HomeMy WebLinkAbout1000-22.-3-19 (3)
COLQN 1 ilL
.
PA,:'E 01 So l
PAGE 02 J
~J~.. f1l=",/ 1 ,~'~q 1..!' ~~,,:,
-,i;il e~1 i 9',<1 '1-;: 4<
r:,lb~t,:,-it'4~:
2013.4
U~i".1 CIFFIC:E'::, rKJr]F'E
Nll'l~/l g" l'l: 3~
I .
~a7S~4~43
~~w O"IC~$ MOORE
PIlGI; 1111
.
APd1.S, U..
IIC'. "ftMU Odovekl, J.C'., O\dr1Mft
."thol' ,..... ,la.1D1 iaal'li
TfMIJlau. ,
., 09' "1a ....15
..0....11,.
.~~1.. WI 11'71.
lar 1000-031-0&-1. a
..... "10.'" acr..
Dear ~~~ orlowa.!,
fta tAl ...,1_ )'Olol Ul4 tho aoud ~at I .,lotl to wltbc'1nv tM
3 1~ .1aor oub4ivl.1on .pplloa~lOft atill ,.n41ft9 vita re9a" to
tJM t._"1'O.1.
My oaly appUcat1GIIW JNI"lIint at thl. U.. are pareWlnt to 'fOWn
Lav#.Q.... ~to... tM 1~1", Iloa:rd of Itppeab. and a wetland paral~
'......UMtl. TOW" 'l'~t... to laprov. the ~M1.tlr19 road.
/
Il@1Iwq
APR 0 6 j~~
Southold Town
Planning Board
-r
-
..... ,,... "r-----r - ,-.,"T,.--..----........--.~r-.-- .
,...... ..6
THIS ~lINOR S'UBDlVISION IS FOR l LOTS ON /o.bC ACRES LOCATED ON
.' . " ;) - . 5",~'fA
11{),,'-j-t', "kO). 5.". ,l-\jIY(.,t'14STV( 1I~ . rc'4,f /7""c,~
SCnl#lOOO- 31-\'--(2-
I MINOR SUBDIVISION (NO ROAD)
Complete application received
Application reviewed at work session
iJlii'l1r:::l
~~
r;oo11r:::l
~~
Applicant advised of necessary revisions
r;oo11r:::l
~~
r;oo11r:::l
~~
Revised submission received
Sketch plan approval
-with conditions
Lead Agency Coordination
SEQRA determination
J:i'-ffD;:/1I-5~ 2- 3 -'iv
os . '1li?)lq~
. I -
Sent to Fire Commissioner
Receipt of firewe'lIlocation
Notification to applicant to include on
final map
Sent to County Planning Commission
Receipt of County Report
fiiiITlr:::l
~~
r;oo11r:::l
~~
Review of SCPC report
Draft Covenants and Restrictions received
Draft Covenants and Restrictions reviewed
Filed Covenants and Restrictions received
I~,LI~
1~,Ll~
Receipt of mylars and paper prints with
Health approval '
Final Public Hearing
Approvalof subdivision
-with conditions
Endorsement of subdivision
!I\S '(,1/'10
.
.
~
APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF PLAT
To the Planning Board of the Town of Southold:
The undersigned applicant hereby applies for (tentative) (final) approval of a subdivision plat in
accordance with Article 16 of the Town Law and the Rnles and Regulations of the Southold Town
Planning Board, and represents and states as follows:
~~';I'- .
1. The applicant is the/owner of record of the land under application. (If the applicant is not the
owner of record of the land under application, the applicant shall state his interest in said
land under application.)
2. The name of the subdivision is to be
(VI/NoR ..IVBOI"'-"/o.'I/ ""..... r;;", IlNOtO.ra.J
....................................................
1-~71lit(l..; f'fff.At4q, (t ~ ~Il"'k ~ '1~./' 7'(1.... .L.. s.: -# 2~C; 'L
................................................................................................
3. The entire land under application is described in Schedule "A" hereto annexed. (Copy of deed
suggested.) DEliO 1-, aJrll.- q I , I fA'f<' f'P .
4. The land is held by the applicant under deeds recorded in Suffolk County Clerk's office as
follows:
q 1/1
Liber ........................ Page
..0...............
/000 - 07/- oJ- 001.. 2..
On .......................,
Liber ........................ Page
......................
On
........................
Liber ........................ Page
......................
On
........................
Liber ........................ Page
......................
On
........................
Liber ........................ Page
......................
On
.......................,
as devised under the Last Will and Testament of ..... ..1'1/1. .. .. .. ...... .. .. .. ........
or as distributee
foIlll
........................................................................
.................................................
..............................................
5. The area of the land is .... .IC{~. ~7.....
acres.
6. All taxes which are liens on the land at the date hereof have been paid ""..pt ............
...............................................................................................
7. The land is encumbered by
mortgage (s) as follows:
NON€:
..............................................................
(a) Mortgage recorded in Liber .............. Page....... . . .. . . . . ... in original amount
of $. . . .. .. . . .. ... unpaid amount $ ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. held by ......................
. . . . . . . . . . . . .. address ......
...........................................................
(b) Mortgage recorded in Liber ......... Page ....................... in original amount
of .............. unpaid amount $...... . . . . . . . . . . . .. '" held by ......................
. . . . . , . . . . . . .. address ................. ..............................................
..J''"
.
.
(c) Mortgage recorded in Liber .............. Pag-e ................ in original amount
of .............. unpaid amount $...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " held by ......................
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., address .........................................................
8. There arc no other encumbrances Of liens ag-ainst the land, e][8eflt ........................
.......................................
() J ,>C.
9. The land lies in the following zoning use districts .... .r.'-.~:. ~~::~~. . . . . ..:z.: . .:-. . . ~~ :~~
~<r
1'?J'31 .
.......................................................................................
10. No part of the land lies under water whether tide water, stream, pond water or otherwise, ex~
cept .. .Np.f':!k. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11. The applicant shall at his expense install all required public improvements.
12. The land ~ (does not) lie in a \Vater District or Water Supply District. Name of Dis-
. 'f . I' D' .. I>./IA 1
trlct, I \Vlt 1111 a lstrlct, 15 . . . . .r.~.. . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .... . . .. .
13. Water mains will be laid by '" _. ./'1//1................................................,
and (a) (no) charge will be made for installing said mains.
14. Electric lines and standards will be installed by ...... ~!kQ.... ... . .... .. . . . . . ... .. _ . . .
and (a)
,;
(no) charge will be made for installing said
lines.
15. Gas mains will be installed by . .. .. .. . !:'~~~... .. ,;, If. .. .. .. ./!l.l(f!.L.~07.. .. .. .. .... .. .. . .
and (a) (no) charge will be made for installing said mains.
16. If streets shown on the plat are claimed by the applicant to be existing public streets in the
Suffolk County Highway system, annex Schedule "n" hereto, to show same.
17. If streets shown on the plat are claimed by the applicant to be existing public streets in the
Town of Southold Highway system, annex Schedule He" hereto to show same.
18. There are no existing- buildings or structures 011 the land \vhich are not located and shown
on the plat.
19. Where the plat sho\vs proposed streets which are extensions of streets on adjoining sub-
division maps heretofore filed, there arc no reserve strips at the end of the streets on said
existing maps at their conjunctions with the proposed streets.
20. In the course of these proceedings. the applicant will "ffer proof of title as required by Sec.
335 of the Real Property Law.
21. Submit a cop)' of proposed deed for tots sho\\'hlg' an restrictions, covenants, etc. Annex
Schedule "D".
...~,
-
.. F: l.-l
A Cofl1,L#.eJ j',AI(),v,~\... A,(~.~---
Car I-1.rJot'- ..r~~.DIVV\vJ' ~EIoO'1.
22. The applicant estimates that the cost of grading
A--'., v,'-
.z.. "'1 . e,-'
~~
.}J.....:..
~
and required public improvements will hE"
$. . . .. . . '" as itemized in Schedule HE" hereto annexed and requests that the maturity of the
Performance Bond be fixed at '" . . . . . . . . . .. years. The Performance Bonel will be written by
a licensed surety company unless otherwise shown on Schedule "F",
+l.
DATE ... ..p.z:~~ !'?f!.tt(l,. .. .. Jc:'!. .~ .., 19 .~I.
...... !)N()f!:t.'r.I... .!-.<!!/'f.If-.'~... ............
(Name of Appli nt)
By... .......... . .
(Signature and Tit
JOSEPH FR DERICK GA
A rrORNEY-A T-LA W
. . . . . . . P.'o' eD-X 969; 9 "OGDEN 1:.ANE' . . . . . . . . .
(Address~UOGUE. NEW YORK 11858
(5Ie) e5.5788
STATE OF NEW YORK. COUNTY OF ... .. . ?V~.'!<:.. .. .. .. .. .. .. . ... ss:
On the ..... .. ./: .~~. .. . day of. . . P..~.(f..":'.~ .IZ.':-.. . . . . . . . . .. '. 19 .~1. . .. before mc personally came
::)'(u:..\., ~d.,....t... qA 'Z.'f4 k b h . l"d 1 d 'b d' !d h
... .... .~ .. . . .. .... .. . . .... .. .. . . .... .. . .. to me nown to e t e I11C IV1 ua escn e In an w 0
executed the foregoing instrument. and acknowledged that. . . .~. . " . executed the same.
NoIary':.~~i~;S~at~~~~~w York. . .~4.4:~~ . -If: .1/ ~. :. . . .: ........
No. 4951364 N P bl' ~
Qualified in Suffolk County otary u IC
Commission Expires May 22. 19 D
STATE OF NEW YORK. COUNTY OF........................ .... ss:
On the................ day............ of .............., 19......, before me personally came
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . to me known. who being by me duly sworn did de-
pose and say that. .. .. . . .. ... resides at No. ....................................................
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . that .......................... is the ..........
of ...................
.......................................................
the corporation described in and which executed the fon'g-oing- instrument; that ............ knows
the seal of said corporation; that the seal affixed hy order of the board of directors of said corporation.
:11111 that... .. . . .. . .. signed ............... name thereto by like order.
N~t~;;' P~bli~"""""""""""""""'"
...~'
'. .,
, ~ '...:
. """-....
.
.
~~
Please complete, sign and return to the Office of the Planning
Board with your completed applications forms. If your answer~
to any of the following questions is ~, please indicate
these on your guaranteed surveyor submit other appropriate
evidence.
1. Are there any wetland grasses on this parcel? ~
(Attached is a list of the wetland grasses defined
by the Town Code, Chapter 97, for your reference)
"sv,rfDL/( ~~
P IL<tNN~G;':BQ'AR. D
~"'-:'.'" '-~~
T~W, ~.".~'. ~':.s'i~Oh~:t< ~O~8'LD
ti' .~""" !__ ,~,i~li~;';' --
~ % \. .C7S"":')'~ ~ "'r.:" <
SIT FOLK:-::eO{J :fY
. -'Uj i. ~i\V .
~ ,
Southold. N.Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
QUESTIONNAIRE TO BE COMPLETED AND SUBMITTED
WITH YOUR APPLICATIONS FORMS TOTHE PLANNING BOARD
2. Are there any other premises under your ownership
abutting this parcel? Yes
3. Are there any building permits pending on
this parcel?
Yes
No
@
8
4. Are there any other applications pending
concerning this property before any other
department or agency? (Town , ~te, County, etc.) ~ No
S. Is there any application pending before
any other agency with regard to a different
project on this parcel?
Yes
6. Was this property the subject of any prior
application to the Planning Board?
7. Does this property have a valid certificate
of occupancy,_ if yes please submit.a copy of same
.
I certify
on by the
. Signature
Yes
Yes
@)
@
@
above statements are true and will be relied
oard in considering ~his application.
/1.. -/'1."11
date
e ty owner or authorized agent
../'
l
14-16-2 (2/B7)-7c
.
.
{
617.21
Appendix A
State Environmental Quality Review
FULLEN~RONMENTALASSESSMENTFORM
SEQR
Purpose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine. in an orderly manner, whether a project
or action may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer. Frequent-
ly, there are aspects of a project that are subjective or unmeasureable. It is also understood that those who determine
significance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may be technically expert in environmental
analysis. In addition, many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting
the question of significance.
The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination
process has been orderly. comprehensive in nature, yet flexible to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action.
Full EAF Components: The full EAF is comprised of three parts:
Part 1: Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic project
data, it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3.
Part 2: Focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action. It provides
guidance as to whether an impact IS likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially-
large impact. The form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced.
Part 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentially-large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the
impact is actually important.
(
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE-Type 1 and
Identify the Portions of EAF completed for this project: 0 Part 1
oPart 3
Unlisted Actions
o Part 2
Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF (Parts 1 and 2 and 3 if appropriate), and any other supporting
information, and considering both the magi tude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the
lead agency that:
o A. The project will not result in any large and important impact(s) and, therefore, is one which will not
have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a negative declaration will be prepared.
o B. Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant
effect for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been required,
therefore a CONDITIONED negative declaration will be prepared_'
o C. The project may result in one or more large and important impacts that may have a significant impact
on the environment, therefore a positive declaration will be prepared.
.. A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions
PROFoJ'ro Svbd'''hr''N of LAAlOJ
.1', rllA7€ AT
Name of Action
E"A Sr t\IlAftlCM
Name of Lead Agency
Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency
Title of Responsible Officer
Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency
Signature of Preparer (If different from responsible officer)
Date
1
- "~'- ."'" .;.-.'"'~~~.
. .
PART 1-PROJECT INFORMATION
Prepared by Project Sponsor
NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant effect
on the environment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E. Answers to these questions will be considered.
as part of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additiona!{
information you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3.
It is expected that completion of the full EAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not involve
new studies, research or investigation. If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specify
each instance.
NAME OF ACTION
PRo('OJ~ S...bdiv.J' "'" of LANDS .I'"fT'vAffi AT r;: II .s-r fVIM<'oN
LOCA liON OF ACTION (Include Street Address, Municipality and County)
"'15)0 N'U ,zr 25' 18(,2- Po-: S/O S7/lf'..S ~AO kA..l', MMh;l/'J _J"/~.II< Co . N'1S
NAME OF APPLICANT/SPONSOR I BUSINESS TELEPHONE
( )
ADDRESS A rrOm\iEY-AT-i..A W
P. O. BOX 969 5 OGDEtIlLAN..
CITY/PO Eo NEW YORK 11858 I STATE I ZIP CODE
(516) 653-5768
NAME OF OWNER (If different) I BUSINESS TELEPHONE
ANOfl-fLW LeiT i-(('": ( )
ADDRESS
.it? CA'1V.,A ~/l(>
CITY/PO j STATE 1 ZIP CODE
'10N I<<.v /oNw '1ork AI'?!.'
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION 3
F~ P".IlLO .J"\,/& ~ DlVJ J'i"....J of VAc.,1,...,.. LA.-.o :.v7o RIl J'1tJ.i-NT~,4L ""'-0" ..r
f
Please Complete Each Question-Indicate N.A. if not applicable
A. Site Description
Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas.
1. Present land use: ~Urban Olndustrial OCommercial OResidential (suburban)
OForest OAgriculture OOther
2. Total acreage of project area: acres.
APPROXIMATE ACREAGE
Meadow or Brushland (Non-agricultural)
Forested
Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland. pasture. etc.)
Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24, 25 of ECl)
Water Surface Area
Unvegetated (Rock. earth or fill)
Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces
Other (Indicate type)
.Rural (non-farm)
10.
PRESENTl Y
"...., acres
o acres
o acres
'fR-
AFTER COMPLETION
10
acres
0 acres
0 acres
y? acres
0 acres
0 acres
.c. 7 acres
acres
acres
0 acres
0 acres
0 acres
acres
3. What is predominant soil type(s) on project sitel S/lNp
a. Soil drainage: aWell drained /00 % of ~ite
o Poorly drained % of site
b. If any agricultural land is involvrd, how many acres of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the NYSt'
land Classification System? t{, A. acres. (See 1 NYCRR 370).
4. Are there bedrock outcroppings on project site? DYes ONo
a. What is depth to bedrock? N. A. (in feet)
-k. Gflill/Ji L
OModerately well drained
% of site
../
2
-"--:_:__.___'c;:",.:.:..;..~.....';;;:~
.
5. Approximate percentage of proposed project site with slopes:
.
.0-10%
2.
%
010-15%
%
0-15% or greater
%
( 7.
6. Is project substantially contiguous to, or contain a building, site. or district, listed on the State or the National
Registers of ,Historic Places? DYes .No
Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural Landmarks?
8. What is the depth of the water table? (in feet)
9.
DYes
.No
Is site located over a primary. principal. or sole Source aquifer?
.Yes
DNa
10. Do hunting. fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? .Yes DNa
11. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered?
DYes .No According to
Identify each species
12. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the prolect site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, other geological formations)
DYes IINo Describe"- ,
. .~ . ' ~
13. Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood 'as an open space or recreation area?
DYes I1No If yes, explain . .-.. .-.
14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community?
DYes IINo
15. Streams within or contiguous to project area: AI ~ A ~
a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary
16. Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area:
a. Name DAM ('0,-10
b. Size (In acres)
30~
17.
(
Is the site served by existing public utilities? RYes DNa
a) If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? /ilIYes DNa
b) If Yes, will improvements be necessary to allow connection? RlYes DNa
Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and
Section 303 and 304? DYes DNa
19. Is the site located in or substantially contiguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8
of the ECL, and 6 NYCRR 617? DYes DNo
Markets Law, Article 25-AA,
18.
20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes?
DYes
IIlNo
.
B.
1.
Project Description
Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate)
a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project sponsor
b. Project acreage to be developed: AJ.(;7 acres initially; J-I.":" Ol"L '7
c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped 75'}. <,r: .LA.Ja~res.
d. Length of project, in miles: /II. fl. (If appropriate)
e. If the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed N. fJ.
f. Number of off-street parking spaces existing IV. fl. ; proposed 11/.11.
g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour :2 - 3 (upon completion of project)?
h. If residential: Number and type of housing units:
One Family Two Family
Initially 0
Ultimately - _______
---
i. Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure 30 height;
j. Linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy is?
o
acres.
acres ultimately.
%;
Multiple Family
Condominium
c..
---
-----
(:,0 :idth;
5"3."1
~.
------
60 length
It. R.o.v.I.
FA.,.,TA G~
.-.'
3
-",..,.~~
.
.
o
tons/cubic yards
2. How much natural matenal (i.c_. ruck, earth, etc.) will be removed from the site?
3.
Will disturbed areas be reclaimed' DVes DNo .N/A
a. If yes, for what intend.~ purpose is the site being reclaimed? N / /l
RIZ: .c.j.'\Ao",,",::>> of OLD ~"" p.Or'O 6<
b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? DYes DNa RJ1PLAl,;,.,....~r Wl"f"f" -n"""" APrfluv.O I=2.oAO. (
c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? DVes DNo
4. How many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site? Y 2. acre/,
5. Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this project?
DVes IINo
6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction
'3
months, (including demolition).
7. If multi-phased:
a. Total number of phases anticipated /II. /I. (number).
b. Anticipated date of commencement phase 1 4- month
c. Approximate completion date of final phase \ \ month
d. Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases? DVes
8. Will blasting occur during construction? DVes lINo
9. Number of jobs generated: during construction I 2-
Number of jobs eliminated by this project 0
Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities?
,<)88
,"68
IINo
year, (including demolition).
year.
; after project is complete
o
10.
11.
DYes
.No
If yes, explain
12. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? DVes I!lINo
a. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) and amount
b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged
13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved1 IlIVes DNo Type
S/lN,TA{2.'1
14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? DVes II! No (
Explain E'N'Tl(.L~ fp.oJ1S'..:.... ..f"~T frfh.J.<.. ov'~ lco ~ AtoM ~>CIJTI,.JG INIt7t:'1-. lSD"O"1
15. Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain? 1!iVes DNo
16. Will the project generate solid waste? DVes ~No
a. If yes, what is the amount per month 0 tons
b. If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used? DYes DNo
c. If yes, give name location
d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill?
e. If Yes, explain
DVes
.No
17.
Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste? DVes
a. If yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal? N.II.
b. If yes, what is the anticipated site life? N. n. years.
Will project use herbicides or pesticides? DVes ENo
Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)1 DYes IiIINo
Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels?
Will project result in an increase in energy use? ~es DNo
If yes, indicate type(s) Ei-f<t~'(' FAoIV' L-II-CO
15-
If water supply is from wells, indicate pumring capacity
Total anticipated water usage per day 250 gallons/day. Pi<..
Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding? DYes
If Yes, explain
III No
tons/month.
18.
19.
20.
21.
DYes
IINo
22.
23.
24.
gallons/minute.
() WJ;Lt.;""',
E" J""T'........A"T/1. (F'.r7",.")
t
.No
:;,tI'
4
-,~._<.,.,....
25. Approvals ReqUire
City, Town, Village Board DYes ENo
( ~. Town, \'iIl8E;i: Planning Board IIYes DNo
City, Town Zoning Board DYes iii No
-€itv, County Health Department III Yes DNo
Other Local Agencies DYes DNo
Other Regional Agencies DYes DNo
State Agencies DE'c. ~"'J' .Yes DNo
Federal Agencies DYes DNo
.
Submittal
Dale
Type
"
fv\ r~i;!:z... -f"~D/\iI..l-/ON
\ 996
SMnM.'1 "" JV(SDIV,J'ioN
\ '39"
N'1J -r: v.i. PrE(l.M i r
\587
C. Zoning and Planning Information
1. Does proposed action involve a planning Qr 19AiAg decision? .Yes DNa
If Yes, indicate decision required:
Ozoning amendment Dzoning variance Dspecial use permit .subdivision Osite plan
Onew{revision of master plan Dresource management plan Dother
2. What is the zoning c1assification(s)of the site? RIZJ"/" ""'T,M_ 2. ,4...< Z"",''//N(;
What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning?
...s- Lo.....f If.,- 2. I!..-~ IEAcl(
What is the proposed zoning of the site? p.~J', oS-", TtlH. 3 E/ If<.. ,,:"'~ l. ,J 0"''-'1
What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning?
JA",€
3.
-I
5.
( 6.
7.
8
9
10.
11.
Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? IIIYes DNo
What are the predominant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a V. mile radius of proposed action?
f<rz./'.o f.,,"/AL
IIYes
DNo
D. Informational Details
Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project If there are or may be any adverse
impacts associated with your proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or
avoid them. SEt: fl'vf~<> -rv<3- 0,,/0"'0.-.) /Y'AP rp..ff'~~'<> 1<''1 fP.iwi<- BA'1L%.f L.S;
Aff""""~~ ~ .ru!!.':: F.Ltfo B. 2. - I "as-
E. Verification
I certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge.
Applicant/Sponsor ':J'DJ'tfPII I-IlItO:;".lK GA"Zzl) Date /.2 _I':} .9/
Signature Title OWNt/L 1/11<'-"- ,/ /lffLIL.ON"T ,/ A7fiJr""j
If the action is in the Coa ea, and you are a state agency. complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding
with this assessm
Is the proposed action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses within a V. mile?
If the proposed action is the subdivision of land. how many lots are proposed?
a. What is the minimum lot size proposed? --'~. F".....
Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of sewer or water districts? DYes iii No
Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police,
fire protection)? BYes DNo
a. If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? aYes DNo
12. Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? DYes lilNo
a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? DYes DNo
l
FREDERICK GAZZA
ATTORNEY-AT_LAW
P. o. BOX 969. 5 OGOEN LANE
QUOGUE, NEW YORK 11958
(518) 653.6788
5
..,1'
. ,-
-~''''''';.'''''ooiJ;;
Part 2-PROJa IMPACTS AND THEIR MAGADE
Responsihility of lead Agency
General Information (Read Carefully)
. In completing the form the reviewer should be guided by the question: Have my responses and determinations been
reasonablel The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst.
. Identifying that an impact will be potentially large (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessarily significant. (
Any large impact must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine significance. Identifying an impact in column 2 simply
asks that it be looked at further.
. The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of impacts and wherever possible the threshold of
magnitude that would trigger a response in column 2. The examples are generally applicable throughout the State and
for most situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be appropriate
for a Potential Large Impact response, thus requiring evaluation in Part 3.
. The impacts of each project. on each site, in each locality, will vary. Therefore, the examples are illustrative and
have been offered as guidance. They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each question.
. The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question.
. In identifying impacts, consider long term, short term and cumlative effects.
Instructions (Read carefully)
a. Answer each of the 19 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there will be any impact.
b. Maybe answers should be considered as Yes answers.
c. If answering Yes to a question then check the appropriate box (column 1 or 2) to indicate the potential size of the
impact. If impact threshold equals or exceeds any example provided, check column 2. If impact will occur but threshold
is lower than example, check column 1.
d. If reviewer has doubt about size of the impact then consider the impact as potentially large and proceed to PART 3.
e. If a potentially large impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated by change(s) in the project to a small to moderate ~
impact, also check the Yes box in column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction is n()t possible. This
must be explained in Part 3.
IMPACT ON LAND
1. Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site?
IitNO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise per 100
foot of length), or where the general slopes in the project area exceed
10%.
. Construction on land where the depth to the water table is less than
3 feet.
. Construction of paved parking area for 1,000 or more vehicles.
. Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally within
3 feet of existing ground surface.
. Construction that will continue for more than 1 year or involve more
than one phase or stage.
. Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than 1,000
tons of natural material (i.e.; rock or soil) per year.
. Construction or expansion of a sanitary landfill.
. Construction in a designated floodway.
. Other impacts
2. Will there be an effect t,. ...IY w',que or unusual land forms found on
the site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, geological formations, etc.)DNO DYES
. Specific land forms:
6
1 2 3
Small to Polential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
0 D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
.
.../"
r
"
e
~~<,...,..'........
.
.
(
IMPACT ON WATER
3. Will proposed action affect any water body designated as protected?
(Under Articles 15, 24, 25 of the Environmental Conservation Law, ECL)
IINO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Developable area of site contains a protected water body.
. Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a
protected stream.
. Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body.
. Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland.
. Other impacts:
4. Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body
of water? IINO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. A 10C?1. increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water
or more than a 10 acre increase or decrease.
. Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area.
. Other impacts:
I
5. Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater
quality or quantity? "NO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed Action will require a discharge permit.
. Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does not
have approval to serve proposed (project) action.
. Proposed Action requires water supply from wells with greater than 45
gallons per minute pumping capacity.
. Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water
supply system.
. Proposed Action will adversely affect groundwater.
. Liquid effluent will be conveyeJ off the site to facilities which presently
do not exist or have inadequate capacity.
. Proposed Action would use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per
day.
. Proposed Action will likelv 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.
. Proposed Action will require the storage of petroleum or chemical
products greater than 1,100 gallons.
. Proposed Action will allow residential uses in' areas without water
and/or sewer services.
. Proposed Action locates commercial and/or industrial uses which may
require new or expansion of existing waste treatment olnd/or storage
facilities.
. Other impacts:
(
l 6 Will proposed action alter drJinage flow or patterns, or surface
water runorf? .NO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed Action would change flood water flows.
7
1 2 3
Small to Potential ,Can Impact Be .
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
~
.
. Proposed Action may cause substantial erosion.
. Proposed Action is incompatible with existing drainage patterns.
o Proposed Action will allow development in a designated floodway.
o Other impacts:
IMPACT ON AIR
7. Will proposed action affect air quality? /IINO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
o Proposed Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips in any given
hour.
o Proposed Action will result in the incineration of more than 1 ton of
refuse per hour.
. Emission rate of total contaminants will exceed 5 Ibs. per hour or a
heat SOurce producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour.
. Proposed action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed
to industrial use.
. Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial
development within existing industrial areas.
. Other impacts:
IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS
8 Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered
species? l1lNO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Reduction of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal
list. using the site, over or near site or found on the site.
o Removal of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habitat.
o Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other
than for agricultural purposes.
o Other impacts:
9. Will Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or
non-endangered species? tIlNO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
o Proposed Action would substantially interfere with any resident or
migratory fish, shellfish or wildlife species.
. Proposed Action requires the removal of more than 10 acres
of mature forest (over 100 years of age) or other locally important
vegetation.
IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES
10. Will the Proposed Action affect agricultural land resources?
"NO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. The proposed action would sever, cross or limit aCCess to agricultural
land (includes cropland, hayfields, pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc.)
8
1 2 3
Small to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
{
.
t
../
~','." .,;,;.....
1 2 3
Small to' Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 '0 . DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
.
.
{"
. Construction activity would excavate or compact the soil profile of
agricultural land.
. The proposed action would irreversibly convert more than 10 acres
of agricultural land or, if located in an Agricultutal District. more
than 2.5 acres of agricultural land
. The proposed action would disrupt or prevent installation of agricultural
land management systems (e.g., subsurface drain lines. outlet ditches,
strip cropping); or create a need for such measures (e.g. cause a farm
field to drain poorlv due to increased runoff)
. Other impacts:
IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES
11 Will proposed action affect aesthetiC resources? \!I NO DYES
(If necessary, use the Visual EAF Addendum in Section 617.21,
Appendix S.)
Eumples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed land uses, or project components obviously different from
or in sharp contrast to current surrounding land use patterns, whether
man.made or natural.
. Proposed land uses, or project components visible to users of
aesthetic resources which will eliminate or significantly reduce their
enJoyment of the aesthetic qualities of that resource.
r
\.. . Project components that will result in the elimination or significant
screening of scenic views known to be important to the area.
. Other impacts:
r/,iPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES
12. Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure of historic, pre-
historic or paleontological importance? Il!INO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed Action occurring wholly or partially within or substantially
contiguous to any facility or site listed on the State or National Register
of historic places.
. Any impact to an archaeological site or fossil bed located within the
project site.
. Proposed Action will occur in an area designated as sensitive for
archaeological sites on the NYS Site Inventory.
. Other impacts:
l
IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION
1] Will Proposed Action affect the quantity or quality of existing or
future open spaces or recreational opportunities?
hamples that would apply to column 2 Il!lNO DYES
. The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational opportunity.
. A major reduction of an open space important to the community.
. Other impacts:
9
...-"
.......:'
" ..-,.;....'~,
....:...
.
IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION
14. Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems?
IINO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Alteration of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods.
. Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems.
. Other impacts:
IMPACT ON ENERGY
15. Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or
energy supply? DNa DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed Action will cause a greater than 5% increase in the use of
any form of energy in the municipality.
. Proposed Action will require the creation or extension of an energy
transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two family
residences or to serve a major commercial or industrial use.
. Other impacts:
NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS
16. Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or vibration as a result
of the Proposed Action? . IINO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Blasting within 1,500 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive
facility.
. Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day).
. Proposed Action will produce operating noise exceeding the local
ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures.
. Proposed Action will remove natural barriers that would act as a
noise screen.
. Other impacts:
IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH
17. Will Proposed Action affect public health and safety?
.NO
DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed Action may cause a risk of explosion or release of hazardous
substances (i.e. oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) in the event of
accident or upset conditions, or there may be a chronic low level
discharge or emission.
. Proposed Action may result' in the burial of "hazardous wastes" in any
form (i.e. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritating,
infectious, etc.)
. Storage facilities for one million or more gallons of liquified natural
gas or other flammable liquids.
. Proposed action may result in the excavation or other disturbance
within 2,000 feet of a site used for the disposal of solid or hazardous
waste...
. Other impacts:
10
.
1 2 3
Small to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
i'-
0 0 DYes ONo
I. 0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
.,
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes QNo
0 0 DYes DNO
0 0 DYes DNo
'r
/'
'-
E
.-"
.._ _.. ~'..,l..........
.
.
18.
(
IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHARACTER
OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD
Will proposed action affect the character of the existing community?
IINO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
· The permanent population of the city, town or village in which the
project is located is likely to grow by more than 5%.
. The municipal budget for capital expenditures or operating services
will increase by more than 5% per year as a result of this project.
. Proposed action will conflict with officially adopted plans or goals.
. Proposed action will cause a change in the density of land use.
. Proposed Action will replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures
or areas of historic importance to the community.
. Development will create a demand for additional community services
le.g. schools, police and fire, etc.)
. Proposed Action will set an important precedent for future projects.
. Proposed Action will create or eliminate employment.
. Other impacts:
1 2 3 ,
Small to Potential Can Impact Be'
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
19, Is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy related to
potential adverse environmental impacts' lI!tNO DVES
(
If Any Action in Part 2 Is Identified as a Potential Large Impact or
If You Cannot Determine the Magnitude of Impact, Proceed to Part 3
Part 3-EVALUATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS
Responsibility of Lead Agency
Pari 3 must be prepared if one or more impact(s) is considered 10 be potentially large, even if the impact(s) may be
mitigated.
Instructions
Discuss the following for each impact identified in Column 2 of Part 2:
1. Oriefly describe the impact.
2. Describe (if applicable) how the impact could be mitigated or reduced to a small to moderate impact by project changers).
3. Ilased on the information available, decide if it is reasonable to conclude that this impact is important.
To answer the question of importance, consider:
. The probability of the impact occurring
. The duration of the impact
. Its irreversibility. including permanently lost resources of value
. Whether the impact can or will be controlled
. The regional consequence of the impact
. Its potential divergence from local needs and goals
. Whether known ob;ections to the project relate to this impact.
(Continue on attachments)
l
11
".:;-:
-......,.,;....~
. 617.21 .
Appendix 8
SI"te Environmental Quality Review
Visual EAF Addendum
14.14-1\ (2'871-9c
(
SEQR
This form may be used to provide additional information relating to Question 11 of Part 2 of
the Full EAF.
(To be completed by Lead Agency)
Visibility
1. Would the project be visible from:
. A parcel of land which is dedicated to and available
to the public for the use. enjoyment and appreciation
of natural or man-made scenic qualities?
(
. An overlook or parcel of land dedicated to public
observation, enjoyment and appreciation of natural
or man-made scenic qualities?
. A site or structure listed on the National or State
Registers of Historic Places?
. State Parks?
. The State Forest Preserve? N IA
. National Wildlife Refuges and state game refuges? filA
. National Natural Landmarks and other outstanding
natural features? IIIIl
. National Park Service lands? tJ /.1
. Rivers designated as National or State Wild, Scenic
or Recreational? tJ IA
. Any transportation corridor of high exposure, such
as part of the Interstate System, or Amtrak? ,1M
. A governmentally established or designated interstate
or inter.county foot trail, or one formally proposed for
establishment or designation? tJlll.
. A site, area, lake, reservoir or highway designated as
scenic?
. Municipal park, or designated open space?
. County road?
. State? "'''If ....,. 2.S-
. Loca I road?
(,..",,,, /lo~D)
Distance Between
Project and Resource (in Miles)
0-'/, '/,_'/2 '/2_3 3-5 5+
o 0 III 0 0
o
o
Iii
o
o
0 0 Il!iI 0 0
0 0 0 0 ~
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
IJ
o
o
Ii
o
o
o
o
o
lit
o
o
o
2. Is the visibility of the project seasonal? (i.e.. screened by summer foliage, but visible during other
seasons)
Iiil!!Yes DNa
3. Are any of the resources checked in question
during which the project will be visible?
. .' DYes IJlIINo
] used by the public during the time of year
1
../
._".......-..."...--........~-
.
DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING VISUAL ENVIRONMENT
4. From each item checked in question I, check those which generally 'describe the surrounding
environment.
Within r
* 1/4 mile *1 mile ,
Essentially undeveloped 0 i1I
Forested 0 Iii
Agricultural /'IIA 0 0
Suburban residential 0 fit,
Industrial /'IIA 0 0
Commercial piA 0 0
Urban Hill 0 0
River, Lake, Pond Df\"" ('",NO III 0
Cliffs, Overlooks 10/1/1 0 0
Designated Open Space /'11(/ 0 0
Flat II! 0
Hilly 0 ~
Mountainous "'111 0 0
Other 0 0
NOTE: add attachments as needed
5. Are there visually similar projects within:
*'12 mile DYes ONo
*1 miles DYes ONo
*2 miles DYes ONo
*3 miles DYes ONo
* Distance from project site are provided for assistance. Substitute other distances as appropriate.
r
"
EXPOSURE
6. The annual number of viewers likely to observe the proposed project is f\\i .J;""" L.
NOTE: When user data is unavailable or unknown, use best estimate.
CONTEXT
7. The situation or activity in which the viewers are engaged while viewing the proposed action is
Activity
Travel to and from work
Involved in recreational activities
Routine travel by residents
At a residence
At worksite
Other
Daily
II
o
!!!1
Ii
o
o
Weekly
o
o
o
o
o
o
2
FREQUENCY
Holidays!
Weekends
o
o
o
o
o
o
Seasonally
o
o
o
o
o
o
(
'.'/
,:..,:..",,-,,,;,\~
.
.
JOSEPH FREDERICK GAZZA
RECEIVED 'BV
SOUlHOLD TO\'iN PlJ\NNING BOARn
ATTORNEY AT LAW
P.O. Box 969 3 OGDEN LANE
QUOGUE, NEW YORK 11959
(516) 653-5766 (DAY AND EVENING)
Sov-r/'oIJ 70"-'-' fL,.."'N:-', ~,
8-1'3-87
~
(q,: (Vl i,.Jo I- Svg O/VI ";0"'" ~ o .P Lp~r;
4:- GAZZA AT" D"'''''
POw ~ ~AJ" rvl AfJ- , D ,J
CxAtL BoAAO (IA ~ f'A crlEfl.-J
TJ+1:-
Dee
;V'1../'
S v (L vlt '.r-
10
pc." r
0"/ f/...-... {',,/lL fIV-t. + LA-LJ
/1 ~ fU, It-n f> 1"'7 oV~...,:lLL
rE..-<.-/ObJ. F;.r '70 v...r
o I- -;-h: .,. "~V:4J fI' A('.
PLI"A-4
,{'= .:r
AOV;"/I!.
f-}((Lf
7 0 0/"-
Pv+'
;"/
To
,/+-.'.1
""A TI ~ ~
\m
,
lX\
H
,.
/-M ./
RE<yv,,..nJ
I'" '1 -'
+L.
I/II-e. + lA-'J ""
;.lJ
......I' " \,)""..".J
.:r::./ V'f -""".... '7
".."",~
of
7/-J1../
f'P-O(04.1
..r......'- d.: v; 01 ; 0 -' ""'"
F:.:f.-t
frj'-'"
./ ../'
A
C 11-'"
I!E
of
. 1'1-- .,
C-o ,./r/.<.--H 0..-1
'W: ,/--f
r{~
=tl=- /t:lOD - "d.:;L -3-19
Dep~w/u.J~
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Building 40-SUNY, Stony Brook, New York 11794
~
.....
~
(516) 751-7900
K",+lL- I "",,^-tlQ..U~s;"5 1>6 -tz, (f' 0 t . ".:>l
-w- I..A. -to Pos:L::>V!.....
J It!-
I-II-'\'?""
,----_. ,._.__.......~..
January 9,
1989 , ,
;:11;'1
:~IW,
I I
I
I I "~9
-,..'-li
~'"
"I R Th'~mas C. Jorllng
I: LS ...,C6ri1missioner
" i' i'
l~l
\ I
I
,'--'-'~---
SOUHlOLO TOWN
PLPNNING BOAilO
Town of Southold Planning Board
Town Hall
53095 Main Rd.
Southold, NY 11971
Attn: Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman
Re: Dam Pond Subdivision
DEC No. 10-87-1200
SCTM No. 1000-22-3-19 thru 22
1000-31-5-1.2
Dear Mr. Orlowski:
I am writing in response to your letter of Septemper 22, 1988, and a subsequent
telephone conversation between Valerie Scopaz of your office and Robert Greene,
the Regional Permit Administrator, concerning the above referenced project. Please
accept my apologies for the delay in responding to your letter and telephone inquiries
regarding a shift in lead agency under the State Environmental Quality Review
Act (SEQR) from DEC to Town of Southold Planning Board.
A review of our file indicates that an application for a DEC Tidal Wetlands
permit was received by this office on July 9, 1987. I determined that the proposed
project was an unlisted action pursuant to the listing of activities in the SEQR
regulations, 6NYCRR Part [617.12, 13]; but suspected that the project might be
considered a Type I action by the Town. A letter was sent to Town Supervisor
Murphy on or about August 5, 1987, along with a copy of the DEC application, environ-
mental assessment form and preliminary subdivision map. This letter was our standard
"Lead Agency Coordination Request" form and indicated that the Department had
no objection to the appropriate Town body assuming lead agency responsibilities
for the poroject. The letter requested a response within 30 days of the August 5,
1987 date of the coordination letter as per Part [617.6(c)(I)]. As the 30 day
period for establishing lead agency drew to a close with no response from the
Town, I telephoned Diane Shultz of the Planning Board office, who seemed to think
that the Planning Board would be interested in assuming lead agency for this project.
However, no written response was received from the Planning Board until your
September 22, 1988 letter. No further action was taken by the Department until
November of 1987 when we decided to proceed with an uncoordinated SEQR review
as per Part [617.6(d)], which resulted in our preliminary determination that the
project will probably not have a significant effect on the environment. We then
proceeded with our review of the project for specific tidal wetland impacts. In
late August of 1988, we learned that there is a possibility of significant cultural
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
January 9, 1989
Page 2
resourCeS being located on the project site and required a literature search and
preliminary archaeological investigation pursuant to the State Historic Preservation
Act. This work is on-going and will allow us to make our official determination
of significance.
With regard to your request for our consent to a change in lead agency from
DEC to Town Planning Board, we feel that our consent is unnecessary. We believe
that no actual coordinated SEQR review was achieved because no written response
was received to our August 5, 1987 lead agency coordination request within the
statutory time frame. We initiated a coordination attempt, which was unsuccessful,
so we proceeded with our own uncoordinated SEQR review which will likely result
in a negative declaration. This uncoordinated review was started because we regarded
this project as an unlisted action, and Part [617.6(d)(I)(2)(3)] provides for
uncoordinated review of unlisted actions and separate determinations of significance
from each involved agency. This situation may change if the archaeological work
and literature search show that the site contains a prehistoric site listed on
the National Register of Historic Places or nominated for inclusion on the National
Register. If this situation arises, then we would consider the project a Type
I action from the new information. Coordinated review would then be mandatory.
Please note that Part [617.6(d)(3)] states: "Fo'r"uncoordinated review of
unlisted actions, each involved agency must make its own determination of significance.
Each involved agency is considered a lead agency wh en making its determination
of significance. At any time prior to an agency's final decision, that agency's
negative declaration may be superseded by a positive declaration issued by any
other involved agency." Since our agencies are involved in an uncoordinated review
of this action, each agency must make its own, independent determination of signi-
ficance. As mentioned above, the Department will probably prepare a negative
declaration if tIe archaeological work reveals no new information. Town of Southold
Planning Board must reach its own determination of significance. A positive declarat-
ion by the Planning Board will supersede a negative declaration issued by any
other involved agency as well as prohibit involved agencies from reaching their
final decisions until after a final environmental impact statement is filed and
findings are prepared. We believe that the Planning Board does not need our consent
to act as lead agency, and is free to make its determination of significance as
it Sees fit.
I hope this adequately explains the Department's pos1t10n on the matter.
If you have any questions or would like to discuss this further, please call at
(516) 751-7900.
Very truly yours,
~ 'JUYv,:2 ~J, 1fl"",^"v'(lII,'6f-
GWH : j f
cc: R. Greene
J.F. Gazza, Esq.
file
George W. Hammarth
Environmental Analyst
r
, fa
PLAN~Il'.jG BOARD MEM~_'
BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR.
Chai rrnan
WILLIAM J. CREMERS
KENNETH L. EDWARDS
GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR.
RICHARD G. WARD
"I~i~ufF0l74~~ " ....
.().' ~,,~ t'a ,
,9~ ~~
~.~ ~!~) .
"'~. '-~
.",,~ !:)'"
~~d~.
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-3136
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
December 1, 1999
Joseph Frederick Gazza
P.O. Box 969
5 Ogden Lane
Quogue, NY 11959
RE: Subdivision Applications for
Gazza and Lettieri
SCTM# 1000-22-3- (19-22) & 31-5-1. 2
Dear Mr. Gazza:
1 reviewed the above mentioned files in response to your telephone
request for a list of the application fees and environmental fees paid to
the Planning Board during the subdivision review. The fees paid are as
follows:
August 1985
July 1989
May 1993
October 1993
Minor subdivision application fees
SEQRA review fee
SEQRA review fee
SEQRA scoping fee
$1600.00
$70.00
$1500.00
$350.00
Please let me know if you require any additional information.
Sincerely, ~
~ -
Melissa Spiro
Planner
.
.
')ub~,
'P&
(Y)5
.I0SII'III'IUIJI'IU' I; (;^/Z^
AI IOI(NIY ,\11 ,\W
1',( 1, HIl\ t)hl),." i li'drll I,allt:
()lln.l~lIe, Nt'\\"Y(llK 11971
\l1s. I':llricia (', [\lr1nlc-Esq
." 1 020 !\'1aill RO,ld
~ll\lll1old, Ncw York 11(J7J
.
NO\'CllIhLT 19, I ()l)1l
I~l': I':asl r'v1;nillll Io1llds of I ,C'llini .Y.. (I;U/;l
Sl'l Mill OOIl.022.IIJ.1I1 'l,1I20.021.0.'2
I kal [\.115. f\loOIC.
'! he 3l.HlYC Icfcn'll'.:cd bnds ha',"C today be(,lI cOlJveyed by the ulI(h:rsi!;T1Cd to the Pc conic land trust who
had further c01lveyed samc 10 l11c 11:11 tllcrship llf COllllly of Suffolk lIIal Town of Southold. 111C lands arc to
he forever ]lIcscJ\Td as OpCII ~pacc.
I here is 110 longer ;111)' nced 10 cnntlllllC' aPl'lical;\llls with [he Soulhold Towll Trustees, Southold Town
Board or Zoning ^ppcals, SOl1thold Town I'I;lIllling Hu,ml (ll NYS DEe.
By copy of this letter to Ihcsc Agencies it is ICSpcc1rully Icqul'slcd that the pending applications be
withdrawlI withou1 prejudice <lnd rurther lIml all)' fees paid in connection with said applications be refunded
as Sotllllold T(l\\ll ilsclrha~) taken o\'er tllese lands rrollllls, llle applicants.
Kindly dose your Ide tlllll1i') matler and n'[11l1110 i',lr. Il'llini :llld~ halfc<lch. the remaining halance in
l'snow you arc ret:lillillg. 11 has been a pkaslIlc to W(11k with you and I hope to have the opportunity to do
so ~\gaill ill I1w (\lllllt'.
Very truly yoms. I
\vi\ I
.I( lS1'1'11 FR\\~rl~JK G^Z7^
^NDREW LETIII'RI
('r: Involved pallil's
\.~ ,k,,j
>
; L., ,J
)
j '='~
: j!UIJ
".
c'
.:......"...
'r c.,
"\~,"'f.' t oF-
~~aW!EJID
DEe 07 1999
Southold Town
Planning Board
Albert J. Krupski, President
James King, Vice-President
Henry Smith
Artie Foster
Ken Poliwoda
Town Hall
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
p~
m5
t's.. fir.
.
.
Telephone (516) 765-18~2
Fax (516) 765-1823
BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
TO:
Planning Board Members
FROM:
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
DATE:
June 18, 1999
RE:
Gazza/Lettieri project
On Monday June 28, 1999 at approx. 7:00 p.m. the Board of
Trustees would like to have a meeting with your board and the
Zoning Board to discuss the Gazza/Lettieri project.
Please let Diane or Lauren know if you can make this meeting.
If you have any questions, please contact our office at 765-1892.
l~~\~\~'-~'~;I..
<i\~\. '
....'..."1 ' "
-'," ."
""V,l. ~ .,~_ '....."(..~
;,,;,w~~~....
i]"'~lliiI;I,I!\i.~j""
.
Sv \'j .
fY\S
APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS
.
Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman
James Dinizio, Jr.
Lydia A. Tortora
Lora S. Collins
George Horning
p$(
f{U,
Southold Town Hall
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
ZBA Fax (516) 765-9064
Telephone (516) 765-1809
BOARD OF APPEALS
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
April 9, 1999
Patricia C. Moore, Esq.
51020 Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
Re: Appl. No. 4619 - Request for Improvements/Fire Access ~ - ~ '3 cJ
Dear Mrs. Moore:
As a follow-up and reminder, this will confirm that the above application is
incomplete pending receipt of documentation, noted below (ref. ZBA October 8, 1998
letter). Would you please forward a copy of the SEQRA law or Section under Part 617
referred to in your January 28, 1999 letter.
1) Seven (7) prints of a survey map with preparer's name, showing the
15' wide driveway required by the Zoning Code and the number of buildings proposed and
the points of access from the proposed right-of-way construction. (The most recent map
submitted to the ZBA was dated October 18, 1998 referring to "9" lots.)
2) Staking or similar markings, in part, to show proposed path and turns, along
both sides of proposed ROW construction, and photographs of same in relation to the
wetlands.
3) Copy of Town Trustees' action and State D.E.e. application or permit regarding
the proposed construction activities within 300 feet of wetlands.
Thank you.
Very truly yours,
GERARD P. GOEHRIN1f~lU'\V1'
CHAIRMAN ~~ 'a U
~..j
AP~ \J - 1:1:';)
Southold Town
Planning Board
.
ORIENT AsSOCIATION
~
. ~
BOX 282 . ORIENT. NY 11957
March 19, 1999
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Planning Board
Town Hall
Southold, New York
Dear Benny,
I'm enclosing letters to the Trustees, ZBA, and Town Board officials about the urgency
to preserve the property around Dam Pond. Your SEQRA positive declaration was
accurate for this sensitive area, and remains, I believe, necessary for the road-access
application before the other boards, even without further subdivision.
But more to the point is the critical significance of this property as identified by the New
York State Open Space Conservation Plan, the Southold Town Open Space and Farmland
Conservation Plan, and the Scenic Byways priority list. This site should not be developed
but should be preserved, and I hope you will do what you can to facilitate the Town's
making a firm commitment to purchase it as soon as possible.
Sincerely,
~
Freddie Wachsberger
Cc: Melissa Spiro, Town Planner
Albert Krupski, Jr., Chairman, Town Trustees
Gerard Goehringer, Chairman, ZBA
l li-h-O"t. \v'~r 'r4rt~t'i) 'J1t.fl-'f
jCt'lVIh N~ uN \\"h \ S l~ -
'1c~~ ~ ~ IN0/.Pr/V
~Dt..,.., a:;{IJ'f~HW7~~Sr.r..~, .
Ib, \i"!~'-i IfI! !;l~'\
U~~MAR 2 Z 1999 't,U
Southold Town
Planning Board
.
.
ORIENT ASSOCIATION
BOX 282. ORIENT. NY 11957
March 19, 1999
Mr. Gerard Goehringer, Chainnan
Zoning Board of Appeals
Town Hall
Southold, New York
Dear Gerry,
The Zoning Board has before it an application for a 280-a variance for access to the
properties owned by Mr. Gazza and Mr. Lettieri around Dam Pond. When a proposed
subdivision of these properties was before the Planning Board, the issue of this proposed
access road, which is based on an existing track that traverses wetlands and is often under
water, was one of the reasons for a positive SEQRA declaration. We strongly urge you to
reject this application.
As you know, the Dam Pond area has been identified by at least three Town plans as a
priority for preservation. I enclose copies of letters to the Supervisor and other members
of town government urging them to commit themselves to its purchase as rapidly as
possible.
Sincerely,
~
FreddieWachsberger
Cc: Jean Cochran, Supervisor
Bennett Orlowski, Chairman, Planning Board
Melissa Spiro, Planner
Albert Kmpski, Jr., Chairman, Town Trustees
.
ORIENT ASSOCIATION
.
BOX 282 . ORIENT. NY 11957
March 19,1999
Ms. Melissa Spiro
Planning Department
Town Hall
Southold, New York
Dear Melissa,
We urge Southold Town to proceed vigorously to preserve the property around Dam
Pond. Its priority listing in the New York State Open Space Conservation Plan and the
Southold Town Open Space and Farmland Conservation plan, as cited in the Dam Pond
Maritime Reserve proposal, indicate that the Town has long recognized its importance.
Additionally, it was given highest priority by the Orient and East Marion members of the
Scenic Byways Committee because of its critical position in the landscape of the
causeway, which has been identified by the people of East Marion and Orient, and by
Southolders at large, as one of the "special places" which resonate strongly in local
citizens' experience of place, and which define for visitors their experience of the
landscape of South old Town.
As you know, there is presently an application before the Town Tmstees and the Zoning
Board of Appeals to develop a road to serve five building lots. The Town of Southold has
the opportunity to acquire this critical property before it is lost permanently to
development, but there is clearly little time to lose. It would be tragic if the Town did not
use the means it has been given by the taxpayers for just such a purchase, and lost a
property which has been unanimously identified as of the most significant importance to
the Town's vistas and environment. The Town must make a firm commitment now to
effect its purchase.
Sincerely,
~
Freddie Wachsberger
Cc: Supervisor Cochran
AI Kmpski, Jr., Chairman, Town Tmstees
Gerard Goehringer, Chairman, Zoning Board of Appeals
Bennet Orlowski, Chairman, Planning Board
,
.
ORIENT ASSOCIATION
.
BOX 282 . ORIENT. NY 11957
March 18, 1999
Mr. Albert Krupski Jr., Chairman
Town Trustees
Town Hall
Main Road, Southold
Dear Mr. Krupski,
The application before you for a road across the wetlands by Dam Pond has raised great
concerus. As you know, this property has been widely identified by State and local plans
as of the greatest significance and highest priority for acquisition by the public.
The track which is being called an old farm road is frequently under water and was a
significant issue in the Planning Board's decision to make a positive declaration when the
application was before them It is difficuh to believe that a road which would access five
properties would not significantly degrade the wetlands of this sensitive area, both
through construction and usage. We urge the Trustees to withhold this permit until this
question can be adequately addressed through complete environmental review.
Sincerely,
~
Freddie Wachsberger
Cc: Jean Cochran, Supervisor
Gerard Goehringer, Chairman, Zoning Board of Appeals
Bennett Orlowski, Chairman, Planning Board
Melissa Spiro, Planning Department
.
ORIENT AsSOCIATION
.
BOX 282 . ORIENT. NY 11957
March 19,1999
Mr. Brian Murphy,Councilman
Town Hall
Southold, New York
Dear Mr.Murphy,
We urge Southold Town to proceed vigorously to preseIVe the property around Dam
Pond. Its priority 1istiDg in the New York State OpeD Space Conservation Plan and the
Southold Town 0peIl Space and Farmland Conservation plan, as cited in the Dam Pond
Maritime Reserve proposal, indicate that the Town has long recognized its importance.
Additionally, it was given highest priority by the Orient and East Marion members of the
Scenic Byways Co..-tttee because ofits critical position in the landscape of the
causeway, which has been id"","fied by the people of East Marion and Orient, lIIld by
Soutbo1ders at large, as one of the "special places" which resonate stIODgly in local
citizens' experience of place, and which define fur visitors their experience of the
landscape ofSouthold Town.
As you know, there is presently an application before the Town Trustees and the Zoning
Board of Appeals to develop a road to serve five building Jots. The Town ofSoutbold has
the opportunity to acquire this critical property before it is lost """"lIePtly to
development, but there is clearly Iitt1e time to lose. It would be tragic if the Town did not
use the means it has been given by the wpayers for just such a purchase, and lost a
property which has been unanimously idoentified as of the most signifiCllllt importance to
the Town's vistas and environment. The Town IIIDSt make a firm co......:I.."""* now to
effect its pnrchase.
Sincerely,
Freddie Wachsberger
Cc: Supervisor CodIran
Melissa Spiro, Town Planner
AI Krupski, Jr., Chairp, Town Trustees
Gerard GoebriDger,JJairman. 2'.oning Board of Appeals
Bennet ~D, P1_lI,1!ing Board
r.
.
ORIENT AsSOCIATION
.
~
MS
BOX 282. ORIENT. NY 11957
March 19,1999
Ms. Melissa Spiro
Planning Department
Town Hall
Southold, New York
Dear Melissa,
We urge Southold Town to proceed vigorously to preserve the property around Dam
Pond. Its priority listing in the New York State Open Space Conservation Plan and the
Southold Town Open Space and Farmland Conservation plan, as cited in the Dam Pond
Maritime Reserve proposal, indicate that the Town has long recognized its importance.
Additionally, it was given highest priority by the Orient and East Marion members of the
Scenic Byways Committee because of its critical position in the landscape of the
causeway, which has been identified by the people of East Marion and Orient, and by
Southolders at large, as one of the "special places" which resonate strongly in local
citizens' experience of place, and which define for visitors their experience of the
landscape of South old Town.
As you know, there is presently an application before the Town Trustees and the Zoning
Board of Appeals to develop a road to serve five building lots. The Town of Southold has
the opportunity to acquire this critical property before it is lost permanently to
development, but there is clearly little time to lose. It would be tragic if the Town did not
use the means it has been given by the taxpayers for just such a purchase, and lost a
property which has been unanimously identified as of the most significant importance to
the Town's vistas and environment. The Town must make a firm commitment now to
effect its purchase.
Sincerely,
~
Freddie Wachsberger
~awq
MAR Z Z 1999
Cc: Supervisor Cochran
AI Krupski, Jr., Chairman, Town Trustees
Gerard Goehringer, Chairman, Zoning Board of Appeals
Bennet Orlowski, Chairman, Planning Board
Southold Town
Planning Boarq
.
ORIENT ASSOCIATION
.
BOX 282 . ORIENT. NY 11957
March 18, 1999
Mr. Albert Krupski Jr., Chairman
Town Trustees
Town Hall
Main Road, Southold
Dear Mr. Krupski,
The application before you for a road across the wetlands by Dam Pond has raised great
concerns. As you know, this property has been widely identified by State and local plans
as of the greatest significance and highest priority for acquisition by the public.
The track which is being called an old farm road is frequently under water and was a
significant issue in the Planning Board's decision to make a positive declaration when the
application was before them. It is difficult to believe that a road which would access five
properties would not significantly degrade the wetlands of this sensitive area, both
through construction and usage. We urge the Trustees to withhold this permit until this
question can be adequately addressed through complete environmental review.
Sincerely,
~
Freddie Wachsberger
Cc: Jean Cochran, Supervisor
Gerard Goehringer, Chairman, Zoning Board of Appeals
Bennett Orlowski, Chairman, Planning Board
Melissa Spiro, Planning Department
.
ORIENT ASSOCIATION
.
BOX 282 . ORIENT. NY 11957
March 19, 1999
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Planning Board
Town Hall
Southold, New York
Dear Benny,
I'm enclosing letters to the Trustees, ZBA, and Town Board officials about the urgency
to preserve the property around Dam Pond. Your SEQRA positive declaration was
accurate for this sensitive area, and remains, I believe, necessary for the road-access
application before the other boards, even without further subdivision.
But more to the point is the critical significance of this property as identified by the New
York State Open Space Conservation Plan, the Southold Town Open Space and Farmland
Conservation Plan, and the Scenic Byways priority list. This site should not be developed
but should be preserved, and I hope you will do what you can to facilitate the Town's
making a firm commitment to purchase it as soon as possible.
Sincerely,
~--
Freddie Wachsberger
Cc: Melissa Spiro, Town Plauner
Albert Krupski, Jr., Chairman, Town Trustees
Gerard Goehringer, Chairman, ZBA
.
ORIENT ASSOCIATION
.
BOX 282 . ORlENT . NY 11957
March 19, 1999
Mr. Gerard Goehringer, Chairman
Zoning Board of Appeals
Town Hall
Southold, New York
Dear Gerry,
The Zoning Board has before it an application for a 280-a variance for access to the
properties owned by Mr. Gazza and Mr. Lettieri around Dam Pond. When a proposed
subdivision of these properties was before the Planning Board, the issue of this proposed
access road, which is based on an existing track that traverses wetlands and is often under
water, was one of the reasons for a positive SEQRA declaration. We strongly urge you to
reject this application.
As you know, the Dam Pond area has been identified by at least three Town plans as a
priority for preservation. I enclose copies ofletters to the Supervisor and other members
of town government urging them to commit themselves to its purchase as rapidly as
possible.
Sincerely,
~
FreddieWachsberger
Cc: Jean Cochran, Supervisor
Bennett Orlowski, Chairman, Planning Board
Melissa Spiro, Planner
Albert Krupski, Jr., Chairman, Town Trustees
.
ORIENT ASSOCIATION
.
BOX 282. ORIENT. NY 11957
March 18, 1999
Jean Cochran, Supervisor
Town Hall
Southold, New York, 11971
Dear Jean,
We urge you to proceed vigorously to preserve the property around Dam Pond. In
addition to its priority listing in the New York State Open Space Conservation Plan and
the Southold Town Open Space and Farmland Conservation Plan, as cited in your Dam
Pond Maritime Reserve proposal, it was, of all the sites listed in Orient for the Scenic
Byways Committee, one of the two highest priority parcels due to its critical position in
the views from the causeway between Orient and East Marion.
The causeway and its surrounding landscape have been identified by the people of Orient
and East Marion, and by Southolders at large, as one of the "special places" which
resonate strongly in local citizens' experience of place, and which define for visitors their
experience of the landscape of South old Town.
There can be few sites more deserving of protection through the Town's program of the
purchase of open space, and few sites more threatened with imminent development.
Please use all means available to achieve this acquisition.
Sincerely,
Freddie Wachsberger
.
ORIENT AsSOCIATION
.
BOX 282. ORIENT. NY 11957
March 19,1999
Mr. Brian Murphy,Councilman
Town Hall
Southold, New York
Dear Mr.Murphy,
We urge Southold Town to proc:eed vigorously to preserve the property around Dam
Pond Its priority listiDg in the New York Stale Open Space Conservation Plan and the
Southold Town Open Spac:e and Farmland Conservation plan, IS cited in the Dam Pond
Maritime Reserve proposal, indic:ate that the Town has long leOOSJ'i-.d its importance.
Additionally, it was given highest priority by the Orient and East Marion memben of the
Sc:enic: Byways Co......ntee bec:ause of its critic:al position in the landscape of the
c:auseway, whicll has been idP.ntified by the people of East Marion and OrieJlt, and by
Southolders at large, IS one of the "special p1ac:es" which resooate strongly in local
cm7P.IIS' experience ofp1ac:e, and which define fur visitors their experience of the
landscape ofSouthold Town.
As you know, there is Jll'esent1y an applic:ation before the Town TlUllteeS and the Zoning
Board of Appeals to develop a road to serve five bnilding lots. The Town ofSouthold has
the opportunity to ac:quire this critic:al property before it is lost p""""'ftClltly to
deve1opmeJlt, but there is clearly little time to lose. It would be tragic: if the Town did not
use the means it has been given by the taxpayers for just such a purchase, and lost a
property which has been nnmimnusly identified IS of tile most sigDific:ant importance to
the Town's vistas and environment. The Town ImlSt make a firm 00....":1 II-ent now to
effect its purchase.
Sincerely,
Freddie Wachsbetger
Cc:: Supervisor Coc:bran
Melissa Spiro, Town Planner
AI Krupski, Jr., Chairp.. ..... . T Tcnown TlUllteeS
Gerard GoebriDserJJairman. Zoning Board of Appeals
Bennet ~ pl.""ing Board
;';".
.
.
.s;U6I::=
M:S
PATRICIA C. MOORE
AIIt:1trIIey at Law
51020 MaiD RolId
Soulbold, New Yori< 11971
Tol: ($16) 765--4330
Fax: (516) 765-4643
FACSIMILE COVER SHEET
The pagE's comprislnq this facsimile transmission contain
confidentJ.al information from Patdcia C. Moore. This int'ot1llation
is intended solely for use by the individual entity named as the
recipient hereof. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware
that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the cont',nts
of this t:ransmission is prohibited. If you have received this
transmi5sJ.on in error, please notify us by telephone irranediately so
we may arrange to retrieve this transmission at no cost to you.
TO: -~ oa~:" - P ...e--.-."';A ~
RE: ~--./.& l)o-
DATE: .3 -{ 7-9'7
TOTAL ~3ER OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER SHEET ~
IF TRANSMISSION IS FAULTY OR INCOMPLETE, PLEASE CALL BACK AS SOON
AS POSSIBI,E.
CLIENT NAll{E:
OPERATOR: MARGARET
~~.h A.~~ ~
~~~,~~~
,AJe.. ~ ZV ~
~I~f[;T~a~~~~
L~: '. ~~J
~IAI< J., kbJ
Southold Town
Planning Board
TO 3911d
3~OOvl ';3~'LBJ 1'\11,
(~~~~9L~TS
gS:Tl 55~T!LT.€8
Sent by: 5T KIFS 94'.5927142
". ..,.........,) , ~, ..., t ,.,:,
ejIOe,l~~~ 13:36 5,67~5~
J3i17/99 ~O:'JAY 00t 7~e
P8Qt'- ,.,
"
LAl>I CfTl'.X.S MCa::.
='~3E 0.;:
_roll II, 1'"
~'t O&"l_ki, Jr.. Cbai~
8OUQo:ld 'fOWTI Pl&lVli1\9 Boa'"
\'oIm 1Il1l1
,:tot. led" Iloe4
..0.... U.,.
.~ll4, n unl
..., ..~~ Mui.on Cl.". .... paC'Oel
IIIO-A, .CUI tlooo-n-3-1t. ~o,u,n
Deal' Q"l~ 01'1__1'
.., .N in l'_lpt of )feN&' 1et"r dat.4 ."RuY :01&, un.
.1_ be ~i'" Ua.~ we, the \aIlkr.19n4lC1. 00 1l0~ vi." to
l\IW.lvi.de our fi.e ... p.~l. looat:_ nonla of taa. 1'OnCI. We
.....-, .11:~... ta. ..,11..,1... ~ .~t.t.. ..._ '1.. .arl
....d LaM t_ l.Oe..
Tb. alOA appl1o.1:ion 1. 801.11 to~ lo~ 000... to the five
.era .inql. , ..parat. parcell owned indlvl4Qally ~ the
~J:'.i9ft", t.h1. .at:10n ia . 'ZQIIA Type II aotion. aM d_. ftOt
1nvol," tile p10nninq BoaZ'tl.
"nIa october ai, 1"1 l.tt.r VIla .1mult~__ll aw.ht.e4 to
y_r _.1'4 vban it v.. .\lllltU;~ t.o u.. Zoninv Manl .n4
'h'\UI'*t.. 1:bb ".. aot. "on atUlllflt to olro1a1rVUt aneS ......nt: ~
IIIQ1lA 111'00.... .. you al1~.. II. un no 1n~t'llJt in .\II:I41v141J19
tile fl.e .ora "ropeni.., IUIlI Plann~ loar4 .""Ueat1OM b&ve
nat: b.an p"l'lua4 in ~ and _ N11~. ~~ .aeb ttv. agre l~
1. .ore oa.~abl. a. . l&%ge ..~.te paroa1.
Tllank Y01,l tor yo~r .nt.Loi~ta4 ooopez'atLon 1n ~1. ..~~".
Vary t".r1alr r-r.,
"
~,.. /
.'1 /
/1N'y'j"b'.(/A c-.~.::;
~~.
. .,~'
----
-----
U--{ .h.c". \ ~l" (iJ.-l,((. Lc, -.'"
-' T-- -
------- ( .
c
(.0 3~'\1d
3dOOI,.j ~,3:<I JJO 11\11
::.t"3tS,3L'31';
9~:TT 65ST/LT/EO
.
.
~
MS
PATRICIA C. MOORE
Attorney at Law
51020 Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Tel: (516) 765-4330
Fax: (516) 765-4643
March 15, 1999
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman
Southold Town planning Board
Town Hall
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971
Margaret Rutkowski
Secretary
~'~"':T~~"'1'~~
~'...'.IF~':(.~-'.'). ~a.'i" i""".
a.V; t~
II .) ~
t '. .... \':';~'.,.,
y, i bAR 1 \i -1999
Southo\d Town
Planning Board
Re:Gazza and Lettieri subdivision
Dear Chairman Orlowski:
Enclosed please find an original letter dated March 10, 1999
from Mr. Gazza withdrawing his subdivision application. Mr. and
Mrs. Lettieri are in Florida and as soon as I receive their signed
letter I will forward it to you.
Thank you in advance for your courtesies in this matter. If
there is anything further you need, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
Very truly yours,
Patricia C. Moore
cc: Mr. Gazza Esq.
Mr & Mrs Lettieri
-JOSEPH FREDERICK GAZZA -
ATTORNEY ATLAW
P.O. Box 969 5 OGDEN LANE
QUOGUE, NEW YORK 11959
(516)653-5766 (DAY AND EVENING)
March 10, 1999
Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman
Southold Town planning Board
Town Hall
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971
Re: East Marion five acre parcels
280-A,SCTM#1000-22-3-l9,20,21,22
Dear Chairman Orlowski,
We are in receipt of your letter dated Fehruary 25,1999,
please be advised that we, the undersigned. do not wish to
subdivide our five acre parcels located north of Dam Pond. We
hereby withdraw the applications to subdivide each five acre
parcel into two lots.
The 280A application is solely for lot access to the five
acre single & separate parcels owned individually by the
undersigned, this action is a SEQRA Type II action, and does not
involve the Planning BoarQ.
The October 28, 1998 letter was simultaneously submitted to
your board when it was submitted to the ~oning Board and
Trustees, this was not "an attempt to circumvent and segment the
SEQRA process" as you allege. We have no interest in subdividing
the five acre properties, and Planning Board applications have
not been pursued in years and we believe that each five acre lot
is more desirable as a large estate parcel.
Thank you for your anticipated cooperation in this matter.
Very
ANDREW LETTIERI
BERNICE LETTIERI
cc: Lettieri & Lettieri
48 Cayuga Rd.
Yonkers,NY 10710
patricia C. Moore-Esq.
51020 ~,.....~.
SouthOld, New York
;
.
JOSEPH FR~PERICK GAZZA-
~
ATTORNEY AT LAW
P.O. Box 969 5 OGOEN LANE
QUOOUE. NewYOIlK 11959
(516)653-5766 (DAY ANt> EVENING)
March 10, 1999
Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman
Southold Town Planning Board
Town Hall
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 11 79
Southold, NY 11971
Re: East Marion five acre parcels
280-A,SCTM#1000-22-3-19,20,21,22
Dear Chairman Orlowski,
We are in receipt of your letter dated February 25,1999,
please be advised that we, the undersigned, do not wish to
subdivide our five acre parcelS located north of Dam Pond. We
hereby withdraw the applications to subdivide each five acre
parcel into two lots.
The 280A application is solely for lot access to the five
acre single & separate parcels owned individually by the
undersigned, this action is a SEQRA Type II action, and does not
inVOlve the Planning Board.
The October 28, 1998 letter was simultaneously submitted to
your board when it was submitted to the ~oning Board and
Trustees, this was not "an attempt to circumvent and segment the
SEQRA process" as you allege. We have no interest in subdividing
the five acre properties, and planning Board applications have
not been pursued in years and we believe that each five acre lot
is more desirable as a large estate parcel.
Thank you for your anticipated cooperation in this matter.
very
GAZZA
ANDREW LETTIERI
BERNICE LE~TIERI
cc. Lettieri & Lettieri
48 cayuga Rd.
Yonkers,NY 10710
Patricia c. Moore-Rsq.
51020
Southold, New York
MAR 1 i 1993
,~ h
,::-out lold TO\:"n
Planning Board
WILLIAM J. CREMERS
KENNETH L. EDWARDS
GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR.
RICHARD G. WARD
.
P~NGBOARDMEMB~
BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR.
Chairman
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
SouthoId, New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-3136
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
February 25, 1999
Patricia C. Moore, Esq.
51020 Main Road
South old, New York 11971
RE: Gazza, Grundbesitzer Corp., and Lettieri Property
SCTM# 1000-22-3-19, 20, 21, 22 & 1000-31-5-1.2
Dear Ms. Moore:
The Planning Board reviewed your January 28, 1999 letter to the Zoning Board of
Appeals, which was copied to the Planning Board and the Town Trustees, at the
February 8, 1999, work session. The letter included a copy of a letter dated October 24,
1998, which was addressed to the Planning Board. The Planning Board's records do not
show that the October 24, 1998 letter was ever submitted to the Planning Board Office.
Your January 28, 1999, letter indicates that "... upon issuance of 280A approval for
access to their individual parcels they will formally withdraw their individual minor
subdivision applications...." Your letter does not direct the Planning Board to withdraw the
applications at this time, and conditions the subdivision withdrawal on the granting of
280A approval. Based on the fact that your client is not formally withdrawing the pending
applications, the question is once again raised as to if the recent applications before the
Town Trustees and the Zoning Board of Appeals are an attempt to circumvent and
segment the SEQRA process.
Until such time that the pending applications are formally withdrawn, the applications for
subdivision approval and the Positive Declarations which were issued in regard to the
applications, remain pending before the Planning Board.
The Planning Board, by copying this letter to both the Town Trustees and the Zoning
Board of Appeals, is notifying those agencies that the subdivision applications which are
pending before the Planning Board have not been withdrawn.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions regarding the above.
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
cc: Zoning Board of Appeals
Town Trustees
.
.
Su4fF
jJb
t11S
j>t..r ~
PATRICIA C. MOORE
Attorney at Law
51020 Main Road
Southold, New Yode 11971
Tel: (516) 765-4330
Fax: (516) 765-4643
Margaret Rutkowski
Secretary
southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals
Gerard P. Goehringer, chairman
southold Town Hall
53095 Main Road
southold, NY 11971
~"fJj)
JAN 29 1999
January 28, 1999
Southold Town
Planning Board
Re: 280 A - Bernice Lettieri, Andrew Lettieri and
Joe Gazza
Dear chairman and Board members:
I am in receipt of a letter dated January 13, 1999 from the
planning Board regarding the above properties. The four property
owners do not wish to subdivide their individual single and
separate five acre parcels.
Enclosed please find a copy of a letter prepared by the owners
and signed by each owner stating that upon issuance of 280A
approval for access to their individual parcels they will formally
withdraw their individual minor subdivision applications submitted
to the Planning Board in the 1980'S which have been inactive since
1993.
The only application the individual owners wish to pursue is
280-a access over the Lettieri 10.67 acre parcel (SEQRA Type II).
Pursuant to 280-a of Town LaW, as amended July 1, 1998, "The
applicant for such a permit may appeal from the decision of the
administrative officer having charge of the issue of permits to the
board of appeals or other similar board, in any town which has
established a board having the power to make variances or
exceptions in zoning regulations for:
(a) an exception if the circumstances of the case do not
require the structure to be related to existing or proposed streets
.
.
or highways, and/or (b) an area variance pursuant to section two
hundred sixty-seven-b of this chapter, and the same provisions are
hereby applied to such appeals and to such board as are provided in
cases of appeals on zoning regulations." (New York state Town Law
S 280-a, as amended July 1, 1998)
The common property owners recorded a right-of-way agreement
giving all parcels north of dam pond a common easement over the
Lettieri ten(10+) acre property. The four parcels north of Dam
Pond would prefer to share an appropriately improved but
environmentally appropriate driveway with natural material and a
pervious surface. We would welcome the Town Engineer's comments
and a coordinated permit process between the Town Trustees and ZBA.
We have applied to the Southold Town Trustees for a wetland
permit and submitted at the public hearing affidavits and testimony
of the history of the farm parcels and how the westerly kettle hole
originated. Pursuant to the Trustee's request, a survey of the road
detailing the contours and setbacks to wetland specifically in the
area closest to Dam Pond and staking of the location of the road
where the road crosses the low spot is being prepared. Once the
area is staked I will call the boards for an inspection.
After the detailed map is complete and the Town Trustees and
ZBA have given us their recommendations for road improvements, we
will be in a better position to apply to the DEC for a regulatory
permit, if one is necessary. since the subdivisions have not been
pursued, and will ultimately be withdrawn, the Planning Board would
no longer have jurisdiction over the road. The access would be
limited to 280-a.
I would be happy to coordinate as many agencies as you deem
necessary.
~lY yours,
~~
Patricia C. Moore
cc: Planning Board w/enc.
Trustees w/enc.
Mr. Gazza (by Fax)
Mr. Lettieri
.
JOSEPH FREDERICK GAZZA
.
ATTORNEY AT LAW
P.O. Box 969 5 OGDEN LANE
QUOGUE. NEW YORK 11959
(516)653-5766 (DAY AND EVENING)
October 24, 1998
Southold Town Planning Board
Town Hall
53095 Main Road
Southold, New York ! 1971
Re: Subdivision Applications of/at
1000-022.00-03.00-019.000(4.9 ac. - 2 lots proposed by J.F.Gazza)
1000-022.00-03.00-020.000(5 ac. - 2 lots proposed by B. Lettieri)
1000-022.00-03.00-021.000(5.393 ac. - 2 lots proposed by J.F.Gazza)
1000-022.00-03.00-022.000(6.3 ac. - 3 lots proposed by J.F.Gazza & A.Lettieri)
Dear Board Members,
The undersigned, Bernice Lettieri and Andrew Lettieri have authorized Mrs. Patricia Moore-Atty. to apply
for a 280-A variances to utilize an existing right of way easement as access to allow one single family
dwelling to be constructed on tax lot 1000-022.00-03.00-19,20,21, & 22. It is our intention to utilize each.
parcel as one building lot and provided that a building permit is issued our pending subdivision application
of these parcels will no longer be requested. It is respectfully requested that upon the issuance of a single
family dwelling building permit on each tax lot that the pending sub-division application affecting each tax
lot be withdrawn.
Very truly yours,
m_~
Consented 10:
. '7
--- .
/"..-A
Off 1-800-877-8881
Fax 1-201-343-1934
Pat Moore Fax: 765-4643
PLANNING BOARD MEMBER....
BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR.
Chairman
WILLIAM J. CREMERS
KENNETH L. EDWARDS
GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR.
RICHARD G. WARD
.
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-3136
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
TO:
Town Trustees
Zoning Board of Appeals
FROM:
Melissa Spiro, Planner
RE:
Property owned by B. Lettieri, A. Lettieri and J. Gazza
(a.k.a. ZBA application for: Proposed Right-of-Way and 280-A
Access for fire vehicles (Five Building Lots) SCTM#
1000-22-3-22)
(a.k.a. Planning Board files for Gazza, Grundbesitzer Corp.
and Lettieri, SCTM# 1000-22-3-19, 20, 21, 22 & 31-5-1.2)
DATE:
January 13, 1999
Below please find a list of Planning Board actions and Planning Board
comments in regard to the above mentioned property.
The Planning Board has had some form of subdivision proposal on the
above mentioned properties pending since the early 1980's. Since 1993,
five (5) subdivision proposals, as noted below, have been before the
Planning Board:
SCTM# 1000-22-3-19:
SCTM# 1000-22-3-20:
SCTM# 1000-22-3-21:
SCTM# 1000-22-3-22:
SCTM# 1000-31-5-1.2:
2 lots proposed on 4.9 acres;
2 lots proposed on 4.0 acres;
2 lots proposed on 5.4 acres;
3 lots proposed on 6.3 acres;
3 lots proposed on 10.67 acres.
On September 14, 1993, the Planning Board issued a Positive Declaration
on each proposal, noting that the 5 subdivision projects were pending in
the same geographic area and that the 5 projects would involve common
and potentially significant impacts. Many of the reasons supporting the
Positive Declaration apply to any type of development of the subject
property. I am listing some of the reasons supporting the Positive
Declaration below and enclosing a copy of the Positive Declaration for
each project for your review.
Development of the subject parcels will result in significant
loss of open space in a Town and County designated Critical
Environmental Area which contains unique habitat and resources
associated with Dam Pond.
.
.
Lettieri I Gazza
January 13, 1999
Page 2
Development of the subject parcels will result in impairment of
the viability of unique habitat areas including overgrown field,
tidal wetlands, dune lands and first growth woods. The
diversity of habitats and the fragmentation and loss of same
represents a significant ecological impact.
Development of the subject parcels may cause impact to the
surface waters of Dam Pond in the form of erosion and
sedimentation, stormwater runoff, and nitrogen load.
Groundwater is shallow beneath the site and may suffer
negative impacts from sanitary system installation.
Development of the subject parcels will cause potential visual
impacts of a negative nature. -
The development of the subject parcels will require common
access and will share some utilities and impacts. The viability
of the access has been questioned by the Town Trustees as this
access may require a road crossing over Trustee land, an
action which the Trustees have indicated they are not inclined
to permit.
The Planning Board held a scoping session in regard to the proposals,
and on November 12, 1993, sent the applicant a summary outline of the
scoping session to be used as a guide for the preparation of a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement. A copy of same is attached. The
proposals before the Planning Board have been dormant since the request
for a DEIS. The applicants (Mr. and Mrs. Lettieri and Mr. Gazza), have
not pursued their applications further.
Pat Moore, attorney for Mr. and Mrs. Lettieri and Mr. Gazza,
attended the Planning Board's work session on September 28, 1998,
during which the Planning Board was discussing the Zoning Board's
request for comments regarding the subject parcels. Ms. Moore told the
Planning Board that her client intended to withdraw the pending
subdivision applications. However, as of this date, the Planning Board
has not received correspondence in regard to the withdrawal of the
subdivision applications. Therefore, the 280-A application presently
stands in direct contravention to the 5 pending subdivision applications
before the Planning Board.
As noted above, one of the issues raised in the Planning Board's Positive
Declaration was the access to the parcels, in that the access would
require the crossing of a wetland. It is recommended that the records of
the Town Trustees and NYSDEC be reviewed in regard to issues of
wetland ownership, wetland permits and the impact of road construction
on the wetlands. In addition, it is recommended that James Richter,
Engineering Inspector, be coordinated in regard to road requirements
within the right-of-way.
.
.
Lettieri! Gazza
January 13, 1999
Page 3
The Planning Board has before it a proposal to subdivide the property
located to the west of the subject properties. The proposed subdivision is
located on SCTM# 1000-22-3-15.1 and 18.3, and is known as Cove Beach
Estates. The Planning Board granted conditional final approval to a 34 lot
subdivision with one of the conditions being that:
A road tap must be provided to allow for access of the adjacent
properties to the east to Main Road. The road tap must be located
approximately six hundred (600) feet north of the intersection of the
proposed road (Cove Beach Drive) and Main Road (State Route 25).
The ownership of the Cove Beach Estates property has changed, and the
new owner has filed conservation easements with the Peconic Land Trust
on a majority of the property. In addition, he is proposing to decrease
the number of lots to 10. The road layout for the 10 lot proposal is
similar to that of the 34 lot proposal and the above mentioned condition
in regard to the road tap will be required for the 10 lot proposal. Please
see the enclosed diagram for clarification in regard to the proposed road
tap location. Although Gazza and Lettieri are guaranteed access to SR25
over the Cove Beach road, this does not resolve the issue of access to
the interior 4 lots.
As noted earlier, the subdivision applications before the Planning Board
have been dormant since the Board's request for the preparation of a
DEIS. The Planning Board questions the end result of the 280-A
application before the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Wetland Permit
Application before the Town Trustees:
-Are the recent applications an attempt to circumvent the SEQRA
process?
-If the pending subdivision applications are not withdrawn, will the
applicants proceed with their wish to subdivide the property into a
total of 12 lots upon receipt of a decision from the ZBA in regard to
the 280-A application?
-If the pending subdivision applications are withdrawn, will the
applicants at a later date re-apply for subdivision of the property?
Again, is this an attempt to circumvent the SEQRA process?
I trust the above mentioned information will assist you in your review of
the pending applications. If you require any additional information,
please feel free to contact me or to review the Planning Board's files.
enc.
.
.
~t Off.lCEOf
'BO.J\'RV OJ .J\PP'E.JtLS
SoutliotaTOwn :JIa1T
53095.'Main :Roan
Soutlio/it; :Ny JI9?.!
765-1809 Z1?.Jl tee. ~JlaW~liil
:~;;;~::;.:;,;:~.~:~t:';;~.........................~~......~
MEMORANDUM SEP 21 l~~tl
TO: Planning Board _, AM
FROM: Board of Appeals trr ~ r Southold Town
DATE: September 22, 19~8 Planning Board
SUBJ: Preliminary Recommendations Planning/Zoning Projects
Re: ProDOSed RiGht-of-Wav and 280-A Access for tire Vehicles (Five
BuildinG Lots) 1000-22-3-22. Our record shows that the Planning
Board had/has jurisdiction in this area. Please describe actions or
conditions relevant to this project. Thank you.
Re: Faith Reform Baptist Use - ExistinG BuildinG at 1000-114-11-12.
This property is Zoned HB and contains existing building(s).
An Interpretation is being requested regarding Section 100-
91A(12), or alternatively a Special Exception }I~der Article IX,
Section 100-91B for religious meeting activities. ~ aaackd) -
Re: Laurel Links Golf Course and.5iGn Variance COn-Site]. Laurel.
A Special Exception for Golf Activities has been tiled. Variance for a
Ground Sign has been tiled and is based upon a Notice of
Disapproval issued by the Building Inspector for this site.
Re: Mr. and Mrs. Ed Dart. Proposed Set-Off/Division at C.R. 48 and
3070 Peconic Lane, Peconic. 1000-74-3-15. Size of house lot is
substandard at 28,400+- sq. ft., and vacant land is proposed at
58,000+- Sof. Applicant proposes to retain same rear line as those
immediately north.
Re: Casa Bianca - Please contirm whether or not there has been any
activity within the last 12 months with your department for any
proposals.
Thank you.
.
.
~
I'b
M5
PATRICIA C. MOORE
Attorney at Law
315 Westphalia Road
P.O. Box 483
Mattituck, New York 11952
Tel: (516) 298-5629
Fax: (516) 298-5664
Margaret Rutkowski
Secretary
April 30, 1996
Board of Town Trustees
Southold Town Hall
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971
RE: Lettieri 280A access for lots
SCTHI 1000-22-3-19 to 22
Dear President Krupski
and Members of the Board:
I would respectfully request a presubmission conference with
the Board regarding the proposed 280A access to the above
referenced lots.
As you know this property has been the subject of litigation
with the adjacent major subdivision, Cove Beach Estates.
Al ternative access over the adjacent parcel has been sought
unsuccessfully through court action.
The owners of the above referenced parcels have agreed not to
subdivide the five acre lots, however they will require 280A access
from the Zoning Board of Appeals and a wetland permit from you.
Before we locate the proposed access, we request your guidance
and assistance.
Very truly yours,
Patricia C. Moore
PCM/mr
".,."..,~_c_'_~-' ~'~"'--~"'-':~' .....- .::.~_..-
:~ :~.~ ,";~-~
, ,,~_7.__.:;-,......._::;.~~~.__..-.~~...,~-
cc: Mr. & Mrs. Andrew Lettieri
Joseph Gazza, Esq. ~
Southold Town Planning Board~
". ~"'
':AAY lc;96
South old Town Planning Boar.
2
.
December 12, 1994
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Mr. Ward: 7:30 p.m. Cove Beach Estates - This major subdivision is for 34 lots on
98.27 acres located on the north side of Main Road; 1776 feet east of Stars Road in
East Marion. SCTM# 1000-22-3-15.1 & 18.3. Is the applicant here, or agent?
Charles Cuddy: I'm Charles Cuddy. I appear on behalf of the owner who is Raoul
Witeveen who is here tonight. Also with us are a number of people; Young & Young
represented by Ken Abruzzo, Joe Fischetti, the engineer and John Halsey and Tim
Caufield from the Peconic Land Trust. This application has been before the Board for
a number of years. It's had, as you know, several different owners. Mr. Witeveen is
the current owner and he has complied with the Board's requirements to get to this
point. This is a property that has had not only a Board of Review hearing on several
occasions with the Health Department, but had been the subject of a Supreme Court
action. We, at this point in time, have received the Health Department approval and
we have DOT approval and we believe that it's appropriate for the Board to go forward
with the 34 lot subdivision. We've set aside a great many acres for open space and
park and recreation and the subdivision I believe meets all the requirements that the
Board has. And for that reason we would ask the Board give us conditional final
approval subject to, among other things, to posting a performance bond and to
complete a certain lot line application with the owner (inaudible).
Mr. Ward: OK. We are in receipt of a letter from counsel William Moore representing
Gazza-Lettieri on the property to the east and that letter will become part of the record
and will be made available to the applicant. Is there anyone else that would like to be
heard this evening regarding this proposed subdivision?
Joseph Gazza: Good evening members of the Board. My name is Joseph Frederick
Gazza. I live at Ogden Lane in Quogue and I'm an adjacent property owner to the
east. The Board may be aware that I've appeared before you at least a dozen times,
maybe more, in connection with my proposed development which is running
simultaneously with the Cove Beach Development. As their development has been
through a most likely 10 year review process, so has mine. By mine, , am talking
about the Andrew Lettieri and the Joseph Frederick Gazza parcels as one. The key
issue in the development of the Lettieri-Gazza property has always been the access
issue and it has been my position that a coordinated plan of access should be
accomplished with the two developments, since they are adjacent properties, since
they share similar problems and since they both have only 50 or 60feet of frontage on
~M~R~. I
I had outlined in a previous letter to this Board back in March of 1992, I'll provide the
Board with a copy at this time -- the reasons for the coordination of access, reasons
that I did not come up with by myself, but reasons that the Town of Southold Town
Trustees determined were important for eliminating two roads side by side or
eliminating a crossing of a wetland area with a roadway or a bridge, for aesthetics.
For reasons that the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
responded to about the non-necessity of having two roads in excess of 1400 feet, side
by side. The DEC clearly made the point that there should be coordinated access, a
coordinated road system. There should be planning between the two developments.
have been unsuccessful in negotiating with the property owners up to now, that may
change now I'm not sure, but the prior owners, Mr. Harold Reese and others, I've
Southold Town Planning Boa.
3
December 12, 1994
.
never been successful in negotiating with them for a coordinated access. My
background in real estate and planning subdivision process, I have never seen an
instance where a Planning Board could look at two maps side by side and know full
well that on map is very difficult to develop with the access that it has, if not
impossible, and not coordinate access between the two maps. I spent a little while this
afternoon at the County Center in Riverhead and I ran out every subdivision map that
this Board has approved in the last five years. And I studied every single map. And
I'd like to report to the Board that, I had a roll of quarters making photocopies of maps
where the Planning Board looked at a parcel, determined that for coordination between
this parcel and adjacent lands that an access spur should be provided. It's a normal,
ordinary planning point.
I'll start with the map of West Mill subdivision for M. Paul Friedberg, where the Board
set forth a road leading to additional lands off of the -- well, let's see, it's your file
number 9539, July 20, 1994. You may be familiar with that one. If I could present
these maps to the Board?
We have a second subdivision map known as the Southold Villas. Your filed map
number 9237 in which Jasmine Lane was provided to continue into adjacent properties
to future access with coordination in mind. We have the map of August Acres in which
a spur road known as the Sage Spur was provided in the subdivision specifically to
connect into future property, and it was labeled as Sage Spur, the adjacent property
was the land of Sage. The map of Thomas MacKenzie filed number 9001, wherein the
Board provided a 50 foot right of way to connect into the land of Latham Farms. The
map of Highpoint Meadows, number 8912. It's an interesting one, the Board provided
a cul-de-sac at the perimeter of the map and called it the Tuthill Road extension with
the provision that the cul-de-sac turn around was to be eliminated when the road
continued into the adjoining development. The map of Chardonnay Woods at
Southold, where the Planning Board also sought then to extend a road through open
space land, the access for a road, through open space to be preserved, in order to
connect it to the lands of Sawicki, which were undeveloped, an acreage parcel
adjacent. That was filed map 8822.
There's been a longstanding practice of this Board to follow proper zoning and
planning principles to provide for future development, to coordinate developments
when possible. And I think that that step in connection with these two subdivisions,
that of Gazza-Lettieri and Cove Beach Estates, has not been fully completed by the
Board and I was hoping that the Board may reflect on your past practices, on the law,
and on the fact that you have adjacent property owners who havel been before you
for eight years focusing on the same issue, asking the Board for your consideration to
provide an access spur and I appear before you this evening, I know it's the final
application of this map, but my request is the same and I would hope that the Board
would considet such an access spur to eliminate the problems that will develop with
uncoordinated development of these two properties. Thank you.
Mr. Ward: Anyone else like to address this particular project?
Mr. Cuddy: I would like to address Mr. Gazza's remarks. He wanted you to reflect on
the law from the past. I didn't hear any law, and I don't think there is any to say that a
neighboring property has the right to go over your property, which is what he proposes.
But I'd like to review the facts with you a little bit because I don't think that they were
Southold Town Planning Board.
4
.
December 12, 1994
fully laid out. Mr. Gazza bought this piece of property a number of years ago. He has
not gotten yet to an Environmental Impact Statement, and it's been more than eight
years since he's owned the property. His parcel is apparently five separate minor
subdivisions that he's trying to get this Board in one point or another to approve. He
hasn't gotten really out of the environmental area yet and he does not have in fact
before you, and actual subdivision. He's got a proposal. We're done effectively with
our subdivision map. What he's asking is that you hold up our map so that something
can be done with his map. I know of no principle that says you must (inaudible) your
neighbors property with the imposition of a so called spur. There's none at law, and
Mr. Gazza has not cited any law.
Quite frankly, what Mr. Gazza is really asking this Board to do is not good planning.
Because if it was good planning, Mr. Gazza could have stood up here and said, I want
one road, you can use my road. But I haven't heard that offer because we're not going
to hear that offer, because Mr. Gazza has a problem with his property, but he forgets
to tell what the problem is and the problem is that it's fragile. Of course, you know that
it's fragile. And what he did was he created a hardship. He bought a piece of
property, it wasn't good, and he wants us, the neighboring property to assist him at this
point, and that's just wrong to do. There's no question of good planning, putting a
spur. That's nonsense to give you all sorts of spur related maps. Spurs are often
done, but this isn't a spur. This is taking Mr. Gazza out of a problem and putting him
across our property and doing it at the last moment. All this is tonight is a question of
leverage and the Board shouldn't lend itself to this type of (inaudible). Thank you.
Mr. Ward: Any further comments?
Mr. Gazza: I'd like to respond, if I may?
Mr. Ward: If you could make it brief it would be appreciated.
Mr. Gazza: Thank you Mr. Chairman. I don't know if the Board can see the
subdivision map from this distance but -- have you had an opportunity to review the
map, Mr. Cuddy? -- it's easy to discern that the Cove Beach Road and the Gazza-
Lettieri Road is running through land that is not environmentally sensitive for a distance
of approximately 1400 feet, side by side. Absolutely two side by side roads. I have no
problem, and neither does Mr. Lettieri with using either the Cove Beach Road or the
Gazza-Lettieri road. We'd be very happy to use just one. This is just improper to have
two roads side by side. Now, we'll offer our road and we have offered to the prior
owners, Mr. Reese, to share 50/50 in the construction of the road, i~ one road. And
that offer was extended to the new owner. We're not here to get something for
nothing. We're here to work on a coordinated plan and to share equitably for the
benefit of both properties, the value of the properties and Southold in particular, by
eliminating two roads side by side.
Now, the peninsula portion of the Gazza-Lettieri development, does need an access
spur. And it needs it just like those other subdivisions, which I gave the Board copies
of, needed an access spur. And we'll pay for that also. I will offer land, money or road
improvements for that access spur. I am here, and I am here on behalf of Mr. Lettieri,
to work with my neighbor, financially and physically to accomplish something that's
best for both subdivisions. As far as the comments pertaining to the subdivision
application, we have applications which are pending. Our fees have been paid; they've
Southold Town Planning Boar.
5
.
December 12.1994
been pending for years. They're actual subdivision applications. We have gone into
the SEaR process. We have had a Scoping Session with Chic Voorhis, who was
compensated, who represents the Town. At that Scoping Session it was determined
that an alternate access over the weiland area must be accomplished in order to
proceed. We cannot cross that weiland area without creating impacts which were, in
the opinion of the Town's environmental consultants, too severe to handle.
Therefore, we cannot proceed under SEaR. We can do an impact statement, we've
discussed it. We've had consultants, we've retained En-Consultants, Mr. Roy Haje, but
we cannot proceed unless alternate access is provided. That's why we have not
proceeded under our SEaR and submilled a DEIS. If we have an access spur, a
DEIS will follow. Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Ward: Is there anyone else here that would like to address this particular
application?
Mr. Russell: My name is Mr. Russell and we own the adjacent property to the west.
We're entirely in favor of the 34 acre set up. That's alii have to say. 'Thank you.
Mr. Cuddy: I would like to make just one point to the Board. We have DOT approval.
Mr. Gazza and Mr. Lellieri do not have DOT approval. We have a road that we can go
over; despite what he says, Mr. Gazza can't go over his road and I think that should
very much be part of the record.
Mr. Ward: Is there anyone else here this evening that would like to address the Cove
Beach Estates subdivision? If not, I believe then that all is in order to close the
hearing.
Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion to close.
Mr. Orlowski: Second.
Mr. Ward: Motion seconded. All in favor?
Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Ward.
Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried.
.................*..
~
Mr. Ward:"""Y:35"J:Mtt Anna K. Plock - This major subdivision is for 5 lots 0 :"il1-
acres, located on an e' ing right of way off North Bayview Rd., a ximately 935
feet east of Reydon Road in thold. Four of the lots are ween 1.7 acres and 2.2
acres in size. The fifth lot is a rese d area to b~eyed to the Peconic Land
Trust. SCTM# 1000-79-5-20.2. ~><:./
I notice that the allorney for the lican:is he~ rk if you would just come
forward for a second. Tare several things that we wou 'ke to see put on the
map. One would at the easement for park and recreation be own on the map.
There's a f~ther things that we have technically that we want to pu~e map.
We ~prove that, subject to, and so before you go into park and recreahmJ:l~d
Scopaz
Bredemeyer, ~
Session: GaU":etteri SCTM #22-3-19, 20, 21, 22 & 31-5-1.2
-
TRUSTEES
. John M. Bredemeyer, III. President
Alben J. Krupski. Jr., Vice President
Henry P. Smith
John B. Tuthill
William G. Albertson
Telephone (516) 765-1892
Fax (516) 765-1823
TO:
Valerie
FROM:
John M.
RE:
scoping
November 19, 1993
DATE:
.
~.
fB
'-is
SUPERVISOR
SCOTT L. HARRIS
Town Hall
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
The Southold Town Trustees are in receipt of your November 12,
1993 memo and the attached scoping outline in the above
referenced matter.
The outline properly addresses our environmental concerns for
inclusion in the impact statement.
Since the Trustees are not inclined to approve any exclusive
private easement over Trustee lands for this or any site, we
will actively participate in the SEQRA review of the access road
as it relates to our proprietary, public trust, and
environmental authority.
We thank you for sharing the scoping outline with us as we now
await the-EIS.
-
--.
..:~-'.~' ;:; . -;-:-:.:;-'
in! J :"'_ l~ 0 \ij. [s..,! n, 'I
, ,.' "j
'11 ii!; NOV 29:993: ijJ
t_~_. !_~
I l_____.__..-i
S0u!;-,.JtD 1C:',',IN
Pl':)l;~ING GOAHO
.,.';"-~...,<-'- 1 '11.1 ....
'\., I. I
I j'~11
! ",
, '\i .'
~',:,
.
The
OPEN
SPACE
Council
P.O. Box 275. Brookhaven. NY 11719
.
ltIr. Riehm!. WaId
Southold Tow Plan1ling BoaId
Tow Hill .
53095ltIainRd.
P. O. Box 1179
Southold. NY 11971
-S/.(8FilE"
f>~
MS
Vs
RI!: proposed subdivisions of Gazza- Lettieri pareels in:East Marion
Dear Mr. WaId,
The Open Space C01lJ\Cil is very in1eres1ed in tile project recently lis1ed in tile EnvimnmenlBl Notice
B1illetin. of Omber 13, 1993 Our major concerns include consideration of tile followiIlg i1elm:
1. Cl1J31er development pl8ll of tile parcels
2. Public acquisition 8l1erllatives, Tow, County and Sta1e
3. Loss of open space, impact3 1.0 wildlife and vegetation particularly NY S endllIlgered, thIea1ened
species and species of special concern
4. Impacts 1.0 Tow Tros1ee owned Dam Pond and its tribu1aries associa1ed
natural reso1lItes and coas1Bl processes
5. Grovth ind ucing aspe~ including tr8ffic b1lIden 1.0 NY S roUle 25
6. Impact3l.O groWldva1er quality and qU8llUty
Please incl1.lde tile Open Space C01lJ\Cil as a "party of in1erest" in tile continuing SIlQRA process and
inform 1J3 of meetings, bearings or publica1ion of tile required documents.
.--.----~-----~.--51
.. i.' l? Ii ;,:' r? t__...,
!, "'1 './ I" I'i
,.' -..,J:,- -..;:3....~~.._4:?'~:; n:l
'jl:1
"
, , ~
.",,/ I S
. ~ ":1
,-,-" !
......._-1
,
. ,',. J t
L--_...:':'__. ~ . _ u_ " ~.,~_.-
.
.
Rlchard O. Ward. Chalrman
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Bennett Orlowski. Jr.
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
,.,<.q".
:"-,-.....UII '-~. 'f ,-").
(~" !!t.... 'jt~ . .
'.;-':'" ....,.~.....,.\
?5 . .. l" '.. _:\~. ~
. ;~:".J ,. '<1;; .,
., ~;, .--')' ",,;..;."'.. ~ '
\.. ,'~:~'~~,,-<,:-).... ::-
n, . -..v ,.-
'. ~. ,',
SCOTf L. HARRIS
Supervisor
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
,- - .-
,.->::-::::-.:;:;-;-,,-..""
Town Hall. 53095 MaIn Road
p. O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTIlOLD
Fax (516) 765 - 1823
November 12, 1993
Joseph F. Gazza, Applicant and Agent
P.O. Box 969
Quogue, NY 11959
Re: Scoping Session for Gazza/Lettieri
SCTM# 1000-22-3-19, 20, 21, 22'and 31-5-1.2
Dear Mr. Gazza:
Enclosed you will find a summary outline of the scoping session
that was held on October 28, 1993. Please use it as a guide
when compiling the Draft Environmental Impact Statement.
Copies of this outline are being sent to all the coordinating
agencies that have been participating in the review of these
applications. If any of these agencies want additional
information to be added to the summary outline, you will be so
notified.
If there are any questions or objections about the outline,
please call me.
Sincerely,
~ .
Valerie Sco a
Senior Planner
enc.
-
... -,......,.~;'.1;..",.._
.
.
RIchard G. Ward. Chalnnan
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Bennett Orlowski. Jr.
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
","j"p. .
~'~:,urrv(,(...")
J~1[i:, ..... -;t .'j......C%;:.A "
_' 'f"., _..
o "L".:-,
;.n ~,' -,""'"
.; ~, _-~~')' ,~> :t" '- .t~: .
~.~.-. .~....\"
"'?,: . .->~
, J "
SCOTf L. HARRIS
SupeIVisor
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
p. O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Fax (516) 765 - 1823
November 12, 1993
To Coordinating Agencies:
Re: Scoping Session for Gazza/Lettieri
SCTM* 1000-22-3-19, 20, 21, 22 and 31-5-1.2
A joint scoping session was held in Southo1d Town Hall on
October 28, 1993 for all five of the above-noted subdivisions.
Enclosed you will find the summary outline of that session.
This outline will be used by the applicant to compile a single
draft Environmental Impact Statement for the five subdivisions.
The Planning Board will use this outline to determine the
completeness of the draft.
As a coordinating agency, the planning Board would appreciate
your reviewing the enclosed document to ensure that the concerns
of your agency are included. If they are not, please commit
them to writing within the next few weeks, so that this summary
outline can be amended as needed. If we do not hear from you,
we will assume your agre~ment with the contents of this summary
outline.
Thank you for your time.
ZCer~lY,
v~
senior Planner
cc: Commissioner - Department of Environmental Conservation
Regional Office - NYSDEC, suny @ Stony Brook
Southold Town Board of Trustees
Southold Town Building Department
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
Suffolk County Planning Commission
New York State Department of Transportation
New York State Department of State
ene.
-
_,-"d'.J.~""",_.t"i,,,,,..~
.
//In
'W . SOCIATES
;''' G CONSULTANTS
~~
.
..5U-6Ace-
~6
~. .Is
1"15
October 28, 1993
Ms. Valerie Scopaz
Planner
Town of Southold
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Dam Pond, Marion
5 Pending Subdivisions
Scope of Draft EIS
Dear Valerie:
. As per our meeting of October 28, attached, please find the final scope of the
Draft EIS for this project. This outline incorporates changes discussed during the
scoping meeting.
This outline can be circulated to the applicant, involved agencies and parties
of interest for the purpose of establishing an understanding of the issues which the
Town will be seeking to have incorporated into the document.
Thank you for the opportunity to be of service to you, and please call if you
have any questions.
enc: scoping outline
- . . - -.~~,....
;__.__lL- :'X~:,:;i_;_j ~i\:i~j~__,J
54 NORTH COUNTRY ROAD, SUITE 2, MILLER PLACE, NY 11764 (516) 331-1455
...
.
.
.
DAM POND, MARION - SUBDMSIONS
SEQR SCOPING OUTUNE
TABLE OF CONTENTS AND SUMMARY
A table of contents and a brief summary are required for Draft EIS
The summary will include:
A. Brief description of tbe action
B. Significant, beneficial and adverse impacts, (issues of controversy must be specified)
C. Mitigation measures proposed
D. Alternatives considered
E. Matters to be decided (permits, approvals, funding)
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
A. PROJECT PURPOSE, NEED AND BENEFITS
L Background and history -- History of acquisition and past use
2. Public need for tbe project, and municipality objectives based on adopted
community developments plans -- summarize municipal objectives from land
use plan section
3. Objectives of tbe project sponsor
4. Benefits of tbe proposed action
a) social
b) economic
B. LOCATION
1. Establisb geographic boundaries of tbe project (use of regional and local sca1e maps
is recommended)
2. Description of access to site
3. Description of existing zoning of proposed site
C. DESIGN AND lAYOUT
1. Total site area -- describe unique features of tbe site whicb constrain use
a) tidal wetlands
b) freshwater wetlands
c) surface water
d) shallow groundwater
e) unique habitat
2. Site Coverage Quantities - prepare a table of estimated site coverage
quantities
a) estimated building coverage
b) estimated driveway coverage
c) estimated subdivision road coverage
d) estimated landscaped area (fertilized/uofertilized)
e) estimated natural area
3. Structures -- expected structures based on market and zoning code
4. Water Supply -- ability to meet Article 4 and water quality standards
5. Sanitary Disposal- necessary Iill and ability to conform to SCDHS design
Page 1
. ..~
.
.
Dam Pond, Marlon - Subdivisions
SEQRA Scopiug Checklist
requirements
6. Stormwater Disposal -- capacity aud desigu requirements
D. CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION
1. Coastructiou
a) total coDStruction period anticipated --timing of development
b) schedule of coDStruction activities -particu1arly due to wildlife sensitive periods
c) future potential development, On site or On adjoining properties
2. Operation
a) type of operation - road/recharge dedication; open space dedication if applicable;
are auy future piers or waterfront structures contemplated
b) schedule of operation - if applicable
E. APPROVALS
1. Permit approvals - list agency, permit aud status
a) Town of Soutbold Planning Board -subdivision
b) Town of Southold Trustees -- use of laud; wet1auds
c) SC Dept. of Healtb Services - sanitary disposal aud water supply
d) NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation -- tidal aud freshwater wet1auds;
protection of waters; water supply if greater than 45 gpm
e) Army Corps of Engineers - if activity below spring high water; CZM
coDSistency review, if applicable
II. ENVIRONMENTAL SE'ITING
Natura1 Resource
A. GEOLOGY
1. Subsurface
a) composition aud thickness of subsurface material - summarize test hole
ioformation
2. Surface
a) List of soil types
b) discussion of soil characteristics
c) distribution of soil types at project site
d) suitability for use
3. Topography -- utilize topo map based on 2' contour intervals
a) description of topography at project site
- slopes
- prominent or unique features
B. WATER RESOURCES
1. Groundwater
a) deptb to groundwater
b) seasonal fluctuations/tidal fluctuatioas
c) water table contours aud direction of flow
d) discuss groundwater-surface water inter-relationship; discharge to surface water;
tidal fluctuatioas
e) determine existing water quality beneatb tbe site in auticipated water
supply zones
CRAMER, V~)\ JASOCIATES
ENVIRONMENT~~G CONSULTANTS
Page 2
.
.
Dam Pond, Marlon - Subdivisions
SEQRA SCO..... Checklist
f) identification of present uses and level of use of groundwater
- location of existing weDs
- public/private water supply
- agricu1tural uses
2. Surface Water
a) describe Dam Pond estuary
b) NYSDEC surface water c1assification
c) determine tidal iDflueoces
d) preseot water quality and salinity
C. TERRESTRJALAND AQUATIC ECOWGY
1. Vegetation
a) list vegetation types on the project site and within the surrounding area; classify into
habitats
b) discussion of site vegetation characteristics
- species presence and abundance
- age
- size
- distribution
- dominance
- community types
- unique, rare and ""d'''gr.red species
- value as habitat for wildlife
- productivity
c) contact NYS Natural Heritage Program for information concerning
unique vegetation, habitats or wildlife species
d) describe habitat needs and biological characteristics of all endangered,
threatened and species of special concern
2. Wildlife
a) perform on-site field inspections to determine wildlife occupying the site
b) consult references to determine species expected to occupy site based on
habitat type
c) list species associated with site; differentiate between species observed
on site and species preseot on site; identify endangered, threatened
and species of special concern
d) contact NYS Natural Heritage Program for information concerning
unique vegetation, habitats or wildlife species
e) describe habitat needs and biological characteristics of all endangered,
threatened and species of special concern
3. Wetlands
a) describe wetlands and characteristics
b) outline NYSDEC wetlands c1assifications and discuss importance/benefits
of each type on or adjacent to the site
Human Resources
A. TRANSPORTATION
1. Transportation Services
a) describe access to the site, main road and internal road circulation
Page 3
.
.
Dam Pond, Marlon. Subdivisions
SEQRA Scoplag Checldlst
b) desaibe e'lict;ng level of use on Maio Road -- ferry traffic, seasonal traffic
- a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic flow
- vehicle mix
. source of e<n.,;"g traffic
c) make not of pedestrian eaviroameat and public transportation, if
applicable
- a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic flow
- vehicle mix
- source of exjct;ng traffic
B. LAND USE AND ZONING
1. E<nct;"g land use and ZODiag
a) desaiption of the e<nding land use of the project site and the surrouadlag area
- make note of Cove Beach Estates and graphically identify open space areas
b) description of existing :roaiag of site and surrouadlag area
2. Land use plaas
a) description of any land use plans or master plaas which include project site and
surrouadlag area
- Master Plan
- Draft LWRP
- Southold Land Use Task Force draft recommedations
- SC P1anaiag Commission recommended acquisition parcels report
- Govemers Task Force draft recommendations
C. COMMUNITYSERVICES
1. Educational facilities
2. Police protection
3. F"lJ"e protection
4. Recreational facilities
5. Utilities
D. CULTURAL RESOURCES
1. VISual resources
a) description of the physical character of the area
b) description of natural areas of significant architectural design
2. Historic/Archaeological Resources - include Cultural Resources .A..~..ment if
completed ll[
a) describe e<nding historic areas or structures listed on State or National
Register or designated by the community, or included on Statewide
Inventory
b) determine if previous historic structures
existed on project site through review of historic maps available at
libraries
c) contact NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation,
Historic Preservation Field Services Bureau for information pertaining
to history and prehistory of the site
IU. SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACfS
Review each aspect of the environmental setting in Section IV and provide a qualitative
CRAMER, vatmR\ J'ASOCIATES
ENVIRONMENT~~G CONSULTANTS
Page 4
.
.
Dam Pond, Marion - Snbdivlslons
SEQRA 8<:0.... Checldlst
discussion of impacts with quantification of impacts where possible. Impacts that are not siguificant
need only be discussed to the point where this is demonstrated. SigPifirant impacts should be discussed
in detail appropriate for the scope of the impact. The following key issues are noted:
.
Sediment control and erosion protection methods should be desc:ribed to minimi__
siltation of wetlands and habitat areas and minimi7e erosion of proposed fill areas.
Excavation for baseinents and sanitary systems should be discussed as related to soil
quantities and erosion protection.
Soils/Topographic E1evationfDepth to groundwater as related to functioning of
sanitary systems.
Quantity and location of 6ll nuC''"''')' to create properly functioning sanitary systems.
Nitrogen concentration in recharge and environmental/ecological impact on Dam Pond
via groundwater underflow. A nitrogen budget should be performed, and discussion of
direction of flow and setbacks should be discussed as related to these impacts.
Discuss project in view of Article 6 and SCDHS design criteria. Discuss Board of
Review process, if applicable for sanitary systems.
Water quality beneath site and suitability for water supply wells.
Impact of groundwater withdrawal from supply wells on existing hydrology.
Impact of the project on surface water by overland runoff from roads and fertilized
areas.
Impact on siguificant habitats and specific species associated with these habitats.
Fragmentation of siguificant habitat particularly in view of Dam Pond and associated
wetlands. Consideration should be given to the peninsula area, and alignment of
habitat/open space areas with the adjacent Cove Beach Estates open space areas.
Impact on ability of NYSDEC designated wetlands to continue to provide benefits
identified in Section II.
Cooformance of project to land use plans and planning efforts/open space preservation
strategies of the Town of Southold.
Vehicle trip generation and ability of roads to accommodate traffic.
Impact of the project on cultural resources including visual, and historic/archaeological
resources which may be identified as a result of Section II.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
IV. MmGATlON MEASURES TO MINIMIZE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
Describe measures to reduce or avoid potential adverse impacts identified in Section ill. The
following is a brief listing of typical measures used for some of the major areas of impact.
Natural Resource
A. GEOLOGY
1. Subsurface
a) use excavated material on site
b) reuse topsoil for landscaped areas
2. Surface
a) use topsoil stockpiled during construction for restoration and landscaping
b) minimi7.e disturbance of non-construction sites -- proposed buffer areas and
conservation easements
c) design and implement soil erosion control plan
3. Topography
a) avoid construction on areas or steep slope
b) design adequate soil erosion devices to protect areas of steep slope
~~
CRAMER, V " RH~ SOCIATES
ENVIRONMENT~ . . ~~G CONSULTANTS
.
Page 5
'^
.
.
Dam Pond, Marlon - Subdivisions
SEQRA ScopIng Checklist
B. WATER RESOURCES
1. Groundwater
a) ensure adequate sanitary design
b) moint.;n permeable areas on the site
2. Surface water
a) ensure use of soil erosion control techniques during construction and operation to
avoid siltation
examples:
- hay bales
_ temporary restoration of vegetation to disturbed areas
- landscaping
b) design adequate stormwater control system
C. TERRESTRIAL AND AQUATIC ECOWGY
1. Vegetation
a) restrict clearing to only those areas necessary
b) preserve part of site as a natural area
c) after construction, landscape site with naturally occurring vegetation
d) time construction activities to avoid wildlife impacts
Human Resources
A TRANSPORTATION
1. Transportation -- design adequate and safe access to project site to handle projected
traffic flow
B. lAND USE AND ZONING
1. Existing land use and zoning
a) design project to comply with existing land use plans
b) design functional and visually appealing facility to set standard and precedent for
future surrounding land use
C. COMMUNITY SERVICES
1. PolicefFlre protection -- ensure efficient access to residences on the site
2. Utilities
a) install utility services underground
b) incorporate water saving fixtures into facility design
D. CULTURAL RESOURCES
1. VlSnal resources
a) provide buffering to improve aesthetics
b) minimize road surface area and significant land disturbance
2. Historic/ Archaeological-- to be determined based on Section n.
V. ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS THAT CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE PROJECT
IS lMPLEMENTED
Identify those adverse environmental effects is Section IV that can be expected to occur
regardless of the mitigation measures considered in Section IV.
Page 6
..,......
.
.
Dam Pond, Marlon. Snbdivlslons
SEQRA Scoplng Checldlst
VI. ALTERNATIVES
This section contains categories of alternatives with ClIlIDlples. Discussion of each alternative
should be at a level sufficient to permit a comparative asSl'..m~nt of costs, benefits and environmental
risks for each alternative. It is not acceptable to make simple assertions that a particular alternative is or
is not feasible. Conceptual sketch plans should accompany alternative design plans to provide a basis for
comparison and analysis.
A. ALTERNATIVE DESIGN
1. Site layont
a) location of structures
b) location of ac:a:ss rontes - avoid crossing of Trustees land
2. Clustering
a) propose a cluster plan which avoids sensitive areas of the site as identified in
Section II (i.e. sbaIlow groundwater, wetlands areas and
interconnection corridors)
3. Transfer of Development Rights
a) determine otber potentially suitable lands to receive development
rights from all or a portion of the subdivisions with the intent of
minimi7ing impact upon sensitive areas
4. Acquisition
a) discuss feasibility of acquisition of all or the most sensitive portions of
the overall project site in order to min;m;7" impact upon sensitive
areas
B. NOACI10N
1. Impacts of no action
a) effect on public need
b) effect on private developers' need
c) beneficial or adverse environmental impacts
VII. IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES
Identify those natural and human resources listed in Section ill that will be consumed,
converted or made unavailable for future use.
VIII. GROwru INDUCING IMPACTS
Indicate if project will cause additional growth in the area which would not otherwise occur.
Consider access, ntilities and precedent.
IX. APPENDICES
Following is a list of materials typically used in support of the EIS.
A. List of underlying studies, reports and information considered and relied on in
preparing statement
B. Technical exhibits (if any) at a legible scale
C. Relevant correspondence regarding the projects may be included
Page 7
'----
'.
.
.
jtt\:)VI U
pf}
A
I'-\S
MORTH FORK EMVIROM~E"TAL CCUMCIL
Route 25 at Love Lane, PO Box 799. Mattituck. NY 11952
516.298-8880
October 28, 1993
Mr. Richard Ward, Chair
Southold Planning Board
Southold Town Hall
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
RE: Scoping - Gazza Subdivision application
Dear Mr. Ward,
I am writing to you, on behalf of the North Fork Environmental
Council, to discuss the issues that should be addressed in the
Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Gazza application
which includes creating 12 lots 00 Dam Pond.
The NFEC is particularly concerned about this subdivision
because of its location immediately adjacent to Dam Pond which is
an extremely sensitive tidal wetland. The sensitivity of this
area has been recognized in that it was designated a Significant
Coastal Fish & Wildlife Habitat by the Department of State, and a
Critical Environmental Area, by the Suffolk County Legislature.
It is important for the DE!S to focus extensively on the
impacts that the subdivision will cause to the proposed site's
natural resource values. I have attached an outline of
additional issues that should be discussed in the document.
Thank you for including them on your scoping check list for this
project.
Sincerely,
'" -c...;,
7J~
" /-
,- ._--'.-~'-"_.'''''-'.'--~'''-"'(
_.L~LJ~ ;!Til
, ~ i ; !
Attachment , ','c 20 "~'3 ,:vit
, ." 0 '~,I...J1
, l t
b...-____---l I
S,)UH;ULD TO'i:N
Pt..;'.;~J!~'!G BG;.;J';O .
a non-profit organization for the preservation of land. sea, air and quality of life
printed on 100% recycled paper
~
/
/'
.
.
Scoping list - Gazza Subdivision
Page
ACCESS
The fact that ~he site lacks access must be f~lly discussed in
the DEIS. The DEIS should identify an access plan, both for the
subdivision and for each individual lot, and the impacts
associated with tne access plan should be d1scussed. Will the
access route affect wet1ands, have a visual ~~cact, or disturb
wildlife utilizing Dam Pond? will the access plan interfere with
fishing or shellfishing opportunities in the Pond? Mitigation
measures, buffers, and setbacks to prevent impacts from occurring
should be described.
CONSTRUCTION
The effects of construction (siltation/erosion) on the
wetlands on-site, and in Dam Pond should be fully discussed. The
DE1S should discuss future or ~otent~al deve100ment on the
adjoining parcel. Cumulative impacts, on the Dam Pone ecosystem,
with that develooment should be discussed. Describe all measures
to mitigate impacts, including erosion control, setbacks and the
delineation of building envelopes.
APPROVALS
The applicant should demonstrate how the oroJect w' comply
with all existing local, county and state laws, including but not
limited to, Suffolk County Health Codes. All additional
permitting agencies including but not limited to Army Corps, DEC,
Trustees, and Department of State, should be identified, and
compliance with their regulations discussed.
LAND USE PLANS
The DE1S shou1d discuss this project's conformance with the
Master Plan. It should also discuss any US/UK recommendations
for changes to the Master Plan that affect this site, or the
resources found on the site, including but not limited to
wildlife habitat, visual character, open space protection, and
the fact that development of the site may adversely impact the
peconic Estuary.
~eco~mendations in Southold's Local Waterfront Revitalization
Plan should also be discussed. Demonstrate compliance.
.
.
Seoping list - Gazza Subdivision
Page 2
TRANSPORTATiON
Discuss conditio~ of roads and current level of use~ discuss
proposed increase in use on Route 25, include cumulative
increases from this project, and the adjacent proposed
subdivision.
GROUND AND SURFACE WATER RESOURCES
The aqu;fers and on-site recharge, depth to water, quality and
flow of groundwater on the site should be discussed. Water usage
should be estimated. Source of drinking water (public/private
wells) shou1d be ~dentif~ed.
Describe on-site drainage patterns and discuss run-of.
containment.
~am Pcnd~ Orient Harbor and their relationship to the ?eco~~c
Estuary should be thoroughly discussed. The National Estuary
Program ana the oDjectives of the Program for the ?econic Estuary
should be described. The Brown Tide Study and its
reccmmendat10ns should also be discussed and compliance
demonstrated.
TERRESTRIAL AND W!LDLIFE
List and describe all types of vegetation on-site, include
discussion of community types and their value as habitat. List
all species o. wildlife that may utilize the site, include
indigenous and migratory species. Include the results of an on-
site field inventory. Identify any rare, endangered or
threatened soecies that may use this site. Discuss their habitat
needs. Discuss long and 3hort-ter~ impacts to the wildlife.
WETLANDS
Describe wetlands on-site and their association to Orient
Harbor and the Peconic Estuary. Describe wetland values.
Discuss the objectives of the Tidal Wetlands regu'ations and
describe compliance.
~isc~ss the known impacts of ferti1ization and run-off on
wetlands. Describe measures that will be taken to prevent those
impacts from occurring here.
~
.
.
Scoping list - Gazza Subdivision
Page 3
FISH AND SHELLFISH
Discuss fishing and shellfishing opportunities available in
Dam Pond and Orient Harbor. Discuss the impact of nitrogen
loading on shellfish beds. Discuss economic implications of
shellfish bed closures in Southold.
OPEN SPACE
Discuss the objectives of the open space programs and policies
of the Town, the county and the state in regard to coastal areas.
Describe how this project wll1 meet those objectives.
FLOOD PLAIN AND COASTAL EROSION
Identify and map any areas within the Flood Plain on the
project site. Discuss FEMA regulations. NYS Coastal Erosion
Management regulations should be discussed and compliance
demonstrated.
ALTERNATiVES
1. Reduce size of lots to one acre and cluster away from
wetlands.
2. Public acquisition. Identify possible sources of funding
including County Open Space Program, Town Open Space
Program and state Environmental Assistance Funds.
3. No act ion.
.
.
'"
.
.~ ~.. rJ4}3~/~~~i
"~~~I
. ~c No~Ih$ I'
;r!eA'sSA ~/U' /
l1a,t;~ J~
i<. or L. f(a. \ e.
'J'o.tyi.. F, ':l1l~-zA
, .
,~~~ IJfEL
V&berl- T. tikm.vol-j.!/Yt E ^ - C[)>\.Sv.-I~-is > (/IV(!. .
'~oltl 1'1'1~
-~ .._-----~.. ..--- ._-....- - -----...--
't:3l> Th 10: 't:> """.
~~~
C// /f. OJ IUS u~1)1.AI'r- ro
!;~ 1f ~tC
Tour-.- f .s IlU- k4{L
.t: ^ -GIo 5,-<(1~1o fs, /t..e- .
5/ P13,
Pl\a.~ O-'Nl"- / IY,L>,,.,,"
~
.
.
.
DAM POND, MARION. SUBDMSIONS
SEQR SCOPING OUTLINE
TABLE OF CONTENTS AND SUMMARY
A table of contents and a brief summary are required for Draft EIS
The summary will include:
A Brief description of the action
B. Significant, beneficial and adverse impacts, (issues of controversy must be specifie4)
C. Mitigation measures proposed
D. Alternatives considered
E. Matters to be decided (permits, approvals, funding)
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACfION
A PROJECf PURPOSE, NEED AND BENEFITS
1. Background and history - History of acquisition and past use
2. Public need for the project, and municipality objectives based on adopted
community developments plans - summarize municipal objectives from land
use plan section
3. Objectives of the project sponsor
4. Benefits of the proposed action
a) social
b) economic
B. WCATION
1. Establish geographic boundaries of !be project (use of regional and loca11Cale maps
is recommended)
2. Description of access to site
3. Description of existing zoning of proposed site
C. DESIGN AND LAYOUT
1. Total site area -- descnbe unique features of the site which constrain use
a) tidal wetlands
b) freshwater wetlands
c) surface water
d) shallow groundwater
e) unique habitat
2. Site Coverage Quantities - prepare a table of estimated site coverage
quantities
a) estimated building coverage
b) estimated driveway coverage
c) estimated subdivision road coverage
d) estimated landscaped area (fertiIized/unferlilized)
e) estimated natural area
3. Structures -- expected structures based on market and zoning code
CRAMER, V~~ ~OCIATES
ENVIRONMENT~')'~i/& ... ~G CONSULTANTS
Pagel
ti
~
"'"
.
.
Dam Pond, Marioa . Snbdlvlsions
SEQRA Scoping Checldist
:"
4. Water Supply - ability to meet Article 4 and water quality standards
S. Sanitary Disposal- necessary fill and ability to conform to SCDHS design
requirements
6. Stormwater Disposal -- capacity and design requirements
D. CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION
1. Construction
a) total construction period anticipated -timing of development
b) schedule of construction activities -partieularly due to wildlife sensitive periods
c) future potential development, on site or on adjoining properties
2. Operation
a) type of operation - road/recharge dedication; open space dedication if applicable;
are any future piers or waterfront structures contemplated
b) schedule of operation -. if applicable
E. APPROVALS
1. Permit approvals - list agency, permit and status
a) Town of SouthoId Planning Board --subdivision
b) Town of Southold Trustees - use of land; wetlands
c) SC Dept. of Health Services - sanitary disposal and water supply
d) NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation - tidal and freshwater wetlands;
protection of waters; water supply if greater than 4S gpm
e) Army Corps of Fnginecrs - if activity below spring high water; CZM
consistency review, if applicable
II. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Natural Resource
A GEOWGY
1. Subsurface
a) composition and thickness of subsurface material- summarize test hole
information
2. Surface
a) List of soil types
b) discussion of soil characteristics
c) distribution of soil types at project site
d) suitability for use
3. Topography
a) description of topography at project site
- slopes
- prominent or unique features
B. WATER RESOURCES
1. Groundwater
a) depth to groundwater
b) seasonallluctuations/tidallluctuations
c) water table contours and direction nf Ilow
d) discuss groundwater-surface water inter-relationship; discharge to surface water;
tidallluctuations
CRAMER, v~\ASOCIATES
ENVIRONMENTA~\', ~ . iNG CONSULTANTS
, ~ ~~
Page 2
~
,.
-
.
.
Dam Pond, Marioa - Subdivisions
SEQRA Scoplng Cbecldlst
e) determine existing water quality beneath the site in anticipated water
supply zones
f) identification of present uses and level of use of groundwater
- location of existing wells
- public/private water supply
- agricultural uses
2. Surface Water
a) describe Dam Pond estuary
b) NYSDEC water supply classification
c) determine tidal influences
d) present water quality and salinity
1.
C. TERRESTRIAL AND AQUATIC ECOLOGY
v
2.
3.
Vegetation
a) list vegetation types on. the project site and within the surrouncIiDg area; classify into
habitats
b) discussion of site vegetation characteristics
- species presence and abundance
- age
- size
- distribution
- dominance
- community types
- unique, rare and endangered species
- value as habitat for wildlife
- productivity
c) contact NYS Natural Heritage Program for information concerning
unique vegetation, habitats or wildlife species
d) describe habitat needs and biological characteristics of all endangered,
threatened and species of special concern
,/
Wildlife
a) perform on-site field inspections to determine wildlife occupying the site
b) consult references to determine species expected to occupy site based on
habitat type
c) list species associated with site; differentiate between species observed
on site and species present on site; identify endangered, threatened
and species of special concern
d) contact NYS Natural Heritage Program for information concerning
unique vegetation, habitats or wildlife species
e) describe habitat needs and biological characteristics of all endangered,
threatened and species of special concern
Wetlands
a) descn"be wetlands and characteristics
b) . outline NYSDEC wetlands classifications and discuss importancejbenefits
of each type on or adjacent to the site
Homan Resources
A TRANSPORTATION
CRAMER, VOO~\'s af~\SOCIA TES
ENVIRONMENTA)hANr;;~G CONSULTANTS
~
Page 3
=
...~
.
.
Dam Pond, Marlon - Snbdlvlslons
SEQRA Scopiag Checldlst
L Transportation Services
a) describe ac:ccss to the site, main road and internal road circulation
b) describe existing level of use on Main Road - ferry traffic, st"a~nn.ltraffic
- a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic flow
- vehicle mix
- source of existing traffic
c) make not of pedestrian environment and public transportation, if
applicable
- a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic flow
- vehicle mix
- source of existing traffic
B. lAND USE AND ZONING
1. Existing land use and zoning
a) description of the existing land use of the project site and the surrounding area
- make note of Cove Beach Estates and graphically identify open space areas
b) description of existing zoning of site and surrounding area
2. Land use plans
a) description of any land use plans or master plans which include project site and
surrounding area
- Master Plan
Draft LWRP
C. COMMUNITY SERVICES
1. Educational facilities
2. Police protection
3. Hre protection
4. Recreational facilities
5. Utilities
D. DEMOGRAPHY
E. CULTURAL RESOURCES
1. VISual resources
a) description of the physical character of the area
b) description of natural areas of significant architectural design
2. Historic/Archaeological Resources
a) describe existing historic areas or structures listed on State or National Register or
designated by the community, or included on Statewide Inventory
b) determine if previous historic structures
existed on project site through review of historic maps available at
libraries
c) contact NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation,
Historic Preservation Held Services Bureau for information pertaining
to history and prehistory of the site
III. SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACfS
Review each aspect of the environmental setting in Sectinn IV and provide a qualitative
discussion of impacts with quantification of impacts where possible. Impacts that are not significant
Page 4
6
6
=
.....
.
.
Dam Pond, Marion. Subdivisions
SEQRA ScopiDg Cbecldist
need only be discussed to the point where this is demonstrated. Significant impacts should be discussed
in detail appropriate for the scope of the impact. The following key issues are noted:
.
Sediment t:OJltrol and erosion protection methods should be described to m;n;mi7p'
siltation of wetlands and habitat areas and m;n;m;7p. erosion of proposed fill areas.
Excavation for basements and sanitary systems should be discussed as related to soil
quantities and erosion protection.
SoilsjTopographie Elevation/Depth to groundwater as related to functioning of
sanitary systems.
Quantity and location of fill necessary to create properly functioning sanitary systems.
Nitrogen concentration in recharge and environmental/ ecological impact on Dam Pond
via groundwater underflow. A nitrogen budget should be performed, and discussion of
direction of flow and setbacks should be dis<"llssed as related to these unpacts.
Discuss project in view of Article 6 and SCDlIS design criteria. Discuss Board of
Review process, if applicable for sanitary systems.
Water quality beneath site and suitability for water supply wells.
Impact of groundwater withdrawal from supply wells on existing hydrology.
Impact of the project on surface water by overland runoff from roads and fertilized
areas.
Impact on significant habitats and specific species associated with these habitats.
Fragmentation of significant habitat particularly in view of Dam Pond and associated
wetlands. Consideration should be given to the peninsula area, and alignment of
habitat/open space areas with the adjacent Cove Beach Estates open space areas.
Impact on ability of NYSDEC designated wetlands to continue to provide benefits
identified in Section II.
Conformance of project to land use plans and plaooing efforts/open space preservation
strategies of the Town of Southold
Vehicle trip generation and ability of roads to accommodate traffic.
Impact of the project on cultural resources including visual, and historic/archaeological
resources which may be identified as a result of Section II.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
IV. MmGATlON MEASURES TO MINIMIZE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
Describe measures to reduce or avoid potential adverse impacts identified in Section ill. The
following is a brief listing of typical measures used for some of the major areas of impact.
Natural Resource
A GEOLOGY
1. Subsurface
a) use excavated material on site
b) reuse topsoil for landscaped areas
2. Surface
a) use topsoil stockpiled during construction for restoration and landscaping
b) m;n;mhe disturbance of non-construction sites - proposed buffer areas
c) design and implement soil erosion control plan
3. Topography
a) avoid construction on areas or steep slope
b) design adequate soil erosion devices to protect areas of steep slope
B. WATER RESOURCES
~\ //~
CRAMER, VOORHI~SOCIATES
ENVIRONMENT~;\; ~G CONSULTANTS
;,
Page 5
=
..
, .
.
.
Dam Pond, Marion. Subdivisions
SEQRA Scoplng Checklist
1. Groundwater
a) ensure adequate sanitary design b) maintain permeable areas on tbe site
2. Surface water
a) ensure use of soil erosion control techniques during construction and operation to
avoid siltation
examples:
- hay bales
- temporary restoration of vegetation to disturbed areas
- landscaping
b) design adequate stormwater control system
:\<(}.'
C. e,1: TERRESTRIAL AND AQUATIC ECOWGY
L Vegetation
a) restrict clearing to ooly those areas necessary
b) preserve part of site as a natural area
c) after construction, landscape site with naturally occurring vegetation
d) time construction activities to avoid wildlife impacts
Human Resources
A TRANSPORTATION
1. Transportation -- design adequate and safe access to project site to handle projected
traffic flow
B. LAND USE AND ZONING
1. Existing land use and zoning
a) design project to comply with existing land use plans
b) design functional and visually appealing facility to set standard and precedent for
future surrounding land use
C. COMMUNITY SERVICES
1. PolicefFire protection - ensure efficient access to residences on the site
2. Utilities
a) install utility services underground
b) incorporate water saving fixtures into facility design
D. CULTURAL RESOURCES
1. VISual resources
a) provide buffering to improve aesthetics
b) minimize road surface area and significant land disturbance
2. Historic/Archaeological -- to be determined based on Section II.
V. ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFEcrs TIfAT CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE PROJECT
18 IMPLEMENTED
Identify those adverse environmental effects is Section IV that can be expected to occur
regardlesS of the mitigation measures considered in Section IV.
VI. ALTERNATIVES ,
This section contains categories of alternatives with examples. Discussion ofCllch alternative
4q~\ /l1fP,
CRAMER, VO~~~&!,tx'sSOCIA TES
ENVIRONMENTA~ \( i,LATifNING CONSULTANTS
, Wl~\\~
Page 6
.
#
=
....-
.. ~ -, .."
.
.
Dam Pond, Marlon - Subdivisions
SEQRA ScopiDg Checklist
should be at a level sufficient to permit a comparative assessment of costs, benefits and environmental
risks for each alternative. It is not acceptable to make simple assertions that a particular alternative is or
is not feasible. Conceptual sketch plans should accompany alternative design plans to provide a basis for
comparison and analysis.
A ALTERNATIVE DESIGN
1. Site layout
a) location of structures
b) location of access routes
2. Qustering
a) propose a cluster plan which avoids sensitive areas of the site as identified in
Section II (Le. sballow groundwater, wetlands areas and
intercounection corridors
3. Transfer of Development Rights
a) determine other potentially suitable lands to receive development
rights Crom all or a portion of the subdivisions with the intent of
minimizing impact upon sensitive areas
4. Acquisition
a) discuss feasibility of acquisition of all or the most sensitive portions of
. the overall project site in order to minimi7p' impact upon sensitive
areas
B. NO ACfION
L Impacts of no action
a) effect on public need
b) effect on private developers' need
c) beneficial or adverse environmental impacts
VII. IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES
Identify those natural and human resources listed in Section III that will be consumed,
converted or made unavailable for future use.
VIII. GROWI'll INDUCING IMPACTS
Indicate if project will cause additional growth in the area which would not otherwise occur.
Consider access, utilities and precedent.
IX. APPENDICES
Following is a list of materials typieally used in support of the ElS.
A List of underlying studies, reports and information considered and relied on in
preparing statement
B. Technical exhibits (if any) at a legible scale
C. Relevant correspondence regarding the projects may be included
.4@.\~ /11ft. .
CRAMER, VOORHI$.lI1;1 .
ENVIRONMENTAk\ANr)::ti ?
~~
SOCIATES
l~G CONSULTANTS
Page 7
I
I
::
....
.
.
.
Richard G. Ward. Chalnnan
George Ritchte Latham. Jr.
Bennett Orlowski. Jr.
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
.ofH'!l ('
..... ,~.J "". /"')
''::'v'' ..f{t ",',',(/'"
-,,v " 't' :,..-;."
:..:;' ,( .~;;::.,,:
"" l ' ..<.,
~~"'" f, ,:~-,;:t:~ ~
'c; .l..:,- 0,
.,>-('''''''~' ~~ r,
0,,> ~<~'"
-<?/ ' ~ ,-). _i"
.. '1: ," <'_J
SCOTI L. HARRIS
Supervisor
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P. O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTIiOLD
Fax (516) 765 - 1823
October 6, 1993
The Southold Town Planning Board will hold a scoping
session on the Gazza/Lettieri subdivision, on Thursday,
October 28, 1993 at 9:30 a.m. in the Supervisor's conference
room at Southold Town Hall, Main Rd., Southold.
Richard G. Ward
Chairman
"
scan I.. HARRIS
superv1!ior
<
Town Ilan. 53095 Mall! lloo;
P. O. Box 117!N Za
So\lthold. New York .JOi!.7!) 'g.
~ ;.;,:< -.=
fax (516) 76s:.~ ij~3'; if; >~ :.l
~ /", -r 'J ~t t?
...... ;;::~.f: l,C f"ool1l
"-"".....O~
:g i:J~ ~;?>Ol
,. Ot.i.! ~hl ~
LW h.!i~ ro Z_
Cl li.:tt ~ ..~J
a: 1.l.0 >'~~
Cl xi: 08
_ Y.ll.o(lll~
i~
.~~
~
in ~
.
~~foiK~"
~~$'~ ~\
s ",,-#':1
en :2
';\"" ,..,
\.,,~ ... ~ \
'~Ol + ~~<::)':(9
~~,
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Rkhard G. Ward. Chalnnan
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Bennett Orlowski. Jr.
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTIlOLD
Tcl<"phone (516) 765.1938
October 1, 1993
Joseph F. Gazza
P.O. Box 969
3 Ogden Lane
Quogue, NY 11959
c...he.(,lC ifldrQwu
~"'-'
A_......~-~
..-.-=---\
G\.';i! ."'j"j ,':i.
~L~_~ ,....:-;.~~..~~ .
':
~~"--"--"~'''''
Re:
Scoping Session for Gazza/Lettieri
SCTM~ 1000-22-3-19, 20, 21, 22 and 31-5-1.2
Dear Mr. Gazza:
Pursuant to our conversation, a scoping session has been se~
for Thursday, October 28, 1~93 at 9:30 a.m. for the above
mentioned subdivision. Please notify your environmental
consultant of this date. The scoping session will be held
th~ Supervisor's conference room at Southold Town Hall.
A copy of the positive Declaration was sent to you under
separate cover. The fee for the session will be $350.00,
must be paid one week prior to this meeting.
5 ",BFiu::-
and
If this
session
~
is not convenient, please notify us immediately and the{)
will be re-scheduled.
If you have any questions, please contact the Planning Board ,
office at 765-1938.
Sincerely,
I? ~~ 4. Itit.L./(/~
Richard G. ~ard
Chairman
cc:
Commissioner - Department of Environmental Conservation
Regional Office - NYSDEC, Suny @ stony Brook
Southold Town Board of Trustees
Southold Town Building Department
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
Suffolk County Planning Commission
New York State Department of Transportation
New York State Department of State
."
,-
~
~
.:t'
l-
to\,
,.'
......
,.,
()-
"
~
M
~
*
.
.
Richard G. Ward. Chainnan
George RJtchie Latham. Jr.
Bennett Orlowski. Jr.
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
'j;~~: r:'. ,"
.(fl:.
.;) ;.'.. "'~;: ...
:? ( I~ _'\.~
- .
SC01T L. HARRIS
Supervisor
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P. O. Box 1179
Scuthold. New York 11971
Telephone (516) 765-1938
October 1, 1993
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOlITHOLD
Fax (516) 765 - 1823
Joseph F. Gazza
P.O. Box 969
3 Ogden Lane
Quoque, NY 11959
Re: Scoping Session for Gazza/Lettieri
SCTM# 1000-22-3-19, 20, 21, 22 and 31-5-1.2
Dear Mr. Gazza:
Pursuant to our conversation, a scoping session has been set
for Thursday, October 28, 1993 at 9:30 a.m. for the above
mentioned subdivision. Please notify your environmental
consultant of this date. The scoping session will be held in
the Supervisor's conference room at Southold Town Hall.
A copy of the Positive Declaration was sent to you under
separate cover. The fee for the session will be $350.00, and
must be paid one week prior to this meeting.
If this is not convenient, please notify us immediately and the
session will be re-scheduled.
If you have any questions, please contact the Planning Board
office at 765-1938.
Sincerely,
1?~ 7'Jz/tUL-/~
Richard G. Ward
Chairman
cc: Commissioner - Department of Environmental Conservation
Regional Office - NYSDEC, Suny @ Stony Brook
Southold Town Board of Trustees
Southold Town Building Department
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
Suffolk County Planning Commission
New York State Department of Transportation
New York State Department of State
~.. ~.,.~....",..... ~
.
.
RIchart! G. Wart!. Chairman
Oeorge RUehle L..'ltham. Jr.
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
'~~\ ;;UJU' fr-Olt"J'~i:.
"', ,','''''' , ","" "',
S': ".,; t- '~;, ':'~-. ~-2. '.:
.?- 'l' -,':""
"~ . --
V': ~..j,,~-<'!:!:!
:') -', -" ......
. " ~. ~. .......:
." '~!l) '~.~:./
cccc:'{ , 'i' .,":>
SCOTT L. HARRIS
Supervisor
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
-. ~~Q7",,:::-D~--
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P. O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
Tckphone(516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTH OLD
Fax (516) 765 - 1823
To: All Involved Agencies
From: Southold Town Planning Board 6
Re: Scoping session for Gazza/Lettieri
SCTM# 1000-22-3-19, 20, 21, 22 and 31-5-1.2
Date: October 1, 1993
A scoping session has been set for Thursday, October 28, 1993
at 9:30 a.m. for the above mentioned subdivision. The scoping
session will be held in the Supervisor's conference room at
Southold Town Hall.
A copy of the positive Declaration is enclosed.
If you are unable to attend the scoping session, please send
any comments you may have as to items you wish addressed in the
Draft Environmental Impact Statement, to the Planning Board
office. The Board's fax number is 765-1823.
cc:
Commissioner - Department of Environmental Conservation
Regional Office - NYSDEC, Suny @ Stony Brook
Southold Town Board of Trustees
Southold Town Building Department
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
Suffolk County Planning Commission
New York State Department of Transportation
New York State Department of State
"J"~~"".,
.'-
.
.
RIchard G. Ward. Chalnnan
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Bennett Orlowski. Jr.
Mark 5. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
SCOTfL.HARRIS
Supervisor
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
- ... .
;':-:::;,::.cu:~)j-'-'~
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
p. O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTH OLD
Fax (516) 765 - 1823
September 14, 1993
Joseph F. Gazza
P.O. Box 969
3 Odgen Lane
Quogue, NY 11959
Re: Proposed minor subdivision
Andrew Lettieri
SCTM# 1000-31-5-1.2
Dear Mr. Gazza:
The following resolution was adopted by the Southold Town
Planning Board at a meeting held on Monday, September 13, 1993:
BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting
under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, makes a
determination of significance, and grants a positive Declaration.
Enclosed please find copies of the positive Declaration for your
records.
Sincerely,
~f~W~1(S
Richard G. Ward
Chairman
enc.
':J.
.
.
RIchard a, Ward. Chairman
George RUehle Latham. Jr.
Bennett Orlowski. Jr.
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
,"'rrur'r "
'\\....v -'_~
')~.. ,,,)
_~v :""" "v%",...
.'"'$ "(~'1.'.. ".e:..
~ '" y,\J;' ~
,..-i' '. 'c,.. t!J:
"-)'~# """"',
-:~:~ -~~'''n, ~~:~-f '~- -~.--;:~~' ,-'
t .
SCOTfL.HARRlS
Supervisor
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P. O. Box 1179
SouthoJd. New York 11971
Tekphooe(516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OS~~JfIHOLD
POSITIVE DECLARATION
Fax (516) 765 - 1823
Notice of Intent to Prepare a Draft EIS
Determination of Significance
Date:
Planning Board
of the Town of Southold
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
June 24, 1993
Lead Agency:
Address:
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617, of the implementing regulations pertaining
to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review) of the Environmental Conservation Law.
The lead agency has determined that the proposed action described below may have
a significant effect on the environment and that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement
will be prepared.
Title of Action:
Minor Subdivision
Andrew Lettieri
East Marion, New York
SEQR Status:
Type I Action
The project which is the subject of this Determination,
involves a subdivision of 10.67 acres into three (3) lots.
The project site is in a Critical Environmental Area and
contains wetlands associated with Dam Pond. Four
additional subdivision projects are pending in the same
geographic area and wtll involve common and potentially
significant impacts.
Project Description:
SCTM Number:
1000-31-5-1.2
Location:
The site consists of 10.67 acres and is located beginning
1,900 feet east of Stars Road on the north side of Main
Road, East Marion.
....
.
..
Andrew Lettieri
SEQR Determination
Comments:
The Planning Board is reviewing this project simultaneously
with the following applications:
Minor Subdivision of Joseph Frederick Gazza
SCfM # 1000-22-3-19
Minor Subdivision of Bernice Lettieri
SCfM # 1000-22-3-20
Minor Subdivision of Joseph Frederick Gazza
SCfM # 1000-22-3-21
Minor Subdivision of Grundbesitzer Corp. & Andrew
Lettieri
SCfM # 1000-22-3-22
Reasons Supporting This Determination:
This determination is issued in full consideration of the criteria for determination of
significance contained in 6 NYCRR Part 617.11, the Long Environmental Assessment Form
Parts I and II, and the following specific reasons:
The project has been evaluated through a Lon.\l EAF Part III which discusses in detail
environmental and planning aspects of the project. .
The action(s) will result in significant loss of open space in a Town and County
designated Critical Environmental Area which contains unique habitat and resources
associated with Dam Pond.
The action(s) will result in impairment of the viability of unique habitat areas
including overgrown field, tidal wetlands, dune lands and first growth woods. The
diversity of habitats and the fragmentation and loss of same represents a significant
ecological impact.
The action(s) may cause impact to the surface waters of Dam Pond in the form of
erosion and sedimentation, stormwater runoff, and nitrogen load. In addition the
actions will require water supply and use in an area of limited water supply potential.
The action(s) will cause potential visual impacts from the waterway and from Main
Road.
The action(s) require common access and will share some utilities and impacts. The
viability of the access from the Andrew Lettieri parcel to other parcels to the north
has been questioned by the Town Trustees as thIS access may require a road crossing
over Trustees land -- an action which the Trustees have indicated they are not
inclined to permit.
An environmental impact statement would permit the proper consideration of
generic impacts associated with the combination of the five (5) projects, and allow for
reasonable mitigation measures and alternatives to be explored.
For Further Information:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
Contact Person:
Richard Ward, Chairman, Planning Boarq
Town of Southold
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
(516) 765-1801
Address:
Phone No.:
Page 2 or3
.......
.
.
Andrew Lettieri
SEQR Determination
Copies or this Notice Sent to:
Commissioner-Department of Environmental Conservation, 50 Wolf Road, Albany, NY
12231
Regional Office-New York State the Department of Environmental Conservation, SUNY @
Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY
Southold Town Board of Trustees
Southold Town Building Department
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
Suffolk County Planning Commission
NYS Dept. Transportation, John A. Falotico, Veterans Memorial Highway, Hauppauge, NY
11788
NYS Dept. of State, Mohabir Persaud, 162 Washington Ave., Albany, NY 12231-0001
Applicant
Page 3 of3
N.
.
.
-SuBl=";U:;
P6
iYS
vS
JOSEPH FREDERICK GAZZA
ATTORNEY AT LAW
P.O. Box 969 5 OGDEN LANE
QUOGUE. NEW YORK 11959
(516)653-5766 (DAY AND EVENING)
SovTholl
""jbVJ,.}
f'/.;I,v,J, -' 'j o..,+-.
'3~ ~~~.:?
Rtf
1'("010>.... J
.
tv' INO(L. .,J\....t,(g OlY'I.I\r;..--J.J'
/W-
p~ ,'>.:J,vo
.~.~ ~;.tt/
(5')
Jr........ #' 1000 _ '2.:2. _ ']' - 19 2.0 '1.1 2,1.. A. ,-
'" TI-J-I-1.2.
; , 1
~Ar Mf-. C/-.o.,r"'A-' 1N>'\r'.l
,
I
~,+J..,\I....,
N.6~
t-
t-Ww
'10 _ r.<o....4
~--.......
(}p("J.nu..J
0-' t),.. J'ti b .v1 Oo,!.tfr,.,.,"""''''''';'..J
"" " f'r.,l ..,S "}o pA'1./
It-..
A&."~
("<. .r,,........"'" J
""../b6......: ....,.c,.-J-'"
.+0
",/1..0.1
~i-
!..,.,..,.;. c:..
.L..tt.......J 7i'- oJ' ~ ,-
Tif""'-A- -IT> f"-,.JJ-'o 11" fJ/.. /-u rl'<T' .,...
(...-.("'......1.
:r. v4"...... 1'''7 " 11.~ -10
a...~! v';"~ ,...,Ar~ i- .;1--. J,lft'1
/,L"-'
to
..J....-.
d<r..~~..........,.-
/-h...
f v('J or-<
/I l,;.f-l<) J
It .,;t:,J.I'r "'c\.V"-
:I
~
r<{".4;J,
fc(.J../' "
L.p.r./ \. "J'It....... J r
.//V./I
f-r-VU-tT
'J I ",,,bL,-
[>ro'" "<0 I
,4
f t.....J
;-h..... ..,,:/1
N-< Av...:lA~
F.....,....J/
",,,...,,,./vv>/I'1
J.....
tv<-~I+'r'V-< 0,< 1.,.1. ?
-h
fW<'w--.-
'\ I.
O!"'...; '1.......
L.,Iv- ·
r.:.~
J-J....
c~J.
'vr
~ i'0=r:.;C..Tj~{~l~(,~~
, : . 'i.!
-' I" ,...... -'") : U 1\'
:.: ,l ......,. 1
!L~l'. .... ,....v 1.~
! i
1....-._____...,-....--1
:::'-~~jT~,~';~_D -:~.'.','~
l p~:,:?::I':G '~:.\.\~;-;J
'----'..-~ --,
.'
<.
.
.
i J i .-~
'-~".~_~'.~~~C.'_"'_""-'_"_U'~_... :J
" ,
<;'<.lIo~ .
~e,
I/S
.
.
,<, , .; ,f" 'J')
. , .'..;".J . I
~",..h...,,'1 .... -- _'U 1...,...1
I l
L-.-_____..---l
S0i.m'Wl D ~G','i;;J
PL\r1t~fd)
MORTH FORK EMVIROMWEMTAL COUMCIL
Route 25 at love Lane, PO Box 799, Mattituck. NY 11952
516-298-8880
August 4, 1993
Richard G. Ward, Chairman
Southold Town Planning Board
Southold Town Hall
Southold, NY 11971
re: Gazza, Lettieri Property
Darn Pond, East Marion
Dear Chairman Ward and Planning Board members,
I am writing to express our concern regarding the action taken at
the July 12, 1993 Planning Board meeting regarding the above
mentioned project. As you will recall, rather than issue a
positive Declaration at that time, the Board instead permitted
Mr. Gazza additional time to attempt to mitigate the
environmental concerns outlined in the review of the Long
Environmental Assessment Form (LEAF). In particular, the issue
of access (or lack thereof) to the property would be addressed by
Mr. Gazza.
We are extremely dismayed by this action. A conditioned negative
declaration, which is what your action of July 12 could lead to,
cannot be used in this case. This is a Type I Action in a
Critical Environmental Area, containing wetlands. It is the
function of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to further
determine the significant impacts of this project, and at that
time the applicant may attempt to mitigate those impacts. To
allow the applicant to try to resolve the issues raised at this
point would deprive the public of a full review of all potential
impacts of this project.
Furthermore, the applicant implied that the only "real" issue to
be addressed was that of access. While it is true that this is a
major concern -- in that the proposed road crosses wetlands __
this is not by any means the only factor which concerns us about
this site. Some of the additional issues are briefly outlined as
follows.
The threat to Darn Pond through erosion and nitrogen contamination
is a serious concern. The unique habitat currently provides
nesting and foraging opportunities that will be put at extreme
risk. Several of the parcels have depths to groundwater of only
5-6 feet -- resulting in the need for extensive fill before
construction. Sanitary system installation could significantly
impair both surface and groundwater. The presence of marsh and
tidal wetlands on several of the sites requires setbacks that may
preclude building on some of the proposed lots.
a non-profit org_nbattoR for the preservation of land, sea, air and quality of life
printed on 100% recycled paper
.,.".
.
.
It is obvious that a site in such an environmentally fragile area
requires an Environmental Impact Statement to fully consider the
impacts of development. The LEAF only touches the most glaring
concerns, the EIS will reveal the full significance of these
impacts, at which time mitigation measures may be considered.
The North Fork Environmental Council respectfully requests that
the Planning Board issue a positive Declaration for these five
projects at your next meeting. We firmly believe that any other
action would be a violation of the NYS Environmental Quality
Review Act.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
~Vy
NFEC Southold
..v
.
.
RIchard O. Ward. Chairman
George RItchie Latham. Jr.
Bennett Orlowski. Jr.
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
,rl';'" :;MfiJ!.,\, />.
,rj~) "'{2 '\"'
ys;s" <:::: '\
,i) ~ #'1;'" ~ ',\
~'- ',", "" ','
-- 1(,.. _.'1.",,"' ~
c::l - .,;~i - '.'
en (, ',~' ::z:,'
'., '-~,,>-,)iW -. ,'.
~!.. . '- I, ';'~'."(.;' ~ '1 _'.'
"'" ,,"" ~'J
': " ",:-'...~ .
.~ _y,. ",. t.
\~_ /J!() _ ,~" .,'i}
~,%'.{ 'lI '~td"/
?-0---C".;....~~d-.i.1..'"
SC<YIT L. HARRIS
Supervisor
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
p. O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTH OLD
Fax (516) 765 - 1823
August 10, 1993
Joseph F. Gazza
P.O. Box 969
3 Ogden Lane
Quogue, NY 11959
Re: Proposed minor subdivision located at East Marion on
Dam Pond: Joseph F. Gazza (1)
Grundbesitzer Corp. & Andrew Lettieri
Andrew Lettieri
Bernice Lettieri
Joseph F. Gazza (2)
SCTM# 1000-22-3-19, 20, 21, 22 & 31-5-1.2
Dear Mr. Gazza:
At last night's public meeting, the Planning Board decided, at
your request, to reserve decision on the environmental
determination for the above noted subdivisions until the next
meeting on September 13, 1993.
Since you requested this delay, it is our understanding that you
also agreed to waive your right to pursue action against this
Board with regard to delaying of the determination until
September 13, 1993.
Sincerely,
7f~ 41 {/~
Richard G. Ward ~S
Chairman
:;:.,'
10 J~ Urn'. P.O. Box 2088, Southampton, NY 11969
Sq /!Fite's
(516)28)')19S F",~SI6)28).o2)S fJt;
~-
PECONIC LAND TRUST
August 9, 1993
i.~-'.
Richard Ward, Chainnan
Southold Town Planning Board
Town of Southold, Town Hall
53095 Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
"';\t.~~
.-.;iJ;
~~'l"''''~
Re: Lands of Letlieri and Gazza at Dam Pond, East Marion
Dear Mr. Ward:
-:.,:
0:-:"','
",-;"
-.',.f.
Recently, John Halsey and I met with Joe Gazza to discuss the future use and
ownership of the above referenced property. Mr. Gazza expressed an interest in
looking at alternatives to the full-yield subdivision plan which is currently being
reviewed by the Planning Board.
The Peconic Land Trust would be interested in working with the owners of the
property on a plan which provides the owners with a means to realize the equity in their
property while also protecting the integrity and natural character of the land and .
surrounding environment.
. . I understand that the Planning Board may be ready make a determination of
significance under SEQRA regulations with respect to the current plan, however, I
would like to request that you postpone making a decision in this regard for at least one
month or until the Peconic Land Trust has had the opportunity to review some
alternatives with the owners. .
""__0_
,."','
Please call if you have any questions. Thanks for your consideration.
~
Assistant Director
cc: Joe Gazza
"; j~
, :; ~:,",'!~~:~"-
-'i
-"",...-"""........~-~..=""'."..,,.......-._._,_....--_...~
P .
.\.~"-, :; ,
(,
ii
",,'
"
, i
.--....-.' .. ...... ~ \.
_~_,Er2?2;2.,~;::'~~ -~
~,__ ._"_n_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
__",.,..--___.._ _"-_-._-.__-.;."_....... ,--'.._....;..:-=- _,.~".;;...'"'....""4l\O:" . ".
..~..\..~
Southold Town p~nning Board
11
.
August 9, 1993
Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward.
Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried.
***********************************
Determinations:
Mr. Ward: Stevens Bluff - SCTM* 1000-83-2-8. We'll hold
that one over.
Francis B. Rauch & R. Stewart Rauch - SCTM*
1000-9-9-22. What's the pleasure of the Board?
Mr. Orlowski: I make a motion that
BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting
under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, assumes lead
agency status, and as lead agency makes a determination of non-
significance and grants a Negative Declaration.
Mr. Latham: I'll second that.
Mr. Ward: Motion seconded. All in favor?
Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward.
Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried.
***********************************
Mr. Ward: Joseph Gazza - This minor subdivision is for 2
lots on 5.393 acres and is located north of an extension of Dam
Pond beginning at a point 534.7 feet west of a point, 1,170.81
feet north of Suffolk County Control Monument No. 10-1243 on
NYS Route 25, East Marion, between the proposed minor
subdivisions of Bernice Lettieri and Grundbesitzer Corp. &
Andrew Lettieri. The applicant is here.
Joseph Gazza: Mr. Chairman, members of the Board. Joseph
Frederick Gazza, Ogden Lane, Quogue. We met a month ago,
and I believe the Board was on the edge of making a
determination as to either positive or negative on the SEQRA.
I had expressed to the Board that I needed a month to find a way
out of getting a positive determination and I have been doing a
little bit of homework. I had a meeting - I'll present to the
Chairman a letter from the peconic Land Trust. I had a
meeting with the members of the peconic Land Trust. Actually,
we had three meetings and I asked. them to study the proposal of
the various minor subdivisions and to come up with an idea. And
they came up with the property - the Old Oyster Farm - that was
on the peconic Bay, and received a negative declaration from
this Board. I asked them if that same reasoning could be
applied to my subdivision in East Marion, and if so, could they
southold Town
~nning
Board
12
.
August 9, 1993
come up with a plan that might be acceptable to present to the
Board to receive a negative declaration. That was the first
meeting.
Then we had a second meeting, and then a third meeting. And
they came up with a plan. They inspected the property. They
had their own environmentalist look at it. And they have a
reduced density idea, shrinking the number of my lots way down
preserving substantial open space, predominantly on the
peninsula, and the north side of the peninsula. They have
coordinated their plan with a plan which they prepared for this
Board, in connection with the Cove Beach Estates subdivision.
They showed me a rather elaborate plan that they developed for
open space and public property. The only problem with the plan
is that it involves public funding to acquire that portion of
the peninsula that they would like to see remain 'undeveloped and
used in conjunction with the open space or public property on
the Cove Beach Estates subdivision. And they asked for a month
to see if that funding has the possibility of being obtained.
They recognize, and they explained to me, that no decision would
be made within a month; but they had a month to approach their
different prospective funders, I guess one of which is going to
be the Town of Southold, in connection with their overall
plan. They said they would have some direction for me.
Now, I expressed to the Board a number of times, I don't want
positive declaration. I want to work with the Board to overcome
the subdivision hurdles to get a map that everybody likes. And,
I think the map that the peconic Land Trust is developing is
sure going to be like by everyone from the environmental and
land use point of view. It would be liked by the
owner/developer, myself and Mr. Lettieri, coupled with public
funding for the acquisition of a portion of our property.
That's my case. If you want to give the Peconic Land Trust a
month to pursue that, I have no problems with giving the Board
the additional time under SEQRA.
Mr. McDonald: Are you asking us for something?
Mr. Gazza: I'm asking for another month to give the...
Mr. McDonald: You would like us to give you another month. To
hold this in abeyance another month?
Mr. Gazza: That's correct.
Mr. McDonald: Let me ask you a further question. If you
proceeded on this along these lines, you would withdraw these
and make application with a new application, on the basis of
whatever discussions you had with the Land Trust.
Mr. Gazza: The Land Trust development plan, which is only a
sketch, involves a subdivision, and it goes along with the minor
southold Town ~nning Board
13
.
August 9, 1993
subdivisions that I had proposed, to a degree, but to a much
less density.
Mr. McDonald: You would withdraw these and submit that in place
of these?
Mr. Gazza: I won't say withdraw. I will say amend, based on
the peconic Land Trust ...
Mr. McDonald: If you don't withdraw these, we'll be negotiating
with you, and I won't negotiate with you. I, personally - I
won't speak for anybody elses vote. I won't negotiate on
this. Because the law says we're not supposed to.
Mr. Gazza:
I don't understand what you mean by negotiate.
Mr. McDonald: You're going to say you're going to amend your
plan, to make a more environmentally sensitive plan. That's
negotiating with us over these plans. You have an application
in front of us, and we're ready to make a determination. . Now
you want to make some changes so we don't give you that
determination. That's negotiation. And the law says we're not
supposed to do that. So, if you're prepared in the future to
withdraw these applicaitons to make that application, I could
justify saying, "What's another month", because you're
requesting it. But if you're saying that you're never going to
withdraw these, all we're doing is wasting a month because, come
a month we're going to go ahead and make our determinations, if
the votes are here. If the votes aren't here then...
Mr. Gazza: Well, I'm attempting not to get a positive
declaration determination. And if I can amend the map to the
satisfaction of everyone, to win your confidence, as the map
that was prepared for the Oyster Farm property, why not proceed
along those lines?
Mr. McDonald: Because the best we can make out, it's illegal.
You have to withdraw the application and make a fresh
application on the basis of these new plans.
Mr. Gazza: Well, maybe when the new plans become available,
the Board could look at the new plan compared to the old plan
and determine at that time whether a new application would be
necessary or a modification would be necessary. Since I haven't
created the new plan, it's being prepared by an organization
that's in between the two of us, so to speak.
Mr. Latham: Can they do that in a month?
Mr. Gazza: Well, they have a sketch ready. But the sketch
and the layout involves the acquisition of a substantial portion
of our property. And if the funding is available for the
acquisition, I will proceed and work with them towards obtaining
this goal. And they said within a month they'd have a better
Southold Town ~nning Board
14
.
August 9, 1993
idea if the funding would be available or not. I'm just going
by what they stated, and they wrote a letter to the Board
concerning that topic. If they come back to us a month from now
and say the funding is not going to be available. There is no
interest on the part of the Town or the County or other
agencies, in utilizing available funds for the acquisition of
this property, then we will proceed with the application
that's before you, and take it as it goes.
Mr. Orlowski: Looking at the last report of
Committee, they don't have any money left.
have to be funded through the County.
the Open Space
It would probably
Mr. Gazza: They mentioned something about a Laurel Lake...
Mr. McDonald:
of that money.
Yeah, but there's no way you're gOing to see any
That's watershed money. You don't qualify.
Mr. Gazza: See, I'm not the expert on obtaining money, but...
Mr. Ward: But you realize that doing it tonight's another 30
days, or roughly, that this project is going to get postponed,
if in fact we don't make a determination tonight.
Mr. Gazza: An additional 30 days nothing will happen.
Mr. Ward: And you realize, the record is going to state you
requested that.
Mr. Gazza: That's correct.
Mr. Ward: Alright. How's the Board feel about that?
Mr. Orlowski: It's been eight years "already so 30 days..
Mr. Ward: I know, that's what I'm saying.
Mr. McDonald: The problem I have is, if he doesn't withdraw
these, say it doesn't work out, the plan doesn't work out, the
money is not there, we just lost 30 more days. If it does work
out he has to withdraw these anyhow. The best I can make out,
he has to withdraw these no matter what.
Mr. Latham: We can't look at two plans...
Mr. McDonald: So, six of one.
Mr. Orlowski: Yeah, but he doesn't know yet. ,
Mr. Ward: He doesn't know whether he's withdrawing or not.
Mr. McDonald: My feeling would be to go ahead with the
determinations. Because it doesn't make any difference. Either
Southold Town Jltnning Board
15
.
August 9, 1993
he's going to withdraw them and then the determinations don't
matter any more, or he's going to be 30 days ahead.
(change tape)
Mr. McDonald: I'm appreciative of what you're trying to do
because I think you're going in a great direction. I do. You
may not think that, but I think that what you're doing is
great. And we're finally beginning to move ahead with this
thing, and I'm appreciative of that. But I don't think we're
doing you any favors, to tell you the truth, to give you the 30
more days, because it doesn't matter one way or the other.
Mr. Gazza: Well, if I get a positive declaration, then my
next step is to go to environmental consultants to have a report
prepared. . .
Mr. McDonald: No, you do the exact same thing you're doing.
You wait to see how the plan comes out, and if it works, if the
plan works, then you just withdraw these and make that
application, which you'll have to do anyhow.
Ms. Scopaz: I think that's a very important point. The
determination of positive declaration does not mean that you
automatically have to go through with the environmental impact
statement. You can still continue exploring your options and
make a decision whether you wish to withdraw the application
that's been given a positive declaration or submit this new
application that you will get with the Land Trust. This forced
determination doesn't put you under a gun or a time frame to
act, but the Board is in a difficult position by not acting.
Mr. Gazza: When the Board acted on the Oyster Farm
subdivision and you gave that a negative declaration, it was
based on the layout and the plan being so acceptable and so
proper, that the impacts had all been addressed. Am I correct
in making that assumption?
Mr. Ward: That's essentially correct.
Mr. Gazza: OK. So, if my plan can be modified or a portion
of the lots acquired with public funding, wouldn't that be along
the same lines?
Mr. McDonald: Yes. If you make a new application. We're in a
technical aspect of the law. That's the problem. It may not be
the most sensible part of the law, but it is a part of the law.
Because you're a type 1 - I know you're going to say you weren't
a type 1 when this started - and that's in ~he.record from last
time. So, we've kind of settled that. We're not agreeing, I
know you don't agree...
Mr. Gazza: We don't agree on that.
Southold Town tIlnning Board
16
.
August 9, 1993
Mr. McDonald: But because of that, we can't sit down and say,
"Well, if you do X, Y and Z then we'll give you a negative
declaration." We're not allowed to do that. And that's what
happens - if you come in with this plan and try (inaudible) on
these applications, that's what it's going to be. You're going
to say, "If I do this, this and this will you change your minds
and not give me a positive declaration?"
Mr. Gazza: I'm not asking you to change your minds. If you
give me a positive declaration, then I'd ask you to change your
mind. But, you haven't made a decision yet.
Mr. McDonald: No, but we are negotiating - it has every
appearance - and it is in reality a negotiation for a negative
declaration.
Mr. Latham: Right now it is.
Mr. McDonald: And you're not supposed to do it.
Mr. Ward: If you were to come back a month from now, or two
months from now, whenever it's resolved, with a new plan, what
it would need, if we give it a positive declaration tonight on
the plan that you've given us, you would withdraw the plan that
you have in tonight and resubmit a new one.
Mr. Latham: Just clear the decks.
Mr. Ward: But you're going to lose another month by doing this.
Mr. Gazza: I've studied that. Suppose that the plan that I
come back, is the same plan but the understanding is that every
other lot or the lots on the north side of the right of way are
to be acquired for public purpose. So, the plan would be the
same but I would not be the owner or developer of half the lots
on the maps because they would be going for a public purpose,
acquired by either the County or the Town as lots. The plan
stays the same. It gets a negative declaration with the
stipulation that the County or the Town is going to acquire
those lots designated X, Y and Z.
Mr. Ward: Well, I think at this point if the applicant is
willing to state for the record he'd like a postponement, I
don't know that we'd oppose that. I don't know how the rest of
the Board feels.
Mr. McDonald:
I think we're wasting his time, but it's his time.
Mr. Ward:
I agree.
Mr. McDonald: I make a motion that we hold this for another 30
days at the request of the applicant.
Mr. Orlowski: Second.
Southold Town ~anning Board
17
.
August 9, 1993
Mr. McDonald: Rather, let me amend that, to our next public
meeting.
Mr. Ward: September 13th. Is there a second?
Mr. Latham: Second.
Mr. Ward: All those in favor?
Ayes: Mr.McDonald, Mr. Latham,Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward.
Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried. Let the record show that
it's for the four applications before us which is Joseph Gazza
I, Joseph Gazza II, Bernice Lettieri, Andrew Lettieri.
The motion addresses all four applications.
Mr. Latham: What about Grundbesitzer?
Mr. Ward: Yeah five. It's five blocks.
***********************************
SITE PLANS
Final Determinations:
Mr. Ward: Linda Taqqart - This proposed site plan is for a
930 square foot retail antiques and decorative gift shop located
on Main Road in Southold. SCTM# 1000-53-2-2.
Mr. McDonald: Mr Chairman, I make a motion that
BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting
under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, established
itself as lead agency, and as lead agency makes a determination
of non-significance and grants a Negative Declaration.
Mr. Ward: Is there a second?
Mr. Orlowski: Second.
Mr. Ward: Motion seconded. All in favor?
Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward.
Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried.
Mr. McDonald: I'd like to make a further motion.
WHEREAS, Linda Taggart is the owner of the property known and
designated as Linda Taggart Retail Gifts and Antiques Store,
SCTM# 1000-53-2-2 located on Route 25, Greenporti and
Southold Town p~nning Board
21
.
August 9, 1993
Mr. Ward: Law in relation to yard sale permits.
Mr. McDonald: I move that we send our comments to the Town
Board.
Mr. Orlowski: Second.
Mr. Ward: Motion seconded. All in favor?
Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward.
Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried.
Mr. Ward:
tonight?
Is there no further business before the Board
Mr. Orlowski?
Mr. Orlowski: No. No comments.
Mr. Ward: Mr. McDonald?
Mr. McDonald: No.
Mr. Ward: Mr. Latham?
Mr. Latham: No.
Mr. Ward: Ms. Scopaz?
Ms. Scopaz: No.
***********************************
Linda Levy - North Fork Environmental Council - I'm the
Southold coordinator. I do just want to put on public record
that, while the NFEC would be very pleased to see any kind of
development done with the Peconic Land Trust on the property
that Mr. Gazza discussed with you tonight, which we know as
the Dam Pond property, we feel very strongly that as it now
stands should have a positive declaration. And whether he comes
back again next month, with another reason to delay the
positive...I mean this is month after month and we need another
30 days, another 30 days...this plan as it stands right now
should receive a positive declaration and if he wants to come in
with something else and withdraw the plan, we would love to see
that. That would be the best of all possible worlds as far as
we're concerned, is to see this plan withdrawn and a new plan
come in that does preserve the wetlands...public acquisition
would be wonderful...preserves the open sp~ce. But as this plan
stands right now, it needs to receive a positive declaration.
And there's nothing he can do to make that change, and I would
really hope that 30 days from now, or whenever the next meeting
is, no matter what he comes in with, if this plan is going to
stand as it does now and he doesn't withdraw it, that he receive
a positive declaration. I just thought I'd get that on the
Southold Town p~nning Board
22
.
August 9, 1993
record so if anything comes up in the future, you've got it.
Thanks.
Mr. Ward:
Is there a motion to adjourn?
Mr. Orlowski: So moved.
Mr. Ward: Moved. Second?
Mr. Latham: Second.
Mr. Ward: All in favor?
Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward.
Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried.
There being no further business to come before the Board, the
meeting adjourned at 8:15 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
~~
Richard G. Ward, Chairman
Martha Jones
Southold Town Plann", Board
7
.y 12, 1993
Determinations:
Mr. Ward: Joseph F. Gazza -. I .. This minor subM vision is for 2 lots on
4.915 acres and is located west of Dam Pond beginning at a point 1,414.51
feet north of Main Road that is 1,950 feet east of Stars Road, East
Marion. SCl'M# 1000..72-.3-.19.
Joseph F. Gazza .. II -. This minor subM vision is for 2 lots on 5.393 acres
and is located north of an extension of Dam Pond beginning at a point 534.7
feet west of a point ],170.81 feet north of Suffolk County Control Monument
No. 10-.]243 on NYS Route 2S, East Marion, between the protx'sed minor
subdivisions of Bernice Lettieri and Grundbesitzer Corp. & Andrew Lettieri.
scrWt 1000..22..3-.2].
Bernice Lettieri - This minor subdivision is for 2 lots on 4 acres and is
located northwest of an extension of Dam Pond beginning at a point ]86.35
feet east of a point 1,4]4.S1 feet north of Main Road at a ~int ],9S0 east
of Stars Road, East Marion. SCl'M# 1000..22-.3-.70.
Andrew Lettieri -. This minor subdivision is for 3 lots on 10.67 acres and
is on the north side of SR 25, 1900 feet east of Stars Road in East Marion.
SCTM# 1000-.3] ..S-.J. 2.
Grundbesitzer CQ!J2_: & Andrew Lettieri -. This minor sUbdivision is for 3
lots on 6.3 acres and is located on a western point of Dam Pond, primarily
west of a point 1,]70.81 feet north of a Suffolk County Control Monument
No. 10-.]243 on NYS Route 25, East Marion. SCl'Mlt 1000--22..3-.22.
Mr. Ward: Are Gazza and T~ttieri here?
Joseph Gazza: Yes, Mr. Chairman, members of the Board. I understand this
evening you're going to talk about either a Positive Declaration or a
Negative Declaration, of the subdivision application of Gazza and Lettier
of East Marion. I would call upon the Board not to give it a Positive
Declaration for the following reason. The purpose of worl<ing with the
Board over the last several years has been to create a subdivision that
does not.have the environmental and important problems that have to be
addressed. We want to create a sUhdivision that works. That ,;arKs for the
developer and that worl<s for the Town, the Town Trustees and the Department
of Environmental Conservation.
For this reason, if you would suspend so to speak, the process under SEQRA
until such time as we could satisfy the concerns which I'm sure you have
raiser'l, so that a Negative Declaration could be issued in connection with
this subdivision. We don't want a positive, ',e ",ant a Negative, and we
want to satisfy your concerns and the concerns of the other agencies
involved, by working the problems out beforehand. I've noticed at another
Planning Board hearing where you were able to work with the developer on
another waterfront parcel to get the prohlems resolved, to get the proper
sethacKs and the water supply taken care of and those environmentally
sensitive lands possible turned over to, in this instance it was the
Peconic Land Trust. You may remember the subdivision, it was the old
oyster farm application?
Southald Town Planni"'Board
8
." 12, 1993
We want to follow those footsteps. We want to wor~ with the Town to
correct problems that may exist so that a positive Declaration would not be
necessary in connection with these minor subdivision applications. I call
upon the Board to give consideration to that, please.
Mr. Ward: Any comments from the Board?
Mr. McDonald: I really lmow where you're coming from, because obviously
you're trying to do something there that's going to work. Our problem is
you're a Type I action and if we, at this point if ';e go ahead wi th you and
enter into discussions about how to change this to make it more
environmentally sensitive, would be a violation of the law. It says that
because you're a Type 1 we either have to give you a Ne~ative Declaration
and say that these don't have a significant impact. Or issue a positive
Declaration and have an impact statement. We can't negotiate with you
about this. The law doesn't let us. The only alternative you have at this
point is to withdraw your applications.
Mr. Gazza: Well, I'd like to refer to Section 617.2H of SEQRA, discusses
conditional Negative Declaration.
Mr. McDonald: It's not allowed in a Type 1 action. Only allowed in an
unlisted action and you're a Type 1 action.
Mr. Gazza: Our subdivision was elevated to Type 1. It started as an
unlisted. If <<e go baclc to tl1e original application date of prior years,
maybe we come under the same regulations that the subdivision of the old
oyster farm came under when tl1ey were able to escape tl1e...
Mr. McDonald: They were Type 1 and they came in with an application that
mitigated everything in the beginning. We didn't enter into negotiations
wi~1 them. They came in with an application that had mitigated all the
problems up front. So, we didn't get into 1ilce you do this and we'll do
that kind of thing with them.
Mr. Gazza: Possibly, if the Board would give a list of the problems that
need to be mitigated, and maylJe a two ';ee~ adjournment so that we could
address those issues. Maybe most of the issues have been resolved. We
certainly tried to wor'c over the last <'\--1/2 years with the Boar"! in
creating a subdivision that benefits everyone. We're notlhere to upset the
regulat ions, we're here to "orlc wi thin them. But to give ita positive
Declaration and to cause us an additional 10 to 15,000 dollars in immediate
expenses, I thin1c it's uncallen for in the nature of this subdivision.
We're trying to >1or1c >1i tl1 you; we want to address the concerns, tell us
what the concerns are. We'll work together on it.
Mr. I-Iard: Well, obviously some of tl1e concerns were raised already where
your access problems in going over wetlands, certainly hasn't been
mit igate"! at this point.
Mr. Gazza: At the last meeting, Mr. Chairman, it was discussed that if we
proceened "ith this next step ann paid the environmental review fees, that
the Board "ould have the leverage to tall( to the adjacent subdivision
mmer, Cove Beach Estates property, about bringing some coordinated access.
SOUt1101d T01ffi PlannieBoard
9
." 12, 1993
Has the Board made any progress wit~ that since out last meeting.
Mr. Ward: No.
Mr. Gazza: That was an important element of our last meeting which I
thought something was going to happen on in the interim. Not yet.
Mr. Ward: Well, the only thing that I can see is that if you would like to
take a try at addressing the issues at this point and submitting that in
writing to us so we could at least let our environmental consultant 1001< at
it.
Mr. Gazza: Have the issues been put forth in some type of a report?
Mr. Ward: Well, you're fully aware of tne issues. Your primary one is an
access and now do you...
Mr. McDonald: But to send it bacl< to the consultant is clearly going to be
an act...I would ask the attorney, but from wnat we had in the past it
would be probably illegal. Tllis is a Type 1 action. If it was unlisted we
could go ahead with this pretty simply. The only alternative I see is to
withdraw the applications, amend tnem and re--submit tnem.
Mr. Gazza: We're not prepared to withdraw. We have submitted over four
years ago at the time when it was unlisted, and I would discuss tnat with
counsel for the Board, ahout tne status today for a SEQRA review and a
positive Declaration. I was noping tnat the Board mignt have some type of
a report on the forms wnicn we did submit on the environmental review tnat
'''e could bring back and address in writing, and possibly a couple of weel<
adjournment to do tnat before a decision would he made.
Mr. Wan1: Well, the positive Declaration, the whole purpose of it is to
ferret out all of tne particular problems or conditions of a particular
SUbdivision, so to do something in between is difficult. Our advice has
been witn the Type I action that we can't do tnat.
Mr. McDonald: If you want us to adjourn for us to ask counsel, we can as1<
counsel their opinion.
Mr. hTar"l: Not tal<e action tonignt, am1 "'e' II put it bacv': on for next
calendar, if in fact we have to go (inau"lible). I
Mr. Gazza: OK.
Mr. McDonald: Have we entered into any kind of time frame on this?
Ms. Scopaz: Yes, does tne Board nave any objection to givin'J him copies of
tne consultants report?
Board: No
Mr. McDonald: Absolutely not. No problem. It's public record. (Everyone
talkin'l)' There's some question about whether we nave le:jal time frames in
this in tne SEQRA.
Southold TOlin Planni~ard
10
.y 17, 1993
So, I<hat I'm
rights under
meeting?
going to ask you is very simply, is are you prepared to waive your
the time frames, so we can continue this over to another
Mr. Gazza:
absolutely.
For the time period necessary until the next meeting,
Mr. McDona ld : Good.
Mr. Gazza: thank you.
********************
SITE PLANS
Final Determinations:
Mr. War" \ Suffolle County National Bank -- This proposed site 'p n is for a
canopy a~d~tomated teller machine at the drive up I<indow 0 this bank, on
Rt.2<; in Matt' tuck. SCTMfF 1000--143--3..4.2. What's the plei! ure of the
~ard? ./
Mr. McDonald: Mr. I make a motion that the Southold TOlin
Planning Board, acti un"!er the State Environmental Quality Reviel< Act
establishes itself as ead agency, and as lead agency makes a determination
of non--significance and rants a Negative Declaration.
,
Mr. Orlol;sld: Second.
Mr. Ward: Motion seconded. favor?
//
Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlows'd, ,/ Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Ward.
Mr. Ward: Opposed?
Mr. McDonald: I'd like to mak a further motion that
WHEREAS, the Suffoll( County/ ational Banle i~ e owner of the property
lm01m awl designated as The Suffoll( County Nati nal Banle, SC'T'M# 1000..
143--3--4.2 located on Ro/te 25, Mattituc'c; and
WHEREAS, a formaZap lication for the approval
suhmitted on June 1 199<; and
WHEREAS, the Sou,holc1 Town Planning Board, pursuant to th State
Environmental uality Reviel< Act. (Article 8), Parle 617, de ared itself
lead agency d issue"! a Negative Declaration on July 12, 19 _; and
plan was
is site plan I<as certified hy Curtis Horton, Senior
July 7, 1993; and
of
W1lE~ S, all the requirements of the Site Plan Regulations
So;rchOld have been met; and nOI< therefore he it
Southold Town Plann4lt Board
32
.UlY 12, 1993
Mr. Ward: OK, we're haclc to hearings held over from previous meetings. We
certainly stayed out of order pretty good tonight. Item one is Harold
Reese, Sr" et al and Otto Uhl, Jr., et al -- This lot line change between
Harold Reese Sr., et al and Otto Uhl, Jr., et al is to convey 10,093 square
feet from Harold Reese, Sr. to Otto Uhl, Jr. and to convey 5,258 square foot
from Otto Uhl, Jr. to Harold Reese, Sr. After the lot line change, the
Harold Reese, Sr. parcel will be 98.1563 acres and the Otto Uhl, Jr. parcel
will be 12.4051 acres. SCl'Mlr 1000--22--3-.15. L 1.8.1 & 18.3.
Ben Kinzler: The original preliminary plat plan approval contains a couple
of things. Number one was the exchange of two parcels so as to square off
one parcel on the proposed Cove Beach subdivision and to add to the
UhI-.Russe11 piece a larger piece. Ohviouslya (inaudible) benefit to them
in the exchange, and the reason of course being the ability to square off
that one corner parcel. I understand there was some issue with the County
Planning Board. Has there been a definition as to what t~e problem is, if
any?
Mr. McDonald: We're about to resolve those problems.
Mr. Ward: We're writing letters bac'{ and forth, there's a communication
gap. They've asked whether we're creating new lots, and we're not. They
were asking for numbers on lots, which aren't lots, so I think at this
point we're ready to proceed with it. Did you have anything else to add?
Mr. KinZler: If the Board has any questions?
Mr. Ward: Any questions from the Board?
Mr. McDonald: Or anyone else?
Joseph Gazza: The neighboring property. I was wondering if the Board had
the opportunity to question the access. There was a discussion at our last
meeting about the coordination of the two access roads, Cove Beach Estates
and the Gazza-.Lettieri subdivision. It seemed 1il{e an opportune time.
Mr. Ward:
before us.
parcels to
Well, this is not a particular
This happens to be a lot line
even out a piece, that's all.
time that the subdivision is
change of trading two pieces of
I
Mr. Gazza: will the access road serve those lots that will be created by
rearrangement?
Mr. McDonald: They'll be no cllange in t~e parcels. There's a parcel now,
there will be a parcel later. The other parcel is existing and accessed
elsewhere. So, there is no change in the parcel. (everyone talking)
Mr. Kinzler: As the roads are already laid out... T became aware of t~e
issue just this evening. It's always unfortunate When you have a neighbor
and you have to wind up meeting him here. But if there was an issue
certainly we would have been delighted to consider in the inception stage
and here we are coming dOlm to the hac\{ end, and very frankly, I don't lmOl,
how it is at t.his point in time we would go about cutting through what
appears to me, the only way to come through would be to cut through
Southold Town Plann~ Board
33
4ItulY \2, \993
existing proposed plots.
Mr. McDonald: That's not what he's proposing at all. It will have to be
addressed in the SEQR process and the final approval for this subdivision,
the major subdivision of which this is trying to facilitate has not been
done, it remains open.
Mr. Gazza: I just thought that this might be an excellent opportunity
since the land owners are both before you on happen chance on subdivisions
.. mine has been pending for five years and...
Mr. McDonald: You had indicated to us you had talked to them...
Mr. Gazza: Numerous occasions.
Mr. McDonald: ...and they had given you answers.
Mr. Reese(?): The only discussion I had with Mr. Gazza was certainly in
regard to once our application was approved, there might be some discussion
between his subdivision, but I wanted Cove Beach approved first.
Mr. McDonald: That's exactly what he relayed to us.
Mr. Reese: Yes, so I want Cove Beach approved, and then if he wants we
can get together somehow, and with the Board's consent, fine, but I want
it approved first.
Mr. Gazza: And the Board led Mr. Lettieri and I to believe at our last
meeting that upon payment of the environmental review fees that the Board
would lod{ into the further possibility because of the SEQR process of
coordinating a common access in the interest OT proper planning.
Mr. McDonald: We said that in the SEQR process we would examine the possin
bilities, those legal possibilities, which exist. And that's what we're ren
quired by law to do and that's what we will do, exactly.
Mr. Gazza: We're gentlemen appearing before you, is there any enlightenment
that you could give on these two applications? I know they' both been pending
for a long time.
Mr. McDonald: You want us to give you the answers to the1process without
engaging in the process. That I can't do. You had discussions with him
already, right? And he has just given you the same response now that you
said he gave previously. If we get into the process, we'll see what the
process brings forward. There are legal considerations that undoubtedly our
lawyers, their lawyers and everybody is going to talk about. We can't resolve
this here. You've asked him and he's responded here to you again, about it.
It's not really pertinent in my mind to the application before us at this
moment, which is a lot line change which is a little tiny piece of their other
project, which is not getting a final approval tonight. It's simply a lot line
change which we would like to move ahead on. I understand your frustration in
this, but I don't see the connection.
Southold Town Plan~ Board
34
.U1Y 12, 1993
Mr. Gazza: Well since you have the adjacent property owners before you...
that you've had this discuss--
go out in the hall and sit
That's why I brought up the fact
already. If the two of you could
and solve it, God bless you.
Mr. McDonald:
ion with them
down and tall<
Mr. Kinzler: I thinle maybe the question you're asking is, what does the
Board see as the further process.
Mr. McDonald: We haven't made even a determination on Mr. Gazza's SEQR,
because he's asleed us to hold it in abeyance while he provides other inform--
ation. There's not even a SEQR determination.
Mr. Kinzler: So we're at different stages of the process.
Mr. McDonald: Yes, you're a quite different stages.
Mr. Gazza: But the common point is the access. I've read the SEQR
and the reports focus as the Chairman focused, on the opening of my
sation this evening before the Board, on coordinated proper access.
neighbor says there is going to be no discussion until he completes
division. Now if he completes the subdivision...
reports
conver--
NOI" my
the sub-.
Mr. McDonald: You want to get the answer to the process witl1.out being inn
volved in the process. You don't leap frog over. You need to enter into your
part of the process. Then we're going to get involved and undoubtedly there
are going to be discussion, legal discussions about this with our attorney
about what can and can't be done.
Mr. Kinzler: I think the perception is not completely accurate. I thinle "hat
my client has said and is intending to say is very simply this, look, the cost
of this thing is enormous. We're anxious to get going "ith the thing as you
kno". To the extent that the Board comes to us or the To\;n Attorneys come
to us in the final process and in conjunction with the approvals and says
listen "ill you do us a favor, could you do this instead of doing that? I
think we've evidenced an ongoing desire to be flexible, to the extent that it
requires a sidentracking and a further delay in the process is not something
we can afford to do. You want us to be reasonable? We're more than prepared
to be reasonable.
Mr. Gazza: I'm trying to be reasonable and I thinle that iif we pool our efforts
we can get two maps approved at the same time.
Mr. Kinzler: I don't thinle, in all fairness, it deserves the belaborin;j of
the Board, before whom it does not appear to be an issue.
Mr. Gazza: I've been before the Board for five years, as you've been maybe
longer and I was led to believe that the access issue was the major part of
holding up my subdivision application and it may '>e.come. a stumbling blocle on
yours.
Mr. McDonald: \~at we were trying to impress upon you at the last meeting
is the same thing .- T haven't been here that long ~ut every time someone's tried
to impress on you n the sooner you get in the process, the sooner you get the
anSivers.
.
Southold Town Planning Board
.
35
July 12, 1993
Five years ago, and unfortunately this thing has totally (inaudible)
up, but the sooner you get in, the sooner we get the answers. If we continue
to sit outside of it, the answers will never come, because until you malce an
application, you never get an answer. If you can't get an answer to the process
without getting into the process. You can't do it.
Mr. Orlowski: I've been here 14 years and I've never had one applicant give
access to another applicant and it's never happened. I don't even know if it's
going to happen now.
Mr. Gazza: Well. then we might as "ell build a bridge and scrap the whole idea
of coordinated access and the Board shoUld have told Mr. r~ttieri and I that
at the last meetin::J and... why side trac]< us?
Mr. McDonald: The answers aren't there until you ask the questions and lie go
around and go through the process. You tl1ink that we can s1t down and make
all the decisions without entering in...the public has something to say about
it, the neighbors have ...(change tape). I would ask that "e move ahead on
this. I "ould like to move ahead on this particular application.
Mr. Ward: What's the pleasure of the Board?
Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion to close the hearing.
Mr. Orlo"ski: Second.
Mr. Ward: All those in favor?
Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Ward.
Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried.
Mr. McDonald: I'd like to make a further motion that
WHEREAS, Harold Reese, Sr., et al is the owner of the property known and
designated as SCTMj~ 1000--22--3--15.1 & 18.3 and Otto Uhl. Jr., et al is the
owner of the property lmown and designated as SCTMj~ 1000--22--3--18.1; and
WHEREAS, the Southold Town Plannin::J Board, pursuant to th~ State Environmental
Quality Review Act, (Article 8), Part 617, declared itself lead agency and
issued a Negative Declaration on May 24, 1993; and
IVHEREAS, all the requirements of the Subdivision Regulations of the Town of
Southold have been met; be it therefore
RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant conditional final
approval to the surveys dated May 28, 1993 and authorize the Chairman to
endorse the final surveys subject to fulfillment of the following condition
"ithin six (6) months of the date of this resolution:
1. Submission of the executed deed for each parcel.
~tr. Ward: Is there a second?
Southold Town Plann4lt Board
36
&lY 12, 1993
Mr. Orlowski: Second.
Mr. Ward: Motion seconded. All in favor?
Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Ward.
Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried.
Mr. Kinzler:
not inteml to
acceptable to
I think we already submitted copies of the executed deed?
file it until the final subdivision was approved. Is that
the Board?
We did
Mr. Ward: Say that again?
Mr. Kinzler: We did not intend to actually swap property until the final sub-.
division approval is granted.
Mr. Ward: Do it with the final map?
Mr. Kinzler: Yes. (inaudible) Thank you.
*~******************
Mr. Ward: Hillcrest Estates -. Section
lots on 22.9 acres located in Orient.
question is, where are you at?
2 -- This major su'YIivision is for 20
SCIM# 1000--13--2--8.5. I ;JUess the
Mr. Kinzler: We had a meeting a number of months ago with members of the
Suffolk County Dept. of Health. The issue is obviously water quality. And
very frankly, while we applied for a variance from the Board and were
denied, we believed and still believe that we would have an appropriate
redress in the courts. What we've done in an effort to avoid that is to
meet with the Board and representatives of the Health Dept. in an effort to
achieve a compromise and to try to wor'e out some solution. At their
suggestion we had gone back and had retested the existing wells and had
found that with some of the wells there had been changes in water quality,
that there's been a dissipation from the water table of some of the
contaminants that previously existed hut that in other locations they still
exist.
As a result of the initial retesting we've decided to dro~ new wells and to
see what water quality is in other parts of the proposed parcel. We're
hopeful, and unfortunately the driller is unable to move with the same
speed (inaudible), with respect to tl-te testing, and not only the testing
but also with respect to the dropping of a well for the water for the pumps
for the fire department. We hope to get that accomplished real quic1ely.
Unfortunately he's not moving as quickly as Ii'e li'ould like and unfortunately
li'e have no control over it. And li'e hope to get that done shortly to go
back 1;0 the Board of Health and to hopefully accomplish ,some kind of a
reasonable compromise in terms of the subdivision. 'What we contemplate the
possibility of doing is combining in some cases, lots. Tn four or five
cases li'e may ta1ee two lots anc comhine them into one lot for purposes of
complying and perhaps averaging out, if you will, the respective water
quality.
CRAMER, VOORHIS & ASSOCIATl:SIAIC.
Environmental & Planning Cons~
54 N. Country Road Suite 2
MILLER PLACE, NEW YORK 11764
[L[]:uu~[f uOOLi:l~~[K'A]DuuLi:l[L
(516) 331-1455
DATE 1 JOB NO
June 29 1993
ATTENTION
Richard Ward Chairman P1anninn
RE:
Dam Pond @ E. Marion
.
TO ..... T.oWD of Southo1d
",0. BO:l\ 1179
..Southold,NY 119.7.1
WE ARE SENDING YOU ~ Attached 0 Under separate cover via
the following items:
>
o Shop drawings
o Prints
o Plans
o Samples
o Specifications
o Copy of letter
o Change order
~ Report
COPIES DATE NO DESCRIPTION
1 ea 6/24/93 Review of 5 subdivision projects: 1'IV~
Joseph F. Gazza prp~
Grundbesitzer Corp.
Andrew Lettieri
I Bernice Lettieri
Joseph F. Gazza
1 6/25/93 1337 Invoice
.
THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below:
o For approval
o Approved as submitted
o Resubmit
copies for approval
otFor your use
o Approved as noted
o Submit
copies for distribution
>
ot As requested
o Returned for corrections
o Return
corrected prints
o For review and comment 0
o FOR BIDS DUE
19_
o PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US
REMARKS
II enclosures are not as noted, kindly nOldy us at once
',j
~J
..
COpy TO
f'ROOUCT1J'~~,"c.(;fllIO<1.l,Ias>owlloOr,:erPHONtTOLlFREe'-800'1l5~
SIGNED:
Voorhis, CEP, AI~_
""".'---'
.
.
Sf-tbr7LES
-'
"....
'@.",.
~ northAmericam
VAN LINES
COLONIAL NORTH AMERICAN
17 Mercer Street
HACKENSACK. NEW JERSEY 07601
Telephone 201-343-5777
Fax 201-343-1934
May 26, 1993
Planning Board Office
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
A tt: Richard G. Ward
Re: Proposed Minor Subdivisions
located at East Marion on
Dam Pond: SCTM# 1000-22-3-19,
20, 21, 22 and 31-5-1.2
Dear Mr. Ward,
This is our written authorization to have Mr. Joseph Frederick Gazza
act on our behalf in this matter.
S1~.'~
&~~~
Andrew Let tierr~ - ..
Bernice Lettieri
:'-;--":".~fTr:: 'i~lt i0:!
)"j
.-"u.' !
AGENT FOR northAmerican@VAN LINES
._._,...'.-.....,._,._~. '
~<\j' 'L:iJ ~,..,;'J
f' .' :_;~).-.~~'..,;_~g
.
,dfJ7=>~
v;:?~~\iHiJLr ~ ~
I;.,~ a..~
l/i:.:..~' 'i"r",:' ~ ~
r-!=::: ~'!lf.' ~~
','- ". 'I
"1_ ,
iJ oJ :i!: \
\i,;,,~.~ :J:J ~
, .~" "'~ (J
:',,'/'" ,,~..j)
'e\. .,.J '\" if
'0.,. ;?[ _' <~" y
::,.... ' .' .,').-
--::->c~~a{jjfY
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski. Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
SCOTT L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD \
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Fax (516) 765.1823
May 18, 1993
\
Joseph Frederick
P.O. Box 969
3 Ogden Lane
Quoque, New York
Gazza
11959
RE:
Proposed
Pond:
Minor Subdivisions located at East Marion
Joseph Frederick Gazza
Grundbesitzer Corp. and Andrew Lettieri
Andrew Lettieri
Bernice Lettieri
Joseph Frederick Gazza
SCTM # 1000-22-3-19, 20, 21, 22 and
31-5-1.2
on Dam
Dear Mr. Gazza:
This is to acknowledge receipt of your check for $1,500.00 as
payment for the review of the long environmental assessment
forms for the above-noted subdivision applications.
Our environmental consultant is being notified to begin the
review.
In closing, I must remind you that we have not received written
authorization for you to act on behalf of Andrew Lettieri 'and
Bernice Lettieri, respectively.
Sincerely,
7?/~ f' n/~/t/s
Richard G. Ward
Chairman
.
: /(Ju:z.n;~~
..' \j.-nl <-~
.' ,C ,,' rev r ~',
'v -'v I ,.,-~';'
fc~> fi.' "~~(,>"'<;',
":i.!...~. ''''. -:/""L '.'.' ~~ \.\.
[1 ::.;5 ,- <L-.' ':?;' ~ B
~ ;..,"\ ,/,' ~J'"
',\ ~~.. .A~~ ( ';;", ~ ~
'~.;;> "). -,' ..~
-':" '~?:1,., . _:"~~_.,~.:,,/y
\~ ";/' ";'->1<:/
':~__ <. ',,1 '>-,::::"..;
"-~_~--u>>JY-'
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Richard G, Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
SCOTT L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Telephone (516) 765,1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
Fax (516) 765,1823
May 18, 1993
Charles Voorhis
Cramer, Voorhis & Associates, Inc.
54 North Country Road
Miller Place, New York 11764
RE:
Proposed
Pond:
Minor Subdivisions located at East Marion on Dam
Joseph Frederick Gazza
Grundbesitzer Corp. and Andrew Lettieri
Andrew Lettieri
Bernice Lettieri
Joseph Frederick Gazza
SCTM # 1000-22-3-19, 20,' 21 ,22 and'
31':~';-2'f" "
Dear Mr. Voorhis:
In February 1992, this office referred to your firm, five long
environmental assessment forms, maps and other relevant
documentation pertinent to the environmental review of the above
noted subdivision applications.
This is to acknowledge receipt of a check for $1,500,00 from the
applicants for the environmental review of same. Please proceed
with the review, If additional information is needed, please do
not hesitate to call Valerie Scopaz.
Sincerely,
~<).#~~
Richard G<'Ward :>
Chairman
Ene. Referral letter of February 4, 1992
----
PLANNING BOJ\RD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman
George Rilchie Latham. Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
Telephone (516) 765-1938
~.t
..... ,....'.-;,.
:. ;:'1
,: ;
Joseph Frederick
P.O. Dox "6"
3 Odgcn :".n<:
OUoguc, t~y ll~J~~'
I
,
sut3H~
~ 'i>\IfFOl,t tl
~'.J~~
~ ~
C> .
en ;;e
SCOTT L. HARRIS
JOSEPH FREDERICK GAZZA-ATIY
P.O. BOX 969, 5 OGDEN LANE .
aUOGUE, NY 11959
PH. 516-653-5766
50-5461214
4162
..r. 1:$.
19~
rAY TO THE J.
O",,[R 0' 11"" t a'v.!...,l
t="..~~~t-!v",.\....l
I $ IJQo:'"
.1
, ,,';!;:
~"'~y TJ....t!o W
I "U":AU=~:; ~o..~=;.~~:~:_A::':~:
I.....'"
;. ':0 ~.~ I,D ~~ b I,,:. 32 00 ~_~ 5 ~ ~_"' -~~~ .
OOllAI~S
-~~.;....
RE: Proposed Minor Subdivisions
located at East Marion on
Dam Pond
".~;,- ""~ ''-.
Joseph Frederick Gazza
SCTM~1000-22-3-19
::._:JDC1l\\'\
~ : i . t
; :... \
i
Bernice Lettieri
SCTM~1000-22-3-20
Joseph Frederick Gazza
SCTM#1000-22-3-21
;
L
i .._-.,.",.;~;"'-'
~ SOJI\1.f}~~Y.)~;\;:~ ,l
nu",jf.~\\.;,) t:l.li"'-".Q__....,___.
-~..:----~.---:"",
Grundbesitzer Corporation
and Andrew Lettieri
SCTM#1000-22-3-22
Andrew Lettieri
SCTM>>1000-31-5-1.2
:~;.,~:;: ,Dear Mr. Gazza:
':'i';t!A~;::rz~;~~b,'S:~.;ii:_\f-:~k~.",:.,:.::"f'r~_l-''i.'~,." __ _'.
_. ~ . .--.. "'-~-..-..- :---.. '.....~-,,- -~'....._.------ "-","- ^,~~,.~.,
h_"~'~"_ "-'""T" ',"_ _~_._ ",,_, ._,'
This letter is in reference to the Board's letter to you
April 9, 1992, (copy enclosed), requesting the environmental
review by its consultants.
of
f'r-d'-4 .l.
c.."- rt 41e, '-
r
(v ,.r,;; ---
of.
N ~~
N .- ao
..;:('. ~U)
>-0:;:.J!!!
...... ';"~:;:-
7!: \~l '\ hi)t f.,O
caJ (j~j' :In:~
..... ....,1"'. ~:;Q""
- 0::< o>-Ill
~ld~II1:t:~
a.. nl1l .W~
LLI w;,': mz-
Q o.:n: ~'\d:!
IX IL.O )(5~
Q J:r- Ou
u. 8J~ ~g
III ~0
o A.
"J.'"JV
State Environmental Quality Review
December 1991 and has not moved forward
of the environmental review fees.
Act was started in
due to lack of payment
Please indicate in writing whether you wish to proceed or
close the file. If you decide to proceed, the review fee is
$300.00 per application made out to the Town of Southold for the
total amount of $1500.00.
~?-q:I
~V'<
l.^-';.I~ -/u
.
.
Southold TO\fn Planning Board
16
May 3, 1993
Mr. Latham: Second that motion.
Mr. Ward: Seconded. All in favor?
Ayes: Mr. McDonalc, Mr. Latham, Mr. OrlO\,s~d, Mr. Ward.
Mr. Ward: OP1JOsed? Motion carried.
******************************
Mr. Warcl: Lo_~l ~~n c~tificates of D8termination.
Mr. McDonalcl: I mal<e a motion th<1t \{e send our comments to the TOIm Boarc.
Mr. Latham: Second, again.
Mr. Ware': Motion seconded. All those in favor?
Ayes: Mr. McDonalcl, Mr. Latham, Mr. OrlO\IS',L Mr. l~ard.
Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried.
OTHER
Mr. Ward:
division propo;:)
- Appointment to discuss pending sub--
--22--3--19, 20, 21. 22 and 31--5--1.2. Welcome.
Joseph Gazza: The Board may remcm'x,r, I'm Joseph Gazza. This evening I'lave
Mr. Andrew Lettieri, and his \life, Bernice Lettieri, in the orange sweater.
We, the owners of this property, have ':-een 1:1efore your Board several times over
several years; it proba1:11y goes 1)ac1<: even longer than that. I ,>rought along a
overall map -- mayhe I could refresh t1,e Board's recollection of where we've
been and mayhe the Board can thereafter, give us an idea al:x:lut \{1'2re \{~' re
going. I can't knO\{ if everyone can see -- I'm cutting you off, but \{e have a
series of parcels wlich are single anc se~3rately o~'med. ~is is the N1drew
Lettieri parcel. this is the parcel of Gazza, t'lis is t1,e parcel of Bernice
Lettieri, this is the parcel of Gazza, and this is tl)e parcel of Lettieri and
Gazza, as partners. So, we have separate pieces, they are separate tax lots
and they predate zoning in SoutholC' as single and separat<~ lots, ",it), the 2X--
ception of this overall parcel, \{hich \;as the sU'>ject of a prior Planning
Board approval \lhen~ \,e set off a lot anc1 the remaining approximaUey J 4 acres
was conditioned on no more than tl)ree lots, at that time. I'm doing all your
war': Valerie.
So, "'e have minor applications which l)ave been eoefore t11e Board for six or
seven years? ~
Mr. McDonald: Ten, fifteen.
Ms. Scopaz: It 'vas l)efore my time.
.
.
Southold Tmm Planning Board
1.7
May 3, 1993
Mr. L~ttieri: 1983.
Mr. Gazza: We've come quite a uClyS ~'iitn t"e ot''12r agencies, for exami)le tl12
DEe has been involved ,vit1l this project, and V1ey 'v~ve cone extensive "letlane
flagging, those ara all t1:1e num'-)2rs that. Clppear, and you can S22 t11e different
classifications of ",etlands. '1"12 S11ffol', County Hei11 t., D2pt. l1as n"vi.2'ved this
in connection ,lith ground\vater sup~)ly and uat'2r quality, and soil quality.
Some ratl-ter extensive Ivor1: Has done in t'lC? mirl 80's ()ertalning to tl1e avail--
ability of potahle \vater supply for the lots as ,1rOPOS2C]. A series of test
IVells IVere driven and analyzecl to determine if tl1e Hater quality IVas -:)ood and
the engineer calculated that there \vas approximately four times the amount of
IVater availar,le on the site than tl1e site l.;oulc1 us"!.
But despite the eig~t or nine years of revietl anrl aIot of ':lorJ.: t11at 'vent into
this we haven't rcc'2ived an approval on the map. Hr. V~tti2ri l>:eeps ask:in] me,
maybe I'm doing somet':ing "'rong and I non' t 11ave t'''e ang'.'fer for hj.m. May1,)2 I
am doing something '''rang. T'le purpose of tnis evenings m22ting 'vas to as!: the
Board ,.rnere \Je're going on t11.is sl11:ldivision. Mayl:2 He're loo1("inq at it \-Trang.
Maytle V,te sltould l:)e loo':ing a different direction. MaY",2 the Board can give us
som2 imput, some guideance, so may1-:'le .Ie could l)rin'J t.his to a conclusion. Mr.
Lettieri 'la8 ~2come 10 years older since \Ie ssarter3, and I ''Ie lost alot of 1:air
since 1<12 started.
Mr. McDonalc: You don't get any syrnpat~y from me.
Mr.Gazza: Bu~ mayhe, 1:Jit1l Vle Board's input ~'le might may1:)'2 correct a pat11.
Maybe ,,,e've heen going dOvm a urong pat~l, may~')e -;.12 need some advice from tl".e
Board. And that I s W11Y 1;'o]e' re here toni"Jl1t to 822 if He might ~)2 able to call
upon you for that. We put t~e map "efore you, I give you my pen. Give us an
idea; S110W us \v"here He're goi.ng 'vrang.
Mr. Waro: WelL may!:>e I'll call on Valerie just to give us a little ">aclcgrounc1
as to \here \le' re at and what \-le' ve given "ac', to you on it.
Ms. Scopaz: Well, basically ~rtlere this application is, W2 have five separate
applications l-efore tl-tis Board ancl W2 have not l)een alJ12 to proceed ~)ecause ~le
started t112 environmental reV.1.2\v. We l-)ave not l:1.~en al::11e to proceed with the
environmental revieIV. We're doing five separate applications and the SEQR~ Has
never concluded. The Planning Board's last letter ,rent out in Marc" of 1.997
saying t"!1at vIe need to malce a Cletermination of significance to complGte t''18
environm(.?ntal review and tl-tat 1'12 ,"ere asl.dng for paYITI'~nt of the environmental
revie\V :'ee of $300.00 for each application, for a tot'll of $1500.00. Basically
tl,at's IVhat ",e need. We need to proce"!d 1-1it.'1 the environmental revie1V. '1."'1-2
DEe and the HealtJ, Dept. so far as my un0erstanc1ing, vil1 not prOC'220 uith
tl,eir r.2vi2~'J of t~2 application r:ccause they don't 1C1ve a SEQHA fet2rmination
from t~e Town. And that's 'las1.cally ",here He arc.
Mr. Ward: So that's our next step, or your next step.
Mr. Gazza: Yeah, on the issue of SEQRA, ,,112n ..12 started eight or nine years
a:)o, tl1ere \las an attempt 'oy the DEC to 1,ave a coorr'li.nated revievr, and South--
~lo1d TO\'m \Vas invitecJ t.o join in that coorc'inat.0cJ revieIV, lout chose not to.
.
.
Soutno1d Tmm Planning Board
18
May :1, 1993
Mr. Gazza: It seems 1il,e ,;e're going to De pulled
"hen tnere's already heen quite an extensive SEQRA
Qac" into t'1e SEQRA process
Horl, done l)y the state DEC.
Mr. Ward: \'i'.lat application Has t'lat on?
Mr. Gazza: The overall suhdivision requires DEC...
Mr. Ward: You're saying t1lerc uas SEQRA reVie'i.T, i,Jas t"c:l1: on a particular
application you're ref~rring to?
Mr. Gazza: The DEC commenced their revie" on t',e entire sU':xlivision app1i..
cation. All of tne lots, looKing as a Hhole, t'le DEC SEQRA. And t1ley invited
Southold to do a coordinated, ~y several letters, and Southo1d either declined
or didn't accept, I don't '010'-1 '10'" you -.mu1c put it.
Ms. Scopaz: We ~ave a letter from t~le DEe u"here 't,{e questionec that. And
basically they came to the conclusion that t',e Tmm sl'ould conrJuct it's mm
environmental reVi2\v. ~Te ~ave to reach our OI.m detenninati.on of significanc2,
an~ \/e I n~ llaving a sep3rate action. '"rl'2 fact that the Town didn I t ta}:::e part in
the DEe revievr for it's p2nnit apparently didn't preclude the 'l'01ffi from doing
it's OHn coordinatec' revi~."" inc1ueling the DEC in 'Nitl1 it as well. That ,faS
outlined in a prior letter in FC"'oruary of 1992. So the DEC, so far as I am
aHare, the DEC and the T01m arc> on t'le same "'avelength. T'le DEC "as no ol1jec..
tion to tOle Tmm conducting it's mill reviel".
Mr. Gazza: I ,;auld agree t:lat tOle DEC Iwuld al1m, you to furt'ler revie", it,
and you certainly 'lave t11at rigl;t under SEQRA to corrunence another review. But. f
it has l:"ft=2i1 revim.,eo over a nin~ year perioo. May'Je ,.,e' re not revie,.,ing t'12
ri~ht things.
Mr. McDonald: Well, let me just offer you this. If all the data is all there,
you're all ready to ~o, the thing to co is get it toget'1er and let's start t'le
revie" process, "hatever He need, and then "e can move this thing ahead. If
you've got all the elata, let's g2t the process...get all the data, put it dmm
and maybe we're there.
Mr. Gazza: Well, from the revie,., >Ii tn tne DEC that's been cond.ucted, t.l1ey' re
focusing on th2 issue of crossin;l t~1e ,.,etlanc area ,.,i th the proposed road f and
they I re very concern20 a'hout this area, as "el1 as the Southald To~m Trustees f
,,,110m lIve had a meeting ,.,it'l in t"he fielr:-1, and tl1is is sort of the focal point
of this su1:xlivision, so to sp2a1{. 'T'he DEe sUJ92sted that alternate access be
obtained for the peninSUla. They're suggesting cominl] tnrough and connecting
into the Harold Reese su\yJivision access road. And the DEC is '1esitant to
approve this configuration until ',e nave exhausted t11e possibility of ontaining
access for t'!!e pcni,nsula, ot"'ler t:lan crossing tl1; s ,.,etlane area. No.., f I recog--
ni ~e t1lat concern ana that I s going to l-x:! an important pa:rt of th2 reviC?w
process under SEQRA. And t'1is one li t,tle focal point COU10 expand the SEQRA
and I could see t~e environmental impact study focusing on tl)is and ,=,ecominJ a
fet., pages several inches l1igh. NOH, Mr. Lettieri and I reco9ni~e tl1is f and
\.,e're trying to get an alternate 'Nay in. Mr. Lett.i2ri may"e you could explain
to t'le Board aoout our efforts to...
.
.
Southold Tmm Planning Board
19
MelY 3, 1993
Mr. Lettieri: Well, lve I v~~ met. ~.;i t.'l Haro1f'1 R20se on
last occassion I SP01(2 Hi th him he said 'dell vi11en I
1vor'c out something.
several occassions. On the
get approval mayhe we can
Mr. McDonald: W!,at's Mr. Roese's status Lig',t nm!?
approval right, hut no final.
He's got a preliminelry
Mr. Kiernan: We're 1vaiting for Health Dept. approval.
Ms. Scopaz: Right.
Mr. McDonald: So 1'1e still hole" juriscJlction in t~le SEQRA over ',is project un--
til we grant tho final approval, ri~lt?
Mr. Scopaz: What cIa you mean, rlo -"e still hav'2 jurisdiction?
Mr. McDonald: Until "0 grant our final approval, 1,0 hold jurisdiction over his
SEQRA revim.,. At any time 112 could reo-open it to reo-examine whatever elspects
of it l1ere pertinent.
Ms. Scopaz: Technically, yes.
Mr. McDonal".: So it's probahly im~)ortant that you move ahead n01;.
Mr. Gazza: l\1e~l, Mr. R2ese is no': obli.g3terl to ';rant us the access.
Mr. Ward: W!,at the SEQRA process is, to put all t'lis on tI,e tahle, anrl ma'ce
it a pac1cage and develop all the alternatives and look at all the options,
environmentally, economically, overy thing; that's the pacJcage that needs to he
put toget'ler. The faster you get going vii tt> t'lat, the quic1cer you're going to
resolve this subdivision.
Mr. McDonald: As time goes hy, just as you saiG, you're reducing your options
in t~le access. It creates n2W pro1Jlems ....lit~ V,e impact statem2nt, i f t~ere is
one. Whether t11ere is one or not, for th2.t ma.tter.
Mr. Gazza: Will t1:1ere 'oe one if...
Mr. McDonald: \..;rho knows? We don't have t'12 application, ",1e don't have tl1e
revie~v, \ve oon' t l-tave anythi.ng to lOok at to mal~e a determination, H"hich is
why 1'1e lvant to move a'lead. I t'lin'c if you got. it in that you would strengt'1en
your !lanc a~out t1le access over t.he alt9rnaV~ rout.e, rath:Jr t11an ~.,eal~en it.
But t',at.' s just my opinion.
,
~",
Mr. Kiernan: Ho1'1 dicl the DEC t.n~at tl1is matter?
Mr. Gazza: The DEC prefers 'm a I terna te access route other tt>an the crossing.
Hr. Kier.wn: W'lat 1'1as their SEQRA c1etC'rmination?
.
.
Southold TOI<n Board
20
May 3, 1993
Mr. Gazza: It ~asn't ~een final.
Mr. Kiernan: It's not final?
Mr. Gazza: They ,..rant me to prove t"at T I V2 ?~~nallster1 tne other alternative
access route. Nm." vlFtat is exl:austerl mean? Does i.t mean ,.,e met ,'lith l}im over
four years and lJeen to his car dealership in Roc'cvi 11e Center tlm or tl)ree
times. We sat dmm "itn 'limo Iv" offered +;0 pay for ',alf of his road. We
offered to share in the development costs of utilities. We've offered to QUY
a lot from him to get access in, ,,,e've...
Mr. McDonald: I thin', a determination from us IVould essentially solve your
pro~lem with the DEC. If you had your determination, whatever it would te,
they're probably going to loa', at tJ,at and 'Jo, I,ell if t1le T9\<n is signed off
on that, w'e must move. So I t1oin" the nest t',ing you can 00 is move yourself
ahead here. Because every day t10at goes loy, I e'on' t ':nOIV IV11at' 11 happen \Vi th
Mr. Reese, hut if he finally <'oes get 'lis Healt'1 ancl '1e's all 10c1:ed up, l'le no
longer have any jurisoiction over him and l-.1,ere's not'1ing I can do to 'lelp you.
Even if t'le study \'/ould indicate it, I Imn't 'lave any anility to help you. I'm
uncertain al;out my pOHer eV2n '.vi t;l it, but it's more t.han it \vould ~ once he
has the final approval.
Ms. Scopaz: You ',ave to 'ceep in mind he is moving aheao I,ith it. It '.ras on
the agenda; he's starting Ifith his l.ot line c1oange, so he's moving ahead...
Mr. Gazza: He's IH~e us, moving like.. .Can t11e Board give us any input on fhe
layout t10at we've proposed? (CH~GE TAPE)
Mr. McDonald: I I/Quld say the answer to that is the same t',ing. Without the
SEQRA, to talk about the layout, we're not...
Mr. Gazza: I 'NaS hoping to extract a little 1)i t more from you t'1an that, you
'mOl, tl-tis...
Mr. McDonald: I wish I could give it to you, Qut I oon't have it.
Mr. Gazza:
'las studied
over. Wloen
You 'mow, the applications have teen ',ere awhile. I ~m01, everyone
them and proloahly ':>een on t',e property several times, anel looked it
we started it was one acre zoning, no," it's t\vO acre zoning.
Mr. McDonald: Well, that's another reason to put a rus" on it then.
Mr. Gazza: 'f!1ree acre or five acre, v'11at I 5 next? But, are lve aS1dng for som,~.-
thing that's reasonahle QY creating t;IO acre lots, or do you thin], it's un--
reasona':>le. We don't want. to go dOl<n the I-Irong path. Some direction at thi.s
point coulo save us time and money and mayhe gi VO?> t'oe Board "',at you're loo'dng
for. .):
Mr. HcDonalcl: Your yield is determined >'y your "ul'~, t"at' s. . .
Mr. GaO':za: Well, "2 coulo'l loolc at a formula and determine t11at, and I agree
"it', you, hut...
.
.
Sout~ol~ ~o"~ Planning Board
21
May 3, 1993
Mr. McDonald: Until we even stake out the wetlands, how do we even ~<J10W w'1at
the bull{ is?
Mr. Gazza: We know w~ere the wetlands are by DEC and by Town Trustee inspec--
tions and site...
Mr. McDonald: Our expert has to take a look at it. We're like everybody else.
we go out there, and as a layman I ~ave an idea, right, but our expert is going
to go over it and say yes, X, Y and Z that's OK. We agree with this line, we
don't agree, and if there's a fight, there's a fight; if not then we can go
ahead and figure your bUll{ and we're on our '~y. We've got to start about
where we're headed. We really need to get into the process. I had thought
after t~e last meeting, ,~s it a year ago the last time you were here?
Mr. Orlows',i: You have a tendency to show up every spring. Is there a reason
for that?
Mr. McDonald: I thought t~at that's where we were going to head then, but
obviously I crossed a wire in the '~y I understood it. Really, tloe 'cest
suggestion I can give you is, get into the SEQRA on this and move it ahead.
That's the step that you need to ta'ce ri9ht now. Once that's ""hind us it's a
giant leap fO~lard.
Mr. Gazza: Would I be correct in assuming that this would 'lecome a Type I
under SEQRA?
Mr. Ward: Because of it's location?
Mr. McDonald: I'm wondering, is that a CEA?
Mr. Ward: Yes, it is.
Mr. McDonald: Then it's a l'fpe I, we have not'1ing to say about it.
Mr. Gazza: So as a Type 1, we're tal'dng...
Mr. McDonald: It's a long form.
Mr. Gazza: It's a long form and we' Fe ta l'dng almut a supplemental DEIS as a
presumption. Do you thinJ,:" it's a good presumption?
Mr. McDonald: You do t~'e long form ilnO '''e'll see. It's "een a year since I've
been out t~1ere.
Mr. Lettieri: There I s no vlay \v2 could possihly cirClUuvent that, if ?;e c~anJ2 tl"e
configuration...
Mr. McDonald: The only thing I can give you as a Cjuide On that is, t"e peojJle
tl-lat \.ler,= in nere l:x?fore you, th~ P(?conic Lana Trust, "had (l similar apbl1icat:.ion,
a Type I, and "hat t'1ey did to t'12ir sU1)division, and you can Jet a 100', at it
in t',e file, was suc'1 tl1at t~ley mitigated all the potential pro'Jlems in ad--
" vance, in that su'Jdivision, and t'1ey got a Negative Declaration. They ,,,ere
.
.
Southold Town Planning BoarG
22
May 3, 1993
Type I, and they submitted a long form, it Has a long Part :.1, ':)ut it ',.,asn I t
any impact statement, that's for sure, an0 t~2Y got a Negative Declaration.
Mr. Gazza: Well, going along "it'l tl,at id2a, if \Ie overcome the !1llr01e of this
crossing, "e might mitigate all the> environmental concerns, or the majority of
them.
Mr. McDonald: Yeah, ')ut that's 'dnd of inverted. Yes, if you can find a ,;ay
to mitigate them, you solve one of your pro>,lems. And t'1at's the 'dnd of tl-JinJ
you're lOOking for. Maybe your plan should show tl-Je alternate access. I don't
know legally, mayhe you need to get up to the T01'm Attorney on that, to see
what power "e have in that respect.
Mr. Gazza: Well, 1ve don't 'lave a 102921 access..
Mr. mcDonald:
l';:no\"1 if 'fe can
11m not tal1r:::ing 'u'lat pOHer you '13V2i ,;<[hat pOtier He
give you something t',at you can't necessarily give
have. I don't
yourself.
Mr. Gazza: Well, I "ave made prior requests to t~e Board to try to induce the
subdivision adjacent to ours to ~ave a coordinat~d access or a coordinated road
system, rat!ler than 'lave tvo roads side "y side. I have pursued that.
Mr. McDonald: We read your letter. Believe me lie pay attention to these
letters, too, >,ut we '<eep vaiting...I lY2lieve everything you're telling me,
nut in our papenlor1<, for our revie,,,r, none of this is corroborated ~~y our ex.-
perts or anything else. We have a map, yes, 'Jut our experts haven I t, even lJeen
out there to say, yes, X, Y Z, he's al-)soll1tely rig'lt. So that's vihy 'v2 need
to get into t!lis process.
Mr. Ward: I thin1< nasically, to let a year go Hit'10Ut getting involved "it',
your SEQRA process, and ~y nOH you lIould have ~een done; let's get in it
and get it going.
Mr. Gazza: We ,.,ere !1oping t.o reach a settlement ,.,ith t'1e sulx1ivision next.
door to use their road system, to eliminate this, whidl would really save us
alot of work, tl-te w1101e process, save the environm2nt...
Mr. McDonald: Moving ahearJ strengthens your !1and. '!'he more you vait, t~le
weal<er your hand gets. Once t!lat final approval, there's literally not'ling
we can do.
Mr. Lettieri: He seemed to indicate, at least to me, tnat he \.,ras \vai ting for
his final approval and t!1en we could discuss it, hut tl-Jen...
Mr. McDonald: Well, that's bet"een you and ~limi maybe ypu can.
Mr. Lat'1am: You tal'dng to Mr. R82se, Jr.?
Mr. T~ttieri: Yes, junior.
Mr. Kiernan: Have you spa)\9n to Mr. Reese's attorney in an effort to try to
move this.
.
.
Southold Town Planning Board
23
May 3, 1993
Mr. Gazza: Yeah, I thin\{ Il1ave. I'm going 'oac!< a year or two ago, I don't
even rernemb2r his name anymore, 'out I c1ir1 conversO' "ith l1is attorney. He l1as
complications. He has a ban~ mortgag2 on all the property. H2'S h2sitant to
grant us any right of '-lay until '12 get's 'lis su"'r1i vision finalized. He's
afraid that it might jeopardize, to t'12 slightc:>st d2gree, l1is su'odivision, and
he doesn't want to ta":e tl1at chanC2.
Mr. McDonald: Well, t~at's H"at uoulrl '1elp you ':ere. If H2, in our revieH,
said that that was advantag20us, it ta'ces that argument alfay from him.
- Obviously, we're not going to stop his subdivision for that reason if Ife're
suggesting that that be clone. Althougl'J, some people Ifould thin" that that's
the way we '>10r'-c.
Ms. Scopaz: You should ...e aware t'1at all
mental consultants, and it has been there
for the c1.1ecki De's ready to move on it.
of your [Japeruor~"::' is at t.11e environ--
for lost year. He're just llaiting
T'"JO' ...all's in your court.
Mr. McDonald: Is there anyway t1:lat 'I'le can.. .o~viously, money is an issue too.
Can Ife ma'(e this one application?
Ms. Scopaz: They have chosen not to merge their pro~erty.
Mr. McDonald: If they made one application, would the fee he lower?
Ms. Scopaz: I don't 'mOl", hecaus2 the consul tant is alrearly charging him less
than they usually charge. Usually, the fee is $400 per application. But he--
cause this is a group application ann all the properties are contiguous to one
another, they've reduced the rate to...
Mr. McDonald: If lle made one application, \fOulrl '1e be paying $<100?
Ms. Scopaz: Right.
Mr. Lat'lam: Well we don't 'enow.
Mr. McDonald: Tl1ere's an option. You've got to ma":e your ot;n decision, but if
you want to reduce the cost, you ma',e one application and then you pay the $'100
instead of paying...
Ms. Scopaz: What they have chosen in tl'Je purc'lase of the property is in five
separate forms of ownership and they've c'losen not to merge t'leir properties.
Mr. McDonald: Well. that's OK too.
Mr. Lettieri: Mr. Gazza m-med this property -. that's '101, I met Mr. Gazza.
,
".,',
Ms. Scopaz: He's sug'Jesting it woule1 be cheaper...
Mr. Lettieri: I 1,nm, and I appreciate t"at very much. Why clan' t ,Ie try t"at?
Mr. Gazza: I don't want to merge my land wit" your land. Please, we've b2en
trying for 10 years to ':orea', tl'Jem apart. now you want to put tllem together?
.
.
Southold TOI<n Pl~nning Board
21!
May 3, 1993
Mr. Lettieri: Are we just merging an application? We're not merging land?
Mr. Kiernan: Does the o~mership of the land have to lye merged in order to
consider it an single application?
Mr. McDonald: I don't thin!, so.
Mr. Ward: I thin'< you can com':>ine applications.
Mr. McDonald: Yeah, I thin', you can combine the application without comhining
the land. Essentially, you've done that already, you've come in as a group and
you're going...
Mr.Lettieri: Well, we did this to show t~e Planning Board at the time. ':>ecause
I'm not a developer by any means, obviously you can tell; when Joe said to me
well, 1<hy don't 1<e s'101< the Planning Board exactly "hat you "ant to do and what
I want to do Ivithin one application, to give tllem a better feel of 1<'lat 1<e're
trying to do here. T'lat' s ",'1y l/hen 1<e first su':>mi. tted our applications and our
details. 1<e sho",ed it as one continuous application or blueprint or whatever
you want to call it. '1"leoretically. there are five minor su1:x1ivisions and even
1<i th this here being right off the Main Rd., I coulcJ nave applied as a minor
SUbdivision with no problem 1<'1atsoever, because there is no DEe approval t'1at I
1<ould require over here. But I thought, and Joe suggested, WllY don't we let
the Planning Board knmv ",hat IVe' re trying to approve so they can 100" at it as
an overall picture. Unfortunatley. we weren't bright enough to realize along
side of us that someone else was rJoing, at that time I think even Billy Joel
"'as Duying the land. So we 'lad no idea "hat anyone else was doing here other--
",ise we would. have tried to meet ",ith the people that m<ned the land 1,ere to
try to go this way because Ive didn't 'mOH that I,e Joing to "ave a proDlem.
Because there is a farm road that goes over the Hetlands that has been used for
many years.
Mr. Latham: Yes, it goes right ca'm near the bay, very low.
Ms. Scopaz: Mar!e, one thing to ',eep in minn. if tlley choose to come in as one
application, it then converts t'le ",hole application in the Health Departments
eyes from a minor to a major.
Mr. McDonald: 0'1 yea'l.
Mr. Lettieri: T'1at would create a problem.
Mr. Ward: It sounds 1 i 1,e t'le $1200 is t"e c'lcapest 1<ay out.
Mr. Lettieri: Yes, OK.
Mr. McDonald: You will be at the Board of RevieH up there?
Mr. Latham: This is your roar' adjoining Reese's? If you came in with this,
you could put your own road at least this far, without any problem, couldn't
you?
.
.
Southold Town Planning Board
75
May 3, 1993
Mr. Lettieri: You mean if I'e l;or"ecJ out something I.d th Reese?
Mr. Latham: No, right in h2re. You don't nav2 to \;or', out anytning to start
your o~m road here, do you?
Mr. Lettieri: '!'hat's correct. rig!)t, (Everyone talJdn;:;)
Mr. McDonald: Yes, >'ut their thin'dng is, t'1at if you're going to ma',e tl]2
road from here to here, I,hy tl'O roads, li'hy not on2?
Mr. Lat;am: It li'ould he less tl]an paying Mr. Reese for it, >'ut you have to
pay someone I guess.
Mr. Lettieri: W211, "e thoug;t I]e I'ould save some 'lucks ann.'..
Mr. McDonald: You could ma',e a nea 1. sure.
Mr. Gazza: We offered to pay half. Not only tl]e road >'ut tl]e utilities.
Mr. McDonald: I thin!, you're pro'>ably going to ta":e a I]ard loo~ at that in
the SEQRA because that's one of t'1e num'Jer one mitigations that you're going
to tall, aoout. You're going to tal', about not disturbing that vletlano at all
for the road anymore. We're tal'dng about trying an alternative.
Mr. Gazza: '!'he configuration of lots on the peninsula, can the Board just give
us a little input on that? I knml you've all loo~(ed at it and I ':nml this is a
very visible spot.
Mr. McDonald: I've got to go bac', to t;e file and really dig in again. Be-.
cause there's such a mass of different lots and everything else.
Mr. Ward: Generally spea~ing, is that I thin', I'e' 0 he in favor of reducing the
length of the road even if it meant that li'herever there li'ere lots "e'd have
some flag lots or something to eliminate some road paving and other problems.
But I thin', these are all things t',at li'ould be aodressed in the environmental
revieli'. You're aS'cing for an off the top of the head comment there's one, the
cUl..de-.sac shouldn't 1)8 that far out on'a peninsula, things li'm that. But
t'1ese are all things tl1at li'ould 'Je addressed in t'le environmental revieli'.
Mr. Gazza: I'm trying to clean up tl]e map. If "e can clean it up and ma'ce it
better, it mal~es for less review and gets you somet11ing closer to what you're
loo'dng for as an end product. Do you finn fault \<ith t'1ree lots on the point?
Mr. Orlmm'd: We could give you all these anSli'ers tonight, but after li'e do the
environmental revie" it'll change the I,hole thing.
-,:,:.
Mr. McDonald: I Ii"lnt to ma'ce another comment. We need to be very careful. If
this is a Type I action, and "e are negotiating about I~lat you li'ant to do, in a
sense, Obviously you're only listening, you're not agreeing to anything, you're
just getting con111ents. Are "e conditionalizing your approval in suc'J a li'ay
that li'e ma',e your SEQRA illegal? '!'his is a Type I action. We cannot issue a
conditional approval, li'hich means we can't sit dOli'l1 with your map and start
ma~ing deals about this map to mitigate t'Je impacts on it. You can submit
.
.
Southold T011n Planning Board
26
May 3, 1993
whatever you want and try to minimize it, and you can read our experts report
and come baclc with a different application to try to ta'ce care of that. But if
1,e sit down and start trying to actually mitigate these; I'm not sure, "ut I
get the strong feeling that that's a conditionalization, in a sense, and not
le9a1. I'm not sure of that, ':Jut everything I've read 9ives me that im;Kess-.
ion. It may not r,e formally conditional r1eclaration, ':Jut it is in fact ,",ecause
you've made all these decisions to mitigate? it. I 'enow it's tec:micaJ..
Mr. Latham: I think you're right.
Mr. McDonald: Because we've heen sued about tl1is and lost.
Mr. Ward: Can I make a sU'Jgestion? Do you still have some more you'<J li"':e to
go over?
Mr. Gazza: Well, tnere's one more point. We 1,ave on t112 peninsula 001-;, four
separate lots tl1at have access over a farm road right of way tl1at's heen in
existence since Weno:Jel, hefore Tahor an"! Jou':x:>'cen. ')'1oose four lots, 1'fOuld
they qualify for four huil<Jing permits at tl1is time?
Mr. Ward: Well, you'd have to prove access.
Mr. Kiernan: Four single and separate lots?
Mr. Gazza: We have four single and separate lots.
Mr. McDonal<J: with access, you'<J he entitled.
Mr. Gazza: Would we have to come hefore your Board for determination as to the
improvement of that access road?
Mr. McDonald: No.
Mr. Kiernan: You ma'~e an application to the Building Dept.. they grant it and
no one challenges their building permit; you're in. If they deny you, you need
to go the 7,BA for a 280A variance...
Mr. McDonald: Or >lhatever else he c1enied you for.
Mr. Gazza: ~o would set ~1e improvement criteria for the access road?
Mr. McDonald: '0BA.
Mr. Gazza: If we didn't have to go to 7,BA, could the Building Dept. determine
crushed stone or...
Mr. McDonald: .If you don't llave access, you l1ave to go to the ZBA, so if you
do have access then l1e just gives it to you. He just gives you your ':Juilding
permit. That's all t~ere is t.O it. It's either hlack or Hhite.
Ms. Scopaz: Well, you have to l1ave Health Dept. approval on that lot.
.
.
Snuthold Town Planning Board
27
May 3, 1993
Mr. Gazza: OK, so we're starting out with four lots on
to the table, w'1ich we have, and we're as'cing for nine.
asi< for?
the peninsula, coming
Is that too much to
Mr. Orlows'<:i: Four is better, if you're as'cing us.
Mr. Lettieri: I thin1{ '{l:1at Joe is really trying to say and I don't t"in'{ l:1e' s
loo'{ing for a commitment, he's just saying do we have to go through tl:1is whole
thing and in your heart of hearts you're saying t"ere's no ,lay we're going to
approve this, maybe if you came in wit" less, the chances are...
Mr. McDonald: I used Plo~{ as an example to the people who were just "ere.
There was some tall, they were entitled to 14, no one ever figured it, hut they
were entitled to at least 10, I'm only guessing.
Mr. Gazza: That's t"e oyster farm?
Mr. McDonald: Yeah. They did four building lots; actually five lots. Now I'm
not proposing any ratio or any equivalancy there. I'm just telling you that
tney did that and they got a Ne;jative Declaration hecause what tl:1ey did miti--
gated the prohlems they were facing. You need to lory, at it in the same light.
I can't tell you the number, because again that's conditionalizing it. You
need to ma'<:e decisions about what is in your best ju<1gement and ,{hat you tl:1inl{
from what you've read. You got alot of material from the DEC, you've done alot
of WOD{ already.
Mr. Latham: They won't let you bridge this in any way?
Mr. Gazza: They said a hridge was their alternative two or alternative tnree,
after we've exhausted an alternate access. They have a classification of
alternatives that...
Mr. McDonald: I hope it's two, because if it's three you've got anotl:1er one
after tnis...
Mr. Lettieri: I guess you all 'mow Fran1, CicnanOt{icz, because I have s'lmm
this to Fran'{ many years ago and 11e' s a designer of beautiful things anrJ he
said we could really do a nice joh. You wouldn't disturb anything and for
whatever reason, the DEC seems to '?ant us to go another way until we can't
get.. .
Mr. Latham: There's a big hole down there with a fresh water pond in it, isn't
it?
Mr. Gazza: Ri~1t here.
,
Mr. Latham: A big deep hole. Very good water. North of you there were three,
four or five big lots. Are they still there?
Mr. Lettieri: I have no. idea.
Mr. T~tl:1am: This isn't Haro.ld Reese's here, or is it?
.
.
Southold Town Planning Board
28
May 3, 1993
Mr. Lettieri, Yes, that's his.
Mr. Ware, OK you folies can stay a couple of minutes, I'd just lilce to close
the hearing and get rid of our tape at this point.
Mr. McDonald, I ma'ce a motion to close this '1earing.
Mr. Latham: Seconrl.
Mr. Ward: All t'1ose in favor?
Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward.
Mr. Ward: Motion passed.
******************************
There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned
at 8,30 p.m.
Respectfully su'>mitted,
Mart'1a Jones
Secretary
~p~~ ,~~~
,
~--.
.
,-:f};:~''<~.'-;-'''~i'-,
.."f ""rfOl" ,~
IV,,""" '1.~"
(V"""II' c.t! ~
iiO'i;,". .........:.'.................... <:;: \.
~I" . .,. ; ~
h 25 ..;:,.~..'- '-', ~
~ en ,i'. ~":i . V
\,,,,,,., f. ~
;\ C:::>.,r,\~~" ~
~Q.[ ']I ''i~cP
~77'o
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L Edwards
SCOTI L HARRIS
Supervisor
Town Hall. 53095 Main Rnad
P.O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Fax (516) 765-1823
March 24, 1993
Joseph Frederick Gazza
P.O.Box 969
3 Ogden Lane
Quogue, New York 11959
RE: Proposed Minor Subdivisions
located at East Marion on Dam Pond.
Joseph Frederick Gazza
Grundbesitzer Corp. and Andrew Lettieri
Andrew Lettieri
Bernice Lettieri
Joseph Frederick Gazza
SCTM * 1000-22-3-19, 20, 21, 22 and
31-5-1.2
Dear Mr. Gazza:
This is in response to your telephone call indicating that
Mr. Lettieri would not be able to attend the planning Board's
March 22nd meeting. This is to confirm that you have
rescheduled your joint meeting with the Planning Board to the
close of its May 3rd public meeting.
The meeting will start at 7:30. It is suggested that you
be there shortly thereafter.
z::~
valerie scop~
Town Planner
. -'-.-
.
Ji:~j'""
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski. Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Latham. 1r.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
.::; ......".
,Yj2-,..;;.j
~'""
i '::::i
", -'.;J
;~;Yll\':"~:'\;,
';: ~ ';'~;::.< ~ ~
)':, =~ ';/\);q
~.-';~,~"
~,' -')1 1 ,,',..> 'f'
~'''~~:~~~[)j,~~"f')''
scon L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
March 17, 1993
Mr. Joseph Frederick Gazza
Attorney at Law
P.O. Box 969
5 Ogden Lane
Quogue, NY 11959
Dear Mr. Gazza;
This is to confirm that the Planning Board will be
available to speak with you and Mr. Letterri at the close of its
March 22nd meeting at Town Hall. The meeting will start at 7:30
PM. I suggest you arrive shortly thereafter.
I apologize for the lateness of this letter but staff has
been unsuccessful in reaching you by telephone for the last week.
Sincerely,
~
tiu' [C~/c&7~V
Valerie Scopaz 0
Town Planner
. .4~~ _
._""
\
,
JOSEPH FREDERICK GAZZA
~
6U6FiLE:"
P8
V.5
bJf1S
ATTORNEY AT LAW
P.O. Box 969 5 OGDEN LANE
QUOGUE. NEW YORK 11959
(516)653-5766 (DAY AND EVENING)
February 13, 1993
Southold Town Planning Board
P.O. Box 1179
Southold,New York 11971
Re: Minor Subdivision at Darn Pond East Marion
Dear Mr. Chairman Ward,
I am in receipt of your letter D.1/15/93 pertaining to the
above referenced and have discussed same with Mr. Lettieri
at Florida.
Mr. Letteri and I respectfully request to appear before your
Board to discuss this matter in March at a date that is
convenient for your Board. I am available to meet with the
Board sooner however Mr. Lettieri will only be returning to
New York in March.
for consideration to this request.
JOSEPH F~D RIC~ GAZZA
cc: Andre~)Let~ieri
48 Cayuga Road
Yonkers, New York
10701
l~ rn@rnOWffi 00
iB24~
SOUTHOLD TOWN
PLANNING BOARD
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kennelh L. Edwards
J'=~
I)/-" 'I"
,dP ~Uf,-Ol/( "
jY~.~{I' .... "a''''
.-';::.' ~.
;g-i,-',:)-r-, - -~
C) I.;..... .
en "i. i"" ~
~ \.' .~. J;:J
""# -~ """
,.~" "'"::!.. ~
.fIJ./ ~jr i-'S
.
.
SCOTI L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Telephone (516) 765.1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Soulhold. New York 11971
Fax (516) 765.1823
,January 15, 1993
Joseph Frederick Gazza
P.O. Box 969
3 Odgen Lane
Quogue, NY 11959
RE: Proposed Minor Subdivisions
located at East Marion on
Dam Pond
Joseph Frederick Gazza
SCTM*1000-22-3-19
Bernice Lettieri
SCTMD1000-22-3-20
Joseph Frederick Gazza
SCTMD1000-22-3-21
Grundbesitzer Corporation
and Andrew Lettieri
SCTMD1000-22-3-22
Andrew Lettieri
SCTM*1000-31-5-1.2
Dear Mr. Gazza:
This letter is in reference to the Board's letter to you of
April 9, 1992, (copy enclosed), requesting the environmental
review by its consultants.
State Environmental Quality Review Act was started in
December 1991 and has not moved forward due to lack of payment
of the environmental review fees.
Please indicate in writing whe.ther you wish to proceed or
close the file. If you decide to proceed, the review fee is
$300.00 per application made out to the Town of Southold for the
total amount of $1500.00.
...........
. .
Page 2
Proposed minor subdivision located at East Marion on Dam Pond
Joseph Frederick Gazza
If you have any questions please so not hesitate to call.
Very truly yours,
;@t!~ 7? U~+d /vf
Richard G. Ward
Chairman
Ene!.
.--,~.,""
:-.
,
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
B~nnctt Orlowski. Jr., Chairman
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
SCOlT L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Telephooe 1516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Soulhold. New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
i'\pril 9, 1992
Joseph Frederick Gazza
P.O.Box 969
3 Ogden Lane
Quogue, New York 11959
RE: Proposed Minor Subdivisions
located at East Marion on Darn Pond.
Joseph Frederick Gazza
SCTI1 ~ 1000-22-3-19, 20, 21, 22.and
31-5-1.2 .
Dear Mr. Gazza:
This is in response to your letters of March 10th and MArch
25th, 1992.
First, the justifications for the Planning Board's position
vis-a-vis the classification of these applications and need for
an environmental review by its consultants have been set forth
in past correspondence.
Second, the Southold Town Planning Board has not been able
to complete its review of the environmentally related issues
because the environmental review fee has not been paid.
Upon receipt of payment, the Board will authorize its
consultant to proceed.
Sincerely,
. 7 . cL
a--n-na:r 6:!-uh~c/' 7"r /"::S-
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
cc: Andrew Lettieri
Bernice Lettieri
'-""~',<:+,~
....:~....
.
""-...
JOSEPH FREDERICK GAZZA
.
-- /
J!.tff; ce
16
($
/'
.'
ATTORNEY AT LAW
P.O. Box 969 5 OGDEN LANE
QuOGUE, NEW YORK 11959
(516)653-5766 (DAV AND EVENING)
[i) ffi@ffiDliJlJij..
lJ1J APR I T 1994 L 'F
"
Southold Town Planning Board
53095 Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Pending minor subdivision application at Dam Pond, East Marion
Section #1000-022-03-019, 020, 021, 022 and 031-05-1.2
Dear Board Members,
The above referenced minor subdivision application has been
pending with your board since July 16th, 1985. During the course
of your 6 3/4 years review of these applications the major obstacle
to obtaining approval of the division as been access. It is obvious
to any reviewer of the above referenced that the proposed subdivision
and road system of the adjacent tract of land "Cove Beach Estates"
should be coordinated with our subdivision. '~our board has failed
to even attempt to coordinate the road systems of adjacent subdivi-
sions. The undersigned has, since 12-6-1981,requested in writing
to your board eleven (11) times to provide for a common road system
rather than two roads running parallel"with ot;hers over 1200 feet.
The NYS DEC had on 9-20-1991 outlined by lett~r (copy attached) that
the roadway as proposed independently on o~r subdivisions could be
ex~ected to adversely impact tidal wetlands and recommended that
access to our property be by using the proposed street or the adja-
cent property to the west, Cove Beach Estates. The DEC continued in
~ A that the Cove Beach Road would be the most efficient as well as
the most environmentally sound solution. The Southold Town Trustees
have informed your board on 1-21-92 that they are not in favor of
our proposE;!.d road system in the area where it crosses the wetland
area and further that this wetlan<:l, area may in fact be trustee land
and not available for road access.
It is apparent to the undersigned that your board is oblivious
to my eleven requests and the requests of the NYS DEe and Southold
Town Trustees, which all uniformly agree that a coordinated road
system be designed to promote proper planning and safeguard environ-
mentally fragile areas. Your board's failure to provide even a "spur"
to allow interconnection of adjacent subdivision.and ':road":SY8t.,em8.1J\;~;!"
between Cove Beach Estates and our lands amounts to poor planninq. . ' "
I respectfully request that your board reconsider the access
issues set forth above prior to your granting final approval to the
Cove Beach Estates subdivision map and road access system. I am
available to meet with your board to discuss this i$sue at your
convenience. Surveys depicting coordinated road systems have been
previously submitted by the undersigne~ to your board.
Please advise, ~ ~,~
cc: Andrew and Bernice Lettieri ~~/ J.///t,/"J'L
48 Cayuga Road " t
Yonkers, New York )0110 p\\ *. GG
Jose~ zza
encl. /I~ Iv ~ ;L.!:::::::;L
. ~~1I/-r"7;!'.. t'/~
via: Certified Mail RRR ~, .Jf-~~cn...r~~ ---,/-.'
"
P '1UU th!3 "U(
~ Certified Mall Rece~
~ No Insurance Coverage Prav!
__ Do nol use for International MAt
~~11>~'::~\ (See Reverse)
Sl'nt In
5,,11.../ J. ~ tt...... - lIo /Vl
Strl'fll A No
:ToV- foil"'" A.~
PO , Slate'" ZIP Code
.s"v.~.il M" 'to-I..
Postage
Certified Fee
Spf'lcial DeliV9ry Fee
ReslrictE'd Delivery Fee
o
0>
S!!
"
c
"
...,
o
~ Po!;lmal r
M
E
&
<JJ
a.
;(13-
'ill'
. 3 ond 4.1 Completl tlllll' ~...i'-WIiIiI;*_~I<~.ftITI1llIII!III'1Q. .. ""
Put your eddr... 'n the "RETURN TO" Spec. on the reve'.. .Ide. F.nu'. to dO' this will pr.wnt thlt card
from being returned to you. The return rece eo will rovid ou he erne f t II
the date of deliv8\Vj For ad Itlona eel t wing serviceS are avel8 e. 0"8U t postma" or or ee!\
.nd~h.ck bOle III or additIonal ..,vle.il ..tad.
,. 0 Show to whom delivered, dat.. and .dd,.....'. .ddr.... 2. 0 R.ltrlct.d Dellv,ry
(Extra dwrge) , .. (Extra :cluJrgt)
3. Article Addressed to: 4. Article Number
P<10<' ~3 70
p. 01 S.rvic.:
Iltered 0 ID~UI'Id
o"lIi 0 cpo
pr" Mfhl CJ ~'rtMn r~~cei I~
w. . b~si9n.tur. of .ddr.....
. nt .~A TE DELIVERED, \
ddr........ Addr... (ONLY If
...q.."td t>>Id fee JXIid).
I
$OUTi"\o 1.1 ,.,<..0('1 PIf'\NtVi(lif,
S~ Oqs.- /??19/n I<cI
5ouT\-\-OId.( /V-y. II
6. Signature ....;. Addressee
X
6.
X
? . 01 D.liv.ry
,,<'
" -:.
PS Form ~811. Apr. 1989
.u'S.G.P,O.1HI-231-1t1
DOMESTIC RETURN RECEIPT
.
t,'.
I.
....
.
"
;;
II
-t=:..
i "','1
l"
,I'I!
,,'
-I"
!rili
f. .~
"i'
Ihl'i
!i,lf({
;PUE
m~r
i-I,jl
.1 ~ ~
I
~ 8
...
\
6
1.......
I
-=-71.
I
.
~'''''''''' .
.
~:i: -
",: .
o
~
o 0
~ 0
:> ~
o I
U' . . j
. Ii'
I, _ I j
"
I
I
!
.
j
i
I
I
~
!
~
u
<
.
~.l -"
2 e ~
~'E; :
en AI - Z
~ V)~....;.
o ~,.-,
>-~ C~.
~ ).::
z 'l:V~
::>. .
o g ~
Vol:
@)~
~
't
...
~
.5
j,;f<i,:
;;~'l\
1
p
I~~!~
.
- -Ji<,'---Z ---~)i~ii
()tOOl< )lO no
Ofl.fO
-Oto'o.,n In
o. ,,,..._ IIO~
i..,,----i"oww..------
,
I! III
ii
tl@llij
I ~ i
"" I
II!, "
1111
!i i!!
.. . .,. ~ ':'
11111
11' I I I
;,IIJ,I!
~ jl ill
Ill! J
!I!III
III i
,
.
!dH
JHIl
It 1/\
<I,
~ J ;
Ilill
j ;!IJ
1:11
}.....~
~)
;{
.~ Q
.l:.
..,
-V '"
b l-
"'1
J 0
~
"
.~~
~O\~ 1 ."" I!,,~l' L l'"~if', .,_
~...........-
.
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennen Orlowski. Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Latham, Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
SCOTT L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
April 9 I 1992
Joseph Frederick Gazza
P.O. Box 969
3 Ogden Lane
Quogue, New York 11959
RE: Proposed Minor Subdivisions
located at East Marion on Dam Pond.
Joseph Frederick Gazza
SCTM ~ 1000-22-3-19, 20, 21, 22 and
31-5-1.2
Dear Mr. Gazza:
This is in response to your letters of March 10th and MArch
25th, 1992.
First, the justifications for the Planning Board's position
vis-a-vis the classification of these applications and need for
an environmental review by its consultants have been set forth
in past correspondence.
Second, the Southold Town Planning Board has not been able
to complete its review of the environmentally related issues
because the environmental review fee has not been paid.
Upon receipt of payment, the Board will authorize its
consultant to proceed.
Sincerely,
"ZK~?'-e~ ~~7:/cr
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
cc: Andrew Lettieri
Bernice Lettieri
'....
.
.\
a.0qL~
.P'~
f/1)"
t/5
TRUSTEES
John M. Bredemeyer, III, President
Henry P. Smith, Vice President
Albert J. Krupski, Jr.
John L. Bednoski, Jr.
John B. Tuthill
SUPERVISOR
SCOrf L. HARRIS
Telephone (516) 765-1892
Fax (516) 765-1823
BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
March 27, 1992
Joseph F. Gazza
Attorney at Law
P.O. Box 969 3 Ogden Lane
Quogue, NY 11959
Re: SCTM #1000-22-3-20, 21, 22, 31-5-2
Dear Mr. Gazza:
The Southold Town Trustees discussed your proposal to span town
owned wetlands and waters in connection with your subdivision
application, at some length, at our March 26, 1992 worksession.
The Board~ primary concerns surround wetland habitat
fragmentation and potential degradation of the wetland
associated with constructing homes and a road in this location.
We believe these concerns can only be addressed through the
SEQRA process and by comparing alternative development
strategies.
We do not want to overly encourage you in your endeavors for a
road in this location.
Absent a plan which would address our overall concerns for the
site, which is contiguous to a Trustee designated critical
Environmental Area and a means of providing an easement which
would clearly benefit the public (i.e. not provide an exclusive
easement) we would be unable to help anyone wanting a road in
this location.
On face value, the Trustees might even have a problem with a
public road in this location were the property entirely in
public ownership.
Any plans to develop the peninsula will
account the possibility that the waters
this "pond" are a finfish breeding area
importance.
have to take into
and nearshore areas of
of considerable loco
00 ~~~: 00 ~~ i~1
SOUTH OLD TOWN
PLANNING BOARD
..
.
.
A resident population of white perch and immature striped bass
exists in very close proximity to this wetlands on this parcel
as a result of the unique water quality and habitats provided by
this estuary.
The waters of this creek system are directly impacted not only
by the quality and quantity of groundwater inflow, but are
tempered by Long Island Sound waters penetrating the course sand
and gravel barrier beach at the north end of the pond in
addition to the obvious influence of orient Harbor and Gardeners
Bay through the mouth of the creek.
We would encourage any proposal which would preserve this
peninsula, thus protecting the unique scenic attributes of this
site and the attendant water quality and fisheries of the pond.
As discussed briefly on field inspection, we anticipate the
public outcry attendant with any proposed development plans for
this site to be severe.
If we can be of further assistance please do not hesitate to
call.
:p-1Y~ ~J!L
John M. Bredemeyer, III
President, Board of Trustees
cc. Planning Board
JMB/djh
...
.
.
TRUSTEES
John M. Bredemeyer, ill, President
Henry P. Smith, Vice President
Albert J. Ktupski, Jr.
John L. Bednoski, Jr.
John B. Tuthill
SUPERVISOR
scon L. HARRIS
Telephone (516) 765-1892
Fax (516) 765-1823
BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES
TOWN OF SOUTIIOLD
Town Hall
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
March 27, 1992
Joseph F. Gazza
Attorney at Law
P.O. Box 969 3 Ogden Lane
Quogue, NY 11959
Re: 22-3-20, 22-3-21, 22-3-22, 31-5-2
ID\VJ~
_2719&2
m
L....I
SOUTHOlD TOWN
PLANNING BOARD
Dear Mr. Gazza:
The Southold Town Trustees discussed your proposal to span town
owned wetlands and waters in connection with your subdivision
application, at some length, at our March 26, 1992 worksession.
The Boards primary concerns surround wetland habitat
fragmentation and potential degradation of the wetland
associated with constructing homes and a road in this location.
We believe these concerns can only be addressed through the
SEQRA process and by comparing alternative development
strategies.
We do not want to overly encourage you in your endeavors for a
road in this location.
Absent a plan which would address our overall concerns for the
site, which is contiguous to a Trustee designated control
environmental area and a means of providing an easement which
would clearly benefit the public (ie) not provide an
exclusive easement) we would be unable to help anyone wanting a
road in this location.
On face value, the Trustees might even have a prOblem for a
public road in this location were the property entirely in
public ownership.
Any plans to develop the peninsula whatever will have to take
into account the possibility that the waters and nearshore
areas of this "pond" are a finfish breeding area of
considerable local importance.
,
ed
e
"..c
.-~.
A resident population of white perch and immature striped bass
exists in very close proximity to this wetlands on this parcel
as a result of the unique water quality and habitats provided by
this estuary.
The waters of this creek system are directly impacted not only
by the quality and quantity of ground water inflow, but are
tempered by Long Island Sound waters penetrating the course
gravel Barren Beach at the north end of the pond and in addition
to the obvious influence of Orient Harbor and Gardeners Bay
through the mouth of the creek.
We would encourage you in any proposal which would preserve this
peninsula, thus protecting the unique scenic attributes of this
site and the attendant water quality and fisheries of the pond.
As discussed briefly on field inspection, we anticipate the
pUblic outcry attendant with any proposed development plans for
this site to be severe.
If we can be of further assistance please do not hesitate to
call.
Sincerely,
John M. Bredemeyer, III
President, Board of Trustees
cc. Planning Board J
JMB/djh
.J1r6Fiu!'S ($
., , . . 1'6
" vS ,/
JOSEPH FREDERICK GAZZA . _ '(I
ATTORNEY AT LAW rn rn@rnow rn
P.O. Box 969 5 OGDEN LANE
QUOGUE. NEW YORK 11959 l1\R ? 1 '992
(516)653-5766 (DAY AND EVENING) ,........ ........
SOUTHOLO TOWN
PLANNING BOARD
Southold Town Planning Board
53095 Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
36'3'l
Re: Pending minor subdivision application at Darn Pond, East Marion
Section #1000-022-03-019, 020, 021, 022 and 031-05-1.2
Dear Board Members,
The above referenced minor subdivision application has been
pending with your board since July 16th, 1985. During the course
of your 6 3/4 years review of these applications the major obstacle
to obtaining approval of the division as been access. It is obvious
to any reviewer of the above referenced that the proposed subdivision
and road system of the adjacent tract of land "Cove Beach Estates"
should be coordinated with our subdivision. Your board has failed
to even attempt to coordinate the road systems of adjacent subdivi-
sions. The undersigned has, since 12-6-1981,requested in writing
to your board eleven (11) times to provide for a common road system
rather than two roads running parallel with others over 1200 feet.
The NYS DEC had on 9-20-1991 outlined by letter (copy attached) that
the roadway as proposed independently on our subdivisions could be
expected to adversely impact tidal wetlands and recommended that
access to our property be by using the proposed street or the adja-
cent property to the west, Cove Beach Estates. The DEC continued in
~ A that the Cove Beach Road would be the most efficient as well as
the most environmentally sound solution. The Southold Town Trustees
have informed your board on 1-21-92 that they are not in favor of
our proposed road system in the area where it crosses the wetland
area and further that this wetland area may in fact be trustee land
and not available for road access.
It is apparent to the undersigned that your board is oblivious
to my eleven requests and the requests of the NYS DEC and Southold
Town Trustees, which all uniformly agree that a coordinated road
system be designed to promote proper planning and safeguard environ-
mentally fragile areas. Your board's failure to provide even a "spur"
to allow interconnection of adjacent subdivision and road systems
between Cove Beach Estates and our lands amounts to poor planninq.
I respectfully request that your board reconsider the access
issues set forth above prior to your granting final approval to the
Cove Beach Estates subdivision map and road access system. I am
available to meet with your board to discuss this issue at your
convenience. Surveys depicting coordinated road systems have been
previously submitted by the undersigned to your board.
Please ad.. vise, ~
cc: Andrew and Bernice Lettieri ~l~/"
48 Cayuga Road .
Yonkers, New York
Jose'J~ !'. G zza
encl.
via: Certified Mail RRR
"
.
.
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Building 40-SUNY, Stony Brook, New York 11794
(516) 751-7900
..
~
~
Thomas C. Jorllng
Commissioner
July 3, 1989
Joseph F. Gazza, Esq.
P. O. Box 969
3 Ogden La.
Quogue, N.Y. 11959
Re: 10-87-1200
Dam Pond Subdivision
Dear Mr. Gazza:
I am writing to update you on the status of the referenced project.
We appreciate the fact that the application has been pending for some
time and are making every effort to bring the matter to a speedy conclusion.
As We have recently discussed, the additional information provided in
your January 17th letter has answered our questions aboqt the Stage 1
Archaeological Survey. The survey is adequate. No further cultural resources
information is necessary. t
I
To proceed with our review of the project for a tidal wetlands permit,
we must confirm the building envelope setbacks from the tidal wetlands edge.
Please have the building envelopes staked as shown on the attached plan. As
usual, the stakes should be labeled, this time with the appropriate letter as
shown on the enclosed copy of the staking requirement plan.
Please also provide information on the' proposed access road. Will the
road be widened or paved? In the vicinity of the wetland crossing, we will.
require that the road be surfaced with crushed stone or other pervious mat "rial.
As previously stated; if improvements to the access road are proposed, please
submit 3 copies of site plan and cross sectional views of the work.
Please contact me when the building envelope stakes are set and you hove
decided what will be done with the access road. We will then re-inspect the
site and proceed with our review. Thank you for your cooperation.
GWH: rw
attachment
cc: file
Very truly yours,
'-y-IQ-U^,O~ ltJ I ~,..,,~
George W. Hammarth
Senior EnVironmental Analyst
../
~;/~~ York State Department o~nVironmental Conservation
/~ Building 40-SUNY, Stony Brook, New York 11790-2356
.
..
...
~
(516) 751-1389
Thomas C. Jorllng
Commissioner
September 20, 1991
Joseph Frederick Gazza, Esq.
l'. O. Box 969
3 Ogden Lane
Quogue, N.Y. 11959
RE: DEC Application #10-87-1200 Dam Pond Subdivision, East Marion,
Southold
Dear Mr. Gazza:
I am wr>t>ng to update you on the status of the referenced application
for a Tidal Wetlands permit to subdivide a 36 acre parcel on Dam Pond into
12 lots and construct an access road.
To date, the sire has been visited several times by Department staff for
inspection and wetland boundary delineation. The issues of concern have
been the proposed access road and the location/configuration of the building
envelopes on several of the lots.
My letter to you dated July 17, 1990, discussed the Department's concerns
about'the roadway and several of the proposed lots. In response you sub-
mitted detail drawings of the roadway and additional prints of the subdivision
map updated with our field flagged tidal wetland boundary and the designations
of the areas in question from the Tidal Wetlands Map. Our review of these
items indicates that the roadway and building envelope issues are still
unresolved.
Roadway
The detail drawings indicate that the section of roadway crossing the
wetland area will be at least 40 feet wide. As stated in my July 17, 1990,
letter, the Department objects to the construction of a 40 foot wide roadway
across the wetlands because of the filling and wetland destruction involved.
Also, we felt that a 40 foot wide roadway is not necessary to access a
maximum of only nine homes.
We have changed our position on the roadway to a hierarchy of alternatives
based on the expected adverse impacts to tidal wetlands:
(A) Gain access to the area of the subdivision north of the wetlands
by using the proposed street on the adjacent property to the west,
Cove Beach Associates. This road appears to run north, past the
landward end of the tidal wetland area to a point where a roadway
could be constructed eastward across lot #1 of the Grundbesitzer
Corps west parcel to join the current alignment. This arrangement:
will require the negotiation of an easement with the adjacent
property owner, but seems to be the most efficient as well as the
most environmentally sound solution.
\,/-:'
./
/'
/
,
.
.
"
Joseph Frederick Gazza, Esq.
September 20, 1991
Page 2
(B) If alternative (A) proves impossible, construct a bridge to carry
the current alignment of the proposed access road across the
wetlands. The length of the proposed bridge does not appear to
be excessive, and the only disturbance of wetland necessary
would be for footings.
"
111,(
I' '
, '
r
(c) A very narrow, maximum width 20 feet, roadway surfaced with gravel
through the wetland area. This roadway would have to be proposed
in a manner that absolutely minimizes the amount of wetland area
destroyed. The proposed 20 foot wide gravel roadway with 10 foot
bulkheaded shoulders is not acceptable.
To proceed, please submit a written statement evaluating alternatives
A - C above and the currently proposed 40 foot wide roadway. The statement
should explain, in as much detail as necessary, the feasibility of each of
the four alternatives from an environmental, economic, practical (construction
techniques, etc.) and legal (will all involved agencies' regulations allow
the alternative?) standpoint. Please provide written do~umentation of any
claims made. This evaluation of alternatives will lead to a chosen
alternative.
If the chosen alternative requires damage to the tidal wetlands (if
alternative B - C, or the original are chosen), the written statement must
include an additional section acknowledging the fact that the alternative
includes activities (filling, construction of bulkhead1ng, driving piles
or footings) which are listed as presumptively incompatible with the
preservation and protection of tidal wetlands and their values in
6NYCRR Part 661.5 (Tidal Wetlands Land Use Regulations). This section
must demonstrate that the alternative chosen either:
(]) Will not have an adverse impact on tidal wetlands and
demonstrate how; or
(2) The need for the project is so great that it overcomes the
presumption of incompatibility assigned the activity in
the regulations.
If not already included
section to elaborate on any
conflict with DEC's and to
in the alternative discussion, this is the
requirements of other involved agencies which
describe any mitigation measures proposed.
Building Envelopes
Please refer to the print of the subdivision map sent with my July 17, ]990,
letter. This map indicates the locations of the required stakes A - CC for the
field inspection. The July 17, 1990, letter includes a list of stakes which
were found not to meet the 75 foot setback requirement of Part 661.6. The
latest subdivision map (received August 17, 1990) has not been updated to show
all building envelopes a minimum of 75 feet landward of the tidal wetland
boundary. Please see page 2 of the July 17, 1990, letter which lists each
stake found to be less than 75 feet from the tidal wetland boundary. As can
be seen from the marked print of the subdivision map, there are four lots
which contain building envelopes which do not meet setbacks. Please relocate
the building envelopes on these lots to meet the required 75 foot minimum
setback. As the lots are all relatively large, it should be a fairly simple
matter to redesign the envelopes to comply.
/'
'/
/'
/'
.
.
..,."
Joseph Frederick Gazza, Esq.
September 20, 1991
Page 3
Please be certain to measure setbacks from the DEC flagged tidal wetland
boundary shown on the survey.
Please discuss our requirements with the other applicants. If you have
questions, please call me at 751-1389. Upon receipt of:
- An acceptably revised subdivision map showing all building
envelopes a minimum of 75 feet from the DEC flagged tidal
wetland boundary and the roadway realigned through the Cove
Beach property to avoid tidal wetlands; or
- Revised subdivison map with correct building envelopes and
the current road alignment with an acceptable bridge over
wetlands; and
- The alternative discussion/presumptively incompatible project
evaluation,
we will be able to proceed. Thank you for your attention in this matter.
Very truly yours,
~~t(), ~.
George W. Hammarth
Senior Environmental Analyst
GWH/rw
cc: file
.
.,
.
.
.
.
TRUSTEES
John M. Bredemeyer, III, President
Henry P. Smith, Vice President
Albert]. Krupski, Jr.
John L. Bednoski, Jr.
]olm B. Tuthill
SUPERVISOR
SCOTT L. HARRIS
Telephone (516) 765-1892
Fax (516)765-1823
BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall
53095 Main Road .
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
March 27, 1992
Joseph F. Gazza
Attorney at Law
P.O. Box 969 3 Ogden Lane
Quogue, NY 11959
Re: SCTM #1000-22-3-20, 21, 22, 31-5-2
Dear Mr. Gazza:
The Southold Town Trustees discussed your proposal to span town
owned wetlands and waters in connection with your subdivision
application, at some length, at our March 26, 1992 worksession.
The Boards primary concerns surround wetland habitat
fragmentation and potential degradation of the wetland
associated with constructing homes and a road in this location.
We believe these concerns can only be addressed through the
SEQRA process and by comparing alternative development
strategies.
We do not want to overly encourage you in your endeavors for a
road in this location.
Absent a plan which would address our overall concerns for the
site, which is contiguous to a Trustee designated Critical
Environmental Area and a means of providing an easement which
would Clearly benefit the public (i.e. not provide an exclusive
casement) we would be unable to help anyone wanting a road in
this location.
On face value, the Trustees might even have a problem with a
public road in this location were the property entirely in
public ownership.
Any plans to develop the peninsula will have to take into
account the possibility that the waters and nearshore areas of
this "pond" are a finfish breeding area of considerable local
importance.
. ....~,
"
I
I
~
A resident population of white perch and immature striped bass
exists in very close proximity to th! wetlands on this parcel
as a result of the unique water quality and habitats provided by
this estuary.
The waters of this creek system are directly impacted not only
by the quality and quantity of groundwater inflow, but are
tempered by Long Island Sound waters penetrating the course sand
and gravel barrier beach at the north end of the pond in
addition to the obvious influence of Orient Harbor and Gardeners
Bay through the mouth of the creek.
We would encourage any proposal which would preserve this
peninsula, thus protecting the unique scenic attributes of this
site and the attendant water quality and fisheries of the pond.
As discussed briefly on field inspection, we anticipate the
public outcry attendant with any proposed development plans for
this site to be severe.
If we can be of further assistance please do not hesitate to
call.
?-lY~ ~:m:
John M. Bredemeyer, III
President, Board of Trustees
cc. Planning Board
JMB/djh
.
.
JOSEPH FREDERICK GAZZA
ATTORNEY AT LAW
P.O. Box 969 3 OGDEN LANE
QUOGUE, NEW YORK 11959
(516) 653-5766 (DAY AND EVENING)
March 10, 1992
Southo1d Town Planning Board
Town Hall Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Five Minor Subdivision, situate at East Marion at Dam Pond
Gazza and Lettieri
Dear Mrs. Valerie Scopaz,
The Lettieri's and I are truly frustrated with the ex-
tensiV~ review and review time that has elapsed over the past
seven (7) years in connection with our simple minor subdivision
request. The Lettieri's may believe that the delay is my fault
howe ver, I have honestly been persistent to my best ability to
get the various regulatory agencies to move forward with the
applications.
I am unable to convince Mr. Lettieri that a SEQRA review
must be commenced for a third time on the application. He knows
that the State Department of Environmental Conservation conducted
their complete SEQRA review over a three (3) year period during
the course of which your Board was repeatedly asked to join in
for a coordinated review but never responded. I am perplexed
how a Type I Action since November 24, 1987 could be reviewed
uncoordinately without a lead agency determination, by the
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and
your Board to date. Possibly you could explain to me why the
Planning Board did not conduct a timely coordinated review with
the State Department of Environmental Conservation for this Type
I action.
Very truly yours,
\
'\
Joseph
erick Gazza
cc: Mr. and Mrs. Lettieri
ill
m@rnuwrnrnl
'Iii!
MAR I ,~ Il:}
SOUTHOLD TOWN
PlANNING BOARD
""
:::'0/,)
vS
mS-
\
.
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
SCOTT L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box I 179
Soulhold. New York 11971
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
March 4, 1992
Fax (516) 765-1823
Joseph Frederick Gazza
P.O. Box 969
3 Ogden Lane
Quogue, New York 11959
RE: Proposed Minor Subdivisions
located at East Marion on Dam Pond.
Joseph Frederick Gazza
SCTM >> 1000-22-3-19
Bernice Lettieri
SCTM >> 1000-22-3-20
Joseph Frederick Gazza
SCTM >> 1000-22-3-21
Grundbesitzer Corporation and
Andrew Lettieri
SCTM >> 1000-22-3-22
Andrew Lettieri
SCTM >> 1000-31-5-1.2
Dear Mr. Gazza:
This is in response to your letter of February 25, 1992 in
which you protest payment of the environmental review fees that
" were quoted in our February 20th letter to you.
Your letter questions the need for an environmental review
by the Town. The attached letter from George W. Hammarth of the
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation explains
Why the Town must conduct its own environmental review. It also
states that the "Town of Southold Planning Board must reach its
own determination of significance."
In order for the Southo1d Town Planning Board to make a
determination of significance, and complete the environmental
review, it must review five long environmental assessment forms
for five separate Type I actions. (The prior fee of $70.00 was
.
.
for the review of a short assessment form for an Unlisted
action. )
The quoted fee per application is $300.00. This charge is
not covered by the initial application fees that you paid in
1985. The consultant will not be authorized to proceed until we
receive your check(s) made out to the Town of Southold in the
total amount of $1500.00 or in separate checks of $300.00
apiece.
In closing, it would be appreciated if you would send
written authorizations from Andrew Lettieri and Bernice Lettieri
to act as agent on their behalf.
If you have any questions, please contact Valerie
Scopaz.
Sincerely,
~~u#d~~~ ~//(f
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
Encl.
VS:vs
cc: Andrew Lettieri
Bernice Lettieri
J
.;
,
(.
.
JOSEPH FREDERICK GAZZA
ATTORNEY AT LAW
P.O. Box 969 3 OGOEN LANE
QUOGUE, NEW YORK 11959
(516) 653.5766 (DAY AND EVENING)
February 25, 1992
Planning Board of Southold Town
P.O. Box 11 79
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Environmental Consultant Review Fees
SCTM#1000-22-3-19 to 22 & 31-5-1.2
Dear Mr. Chairman Orlowski,
Sl-tt.1yfi t..P
It?
/:5 I
t1S
}</s
A full environmental review persuant to SEQR was
conducted by the NYS DEC over the past 4 years including
a Stage 1 Archaeological survey. I possess documentation
whereby the DEC attempted coordinated review with the Town and
the Town failed to comply with the DEC request. It appears
from your letter of 6/19/89(copy attached) that the Town's
own Environmental Review Firm "Szepatowski Associates Inc."
did a duplicate SEQR review of this matter at our expense.
The suggestion that a third review of this matter be
conducted by a new firm as an agent for the Town (your
letter of 2/20/92) at an additional cost of $1500.00 to us is
uncalled for.
Please advise,
Encl.
cc: Andrew Lettieri
~ R @ ~ ~ W ~ fi1\1\
n IS Iii
, ,\ ij \.
f33 2 <3 ;,:92. \ i.-/ \
1
UTHOLO TD'I.,IN I.
SO G 0"1'"
PL~,~NIN .:,'" .,.' --'"
.
.
,
Town lIall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
TElFrllONE
(516) 765.1938
.q M..:U' \ /..,,-
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
June 19, 1989
Joseph Gazza
P.O. Box 969
3 Ogden Lane
Quogue, Wi 11959
RE: Gazza/Lettieri
SCTM *1000-22-3-(19-22)
Dear Mr. Gazza:
A review of our books indicates that the fees for the
ongoing environmental review of the above-referenced project
subject to the New York State Environmen~al Quality Review Act
have not been paid.
Enclosed you will find a copy of the bill that was sent to
the Planning Board by its environmental consultant, Szepatowski
Associates, Inc. for the review of the above-named project to
date.
It would be appreciated if you would submit the balance,
which is $70.00, to this office by July 3, 1989.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact this office.
1:.1.. H .2.:11;;)
(/<<(:y ~:7-1/,(/ tJ/
,.1;'/.- /' ..,_' . /'
, ,~... ,....,'.~ " I t... '~~"#_,f-t",^..~,-.1.~.....
___-...-1.,.~'V"..l.l... \...,.: ~-"~_. .'''' '"
BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. ~
CHAIRMAN
cc: James A. SChondebare, Town Attorney
John A. Cushman, Town Accountant
---"'T-'<l'-~'~"
.
.
SAJ~
DATE
8/26/88
SZU'ATOWSKI ASSOCIATES INC. ENVIRONMfNTM CON~lJLT^NJ~
Mr. Bennet Orlowski, Jr.
Planning Board Chairman
Southold Town Hall
53095 Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE =
AMOUNT
$ 905.00
$ 615.00
$ 885.00
$ 900.00
$ 70.00
$ 35.00
$ 35.00
$3445.00
Angel Shores
August Acres
Harold Reese/Cove Beach
Norris Property/Carr-Wanat
Marina Bay Club
Cedarfields
Gazza/Lettieri
.,.
PAYMENT DUE UPON RECEIPT
THANK YOU
,}T/
. ' .:If1'( _
~I ----e
~OWSKI ASSOCIAns INC. '"""0'"'"'' CO"""",
~~
&-lrlfTlr r
"C:) ., t' ':'.'3 ~
,:0 .J J :;"":
SOUTHOLD TOWN
PLANNING BOARD
QICE
Mr. Bennet O'~lowski, Jr.
Planning Board Chairman
Southold Town Hall
53095 Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
DATE
September 29, 1981
NUMBER
DESCRIPnoN
Angel Shores
Cove Beach Estates
Norris Property/Carr-Wanat
Tidemark/Cliffside
Hanauer.& Bagley
i
Gazza/Lettieri
TOTAL AMOUNT DUE =
PAYMENT DUE UPON RECEIPT
THANK YOU
AMOUNT
$ 70.00
$ 455.00
$ 435.00
$ 100.00
$ 425.00
$ 35.00
$1520.00
')
~D-<-
#~c;,\\fFOl0'
')~~"II.../'. ~'~"
~91o.;: .'. . ~
:::0 I" "'"
Cl t' . -
en.., :e
~ ,'. . J::!
...... '. ~ . . '<'
'%1.' . s::.~
. '? ''0./. J';~'- i-~. .
,;]I
=
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
SCOIT L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Soulhold. New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
February 20, 1992
Joseph Frederick Gazza
P.O. Box 969
3 Ogden Lane
Quogue, New York 11959
RE: Proposed Minor Subdivision
located at East Marion on Dam Pond.
Andrew Lettieri
SCTM ~ 1000-31-5-1.2
Dear Mr. Gazza:
The Southold Town Planning Board has referred the Long
Environmental Assessment Form and map for the above-named
subdivision to its environmental consultant for review. The
cost of this review will be three hundred ($300) dollars.
The consultant will be authorized to proceed once we
receive your check made out to the Town of southold in the
amount stated above.
In closing, I must remind you that we have not received
written authorization from Mr. Lettieri for you to act in his
behalf .
If you have any questions, please contact valerie Scopaz.
Sincerely,
~~. 62zL~;. ~ /t!r'
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
cc; Andrew Lettieri
CRAMER,v~~J~SO~TES
ENVIRONMENT~.iOf~G CONSULTANTS
.
-
\
,ftqjptu(5l-
tI$
February 18, 1992
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman, Planning Board
Town of Southold
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Requests for cost estimates for Ih~ subdivision
applications under the names of Joseph Frederick Ga:tza
(2 appliclltions), Bernice uHlerl, Andrew uUieri,
and Grundbesitzer and Andrew Lettieri.
Dear Benny:
As per my conversation with Vale:-ie Scopaz, the fee to review the above referenced
subdivision applIcations is $300.00 per project.
If there is any questions or the need for adJitional information pleas,,: fee! free to call.
Ain1erely, ) / / t1.
lfL-t~~brJ f1WU.~fr~1..-
Charles J. Voorhis, CEI', AIel'
m ~E~ 1~9U'S~2 ~ @
.'~ I&WM~W8A~~
54.2 NORTH COUNTRY ROAD, MILLER PLACE, NY "764 (516) 331-14SS
W:
'-,<
~Lf
16
1$ /
/V15
JOSEPH FREDERICK GAZZA
ATTORNEY AT LAW
P.O. BOX 969 3 OGDEN LANE
QUOGUE. NEW YORK 11959
(516) 653-5766 (DAY AND EVENING)
February 11, 1992
Board of Trustees
Town of Southold
P.O. Box 1179
Southo1d, New York
11971
Re: Proposed minor subdivisions Lettieri & Gazza
SCTM# 1000-022-03-019,020,021,022 & 1000-031-05-001.2
Gentlemen,
I represent the owners of the above referenced parcels of land which
have been under minor subdivision review since 1985. It is unfortunate
that I was not apprised that your Board would be discussing the above
referenced "at some length" at your 1/16/1992 work session. Prior to
your preparing any formal resolution regarding access to our lands I
respectfully request the opportunity to address your Board on the following
issues:
1. Fee Title ownership to the above referenced parcels as conveyed by Deeds
throughout each lots chain of title describes land as shown on Suffolk County
Tax Map(copy attached).
2. The low land lying along the boundary line~ of Lot 19 & Lot 001.2
j has been designated by the NYS DEC as containing plant species that
survive in a wetland area however this land area is not "underwater land".(*)
3. The ownership of lands of the Town of Southold is shown as "DaM Pond"
on the tax map photocopy enclosed. By what document do you base your
statement that the land along the boundary of Lot 19 & 1.002 is "Town
Trustee Land" (P2 of 1/21/92 correspondence of Town Trustees to Town
Planning ,Board.)
(*) The High water line of Dam Pond is accurately sho.;n on the ComIty
Tax Map and our surveys and does not extend west of the South West corner
of Lot 20.
4. The early Title to the above referenced parcels can be traced to Seth H.
Tuthill who designated this land the "Rocky Point Farm"'. On 3/20/1857
Joseph Lewis Tuthill & William S. Hobart ExecutorS of the last will and
testament of Seth H. Tuthill conveyed the "Rocky Point Farm at Liber 63
page 91 to Jonathan Truman & George Tuthill. George Tuthill who died in
1870 left a will recorded at Liber E Page 155 and Liber 10 page 602. George
Tuthill's heirs at law were Henry H.C. Tuthill and JUliett M. Lamphear.
In the early 1900's, Henry H.C.Tuthill & JUliett M. Lamphear by Deed Liber 458
page 402 divided the peninsula into lots as they appear on the tax map
today. Rights of way to these lots via travelled farm roads have existed
since their creation to the main road. The travelled farm road that crosses
the lowland area of Lot 19 & 001.2 exists at an elevation of over 6ft. above
mean sea level. This road provides ingress & egress for auto and truck,
contains no wetlands on it and my individual use thereof has been uninterupted
during my 14 years of ownership of Lots 19 & 21. The peninsula was farmed
land and as such required continuous lul'h"M-;o.v by farm equipment & tractors.
The idea of restricting AN ~.....J-l'J"'5 fAR..... re..--d ....,h,.J. iJ" ;lu.. o",l7 Lc.?AL Ac.c~
[C
f~"'''>) ~+
~
ill rnOOllill\YJ [~ !.
FEB I 2 1992
SOUTHOLD TOWN
PLANNING BOARD
1-0 over 20 aes for use only by foot(P3 your'etter s...,.'~)is a matter
our attention"Ti'~l undoubtedly be focusing on a our meeting.
Kindly advise when I may appear before your Board to discuss the
above referenced.
Res
GAZZA
Encl.
cc: Andrew & Bernice Lettieri
-7 T
"-
c
"''"'
,
('
/.
WfWtOlOI>Q
s""""'
M.D.eo
.~
1,001.1
.~
.......1
Do. ....
of>
I
:....-
.
~
~
-~-
J
~
,t
Hl "C 1M IJI
".
~
.
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
,~':'frr1! I,
",;;),,~~...,!~
-.v '.'1; '/,
""-"1':' .... <t4_.
:':1 : :",k,,_ .;.:..:,
~~ .~;:,/ :.
~!'~1;>~?:;'?'"
'. ,J "
SCOTI L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
February 4, 1992
Joseph Frederick Gazza, Esq.
P.O. Box 969
3 Ogden Lane
Quogue, New York 11959
RE: Proposed Minor Subdivision
located at East Marion on Dam Pond.
Andrew Lettieri
SCTM # 1000-31-5-1.2
Dear Mr. Gazza:
The following resolution was adopted by the Southold Town
Planning Board at its meeting on Monday, February 3, 1992.
BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board,
acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, assumes
lead agency status on this Type I action.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Board will wait
for receipt of a report from the Board of Trustees regarding the
accuracy of the wetlands line before proceeding with its
determination.
It would be appreciated if you would send written
confirmation from Mr. Lettieri that you are authorized to act as
agent in his behalf.
.
.
If you have any questions, please contact Valerie Scopaz.
Sincerely,
/) 1_ /' '//}..
Z;:ft/?,-~>t1 ~~Vf., /f/t'~
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
Encl. Trustee Report
cc: Andrew Lettieri, Applicant
Judith T. Terry, Southold Town Clerk
Southold Town Board of Trustees
Southold Town Building Department
Suffolk County Planning Commission
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
(Attn: Robert DeLuca)
N.Y.S.Department of Environmental Conservation - Allbany
N.Y.S.Department of Environmental Conservation - Stony Brook
(Attn: George Hammarth)
N.Y.S Department of State (Attn: Mohabir Persaud)
N.Y.S Department of Transportation (Attn: Charles Kilduff)
---
.~
.
0-((60[(:-
/6
J<:5
TRUSTEES
John M. Bredemeyer, III, President
Henry P. Smith, Vice President
Albert J. Kropski, Jr.
John L. Bednoski, Jr.
John B. Tuthill
SUPERVISOR
SCOTT L. HARRIS
Telephone (516) 765-1892
Fax (516) 765-1823
BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
TO:
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Planning Board
John Bredemeyer, I~
Board of Trustees~
~ ~ @ ~ ~ W,~II~
I
.
SOUTHO~D 70~Vi\t
PLMlNlf',G ''.'A'W
FROM:
RE:
Proposed minor Subdivision:
Bernice Lettieri SCTM #1000-22-3-21
Grundbesitzer Corp. - Andrew Lettieri
SCTM #1000-22-3-22
Andrew Lettieri SCTM #1000-31-5-1.2
DATE:
January 21, 1992
The Southold Town Trustees concur with your classification of
the above referenced proposed minor subdivisions as type I
actions for being contiguous with our Town Trustee CEA.
Additionally, this Board would like to go on record as opposed
to the road or bridge or similar structure shown over Town
Trustee land between the Andrew Lettieri and Joseph Gazza
parcels. As in the case of Wade Vs. the Town Trustees, we are
not inclined to permit any exclusive easement over Trustee owned
underwater lands and wetlands. This item is not negotiable.
The Board discussed this at some length during our January 16,
1992 work session and will prepare a formal resolution
reflecting this consensus should you or the developer(s) request
it. The Trustees will, however, not oppose reasonable uses such
as catwalk ramp and float assemblies for individual or community
use for small vessels or to bridge wetlands for access by foot.
Since the wetlands have previously been delineated by the
NYSDEC we are asking that Bruce Anderson, our environmental
Consultant, confirm their accuracy. Provided the wetlands are
properly designated, we may not require an additional natural
resource review from Mr. Anderson should your Board retain its
consultant for purpose of a review of the LEAF.
Owing to the sensitive nature of this area, we would request
that all buildings be located greater than 75' landward of the
accepted wetland line and that the most stringent land use
_'\ :,..;
.l
.
practices be encouraged though C & R's. This Board will be
interested in participating in any scoping session should one
be necessary.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
cc: Bruce Anderson
.
.
JARD MEMBERS
Nski. Jr.. Chairman
dtchie Latham. Jr.
.chard G. Ward
lark S. McDonald
Aenneth L. Edwards
;;;: ~).
SCOTI L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Soulhold. New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
February 4, 1992
Cramer, Voorhis & Associates, Inc.
Environmental and Planning Consultants
54 North Country Road
Miller Place, New York 11764
Re: Attached requests for cost estimates for five
subdivision applications under the names of
Joseph Frederick Gazza (2 applications),
Bernice Lettieri, Andrew Lettieri, and
Grundbesitzer and Andrew Lettieri.
Dear Messeurs Cramer and Voorhis:
As will become evident upon a reading of the enclosed
materials, the Planning Board, the State Department of
Environmental Conservation and the County Departmept of Health
Services are reviewing these five separate applicaaons together.
It would be appreciated if you would take this into
consideration in your estimate of time and cost of review.
Sincerely,
~~~~/~
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
,
.
2 - j-~7L
THE MAP THAT ACCOMPANIED THIS APPLICATION
HAS BEEN PLACED IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW MAP FILE
FOR THE FOLLOWING SUBDIVISIONS:
1000-22-3-19
1000-22-3-20
1000-22-3-21
1000-22-3-22
1000-31-5-1.2
.
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennell Orlowski, Jr., Chainnan
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
SCOlT L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Soulhold, New York 11971
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Fax (516) 765-1823
February 4, 1992
Cramer, Voorhis & Associates, Inc.
Environmental and Planning Consultants
54 North Country Road
Miller Place, New York 11764
RE: Proposed Minor Subdivision
located at East Marion on Dam Pond.
Andrew Lettieri
SCTM # 1000-31-5-1.2
Dear Messuers Cramer and Voorhis:
The Southold Town Planning Board refers the enclosed Long
Environmental Assessment Form and map for the above-named
subdivision to you for a cost estimate.
Also enclosed for your information is the coordination form
and correspondence from coordinating agencies.
If you have any questions, please contact Valerie Scopaz.
Sincerely,
~~~~/4
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
Encls.
Coordination Letter
Town Trustee Report
Robert DeLuca's Report:
Charles E. Kilduff's Report:
Suffolk County Department of
Health Services
N.Y.S. Department of
Transportation
N.Y.S. Department of State
Mohabir Persaud's Report:
---
~.
)
.
0-(( 13F;[f:-
1'6
1/~5
TRUSTEES
John M. Bredemeyer, III, President
Henry P. Smith, Vice President
Albert J. Krupski, Jr.
John L. Bednoski, Jr.
John B. Tuthill
SUPERVISOR
SCOTI L. HARRIS
Telephone (516) 765-1892
Fax (516) 765-1823
BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
FROM:
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Planning Board
John Bredemeyer, I~
Board of Trustees~
Proposed minor Subdivision:
Bernice Lettieri SCTM #1000-22-3-21
Grundbesitzer Corp. - Andrew Lettieri
SCTM #1000-22-3-22
Andrew Lettieri SCTM #1000-31-5-1.2
ill
~ @ ~ ~ W ~ 1m
JAN 29 1992 LJ
TO:
RE:
SOUTHOLO TOWI~
PLANNING gOARD
------...-.
DATE:
January 21, 1992
The Southold Town Trustees concur with your classification of
the above referenced proposed minor subdivisions as type I
actions for being contiguous with our Town Trustee CEA.
Additionally, this Board would like to go on record as opposed
to the road or bridge or similar structure shown over Town
Trustee land between the Andrew Lettieri and Joseph Gazza
parcels. As in the case of Wade Vs. the Town Trustees, we are
not inclined to permit any exclusive easement over Trustee owned
underwater lands and wetlands. This item is not negotiable.
The Board discussed this at some length during our January 16,
1992 work session and will prepare a formal resolution
reflecting this consensus should you or the developer(s) request
it. The Trustees will, however, not oppose reasonable uses such
as catwalk ramp and float assemblies for individual or community
use for small vessels or to bridge wetlands for access by foot.
since the wetlands have previously been delineated by the
NYSDEC we are asking that Bruce Anderson, our environmental
Consultant, confirm their accuracy. Provided the wetlands are
properly designated, we may not require an additional natural
resource review from Mr. Anderson should your Board retain its
consultant for purpose of a review of the LEAF.
OWing to the sensitive nature of this area, we would request
that all buildings be located greater than 75' landward of the
accepted wetland line and that the most stringent land use
~.
J
.
practices be encouraged though C & R's. This Board will be
interested in participating in any scoping session should one
be necessary.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
cc: Bruce Anderson
.
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
.
~e)I'lU ..s
1"6
j/5
/'15
-
Robert J. Gaffney
SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES
Mary E. Hibberd, MD, MPH
COMMISSIONER
January 24, 1992
Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner
Town of Southold, Planning Board Office
Southold Town Hall
53095 Main Street - P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
RE: Dam Pond Resubmission
(aka: Minor Subdivisions ofB. Lettieri, J. Gazza, Grundbesitzer & Lettieri, & A. Lettieri)
SCTM Is: 1000-22-3-20, 1000-22-3-21, 1000-22-3-22, 1000-31-5-1.2
Dear Ms. Scopaz:
The Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS) has received your letter of
December 24, 1991, regarding the above-referenced application and has no objection to the
Southold Town Planning Board's designation as lead agency.
Based on the information reviewed, and the overall site location within a designated Critical
Environmental Area (Peconic Estuary & Dam Pond), we believe that the magnitude and
significance of potential environmental impacts is sufficient to warrant the preparation of a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). We believe the DEIS process is the most responsible way
to assess the potential impacts of the proposed overall site development, and to examine potential
alternative actions which could minimize potential negative environmental effects.
In our opinion, individual reviews of the five separate minor subdivision proposals would
circumvent the comprehensive review requirements and intent of SEQRA. The implementing rules
and regulations for SEQRA state clearly that "considering ouly a part or a segment of an action is
contrary to the intent of SEQRA" [NYCRR: 617.3(k)(1)]. In January of 1988 the applicants involved
in these proposals were informed by our agency that owing to the interrelationships of the subject
properties, it was requested that the developments be consolidated into one overall project and map
(see attached SCDHS letter of 1/13/88).
In addition, separate project reviews are also inconsistent with the stated objectives of
SEQRA which call for agencies to avoid unnecessary duplication of rep
OWrIm
.MN 2 8 1992 ~
COUNTY CENTER
RIVERHEAD. N.Y. 1 1901.3397
PlASOUTHOLD TOWN
NNlNG BOARD
Letter to Valerie Scopaz
January 24, 1992
Page 2
('
.
requirements, and which recommend the combination or consolidation of proceedings in the interest
of prompt review [NYCRR: 617.3(1)]. Combined review reduces duplication of efforts and provides
the benefit of increased alternative design flexibility.
Based on our review, we are most concerned with the subject proposal's individual and
cumulative effects upon potable water supply, regulated tidal wetlands, coastal wildlife habitat (on
and adjacent to the site), public access to water resources, and local visual aesthetics in this highly
visible and scenic area.
In addition, we submit the following comments for your consideration.
I. Suffolk County Sanitary Code (SCSC)
A. Article 6 Application Status:
The SCDHS has received five separate applications for two and three-lot realty subdivisions of
overall site. To date, our agency has issued approval for only one 2-lot land division on the overall
property. This approval (Minor Map of Andrew Lettieri) issued in 1985, involved the southernmost
portion of the overall site (SCTM#: 1000-31-5-1.2). All of the other applications are currently
incomplete.
Please be advised that SCDHS subdivision approvals automatically expire if the applicant has not
filed a realty subdivision map with the Office of the Clerk of Suffolk County within six months of
the date of approval of the Department (SCSC, Article VI, Sec.760-602). Absent evidence to the
contrary, it does not appear that the minor subdivision of Andrew Lettieri was ever fIled with the
County Clerk.
The unapproved minor subdivision applications which comprise the overall action have remained
inactive since 1989 pending additional information from the applicant, and completion of the
SEQRA process. In January of 1989 our agency notified one of the applicants (Joseph Gazza) that
we would not accept a 1984, Town-issued Negative Declaration for a 2-lot portion of the overall site
as acceptable SEQRA compliance sufficient to warrant action by our agency, on what was then a 4-
lot subdivision proposal on the same site.
B. Water Quality Concerns:
Please be advised that test well data obtained in 1985 from the vicinity of the easternmost
subdivision (SCTM #: 1000-22-3-22) indicated high chloride concentrations. Potability of water on
this portion of the site has not yet been determined. Additional well sampling data will be required
prior to further action.
The overall site development map recently coordinated with our agency indicates what appears to be
a proposed community water supply system to serve the easternmost subdivision. Our records do
not indicate any such proposal before our agency. The DEIS for the overall action should provide
Letter to Valerie Scopaz
January 24,1992
Page 3
.
.
design details, flow calculations, and water quality data for this aspect of the project. In addition, the
applicant should make a formal revision to the application before our agency which includes this
proposal so a technical review can be undertaken.
C. Sanitary Code Provides for Clustered Subdivisions:
Article 6 of the SCSC provides for the clustered development of realty subdivisions, in which one or
more relatively undersized parcels is designed in such a manner as to allow a substantial
unimproved portion of the tract to stand open and uninhabited.
D. Lot Size Reauirements for Clustered Subdivisions with Private Wells:
In the event that the subject proposal is served by private wells, please be advised that lot sizes may
be reduced to 20,000 sq ft and conform to the water facilities requirements of Article 6 (providing
the project conforms to the appropriate equivalent density, and meets all required setbacks, and
separation distances for the installation of subsurface sewage disposal and water supply facilities).
Lot size reductions can often provide valuable mitigation for potential natural resources impacts
associated with large-lot development.
E. SCDHS Compliance Requirements and Jurisdiction:
The applicant must comply with the requirements of the SCSC and all relevant construction
standards for water supply and sewage disposal systems. Design and flow specifications, subsurface
soil conditions, test well data, and complete site plan details are essential to the complete review of
this project. These considerations are reviewed fully during the SCDHS application review.
SCDHS maintains jurisdiction over the [mal location of sewage disposal and water supply systems.
The applicant, therefore, should not undertake the construction of either system without Health
Department approval.
II. NATURAL RESOURCES
A. General Comments:
The overall project site is located in a sensitive and scenic area which has been recognized as a
Town and County-designated Critical Environmental Area, and as a Significant Coastal Fish and
Wildlife Habitat (Orient Harbor Extension) by the New York State Department of State. Staff from
the Office of Ecology have conducted a field inspection of the overall project site and believe that
approximately two-thirds of the property is valuable as a tract of increasingly scarce coastal habitat.
The importance of this site's natural resources value is underscored by its proximity to the adjacent
Cove Beach property which contains a significant tract of mature oak woodland. We believe that the
transition between the subject site's successional habitat and mature woodlands to the west increase
the site's overall terrestrial habitat value by providing vertical and horizontal vegetative diversity
and a related diversity of wildlife habitat. It is our understanding that the development design for the
Letter to Valerie Scopaz
January 24,1992
Page 4
.
.
Cove Beach parcel will provide for meaningful oak woodland protection in the vicinity of the
subject parcel's northwestern perimeter.
B. Proposed Development Desien:
The "grid" style lot configuration proposed by the applicant should be redesigned to minimize
potential impacts to the site's numerous and sensitive natural resources which include regulated tidal
wetlands, Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitat resources, visual resources, and limited
drinking water supply.
In addition, the overall site development will require the expansion of an existing faml road to
traverse Town and State-regulated tidal wetlands. Roadway expansion onto the northern portion of
the site will likely result in erosion, sedimentation, and possibly the direct elimination of regulated
tidal wetlands. In the long term, this roadway will likely channel stormwater runoff and its
associated contaminants into the wetlands and surface waters of Danl Pond.
As designed, the proposed residential lots do not appear to provide for limited clearing restrictions
which would help prevent the proliferation of fertilizer-dependant turf and its associated potential
impacts on ground and surface waters. We are also concerned that the lack of stringent clearing
restrictions will heighten the visual impacts associated with the development of this parcel.
Detailed roadway construction and drainage details should be required as part of the DEIS so that
potential impacts to the site's natural resources can be responsibly evaluated.
Also, a visual impact assessment should be conducted to examine the potential visual resource
degradation associated with the proposed action. We are particularly concerned with long-term post-
development inlpacts which could be seen from Main Road (NYS Rte. 25).
C. Alternative Cluster Conrl2uration:
We encourage the Town to require consideration of the enclosed cluster plan as a development
alternative in the DEIS. We believe this alternative offers significant natural resources protection
and maintains lot sizes consistent with the surrowlding area.
This development alternative provides protection for more than 20 acres of undeveloped coastal
habitat, eliminates the need for road construction across regulated tidal wetlands, and would
preserve the scenic vista which can be seen from Route 25.
In addition, this project design would confine development to areas of the site which are least
susceptible to coastal erosion hazards and flooding, and which also appear to have better water
quality (based on prior sampling data).
Letter to Valerie Scopaz
January 24,1992
Page 5
.
.
Also, we believe that when the proposed open space is considered in combination with the protected
lands of the adjacent Cove Beach property, the overall value of the subject dedication is
significantly increased.
The Town may wish to consider the possible public benefits of having proposed open space
dedications transferred to the Town or a suitable land stewardship organization for long-term
protection and limited public access opportunities (small boat launch, interpretive trails, shell and
fmfishing access, etc.).
At a minimum, our agency strongly encourages that protected open space be retained in its natural
state, and that no construction, excavation or f1lling be permitted in these areas. Open space
covenants and restrictions should state clearly that such areas are intended for passive (non-
motorized) recreational use and that they may not be subsequently converted to active recreational
or community use (ball fields, impervious parking, tennis courts etc.) in the future.
D. Indiaenous Veg:etation:
Indigenous vegetation should be used wherever possible in the landscaping of this project. Such
vegetation is well suited to the on-site soils and can provide valuable mitigation in reclaiming
disturbed portions of the site.
E. Low Impact Recharg:e Areas and On-Site Soils Protection:
In an effort to reduce potential impacts to indigenous vegetation, wildlife habitat, on-site topography
and unconsolidated soils, we encourage consideration of recharge areas which require minimal
excavation and structural modification.
Also, we encourage careful monitoring of any project which requires the creation oflarge recharge
basins, which we believe, have the potential to become unregulated "borrow pits" or "sand mines"
during the development phase of a project.
F. General Erosion Control Measures:
Leaching pools installed along the project's proposed roadway are likely to f1l1 rapidly with
unconsolidated sediments during construction phases of the project providing limited long-term,
stormwater control benefits. We request that the Town require a clean-out of these facilities during
and after the majority of the site's development. Furthermore, we encourage the periodic
maintenance of all such facilities on the project site.
In order to minimize off-site erosion and siltation, we recommend the stabilization of all
construction access points with a 50 foot long crushed stone bed (mininmm depth of 6 inches),
underlain with a commercial filter cloth.
.
Letter to Valerie Scopaz
January 24, 1992
Page 6
.
.
G. Clearinv and Manaved Turf Restrictions:
We strongly support the imposition of clearing and managed turf restrictions on individual lots
which can provide for greater protection of native vegetation, wildlife habitat, and reduce the
potential for areas of fertilizer-dependant turf.
m. SUMMARY:
Based on the material reviewed, we believe that the proposed action will have negative
environmental effects of significant magnitude and importance to require the preparation of a DEIS.
Only a DEIS can provide for the level of necessary detail required to assess the above-mentioned
issues. We believe meaningful discussion of alternative actions which minimize potential negative
impacts is essential to this process, and we strongly encourage the Town to require detailed
discussion of reasonable alternatives.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this application. If you have any questions please feel
free to contact the Office of Ecology at 852-2078.
Sincerely,
~~A)~
Robert S. DeLuca
Sr. Environmental Analyst
Office of Ecology
Enclosures
cc: Vito Minei, P.E.
Louise Harrison
Stephen Costa, P.E.
Charles Hamilton, NYSDEC
George Hammarth, NYSDEC
Mohabir Persuad, NYSDOS
Office of the Southold Town Trustees
Frank Dowling, SC Planning
.
P>lt-xick c::. HCllnin
SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES
DAVID HAIH~IS. M,O.. M.P.H.
COMMISSIONER
Janucu:y 13, 1988
Joseph Gazza
P.O. Box 969
3 Ogden Lane
Quiogue, N.Y. 11959
RE: SClM# 1000-22-3-21,19,20,22
SClM# 1000-31-5-1
Dear Mr.. Gazza:
This Depart::ment is in receipt of five separate applications
for Realty DevelO]:ll'el1t inVOlving the above referenced properties.
Due to the interrelationship of the properties and applications
it is requested that the Develc:pnents be CCrlsolidated into one overall
project and map, for SEQRA review purposes. This will facilitate the
review and varian <E process.
4.~
r,
If you have any questions concerning this, please feel free to
contact rre.
Very truly yours,
CL):
',-
;
r_.
RRR:1jr
cc: NYSDEX:
Sootho1d Town Planning Board
Vito Minei
Hamnarth, NYSDEX:
Royal R. Reynolds, PE
Sr. Public Health Encjineer
Bureau of Wastewater Managel1'ent
JNTY CENT I "
EFlHEAO. f". I I 9(
548-
,u~n1~~
JAN28~
\-IOlO ToWN
SOllJ",.,C. ~G.I?O
PL."'" ", ..
(
.
S;U6nt.C
/6
6
STATE OF NEW YORK
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY
HAUPPAUGE. N.Y. 11788
JAMES A. KUZLOSKI
REGIONAL DIRECTOR
FRANKLIN E. WHITE
COMMISSIONER
January 16, 1992
Mr. Bennett Orlowski
Planning Board
Southhold Planning Board
Town Hall
P.O. Box 1179
Southhold, New York 11971
Subdivision
East Marion
;?
Dear Mr. Orlowski:
, .
HIi' ~ qa'Z2fl-- -t /..di7e.-: ~tfM,1$ld)t/:)-
We have no project on NY25 in the area, in the next 5 years.
We have no comments on the proposed subdivision.
Very truly yours,
I"1f' ,1 /? dt1i ' /
(~Jc..~ ~., .
_~ JOHN A. FALO'r cot
Planning & Program Management Director
w.~Ii~\~:] Ii ~
~t ,rd) ~
\~ ~2\~
\lOlll'\O'll14
i\}!:!lIll1G IlO~R\)
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER
- --. ------,..--- -----------
~
*
..
Sli/JVIU[
18
Is
STATE OF NEW YORK
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
ALBANY, N.Y. 12231-0001
GAIL S. SHAFFER
SECRETARY OF STATE
January 13, 1991
Valerie Scopaz
Planning Board Office
Town of Southold
Town Hall
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971
Dear Ms. Scopaz:
I refer to your correspondence, dated December 24, 1991,
to this office regarding designation of lead agency status
for the minor subdivisions of Bernice Lettieri, Joseph
Frederick Gazza, Andrew Lettieri and Grundbesitzer Corp. and
Andrew Lettieri.
This department does not have any obj ection to the
Southold Planning Board assuming lead agency status. We
would like to be placed on your mailing list to receive
Environmental Impact statements for those subdivisions when
they are prepared so that we can determine their consistency
with the state's Coastal Management Program.
Please contact me at (518) 474-6000 if you have any
questions.
Sincerely,
A~~~~~
Coastal Processes
Technical Specialist
MP/jtb
SQUTIIOLD toWN
flAIiNING BOARD
.
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski. Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
,,;,lirrul.! ,~
..'~" '" "a
,""~ "i. ~,-'
,/~ :- ~":
>: cA :?- ,:
'V" '"0.. ,"'~ ;..::. .~.\'
'_~':1, \ ";;,:'
?; .~
SCOTI L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Fax (516) 765-1823
December 24, 1991
Joseph Frederick Gazza, Esq.
P.O. Box 969
3 Ogden Lane
Quogue, New York 11959
RE: Proposed Minor Subdivision
located at East Marion on Dam Pond.
Andrew Lettieri
SCTM # 1000-31-5-1.2
Dear Mr. Gazza:
The following resolution was adopted by the Southold Town
Planning Board at its meeting on Monday, December 23, 1991.
BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board,
acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, starts
the coordianted environmental review on this Type I action.
If you have any questions, please contact Valerie Scopaz.
Sincerely,
~~~/t/s
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
Encls.
cc: Andrew Lettieri, Applicant
"
.. ,c,_... ".,.;_.""_d.-..;_'.."''''"";...............,~...:,:...-,....
.-' ..~.~_',"""IJl~_"'"", ........'"-""'_...~_.._... ~ ~"'-
.
.
The lead agency will determine the
impact statement (EIS) on this project.
the date of this letter, please respond
have an interest in being lead agency.
need for an environmental
Within thirty (30) days of
in writing whether or not you
Planning Board Position:
(x ) This agency wishes to assume lead agency status for this action.
This agency has no objection to your agency assuming lead agency
status for this action.
(x ) Other. I See comments below).
Comments: The Planning Board is reviewing this project
simultaneously with the following applications:
Minor Subdivision of Joseph Frederick Gazza
SCTM # 1000-22-3-19
Minor Subdivision of Bernice Lettieri
SCTM # 1000-22-3-20
Minor Subdivision of Joseph Frederick Gazza
SCTM # 1000-22-3-21
Minor Subdivision of Grundbesitzer Corp. & Andrew
Lettieri
SCTM # 1000-22-3-22
The Planning Board's initial determination is
that this proposal, when considered in
conjunction with the others, will have a
significant environmental impact.
cc: Judith T. Terry, Southold Town Clerk
*Southold Town Board of Trustees
Southold Town Building Department
*Suffolk County Planning Commission
*Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services
*N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation - Albany
*N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation - Stony Brook
IAttn: George Hammarth)
*N.Y.S. Department of State (Attn: Mohabir Persaud)
*N.Y.S. Department of Transportation
* Maps are enclosed for your review
"';'-'~;";'~'---"-"-'-'" ,.......;;;.:..;......-~,---....;,;.. --
.
~
.
December 24, 1991
RE: Lead Agency Coordination Request for:
Proposed Minor Subdivision of
Andrew Lettieri
Dear Reviewer:
The purpose of this request is to determine under Article 8
(State Environmental Quality Review Act-SEQRA) of the Environmental
Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617 the following:
1. Your jurisdiction in the action described below;
2. Your interest in assuming the responsibilities of lead
agency; and
3. Issues of concern which you believe should be evaluated.
Enclosed please find a copy of the proposal a completed long
Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) to assist you in your response.
Project Name:
Andrew Lettieri
West side Dam Pond
East Marion, N.Y.
SCTM *1000-31-5-1.2
Requested Action:
To subdivide a 10.66 acre lot into three
building lots.
SEQRA Classification:
(x) TYpe I
( ) unlisted
Contact Person:
Valerie Scopaz
(516)-765-1938
.
.
.
The lead agency will determine the
impact statement (EIS) on this project.
the date of this letter, please respond
have an interest in being lead agency.
need for an environmental
Within thirty (30) days of
in writing whether or not you
Planning Board Position:
(x ) This agency wishes to assume lead agency status for this action.
) This agency has no objection to your agency assuming lead agency
status for this action.
(x ) Other. (See comments below).
Comments: The Planning Board is reviewing this project
simultaneously with the following applications:
Minor Subdivision of Joseph Frederick Gazza
SCTM * 1000-22-3-19
Minor Subdivision of Bernice Lettieri
SCTM * 1000-22-3-20
Minor Subdivision of Joseph Frederick Gazza
SCTM * 1000-22-3-21
Minor Subdivision of Grundbesitzer Corp. & Andrew
Lettieri
SCTM * 1000-22-3-22
The Planning Board's initial determination is
that this proposal, when considered in
conjunction with the others, will have a
significant environmental impact.
cc: Judith T. Terry, Southold Town Clerk
*Southo1d Town Board of Trustees
Southold Town Building Department
*Suffolk County Planning Commission
*Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services
*N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation - Albany
*N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation - Stony Brook
(Attn: George Hammarth)
*N.Y.S. Department of State (Attn: Mohabir Persaud)
*N.Y.S. Department of Transportation
* Maps are enclosed for your review
.
.
I*~/c:,!
5.A!fi U'
fb
JOSEPH FREDERICK GAZZA
ATTORNEY AT LAW
P.O. Box 969 3 OGDEN LANE
QUOGUE. NEW YORK 1 1959
(516) 653-5766 (DAY AND EVENING)
December 20, 1991
Southold Town Planning Board
53095 Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Proposed Minor Subdivision at Dam Pond East Marion
1000-022-03-019,020,021,022 & 031-05-1.2
Dear Mr. Chairman Orlowski,
The above property proposed subdivision has been improperly
held in a comatose state by the Planning Board since 3/10/89 due to
ill advise that these separate parcels were merged. I appreciate
your honesty in admitting this situation in PP2 of your letter to
me of 12/18/91. Based upon this delay and the fact that the five
subdivision applications were all filed in 1985 I respectfully
request exemption fro m the ~ A106-38 E. (3) Section of Southold Code
that provides for a charge of $2,000 per lot subdivision fee.
An environmental review of Lot 1.2 owned by Andrew Lettieri
persuant to SEQR was completed by your Board as per resolution
Dated 12/18/84 with a negative Declaration having been issued.
Your statement that a coordinated review persuapt to SEQR was
started by your Board on 9/11/85 would be consid{ent with the
timing of the subdivision application filing date of August 1985,
however the coordination statement appears to be at odds with the
correspondence a part of the record to wit:
1. DEC letter of 11/16/87 whereby DEC conducted an uncoordinated
review.
2. Town Planning letter of 9/22/88 states that NYS DEC is
lead Agency at that time.
3. DEC letter of 1/9/89 outlines that project is an unlisted
action and that Town failed to timely respond to a DEC "Lead
Agency Coordination Request". DEC having completely reviewed the
project under SEQR(Including Archaeological) and having determined
"Negative Declaration" of this unlisted action.
I trust under the circumstances of trese applications over
the past six years that your Board will likewise determine the
action to be "unlisted" and issue a negative declaration. Since
this lead Agency was DEC and since your Board did not join in a
coordinated review after DEC request and with knowledge that a
type 1 action makes coordinated review mandatory there is no
reasonable choice but to independently conclude this action to
be unlisted and declare a negative declaration.
Resp
w ~
@
CKoEC"~Z1' 1991
SOUTHOLO TOWN
PLANNING BOARD
---~
.
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennell Orlowski, Jr., Chairman
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
SCOTI L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Fax (516) 765-1823
December 18, 1991
Joseph Frederick Gazza, Esq.
P.O. Box 969
3 Ogden Lane
Quogue, New York 11959
RE: Proposed Minor Subdivisions
located at East Marion on Dam Pond.
SCTM ~ 1000-22-3-19 Joseph Frederick Gazza
~ 1000-22-3-20 Bernice Lettieri
~ 1000-22-3-21 Joseph Frederick Gazza
~ 1000-22-3-22 Grundbesitzer Corporation
and Andrew Lettieri
~ 1000-31-5-~ Andrew Lettieri
(,;)..
Dear Mr. Gazza;
This is in reply to your letters of November 13th and
November 25th in which you responded to questions that affected
all of the above-noted applications. These questions had been
set forth in a previous letter from this Board dated March 10,
1989.
After careful review of these letters and the application
files, it appears that the properties in question are not
merged. Therefore, the Planning Board will proceed with its
review of the applications of which there are five.
A coordinated environmental review pursuant to SEQR was
started on September 11, 1985 for four of the applications.
However, a determination of significance was never made. It
also appears that the environmental review of the southernmost
lot owned by Andrew Lettieri was not started. In order for the
Planning Board to comply with the State law and complete the
environmental review, we will need a completed long
environmental assessment form for each application. The short
forms that were submitted in 1985 are no longer usable due to
the designation by the Town Trustees on November 24, 1987 of Dam
Pond as a Critical Environmental Area. According to the State
Environmental Quality Review Act, all proposals in Critical
..~'lr
........;.;;;....';.; +.""':.4,~'
.
.
Environmental Areas must be reviewed as Type I actions. A long
environmental assessment form is enclosed.
After receiving the completed assessment forms, the
Planning Board will continue the coordinated review that was
started in 1985. The fee for our consultant's environmental
review services will be sent under separate cover.
Because of the length of time that has elapsed, we wish to
send each of the coordinating agencies another copy of each
subdivision map. It would be helpful if you could send the
office eight copies of each of the five subdivision maps, plus
eight of the general map that shows all of the applications.
It also would be appreciated if you could complete the
enclosed application form for the minor subdivision of the
remainder of the Lettieri lot (SCTM # 1000-31-5-2.1) into three
lots so that our file is complete.
since you have authored all the recent correspondence on
behalf of the separate applications noted above, it has been
assumed that you are the designated agent for each application.
However, written confirmation of this from each of the
applicants would be appreciated.
If you have any questions, please contact Valerie Scopaz.
Sincerely,
~~'/a;~
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.I"'IN~
Chairman
Encls.
cc: Harvey A. Arnoff, Town Attorney
Andrew and Bernice Lettieri
.'
."''''';:':'''"''''':~''''~'~~
"
eC
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Building 40-SUNY. Stony Brook, New York 11794
..
~
~
.'
e(
(516) 751-7900
-....~".-
'.11 is Thomas C. Jorllng
~ ~Commissloner
";'1
,:i1jl
Ii U ;
\ L-.i !
r~
..:;,t
January 9, 1989
".;;
; ;"JW~
. \
I ,
:iOUWOLO iGWN
PWll'lING BO'.@
Town of Southold Planning Board
Town Hall
53095 Main Rd.
Southold. NY 11971
Attn: Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman
Re: Dam Pond Subdivision
DEC No. 10-87-1200
SCTM No. 1000-22-3-19 thru 22
100U-31-~-l.l
Dear Mr. Orlowski:
I am writing in response to your letter of September 22, 1988, and a subsequent
telephone conversation between Valerie Scopaz of your office and Robert Greene,
the Regional Permit Administrator, concerning the above referenced project. Please
accept my apologies for the delay in responding to your letter and telephone inquiries
regarding a shift in lead agency under the State Environmental Quality Review
Act (SEQR) from DEC to Town of Southold Planning Board.
A review of our file indicates that an application for a DEC Tidal Wetlands
permit was received by this office on July 9, 1987. I determined that the proposed
project was an unlisted action pursuant to the listing of activities in the SEQR
regulations, 6NYCRR Part [617.12, 13]; but suspected that the project might be
considered a Type I action by the Town. A letter was sent to Town Supervisor
Murphy on or about August 5, 1987, along with a copy of the DEC application, environ-
mental assessment form and preliminary subdivision map. This letter was our standard
"I;ead Agency Coordination Request" form and indicated that the Department had
no objection to the appropriate Town body assuming lead agency respon~ibilities
for the poroject. The letter requested a response within 30 days of the August 5,
1987 date of the coordination let~er as per Part [617.6(c)( I)]. As the 30 day
period for establishing lead agency drew to a close with no response from the
Town, I telephoned Diane Shultz of the Planning Board office, who seemed to think
that the Planning Board would be interested in assuming lead agency for this project.
However, no written response was received from the Planning Board until your
September 22, 1988 letter. No further action was taken by the Department until
November of 1987 when we decided to proceed with an uncoordinated SEQR review
as per Part [617.6(d)], which resulted in our preliminary determination that the
project will probably not have a significant effect on the environment. We then
proceeded with our review of the project for specific tidal wetland impacts. In
late August of 1988, we learned that there is a possibility of significant cultural
-
e(
e<-
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
January 9, 1989
Page 2
resources being located on the project site and required a literature search and
preliminary archaeological investigation pursuant to the State Historic Preservation
Act. This work is on-going and will allow us to make our official determination
of significance.
With regard to your request for our consent to a change in lead agency from
. DEC to Town Planning Board, we feel that our consent is unnecessary. We believe
that no actual coordinated SEQR review was achieved because no written response
was received to our August 5, 1987 lead agency coordination request within the
statutory time frame. We initiated a coordination attempt, which was unsuccessful,
so we proceeded with our own uncoordinated SEQR review which will likely result
in a negative declaration. This uncoordinated review was started because we regarded
this project as an unlisted action, and Part [617.6(d)(I)(2)(3)] provides for
uncoordinated review of unlisted actions and separate determinations of significance
from each involved agency. This situation may change if the archaeological work
and luerature search show that the site contains a prehistoric site listed on
the National Register of Historic Places or nominated for inclusion on the National
Register. If this situation arises, then we would consider the project a Type
I action from the new information. Coordinated review would then be mandatory.
Please note that Part [617.6(d)(3)] states: '~or uncoordinated review of
unlisted actions, each involved agency must make its own determination of significance.
Each involved agency is considered a lead agency wh en making its determination
of significance. At any time prior to an agency's final decision, that a~ency's
negative declaration may be superseded by a positive declaration issued by any
other involved agency.1I Since our agencies are involved in an uncoordinated review
of this action, each agency must make its own, independent determination of signi-
ficance. As mentioned above, the Department will probably prepare a negative
declaration if tre archaeological work reveals no new information. Town of Southold
Planning Board must reach its own determination of significance. A positive declarat-
ion by the Planning Board will supersede a negative declaration issued by any
other involved agency as well as prohibit involved agencies from reaching their
final decisions until after a final environmental impact statement is filed and
findings are prepared. We believe that the Planning Board does not need our consent
td" act as lead agency, and is free to make its determination of significance as
it sees fit.
I hope this adequately explains the Department's pos1t10n on the matter.
If you have any questions or would like to discuss this further, please call at
(516) 751-7900.
GWH : j f
cc: R. Greene
J.F. Gazza, Esq.
file
Very truly yours,
'.'1_ . I J}1 ...L/J
~ :.p.(""?:J- ~{" 'Mv",^^",'CVtr;u-
George W. Harnrnarth
Environmental Analyst
. .
$).l6Pluf
.'~
....
~
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Building 40-SUNY, Stony Brook, New York 11794
(516) 751-7900
Thomas C. Jorling
Commissioner
July 3, 1989
Joseph F. Gazza, Esq.
P. O. Box 969
3 Ogden La.
Quogue, N.Y. 11959
Re: 10-87-1200
Dam Pond Subdivision
Dear Mr. Gazza:
I am writing to update you on the status of the referenced project.
We appreciate the fact that the application has been pending for some
time and are making every effort to bring the matter to a speedy conclusion.
As we have recently discussed, the additional information provided in
your January 17th letter has answered our questions about the Stage 1
Archaeological Survey. The survey is adequate. No further cultural resources
information is necessary.
To proceed with our review of the project for a tidal wetlands permit,
we must confirm the building envelope setbacks from the tidal wetlands edge.
Please have the building envelopes staked as shown on the attached plan. As
usual, the stakes should be labeled, this time with the appropriate letter as
shown on the enclosed copy of the staking requirement plan.
Please also provide information on the proposed access road. Will the
road be widened or paved? In the vicinity of the wetland crossing, we will
require that the road be surfaced with crushed stone or other pervious material.
As previously stated; if improvements to the access road are proposed, please
submit 3 copies of site plan and cross sectional views of the work.
Please contact me when the building envelope stakes are set and you have
decided what will be done with the access road. We will then re-inspect the
site and proceed with our review. Thank you for your cooperation.
Very truly yours,
~.W,~
GWH: rw
attachment
cc: file
George W. Hammarth
Senior Environmental An~'uQT
Io)moomO\'!lrn~
Ul) IlEC I ~ 1991 ~
.'
SOUTHOLD TOWN
PlANNING BOARD
/
,.-
.,".----
.
.
..- .-----
.-
JOSEPH FREDERICK GAZZA
ATIORNEY AT LAW
P.O. Box 969 3 OGDEN LANE
QUOGUE. NEW YORK 1 1959
(516) 653-5766 (DAY AND EVENING)
September 26, 1988
Southold Town Planning Board
town Hall
Main Road
Southold, New YOrk
Re: Minor Subdivisions of Lands of Gazza
Minor Subdivisions of Lands of Lettieri
All situate at Dam Pond, East Marion, New YORk
Dear Mr. Chairman, Bennett Orlowski, Jr.,
,
,
i
I am in receipt of a copy of your letter to New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation dated September 22, 1988
pertaining to the above referenced. It pleases me very much to see
that your Board is working on these five (5) subdivision Applica-
tions at this time. It was only after proof,sufficient to
thd satisfaction of the Town Attorney that each Application
was seperate, that the Planning Board accepted these five (5)
Applications as seperate Minor Subdivision Applications.
My records indicate that on September 19, 1985, your
Board endorsed the proposed thirteen (13) lot layout as
sUbmitted on these five (5) Subdivision Applications, however,
required a 50 foot right of way thru the subdivisions con-
structed in compliance with Town of Southold Highway
specifications. The correspondence, meetings and calls during
the period October 1985 to March 1987 between us focused on
the necessity for such a substantial road system and the
duplication of a parallel road system within the property of
Cove Beach Estates (an adjacent pending subdivision). The
continuous and perseV~ring efforts by the undersigned since
1977 with the various owners of Cove Beach Estates and your
Board to provide common access and a proper planned access
system have never been successful. I respectfully requested
of your Board to provide for future development of the
entire area by providing access to the Peninsula via a con-
nection into the Cove Beach Road system. This connection
would alleviate my proposed road which would have to cross
an area close to Wetlands on both sides. A road close to
Wetlands necessitates' review by the Town T~ustees and the
New. York State Department of Environmental Conservation.
.
.
JOSEPH FREDERICK GA:ZZA
ATIORNEY AT LAW
P.O. BoX 969 3 OGDEN LANE
QUOGUE, NEW YORK 11959
(516) 653-5766 (DAY AND EVENING)
page 2
Your Board has been in a position to foster this access
planning but has neglected to. In March of 1987, it became
apparent to the undersigned that your Board was not re-
quiring an access termination into the Penn insula thru
the Cove Beach Map and I therefore requested of your Board to
further process the five (5) Subdivision Applications to-
gether with road improvements dictated on September 19, 1985.
It was inquired of me by Planning Board staff as to the
status of the five (5) Subdivision Applications with the
SCDHS and the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation.
, The SCDHS position was)that further action on the five
(5) Applications could not be taken until a SEQR determination
by the Town of Southold was made (see notice attached) and
a Department of Environmental Conservation Permit had been
issued. The Department of Environmental Conservation's .
position was that since the Town failed to respond to the
SEQR Lead Agency Coordination request by DEC of August 4,
1987, the DEC was proceeding with an uncoordinated, indepen-
dent review (see letter dated November 16,1987, attached).
The Board of Trustees, Town of Southold had on June 9, 1988
written that a 75 Ft. buffer landward of the DEC stake line,
should be maintained, as their recommendation.
The records I have kept pe~taining to these five (5)
seperated Applications for Minor Subdivisions indicate the
following:
1000-031-05-001.2 Deed 9111/58
Owner - Andrew Lettieri
Size - 10.67 acres
Request - Subdivision into three (3) residential Lots
Complete Application duly filed on August 2, 1985
with Planning Board - Pending
Complete Application duly filed on August 7, 1985 with
Suffolk County Department of Health Services - Pending
Complete Application duly filed on July 9, 1987 with
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
No. 10-87-1200 - Pending
Note: Lot 001.2 is Lot B (10.67 Acres) of a two (2) Lot Minor
Subdivision of a 13.326 acre parcel approved by the Planning
.
.
JOSEPH FREDERICK GAZZA
AlTORNEY AT LAW
P.O. Box 969 3 OGDEN LANE
QUOGUE. NEW YORK 1 1959
(516) 653-5766 (DAY AND EVENING)
page 3
Board and Health Department on April 15, 1985. Covenants and
Restrictions were required by Planning Board and filed with
the County Clerk to the effect that Lot 001.2 when further sub-
divided would be three (3) Lots only. The Planning Board
(lead Agency under SEQR - with full notice to all involved
Agencies) made an initial determination of non-significance
under SEQR on December 17, 1984, followed by the issuance
of a negative Declaration (see copy attached).
1000-022-03-019 Deed 8390/366
Owner: Joseph Frederick Gazza
Size: 4.915 acres
Request: Subdivision into two (2) residential Lots
Complete Application duly filed on July 16, 1985 with
Planning Board - Pending
Complete Application duly filed on August 7, 1985 with
SCDHS - Pending
Complete Application duly filed on July 9, 1987 with
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation,
No. 10-87-1200 - Pending
1000-022-03-020 Deed 9111/64
Owner: Bernice Lettieri
Size: 4 acres'
Request: Subdivision into
Complete Application
Planning Board - Pending
Complete Application duly filed on
SCDHS - Pending
Complete Application duly filed on July 9, 1987 with
Ne~ York State Department of Environmental Conservation,
No. 10-87-1200 - Pending
two (2) residential Lots
duly filed on august 2, 1985
with
August 7, 1985 with
1000-022-03-021 Deed 8390/366
Owner: Joseph Frederick Gazza
Size: 5.393 acres
Request: subdivision into two (2) residential Lots
Complete Application duly filed on August 2 , 1985 with
Planning Board - Pending
Complete Application duly filed on Au'gust 7, 1985 Idth
SCDfIS - Pending
J
.
.
JOSEPH FREDERICK GAZZA
ATTORNEY AT LAW
P.O. Box 969 3 OGDEN LANE
QUOGUE. NEW YORK 1 1959
(516) 653-5766 (DAY AND EVENING)
page 4
Complete Application duly filed on July 9, 1987 with
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation,
No. 10-87-1200 - Pending
1000-022-03-022
Owner: Grundbesitzer
Size: 6.3 acres
Request: Subdivision
Deed 9131/377
Corp. and Andrew Lettieri
into three (3) residential Lots
Complete Application duly filed on August 2, 1985 with
Planning Board - Pending
Complete Application duly filed on August 7, 1985 with
SCDHS - Pending
Complete Application duly filed on July 9, 1987 with
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation,
No. 10-87-1200 - Pending
It would appear to the undersigned that:
l~ Review under SEQR pertaining to 1000-031-05-001.2 has
been completed as of December 17, 1984. The SCDHS should
review this three (3) Lot division seperate from the others
and approve same. The NYS DEC should issue a letter of no-
jurisdiction due to previous review under SEQR, Lot Size,
elevation above sea level, and building envelope setbacks.
The Planning Board in connection with the prior approval
has review"ed this parcel and requ.ired a covenant to be
filed limiting subdivision to the requested three (3)
Lots.
~- The four (4) Penn insula parcels are each single and
seperate tracts independently owned. I have no intentions
of building on my two (2) parcels at this time, a retire-
ment home or future use by my three children would be a
possibliity. Mr. Lettieri has not expressed intentions of
development or not, to me. Mr. Lettieri and I have
decided to subdivide our properties adjacent to each other,
to create an estate type setting of choice two plus
acre lots for our future.
I would hope that your Board re-consider the Cove Beach
Road system in connection with their sub-division map
presently before you. Proper planning dictates better access
which should obviate the need for me to build a road to Town
specifications near a Wetland.
..',1
.
.
JOSEPH FREDERICK GAZZA
ATTORNEY AT LAW
P.O. BoX 969 3 OGDEN LANE
QUOGUE, NEW YORK 1 1959
(516) 653-5766 (DAY AND EVENING)
page 5
The Planning Board's sudden interest in obtaining lead
Agency status under SEQR pertaining to the five (5) sub-
division Applications puzzels me. On one Application, you
have already issued a negative Declaration and on the other
four (4), since August 4, 1987, your Board has not been
interested despite requests by the undersigned on August 7,
1987, the SCDHS on June la, 1987 and the New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation on August 4, 1987.
It is my understanding that ~617.6 of 6 NYCRR provides a
twenty (20) day time period for lead Agency status determination.
It is not my desire to argue with your'Board over
these proposed subdivisions, but to work with your Board
to make the lots created a model subdivision of estate
type setting. I believe the proposed sUbdivision maps as
submitted define excellent lot layout, size and design. The
layout could be modified to further improve the subdivision
only if alternate access was available thru Cove Beach Estate's
r~ad system. That choice is yours to make, mine only to
respectfully request. Three plus years has been a long
time to wait for permission to divide five (5) seperate
tracts into twelve (12) lots. Please advise what I may
do to satisfy your Planning concerns and help conclude
the subdivision process.
encl.
cc: file
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
SCDHS
Mr. Andrew Lettieri
Ver
PAR~-PROJECT INFORMATION .
Prepared by Project Sponsor
NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant effect
on the environment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E. Answers to these questions will be considered
as part of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification ana public review. Provide any additional
information you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3.
It is expected that completion of the full EAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not involve
"'new studies, research or investigation. If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specify
each instance. J
NAME OF ACTION
Pro....~ Svbcl:lI:.r;o,.J o~ I..II..-oJ J'l.."....k'
lOCATION OF ACTION (Include Street Address, MunicIpality and County)
rJ I I' 0 tI'1J It,- ). 5'" I 861 Fr- r;; 0 JTI'IU 110...0
NAME OF APPLICANT/SPONSOR
]"seph Frederick Gazza - A
ox %9 3 Ogden Lane
Quogue, New York 1l95~
1 .
T
FAJ'T
/lI1A~lo,J
E AJ. f'lAI.;'N
S,,/% II-< Coli"'''''' tJ'I.!'
BUSINESS TELEPHONE
ADDRESS
NAME OF OWNER (If different)
Jose h Frederi -
ADDRESS P.O. Box 969 3 Ogden Lane 8<
Quoguc, New York 1195~
CITY/PO 1 -
13J<~tJ"li: L IF TTIE",a. i
ZIP CODe
CITY/PO
lfe (A'1V A
R"AO
ZIP CODE
't.,..~..s
NfI,.J 'fork
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION
Pro(oJt 1 S,,1. . J """~,1
..f V,. 1........-
LA_~ ',~"'" 1"2.
lltJi.lt~T\"L LoTS'
Please Complele Each Queslion-Indicate N.A. if not applicable
A. Site Description
Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas.
1. Present land use: ..DUrban Dlndustrial DCommercial DResidential (suburban)
o Forest DAgriculture DOtl)er
"30.98
.Rural (non-farm)
2. Total acreage of project area:
APPROXIMATE ACREAGE
Meadow or Brushland (Non-agricultural)
Forested
Agricultural (Includes orchards. cropland, pasture, etc.)
Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24, 25 of ECL)
Water Surface Area
Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill)
Roads, buildings and other paved surf aces
Other (Indicate type)
3. What is predominant soil type(s) on project sitel JAM> k <;lR."v'..!t
a. Soil drainage: .Well drained 100 % of site DModerately well drained
DPoorly drained % of site
b. If any agricultural land is involved, how many acres of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the NYS
land Classification System? N. t\. acres. (See 1 NYCRR 370). .
4. Are there bedrock outcroppings on project site? DYes .No
a. What is depth to bedrock? N.I\. (in feet)
acres.
PRESENTLY
27.1; apes
AFTER COMPLETION
.2 7. R.i> acres
acres
()
acres
o
o
'/'L
acres
o
\'h_
o
acres
acres
acres
o
o
I\I~
acres
acres
o
"I......
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
% of site
2
0'
'0
'i .APllIoxillJillP pPr(T'IlI<l~:(, of IHnl)()~f'(.Ojf'(t "ilf' with c;loJlr''':
.0.10% ...... .ft__ %
U15% or greater
r.-lIO.l:.%.
&. Is project substantially contiguous to, or contain a building, site, or district, listed on the State or the
Registers of Historic Places' DYes .No
7. Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural landmarks? DYes "No
8. What is the depth of the water table? 'J j\p. (in reet) r'k.... +- 20 FT.
9. Is site located over a Jjrilllary. principal, or ~ole source aquifer?
.Yes
DNa
10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area?
.Yes
DNa
11. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered?
DYes liNo According to
Identify each species
12. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, other geological formations)
DYes .No Describe
13. Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area?
DVes .No If yes, explain
14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community?
DYes .No
15. Streams within or contiguous to project area: N. A.
a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary
16. lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area:
a. Name D"........ PbN'O
b. Size (In acres)
30 t
17. Is the site served by existing public utilities? .Ves DNa
a) If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? Ii Yes DNa
b) If; Ves, will improvements be necessary to allow connection? liVes DNa
18. Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets law, Article 25-AA,
Section 303 and 304? DYes DNa
19. Is the site located in or substantially contiguous to a Crilical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8
of the ECl, and 6 NVCRR 6171 DVes DNa
20. Has the site ever I.>een used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes?
DVes
.No
l
B. Project Description
1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate)
a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project sponsor
b. Project acreage to be developed: >Q. iL- acres initially;
,: ...
c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped 7r-J.1L"",1-acres.
d. length of project, in miles: W. A. (If appropriate)
e. If the project is an expansion. indicate percent of expansion proposed 1'. A.
f. Number of off-street parking spaces existing N. A ; proposed N. t1.
g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour 3- S' (upon completion of project)?
h. If residential: Number and type of housing units:
One Family Two Family
o ""
"
i. Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure 30 height; f40 width; ~ 0
j. linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy is? f'?,t ft.
o
'lo.n'
acres.
acres ultllnately.
%;
Initially
Ultimately
Multiple Family
"",
Condominium
"-
"
length.
.
3
,
,., . .
W IIlllch 'lC\ luril I Illillerii.d (i.e., ro<.:k, earth, etc.) will lH! 1(!llluved frum the site? ~~ tons/cubic V.1fds
Will disturbed areas be reclaimedl DYes DNa lllN/^
a. If yes, for what intended purpose is the site being reclaimedl fJf'.
b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? DYes DNa ....- o/"~'.J') oF- 0... ~ ...- ..
c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? DYes DNa "'-tt......... ~;,L '"1\",~ /l.rr".-.J- (l..~~.
4. How many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site? .1..... acres.
5. Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this project?
DYes .No
o. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction
~
months, (ir-uih9iRS dumRlitia,,).
7. If multi-phased:
a. Total number of phases anticipated N. A , (number),
b, Anticipated date of commencement phase 1 ~ month
c. Approximate completion date of final phase " month
d. Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phasesl DYes
Will blasting occur during construction I DYes "No
Number of jobs generated: during construction I "2-
o
'01118
1'188
III No
year, (ind...d;"6 d.........Ii C,:...).
year.
8.
9.
10.
11.
; after project is complete
o
Number of jobs eliminated by this project
Will project require relocation of any projects or facilitiesl
DYes
.No
If yes, explain
12. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? DYes IINo
a. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) and amount
b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged
13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involvedl WYes DNo Type JAw.'-r1.~ '1.
14. Will }urface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? DYes .No
Explain E"T-ll'4. thlh'" Jrt ~A'''' ovt... 100 Ft. Fi--.... EY"-'-') wJ1'~ <<'00'1
15. Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain I '-Yes DNo
10. Will the project generate solid wastel DYes ~No
a. If yes, what is the amount per month 0 tons
b. If yes, will an ~xisting solid waste facility be usedl DYes DNo
c. If yes, give name ; location
d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? DYes l!Ii'No
e. If Yes, explain
17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste? DYes lit No
a. If yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposall N. {l. tons/month.
b. If yes, what, is the anticipated site lifel N.ll. years.
18. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? DYes .No
19. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? DYes .No
20. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels? DYes .No
21. Will project result in an increase in energy usel IIIYes
If yes, indicate type(s) EU'<TO.I < 1"<<.... ).,/1. In
DNa
I'
22.
23.
24.
If water supply is from wells, indicate pumping capacity I S-
Tatal anticipated. water usage per day 'l.l).. gallons/day.
Does project involve local, State or Federal fundingl DYes
If Yes, explain
gallons/minute.
'f', o",JR,,,) ~,-~
.No
4
I
._~
I,
,
;1
,
i
i;
I;
1':
!'
City. lown, Vill.lgl' lIo.lId . I lYe~ 'I'! No
eTt1', Town, ~!:" Planning Uoard ~Yes DNa
City, Town Zoning Uoard DYes IiIlNo
en-,-, County Health Department _Yes DNo
.
Other Local Agencies DYes DNo
Other Regional Agencies DYes DNa
State Agencies DEe. IIlYes DNa
Federal Agencies DYes DNa
Type
.
P',tloil. j\I~<:t\""""o,.J
\<)'1.1,.
J",,,:w...., At. fv{J 01" " 1 0""
tI'1.r"T. W r".:+J
\l}R1
C. Zoning and Planning Information
1. Does proposed action involve a planning :-r '.....n;ng decision? III Yes DNa
If Yes, indicate decision required:
Dzoning amendment Dzoning variance Dspecial use permit IIIsubdivision Dsite plan
Dnew/revision of master plan Dresource management plan Dother
". .,.
2. What is the zoning c1assification!s)of the site? lt~J,,,,(wTl"l.. 2. - _-^"V,
3. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning?
F="i~.I.o(.. loT" ~",,~ '" "L
4. What is the proposed zoning of the site? F!\i:J,oiO".,;I\L
5. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed' as permitted by the proposed zoning?
J(j...~
6. Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? .Yes DNa
7. What are the predominant land use!s) and zoning classifications within a V. mile radius of proposed action?
p.~Jlot"Ti .L
8. Is Jthe proposed action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses within a V. mild MlYes DNa
9. If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed? I 2.
a. What is the minimum lot size proposed? 8/000 "l ~+.
10. Will proposed action require any authorization!s) for the formation of sewer or water districts? DYes .No
11. Will the propo~ed action create a demand for any community prqvided services (recreation, education, police,
fire protection)? IIYes DNa .
a. If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? .Yes DNa
12. Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? DYes .No
a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional trafficl DYes DNo
D. Informational Details
Attach any additional information' as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse
impacts associated with your proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or
avoid them. JEE Pf'..,."r;:o ""cz. o/Vv.... . I"'" . f'ft"....~ "i Fitl\...... ~~.,LEJ l..-".
E. Verification
I certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge.
Applicant/Span O.rEPH ll€'oE..,,\o< GI\"Z.ZIl. Date II, 23, 1"1 B 7
Signature
If the aclion is in t e
with this assessment.
Title 0....... I'''.. .... II ...L,.~,.,..
, ~I'
. and you are a slate agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form ~efore proceeding
5
.
..
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennell Orlowski. Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
...;., ,~<_..:-., - ",'~"
rPjJ'1>~fFDl" .~
''\> '1~ ~
,/Yi=>",~'\;. :.~.~"l~~.
.IJ~,~ I: ",,<
~ ..... , rr,
,(::)', ~ """
'~ ~ '> . .~<,:Y:
~Q./ ijr "t-'O(y'
'""<\:;--'::::7:::::':::':':";"
scon L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Fax (516) 765-1823
December 18, 1991
Joseph Frederick Gazza, Esq.
P.O. Box 969
3 Ogden Lane
Quogue, New York 11959
RE: Proposed Minor Subdivisions
located at East Marion on Dam Pond.
SCTM * 1000-22-3-19 Joseph Frederick Gazza
* 1000-22-3-20 Bernice Lettieri
* 1000-22-3-21 Joseph Frederick Gazza
* 1000-22-3-22 Grundbesitzer Corporation
and Andrew Lettieri
* 1000-31-5-~ Andrew Lettieri
t.7.-
Dear Mr. Gazza;
This is in reply to your letters of November 13th and
November 25th in which you responded to questions that affected
all of the above-noted applications. These questions had been
set forth in a previous letter from this Board dated March 10,
1989.
After careful review of these letters and the application
files, it appears that the properties in question are not
merged. Therefore, the Planning Board will proceed with its
review of the applications of which there are five.
A coordinated environmental review pursuant to SEQR was
started on September 11, 1985 for'four of the applications.
However, a determination of significance was never made. It
also appears that the environmental review of the southernmost
lot owned by Andrew Lettieri was not started. In order for the
Planning Board to comply with the State law and complete the
environmental review, we will need a completed long
environmental assessment form for each application. The short
forms that were submitted in 1985 are no longer usable due to
the designation by the Town Trustees on November 24, 1987 of Dam
Pond as a Critical Environmental Area. According to the State
Environmental Quality Review Act, all proposals in Critical
.
..
Environmental Areas must be reviewed as Type I actions. A long
environmental assessment form is enclosed.
After receiving the completed assessment forms, the
Planning Board will continue the coordinated review that was
started in 1985. The fee for our consultant's environmental
review services will be sent under separate cover.
Because of the length of time that has elapsed, we wish to
send each of the coordinating agencies another copy of each
subdivision map. It would be helpful if you could send the
office eight copies of each of the five subdivision maps, plus
eight of the general map that shows all of the applications.
It also would be appreciated if you could complete the
enclosed application form for the minor subdivision of the
remainder of the Lettieri lot (SCTM # 1000-31-5-2.1) into three
lots so that our file is complete.
Since you have authored all the recent correspondence on
behalf of the separate applications noted above, it has been
assumed that you are the designated agent for each application.
However, written confirmation of this from each of the
applicants would be appreciated.
If you have any questions, please contact Valerie Scopaz.
Sincerely,
~~'/a;A
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.~"/~~
Chairman
Encls.
cc: Harvey A. Arnoff, Town Attorney
Andrew and Bernice Lettieri
.
. -
RECEIVED BY
SOUTHOLD TOV,N PlANNING EOARn
JOSEPH FREDERICK GAZZA
ATTORNEY AT LAW
P.O. Box 969 3 OGDEN LANE
QUOGUE. NEW YORK 11959
(516) 653-5766 (DAY AND EVENING)
Sov-r/'oIJ 7Ow..I fL..,w,.J;..I, ~,
~: (VI ;,",0'-
sv~ D/vI "';0"""''-
" .P
PONt:>
r-1 Af1- I D ,J
~A/)
CYAt<-
SoMa
IV' ~,.. 13 IE ('J
T J+it-
DCe
IV'?../'
Sv(l...vrt~,....
10
pl..;,r
()./ if....... T',o/ll flVoL + LA-A
lt~tEA A-70 f' {"I 7 ov~,,-/.lLL
r=~~/o~J F:..... 70 v...r
o J. ~t..: J" f'l,.ev; 4 J '^ Af.
pLrA.&<.
,fC .x
fjPV;Jj(
f1<(c..f'
7 0 vt<-
~+.
;./
TO
TI+->'j
1"'/4 TI ~ ~
\m
un
H
8-/~-B7
,
Lp rr.....,.., 4-
GA'Z Z A
AT 01'1"'"
/...J.A ./
t<.E((o/l ~"O
1"''1
+L
(.iV-e. +. lA-'J ..I'
,11-'
oJ " '" ",......1
r./ V't-""'....'7
"",N~
of
7J.JIJ
f' p.. 0 (" 4 J
..r......~ J,.. v: ,.f : 0 -' - .
F:.:~
f'r..-.....
.;-./'
A
ell......
~E
or
/-1...... '7
Co --'~., ~-M 0./
w: ,I-I
r{~~
::f!=- rDOD -:;l. ~ -3-19
De.p~w/w~
----~ -
.
\
,
Southold, N.Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
September 19, 1985
Mr. Joseph F. Gazza
Attorney at Law
37 Gardiners Lane /
Hampton Bays, NY 11946
Re: Subdivisions of Joseph Gazza,
Bernice Lettieri, Andrew Lettieri,
Joseph F. Gazza, and Lettieri and
Grundbesitzer
Dear Mr. Gazza:
The following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning
Board, Monday, September 16, 1985.
RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board request
that the 50' right-of-way throught the above mentioned
subdivisions located at East Marion be constructed in compliance
with the Town of Southold Highway Specifications and Standard
Sheets, (revised and adopted July 30,1985).
Would you please submit construction plans to the Board,
pursuant to the above resolution.
The Highway Specifications may be purchased at the Southold
Town Clerk's Office.
Upon receipt of the plans, we will schedule this on the
next regular Planning Board agenda.
Please don't hesitate to contact our office, if you have
any questions.
Very truly yours,
~ ()rLow,Q.ll / h. ~
BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR., CHA~N
SOUTH OLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD
By Diane M. Schultze, Secretary
.
.
Raymond Jacobs, Highway Superintendent, spoke to Joseph Gazza
and Frank Cichanowicz regarding the roads within the minor
subdivsiions for Gazza and Lettieri at East Marion.
Mr. Jacobs advised that the access road will be required to
be constructed as a major subdivision road to the specs and
that it should be checked out with the Trustees since there
is wetland area where the road would be.
Filed:
Joseph F. Gazza
Joseph Gazza(Grundbesitzerl- landowner in German)
Bernice Lettieri
Andrew Lettieri
Lettieri and Grundbesitzer
.--r~-----"----- .
~
, ~T..
.
t
-~q
" ~M~~" ~~I~~-:
---- --
HwWllS "ttlS fd-c{~ukJ ~
. ~-oWb (oaJ~
c I6ss lMdJsiA?
et.tIUMt? ~ lDtJlnj ?
F' 1/ ~
'Net:::l:J ~XAcr LoCA710N (DIH(g'(0IOIV.5 /1 .&::;z:i&AI~ CJt= f!.O.w.
Kra...o IlJ~'" /llE:EFDev .
52.--4. ql'f'JU~5 Yo- 401(;00 := 'Clu,uCJO ~
f. q't?" ~ 43/?V;O :: e(~ Oq7 ~
?~ ICj'SjOOO ~ $;ftUWN ON ~AP
<::> ~ Jil'IC+I I::. rr?
,