Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1000-6.-2-5
k'SI - T t A N j=% i I)I'I iiY 144 ryl A . Sill 'I 3'r'� I J11W ' liayuy 4s +n 8 5 H 5 N, ,c IILxm fPUNO I r , xVLYV[ 1sY LAND — i I FISHERS161 Ig SOUND z i 5 4'30"00'W 200'+ AREA = 4354 Y- ) j d iYFJ+, .A y57 S 75• SF N551. 90 01'30'E W 1551. 98 ISS.O' N 14'58'30'E 250, }} it ... .� i � •„11 A IP:i��� CRESCENT AVENUE LOCATIDN MrAP 'esti MERESTONE �� �___ - SCALE 1'-4001 (EXIST) FII % 5 75'01'30,, E '', A* _ " N 5937.77 - r 1 ' W 1540.47 I 197_97 2 �'kan+7. :p".^.M'^M•',RS... I. 1� 1 MERESTONE ?i\, (EXIST) R A \ L I TAX MAP -DISTRICT 1000 SEC G ry I BLOCK 2, LOY 5 _ 1ICYSl�'JT . o- ^J 1 1 PORCH s I - W/F 03 HOUSE z . v` 10 T LOCATION MAP \ c Y SCALE 1`= 100' ' FI 0 o I o A1 '{^'�: idjd W 1 Ma m GAR, MERE5T0 NE � c (EXIST) I o.ai n� A PROPOSED SETBACK LINE 'n m FOR FUTURE DWELLING-TO - } > N DE CONSTRUCTED AFTER �• m o o REMOVAL OF EXISTING an d _ ) T � BwLD1NGs, w „ APPROVED BY LJ' 0 G44DEN c AREA To BE DEEDED FROM PLANNING BOARD g' LOT 5 TO LOT G 5505 S.F. < ,n PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD q q IEF; `� .r ,ndd�kl, r 34 ?I r,fM"'"1�1yaIC;)1 $Hn WIry F,4 ryi V"VR euY� rlr f' NOTES ° DATE" 1 , 1 n,tiR Lit T i st I ' a i�+ " LOT 5 LOT 6 'µIf I OWNERS JOHN S. MCGEENEY EDWARD F RODENBACH, TRUSTEE U)A JANUARY G11992 9n I G. +�i 9 7nw, I 550 WHITE OAK RD CIO PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFS KY i WALKER NEW LANANI CT 04890 1055 WASHINGTON BOULEVARD, 9TAMFORDr CT 06901 .� > 2 LOTS AE LOCATED IN THE TOWN of SOUTHOLD, mm SHED y rn COUNTY ;OF SUFFOLK, STATE OF NEW YORK,DIST- / '\ ; —1 ` RICE 10001 SEC. G, BLOCK 2, LOTS 51 4. 3, UTILITI65 ARE EXISTING, SITE 15 SERVICED BY EX15TIKIG MUNICIPAL WATER i EX15TING .I HouinnvX° PROPOSED LOT LINE CHANGE r" ON 51 TES SEWAGE SYSTEMS. S t R L it, POLE.145 > A. _ �v 3 PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN ZONE R-80. N 5. COORDINATE DISTANCES ARE MEASURED FROM LIS. PROPER71-ES OAF _--�\ TAX MAP-DISTRICT',1000 , m COAST AND GEODETIC 5URVEY TRIANGULATION SEC. G, BLOCK 2, LO G \� i 1: STATION "PROS". p f 1�\ JOHN S. MCGeENeV ED'wARO F 'R OpeNB:gGH 'TR U'5. '+ - MERESTONE M G LOT AZEA51 'B' DRIVE L {\'� L (EXIST) \ IF }{ rI JOHM 5 M'C1GEENEY ' AVENUE B� 3 CRESCENT 'AVE^ N 5522,01 µ . \F \ /5\14 + m /-� ``(/\ SLOCK OT EXISTING PKOPOSED FISHERS ISLAND, NEW YORK W 1411.77 I I I1 $ G5�3/51.g3. POI# \ {1 r " 9LK I / LOT 13 4954Y- S.F �39i Y- S.i [ A � .1 Y 40 20 'O 40 5' I' BLK 2/ LOTS 45,7GG7-S F. 571441�SF J[�A(.� ' 'LQ EDWARD E RODENBACH, TKUSTEE ' 15LOCKILOT EXISTING PROPOSED CHANDLER, PALMER E 'K'ING 1 d, ALK 2/ LOT& 201452' F ZB,957Y-5.F. I�. ONNR"4' ICu-f . ,W i ,LF NELV NpR.11lItCH, AVENUE �P�PP oil .sT9�°9� QCT4gER 21,1992 ADDITIONS : NOV. 19,199E _ 1 m REVISIONS I DEC. Z, I'A72 oft f _ -- - \I' .- ADA1T1oN5 sREV1blOnlg JAN. G, 19y3 POLE AIGG , ¢ ADDITi'OR'�.f REVISIONS JAN.2T. 1773 gq50�1f( � ryryyy tiS�N° 04952 AD'Om6NS f� REVISIONS 'FEB. x, 1903 sr,R°�'=i 4 �OSUFFO(,�-c PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS rya. T SCOTT L. HARRIS Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman O.ril O�� Supervisor George Ritchie Latham, Jr. ,/�Ql �a Richard G. Ward Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Mark S. McDonald P.O. Box 1179 Kenneth L. Edwards PLANNING BOARD OFFICE Southold, New York 11971 Telephone (516) 765-1938 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765-1823 May 4, 1993 Stephen L. Ham, III Mathews and Ham 45 Hampton Road Southampton, NY 11968 Re: Proposed lot line change for John S. McGeeney & Edward F. Rodenbach, Trus. SCTM# 9:4.*S & 6 Dear Mr. Ham: The following took place at a meeting of the Southold Town Planning Board on Monday, May 3 , 1993 The final public hearing, which was held at 7: 35 P.M. was closed. The following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, John S. McGeeney and Edward F. Rodenbach, Trus. are the owners of the property known and designated as SCTM# 1000-6-2-5 & 6, located at Avenue B and Crescent Ave. in Fishers Island; and WHEREAS, this lot line, to be known as proposed lot line change for John S. McGeeney and Edward F. Rodenbach, Trus. , is for a lot line change to subtract 11,485 square feet from a 65, 999 square foot parcel and add it to a 20,482 square foot parcel; and WHEREAS, a variance was granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals on March 18, 1993 ; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, (Article 8) , Part 617, declared itself Lead Agency and issued a negative declaration on March 1, 1993 ; and WHEREAS, a final public hearing was closed on said subdivision application at the Town Hall, Southold, New York on May 3 , 1993 ; and WHEREAS, all the requirements of the Subdivision Regulations of the Town of Southold have been met; and be it therefore, RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approve and authorize the Chairman to endorse the final survey dated February 2, 1993. Enclosed please find the map endorsed by the Chairman, for your records. Please contact this office if you have any further questions. Sincerely Ric ar G. Ward Cha' �� ��2�"/ /L n c: Building Department Assessors Office Zoning Board of Appeals • # To/1// s. Mc 6'EE n�Yd THIS LOT LINE CHANGE BETWEENAND '60wRk 9 s. 900En rS4-H. -[4qS . IS LOCATED ON Aelf •Q e s f,1L Ale IN SCTM# 1000- LOT LINE CHANGE Complete application received _rAW Application reviewed at work session "H 73 ' •` oK un t OK Applicant advised of necessary revisions Revised submission received uo•t OK Lead Agency Coordinatio 3607is_yj�� t, i 3 ' SEQRA determination - 104 j ao•L Sent to County Planning Commission tnioK 00` oK 7, Pff (�onc-,1roA»�N� c r sMwuER� 09� 7-Ir-?,7 4, >� Review of SCPC report Draft Covenants and Restrictions received ,"ro' oK .mT Draft Covenants and Restrictions reviewed '"ro. OK Filed Covenants and Restrictions received Final Public Hearing Approval of Lot Line -with conditions — Endorsement of Lot Line5 L/93 ms 1/l/90 Th�ls p,�c) Posk_d ZoT1-i1rF /s T, s41117-,r4cr � /i q B S s qw o9 (6 F FET Fleo io, i9 6 9,1,6 s q 4e e PE /=o or Pi9 RG,9 /- / n O /`/00 / r Fd •9 ad 5i8*-Z s y� vr14� moor^ .P/9le�6i John S. McGeeney Edward F. Rodenbach, Trustee 550 White Oak Road c/o Paul, Hastings, Janofsky New Canaan, CT 06840 & Walker 1055 Washington Boulevard Stamford, CT 06901 �/CtO�.�lye.l &Tcvax L , 1992 Planning Board Town of Southold Main Road DEC 2 2 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Proposed Lot Line Change - Propertied of John S. McGeeney and Edward F. Rodenbach Trustee (SCTM # 's 1000-6-2-5 & 6) Dear Sirs: We are making application to your Board for a lot line change with respect to our property at Fishers Island (SCTM # 's 1000-6-2-5 & 6) as shown on the Map prepared by Chandler, Palmer & King submitted herewith. Please be advised that we approve of the proposed lot line change as reflected on such Map. Please be further advised that the purpose of the proposed lot line change is to increase the size of the property owned by Edward F. Rodenbach, as Trustee (SCTM # 1000-6-2-6) , so as to permit the construction, following the demolition of the existing structures on such property, of a single-family dwelling in the northeast portion of the lot. Very truly yours, � o �_ le) '501y o ey_ Edward F. Rodenbach, as T ustee ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF CONNECTICUT ) ss. . COUNTY OF FAIRFIELD j�) On the a n day of 4k tevoer, 1992 before me personally came john S,--McGaaaa and Edward F. Rodenbach, to me known to be the individuals described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that they executed the same. 1DOROTHY ESPOSM -- NOTARY '" Pi:IC Notary P lic f COMM.RF. €'i✓ ftAc g� ^17 ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF CONNECTICUT) ) ss: Stamford COUNTY OF FAIRFIELD ) On this 2nd day of December, 1992 before me personally came John S. McGeeney, to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that they executed the same. Notary Public RACHEL A. I k-"I_LS votary Public,StO01COM86 A My CommissiM Expel gab 31,1993 John S. McGeeney Edward F. Rodenbach, Trustee 550 White Oak Road c/o Paul, Hastings, Janofsky New Canaan, CT 06840 & Walker 1055 Washington Boulevard Stamford,- : 69901 v-N,o Z a ie� 1992 Planning Board Town of Southold Main Road �Er Southold, NY 11971 Re: Application for Lot Line Change Dear Sirs: The undersigned, John S. McGeeney and Edward F. Rodenbach, as owners of premises situate at Fishers Island, New York (SCTM # 's 1000-6-2-5 & 6) , hereby authorize Stephen L. Ham, III of Matthews & Ham, 45 Hampton Road, Southampton, New York 11968, to act as our agent in making such applications to your Board and in taking any and all incidental actions in regard thereto, including without limitation, completing and executing the required forms, giving any required notices and appearing at any public hearings, as he shall deem necessary or advisable in order to obtain approval of the proposed lot line change with respect to such premises in accordance with the Map prepared by Chandler, Palmer & King, as the same may be revised from time to time. I)IOLI oc Jo VKW ne Edward F. Rodenbach, as Trustee ACKNOWLEDGMENT ' STATE OF CONNECTICUT ) ss. . COUNTY OF FAIRFIELD ) n< On the � day of ikvoember, 1992 before me personally came 3ehn- and Edward F. Rodenbach, to me known to be the individuals described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that they executed the same. otary P 1 i.c�. — DOROTHY ESPOSITO NOTARY PUBLIC 1nro wA evnmm uAeru n1 .nM . ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF CONNECTICUT) ) ss: Stamford COUNTY OF FAIRFIELD ) On this 2nd day of December, 1992 before me personally came John S . McGeeney, to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that they executed the same. Notary Public „.,�;HEL A. INGAL c;tary Public,State Of COnnecticut My Commissiat Expias V&TA 314993 AFFIDAVIT DEC 2 2 t07 STATE OF NEW YORK ) ss. : COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ) STEPHEN L. HAM, III, being duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. I am the authorized agent of John S. McGeeney and Edward F. Rodenbach, Trustee, owners of premises designated on the Suffolk County Tax Map as District 1000, Section 6, Block 2, Lots 5 and 6, respectively, which premises are the subject of an application to the Planning Board of the Town of Southold for a lot line change. The foregoing lots are shown on a certain map prepared by Chandler, Palmer & King and submitted to the Planning Board of the Town of Southold in connection with such application. 2 . The proposed lot line change will be effected by the transfer of an approximately 8, 505 square foot portion of tax lot 5 to tax lot 6. 3 . I hereby affirm on behalf of the owners that, upon approval of the lot line change and upon the property transfer described above, the portion of tax lot 5 so transferred will merge with and become a part of tax lot 6 and will not thereafter constitute a separate buildable parcel. 4 . I make this affidavit in order to induce the Planning Board of the Town of Southold to grant its approval to the proposed lot line change in accordance with the application therefor. StepheA L. Ham, III Subscribed and Sworn to Before Me this 21st Day of December, 1992 e- i/ E JANE Mile Nota blit LitS"d%0tuA No.52491EM Q"4fi6d m SuWIY Couoh x 9 9 3 EXPM D"Mbu A FW t .rah. 1 AA• atIMIAt tale uertta atroa wataes rtes eareerwr-na arnttttelan worts w was n uanass ala7. � ,.; 1ZaMit�1�W67 F F ..� flfa DOCKntr.m&k the j'A Ikyd January .nurtaeaborwreawi ninety-tw0 t+ — DEk10-.1NE JOLY. now residing at (no 0) Avenue B. Fishers Island, �New York 06390 2 panr d pac the bne Pan.awJ _ :)f, -EDWARD F. RODENBAt'll, Trustee under agreement dated as of Janwey 6 e -1992 with John S. NcCeeney, Crantor. c/o Paul, IlMstings, Janofsky 6 Walker. 1055 Washington Boulevard, ;tanford, CT 06901 party of the wrand tan. ` w7YINISS 1L dot the pony of the fins Pon.in e,ntwkruion of Teo Dollars sell other ariaslle aterdltW�sj'�•o pd by tie party d the aa.ad turf hr.hereby grant and rekae mar the parry of the sw ad pe,rs - r rraetron and awgn.set sew tun, of :4 W.I part Ironer. A7J.tlrt trepan paha,p..Y.ser yarrer.d W.I. with the buklop aad Mporrrals dataa _ Mat•$ead bean 7 JVX a, at Rlafrers Island, lwn of Southold, Qanty of 8uttblk ad staffs WF4 Qs �+r.nnrly bounded and de maribed se founts: t _ ti re eye ... s; a m=u= at a Mo satent at an angle in the IQtlrrttrly lir at My mafit birtq lasted 5527.01 fast Ntath of a pod* dull$ Ia 11.77, ..,.: CC a NO MMM& trrYtftq tto United states Onset and mistio Yvq ` Tr aotial Omar$ . Tq .. 110101111111111 !a lades, x dopeon, 35 drutoo. 00 aamtb Ort 19_11111 w . lwallet� to a point; shmpok 06 doper, 70 time, 30 roods Ott 161.00 Det to a w� 1�ltetil x dOps , 77 dflfatas. 00 mads Met 176.11 Gat to•pelt) loth 67 4sse. 00 dntr, 00 aacads 11at x.00 Gat to tho Nowa A an n71/,mertJlaYafarly 1 fat of Awaar D at tlr pont or plana ase �DNpp,: , .. IM SID 1011 I m s the ser p e"= comellod to Ow prety at tlr !Lilt ad.Os7.a Aladad Jady A/th Orrlae ALedae ady, tl•Orri (d.d.d. 7lr 1!711r q dead dated O"M r, 1x1 alt taoaYad In tea aide at 01110egr 030111 IN !lute SM Ides 51 an O$tmae 11, 1x1. .';.. Tborrlax'w"an .tal-and n ,t A an -1 .Ir *v qM t p.ty..1 W Ft a WI a sell er any .tte'eb raf '7, attlf♦�dts�N slaw ar,aN..l p.urx.w W,r.oee M,w Wrwl,1 t a.k.�IIk R ee\Mr sgwYrm rM std ON and Mal POP"w W wne.I W M.t pre a sued 1., rnl pyrouw: To IIAY . AND ND 70 1 Mo!lar fwrira 6r.ra ftaar l w W p.ny ul ser r,N►1 p,r,d,r I..r, a .,o:aawa art aayea d r�a,M Or too of 1b eared per bw... a, .; &M AP of 16,64 parr,'..r.'n.a.Ike W p,n .d W 6a pot taa ao.baw,N ..0,n.1 .n..h..g a�ldr r Tett/armor.War Ma wlaalkrrwl r ✓n .w .ker.ra.rxryt a. M+r..j AXV dlr pIt.1 tr w pan,...elsM1al...a 6.rr a,/tr ta. fes..e.w..rw. nw W p,e,J P""' fM tltpld edl aeeew tb,e,..raae.. Ir ttr.eryar..aa oA\nd w rltltt Y sereno seas.a..d .tt, IM rratir i d.~`r' r oYeisyi Ik�i ~~ phone we or adsr.a..e. W.a w�drlt dgsa � �~brier atrtr sef fee d as a41 d qr ser Y e 7Y, Y\r.card r d Y sant .: _. 'jesrn'ee\raeer i wr of ati.6rYtrrn r rgdrw . - ", 1Ir111�taoDDr.the pry el t0 beg tet has&f snored ob rld Iw 4"Met w see @ban vr a, srlab 42 a° bI IslfsMa� a��ea"� 3' yy y�.-�'�' ��,1�{ to t 'j�,�l[�'�+✓ tf?".3. 1MS'"1"F .LNMCIM Jelly N �. o .. naN�t a Ttec awn r .... of i January 19 92 + 41an awl Oa tee dry al 19 ,Yf..- e ine Joly tapertramy exa � z�l�sot �! Y am hau.n b be the indnidml dnerawd m ani .M.+pi tne Yearn Y Y ddr flw iassdtal wrihed et awl txeealed fM (wegning inwrtawnt, Snl ankttuw bilged ttit eeRwed tM Imgreg barywwr, and aknor4dged aha YRwad the enoe. \ I NRmed this, Ball futary clTIC_______"So-0 wren eels Iy1Yr. L ,1 h� . / Lu STAN Oa Mw YOM.CpMey a .0 {Tan M Mw Voss.CA OF ,Pen the day n/ 1'a Mfnre nr On the Jar of 19 ,be(-- Personal tbtm 1,l,rumally rami In et Keown,who.being by tne duly s..orn,did Jrtme and the attbrnbiq milia b the bre(ais. iar�lat. ay tlrr be Tesidea at no. rhmt 1 Sin penaea0y, aeVmse4 whw britg y d sixam.did depor and say that he sew"at bw an he is the y d i that he knows .the cortnratmn de-cnled F Sad which exceeded the foregoing inonymeno. tlrn he Y be the ` �:.heawa the Sell d Said corporatnn; that the owl affixed described to and who ssrteld she htgnittg _— ` Ya aid ieeaetteat is Snch eprporate scala slut it ata. w.I that he. said subsoTlitg w1Yre, d by alder of the bused of direrora of viJ nnpura' execute the sa m;ad that "KhheeS,♦WY IM that be signed Is tame thefou by like urderat the sante time sab ailed ► stssaa'a�rlhta/'�- tj. art t � X i v4 V - Ananias(AaaltaaAeli f7Q7�'. bOlf sur ran 9"M Swan 'rte,.;rel W -. 6N - IY�eaeftgarMwlte daaOeST off� was To u COMM POAD 1"noLAWAA IN t. a December 18 , 1992 Southold Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Re: Lot Line Change for John S . McGeeney and Edward F. Rodenbach , Trustee (SCTM hp' s 1000-6-2-5 & 6) Gentlemen: The following statements are offered for your consideration in the review of the above-mentioned minor subdivision and 'its referral to the Suffolk County Planning Commission: (1) No grading, other than foundation excavation for a residential building is proposed. (2) No new roads are proposed and no changes will be made in the grades of the existing roads. (3) No new drainage structures or alteration of existing structures are proposed. Yours truly, L. '� " ""'�11L Stephen L. Ham, III , authorized agent for John S . McGeeney and Edward F. Rodenbach , Trustee h - - 617.21 SEQR Appendix A • State Environmental Quality Revief. itFULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM' : Mr, 22 Purpose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an brdelly manner, whether a project or action may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is nt always easy an9wer:#req 'ent- ly, there are aspects of a project that are subjective or unmeasureable. It is also un UD'WAW those who deter�ine significance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may be technically expert in envir'on`rer in l analysis. In addition, many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting the question of significance. The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination process has been orderly, comprehensive in nature, yet flexible to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action. Full EAF Components: The full EAF is comprised of three parts: Part 1: Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic project data, it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3. Part 2: Focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action. It provides guidance as to whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially- large impact. The form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced. Part 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentially-large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the impact is actually important. DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE—Type 1 and Unlisted Actions Identify the Portions of EAF completed for this project: ❑ Part 1 ❑ Part 2 ❑Part 3 CUpon review of the information recorded on this EAF(Parts 1 and 2 and 3 if appropriate), and any other supporting information, and considering both the magitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the lead agency that: ❑ A. The project will not result in any large and important impact(s) and, therefore, is one which will not have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a negative declaration will be prepared. 11B. Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been required, therefore a CONDITIONED negative declaration will be prepared.* ❑ C. The project may result in one or more large and important impacts that may have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a positive declaration will be prepared. ' A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions Name of Action Name of Lead Agency Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer (=ofcer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer(If different from responsible officer) Date 1 PART T—PROJECT INFORMATION Prepared by Project Sponb-r NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a signific8nt effec on the environment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E. Answers to these questions will be considere as part of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any addition information you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3. It is expected that completion of the.full EAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not involve new studies, research or investigation. If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specify each instance. NAME OF ACTION _ Lot Line Change - Properties of John S. McGeeney and LOCATION OF ACTION(Include Street Address, Municipality and County) Edward F. Rodenbach, Trustee r ent Avenue and Avenue B, Fishers Island, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk NAME OF APPLICANT/SPONSOR Stephen am, , a3 n BUSINESS TELEPHONE John S. McGeeneyand Edward F. Rodenbach, Trustee ADDRESS ( 1 ) 283-2400. 45 Hampton Road CITY/PO Southampton STATE ZIP CODE NY 11968 NAME OF OWNER(If tlltferent) BUSINESS TELEPHONE ADDRESS CITY/PO STATE ZIP CODE DESCRIPTION OF ACTION transfer of 8,505*-- sq• feet from premises owned by John S. McGeeney (SCTM .# 1000-6=2-5) to premises owned by Edward F. Rodenbach, Trustee (SCTM # 1000-6-2-6) to effect lot line change Please Complete Each Question-Indicate N.A. if not applicable A. Site Description Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas. 1. Present land use: ❑Urban ❑Industrial ❑Commercial ❑Residential (suburban) EIRUral (non-farm) ❑Forest ❑Agriculture ❑Other 2. Total acreage of project area: 1.938 acres. APPROXIMATE ACREAGE PRESENTLY AFTER COMPLETION Meadow or Brushland (Non-agricultural) 1.808 acres 1.808 acres Forested acres acres Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland, pasture, etc.) acres acres Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24, 25 of ECL) acres acres Water Surface Area acres acres Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill) acres acres Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces 3 acres 13 acres Other (Indicate type) acres acres 3. What is predominant soil type(s) on project site? Riverhead sandy loam a. Soil drainage; _®Well drained inn % of site ❑Moderately well drained °6 of site ❑Poorly drained % of site b. If any agricultural land is involved, how many acres of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 Of the NY Land Classification System? acres. (See 1 NYCRR 370). 4. Are there bedrock outcroppings on project site? Dyes MNo a. What is depth to bedrock? c. 600 (in feet) 2 = 5. Approximate percentage of proposed project site with slopes: MO-10% % [310-15 9/ % • ❑15% or grei• % 6. Is project substantially contiguous to, or contain a building, site, or district, listed on the State or the National Registers of Historic Places? ❑Yes ®No '. Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural Landmarks? ❑Yes ®No 8. What is the depth of the water table? >17 (in feet) 9. Is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aquifer? ( Yes ONO 10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? ❑Yes ®No 11. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered? Dyes ®No According to Identify each species 12. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, other geological formations) ❑Yes KlNO Describe 13. Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area? ❑Yes ONO If yes, explain 14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community? El Yes (ZNo 15. Streams within or contiguous to project area: none a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary 16. Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: a. Name none b. Size (In acres) 17. Is the site served by existing public utilities? ®Yes ONO a) If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? ®Yes ONO b) If Yes, will improvements be necessary to allow connection? Dyes ®No 18. Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 304? ❑Yes ®No 19. Is the site located in or substantially contiguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 of the ECL, and 6 NYCRR 617? ®Yes ONO 20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes? ❑Yes CZNo B. Project Description 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project sponsor 1.938 acres. b. Project acreage to be developed: 0 acres initially; •05 acres ultimately. c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped 1.8 acres. d. Length of project, in miles: N/A (If appropriate) e. If the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed N/A %; f. Number of off-street parking spaces existing N/A ; proposed N/A g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour N/A (upon completion of project)? h. If residential: Number dnd type of housing units: One.Family Two Family Multiple Family Condominium Initially " fh ee Ultimately two i. Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure 30 height; 30 width; 50 length. j. Linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy is? c . 200 ft. 3 2. How much natural material ' , rock, earth, etc.) will be removed fro he site? n tons/cubip yards. 3. Will disturbed areas be reclaimed? ❑Yes ❑No pN/A a. If yes, for what intendcc: purpose is the site being reclaimed? b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? ❑Yes ❑No c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? Oyes ❑No 4. How many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site? 0 acres. 5. Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this project? ❑Yes ®No 6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction N/A months, (including demolition). 7. If multi-phased: a. Total number of phases anticipated N/A (number). b. Anticipated date of commencement phase 1 month year, (including demolition). c. Approximate completion date of final phase month year. d. Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases? ❑Yes ❑No 8. Will blasting occur during construction? ❑Yes ®No 9. Number of jobs generated: during construction 0 after project is complete 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project 0 11. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? ❑Yes ®No If yes, explain 12. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? ❑Yes gNo a. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) and amount b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged 13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? ❑Yes E3No Type 14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? ❑Yes ®No Explain 15. Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain? ❑Yes ®No 16. Will the project generate solid waste? ❑Yes ®No a. If yes, what is the amount per month tons b. If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used? ❑Yes ❑No c. If yes, give name ; location d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? ❑Yes ❑No e. If Yes, explain 17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste? ❑Yes ®No a. If yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal? tons/month. b. If yes, what is the anticipated site life? years. 18. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? . ❑Yes ®No 19. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? ❑Yes ®No 20. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels? Dyes ®No 21. Will project result in an increase in energy use? ❑Yes MNo If yes , indicate type(s) 22. If water supply is from wells, indicate pumping capacity N/A gallons/minute. 23. Total anticipated water usage per day rJ/o gallons/day. 24. Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding? ❑Yes ®No If Yes, explain 4 25. Approvals Required: Submittal • To Date City, Town, Village Board ❑Yes IjdNO City, Town, Village Planning Board [ZYes ❑No lot line change 12-18-92 City, Town Zoning Board ®Yes ❑No area variance 12-14-92 City, County Health Department Dyes ®No Other Local Agencies Dyes MNO Other Regional Agencies Dyes (3No State Agencies Dyes ®No Federal Agencies Dyes MNo C. Zoning and Planning Information 1 . Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, indicate decision required: ❑zoning amendment (Nzoning variance ❑special use permit ❑subdivision ❑site plan ❑new/revision of master plan ❑resource management plan ❑other 2. What is the zoning classification(s)of the site? R-80 single—family residential 3. What is the maximum potential development of the site if devel ed as permitted by the present zoning? two pre—existing single—family dwellings on one �gt; na nrP ax; gtina single—family dwelling on the other lot 4. What is the proposed zoning of the site? same 5. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning? same C6. Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? (JYes ❑No 7. What are the predominant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a '/4 mile radius of proposed action? R-80 single—family residential 8. Is the proposed action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses within a '/4 mile? ®Yes ❑No 9. If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed? N/A a. What is the minimum lot size proposed? N/A 10. Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of sewer or water districts? Dyes IXINo 11 . Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police, fire protection)? ❑Yes IZNo a. If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? ❑Yes ❑No 12. Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? ❑Yes NNo a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? Dyes ❑No D. Informational Details Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse impacts associated with your proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or avoid them. E. Verification I certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge. Applicant/Sponsor Name John S. McGeeney and Edward F. Rodenbach Date December 18, 1992 Signature BY L • Title authorized agent Stephen L. Ham, III If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment. 5 wart 2—PROJECT IMPACTS ANp THEIR MAGN117„ Responsibility of Lead Agency J General Information (Read Carefu.,y) • In completing the form the reviewer should be guided by the question: Have my responses and determinations,been reasonable? The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst. that an impawill be potentially • Any large Identifying eimpact mustt be eval ated in PART 3 toedetermine 2significaonce. Identifying is impact ein columssarily n 2f simply asks that it be looked at further. • The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of impacts and wherever possible the threshold of magnitude that would trigger a response in column 2. The examples are generally applicable throughout the State and for most situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be appropriate for a Potential Large Impact response, thus requiring evaluation in Part 3. • The impacts of each project, on each site, in each locality, will vary. Therefore, the examples are illustrative and have been offered as guidance. They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each question. • The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question. • In identifying impacts, consider long term, short term and cumlative effects. Instructions (Read carefully) a. Answer each of the 19 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there will be any impact. b. Maybe answers should be considered as Yes answers. c. If answering Yes to a question then check the appropriate box (column 1 or 2) to indicate the potential size of the impact. If impact threshold equals or exceeds any example provided, check column 2. If impact will occur but threshold is lower than example, check column 1. d. If reviewer has doubt about size of the impact then consider the impact as potentially large and proceed to PART 3. e. If a potentially large impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated by change(s) in the project to a small to moderate impact, also check the Yes box in column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction is not possible. This must be explained in Part 3. 7 2fCana Small to Potentialt Be IMPACT ON LAND Moderate Large By 1 . Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site? Impact Impactange ONO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise per 100 ❑ ❑ No foot of length), or where the general slopes in the project area exceed 10%. • Construction on land where the depth to the water table is less than ❑ ❑ No 3 feet. • Construction of paved parking area for 1,000 or more vehicles. �] ❑ No • Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally within ❑ ❑ 3 feet of existing ground surface. Yes ❑No • Construction that will continue for more than 1 year or involve more ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No than one phase or stage. • Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than 1,000 ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No tons of natural material (i.e., rock or soil) per year. • Construction or expansion of a sanitary landfill. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Construction in a designated floodway. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Other impacts ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 2. Will there be an effect t<. _..iy ur:,que or unusual land forms found on the site?(i.e., cliffs, dunes, geological formations, etc.)ONO DYES t • Specific land forms: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 1 _ 2 __ 3 SM1. Potential Can Impact Be IMPACT ON&TER Mo e Large Mitigated By 3. Will proposed action affect any wat body designated as protected? Impact Impact Project Change (Under Articles 15, 24, 25 of the Environmental Conservation nn LawNO ❑YES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Developable area of site contains a protected water body. ❑ El ❑Yes ONO • Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a Cl ❑ Dyes ❑No protected stream. • Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland. ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 4. Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body of water? ONO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water El F-1 ❑Yes ❑No or more than a 10 acre increase or decrease. • Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes []No • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No 5. Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity? ONO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action will require a discharge permit. ❑ ❑ 11 Yes ❑No C • Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does not ❑ ❑ ❑Yes [--]No have approval to serve proposed (project) action. • Proposed Action requires water supply from wells with greater than 45 C] El El Yes []No gallons per minute pumping capacity. • Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water ❑ - ❑ ❑Yes ❑No supply system. • Proposed Action will adversely affect groundwater. ❑ ❑ [--]Yes ❑No • Liquid effluentwill be conveyed off the site to facilities which presently ❑ ❑ ❑Yes []No do not exist or have inadequate capacity. • Proposed Action would use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per ❑ ❑ [--]Yes []No day. • Proposed Action will likely cause siltation or other discharge into an ❑ ❑ Dyes [-]No existing body of water to the exte-t that there will be an obvious visual contrast to naturai conditions. • Proposed Action will require the storage of petroleum or chemical ❑ ❑ [--]Yes 1:1 No products greater than 1,100 gallons. • Proposed Action will allow residential uses in areas without water ❑ ❑ E-1 Yes [-]No and/or sewer services. • Proposed Action locates commercial and/or industrial uses which may ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No require new or expansion of existing waste treatment and/or storage facilities. • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 6. Will proposed action alter drainage flow or patterns, or surface water runoff? ONO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action would change flood water flows. 1 ❑ ; ❑ 1 ❑Yes ❑No 7 a p 1 { 3 Small Potential Can Impact Be Modern,,: Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change - Pro sed Action may cause substantial erosion. f CI ❑ ❑Yes l Pro sed Action is incompatible with existing drainage patterns. ❑No Prop sed Action will allow development in a designated floodway. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No Othe impacts: ❑ 11 Yes ❑No ❑ ❑ []Yes ❑No IMPACT ON AIR Will proposed action affect air quality? Exa pies that would apply to column 2 ANO OYES Prop sed Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips in any given lour. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No drop sed Action will result in the incineration of more than 1 ton of ❑ efus ^mer hour. ❑ ❑Yes ❑No _mis ' rate of total contaminants will exceed 5 lbs. ` per hour or a ❑ ❑ lent o'�rce producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour. ❑Yes ❑No t_, 'rop action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed �1. in ustrial use. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No t; roposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial evelopment within existing industrial areas. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No itheil impacts: ❑ ❑ 13 Yes ❑No IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS 'v' Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered C p 'es? ONO OYES xa pies that would apply to column 2 du tion of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal , u ing the site, over or near site or found on the site. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No mo al of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habitat. ❑ pli ation of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other 1:1 ❑Yes ❑No n f r agricultural purposes. ❑ El ❑Yes ❑No ier impacts: ❑ ❑ 13 Yes ONO - ill Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or n-endangered species? ONO OYES .mples-that would apply to column 2 Dosed Action would substantially interfere with any resident or atory fish, shellfish or wildlife species. ❑ ❑ E3 Yes ❑No osed ction requires the removal of more than 10 acres iatbTe forest (over 100 years of age) or other locally important ❑ ❑ [:]Yes ❑No �- tation. IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES 'il it he Proposed Action affect agricultural land resources? I ONO OYES �rrlples that would apply to column 2 'rdddd I_ would sever, cross or limit access to agriculturalLo "includes cropland, hayfields, pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc.) LC action ❑Yes ❑No 8 2 3 Small "to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change • Construction activity would excavate or compact the soil profile of ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No agricultural land. • The proposed action would irreversibly convert more than 10 acres ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No of agricultural land or, if located in an Agricultutal District, more than 2.5 acres of agricultural land. • The proposed action,would disrupt or prevent installation of agricultural ❑ ❑ []Yes ❑No land management systems (e.g., subsurface drain lines, outlet ditches, strip cropping); or create a need for such measures (e.g. cause a farm field to drain poorly due to increased runoff) • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES 11 . Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources? ONO DYES (If necessary, use the Visual EAF Addendum in Section 617.21, Appendix B.) Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed land uses, or project components obviously different from ❑ ❑ ❑Yes []No or in sharp contrast tb current surrounding land use patterns, whether man-made or natural. • Proposed land uses, or project components visible to users of ❑ ❑ []Yes ❑No aesthetic resources which will eliminate or significantly reduce their enjoyment of the aesthetic qualities of that resource. • Project components that will result in the elimination or significant ❑ ❑ []Yes ❑No screening of scenic views known to be important to the area. • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 12. Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure of historic, pre- historic or paleontological importance? ONO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action occurring wholly or partially within or substantially ❑ Cl []Yes ❑tlo contiguous to any facility or site listed on the State or National Register of historic places. • Any impact to an archaeological site or fossil bed located within the ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No project site. • Proposed Action will occur in an area designated as sensitive for ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No archaeological sites on the NYS Site Inventory. • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION 13, Will Proposed Action affect the quantity or quality of existing or future open spaces or recreational opportunities? Examples that would apply to column 2 ❑NO DYES C_ • The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational opportunity. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • A major reduction of an open space important to the community. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No 9 IMPACT ON TRAN' ORTATION 2 •3 14. Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems? Moderate PotenLargeal Can Mitigated atedImpaBe ONO DYES Impact Impact Im Examples that would apply to column 2 act Project Change • Alteration of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods. ❑ • Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems. ❑ ❑Yes ONO • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ Dyes ONO ❑ ❑ Dyes ONO IMPACT ON ENERGY 15. Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or energy supply? Examples that would apply to column 2 ❑NO DYES - Proposed Action will cause a greater than 5% increase in the use of any form of energy in the municipality. ❑ ❑ El Yes ONO Proposed Action will require the creation or extension of an energy ❑ transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two family ❑ ED Yes ONO residences or to serve a major commercial or industrial use. Other impacts: ❑ ❑ Dyes ONO NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or vibration as a result of the Proposed Action? ONO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 Blasting within 1,500 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive facility. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONO Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day). �- Proposed Action will produce operating noise exceeding the local ❑ El Dyes ONO ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures. ❑ El 11 Yes ONO 'roposed Action will remove natural barriers that would as a oise screen. act ❑ ❑ Dyes ONO 7ther impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONO - IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH Will Proposed Action affect public health and safety? Examples that would apply to column 2 ONO DYES oposed Action may cause a risk of explosion or release of hazardous ❑ bstances(i.e. oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) in the event of ❑ Dyes ONO cident or upset conditions, or there may be a chronic low level :charge or emission. wastes oposed Action may result in the burial of "hazardous " in any ❑ m 0.e. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, ❑ ❑Yes ONO radioactive, irritating, ectious, etc.) i 'rage facilities for one million or more gallons of liquified natural or other flammable-liquids. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONO posed action may result in the excavation or other disturbance hin 2,000 feet of a site used for the disposal of solid or hazardous ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONO .te. ler impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 10 2 3 IMPACT ON GROWTH It CHARACTER Small to Potential Can Impact Be OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD Moderate Large Mitigated By 18. °Will proposed action affect the character of the existing community? Impact Impact Project Change ONO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • The permanent population of the city, town or village in which the ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No project is located is likely to grow by more than 5%. • The municipal budget for capital expenditures or operating services ❑ ❑ ❑Yes []No will increase by more than 5% per year as a result of this project. • Proposed action will conflict with officially adopted plans or goals. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes [:]No • Proposed action will cause a change in the density of land use. ❑ ❑ []Yes []No • Proposed Action will replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No or areas of historic importance to the community. • Development will create a demand for additional community services ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No (e.g. schools, police and fire, etc.) • Proposed Action will set an important precedent for future projects. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Proposed Action will create or eliminate employment. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ []Yes ❑No 19. Is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? ONO DYES If Any Action in Part 2 Is Identified as a Potential Large Impact or If You Cannot Determine the Magnitude of Impact, Proceed to Part 3 Part 3—EVALUATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS Responsibility of Lead Agency Part 3 must be prepared if one or more impact(s) is considered to be potentially large, even if the impact(s) may be mitigated. Instructions Discuss the following for each impact identified in Column 2 of Part 2: 1 . Briefly describe the impact. 2. Describe(if applicable)how the impact could be mitigated or reduced to a small to moderate impact by project change(s). 3. Based on the information available, decide if it is reasonable to conclude that this impact is important. To answer the question of importance, consider: • The probability of the impact occurring • The duration of the impact • Its irreversibility, including permanently lost resources of value • Whether the impact can or will be controlled • The regional consequence of the impact • Its potential divergence from local needs and goals • Whether known objections to the project relate to this impact. (Continue on attachments) _ 11 / 14 14-11 f--87)-9< 617.21 Appendix B SEAR SIA Environmental Quality Review Visual EAF AddeAndum This form may be used to provide additional information relating to Question 11 of Part 2 of the Full EAF. (To be completed by Lead Agency) Visibility Distance Between Project and Resource (in Miles) 1. Would the project be visible from: • A parcel of land which is dedicated to and available 0-'/4 1/4.1/2 1/2-3 3-5 5+❑ 11 13 ❑ ❑ " to the public for the use, enjoyment and appreciation of natural or man-made scenic qualities? • An overlook or parcel of land dedicated to public ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ observation, enjoyment and appreciation of natural ❑ or man-made scenic qualities? • A site or structure listed on the National or State ❑ ❑ ❑ Registers of Historic Places? ❑ • State Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • The State Forest Preserve? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • National Wildlife Refuges and state game refuges? ❑ El 1:1 11E3 • ❑ National Natural Landmarks and other outstanding ❑ ❑ ❑ natural features? ❑ ❑ • National Park Service lands? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • Rivers designated as National or State Wild, Scenic ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ or Recreational? ❑ ❑ • Any transportation corridor of high exposure, such ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ as part of the Interstate System, or Amtrak? ❑ • A governmentally established or designated interstate ❑ ❑ ❑ or inter-county foot trail, or one formally proposed for ❑ ❑ establishment or designation? • A site, area, lake, reservoir or highway designated as ❑ ❑ ❑ scenic? ❑ ❑ • Municipal park, or designated open space? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • County road? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • State? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • Localroad? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 2. Is the visibility of the project seasonal? (i.e., screened by summer foliage, but visible during other seasons) Ci Yes ❑Pio 3. Are any of the resources checked in question 1 used by the public during the time of year during which the project will be visible? ❑Yes ❑No i 1 ' F RIPTION OF EX TING VISUAL ENVIRONMENT m each item checked in question 1, check those which generally describe the surrounding'`'ironment. Within"V4 mile I mile ally undeveloped ❑ EJ El El F-1 ❑ Suburban residential El ❑ Industrial ❑ El ❑ El _ Urban ❑ ❑ River, Lake, Pond El ❑ Cliffs, Overlooks ❑ ❑ Designated Open Space ❑ ❑ Flat Hilly ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Mountainous ❑ ❑ Other ❑ ❑ NOTE: add attachments as needed 5. Are there visually similar projects within: '1/2 mile Dyes ❑No "1 miles ❑Yes ❑No '2 miles Dyes ❑No '3 miles 11 Yes 1:1 No C Distance from project site are provided for assistance. Substitute other distances as appropriate. EXPOSURE 6. The annual number of viewers likely to observe the proposed project is NOTE: When user data is unavailable or unknown, use best estimate. CONTEXT 7. The situation or activity in which the viewers are engaged while viewing the proposed action is FREQUENCY Holidays/ Activity Daily Weekly Weekends Seasonally Travel to and from work ❑ ❑ Involved in recreational activities ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Routine travel by residents ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ At a residence ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ At worksite ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Other _ ❑ 71 ❑ ❑ E 2 APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF PLAT To the Planning Board of the Town of Southold: The undersigned applicant hereby applies for (tentative) (final) approval of,a fAb'd visit n plat ins accordance with Article 16 of the Town Law and the Rules and Regu&TflnfS446�f4t*`I'Ywn Planning Board, and represents and states as follows: authorized agent of the 1. The applicant is the'ownesof record of the land under application. (If the applicant is not the owner of record of the land under application, the applicant shall state his interest in said land under application.) 2. The name of the subdivision is to be . . . ..Lot_ Line. Change — Properties of . .. . . . . . . . . John S. McGeeney and Edward F. Rodenbach, Trustee . .. .. ... . .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ....... ..... . .. . . . .. .. .. .. . . .. .. .. .. . . .. . . .. .. .. .. . . . ... . .. . . .. ... . 3. The entire land under application is described in Schedule "A" hereto annexed. (Copy of deed suggested.) 4. The land is held by the applicant under deeds recorded in Suffolk County Clerk's office as follows: McGeeney Liber . .513.4.2.. . . .. .... . . . . .. . Page . . . ..3Q$. . . .. . . . . .. .. , On Nnvember...19,. .1970. . . ; Rodenbach Liber • .11401... ...... ... . ... Page . . . ...565. . ... .. . . .. . . . On Jan uary. .15,-1.992. . . . Liber . .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . .. . Page . . . .. .. . . .. . . . . .. . . .. . On . .. .:.. . . . . .. ... . . . ... . ; Liber . .. . . .. . . .. .. ... . .. . . . . . Page . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . .. .. . On . .. .... .. .. .. .. . . . . . . . . ; Liber Page . .. .. .. .. . . . . .. . . .. .. . . On av a 9%,U 9d::4&V;,*Xt4W IM4XMIQ x999XF MSiS�X?56 . . . . . . ... . . .. .. . . . . .. . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . .. .. orXWKXhisWbUtxa . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . ... ... .. . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. ..... .. .. .. .. . . . .. . . . . .. .. . . . . .. .. . . .. .. .. .. ... .............. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. .. .... .. ... . . .. ... . .... . .. . 5. The area of the land is ...1.93-q . . . . .. .. . acres, of which .1952 acre is to be transferred by McGeeney to Rodenbach 6. All taxes which are liens on the land at the (late hereof have been paid except .thQ.A R4yAle for the 1992/93 lien year. . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . .. .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. ... . . . . .. .. .. . . . 7. The land is encumbered by . . . .9ne. . .. . . .. . . .. .. . . . . . . .. . . .. . . .. .. . : mortgage (�) as follows: (a) 'Mortgage recorded in Liber . . .5929. . . . . . . Page . . . .. . .183. . . . . .. , in original amount Of $.35,000 • • , •, • unpaid amount $ .�;. 5.>.000 hell by Nort. ..h Fork. ..Bank, as . .. . . . . .. . . . successor to Southold Savings- Bank address . .. . .UiD.RQa0,..$9utpold., .Ngw.Yprk... . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . (b) 'Mortgage recorded in Liber . . . . . . . . . Page • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • . . . . . . . in original amount Of . . . .. . . . . . . . . . unpaid amount $. .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . held b . . . . . . . .. . . . . . address . .. .... . . ... . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. . . . .. . .. . . . . .. (c) Mortgage recorded in Liber . . . . . . . . . .. . . . Page . . . . . . . .. . . .. .. . in original amount of . . . . . . . .. . . .. . unpaid amount $. .. . . . . . ... . .. . . . . . . . . . held by . . . .. . . .. .. . . .. .. . .... ... .. . . . . .. .... .. .. . .. address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . .. .. .. . ... . .. .. . . . . . . . . . 8. There are no other encumbrances or liens against the land.xxat W. . . .. . . . . . . .. .. .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .... .. . . . . .. ... . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . .. .. .. .... .. ... .. .. .. ..... ... 9. The land lies in the following zoning use districts . .. .. .. . . .... . . .. ...... .. .. .. .. .. . . . .. . ..... .. . . .... .. .. .. . . .. . . .. . . . . .. .. . . . . .. . . .. . . . . .. . . .. .. . . .. . . .. .... ..... . . .... ...... . . 10. No part of the land lies under water whether tide water, stream, pond water or otherwise, efX XROM . .. .. .... .. . . .. .. .. . . ... . .. . . .. . . ... . . .. . . .. . . .. .. .. .. .. . . .. .. .. .. . .. .... . ..... . .. . 11. The applicant shall at his expense install all required public improvements. 12. The land (does) (x�xxjt) lie in a Water District or Water Supply District. Name of Dis- trict, if within a District, is . . . .... .F!,91Xe]7$. zAIUO. .w.at@I". Works, , , ,, , , , , , , , , , ,,,,, , , ,, 13. Water mains will be laid by . . . .. .. .existing , , , ,, , , ,, ,, , and (a) (no) charge will be made for installing said mains. 14. Electric lines and standards xvill be installed b existin& .. .. .... . .. .. .. . . .. .. .. .. .. . . .. .. . . . .. .. .. . . . and (a) (no) charge will be made for installing said lines. 15. Gas mains will be installed by . .. . . . . .A4A. . . .. .. . . .. . . . . .. .. .. . . .... .. .. . .. .. . .... . . .. . . . and (a) (no) charge will be made for installing said mains. 16. If streets shown on the plat are claimed by the applicant to be existing public streets in the 'Suffolk County 1Iighway system, annex Schedule "R" hereto, to show same. 17. If streets shown on the plat are claimed by the applicant to be existing public streets in the Town of Southold Highway system, annex Schedule "C" hereto to show same. 18. There are no existing buildings or structures on the land which are not located and shown on the plat. 19. Where the plat shows proposed streets which are extensions of streets on adjoining sub- division maps heretofore filed• there are no reserve strips at the end of the streets on said existing maps at their conjunctions with the proposed streets. �.,,�. 20. In the course of these proceedings, the applicant will offer proof of title as required by Sec. 335 of the Real Property Law. 21. Submit a copy of proposed deed for lots showing .all restrictions, covenants, etc. Annex Schedule "D". PNLIA}V'N QA D N Ln. r' T0. 1 O ,SOU, ;HOLD S[} FiQL TY J Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 QUESTIONNAIRE TO BE COMPLETED AND SUBMITTED WITH YOUR APPLICATIONS FORMS TO THE PLANNING BOARD Please complete, sign and return to the Office of the Planning Board with your completed applications forms . If your answer to any of the following questions is yes , please indicate these on your guaranteed survey or submit other appropriate evidence. 1. Are there any wetland grasses on this parcel? Yes No (Attached is a list of the wetland grasses defined — by the Town Code, Chapter 97 , for your reference) 2. Are there any other premises under your ownership abutting this parcel? Yes No 3. Are there any building permits pending on this parcel? See attached sheet . Yes No 4 . Are there any other applications pending concerning this property before any other department or agency? (Town , State, County, etc. ) Yes No See attached sheet . — 5 . Is there any application pending before any other agency with regard to a different project on this parcel? Yes No 6 . Was this property the subject of any prior application to the Planning Board? Yes No 7. Does this property have a valid certificate of occupancy, if yes please . submit .a copy of same Yes No See attached . I certify that the above statements are true a&`will be relied on by the Planning Board in considering this application. December .18 , 1992 Signature of1property owneror authorized agent date Stephen L. Ham, III , authorized agent for John S . McGeeney and Edward F. Rodenbach , Trustee Attachment to questionnaire for: the Planning Board STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF SUFFOLK, ss : On the 18th day of December 19 94 before me personally came_ Stephen L. Ham. . III to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he executed the same. QE 90 ALii* � c MTMy PU6WC,Style it*"rr,:, Notary,, Public 1a 47 AIMS owfitiod M Sutwk Oouniy - C+yyaswn Exprres Pxes7tfyr Yd IWy� /p9� Attachment to Questionnaire Item 3 . There are two open building permits (Nos. 20333Z and 207652) on the premises owned by John S. McGeeney (SCTM # 1000-6-2-5) . Item 4 . Application has been made to the Zoning Board of Appeals to permit the proposed lot line change. Item 7. Except for an addition that is being completed pursuant to one of the building permits referenced above, the structures on the premises owned by John S. McGeeney (SCTM # 1000-6-2-5) pre-exist the Zoning Ordinance. No pre-existing Certificate of Occupancy has ever been applied for or issued. A Certificate of Occupancy covering the structures on the premises owned by Edward F. Rodenbach, Trustee (SCTM # 1000-6-2-6) , is submitted herewith. MVV 22 '91 10:55 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD F•2/4 j �- 4 FORM NO. 4 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT 1, Office of the Building Inspector Town Hall Southold, N.Y. { PRE EXISTING CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY .J No Z-20367 Date NOVEMBER 20 1991 THIS CERTIFIES that the building ONE FAMILY DWELLING ,I Location of Property AVENUE B FISHERS ISLAND N Y House No. Street Hamlet { County Tax Map No. 1000 SeStion 6 Block 2 Lot 6 Subdivision Filed Map No. Lot No. I j conforms substantially to the Requirements for a One Family Dwelling built Prior to: _ APRIL 9, 1957pursuant to which CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY NUMBER Z-20367 dated NOVEMBER 20 1991 was issued, and conforms to all of the requirements of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is TWO ONE FAMILY DWELLINGS WITH ACCESSORY WOOD STORAGE BUILDING The certificate is issued to CHARLES 70LY i (owner) Of the aforesaid building. SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH APPROVAL N/A UNDERWRITERS CERTIFICATE No. Nfps PLUMBERS CERTIFICATION DATED NIA — *PLEASE SEE ATTACHED INSPECTION REPORT. Building Inspector Rev. 1/61 S 22. The applicant estimates that the cost of grading and required public improvements will be $. . . ..9... , as itemized in Schedule "E" hereto annexed and requests that the maturity of the Performance Bond be fixed at . . . .. .. .. . . . . . years. The Performance Bond will be written by a licensed surety company unless otherwise shown on Schedule "F". John S. McGeeney and DATE , December 18 19 92 . . Edward F. Rodenbach, Trustee . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. .. .. .. ........ . ... .. .... . (Name of Applicant) { (Signature an Title) Stephen L. Ham, III, authorized agent 45 Hampton_ Road,,SoytktdlRRton.,..NY.11968. (Address) STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF . . . . . . . .WFFID.LK. .. .. .. .. .. . . .. .. ss: On the . .18th. . . . . .. .... . day of. . . .. .... .D9ceMker. . . . . .. . . .. 19. .92. ., before me personally came . .. . . . . . LII. .. . . .. . . . . . . . to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that . . . .. he. . . , executed the same. E JANE ALI F1E "AM SM Yf NO TWA bi. . . .Nn 624014M.. . Notary Pu c QtWifiey m$Iwk �rrao�A��x►>7i2R NYIP- /993 STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . .. .. .. .. .. . ss: On the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . day . .. .. .. .. . . . of . . . . . .. . . ... . .. 19. .. . . ., before me personally came . . to me known, who being by me duly sworn did de- pose and say that . .. . . . . . . . . . resides at No. . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . .. .... . . . .. ... . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . that . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . .. . . . . .. . is the . . . .. . . . . . of . ... .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . .. .. . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . the corporation described in and which executed the foregoing instrument; that . .. .. .. . . . . . knows the seal of said corporation; that the seal affixed by order of the board ofd;rectors of said corporation. and that . . . . . . . . . . . . signed . .. . . . . ... . .. . name thereto by like order. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . .. .. . . . . .. . .. . . .. .. . . Notary Public t Vo rag APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Southold Town Hall lt,�5-may/ Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman H T 53095 Main Road Serge Doyen, Jr. P.O. Box 1179 Jamesld, New Roberti A. Villa r y��l *t �aO� SoFax o(5 6) 765- 11971 1823 Richard C. Wilton Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD July 14, 1994 Stephen L. Ham III, Esq. 45 Hampton Road Southampton, NY 11968 Re: Your Letters of July 12th and July 13, 1994 Inquiry Concerning Properties of McGeeney & Rodenbach Dear Mr. Ham: Our office has reviewed your communications with reference to a new proposal to file an application. It does appear that the project will not be conforming with the zoning code and which will not conform to the lot-line variance and pending re-division application before the Planning Board, however, more information will he necessary - which is reviewed through an appeal process and public hearing only. Zoning, as you may know, does not encourage more than one dwelling on a parcel, or new construction near a dividing property line, particularly where there are two different property owners. You may follow the same course of procedure as other applicants by filing an application with the Building Department, obtaining an appropriate Notice of Disapproval, and filing an appeal with the Board of Appeals in order that a public hearing may be held and full review made. Not only will a new variance application be necessary, it may also be necessary for us to reopen the lot-line variance application since the circumstances are changing. (The lot-line variance previously rendered does not change the normal procedure required for appeals on building and zoning matters.) In checking with Robert Kassner of the Planning Board office today, we were informed that you may need to re-file new maps with the changes since their approval was based upon the two buildings being removed. Vel`�G/// GERARD P. GOEHR GER CHAIRMAN r l Enclosure / a 7 cc: Southold Town Planning Board � .� 1 8 Town Building Department AR eA . �`- _ s x5.f N Sl/2LG 5 75.01'70• V ISSL It C 195.0' N!5.01 cRESCE4T nC[[STONE (1XIST) , S 75•pl'70' E N $93777 ti 19797 V ISG0.�7 ; i MFRESTONC I 1 MIST.) I I • i I OI TAX MAP - DISTRICT 1000 SEC, G lie i BLOCK Z. LOY S I I � I � 1 I , I rn ' N PORCH r N J I N > ul - 1 I VHF o m I I HOUSE N I I c a s Z 1 7 m I I N r >J 1 I I I �� g ➢ - --- o A CD A I ' 3 GAC. rn I,•.J q rn A � 4a MCRCSTONC (EXIST.) N PROPOSED JIT/ACX LINE - - - r IOC IVTVRC DN/LLING-TO DC C831STR•LCTED A"[4 o g /` RCnOVAL OF EXISTING q. r c yM R �CAtOFAi AREA LOT < PROPOSED PROPERTY LIVE .a: : �' yy.��^..t`�t! • La• ,yr +l v<a r.}.1 iv.' ... s'.,v.. ' v so bid<::.•`ae. ;:� .�°.` '�gggggg.I: .f,��'' : N 3 PoLE•8 0 .1 • n j SHEp 'Y w. rn a << r g R:3g'..zk • POLL X169 > mt. „?y m 70 TAX MAP -DISTRICT ' 1000 °'„'•e.:a „ ` SEC. 6, BLOCK Z, LOl� � eR.FPik. n R !STONE EXIST) N SSZ1.01 V IGII.T7 MATTHEWS & HAM ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW 45 HAMPTON ROAD SOUTHAMPTON,N.Y.11968 516-283-2400 PHILIP S.MATTHEWS TELECOPIEE 516-287-1078 July 12 , 1994 ue o-ease ST"NEN L.HAM,III BY HAND Board of Appeals Town of Southold Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Application Nos. 4145 and 4151 - McGeeney and Rodenbach as Trustee (SCTM # ' s 1000-6-2-5 & 6) Dear Board Members: Last year you granted two variances to permit a lot line change between the referenced parcels and to allow for a nonconforming building envelope to be constructed on tax lot 6 . Copies of both determinations are enclosed. The lot line change was approved by the Planning Board and a deed was recorded to effect the related transfer of an 8, 505 square foot parcel from tax lot 5 to tax lot 6. The two lots have been assigned new tax map numbers, 5. 1 and 6. 1, respectively. As a condition to the variance granted with respect to the nonccnforming building envelope, you prohibited any new construction from being commenced until both the principal dwelling and the cottage located on tax lot 6 were removed from the premises. The owner of new tax lot 6. 1 has been approached by at least one year-round resident of Fishers Island who has made several inquiries concerning occupancy of the cottage. As you know, affordable housing for the local population of Fishers Island has been and continues to be a serious problem. In light of the foregoing, I am writing to inquire whether you would be willing to amend the conditions to your determination with respect to the removal of the cottage to allow my client to refurbish it for rental . If you will excuse the metaphors, I want to stress that my client is not seeking some back door modification to allow him to have his cake and eat it too. He agreed to and fully accepts the conditions set forth in both determinations and is perfectly happy to abide by them if you do not see fit to grant additional relief. At the same time, he believes it would be • a shame to remove a structure that, when put into good condition, would have some utility for the community. As you can well understand, however, he does not want to make a substantial expenditure on the cottage only to be required to remove it when he decides to build a new principal dwelling at the site. I have listed below a few possible resolutions of this issue; perhaps you can suggest others. 1. Permit the refurbished cottage to remain even if a new principal dwelling is built taking advantage of the building envelope for which the variance was granted. 2 . Same as No. 1 except require the cottage to be converted to an accessory building without living accommodations if the property is ever transferred to someone who is not a beneficiary of the trust of which Edward Rodenbach is trustee or a direct descendant of such a beneficiary. 3 . Same as No. 2 except require the cottage to be so converted if the property is ever transferred to anyone other than Edward Rodenbach as trustee. 4 . Same as No. 1 except modify the building envelope for the new principal dwelling to make the rear yard more conforming to current zoning requirements. In all cases, some restrictions could be imposed (as is the case with Walsh Park) to assure that the cottage is rented only to a full-time resident of Fishers Island. I have set forth these options in an order from most to least favorable to the owner. I have not discussed them with the owner but, unless there is only a small modification to the building envelope, my guess is that option 4 would probably not be acceptable and option 3 may not be acceptable. Option 2 may strike an appropriate balance. I understand that the beneficiaries of the trust are members of the family of John S. McGeeney, the owner of new tax lot 5. 1. So long as tax lot 6. 1 is in that family, it would appear that no undue financial gain would be realized by reason of having two dwellings on this lot which, after all, has supported two dwellings since the adoption of the Zoning Code. The rental income would help offset the cost of refurbishing the cottage which would in turn provide sorely ,needed housing for a year-round resident. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on these proposals and any others you may consider. Thank you for your attention to this matter. 0 0 Southold TbNn Planning Board ^ May 3, 1993 Ayes: Mr. MCDonald. Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward. Mr. Ward. Opposed? Motion carried. Ufa ..knt,,:k. Mr. Ward: 7;35 g'.H. W{j j �j y`y TpV a3�A 3Yiiard L ®moi G-stv,. Trus. - This proposed lot line change is to subtract 11 ,185 squaro feet from a 65,966 square foot parcel and add it to a 20,,182 square foot parcel located on Fishers Island. SCTMP 1000--6--2--5 & 6. Is there anybody here that would like to address the Board that would possibly lie opposed to this project? Anyhody ti-iat could, neither pro nor con, like to make any comments at alis time? If riot, is any-- body here in support Of t"is application? Tf not, what is t'.1e pleasure Of t}le Board? I thins-, all is in order to close this hearing. Mr. Orlo-usL-i: So moved. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Ward: Motion 'ias heen seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward. Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried. Unat's the pleasure of the Board? Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ma'o a motion. WHEREAS, John S. McG?eney and Edward F. Rodenhach, Trus. are the oemers of the property lmotm and designated as SCPMp 1.000--6--2--5 & 6, located at Avenue B and Crescent Ave. on Fis .ers Island; and WHEREAS, this lot line, to be lmown as proposod lot line change for Jolu1 S. McGeeney and Edward F. Roden�ach, ;ros. , is for a lot line change to subtract 11,485 square foot from a 65,999 square foot parcel and add it to a 20,982 scvare foot parcel; and WHEREAS, a variance gas granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals on Marc' 1.8, 1993; and WHEREAS, Vie SOuthold Town Planning Board, pursuant to the State Environmanta]. Quality Review Act, (Artic.e 8) , Part 617, declared itself .load agency and issued a Negative Declaration on March 1 , 1993; and WHEREAS, a final public hearing was closed on said ,uhdivisionap,licati.on at the Town Hall, SOut1:Old, N_w York, on may 3, 1993; and WHEREAS, all the requirements Of the Suxlivision Regulations of the TOlaz of Southold have bcen m^_ and he it therefora_, RESOLVED that the Southold Tolin Planning Board approve and aut"ori.ze the Chair- man to endorse the final survey dated February 2, 1993. �J� `�� =per . /QK ✓ � Pb APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L.HARRIS v Supervisor Gerard P Goehringer, Chairman = d Serge Doyen,Jr. j FJ Town Hall, 53095 Main Road James Dinizio,Jr. � ' P.O. Box 1179 Robert A.Villa = s ''d; Southold, New York 11971 Richard C.Wilton " Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS Telephone (516) 765-1800 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Application No. 4145 . ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS Application of JOHN S. McGEENEY and EDWARD F. RODENBACH (as Trustee) for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-32 for approval of a reduction of the lot area of an existing parcel, with an increase of the lot area of the adjoining parcel, in this proposed lot-line change. Location of Property: South Side of Crescent Avenue and the north side of Avenue "B, " Fishers Island, NY; County Tax Map Parcel ID Nos. 1000-6-2-5 and 6. Each lot as exists is shown to be substandard in lot area and is located in the R-80 Zone District. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on January 14, 1993 and February 23 , 1993 , and all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; and WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; and WHEREAS, Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question, its present zoning, and the surrounding areas; and WHEREAS, the Board made the following findings of fact: 1. This is an application requesting approval in the reduction of the lot area of a presently nonconforming, substandard lot from 70, 322 ( 65,966 & 4, 356+-) square feet to 61,817 square feet, inclusive of the small strip of land located along the beach area (Lot Ref. ##13) . 2 . The amount of land area to be deeded from Lot 5 to Lot No. 6 is 8 , 505 square feet, which will increase the lot area of Lot 6 to 28, 957 square feet. 3 . The lots above-referenced are identified on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 6, Block 2, Lots 5, 6 , and 13 . Lot Reference Nos. 5/13 are shown along Crescent Avenue, and Lot Ref . No. 6 fronts along Avenue B. TELL l� PPR 2 g 1993 s I Appl. No. 4145 - Ro&bach/McGeeney • Decision Rendered March 18, 1993 Southold Town Board of Appeals 4. Lot Nos. 5 and 13 (northerly lot) are combined as one parcel, and the following structures are shown to exist as of December 13, 1991, as confirmed by survey prepared by Chandler, Palmer & King: a) two-story, single-family dwelling, b) 16 ' x 18 ' accessory single-story garage building located in the rear yard and used since the enactment of zoning for storage and garage-related purposes; c) 12 ' x 20 ' accessory single-story shed ( storage building) situated in the rear yard area, and which is now being relocated under Building Permit No. 20333Z dated December 13, 1991 and enlarged with an 8 ' x 10' single-story addition. There is no certificate of occupany or pre C.O. found in the town to show that a review has been made declaring this "shed" building to be a guest cottage (sleeping use for family members only) . Further application and review will be required to address the use of this building for other than shed purposes or for sleeping quarters for family members. 5. Pursuant to a newer survey dated October 21, 1992, also prepared by Chandler, Palmer & King, the same structures exist as noted above, except that the 12 ' x 20 ' shed has been enlarged by 80 sq. ft. ( 8 ' x 101 ) , and a fence enclosure for garden purposes has also been erected in the rear yard. 6. Lot No. 6 (southerly lot) is improved with the following structures as shown on the December 21, 1991 survey prepared by Chandler, Palmer & King: a) single-story cottage structure in very poor condition and situated on or near the rear property line at the northwest corner of the premises; b) single-story, single-family dwelling situated near the center of the premises; c) small 7 ' x 12 ' accessory shed (storage building) located in the rear yard at the extreme northeast corner of the premises. 7. Each of these two parcels is nonconforming in this R-80 Residential Zone District (eff. 1-9-89) since the lot area requirement is 80, 000 minimum per lot. 8. In considering this application, the Board also finds and determines: Appl. No. 4145 - Roonbach/McGeeney • Decision Rendered March 18, 1993 Southold Town Board of Appeals 8 . a) there is no detriment to the health, safety, or welfare of the community, and the benefit to applicant is greater; b) the relief requested will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district; c) the grant of this variance for an adjustment in the lot area for each of the two parcels is not causing or creating an increase in dwelling unit density, and this variance will not cause a substantial effect on available governmental facilities; d) there is no other alternative feasible for appellants to pursue; e) the relief requested will not adversely impact the essential character of the neighborhood; f) the relief requested is not substantial in relation to the requirements, particularly since this is an exchange of property to increase the size of a smaller parcel; g) that in view of the manner in which the difficulties arose, and in considering all the above factors, the interests of justice will be served by granting the variance, as conditionally noted below. Accordingly, on motion by Chairman Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Dinizio, it was RESOLVED, to APPROVE the reduction in the lot size of a nonconforming parcel by 8, 505 square feet in order that the nonconforming parcel (to the south) may be increased by 8 , 505 square feet (see lot lines shown on survey prepared by Chandler, Palmer & King dated October 21, 1992 , PROVIDED: A) the northerly parcel (combined Lots 5 and 13 ) remain as one parcel with a total lot area of 61,817 sq. ft. ; B) the southerly parcel contain a lot area of not less than 28, 957 square feet; C) there be no increase in dwelling unit density for Appl. No. 4145 - RcOnbach/McGeeney Decision Rendered March 18 , 1993 Southold Town Board of Appeals either parcel. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Dinizio, Villa and Wilton. This resolution was duly adopted. lk GERARD P. GOEHRINGER,✓HAIRMAN has F01 4-e OG � l N E . PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ,a :' T SCOTT L. HARRIS Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman ® `� Supervisor George Ritchie Latham, Jr. a7,( Richard G. Ward Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Mark S. McDonald P.O. Box 1179 Kenneth L. Edwards PLANNING BOARD OFFICE Southold, New York 11971 Telephone (516) 765-1938 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765-1823 April 13, 1993 Stephen L. Ham III Matthews & Ham 45 Hampton Road Southampton, NY 11968 RE: Lot Line Change for John S. McGeeney and Edward F. Rodenbach, Trus. Fishers Island SCTM#1000-6-2-5 & 6 Dear Mr. Ham: The following resolution was adopted by the Southold Town Planning Board at a meeting held on Monday, April 12, 1993 . ; BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, May 3, 1993, at 7: 40 p.m. . For a final public hearing on the maps dated February 2, 1993 . Please contact this office if you have any questions regarding the above. Very truly yours, Richard G. Ward Chairman �gpFFO(,�c 2tc ✓c APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS 0� OGy SCOTT L.HARRIS Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer, Chairman h z Serge Doyen,Jr. p ,F Town Hall, 53095 Main Road James Dinizio,Jr. P.O. Box 1179 Robert A.Villa �Ol �[ �� Southold, New York 11971 Richard C.Wilton Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS Telephone (516) 765-1800 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD INTER-DEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM TO: Richard G. Ward, Planning Board Chairman FROM: Board of Appeals DATE: February 11, 1993 SUBJECT: Request by ZBA for PB Comments Based Upon Site Plan or Subdivision Regulations Coordinated for your comments are the following projects. Please let us know whether or not the site layout as proposed by the applicant may be substantially affected or conflict with your requirements in these applications. Public hearings have been calendared for February 23, 1993 , however, if you are not able to respond either verbal or written comments, please let us know. Thank you. SITE PLANS: Appl. of JAMES R. LEWIS for East End Supply Co. , Inc. (by Garrett A. Strang, R.A. ) - new warehouse building on 67 ,124 sq. ft. parcel. LI Zone District at 645 Ninth Street, Greenport. 1000-48-2-1 and 44.1. SUBDIVISIONS OR LOT LINE CHANGES: Appl. of JOHN S. MCGEENEY AND EDWARD F. RODENBACH. Exchange of property will require a Variance to reduce lot area of the northerly parcel, increasing the nonconformity. Lots are substandard in size. R-80 Zone. 1000-6-2-5, 6 and 13 . Avenue B and Crescent Avenue, Fishers Island. � I i SOOTHOLD U^' PLANNING BDnr," _„_ W CID PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L. HARRIS Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman '� ifi _ t Supervisor George Ritchie Latham, Jr. Richard G. Ward Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Mark S. McDonald P.O. Box 1179 Kenneth L. Edwards PLANNING BOARD OFFICE Southold. New York 11971 Telephone (516) 765-1938 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765-1823 TO: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman, Zoning Board of Appeals From: Richard G. Ward, Chairman RE: Pending Lot-Line Changes that require action by the Board of Appeals Date: February 26, 1993 As requested, following is a list of Lot-Line applications pending at the Planning Board that requires action by the Board of Appeals. SCTM# Name 1000-6-2-5 & 6 John S. McGeeney & Edward F. Rodenbach, Trus. 1000-128-4-9, 15 & 16 Henrietta A. Mormile & Arthur & Marian Mormile i I �I i NEW:-::;:NEGATIVEiiiiii?iiiiiiiil.............iii. ii................ : 03 : .............................................................................................. 12 93: .::1.4 : 55..._........... ILE NUMBER : ; N1472800-00872 `:Town of ISLIP, SUFFOLK County EAD AGENCY : : :.•. 473800 ( Town of SOUTHOLD, SUFFOLK County .:.; FFICF or BOARD ;;Planning Board .:: .... . . ' .. ..... CLASS T Un.listed:"' ... .... ...... .. ......... i . ... TITLE _T. • McGeeney & E. Rodellbac...:. Ype .. .. ... . . .. ESC'RIPTION , Subtract 11 , 845sf from a 65, 966sf parcel & add it to a 20, 682sf parcel loc. Avenue B. ,DATE RECEIVED : ; ,� ,,;;Negative DecIaratiom Il... : .. Normal Void „! :.,'.. Condi.tioned .. :,:. . .... ... . ........:Rescinded ........................................................................................................................:... ::::.:::::::::::::::::::::::.:::::::::: Current Re .................................................................: cord 2MPOR'I'AIVT > > F' j- 1e Number N 1 — 4 7 2 8 0 0 — 0 0 8 7 2 Use the above number in all correspondence about this action ! To the Lead Agency : The above information confirms that filings on the described Negative Declaration were officially received by, and entered in the SEOR Repository on the date(s) shown in the box headed DATE RECEIVED above. The date and time in the second line show when this document was printed. Please check the information above carefully. For corrections or questions contact Charles Lockrow, (518)457-2224, or write to: SEOR Repository NYSDEC Division of Regulatory Affairs 50 Wolf Road, Room 514 Albany, NY 12233 Town of i. SOUTHOLD ' 8 — Planning Board �J jam 53095 Main Road-P. O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 SOD 040 ;: PIP^.'ni; y9�;UFFtYf.0 O�� O t9' Gym 1 � q PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS W ,? SCOTT L. HARRIS Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman L9 `T Supervisor George Ritchie Latham, Jr. Richard G. Ward Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Mark S. McDonald P.O. Box 1179 Kenneth L. Edwards Southold, New York 11971 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE Telephone (516) 765-1938 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765-1823 March 2 , 1993 Stephen L. Ham III Matthews & Ham 45 Hampton Road Southampton, New York 11968 RE: Lot Line Change for John S. McGeeney and Edward F. Rodenbach, Trus. Fishers Island SCTM#1000-6-2-5 & 6 Dear Mr. Ham: The following resolution was adopted by the Southold Town Planning Board at a meeting held on Monday, March 1, 1993 . BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, established itself as lead agency, and as lead agency makes a determination of non-significance and grants a Negative Declaration on this Type I action. Enclosed please find a copy of the Negative Declaration for your records. Very truly your/s, - GV cr�.flO Richard G. Ward "u Chairman Encl. • .ZLLai_.�.e1� • p ' PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS �? rn }r' SCOTT L. HARRIS -. Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman ?i > �.� � - - � Supervisor George Ritchie Latham. Jr. Richard G. Ward ` -+F��,' Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Mark S. McDonald " P.O. Box 1179 Kenneth L. Edwards PLANNING BOARD OFFICE Southold, New York 11971 Telephone (516) 765-1938 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765-1823 State Environmental Quality Review NEGATIVE DECLARATION Notice of Determination of Non-Significance March 1 , 1993 This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act) of the Environmental Law. The Southold Town Planning Board, as lead agency, has determined that the proposed action described below will not have a significant effect on the environment and a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will not be prepared. Name of Action: John S. McGeeney and Edward F. Rodenbach SCTM# : 1000-6-2-5 & 6 Location: Avenue B, Fishers Island SEQR Status: Type I (X ) Unlisted ( ) Conditioned Negative Declaration: Yes ( ) No (X ) Description of Action: This proposed lot line change is to subtract 11,845 square feet from a 65,966 square foot parcel and add it to a 20 , 482 square foot parcel. Both lots have existing houses. 0 Page 2 John S. McGeeney & Edward F. Rodenbach SEQR Negative Declaration Con' t. Reasons Supporting This Determination: This project involves a lot line change that will result in two lots both with existing houses; thus the change will not be a more intensive use of the land. Both lots are non-conforming in area. The applicant has applied to the Board of Appeals for an area variance. This change will increase the size of the smaller lot in this R-80 zone in keeping with zoning in this area. The applicant will have to comply with the requirements of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code (SCSC) and all relevant standards of water supply and sewage disposal systems. Design and flow specifications, subsurface soil conditions, and site details will have to be approved by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS) . This impact is not considered significant due to the anticipated project compliance with established requirements of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code (SCSC) and the Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS) and the required obtainment of the relevant permits. An Environmental assessment has been submitted and reviewed. It was determined that no significant effects to the environmental were likely to occur should the project be implemented as planned. For Further Information: Contact Person: Robert G. Kassner Address: Planning Board Telephone Number: ( 516) 765-1938 cc: Suffolk County Department of Health Services Commissioner, NYSDEC, Albany Judith Terry, Town Clerk Building Department Applicant SuBG«E • COUNTY OF SUFFOLK • R6 ROBERT J. GAFFNEY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES MARY E. HIBBERD, M.D., M.P.H. COMMISSIONER February 18, 1993 Mr.Richard G.Ward,Chairman Town of Southold vy Town Hall-53095 Main Road q _[ ! I i P.O.Box 1179 ,v Southold,New York 11971fJ FEB 2 510 RE: Proposed Lot-Line Change for McGeeney&Rodenbach SCTM#: 1000-06-2-5&6 3,ULVr4D i" '"d Dear Mr.Ward: The Suffolk County Department of Health Services(SCDHS)has received your letter dated January 12, 1993, concerning the above-referenced application,and has no objection to the Town's designation as lead agency. This correspondence is intended primarily to expedite the procedural requirements of SEQRA pertaining to the establishment of lead agency.The comments provided below are,therefore,general in nature,representing several of our most common concerns regarding Suffolk County projects.The department wishes,however,to reserve its right to provide more detailed information within the comment period(s)established for this action. I. Suffolk County Sanitary Code (SCSC) 1. The SCDHS maintains jurisdiction over the final location of sewage disposal and water supply systems,pursuant to the authority and requirements of Articles 4,5,6 and 7 of the SCSC. Applications must comply with all relevant density and construction standards for water supply and sewage disposal. Applicants should not undertake the construction of,or connection to,either system without Health Department approval. 2. Where applicable,the department regulates the storage,handling and discharge of restricted toxic and hazardous materials pursuant to the requirements of Articles 7& 12 of the SCSC. 3. If an application has not yet been submitted to the SCDHS,one should be filed at the earliest date to allow for the technical review of the proposed action.Project designs submitted to the department should be fully consistent with any action currently under review through the SEQRA process. 4. Design and flow specifications,information regarding subsurface soil conditions,water supply information,and complete design details are essential to the review of this project,and are evaluated fully at the time of application review.Should the town require additional environmental information(such as a DEIS),discussion of the compliance requirements of the SCDHS should be required. 5. Of particular concern to the department are those areas which because of elevated groundwater conditions,or soils which are not conducive to the proper functioning of conventional subsurface sanitary sewage disposal systems. Your agency should be aware that such conditions frequently require the use of fill or the excavation of subsurface soils to accommodate subsurface sanitary disposal systems constructed in conformance with the requirements of the SCSC. DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COUNTY CENTER RIVERHEAD. N.Y. 11901-3397 852-2100 �+ Letter to Richard G. Ward* • February 18, 1993 Page 2 6. The department is also significantly concerned with areas where access to potable water may be constrained by unacceptable groundwater quality and the lack of an available public water supply.All private water supply systems must be constructed in conformance with requirements of the SCSC. H. NATURAL RESOURCES: 1. The SCDHS fully supports all efforts to maximize protection of natural resources which may be impacted upon by construction and development activities.It is the position of the department that the SEQRA review process provides the greatest opportunity for comprehensive consideration of these resources, and that all practicable planning measures should be employed to help ensure their protection. Of particular concern to department is the adequate protection of wetlands,surface waters,natural communities, contiguous natural habitats,and rue,threatened and endangered species.In addition,efforts to protect sensitive physical resources such groundwatems,dunes,bluffs,shorelines,natural drainage channels,groundwater recharge areas,and steep slopes are fully supported and encouraged by the SCDHS. In general,the department encourages the following land use measures be considered(where appropriate)to actions being reviewed pursuant to SEQRA. 1.Maximum practicable setbacks from all wetlands,surface waters,dunes,and bluffs. 2.Non-disturbance buffers between wetland limits and required structural setbacks. 3. Clustering of subdivision lots to provide for maximum preservation of large contiguous areas of dedicated open space. 4. Stringent clearing limitations which can reduce potential impacts to wildlife habitats,vegetative communities, and unconsolidated soils. 5.Maximum practicable confinement of development to areas with slopes of less than 10%. 6.Maximum use of native species for landscaping purposes. 7. Construction of recharge areas,so as to minimize the amount of disturbance and structural modification to the site. 8.Maximum use of land-banked parking on commercial sites. 9.Minimal use of fertilizer-dependant turf and landscaping. 10.Employment of stormwater runoff control measures necessary to maintain runoff on-site. The department appreciates the opportunity to participate in the SEQRA review of this proposal.Additional information may be provided prior to the close of the established comment period.Should you have any questions or require additional information,please feel free to contact the Office of Ecology at 852-2078. Sincerely, -M,ui� T, Madc J.Reuschle Environmental Planner Office of Ecology MJR/amf cc: Vito Minei,P.E. Stephen Costa,P.E. r MATTHEWS & HAI ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW 45 HAMPTON ROAD SOUTHAMPTON,N.Y.11068 516-283-2400 PHILIP H.MATTHEWS TELEOOPIER 516-287-1076 .ae mam STEPHE.G L.HAM,III February 9, 1993 Mr. Robert Kassner Planning Board Town of Southold Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Lot Line Change for John S. McGeeney and Edward F. Rodenbach; (SCTM # 's 1000-6-2-5 & 6) Dear Bob: I have enclosed eight prints of a revised map of the referenced lot line change. The revisions reflect that the two single-family dwellings on tax lot 6 will be removed and the rear yard setback for a new dwelling on that lot will be 20 feet. No changes were made to the area to be transferred from tax lot 5 to tax lot 6. Sincerely, .0 r z 41'..-t Stephen L. Ham, III SLH:ja Enclosure PLANS"", c PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS rn t p Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman SCOTT L. HARRIS George Ritchie Latham, Jr. �/© b�! -Supervisor Richard G. Ward 1 " Mark S. McDonald Town Hall, 095 Main Road B P.O. Box 1179 Kenneth L. Edwards PLANNING BOARD OFFICE Southold, New York 11971 Telephone (516) 765-1938 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765-1823 Jan. 12 , 1993 RE: Lead Agency Coordination Request Dear Reviewer: The purpose of this request is to determine under Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act-SEQRA) of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617 the following: 1. Your jurisdiction in the action described below; 2. Your interest in assuming the responsibilities of lead agency; and 3 . Issues of concern which you believe should be evaluated. Enclosed please find a copy of the proposal and a completed Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) to assist you in your response. Project Name: 'PA00PcSE0 LoT./ lrlF CHA—� J-0 s�Dwi3P. P � . `fr'olltniz/�cN S�Twrztf000-F- a2. - ."d" 6 Requested Action: Sv071rh�- !! 41?,) Sy_4f4o���t7� f'PoM 6 S 6 -3 j:on rc r-oa7- �Ra�L ! O go_y_o Sovsr?� Focidi�ocEG 0 1 PPC&SHO /7L. Cyr fiaiaY� SEQRA Classification: ( X ) Type I ( ) Unlisted Contact Person: ( 516).-765-1938 The lead agency will determine the need for an environmental impact statement (EIS) on this project. Within thirty ( 30) days of the date of this letter, please respond in writing whether or not you have an interest in being lead agency. Planning Board Position: (x) This agency wishes to assume lead agency status for this action. ( ) This agency has no objection to your agency assuming lead agency status for this action. ( ) Other. ( See comments below) . Comments: ryes /s ,-= T yf'� -s r11,0 Srivn'/� %h`E !?PP�iC.����rA1�12 Please feel free to contact this office for further information. Sir)qerely, J Richard G. Ward Chairman cc: Board of Appeals Board of Trustees yF Building' Department Southold Town Board Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services NYSDEC - Stony Brook NYSDEC - Albany * Maps are enclosed for your review Coordinating agencies • 617.21 • Appendix <'a SE ® State Envircnmental Duality FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ME Purpose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants 3nc agent i s dereor action maybe significant. The question of whet h r an action rn.,� k,= :i it ic, i ; ly, there are aspects of a Me vnsw r. a prof: project that are subjec I e or unrneasun�a bi _ sY c answe Freque significance may have little or no formal knowledge of the env; o In , analysis. In addition, many who have knowledge in one partir.ular 3 .ea m; } Ot f tt c E who detarmi )•p, rr in environsren, the question of significance. The full EAF is intended to provide a method whe•ebv alic.,, - r IdE concerns af'ecti Process has been orderly, comprehensive in nature, (et tlexil:le P: ail,; ., that the determinati< Full EAF Components: The full EAF is comprised of [h.ree parts: I fit a projecT or actio Part 1: Provides objecti.e data and informattcn about a data, it assists a reviewer in the anal,/5,s t sis that take; ple r_r i Far nti'y,ng basic proje, Part 2: Focuses on identifying the range of oostible irr pec s that rr ro large impac: guidance as r an impac to whethetis ikely to be con;u9erE.ci s a'.I r: Or ac tion. It provide impact. The form also identifies whether an r,p<cl: c t h,: he 17 is a potentially Part 3: If any impact in Fart 2 is identified as potential] la p; t cec. impact is actually important. y F,ec am to whether or net the DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE— type I Identify the Portions of EAF c,c,mpleted for this t , Cproject: E1 Fr' Upon review of the information recorded on this I'AF (Parts - and :: and 3 ,rl- .I JI' rt 3 information, and considering both the magitude and im ortaice o eeua'; i lead agency that: oche supporting ete-rr ined by the Cl A. The project will not result in any large and importa,I imp,:c ;I have a significant impact on the envi-onrm�nt, ;fere! 'e it r < ativ, 1, e v h ch will not ❑ B. Although the project could have a sigriricant effect cr the !, rc nri: r 'c Prepared. effect for this Unlisted e b=en required, Action because the mitigation rn-asure s est L c therefore a CONDITIONED negative declaration will be prey ,ed be a significant ❑ C. The project may result in one or more far ,_ and im on the environment, therefore g' portal ,! i ;rs i" r. A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only veliid for If I stedPA.a,c mf c':nt impact Nar" of .Action Name of Lead Ai encu Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in. Lead Ager C,/ TILE. Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature ut Pn�par (If r. ( , i- — �. 'sit b! officer] Date ___... PART PRO�'cCT ,NFORMP—lOti Prepared by Project Spon((`* NOTICE: This document is designed Lo assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significarrt effec i on the environment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E. Answers to these questions will be considere as part of the application for approval anc may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any addition information you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3. It is expected that completion of the.full EAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not involy: new studies; research or investigation. If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specif, each instance. NAME OF ACTION - Lot Line Change — Properties of John S. McGeeney and Edward F. Rodenbach, Trustee LOCATION OF ACTION(Include Street Address, Municipality and County) Crescent Avenue and Avenue B, Fishers Island, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk NAME OF APPLICANT/SPONSOR Stephen L. Ham, iii, as agent: BUSINESS TELEPHONE John S. McGeeney and Edward F. Rodenbach, Trustee ( 1 ) 28 —2400 _ ADDRESS 45 Hampton Road CITY/PO Southampton srnre ZIP CODE NY 1 11968 NAME OF OWNER(If differenq - BUSINESS TELEPHONE -- ADDRESS - _-- — - - CITY/PO STATE ZIP CODE DESCRIPTION OF ACTION transfer of 8 ,505± sq. feet from premises owned by John S. McGeeney (SCTM .# 1000-6-2-5) to premises owned by Edward F. Rodenbach, Trustee (SCTM # 1000-6-2-6) to effect lot line change Please Complete Each Question—Indicate N.A. if not applicable A. Site Description Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas. 1. Present land use: ❑Urban ❑Industrial ❑Commercial ❑Residential (suburban) I]RUral (non-farm) ❑Forest ❑Agriculture ❑Other 2. Total acreage of project area: 1.938 acres. APPROXIMATE ACREAGE PRESENTLY AFTER COMPLETION Meadow or Brushland (Non-agricultural) 1.808 acres 1.808 acres Forested acres acres Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland, pasture, etc.) acres acres Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24, 25 of ECL) acres acres Water Surface Area acres acres Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill) acres acres Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces A4 acres .13 acres Other (Indicate type) acres acres 3. What is predominant soil type(s) on project site? Riverhead sandy loam a. Soil drainage: )Well drained Ino % of site ❑Moderately well drained 40 of site ❑Poorly drained % of site b. If any agricultural land is involved, how many acres of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the NYE Land Classification System? acres. (See 1 NYCRR 370). 4. Are there bedrock outcroppings on project site? ❑Yes ENO a. What is depth to bedrock? e. 600 (in feet) 2 5. Approxima'e percentage of propprotect site with slopes: F10-10°� °� o0 ❑10-1540 00 ❑15% or 6. Is project substantially contiguous to, or contain a building, site, or district, listed on the State or the National 'Registers of Historic Places? ❑Yes ®No CI. Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural Landmarks? ❑Yes CDNo 8. What is the depth of the water table? >17 (in feet) 9. Is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aquifer? 12Yes ❑No 10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? ❑Yes ®No 11. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered? ❑Yes ®No According to Identify each species 12. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, other geological formations) ❑Yes (K]No Describe 13. Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area? ❑Yes ®No If yes, explain 14: Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community? ❑Yes I}ZNo 15. Streams within or contiguous to project area: none a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary 16. Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: a. Name none b. Size (In acres) 17. Is the site served by existing public utilities? ®Yes ❑No Ca) If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? ®Yes ❑No b) If Yes, will improvements be necessary to allow connection? ❑Yes ®No 18. Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 304? ❑Yes ®No 19. Is the site located in or substantially contiguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 . of the ECL, and 6 NYCRR 617? ®Yes ❑No 20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes? ❑Yes CRNo B. Project Description 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project sponsor 1.938 acres. b. Project acreage to be developed: 0 acres initially; 05 acres ultimately. c. Project acreage to remain undeve!oped 1 .8 acres. d. Length of project, in miles: N/A (If appropriate) e. If the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed N/A %; f. Number of off-street parking spaces existing NSA ; proposed N/A g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour NIA (upon completion of project)? h. If residential: Number and type of housing units: One. Family Two Family Multiple Family Condominium Initially "-three -- i Ultimately two i. Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure 30 height; 30 g width; - 50 length. I .Linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy is? c . 200 ft. 3 2. How much natural material C rock, earth, etc.) will be removed fro( a site? 0 tons/cubit yards, 3. Will disturbed areas be reclaimed? Dyes ONO MN/A �$I a. If yes, for what intended purpose is the site being reclaimed? b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? Dyes ONO c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? Dyes ONO 4. How many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site? 0 acres. 5: Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this project? Dyes ®No 6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction N/A months, (including demolition). 7. If multi-phased: a. Total number of phases anticipated N/A (number). b. Anticipated date of commencement phase 1 month year, (including demolition). c. Approximate completion date of final phase month year. d. Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases? Dyes ONO 8. Will blasting occur during construction? Dyes ®No 9. Number of jobs generated: during construction 0 after project is complete 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project 0 11. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? ❑Yes ®No If yes, explain 12. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? Dyes PNo a. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) and amount b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged 13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? ❑Yes ONO Type 14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? ❑Yes ®No Explain 15. Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain? Dyes ®No 16. Will the project generate solid waste? Dyes ®No a. If yes, what is the amount per month tons b. If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used? Dyes ONO c. If yes, give name I ; location d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? Dyes ONO e. If Yes, explain 17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste? Dyes ®No a. If yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal? tons/month. b. If yes, what is the anticipated site life? years. 18. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? , Dyes MNo 19. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? Dyes ®No 20. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels? Dyes ®No 21. Will project result in an increase in energy use? [--]Yes ®No If yes , indicate type(s) 22. If water supply is from wells, indicate pumping capacity N/A gallons/minute. 23. Total anticipated water usage per day N/A gallons/day. 24. Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding? Dyes ®No If Yes, explain 4 25. Approvals Required: • Submittal Date City, Town, Village Board Dyes 12No CCi'fy, Town, Village Planning Board QYes ❑No _ lot line change 12-18-92.._ _ City, Town Zoning Board ®Yes ❑No area variance 12-14-92 City, County Health Department Dyes ®No Other Local Agencies Dyes IInNo Other Regional Agencies Dyes LXNo State Agencies Dyes ®No Federal Agencies Dyes ®No ' C. Zoning and Planning Information 1 . Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision? ®Yes ❑No If Yes, indicate decision required: ❑zoning amendment INzoning variance ❑special use permit ❑subdivision ❑site plan ❑new/revision of master plan ❑resource management plan ❑other _ 2. What is the zoning classification(s)of the site? _— R-80 single-family residential 3. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning? two pre-existing single-family dwellings on one lot; np nrp-existing single-family dwelling on the other lot 4. What is the proposed zoning of the site? same 5. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning? same C6. Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? CNYes ❑No 7. What are the predominant land use(s) and zoningclassifications within a '/4 mile radius of proposed action? R-80 single-family residential 8. Is the proposed action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses within a '/4 mile? ®Yes ❑No 9. If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed? NSA a. What is the minimum lot size proposed? N/A 10. Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of sewer or water districts? Dyes 2t)NO 11 . Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police, fire protection)? ❑Yes IONo a. If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? ❑Yes ❑No 12. Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? Dyes IMNo a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? Dyes ❑No D. Informational Details Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be anv adverse impacts associated with your proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or avoid them. E. Verification I certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge. Applicant/Sponsor Name''� John S. M,�c[G_eeney and Edward F Rodenbach Date December 18, 1992 BY Signature `� 4e , (- H—bu1 _-mTitle authorized agent Stephen am, III If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment. 5 Responsibility of Lead Agency General Information (Read Carefy) • In completing the form the reviewer should be guided by the question: Have my responses and determinations been reasonable? The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst. { • Identifying that an impact will be potentially large (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessarily significant. Any large impact must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine significance. Identifying an impact in column 2 simply asks that it be looked at further. • The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of impacts and wherever possible the threshold of magnitude that would trigger a response in column 2. The examples are generally applicable throughout the State and for most situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be appropriate for a Potential Large Impact response, thus requiring evaluation in Part 3. • The impacts of each project, on each site, in each locality, will vary. Therefore, the examples are illustrative and have been offered as guidance. They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each question. • The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question. • In identifying impacts, consider long term, short term and cumlative effects. Instructions (Read carefully) a. Answer each of the 19 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there will be any impact. b. Maybe answers should be considered as Yes answers. C. If answering Yes to a question then check the appropriate box (column 1 or 2) to indicate the potential size of the impact. If impact threshold equals or exceeds any example provided, check column 2. If impact will occur but threshold is lower than example, check column 1. d. If reviewer has doubt about size of the impact then consider the impact as potentially large and proceed to PART 3. e. if a potentially large impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated by change(s) in the project to a small to moderate impact, also check the Yes box in column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction is not possible. This must be explained in Part 3. 1 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be IMPACT ON LAND Moderate Large Mitigated By 1. Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site? Impact Impact Project Change ONO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 *-Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise per 100 ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No foot of length), or where the general slopes in the project area exceed 10%. • Construction on land where the depth to the water table is less than ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 3 feet. • Construction of paved parking area for 1,000 or more vehicles. ❑ ❑ []Yes ❑No • Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally within ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 3 feet of existing ground surface. • Construction that will continue for more than 1 year or involve more ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No than one phase or stage. • Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than 1,000 ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No tons of natural material (i.e., rock or soil) per year. • Construction or expansion of a sanitary landfill. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Construction in a designated floodway. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Other impacts ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 2. Will there be an effect V. ...,y un.clue or unusual land forms found on � the site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, geological formations, etc.)ONO DYES • Specific land forms: Cl ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 6 Sm to Potential Can Impact Be IMPACT TER to Large Mitigated By 3. Will proposed action affect any body designated as protected? act Impact Project Change {Under Articles 15, 24,25 of the Environmental Conservation Law, ECL) ONO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Developable area of site contains a protected water body. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No protected stream. • Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland. ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 4. Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body of water? ONO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No or more than a 10 acre increase or decrease. •. Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes []No • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No S. Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity" ONO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action will require a discharge permit. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No C • Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does not 11 ❑ C1 Yes ❑No have approval to serve proposed (project) action. • Proposed Action requires water supply from wells with greater than 45 ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No gallons per minute pumping capacity. _ • Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No supply system. • Proposed Action will adversely affect groundwater. ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No • Liquid effluent will be conveyed off the site to facilities which presently Cl ❑ Dyes ❑No do not exist or have inadequate capacity. • Proposed Action would use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No day. • Proposed Action will likely cause siltation or other discharge into an ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No existing body of water to the extet that there will be an obvious visual contrast to naturai conditions. • Proposed Action will require the storage of petroleum or chemical ❑ ❑ ❑Yes []No products greater than 1,100 gallons. • Proposed Action will allow residential uses in areas without water ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No and/or sewer services. • Proposed Action locates commercial and/or industrial uses which may ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No require new or expansion of existing waste treatment and/or storage facilities. • Other impacts: ❑ Cl ❑Yes ❑No 6. Will proposed action alter drainage flow or patterns, or surface water runoff? ONO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action would change flood water flows. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 7 G = Small Potential Can Impact,f3e; h Moder. Large mitigated JE Impact Project Change Pro sed Action may cause substantial erosion. Pro sed Action is incompatible with existing drainage patterns. ❑ 11 Yes ❑No Prop sed Action will allow development in a designated floodway. ❑ El Yes ❑No Othe impacts: ❑ El ❑No ❑ ❑Yes []No IMPACT ON AIR Will proposed action affect air quality? ONO OYES Pro ples that would. apply to column 2 Prop sed Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips in any given ❑ hour. ❑ ❑Yes ❑No Prop sed Action will result in the incineration of more than 1 ton of ❑ ❑ refus -aper hour. Dyes ❑No Emis 'on rate of total contaminants will exceed 5 lbs. per hour ora ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No heat Sq-4rce producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour. PropgsN action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed ❑ to industrial use. ❑ Dyes ❑No Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial ❑ acvelopment within existing industrial areas. ❑ ❑Yes []No Othen impacts: 0 ❑ Dyes ❑No IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS L WC Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered C sP 'es? ONO - OYES Exa Ales that would apply to column 2 'edu tion of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal ❑ ❑ st, u ing the site, over or near site or found on the site. ❑Yes ❑No emo al of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habitat. ❑ ❑ Ppli at ion of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other ❑ ❑Yes ❑No ian f r agricultural purposes. ❑ Dyes ❑No -them impacts: ❑ ❑ i Dyes ❑No ILL- Vill Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or 'on e, xampldangered species? ONO DYES I e5-that would apply to column 2 j oPosed Action would substantially interfere with any resident or ❑ gratory fish, shellfish or wildlife species. ❑Yes ❑No 'Posed Action requires the removal of more than 10 acres ❑ mat e 6orest (over 100 years of age) or other locally important Dyes ❑No ;etation. IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES Will jthe Proposed Action affect agricultural land resources? xa_I I Iples that would apply to column 2 ONO OYES P d� action would sever, cross or limit access to agricultural ❑ �— I'ncludes cropland, hayfields, pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc.) ❑ Dyes ❑No B ' 2 3 — Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change • Construction activity would excavate or compact the soil profile of ❑ ❑ agricultural land. Dyes ❑No • The proposed action would irreversibly convert more than 10 acres ❑ ❑ of agricultural land or, if located in an Agricultutal District, more Dyes ❑No than 2.5 acres of agricultural land. • The proposed action would disrupt or prevent installation of agricultural ❑ ❑ e. ❑Yes ❑No land management systems (e.g., subsurface drain lines, outlet ditches, strip cropping); or create a need for such measures (e.g. cause a farm field to drain poorly due to increased runoff) • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES 11 . Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources? ONO OYES (If necessary, use the Visual EAF Addendum in Section 617.21, Appendix B.) Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed land uses, or project components obviously different from or in sharp contrast to current surrounding land use patterns, whether ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No man-made or natural. • Proposed land uses, or project components visible to users of ❑ ❑ aesthetic resources which will eliminate or significantly reduce their ❑Yes ❑No enjoyment of the aesthetic qualities of that resource. • Project components that will result in the elimination or significant ❑ screening of scenic views known to be important to the E3 ❑Yes ❑No area. • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 12. Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure of historic, pre- historic or paleontological importance? ONO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action occurring wholly or partially within or substantially ❑ contiguous to any facility or site listed on the State or National Register El Dyes QNo of historic places. • Any impact to an archaeological site or fossil bed located within the ❑ project site. ❑ Dyes ❑No • Proposed Action will occur in an area designated as sensitive for ❑ archaeological sites on the NYS Site Inventory. ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION 13, Will Proposed Action affect the quantity or quality of existing or future open spaces or recreational opportunities? Examples that would apply to column 2 r The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational o ONO OYES • A major r Opportunity. ❑ ❑ El Yes ❑No 1 eduction of an i open space important to the community. ❑ • Other impacts: ❑ Dyes ❑No ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 9 IMPACT ON TRAN RTATION i' 1 4 3 � b . Sm Ero Potential Can Impaet Be j 14. Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems? - Moderate Large Mitigated By ! ONO DYES Impact Impact Project Change Examples that would apply to column 2 • Alteration of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods. ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No • Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems. Cl ❑ []Yes ❑No • Other .impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes []No IMPACT ON ENERGY 15. Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or energy supply? ONO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action will cause a greater than 5% increase in the use of ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No any form of energy in the municipality. • Proposed Action will require the creation or extension of an energy ❑ ❑ ❑Yes []No transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two family residences or to serve a major commercial or industrial use. • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or vibration as a result of the Proposed Action? ONO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Blasting within 1,500 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive ❑ ❑ []Yes El No facility. / Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day). ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No Proposed Action will produce operating noise exceeding the local ❑ ❑ 11 Yes ❑No ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures. Proposed Action will remove natural barriers that would act as a ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No noise screen. Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH r Will Proposed Action affect public health and safety? ONO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 Proposed Action may cause a risk of explosion or release of hazardous ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No substances(i.e. oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) in the event of accident or upset conditions, or there may be a chronic low level discharge or emission. Proposed Action may result in the burial of "hazardous wastes" in any ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No form (i.e. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritating, i Infectious, etc.) Storage facilities for one million or more gallons of liquified natural ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No ;as or other flammable liquids. I 3ronosed action may result in the excavation or other disturbance ❑ ❑ []Yes ❑NO vithin 2,000 feet of a site used for the disposal of solid or hazardous +aste. )cher impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 10 IMPACT ON GROWTH CHARACTER Small to Potential Can Impact Be OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD Moderate Large Mitigated By 18. -Will proposed action affect the character of the existing community? Impact Impact Project Change ONO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • The permanent population of the city, town or village in which the ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No project is located is likely to grow by more than 5%. - • The municipal budget for capital expenditures or operating services ❑ Cl ❑Yes ❑No will increase by more than'5% per year as a result of this project. • Proposed action will conflict with officially adopted plans or goals. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Proposed action will cause a change in the density of land use. ❑ ❑ [Dyes ❑No • Proposed Action will replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No or areas of historic importance to the community. • Development will create a demand for additional community services ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No (e.g. schools, police and fire, etc.) • Proposed Action will set an important precedent for future projects. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No •. Proposed Action will create or eliminate employment. ❑ ❑ Dyes []No • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes [-]No 19. Is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? ONO OYES If Any Action in Part 2 Is Identified as a Potential Large Impact or If You Cannot Determine the Magnitude of Impact, Proceed to Part 3 Part 3—EVALUATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS Responsibility of Lead Agency - Part 3 must be prepared if one or more impact(s) is considered to be potentially large, even if the impact(s) may be mitigated. Instructions Discuss the following for each impact identified in Column 2 of Part 2: 1. Briefly describe the impact. 2. Describe(if applicable)how the impact could be mitigated or reduced to a small to moderate impact by project change(s). 3. Based on the information available, decide if it is reasonable to conclude that this impact is important. To answer the question of importance, consider: • The probability of the impact occurring • The duration of the impact • Its irreversibility, including permanently lost resources of value • Whether the impact can or will be controlled • The regional consequence of the impact • Its potential divergence from local needs and goals • Whether known objections to the project relate to this impact. (Continue on attachments) _ 11 / .� 111 r 37)-Q, 617.21 SEAR Appendix B Sty l Environmental Quality%ReView Visual EAF Addendum This form may be used to provide additional information relating to Question 11 of Part 2 of the Full EAF. (To be completed by Lead Agency) Distance Between Visibility Project and Resource (in Miles) 1. Would the project be visible from: 0-1/a 1/a-1/z 1/z-3 3-5 5+ • A parcel of land which is dedicated to and available ❑ ❑ ❑ c ❑ to the public for the use, enjoyment and appreciation of natural or man-made scenic qualities? • An overlook or parcel of land dedicated to public ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ observation, enjoyment and appreciation of natural or man-made scenic qualities? • A site or structure listed on the National or State 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Registers of Historic Places? • State Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ Cl ❑ • The State Forest Preserve? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • National Wildlife Refuges and state game refuges? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ • National Natural Landmarks and other outstanding ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ natural features? National Park Service lands? Cl ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • Rivers designated as National or State Wild, Scenic ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ or Recreational? • Any transportation corridor of high exposure, such ❑ ❑ ❑ ED ❑ as part of the Interstate System, or Amtrak? • A governmentally established or designated interstate ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ or inter-county foot trail, or one formally proposed for establishment or designation? • A site, area, lake, reservoir or highway designated as ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ scenic? • Municipal park, or designated open space? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • County road? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • State? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • Local road? _ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 2. Is the visibility of the project seasonal?(i.e., screened by summer foliage, but visible during other seasons) ❑Yes ❑No 3. Are any of the resources checked in question 1 used by the public during the time of year during which the project will be visible? ❑Yes ❑No 1 ' DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING VISUAL ENVIRONMENT 4. From each item checked in question 1, check those which generally describe the surrounding environment. Within #1/a mile *I mile Essentially undeveloped ❑ ❑ Forested ❑ ❑ Agricultural ❑ ❑ Suburban residential ❑ ❑ Industrial ❑ ❑ Commercial ❑ ❑ Urban ❑ ❑ River, Lake, Pond ❑ ❑ Cliffs, Overlooks ❑ ❑ Designated Open Space ❑ ❑ Flat ❑ ❑ Hilly ❑ ❑ Mountainous ❑ ❑ Other ❑ ❑ NOTE: add attachments as needed 5. Are there visually similar projects within: '1/2 mile ❑Yes ❑No *1 miles []Yes El No '2 miles El Yes ❑No '3 miles F-1 Yes []No ' Distance from project site are provided for assistance. Substitute other distances as appropriate. EXPOSURE 6. The annual number of viewers likely to observe the proposed project is NOTE: When user data is unavailable or unknown, use best estimate. CONTEXT 7. The situation or activity in which the viewers are engaged while viewing the proposed action is FREQUENCY Holidays/ Activity Daily Weekly Weekends Seasonally Travel to and from work ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Involved in recreational activities ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Routine travel by residents ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ At a residence ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ At worksite ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Other _ ❑ r ❑ ❑ c L 2 r MATTHEWS & HAM ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAw 45 HAMPTON ROAD SOUTHAMPTON,N.Y.11968 516-283-2400 PHILIP H.MATTHEWS TELECOPIER 516-287-1076 nei¢aeasi STEPH85 L.HAM,III January 27, 1993 Mr. Robert Kassner Planning Board Town of Southold Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Proposed Lot Line Change for McGeeney and Rodenbach; (SCTM Vs 1000-6-2-5 & 6) Dear Bob: I have enclosed five prints of a revised survey relating to the referenced application for a lot line change. No changes have been made to the proposed new configurations for the two lots. The revision merely reflects the addition of a building envelope for which we will seek an additional variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals. Delivery of the enclosed prints exhausts my current supply. I will try to provide you with three more in the near future. Sincerely', �P Stephen L. Ham, III SLH:ja Enclosures BY HAND a ) �fFO(�COG �� y1 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS en �:.; n2y SCOTT L. HARRIS Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Supervisor George Ritchie Latham, Jr. 1 &i Richard G. Ward � � Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Mark S. McDonald P.O. Box 1179 Kenneth L. Edwards Southold, New York 11971 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE Telephone (516) 765-1938 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765-1823 TO: Gerard P. Goehrinaer. , Chairman, Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: Richard G. Ward, Chairman-,I�st� �4�S RE: McGeeney and Rodenbach Proposed Lot-Line Change Crescent Avenue, Fishers Island SCTM# 1000-6-2-5 & 6 DATE: January 12, 1993 This is in response to your request of January 5, 1993, for this Board' s comments on the above referenced lot-line change. The Planning Board is not in a position to comment on this request for a variance until the coordinated environmental review of this Type I action is completed. • � Su�Fi� MATTHEWS & HAM KEN �(NPXd ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW M4f IC 45 HAMPTON ROAD /1 SOUTHAMPTON,N.Y.11938 516-2832400 PHILIP B.MATTHEWS TELECOPIER 510-287-1076 Qft.-aez, STEPHEN L.HAM,III January 13 , 1993 Planning Board Town of Southold Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Attn. : Robert Kassner Re: Proposed Lot Line Change - Properties of John S. McGeeney and Edward F. Rodenbach, Trustee (SCTM Vs 1000-2-5 and 6) Dear Bob: I have enclosed four prints of a revised map relating to the referenced lot line change. The revisions do not affect the area or configuration of the parcel to be transferred but merely show the current locations of the structures on each lot. I will be obtaining four additional prints from Chandler, Palmer & King in due course and will mail them to you upon receipt. Sincerely, Stephen L. Ham, III SLH:ja Enclosures BY HAND L 4 }i << 1. kYY � PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS t SCOTT L. HARRIS Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairmant� ,+,p �*:, .•`" �� Supervisor George Ritchie Latham, Jr. Richard G. Ward ''-Qzrralp� Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Mark S. McDonald P.O. Box 1179 Kenneth L. Edwards PLANNING BOARD OFFICE Southold, New York 11971 Telephone (516) 765-1938 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765-1823 January 12, 1993 Stephen L. Ham III Matthews & Ham 45 Hampton Road Southampton, New York 11968 RE: Lot Line Change for John S. McGeeney and Edward F. Rodenbach, Trus. SCTM#1000-6-2-5 & 6 Dear Mr. Ham: The following resolution was adopted by the Southold Town Planning Board at a meeting held on Monday, January 11, 1993 . BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, start the coordination process on this Type I action. Please contact this office if you have any questions regarding the above. Sincerely, 1 «�'WIM�t ✓(y vt/� Richard G. Ward �1S Chairman SccB F7c� R V, ✓ Vs APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS N; 04 e x SCOTT L.HARRIS cSupervisor Gerard P.Gaehringer, Chairman y Z Serge Doyen,Jr. p Town Hall, 53095 Main Road James Dinizio,Jr. '�' 0!� P.O. Box 1179 Robert A.Villa � #t �a Southold, New York 11971 Richard C.Wilton Fax (616) 765-1823 Telephone (516)765-1809 Telephone (516) 765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD INTER-DEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM TO: Richard G. Ward, Planning Board Chairman FROM: Jerry Goehringer, Chairman, Board of Appeals' DATE: January 5, 1993 SUBJECT: New Application - McGeeney and Rodenbach at F.I. Proposed Lot-Line Change and Exchange of Land Area Substandard Lots ID #1000-6-2-6 & ( 5 and 13 ) It has been brought to our attention that Stephen Ham III, Esq. has within the last couple of days filed an application with the Planning Board Office for a lot-line change involving two substandard lots located on Fishers Island. Since the lots involved are substandard and one of the lots is being further reduced as to its nonconformity ( lot area) , an area variance has also been filed. (For your convenience we are attaching a copy of the December 10, 1992 Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector initiating the appeal process. ) Please be aware that the Board of Appeals is not an involved agency under SEQRA, however, our office would like to be included as an interested agency. (In the past, when a project did not involve an application before the ZBA, substandard lot projects were not coordinated with our office under SEQRA. In this project, zoning relief is necessary. ) The area variance has been advertised for a January 14, 1993 public hearing, and we are awaiting additional information (updated map, single and separate search, etc. ) from the applicant before concluding the hearing process. There has recently been new construction on the "shed" on the northerly parcel as well as the "house" with possible footprint changes for which building permits are active. In any event, you should feel free to provide comments for our record concerning this project. Thank you. 09 IOARD s SOUiHOLDTOlNN �fJ PIANNIN� I��.o' L�a383oE GEES ---- Ccs. '979 I 46463—e-a_c I I I i I I I I ' I I � l 2 I pl m Pccc« r 135 D 1 �v N x 6 a r A rc w L, U > w W A y � 1 t a r k ' I � Owe too it AR EA•.G5.9G4 •i 51 >r � r i Ix 3L > '�11 PARCEL ACOUIRCD, 1 T ` IN 1011 O: A /LCE�z VE �"Q 1rrl "E A .Z�zSF S E T W 1611 -77 ``` •. 'r QH.c.. P• FORM NO. s TOWN OF SOUTHOLD 1 BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN HALL SOUTHOLD, N. Y. BUILDING PERMIT CTHIS PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON THE PREMISES UNTIL FULL COMPLETION OF THE WORK AUTHORIZED) N2 20333 Z Date ....& �.......L..y.................... 19... 1410 Permission is hereby granted to/:: t0 ..... .. ......0(,. .. .....����s' % ........................... ................................................................ ......................................................................................... at premises located at ...... .. / _,ryy ......,.. ... .... .... .............................. �v�.................. .............................................. /l/� Y.a.._... .................................................................. County Tax Map No. 1000 Section .........CO............ Block �..... Lot No. ..... .............. ..... pursuant to application dated .. �frG. ......... ..................... . ,t19..��1 and approved by the .. Building hInspector. Fee $...v4�.1. Building Inspector Rev. 6/30/80 80,1RD OF HEALTH . . . . , FORM N0. 1 3 SETS OF PLANS , , „ • . . . SURVEY _ • ' • ' TOWN OFSOUTHOLD CHECK BUILDING DEPARTMENT SEPTIC FOR11 TOWN HALL " " " ' • • • SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 NOTIFY TEL.. 7G51802 CALL Examined . . ... .. . . . . . . . . .. 19 , MAIL .. . . . . . . . . . . . . / AIL T0: Approved f7 L . , 19o,JPcrmit No. -C� . . . . . . . . _ Disapproved a/c . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Building Inspector) �. APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT Date . 'iL INSTRUCTIONS lis be sets of plans acclurate plot plan to scale. Fee aletely lled in by ccordin� tYpetvriter or in ink and submitted to the Building I b. Plot Plan showing g to schedule. Inspector, with location of lot and of buildings on premises, relationship to adjoining r areas, and giving a detailed description of layout of property must be drawn on the diagram which is part of this apps.. cation. � Premises or public street C. The work covered by this application may not be commenced beforessuance of Building Permit i d. Upon approval of this application, the Building Inspector will issued a Building Permit to the a h shall be kept on the premises available for inspection throughout the work. . No building shall be Occupied or used in whole or in Part for an ur PP cant' Such pet7rii shall have been granted by the Building Inspector. y P Pose whatever until a Ce e rtiS cte of Occupancy APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE to the Building Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, and other applicable Laws,Ordinances he Department for the issuance of a Building Permit pursuant to the Rc:ulations, for the construction of buildings, additions or alterations, or for removal or demolition, as herein describeor d. The applicant agrees c comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, building code, housing code, and regulations, and to admit authorized inspectors on premises and in building for necessary inspections . : .lyz (Signatu. re of applicant,or name,if a corporation) State whether applicant is owner, lessee (Mailing address of applicant) �`' `L� enitect, engineer, general contractor, electrician, plumber or builder. . .. ... . . .. . . NameOf owner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ofpremises L S' �� � • ••. . . . .......... . . ..... . . . . . . . :. . . . . . . !f t (as on the tax r or latest deed) aPPI. is a corption, s�gnature oCduly authorized officer. (Name artd title of corporate officer) ` Builder's License No. . . . . .���✓r 7 : /�.Z Plum bcr's License No. • , , , , , 9 /� 29 Z Electrician's License No. . . . . . Other Trade's License No. . . • Location OC land on which proposed work will be done: 0'use* I CGGr. a !� e Nu' mber ? .Z C . .. . . . .Street . . .. ... . I .'! O1o390 Count Hamlet .. . . . . .. Y Tax Alap No. 1000 Section . .. . . . . . . . . Block Z- Subdivision . . . ... . . . . Lot . . . . .... . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . Filed Alap No. . . State existing Lot . .... , e use and occupancy of premises:Ind intended use and occupancy Of a• Existing construction use and occupancy J ` — i . .. . .. .. . . . . .. . . . ��> _ • b. int ended us. .. , Occupancy .. Niw�a ar •vod. (check .which applicable): New Building RcPyr . . . _ . . . . . . . Removal . . . . . . •• ' n• . Addition . . . . . . . . . . .Ulcrabon . rennin•Court Demolition . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sui�:ain; 7001. , '• ••r•j . . . . . . • Accessory Building. . J, Pstimatcd Cost . . . . . . . : . . YOt1. 00 Fence . . . .i . .Other Work. . . . ••. ,k . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . Fee . . . . . . . 25.00• . • . . .- . . . . . . . .... .. . . . . . .. . . 5. If dwelling number of dwcllino units . . . . . . . . . . . (to be paid on filing this application) Number of dwelling units on each floor . C para>c, number of cars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. If business, commercial or mixed occupancy, specify nature and extcnt.of cath type of use . . . . ,.•_ . • _ . . . . . . ' 7. .dimensions of existing structures, if any: Front . . . . ZOr-y.' , Rcar . ... . . . . . . . . . . . Hei_!tt . . 4S ' Depth . .(?,'.Je.0 . . . . . Number of Stories , /- Dimensions of same structure with alterations or additions. Front • . .... " ' ' .. ' ' Depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rcar . . ........ • S. Dimensions of entire Freight . , , , , , . Number of Stories . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . new construction: Front , " " 116-01t . . . .. . . . . . . Rear . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . Depth . . . Number of Stories . 9. Size of lot: Front . . . . . . . . . . . Rcar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . Depot . . . . . .. ..... .. . 10. Date of Purchase . . . ch • • sen are • .situated . . Name of Former Owner . , . . . . . . _ __ 1 1. 'Lone or use district in which premises are situated - : . . :. . , _ •_. • _. •_. - " ' 1:. DOCS Proposed construction violate any zoning law, ordinance or regulation: • 13. Will lot be regraded " " " " " " ' " ""'••• " • •. . . . Will excess fill be removed from premises: Yes . ... No. 14. Name of Owner of premises . . . . . . " Name of Architect . . . . . Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Phone No idame of Contractor . Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Phone No. ...... . . . . . . .. . IS_):s this property Address . . . . . . Phone No. . .; located within I00 feet of a tidal wetland? *YES..._HO * Cf yes , Southold Town Trustees Permit may be required. + PLOT DIAGRAM i Locate clearly and distinctly all buildings, whether existing or proposed, and.indicate all set-back dimensions from property lines.Give street and block number or description according to deed, and show street names and indicate whether interior or comer lot. 41/ / B (V :TAT;- OF NE t YO 'OUN"• Y OF S.S . . . • . • • • • • • • • • • • •. • • . . . being duly sworn, deposes and says that he is the applicant (Name of individual signior;contract) i bove named. / 'e is tf c . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . .�uur,L��2h �er+z.fl2rn�e�. '�c.: . (Cont actor, agent, corporate officer, cteJ .' f said owner or owners• and is duly authorized to perform or have performed rile sa:J -0:1; and Io male and fi e 'plicalion: that all statements contained in this applicarfon arc true to file bca of l:i: t.nn.%lam.;,;_ r.:.: lmtart;and /hit ork will be perfomcd in the manner set forth :n fife appbcal:e_: I.Ic:! t::r:- ••:r. . _,, .. •vom to before me till. _:,,F,m, 9C otary Pub:.:, . .♦ . . _`Tri . .. `.�J\�•�4cayjd, yDly.,\ Y7�y� " . . . J &W 5 T M Sic �r� - y� '041 jo oinit 08. 91 1 0 7>•�, - 01 .i i f 1 y �V r� A�� ,•~slob^� . � r � W -moi p i • — 1-c aac+vaa •rKt .7 i y. \C 1 1 1 � CNug g ' TIT. aUA1GAti•11Y`� CO. v p - - ....- �,., aYYALD bAVIN6S �•� - LAW OFFICES OF PAUL, HASTINGS. JANOFSKY & WALKER LEE G q pwwirvEwSuia iuCLVOiuG awOFEE510rvAL cowaaw.Yl .S A'TLA'NTA OFFICE GEORGIA-PACIFIC CENTER ROBE p ,I 133 PEACHTREE STREET, N.E. LEG MAP. c LARLEs 11 wn✓— NINTH FLOOR ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303-1840 _ TELEPHONE 14041 566-9900 LOS ANGE-ES of 1055 WASHINGTON BOULEVARD 555 SOVT" FLOWER c-_ NEW YORK OFFICE LOS ANGELES. CAL1aORNu 5TAMFORO, CONNECTICUT 06901-2217 399 PARK AVENUE TELEPHONE 12'31661-"" NEW YORK. NEW YORK 10022-4697 TELEPHONE 12031 961-7400 TELEPHONE 12121316-5000 ORANGE COUNTY 0== 695 TOWN CENTER 0 C NINGCT1CUT C. OFFICE COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA a=.c.z2A FACSIMILE (2031 359-3031 1050 CO NNECTICVT AVENUE. N Y TELEPHONE 17141 668-1-,? WASHINGTON, OC. 2003S-5331 TELEPHONE 12021 223-9000 WEST LOS ANGELES 12990CEAN AVE+ June 24 1992 TOKYO OFFICE SANTA MONICA, CAL FORNI< __76 7 - TORAH O MON OHTORI BUILDING TELEPHONE !2131 319 4-3. TORANOMON -CHOME MINATO-KU.TOKYO 1O5 TELEPHONE 1031 3507-0730 WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL 5_- (203) 961-7402 OUR FILE No. Town of Ssuthold Building -epartment P.O. Box. 1179 Main Street Southold, i7Y 11971 Dear Mr. Horton: At the request of my son, Peter, I enclose an Affidavit attesting to the fact that the "Shed" in back of the house has been occupied as a guest cottage for at least the last forty-five years. If I can provide you with any additional information on this, please don't hesitate to give me a call. Sincerely, 7 .G5 John S. McGeeney JSM:rai Enclosure AFFIDAVIT OF JOHN S. McGEENEY STATE OF CONNECTICUT ) A+- ss: /_u_c:vvr� COUNTY OF FAIRFIELD ) JOHN S. McGEENEY, being duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. I am over eighteen years of age and I recognize the obligation of an oath. 2 . I am the owner of that certain piece of property located on Crescent Avenue, Fishers Island, New York, as described in the attached survey of Messrs Chandler, Palmer and King, prepared on December 12, 1991. 3 . To the best of my knowledge and belief, the structure located behind the main house on the lot bordering on Crescent Avenue denominated as "Shed" has, since at least 1947, been continually utilized and occupied as a guest cottage. John S. McGeeney Sworn to before me this U <' QL1+ ,th day of June, 1992 „ N airy; Public 1NpN BWOWE A No4ry Pubk of Cpnec6wt ,,�p Commission Exgra UeummW 31,1995 MS R8-cv> vti MATTHEWS SC IMAM ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW 45 HAMPTON ROAD SOUTHAMPTON,N.Y.11968 516-283-2400 PHILIP B.MATTHEWS TELECOPIER 516-287-1076 .emaeae STEPHEN L.HAM,III December 21, 1992 Planning Board Town of Southold Main Road Southold, NY 11971 06'e-, Re: Proposed Lot Line Change - Properties of John S. McGeeney and Edward F. Rodenbach, Trustee (SCTM Vs 1000-6-2-5 and 6) Dear Sirs: In connection with the referenced application for a lot line change, I have enclosed the following: 1. Letter of authorization for Stephen L. Ham, III to act as agent for the applicants, John S. McGeeney and Edward F. Rodenbach. 2 . Letter approving the lot line change and setting forth its purpose, executed by John S. McGeeney and Edward F. Rodenbach. 3 . Affidavit regarding merger, executed and sworn to by Stephen L. Ham, III. 4. Photocopies of deeds recorded in Liber 6842 page 308 and Liber 11401 page 565. 5. Form letter regarding drainage, roads, etc. 6. Long Environmental Assessment Form. 7. Application for Approval of Plat. 8 . Our check to the Town of Southold in the amount of $50. 9. Questionnaire, duly acknowledged. DEC 2 2 Continued L-77;0 Planning Board December 21, 1992 Page 2 10. Eight prints of the survey showing the existing and proposed lots. 11. Copy of Certificate of Occupancy covering the pre- existing structures on the parcel designated by SCTM No. 1000-6- 2-6. Please review the enclosed documents and notify me immediately if any further information or documentation will be required before you can begin your review of this application. Very truly yours, 474C. 4W" Stephen L. Ham, III SLH:ja Enclosures r i 1 I i i �I pfMlb ,S4NP' [PYpP j � ••• 4., ) S�`4i] j cPf1[[NT VIYU[ - ,Y IS HERS ISLAND SOUNData u..l S�T i a l ti :4 59'30'00"W 200'+j it 1 200' ARE "I I R � a • N 5997 ZG S 75'OA 30.9350 '/- S.F. :0! •• � 4 W1551. 98 E 195.0 NI5.0, Q'E r, C1 250' _i � CRESCENT I ' 41 .LOCATION MAP AVENUE 20R' SCALE 0-600' MERESTONE _-- (EXIST.) , 5 75"01'30' N 593777 I E W 1560.47 19297 C''„`•P.. ;A',". �".SSffi... P, 1 j MERES70NE (EXIST) I q y xN TAX MAP -DISTRICT 1000 SEC. GW✓"� p BLOCK 2, L0� 5 �MrT(x��+y�Y.�l+{•, I � I \ ^Veuve .S. ` I PORCH W/F ° HOUSE N LOCATION MAP SCALE I"' 100' 29 0 W E rn m ! I 3 GAR. -C rn v. ` o M ERESTONE (EX(ST) G\ m 70 N rn Z C N o 6AR 0EN l AREA TO BE DEEDED FROM N LOT 5 TO LOT 6 = 8505'/- S.F t m pR OPO SEp PROPERTY LINE m r 1 1 y Y 7 t nil r ^ n `f'• r'' r`' x NOTES 4147wr i�Vr Y1 S at v�'.^ ,}rx I'' � p Tjir t" 41 s LOT 5 407 G L OWNERS JOHN 5, MCGEENEY EDWARD F RODEN BAC H, TRUSTEE U/A JANUARY b, 1992 n 176 , di u[sl J . T JANOFSKY t WALKER 550 WHITE OAK RD CIO PAUL HASTINGS, p 4 'itl NEW CANAN, CT 06090 1055 WASHINGTON BOULEVARD, STAMFOR D, CT OG 901 p LOTS ARE LOCATED IN THE TOWN OF SOUTNOLD, m / jj\ SHED v x COUMTY OF SUFFOLKI STATE OF NEW YORK,615T- ^�Y � RIOT 1000, SEC 4, BLOCK 2, L075 516. 3. UTILITIES ARE EXISTING. SITE 15 SERVICED k ', [7 TI BY EXISTING MUNICIPAL WATER i EXISTING PROPOSED LOT LINE CHANGE HOUSE \ 1 r ON SITE SEWAGE SYSTEMS. POLE 1149 ➢ RI 3 9. PROPERTY 19 LOCATED IN 20NE R-eD. PROPERTIES OF x. to 5. COORDINI{�'TE DISTANCES ARE MEASURED FROM U.S 7O COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY TRIANGULATION. 1 M --1 TAX MAP-PISTRICT',1000 \ w 1T JOHN S. I IC GEENEY ° EoWAR,D F RODENBAGH, TRUS. SEC G, BLOCK 2, L07( 6 STATI9NJ j"PROS". \ 0 G. LOT AR4.A5 /0 I *{ ` 011 I.1' MERE570NE �� DRIVE 11 \ / 1 , J � 5 M[GEEN Y �P�eav H ST9yop� AVENUE Pp� f I, RESCENT nVE. POLE. C 0 EXISTING PEOP09ED v�' °� F15HER5 ISLAND NEW YORK N 5522 01 1 \. / '147 m q0 20 O 40 W 1411.T7 �� /B ` PQLE ' I.a LK I / LOT 13 43%Y- SF `S65.3'1� t63 ` M ; ; ';l �3�LK 2/ LOTS 65,966% S.F. 57441M SF II Y'�-Y 1 SCALE I" ` qU OQ E zo \ ,F EDWd�D F. RODENBACN, TRUSTEE ° ti CHANDLER PALMER -f KING 9. 1 gB. 1 ' r, LOCK O LO EXISTING PROPOSE p �4SF0 ° 0495 FSI a- \ jBLK2/ LOT& 20,452N-SF 28,952H--S.F. NORWICH , \ II CONNECTICUT AVf E NUE '8• 'r ED, OCTOBER 2l, 1992 ADDITIONS : NOV. 19, 195Z — -- RE ION REVISIONS 2, 1992 00 —'- p1TIOI0NS p REVISIONS JAN G, 1993 POLE `164 rI -�� q, i PASOLITOLD Towil HOAR' 1: ii J 3'f4(o e P,Sffe'-5 FISHERS ISLAND SOUND .I "C:N SITE aunt ep a, S 4.30'00'w aao'r 200AREA 935 GY- SF N 59 BZ Z6 5 75.01'30" W 155198 E 195 D' N19.O CR '30•E CR 25 .__. 6n..•.''L •b� , „u a ter.,' _ 0 ES ENT AVENUE LOCATIDN MAP • _ nEEK15T) SCALE 1"=600' (E X15T) 75"01'30" Ei [_5 s N 593777 __ W 1560.47 7' 11 MERESTONE a ...... ........ .... .E."`•:::.. + , (EXIST) EZ I p j TAX MAP -DISTRICT 1000 SEC C. G " \ l I ro BLOCK 2, LDY 5 "lAl 4Y:YI:'7'i�.YNS I J . PORCH [ ' ^• _ I N 93 � I m N 93 W/F HOUSE N m 11 r J0 LOCATION MAP 1 c v SCALE 1' = 100' CO ' A I 3 GAR. t I A z e r0 MEREST (EXIST) A N m A" N ROfN AREA TO BE DEEDED FROM 3 00 J LOT 5 TO LOT G 8505'/- 5 F PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE A . F; G *A kyr. Y }rI NOTESLOT 25 1 i!"' Y,"#Oi •Ke : 3 OWNERS' JOHN S. MCGEENEY EDWARD E RODENBACK, TRUSLOT 5 TEE UJA JANVARY G, 1992 /fin /iY`�� Sr9DL9r n 174.37 :1 y 550 WHITE OAK RD CIO PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOFSKY F WALKER !�'� "N' POLE 87 NEW CANAN, CT 06810 1055 WASHINGTON BOULEVARD, STAMFORD, C7 06901 1 m y © c, , I� y / /,R r .: ➢ Z LOTS ARE LOCATED IN THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, , rn \ 70 5HE0 » m COUNTY OF SUFFOLK, STATE OF NEW YORK,DIST- —I z RICT 1000, 5EC G, BLOCK 2, LOTS 5 ! G, 3 UTILITIES ARE EX15TING SITE 15 SERVICED NOu6e \, n BY EX15'1-ING MUNICIPAL WATER e EXISTING \ p r PROPOSED LOT LINE CHANGE O •�� POLE '169 y ON SITE SEWAGE SYSTEMS. PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN ZONE R-BO. 32 +I A 5 COORDIIIATE DISTANCES ARE MEASURED FROM U9 P R 0 P E R T I ES Q F TAX MAP-DISTRICT \I000�iH '4 rn COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY TRIANGULATION r', SEG 6, BLOCK 2, LOIS 6 O STATION "PROS". �,r� I nERFSroNE DRIVE 1'I \ o G Lor AEL>s JOHN S. I c GEENEY EDWARD ODENBAGH TRUS, AVENUE "B CRESCENT AVE. (EXIST) \ I` POL m JOHN 5 MCGEENEY N 155?2 6161117 � � , \ / )O7 BLOCK�LOY EXISTING PRbPOSED W 141177 S `• 181 \§PaE '� BLK I / LOT 13 435G'Y-- S.F 4356'/- S.I FCI5HER5 ISLAND,0 zO N00 YORK40 65�35'0a F ELK Z/ LOTS 65,966`/-5F 57,4Wl SF SCALE I 1" ` 9� iiia I ", zoy B3. ", \ EDWARD F RODEN BRC H, TRUSTEE eLLOCKILOT EXISTING PROPOSED CHANDLER, PALMER { KING riLK2 / LOTG 20,452 1/ 28,957 H-5F I� NORWICH , CONNECTICUT AVE EDGE NUE "B•. PVnr�y\ OCTOBER 21, 1597- ADDITIONS 992ADDITIONS ' NOV. 19, 1992 RFV1510NS ' DEC, 2, 1992 — � ADDITIONS g95VI51OMS JAN. 6, 1993 POLE "166 ADDITIONS { REVISIONS JAN.22, 1993 k O LS IN L5 0 l'/ L5 q JAN28mM D S � SONTfIOLB PLANNING BOA,o A .u. eouxo — GDN,o FISHERS ISLAND SOUNDo.lppp d�"< „ 1 5 1'30'00'W 2001q 200' AREA = 9350 Y_ 'F N 598726 S 75.01'30`E [ $L .�u,;Lnd W 1551. 9B 195.0' N75 SB 30'E V.,..a _ ..,a h" 5 O' F ...,a a�Mr•' ung .A R f C 5C � EMC ENT LOCATION MAP AVENUE " MERE5TONE I "m.m (EXIST) 1 _- _— ••••___ ____ "4AIP' SCALE N 593777 1l1 7 M(EXISTONE W 156047 -- f9•.'L'L:"1'•:58.., y r, 751979 0„ E n .....o: ....,... .,. - 01'3 I I q I 1 j TAX MAP -DISTRICT 1000 SEC 6 \ opal BLOCK 2, LOY 5 , N - I I PORCH -_ W/F ^ 03 I HOUSE N m Z DAT LOCATION MAP I\ c Y SCALE I"= 100' O A A m o a o m 03 A 700 SHED E i O 3 GAR rn � lil A w n((EXIST) ) POLE '170 _-- -_- POLE '172 MERESTONE (EXIST) A 70U A Z 0 a m m C, W d a N = c W' N \ AREA TO BE DEEDED FROM 3g ' 40T 5 TO LOT 6 = 8505% S.F , < � PR Op05 ED PROPERTY LINE - x " r NOTES ' LOT s LOT 6e I OWNERS JOHN S MCGEENEY EDWARD F RODEN BAC H, TRUSTEE UTA JANUARY 6, 1992 )76.32 Tw y 550 WHITE OAK KD CIO PAUL, HASTINGS, JANOF5KY E WALKER Of A .{ /"• ,` POLE'87 c NEW CAVAN, CT 06890 1055 WASHINGTON BOULEVARD, STAMFORD, CT 06901 �7 I' p 2 2 1992 2 LOTS ARF LOCATED IN THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, U ' m \ SHEO rn COUNTY OF SUFFOLK, STATE OF NEW YORK,DI5T- SHU71 Oi -- PLAPIHINO 80 9L 4 -i ` KICT 1000, SEC G, BLOCK 2, LOTS 5 t 6 0 i0Ill' ]yp f m 3. UTILITIES ARE EXISTING. SITE 15 5EPOCFD 1L^= _ < BY EXISTING MUNICIPAL WATER e Ex15Tl NG HOUSE51TE ON SITE SEWAGE sysrEMs PROPOSED LOT LINE CHANGE r o '"\ POLE 169 3 9. PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN ZONE R-80, PROPERTIES OF m m S. COOROINATE DISTANCES ARE MEASURED FROM U.S TAX MAP-D15TRICT ',1000 \ W COAST AMO GEODETIC SURVEY TRIANGULATION m M SEC 6, BLOCK 2, Lobb ak%M STATION "PR05 JOHN S. MC GEENEY ` EDWgRO F RODENBACH, TRUS, MERESTONE ', DRIVE \ \ �o G LOT AREA5 (EXIST) ` \ BLOCKS LOT EXISTING PROPOSED AVENUE "B ! CRESCENT AVE. N 552201 � , �, q�j BLK ?/OT 66,966aG5F 57961'/- 5.F W 1611,77 365e )863 ULE ELK 2/ LOT G 20, 452 Y-5F. 28,957'/- 5F. FISHERS ISLAND�o Zo NOW YORK 35 CO `(\ ,\ SCALE I" ` 90� - Mimi 209 83, y ,\ CHANDLER, PALTER t KING x EwY NoRwIcH , oFNe CONNECTICUT AVP ` �E06F 9�P Pft0 H.Srh 09F NUE o OCTOBER 21, 1992 _ 8" o � m ADDITIONSNOV. 19, 1992 REVISIONS DEC 2, 1992 POLEIG6 k h