 4. ALL CONSTRUCTICN SHALL C~NFORM TO ~HE SPEOIFIOAT!ONS OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHO~D. THE SURVEY OA TA WAS rAI~N FROM A SURVEY BY ~UNG, AND YOU~NG OFRIVERNEAD, N. Y. , AND WAS PREPARED' iry: PHOTOGRA~E~RIC METHODS OSING AN AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH DATED FEOJ~U~RY 7. 1~88. , ' 5. THIS SURVEY INFORMATION ',~- DATUM AND' THE NEW YORK STAT'ii S. THE STORMWA TER RECHARGE ~ STORAGE FOR THE RUNOFF TRIBUTARY AREA· F' IN THE NATIONAL !GEODETIC VERTICAL PLAICE CO0)701.NAI TE ~ YS TEM. ~$1N$ SHALL E~E DESIGNED TO PROVIDE ~OM A SIX INCH (6~,) RAINFALL, ON THE 7. ALL RUNOFF FROM THE P~V~D AREAS SHbLL, BE DIRECTEO INTO THE RECHARGE BASINS. UNDER NO'CIRCUMSTANCES SHALLiROAD RUNOFF FLOW TO OR BE PIPED;INTO THE E~I~TING FETLANO;A~EAS. 8. THE RECHARGE BAS,IN~ SHAL~ BE EENCED PRIOR ~0 EXCAV~TION'~ND SHALE ,BE CONSTRUCTED IN ~CCORDAN~E WITH ALL ~OWN REQUIREMENTS AND SPEC'IF/CATIONS· . ' · 9, ,'ALL PRECAUTIONS SHALL B~i TAKEN DURING ' CONSTRUCTI. ON TO PREVENT ' EROSION, FLOODING, OR ANY,O~rHER HAZARDOUS C;ONDI~I~N. ANO. ARE OF,THE ALL ' LOTS IN THIS SUBD, IV~S rI~N':ARE 40, OOO~SF- AND GREATER, I N CONFORMANCE WI TH THE :, REQU I REMENTS OF ART) CLE 6 SUFFOLK COUNTY 5ANI~ARY CO~,' " ~ '~ ' 5POTELEVATION .............. coNTouR LIN~ ...'..I ~'~i~T NUMBER 4-1M!T OF WETLAND .. ............. i '" .... PROPERTY L/NE .'. . ' ASPHALT ROAD ................... DIRT~ ROAO ......... ~ ~ ........... i, ------------ = = PENCE; ,'.. ........ · ....; . wco ED - : \ 'LEGEND., , ~X IS ? I NG PROPOSED DATE REVISIOIN 4-S-S0 REV/GED LAYOUT TO Pt~OVIDE 150' · OR'BADG. UN~ ALL LO~T8 TO HAVE 4~0002 S~ DRY S-fiB0 EUMtNATED RECRE~TflO~ ARE~ · DDED LOT ~.89 LOCATION ,MAP N. LS. S.C.T.M. # I000-IIP-01-16 HEATHER HILL $ ' MATTITUCK, TOI~NOF,~ouTHoLD, NEI4f YORK consulting enginee~ 3505 Veterans Memorial H~., Suite' M / Ronkonkoma, N. ~ 1 ~ 77~ SCALE: PRO~. NO.: - 1PATE: SHEU 1 ~ 1 SKETOH pLAN- YIELD. MAP 000 // / 45,.~0.+ SY. @ 't t/ '/ / 44'600~-$'~ 41, 40,150..+ SJ'-. ~,20 ..... / lzo.~ ~782: s.F 4 O, OlOt ~..P,. ~ $00.* $.F. 45,500-~ N 54, $00.* $.F. ~ W 190' 40, GO0-+ BUILDING d / GETBACK-~ ~.~ / I R. OW. 33,: 4 /' EX/STING (J /GO' \ } 4~ 000.-* $.F. tS.E 900~ ~F.. UPLAND) 40,800C~.E 4o, oo; 1 / u'tsdAND) * ---BUILDING ENVELOPE EX/STING WETLANDS W ~OOt$.E \,./2 R~MOV£O f (40,0002 ' 48,354 ~S.F 41t, PROPOSED 4/0' / 44~950 -$.P. / 41~900+-S.F.. ® 40,$8$'r'S.F.. /50' R=2Y (TY/= 4455o,* s.F.. \ @ 40,6102 PGP' 4~/o,., pGP' 41,550-* S.F. 44500tS. K ®", ., ® ® 40,725 ~:S., 40,§35~S E 40,~11 *S.E 1 ~S.E 40,2502,,$F.. ? / FUTURE TAP STREET IF REOUIRED ~ I N/F W/LLIA~ ,~ TOMPK1NS .0, ENTEN~ANN J ~ ,,/ / 6L 6~' PLAN SCALE .' I" = I00' TOTAL AREA $ I TE OA TA OF PARCEL ...- ......................... 107.62 ACRES TOTAL NUMBER OF LOTS ...................................... 89 MINIMUM LOT SIZE .............. ,, ...... .; ............ 40,000 SF ZONING ' R-40 LENGTH OF~RROPOSED ROAD ....... ? ...................... 6700 LF SCHOOL DISTRICT ................. .......... ~TTITUCK~CUTCHOGUE GENERAL NOTES 1. THE APPLICANT FOR THIS PROJECT IS THE SHAMROCK PROPERTIES CORPORATION OF aGO FIFTH AVE., RM 1826, N.Y., N.Y. 10118. 2. ALL PROPOSED UTILITIES SHAL~ BE UNDERGROUND, 3. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD. 4. THE SURVEY DA TA WAS TAt~EN FROM A SURVEY BY YOUNG,AND YOUNG OFR/VERNEA£ N. Y. , AND WAS PREPARED J~Y PNOTOGRAMME TR I C METHODS USING AN AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH DATED FEBrUARy. 7, 1988. , , THIS SURVEY INFORMATION ~S ' IN THE NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM AND THE NEW YORK 5TAT~ PLANE COORDINATE S, YSTEM. THE STORMWATER RECHARGE PJA$1N$ SHALL EE D~$1GNED TO PROVIDE STORAGE FOR THE RUNOFF FROM A SIX INCH (6") RAINFALL ON THE TRIBUTARY AREA. ALL RUNOFF FROM THE PAVED AREAS SH,~LL BE ~IRECTED INTO THE RECHARGE BASINS. UNDER NOI. ClRCUMSTANCEB SHALL 'ROAD RUNOFP FLOW TO OR BE pIPED INTO THE EXISTING WETLAND' AREAS. THE RECHARGE BASINS SHRL~ BE 'FENCED PRIOR EXCAVATION AND SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ~CCORDANCE W/TH ALL ~,WN FtE(~UIREMENT$ AND SPECIFICATIONS. ,,~ ,!, ALL 'PRECAUPIoNs SHALL DURING 'ION TO PREVENT EROSION, FLOODING OR NOT£' ~ INDICATED DOES NOT INCLUDE ACC~SGWAY. LEGEND E, XISTING SPOT ELEVATION ................. ~55. o CONTOUR LINE ...... ' ' ~Y;~f-OT NUMBER ..................... ~IMIT OF WETLAND ................. · .... · PROPERTY LINE ................... J -- ASPHAL~ ROAQ ................... FENCE ....... .......... · ..... PROPOSED DATE REIVISION 4-9-$0 REVISED L~rOOr :ro PROVIDE I·0' · OR ·~O~ LIN~ ALit LOTS TO HAVE 40, O00s' 8,E ORY EL/M/gATED RECRIEATION AREA, G-lB-90 ADDEO LOT A~St9 BOARD ~OMMENTS PROJECT ,~ LOCATION MAP N.T.S. JUN I 9 1990 S.C.T.M. # I000- 112 -01-16 HEATHER HILL S MA TTITUCK, TOWN OF 8OUTHOLD, NEW YORK consuNng enginoo~ 3505 Veterans Memorial Hwy., Suite M / Ronkonkoma, N. ~ 1177~ PROJ. NO,: SHEET ~ OF/ N/F JOSEPH ~, MACAR/ 8 LOUIS ~ SIMEONE '°°1 DORIS/~ BROWN / t JOSEPH A. WANAT // ) al, zoo-+ SF / -~ I 86, GOO_+ SF N/F JOSEPH { MAOARI $ LOUIS F. SIMEONE EXISTING R..O,W. -- ~ I '~ .% P OPOSED ROADWAY ~1.075-+ SF / PPO' LOtyOrE.AREAs sHOwN iN PARENTHESES/ND/CATE LOT AREA ~XCLUSIVE OF ACCESSWAY TO FLAG LOTS, WETLANDS AND SLOPES EXCEEDING 15~ . N/F WILLIAM 8 TOMPKIHS D. ENTENMANN PLAN 85, 000_+ SF 480,50O_+ SF) LEGEND SPOT ELEVATION ....... . CONTOUR LINE 50 .-- LOT NUMBER .......... LIMIT OF WETLAND ....... - ....... PROPERTY LINE ....... ASPHALT ROAD ......... DIRT ROAD .......... FENCE ............... WOODED AREA ............ SITE DATA TOTAL NUMBER OF LOTS...; ....................................................... 46 MINIMUM LOT SIZE ................................ BO,O00 SF ZONING .................................. R-BO LENGTH OF PROPOSED ROAD ....................................................... 6180 LF SCHOOL DISTRICT ........................................................... MATTITUCK-CUTCHOGUE GENERAL NOTES 1. THE APPLICANT FOR THIS PROJECT IS THE SHAMROCK PROPERTIES CORPORATION OF 350 FIFTH AVE., RM 1826, N.Y., N.Y. 10118. 2. ALL PROPOSED UTILITIES SHALL BE UNDERGROUND. 3. ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD. 4. THE SURVEY DATA WAS TAKEN FROM A SORVEY BY YOUNG AND YOUNG OF RIVERHEAD, N.Y., AND WAS PREPARED BY PHOTOGRAMMETRIC METHODS USING AN AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH DATED FEBRUARY 7, 1988. 5. THIS SURVEY [NFORMATiON 1S IN THE UATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM AND THE NEW YORK STATE PLANE COORDINATE SY3TEN. 6. THE STORMWATER RECHARGE BASIN SHALl. BE DESIGNED TO PROVIDE STORAGE FOR THE RL~NOFF FRO~i[A SIX INCH (6") RAINFALL ON THE TRIBUTARY AREA. 7. ALL RUNOFF FROM THE PAVED AREAS SHALL BE DIRECTED INTO THE RECHAROE BASIN. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL ROAD RUNOFF FLOW TO OR BE PIPED INTO THE EXISTING WETLAND AREAS, 8. THE RECHARGE BASIN SHALL BE FENCED PRIOR TO EXCAVATION AND SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL TOWN REQUIREMENTS AND SPECIFICATIONS. 9. ALL PRECAUTIONS SHALL BE TAKEN DURING CONSTRUCTION TO PREVENT EROSION, FLOODING, OR ANY OTHER HAZARDOUS CONDITION. 10. ALL LOTS IN THIS SUBDIVISION ARE 80,000 SF AND GREATER, AND ARE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 6 OF THE SUFFOLK COUNTY SANITARY CODE. SHADED A~-A INDICATES SZOPES ~+-- GA~'A?E-~-THA N / 5 % TJE BF TJF 80,0692 SF ~ aPO' $45' 8.9,508; SF~ '- 700-+ 5 ~'~" --'" lo0,100-+ RECHARGE N ~/° PR OUEC T L OCA TION - L OCA TION MAP N.~,S. Co~s~dtlng Engineers and Land Su~eyors [] 125 Church Street Mal~rne, NY 11565 TEL: (516)599-3663 FAX: (516) 593-8160 · 1001 Middle ~unt~ Road Ridge, NY 11961 TEL: (516) 924-3230 FAX- (516) 924-3557 9003 NH I"= I00" AUG. 1990 / I .i Y/ELD MAP OF PROPERTY MTUATED AT MA T/TUCK TO~N O~ SOUTNDLO St~LK COt~T~ NEW SUFFOLK ~ TAX k~% DI$T/~ I000 SECTION lip BLOCK OI LOT, .®