Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1000-117.-8-10
ESSEKS, HefTeR, CUDDY & ANGEL January 4, 1984 To~q Board Town of Southold Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Re: Application of Marine Associates Dear Town Board Members: The application for Marine Associates for change of is the subject of a public hearing this evening, is withdrawn. zone, which herewith Very truly yours, William W. Esseks WWE :cf JUDITIt T. TERRY TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL SIAlISlICS OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK' TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southol& New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 PLEASE PUBLISH THE ATTACHED NOTICE ON DECEMBER 1, 1983 AND FORWARD ONE (1) 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 Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Building Department Town Clerk's Bulletin Board David DeRidder, DEC, Stony Brook Commissioner Williams, DEC, Albany NYS Leg. Comm. on Water Resource Needs of L.I. NYS Department of State OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLI) l'own llaII, 53095 Main Road P.O 13()x 728 $o~lh~)lcl, New York I971 NOTICE OF RECEIPT OF FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Date: November 25, 1983 APPLICANT: Marine Associates, Inc. ADDRESS: New Suffolk, New York PERMIT APPLIED FOR AND APPLICATION NUMBER: Change of Zone from "C" Light Industrial District to "M-I" General Multiple Residence District, Petition No. 257 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Applicant desires to redevelop the property to construct condominium units. PROJECT LOCATION: New Suffolk, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, New York, bounded north by Loria and Cutchogue Harbor, east by Cutchogue Harbor, south by MacKay and Cutchogue Harbor, and west by First Street. SEQR DETERMINATION: A Final Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared on this project and is on file. AVAILABILITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT: The Final Environmental Impact Statement may be reviewed at the address listed below. Comments on the project must be submitted to the Contact Person indicated below no later than December 20, 1983. CONTACT PERSON: Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk Town of Southold, Town Hall Main Road, Southold, New York 11971 (516) 765-1801 JUDITH T. TERRY TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL S I'A ['ISTICS OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 NOTICE OF SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT Dated: November 15, 1983 Pursuant to the provisions of Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, Part 617 of Title 6 of the New York State Codes, Rules and Regulations, and Chapter 44 of the Southold Town Code, the Southold Town Board, as lead agency, upon receipt of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement, and public hearing on same, does hereby determine that the action described below is a Type I action and is likely to have a significant effect on the environment and has requested the filing of a Final Environmental Impact Statement. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION Petition of Marine Associates, Inc. for a Change of Zone from '!C" Light Industrial District to "M-l" General Multiple Residence District on certain property at New Suffolk, in the Town of Southold, New York. Further information can be obtained by contacting Mrs. Judith T. Terry, Southold Town Clerk, Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York 11971. copies to: David DeRidder, DEC, Stony Brook Commissioner Williams, DEC, Albany Southold Town Building Department Southold Town Planning Board NYS Department of State Suffolk Co. Department of Health Services Town Clerk's Bulletin Board DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES COUNTY OF SUFFOLK PETER F. COHALAN SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE SEP g 0 DAVID HARRIS, M.D., M.P.H. September 16, 1983 Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals & Planning Board Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Gentlemen: Please be advised that this office is in receipt of plans for the conversion of the North Fork Shipyard into 24 condominium units situate New Suffolk. Since this is not a Type 1SEQRA action, mandatory coordi- nated review is not required. However, this office does wish to coordi- nate its review since there are many permits required for this development. The proposed plan indicates denitrification of the sewage and the creation of a public water supply. The current sanitary design would require that the grade be raised at least 6 feet. It appears all of the matters before the department can be satisfied. In accord, it would be appreciated if one of your two agencies would assume the lead agency. We are awaiting your reply. Very truly yours, ~// Robert dewell,/P/..E. Public Health Engineer Environmental Engineering Section RJ/ctk cc. Chuck Hamilton, NYSDEC John Mahoney COUNTY CENTER 548-3313 CIVIC NEW SUFFOLK ASSOCIATION INC. POST OFFICE BOX N E W S U F F O L K, N, Y. September 6, 1983 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers New York District 26 Federal Plaza New York, N.Y. 10278 Attn: Ms. Carol Rath Regulatory Branch Re: I.~AINTENANCE DREDGING WITH BEACH NOURISHMENT DISPOSAL NEW SUFFOLK, N.Y. PUBLIC NOTICE No. 11538-83-118-L2 Gentlemen: In connection with the referenced proposal by the Suffolk County Department of Public Works to modify an existing permit, Department of the Army Permit No. 9865, to provide for place- ment of dredged material to areas north of the New Suffolk Boat Ramp Facility in addition to areas to the south as previously authorized,we have the following comment~ We support the continued maintenance dredging of the New Suffolk Boat Ramp Facility in order to assure safe and adequate depths for navigation and beneficial use of the dredged material. With respect to the placement for beach nourishment to the north of the ramp, in light of objection by the people of New Suffolk against a proposal by I~arine Associates, Inc., to 9evelop the site of the North Fork Shipyard as a condomlhium (see attachment) and since that site falls within the new area proposed for beach nourishment, we respectfully request that approval be conditioned in a manner which would provide; (1) that the placement of fill for beach nourishment does not increase the upland area for the purpose of density determination and, (2) that the material shall not be used or removed to other parts of the same property for fill We appreciate the opportunity to comment on this matter which is of great interest to our community. Very truly yours, Pauline A. Krementz, F~es. cc: Att. VIC NF,.W SUFFOLK ASSOCIATION INC-,. poST oFFICE BOX 642 N E W S U F F O L K, N. Y. ~uthold Town rm~ ..... ~ Town of Southold Town Hall ~ " i'~.Y. 11971 Sou~hola, JUDITH T. TERRY TOWN (?LERK REGISI'RAR OI. VITAL SI,\IIS Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 OFFICE OF TIlE TOWN CLERK TOWN oF SOUT.OLD 3LIL % 3__ NOTICE OF SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT Dated: July 20, 1983 ~J~k~p Pursuant to the provisions of Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, Part 617 of Title 6 of the New York State Codes, Rules and Regulations, and Chapter 44 of the Southold Town Code, the Southold Town Board, as lead agency~ does hereby determine that the action described below is a Type I action and is likely to have a significant effect on the environment. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION Petition of Marine Associates~ Inc. for a change of zone from "C" Industrial District to "M-i" General Multiple Residence District on certain property located on the easterly side of First Street~ New Suffolk~ New York. Further information can be obtained by contacting Mrs. Judith T. Terry, Southold Town Clerk~ Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold~ New York 11971. Copies to: David DeRidder, DEC, Stony Brook Commissioner Williams~ DEC, Albany Southold Town Building Department Southold Town Planning Boardk Town Clerk's Bulletin Board Marine Associates~ Inc. COUNTY OF SUFFOLK RECEIVED JUL 8 1983 Town Clerk Souf~o~d Peter F. COHALAN SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING LEE E, KOPPELMAN DIRECTOR OF PLANNING July 7, 1983 MS. Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk Town of Southold Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Application of "Marine Associates Inc." - (#257) for a change of zone from "C" Light Industrial to '~-1" General Multiple-Residence, Town of Southold (SD-83-7). Dear Ms. Terry: Pursuant to the requirements of Sections 1323 to 1332 of the Suffolk County Charter, the Suffolk County Planning Commission on July 6, 1983 reviewed the above captioned application and after due study and deliberation Resolved to disapprove it because of the following: 1. It appears injurious to the integrity of the limited underground water resources in the locale; 2o It is inconsistent with the Long Island 208 Water Quality Management Plan and subsequent related studies of the Suffolk County Department of Health Services which indicate severe water supply limitations in the locale; It is inconsistent with the Long Island regional element of the N.Y.S. Coastal Zone Management Plan which designates this area for commercial- recreation use; 4. It is inconsistent with the Town of Southold Development Plan which designates this area for commercial (marine) development; 5. There is a demonstrable shortage of marine/recreational facilities within the Town of Southold; 6. Premises is subjected to storm tide impacts; and 7. Premises possesses unique historical and maritime significance. Very truly yours, GGN:jk Lee E. Koppelman Dir~ of Planning~ Chief Planner Mr. Henry Raynor Town Plenning Board Town Hell Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protoxt against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of lO,O00 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 560 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of usY I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, HENRY E. RAYNOR, Jr., Cf;airman JAMES WALL BENNETT ORLOWSKI, Jr. GEORGE PdTCHIE LATHAM, Jr. WILLIAM F. MULLEN, Jr. Southold, N.Y. 11971 June 8, 1983 TELEPHONE 765-1938 Mrs. Judith Terry Town Clerk Southold Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Re: Marine Associates, Inc. Change of Zone Dear Mrs. Terry: The following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning Board, Wednesday, June 1, 1983. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board recommend denial for the petition of Marine Associates, Inc. for a chanqe of zone from "C" Light Industrial District to "M-l" General Multiple Residence District on certain property at New Suffolk for the following reasons: (1) It is not compatable with the Development Plan of the Town of Southold. Area disignated as commercial for marine use. Presently there exists a shortage of dockage space throughout Southold Town. The marine recreation use should be encouraged and expanded throughout the Township; not converted to a multiple use. This site, as well as other sites within the Town, may be viable for expansion for marine use. (2) Overintensification of resources. (3) There appears to be serious concerns over the fol- lowing resources as presented in the Environmental Assessment Form. A-8 -Depth to fresh water table, quanity of sustain- able withdrawal. A-9 -Opportunities for fishing exists in project area; listed "no" by applicant. Mrs. Judith ~ ry pg. (2) 6/~/83 (13) Scenic view listed "no" by applicant. (15) Project is contiguous to Peconic Bay. (4) The Southold Town Planning Board would recommend SEQRA to be fully reviewed for this project. (5) Not compatable with use characteristics within the neighborhood and could set a pattern for further re- zoning. (6) Possible elimination of an historic site (New Suffolk Post Office). (7) There is considerable public controversy concerning this project (EAF Part II, #18). Very truly yours, HENRY E. RAYNOR, JR., CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Susan E. Long, Secretary Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 MAY g ? REC'D Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us~ I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, NE£,2 Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endsnger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us? I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, ,MAY g REG'EI Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us2 I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 MAY g REg'B Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to 10 against bhe proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of lO,O00 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of ou~ only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us2 I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, 4'~,,~.~J '-''"' Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 NAY 1_ 9 REC'D Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to l0 against bhe proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us? I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in proteSt against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us2 I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 MAY 1 $ REC'D Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have Just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of lO,O00 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the~launchlng ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us? I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, //..ce Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of lO,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of usY I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 1 REC'D Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in prote~t against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of lO,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us? I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in Mew Suffolk havc~ just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First~ I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would ondanger ou~ aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 560 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Martyrs or the iaunching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us? I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 1!971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to l0 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext mgainst this development. There are several considerations. First~ I am concerned that the water consumption of !0,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusious in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 550 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us~ ' I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this deVelopment. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be-built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of lO,OO0 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us~ I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. llg?l 1 ? REB'D Dear Mr. Raynor: I Concerned cibizens in New Suffolk have just voted to l0 against the proposed condominium to be-built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in pretext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 5~0 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us~ I am not even refeFring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding Problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to 10 against I, he proposed condomini~m to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protect against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am ~oucerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aq~ifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would hawe to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us? I problems, traffic difficult~es. am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, flooding problems, and other such I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve thi~ d~velopment. Sincerely yours, in New Suffolk have just voted 167 nium to be built at the North Fork n protext against this development. considerations. First, I am concerned )00 gallons a day would endanger our - intrusions in this area already. sewage would have to go somewhere, ur water table or into our bay. approve pment would stretch almost 500 feet and would deprive many of us of our ~rge development would not fit in with Yew Suffolk. And what would happen to ramp, sources of pleasure to many ferring to parking problems, noise ,ding problems, and other such ~commend that the Town Board not Zely yo Ul~S, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 , AY 1 ? REC'D Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the~launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us~ I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have Just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us~ I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, ~JO$ EPH FENTON ATTORNEY AT LAW ~IACKSON STREET NEW SUFFOLK, N.Y. 11956 (5161 734-5099 To~ Board, Planning Board, Town Attorney, Town of Southold, Southo~d, N.Y. 11971 May 16, 1983 Re: Application of MarineAssoc- iates, Inc. for zoning change Gentlemen: I represent Ruth T. Houston of New Suffolk, Tm~rn of Southold, Suffolk County, New York. On May 29, 1960, the Grsntor, Mrs. Houston, by deed recorded in Liber 4915 page 376 conveyed to Applicant's pre- decessors in interest, James Arthur Kenniff and Philip F. Lindner, the subject property. That conveyance was subject to the following covenant and restriction: "Subject to the use of the conveyed premises as and for the operation of a Boat Yard or a Marina, or any other business associated with the operation of a Boat Yard business." (see page 377) I enclose a copy of this deed together with copies of all other subsequent conveyances of this proper~ty which con- stitute the chain of title to the Applicant. In the above referred to deed, Grantor created certain tenancies and uses for her life and/or the life of her husband and another, which were released by subsequent deed dated February 13, 1978 recorded in Liber 8393, page 60. This document contains the following language: "This deed is limited solely to the release of life estates in the above described premises." (underlining added for emphasis) Clearly, the covenant and restriction in the original conveyance (on page 377) dealing with the property's use as a boat yard, as more particularly set forth in the deed and quoted above, was not released and constitutes a continuing restriction with respect to the property's use. Accordingly, multiple dwelling use was not contemplated or permitted by Grantor's conveyance. This restriction prevents Applicant from utilizing the property ~n the manner proposed by and set forth in its Application, and constitutes, by itself, a preclusive basis for continuing existing zoning. Respectfully submitted, cc: R and F Houston -/ BEING a~ i~endt, ~ to ~ ~e same premises e~ve~ed ~o ~ ~'~ Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board To~n Hall Southold, N.Y. llg?l MAY 1 (; R£C' Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have Just voted 167 to 10 .against the proposed condomini~nn to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protect against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us~ I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, 1 G REC' Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger ou~ aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the.launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us~ I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: , Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have Just voted 167 to 10 against ~he proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protect against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am doncerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. .Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us~ I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have Just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of lO,O00 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the~launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us2 I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 1 G Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have Just voted 167 to 10 against bhe proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the.launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us2 I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. ~ir. Henry Raynor Chzirman, Board of Appeals Southold Town Hall Southold, ~.Y. 11971 ]. 6 REC'I Dear ~'{r. Raynor As a long-time~esid New Suffolk, I was distressed to learn of the plans of ~arine Associates to build condominiums on the property presently occupied by The North Fork Shipyard, county tax number 1000-117-8-18. There are so many salt-water encursions into local New Stuffolk wells (you must remember that we are almost completely surrounded by water in tkis little hamlet of ours), that I was quite surprised to learn of Kenniff's plans. The twenty-four units that he hopes to buLld would pull about 10,O00 gallons per day out of our skimpy little aquifer, and the development would have to go quite far west in order to even think ofgetting enough sweet water to supply the thirsty big city folks, to say nothing of non-domestic consumption (lawns, car-washings, etc. ) or of Just where those lO,OOO plus gallons of se¥~age would end up -- leaching into the bay and Lnto the wells of those of us who already live in the commtuuity. &nd just what am I to look at when I go out onto my porch -- almost 500 feet of barracks almost forty feet high, considering the amount of fill which the developers want to bring onto the site. And this doesn't confront at all the other matters such as noise, traffic, parking, and suchlike. Kenniff and his fellow investors are thinking of adding some forty percent to the New Suffolk population, all at once and all in one concentrated area. ¥~e just can't digest such a change, and I hope that you and the other members of your board wd_ll quietly and firmly shut do~;~ the am~tions of these people who want to turn New Suffolk into something that it was never meant to be -- a kind of North Fork Miami Beach. I look fo~vard to hearing your thoughts on this matter. Sincerely yours, ~ir. Henry P~ynor Chairman, Board of Appeals Seuthold Town Hall Southold, ~.~.Y. llg?l Dear ;~r. Raynor: ~/)~l~u~ As a long-timc~esident of ~.~ew Suffolk, I was distressed to learn of the plans of ~rine Associates to build condomin~m~ on the property presently occupied by The North Fork Shipyard, county tax number lO00-11?-8-18. There are so many salt-water encursions into local New Suffolk wells (you must remember that we are almost completely surrounded by water in this little hamlet of ours), that ! was quite surprised to learn of Kenniff's plans. The twenty-four units that he hopes to build wo~uld pu~l about 1%O00 gallons per day out of our skimpy little aquifer, and the development woul~ have to go quite far west in order to even thi~k ofgetting enough sweet water to supply the thirsty big city folks, to say nothing of non-domestic consumption (lawns, car-washings, etc. ) or of just where those lO,O00 plus gallons of sev~age would end up -- leaching into the bay and into the wells of those of us who already live in the commuuity. &nd just what ~m I to look at when I go out onto my porch -- almost 500 feet of barracks almost forty feet high, considering the amount of fill which the developers want to bring onto the site. ~nd this doesn't confront at all the other matters such as noise, traffic, parking, an~S suchlike. Kenniff and his fellow investors are thinking of adding some forty percent to the New Suffolk population, ~ll at once and all in one concentrated area. We just can't digest such a change, and I hope that you and the other members of your board will quietly and firmly shut dov.~ the ~m~tions of these people who want to turn New Suffolk into something that it was never meant to be -- a kind of North Fork Miami Beach. I look four, rd to hearing your thoughts on this matter. Sincerely yours, in New Suffolk have just voted 167 ~lum to be built at the North Fork n protext against this development. considerations. First, I am concern~ D0 gallons a day would endanger our intrusions in this area already. ewage would have to go somewhere, r water table or into our bay. ~ent would stretch almost 500 feet and would deprive many of us of our .ge development would not fit in wit ~ Suffolk. And what would happen to ,amp, sources of pleasure to many ~rrtng to parking problems, noise -ng problems, and other such )mmend that the Town Board not MAY 13 RF, g'D Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have Just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the~launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us~ I problems, traffic difficulties. am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, flooding problems, and other such I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 l A¥ 12 REC'D Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have Just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. Finest, I am concerued that the water consumption of lO,O00 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the,launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us~ I problems, traffic difficulties. am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, flooding problems, and other such I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have Just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launchlng ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us2 I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, // in New Suffolk have just voted 167 J! ~itizens to 10 against the propo~e~ condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Pourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us~ I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have Just voted 167 to l0 against the proposed condomint~nn to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protect against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am doncerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us? I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this d~velopment. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. llg?l Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted to l0 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,O00 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us~ I problems, traffic difficulties. am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, flooding problems, and other such I urge you to recommend that the TOE Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to l0 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of lO,O00 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us2 I problems, traffic difficulties. am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, flooding problems, and other such I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. llg?l Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have Just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the~launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us~ I problems, traffic difficulties. am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, flooding problems, and other such I urge you to recommend that the Towu Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have Just voted 167 to 10 against bhe proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of lO,O00 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the.launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us2 I problems, traffic difficulties. am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, flooding problems, and other such I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the~launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us2 I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerel..y yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Chairman~ Board of Appeals $outhold Town Hall $outhold, N.Y. llg?l Dear i~r. Raynor: As a long-time resident of New Suffolk, I was distressed to learn of the plans of Marine Associates to build condominiums on the property presently occupied by The North Fork Shipyard, county tax number lOO0-11?-8-18. There are so many salt-water encursions into local New Suffolk wells (you must remember that we are ~lmost completely surrounded by water in thus little hamlet of ours), that I was quite surprised to learn of Kenniff's plans. The twenty-four units that he hopes to budld would pull about lO,O00 gallons per day out of our skimpy little aquifer, and the development would have to go quite far west in order to even think ofgetting enough sweet water to supply the thirsty big city folks, to say nothing of non-domestic consumption (lawns, car-washings, etc. ) or of just where those lO,OO0 plus gallons of sewage would end up -- leaching into the bay and into the wells of those of us who already live in the co.~n=nity. A.nd just what am I to look at when I go out onto my porch -- almost 500 feet of barracks almost forty feet high, considering the amount of fill which the developers want to bring onto the site. And this doesn't confront at all the other matters such as noise, traffic, parking, and suchlike. Kenniff and his fellow investors are thinking of adding some forty percent to the New Suffolk population, sll at once and all in one concentrated area. We just can't digest such a change, and I hope that you and the other members of your board will quietly and firmly shut do~ the ambitions of these people who want to turn New Suffolk into something that it was never meant to be -- a kind of North Fork Miami Beach. I look fo~vard to hearing your thoughts on this matter. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Chairman, Board of Appeals Southold Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Zr. Raynor: As a long-time resident of New Suffolk, I was distressed to learn of the plans of Marine Associates to build condominiums on the property presently occupied by The North Fork Shipyard, county tax number 1000-117-8-18. There are so many salt-water encursions into local New Suffolk wells (you must remember that we are almost completely surrounded by water in this little hamlet of ours), that I was quite surprised to learn of Kenniff's plans. The twenty-four units that he hopes to build wo~_ld pu~l about 10,000 gallons per day out of our skimpy little aquifer, and the development would have to go quite farwest in order to even think ofgetting enough sweet water to supply the thLrsty big city folks, to say nothing of non-domestic consumption (lawns, car-washings, etc.) or of just where those lO,O00 plus gallons of sewage wou~d end up -- leaching into the bay and into the wells of those of us who already live in the co-~muity. &ud just what am I to look at when I go out onto my porch -- almost 500 feet of barracks almost forty feet high, considering the amount of fill which the developers want to bring onto the site. ~ud thd~s doesn't confront at all the other matters such as noise, traffic, p~rking, and suchlike. Kenniff and his fellow investors are thinking of adding some forty percent to the New Suffolk population, all at once and all in one concentrated area. We just can't digest such a change, and I hope that you and the other members of your board w~l] quietly and firmly shut do~m the am~tions of these people who want to turn New Suffolk into something that it was never meant to be -- a kind of North Fork Miami Beach. I look fo~vard to hearing your thoughts on this matter. Sincerely yours, FiBROSI~ - ~Ir. Henry P~ynor Chairman, Board of Appeals Southold Tow~. Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear L~r. Raynor: As a long-time resident of New Suffolk, I w~s distressed to learn of the plans of Marine Associates to build condominiums on the property presently occupied by The North Fork Shipyard, county tax number 1000-117-8-18. There are so many salt-water encursions into local New Suffolk wells (you must remember that we are ~lmost comnletely surrounded by water in this little hamlet of ours), that ! was quite surprised to learn of Kenniff's plans. The twenty-four units that he hopes to build would pull about 10,000 gallons Der day out of our skimpy little aquifer, and the development would have to go quite fa~west in order to even think ofgetting enough sweet water to supply the thirsty big city folks, to say nothing of non-domestic consumption (lawns, car-washings, etc. ) or of Just where those 10,OOO olus gallons of sewage would end up -- leaching into the bay and into the wells of those o~ us who already live in the com~mnity. &nd just what am I to look at when I go out onto my porch -- almost 500 feet of barracks almost forty feet high, coB$idering the amount of fill which the developers want to bring onto the site. knd this doesn't confront at all the other matters such as noise, traffic, parking, and suchlike. Kenniff and his fellow investors are thinking of adding some forty percent to the New Suffolk population, all at once and all in one concentrated area. We just can't digest such a change, and I hope that you and the other members of your board will quietly and firmly shut do~ the ambitions of these people who want to turn New Suffolk into something that it was never meant to be -- a kind of North Fork Niami Beach. I look fomwrd to hearing your thoughts on this matter. Sincerely yours, Mr. Nenry Raynor Chairman, Board of Appeals Southold Town Hall Southold, N.Y. llg?l 1-3 REC'D Dear llr. Raynor: As a long-time resident of New Suffolk, I was distressed to learn of the plans of Marine Associates to build condominiums on the property presently occupied by The North Fork Shipyard, county tax number 1000-117-8-18. There are so many salt-water encurelons into local New Suffolk wells (you must remember that we are almost completely sttrreunded by water in this little hamlet of ours), that I was quite surprised to learn of Eenniff's plans. The twenty-four units that he hopes to build would p~ll about 10,000 gallons per day out of our skimpy little aquifer, and the development would have to go quite far west in order to even thiuk ofgettiug enough sweet water to supply the thirsty big city Solke, to say nothing of non-domestic consumption (lawns, car-washings, etc. ) or of just where those lO,O00 plus gallons of sewage wotul8 end up -- leaching into the bay and into the wells of those of us v~o already live in the co.mm~uity. &nd just what em I to look at when ! go out onto my porch -- almost 500 feet of barracks almost forty feet high, cg~sidering the amount of fill which the developers want to bring onto the site. &ud this doesn't confront at all the other matters such as noise, traffic, parking, and suchlike. Kenuiff and his fellow investors are thinking of adding some forty percent to the New Suffolk population, all at once and all in one concentrated area. We just can't digest such a change, and I hope that you and the other members of your board will quietly and firmly shut do¥.~ the ambitions of these people who want to turn New Suffolk into something that it was never meant to be -- a kind of North Fork Miami Beach. I look fo~vard to hearing your thoughts on this matter. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just vo~ed 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concer~ that the water consumption of lO,O00 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of ou~ only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in wit the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us~ I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to l0 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in prote~t against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us2 I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to approve this development. recommend that the ToE Board not Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board To~n Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in prot~t against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of lO,O00 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us~ I problems, traffic difficulties. am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, flooding problems, and other such I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, ~ir. Henry P~ynor Chairman, Board of Appeals Southold Town. Hall Southold, ~,~.Y. llg?l 1 REC'B Dear i~r. Rap-nor: As a long-time resident of New Suffolk, I was distressed to learn of the plans of ~rine Associates to buLld condominiums on the property presently occupied by The North Fork Shipyard, county tax number lO00-11?-8-18. There are so many salt-water encursions into local New Suffolk wells (you must remember that we are a~lmost completely surrounded by water in this little hamlet of ours), that I was quite surprised to learn of Kenniff's plans. The twenty-four units that he hopes to buLld would pull about lO,OO0 gallons per day out of our skimpy little aquifer, and the development would have to go quite far west in order to even think ofgetting enough sweet water to supply the thirsty big city folks, to say nothing of non-domestic consumption (lawns, car-washings, etc. ) or of Just where those 10,000 plus gallons of selvage wou~d end up -- leaching into the bay and into the wells of those of us v~o already live in the co.~n~nity. &ud just what ~n I to look at when I go out onto my porch -- almost 500 feet of barracks almost forty feet high, considering the amount of fill which the developers want to bring onto the site. ~Lud this doesn't confront at all the other matters such as noise, traffic, parking, and suchlike. Kenniff and his fellow investors are thinking of adding some forty percent to the New Suffolk population, all at once and all in one concentrated area. Ne just can't digest such a change, and I hope that you and the other members of your board?rill quietly and firmly shut do~ the am~tions of these people who want to turn New Suffolk into something that it was never meant to be -- a kind of North Fork Miami Beach. I look fo~vard to hearing your thoughts on this matter. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Reynor Town Planning Board Town Hell Southold, N.Y. 11971 MAY 1 1 REC'B Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of lO,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusious in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a la~ge development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us2 I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, MRS HELEN G HORTO ,MAY 11 REC'D Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to l0 against the proposed condominium to be bui'lt at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us2 I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to l0 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in prote~t against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of lO,O00 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us~ I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protest against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us? I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problams, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. ~~m~~~Sincerel~y yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 qVIAY 11 REC D Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to l0 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in prote~t against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us2 I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and ot~er such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, I~O0~OTE PRODUOTIO~.~S lT.q, 255 West End Ave N,Y,, N, Y, 10023 Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us2 I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difflcult~.es. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, 9 Yay, 1983 Box 22h l~ew Suffolk, ¥.Y. 119~6 Mr. Hendr P~ynor Planning Board Town Hall Southold, !J.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: I would draw your attention to the ~allot taken last Friday night at the New Suffolk Schoolhouse concerning Kenniff's proposed condominiums at the foot of Main Street: 167 local property ov~ners against the project, and 10 for it. Certainly a one-sided vote on the side of good sense. One final note: of the half dozen local lawyers in New Suffolk, both full-and part-time residents, one is for it and five against. So even the legal p~ofession is on our side for a change. I look forward to seeing you plump for justice on next Monday night. Sincerely yours~ Thomas Lo Lewry Bx 22h ~ew Suffo!k~ ~Y.Y. 119~6 ~. Henry R~ynor Planrdng Beard Tovm Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 · JOSEPH F'ENTON ATTORNEY AT LAW ,-JACKSON STREET NEW SUFFOLK, N.Y. 11956 (516) 734-5099 RECEIVED BY SOUTHOLB TOWH P HIH( BOARB HAY 1 0 i983 DATE Planning Board Southold, New York 11971 Gentlemen: May 10, 1983 Re: Proposed condominiums Marine Associates,Inc. North Fork Shipyard, New Suffolk ~ am a resident of New Suffolk, and have been a resident of the Town of Southold for fifty eight years, all of mI life. I respectfully recommend that the Planning Board dis- approve the Site Development Plan which I understand has been filed in this mat%er and which you have under advisement at this time. As I understand the law, the Board is to take into consideration the public health, safety and welfare, the comfort and convenience of the public in general and the residents of the immediate neighborhood in particular. I am sure that others, more expert and competent than I, have or will express themselves with respect to the ~:evere fresh water problem that exists, and that of sewerage, as well as the fact that the proposed developmenl is out of character with its surroundings and the very soul of New Suffolk. The recent expression of contempt for the project by the residents of New Suffolk in the 167 to tO vote on the proposal, and the vehemence of feeling expressed at the meeting which preceded the vote, suggest that this project is perceived by the villagers to be a desecration of the neighborhood and a ravaging of the rights the villagers have acquired to long standing and contiuued visual and physical access to Peconic Bay from and through the property. For almost a century~ residents of New Suffolk have h~d the unimpaired right to traverse the property to fish off the southeastern bulkhead, for blowfish in earlier days, and for snappers and other fish. Can this use and enjoyment by the pub- lic be cut off after so long and uninterrupted a period? I urge the Board, based on the facts and its wisdom, to consider carefully the "Dune Road Syndrome". You know of your own knowledge, as well we all do, that northeastern storms in Sept- ember an~ at other times, or hurricanes, can put New Suffolk under water up to Second Street, ~nd have on many occasions. Is there not a duty to warn or proteot an unsuspecting purchaser that his or her home may be inundated, damage~, and furniture and possess- ions ruined? Will not the Town be subject to suits for damages for permitting structures which propose to violate nature in the quest for profit, because the Town knew, or should have known of this inherent danger? Are not people, flooded in Louisiana this year by an "Act of God" equally as indlgna~t at the new highway which blocke~ the run off and contr~ibuted to the flooding? Raising the si~e may merely transfer the problem to the adjoining properties, as jetties may ihave done recently on our own south side. Will there not be a question of liability on the Town's part in such event? When the proposed auxiliary fresh water system fails to adequately supply each resident's needs, when brackish water cannot be tolerated, will not the Town ~e put to the expense and be required by law to install piping and a ~unicipal water system? Should America's first submarine base be converted to condominiums? Did Marine Associates, Inc. object to present zoning when it was proposed and request multiple dwelling? Is it not late to request patchwork zoning now? Are not all present adjoining uses inconsistent? ShouId not the "comfort and convenience of the publi~" to use the existing launching ramp and the existing fishing station prevail over the rights of prospective purchasers of these units who would also be entitled to quiet enjoyment at early morning hours, if the property is rezoned in a patchwork manner? I understand that the U.S. Postal Service lease on the post office space which the applicant includes in the project has 2'years before expiration. Ignoring possible renewal rights, would not this project encourage the Postal Service to eliminate the post office in New Suffolk entirely, in keeping with its policy of cutting down on locations? We are loath to provide an excuse. The post office remains an important social center in New Suffolk. We do not haveh~w~ mail delivery here, and this institution and at this location, serve~Suseful a social servioe as do the school and churches, as a place to meet, exchange local The existing Galley Ho restaurant on the site employ~ perhaps a dozen peopte, as does the boat yard. The proposed condo- miniums will probably employ one person, if that, in place of the two dozen or so presently employed. A cursory review of two deeds from the State of New York and from the Town of Southold to the applicant's grantors or their predecessors in interest, disclose that pertions of the North Fork Shipyard property were granted cn ¢ondi%ion that such lands be applied to the "purposes of commerce". Has the applicant provided you with copies of such deeds as required by Legal Data requirements, including but not limited to a complete 0utline of existing deed restrict~ons or covenants applying to the property? If not, I will be pleased to supply them. Has your attorney advised with respect to such limitations? Can patchwork zoning be resorted to in view of these restrictions, or must *xisting zoning, consist- ent with the State's az~d the Town's own grants be continued? Is the density requested conditioned on the acreage or ~ portion of it so conveyed and so limited? Lastly, are we being hoodwinked by a Madison Avenue public relations c~mpatgn? THAT THERE IS NO SIGNIFICANT COMMUNITY OPPOSITION TO THE PLAN. THAT 2~ PROPOSED CONDOMINIUMS WILL USE LESS WATER THAN T~ RESTAURANT BOES NOW. Ninety-five percent of the res- idents voted against this propose~ abomination. Have the proponents of this project considered the vast quantities of fresh water re- quire~ to irrigate landscaping in dry weather, landscaping that is mandatory in ali Site Development? Such irrigation has already rendered a number of waterfront and near water sites untenable because of the inrosds of salt from adjoining bays and inlets. A delicate balance of nature that these people propose to upset~ keeps the salt water out. Groundwater cannot be pumped out in- definitely because the removal of this pressure will let in the salt. The cost of the energy needed to desalinate salt water, not just brackish water, wilI r~nder the project unecon~caI and, ultimately, a burden on the community. I am sure the Board is wise enough to see through this sort of campaign, and to prevent the pluudering of Southo~d's finest natural resource, Peconic Bay, so that the will of the people, expressed so emphatically by the villagers in their vote, and the intent e~pressed by both the State of New York and the Town of Southold as set forth in their grants, will not be frustrated. R~aoectfully submitted, ~o~eph'~Fen~on Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have Just voted 167 to l0 against bhe proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a lange development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty'e or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us~ I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, mAY 10 REC'B Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board To~n Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have Just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protest against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of lO,O00 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us~ I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protest against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in th~s area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of usY I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. " - I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in prote~t against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us2 I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, Mr. Henry Raynor Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 MAY 10 REC'B Dear Mr. Raynor: Concerned citizens in New Suffolk have just voted 167 to 10 against the proposed condominium to be built at the North Fork Shipyard. I wish to add my voice in protext against this development. There are several considerations. First, I am concerned that the water consumption of 10,000 gallons a day would endanger our aquifer. There are many salt water intrusions in this area already. Second, all that sewage would have to go somewhere, and we don't want it to go into our water table or into our bay. Third, the development would stretch almost 500 feet north to south, forty feet high, and would deprive many of us of our only view of the bay. Fourth, such a large development would not fit in with the small-village atmosphere of New Suffolk. And what would happen to Captain Marty's or the launching ramp, sources of pleasure to many of us~ I am not even referring to parking problems, noise problems, traffic problems, flooding problems, and other such difficulties. I urge you to recommend that the Town Board not approve this development. Sincerely yours, CIVIC NEW SUFFOLK ASSOCIATION INC. POST OFFICE BOX 642 N E ~V S U F F O L K, N, Y. t'~y 10, 1983 William R. Pell,III Supervisor, Town Board Southold, New York 1].971 Dear Supervisor Pell, On Friday/~y 6th. I983, the residents and property owners of New Suffolk held a meeting to express their opinions regarding the condominium project proposed by the North Fork Shipyard in New Suffolk. A vote was held by the co~m~unity as to whether they favored the project. ~e Results were a resounding negative vote 168 against to 10 in favor. This was the largest nmeting held in the history of the New Suffolk Civic Association. The membership expressed to the association that an attorney should be hired to represent the interest of the community and take whatever legal steps that are necessary to stop the approval of this project. Words cannot express the tremendous cohesiveness in this co~unity in oppositioa to this project. ~is opposition encompasses a total cross section of the connnunity. c.c..Daniel J Larkin c.c. Henry Raynor c.c. Lee E. Koppelman Very truly yours, Pauline A. Krement~ President Henry Raynor Town Hall Southold NY 11971 May 6, 1983 Dear Mr. Ray.or, My wife and I and three children live full time on New Suffolk Rd in New Suffolk. We certainly hope you will not permit the outrageous plans for the ship yard. It will destroy everything good about New Suffolk. There are plenty of other places for condominiums. There are almost no places left like New Suffolk. I think most of our neighbors feel the same way. Sinoere~ Danny Lyon Box 295 New Suffolk, New York 11956 Carleton H. Er~leman~u 2348 N.E. 28th Court Lighthouse point, Fla. 33064 April 27, 1983 Hon. William R. Pell III Supervisor, Town of Southold To~rn Hall, Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Sir: re: Proposed rezoning of North Fork Shipyard, New Suffolk, N.Y. We do not return to our cottage at Kimogenor Point in New Suffolk until mid May, but we feel it urgent to let yo~ and the other persons getting copies of this letter, know of our concer~ about the proposal to change the zoning of the North Fork Shipyard in New Suffolk to allow the erection of condominiums in its place. Mrs. Endemann~s family and now bur family has occupied Cottage #10 since 1920, when Mrs. Endemann's father and ten other families purchased the stock of the Kimogenor Point Company from the Moores - sixty-three years ago. We will always feel we are a part of New Suffolk, we enjoy its people and its way of life. From almost any point of view, to allow the North Fork Shipyard to be rezoned to have condominiums in its place would be a mistake and completely change the character and way oflife of the small hamlet of New Suffolk. From what we hear, such a change could in. volve land fill with resultant flooding of adjacent business and residential properties, tall buildings, incompatible with the small village atmosphere of New Suffolk, shutting off the view of bhe water, and possible sewage and fresh water problems. The fact that the shipyard has allowed many of its buildings to become unsafe and disreputable looking should not be used as an excuse for seeking the change of zoning. In addition, we question whether the change could be spot zoning and unconstitutional. As we recall it, the:original zoning made the shipyard and certain of the adjacent prope~ti~scommercial or indus- trial. This would have to be changed to residential, yet Capt. Martyrs fishing station next door to the north and the gift shop and Capt. Ahab's across First St. would remain ~ form of commercial or industrial zoning. Regardless of the legal technicalities, we think the proposal is ill-advised and we urge you and others getting a copy of this letter to turn it down in any form. cc: Daniel J. Larkin Dept. of Environmental Conservation SUNY, Region l, Bldg.40 Room 219 Stony Brook, N.Y. 11794 /Ben~y Raynor Planning Board of Appeals Southold, N.Y. 11971 yours/~ Carleton H. Endemann Barbara B. Endemann CC: Lee E. Koppelman Suffolk Cty. Planning Comm. Veterans Hwy. Hauppauge, N.Y. 11787 April 26, 1983 Henry Raynor, Chairman Planning Board of Appeals Southold, N.Y. 11971 Box 649 New Suffolk, N.Y. ]]956 Dear Henry: I would like to compliment you on the fine job you have done over the last few y~ars. We have been faced with some difficult choices, and you have met them with reasonable alternatives. Over the last 36 years, we have seen New Suffolk grow slowly with dignity and grace, and I hope we will continue in this manner. Cluster housing is an idea whose time has come, and appropriate usage of the concept will benefit us all. The proposed New Suffolk Shipyard Condominiums will add 33% more residents (albeit, probably seasonal residents at the outset), to the ~opulation of New Suffolk on something less than 5% of our total land mass. Please veto the proposed New Suffolk Shipyard Condominiums on the basis of incompatible density. If we could compute a standard of residential density in New Suffolk by adding all the Acreage currently assessed as improved residential acreage and dividing by the number of parcels, (I would guess this standard to be 1/2 acre), and then equitably compute the real acreage of the shipyard property against the standard we could in good conscience approve a condominium plan of perhaps 6 units on the site. I know you will give this your careful consideration and trust the matter to your good judgment. Please do not hesitate to call if I may assist you in some way. Very Truly Yours~ Andrea Rive cc: Bill Pell, Supervisor. JUDITII T TERRY TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR Ol VITAL SI \IISIICS OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 April 11~ 1983 To Whom It May Concern: Attached hereto is revised Long Environmental Assessment Form filed by Marine Associates in connection with their applica- tion for a change of zone from "C" Industrial District to "M-i" General Multiple Residence Districts on certain property located on the easterly side of First Street, New Suffolk~ New York. ~ Ju~lith T. Terry Southold Town Cler~ Posted on Town Clerk's Bulletin Board on April 11, 1983. RECEIVE.D. APR 111983 .Town Cle~ Southold TOWN OF SOUTHOLD EA[ EHVIRO;IMENTAL ASSESSMENT PART I Project Information NOTICE: This document ~. des~cned to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant effect on the ehvlrco,~nt. Please cor~lete the entire Data Sheet· Answers to these questions w~ll be considered as Dart Of the a~olication for approval and m~y be subject to further verification and pub)it review. Provide any additiona~ ~n~onn~Cion you believe will be needed to comolet~ PARTS 2 and 3. It is expecteo that como)orion of the EAF will be denendent on information currently available and will not involve new studies, research or investidation. If information requiring such additional work is unavai~ble. so indicate and s~ecify each instance. NAME OF PROJECT: NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER (If Different) "S~.~ ~ (Name) ADDRESS AND N~d~E OF APPLICANT: (Street) (Hame} BUStNCSS PHONE: (State} (Zip} (PLEASE COMPLETE EACH QUESTION - Indicate N.A. if not applicable} SITE DESCRIPTION (Physical setting of overall project, both develoned and undeve)ooed areas) 1. Genera) character of the land: Generally uniform slope ~ Generally uneven and rolling or irregular ~. Present land use: Urban , Industrial .~,_ , Commercial , Suburban ., Rural __. , Agriculture , Other 3. Total acreage of 9roject area:~.~acres.~,~ ~-~ /~- ~AKG~J,,,~T e~ ~o~6 Meadow or Brushland Forested ~oricu)tural 'l-tland (Freshwater or Tidal ~s net Articles 24, ~S ~r F.C.L.) Presently After Completion /k/O~cres /V0~,~ acres 4/~,,v~acres ~ acres ~e~cres ~- acres ~Qu~*~res Hater Surface Area Unvegetated (rock. earth or fill) Roads, buildinas and other paved Other (indicate ty~e) wrat Js ~.edominant soil type(s) on oroiect site? ................ , Forest Presently After Completion ,~_Jl'ac r es ~.~'~_.a o,'e s /~yj~/~a ores Approxir~ate percentage of proposed project site with greater -- , %. J ~; 15~ or 7. Is project contiguous to, or contain a buildino or site listed on the National Reeister of His:or c Places? Yes .XNo lO. Does project site contain.~ny species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endanqered - Yes /~Jo, according to - Identify each species ll, Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e, cliffs, dunes, other geological formations - Yes _~ No. (Describe 12. Is the project site presently used by the coat, unity or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area - Yes X No. 13. Does the present site offer or include scenic views or vistas known to be important to the co,unity? Yes ~ NO 14. Streams within or contiguous to project area: a, Na~ of stream and name of river to which it is tributary ~O~i~, ~ 15. Lakes, Ponds, Wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: 16. What is the dominant ]and use and zoning c)assification within a I/4 mile radius of the project (e.g. ~ m single family residential, R-2) and the scale of development e.g. 2 story). PROJECT ~TION I+~ ~ 1. Physical di~nsions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) b. Project acreage developed: ~ acres initially; ,~acres ultimately, c. P~ject acreage to remain undeveloped ~ d. Length of project, in miles: ~"~ (if appropriate) ; developed acreage f. Nu~er of off-strut parking spaces existin, ~ ; proposed -~. ~i~ ~ g. Maximum vehicular trios generated per hour /t~ (upon c~pletion of project) h. If residential: Number and type of housinq units: ~ne Family Two Family Multiple Family Initial Ultimate If: Orientation ]!e~gnPornood-City-Regional Industrial Estimated Employment Condominium 2. How much natural material (i.e. rock, earth, etc.) will be removed from the site - ~,Y~ tons cubic yards. 3. How many acres of veqetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site 4. Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed ~y th~s 5. Are there any plans for re-vegetation to replace that removed during construction? ~ Yes 6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction ,~'~ months, (including demolition). 7. If multi-~hased project: a. Total number of phases anticipated No, b. Anticipated date of cor~qencement phase I month year (incluoin~ /~[ .~[-. demolition) - c. Approximate completion date final phase month .__year. d. IS phase 1 financially dependent on subseouent phases? Yes No 8. Will blasting occur during construction? Yes ~ No 9. Number of jobs generated: during construction ~ ; after project is complete 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project ll. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? ~ Yes NO. If yes, explain: l~. a. Is surface or subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? ~ Yes __~o. b. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage. industrial, etc.) ~.~-~. ~ c. If surface disposal name of stream into which effluent will be discharged 13. Will surface area of existing lakes, ponds, streams, Pays or other surface waterways be increased or decreased by proposal? __Yes X No. 14. Is project or any portion of project located in the lO0 year flood plain? X' Yes No 15. a. Does project involve disposal of solid waste? ~ Yes No ~o~/~-~ ~ ~J/D~ST~ lr'o If yes, will an existing solid waste disnosal facility be used? .X Yes ___No If yes, give name: ~'~'~ly ~(X~A~Dm~r : location ~-'~¢,~/ tlill any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? Yes _~.~ No d. 19. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? Yes ~ No Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? Yes )~ NO Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambience noise levels? Yes y,, No Will project result in an increase in energy use? Yes ~ No. If yes, indicate type(s) 20. If water supply is from wells indicate DUmping capacity 21. Total anticinated water usage per day<~-~(~(~:~__gaIs/day. 22. Zoning: a. ~dhat is dominant zoning classification of site? b. Current specific zoning classification of site gals/minute, 26. Approvals: a. Is any Federal pemit required? Yes ..... No b. Does project involve State or Federal funding or financing? --- C. Local and Regional approvals: Approval Required (Yes, No) (Ty~ei Submittal Approval (Date) (Date) City, Town, Village Board City, Town, Village Planning Board City, Town, Zoning Board City, County Heal th Department Other local agencies Other regional agencies State Agencies Federal Agencies C. INFORMATIONAL DETAILS Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may Oe any adverse impacts associated with the proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which can be taken to,mitigate or avoid t~,.~n -4- EAF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENZ - PART II Project Impacts and Their Magnitude General ln~n~-~atio~ [R~!d Carefully) - In compIecing the form the reviewer should be guided by the Question: Have my decisions and determinations been reasonaoie? The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst. - IdentiFying that an effect will be potentially large (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessarily sionificamt. Any large effect must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine significance. 8y identifying an effect in column 2 simply asks that it be looked at further. - The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of effects and wherever possible the threshold of magnitude that would trigger a response in column 2. The examples are generally applicable throughout the State and for most situations, But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be more appropriate for a Potential Large Impact rating, - Each project, on each site, in each locality, will vary. Therefore, the examples have been offered as guidance. They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each ouestion. - The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question. INSTRUCTIONS (Read Carefully) a. Answer each of the 18 questions in PART 2. Answer Ye~s if there will be any effect. b. Maybe answers should be considered as Ye~s answers. c. If answering Yes to a euestion then check the appropriate box (column 1 or 2) to indicate the eotential 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 the size of the impact ~hen consider the impact as potentially large and proceeO to PART 3. e. If a eotentially large impact mr effect can be reduced by a change in the project to a less than large magnitude, place a )es in column 3. A No response indicates~that such a reduction is not Possible. IMPACT ON LAND WILL THERE BE AN EFFECT AS A RESULT OF A PHYSICAL CHANGE TO PROJECT SITE? Examples that Woulo Apply to Column 2 NO YES @0 Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise Per lO0 Coot of length), or where the general slopes in the project area exceed 10%. SMALL TO POTENTIAl CAN IMPACT BE MODERATE LARGE REDUCED BY IMPACT IMPACT PROJECT CHANGE Construction on Land where the depth to the water table is less than 3 feet. ronstruction of paved Darkinq area Fmr l.~ or more vehicles. C~nstruction on la~d where bedrock is exposed or qenerally within $ feet of existing ground surface, Construction tna~ will continue for more than 1 year or involve ExcavAtion for m~ning 9urposes that would remove more than 1,000 Cons of natural material (i.e, rock or soil) per year. Construction of any new sanitary landfill. WILL THERE BE AN EFFECT TO ANY UNIOUE OR UNUSUAL LAND FnRMS/~-~ FOUND ON THE SITE? (i.e. cliff,, dunes aeoloqica] fo~- [~OJJ t$c~ns, etc. L)mACT ON WATER 3. WILL PROJECT AFFECT ANY WATER BODY DESIGNATED AS .......... PROTECTED? (Under Articles 15, 24, 25 of the Envir- oriental Conservation Law, E.C.L.) Examo)es that Would Apply to Column 2 -- Dredg~na m~re than log cubic yards of material fro~ channel of a protected stream. -- Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland. Other impacts: NO YES Examoles that Would Apply to Column A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water Dr mOre than a 10 acre increase or decrease. Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area. 5. WILL PROJECT AFFECT EDRFACF OR GROUND~4ATER DHALITY? Examples tnat !Jould Apply to Column 2 -- Project will adversely affect groundwater, -- Liqu)o eff)uent will be conveyed off the site to fac~)ities which presently do'not exist or have ;!!ALL Tq I POTENTIAL CAN I'iPACT BE J ~P~',~ T IMPACT PDOdECT CHAd;DF NO YES gUNOFF? ................................................... ~0 Pro iect is likely to cause substantial erosion. Pro)eot is incompatible with existing drainage patterms. i,M, PACT ON Ail IlO YES Fxamoles that Hould Apply to Column 2 Project will induce 1,~1~0 or more vehicle trips in any given hour. Project will result in the incineration of m~re than 1 ton of refuse per hour. Project emission rate of all contaminants w~ll exceed 5 lbs. Der hour or a heat source nroducing ~re than lO million BTU's per hour. L"2.~CT ON PL~K(T~ ANn ~,"t[~,A',S NO YES 8. WILL PROJECT AFFECT ANY THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES? ~ ~ Examoles that Would Apoly 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. __ Removal of any ~ortion of a critical or sionificant wild- life ~abi~,)~. -- Ap~licatihn of Pesticide or he~icidp over n~re than Example that Would Apply to Column ~tALL TO P(gTENTIAL I CAN IllPACT BE ~)DE RJ~TE LARGE REDUCED GY -7- lg. Project wi)] result in the elimination or major screening Of scenic view5 or vistas knmm to be important to the area. Other impacts: 11. WILL PROJECT IUPACT ANY SITE OR STRUCTURE OF HISTORIC, NO YES Examples that Would Apply to Column 2 P r~iect occurina wholly or oartially within or contiguous to any facility or site listed on the !~ational Reaiscer of historic places. Any impact to an archeological site or fossil bed located within the project site. I~P~CT O~l O~EH SPACE & RECREATIO)! 12. WILL THE PRnJECT AFFECT THE OUA~TITY OR QUALITY OF EXISTI!~G NO YES OR FUTURE OPEN SPACES OR RECREATIONAL OPPORTU!~ITIES? ...... ~OI Examples that Would Apply to Column 2 -- The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational oPPortunity. -- A major reduction of an open space important to the cor~unity. SYSTEUS? ............................................... 14. 15. IMPACT ON ENERGY dILL PROJECT AFFECT THE COMMUNITIES SOURCES OF FUEL OR NO ENERGY SUPPLY? ........................................... Examoles that Would ~pply to Column 2 Project causing qreater than 5% increase in any form of energy used in municipality. I :5. Project reouir ng the creation or extension of an energy transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 sinqle or two family residences. Other impacts: IMPACT ON NOISE WILL THERE BE OBJECTIONABLE ODORS, NOISE, GLARE, VIBRATION NO YES or ELECTRICAL DISTURBANCE AS A RESULT OF THIS PROJECT? .... Examoles that Would ADoly to Colu~n 2 ~)0 Blasting within 1,509 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive facility. Odors will occur mutinely (~re than one hour per day). Pmject will nroduce operating noise exceedinm the local ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures. P~Ject will re~ve natural barriers that would act as a noise screen. Other impacts: ?PACT 0)! HEALTH & HA~ARD~ NO YES 16. !IILL PROJECT AFFECT PUBLIC IfEALTH AND SAFETY? ............. Examol~s that Would Apply to Column 2 Q O -- Project will cause a risk of exglosion or release of hazardous substances (i.e. oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) in the event of accident or uoset conditions, or there will he a chronic low level discharge or emission. -- Project that will result in the burial of "hazardous wastes" {i.e. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritating, infectious, etc., incIudino wastes that are solid, semi-solid, liquid or contain gases.) Storaoe facilities for one million or more Qallnns of liouified natural gas or other liouids. SMALL TF) POTENTIAL CAN IMPACT BE IODERAT LA~GE REDUCED BY IMPACT IIIPACT PROJECT CHANGE ES ) S ) WILL PROJECT AFFECT THE CHAPACTER ~F THE EXISTING NO YES COMHUNITY? ................................................ GO Example that Would Apply to Column 2 The population of the City, Town or Village in which the proJeCt is located is likely to grow by more than 5% of resident human population. The municipal budgets for capital expenditures or opera- ting servlces will increase by m~re than 5% per year as a result of this project. Will involve amy permanent facility of a non-agricultural use in an agricultural district or remove nrime agricultural lands from cultivation. The project will replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures or areas of historic importance to the CD~qunity. Development will induce an influx of a particular age group with special needs, Project will set an important precedent for future proiects. Project will relocate 15 or ~re emnloyees in one or more businesses, Other impacts: 18. NO YES IS THERE PUBLIC CONTROVERSY CONCERNING THE PROJECT? ....... Examples that Would Apply to Column 2 Either §overn~_nt or citizens of adjacent cormunities have expressed OPpOsition or rejected the pro iect or have not been contacteo. Objections to the Proiect from within the co~nitv, IIF ANY ACTION IN PART 2 IS IDEHTIFIED AS A I POTENTIAL LARGE IMPACT OR IF YOU CANNOT DETERMINE THE MAG ITUDE OF IMPACT, PROCEED TO PART 3. PORTIONS OF EAF COMPLETED FOR THIS PROJECT: DETERMINATION PART I __ PART II__ PART 3 ;ttALL TO POTENTIAL CAN IMPACT BE ~ODERATE LARGE REDUCED BK IHPACT IIIP a,C T PROJECT CHANGE Upon review of the information recordeO on this EAF (Parts l, 2 and 3) and considerimq both the maqnitude and imoortance of each tnl>act, it is reasonably determined that: A, The project will result in no major impacts and, therefore, is one which may not cause significant damaoe to the environment. Althouph the pro]eot could have a significant effect on the The project will result in one or more major adverse impacts that cannot be reduced and may cause s)qnificant damaoe to PREPARE A HEF:ATIVE DECLARATION Agency EAF ElJVIRO{~MENTAL ASSESS~E~;T - PART IIl I~(FOR~fAT ION Part 3 is prepared if one or more impact or effect is COnSidered to be potentially The amount of writing necessary to answer Part 3 may be determined by answering the question: !n ~riDfl~ completing the instructions below have I placed in this record sufficient information to indicate the reasonableness of my decisions? INSTRUCTIONS Complete the followinq for each impact or effect identified in Column 2 of Part 2: I. Briefly describe the impact. 2. Describe (if applicable) how the impact might be mitigated or reduced to a )ess than large ~mnact Dy a pro- ject change. 3. Based on the information available, decide if it is reasonable to conclude that this impact is important to the minicioality (city, town or village) in which the project is located. To answer the question of importance, consider: The probability of the impact or effect occurring The duration of the impact or effect Its irreversibility, including permanently lost resources or values ~hether the impact or effect can be controlled The regional consequence of the impact or effect Its potential divergence from local needs and goals ~netner Known objections to the project apolF to this impact or effect. DETERMINATION OF SIG~)IF!CA!iC£ An action is considered to be significant if: Ane (or n~re) imgact is determined to both lame and its (their) conseouence, based on the rewew above, is imoortant. PAPT III STATEHENTS (Continue on Attachments, as needed) JUDITH T. TERRY TOWN CLERK REGISTRAROI VIIALS1 \IISTICS OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 April 11~ 1983 To Whom It May Concern: Attached hereto is revised Long Environmental Assessment Form filed by Marine Associates in connection with their applica- tion for a change of zone from "C" Industrial District to "M-i" General Multiple Residence District, on certain property located on the easterly side of First Street, New Suffolk, New York. ~' JuZi~ith T. Terry Southold Town Cler~ Posted on Town Clerk's Bulletin Board on April 11~ 1983. RECEIVED TO~¥N OF SOUTHOLD APR l 1 198. Town Cle~ $outhold EAF ENVIRO;IMENTAL ASSESSMENT ] 'PART Project Information NOTICE: This Oocu~ent (, desk?ned to assist in determining whether t~e action proposed may have a significant effect on t~e e~wl~c-,.~nt. Please complete the entire Data Sheet. Answers to these questions w~ll be considered as oart of the aoo)ication for approval and may be subject to further yeti fication and public review. Provide any additional Information you be)ieve will be needed to comolete PARTS 2 and 3. It is exPecteo tmat como)etlon of the EAR willbe dependent on information currently available and will not involve new Studles, research or investiqation. If information requirino SUCh additional work is Unavai~ble, SO indicate and soecify each instance. - ~(AME OF PROJECT: NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER (If Different) (Name) AGDRESS AND N~YiE OF APPLICANT: (Street.) ~ (State) (Zip) DUStIICSS PHONE: DESCRIPTION OF P~OJECTt (Briefly describe type of project Or action) /~'~ ~qO/l~' (PLEASE COMPLETE EACH QUESTION - Indicate N.A. if not applicable) SITE DESCRIPTION (Physical setting of overall project, both develoned and undevelooed areas) 1. Genera) character of the land: r, enerally uniform slope ~ Generally uneven and rollind or irregular 2. Present land use: Uroan , Industrial .~ , Commercial , Suburban ., Rural .... , Agriculture. , Other ' --- Forested Aoriculturml Presently After Completion /lY~cres /V~ acres ~Y~ acres ~(~_~.acres /~/~ ~acres 'l~tland (Freshwater or Tidal as her Articles Uater Surface Area Unvegetated (rock, earth or fill) Roads, buildines Other (indicate tyne) Forest Presently After Completion ~z)~y~a c r es ~_~ a c r e s Approximate percentage of proposed project site with slopes: greater --, %. 7. Is project contiguous to, or contain a buildinn or site listed on the National ~eqister of Historic Places? _Yes X No 9. ~ hunting or fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? __Yes ~ NO ~j 10. Does project site contain,Jny species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endaneered - Yes /'~[Io, according to - Identify each species ll. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e. cliffs, dunes, other geological formations - Yes ~ NO. (Describe 12. Is the project site presently used by the cor~nunity or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area - Yes X NO. 13. Does the present site offer or include scenic views or vistas known to be important to the community? Yes ~ No )4. Streams within or contiguous to project area: a. Na~ of stream and name of river to which it is tributary ~b~ ~ 15. Lakes, Ponds, Wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: 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) B. PROJECT ~TION 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate} a. lotal contiguous acreage o~ned ~y project sponsor ~ /'~ acres. b. Project acreage developed: ,~ acres initially; ,~acres ultimately. c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped d. Length of project, in miles: ~/~ (if appropriate) age ~Ay'~:~ ; developed acreage f. )lun'~er of off-strut parking spaces existino ~.~ ; proposed _~_. g. Maximum vehicular tri~s generated per hour /~ (upon completion of project} One Family Two Family Multiple Family Initial Ultimate If: Orientation !e~§nbornood-City-Regional Estimated Employment Industria) height cf tallest ~ronoseo structure __~.~__~/..feet. Total Condomi n ~ um -2- How much natural material (i.e. rock, earth, etc.) will be removed f~om the site - ¢~y~ax~ tons cubic yards. How many acres of veqetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) ~ill be reproved from site -~y~acres. 4. Will any mature forest {over lgO years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this project? Yes y~ NO 5. Are there any plans for re-vegetation to replace that removed during construction? ~ Yes rio 6. If single Dbase project: Anticipated period of construction ,l~/.~ months. {including demolition). 7. !f multi-phased project: a. Total number of phases anticipated No. b. Anticipated date of co~encement phase I month year (incluOing /V./~-' demolition) c, Approximate completion date final phase month d. Is phase 1 financially dependent on subseouent phases? Yes NO 8, Will blasting occur during construction? Yes ~ No g. N~-nber of jobs generated: during construction ~ ; after project is complete 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project ll. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? )~ Yes No. If yes, explain: 12. a. is surface or subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? X Yes __Ho, b. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) ~,~-~i. ~ c. If surface disposal name of stream 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 proposal? Yes ~ No. 14. Is project or any portion of project located in the 100 year flood plain? ~ Yes No 15. a. Does project involve disposal of solid waste? )~ Yes No~m~/'~-~ ~/~$~ b. If yes, will an existing solid waste disposal facility be used? .X Yes ___No o. yes. give na e: r : location d. !Mil any wastes not go into a sewage disposal System or into a sanitary landfill? __Yes _)<~ No 16. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? Yes ~ No l 7. Will project routinely produce odors {more than one hour per day)? Yes )~ NO 18. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambience noise levels? Yes ~ No 19. Will project result in an increase in energy use? Yes )~ No. If yes, indicate type!s) 20, If water supply is from wells indicate PUmo~ng capacity 21. Total anticipated water usage per day~'~_~qals/day. 22. Zoning: gals/minute. b. Current specific ZOning classification of site ~ d. If no, indicate desired zonlnq //~L~F~_~__ _____/~ _~_i~/~<Zi.~'_.._ .. 26. Approvals: a. Is any Federal permit required? Yes NO b. Does project involve State or Federal funding or financing? C. Local and Regional approvals: Yes No Approval Required Submittal Approval (Yes, No) (Type) (Date) (Date) City, Town, Village Board City, Town,.Village Planning 8oard City, Town, Zoning Board City, County Health Department Other local agencies Other regional agencies State Agencies Federa) Agencies C. INFOPJqATIONAL DETAILS TITLE: REPRESENTING: DATE: 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 imgacts and the measures which can be taken to mitigate or avoid thn~ ~,~_~ PREPARER'S SIGNATURE: EAF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - PART II Project Imoacts and Their Magnitude Genera! ln~n~-~attnn~ ":.r.._~,r~ Carefully) - In compleLing the form the reviewer should be guided by the Question: Have my decisions and determinations been reasonable? The reviewer is not expected to be an exoert environmental analyst. - Identifying that an effect will be potentially large (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessarily si?lflc_a~. Ar:y large effect must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine significance. By identifying an effect in column 2 simoly asks that it be looked at further. - The Examoles provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of effects and wherever possible the threshol~ of magnitude that would trigger a response in column 2. The examples are generally apQiicable throughout the State and for most situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be more aporopriate for a Potential Large Impact rating. - Each project, on each site, in each locality, will vary. Therefore, the examoles have been offered as guidance. They do not cons~l.u~e an exhaustive list of Impacts and thresholda to answer each Question. - The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question. INSTRUCTIONS (Read Carefully) a. Answer each of the 18 questions in PART 2. Answer Ye~s if there will be any effect. b. Maybe answers should be considered as Ye~answers. c. If answering Yes to a Question then check the appropriate box (column 1 or 2) to indicate the Potential size of the imoact, 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 the size of the impact ~he~ consider the impact as ootentially large and proceed to PART 3. e. If a potentially large imoact or effect can be reduced by a change in the project to a less than large magnitude, place a Yes in column 3. A No response indicates' that such a reduction is not ~ossible. NO Y[S @© Any constru:tiom on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise der lO0 Foot of lengt!l!, or where the general slooes in the project area exceed 10%. IMPACT ON LAND WILL THERE BE AN EFFECT AS A RESULT OF A PHYSICAL CHANGE TO PROJECT Si?E? Examples that Would Apply to Column 2 Construction on Land where the denth to the water table is less than 3 feet. tons cf natural material (i.e. rock or soil) per vear. SMALL TO POTENTIAL! CAN IMPACT BE MODERATE LARGE REDUCED BY IMPACT IMPACT PROJECT CHANGE -- Construction in a desiqnated floodway. Other impacts: WILL T~EAE BE AN EFFECT TO ANY UNIQUE OR UNIISUAL L~NO FOUND ON THE SITE? (i.e. cliff~, dunes, qeoloqical fo~- t$o~s, etc.) ' -- Specific land forms: ~PACT ON WATER PROTECTED? (Under Art cles 5, 24, 25 of the Envir- onn~ntal Conservation Law, Dredgino n~ore than 10g cubic yards of material From channel of a protected stream. Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland. Other imDact$: WILL PROJECT AFFECT ANY NON-PROTECTED EXISTING OR NFFI NO YES BODY OF HATER? Examples that Would Apply to Column 2 A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water or ~re than a l0 acre increase or decrease. Construction of a body of water that exceeds lo acres of surface area, Project will require a discharge permit. ~!~ALL TO i PATE~iT.IAL CAN IrlPACT BE aAgER~TE ! LARG= REDUCED BY )MPA~T( IMP/~CT PqOJEr-T CHANCE YES ES ) YES RUXOFF? ................................................... QO Examole that '~ould ~ply to Colurtn 2 Pro)oct wnu)d imnede flood water flows. Proiect is likely to cause substantial erosion. Pro)ect is incompatible with existing drainage patterns. IlO YES PROJECT AFFECT AIR QUALITY? ........................... ~ ~ Fxammtes that Hould Apply to Colu~ 2 Project will tnduce 1,0~,0 or more vehicle trips in any given hour, Project will resu)t in the incineration of more than I ton ef refuse per hour. P~oject emission rate of a)) contaminants will exceed lbs. ~er ~our or a heat source n roducing ~ore than lO million 8TU's per hour. 8. WILL PROJECT AFFECT ANY THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES? Examples that Would Apoly 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. -- Re~oval of any oortion of a critical or sionificant wild- life habit, lC. -- ~onlicatinn of Pesticide or he)~icido over more than NO YES ®0 t~ILL PoOJECT SUBSTANTIALLY AFFECT r!ON-THREATE:~ED OR NO YES ENDA~iREgED SPEC:ES? ....................................... 0 Examo)e that Would Apply to Column 2 Q -7- ll, ?PACT ON HISTORIC RESOURCES WILL PROJECT II!PACT ANY SITE OR STRUCTURE OF HISTORIC, NO PRS-HI%T~IC OR PALEONTOGIC~L II~POPTANCE? ................. Examoles that Would Aoolv to Column 2 ~ Pr~iect occurino wholly or oartially within or contiouous to any facility or site lis:ed on :he National Reais~er of historic places, Any impact to an archeological site or fossil bed located within the project site. Other impacts: I~P~CT ON OmEH SPACE & RECREATION 12. NILL THE PRnJECT AFFECT THE DUANTITY OR QUALITY OF EXISTING NO OR FUTURE OPEN SPACES OR RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES? ...... Exammles that ~lould Amply to Column 2 -- The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational oooortunity. -- A major reduction of an open space important to the co,unity. NO 1. 2.. 3. YES YES YES I~P4CT ON ~HERGY $1ILL PROJECT ,~FFECT THE COMMUNITIES SOURCES OF FUEL OR NO ENERGY SUPPLY7 Examoles that Would Apply to Column 2 Project causing qreater than 5% increase in any form of energy used in municipality. Project reouiring the creation or extension of an energy transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two family residences. Other impacts: I~MR~CT ON NOISE 15, WILL THERE BE OBJECTIONABLE ODORS, NOISE, GLARE, VIB)~ATIQN NO YES or ELECTRICAL DISTURBANCE AS A RESULT OF THIS PROJECT? .... Examoles that ~ould Aooly to Coluq~n 2 GO __ Blasting within 1.500 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive facility. __ Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day). __ Project will nroduce operating noise exceedinn the local ambient noise levels fo~ noise outside of structures. __ Project will remove natural barriers that would act as e noise screen. Other impacts: IMPACT ON HEALTH & HAZARD~ 16. !'IILL PROJECT AFFECT PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETy? ............. NQ YFS Examol~s that Would ~,pply to Column 2 QO Project will cause a risk of exglosion or release of hazardous substances (i.e. oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) in the event of accident or UDSet conditions, or there will he a c~ronic )o~.y level discharge or emission. Project that will result in the burial of zero,us wastes" ISMALL TO POTENTIAL CAii IHPACT CE ):ODER~ TE LARGE REDUCED BY IMPACT IHPACT PROJECT CHANGE ~S ) S IMPACT ON GDQ~FH AND CHARACTER OF C~MMUNITY OR q_rIGMRqPWO~ 17. WILL PROJECT AFFECT THE CHAPACTER nF THE EXISTING DOM ~UNITY? ............. Examole that Would Apoly to Column The population of the City, Town or Village in which the project is located is likely to grow by more than 5% oF resident human population. The municipal budgets for capital expenditures or opera- ting services will increase by more than 5% per year as a result of this project. Will involve any Permanent facility of a non-aQricultural use in an agricultural district or remove nrim~ agricultural lands fr~)m cultivation, SMALL TO POTE;ITIAI ~"'~N IMPACT 2E-- 'iODERATE LARGE REDUCED BY IMPACT IMPACT PROJECT CHANGE NO YES NO YES '@© The eroject will re:lace or eliminate existing facilities, structures or areas of historic importance to the cor~unity. Development will induce an influx of a particular age group with special needs, Project will set an important precedent for future proiects. Project will relocate 15 or more employees in one or more businesses. Other imoacts: 18. IS THERE PUBLIC CONTROVERSY CONCERNING THE PROJECT? ...... Examoles that Would Apply to Column 2 -- Either government or citizens of adjacent communities have expressed OPPOSition or rejected the project or have not been contacted, -- Obiections to the nroiect f~m within the co~unit¥. IF ANY ACTION IN PART 2 IS IDENTIFIED AS A ~ POTENTIAL LARGE IMPACT OR IF YOU CBNNOT DETERMINE THE MAGNITUDE OF IMPACT, PROCEED TO PART 3, PORTIONS OF EAF COMPLETED FOR THIS PROJECT: DETERMINATION PART I PART II PART 3. Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF {Parts l, 2 and 3) and considerinq both the maonitude and imnortance of each in'pact, it is reasonablv determined that: A. The project will result in no major impacts and, therefore, is one which may not cause significant damaoe to the environment. B. Althouoh the project could have a significant effect on the envlr~nr~ent, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitiqation measures described in PART 3 have been included as Dart of the Droposed project. S1gn~t Prenarer (if different from responslbl~e~ffic~r) PREPARE ? !IEr~ATIVE DECLARATION PREPARE A NEF, RTIVE DECLARATION © PREPARE POSITIVE DECLARATION PROCEED WITH SIS -' Agency ~r~'nt or tyee nam~ of responsible offl~a] in Lead Agency EAr E~IVIROI;MENTAL ASSESS)tEliT - PART III Et'~LUATID~I OF TNE IMPOPTANCE OF IMPACTS I~IFORMATIO~ Part 3 is prepared if one or more impact or effect is considered to be potentially large. The amount of wri ting necessary to answer Part 3 may be determined by answering the question: In briefly completing the instructions below have I placed in this record sufficient information to indicate the reasonableness of my decisions? INSTRUCTIO~IS Complete the following for each impact or effect identified in Column 2 of Part 2: 1. Briefly describe the impact. 2. Describe (if apolicable) how the impact might be mitigated or reduced to a less than large imnact by a pro- ject Change. - 3. Based on the information available, decide if it is reasonable to conclude that this imnact is imoortant to the minicibality (city, town or village) in ~vhich the project is located. To answer the question of importance, consider: - The probability of the impact or effect occurring The duration of the impact or effect Its irreversibility, including permanently lost resources or values Uhether the impact or effect can be controlled The regional consequence of the imbact or effect Its potential divergence from local needs and goals Whether known objections to the project apply to this impact or effect. DETERMINATION OF SIGh)IF!CA,iCE An action is considered to be significant if: nne {or more) imoact is determined to both lame and its (their) conseouence, based on the review above, is imoortant. PAPT III STATEMENTS (Continue on Attachments, as needed) Northeast corner 3rd & Main Streets Po 0, Box 147 New Suffolk, New York 11988 8 April 1983 Hr. Henry Raynor, Chairman Southold Town Plan=lng Board Town Fail, Xain Road Southold, New York 11971 Dear Henrys We would like to register with the Planning Board our total opposition to the proposal by James A. Kenniff.s ~JIarine Associates to build condominisuns on the property now occupied by The North Fork Shipyard (county tax number 1000-117-8-18). Marine Associates proposes to build 24 condominiums on land that has been under salt water in major storms, as anyone could see if the high water marks on the Post Office building hadn't been painted over. Folly~ Those 24 households would not be able to get their fresh water from their ovm property - their supply could only come from the rest of us, endangering our already limited supply by depletion and salt water intrusion. Wall-to-wall cesspools to h~udle the sewage of 24 households in so limited a space would bring leaching into Peconic Bay, if not into our wells. Do we need to hasten the pollution of our swimming, fishing, clamming, boating waters in this way? Talk about environmental tmpact~ And are we really compelled to witness the despoiling of our shoreline and our water view? The c~rm of New Suffolk is epitomized by the view at the end of our ?sin Street -- the little Post Office, the water, the boats. If you let ~arine Associates cover up al! that (including the street~) with 2~-storey barracks, you will have deprived us all of literally half the water, iow of New Suffolk hamlet. Zt seems to us that the proposal would so change the character of New Suffolk, in fact destroy it, that future real estate values for the hamlet as a whole may suffer, ~ud that will hurt us all. The ~mbience we have here is fragile. Changes should be kept to scale. New Suf£olk has its problems. Our neighbors in the First Street area (and on Third Street we are not far away) have complaints. But surely there are ways in which our community ~d the Tov~ c~u work together toward solutions, without, shall we say, inviting the fox into the henhouse because the chickens are noisy. Aud thera are other ways to pretty up the waterfront, if needs must be (we happen to like boats and docks); 2~ barracks do not constitute a beautification plan. Until now we have for twcnty-eig~ years been happily grateful that our fates brought us to New Suffolk and we cannot imagine any other place we would like to live. Please don't spoil it~ Most sincerely, on Robbins ~Joan Robbins i~ortheast corner ~rd & '~ain Streets Po Oo Box 1.47 ~ew Suffol~4 ~'!ew York 11956 April ]9~ ~,!r. ~enry Ra~.;or, Chair~rl $outhold Tov~ Plsnn~g Bosrd Town ~all, if. ain Road Southold, New York 11971 Dear We would like to register with the Plarn~ing Board our total o[Tosition tc the proposal by james A. Kenn~*f's b~arine Associates to build col~.dominiums cn t~ property now occupied by The Eortb~ Fork Shipy'ard (county tax. n'~her 1000~] 17-8-18). ~£ar~ne Associates proposes t~ build 24 condominiums o_a land that has been under salt water in ~ajor storms, as anyone could see if the high water ~arks on the Post CiTice buildiug hadn't been painted over. Folly'~ Those 24 homseholds would not be able to get their fresh water from their eyre property - their supply could only come from the rest of us, endangering our already limited supply by depletion snd salt water Lntrusion. Wall-to-wa].l cesspools to h~dle tFe sew~e of 24 hm,seholds in so limited a sDs. ce would bring !~aching h~to Peconic Bay, if not into cur wells. Do we need to hasten the pollution of our swi.~ming, fishing, clamoring, boating waters in this way? Ta~k about envirer~menta], impact~ And are we really compelled to witness the despoiling of our shoreline and our water' view? The c~mrm of New Suffolk is epitomized by the view at the end of our '.lain Street -- the little Post Office, the water, the boats. If you let ~(arino Associates cover up all that (inoludlr4; the streetl) with 2½-storey barracks, you will have deprived us all of literally half the water, iow of New Suffolk hamlet. -~t seems to us that the proposal would so ci~ge the character of New Suffolk, in Fact destroy it, that f~ture real. estate values for the hamlet as a whole may suffer, ~d 'that will hurt us all. The ~mbience we ?~ve here is fragile. C~nges sho,~td be kept to scale. New Suffolk has its problems. Our netghborsin the First Street area (smd on Third Street we are not far away) hs~e cora~laints. But surely there are ways in which our community and the Town can work together toward solutions, without, s?~ll we say, invit~a~g the fox into the henhouse because the chickens are noisy. And t?.ere are other ways to pretbp up the w~te~:Tront, if needs must be (we b~ppen to like boats an~ docks); 24 barracks do not constitute a beautification plan. ~Jntil now we ~h~tve for twenty-eight years been happily grateful that our fates brought us to New Suffolk and ~'o cannot imagine ~ny other place we would like tc live. Please don't spoil itl Most sincerely, ' E'ewton Robbir. s ~JJoan Robbins HENRY E. RAYNOR, Jr., Chairman JAMES WALL BENNETT ORLOWSKI, Jr. GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, Jr. WILLIAM F. MULLEN, Jr. OW. O D Southold, N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE 765-1938 April 8, 1983 Mr. Thomas Lowry Box 224 New Suffolk, New York 11956 Dear Mr. Lowry: Thank you for your letter of April 1, 1983 and the en- closures you sent to various departments regarding the pro- posal of Marine Associates, Inc. As the Town is lead agency on this project, you may wish to address the Town Board with those concerns stated in your letters. Again, thank you for expressing your interest in the future development of Southold Town. Very truly yours, HENRY E. RAYNOR, JR. , CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD ' / ti - ~' By' Susa~ 4/Long, Secretary 'y l~o Henry Raynor, Chair~an Board of Appeals Southoid ToYm Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 29 ~..~arch, 1983 · · Box 224 New Suffolk, N.Y. 11956 Dear Henry Ra.y//or: Certainly you have driven by my place in New Suffolk and exchanged waves with me often enough to know that I would be against a~z such development plan as Kenniff's. I spend too much time on ny front porch to take any interference with my sight-line lying down. Please find enclosed ~ letters to DEC, the Suffolk County Planning Commission, your Board, the eddtor of The Suffolk Times, for your filing against the tdme you p$'ople take up the matter. There are enough of us vocal types so that the develcpers will have a real fight on their hands. I look forward to hearing from you in eric: scads of stuff Sincerely yours, omas Lowry I 28 }.Iarch~ 1983 Box New Suffolk, !'I.Y. 11956 ~. Henry P%ynor Chairman, Board of Appeals Southold Tov~n Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear i{r. Raynor: As a long-time resident of New Suffolk, I was distressed to learn of the plans of Marine Associates to build condominiums on the property presently occupied by The North Fork Shipyard, county tax number lO00-11?-8-18. There are so many salt-water encursions into local New Suffolk wells (you must remember that we are almost completely surrounded by water in this little hamlet of ours), that I was quite surprised to learn of Kenniff's plans. The twenty-four units that he hopes to buLld would pull about lO,C00 gallons per day out of our skimpy little aquifer, aud the development would have to go quite far west in order to even think ofgetting enough ~veet water to supply the thirsty big city folks, to say nothing of non-domestic consumption (larvas, car-washings, etc. ) or of just where those lO,O00 plus gallons of sewage would end up -- leaching into the bay and into the wells of those of us v~o already live in the co~mmunity. And just what sm I to lock at when I go out onto my porch -- almost 500 feet of barracks almost forty feet high, considering the amount of fill which the developers want to bring onto the site. And this doesn't confront at all the other ~tters such as noise, traffic, parking, and suchlike. Kenniff and his fellow investors are thinkinE of adding some forty percent to the New Suffolk population, ~ll at once and all in one concentrated area. We just can't digest such a change, and I hope that you and the other members of your board will quietly and firmly shut dorm the am~tions of these people who want to turn New Suffolk into something that it was never meant to be -- a kind of North Fork Niami Beach. I look fo~vard to hearing your thoughts on this matter. Sincerely yours, Regulatory Affairs Department of l~nviro~ment~l Conservation Stony ~ro~k Ca~pus, Re~ion 1, Bldg. 40 3tony Brook, New York 1179~ 11 March, 1983 Box 224 New Suffolk, N.Y. 1195 As a lon!~-time resident of New Suffolk in Eastern Long Island I was distressed to learn in the current issue of The Mattituck Watchman that the owner of the l~orth Pork Shipyard, James A. Kenniff, president of ~'arine Associ~tes, has applied for permission to erect twenty-four conCominiums on his property in New Suffolk (the county tax n~nber of the property in question is 1000-Il7-8-18, and I enclose a copy of the ~ap in question). T am addressing myself to you and to your department not be- cause of the obvious fact that such an enterprise will despoil the character of the hamlet which my family and I have come to love, but because of the fact that the proposition involves ecological matters which are a proper concern of you and ~our department. I believe t}zat not a single dwelling or business east of Firat Street in New Suffolk draws its drinking water from a well point on its o~n lan~, but instead has to draw its supply from points on other land to the west. The shipyard itself, for ex~01e, and the GalleyHo restauran; on the shipyard ~operty employs points on land to the west, specifically on land the tax number of which is 1000-117-8-13. And I know that the owner off at least one lot on t~e west side of First Street, specificslly 1000-117-9-26, draws his water from property on the west side of Second Street, specifically 1000-117-9-23. The point that I ma~{e is that there is no water to be had east of First Street which would be sufficient to su~.ply twenty-four condo- miniums, and that moving[ the points to the west would only deprive alreaCy existing propert~ owners of their share of the already endangere supply of sweet water. Such a project would also greatly increase the possibility of salt water intrusion into the wells of current residents of th~ neighborhood. Furthermore, the specter of condominiums dumping their sewage into Peconic Bay (which is what would happen, no matter where the new cess pools might be placed on Kenniff's property) or into the already- existing wells of their neighbors, is enough to sour thoughtful residents completely on the idea of a large increase in the number of New Sui~blk dwelling units -- there are only 250 of us full-time resid~ in this tiny community. I hope that you will take my exceptions as seriously as they are intended, and that you will quickly put the kibosh on Kenniff's idea. Sincerely yodrs, 29 March, 1983 Box 22h New Suffolk, N.Y. 11956 Mr. Troy Gustavson, Editor The Suffolk Times ~,.Iain Street Gr.~enport, ~7.Y. 11944 Dear ~r. Gustavson: You have received a number of letters from your readers relating to the proposed condominium development in New Suffolk. This is another such, from another resident of New Suffolk who does not want the area to become despoiled by high concentrations of housing. This one proposes to add about 40% to the population of our little hamlet, a hamlet where the salt water is "~lready troubling our wells and the sewage is already proving to be a problem. ~e are surrounded by water on all sides, our aquifer is already strained to the limit, and we just cannot withstand many more people added to our population. Furthermore, the proposed three-story apartments would tower almost forty feet above ground level, quite blocking many of us from our accustomed views of the Bay. And I do not even mention other problems such as traffic, noise, automobile parking, and suchlike~ which by themselves would completely alter the character of our community. Our precious quality of life by its very nature c~nnot be extended to large numbers of people. To pretend otherwise is unrealistic. Sincerely yours, Thomas Lowry Anne Lowry Chairman Suffolk Co~uuty PTanning Commission Veterans ~emorial Highway Hauppauge, N.Y. ll?8? 28 March, 1983 Box 224 N~v Suffolk, N.Y. 11956 Dear Sir: As a long-time resident of New Suffolk, I was distressed to learn in recent newspaper stories in The Suffolk Times and The Nattituck Watchman that James A. Eenniff acting as Marine Associates is planning to build twenty-four large condominium units on the bayfront property presently occupied by The North Fork Shipyard and several other local establishments (the county tax number of the parcel in question is 1OOO-117-8-18). Kenniff's application is presently pendiug before the Regulatory Affairs Division of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation where it has (~istakenly, in my view) been classified as a class three affair as being of negligible envdronmental impact. There are several considerations I should like to bring to your attention. First, that the proposed development would use at least lO, O00 gallons of water just for domestic purposes each and every day -- and this in a location in which there have been many salt water incursions into the local water table -- most of which would ultimately leach into the adjacent bay as sewage. (I know of no well point on land situated to the East of First Street which produces anything better than brackish water. Indeed, some points to the west of First Street do so as well.) Obviously, those of us who are already residents of the hamlet would suffer from any such development, either from having our wells po~ted by the new sources of sewage or from having the already slim aquifer on which we draw depleted. Our present popula- tion is abcu~ 250 year-round residents, and the sudden influx of about a hundred high- rolling big-city second-homers would increase our small population by scmething like 40% -- each unit of the proposed development would sell for several hundreds ~f thousands of dollars. The sketches of the development which I have seen call for the units to stretch from North to South ahost 500 feet and almost 40 feet high, amounting to something like a great w~ll of China along much of the eastern border of the co~nunity, depriving us of the water views we have come to love and to regard as part of our environment. I am not addressing myself to other problems such as parking of cars, noise, traffic, and the like, which would substantially alter the ambiance of our little con~nunity even if there were no other problems. I urge you to disapprove this development when it comes before your commission. Sincerely yours, Thomas Lowry JUDITII T. TERRY TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OI' VIT~.L SI \IISrlCS OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD April 6~ 1983 Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 Mr. Henry E. Raynor, Jr.~ Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Hall Southold~ New York 11971 Dear Henry: The Town Board discussed your letters of March 29th in which you requested disclosure statements from the applicants of Dalchet Corp. and Marine Associates, Inc. It was the decision of the Town Board that such a request should come from the Planning Board. With relation to the "Town Board's reassessment of the Environmental Assessment Form for accurate compliance"~ on Marine Associates~ Inc., the Town Board, as lead agency, will study this further. Very truly yours~ Judith T. Terry Southold Town Clerk JUDITH T. TERRY TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR Ol' VITAL ~1 ,\1 IS[[(S OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD April 6, 1983 Town Hail, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 Mr. Henry E. Raynor, Jr., Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Dear Henry: The Town Board discussed your letters of March 29th in which you requested disclosure statements from the applicants of Dalchet Corp. and Marine Associates, Inc. It was the decision of the Town Board that such a request should come from the Planning Board. With relation to the "Town Board's reassessment of the Environmental Assessment Form for accurate compliance", on Marine Associates~ Inc.~ the Town Board~ as lead agency~ will study this further. Very truly yours, Judith T. Terry Southold Town Clerk Mrs. George R. Harrison 228 Clayton Road' Scarsdale, N. Y- 10583 ~ 5 ~g'~ CHARLE~ R. CUDD¥ ESSEKS, HEFTER, CUDDY ~ ANgel COUNSELORS AT LAW March 31, 1983 Planning Board of the Town of Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Attn.: Mr. Henry Raynor, Chairman Re.: Marine Associates Inc. Gentlemen: This is to advise you that the undersigned, with regard to a proposed zoning change for property at New Suffolk in the Town of Southold, represents Marine Associates Inc. Enclosed herewith please find affidavit of James A. Kenniff, submitted for the purpose of establishing the officers, directors and shareholders of Marine Associates Inc., the petitioner in the anticipated zone change. I request the opportunity, on behalf of the petitioners, together with the corporation's engineer, John Mahoney, and its environmental consultant, Roy Haje, to meet with the Board or is representatives to discuss the proposed amendment. Very truly yours, William W. Esseks WWE/F ENCL. AFFIDAVIT STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ) SS.: JAMES A. KENNIFF, being duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. That he resides at Youngs Avenue, Southold, New York, and that he is the President of and a Director of Marine Associates Inc., a New York business corporation with its principal place of business at New Suffolk, New York. 2. Marine Associates is the petitioner for a proposed change of zone from Light Industry to Multiple Dwelling I for property consisting of approximately 3.67 acres at New Suffolk, Southold, New York. 3. Pursuant to the provisions of Section A106-40 B of the Code of the Town of Southold, I advise and represent to the Town of Southold that the officers of Marine Associates Inc. are as follows: James A. Kenniff Southold, New York - President Jonathan Rosen - vice President New York City, New York Caleb Lanning - Secretary Falls Church, Virginia; and that the directors of the corporation are: James A. Kenniff, Fred C. Smith, Jonathan Rosen, Caleb Lanning, Thomas Uhlinger, Southold, New York; Glen Head, New York; New York, New York; Falls Church, Va.; Cutchogue, New York. h,.~for th to the best of mv knowledge and belief, and my information are based on the stockbooks of the and ~ts other records. 4. The shareholders of said corporation are as set upon Schedule "A" annexed hereto. I affirm the foregoing under penalties of perjury knowledge and corporation DATED: March 31, 1983 A. Kennff? SCHEDULE "A" One of' ~wo 'P&ges Cert. No. 3 4 5 6 8 9 SHAREHOLDERS, Name J. A. Kenniff North Fork Shipyard New Suffolk, NY 11956 Okerson, Ann P. 815 Pebble Drive Greensboro, N.C. 27410 Joseph Pasternak 11 Knoll Lane Levittown, NY Chemistry Hall Labs P.O. Box 255 Bradentown, Fla. Richard P. Hoffman 3256 Detroit Ave. Toledo, Ohio Marcell or Jean Mooney 6439 Ensley Lane Kansas City, Kansas T. Jackson Laughlin 10338 Woodbridge North Hollywood, Ca. Dorothy S. Goldman 215 East 68th Street Apt. 22F New York, New York 10021 Fred C. Smith 197 Brookville Lane Old Brookville Glen Head, NY 11545 MARINE ASSOCIATESt INC. Cert. No. Name 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Fred C. Smith III 197 Brookville Lane Old Brookville Glen Head, NY 11545 C.B. Laning 6404 Lakeview Drive Falls Church, Va. 22041 Virgil S. Thurlow 3722 King Arthur Rd. Annandale, Va. John J. Desiderie 22 Greenbriar Rd. Turnersville, NJ Robert E. Adams'on 931 Eve Street Delray Beach, Fla.33444 Emily A. Brock c/o Mr. R. Earl Warren P.A. 359 West Deerborn St. Englewood, Fla. 33533 Mrs. E. J. zi~nerman 6123 Stoneham Lane McLean, Va. Hubert and Lorraine St. Onge 3655 Red Bud Ct. Downers Grove, Ill. 60515 Frank Virden c/o C.B. Laning 6404 Lakeview Drive Falles Church, Va.22041 ~e~o No. 19 20 21 22 23 Name Francis W. Smith 197 Brookville Lane Old Brookville Glen Head, NY 11545 George Walczyk 197 Brookville Lane Old Brookville Glen Head, NY 11545 Lawrence C. Oakley 13647 Calais Dr. Del Mar, Ca. 92014 Alan A. Smith 139 Merryman Ct. Annapolis, Md. 21403 Annette G. Button 4243 E. Sierra Madre Apt. E Fresno, Ca. Richard L. Wakeman 945 Nineth St. Apt 10 Santa Monica, Ca. Jonathan P. Rosen 40 East 69th Street New York, New York 10021 Susan M. Kenniff Youngs Avenue Southold, New York J. Darby Kenniff Youngs Avenue Southold, New York Thomas J. Uhlinger P.O. Box 82A New Suffolk, New York Lloyd C. And Therasa Thornsbury Pine Neck Road Southold, New York 3O 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Name Mrs. Charles Weakley 3541 Hamlet Place Chevy Chase, Md 20015 Herbert Buschman 157 Park Blvd. Malvern, NY Stephen R. Button Nyack, NY /~ Edna Wisan 1001 Woodycrest Ave. B[onx, NY 10452 Nonsanna H. Wakeman 485 Toyopa Drive Pacific Palisades, Ca. 90272 William E. Spicer 985 Mayfield Avenue Stanford, Ca. 94305 James M. Kenniff 72 Southside Avenue Freeport, New York Cornelia J. Davies 4005 Hermitage Rd. Richmond, Va. 23219 Bear, Stearns & Co. 55 Water Street New York, NY 10041 )60782 epw ESSEKS, HEFTER, CUDDY ~ ANGEL COUNSELORS AT LAW RIVEF~HEAD, NY. 119OI WATER M~lL OFFICE March 31, 1983 Planning Board of the Town of Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Attn.: Mr. Henry Raynor, Chairman Re.: Marine Associates Inc. Gentlemen: This is to advise you that the undersigned, with regard to a proposed zoning change for property at New Suffolk in the Town of Southold, represents Marine Associates Inc. Enclosed herewith please find affidavit of James A. Kenniff, submitted for the purpose of establishing the officers, directors and shareholders of Marine Associates Inc., the petitioner in the anticipated zone change. I request the opportunity, on behalf of the petitioners, together with the corporation's engineer, John Mahoney, and its environmental consultant, Roy Haje, to meet with the Board or is representatives to discuss the proposed amendment. Very truly yours, william W. Esseks WWE/F ENCL. STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ) AFFIDAVIT SS.: JAMES A. KENNIFF, being duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. That he resides at Youngs Avenue, Southold, New York, and that he is the President of and a Director of Marine Associates Inc., a New York business corporation with its principal place of business at New Suffolk, New York. 2. Marine Associates is the petitioner for a proposed change of zone from Light Industry to Multiple Dwelling I for property consisting of approximately 3.67 acres at New Suffolk, Southold, New York. 3. Pursuant to the provisions of Section A106-40 B of the Code of the Town of Southold, I advise and represent to the Town of Southold that the officers of Marine Associates Inc. are as follows: James A. Kenniff Southold, New York - President Jonathan Rosen - Vice President New York City, New York Caleb Lanning - Secretary Falls Church, Virginia; and that the directors of the corporation are: James A. Kenniff, Southold, New York; Fred C. Smith, Glen Head, New York; Jonathan Rosen, New York, New York; Caleb Lanning, Falls Church, Va.; Thomas Uhlinger, Cutchogue, New York. 4. The shareholders of said corporation are as set ~ ~ ~forth upon Schedule "A" annexed hereto. ~ ~-~ I affirm the foregoing under penalties of perjury ~z~ ~o ~ . z oo~ u~to the best of my knowledge and belief, and my knowledge and ~ -. ~ ~ F Information are based on the stockbooks of the corporation ,~ _u _ s .~. ~ ~ 6~ and its other records. DATED: March 31, 1983 6~ ,F/~James A. Kennff'f SCHEDULE "A" One of Two Pages 3 4 5 6 8 9 Cert. No. 1 SHAREHOLDERSr Name J. A. Kenniff North Fork Shipyard New Suffolk, NY 11956 Okerson, Ann P. 815 Pebble Drive Greensboro, N.C. 27410 Joseph Pasternak 11 Knoll Lane Levittown, NY Chemistry Hall Labs P.O. Box 255 Bradentown, Fla. Richard P. Hoffman 3256 Detroit Ave. Toledo, Ohio Marcell or Jean Mooney 6439 Ensley Lane Kansas City, Kansas T. Jackson Laughlin 10338 Woodbridge North Hollywood, Ca. Dorothy S. Goldman 215 East 68th Street Apt. 22F New York, New York 10021 Fred C. Smith 197 Brookville Lane Old Brookville Glen Head, NY 11545 MARINE ASSOCIATESt INC Cert. No. Name 10 Fred C. Smith III 197 Brookville Lane Old Brookville Glen Head, NY 11545 11 C.B. Laning 6404 Lakeview Drive Falls Church, Va. 22041 12 Virgil S. Thurlow 3722 King Arthur Rd. Annandale, Va. 13 John J. Desiderie 22 Greenbriar Rd. Turnersville, NJ 14 15 Robert E. Adamson 931 Eve Street Delray Beach, Fla.33444 Emily A. Brock c/o Mr. R. Earl Warren P.A. 359 West Deerborn St. Englewood, Fla. 33533 16 Mrs. E. J. Zimmerman 6123 Stoneham Lane McLean, Va. 17 Hubert and Lorraine St. Onge 3655 Red Bud Ct. Downers Grove, Ill. 60515 18 Frank Virden c/o C.B. Laning 6404 Lakeview Drive Falles Church, Va.22041 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Name' Francis W. Smith 197 Brookville Lane Old Brookville Glen Head, NY 11545 George Walczyk 197 Brookville Lane Old Brookville Glen Head, NY 11545 Lawrence C. Oakley 13647 Calais Dr. Del Mar, Ca. 92014 Alan A. Smith 139 Merryman Ct. Annapolis, Md. 21403 Annette G. Button 4243 E. Sierra Madre Apt. E Fresno, Ca. Richard L. Wakeman 945 Nineth St. Apt 10 Santa Monica, Ca. Jonathan p. Rosen 40 East 69th Street New York, New York 10021 Susan M. Kenniff Youngs Avenue Southold, New York 11~ J. Darby Kenniff Youngs Avenue Southold, New York Thomas J. Uhlinger P.O. Box 82A New Suffolk, New York Lloyd C. And Therasa Thornsbury Pine Neck Road Southold, New York Cert. No. 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Name Mrs. Charles Weakley 3541 Hamlet Place Chevy Chase, Md 20015 Herbert Buschman 157 Park Blvd. Malvern, NY Stephen R. Button Nyack, NY i~ Edna Wisan 1001 Woodycrest Ave. Bronx, NY 10452 Nonsanna H. Wakeman 485 Toyopa Drive Pacific Palisades, Ca. 90272 William E. Spicer 985 Mayfield Avenue Stanford, Ca. 94305 James M. Kenniff 72 Southside Avenue Freeport, New York Cornelia J. Davies 4005 Hermitage Rd. Richmond, Va. 23219 Bear, Stearns & Co. 55 Water Street New York, NY 10041 060782 epw HENRY E. RAYNOR, Jr., Chairman JAMES WALL BENNETT ORLOWSKI, Jr. GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, Jr. WILLIAM F. MULLEN, Jr. Southold, N.Y. 11971 March 29, 1983 TELEPHONE 765-1938 Mrs. Judith T. Terry Southold Town Clerk Southold Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Re: Marine Associates, Inc. Change of Zone Dear Mrs. Terry: The following action was taken by the Southold Town Plan- ning Board, Monday, March 28, 1983. RESOLVED that prior to the Planning Board preparing an official report defining the conditions on the petition of Marine Associatest Inc. for a change of zone from "C" Light Industrial District to "M-l" General Multiple Residence Dis- trict on certain property at New Suffolk, that a disclosure statement listing all principles of the Association be submit- ted to the Planning Board and Town Board's reassessment of the Environmental Assessment Form for accurate compliance. Comments with regard to the Environmental Assessment Form are available if requested. cc: Town Supervisor Town Councilmen Town Attorney Very truly yours, HENRY E. RAYNOR, JR. , CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Susan J~ Secretary , 1983 Box 22h New Suffolk, N.Y. 119~6 ~nryRaynor, Chairman of Appeals old Town Hall old, N.Y. 11971 Her~ry R~y~nor: Certainly you have driven by ~y place in uffolk and exchanged waves with me often enough to that I wo~ld be against any such development plan as ff's. I spend too much time on my front porch to take nterference with ray sight-line lying down. Please find enclosed ~Y letters to DEC, ;uffolk County Planning Commission, your Board, the ~r of The Suffolk Times~for your filing against the you people take up the matter. There are enough of us vocal types so the develcpers will have a real fight on their hands. I look forward to hearing from you in scads of stuff Sincerely yours, 28 March, 1985 Box 22~ New Suffolk, N.Y. 119~6 L~r. Henry Raynor Chairman, Board of Appeals Southold Town Hall Southold, N.Y. llg?l APR 1 E'I] Dear ~r. Raynor: As a long-time resident of New Suffolk, I was distressed to learn of the plans of ~arine Associates to build condominiums on the property presently occupied by The North Fork Shipyard, county tax number 1000-117-8-18. There are so many salt-water encursions into local New Suffolk wells (you must remember that we are almost completely surrounded by water in this little hamlet of ours), that I was quite surprised to learn of Kenniff's plans. The twenty-four units that he hopes to build would pull about lO,OOO gallons per day out of our skimpy little aquifer, and the development would have to go quite far west in order to even think ofgetting enough sweet water to supply the thirsty big city folks, to say nothing of non-domestic consumption (lawns, car-washings, etc. ) or of just where those lO,O00 plus gallons of sewage would end up -- leaching into the bay and into the wells of those of us who already live in the community. And just what am I to look at when I go out onto my porch -- almost 500 feet of barracks almost forty feet high, considering the amount of fill which the developers want to bring onto the site. And this doesn't confront at all the other matters such as noise, traffic, parking, and suchlike. Kenniff and his fellow investors are thinking of adding some forty percent to the New Suffolk population, all at once and all in one concentrated area. We just can't digest such a change, and I hope that you and the other members of your board will quietly and firmly shut down the ambitions of these people who want to turn New Suffolk dnto something that it was never meant to be -- a kind of North Fork Niami Beach. I look foz~vard to hearing your thoughts on this matter. Sincerely yours, Regulatory Affairs Department of ]~nvironmental Conservation Stony Brook Campus, Re~ion l, Bldg. 40 Stony Brook, New York 1179~ 11 March, 1983 Box 224 New Suffolk, N.Y. 11956 D~ar Sir: As ~ lon!~-time resident of New Suffolk in Eastern Long Island I was mistressed to learn in the current issue of The Mattituck Watchman that th~ owner of the North Pork Shipyard, James A. Kenniff, president of ~'arine Associates, has applied for permission to erect twenty-four conGominiums on his property in New Suffolk (the county tax n~nber of the property in question is 1000-117-8-18, and I enclose a copy of the ~ap in question). 5 am addressing myself to you and to your department not be- cause of the obvious fact that such an enterprise will despoil the character of the aamlet which my family and I have come to love, but because of the fact that the proposition involves ecological matters whic~ are u proper concern of you and ~our department. I believe t}~at not a single dwelling or business east of Firmt Street in New Suffolk draws its drinking water from a well point on its own land, but instead has to draw its supply from points on other land to the west. The shipyard itself, for exa~le, and the GalleyHo restaurant on the shipyard ~mperty employs points on land to the west, specifically on land the tax number of which is 1000-117-8-13. And I know that the owner of at least one lot on the west side of First Street, specifically 1000-117-9-26, draws his water from property on the west side of Second Street, specifically 1000-117-9-23. The point that I make is that there is nc water to be had east of First Street which would be sufficient to su~ply twenty-four condo- miniums, an~ that moving[ the points to the west would only deprive alreamy existing propert, owners of their share of the already endangere, supply of sweet water. Such a project would also greatly increase the possibility of salt water intrusion into the wells of current residents of th£ neighborhood. Furthermore, the specter of condominiums dumping their sewage into Peconic Bay (which is what would happen, no matter where the new cess pools might be placed on Kenniff's property) or into the already- existing wells of their neighbors, is enough to sour thoughtful residents completely on the idea of a large increase in the number of New Su~blk dwelling units -- there are only 250 of us full-time residents in this tiny community. I hope that you will take my exceptions as seriously as they are intended, and that you will quickly put the kibosh on Kenniff's idea. Sincerely yours, 29 Narch, 1983 Box 22~ New Suffolk, N.Y. 11956 Mr. Troy Gustavson, Editor The Suffolk Times Main Street Greenport, N.Y. 11944 Dear Mr. Gustavson: You have received a number of letters from your readers relating to the proposed condominium development in New Suffolk. This is another such, from another resident of New Suffolk who does not want the area to become despoiled by high concentrations of housing. This one proposes to add about 40% to the population of our little hamlet, a hamlet where the salt water is already troubling our wells and the sewage is already proving to be a problem. We are surrounded by water on all sides, our aquifer is already strained to the l~m~t, and we just cannot withstand many more people added to our population. Furthermore, the proposed three-story apartments would tower almost forty feet above ground level, quite blocking many of us from our accustomed views of the Bay. And I do not even mention other problems such as traffic, noise, automobile parking, and suchlike~ which by themselves would completely alter the character of our community. Our precious quality of life by its very nature cannot be extended to large numbers of people. To pretend otherwise is unrealistic. Sincerely yours, Thomas Lowry Anne Lowry Chairman Suffolk County Planning Commission Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, N.Y. ll?8? 28 March, 1983 Box 224 New Suffolk, N.Y. n956 Dear Sir: As a long-time resident of New Suffolk, I was distressed to learn in recent newspaper stories in The Suffolk Times and The Mattituck Watchman that James A. Kenniff acting as Marine Associates is planning to build twenty-four large condominium units on the bayfront property presently occupied by The North Fork Shipyard and several other local establishments (the county tax number of the parcel iu question is 1000-117-8-18). Kenniff's application is presently pendiug before the Regulatory A~fairs Division of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation where it has (mistakenly, in my view) been classified as a class three affair as being of negligible environmental impact. There are several considerations I should like to bring to your attention. First, that the proposed development would use at least lO,000 gallons of water just for domestic purposes each ~nd every day -- and this in a location in which there have been many salt water incursions into the local water table -- most of which wo~_ld ultimately leach into the adjacent bay as sewage. (I know of no well point on land situated to the East of First Street which produces anything better than brackish water. Iudeed, some points to the west of First Street do so as well.) Obviously, those of us who are already residents of the hamlet would suffer from &r~ such development, either from having our wells po~ted by the new sources of sewage or from having the already slim aquifer on which we draw depleted. Our present popula- tion is abou{ 250 year-round residents, and the sudden influx of about a hundred high- rolling big-city second-homers wo~ld increase our small population by s~ething like 40% -- each unit of the proposed development would sell for several hundreds ~f thousands of dollars. The sketches of the development which ! have seen call for the units to stretch from North to South almost 500 feet and almost 40 feet high, amounting to something like a great wall of China along much of the eastern border of the community, depriving us of the water views we have come to love and to regard as part of our environment. I am not addressing myself to other problems such as parking of cars, noise, traffic, and the like, which would substantially alter the ambiance of our little con~nunity even if there were no ether problems. I urge you to disapprove this development when it comes before your commission. Sincerely yours, Thomas Lowry JUDITIt T. TERRY TOWN CLERK OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 March 9, 1983 i 0 REB'D Mr. Henry E. Raynor~ Jr.~ Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Southold~ New York 11971 Dear Henry: Transmitted herewith is petition of Marine Associgtes~ Inc. requesting a change of zone from "C" Light Industrial District to "M-I" General Multiple Residence District on certain property at New Suffolk, New York. Your Board is hereby instructed to prepare an official report defining the conditions described in said petition and determine the area so affected with your recommendations. Very truly yours~ Judith T. Terry Southold Town Clerk Attachment r TOWN OF SOUTHOLD IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF FOR A C1L~kNGE, MODIFICATION OR AMENDMENT OF THE BUILDING ZONE ORDIN- ANCE OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK. BLOCK .OT- TO THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD: .............................................................. -/./'. ........... .X:.... (insert name of petitioner) Suffolk County, New York, the undersigned, am the owner of certain real property situated at /t/.~,14~. ~¥,~0..~..~..~...' ~.. and more particularly bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the easterly side of First Street at the southwest cor~ of the premises herein described where the division line between said premises a_ the land now or formerly of the Radel Oyster Company adjoining on the south intersects the said easterly side of First Street; running thence North 6 degrees 54 minutes 30 seconds East along the easterly side of First Street, 211.02 feet to the corner formed by the intersection of the easterly side of First Street with the southerly side of Main Street; thence South 83 degrees 45 minutes East along the southerly side of Main Street 193.50 feet to the southeast corner of said Main Street; thence North 6 degrees 15 minutes East along the easterly end of Main Street, 49.50 feet to the northeast corner of Main Street; thence North 83 degree 45 minutes West aldng the northerly side of Main Street, 192.94 feet to the corne~ formed by the intersection of the northerly side of Main Street with the easterly side of First Street; thence along the easterly side of First Street, North 6 degrc 54 minutes 30 seconds East 272.45 feet to the land formerly of David H. King; thence South 83 degrees 47 minutes 30 seconds East along said last mentioned lan to Peconic Bay; thence in a general southerly direction along Peconic Bay to the northerly line of land of Radel Oyster Company; thence along said land of Radel Oyster Companyj NOr(h 83 degrees 05 minutes 03 seconds West to the easterly side of First Street at the point or place of beginning. TOGETHER with all the right, title and interest of the parties of the first part in and to several grants of land under water directly in front of these premises c on v_e~y~e d. .... ~ 2. I do hereby p~tit--{on the Town Board of the TOW,{ of Southold to change, modify and amend the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, including the Building Zone Maps heretofore made a part thereof, as follows: 3. Such reqnest is made for thc follo~ving reasons: STATE OF NEW YORK, ) ) SS:- COUNTY OF SUFFOLK, ) , BEING DULY SWORN, deposes and says that he is the petitioner in the within action; that he has read the foregoing Petition and kzmws the contents thereof; that the same is true to his (her) own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on iuformation and belief, and that as to those matters be believes it to be true. Sworn to before me this ...~.. day of...~?..t~4.~..q...~. ...... 197.':? THOMAS 3. UHLII',IGE~ JqOTARY pUBLIC, SJate ot blew No Ot - 4733066 TOWN OF SOUTIfOLD N1AR 10 REC'D EAF ENVIRO;IMENTAL ASSESSMENT -'PART I Project In formJtion ~OTICE: Th~s ~ncument ,~ des~cned to assist in determining whether t~e action proposed ma), have a significant efiect on t?e er~vlrc',~nt. Please cor~)ete the entire Data Sheet. Answers to these questions will be considered as part of the ~o)~cation for aPPrOval and ~y be subject to further verification eno public review. Proviae any additional m~or~r~C~on you believe will be neede~ to complete PARTS 2 and 3. It ~s exoecteo shat cGrDlnticn of the EAF wil) be dependent on information currently avai)ab)e and wil) not involve new studies, research pr invescioation, If information requirino sucO additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specify each instance. · ;~AME OF PROJECT: NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER (If Different) (Name) A~DRESS AND N~JtE OF APPLICANT: (S~reet) (Sc~et) (Zip) ~escribe type of ~mject or action) ~ ~~ ~~ DESCRIPTION (Briefly (PL[ASE COHPLETE EACH QUESTION - Indicate N.A. if m~t applicable) A. SITE DESCRIPTION (Physical setting of overall p~oject, both develoned and undeveloped areas) ). Genera) character of the land: r~nerally uniform slope ))< Generally uneven and ro)linq or irregular 2. Present land use: Urban , Industrial ~._ , Corrrnercial , Suburoan Rural Forest , Agriculture , Other ' -' - -' 3. Tote)acreage of project area:~kc~cres.~,~7.~.~ ~.~~ ~ ~-.~ ~ Approximate acreage: Presently After Completion ~ Presently After Comoletion Meadow or Brushland .~cres ~o~F~cres dater Surface Area ~. ~ acres ~,/O ac-~s Forested ~Jcres ~cres ~ge:a:ed (roc~, earth or fill) ~cres ~acres Tidal as net Articles '~acr~ sdrfaces ~_acres L~acres Places? _Yes ~o a ]l. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e. cliffs, dunes, other geological fomations - Yes ..~ NO. (Describe 12. Is the project site presently used by the co~m~unity or neighbornood as an open space or recreation area - Yes ~ NO. 13. ~oes the present site offer or include scenic views or vistas known to be important to the CO. unity? Yes ~ NO 14. Streams within or contiguous to project area: a, Name of stream and name of river to which it is tributary 15. ~Lakes, Ponds, Net)and areas within or contiguous to project area: a. Na~ _ /Y~ ~ : b. Size (in acres) )6. What is the dominant )and use and zoning classification within a 1/4 mile radius of the project (e.g. single family residential, R-2 and the sca e of development (e.g. 2 story), PROJECT DESCRiPTiON ). Physical di~nsions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate} a. Total contiguous acreage owned by project sponsor ~'~ acres. b. Project acreage developed: ~res initially; ~ ,ires ultimately. c. P~ject acreage to remain unaeveloped ~. i~ . d, Length of project, in miles: ~/~ (if appropriate) e. If p~Je~ is an expansion of existing, indicate percent of expansion proposed: building square foot- age .~ ; developed acreage of off-s~r~t oar~ng spaces ex~stlnQ , ~J~ ; proposed _ ,~ ~4~Y~ ~ Maximum vehicular trios generated per hour /~-'~ (upon c~pletion of project) h. If residential: Number and type of housinq units: gne Family Two Family Ultimate i. If: Mu) tiple Family e~gnbornood-City-Regional Estimated Emoloyment TOtal n~gnt of tallest nrooosed structure _ _~.~,'~/._feet. Conddminium 2. How much natural material (i.e. rock, earth, etc.) will be ren~ved from the site - /~L)/Y'~ tons cubic yards. 3. How many acres of veqetat~on (trees. shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from si~e -~.~v~ acres.~'~J'j 4. W~II an./ mature forest~wer IOO years old) or other locally-important veoetationObe re~ve~Jby ~n)~m a. Total number of phases anticipated No. b. Anticipated date of con~encement phase ~ de~lition) c. Approximate completion date final phase d. Will blasting occur during construction? N~m~ber of jobs generated: during construction month month Is bhase ] financially dependent on subseouent mhases? ~ ; after project is complete O/b,~__ Number of jobs eliminateq by this project .~ . Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? Yes No. If yes, explain: 12. a. Is surface or subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? _.V,'j~' les b. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) ~ c. If surface d~sposal name of stream into which effluent will be discharged ].~¢~,'(~ 13.~.Will surface area of existing lakes, ponds streams, bays or other surface water~ays be increased or .~' ~'"~,~'oocreasea ~y proposal~ Yes ,X NO 14. Is ~roJec~ or any pcrt~on of project located in the 1OO year flooq plain? ,2(' Yes NO 15. a. Does project involve disposal of solid waste? Yes ~J~No 16. 17. 18. b. If yes. will an existing solid waste disnosal facility be used? Yes No c. If yes, give name: t location d. Uil) any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? Yes Will prn]ect use herbicides or pesticides? Yes ~ NO Will project routinely produce odors {m~re than one hour get day)? Yes ~ NO Project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambience noise levels? Yes ~ No Will Will project result in an increase in energy use? __Yes ~J~'NO. If yes, indicate type(s) 20. 21. 22. Total anticipated water usage per day _~'~.~(~qals/day. d. gals/minute. A/o Z6. Approvals: Approval ~equlred (Yes, Ho) (Type) Submittal Approval (Date) (Date) City, Town, Village Board City, Town, Villaoe Planning Board City, Town, Zoning Board City, County Health Oepartn~nt Other local agencies Other regional agencies State Agencies Federal Agencies C. INFORMATIONAL DETAILS Attach any additional information as n~y be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse tmp~cts associated with the proposal, ple6se discuss such impacts and the measures which can be taken to mitigate or avold them. PREPARER'S SIGNATURE: TITLE: REPRESENTING: DATE: -4- EAF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENZ - PART Project Impacts and Their Magnitude General hl~s'-~tlo~ fq~-!d Carefully) - In compjec~r,q cn~ ~orm the reviewer should be guided by the question: Have my decisions and determinations been reascnae]e? The rewewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst. - Identifying that an effect will be potentially large (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessarily sian~ficant. ~:y larqe effect must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine significance, By iaent~fying an e~ect in celumn 2 simply asks that it be looked at further. - The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of effects and wherever Possible the threshn of m~'~ni~uJe that would trigger a response in column 2. The examples are generally applicable throughout the State and for most situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be ~re appropriate for a Potential Large Impact rating. - Each project, on each site, in each locality, will vary. Therefere, the examples have been offered as guidanc They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each nuestion. - The pumper of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question. INSTRUCTIONS (Read Carefully) a. Answer each of the 18 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there will be any effect. b. Ma~be answers should be considered as Yes answers. c. If answering 'fps to a ouestion then check the appropriate box (column 1 or 2} to indicate the ootential 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 ). d. If reviewer has doubt about the size of the impact :~en consider the impact as potentially large and Proceed to PART 3. e. If a Potentially large impact or effect can be reduced by a change in the project to a less than large magn}tu6~, place a Yes in column 3. A No response indicates~ that such a reduction is not Possible. IMPACT ON LAND cr -r~ AS OF i. ~ILL THERE SE Ail ~.Fs~, A RESULT A PHYSICAL CHANGE TO PROJECT SITE? NO YES ¸GO Any Construstioq on slopes of 15~ or greater, (15 foot rise der 1O0 foot of lengt,:~, pr where the general slopes in the project area exceed 10%. IS'MALL TO POTENTIA r CAN IMPACT BE MODERATE LAR~iE REDUCED BY IHPACT !MPACT PROJECT CHANGE Construction on Land where the depth to the water table is less than 3 fee~, -- C~ns~ruct~on on land where bedrock is exnJsed or qenerally WI,L£ THERE BE AN EFFECT TO ANY UNIQUE OR UNIJSUAL L~NO FORMS ,~ .~-~ FOUND ON THE S)TE? (I.e. cJiff~, dunes, oeoloqical for~- (/$/~'}~ ~j 3. WILL PROJECT AFFECT ANY WATER BODY DESIGNATED AS .......... Nn YES PROTECTED7 (Under Articles 15, 24, 25 of the Envir- Q 0 onmenta] Conservation Law, Examotes that Would A:pl], to Co]u~n 2 · 4. LL PROJECT AFFECT ANY NON-PROTECTED EXISTING OR NFFI NO YES PROJECT JFF£CT SURFACE OR GROUND'~ATER A ALITY? YES ®C P~TENTIAL LARGE IMPACT CAN I'IPACT BE REDUCED BY P°OJE£T CHANGE t 'JILL PR~IJECT ALTER DRAINAGE FLQn, PATTED'IS OR SURFACE !lATER NO YES IlO YES PROJECT AFFECT AIR QUALITY? ........................... ~,~ ~ Fxa,m~)es that Iiould Apply to Column 2 Pmject will induce 1,~QO or ~ vehicle trips in any given Project will result in the incineration of ~ than I ton million BTU's per hour. WILL PROJECT AFFECT ANY THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES? E~moles that Would Apoly tO Co)u~ 2 ~eouction of one or ~ species listed on the New York or FeUeral )ist, using the site, over or near $1te or YES ®0 tHLL POQJECT SUn~ST~JTIALLY AFFECT ))(1N-THREATE~ED OR NO YES E';DANqERE~ SPECIES? ....................................... GO -7- ll. I~PACT ON HIKTO~IC ~SSOUR£ES YES W)LL PRO]EC.T I?PACT ANY SiTE OR STRUCTURE OF HISTORIC, NO I~PAFT qD~ OPEN SPACE & RECREATION 12. WILL THE PRAJECT ~F~ECT THE OUANTITY OR OUALITY OF EXISTING NO YES - .~.~ OR RECRE~TIONAL OPPORTU IT,ES ....... /~'~i/~ Examoies that houid ODDly to Column 2 The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational oooortunity. A ma]or reduc[]on Of an open space Important ~o :he cor~un~Ly. 13. '.'ILL TmERE EE ,~'~ EFFECT TO EXISTIN~ TRANSPORTATION NO YES ......... REDIjC£D q¥ PRqJf-ET C ~r~ GE 14. 15. I~DACT ON E~ERGY UILL PROJECT AFFECT THE COMMUNITIES SOURCES OF FUEL OR NO YES ENERGY SUPPLY7 ........................................... ®C) Examples that ~ould ~pDly to Column 2 Project causing greater than 5% increase in any form of energy used In municipality. Project requiring the creation or extension of an energy transm~ss)on or Supply system to serve more than 5~ single or two family residences. Other impacts: ?PACT ON NOISE WILL THERE BE OBJECTIDNABLE ODORS, NOISE, GLARE, VIBRATION NO YES or ELECTRICAL DISTURBANCE AS A RESULT OF THIS PROJECT? .... /~-~k/~-,,k Examnles that l~ould Aoely to Columo 2 Blasting within 1,5OO feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive facility. Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day). P roiect ~ill nroduce operating noise exceedinm the local ambient no~se levels for noise outside of structures. Project will remove natural barriers that would act as a noise screen. !MD~CT O! HEALTH & HA~ARD~ )(o iFS 16. 'tILL PROJECT AFFECT PUBLIC IIEALTH AND SAFETY? ............ Examples that Mould Apply to Column 2 Project will cause a risk of exglosion or release of hazardous substances (i.e. oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) ~n the event of accident or uoset conditions, Or there will he a chronic 1OW level discharge or emission. __ Prolect t~at ,~ill result in the burial of "hazardous wastes*' (1.e. toxic, :oisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritating, infectious, etc., incluOin~ wastes that are solid, semi-solid, }lqu)o or contain gases.) Storage £aclliti~s for one million or more ga)lnns of liouified natural gas or other liouids, SHALL TO POTENTIAL CAi~ IMPACT ~E )~DER~TE LARGE REDUCED BY IMPACT I'IPACT PROJECT CHANGf S ) 18. IS THERE PUBLIC CONTROCERSY CONCERNING THE PROJECT? ....... Examnles tnat ~ould Apply to Oo}umn 2 NO YES ®0 IF ^NY ACTION IA~ PART Z IS IDENTIFIED AS A POTEHTIAL LARGE IMPACT OR IF YOU CANNOT DETERNINE THE MAGNITUDE OF IMPACT, PROCEED TO PART PORTIONS OF EAF COMPLETED FOR THIS PROJECT PART I PART Upon rewew of the infor~.ation recorded on this EAF (Parts J, 2 lC'- [r:VIROI~H£NTAL ASSESSHFIiT - PART THE IHPQPTANCE GF IMP'~CTS Part 3 is prepared if one or more impact or effect is considered to be potentially larae. The amount of wrlt~nn necessary to answer Part 3 may be determined by answering the question: In briefl completing the Instructions below have I placed in this record sufficient information to indicate reasonableness of my oec~sions? INSTRUCTIOn,S Coml)lete the followinq for each impact or effect idenbified in Column 2 o~ Part 2: Briefly describe the lmpact. Describe (if apolicabte} how the impact might be mitigated or reduced to a less than larae imnact by a pro- ject cqange. Based on tme info~ation available, decide if it is reasonable to conclude that this impact is important to the min~cipa)ity (city, town or village) in which the project is located, To answer the question of importance, consider: The probability of the impact or effect occurring - The duration of the impact or effect Its irreversibility, including permanently lost resources or values ~hether the impact or effect can be controlled The regional consequence of the impact or effect Its potential divergence from local needs and goals Whether known objections to the project apol¥ CO this impact or effect. DETERHINATIO;( OF SIG~!IF!CA~iCE An action is consioered to be significant if: Ane lot r~re) imoact is determined to both larne and its (their) conseouence, hosed on the review above, is Important, PAPT III STATEH?(TS (Continue on Attachments as needed) PROOF OF MAILING OF NOTICE NAb, IE ADDRESS STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF SUFFOLK: , being duly swbrn, depbses and says that on the ~'~ d~y of /')'7/q ~ C AL ,19 ~o ~ , deponent mailed a true copy of the Notice set forth on the reverse side hereof, directed to each of the above-named persons at the addresses set opposite their respective names; tha~ the addresses set opposite the names of said persons are the addresses of said persons as shown on the cur- rent assessment roll of the Town of Southold;that said Notices were mai]ed at the United States Post Office at ~ ~-~' -~'~.' 'IL'~-O L~', t~l .~f ;that said Notices were mailed tO each of said persons by~ (registered) mail. Sworn to me this day of ~! ~4/~c'FL ,19 ~ ~ . THOMAS J. UHLING£R NOTARY PUBL!C, Stale of N~Jw York No. OI - 473306.5 Commissiofi ExpJr:s /A~.rch 30, I)~'~jL TOWN BOARD, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD In the Matter of the Peri[ion of to the Town Board of the Town of Southold. TO: NOTICE YOU ARE HEREBY GIVEN NOTICE: 1. That it is the intention of the undersigned to petition the Town Board of the Town of Southold to 2. That the property which is the subject or, he Petition is located adjacent to your property and is des- 3. That the property which is the subject of such ~etition is located in the following zoning district: 4. That by such Petition, the undersigned will request that the above-described property be placed in following zone district classification: /J'~ -- / ~ c~ LT-, ~2L~ - ~7~ ~c/ ~z=' ~ ¥ c~ $. That within five days from the date hereof, a written Petition requesting the relief specified above will be fi]ed in the Southold Town Clerk's Office at Main Road, $outhoid, 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 Post Office Address: JUDITH T. TERRY TOWN CLI;R K OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 March 9, 1983 MAR 10 Mr. Henry E. Raynor, Jr., Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Southold, New York 11971 Dear Henry: Transmitted herewith is petition o£ Marine Associates~ Inc. requesting a change of zone from "C" Light Industrial District to "M-i" General Multiple Residence District on certain property at New Suffolk~ New York. Your Board is hereby instructed to prepare an official report defining the conditions described in said petition and determine the area so affected with your recommendations. Very truly yours~ Judith T. Terry Southold Town Clerk Attachment TOWN OF SOUTHOLD IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF FOR A CI~a,~NGE, MODIFICATION OR AMENDMENT OF THE BUILDING ZONE ORDIN- ANCE OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, SUFFOLk COUNTY, NEW YORK. BLOCK LOT TO TI-IE TOWN BOARD OF Tt~, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD: ,, (~risert name of petitioner) Suffolk County, New York, the undersigned, am the owner of certain real property situated at ........ mo e particularly. ounded and described as foilows: BEGINNING at a point on the easterly side of First Street at the southwest corp of the premises herein described where the division line between said premises the land now or formerly of the l{adel Oyster Company adjoining on the south intersects the said easterly side of First Street; running thence North 6 degrees 54 minutes 30 seconds East along the easterly side of First Street, 211.02 feet to the corner formed by the intersection of the easterly side of First Street with the southerly side of Main Street; thence South 83 degrees 45 minutes East along the southerly side of Main Street 193.50 feet to the southeast corner of said Main Street; thence North 6 degrees 15 minutes East along the easterly end of Street, 49.50 feet to the northeast corner of Main Street; thence North 83 degree~ 45 minutes West along the northerly side of Main Street, 192.94 feet to the corner formed by the intersection of the northerly side of Main Street with the side of First Street; thence along the easterly side of First Street, North 6 degre 54 minutes 30 seconds East 272.45 feet to the land formerly of David H. King; thence South 83 degrees 47 minutes 30 seconds East along said last mentioned lan, to Peconic Bay; thence in a general southerly direction along Peconic Bay tO the northerly line of land of l{adel Oyster Company; thence along ~aid land of Oyster Company; N0rih 83 degrees 05 minutes 03 seconds West to the easterly side of First Street at the point or place of beginning. TOGETHER with all the right, title and interest of the parties of the first part in and to several gr~nts of land '-nder water directly in front of these premisem conveyed. .. ~ 2. I do hereby petition the Town Board of the Town of Southold to change, modify and amend the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, including lhe Building Zone Maps heretofore made a part thereof, as follows: 3. Such request is made for the following reasons: STATE OF NEW YORK, ) ) SS:- COUNTY OF SUFFOLK, ) ~.r'Zq.. L:~ J~, ~6-~ ['~-~ BEING DULY SWORN, deposes and says that he is the petitioner in the within action; that he has read the foregoing Petition and knoxvs the contents thereof; that the same is true to his (her) own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and that as to tbose matters he believes it to be true. Sworn to before me this..~., day of...~.~.~.. THO/~AS J. UHLINGEI~ ~OTARY ?U~LIC, State of NeW No. 01 - 4733066 TOWN OF SOUTIIOLD EAF ENVIRO;IMENTAL ASSESSMENT PART I Project I n formation NOTICE: This cocune,t ,. des?ned to assist in determining whether t~e action proposed may have a significant eftect on the er,v(-c.,'~nt. Please cor~lete the entire Data Sheet. Answers tO these questions will be considered as dart of the apolication for aooroval and may be subject tO further verification and public review. Provide any additional In'or--Cmn you believe will be needed to comolet~ PARTS 2 and 3. It ~s exoecteo snot ccmolnt~cn of the EAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not involve new Studies, research or investioation. If infori~atlon requlrino such additional work is unaval~ble, so indicate and soecify each instance. · NAME OF PROJECT: NAME AND ADDRESS OF OWNER (If Different) (Name) A3DRESS AND NAZiE OF APPLICANT: (Streetj a~e) ~ (Zip) .0, j tote) (Zip) DESC'IPTIO' OF PqQJECTt (Briefly describe type of p~ject or action) ~ ~~. ~~ (PL[ASE COMPLETE EACH QUESTIA)I - Indicate N.A. if n~t applicable) SITE DESCRIPTION (Physical setting of overall project, both deve)oned and undevelooed areas) I. General character of the land: fleneral)y uniform slope ~ Generally uneven and rollinq or irregular 2. Present land use: Urban __, Industrial ~ , Conmnercial , Suburban Rura) Forest , Agriculture , Other ' -' -' 3. Total acreage of oroject area: ~X_~acres.~.~7 ~ ~x~.~.~ q ~'~ ~ Aooroximate acreage: Meadow or Brushland Forested ~qricultural 24, ~5 or r.C.L~) Presently After Completion J/~cres ~acres O~YAJcres ~cres ~/~Y~acres ~_~cres ~yO~acres Presently After Completion dater Surface Area J~'~ acres Unvegetated (rock, earth or fill) Roads, bui)dinos and Other paved surfaces Other (indicate tyne) ....... 7, 8. 9. 10, 11. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e. cliffs, dunes, other geologicai formations - Yes J(~ HO. (Describe 12. Is the project site presently used by the co~nunity or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area - Yes .~ NO. 13. Does the present site offer or include scenic views or vistas known to be important to the core, unity? Yes ~ NO 14. Streams within or contiguous to project area: a. Name of stream and name of river to which it is tr~Ou~ary t~Y~/~y~ 15. 16. B. Lakes, Ponds, Wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: a. Name -, ~/~ '~/~ ; b. Size (in acres) What is the dominant land use and zoning class f cat on w thin a )/4 mile red us of the project (e.g. single family residential, R-2) and the scale of development e g 2 stor PROOECT DESCRIPTION I. Physical dimensions and scate of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) a. Total contiguous acreage owned by project sponsor 3,~ acres. b. Project acreage developed: ;b~'~::~.res initially; ~]~1~ ,ores u]ti~te]x. c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped d. Length of project, in miles: /~4 (if appropriate) e. If project is an expansion of existing, indicate percent of expansion proposed: building square foot- age ~/~ ; developed acreage f. tlu~lber of off-strut oarKlng spaces existind g. Maximum vehicular triPS generated per hour ,t~'"' (upon completion of project) h. If residential: Number and type of housinq units: gne Family Two Family Multiple Fami Initial Ultimate i. If: )noustrial e~qnbornood-City-Regio6al Esti~ted Emoloyment Condominium 2. Ho~ much natural material (i.e. rock, earth, etc.) will be removed fro~ the site - /~L~/~ tons cubic yards, 3. How many acres of veqetat~on (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed fro~ si~e -/Vc.,v~ acres. 4. Will any mature forest ~ver log years old} or other locally-important veoetationObe removeld ~y de~lition) d. IS phase 1 financially dependent on subseouent ~hases? Yes 8. Nill blasting occur during construction! Yes ~ No 9. N~ber of jobs generated: during construction ~ ; after project is comp)ere 10. ~um~er of jobs eliminated by this project .~ . ll. Will p~ject require relocation of any projects or facilities? ~ Yes No. if yes, explain: 12. a. Is surface or subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? ~_Fes ~o. b. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) ~ 13. Will surface area of existing lakes, ponds, streams, bays or other surface wate~ays be increased or decreaseo by groposa)? Yes ,X NO. 14. Is?roJe~.~ *~ or any portion of project located in the lO0 year flood plain? ~ Yes 15. a. Does project involve disposal of solid waste? Yes ~No b. If yes, will an existing solid waste disoosal facility be used? Yes No c. If yes, give name: : location d. dill any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? Yes 16. Will pr~ect use herbicides or pesticides? Yes ~ No ~7. Will project routinely produce odors {~re than one hour ~er day)? __Yes ~ No 18. Will project ~roduce oDerating noise exceeding the local ammlence noise levels? Yes ~ No 19. __Yes ~o. If yes, indicate type(s) Nill project result in an increase in energy use? 20. 21. 22. If w~ter supply is from wells indicate oumo}ng capacity ~.mO gals/minute. Total anticipated water usage per gay _.~'~O_.O_~als/day. b, Curreqt saecieic zoning classification of site ~ 26. Approval Required (Yes, No) (Type} Submittal Approval (Date) IDate) City, Town, Village Board City, Town, Villaoe Planning Board City, Town, Zoning Board City, County Health Department Other local ageDc~es Other regional agencies State Agencies Federal Agencies C. INFORMATIONAL DETAILS Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may De 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 SI GNATURE: ,~.~$ ~.~ ~ TITLE: REPRESENTING: DATE: -4- EAF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT- PART II Project Impacts and Thei~ Magnitude Genera! ~r,~at ,tn ,I~.!d Carefully) - In complec~r~ %~ for~n the reviewer should be guided by the question: Have my decisions and determinations been reasenaoieZ The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst. - Identifying thJt ar effect will be potentially large (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessarily sionlfiCant. Any large effect must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine significance. Ry iOent:fyin9 an ~f~ect in celumo 2 simply asks that it be looked at further. - The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of effects and wherever Possible the threshol of m~ni':ude that would trigger a response in Column 2. The examples are generally applicable throughout the Statu and for most situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be ~ore appropriate for a Potential Large Impact rating. - Each project, on each site, in each locality, will vary. Therefore, the examples have been offered as guidancc They go not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each Question. - The numOer of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question. Carefully) a. Answer each of the 18 questions in PART 2. Answer Ye~s if there will be any effect. b. Maybe answers should be considered as Ye._~s 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 the size of the impact ~hen consider the impact as notentially large and proceed to PART 3. e. If a potentially larqe impact or effect can be reduced by a change in the project to a less than large magn)tuoe, ~iace a )es in column 3. A No response indicates, that such a reduction is not Dossib)e. INSTRUCTIONS (Read )?ACT ON LAN~ NO Y[S ~ILL THERE ~E A~J·_r~.,'~' A5 ~ RESULT O? A PHYSICAL CHANGE TO PROJECT 5]TE? Any construstioq on ~lopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise her 100 foot of lengt~), er where the general slopes in the project area exceed 10%. Construction on Land where the depth to the water table is less than 3 feec. Construction of paved Darkinq arem Fmc l,~q9 or more vehicles. C~ns~ruction on l~nd where bedrock ~s exposed or generally within 3 feet of existing grounJ sbrface. Construct~,n ~na~ will continue for more than ~ year or involve SMALL TO POTENTIAL CAN IHPACT BE MODERATE LARGE REDUCED BY IHPACT IMPACT PROJECT CHANGE -$. FOUND ON THE SIT£? (i.e. cliff~, dunes, oeo]oqica for'ma- ?PACT ON WATER WILL PROJ£CT AFFECT ANY WATER BODY DESIGNATED AS .......... ~ ~ PROTECTED? (Under Articles iS, 24, 25 of the Envir- ExamolPs that Nould Agply to Column 2 channel of a protected stream. WILL PROJECT AFFECT ANY NON-PROTECTED EXISTING OR NFW NO YES BODY OF ,,ATER? ........................................... (~ 0 YES JMP~ r~T IMPACT PROJECT CHANR~ ES ) m 'HLL PRgJ[CT ALTER D~A)NAGE FLQH, PATTEn'IS OR StlRFRCE !lATER NO YES Examole that '~ould ~nply to Colunn 2 Prolect is likely to Cause substantia) erosion. Pro)eot is ~ncompatib)e with existing drainage patterns. IlO YES dILL PROJECT AFFECT AIR QUALITY? ........................... ~ ~ Fxamples that Hould Apply to Column 2 Project will induce 1.~00 or ~ore vehicle trips in any given hour. Project will result in the incineration of more th4n 1 ton Project emission rate of all contaminants will excmed S lbs. Der hour or a heat source ~Kodu¢ln~ ~ore t~en 1~ million ~tU's per hour. 8. WILL PROJECT AFFECT ANY THREATENED OR ENDANREREO SPECIES? Peeuction of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal list, using the site. over or near s~te or found on the site. Rer~val of any oort~om of a critical or siqnificant wi)d- YES ®0 ';ILL P~OJECT SUBSTANTIALLY AFFECT I!ON-THREATE~IED OR NO YES ENDANr, ERED SPECIES? ....................................... ~ 0 E~amole that Would Apply to Column 2 Prolect would substantia))y interfere with any resident -7- PR£-,!IcLq~I[ nR PALEONTOCIC~L [I'POPTANCE? ................. OR FLTURE O~Eh c'' ; QO 13. WILL THERE EE ~q EFFECT TO EXISTING TRANSPORTATION NO YES !]"ALL Tq L I4. I~PACT (1N E!iERGY ~:ILL P~OJECT ,~FFECT THE COMMUNITIES SOURCES OF FUEL OR NO YES ENERGY SUPPLY? ........................................... Exameles that Would Apply to Column 2 ProJect causing qreater than 5% increase in any form of energy used In municipality, Project requiring the creation or extension of an energy transmsslon or supply system to serve more than 50 sinqle or two fami)y residences, Other impacts: ?P~CT ON NOISE 15. WILL T~ERE BE OBJECTIONABLE ODORS, NOISE, GLARE, VIBRATION NO YES or ELECTRICAL DISTURBANCE AS A RESULT OF THIS PROJECT? .... -- Blastinq within 1,50g feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive facility. __ Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day). __ Pro iect will nroduce oeerating noise exceedinn the local ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures· __ Project will remove natural barriers that would act as a noise screen, Other impacts: !,?ACT 0~! HEALTH & HAZARD} ~o ~ES 16. '/ILL PROJECT AFFECT PUBLIC IIEALTH AND SAFETY? ............ A~ Examot~s that Would ApPly to Column 2 - -~- Project will cause a risk of ex,)asian or release of hazardous substances (i.e. oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) )n the event of accident or uDset conditions, or there will he a chronic low level discharge or emission. __ Prolect that will result in the burial of "hazardous wastes" (i.e. toxic, ~oisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritating, infectious, etc., includinn wastes that are solid, semi-solid, )iquio or contain gases.) StoraaB £acilitiAs for one-million or more gallnns of liouiFied natuPal ga~ or other liouids. SHALL TO POTENTIAl CAi( IMPACT CE iIODERJTE LARGE REDUCED BY IMPACT I'IPACT PROJECT CHANGE S ) 17. WILL PROJECT AFFECT THE CHAPACTEq nF THE EXISTING NO YES CO~HUNITY? ......................................... GO Example that Would ApolY to Column 2 I -- The population of the City, Town or Village in which the -- The project will replace or eliminate existing facilities, -- Development will ~nduce an influx of a particular age g~up with special needs. 18. ~5',LL TQ J NO YES IS THERE PUBLIC CONTRO,ERSY CONCERNING THE RROJECT? ....... Examples that Would Apply to Colurmt 2 IF ANY ACTION IN PART 2 IS IDENTIFIED AS A J PQTENTIAL LARGE IMPACT OR IF YOU CANNOT DETE~INE J THE MAGNITUDE OF IMPACT, PROCEED TO PART 3. J POTE;ITIAL CAN iMPACF 6~ LARGE REDUCED BY IltPAC T PROJECT CHANGE PORTIONS OF EAF COMPLETED FOR THIS PROJECT. PART I __ PART II __ PART ]___ Upon rewew of the information recorded on this EAF (Parts l, 2 and 3) and considerinq both the maon~tude and imaortance of each PREPARE A tiECATIVE DECLARATION © PREPARE A NEGATIVE OECLARA[IC~( INST~,,C, 0.,~ Co.~s~.lete the foilo~n~q for each impact or effect identifJed Jn Column 2 oF Part Z: Describe (if applicable) how the ~mpact might be mitigated or red,ced to a less than large ~mnact ~' P~PT III STATE~E!tT5 (C(mtlnue on ?ttachment$, as needed) TOWN BOARD, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD In the Matter of the Petition of to the Town Board of the Town of Southold. TO: NOTICE YOU ARE HEREBY GIVEN NOTICE: 1. That it is the intention of the undersigned to petition the Town Board of the Town of Southotd to request a 2_0 ~e_~ ~--~-,ff ~L,~- c~ ~ r. w,. /-zG ~ ~ ~c~ ~ ~C ~-/ ~uc~,~. - 2. That the property which is the subject of the Petition is located ~dj~ce~t to your property ~nd is des- 3. That the property which is the subject of s~ch~tition is located in the fo~towin~ zoning district: 4. Th~ by such Petition, the undersisn~d will request that the above-described propert~be placed in th~ following zone district classification: ~-- / ~ a LT,~/e - ~1 ~ ,u C c~ 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 dat~ of such hearing m the Suffolk Times and in the Long Island Traveter-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. Dated: Petitioner Post Office Address: PROOF OF MAILING OF NOTICE NAME ADDRESS STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF SUFFOLK: , being dulv sworn, deposes and says that on the of /9'?/4 ~C/4 , 1 9 ~o ~ , deponent mailed a true copy of the Notice set ford~ on the reverse side hereof, directed to each of the above-named persons at the addresses set opposite their respective names; tbat the addresses set opposite the names of said persons are the addresses of said persons as shown on the cur- rent assessment mil of the Town of Southold;that said Notices were mailed at tbe United States Post Office at ~.~ ,;~'4~& LU~ ~ ~ ;~ha~said Notices were mailed to each of said persons by~ (registered) mail. Sworn to me this ~ dayof fL~d/~c*~ ,'19 (~. GEORGE ~ F~SHER, UR. K~o~enor ?oint, I AY 5 ~arch ~, 198~o New ~uffolk CXvlo ?. o. Box 6~2, New Suffolk, New ~ork ~e are deeply dls~reesed to lea=,~ of the pla~ to lmXld the con~o~tntms in New 3~fo~. ~ suoh~l~w~d o~e the o~acter of the little Ylll~e forever. Havtn~ been resident of New ~uffolk for over 60 year~, we are mo~e then happy to keep the area the way Xt Please record our vote on the May 6th meetin~ as bei~ AGAINST any such Cha~e In the village of New Suffolk. Kr. ~T~Or~// ~r. Pell Ver,/ trul~ ~rours, MART~A C. FISRER <.__ G~ORGE F. FIS~, JR. 2. How much natural material {i.e. rock, earth, etc.) will be removed from the site - ~--- tons cubic yards. 3. How many acres of veqetation (trees. shrubs, ground covers) ~ill be removed from site -Yl/m~acres 4. Will any mature forest (over)gO years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this project? Yes ~% NO - 5. Are there any plans for re-vegetation to replace that removed during construction? ~ Xes ~io 6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction ,~ months, {including demolition}. 7. If multi-phased project: a. Total n~nber of phases anticipated , No. b. Anticipated date of co~encement phase I month vear {including ~!../~ demolition) ' C. Approximate completion date final phase month year. d. Is phase 1 financially dependent on subseauent phases? Yes . NO 8. Will blasting occur during construction? Yes ~ No 9. N~mber of jobs generated: during construction ~ ; after project is comp)ere lO. Number of jobs eliminated by this project 11. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? ~ Yes NO. If yes, explain: lZ. a. Is surface or subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? ~ Yes __No. /~.1¥ b. If yes, indicate type of waste {sewage, industrial, etc.) ~,~-~. ~ c. If surface disposal name of stream 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 proposal? Yes X No. 14. Is project or any portion of project located in the lO0 year flood plain? ~(~ Yes No 15. a. Does project involve disposal of solid waste? ~ Yes No~/ /~'~ b. If yes, will an existing solid waste disQosal facility be used? X Yes No c. yes. give name: r location ~'~"~'~-~ d. !lill any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? Yes _~,~ No 16. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? Yes ~ No 17. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour Der day)? Yes X NO 18. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambience noise levels? Yes ~(, No 19. Will project result in an increase in energy use? Yes )~ No. If yes, indicate type!s) 20. If water supply is from w~lts indicate pumping capacity 21. Total anticinated water usage per 22. Zoning: gals/minute. b. Current specific zoning classification of site ~ d. If no, indicate desired zo~inq II~ll~?/E ..... _~_~_~--~_~F./~Y~-~ 26. Approvals: a. Is any Federal pe~it required? _Yes .... No b. Does project involve State or Federal funding or f~nancing? C. Local and Regional approvals: Approval Required (Yes, No) (Type) (Date) (Date) City, Town, Village Board City, Town, Village Planning Board City, Town, Zoning Board City, County Health Department Other local agencies Other regional agencies State Agencies Federal Agencies C. INFORMATIONAL DETAILS Attach any additional infor~ation as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse impacts associated with the proposal taken to mitigate or avoid th . TITLE: DATE: -4- EL. VAI'-, F_--~, J U .I 2 /<5 V , ~ ~C~A ~ ~o ,~ 19~ ~, ~,0~' RECEIVED BY o~ ~ N~I~ SOU~OLD IOW~ PBHNING BOARD DATE ~'- - - ~ ~OV~, -- ......... h,.~ g-3 $.85'Z'7'OO'E,- 193,45 $'4 N.4*33'OO"E' 50.0 4-5 N.B§"P,"/'CO'W.-/9Z,94 E-6 N.D°OS'CIO'E. - ~72.61 ',4 SUF'F. CO. TAW' MAP DATA,~ tOOO-] 1"/-8 -18.