Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1000-49.-1-25.1 1D HENRY E. RAYNOR, 3r..Cha~rman JAMES WALL BENNETT ORLOWSKI, Jr. GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, Jr. William F. Mullen, Jr. Southold, N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE 765- 1938 June 25, 1982 Mr. Stephen Shilowitz 330 East 33rd Street New York, New York 10016 Dear Mr. Shilowitz: Please be advised of the following action taken by the Southold Town Planning Board, Tuesday, June 15, 1982. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approve the site plan of Stephen Shilowitz for the waterfront condomin- ium project located at 6th Street, Greenport. The Chairman has endorsed approval on the above mentioned site plan and filed in the Planning Board office. A copy of same has been forwarded to the Building Department for their files also. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact our office. Very truly'yours, HENRY E. RAYNOR, JR., CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD cc: Building Dept. By Susan E. Long, Secretary COUNTY OF SUFFOLK PATRICK G, HALPIN SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING ARTHUR H. KUNZ October 26, 1989 Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Town of Southold Planning Board Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Map of Pipes Cove - Condominium Located at Sixth Street and Peconic Bay, Southold, New York T.P.I.N. 1000-49-01-25.1 1001-007-01-[6 Dear Mr. 0rlowski: It has come to the attention of the Suffolk County Planning Co~nission that a tract of land at the above mentioned location may have been subdivided without having been submitted for review in accordance with the requirements of Article XIV, Section A14-24 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code. Failure to observe the aforementioned County Administrative Code requirements and rules promulgated by the Commission to admfnister same would render the subdivision procedurally defective and could invalidate the use and occupancy of the premises and adversely affect the owner's interest therein. We therefore urge you to be sure that these requirements are satisfied. Very truly yours, Arthur H. Kurtz Acting Director of Planning b~ Charles G. Lind Chief Planner Subdivision Review Division File: 1333-N-89-06 CGL:mb cc: Dr. Jonathan Richmond, Chairman Village of Greenport Planning Board Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold. New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD June 12, 1989 Victor Lessard Building Department Southold, NY 11971 RE: Pipes Cove SCTM 91000-48-3-p/o 42.1 Dear Mr. Lessard: The following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning Board on July 10, 1989. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board recommend that the Building Department issue a Certificate of Occupancy for the above mentioned project subject to the installation of railings as per State Building Regulations. The Planning Board reguests that the Building Department notify the Board when the above condition is complied with. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Very truly yours, , cc: Leroy Barnes jt Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold. New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: Building Department FROM: Planning Board DATE: June 30, 1989 RE: Pipes Cove SCTM~ 1000-48-3-p/o 42.1 The Planning Board conducted a site inspection of Pipes Cove and found that all is in order. The above mentioned site plan is scheduled to be on the July 10, 1989 Planning Board agenda fer the Planning Board to make a recommendation to the Building Department in regard to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. Southol l ..~ ~ S A V I N G S B A N K MAIN OFFICE · 54375 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971 · (516) 765-2800 Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. $outhold Town Planning Board Town Hall Main Road $outhold, New York 11971 May 30, 1989 ilt ,JUN 2 'I' Re: Pipes Cove Condominiums 6th Street Greenport, New York Dear Mr. Orlowski: This is to inform you that I met with the majority of the members of the Pipes Cove Homeowners Association on Sunday, May 29, 1989 for the purpose of resolving the dispute regarding our site plan. After a thorough discussion of their feelings and objections, I agreed to the following items: To truck in fill, primarily on A1 Scott's property to change the grade, approximately 300 to 350 yards of fill. To plant evergreen type shrubs, approximately four feet in height, which will act as a screen starting at 'the southwesterly corner of the driveway area. Shrubs are to be put in between the retaining wall and the curb on the westerly side, then running near the fence on our property to the Village line. The chain link fence will be extended from the present point to the tree where the private property sign is now located near the beach. I agreed that when the homeowners construct their bulkhead in front of their property that we would have the same contractor extend it to tie in with our current bulkhead and the Bank will pay its pro rata share for this construction. Other convenient offices located in Southampton, Port Jefferson Station, Bohemia, Amagansett, Easlport, and Sag Harbor. Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Southold Town Planning Board May 30, 1989 Page 2 We discussed these items several times so that everyone clearly understood what we had agreed to and all members agreed that this would resolve the matter. I would appreciate the Planning Board authorizing the Town Building Inspector to issue Certificates of Occupancies based upon the agreement set forth in this letter. RWT/km pc: , '~lexander Scott Richard F. Lark, Esq. Very truly yours, Raymond W. Terry, Jr, President ou hol l r S A V I N G S S A N K MAIN OFFICE · 54375 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971 · (516) 765-2800 Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Southold Town Planning Board Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Dear Mr. Orlowski: May 30, 1989 Pipes Cove Condominiums 6th Street Greenport, New York This is to inform you that I met with the majority of the members of the Pipes Cove Homeowners Association on Sunday, May 29, 1989 for the purpose of resolving the dispute regarding our site plan. After a thorou§h discussion of their feelings and objections, I agreed to the following items: To truck in fill, primarily on A1 Scott's property to chan§e the grade, approximately 300 to 350 yards of fill. To plant evergreen type shrubs, approximately four feet in height, which will act as a screen starting at the southwesterly corner of the driveway area. Shrubs are to be put in between the retainin9 wall and the curb on the westerly side, then running near the fence on our property to the Village line. The chain link fence will be extended from the present point to the tree where the private property sign is now located near the beach. I agreed that when the homeowners construct their bulkhead in front of their property that we would have the same contractor extend it to tie in with our current bulkhead and the Bank will pay its pro rata share for this construction. Other convenient offices located in Southampton, Port Jefferson Station, Bohemia, Amagansett, Eastport, and Sag Harbor. Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Southold Town Planning Board May 30, 1989 Page 2 We discussed these items several times so that everyone clearly understood what we had agreed to and all members agreed that this would resolve the matter. I would appreciate the Planning Board authorizir.§ the Town Building Inspector to issue Certificates of Occupancies based Upon the agreement set forth in this letter. RWT/km Very truly yours, President :' /~ pc:, 'Alexander Scott Richard F. Lark, Esq. 8Southold SAVINGS BANK 1'389 MAIN OFFICE · 54375 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971 ' (516) 765-2800 May 22, 1989 Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Southold Town Planning Board Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Pipes Cove Condominiums 6th Street Greenport, New York Dear Mr. Orlowski: This is to confirm our recent conversation and to set forth the Bank's position relative to some of the con- tiguous neighbors' objections. Several days ago, I met with Allan Scott, an owner whose property adjoins ours on the north side. He made his feelings known that he was unhappy as to the height of the retaining wall on the north side and west of Mrs. King's property. I suggested that we might be agreeable to trucking in some fill to change the grade at this point of his property and further suggested that we would consider planting cedar trees or some similar shrub within our property line that would act as a natural screen for head- lights when the owners of the apartments park their automobiles. Mr. Scott agreed that he would speak to his fellow neighbors and get back to me. This plan was agreeable to him. Let me assure you that the Bank's position will be one of trying to maintain a harmonious relationship with the neighbors of this project. RWT/km Very truly yours, Raym~0nd W. Terry, Jr.' President Other convenient offices located in Southampton, Port Jefferson Station, Bohemia, Amagansett, Eastport, and Sag Harbor. 8 Sou hold SAVINGS BANK MAIN OFFICE · 54375 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971 · (516) 765-2800 May 30, 1989 Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Southold Town Planning Board Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Pipes Cove Condominiums 6th Street Greenport, New York Dear Mr. Orlowski: This is to inform you that I met with the majority of the members of the Pipes Cove Homeowners Association on Sunday, May 29, 1989 for the purpose of resolving the dispute regarding our site plan. After a thorough discussion of their feelings and objections, I agreed to the following items: To truck in fill, primarily on A1 Scott's property to change the grade, approximately 300 to 350 yards of fill. To plant evergreen type shrubs, approximately four feet in height, which will act as a screen starting at the southwesterly corner of the driveway area. Shrubs are to be put in between the retaining wall and the curb on the westerly side, then running near the fence on our property to the Village line. The chain link fence will be extended from the present point to the tree where the private property sign is now located near the beach. I agreed that when the homeowners construct their bulkhead in front of their property that we would have the same contractor extend it to tie in with our current bulkhead and the Bank will pay its pro rata share for this construction. Other convenient offices located in Southampton, Port Jefferson Station, Bohemia, Amagansett, Eastport, and Sag Harbor. Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Southold Town Planning Board May 30, 1989 Page 2 We discussed these items several times so that everyone clearly understood what we had agreed to and all members agreed that this would resolve the matter. I would appreciate the Planning Board authorizing the Town Building Inspector to issue Certificates of Occupancies based upon the agreement set forth in this letter. RWT/km Very truly yours, Raymond W. Terry, Jr, · President pc: Alexander Scott Richard F. Lark, Esq. SOUTHOLD TOV~N PLANNING BO~RB T' iLD Y Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 January 20, 1987 Mrs. Betty Wells Accounting Dept. Town Hall Southold, NY 11971 Re: Personnel File Diane M. Schultze Dear Mrs. Wells: The following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning Board, Monday, January 12, 1987. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board request that the attached correspondence from Stephen Shilowitz, dated December 5, 1986 be placed in the personnel file for the Planning Board Secretary Diane M. Schultze, with a copy to the Town Board. Attached is a copy of the correspondence. Very truly yours, BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. , CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Diane M. Schultze, Secretary enc. cc: Town Board T _ LD Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 December 17, 1986 Mr. Stephen Shilowitz, AIA 330 East 33rd Street New York, NY 10016 RE: Amended Site Plan for Pipes Cove Condominium Dear Mr. Shilowitz: Enclosed is a survey of the amended site plan which has been endorsed by the Chairman. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact our office. Very truly yours, BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR., CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Diane M. Schultze, Secretary enc. Architect Stephen Shilowitz, A.I.A. 330 East 33rd Street, New York, N~Y. 10016 (212/ 689-0242 CONSULTANT KOICHI NAGASAWA, 4 33 HIGASHI 4 CHOME, SHIBUYA-KU, TOKYO, JAI~AN December 5, 1986 Re: PIPES COVE CONDOMINIUM Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Dear Chairman Orlowski, I wish to express my very great appreciation to you and the Board for the recent approval granted to my project upon the an~ended site plan. This action, which was so promptly taken, has significantly contributed to the success of the project which I so earnestly desire. I believe that it is evident to everyone who has taken their valuable time to review the project that my prime objective remains to create a truely beautiful environment upon my site and that my efforts to do so these many years that I have been so involved represent, without a doubt, a" labor of love "' Many, many thanks to you all, including the secretary to the Board, Diane M. Schultze, who has been very gracious to me in her official capacity. P D T~LD¥ Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 December 5, 1986 Mr. Stephen Shilowitz, 330 East 33rd Street New York, NY 10016 AIA Re: Amended site plan for Pipes Cove Condominium Dear Mr. Shilowitz: Enclosed is a copy of the corrected correspondence with regard to the above mentioned proposal. The resolution has been corrected to indicate the units approved with in the Town of Southold only. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact our office. Very truly yours, cc: Building Department Board of Appeals BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. , CHAIRMAN U~U~THOLD TOWN .PL~ M. Schultze, Secretary Stephen Shilowltz, 330 least 33rd Street, New York, N.Y. 10016 (2121 689-0242 CONSULTANT Diane Schultze Secretary, Planning Board Town of Southold Box 728 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Architect NOV £ 5 1986 November 21, 1986 Re: PIPES COVE CONDOMINIUM Sixth Street Greenport/Southold, NY Dear Mrs. Schultze, Pursuant to my telephone call to you today regarding the resolution of the Town ZBA given last night upon my above referenced project, I am enclosing herewith four prints of the revised Site Plan A-l, latest date 11-21-86, reflecting the setbacks required by that resolution. As I stated to you, the net result of the change forced upon me by the ZBA is the loss of one unit ( in Building No.1, the closest to the southerly bulkeah line ) and its increased setback from that same bulkhead as well as the one to the west. Thus, the new site plan is of less density than the previously approved ( by the Planning Board ) one and the setbacks have been increased. I believe that this change should pose no problem for re-approval by the Planning Board and hope that they can so certify as quickly as is convenient for them. The ZBA's deliberations have lasted six months and this alone has caused me extreme hardship and no small danger of losing the considerable investment I have made in this project. That investment was made upon the previously obtained approvals, including that of the Southold Planning Board, upon which I had based my decision to purchase the land. I am grateful for favorable consideration by the Planning Board, if it is forthcoming. Very~urs, Southold Town Board of Appeals MAIN ROAD- STATE RnAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. TELEPHONE (516) 765-t809 ACTION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 1986 Appeal No. 3513 Application Dated/Filed May 16, TO: Stephen R. Angel, Esq. as Attorney for STEPHEN SHILOWITZ Esseks, Hefter, Cuddy & Angel 108 East Main Street, Box 279 Riverhead, NY ll901 [Appellant(s)] At a Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals held on November 20, 1986 the above appeal was considered, and the action indicated below was taken on your [ ] Request for Variance Due to Lack of Access to Property New York Town Law, Section 280-a [ ] Request for Special Exception under the Zoning Ordinance Article , Section [×] Request for Variance to the Zoning Ordinance Article XI, Section 100-ll9.2(B) [ ] Request for Application of STEPHEN SHILOWITZ for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XI, Section 100-119.2(B) for permission to con- struct condominium complexes within 75 feet of bulkhead and tidal water, at the west side of Sixth Street, Greenport, NY; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 49, Block 01, Lot 25.1. Zone District: "M-Light Multiple" Residence. This is an appeal for an area variance of the setback require- ments of Section 100-119.2(B) of the Zoning Code of the Town of Southold. Appellant's property is located on the west side of Sixth Street at Greenport, adjacent to the tidal waters of Pipes Cove and Peconic Bay. The total property, including underwater land, comprises an area of 98,949 sq. ft. (2.26 acres), of which 56,997 sq. ft. (57.79%) is located within the territorial boundaries of the Town of Southold, and 41,497 sq. ft. (42.13%) is within the incorporated Village of Greenport. The premises are designated on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as follows: 1000-49-01-25.1 (Southold); 1001-007-01-16 (Greenport). The appellant and/or his predecessor have obtained grants for the underwater portion of the premises from the State of New York. By way of background, Appellant since 1982 has been actively engaged in obtaining all necessary permits and/or approvals required for the construction of a nine-unit condominium complex on the premises, including zoning changes from both the Town of Southold and the Village of Greenport; site plan approvals; special condo- minium permit approval from the Village of Greenport; New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Tidal Wetlands permit; Southold Town Trustees' Tidal Wetland permit; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit for bulkheads, dredging and floating docks; and a building permit from the Village of Greenport. In March of 1985, the Southold Town Board amended the Town Zoning Code by adding thereto Section 100-119.2B, which provides that all buildings must be set back 75 feet from the tidal waters or wetlands. On May 9, 1986, appellant applied for a permit to construct condominiums on the site. Such application was denied for the reason, inter alia, that the proposed construction did not conform to the 75-foot set back requirement of Section 100-119.2B of the Zoning Code. This appeal is from such denial. CHAIRMAN, SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Form ZB4 (rev. 12/81) Page 2 - Appeal No. 3513 Matter of STEPHEN SHILOWITZ Decision Rendered November 20, 1 986 Hearings were held by this Board on June 19, 1986; July 17, 1986; August 14, 1986; September ll, 1986; and October 2, 1986, at which hearings all parties and their attorneys were given the right to present such testimony and documents as they deemed appropriate. During the several months that this appeal has been pending before the Board, the members have had an opportunity to visit the premises in question and the review of all documents introduced before the Board. The Board is also familiar with the history of the site, its former uses, and the condition of and uses of the structures located thereon. Prior to the purchase of the.premises by Appellant, an oyster-~rocessing plant was located thereon, which use had been discontinued for many years and the buildings and bulkheads along the shoreline were in a dilapidated condition. Appellant has submitted a site plan, dated July l, 1982, which shows three buildings. Building 1, containing four dwelling units, is located entirely within the Town; Building 2 containing four dwelling units, is partially within the Town and partially within the Village; Building 3 contains one dwelling unit and is located entirely in the Village. Building 1 on this plan is located on the southerly portion of the premises with insufficient setbacks at 20 feet from the southerly bulkhead, seven feet from the westerly bulkhead, and 25+ feet from the easterly bulkhead, at the closest points. Building 2 on this plan is located near the center portion of the premises with insufficient setbacks at 26± feet from the easterly bulkhead, at the closest points (Southold). At the September ll, 1986 meeting, appellant submitted an alternative plan which reduced the dwelling units in Building I from four to three units, resulting in an increase in the setback from the westerly bulkhead from seven to 21 feet, and from the easterly bulkhead from 25± feet to 45± feet. Building 2 on this plan is shown to be 29 feet from the easterly bulkhead, 62 feet from the northwest bulkhead, and 54 feet from the north bulkhead (Southold), at its nearest points. Appellant has submitted an affidavit which sets forth the fact that he has spent the sum of $210,000 to purchase the premises; $65,000 for architectural and engineering services; $12,000 for consultants; $110,000 for attorneys' fees; and $40,000 for advertising, telephone calls and miscellaneous expenses, or a total sum of $437,000 on this project, to date. As previously indicated, this is an application for an area variance where the standard is whether strict compliance with zoning ordinance will result in "practical difficulties." Although the courts have not defined the term "practical difficulties," in the Case of Wachsberger v. Michaelis, 19 Misc. 2d 909, the Court said that the following matters should be considered: (1) how substantial the variance is in relation to the requirement; (2) the effect, if the variance is allowed, of the increased population density thus produced on available governmental facilities; (3) whether a substantial change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or substantial detriment to adjoining properties; (4) whether the difficulty can be obviated by some method, feasible for the appellant to pursue, other than a variance; and (5) whether in view of the manner in which the difficulty arose and in consideration of the above factors, the interests of justice will be served by allowing the variance. In applying the above considerations to the facts in this case, the Board finds: (1) that the variance requested is substantial in relation to the zoning requirement; (2) that the resulting increase in population density if a variance is granted will not produce an undue burden on available governmental Page 3 - Appeal No. 3513 Matter of STEPHEN SHILOWITZ Decision Rendered November 20, 1986 facilities, since municipal sewer and water service to the facility has been approved, additional on-site fire hydrants are to be provided by the appellant and the municipal fire department has approved the project; (3) that the grant of a variance will not produce a substantial change in the character of the neighborhood or create a substantial detriment to adjoining properties. If nine dwelling units are built on the site, which contains 98,494 sq. ft. of area, the resulting density is approximately one unit per 10,900 sq. ft. of area; if eight units were built (as in the alternative plan), the density would be approximately 12,300 sq. ft. of area per dwelling unit. This compares favorably with existing dwellings in the neighborhood; (4) this Board finds that the difficulty cannot be obviated by a method feasible for the applicant to pursue. Both the attorney for the appellant and the attorney for neighboring property owners agree that if no variance is granted, only 1-1/2 units could be built on the premises located in the Town, and that the total number of units would be reduced to four, a reduction of more than 50%. Considering the investment made to date, in reliance upon the Town Code prior to its March 1985 addition of Section 100-119.2B, the Board finds that there is no method feasible to the appellant to obviate the granting of a variance; (5) the final consideration is whether in view of the manner in which the difficulty arose, justice will be served by the grant of a variance. A review of the record in this matter demonstrates that the appellant, in good faith, contracted to purchase the premises in 1981 contingent upon his ability to obtain all required permits and approvals to construct condominium units at the site; that he thereafter applied to the Village, Town, County, State and Federal agencies for all required permits and approvals at a cost of many thousands of dollars, and the expenditure of more than three years of time and effort; that after obtaining the required permits and approvals, the Town Zoning Code was amended requiring that the buildings be set back 75 feet from the bulkheads on the site. It is the determination of this Board that the appellant has demonstrated that a strict application of Section 100-119.2B of the Zoning Code would result in practical difficulties and significant economic injury. The appellant has submitted an "alternative plan" to this Board on 9/11/86 and his attorney has stated that the Board could consider the same in its determination of this matter. The Board does hereby grant a variance of the provisions of Section lO0-119.2B of the Zoning Code to the extent, and subject to, the conditions hereinafter set forth. Accordinqly, on motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, ~t was RESOLVED, to GRANT a variance from the provisions of Section lO0-119.2B of the Zoning Code to the extent, and subject to, the conditions as follow: 1. There is no disturbance of land within wetland and beach areas. 2. There is no surface water runoff into tidal waters or neighboring lands (shall remain on this site). 3. Updated Certification by Building Department and Final Site Plan are approved by the Planning Board. ~age 4 Appeal No. 3513 Matter of STEPHEN SHILOWITZ Decision Rendered November 20, 1986 o Two copies of the Final Map are filed with the Office of the Board of Appeals. 5. This approval is not to be deemed an approval for any other construction, accessory buildings or otherwise. Conditions No. l, 2 and 3 of the Suffolk County Planning Commission, as set forth in its letter of recommendation to this board dated October 9, 1986, which conditions are as follow: (a) The area of Building 1 should be diminished to allow accommodation of only three dwelling units; (b) Building 1 shall be relocated with a westerly bulkheaded setback of 21 feet along the Peconic Bay; (c) Relocated Building 1/accessory wood decking shall have southerly bulkheaded setbacks of 35 feet/30 feet, respectively, along Peconic Bay. (Thirty-five ft. setback for the foundation of dwelling units. Thirty ft. setback for open deck without concrete foundation attachment to dwelling units.) 7. There will be no overhead lighting which would ~e adverse to neighboring properties. Deck addition is to remain open and unroofed, and is to be constructed on pilings (without a permanent concrete attachment to dwelling foundation structure). 9. There is to be compliance with the lowest floor elevations of the Floodplain Management Law. 10. There will be no further setback reductions. Il. There will be no new fenced or other structures within 75 feet of tidal water, (except as approved hereini~. This Board declines to adopt Condition No. 4 of the Suffolk County Planning Commission report, which condition provides as follows: "Approval of the Greenport Fire Department," for the reason that it believes that it is not appropriate for this Board to make its approval of a variance subject to the approval of a fire department which provides fire protection to the subject premises. This Board believes that it is appropriate for this Board to consider recommendations of a fire department, which it has done in this case, but not to condition its approval of a variance upon the formal approval of a fire. department to the grant of such variance. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Douglass, Doyen and Sawicki. This resolution was duly adopted lk GERA'RD P.'GOE'HRING~, CHAIRMAN November 20, 1986 P~qlD Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 MEMORANDUM TO: Southold Town Trustees FROM: Southold Town Planning Board DATE: May 13, 1986 RE: Stephen Shilowitz Site Plan In accordance with your request, we offer the following information with regard to the above mentioned site plan. This site plan for condominiums located at Sixth Street, Greenport was approved by the Planning Board on June 15, 1982. Attached is a copy of the endorsed site plan. Please contact our office if you have any questions. NEW YOI~ STATE DEr ARTMENT OJ: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION PER-MIT I P£RMIT NO. ~ TW S77-0156 l~q ARTICLE 24, (Freshe~aler Wetlands) [__] ARTICLE 36, (Construction in Flood Hazard Areas) PERMIT ISSUED TO Enconsultants, Inc. for Stephen Shilowitz ADDRESS OF PERMITfEE 64 North Main Street, Southampton, N~' 11968 LOCATION OF PROJECT (Section of stream, tidal wetland, dam, building) Pipes Cove DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Repair or replace within 18" 689-+ 1.f. of steel bulkhead with timber bulkhead and construct 400m 1.f. of timber bulkhead. Expand existing boat basin by removal of 5,000 cu. yds. of up- land fill and place fill upland except in 20' X 15' area of existing waterway. Construct 8 condominium units, boat house/residence and parking areas as per supplied plans. Construct 120' X 4' floating dock to four 44' X 4' floats as per supplied plans. COMMUNITY NAME (City, Town, Village) Oreenport COUNTY Suffolk TOWN Southold FIA CC~MUNI~ NO, DAM NO. PERMITEXPIRATION DATE March 31, 1983 GENERAL 1. The permittee shall file in the office of the appropriate Regional Permit Administrator, a notice of intention to commence work at least 48 hours in advance of the time of commencement and shall also notify him p~omplly in writing of the completion of the work. 2. The permitted work shall be subiect to inspection by an authorized representative of the Departmeot of Environmental Conservation who may order the work suspended if the public interest so requires. 3. As a condition of the issuance of this permit, the applicant has ac- cepted expressly, by the execution of the application, the full legal respon- sibility for ali damages, direct or indirect, of whatever nature, and by whom- ever suffered, arising out of the project described herein and has aRreed to indemnify and save harmless the State from suits, actions, damages and costs of every name and description resulting from the said project. 4. Any material dredged in lhe prosecution of the work herein permitted shah be removed evenly~ without leaviflR large refuse piles, ridges across the bed of the waterway or flood plain or deep holes that may have a tendency to cause injury to navigable channels or to the banks of the waterway. 5. Any material to be deposited or dumped under this permit, either in the waterway or on shore above high-water mark, shall be deposited or dumped at the locality shown on the drawing hereto attached, and, if so p~escribe~ thereon, within or behind a good and substantial bulkhead or bulkheads, such as will prevent escape of the material into the waterway. 6. There shall be no unreasonable interference with navigation by the work herein authorized. 7: That if future operations by the 5~ate of New York require an alteration in the position of the structure or work herein authorized, or if, in fhe opinion of the Department of Environmental Conservation it shall ca~se unreasonable obstruction to the free navigation of said waters or flood flows or endanger the health, safety or welfare of the people of the State, or loss or'destruction of the natural resources of the State, the owner may be ordered by the Depart° ment to remove of alter the structural work, obstructions, or hazards caused thereby without exponse to the State; and if, upon the expiration or revocation of this permit, the structure, fill, excavation, or other modification of the watercourse hereby authorized shall not be completed, the owners shaH, without expense to the State, and to such extent and in such time and manner as the Department of Environmental Conservation may require, remove all or any portion of the uncompleted structure or fill and restore to its former condition the navigable and flood capacity of the watercourse. No claim shall be made against the State of New York on account of any such removal or alteration. CONDITIONS 8. That the State of New York shah in no case be Hable for any damage or iniury to the structure or work herein authorized which may be caused by or resul! from future operations undertaken by the State for the conservation or improvement of navigation, or for other purposes, and no claim or right to compensation Shall accrue from any such damage. 9. That if the display of lights and signals on any work hereby authorized is not otherwise provided for by law, such lights and signals as may be pre- scribed by the United States Coast Guard shall he installed and rnaintained by and at the expense of the owner. 10. AH work carried out under this permit shall be performed in accor- dance with established engineermg practice and in a workmanlike manner. lt. if granted under Articles 24 or 25, the Department reserves the right to reconsider this approval at any time and afte~ due notice and hearing to continue, rescind or mndify this permit in such a manner as may be found to be )usl and equitable. If upon the expiration or revocation of this permit, the modification of the wetland hereby authorized has not been completed, the applicant shall, without expense to the State, and to such extent and in such time and manner as the Department of Environmental Conservation may require, remove all or any portion of the uncompleted structure or fill and restore the site to its former condition. No claim shall be made aRainst the State of New York on account of any such removal or alteration. 12. This permit shall not be construed as conveying to the applicant any right to trespass upon the lands or interfere with the riparian rights of others to perform the permitted work or as authorizing the impairment of any rights, title or interest in real or personal property held or vested in a person not a ~arty to the permit. 13. The permirtee is responsible for obtaining any other permits, ap- provals, lands, easements and rights-of-way which may be required for this project. 14. If granted under Arficle 36, this permit is Rranted solely o~ the basis of the requirements of Article 36 of the Environmental Conservation Law an~ Part 500 of 6 NYCRR (Construction in Flood Hain Areas havin$ Special Flood Hazards - Building Permits) and in no way signifies that the project will be free from floocling. 15. By acceptance of this permit the permittee agrees that the permit is contingent upon strict compliance with the special conditions on ~he reverse side. 9s-~o.4 ~/75) ' (SEE g£VERSE SIDE) APPLICATION FOR PERMIT &PPLICAt iON NE}. Read instructions on hack before ¢ onlpleting this applicaJion. P]ease tyFe or ilrint clearly in ink. Use separaJr addenda and exhibits to provide all required data and explanations for ~hich space on theforn is inadequale. r] ARTICLE 15, TITtE 8 (CONIRt)L ~8 AQUATIC INSECTS, WEEDS, OR UNDESIRABLE FISH) ~ARTICLE 15, TITL[ 5 (PROTECTION OF WAIERS) ~ FOr Ihe construction, re(onstructinn, or repair of a DAM or ot~er impoundment sbuc~ure. [ ] For the construction, reconstruction, or repah of any permanent DOCK, pier, or wharf; and any dock, pier, or wharf, built on openwork ~uppods, which has a lop surface ar~a of more than 200 square feet. ~ For the disturbance ol a STREAM BED or excavatio~ in or fill cf navigable waters. ~ARTICLE 15, IlILE 15 ~ WATER SUPPLY ~ LONG ISLAND WELL ~ARTICLE 24(FRESHWA~ERWE]LANDS) ~ ~rmit [] Letterof Pmnbssion ~ A~TICLE g (TIDAL WUO ANDS) 1. NA~,tE OF APPLICANT: l~t, ICOtliJU~.Jc~lnta~Ttlc. 2. APPLICANT IS A/AN [7 Individual [] Partnership ~ Association ~-]Corporation ~Municipa[ity []Governmental Agency 3, NAME & TITLE OF OFFICIAL SIGNING APPLICATION ~oy L. ll~Je~ STREET ADDRESS64 North OR P. O. BOX 2836360 PHONE ___ 1 POST OFFICE _ ~vu~_~,.~on STATE ZIP CODE ~'~ 4. NAME & ADDRESS OF~(~'I~ con~r~C~ V~ (if not applicant) $~t,~l~ll~ll -~tZ PHONE 212 6g90242 STREET ADDRESS 3308.33r~1 SI:. ltY OR P. O. BOX POST OFFICE STATE 5. PRO]ECT LOCATION: g~'~(~l~E*g a) City or Village of Southold Town of 10016 ZIP CODE WILL PROJECT UTILIZE STATE OWNED LAND? [] Yes ~ No NAME OF STREAM OR OTHER WATER BODY: (If appropriate; if un-named, show on map - See Item 5b) ~uffolk PipeS Cove County of h) Specific project site or area is marked on U.S.G.S. or equivalent ma attached as Exhibit NO. 7. PROPOSED USE: ~ Private J 8, PROPOSED STARTING DATE: 9. APPROXIMATE COMPLETION DATE 10. FEE OF $ 50~ENCLOSED [] Public ~j Commercial J 11. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: (Feet of rip-rap new channel; cubic yards of material to be removed; draining, dredging, filling, and location of disposal sites; type of sJructure to be installed; height of dam; size of impoundment; capacities of proposed water sources; extent of distribution system; etc.) ~pl~Ce Or repair (~ithin 1~") 68~: if of ~xiJting fatll~ ~eet steel ~l~d in ~ lo~tl~ ~ configuration with tier ~lkha~d. :xpa~ existi~ basin by )f ~terial f~ ex~ing upl~. leant of extsti~ ~te~y (20'x15') will ~ ii[l~ to ~11~ e~n configuration. Focr (~,~ ~4'x4' fi~er float~ agreed to l~'x4 Ih~.~Yh~project--- -- will require the following additional permits, applicati~s for which are the responsibility of others; [] DAM [] DOCK [] STREAM DISTLJRBANCE ~1 SPDES/NPDES [] WATER SUPPLY [_j L. I.WELLS ~] FRESHWATER WETLANDS [] TIDAL WETLANDS 13. NAME AND ADDRESS OF OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER OF LOCALITY WHERE PROPOSED WORKS ARE LOCATED: 14. iS ANY PORTION OF THE ACTIVITY FORWHICIt A PERMIT IS SOUGHT NOW BEGUN OR COMPLETE? [] Yes [] No If "YES", explain in addenda, giving reasons and dates, and show existing work on drawings or map. 15. CERTIFICATION: I hereby affirm under penalty of perjury that information provided on this form and all attachments submitt~tt.j~e~a~- /~ w~ h is true o the best of my knowledge and behef. False statements made hereto are pumshable as a CId~sr~A~, K~ misdemeanor pursuant to Section 210.45 of the Penal Law. As a condition to the issuance of a permit, the applicant accepts full legal responsibility for all damage, direct or indirect, of whatever nature, and by whomever suffered, arising out of the project described herein and agrees to indemnify and save harmless the State from suits, action~.,¢: damages and cost~ of every name and description resulting from the said project. ~ v DATE SIGNATURE 95-19-2 (4/80) -SEE REVERSE SIDE- INSTRUCTIONS 1. Prepare and submit four (4) copies of this application, Use typewriter or print clearly in ink. 2. Submit with the application three copies o1 a drawing showing location and extent et work to be done. 3. Applications by counties, cities, towns and villages shall be signed by the chief executive officer thereof or the head of the department or agency undertaking the project. 4, The applicant may be required to publish a "Notice of Application" as provided by the Regional Permit Administrator. 5. If other than owner makes application, written consent of the owner must accompany application. 6, Acceptance of a permit subjects permittee Io restrictions, reguIations or obligations stated in application and/or permit. 7. If a public hearing is necessary, the app]icanl may be required to furnish the names and addresses of all adiacent landowners and all known claimants to water rights. 8. Applications for the construction, reconstruction or repair of a dam or other impoundment structure must be accompanied by Supplement 9. Applications for the construction, reconstructi(m or repair of a dock, pier, wharf or other permanent structure used as a landing place for watercraft must be accompanied by Supplement 10. Applications for a water supply permit must be accompanied by Supplement W-I, special instructions on which SUP£RCEDE certain of the above instructions, gee "Water Supply" handbook. 11. Applications for a ~ermit to apply a chemical to control or eliminate aquatic vegetation must be accompanied by Supplement A-l, 12. Question No. 12 pertains to projects involving two or more applicants. One typical example is a new subdivision, requiring a Wetlands Permit for the developer, the project to be within a water district extension, requiring a Water Supply Permit for the town. 13. Be sure to enclose proper application fee, no!ed accordingly in Item 10; see Part 621, Uniform Procedures Fules, Rule 621.5. (It in doubt, discuss with Regional Dffice before submitting application). 14. INCOMPLETE OR INACCURATE INFOR~, AT ON MAY DELAY P[~OCESSING~ INFORMATION Application for permit to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation is authorized by Environmental Conservation Law, Article 15 (Title 3- Control of Aquatic Insects, Weeds, or Undesirable Fish; Title 5-Stream Protection; Title 15-Water Supply), and Article 24 (Freshwater Wetlands). N.Y.S. DEC Region 1 Bldg. 40 - Rm. 219 SUNY-at Stony Brook Stony Brook, N. Y. 11790 Mtn: Regional Permit Administrator (516) 751-7901 N.Y.S. DEC Region 4 Region 4 Office Stamford, N. Y. 12167 Attn: Regional Permit Administrator (607) 652-7364 N.Y.S. DEC Region 7 P. O. Box 1169 Fisher Avenue Cortland, N. Y. 13045 Administrator (607) 753-3094 N.Y.S. DEC Region 2 2 World Trade Center 61st Floor New York, N. Y. 10047 Mtn: Regional Permit Administrator (212) 488-2758 N.Y.S. DEC Region 5 RI. #86 Ray Brook, N. Y. 12977 Mtn: Regional Perr~it Administrator (5t8) 891-1370 N.Y.S. DEC Region 8 P, O, Box 57 Avon, N. Y. 14414 Atto: Regional Permit Administrator (716) 226-2466 N .Y.S. DEC Region 3 2t South Putt Corners Road New Paltz, N. Y. 12561 Mtn: Regional PeEmit Administrator (914) 255-5453 N.Y.S. DEC Region 6 State Office Building 317 Washington Street Watertown, N. Y. 13601 Attn: Regional Permit Administrator (315) 782-0100 N.Y.S. DEC Region 9 584 Delaware Avenue Buffalo, N. Y. 14202 Attn: Regional Permit Administrator (716) 842-5828 .......... RECEIVED SEP 9 1981 N, Y.S.D.E.C. g)-t. OO ( I+'I$ ( RECEIVED BY SOUTHOLD TllW FLN' itli G BOAP, JUN 9 _1982 Stephen Shilowitz, l.l.l. DATE 330 East 33rd Street, New York, N.Y. 10016 (212) 689-0242 CONSULTANT KOICHI NAGASAWA, 4-33 HIGASHI 4 CHOME, SHIBUYA Kg, TOKYO, JAPAN Henry E. Raynor, Jr., Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Town of Southold P.O. Box 728 Southold, NY 11971 Architect June 4, 1982 Re:6th Street Waterfront Condominium Project Greenport-Southold, NY Dear Mr. Raynor, Pursuant to your letter dated May 27, 1982 and our subsequent telephone conversation regarding the above referenced project and your request for a site plan drawing indicating ammendments to the lighting fixture schedule, screening and buffering of the parking area, I am herewith enclosing a revised drawing of the site plan with the new revision date, 6-4-82, in accordance with the Planning Board's wishes. This revised drawing indicates outdoor lighting along the entrance driveway from 6th street as well as along the entire perimeter of shared property lines particularly at the outdoor parking area and represents, as such, a revision to a preliminary drawing previously submitted to the Building Inspector for outdoor lighting and plumbing, with an earlier date of 1-8-82, as part of the documents accompanying my basic application for site plan approval. This newly revised drawing also indicates a length of wood palisade fencing 115 ft. in one length and 70 ft. in another length ( both approx, lengths ) screening the parking area from the adjoining neighbors as well as a portion of the entrance driveway. In addition, the drawing still further indicates that the entire buffer area between said fence and parking area and the length of the entrance driveway will be planted with black pine trees and juniper shrubs in accordance with a planting scheme that I will be pleased to submit to the Board and to the Building Inspector when drawings are more fully developed for a building permit. I believe that this revision more than satisfies the Board's requests at this time. I await your further word should additional information be required of me. Thank you for your continued interest. enoZ. (, P.S.: please note the "NOTE "dated 6-4-82 at the upper right hand corner of the enclosed drawing explaining in detail the above revisions. Lighting fixtures along property lines will be fitted with side screens to eliminate light spillage to adjacent properties. HENRY E RAYNOR. Jr., Chairman FREDEDdCX Z CC,qDCN JAMES WALL BENNETT ORLOWSKI, Jr. GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM. Jr. William F. Mullen, Jr. May 27, 1982 TELEPHONE 765- 1938 Mr. Stephen Shilowitz 330 East 33rd Street New York, New York 10016 Dear Mr. Shilowitz: Our board had an opportunity to review your proposed site plan at our meeting of May 24. Our board requests that you submit three copies of the site plan reflecting amendments on the lighting fixture schedule and screen- ing and buffering of the parking area prior to our making a final determination on this proposal. Upon receipt of the above information, we will expedite those actions necessary for final approval. Thank you for your cooperation. Yours very truly, HENRY E. RAYNOR, JR., CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Susan E. Long, Secretary Q;W;]-~ Or SOUTt[O:LD S 12F FQ LK~CO.LkNTY Southold, N,Y. 11971 HENRY E. RAYNOR. Jr.. Chairman JAMES WALL BENNETT ORLOWSKI. Jr. GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, Jr. William F. Mullen, Jr. May 26, 1982 Mrs. Judith Terry Town Clerk $outhold Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Re: Stephen Shilowitz - COZ Dear Mrs. Terry: The following action was taken by the Southold Town Monday, May 24 1982: Planning Board, TELEPHONE 765-1938 RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board reconunend approval on the application of Stephen Shilowitz for a change of zone from "C" Light Industrial District to "M" Light Multiple Residence District based on the following reasons: 1. Would upgrade the area 2. Would upzone the area 3. The operation will be serviced by both municipal water and sewerage 4. Recreational boating, along with other amenities would be conducive to the area Yours very truly, HENRY E. RAYNOR, JR., CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Susan E. Long, Secretary JUDITH T. TERRY TOWN CLERK REGiStRAR Ol VITAL STATISTICS K Southold, L. 1., N. Y. 11971 '[IELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 May 13, 1982 Dear Henry: The attached petition of Stephen Shilowitz has been filed to correct an error made by me in failing to include the parcel described in this petition in the Notice of Public Hearing and Notice of Change of Zone. For some reason Van Tuyl described the property as Parcel A and Parcel B and I omitted Parcel B. The Town Board assumed they granted a change of zone on the entire parcel as applied for by Mr. Shilowitz in Petition No. 249. JUl)HIt T TERRY OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 ['ELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 May 19, 1982 Mr. Henry E. Raynor, Jr., Chairman Southold mown Planning Board Southold Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Dear Henry: Transmitted herewith Js Petition No. 252 of Stephen Shilowitz requesting a change of zone from "C" Light Industrial District to "M" Light Multiple Residence District on certain property at Greenport, Town of Southold, New York. You are hereby instructed to prepare an official report defining the conditions described in said petition and determine the area so affected with your recommenda- tions. Very truly yours, Judith T. Terry Southold Town Clerk Enclosure CAS . NO: .... STA oF NEW PE=T ON TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ~ ~E MATTER OF ~ PE~TION OF FOR A CI~GE, MOD~ICATION OR ~EN~MENT OF T~ BUILD~G ZONE O~IN- ~CE OF T~ TOWN OF SOU~OLD, S~FOLK CO~TY, NEW YO~. TO THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD: 1. I, ...S..t...e.p.h.~p.....S..h...i..1..o...w..i...t.z. ...................... residing at ..3..3...0....E...a.~.t.....3..3...r...d._..S_t..r.e.~.t. ...... New Yo(ri~<sert name of petitioner) 10016 ~{1Y~t~-dfft/g~y, New York, the undersigned, am ~ne ~)g~gl~o~cer~aln real proper~y sl~ua~ea at ...6..t....h...S.t...r...e.e.-t........G.r.e..e...n..P..°.~'.t, NYand more particularly bounded and described as follows: ALL that certain tract or parcel of land now or formerly under the ordinary high water mark of Pipes Cove, together with the building thereon, situate, lying and being at Greenport, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the southerly boundary-line of Village of Greenport on the westerly line of land now or formerly of Harvey, being the southeasterly corner of the upland portion of land about to be conveyed to Shilowitz; running thence through the waters of Peconic Bay, three courses: (1) S.43°30'W.-100 feet; thence (2) N.46°30'W.-340 feet, more or less; thence (3) N.33°43'20"E.-106 feet, more or less, to land now or formerly of Braun; thence along said other land about to be conveyed to Shilowitz, S.46°30'E.-355.53 feet to the point of beginning. 2. I do hereby petition the Town Board of the Town of Southold to change, modify and amend the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, including lhe Building Zone Maps heretofore made a part thereof, as follows: From "C" Light Industrial District to "M" Light Multiple Residence District. 3. Such request is made for the following reasons: Petitioner desires to effect a change of zone for the purpose of constructing nine (9) residential condominium units with mooring spaces available in an adjoining boat basin for power and/or sail boats. The premises in question lie within, in part, the Incorporated Village of Greenport, and, in part, in the Town of Southold. With re- spect to that part which lies within the Village of Greenport, it is ~equested that change of zone be made from a General Commercial Dis- trict to a Waterfront Commercial District. As concerns those lands within the Town of Southold, it is requested thata change of zone be made from "C" Light Industrial District to "M" Light Mul~ple-Residence District. The proposed project would enhance the waterfront area in that exist- ing dilapidated structures would be removed and replaced with highly valued residential buildings. The tax base of the property would be substantially increased without a great demand upon existing municipal facilities. From an esthetic and environmental viewpoint the area would be transformed from one of~on-use ~one of attractive usuage-- in all areasthe community will benefit-f~orn, s6ch.~. ~ · - STATE OF NEW YORK, ) ) SS:- COUNTY OF SUFFOLK, ) STEPHEN SHILOWITZ ............................................... BEING DULY SWORN, deposes and says that he is the petitioner in the within action; that be has read the foregoing Petition and knows the contents thereof; that the same is true to his (l~eX) own knoxvledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and that as to those matters he believes it to be true. (L. S.) Sworn to before me tlfis .127ch day of ....... ~a~y ............. 19.8..2. J!!PlTl! T T~q,~'f ~ Nc~'y Public. TOWN BOARD, TOWN OFSOUTHOLD In the Matter of the Petition of Stephen Shilowitz to the Town Board of the Town of Southold. TO: Cove Circle Association Box 260 Greenport, N.Y. 11944 Village of Greenport 236 Third Street ~reenport, N.Y. 11944 NOTICE YOU ARE HEREBY GIVEN NOTICE: 1. That it is the intention of the undersigned to petition the Town Board of the Town of Southold to requesta change of zone to the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Southold. 2. That the property which is the subject of the Petition is located adjacent to your property and is des- cribed as follows: Premises general.~ contiguous of land of the VxlIage of Greenport, situate at Sixth Street, on Peconic Bay, Greenport, New York. 3. That the property which is the subject of such Petition is Io~:ated in the following zoning district: "C" Light Industrial 4. That by such Petition, the undersigned will request that the above-described property be placed in the following zone district classification: "M" Light Mult iple-Residenoe 5. That within five days from the date hereof, a written Petition requesting the relief specified above will be filed in the Southold Town Clerk's Office at Main Road, Southold, New York and you may then and there examine the same during regular office hours. 6. That before the relief sought may be granted, a public hearing must be held on the matter by the Town Board; that a notice of such hearing must be published at least ten days prior to the date of such hearing in the Suffolk Times and in the Long Island Traveler-Mattituck Watchman, newspapers published in the Town of Southold and designated for the publication of such notices; that you or your representative have the right to ap- pear and be heard at such hearing. Dated: May 12, 1982 Stephen Shilowitz Petitioner Post Office Address: 330 East 33rd Street New York, New York 10016 PROOF OF MAILINGO.~ NOI'tCE NAME Cove Circle Associates Village of Greenport ADDRESS 2:~5 Third Str{'et, STATE OF NEW YORK : COUNTY OF SUFFOLK: SS.; Szephen Shilowitz o residing at 330 Eas] ~ New York New York , being duly sworn, deposes and says that on the L-Z[]~ of ~av , 1982 , deponent mailed a true copy of the Notice set forth on the reverse side hereof, directed to each of the above-named persons at the addresses set opposite their respective names, that the addresses set opposite the names of said persons are the addresses of said persons as shown on the cu,- rent assessment roll of the Town of Southold; that said Notices were maiIed at the United States Post Office at Southold, New York .;thatsaid Notices were mailed toeach of said persons b¥ (certified ~[~ mail. Sworn to me this 12th day of May ,19 82 Notary Public Y ~T T .... SHORT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ENVIRONHENTAL ASSESS~JENT FORk~ INSTRUCTIONS: (o) In order to answer the.questions in this short EAF it is assumed thai the preparer will use currently available informatlon concerning the project and the likely impacts of the action. It is not expected that additional stud/es, research or other investigations will be undertaken. (b) If any question has been answered Yes the project may be significant and a completed Envlronmental Assessment Form is necessary. (c) Z£ all questions have been answered No it is likely that this project is not significant. E~vironmental Assessment 1. W±11 projec~ result in a large physical change to the project site or physlcally alte~ more than 10 cores of land? ........................ Yes c//No 2. Will there be a major change to any unique or unusual land form found on the site? .......... Yes 3. Will project alter or have a large effect on exlstin9 body of water? ....................... Y~s,v~No 4. Wi11 project have a potentially large impact on groundwater quality? ....................... Yes b/No 5. Will project significantly effect drainage flow on adjacent sites? ........ ' ................ Yes~"No 6. Will project affect any threatened or endangered plant or animal species? ........... Yes/No 7. Will project result in o major adverse effect on air quoliiy? ............................... Yes /No 8. Will project have a major effect on visual cherocier of the community or scenic views or vistas known to be important to the community? Yes /No 9. Will project adversely impact any site or structure of historic, prehistoric or paleontological importance or any site designated as O critical environmental area by a local agency? ............ ,.~..-..~-.~.~.~-.~..v Yesc'~No 10. Will project have a bajor effect on existing or future recreational opportunities? ......... Yes C/No 11. Will project result in major traffic problems or cause a major effect to existing transportation systems? ....................... Yes'-/ No 12. Will project regularly cause objectionable od~rs, noise, glare, vibration, or electrical disturbance as o result of the project's operation? .................................... Yes~;/No 13. Will project have any impact on public health ', or safety? .................................... Yes /No 14. Will project affect the existing community by directly causing o growth in permanent population of more then 5 percent over o one year period or have o major negative effect on the character of %he community or neighborhood~ Yes ~/No 15. Is there public controversy concerning the project9 ^ . ..... ; ............... e ................ Yes PREPARER'S SIGNATURE. , REPRESENTING 1 $ L A/V D 800 '= ~'" t !OOt- OO7- l - l~, lO00-O,,~c:j- I - ~D,~ · ~ Architect Stephen Shilowitz, A.I.A. 330 East 33rd Street, New York, N.Y. 10016 (212) 68~-0242 Edward F. Hindermann Building & Housing Inspector Town of Southold P.0. Box 728 Southold, NY 11971 May 5, 1982 Re: 6th Street Waterfront Condominium Project Greenport,Southold, NY Dear Mr. Hindermann, Pursuant to our telephone conversation today regarding the establishment of the rear yard requirement for the above referenced project, I am enclosing herewith three prints of my site plan for the same, with the latest ( today date: 5-5-82 revision, indicating that all proposed structures are at least fifty ( 50 ) feet back from the rear yard line established by the Van Tuyl & Son survey I referred to in my last letter to you dated May 1, 1982. I believe that this revision as well as my earlier letters on the subject of all the points you made in your report to the Planning Board dated April 12, 1982 will permit you to accept the site plan in its present form. I trust that the Planning Board will therefore issue its approval thereupon. Once again, many thanks for your interest and patience! I look forward to meeting with you in person when we review final dra~ings for building permit approval. encl. OF OL BOLD OFFIC£ OF BUILDING INSP£CTOR P.O. BOX 728 TOWN HALL SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 TEL. 765-1802 May 5, 1982 ?lanning Board Town of $outhold Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Subject: Greenport-Southold Condominiums Site ?lan Review SK-1, 3/15/82 Gentlemen: As a result of the comments made to you, letter of April 12, 1982, Mr. Shilowitz, after meeting with you, has contacted me with reference to the rear yard set back. The site plan submitted for review did not reflect the actual boundary lines of this site. I have since received a survey dated 12/19/67 and a site plan dated 9/8/81 that shows set back of proposed buildings and actual rear yard boundary line. In view of this, the 50'-0" rear yard set back requirement will be met. (Copy of survey and site plan herewith.) I have ingly and re-submit to your Board. Building & Housing Inspector asked Mr. Shilowitz to correct his site plan accord- EFH:ec Attachments I / ( SITR PLAN 6th ST2KEET AT P. iI~S COVE G~EENPC~T, NY for: ~.,,w-"HEN SH~LOWITZt' ~.I.A date: 9/28~81 scale: 1 in.~6 NYMH News NEW YORK MANUFACTURED HOUSING ASSOCIATION ( ~mh~ ) PRESIDENT'S POINTS Northeast Funding to Change As of April 1,1982, the payment of dues and/or funding program for the New York Manufactured Housin§ Association from all manufacturers will be sent di- rectly to the Association. The Northeast Manufactured Housing Association will no longer function in this capacity. We who are involved in NYMHA feel that it is imperative that all manufacturers participate in this venture. The Executive Board will be using the funding program money in our legislative efforts, public relations and programs to enhance the manufactured housing industry in New York State. The funds will be kept in a special account for the pre-quoted uses. We are striving to improve the manufac- tured housing industry image and support efforts so that we may take our place as the best affordable housing in New York State. By joining the funding program and sup- porting same, manufacturers automatically become members of the New York Manu- factured Housing Association. On behalf of NYMHA, and as President, I want to thank participating manufacturers in advance for their continued support of our organization. My thanks also to manufacturers who have not previously participated in our program but have now indicated that they will support our positive attitude in making factory-built housing No. 1 in New York State. Sincerely yours, William E. Sprague President Jesse McEIroy, Director of the HUD Office of Manufactured Housing Stand- ards (Title VI), has announced his resigna- tion from that office effective April 9. His successor has not been named. NEMHA Elects Haylor, George Genereux, well-known mobile home park owner from Massachusetts, has been elected chairman of the North- east Manufactured Housing Association. Genereux is owner/operator of Red Wing Estates in E. Warehan, MA, and represents the New England Manufactured Housing Association on the Northeast board. He took over leadership of the regional as- soc[ation at the last meeting of the board of directors on January 25. Elected Vice Chairman was Bud Haylor of Hay[or, Freyer, Coon Inc. in Syracuse, New York, an insurance agency whose MHD Division specializes in manufactured housing. The new Secretary is Anne Rusiniak, former president of the New York Manufactured Housing Association and' owner of Shady Acres Mobile Home VP; Rusiniak, Secretary Park in Cheektowaga, New York. Jim Boyts, of the national staff of Skyline Corporation in Elkhart, Indiana, was elected Treasurer. The board of directors of the regional association also consists of four additional manufacturer members. Those elected in- elude Frank Bevlock of Burlington Homes, St. Clair, Pennsylvania; Richard Lauriello of Redman Homes in Ephrata, Pennsylvania; Guy Arnold of Marlette Homes in Lewist0wn, PA, and Dan Dugan of Schult Homes in EIkton, Maryland. The NEMHA board of directors is com- posed of two representatives of each member state association as well as the member manufacturer representatives. Continued on page 4 Ninteen New Members Welcomed to NYMHA The New York Manufactured Housing Association welcomes 19 new members who have joined the group since the first of the year. Ten of those new members have joined since the deadline for the 1982 Membership Directory. Please keep their names and addresses and add them to your directory for future reference. Astro Manufacturing Company, Box 189, Shippenville, PA 16254. Tel: 814/226-6822. Curtis Mobile Homes, Attn: Emust Gier, 2032 East Schodack St., Castleton, NY 12033. Tel: 518/477-7682. Greentree Credit Corp., Attn: W. C. Galand, P.O. Box R, Uniontown, PA 15401. Tel: 1-800-245-1340. Getting Industries, Inc., Shipshewana, Indiana 46565. Tel: 219/'/684131. Hickory Hill E~tates, Attn: Arnold Sheer, c/o Edison Motor Court, Route 55, Poughkeepsie, NY 12603. Tel: 914/454-3080. Lake City Manufactured Housing, Inc., 10068 Keystone Drive, P.O. Box 219, Lake City, PA 16423. Prestige Homes, ARm Lynn Ferrera, Route 96, Clifton Springs, NY 14432. Tel: 315/462-9401. Rolling Acres Mobile Park, ARm Frank Ligotino, 227 Costa Road, Highland, NY 12528. Tel: 914/883-7210. Sonlight Homes, Inc., Attn: Dick Wagner, Route 98 at Barre Center, Albion, NY 14411. Tel: 716Ri89-9507. Zimmer Homes, P.O. Box 297, Selin~rove, PA 16254. Continued o n page 5 GECC Endorses Variable Rate Financing John (Jack) Jaegel, New York Sales Man- ager of the General Electric Credit Corporation, spoke with members of the Board of Directors of the New York Man- ufactured Housing Association concerning variable rate financing. Currently, variable rate financing is allowed in New York State for site assembled homes only. Jaegel told the board that GECC is active in ten states with a variable rate financing program for mobile homes and would like to see state legislators in New York pass legislation which would permit mobile home owners to buy under that option. Jaegel explained some of the parameters for the GECC program in those states where it operates. First, under variable Continued on poge 5 may/june 1982 Fire Risk Lower for Mobile/Manufactured Homes The risk of fire is greater in a site-built house than in a mobile/manufactured home, according to a recently released national study, "Comparison of Fire Risk in Mobile Homes and Site-Built Homes," the Manufactured Housing Institute has reported. Conducted by independent researcher Howard Gates, the study found that mobile/manufactured homes of recent make have a lower fire incidence rate than site-constructed houses of all sizes and ages. Gates' analysis of available data for the period of 1976-78 revealed that the incidence of fire in site-built houses was 534.5 per 100,000 homes, compared to the lower rate of 378.9 fires per 1000,000 mobile/manufactured homes. The MHl-commissioned study also found that the 1978 fire fatality rate (the year on which the Gates report was based) was Membership Kit A few months ago, the Board of Directors of the New York Manu- factured Housing Association, responding to a request from mem- bers, authorized the design cfa membership identification kit. As part of the kit, goals and ideas for the membership were to be inscribed on a plaque suitable for office display. Pins were designed so that the sales, service and management staffs of dealers, parks and service organizations could be readily identified as members of the Association. Double-faced, self-adhering decals were ordered so that they could be displayed on the doors and windows of dealerships and vehicles attesting to Association membership. A logo sheet was printed containing NYMHA Iogos of varying sizes in order for members to claim Association affiliation in newspaper ads, on stationery, or in brochures. Aisc, instructions were included showing members just how they could go about publicizing their individual open houses or other events of public interest. Those kits are now available - to members only -- on a first-come first-serve basis, for $55, postpaid. Order yours TODAY/ 5-inch by 7-inch plaque mounted on an 8-inch by 10-inch walnut finished wood backing. 4 3/4-inch pins -- silver finish with red highlights. 5 double-faced, self-adhering decals suitable for office window or door or vehicle window. 1 logo sheet containing 1 2 Iogos in various sizes on reproducible stock. publicity instruction sheet. Clip and return to: New York Manufactured Housing Association, 5858 East Mofloy Road, Syracuse NY 13211 Name ................................................. Business Name .......................................... Address ............................................... Phone No ............... Bill Me ...... Check Enclosed ...... 2 closely comparable to that of site-built houses under 1,000 square feet in floor area, a size group which matches the ma- jority of mobile/manufactured homes in the U.S. stock. The lower rate of fire incidence for mo- l?lie/manufactured homes, according to the study, is due in large part to the strin- gent fire safety features required by the Department of Housing and Urban De- velopment (HUD) Manufactured (Mobile) Home Construction and Safety Stan- dards. First implemented in 1976, this mandatory national building code pre- scribes the construction standards and safety requirements for every mobile/ manufactured home built in the United States. Among the many federally mandated fire safety provisions that must be incorpor- ated into every mobile/manufactured home built in America are: (1) each bile home must have a minimum of two easily accessible exits; (2) walls and ceil- ings are subject to restrictive flame-spread requirements; (3) restrictive flame-spread requirements apply to interior finishes adjacent to cooking ranges~ and water heater and furnace enclosures; (4) a Continued on page 3 NEW YORK MANUFACTURED HOUSING ASSOCIATION ~ 5858 East Molloy Road Syracuse, New York 13211 315/455-5507 officers Bill Sprague ........... President Beverly Seiners .... 15t Vice Pres|dent Lee Saxby ....... 2nd Vice President Petricia F|e~erer ......... Secrat~ry Dick Harper ........... Treasurer Jim Freyer... Associate Vice President Anne R asiniak ....... Past President directors Ken Alley 8ill Kest Jack Bridwell Jennie Pantazis Carol Brodock Pete Petroski Glen Cunningham Joe Snell Tim Oonnelly Elwood Schultz Pat Eversole Jim Spence Barbara Faraone Joy Whistle Stan Hall Paul Wilson Bud Haylor staff , Beverly Lowum ............... ......... Executive Administrator EDITORIAL AND ADVERTISING OFFICES NYMHA News 525 Oak Street Syracuse, New York 13203 315/472-8897 ~ Rates available upon request. · Fire Risk Lower Continued from page 2 smoke alarm and emergency egress win- dows (that can be quickly "popped out" in a fire) are required in ali sleeping areas; and, (5) aluminum electrical wiring is strictly prohibited by the HUD standards. The most up-to-date building codes that govern construction of site-built housing do not require more stringent and compre- hensive fire safety features than :hose mandated by the HUD Manufactured Home Standards. in fact, many are less restrictive, according to MHI. For example, in California, a state with one of the largest concentrations of mobile/manufactured homes in the na- tion, recent manufactured housing fire data indicated that the fire incidence rate of mobile homes is significantly less than that of site-bulK housing. A California State Fire Marshall report found that one out of every 155 single family dwellings in the state had a fire occurrence, while one out of every 40:2 mobile homes ex- perienced fire. In addition, C. Benjamin Roy, the Fire Marshall of the State of Delaware said in an articJe that appeared in the December 1981 issue of "Delaware Magazine" that mobile/manufactured homes are "a good form of housing -- and safe." Roy went on to say that "the industry addresses the problem of fire safety very well." MHI President Walter L. Benning says that the industry has made "tremendous strides towards increasing mobile/manu- factured home fire safety in recent years" and he expects the situation to keep on improving. "We recognize that there might have been some fire-related problems with older mobile/manufactured homes," Benning said. "Indeed those problems were a major factor in the industry's adoption of a fire safety code in the sixties and later the federal government's institution of the national standards." Harrisb urg Show The 1982 Harrisburg Show was a super success for New Yorkers in many ways, according to NYMHA Executive Admin- istrator Beverly Lowum. "There were more New Yorkers attending than people from any other state," she reported, "and we have had a very positive response in terms of new NYMHA members." Lowum told the Board of Directors at their April meeting that she had followed up on close to 30 potential new members. Several have already returned applications and three new manufacturers joined the Association funding progrRm at the show. IT WAS SUPER] Several NYMHA members participated in the Association efforts at the show. A special thanks go to Fran and Leo Saxby who transported and helped to set up and staff the NYMHA Display Boqth. In addition to the Saxbys (he's this year's Membership Chairman), thanks also go to the following members who gave time to staff the booth: Eleanore Elderbroom, Pat Fiederer, Jennie Pantazis and Anne Rusiniak. WHY DO WE LOSE CUSTOMERS? Editor's note: We thank the Indiana Manufactured Housing Association for the fo/lowing interesting item. Why do we lose customers? Recent sales research reveals why businesses lose cus- tomers: Sixty-eight percent are lost because of indifferent treatment. Four- teen percent are lost because of grievan- ces not adjusted. Nine percent are lured away because of lower prices. Five per- cent are influenced by others to trade elsewhere. Three percent move away. One percent die. Notice that 68 percent of your customers are lost because of discourteous or indif- ferent treatment and 14 percent because of grievances not adjusted. Eighty-two percent are lost for only two reasons. IDEALERS' NOTE New participation agreements will be needed from all mobile/manufactured home dealers within New York State. You will soon receive a letter with partici- pation agreements. Please fill tl~em out for all of your manufacturers and return them promptly to the Association office. Your cooperation is the first step in 100 percent manufacturer participation[ Condo Seminar... Interested ? Your association is investigating the pos- sibilities of organizing a full-day seminar on condominium development of mobile home parks. If there is sufficient interest among members, NYMHA Executive Ad- ministrator Beverly Lowum will set up a seminar on the subject. Time and place will be arranged to suit the convenience of the majority of those interested. Please call or write Mrs. Lowum to express you interest. I I ADD-ON-ROOMS · Benning noted that the manufactured · DODEZ AND DERR I housing industry pioneered the use of smoke detectors in residential dwellings. I ~'l~a,zL,fact,~ o/' C~d,~ibj ~t,i~ The MHI/Gates study is based on 1976-78 m ~ · data compiled by the National Fire Pro- MODULARS FOR MOBILE HOMES tection Association and the National Fire mI OFFICE and FACTORY ~ Incident Reporting System. · 2305 Foxiana Road Middletown, PA 17057 · Phone 717-944-9801 · i Dealer Inquiries Invited · mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmam 3 NEMHA Elects New Officers Continued from page I Staff heads of the associations also attend quarterly meetings of the board. The regional association has acted as a ve- hicle for per-unit funding of the partici- patina associations. It is also a forum for the exchange of expertise on issues of leg- islation, zoning, planning, land use regu- lations and court cases. In 1980, the Northeast Association spon- sored a long-range planning retreat at- tended by most of the regional group. For two days, participants hammered out a long-range plan for the industry in the Northeast. That plan has been in the pro- cess of being implemented slowly but surely, over the last two years. At their January meeting, the board of directors of the Northeast Association agreed to discontinue the collection of fees as a function of the regional group. Each state association will establish its own funding program, billed and col- lected by the individual state associations. "This transfer of responsibilities to the member state associations will significant- ly decrease NEMHA's clerical and book- BLUE DIAMOND F us II MHD, the insurance firm you've known and trusted for twenty-five years, continues to offer ail of the benefits and broad coverages that you know you get with the BLUE DIAMOND PLUS II, a oomp~hensive program designed for the mobile homeowner. , you're a business man with insurance needs that are special to business situations. Did you know that the SPECIALIZED INSURANCE PROGRAMS FOR THE MANUFACTURED HOUSING INDUSTRY SINCE 1953 people from Haylor, Freyer & Coon CAN PLAN FOR ALL YOUR INSURANCE NEEDS? Is yours a family business? Then your life insurance plans should be designed to help your famity succeed without you. Is your business a partnership? A buy-seU plan can prevent a "forced sale" should one of the partners die. Do you have a business loan? If you have expanded your business with the assistance of outside financing, you should carry additional life insurance in the amount of the loan. Is yours a one-man owner operated business? Who will support you should you become disabled? Major medical and income continuance insurance protection could be the most important protection you wilt ever buy. Call TOM MICHAELS 31~ - 4~s~ - ?i~ ~ keeping overhead and increase the net amounts going to the state associations from per unit funding," stated Chairman George Genereux. He pointed out that allowing each association to produce its own type of funding program could en- courage participation of all the state as- sociations in the Northeast Association, instead of just the maiority. Next meeting of the board of directors has been scheduled for Monday, April 26 at the Sheraton Airport Inn in Philadel- phia. Each participating association is pledged to have both representatives and their staff head at the meeting. Manu- factured representatives are committed to attending as well. "Clearing the agenda of bookkeeping discussions will allow more valuable time to be devoted to a sharing of problem solving," Genereux pointed out. "The de- cision to devote all the associations' energies to confronting the major problems facing our industry is a signif- icant move in the evolution of the region- al organization," he concluded. MHI 'Teaches' President's Commission The five newly appointed members of President Reagan's Commission on Hous- ing recently attended a "crash course" on manufactured housing sponsored by the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI). MHI Board Chairman, C.O. Smith, Jr., hosted a luncheon in Washington, D.C., for the five new Housing Commission members. Joining C.O. Smith as co-host was veteran Housing Commission member Robert Mathison. Mathison chairs a special Commission ]-ask Force that is in- vestigating manufactured homes as a solution to the nation's housing crisis. This "Special Issues" Task Force also in- cludes the five new Housing Commission members: Herbert Barness, Chairman of the Board, The Barness Organization; Robert G. Boucher, President and Chair- man of 1st Denver Mortgage Co.; Robert F. Hatch, Executive Vice President, Cambrian Energy Systems, Inc.; Charles E. Klumb, President, Klumb Lumber Company; and Sherman R. Lewis, Jr., Chairman, Shearson-American Express Co. Also participating in the MHI meeting were David Gogol, Senator Richard Lugar's Special Assistant, Jack Brady of the FHA, George Alexander of the VA, nationally known housing activist Ms. Cushing Dol- beare, and }ira McCollum from HUD. GECC Endorses Variable Rate Continued from p#ge 1 rate financing, increases or decreases may be made to the interest rate over the ma- turity of the contract. Increases or decreases may be made twice a year with decreases being mandatory. Rate adjust- ments are keyed to a variety of indexes, but, the GECC program is tied to the rates of return on treasury bills. The maximum six-month increase which GECC would institute would be one percent. The minimum increase would be one-tenth of one percent. There would be no maximum or minimum on a decrease. GECC programs do not permit a negative mortgage amortization to occur, Jaegel said. He pointed out that in some states non- refundable points may be collected. And some states have a maximum/minimum increase and decrease over the life of the mortgage of seven and a half percent either way. Customers must be notified 40 days in advance of any changes in interest. Jaegel explained that in those states which allow the variable rate financing, three out of four of the GECC contracts are based on variable rate financing. Jaegel asked the board to think about the possibilities of variable rate financing, noting that as a lender, his company feels that the future success as a mobile home tender lies in variable rate financing. Feb. Shipments Up in NY February shipment figures for mobile homes showed a two percent decline over figures from February, 1981. Manufac- turers shipped 17,219 mobile homes to retail sales locations and permanent sites during February, 1982. On a cumulative basis, manufacturers shipped 30,951 homes during the two- month period ended Feburary 28, 1982, compared to 33,143 homes shipped dur- ing the same period a year ago, a seven percent decrease. New York showed an eighteen percent increase in February, 1982 over '81 with 169 homes coming into the state this month. The New York total for year- to-date shows a slight four percent drop. Welcome Continued from page ! The nine new 1982 members already listed in your directory are: Affordable Mobile Home Brokers ......... .................... Ballstoo Lake B-G-B Mobile Homesites ......... Beacon Casual Estates .............. Liverpool Golden Anr~ Mobile Sales ....... Chatham Hunts' Mobile Homes ............ Victor Mobhhome Marketing, Ina .... Central Square Lake's Mobile Home Pork ........ Calcium S & H R~¥cling ............. Mars, PA Spring Brook Park ............. Victor Bieger Succumbs Joseph H. Bieger of B-Y Mobile Homes, Inc., B-Y Supplies, Inc., Angola, New York, and Hull's Mobile Village.of Silver Creek, New York, died unexpectedly on Friday, February 19, 1982, in Hialeah, Florida. Joe was a charter member of the Western Chapter of the New York Manufactured Housing Association. Survivors include his wife, Wanda, a son, Garry and two grandchildren. Champion's moving in, moving up and moving on. The competition's just moving over. TITAN BY $cHamPton HOME BUILDERS CO. P.O. BOX 56 SANGERFIELD, NEW YORK 13455 IJp to one-column inch is offered to Members nnd Associete Members at No Chnrge for ed. verti$ing items or services pertinent to industry. Member ads are carried for two insertions and can be repented upon written instructions. Mon-memhers may advertise at established rates. NEW and USED MOBILE HOME FINANCING. Conventional and FHA financing available - Competitive rates. Payment Plans, Inc. Call 1-800-462-1070. INSURANCE FOR WESTERN NY Mobile Home Dealers & Parks. Discounted rates, not subject to audit. Call collect to Gillette In- surance Agency. 716/494-1440. FOR SALE One of New York State's most modern parks-- Floral Park. 142 spaces, plus miscellaneous rentals and commercial frontage. For complete information, principals only, contact Robert Relyea, c/o Maple Manor, R. D. No.3, Bridge- port, NY 13030 315/633-5559. ATTENTION - Safe, secure mobile home star- age available. Short-or long-term. Burke Mobile Homes, Rt. 5 & 20, West Bloomfield (18 miles south of Rochester). Call 716/624-1003. MOBILE HOME Park Liability Insurance - Competitively priced. Call Tom Higgins- Hay- Ior, Freyer and Coon Inc. 315/422-7276. FORMALDEHYDE FUMES-reduced to harm- less carbon dioxide and water with Hyde Away. Safe, new spray product. Dealer price- $90.40/ case (12 1-quart bottles per case). Mobilehome Supplied, Inc., 660 Basket Road, Webster, NY 14580. Call 716/265-1550. PARK SPACES AVAILABLE - Retirement & family sections. Park located ~ mile from state park & public golf course. Large, landscaped lots will accommodate single and doublewides. TOLEGATE MOBILE HOMES, Moravia, NY 315/497-0091. Water Systems Survey Many NYMHA members who own or operate mobile home parks have received an EPA Survey of Water Systems. Holt Boomgren, President of the National Manufactured Housing Federation has contacted NYMHA urging all of those who have received the questionnaires to fill them out and return them promptly. Bloomgren said, "The questionnaire you have received is being mailed to manufac- tured housing community owners/opera- tots by a private consulting firm under the terms of a contract awarded by the Environmental Protection Agency. The results are to be used by EPA in evalu- ating the effectiveness of its regulations concerning drinking water, as mandated by the Congress in the Safe Drinking Water Act. '~lt will be beneficial to our industry if the park members of your association who operate their own water systems will take a few minutes to complete the questionnaire." Judy Cart, formerly Executive Director of the Hardison Institute, has announced the forma- t/on of The Manufactured Housin# Land Man- agement Institute, offering training and job placement and consulting services in the menu. lectured housing industry. For information write Judy Cart and Associates, P.O. Box 704, Bettendorf, Iowa 52722; 319/359 444 I. WeOffer: Low Bank Rates Terms to 240 Months Complete Insurance Coverage Prompt Service (~ FORWARD CONSULTING CORPORATION 1121 GRAFTON SIREET WORCESTER, MASS 01604 (617) 75~ 4';10 6 I ~L'ON l!mJad I alVd q9¥ ISOd 'S'fl ateH qlng [L6[[ XN 'p[oqlnos 'PH pz. oE ~kn. miUlcI u~o& pioqlnoS L L~;E t >ldo,x, ~aN peo'd XOllOl41 lse3 uo!lepossv ~u!snoH Stephen Shilowitz, A.I.A. 330 East 33rc~ Slretl, New York, N.Y. )0016 (2]2) 689-0242 CONSULTANT May 1, 1982 Re: 6th Street Waterfront Condominiu~m Project Greenport-Southold, NY Edward F. Hindermann Building & Housing Inspector Town of Southold P.O. Box 728 Southold, NY 11971 Dear Mr. Hindermann, I believe that I have found the logical basis for determining the locat%on and extent of the rear-yard required under the Zoning Code of the Town and am taking this opportunity to send the related material to you under cover of this letter and with my explanation. The material consists of a copy of a survey of the entire property, prepared by the surveying firm of Van Tuyl & Son dated 12-19-67 and which was attached to my contract with Homan& Cappa as one of the exhibits as well as a description of the property, also attached to that contract as an exhibit. Both the survey drawing and the description refer to the property line ( which I have underlined in red on both docUments ) at the south-west corner of the site running into the water. It is this line, rather than the bulkhead itself ( which actually lies within the property ) and the property line running N 47d13'20"E for a distance of 130.38' which both constitute in my opinion the rear propertyline. The definition of a rear lot line in the Zoning Code of Southold reads," the lot line generally opposite to the street line; ..... ". It is my view that the line running S 82d41'20" E is clearly the side lot line and that the two lines I have referred to ( N 47d 13' 20" E and N 33d 43' 203' E ) are together the rear lot line. Thus, a 50 ft. rear yard occurring from that reference line will not pass through nor eliminate any of the residences I have indicated upon the site plan I have submitted for your approval. Incidentally, no reference is made whatsoever in the deed description of the 40 ft.(approx.) line nor the 79 ft.(approx.) bulkhead thus reinforcing my view and contention that the intersection of those two lines is not the correct reference point. Inasmuch as I believe you did not receive a copy of the survey with the site plan ( my ommission ) I can understand the basis of your first observation. I trust that the enclosed material will aid you in approving the site plan as I last submitted it ( revision date 4-22-82 ) which altered the parking arrangement to co~form with the code. I have promised to install security lighting at the driveway and parki_n~K~a in accordance with //2 -' SS/as encl. xk SCHEDULE "A" PARCEL A ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings thereon erected, situate, lying and being at Greenport, in the town of Southhold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the ordinary high water mark of Pipes Cove distant on a course North 46 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West 355.53 feet to the southwesterly corner of land now or formerly of Harvey (said point being the southerly point of upland conveyed by the J & J W. Elsworth Company to Franklin C. Ashby by a deed dated 1/3/56, recorded 1/9/56 in Suffolk county Clerks Office in Liber 4051 cp 255); RUNNING THENCE along land of Ashby North 64 degrees 15 minutes 30 seconds East 183.37 feet to a point marking the southwesterly corner of lands of Greenhalgh; THENCE along the southerly line of land of Greenhalgh, South 82 degrees 41 minutes 20 seconds East 165.19 feet to a concrete monument set on the westerly line of Sixth Street; THENCE along the westerly line of Sixth Street, South 7 degrees 18 minutes 40 seconds West 230.00 feet to the northerly point of land now or formerly of Harvey; THENCE along the northwesterly line of said land now or formerly of Harvey, South 29 degrees 5 minutes 40 seconds West 86.08 feet to the ordinary highwater mark of Pipes Cove; THENCE along the ordinary high water mark of Pipes Cove in a general northwesterly direction to the point or place of BEGINNING, the last course being described by a tie only as North 46 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West 355.53 feet to the point or place of BEGINNING. PARCEL B ALL that certain tract or pracel of land now or formerly under the ordinary highwater mark of Pipes Cove, together with the building thereon, situate, lying and being at Greenport, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, bounded as described as follows: ~EGINNING at a point on the ordinary high water mark of Pipes Cove distant on a course North 46 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West 355.53 feet from the southwesterly corner of land now or formerly of Harvey (said point being the southerly point of upland conveyed by J & J W Elsworth Company to Franklin C. Ashby by a deed dated 1/9/56, recorded 1/9/56 in Suffolk County Clerk's Office in Liber 4051 cp 225). RUNNING THENCE along the ordinary -igh water mark of Pipes Cove in a general southeasterly direction to land now or formerly of Harvey a distance measured by a tie line only on a course South 46 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds East of 355.53 feet; RUNNING THENCE into the waters of Pipes Cove at right angles to said ordinary high water mark in a southwesterly direction a distance of 100.00 feet; THENCE North 46 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of about 340 feet to the southeasterly line of a grant of land under the water conveyed by J & J W Elsworth Company to Franklin C. Ashby in the deed aforesaid; THENCE North 33 degrees 43 minutes 20 seconds East about 106 feet to the point or place Of BEGINNING. PARCEL C ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, situate, lying and being in the Town of Southhold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, counded and described as follows: BEGINNING at in iron pipe at the southwesterly corner of land now or formerly of Greenhalgh adjoining land of Homan and Cappa, from said point of beginning; RUNNING along said land of Homan and Cappa South 64 degrees 15 minutes 30 seconds West 183.37 feet to the ordinary high water mark of Pipes Cove as found in 1955; THENCE along the "Community beach" North 47 degrees 13 minutes 20 seconds East 130.38 feet; THENCE along land now or formerly of Bruan, South 82 degrees 41 minutes 20 seconds East 70.05 feet to the point of BEGINNING. ,O' .:L/', [ ;: /: O' ~/U ~'v b'y L~DFo .J/,' p! ........ APR 0 ~u~ldinq & Mous~u~ Inspector ToMn of Southold P.O. Box 728 9outhold, NY 11971 A~r£1 28, 1982 Strut Waterfront Project Southold-Greenport Southold, NY ~ear ar. a~der~ann, In ny rush to make the evening ~aih_~sg and having returned from the ~ost offXce, ! re-read & copy of BF letter wrXtten to you today regarding your feint given to the Plan=Lng Baud and specAflcallF w~ter. To ~y regret, I forgot to g~ve you the reference ! found ~n the Hew Yo~k State ~4ttple OwllAng Code uhlch X believe sumatra ny cGntentAon that the Mater s~de of my property requires no rear yard cons~ieratim and that An fact ~e lo~ Ltue runnAnq 130.38 ft. ~s the proper lane to coosXder a~ the pert~ment re£eren~e point. The Code reference that X w~h to bring to your attention is found o~ page 29 of that c~de, section B 204-2 ( 713.2 ) and the port~ of ~ at ~ ~ of ~ ~1~ ~ s~l ~t~d al~ ~ r--~ lot ~e of a lot ~t ~ ~r ~ ~ ~w of lo~; a n~ ~ ~s ~t r~ ~ ~ ~X~ ~ X~ o~ a~ ~ ~ off ~ It seem~ to ne that the porfuLcn of ny sXte that you have used as the rear yard reference abuts the o~n water and may well qualify for the terms stated above. In &ny event, Xt does seen that the I=apa~o/dal shape of my s~te de£Xe8 an exact an~ cX~ daf~n~CLo~ of a rear yard and ~n fact that coam0a a--nme in th~- MI:ret would in~Lcate that what ! have proposed as a rear parking, drXveway and planted h~ffer X~ cle~l~ ~n the ~nter#ts of all parties. Th~s letter ~s ~ntended to su~lement the enclosure of this mm date maXl~d at an earlXer h~ur and w~Lch ~ncluded a covering letter, drawings ·nd au a~r/a~ p~/. ~nk you onc* aqa~n., S~ph~ ss/u c.c.: SoutJ~old P~.~.ng Boa:~l Architect Stephen Shilowitz, A.I.A. 330 East 33rd Street, New York, N.Y. 10016 (212) 689-0242 CONSULTANT KOICHI NAGASAWA, 4-33 HIGASHI 4 CHOME, SHiBUYA-KLJ, TOKYO, JAPAN April 26, 1982 Re: 6th Street waterfront condominium development Greenport-Southold, NY Henry E. Raynor, Jr. Chairman, Planning Board Town of Southold Southold, NY 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor, I am enclosing herewith three prints of my site plan for the above referenced project revised April 22, 1982 to reflect certain changes to the parking arrangement in order to conform to the Zoning Code as I understand it to read. I look forward to my shceduled appearance at the regular meeting of the Planning Board this evening to further discuss the project. Very t_~r~y ~urs, Ste~henj,~hilowitz SS/as encl. Stephen Shilowitz, A.I.A. 330 last 33rd Street, New Ya~k,N?~' 10016 (212) 689 0242 CONSU LTAN I' April 28, 1982 Re: 6th Street Waterfront Condominium Project Greenport-Southold, NY Edward F. Hinde~nann Building & Housing Inspector Town of Southold P.O. Box 728 Southold, NY 11971 Dear Mr. Hindermann, telephone conversation today regarding tho above referenced project. As T stated to you, I hac. received a copy of your letter to the Planning Board dated April 12, 1982: in which you reviewed my drawings for conformance to the Zoning Code and I therefore was in a position to adress the points you made therein to the Board during its hearing, which I attended, on the evening of April 26, 1982. Prior to that hearing I delivered a rewised site plan to the Planning Board Office ( revised date 4-22-82 ), three copies, indicating changes to the parking arrangement whereby all requirements suggested in your report are now met ( distances from lot lines, width of parking stalls, etc. ) and I stated to the Board during the hearing that. I would of course construct landscaping and fencing to satisfy the related needs of parking areas to such lot lines. I further stated that I would adjust the design of lighting at driveways, etc. which are near lot lines to preclude glare. Regarding the matter of identifying the proper rear yard for the site, as I explained to the }~oard and to you during our telephone conversation today, it is my belief that the property line marked upon the survey as N47 13'20"E for a distance of 130.38' is the only sensible line that could est~J~lish a co~mon rear property line between my site and that of my neighbors to the west. This may be examined upon the copies of the surveys I have enclosed herein marked in red pencil "A", B", and "C". Drawing "A" is an actual copy of the one submitted o]% my behalf to the NY State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) and which they approved. It is my opinion that my site is a trapazoidal one, at least five sided and that the open water to the west of the western-most bulkhead is the only element remotely near any of the buildings I propose to construct upon the site and that in fact the 130.38' line between myself and the "Cove Circle Assoc." (see dwg "B" would naturally form our co~mon rear boundry if the S82 41"20" line is regarded as the side lot line. I am also enclosing a fine aerial photo of the site which clearly indicates the beach line with respect to the western bulkhead and the edge of the neighbors planting. I respectfully request that you reconsider your finding described in your report to the Board and grant permission for the site plan I ~ave already submitted revised 4-22-82 to be accepted by the Board. I will, of course, abide by your decision. Th~%k you f, or ~ur~consider~ interest in this project. Stephen Sh~witz~ SS/as; enc. ; . .: Southold Planing Board TOWN OF SOUTHOLD OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR P.O. BOX 728 TOWN HALL SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 765-1802 April 12, 1982 Planning Board Town of Southold Main Road Southold, N.Y. Subject: Greenport-Southold Condominiums Site Plan Review SK-1, 3/15/82 Gentlemen: The premises for this proposed development is located in the M-Light Multiple Residence District. The intended multi- ple dwelling use is permitted under Art. IV, Section 100-40 A (2) of Zoning Ordinance, Town of Southold. Site plan does not indicate the availability of city water, therefore, for dwelling unit density, 9,000 square feet of land for each dwelling unit was used to calculate the number of units permitted. (Art. XI, See. 100-116) The six units A-F inclusive are permitted for the lot area. Under Art. IV, Sec. 100-41, Bulk and Parking Schedule, a rear yard set back of 50'-0" is required. To determine rear yard area, a line parallel with 6th Street was estab- lished 50'-0" east of point of intersection of 79.00 and 40. O0 boundary lines. Buildings A & B are located in the rear yard area and a variance for insufficient rear yard set back would be necessary. While parking spaces are shown, the size was not indi- cated. In scaling the area provided for parking, it appears the width of each space is 9'-0% Section 100-112 C requires that spaces be 10'-0" in width. Parking spaces can not be closer than 10'-0" from the property line. A corner of one 5pace on the north end of a row falls with in the 10'-0" set back requirement (Sec. 100- 112 J (1)). Page 2 There has been no screening of parking area as required in Sec. 100-12 J (5) and K (1). Lighting fixture schedule, fixtures 'A', their proximity to property boundaries could possibly create glare beyond such boundaries. This would be prohibited under Sec. 100-714 A & B. pectful~y~mitted, Edward F. Hindermann Building & Housing Inspector EFH:ec TOWN OF SOUTHOLD OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR P.O. BOX 728 TOWN HALL SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 TEL. 765-1802 April 12, 1982 Planning Board Town of Southold Main Road Southold, N.Y. Subject: Greenport-Southold Condominiums Site Plan Review SK-1, 3/15/82 Gentlemen: The premises for this proposed development is located in the M-Light Multiple Residence District. The intended multi- ple dwelling use is permitted under Art. IV, Section 100-40 A (2) of Zoning Ordinance, Town of Southold. Site plan does not indicate the availability of city water, therefore, for dwelling unit density, 9,000 square feet of land for each dwelling unit was used to calculate the number of units permitted. (Art. XI, Sec. 100-116) The six units A-F inclusive are permitted for the lot area. Under Art. IV, Sec. 10C-41, Bulk and Parking Schedule, a rear yard set back of 50'-0" is required. To determine rear yard area, a line parallel with 6th Street was estab- lished 50'-0" east of point of intersection of 79.00 and 40. 00 boundary lines. Buildings A & B are located in the rear yard area and a variance for insufficient rear yard set back would be necessary. While parking spaces are shown, the size was not indi- cated. In scaling the area provided for parking, it appears the width of each space is 9'-0". Section 100-112 C requires that spaces be 10'-0" in width. Parking spaces can not be closer than 10'-0" from the property line. A corner of one space on the north end of a row falls with in the 10'-0" set back requirement (Sec. 100- 112 J (1)). Page 2 There has been no screening of parking area as required in Sec. 100-12 J (5) and K (1). Lighting fixture schedule, fixtures 'A', their proximity to property boundaries could possibly create glare beyond such boundaries. This would be prohibited under Sec. 100-114 A & B. R~pec tfully ~mit ted , Edward F. Hindermann Building & Housing Inspector EFH:ec HENRY E RAYNOR. Jr., Chairman FDEZZXiCi'. E ~ JAMES WALL BENNETT ORLOWSKI, Jr. GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM Jr. William F. Mullen, Jr. TELEPHONE 765- 1938 Mr. Stephen Shilowitz 330 East 33rd Street New York, New York 10016 April 9, 1982 Dear Mr. Shiowitz: To date, our office is not in receipt of site plan certifi- cation from the Building Inspector regarding your proposal. As a result, we must adjourn our meeting that has been scheduled for 8:45 April 12, 1982. This matter has been to be held April 26, ment time. tentatively scheduled for our meeting 1982. We will notify you of an appoint- Yours very truly, HENRY E. RAYNOR, JR., CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Susan E. Long, Secretary LD SEFF~ HENRY E. RAYNOR, .Ir.. Chairman JAMES WALL BENNETT ORLOWSKI, Jr. GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM. Jr. Nilliam F. Mullen, Jr. Southold. N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE 765-1938 March 30, 1982 Mr. George Fisher Senior Building Inspector Southold Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Re: Stephen Shilowitz Site Plan Dear Mr. Fisher: Attached please find two copies of an amended site of the above captioned site plan, along with correspondence from the applicant explaining the changes. I hope you find this information helpful with regard to our request for certifi- cation on this site. Yours very truly, HENRY E. RAYNOR, JR., CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Susan E. Long, Secretary attch. HENRY E. RAYNOR, .Ir., Chairman JAMES WALL BENNETT ORLOWSKI. Jr. GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, Jr. William F. Mullen, Jr. TO~ F;SC ~J~.~ 0 L D $outhold, N.Y. 11071 TELEPHONE 765- 1938 March 23, 1982 Mr. George Fisher Senior Building Inspector Southold Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Dear Mr. Fisher: The following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning Board, Monday, March 22, 1982: RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board forward the site plan of Stephen Shilowitz to the Building Inspector for certification. I have attached three maps of this site, along with a copy of a letter stating a deficiency in the distance between the two groups of structures. Yours very truly, HENRY E. RAYNOR, JR., CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD Attch. By Susan E. Long, Secretary March Waterfront Condominium Project - Stephen Shilowitz 6th Street CHECK LIST FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL : SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING CHAPTER 100 GREENPORT VILLAGE ZONING CHAPTER 85 ( item numbers do not reflect actual Code references but include all General Requirements 1. Objectives A. Traffic Access - site is not a corner lot. 6th Street may be considered a full- width thoroughfare. Nine dwelling units will not burden the street. B. Circulation & Parking - Nine garages plus sixteen outdoor spaces for parking are provided for a total of 25 spaces. Code requirement is for 14 spaces only as a minimum. C. Landscaping & Screening - Abundent new landscaping will be provided including Black Pine and Juniper to properly screen the project. In addition it is proposed to erect a continuous wood screening fence and gate along the length of 6th Street. D. Environmental Impact - An Environmental Impact Statement, prepared by consultant Roy Haje, has been submitted. A Permit for the project, issued by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation ( copy enclosed ) has been obtained. 2. Legal Data A. Southold Town: District 1000, Section 49, Lot 25.1, Block 1 Greenport Village: District 1001, Section 007, Lot 16, Block 01 - B. Stephen Shilowitz, 330 East 33rd Street, New York, NY 10016 Contract Vendee C. Site Plan prepared by Stephen Shilowitz, A.I.A., Architect, registered in the State of New York. Address same as above. D. Last date of Drawing 3-15-82. North Point and scale upon drawing. E. Site Description - survey included, prepared by Van Tuyl & Son dated 9-13-77 F. Sixth Street and Johnson Place. ( Widths to be provided ) G. Adjoining property data - survey enclosed prepared by Van Tuyl & Son dated 10-6-81 H. Easements, stebacks, etc. - See site plan for proposal and dimensions J. Existing Zoning - Southold Town:"M" Light Multiple Residence Greenport Village: Waterfront Con~nercial ~ 3. Natural Features A. Contours - Existing site is approximately one single grade at approximately 5.00 feet above MSL (datum 0.00 feet.) See proposed site plan for proposed new elevations in accordance with established BFE 10.00 feat. B. Storm Flooding - entire site subject to periodic flooding. See proposed design and proposed new elevations related to BFE. C. Location of existing watercourses, etc. - see enclosed proposed site plan. 4. Existing Structures & Utilities A. Location of uses, structures, etc. - see enclosed proposed site plan for new structures. See enclosed survey for location of existing structures. B. Paved areas, sidewalks, etc. see enclosed proposed site plan, survey, etc. C. Existing sewer, culverts, water supply, etc. - site is served by Village sewer, water & electric. See enclosed Village utility data and enclosed proposed underground utilities. D. Other existing development, etc. - see enclosed proposed site plan and survey 5. Proposed Development A. Location of proposed buildings - see enclosed proposed site plan B. Location of parking, etc. - see enclosed proposed site plan C. Location, etc. of outdoor lighting, etc. - see enclosed proposed outdoor lighting plan. Lights will be on automatic timer subject to nighttime requirements. D. Outdoor signs - Project "name" will be placed upon discreet placque at entrance gate on 6th Street. E. Location, etc. of access, etc. - see enclosed proposed site plan F. Proposed grading, etc. - see enclosed proposed site plan G. Proposed site utility arrangement - see enclosed proposed mechanical & electrical plans H. Deed restrictions, convenants - condominiums u~der NYS Attorney General regulations I. Public Improvements - none J. Project Staging - site plan is complete Architect Stephen Shilowitz, A.I.A. 330 East 33rd Street, New York, N.Y. 10016 (212) 689-0242 CONSULTANT KOICHI NAGASAWA, A.33 HIGASHI 4 CHOME, SHIBUYA-I(U, TOKYO, JAPAN March 16, 1982 Re: 6th Street waterfront condominium development Greenport-Southold, NY Henry E. Raynor, Jr. Chairman, Planning Board Town of Southold Southold, NY 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor, Pursuant to our meeting at the office of the Planning Board on March 9, 1982 I am submitting a site plan I have prepared myself, as a registered architect in the State of New York, for the above referenced project for consideration of site plan approval. This submission consists, in triplicate, the d~awing of the site plan bearing the latest date 3-15-82 and other related information which the Building Inspector will require for Certification. Upon your further suggestion that I not need to attend the meeting of the Planning Board on March 22, 1982, I am hand delivering the material to your office in lieu of a formal pre-submission conference. I wish to thank you and the Board for your kind patience in this matter and attention to my application. Very Iru~ y°urs ,,' ,,'-x SS/as encl. c.c.: Judith T. Terry, Southold Town Clerk PS; I am also enclosing a copy of the notice of granting a permit to me by the New York State Department of Environmental Protection. PPS: Please note that the distance between the two groups of attached structures is only 30 feet. The code requires 50 feet minimum. In as much as the design density of the entire pro- ject is less than 20% (35% maximum is allowable), I believe that the request for relief related to the distance is reason- able and justified. te~ph March 1982 Waterfront Condom/nium Project - S en Shilowitz 6th Street CHECK LIST FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL : SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING CHAPTER 100 GREENPORT VILLAGE ZONING CHAPTER 85 ( item numbers do not reflect actual Code references but include all General Requirements ) 1. Objectives A. Traffic Access - site is not a corner lot. 6th Street may be considered a full- width thoroughfare. Nine dwelling units will not burden the street. B. Circulation & Parking - Nine garages plus sixteen outdoor spaces for parking are provided for a total of 25 spaces. Code requirement is for 14 spaces only as a minimum. C. Landscaping & Screening - Abundent new landscaping will be provided including Black Pine and Juniper to properly screen the project. In addition it is proposed to erect a continuous wood screening fence and gate along the length of 6th Street. D. Environmental Impact - An Environmental Impact Statement, prepared by consultant Roy Haje, has been submitted. A Permit for the project, issued by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation ( copy enclosed ) has been obtained. 2. Legal Data A. Southold Town: District 1000, Section 49, Lot 25.1, Block 1 Greenport Village: District 1001, Section 007, Lot 16, Block 01 B. Stephen Shilowitz, 330 East 33rd Street, New York, NY 10016 Contract Vendee C. Site Plan prepared by Stephen Shilowitz, A.I.A., Architect, registered in the State of New York. Address same as above. D. Last date of Drawing 3-15-82. North Point and scale upon drawing. E.. Site Description - survey included, prepared by Van Tuyl & Son dated 9-13-77 F. Sixth Street and Johnson Place. ( Widths to be provided ) G. Adjoining property data - survey enclosed prepared by Van Tuyl & Son dated 10-6-81 H. Easements, stebacks, etc. - See site plan for proposal and dimensions J. Existing Zoning - Southold Town:"M" Light Multiple Residence Greenport Village: Waterfront Commercial 3. Natural Features A. Contours - Existing site is approximately one single grade at approximately 5.00 feet above MSL (datum 0.00 feet.) See proposed site plan for proposed new elevations in accordance with established BFE 10.00 feet. B. Storm Flooding - entire site subject to periodic flooding. See proposed design and proposed new elevations related to BFE. C. Location of existing watercourses, etc. - see enclosed proposed site plan. 4. Existing Structures & Utilities A. Location of uses, structures, etc. - see enclosed proposed site plan for new structures. See enclosed survey for location of existing structures. B. Paved areas, sidewalks, etc. - see enclosed proposed site plan, survey, etc. C. Existing sewer, culverts, water supply, etc. - site is served by Village sewer, water & electric. See enclosed Village utility data and enclosed proposed underground utilities. D. Other existing development, etc. - see enclosed proposed site plan and survey 5. Proposed Development A. Location of proposed buildings - see enclosed proposed site plan B. Location of parking, etc. - see enclosed proposed site plan C. Location, etc. of outdoor lighting, etc. - see enclosed proposed outdoor lighting plan. Lights will be on automatic timer subject to nighttime requirements. D. Outdoor signs - Project "name" will be placed upon discreet placque at entrance gate on 6th Street. E. Location, etc. of access, etc. - see enclosed proposed site plan F. Proposed grading, etc. - see enclosed proposed site plan G. Proposed site utility arrangement - see enclosed proposed mechanical & electrical plans H. Deed restrictions, convenants - condominiums under NYS Attorney General regulations I. Public Improvements - none J. Project Staging - site plan is complete NEW YOI~STATE DtRTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION PER-MIT IP~T NO. TW S77-0156 P~IQ UNDER THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION LAW ARTICLE 15, (Proteclion of Water) [] ARTICLE 25, (Tidal Wetlands) . ARTICLE 24, (Freshwater Wetlands) [] ARTICLE 36, (Construction in Flood Hazard Areas) PERMITISSUEDTO Enconsultants, Inc. for Stephen Shilowitz ADDRESSOFPEIbVd~EE 64 North Main Street, Southampton, iN~' 11968 LOCATION OF PROJECT (Section of slream, lidal wetland, dam, building) Pipes Cove DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Repair or replace within 18" 689~ 1.f. of steel bulkhead with timber bulkhead and construct 400m 1.f. of timber bulkhead. Expand existing boat basin by removal of 5,000 cu. yds. of up- land fill and place fill upland except in 20' X 15' area of existing waterway. Construct 8 condominium units, boat house/residence and parking areas as per supplied plans. Construct 120' X 4' floating dock to four 44' X 4' floats as per supplied plans. COMMUNI~ NAME(City, Town, Village) Greenport COUNTY Suffolk JTOWN Southold F,A COMMUN,~ NO. ROAM NO. GENERAL 1. The permittee shall file in the office of the appropriate Regional Permit Administrator, a notice of intention to commence work at least 4~ hours in advance of the time of commencement and shall also notify him promptly in writing of the completion of the work. 2. The p~rrnilted work shall be subject to inspection by an authorized representative of the Department of Environmental Conservation who may order the work suspended if lhe public interest so requires. 3. As a condition of the issuance of this perndl, the applicant has ac- cepted expressJy, by the execution of the application, the full legal respon- sibility for all damages, direct or indirect, of whatever nature, an~ by whom- ever suffered, arising out of the project described herein and has agreed to indemnify and save harmless the State from Suils, actions, damages and costs of every name and description resulting from the said project. 4. Any material dredged in the prosecution of the work herein permitted shall be removed evenly, without leaving large refuse piles, ridges across the bed of the waterway or flood plain or deep holes that may have a tendency to cause injury to navigable channels or to the banks of the waterway. 5. Any material to be deposited or dumped under this permit, either in the waterway or on shore above high-water mark, shall be deposited or dumped at the locality shown on the drawing hereto attached, and, if so prescribed thereon, within or behind a good and substantial bulkhead or bulkheads, such as will prevent escape of the material into the waterway. 6. There shall be no unreasonable interference with navigation by the work herein authorized. 7: That if future operations by the ~tate of New York require an alteration in the position of the structure or work herein authorized, or if, in the opinion of the Department of Environmental Conservation it shall cause unreasonable obstruction to the free navigation of said waters or flood fiow~ or eodanger the health, safety or welfare of the people of the State, or loss or'destruction of the natural resources of the State, the owner may be ordered by the Deport- ment to remove o~ alter the structural work, obstructions, or hazards caused thereby without expense to the State; and if, upon the expiration or revocation of this permit, the structure, fill, excavation, or other rnedification of the watercourse hereby authorized shall not be completed, the owners shall, without expense to the State, and to such extent and in such time and manner as the Department of Environmental Conservation may require, remove all or any portion of the uncompleted structure or fill and restore to its former condition the navigable and floc~ capacity of the walercourse. NO claim shall be made against the State of New York on account of any such removal or alteration. CONDITIONS 8. That the 5tare of New York shall in no case be liable for any damage or inlury to the structure or work herein authorized which may he caused by or result from future operations undertaken by the State for the conservation or improvement of navigation, or for other purposes, and no claim or right to 9. That if the display of lights and signals on any work hereby authorized is not otherwise provided for by law, such lights and signals as may be pre- scribed by the United States Coast Guard shall be instaUed and maintained by and at the expense of the owner. 10, All work carried out under this permit shall be performed in accor- dance with established engineering practice and in a workmanlike manner. 11. If granted under Articles 24 or 25, the Department reserves the right to reconsider this approval at any time and after due notice and bearing to continue, rescind or modify this permit in such a manner as may be found to be just and equitable. If upon the exbiration or revocation of this permit, the modification of the wetland hereby authorized has not been completed, the remove all or any portion of the uncompleted structure or fill ami restore the site to its former condition. No claim shall be made against the State of New 12. This permit shall nol be construed as conveying to the abblicant any right to trespass upon the lands or interfere with the riparian rights of others 13. The permittee is responsible for obtaining any other permits, ap- provals, lands, easements and rights-of-way which may be required for this project. 14. If granted under Article 36, this permit is granted solely on the basis Part 500 of 6 NYCRR (Construction in Flood Plain Areas having Special Flood Hazards - Building Permits) and in no way signifies that the project will be free from flooding. 15. By acceptance of this permit the permittee agrees that the porrnit (SEE REVERSE SLOE) Stephen Shilowitz, A. LA. 330 East 33rd Street, New York, N.Y. 10016 (212) 689-0242 CONSULTANT KOICHI NAGASAWA, 4 $3 HIGASHI 4 CHOME, SHIBUyA-KU, TOKYO, JAPAN Architect FEB February 18, 1982 Re: Waterfront Condominium Project Southold-Greenport ( 6th Street, Greenport ) Susan Long Secretary, Southold Planning Board ~own Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, NY 11971 Dear Mrs. Long, Thank you for your kind reception during my brief visit to your office on February 16th. Pursuant to the matter we discussed, the above referenced project, I will appear at your office at 3:30 PM on March 9, 1982 to meet with Henry Raynor to discuss the same and again on March 22, 1982 when my project may be discussed by the Planning Board during its regular meeting. Should any change occur in the above schedule, please inform me accordingly. I'L~NNING BOARD 'I'O~I'N O1.' SOUTHOIA'~ SI:FFOLK COUNT'1 William F. Mullen, Jr. NY. I1971 TEI,EPHON!. November 25, 198~ Southold Towtl [/oard Southold Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Gent lemen: Pt a regular meeting of the Southold Town Plannin9 Board, November 23, 1981 the following action was [aken: Monday RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board recommend approval on the applXcation of ~tephen Shilowitz for a change of zone from 'C' L~gbt Industrial District to 'M' Light Multiple Residence Dis- trict, based on the following reasons: 1. would upgrade thc area would upzone the area 3. the operation wiI1 be serviced by both municipal water and sewerage 4. recreational boating, along with other amenities would be condtuDive to the area Yours very truly, HENRY E. RAYNOR, JR., CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Susan E. Long, Secretary JUDITH T. TERRY TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS SuvFOLK OU TY Southold, L. I., N. Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 November 11, 1981 Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Gentlemen: Transmitted herewith is petition of Stephen Shilowitz requesting a change of zone from "C" Light Industrial District to "M" Light Multiple Residence District on certain property located on the west side of Sixth Street, on Peconic Bay, Greenport, New York. You are hereby instructed to prepare an official report defining the conditions described in said petition and determine the area so affected with your recommenda- tions. Very truly yours, Judith T. Terry Southold Town Clerk Enclosures (6) STATE OF NEW YORK PETITION TOWN OF SOUTHOLD IN THE MATTER OF q/q]g PETITION OF FOR A CI~NGE, MODIFICATION OR AMENDMENT OF THE BUILDING ZONE ORDIN- ANCE OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK. TO THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD: 1. I, STEPHEN SHILOWITZ residing at 330 East 33rd Street N . (insert name of petitioner) ew ~orK, c,ontract vendee x~4~ff~l~x~,m4~;{New York, the undersigned, am thd~r~ of certain real property situated at 6th St., Greenport, N.Y. ............................................................. ~nd more particularly bounded and described as follows: AS PER SCHEDULE A, ANNEXED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF. 2. I do hereby petition the Town Board of the Town of Southold to change, modify and amend the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, including the Building Zone Maps heretofore made a part thereof, as follows: From a "C" Light Industrial District to a "~' Light Multiple-Residence District. 3. Such request is made for the following reasons: Petitioner desires to effect a change of zone for the purpose of constructing nine (9) residential condominium units with mooring spaces available in an adjoining boat basin for power and/or sail boats. The premises in question lie within, in part, the Incorporated Village of Greenport, and, in part, in the Town of Southold. With re- spect to that part which lies within the Village of Greenport, it is requested that change of zone be made from a General Commercial Dis- trict to a Waterfront Commercial District. As concerns those lands within the Town of Southold, it is requested that a change of zone be made from "C" Light Industrial District to "M" Light MulSple-Residence District. The proposed project would enhance the waterfront area in that exist- ing dilapidated structures would be removed and replaced with highly valued residential buildings. The tax base of the property would be substantially increased without a great demand upon existing municipal facilities. From an esthetic and environmental viewpoint the area would be transformed from one of.a~on-use, toone of attractive usuage-- in all areas the community wzll benefz~ '~rom. s~ch..a-b,~nc/f:~e~at..p.ro0 eg~. (L.S.) STATE OF NEW YORK, ) ) SS:- COUNTY OF SUFFOLK, ) STEPHEN SHILOWITZ ............................................... BEING DULY S1A/ORN, deposes and says that he is the pet{tioner in the wkhln action; that he has read the forego{ng Petition and kno~vs the contents thereof; that the same is true to his (~gr~ own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and b¢lief, and that as to those matters he bcI{eves it to be true. Sworn to before me RICHARD J, CRO~ NOTARY P[J~L~(, State of New York No, 52-58~1280 - Sulfa k TOWN OF SOUTHOLD - ZONE DESCRIPTION SCHEDULE "A" PARCEL A ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings thereon erected, situate, lying and being at Greenport, in the Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the ordinary high water mark of Pipes Cove distant on a course North 46 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West 355.53 feet to the southwesterly corner of land now or formerly of Harvey (said point being the southerly point of upland conveyed by the J & J W. Elsworth Company to Franklin C. Ashby by a deed dated 1/3/56, recorded 1/9/56 in Suffolk County Clerk's Office in Liber 4051 cp 255); RUNNING THENCE along land of "Community Beach" North 47 degrees 13 minutes 20 seconds East 130.38~feet to land now or formerly of Braun; thence along said last mentioned land South 82 degrees 41 minutes 20 seconds East to a point marking the northwesterly cor- ner of lands of Village of Greenport; THENCE along the westerly line of lands of Village of Greenport, South 6 degrees 58 minutes 35 seconds West 176.72 feet to a point at the southwesterly corner of the lands of Village of Greenport; THENCE along the southerly line of lands of Village of Greenport, South 37 degrees 35minutes 40 seconds East 187.59 feet to the north- westerly line of land now or formerly of Harvey; THENCE along the northwesterly line of said land now or formerly of Harvey, South 29 degrees 5 minutes 40 seconds West 0.39 feet to the ordinary high water mark of Pipes Cove; THENCE along the ordinary high water mark of Pipes Cove in a general northwesterly direction to the point or place of BEGINNING, the last course being described by a tie only as North 46 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West 355.53 feet to the point or place of BEGINNING. PARCEL B ALL that certain tract or parcel of land now or formerly under the ordinary high water mark of Pipes Cove, together with the building thereon, situate, lying and being at Greenport, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the ordinary high water mark of Pipes Cove distant on a course North 46 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West 355.53 feet from the southwesterly corner of land now or formerly of Harvey (said point being the southerly point of upland conveyed by J & J W. Elsworth Company to Franklin C. Ashby by a deed dated 1/9/56 recorded 1/9/56 in Suffolk County Clerk's Office in Liber 4051 cp 225). RUNNING THENCE along the ordinary high water mark of Pipes Cove in a general southeasterly direction to land now or formerly of Harvey a distance measured by a tie line only on a course South 46 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds East of 355,53 feet; RUNNING THENCE into the waters of Pipes Cove at right angles to said ordinary high water mark in a southwesterly direction a distance of 100.00 feet; THENCE North 46 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of about 340 feet to the southeasterly line of a grant of land under the water conveyed by J & J W Elsworth Company to Franklin C. Ashby in the deed aforesaid; THENCE North 33 degrees 43 minutes 20 seconds East about 106 feet to the point or place of BEGINNING. TOWN BOARD, TOWN OF $OUTHOLD In the Matter of the Petition of STEPHEN SHILOWITZ, to the Town Board of the Town of Southold. TO: Cove Cirdle Associates Box 260 Greenport,' N.Y. 11944 Alexander Scott 286 Ivy Avenue Westbury, NY 11590 LoufsGreenhalgh Sixth Street Greenport, N.Y. 11944 Village of Greenport 236 Third Street Greenport, N.Y. 11944 NOTICE YOU ARE HEREBY GIVEN NOTICE: 1. That it is the intention of the undersigned to petition the Town Board of the_Town of Southold to request a change of zone to the Zoning Ordinance ot the 'Pnw'n nF Soul-hold. 2. Thattheproperty whichisthesubjectofthePetitionislocatedadjacenttoyourpropertyandisdes. cribedasfollows: premises contiguous to the westerly and southerly boundaries of land of,the Village of Greenport situate at Sixth Street on Peconic Bay~ G~eenport, New York. 3. Thatthepropertv whichisthesubjectof'suchPetitionislocatedinthefollowingzoningdistrict: "C'r Light Industrial 4. That by such Petition, the undersigned will request th&t the above-described property be placed in the ~ following zone district classification: "M" Light Multiple-Residence ~ 5. That within five days from the date hereof, a written Petition requesting the relief specified above will be filed in the Southold Town Clerk's Office at Main Road, Southold, New York and you may then and there examine the same during regular office hours. 6. That before the relief sought may be granted, a public hearing must be held on the matter by the Town Board; that a notice of such hearing must be published at least ten days prior to the dat~ of such hearing in the Suffolk Times and in the Long Island Traveler-Mattituck Watchman, newspapers published in the Town of Soothold and designated for the publication of such notices; that you or your representative have the right to ap- pear and be heard at such hearing. Dated: October 29~ 1981 Stephen Shilowitz Petitioner Post Office Address: 330 East 33rd Street New York, New York PROOF OF MAILING OF NOIFC[ NAME ADDRESS Cove Circle Associates Alexander Scott Louis Greenhalgh Village of Greenport Box 260, Greenport. 286 Ivy Avenue, Westbury: Sixth Street, Greenport, 236 Third Street, SIAIbU~ ~bw ro~ . COUNTY OF SUFFOLK: SS.: JANE FLATLEY ~ residing at Mattituck, New York~ ~being duly sworn, deposes and says that on thc .~.t__~. da,~ of October ,19 81 , deponent mailed a true copy of the Notice set forfi~ on dm reversr side hereof, directed to each of the above-named persons at the addresses set opposite thei~ respective names; that the addresses set opposite the names of said pmsons are the addresses of said persons as show~ oo the cur- rent assessment roll of the Town of Southold; that said Notices were mailed iit the United States [ ;s Office 6utehogue .......... ; that said Notices were mailed to each of said persons b~ ~certified} (~ mail. Sworn to me this 29~h day of 9c~gober ) , ~9 8~1 . Jane Platley RICHARD J, CRGN ~otary Public, State of New No. 52-5861280 - Suffolk County Commission ExpiresMarch 30, TOW~F SOUTHOLD I NS TF~LJC [ ~.ON$: ~r-) tn order ~o cmr,,'cr the que~ic;~:~ ~r, ~' ' ' . ~ ~,zs s~ or~ EAF it is assumed thc~ ~he preparer ~,L!I use currently oval!able inForrnc~ion concerning the project and the likely impacts of the action. It is not expected thee edcf~tior~l studies~ research or other investigations will be undertaken. (~) IF ~n) qu~ stion has been answez'ea ~es Lt,e Is;o3cct may be s.ignificonL and a completed ~nvironmental AsSessment Form is necessary. (c) It all questions have been answered No it is likel~ that this pro]oct is not signJficonL. (c]) Environmental Assessment '~. ~','ZZZ p~oject ~esu~t in o Zo~ge physZcaZ change to the project site or physically altec- more than 10 acres o¢ land~ Yes ~o 2. Will there be a mo~or change to any unique or ~ unusual lend form found on the site? .......... Yes ~No 3. Will p~oject alter or Hove a large eF¢eni on ' existing body of water? ....................... Y,es ~No 4, Will project hove ~ potentially large impact on groundwater quality? .... ; .................. Yes ~No 5. Will project significantly effect drainage ~ flow on adjacent sites? ........................ Yes ~No 6. Will project aEfect ony threotened or endongered plonf or onimol species? ........... Yes ~o 7. ~,'/ill project result i,n o mo jot odverse ~ ~ on sir quoli%y? ............................... Yes NO 8. ~,'/ill pro~ect hole o mo jot effec~ on visuol chorocter of the community or sccnic via, ws or vis[os known to be important to ~hu coramunity? Yes No S. ?/ill project adversely impact any si~e or structure of historic, prehistoric or paleontological importance or any site designated os o critical environmental oreo ~ by e local agency? ............ -.;.. ....... '.~ ... Yes No 10. Will project have o be jar effect on existing or Future recreational opportunities? ......... Yes / No 11. Will project result in major traffic problems or cGuse o major effect to existing / transportation systems? ....................... Yes~No 12. Will project regularly cause objectionable od~rs, noise, glare, vibration, or electrical disturbance os e result of the project's / operation? .................................... Yes~No 13. Will project hove any impact on public health ~ or safety? .................................... Yes~No i4. Will project affect the existing community by -- directly amusing o growth in permanent population of more then 5 percent ove~ o one year per/od or have e major neggtive ,.~fcct on the character of the community or - neighborhood? Yes 15. Is there public controversy concerning the progect?.~ ...... } ¥..~~ ................ . Yes~ ~-- M -- ~ , ~ . /~ ~4LLAgF 0 OR; GreenP°rt HarbOr isLAND Architect Stephen Shilowitz, A.,.A. 330 East 33rd Street, New York, N.Y. 10016 (212/ 689-0242 CONSU LTAN? KOICHI NAGASAWA, 4.33 HIGASHI 4 CHOME, SHIBUyA.KU, TOKYO, JAPAN March 24, 1982 Re: 6th Street Waterfront Condominium Development Greenport-Southold, NY Henry E. Raynor, Jr. Chairman, Planning Board Town of Southold, NY 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor, I am herewith submitting three prints of a supplementary drawing, SK-2 "Proposed Site Plan, Greenport-Southold Condominiums "dated March 22, 1982 prepared by myself to indicate a small revision in the elevations of the new grades that I propose to create upon the above referenced site. The difference between my earlier submission ( under cover of my letter to you dated March 16, 1982 ) and the enclosed drawing reflects the Basic Flood Elevation (BFE) requirements of the Federal Flood Insurance Program which has required all living spaces to be at or above 10.00 feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL). My earlier submission, while providing this elevation at the proposed residences ~nd the raised terrace between those structures and the boat basin and Pipes Cove, indicated a lower driveway and parking area elevation which, while permissable, might have been subject to flooding perhaps as often as twice a month due to occurring strong easterly winds coinciding with high tides. The new drawing provides the BFE elevation of 10.00 feet at the driveway parking area and a front terrace elevation of 11.00 feet. Inasmuch as surrounding neighbors and the Greenport Park itself are generally 5 feet higher than the site I am developing I believe that the change I wish to make makes good common sense from every point of view. Fortunately, considerable dredged spoil will be available for the fill so required although I must bear some additional expense to obtain the remainder. I also believe that the resulting landscape will be visually enhanced and I will bend every effort to plant the area in a handsome manner. Thank you for your consideration of my application. / Very t~,~u your , encl. Architect Stephen Shilowitz, A.I.A. 330 East 33rd Street, New York, N.Y. 10016 (212) 689-0242 CONSULTANT )~OICHI NAGASAWA, 4 33 HIGASHI 4 CHOME, SHIBUYA KU, TOKYO, JAPAN March 16, 1982 Re: 6th Street waterfront condominium development Greenport-Southold, NY Henry E. Raynor, Jr. Chairman, Planning Board Town of Southold Southold, NY 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor, Pursuant to our meeting at the office of the Planning Board on March 9, 1982 I am submitting a site plan I have prepared myself, as a registered architect in the State of New York, for the above referenced project for consideration of site plan approval. This submission consists, in triplicate, the drawing of the site plan bearing the latest date 3-15-82 and other related information which the Building Inspector will require for Certification. Upon your further suggestion that I not need to attend the meeting of the Planning Board on March 22, 1982, I am hand delivering the material to your office in lieu of a formal pre-submission conference. I wish to thank you and the Board for your kind patience in this matter and attention to my application. Very tru~ y°urs If ss/as encl. c.c.: Judith T. Terry, Southold Town Clerk PS; I am also enclosing a copy of the notice of granting a permit to me by the New York State Department of Enviro~ental Protection. PPS: Please note that the distance between the two groups of attached structures is only 30 feet. The code requires 50 feet minimum. In as much as the design density of the entire pro- ject is less than 20% (35% maximum is allowable), I believe that the request for relief related to the distance is reason- able and justified. New York State Departmentof Environmental Conservation Regulatory Affairs Bldg. 40, SUNY - Room 219 Stony Brook, New York 11794 516-751-7900 October 2, 1981 Commissioner Henry Raynor, Chairman Town of Southold Planning Board Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Construction of (8) condominium units, boat house and associated sanitary systems Re: and access road. Proposed pro~ect includes repair replacement of 689 5, of bulk- head and 400 ~' of new bulkhead expanding the existing m~rina to allow construc- tion of (4) new floating finger docks connected to a 120 main floating dock and a 12' x 90r boat slip. Projec[ requires dredging 5,000 cu. yds. of material to 10' ~ _~elaw mean low water spoil to be placed on the site uear Mr. ~.aynor: The NYS Department of Environmental Conservation has received application(s) for Tidal Wetlands Permit No. TW S77-0156 PW, WQ by Enconsultants, Inc. for Stephen Shilo- witz. Pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, the project is defined in 6 NYCRR, Part 617, as an unlisted action. As such, coordinated review by involved agencies is optional. This Department has made a preliminary determination that the action will not sig- nificantly affect the enviornment and wishes to coordinate review to confirm this deter- mination. As an agency also involved in approving this action, you are hereby requested to indicate whether or not you agree with this Department's initial determination and as- sumed status of lead agency. Enclosed is a copy of our application(s) and Environmental Assessment Form (EAF). Also, please make known to this Department your concerns for this project so that our final determination of significance will reflect your views and recomendations. Please reply by October 13, 1981. Sincerely, David De Ridder Associate Environmental Analyst EUC · cc: Enconsultants, Inc. TW application for Stephen Shilowitz by Enconsultants,Inc. Item 11 (con~inued~ ~ will be installed to accomodate boats. Floats will be secured by 12"x35' pilings. Spoil will be used as backfill on property. Construct 8 residential units on upland landward of existing bulkheads, plus associated sanitary systems and access road. Construct a "boat house" over proposed sl~p on northeast side of property. ~ I~kNNING BOARD 'I'()~;'N OF SOUTItOLI) SI'FFOt,K COUNTY William F. Mullen, gE. Sou~hold. N.Y. 1197! TELEPItONE November 25, 1981 Southold '£OWn f~oar] Southold Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Gentlemen: At a reg~iar meeting of the Southold Town P~anning Board, November 23, 1981 the following action was taken: Monday RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board recommend approval on the application of Stephen Shilowitz for a change of zone from "C" Liqht IndusLrial District to "M" Light Multiple Residence Dis- trict, based on the following reasons: 1. would npgrade thc area 2. would upzone the area 3. the operation wJll be serviced by both municipal water and sewerage 4. recreational boating, along with other amenities would be conducive to thc area Yours very truly, HENRY E. RAYNOR, gR., CHAIRMAN oeec! O.,D TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Susan E. Long, Secretary JUDITH T. TERRY TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS Southold, L. 1., N. Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 November 11, 1981 Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Gentlemen: Transmitted herewith is petition of Stephen Shilowitz requesting a change of zone from "C" Light Industrial District to "M" Light Multiple Residence District on certain property located on the west side of Sixth Street, on Peconic Bay, Greenport, New York. You are hereby instructed to prepare an official report defining the conditions described in said petition and determine the area so affected with your recommenda- tions. Very truly yours, Judith T. Terry Southold Town Clerk Enclosures (6) STATE OF NEW YORK PETITION TOWN OF SOIJTHOLD iN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF FOR A CHANGE, MODIFICATION OR AMENDMENT OF THE BUILDING ZONE ORDIN- ANCE OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK. TO TH]/] TOWN BOARD OF TILE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD: 1. I ..... STEPHEN SHILOWITZ residing at 330 East 33rd Street ~insert name of petitioner) New YorK, . c,ontract vendee xe~l~x~MNew York, the undersignea, am thdm~rm~ of certain real property situated at 6th St., Greenport, N.Yo~nd ........................................................... more particularly bounded and described as follows: AS PER SCHEDULE A, ANNEXED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF. 2. I do hereby petition the Town Board of the Town of Southold to change, modify and amend the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, including lhe Building Zone Maps heretofore made a part thereof, as follows: From a "C" Light Industrial District to a "M" Light Multiple-Residence District. 3. Such request is made for the following reasons: Petitioner desires to effect a change of zone for the purpose of constructing nine (9) residential condominium units with mooring spaces available in an adjoining boat basin for power and/or sail boats. The premises in question lie within, in part, the Incorporated Village of Greenport, and, in part~ in the Town of Southold. With re- spect to that part which lies within the Village of Greenport, it is requested that change of zone be made from a General Commercial Dis- trict to a Waterfront Commercial District. As concerns those lands within the Town of Southold, it is requested thata change of zone be made from "C" Light Industrial District to "M" Light Mulgple-Residence District. The proposed project would enhance the waterfront area in that exist- ing dilapidated structures would be removed and replaced with highly valued residential buildings. The tax base of the property would be substantially increased without a great demand upon existing municipal facilities. From an esthetic and environmental viewpoint the area would be transformed from one of non-use to one of attractive usuage-- in all areas the community will benefi~.~rom, s/nch..a.~ep~.i~ria~.p~oj~t' (i,. s. ' STATE OF NEW YORK, ) ) SS:- COUNTY OF SUFFOLK, ) STEPHEN SHILOWITZ .............................................. , BEING DULY SWORN, deposes and says that he is the petitioner in the within action; that he has read the foregoing' Petition and knmvs the contents thereof; that the same is true to his (J5~ own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and that as to those matters he believes it to be true. // : Stephen Sh~lo~itz ~x,..'"', Sworn to before me .... ..... ' . .... . . . RICHARD J CRO~ NOTARy PUBLIC State of New -s.S~cn expires March 30, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD - ZONE DESCRIPTION SCHEDULE "A" PARCEL A ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings thereon erected, situate, lying and being at Greenport, in the Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the ordinary high water mark of Pipes Cove distant on a course North 46 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West 355.53 feet to the southwesterly corner of land now or formerly of Harvey (said point being the southerly point of upland conveyed by the J & J W. Elsworth Company to Franklin C. Ashby by a deed dated 1/3/56, recorded 1/9/56 in Suffolk County Clerk's Office in Liber 4051 cp 255); RUNNING THENCE along land of "Community Beach" North 47 degrees 13 minutes 20 seconds East 130.38 feet to land now or formerly of Braun; thence along said last mentioned land South 82 degrees 41 minutes 20 seconds East to a point marking the northwesterly cor- ner of lands of Village of Greenport; THENCE along the westerly line of lands of Village of Greenport, South 6 degrees 58 minutes 35 seconds West 176.72 feet to a point at the southwesterly corner of the lands of Village of Greenpcrt; THENCE along the southerly line of lands of Village of Greenport, South 37 degrees 35minutes 40 seconds East 187.59 feet to the north- westerly line of land now or formerly of Harvey; THENCE along thenorthwesterly line of said land now or formerly of Harvey, South 29 degrees 5 minutes 40 seconds West 0.39 feet to the ordinary high water mark of Pipes Cove; THENCE along the ordinary high water mark of Pipes Cove in a general northwesterly direction to the point or place of BEGINNING, the last course being described by a tie only as North 46 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West 355.53 feet to the point or place of BEGINNING. PARCEL B ALL that certain tract or parcel of land now or formerly under the ordinary high water mark of Pipes Cove, together with the building thereon, situate, lying and being at Greenport, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the ordinary high water mark of Pipes Cove distant on a course North 46 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West 355.53 feet from the southwesterly corner of land now or formerly of Harvey (said point being the southerly point of upland conveyed by J & J W. Elsworth Company to Franklin C. Ashby by a deed dated 1/9/56 recorded 1/9/56 in Suffolk County Clerk's Office in Liber 4051 cp 225). RUNNING THENCE along the ordinary high water mark of Pipes Cove in a general southeasterly direction to land now or formerly of Harvey a distance measured by a tie line only on a course South 46 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds East of 355.53 feet; RUNNING THENCE into the waters of Pipes Cove at right angles to said ordinary high water mark in a southwesterly direction a distance of 100.00 feet; THENCE North 46 degrees 30 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of about 340 feet to the southeasterly line of a grant of land under the water conveyed by J & J W Elsworth Company to Franklin C. Ashby in the deed aforesaid; THENCE North 33 degrees 43 minutes 20 seconds East about 106 feet to the point or place of BEGINNING. TOWN BOARD, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD In the Matter of the Petition of STEPHEN SHILOWITZ, to the Town Board of the Town of Southold. TO: Cove Circ*le Associates Box 260 Greenpo~t,' N.Y. 11944 Alexander Scott 286 Ivy Avenue Westbury, NY 11590 Loufs 'Greenhalgh Sixth Street Greenport, N.Y. 11944 Village of Greenport 236 Third Street Greenport, N.Y. 11944 NOTICE YOU ARE HEREBY GIVEN NOTICE: 1. That it is the intention of the undersigned to petition the Town Board of the_Town of Southold to request a__ change of zone to the Zoning Ordinance of the Tc~r~m nt= Southold. 2. That the property which is the subject of the Petition is located adjacent to your property and is des- cribed as follows: Premises contiguous to the westerly and southerly boundaries of land of ,the Village of Greenport situate at Sixth Street on Peconic Bay: Greonport; New York, 3. That the prog~r~trv wi, ich is the subject of'such Petition is located in the following zoning district: Light Industrial 4. That by such Petition, the undersigned will request th;t the above-.described property be placed in the following zone district classification: "M" Light Multiple-Resmdence 5. That within five days from the date hereof, a written Petition requesting the relief specified above will be filed in the Southold Town Clerk's Office at Main Road, Southold, New York and you may then and there examine the same during regular office hours. 6. That before the relief sought may be granted, a public hearing must be held on the matter by the Town Board; that a notice of such hearing must be published at least ten days prior to the dat~ of such hearing in the Suffolk Times and in the Long Island Traveler-Mattituck Watchman, newspapers published in the Town of Southold and designated for the publication of such notices; that you or your representative have the right to ap- pear and be heard at such hearing. Dated: October 29~ 1981 Stephen Shilowitz Petitioner PostOfficeAddress: 330 East 33rd Street New York, New York PROOF OF MAILING OF NOTICE NAME ADDRESS Cove Circle Associates Alexander Scott Louis Greenhatgh Village of Greenport Box 260, Greenport, N.Y~ ]19~4 286 Ivy Avenue, Westbury, N.¥, ~1590 Sixth Street, Greenport, N.Y~ i[]944 236 Third Street, Greenport~ M~ 11944 ~ ~:o o ~ ..... ?~??_aL:~'~'~,~,:; _. ~ > ::~ ,; ~ S]AIF_U~ iNLW ruK~ . COUNTY OF SUFFOLK: ss.: JANE FLATLEY .... residing at_ ~__Y~ t. _t i__t_u?~ k_, N~w York~ __ ____~ being duly sworn, deposes and says that o~t the _2.~9 ~ day of October ,19 81 _, deponent m. ai]ed a true copy of the Notice set folth .n the reverse side hereof, directed to each of the above-named persons at the addresses set opposite their respective names; that the addresses set opposite the names of said persons are the addresses of said persons as rent assessment roll o~ the ]own of Southold; that said Notices were mailed a~ the United States Post Office at Cutchogue (~ mail. Sworn to me this 29Kh day of O~tobe~ ~ ,19 81 . ; that said Notices were mailed to each of said persons by' (certified) ? ' i::~-.J a~e--F 1 a, ~ le .v RICHARD J, CRGN Rotary Public, State of New York rim 52-5861280 - Suffork County Commissio~ Ezpires March 30, 19~~'' TO~ SOUTHOLD SHORT EHVIP,,OHHEHTAL ASSESSh!Ei~IT FORH ]h,~.,uCi EONS: (o) In order to c:nswer the question, s in ~' 's ,.~z ~ho:t EAF it is assumed that the prepore~ w±ll use currently available in'ormatzon concerning the p:oject and the l±kely impacts of the action. [t is not expected that additional studies, research or other ±nvestigaLions v, iii be undertaken. (b) IF any question has been answered Yes the pi-eject may be significant and o completed Environmental AsSessment Form is necessary. (c) IF all questions have been answered No it is likely that this pro~ccL is not significant. Environmental Assessment 1. Will p~oject ~esult in o large physical change to ±he project site or physically alter more than lO acres of land? ........................ Yes ~No 2. Will there be a ma]or change to any unique unusual land form found on the site? .......... Yes 3. Will project alter or have o large effect on - existing body of water? ....................... Y~s.~/No 4, Will project hove ~ potentially !argo impact on grou~dv~eter quality? ~ Yes '~No 5. Will project significantly effect d~oinage flow on adjacent sites? ........................ Yes 6. Will project affect any threatened or endangered plant or animal species? ........... Yes ~/~o 7. Will project result in o major adverse r~ on air quality? ............................... Yes No 8. %'/ill pro~ect hake o major effect on visual charecter of the community or scenic views or vistas I<nown to be impor¢cnt to ~h~ community? 9. Will project adversely impact any site or sfrucLure of historic, prehisforic poleonLoloGicol import'once or Shy site desi9nsfed ~s o crificol environmental oreo by o local agency? ............. ..:....~.~.......~..~ Yes No 10. %'1ill projeci hove a bsjor effeci on existing or fulure recreolionol opporfunifies? ......... Yes /No 11. Will project result in major ~roffic problems or cause o major effect ~o exisiing / fr~nsporio¢ion systems9 Yes/No 12. ~'~ill projecf regularly cause objeciionoble od~rs, noise, Glare, vibration, or electrical disturbance os a result of the projeci's / operation? .................................... Yes~No 13. Will project hove any impac~ on public health or sofefy? .................................... Yes~No 14. ~i~i!1 project affect the existing communliy by ~ directly cousing o growth in pcrmonenf popu!ofion of ~ore than 5 percent over o one year peciod or hove o major negative effect on the character of the community or neigi~bor/~ood?. Yes ~5. Is ihere public controversy concerning / - ~reer~°rf isLaND COUNTY OF SUI['FOLK DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES DAVID HARRIS, M.D., M.P.H. October 13, 1981 Mr. David DeRidder Associate Environmental Analyst NYSDEC Building No. 40, SUNY, Room 219 Stony Brook, N.Y. 11794 RE: Tidal Wetlands Permit No. TW S77-0156 PW, WQ by Enconsultants, Inc. for Stephen Shilowitz Dear Mr. DeRidder: I am in receipt of your letter concerning the above. It appears that the project will have public water and public sewers available. Therefore, we do not feel that it will significantly effect the environment in this respect. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, Royal R. Reynolds, P.E. Public Health Engineer General Engineering Services RRR:ljr cc: Southold Planning Board AF~ENDlX A EAF ENVIRO;tMENTAL ASSESSMENT - PART I Project Information NOTICE: This d~cument is desioned to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant effect on the er,v!ronment. Please co~lete the entire Data Sheet. Answers to these questions will be considered as Dart of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additional information you believe will be needed to comblete PARTS 2 and 3. It is expected that completion of the EAP will be dependent on information currently avallab)e and will not involve new studies, research or investtqatton. If information requtrin~ such additional work is unavai~ble, sO indicate and spoci fy each instance. NA~ OF PROJECT: AOI~ESS AND NNIE OF APPLICANT: EN. CONSU£ TANT~. INC, 64 NOI.1TN MAIN STREET (Nam) (Street) NAME AND ADDRESS OF~'OI~ (If Different) (Name) ~ (Street) (P.O.) (State) (Zip) 8US~NESS PHONE: (P.O.) (state) (zip) DESCRIPTION OF P~O~ECT: (Briefly descMbe ~ype Of ~mJec~ or Ktton) I' L, ~IPLEASE COMPLETE EACH QUESTION - Indicate N.A. tf not applicable) SITE DESCRIPTION (Physical setting of overall project, both develoned and undeveloped areas) 1. General character of the land: ~,enerally untform slopo / Generally uneven and mlling or irregular 2. Present land use: Urban __, Industrial , Commrcial ~/' __ , Suburban , Agriculture ,Other /-J/~ ~F-~~ ~,'~ ~,¢,:J'..//.~t~. 3. Total acreage of Project area: Z ~'~acres. Approximate acreage: Meadow or Brushland Forested Aqricultural ~etland (Freshwater or Tidal as Der Articles ~a, 25 or F.C.L.) ., Rural _, Forest Presently After Completion Presently After Completion acres acres I'later Surface Area ' ~ acres acres acres Unvegetated (rock, earth or fit1) / acres ~____.acres and other paved ,~ Other (indicate tyne) acres acres 4.'~hat is n-edominant soil type(s) on nro~ect site? t. tUhat is depth to bedrock? Ca~~ (!n feet) 9/1178 6, Approximate percentage of proposed nroject site with slooes: 0-10~ /JO,',; ln-l~; %;-)5~ or greater %. 7. Is project conti~)uous to, or contain a buildino or site listed on the National Register of Historic Places? Ye~ ~JNo 8. What is the depth to the water table? ~ feet g, Do hunting or fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? Yes 10. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered - Yes ~/ ~1o, according to - Identify each species Il.Are there any unique or u~sual land forms on the project site?~ (i,e. cliffs, dunes, other geological formations - .____Yes ,J~No. (Describe 12. Is the project site ~resently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area - Yes J No. 13. Does the present site offer or include scenic views or vistas known to be important to the co~unity? Yes ~No Streams within or contiguous, ltO project area: 14. a. Name of stream and name of river to which it is tributary 15. Lakes, Ponds, Wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: a. Xame pC~¢o-t/~ ~'~0. ; b. Size (in acres) -- 16.What is the dominant land use and zoning classification within a 1/4 mile radius of the project (e.g. single femtly residential, R-2) and the scale of development (e.g. 2 story). ~-'~.n.~ PROJECT OESCRIPTIOH Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) Total contiguous acreage owned by project sponsor acres. Project acreage developed: __acres initially; acres ultimately. Project acreage to remain undeveloped Length of project, in miles: (if appropriate) If project is an expansion of existing, indicate percent of expansion proposed: age ; developed acreage Number of off-street parking spaces existinp /~ ~ ; proposed /~'~ Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour (upon completion of project) building square foot- If residential: Number and type of housing units: One Family Two Family Multiple Family Condominium Initial Ultimate ~ ~ ~ If: Orientation ;!eighborhood-Ci ty-Regional Estimated Emoloyment Con~nercial Industrial j. Total height of tallest nroposed structure ...... ,3~ feet. -2- How much natural material (i.e. rock, earth, etc.) will be removed from the site - 0 tuns cubic yards. 3. How many acres of veqetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be re,loved fro~ site ~ 0 acres. years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this 6. If single ~hase project: 7. If multi-phased broject: Will any mature forest ~J>ver 100 project? Yes ~-~ No Are there any plans for re-vegetation to replace'that removed during construction? ~- Yes~' r~o Anticipated period of construction J~months, (including demolition). a. Total number of phases ~nticioated ~' No. b. Anticipated date of commencement phase ?~'~month year {including demolition) c. Approximate completion date final phase month. ~ea~. d. Is phase 1 financially dePendent on subsequent phases? __Yes __No /No ; after project is complete 8. Hill blasting occur during construction? Yes g. Number of Jobs generated: during construction ~£) lO. Number of Jobs eliminated by this project ~ ll. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? Yes ,~No. If yes, explain: 12. a. Is surface or subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? Yes b. y,s. tndicete type of waste (sewage, ihdustrial, etc.) c. If surface disposal name of stream into which effluent will be discharged 13. Will surface area of existin~ lakes, ponds, streams, bays oF other surface waterways be increased or decreased by proDosal? ~'Yes NO. ~(~,,~ ~¢~.-~ I)~ s, ~. 14. Is project or any portion of project located in the 100 year flood plain? /Yes No 15. a. Does project involve disposal of solid waste? / Yes No 'j b. If yes, will an existing solid waste disposal facility be used? /Yes No c. ,f ye,. giYe oamo: : locatio,- d. UtIi any wastes not go into a s~age disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? .Yes 16. Wi11 ~roJect use herbicides or pesticides? Yes ~o 17. Will project routinely p~duce odors (~re than one hour per day)? __Yes /NO ~,,~ (',~',,K 18. Will project produce operating eoise exceeding the local ambience noise levels? / .Yes )g. Will project result in an increase in energy use? ~Yes No. If yes, indicate type,s) __ 20. If water supply is from wells indicate oum~ing capacity ~ gals/~inute. 21. Total anticinated water usage per day 22. Zoning: ~ z/~,~ _gals/day. l.lhat is dofninant zoning clessi,ication o¢ site? ~/--J~t 25. Appmvals: City, Town, Village Board City, Town, Village Planning Board City, Town, loning Board City, County Health Department 'Other local agencies Other regional agencies State Agencies Federal Agencies Is any Federal permit required? J Yes No Does project involve State er Federal funding or financing? Yes Local and Regional approvals: Approval Required Submittal A~proval (Yes, No) (Type) (Date) (Date) Ce INFOIU4ATIONAL DETAILS Attach any additional tnfo~mation as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse impacts associated with the proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which can be taken to mttigate or avotd them~ PREPARER'S SIGNATURE: TITLE: gE.ESE,TI.G: -4- EAF ENVIRON~FNTAL ASSESSMENT - PART II Project Impacts and Their Magnitude General Information (Read Carefully) - In completing the form the reviewer should be guided by the question: Have my decisions and determinations been reasonable? The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst. - Identifying that an effect will be potentially large (column 2} does not mean that it is also necessarily significant. ~ny large effect must be evaluated in PAINT 3 to determine significance. By identifying an effect in column 2 simply asks that it be looked at fuPther. - The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of effects and wherever possible the threshol of mag~ that would trigger a response in col u~ 2. The examples are generally applicable throughout the State and for mast situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds m~y be more appropriate for a Potential Large Impact rating. - Each project, on each site, in each locality, will vary. Therefore, the examples have been offered as guidance They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each Question. - The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question. INSTRUCTIONS (Read Carefully) a. Answer each of the 18 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there will be any effect. b. Maybe answers should be considered as Yes ~nswers. 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 the size of the impact ~j)en consider the imoact as potentially large and proceed to PART 3. e. If a potentially large impact or effect can be reduced by a change in the project to a less than large magnitude, place a Yes in column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction is not possible. 1, ~.. 3. IMPACT ON LAND 1. WILL THERE BE AN EFFECT AS A RESULT OF A PHYSICAL CHANGE TO PROJECT SITE? Examples that Would Apply to Column 2 NO YES ronstruction of oaved oarkinq are, CAr 1,~Q~ or mare vehicles. C~nstruction on land where bedrock is exoesed or generally within 3 feet of existing ground surface. Construction that will continue for more than 1 year or involve more than one nhase or stage. Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than ),000 tons of.natural material (i.e. rock or soil) per year. Construction of any new sanitary landfill. -5- SMALL TO POTENTIAL CAN IMPACT BE MODERATE LARGE REDUCED BY IMPACT IMPACT PROJECT CHANGI Construction on Land where the death to the water table is less than 3 feet. Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise nar 100 foot of length), or where the general slopes in the project area exceed 10%. e Construction in a designated floodway. Other impacts: ~ YES WILL THERE BE AN EFFECT TO ANY UNIQUE OR UNUSUAL LANO FnI~tS~L""XA FOUNO ON THE SITE? (ire. cliffs, dunes. ;wologtcal formm- tt4ms, etc.) Specific land forms: R!eALL TA !POTEnTIAl CAN ItlP~CT BE ~nOERATE LARGE REDUCED BY IHPACT IHPA~T PROOE~T CHANGE tUPACT ON WATER N~ YES 3. WILLPROJECTAFFECTANYWATERBOOYOESI~ATEDAS ......... PROTECTED? (Under Arttclea 15, 24, 2S of the Envir- onmental Conservation Law, E.C.L.) Examples that Would Apply to Colunm 2 Dredging more then 100 cubtc yards of material from -- channel of a protected stream. Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland. Other impacts: WILL PROJECT AFFECT ANY NON-PROTECTEO EXISTINR OR NFW NO YES BOOT OF HATER? ........................................... .~ O Would Apply Column 2 Examples that to A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water or more than a 10 acre tncrease or decrease. Construction of a body of water that exceeds lO acres of surface area, Other imnacts: WILL PROJECT AFFECT SURFACE OR GROUND!CATER nlIALITY? Examples that Would Apply to Colurm 2 Project will require a discharge permit. Project requires use of a source of water that does not have approval to serve proposed project. Project requires water supply from wells with 9rester than 45 gallons per mtnute pumping capacity. Construction or operation causing any contamination of s public water supply system. Liquid effluent will be conveyed off the stta to facilities which oresently do not exist Or have inadequate capacity. Project requiring a facility that would use water in ~Project will likely cause siltation or other discharge into an existing body of water to the extent that there will be an obvious visual contrast to natural conditions. :¢iLL ~ROJ£CT ALTER DRAINAGF FLqU, PATTEOqS OR SURFACE HATER NO YES ~UNOF;? ................................................... ~0 Exam~.le that ,','auld ~nply to Column E ~ Project would imQede ~lood water flows. Project is likely to cause substantial erosion. Project is incompatible with existing dratnape patterns. IHPACT ON AIR 7. PILL PROJECT AFFECT AIR QUALITY? ............... Examples that Hould Apply to Column 2 __ Project will induce 1,qOOormore vehicle trips in any given hour. __ Project will result in the incineration of mom than 1 ton of refuse per hour. ~ Project emission rate of all contaminants will exceed $ million BTU's per hour. Other tmoacts: IJ~PACT ON PLANTS A~D ANImal ~ WILL PROdECT AFFECT ANY THREATENEO OR ENDANGERED SPECIES? Ex&mples that Would Apoly to Column 2 Reduction of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal list, using the site, over or near site or found on the site. Removal of any hart(on of a critical or siqniftcant wild- life habiG)C. Ao~licatinn of Pesticide or he.bicide over more than tv,ice a yea? other than fo~a~cjitural pa.~es. Other impacts: YES YES S~tALL TO POTENTIAL:I CAN IIIPACT BE F/)UER~TE LARGE REDUCED DY ;?A~ C" i"P~CT PROJECT CHANGE !~ILL PROJECT SUBSTA(ITIALLY AFFECT )(ON-THREATE:IED OR NO YES ENDANGERED SPECIES? ....................................... ~0 Examole that Would Apply to Colum~ ~ Project would substantially interfere with an? resident or migratory fish or wildlife species. Project renu(res the removal of ~ore than lq acres of mature forest (over IOA years in mae) or other locally imoort~nt vegetation. .?. m m Examnles that ~ou)d Apply to Column 2 An incompatible visual affect caused by the intro~uctinn ~ Of new matert~ls, colors and/or forms in contrast tn the~ surrounding landscape. A oroject easily visible, not easily screened, that is obviously different from nthers around it. Project will result in the elimination or major screening of scenic views or vistas known to be important to the area. Other impacts: IMPACT ON HISTOgIC RESOURC~ WILL PROJECT IMPACT ANY SITE OR STRUCTURE OF HISTORIC, PRE-HI,TOPIC AR PALEONTOGICAL IMPOPTANCE? ..... Examoles that Would ADolv to Column 2 Project occurinq wholly or nartially within or contiguous to any facility or site listed on the National Reoister of historic places. Any impact to an archeological site or fossil bed located within the project site. Other impacts: NO IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE & R~CREATION 12. WILL THE PRAJECT AFFECT THE OUANTITY OR QUALITY OF EXISTING NO OR FUTURE OPEN SPACES OR RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES? ...... Examples that Would A~ply to Column 2 The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational o~ortunity. A major reduction of an o:en space important to the community. Other imoact$: IMPACT AN TRANSPORTATION HILL THERE BE AN EFFECT TO EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS? ............................................... Examples that Would Annlv to Column 2 Alteration of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods. Project will result in severe traffic nroblems. NO Other impacts: 5~ALL Tq r'OT~I!TIAL CA!~ IMPACT BE I(~DER;~T [ ~qQG[ PEDUC[D ny I~PACT I'~r~cT PRqJEC? CHANGE YES YES YES I~PACT ON ENERGY 14. WILL PROJECT AFFECT THE COMMUNITIES SOURC£S OE. FUEL ~R NO YES ENEROYSUPPLY? ......................................... '~0 Examples that Would Apply to Colum 2 Project causing qreater than 5% increase in any fo~ of ener~ used in municipality. ~ Project requiring the creation or extension of an energy transmission or supply system to serve mre than SO sinqle or two family residences. 15. Other impacts: IMPACT OH NOIS~ WILL THERE BE OBJECTIONABLE ODORS. NOISE, GLARE, VIRRATI~N NO YES or ELECTRICAL DISTURBANCE ASA RESULT OF THIS PROJECT? .... Examples that Would Ao~ly to Column 2 Blasting within 1,SOO feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive facility. Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day). Project will nroduce ooerating noise exceedinn the local ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures. Project will remove natural barriers that would act as a noise screen. 1' 2. Other impacts: IHPACT ON HEA~TH & HAZARDS N~ YF 16. !',ILL PROJECT AFFECT PUBLIC I,EALTH AND SAFETY? ........... ~0i Examples that I{ould Apply to Column 2 Project will cause a risk o¢ explosion or release of hazardous -- substances (i.e. oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) in the event of accident or upset conditions, or there will he a chronic low level discharge or emission. Project that will result in the burial of "hazardous wastes" -- {i.e. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritating, infectious, otc., includinq wastes that are solid, semi-solid, liquid or contain gases.) Storaoe facilities for one million or more gallons of liouiFied natural gas or other liouids. Other imoacts: SMALL T~) POTENTIAL CAi( IHPAcT CE '~DERATE LA ~.GE REDUCED BY IMPACT I'IPaCT PROJECT IMPACT Oil GROWTH AND CHARA(iT):P nv C~,!i!!:Ni Fy ~ 'iCI ~'HQP'(~ 17. WILL PROJECT AFFECT THE CHAPACTE~ nF T)~E EXISTINq qA YFS COMe,UNITY? ............................................... Example that Would Apol¥ to Column 2 -. 7 The population of the City, Town or Village in which t~e -- project is located is likely to prow by ~re than 5~ oF resident human population. The municipal budgets for capital expenditures or opera- J ting services will increase by more than 5~ per year as a result of this project. Will involve any ~ermanent facility of a non-agricultural -- use in an agricultural district or re. ye nri~ agricultural lands f~m cultivation, The project will replace or eliminate existing facilities. structures or areas of historic importance to the community. Development will induce an influx of a particular age group with special needs. Project will set an important precedent for future proiects. Project will relocate 15 or more emnloyees in one or more businesses. Other tmoacts: IO. IS THERE PUBLIC CONTROVERSY CONCERNING THE PRQJECT? Examples that Would Apply to Colunm 2 Either government or citizens of adjacent conmunities have expressed opposition or rejected the protect or have not been contacted. Oblections to the nreiect from within the community. IIF ANY ACTION IN PART ~ IS IDENTIFIED AS A PQT£~(TIAL LARGE IMPACT OR IF YOU CANNOT DETEIU4INE i THE MAGNITUDE OF IMPACT, PROCEED TO PART 3. PORTIONS OF CAF COMPLETED FOR THIS PROJECT: DETERMINATION PART I ' PART II ¥/~ PART 3 ~0[',~ .q ! ~ REDUCED I~'PAF: i ?IPA~ T PROJECT Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF (Parts l, 2 and 3) and considerinq both the magnitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined that: The project will result in no major impacts and, therefore, is one which may not cause significant damaoe to the environment, Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation ~easures described in PART 3 have been included as p~rt of the proposed pKoject. PREPARE A !IEnAT[VE DECLARATION PREPARE A NEGATIVE DECLARATION icl The project will result in one or more major adverse impacts PREP.ARC POSITIVE DECLARATIOn( PROCEED WITH EIS that cannot be reduced and may cause significant damage to the envi ronment. ~J~Y ~ ~ ~ ~'p atu e of R.sponsible Official in Lead ~j~//~ ~ Agency Signature of Pr~n~re~ (ff' different from responsible officer} in Lead Agency C 1 ,0 · '"""T LOT ua~~ H ~4 LIST OF DRAWINGS ARCHITECTURAL A-1 2 3 4, 5 6. 7. SITE PLAN FLOOR & ROOF PLANS, ALL LEVELS UNITS GROUND FLOOR PLAN, S~HEDULES UNITS SECOND FLOOR PLAN ROOF PLAN CROSS SECTIONS, ELEVATIONS ELEVATIONS BLDG NO. ~ BLDG NO. ?.. UNITS A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I " b UF. ATi;(G, VENTiLATiNG,- Ai~-CGNGiTiGNiNG 2LEC~',~ ICAL 8. EXTERIOR WALL DETAILS g. EXTERIOR WALL DETAILS lO. DETAILS STAIR, CHIMNEY, ETC. ll. DETAILS, MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURAL TEST BORING REPORT S - l. SITE PLAN & BULKHEAD DETAILS 2. FOUNDATION PLAN & SECTIONS 3, . GROUND FLOOR FRAMING PLAN 4. SECOND FLOOR FRAMING PLAN 5. ROOF FRAMING ~LAN MECHANICAL & ELECTRICAL SU- 1. SITE UTILITIES ~1. HYAC See Dwg. NO. 5 LL- I for SCHEMATZC PLUMING RISER D/-AG~M RECEIVED BY NflV o4 'f0 n_ DATE 9- z-I-'~ ~LO~ ~'-..~'. I ,~D, ' PIPES COVE CONDOMINIUM 9 Residential Units and Boat Basin with Floating, Docks Sixth Street, Village of Greenport/Town of Southold, NY for YUMI REALTY CORPORATION 330 East 33rd Street, New York, NY lOO16 te1:212-689-0242.. STEPHEN SHILOWITZ, A',I'.A., ARCHITECT 921 Bergen Avenue, Jersey City, NJ 07306 te1~201-659-0820 WEIDLINGER ASSOCIATES, CONSULTING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS 233 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY lO001 tel:S12-563-BSO0 MORRIS ASSOCIATES, CONSULTING MECHANICAL & ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS BO0 Highway 36, Atlantic Highlands, NJ tel:2D1-291-B700 scale : 0 date t, I Ar?£A = 2.25 ~cres N/O/F LAND OF BRAUN · - S 82~41'20,,E N/O/F LAND F E ~,PPROVED BY THE INCORPORATED VILLAGE OF GREENP RT PLA lNG-BOARD. NO. F] OCT 191989 PECONIC SURVEYORS F~ C. (516) 765 - 5020 P.O. BOX. 909 MAIN ROAD SOUTHOLD, N Y. 11971 FILED OCT 19 ~ OF GREENHALGH THE LOCATION OF STRUCTURES SHOWN HEREON CONFORMS ~0 THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING REGULATIONS OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD AND THE INC. V~LLAGE OF GREENPORT THE UNDERSIGNED CERTIFIES THAT THIS MAP /FLOOR PLAN IS AN ACCURATE COPY OF P6RTIONE OF THE MAPS OF THE SUILDING$ AD FILED WITH AND APPROVED BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT OF THE TOWRD OF SWORN TO ME THIS DAY OF "/':: %~ .-:,'-:_: L '-~, * - THIS MAP/PLAN WHEN FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF SUFFOLK COUNTY SHALL COLLECTIVELY BE DEEMED TO BE THE FILING REQUIRED BY ARTICLE'9 B SECTION 339- P OF THE REAL PROPERTY LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK AND SHALL BE CONSIDERED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DECLARATION OF CONDOMINIUM FOR PIPES COVE CONDOMINIUM RECORDED IN SAID OFFICE SIMULTANEOUSLY HEREIN, MAP OF PIPES COVE AT GREENPORT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SUFFOLK COUNTY, N.Y. I000 49 OI 25 I lO0 ! 07 OI 16 SCALE I": 30' AUG. 3, 1989 A WXA'nOR ~, ~R'nm.~ ~ MCnON ~ ~ OIF ~11 N[W YORK RTAT[ EDUC*~TION I HEREBY THAT THIS MAP WAS MADE BY US FROM ACTUAL SURVEYS COMPLETEDF~ ~/~ AND THAT ALL CONCRETE MONUMENTS SHOWN THUS- · HEREON ACTUALLY EXIST AND THEIR POSITIONS ARE CORRECTLY SHOWN AND ALL DIMENSIONAL AND GEODETIC DETAILS ARE CORRECT. ~/~,~ ~_/~;. J'dHN ~ ME~rz~'R ~S. LS. LIC. NO. 4SB~S 88 - 173 e., gg'41' ?.O"E. 16r~. 19 : r-~ OF MAr ,-','u ~2 v,[::V ~&htD, F o ~.-. +--~ r ,--5. J Ak/! E" r' Lf'Obi: ' I1_ J b T i f ' -4