Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-7133 Nunemaker, Amanda From: Joseph O'Leary Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 1:30 PM To: Nunemaker,Amanda Subject: RE: Please check Amanda, Andy accompanied me to verify that work was existing to the bulkhead and fill was appropriate. No violation is needed. R/ Joe Joseph O'Leary M-7 Bay Constable Town of Southold Police Dept 631-765-2798 From: Nunemaker, Amanda Sent:Tuesday, October 15, 2013 1:12 PM To: Joseph O'Leary Subject: RE: Please check Ok, thanks. From: Joseph O'Leary Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2013 12:14 PM To: Nunemaker, Amanda Subject: RE: Please check I will return and check and advise Joseph O'Leary M-7 Bay Constable Town of Southold Police Dept 631-765-2798 From: Nunemaker, Amanda Sent:Tuesday, October 15, 2013 8:45 AM To: Joseph O'Leary Subject: RE: Please check Joe, There is no new bulkhead permit on this property. Was it repair to 75%or less of the structure or did he replace it all? From: Joseph O'Leary Sent:Tuesday, October 15, 2013 8:24 AM To: Nunemaker, Amanda Cc: Epple, Andy Subject: RE: Please check Amanda, I responded to this location on Saturday Am. I found no violation. Fill is necessary to complete the bulkhead work that a permit was filed for. The fill amount was necessary to level the ground to the bulkhead work, graded and seeded. If you need anything else for this, let me know. Respectfully, Joe Joseph O'Leary M-7 Bay Constable Town of Southold Police Dept 631-765-2798 From: Nunemaker, Amanda Sent: Friday, October 11, 2013 1:34 PM To: Kirincic, John; Epple, Andy; Joseph O'Leary Subject: Please check Good Afternoon All, We had an anonymous resident of the West Lake area who came in to the office and brought to our attention that Sim Moy(750 West Lake Drive,Southold) had ripped up his established lawn area and soil (areas were burned from salt water from Sandy) and brought in new soil and seeded. We do not know how much fill was brought in or the extent of the work. Last week during the high winds and high tides,supposedly the new fill and seed had washed away into the water and again more fill had been delivered. He also advised us that his house was badly damaged during Sandy and Mr. Moy had completed repairs on it. He said repairs included siding,windows, interior(which are exempt by our code, but we are not sure if there were more repairs completed that may need a Trustee permit). Please take a look and let us know what you think. Thanks! ✓1qananda unem.aker Clerk Typist Town of SouthoCd Boardof Trustees 631-765-1892 2 Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. Newman Village, Suite E,2322 Main Street,P.O.Box 2003,Bridgehampton,New York 11932-2003 (631) 537-5160 Fax: (631) 537-5291 Bruce Anderson,M.S.,President June 23, 2011 Jill Doherty, President Southold Town Trustees P. O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Re: Moy Property Situate: 750 West Lake Drive, Southold, NY SCTM#: 1000-90-2-1 Trustee Permit #: 7133 Dear Mrs. Doherty, Request is hereby made to extend the permit referenced above for one year. Enclosed herewith please find a check made payable to the Town of Southold in the amount of $50.00 in satisfaction of the requisite extension fee. Sincer , Bruce . Anderson r, JUN 2 4 2011 : . WdatRECEIPT e:` ' -- N o Received From-. ' A cc rn =Address Z O u-: a '^For F- O un o LL Z Cl) ACCOUNT HOW PAID Iia 0 AMT OF - ' CASH (' o ,ACCOUNT :;• „ - m "RMT PAID. - ✓" ,, ' CHECK U ,BALANCE MONEY ORDER❑ Y`1 DUE CREDIT CARD E) v, Jill M.Doherty,President j '*0 sour® Town Hall Annex Bob Ghosio,Jr.,Vice-President �® �� 54375 Main Road P.O.Box 1179 James F.King Southold,New York 11971-0959 Dave Bergen ® ® a® Telephone(631) 765-1892 John Bredemeyer l�cpU�c,�� Fax(631) 765-6641 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD July 20, 2011 Mr. Bruce Anderson Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. P.O. Box 2003 Bridgehampton, NY 11932-2003 RE: SIM MOY 750 WEST LAKE DR., SOUTHOLD SCTM#90-2-1 Dear Mr. Anderson: The following action was taken by the Southold Town Board of Trustees at their Regular Meeting held on Wed., July 20, 2011: RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Board of Trustees grants a One-Year Extension to Wetland Permit#7133, as issued on July 22, 2009. This is not an approval from any other agency. Sincerely, IV Jill M. oherty Presi nt, Board of Trustees JMD:Ims In 3 � �- Jill M Doherty,President 54 SUFFO( Cp P O.Box 1179 Bob Ghosio,Jr.,Vice-President � Gy Southold,NY 11971 James F King C Telephone(631 765-1892 Dave Bergen Fax(631)765-6641 John Bredemeyer y �� Southold Town Board of Trustees Field Inspection/Worksession Report Date/Time: Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. on behalf of SIM MOY requests a One-Year Extension to Wetland Permit#7133, as issued on July 22, 2009. Located: 750 West Lake Dr., Southold. SCTM#90-2-1 Type of area to be impacted: _Saltwater Wetland Freshwater Wetland Sound Bay Distance of proposed work to edge of wetland Part of Town Code proposed work falls under: _Chapt.275 Chapt. 111 other Type of Application: Wetland _Coastal Erosion _Amendment Administrative_Emergency Pre-Submission Violation Info needed: Modifications: Conditions: Present Were: J. Doherty B. Ghosio J. King D. Bergen, J. Bredemeyer D. Dzenkowski other Form filled out in the field by Mailed/Faxed to: Date: 0 James F.King,President ��OF SOUjyo Town Hall Jill M. Doherty,Vice-President 53095 Route 25 Peggy A. Dickerson # P.O. Box 1179 Q Southold,New York 11971-0959 Dave Bergen Bob Ghosio, Jr. Telephone(631)765-1892 Fax(631)765-6641 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE OFFICE OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES 72 HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF THE WORK, TO MAKE AN APPOINTMENT FOR A PRE-CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION. FAILURE TO DO SO SHALL BE CONSIDERED A VIOLATION AND POSSIBLE REVOCATION OF THE PERMIT. INSPECTION SCHEDULE Pre-construction, hay bale line 1 st day of construction '/2 constructed VProject complete, compliance inspection. u BOARD OF SOUTHOLD TOWN TRUSTEES 1(, SOUTHOLD,NEW YORK PERMIT NO. 7133 DATE: JULY 22,2009 ISSUED TO: SIM MOV Y PROPERTY ADDRESS: 750 WEST LAKE DR., SOUTHOLD SCTM#90-2-1 AUTHORIZATION Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 275 and/or Chapter I I 1 of the Town Code of the Town of Southold and in accordance with the Resolution of the Board of Trustees adopted at the meeting held on July 22,2009 in consideration of application fee in the sum of$250.00 paid by Sim Mov and subject to the Term and Conditions as stated in the Resolution,the Southold Town Board of Trustees authorizes and permits the following: Wetland Permit to construct a single-family dwelling and sanitary system with the following conditions: the'area between the timber curb and the bulkhead is left as a non-disturbance buffer,with the exception of a 4' wide path to the water; no grading of the property; no fill or other material is placed on the property with the exception of the amount necessary for the sanitary system, as approved by the Heath Dept.; the remaind of the property is maintained as a non-turf area; a line of staked hay bales is installed prior to any construction activities, and all as depicted on the survey prepared by David H. Fox last revised September 10, 2009. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the said Board of Trustees hereby causes its Corporate Seal to be affixed, and these presents to be subscribed by a majority of the said Board as of this date. �g,11EfQI,�c 000 d i y�� QQt Bob Ghosio, Jr. — NAY TERMS AND CONDITIONS The Permittee, Sim Mov.residing at 106 Mulberry St Ant 7 New York NY 10013 as part of the consideration for the issuance of the Permit does understand and prescribe to the following: 1. That the said Board of Trustees and the Town of Southold are released from any and all damages, or claims for damages,of suits arising directly or indirectly as a result of any operation performed pursuant to this permit, and the said Permittee will,at his or her own expense, defend any and all such suits initiated by third parties,and the said Permittee assumes full liability with respect thereto, to the complete exclusion of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold. 2. That this Permit is valid for a period of 24 months, which is considered to be the estimated time required to complete the work involved,but should circumstances warrant,request for an extension may be made to the Board at a later date. 3. That this Permit should be retained indefinitely, or as long as the said Permittee wishes to maintain the structure or project involved, to provide evidence to anyone concerned that authorization was originally obtained. 4. That the work involved will be subject to the inspection and approval of the Board or its agents,and non-compliance with the provisions of the originating application may be cause for revocation of this Permit by resolution of the said Board. 5. That there will be no unreasonable interference with navigation as a result of the work herein authorized. 6. That there shall be no interference with the right of the public to pass and repass along the beach between high and low water marks. 7. That if future operations of the Town of Southold require the removal and/or alterations in the location of the work herein authorized,or if, in the opinion of the Board of Trustees, the work shall cause unreasonable obstruction to free navigation,the said Permittee will be required, upon due notice,to remove or alter this work project herein stated without expenses to the Town of Southold. 8. The Permittee is required to provide evidence that a copy of this Trustee permit has been recorded with the Office of the Clerk of the County of Suffolk as a notice covenant and deed restriction to the deed of the subject parcel. Such evidence shall be provided within ninety(90)calendar days of issuance of this permit. 9. That the said Board will be notified by the Permittee of the completion of the work authorized. 10. That the Permittee will obtain all other permits and consents that may be required supplemental to this permit, which may be subject to revoke upon failure to obtain same. James F.King,President ��Of souTyo Town Hall Annex Jill M.Doherty,Vice-President 54375 Main Road yy P.O. Box 1179 Peggy A. Dickerson T Southold, New York 11971-0959 Dave Bergen G Bob Ghosio,Jr. 0 �� Telephone(631) 765-1892 1�C0 ' Fax(631) 765-6641 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD July 22, 2009 Mr. Sim Moy 106 Mulberry St., Apt. 7 New York, NY 10013 RE: 750 WEST LAKE RD., SOUTHOLD SCTM#90-2-1 Dear Mr. Moy: The Board of Town Trustees took the following action during its regular meeting held on Wed., July 22, 2009 regarding the above matter: WHEREAS, Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc,. on behalf of SIM MOY applied to the Southold Town Trustees for a permit under the provisions of Chapter 275 of the Southold Town Code, the Wetland Ordinance of the Town of Southold, application dated January 31, 2005, and, WHEREAS, said application was referred to the Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council and to the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Coordinator for their findings and recommendations, and, WHEREAS, Public Hearings were held by the Town Trustees with respect to said application at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard, and, WHEREAS, the Board members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question and the surrounding area, and, WHEREAS, the Board has considered all the testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application, and, WHEREAS, the structure complies with the standards set forth in Chapter 275 of the Southold Town Code, 2 • WHEREAS, the Board has determined that the project as proposed will not affect the health, safety and general welfare of the people of the town, NOW THEREFORE BE IT, RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees APPROVES the application of SIM MOY to construct a single-family dwelling and sanitary system with the following conditions: the area between the timber curb and the bulkhead is left as a non-disturbance buffer, with the exception of a 4' wide path to the water; no grading of the property; no fill or other material is placed on the property with the exception of the amount necessary for the sanitary system, as approved by the Heath Dept.; the remainder of the property is maintained as a non-turf area; a line of staked hay bales is installed prior to any construction activities, and all as depicted on the survey prepared by David H. Fox last revised September 10, 2009. Permit to construct and complete project will expire two years from the date the permit is signed. Fees must be paid, if applicable, and permit issued within six months of the date of this notification. Inspections are required at a fee of$50.00 per inspection. (See attached schedule.) Fees: $100.00 Very truly yours, � o-7' 6. L Jame F. King President, Board of Trustees JFK/Ims Y � e �f . .,.,., .. .., .._.�., �l i V 1 WWI, t 2$' Y „� ,� �-. -� - . �.a _ _ ,� --- � _ . � . �� � ' .AL � ;k��h,�� � .;;;fit ,ar •� _ ': _ / 0812009 12 : 21 \ r I g L WEST E 'o � TRg 1 Q o APPROX NWM W g0 PRa'OSED LINEOF, NA7DAlE5 R=des / \ WIFOtx"n�N�s M EDGE aF 11-ALES WEST LAK DCDry eLnNO p � saw �' r \ �70 / PR DR WAY µ'��� Ar M r 3 43'50"E�� -- - r ' — _ _ ---_ _ — �- rPROPOSED WATER — ^O [V 77.04' I r — — — J %EL=B.1 rOPOLE —— WA —MAIN — �__ _ Y 4 PROOOSCO RETAINING —— —— —— EAsnNc WAtEq MNN — r WALL % N70' fasnNc BTENBER Ro,owAy ti CO WE I __ r r 43'50"W i i � �(CP�� .'� er O / I S I-T \ /\� /_I cP tee' 300.00' `l_• i `s/�I DP L�'anR r I V fL.p„ I I n I\ FE it cP 1•_r' � i O 0 J 30, i + MNIr4INRrCP I I ^ ro e NOTES: -,IIIPROPOSED it 1. TOTAL AREA = 8,861 S.F. (ADJACENT AREA) a o' 2. O = SPIKE SET,*= REBAR FOUND. ep Is EHD 3. SUBDIVISION MAP "CEDAR BEACH PARK" FILED ig ( PRD" PERNo,, I I IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF SUFFOLK COUNTY RI EW �W IfAY ,. n ON DEC. 20, HOW AS FILE NO. 90 iese rDJ1-ISE wuN� �- 4. ELEVATIONS SHOWN HEREON ARE REFERENCED TO DLE ��� � PROP, N.G.V. DATUM (MSL 1929), 4� .I ERNCE awfuwc LOt �� 5. THIS PARCEL IS WITHIN FIRM ZONE AE(EL B) AS Lau, wArER 8 DILINEATED ON FIRM BOUNDARY MAP N0. M 1,., nOw 01- 3610300169 G LAST DATED MAY 04, 1998. M NON-TURF BUFFER L St. Johns E formerly 6 APPROXIMATE FILL REQUIRED = (TD BE O p MAINTgI �R� DECH 3 plscopol Ch 180 CUBIC YARDS REQUIRED (FOR SANITARY). 2E.D RESENT CON DITION)IN , urch 7. ADJACENT LOT COVERAGE: Lot 119 10.0' •H HOUSE = 1,061 S.F. PROPOSED E i r- 01, DECK = 506 S.F. r+at+ae ov+r AieA h TOTAL = 1,567 S.F. OR 17.75 F1� D NON RtST1JRPN�CE 8U e. THE NON-TURF BUFFER MAY BE MAINTAINED ,;WMA `! I 'B,RL'WgLa M VIA MOWING. N70'39'3309 N6 Nu0 I APPROVED BY II W 9 44'34ryJ EL=J.O_ SEPT. 10, 2009 INDICATED APEEERS W COARD OF TRUSTEES JUNE 26, 2006 RENSEa PRaP. EEPnC n pNE ALOV9•p3' NG e p MAY 19, 2005 LOC, MONITURING MLLS APPRON HP APR. 11, 2005 OEC, AMENOMEN S PRopOSED , P TOWN OF SOUTHOLD _ JAN. 20, 2005 PROP. STROOHHR,S ATM DATE: DEC. 06, 2004 -`L OCT Z 09 JOB NO:2004-744 " F �y CERTIFIED TO: 3 O` SIM MOY Ll TILESurvey for: (� v` ECOMC MOY I BAY TEST HOLE DATA Lot 119,"M"Cedar Beach Park" McOONAlO GEOSCIENCE - -- , DEC. 20, 2004 p At EL=E.2 00 Ba view - C.I. COVER MIXED SAND D - TO GRADE AND LOAM Town of HOUSE GW Southold W 05 EL=1.5 WATER IN 4.J Southold FINISHED GRADE MINED SAND - - _ AND LOAM Suffolk County, New York DAVID H. FOX, L.S. P.C. N.Y.S.LS. #50234 CRAWL SPACE a mu T/wa-re norniinrm wnu J.0 WATER IN L, Aja �'2 S.gC.T.M.: 1000-090.00-02.00-001.000 FOX LAND AVENUE,a R��, GROWNSEW �S ll LS LI D �":°ho>'ro6(` 31SUNSET AVENUE19 rEI -rRa�� En�lar"RAo" �WESTHAMPION 2BB�0022Y. 1" 78 IT 1. _� ii BROWN BOG AB N 51HIREE) EAB U - ro WATER IN IB.O o 0 63 Iso 9 ALE:1"=20' 1 zE uw EL=24 WATER IN - — SEASONAL HIGH PALE BROWN '�" nr. Nm BE ED—DERED TO BE a Vk. TRUE 'OR' GROUND WATER FIN i ��� 0 200 _ SEPTIC TANK CESSPOOL COARSE BAND O I� „s lao0 oa, 170 _ E 2004-744 James F. King, President SOF SOUTy Town Hall Jill M. Doherty,Vice-President �0`� 53095 Route 25 yy P.O. Box 1179 Peggy A. Dickerson T Southold, New York 11971-0959 Dave Bergen �0 Telephone(631) 765-1892 �l�'�,oU 'N Fax(631) 765-6641 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES November 15, 2006 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Mr. Bruce Anderson Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. P.O. Box 2003 Bridgehampton, New York 11932 Re: SIM MOY 750 WEST LAKE ROAD, SOUTHOLD SCTM# 90-2-1 Dear Mr. Anderson: The Board of Trustees took the following action during its regular meeting held on Wednesday, November 15, 2006 regarding the above matter: WHEREAS, Suffolk Environmental Consulting as agent for SIM MOY applied to the Southold Town Trustees for a permit for a single-family dwelling, attached rear deck, pervious driveway, retaining wall, and sanitary system under the provisions of the Wetland Ordinance of the Town of Southold, application dated January 31, 2005, and WHEREAS, said application was referred to the Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Coordinator for their findings and recommendations, and, WHEREAS, the Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council recommends Disapproval of the application for the following reasons: - The concern with raising the septic system and the proximity to the water table. - The concern with drainage. - The concern with a suitable buffer area. - Status and condition of the bulkhead is unclear. And, WHEREAS, the Town of Southold Senior Environmental Planner and Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Coordinator has recommended the proposed single-family dwelling, attached rear deck, pervious driveway, retaining wall, and sanitary system be found INCONSISTENT with the following Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Policy Standards: 5.1, 5.3,5.4, 5.5, 6.3, and which recommendation attached hereto, 0 2 0 and therefore be found INCONSISTENT with the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan ("LWRP"), and, WHEREAS, numerous Public Hearings were held by the Board of Trustees with respect to said application, with the first one on March 23, 2005, at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard, and, WHEREAS, the Board members on multiple occasions personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question and the surrounding area, and, WHEREAS, the Board has considered all the testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application, and, WHEREAS, the application does not comply with the standards set forth in Chapter 275 of the Southold Town Code, and, WHEREAS, the Board has determined that the project as proposed will have a detrimental effect upon the health, safety and general welfare of the people of the Town, and, WHEREAS, the proposed deck is located 27' from the bulkhead along the inlet to West Lake, the proposed house is located 30' from the bulkhead along the inlet to West Lake and 31' from the bulkhead along Little Peconic Bay, the proposed septic tank is 24' from the bulkhead along the inlet to West Lake, the proposed cesspool is 40' from the wetlands, and the proposed driveway is 2' from the bulkhead, and, WHEREAS, the minimum setbacks in the Chapter 275, Wetlands and Shoreline of the Town Code, Section 275-3.D. that apply to any and all operations proposed on residential property within the jurisdiction of the Board of Trustees are as follows: (1) Residence: 100 feet (2) Driveway: 50 feet (3) Cesspool: 100 feet (4) Septic tank: 75 feet And, WHEREAS, the subject property is surrounded by tidal wetlands on three sides, and, WHEREAS, these wetland systems are typically found within and comprise an intertidal salt marsh/beach ecosystem, and, WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees found the proposed action does not comply with the purpose of Chapter 275 which states," It is the intention of this chapter to ensure for the citizens of the Town of Southold the protection and preservation of its wetlands and that they shall be regulated in order to maintain their values, including water pollution control, groundwater, flood control, and protection of wildlife habitat and plant habitat", and, • 3 WHEREAS, a document submitted by the applicant titled "Groundwater Flow Analysis for Moy Property" was reviewed by Ron Paulsen, a Hydro geologist with the Suffolk County Department of Health Services and and Daniel O'Rourke, Project Hydro geologist of Camp Dresser and McKee, a consulting engineering company and both found the document to contain discrepancies, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, for the reasons stated above, that the Board of Trustees finds the application of Sim Moy to be INCONSISTENT with the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program, and, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE the application of Sim Moy to construct a single-family dwelling, attached rear deck, pervious driveway, retaining wall, and sanitary system, and, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this determination should not be considered a determination made for any other Department or Agency, which may also have an application pending for the same or similar project. Very truly yours, �aures F. K�ing President, Board of Trustees JFK: hkc • MAILING ADDRESS: PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS P.O. Box 1179 JERILYN B.WOODHOUSE �OF SO(/j�olo Southold, NY 11971 Chair OFFICE LOCATION: KENNETH L. EDWARDS * # Town Hall Annex MARTIN H. SIDOR A Q 54375 State Route 25 GEORGE D.SOLOMON .� �O (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.)N JOSEPH L.TOWNSEND �yCOurm,��' Southold, Y '11, Telephone: 631765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD To: James King, President Town of Southold Board of Trustees From: Mark Terry, Senior Environmental Planner LWRP Coordinator Date: August 22, 2006 (REVISED) Re: Request for Wetland Permit for Sim Moy SCTM#1000-90-2-1 Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. on behalf of SIM MOY requests a Wetland Permit to construct a single-family dwelling, attached rear deck,pervious driveway,retaining wall,and sanitary system. Located: 750 West Lake Rd., Southold. SCTM#90-2-1 As you are aware, on August 25,2005 a Consistent recommendation was proposed for the action with consideration with all supporting documentation submitted by the applicant including a document entitled "Groundwater Flow Analysis for Moy Property"dated August 15,2005 and prepared by Suffolk Environmental Consulting. Following the Consistent recommendation,Mr.Ron Paulsen, a Hydrogeologist with the Suffolk County Department of Health Services reviewed the document and submitted a letter dated April 4,2006 identifying discrepancies within the document and outlining concerns with soil permeability. Correspondingly, Camp Dresser &McKee (CDM) also reviewed the report and found discrepancies. Therefore, the proposed action has been re-reviewed to Chapter 95,Waterfront Consistency Review of the Town of Southold Town Code and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program(LWRP)Policy Standards. Based upon the information provided on the LWRP Consistency Assessment Form submitted to this department,new information and as well as the records available to me, it is my recommendation that the proposed action is INCONSISTENT with the denoted following Policy Standards and therefore,is INCONSISTENT with the LWRP. Policy 5 Protect and improve water quality and supply in the Town of Southold. 5.1 Prohibit direct or indirect discharges that would cause or contribute to contravention of water quality standards. 5.3 Protect and enhance quality of coastal waters. 5.4 Limit the potential for adverse impacts of watershed development on water quality and quantity. 5.5 Protect and conserve the quality and quantity of potable water. As indicated above the applicant fails to prove that the above policy and sub-policies will be met. Policy 6 Protect and restore the quality and function of the Town of Southold ecosystem. 6.3 Protect and restore tidal and freshwater wetlands. A. Comply with statutory and regulatory requirements of the Southold Town Board of Trustees laws and regulations for all Andros Patent and other lands under their jurisdiction 1. Comply with Trustee regulations and recommendations as set forth in Trustee permit conditions. The deck structure setback located on the west side of the structure from the bulkhead is proposed at 24 feet and the deck structure located on the south side of the structure is 26 feet(map dated as received July 6. 2006), a minimum setback distance of 100 feet is required pursuant to Chapter 275-3. CC: Shawn Kiernan,New York Department of State,Division of Coastal Resources James F. King, President ��OF so yo Town Hall Jill M. Doherty,Vice-President 53095 Route 25 Peggy A. Dickerson P.O. Box 1179 4 Southold,New York 11971-0959 Dave Bergen H Q John Holzapfel i� �� Telephone(631) 765-1892 ��courm Fax(631) 765-6641 t BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BOARD OF TRUSTEES: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD --------------------------------------------------------------- In the Matter of the Application of --Jura----:Mol---------------------------------- COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) STATE OF NEW YORK) 4, ^ NB ❑Agent ■ Complete Rams 1,2,and 3.Also comP�e X ❑Addresses Rem 4 ff Reshfoted De1Nery Is desired. ■ so Your name and address on the reverse Pooled Name) C;71of �� can return the card to You, B. Received by( s t that this of the maaplece, ■ poach this card to taro back Rem t7 ❑ TM or o the front lf space P D. b 1°88 ew: ❑No f. Addressed to: ym.enter del address known as W �ey en, and that I have �7d)( � a. �l otthe dateofthe public IESW�,t M� 2 ❑ � pRstumReceiptforMercharMiseAlew Y& , lW 13 ❑insured Mail ❑C.D.D. Lct (0 4. Resbkted DaWeN+print Fw) t]Yes 2. AnloisNumber 7005 18213 aap5 2p 52 p382 (FrW at r from sendop bw 102595-02-tl.1540 Domestic Return RecelPt ps Form 3811,FebnlarY 2004 (signature) Sworn to b9fore me this day of 4,vjr 2006 N964Public NotaryaPublic of New York o.oval fietl0in iSuffolkBCounty Commission Expires January 2, 2007 Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. Newman Village, Suite E, 2322 Main Street, P.O. Box 2003, Bridgehampton,New York 11932-2003 (631) 537-5160 Fax: (631) 537-5291 Bruce Anderson. M.S.,President Via Certified Mail September 7, 2006 SEP 8 2006 Ms. Heather Cusak Southold Town Board of Trustees P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Application of Sim Moy Situate: West Lake Road; Town of Southold SCTM #: 1000-090-02-001 Dear Ms. Cusak, This is to confirm that I met with you at the Trustee Office on September 6, 2006, and witnessed your removal of what you described to me to be an "internal memo" which the Trustees requested that you write to them. The date of that memo is August 30, 2006. I requested that you provide a copy of your internal memo to me. I also note that various contact were made to the Suffolk County Department of Health Services C'SCDHS") without the applicant's knowledge and that based upon a response from SCDHS, Mark Terry has reversed himself now declaring the project to be inconsistent with the Town's Local Waterfront Revitalization Program ("LWRP"). t request any and all referral documentation to SCDHS and to Mark Terry be provided to me. Finally, I request that I be provided and made aware of any and all documentation, meetings; correspondence with SCDHS, Mark Terry or residents in the area opposed tQthe application of Moy be provided to me. Documentation means, memos, e-mails, notes taken at meetings or any other related records. Finally, please provide me with a copy of all minutes for all Trustee meetings during which the Moy application was discussed. I enclose a copy of the Town's FOIR request for these items. Sincerely, Bruce A. Anderson cc: D. Moy P. Finnegan, Esq. r Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. Newman Village, Suite E, 2322 Main Street, P.O. Box 2003, Bridgehampton, New York 11932-2003 (631) 537-5160 Fax: (631) 537-5291 Bruce Anderson, M.S.,President December 15, 2005 Albert Krupski, Jr., President Southold Town Trustees P. O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Moy Situate: s/s West Lake Drive, Town of Southold DEC 19 2005 SCTM # 1000-90-2-1 Dear Mr. Kruspski, This correspondence is submitted as a follow-up to my previous correspondence to you dated November 16, 2005. As you know, Ms. Quinn under cover letter of Land Owners Abstract Corp. filed several deeds of other properties to draw the conclusion that the applicant has no right of access over a private road to subject parcel in an attempt to render the premises un-buildable. Enclosed herewith please find the deed for subject parcel dated 1/6/05 filed at Liber D00012364 and page 526. 1 have highlighted the first two lines at paragraph 4 that certify the applicants right to the road. I also enclose a copy of the deed for the premises adjacent to and east of the applicant owned by Dai Moy recorded March 7, 1960 at Liber 4778 and Page 106 which deed establishes Mr. Moy's right to the road. I enclose a copy of the deed of Preston M. Harrington III for the premises directly adjacent to and east of Mr. Mot's property recorded Febnrary 3, 1986 at Liber 10012 ands Page 14 which deed establishes Mr. Harrington's right to the road. All property owners fronting this section of the road have a right to its use for access. The testimony of Merlon Wiggin and the statements made by Ms. Quinn on behalf of the West Lake Association asserting that the applicant has no right to the road are erroneous and must be disregarded. Kindly have Mr. Johnston verify the facts outlines herein. Sincerely, Bruce A. Anderson Cc. D. Moy SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERIC RECORDS OFFICE RECORDING PAGE Type of Instruments DBMS/DDD Recorded: 01/06/2005 Nu ber of Pagess 4 At: 04:04:47 PN Receipt Number : 05-0002230 TRANSFER TAX NW®ER: 04-23325 LIBER: D00012364 PAGE: 526 Districts Sections Block: Lots 1000 090.00 02.00 001.000 BZA3En BD AND CBARGBD AS FOLLOWS Deed Amount: $0.00 Received the Following Fees For Above Instrument Bxsmpt Exempt Page/Fill ng $12.00 NO Handling $5.00 NO Cox $5.00 NO NYS SRCRO $15.00 NO VA-CTY $5.00 NO BA-STATS $165.00 NO TP-584 $5.00 NO Cart.Copies $0.00 NO RPT $30.00 NO 8CTM $0.00 NO Transfer tax $0.00 NO Ccma.Pres $0.00 NO Fees Paid $242.00 TRAN88ER TAX IIDNBBRs 04-23325 TRIS PAGE IS A PART OF TSS INSTZMMWT THIS IS NOT A BILL Bdward P.Remains County Clark, Suffolk County D J ` r RECORDED 7MM Jan 06 04:04147 PK Nelsbxafpggn Edwrd P.Rosalrq TOURRNS CLERIC W SUFFOLK 006NTV 8xrbl r L WW12364 P 526 GNIIIwM/ DT4 04-73575 1'rlar Of r Dead/Mortgage Indromod Deal/Matgsga Tex uls up Rocerdbg/FRbg Slrnry 4 FEE foga/PINag pee L :1 Morgage And. — IbsxNMg --•-- I.INde I'm •Il'-514 2.MMKIpNI I ox Heedless Bub Toto) 6A-5217(Coludy) ///•••L) Bub Told , SpwMasl. Of EA-321710IaMl Spo./Ad. ILP.TALA. q"�J - V// TOT.MTC.TAX O — Ceamt d0d. Jan wl Town__Came my_ Nabi for Appbrllaenwl AOW vk 4 TrarKw I'm CaNRedCapt based=Tax Ilse prgwly wvere/we geg,Daisy tt''`` will be InI roved !nail sell Tulp dwplbrg only1 ab ONrw VUN—ORANbTCytAL .�.yYa—coahlattillily NO,ne apprqulww pyw r _ofdb1 11 1 Rd Prajoa Tw servla.Army VodRodlar servo/lou Fund I -�— - Lal on Coideu r Ilon uuul S $law 8M1674 1000 09000 OZDD 001000 CPP•raN r s two R EMC A .. lurpravad Wlbtr �^DE Vacant baud 7 Sdbhclbw/DlsdyrgsYRehwgn LW Properly Owsen Mailing Add - 11BCORb i IIMI1N TO$ TO William H. Price, Jr., Esq. '1'U P.O. -Box 2065 Greenport; Ron{ York 11944 I, tCoulpnny Ldurnrollun Co. Name neer -- ' Suffolk County.Recording & Endorsement Page 'nits ryge Rales pelt of Ile alhxlwd dead- . wade by: (SI'ECJFY'ITI'S OF IWMLIMLWI-) SIN H. IIOY Use Isadws Ileroln Is silunlcd In j SUFFOLK C0LH4'IY.NSW Y0HK f TO Io lhr Tbtnuldp of Southold 106 Mulberry'Corp. Oil Hit VILLAOh orI(AMLSI'of_ Southold IIOXI'-S 5'11 IILU 9 MU51'ULr ITFLD OR IWNIND IN BLACK INK ONLY PIOOlt TU ItLY;olINNO Wt FII-INO. IOVGItI CON§t LT YbUN LAYYYM WON naiutNo TIN BOTnUMW-flan WMUMM SWWLD 9E UNM EY LAYV M ONLY. THIS INDENTURE,made the.300 day of November,Two Thousand Four BETWEEN SIM H. MOY,residing at 106 Mulberry Stmt,Apt. ?,.New York;New' -York 10013 party of the first part,and 106 MULBERRY CORP., whose address is 106 Mulberry Street, Apt. 7,New York, New York 10013, party of the second part, : WITNESSETH,that the party of the first part,in consideration of Teii Dollars and other valuable consideration paid by the party of the second part, does hereby grant and release unto the party of the second pan, the heirs or successors and assigns of the party of the second part forever,a one(1 X►)percent interest in and to ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improveme is thereon i erected. situate. lying and being at Cedar Beach._ near Southold,'.in the Town of Southold. County of Suffolk and State of New York, particularly identified as;Lot Numbered 119 on a certain Map entitled "Subdivision Map'of Ccdar ]leach Park" and filed in the Suffolk County Clerk's Office as Map No. 90. TOGETHER with dll the right;•title:dpd interest, if any, of the•party of the.fust part in and to the POconic Bay and inlets and the lands under the waters thereof, lying in front of and adjacent thereto. BEING AND INTENDED TO BE the same premises conveyed to the party of the first part by deed deed 1/21/65 and recorded 2/3/65 in the Office of the Suffolk County Clerk-in Libor 5695, Page 446. TOGETHER with all right, title and interest, if any, of the party of the first part in and b any seem and roads abutting the above described premises to the center lines thereof;TOGETHER with the appurtenances and all the estate and rights of the party of the first part in and to said premises; TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the premises herein granted unto the party of the second part,the heirs or succcssori and asiigns of the party of the second part forever. AND the party of the first part covenants that the party of the first part has not done or suffered anything whereby the said promises have been encumbered in any way whatever, except as aforesaid. I AND the party of the-first part, in compliance with Section 13 of the Lien Law, covenants that the party of the first part will receive the consideration for this conveyance and will hold the i right to receive such consideration as a trust fund to be applied first for the purpose of paying the cost of the improvement and will apply the same first to the payment of the cost of the improvement before using any part of the total of the same for any other purpose. The word "party"shall be construed as if it read "parties"whenever the sense of this indenture so requires. i 1N WMESS WHEREOF, the party of the first part has duly executed this deed the day and year first above written. IN PRESENCE OF: 7 SIM H. MOY I J STATE OF NEW YORK) )as.: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) On the 3& day of November, 2004, before mc, the undersigned, personally appeared Sim H. Moy. personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the individual(s) whose narnc(s) is (arc) subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/shddwy executed the same in hislim/their capecity(ies), and that by hisiber/their signaluro(s) on the instromeot, die individusl(s). or the person upon behalf of which the individual(s)acted,executed the instrument. ✓--- Notary lic VAAJAM H.PRICE.JR. Notary Public,SUMIG of Nsrs Vwk Na 46"944,84AM&Cauaq 'farm DOM February 26.20 ' I I t t Deer Taxpayer, fell"wlkefoclkrl of Mariana Iran been liked in my office and I din enclosing Ills original copy ror Your records. ire ponbn ofyour nwnlhly nwdgage paIinced hwluded your properly hilick yyn will now reed Iml Tewn•raa i�ver ao OW aan near beinx holes LocIvll 1 h e r 3FI to luxes re Wya6k Wee g Yod on or before Unary IOn and on of before May psymonli In a Ihrrely fashion couldresull in a penally. Please clinical year kcal Town Tax deceiver t psyme■1. vllb any gnnikau tegardlag pnparly lax Babylon Town Receiver of Taxes Riverhead Town Receiver of'rexn 200 Bell Sunrise N1111waY 200 Nowell Avcoue Non)Lhde014m1,N.Y. 11757 Rlverhesid,N.Y. 11901 (316)937-3004 (316)727-3200 , Brookhaven Tow i keceivet bf Taxes Sheller blamed Town Receiver of Taxes 150 Bad Malo Wrest Sheller Island Town 14211 pod 1eBireon.N.Y. 11777 iWh*IaMial,N.Y. 11964 W0473-0236 (316)749-3338 0, pJel Ilauyloll Tom$Receiver orrl m.° Sudildawh Town Receiver otTnxea 300 PaaOgo pies, 99 Wed Main Strad Basi Fhm4wu*4 N.Y. 11937 -Smllllowo,N.Y. 11721 (316)324-2776 (316)360-7610 Ilwdingldr Toft Receiver of Taxes Souihamplon Town Readver of Taxes 100 Mein Slreel 116 Flemplou Road Ihmlloglon,N.Y. 11743 Soulhampkrn,N.Y. 11962 I 1516)331-3217 ._ ; .. — (!16}227-6514°- .... -- •.•' '' . Islip Town Receiver0f Taxes Sou11rold Tov01 Receiver of Taxes 40 Nassau Avemw 53095 Main Road Islip,N.Y. 11751 SoWlnld,N.Y. 11971 (516)224-5380 (316)765-1103• Sincerely, Hdwart�i�l� . Suffolk County Clerk ds, S 1 2M9 I ' r .• ,wwlaxw 1 A.nJ„J N.Y.B.T.U,Fwm L0el.44WBM—BuL.io.nJ Jak Ue.d, wn6 C un y.inn G,unoi,Av.-InairiJuJ w Cvpvuiw, W(au CONSULT YOUR LAWYSR RSIORS IN SIONO THIS INSTRUMINT—THIS INSTRUMINT SHOULD SI USID ISY LAYERS RS ONLY. � I you I, t1Wfi.1.R.S. LOIa1778 mu lllfi THIS INDENTURE,made the � day of !'larch . nineteen hundred and sixty BETWEEN rosldin at roconic Land poconiC , � H.CNllY J. STISTH, ES Now York, I ; I party of the first part,and 1n1 i- IduY, residing at 37 Mott Street, Now York 13, Now York party of the second part, of first party ep that tion ofeen ne valuablers and other lbleasu tothparty of the seecondpart9tehe m paid y(h WITNESSETH, of the part,does or successors and assigns of the party of the second part forever, 4( C4h1 �KS jpp�tdtl[IIdK 11➢L�hltUib7laf 710.�UtlP1f965fM I /el3xtlB�nammtaa�m ly7a>C7Da�jIN ALL those certain lots, piocOu or parcels of land, situate, lying an.: being in the Town o£ Leuthold, County of Suffolk and State of K> iJow York, known and duoignatud as Lot Noe, 117 and 118 on a contain . Q map entitled " ubdivision P;ap of Coder Beach Yark, layviow, Town''of ' ■M'•p Joe of the Clerk Southold, :;uffolk County, 1I.Y." and fllod _in the Off of tho County of Suffolk on December 20, 1927 as Nap No. 90. This conveyance is made subject to oasomonts, covenants and ro- striotions of record, if any, now sffocting said promises. Togother with all thu right, title and intorust, if any, Of the party of thu first part, in and to the Y000nic fay and inlots and the lands under the wators thereof , lying in front and adjacent thereto. nf,LTHER with rill right, title and iutnxeq ii nn>', of the party of the first mit in slid to ally' streets and II roads abutting the above described premises to the center litres tltercroE; TOG1i�1ILR with the a>purteD TO and all rho estate and rights of the party of the first part In and to said [remises; TO LTAV AND TO HOLD the pranlses herein granted unto the party of the Beeand part,the Iioil'B or BUCCCB90(B and A881gnB Of the party of the second part forever. i AND the party of the first part covenants that the party of the first part has not clone or suffered anything wherebyy the said premises have been encumbered in ally way Lwhatever;ttCept US aforc.aid. AND the party of the first part, in compliance with Section 13 of the Lien Law, covenants that the party of the first part will receive the consideration for thio conveyance and will hold the right to receive such a - cration as a trust fund to he applied first for the purpose of paying the cost of tile p e imrovement and willl apply the same first to the Payment of the cost of the improvement before using any part of the total of the sante for any other purpose• The ward party" Shall he construed as if it read "parties" whenever the sense of this indenture so requires. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the party of the first part has duly executed this deed the day and year first above written. IN PRESENCE eTt STATE 0E NEW YORK,COUNTY OF <7 +l Y"F�L �S u+ I STATE OF NNW YORK,COUNTY Of ss+ On the J day of MSP_c /1 19 1 , before I On the day of 19 before me personally peremwlly come to me known to be the individual described in and who to me known to be the Individual described in and who Qp executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that executed the same, executed tiro same. HI':NSFFl.41-R O. TFNRV,Jn, NOIARY 1'V_IT -,ir '�w YORK kvn' i,, Cuunfy "'no My c"",.:I..n 1" 1. MVI111 ao, IDT/ STATE 0E NSW YORK,COUNTY OF STATE OF NEW YORK,COUNTY OR On the day of 19 before ns On the day of 19 before Inc personally came pereumdly rune to me known, who, bcin by Inc duly sworn, did depose and the dubscrlhing wines to the foregoing Instrument, with say that be resides at No. whom I am personally acquainted, who, being by me' duly ; sworn, did depose and say that he resided at No. that he Is the that ha knows of the corporation described to be the individual In and which executed the foregoing Inslrun+cut; that hr knows the seal of said corporation; that the sent affixed Jescrlbed In and wlm executed the foregoing Instrument; to said instrument is such corporate seal; that it was so that he, said subscribing witness, was present and saw affixed yboard,ocorpora- execute fle same; lat ( iwitness,said andtiothat tic signed by Ike oder at the same time subscribedII name as witness theretu. I W F Q ":z 4; z �.. r e V CV V M n tO S J zi at u2— ' �1a►1'11A1MaMfit♦MmosYaM wfMMW-7N{ ". M411mIwR mN111e N IIMe"MIN Mt.` INV K 14 31739 TM04MINfiME,nwde the day of nineteen,htdred and eighty—six N[111M0M t PRESTON M. HARRINGTON III and GEORGE TONE Hl1RRINGTON, � . Co-Executors of the Last Will and Testament o Eatharime Tone Harrington, .�. residing at 15 Division Avenue, South Nyack, Ny 1096 lasaar d the i,m tun,mend PRESTON M. HARRINGTON III I' residing at 15 Division Avenue, South Nyack, MY 109 Av r 317 MA d the NOW pall, f rJ X11 F Mr tYa dry d the bit Put,is u w&mt; a of an dei M WA wMr"W"r.riisail� Mid y the puny d the awasd para,dna hm+Y paw red torten,woo w 901"') w tteoomwx.d d d1a Mn tunny d Me e.med Darr.tae Yin, d w"'6w Party M tY aaeand termer, ��6') Ani.An,amn pbt,�s6e ar Mad of 104 wth the I 'mli p and'tt�srrwwwb themes weheA.efhshti b�seKieirisiY 'masa of Southold, as : yy of � r 14090bt, Stab of New.York, known andel eignaeed -as P of r 06a&j.1) 000 Hundred Sixteen (116), as shown on a certain map entitled "Subdivision Map `cedar Beach I•ark, situate at''MI'V1140" T6wn of E0410101d, NOW York, surveyed and certified ky Otto N. Van Tuyl, 4'.d.�f__aee���rrr B"imeer and Surveyor, as Map Number Ninety (90) on or about tr December 19, 1927. ' Subject to any state of facts an accarate survey Might show. Subject to mvenante, restrictions, easements and Aeclarati3its, 1 if any, contained in former instruments cf record, insofar as the same Presently affect the premises, r Together with an easement for ingrwas and egress overall streets, roads, drives and lanes as laid down on said inapt and ala, the right of ingress and egress in and to any of the Inlets, hdsins or Barbara on said map, and to Near a boat or boats in Cedar Beach Harbor. Together with all the right, title and interest, if any, in and to lead in front of said premises under water in the Peconic. Bay, and all riparian rights tlserain. Together with the right, to run with the land, to use and enjoy in common with otbers enjoying similar rights and privilege . those Portims of Cedar BRACE Park, which have been or way : erein- after be set Raids for cpmunity Purposes subject to rights reaervationa, rues and regulations as contained in deeds of record.if RR riay.mink and iwerw.if any. d tke prey of An 6riaPau[in and so any wntw and alrt� deatra"'d Kamm to Mor canter lima Hertel;TOGETHER w(ih Aa and"andaal the ttomm a and rights d da Party d tY fest Pan in and q mid •,reaiwa: TO HAVE appwtwAnm AND TO .. tine WMA dor "M Po granted. dee Potty of the aamd put,Ne wain or snecauas mad awisaw of AND dw Party at tY firm Pan cu,e njs tlxr,tie Pant'of the 6rti put her fn, .'Moe or suffere,l anything wenok tY Ui'f pttaiM have horn teeunhered in any way whatever,except as +ioaewid. AND tie paws,d the first parr,m mnplyMt witfl Swim Il of the Lien 4w•, mvenanra sY:m rt of tie ire Pett aria esttive dw saaafi mares for tlds saaveyamt arnl will hold the right to :tct,%t $ r:: enor eaati6a as a iraat fund to be appitd irsa for the pot"of pains the atm cd the i t mad will a t Purpose. sid door Ram ire to rhe Payment of rite cost of the imptovenwnt before enirj an?an rd Ise Neel.,f the sere aa7 amber Tyy_��1�aapartc�i II eytonrsaif it whenerer the w�nQw'of Chir indeot.:re or, tejon, /ass'eaeeeO JJ C1 'p!/ ,• teeher a iiM the dq d Lune fent aYwe �aaq for i Ad o MTS on r hgy sero w ,IIF. 7 am rA Geurtyif -TbnJl part Ryton .,r 4m !r gttan ; s t. fill 10 nap w t/r vim a..11arry Or`r(tff ke" / N .w i If.41 Or Aw.*W' C1i,aMY aM lb the diy of )_- -.} Ir7UG Irf•.e rot , , thr I li c ,: 'rA. . MUMMll cw,w 1`Rt 1.Oli M. If4RRINCTON Ill Y tkIq . Of�re uw � Y 1 xmalq� eayn f 1fORGE 1UtII- IS 1F 21^l�"'PCl!; I i Io nm rx I t' L, h rfnidnal I wt-nv1 111 •md whc .In 'nr III to be ill, ind\,olt,i 'i ltd in and a.ho rxn tl<1 1 t,rrg,.ing it lmm�al rl nYu•ry lr,.v( ti cal e( {."1 N✓r I gIe b `gang n"t"Jolot. and F.a,v:b-0ged that r. sa nrd i1,r Ir ,.. ha esecoal h ;amt / I l l / pr i!w J. FE.^PFR Il) I :, IA +ILO VA4 t.^ot Now"Irk hc:a'/ I+ noa'I •,�_,eu fh 1,-,,MP1,h.wd CdlM1r1 Fer i,r:cs, .u, i.,.piies ; 1, 13 9'I Oov,x(.Nan ExpirM Mma a 1'bl j , aYaa Oa M Tawe, llaMaarr W au 'RAIM O/MVI IOM.catarTY cw ru .M IL: •hs o1 _ 19 ,x rte r•.re ''. r n ane dw day rd 111 Iwton P.Ie I aalal, per:onall, came 1 1,t Lw'.r' wlm. 'Wing by twit (fill) sworn, 'I'dd i rc and ;,the subwribing Jvirr, io 01r foreg,ing Io 1 o,ot. with v nm Ix• rrodts t `xnwh nn 1 a", per ontlly acqurointt i who, wil i r Inv (1,11%tie sw'urn• dol Orlin" w,(say that !,t n:ide: ry \c. 11 "I that he knows 1hr corporal:on I iribcd nurI wIoA dx. IwrI inxnuntrnil IILt he to be thr indi riA•:xl Lrv,a- it' r-d ill un1 a,qn a nun; 1111 the . a! affixed •Iey •dell in and wll, ,•xnuttd the foregoing ir,sttun rn: L. „ol I In,:ruut a vnh (oq.rate ,,I' that it ora, sW d-' hr• ';'Id ul...,.,ii,iug wd,wss, oas proa and a�w a Hixni by ur•Irr it Ilse hard of dwertr:n ..f •.id execute the %me;and that :,t,:aid witla:Is, Ira,. AId Itrat he iicnrd h nam- rtxteto by like peter at ; e name time 11 'scribed h name as witness torsen, Bargain aNO Bair 8rra court+ 91 bl:,111n1`.aal 1,.Ua•,l Lxta 1(rx. V I', n1(Nd fill i'RI;STON M. IIA.RRINt:"MN ill and 11,11 SUP '01,11 COUNTY GEORGE i'ONC NARRINGTON, Co-Exerutn.a cf the :.a!:t Will .and Testament of fatharire T. P,affir.ington IkCSI'ON M. HARRINGTON III MEYUEN YY ll id -- Marr~IOaw w raw • *.nsrr m nru Ilrawrws teRuckln wigno le Hare: �roick i lr. ' e' Kn}gllx.. 3ECl/fllYTFTLE A. 'U GL'AI[AA'T}'C'UAfP.61YY i3 lot i r).an street P. 0.. Sax 111 eruwsww ler�,w naw Tpwx 1 Er:glew+tOd, NA 'tie Na. 07631 a, . a � I Y Y S it , . x qx t `:1 , TIM, S (Description Continued) BRING the same premises conveyed to Preston M. Harrington Jr. , and Katharine T. Harrington, his wife, by deed dated June 17 , 1947, from Rosemary M. Pomeroy, formerly Rosemary M. Taccereo, and Franklin F. Regan, as executors of the last will and testament of Frank N. Taccardo, late of Flushing, Queens County, New York, and recorded Tune 30, 1947, in Liber 2722 page 473 In the Suffolk County Clerk's Office. Said Preston m. Harrington & 0, a resident of Bergen County* Now ,Terse ld X& r ne . 0drrington died a resident of Bergen County on February 6, 1983. +k OPP .,r rrj . 15 i l .. ti +1 i y+. A S+y.. i Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. Newman Village, Suite E, 2322 Main Street,P.O. Box 2003, Bridgehampton,New York 1 1932-2003 (631) 537-5160 Fax: (631) 537-5291 Bruce Anderson,M.S.,President November 16, 2005 Albert Krupski, Jr., President Southold Town Trustees r - P. O. Box 1179 } ! 1 Southold, NY 11971 11 i E 1 Re: Moy ? ;,` NOV j 1 NO Situate: s/s West Lake Drive, Town of Southol� SCTM # 1000-90-2-1 Dear Mr. Kruspski, I have reviewed the correspondence of Ms. Quinn dated October 12, 2005 along with the accompanying subdivision map and deeds and offer the following comments: 1. The cover letter with letter head identified as Land Owners Abstract Corp. is signed by Bonnie M. Quinn. 2. Ms. Quinn identifies herself as a member of the West Lake Association at paragraph 1 on page 1. 3. Paragraph 2 refers to a deed and the correspondence attaches 5 deeds. The first deed dated November 13, 1929 at liber 1169 and page 27 describes lot 92 and lot 93 of the subdivision Map of Cedar Beach Park conveyed from J. P. Muller Realty Corporation to Florence Homan ("Deed #1"). The second deed is partially illegible but refers to lot 6, 7 and 8 of the subdivision Map of Cedar Beach Park ("Deed #2"). The third deed is almost completely illegible ("Deed #3"). The forth deed dated January 121, 1929 at liber 1405 and page 410 conveys lot 114 of the subdivision Map of Cedar Beach Estates from J. P. Muller Realty to Arthur W. Jones and Ruth Green Jones ("Deed #4"). The fifth deed is completely illegible. Importantly none of the deeds submitted are for subject property. 4. Paragraph 5 states a concern that access not be eliminated to the inlet. Subject application does not block access to the inlet. 5. The applicant does not propose to take any street. 6. At paragraph 1 on page 2 Ms. Quinn states "Land Owners Abstract Corp. has no liability to any information supplied or the outcome of the case." I have reviewed the correspondence of Merlon Wiggin to the Southold Town Trustees dated November 3, 2005 which states "Enclosed as requested are more readable covenants and restrictions that apply to the best of our knowledge to subject lot,". I note Mr. Wiggin attaches Deed #1 along with a copy of a covenant and restriction that applies to lot#113 of the Subdivision Map of Cedar Beach Park. It is important to note that the deed and covenant and restriction refer to different lots altogether and neither refers to the lot that is the subject of this application. Kindly have Mr. Johnston verify the facts outlines herein. Sincere) Bruce A. Anderson Cc. D. Moy _ Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. Newman Village, Suite E,2322 Main Street,P.O. Box 2003, Bridgehampton,New York 11932-2003 (631) 537-5160 Fax: (631) 537-5291 Bruce Anderson.M.S., President Via Facsimile November 16, 2005 Albert Krupski, Jr., President Southold Town Trustees P. O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Moy Situate: ROW off West Lake Drive, Southold SCTM # 1000-90-2-1 Dear Mr. Kruspski, Kindly adjourn the above referenced permit matter to the regular meeting of December of this year. As requested by your Board, we are still in the process of examining title issues that came up as a result of last month's meeting. Sincerely, IL""-' Bruce A. Anderson Cc. D. Moy Sep 30 04 03: 04p p. 1 Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. Newman Village,Suite E,2322 Main Street, P.O. Box 2003,Bridgehampton,New York 11932-2003 (631) 537-5160 Fax: (631)537-5291 Bruce Anderson,M.S.,President Via Facsimile November 16, 2005 Albert Krupski, Jr., President Southold Town Trustees P. O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Moy Situate: ROW off West Lake Drive, Southold SCTM# 1000-90-2-1 Dear Mr. Kruspski, Kindly adjourn the above referenced permit matter to the regular meeting of December of this year. As requested by your Board, we are still in the process of examining title issues that came up as a result of last month's meeting. Sincerely, Bruce A. Anderson Cc. D. Moy 0 MAILING ADDRESS: PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS �O f so P.O. Box 1179 JERILYN B.WOODHOUSE �O� '701 Southold, NY 11971 Chair (Q i, OFFICE LOCATION: WILLIAM J. CREMERS T Town Hall Annex KENNETH L.EDWARDS co Q 54375 State Route 25 MARTIN H. SIDOR � �0 (cor. Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) GEORGE D.SOLOMON �,YCOU,M'N Southold, NY 111, Telephone: 631 765-1935 Far: 631 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD To: Town of Southold Board of Trustees n From: Mark Terry, Senior Environmental Planner i LWRP Coordinator j Date: August 23, 2005 Re: Request for Wetland Permit for Sim Moy SCTM#1000-90.-2-1 SIM MOY requests a Wetland Permit to construct a single-family dwelling, attached rear deck, pervious driveway, retaining wall and sanitary system. Located: 750 West Lake Rd., Southold. SCTM# 90-2-1. The parcel is located on Little Peconic Bay. The proposed action has been reviewed to Chapter 95, Waterfront Consistency Review of the Town of Southold Town Code and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP)Policy Standards. Based upon the information provided on the LWRP Consistency Assessment Form submitted to this department, as well as the records available to me, it is my recommendation that the proposed action is generally CONSISTENT with the Policy Standards and therefore is CONSISTENT with the LWRP provided that the following standard best management practices are implemented. 1. Require water quality protection measures for areas generating runoff (gutters, downspouts, dry wells and pervious driveways)post construction. Depth to groundwater is extremely shallow. To further Policy 5 and protect surface and ground water quality and conserve water supply to the greatest extent possible it is requested that the Board require the following best management practices for landscaping and lawn establishment post construction: 1. Require native landscaping to minimize irrigation and avoid fertilizer applications. 2. Require disease-resistant and drought-tolerant plants (where possible). 3. Retain existing vegetation within non-disturbed buffers to minimize lawn areas. Pursuant to Chapter 95, the Board of Trustees shall consider this recommendation in preparing its written determination regarding the consistency of the proposed action. Please contact me at (631) 765-1938 if you have any questions regarding the above. Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. Newman Village, Suite E,2322 Main Street,P.O. Box 2003,Bridgehampton, New York 11932-2003 (631) 537-5160 Fax: (631) 537-5291 Bruce Anderson, M.S., President August 15, 2005 Albert Krupski, Jr., President Southold Town Trustees P. O. Box 1179 D r 17` Southold, NY 11971 --= f' Re: Moy AUG 1 7 20u3 Situate: ROW off West Lake Drive, Soul iold SCTM # 1000-90-2-1 smdi 9" 1c'm Bas,rf 5' ltu slew Dear Mr. Kruspski, Enclosed herewith please find six copies of the Groundwater Flow Analysis for Moy Property prepared by this Firm dated August 15, 2005. This study was required by you during your public hearing of April 20, 2005. Kindly place this matter on your August 24th hearing agenda for discussion and determination. ASincerely, Bruce A. Anderson Cc. D. Moy w/ encl. .,4 09: 23a P. Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. Newman Village,Main Street,P.O.Box 2003,Bridgehampton,New York 11932-2003 (516)537-5160 FAX:(516)537-5291 FAX COVER Date: 7/20/05 Number of pages including cover 1 To: Mr.Albert J.Krupski,President Southold Town Board of Trustees Fax# : 631-765-6641 From: William J. Lohn Re: MOYApplication Situate: s/s West Lake Drive Bayview; Town of Southold,NY SCTM M 1000—090—02 -001 Comments: Dear Mr. Krupski, As you know,this Firm represents Mrs.Moy,owner of the property referenced above,who is pending review from your office for construction of a 3 bedroom single family dwelling on pilings thereon. By way of this correspondence,and on behalf of the client,please add this matter to the agenda for the regular August Board of Trustees meeting. If there are any questions regarding this matter,please feel free to contact this office at any time. Thank you as always for your attention and consideration Sincerely, \ i William J.Lohn cc: S.Moy Please call us at(516)537-5160 if there is any problem with this transmission. 0 Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. Newman Village, Main Street,P.O. Box 2003, Bridgehampton, New York 11932-2003 (631) 537-5160 Fax: (631) 537-5198 Bruce Anderson, M.S., President Via Facsimile and Reaular Mailina March 21, 2005 Mr. Albert J. Krupski, President D Town Hall 'tD 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 MAR 2 c0U5 {J Southold, NY 11971 SUI iaald laNe Re: MOY Application Board of Trustees Situate: s/s West Lake Drive Bayview; Town of Southold, NY SCTM #: 1000—090—02 -001 Dear Mr. Krupski, As you know, this Firm represents Mr. and Mrs. Moy, owners of the property referenced above, who are pending review from your office for improvements thereon. This proposal is scheduled to be heard before your Board on Wednesday evening, March 23, 2005, however, due to scheduling conflicts, this office cannot be present to represent Mr. and Mrs. Moy. Accordingly, by way of this correspondence,kindly adjourn this matter for the next available Southold Board of Trustees meeting. This office additionally requests for public re-notification of this project. Should you have any questions and/or comments, kindly contact this office at any time. Thank you as always for your attention and consideration. Sincerely, Matt D. Ivans cc: S. Moy Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. Newman Village, Suite E, 2322 Main Street,P.O. Box 2003,Bridgehampton,New York 11932-2003 (631) 537-5160 Fax: (631) 537-5291 Bruce Anderson,M.S., President August 18,2006 Mr.James King, President Southold Town Trustees Town Hall P.O. Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Re: Moy Property Situate: West Lake Road Bayview,Town of Southold SCTM #: 1000-090-02-001 Dear Mr. King, As you know,this Firm represents the owner of the above referenced property,who is seeking approval from your Board to make improvements thereon. This matter is on the agenda for the regular meeting to be held on August 23,2006. Therefore, in accordance with Town Code, please find enclosed herewith for your review: 1) original signed and notarized Affidavit of Mailing; 2) copy of the Legal Notice that was mailed to adjacent property owners; 3) original Certified Mailing Receipts and copies of the same. Kindly review the enclosed items. If you have any questions,or require additional information,please don't hesitate to contact me. Thank you as always for your attention and consideration. Sincerely, William J. Lohn Encl. Cc: D. Moy PROOF OF MAILING OF NOTICE ATTACH CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS Name: Address: Dai W.Moy 88 Mulberry Street New York,NY 10013 Arthur A Sowinski Attn: Sarah Sowinski 24 Bancroft Road Poughkeepsie,NY 12601 STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK William J. Lohn residing at 2322 Main St. ; Newman Village Suite 8; P.O. Box 2003; Bridgehampton, NY 11932 , being duly sworn deposes and says that on the /nrti day of 20 (25o , deponent mailed a true copy of the Noti et forth in the Board of Trustees Application, directed to each of the above named persons at the addresses set opposite their respective names; that the addresses set opposite the names of said persons are the address of said persons as shown on the current assessment roll of the Town of Southold; that said Notices were mailed at the United States Post Office at Bridgehampton that said Notices were mailed to each of said persons by (certifie (registered) mail . Sworn to before me this (�ti day of 0 p� Notary Pub is Matthew D. Ivans Notary Public of New York No. OlIV6053859 Dualified in Suffolk County Commission Expires January y2, 2007 U.S. Postal Service U.S. Postal Service RECEIPT CERTIFIED MAIL.. RECEIPT CERTIFIED MAIL Dornestic Mail Only;No Insurance Covera eProvided (Domestic Mail On1Y N°Insurance Coverage Provided 9 ) For delivery information visit our wcbste at www usps.com ru amr-u 0 For delivery information visd our website at www.usps.ca i a) f e.: i Ln ® .,1 1. Ln t 32 LINIT c Ln csw Fee '0 AMP M 2.4 UG pwik waft ^ me 103 p1mm _3 ROWWW F" � i — 1 11 _. 4.6 081"10/06 1{ 1 Iq Ln TOW � a) Sww To 0 l.. •• Hu AIX U.S. POSta� SBrVICe .. .� .; vs rorn :umo � :r.n:' �it .„,�i� i ,imt=os ru CO ru Ul CERTIFIED MAIL.. RECEIPT (Domestic Maf{Only;No lnsurancr Co verage Pro viAed) For delrvey inbrm.0 an visit our wrbsne al www uspsco nt : 1 /t ru pomp sibA 32 Ln C3 M,=R= Pwnlig. waft . �� i lerk: RHmDo cc Ln 1 1. •• NOTICE TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER BOARD OF TRUSTEES, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD In the matter of applicant: SIM NOY SCTM# 1000-90 - 2 - 1 YOU ARE HEREBY GIVEN NOTICE: 1 . That is the intention of the undersigned to request a Permit from the Board of Trustess to: Applicant proposes to construct a 1061 SF single family dwelling on piles with attached deck and attendant sanitary System 2 . That the property which is the subject of Environmental Review is located adjacent to your property and is described as follows : West Lake Road; Bayveiw; Town of Southold NY 3 . That the project which is subject to Environmental Review under Chapters 32, 37, or 97 of the Town Code is open to public comment. You may contact the Trustees Office at 765-1892 or in writing. The above referenced proposal is under review of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold and does not reference any other agency that might have to review same proposal. OWNERS NAME: Sim Hoy MAILING ADDRESS:_106 Mulberry Street - Apt 7 New York NY PHONE # (631) 537-5160 Enc. : Copy of sketch or plan showing proposal for your convenience. Albert J. Krupski, President Town Hall John Holzapfel,Vice President 53095 Main Road Jim King P. O. Boz 1179 Martin H. Garrell Southold,New York 11971 Peter Wenzel Telephone(631)765-1892 Fax(631 )765-1823 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Office Use only Coastal Erosion Permit Application S� L Wap X Wetland Permit Application Grandfather Permit Application waiver/Amendment/Cha�r]�,�� , /Received Application: //.3/I0� Received Fee: $ W' Completed Application //4110% D 0 �p Incomplete VV SEQRA Classification: Type I Type II Unlistedr. - Coordination: (date sent) JAN 3 ZC 0 CAC Referral Sent : Odor ., Date of Inspection: Receipt of CAC Report : R�,r,i er 1r;;eraFs Lead Agency Determination: Technical Review: i Public Hearing Held: Resolution: 0� Name of Applicant SIM H. MOY Address 106 Nuiberry Street; Apt. 7; New York, NY 10013 Phone Number ( 212 ) 431 - 8531 Suffolk County Tax Map Number: 1000 - 090 - 02 - 001 I` Property LocationA/a Most Lake Road; Southold, NY (provide LILCO Pole #, distance to cross streets, and location) AGENT: Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. Address: P.O. Box 2003 Bridgehampton, NY 11932 Phone Number: (631) 537-5160 Fax: # (631) 537-5198 1 Bo d of Trustees Application* GENERAL DATA Land Area ( in square feet) : 8, 861 square feet± Area Zoning: Previous use of property: Vacant lot improved with bulkheads Intended use of property: Residential Prior permits/approvals for site improvements: Agency Date X No prior permits/approvals for site improvements. Has any permit/approval ever been revoked or suspended by a governmental agency? X No Yes If yes, provide explanation: Project Description (use attachments if necessary) Applicant proposes to construct a private single family dwelling (three bedrooms; 1, 061 square foot ± "footprint'); attached rear deck (506 square feet ±); pervious driveway; retaining wall (155.0 linear feet ±); and sanitary system, including the placement of 169 cubic yards of clean fill. 2 Board of Trustees Application* WETLAND/TRUSTEE LANDS APPLICATION DATA Purpose of the proposed operations: Applicant proposes to construct a private single family dwelling (three bedrooms; 1, 061 square foot t "footprint ), attached rear deck (506 square feet t); pervious driveway; retaining wall (155.0 linear feet t); and sanitary system, including the placement of 169 cubic yards of clean fill. Area of wetlands on lot: 0. 0 square feet Percent coverage of lot: 0. 0 % Closest distance between nearest existing structure and upland edge of wetlands: 0. 0 feet (existing Bulkheads) Closest distance between nearest proposed structure and upland edge of wetlands: 29 . 0 ± feet (Proposed NK corner of rear deck) Does the project involve excavation or filling: No X Yes If yes, how much material will be excavated? N/A cubic yards How much material will be filled? 169 ± cubic yards Depth of which material will be removed or deposited: 2 . 0 ± feet Proposed slope throughout the area of operations: Flat Manner in which material will be removed or deposited: N/A Clean fill to be deposited and graded by typical front-end loader and manual labor. Statement of the effect, if any, on the wetlands and tidal waters of the town that may result by reason of such proposed operations (use attachments if appropriate) : No negative impacts are anticipated due to the location of the proposed improvements being the maximum attainable without resulting In zoning non-conformity. In addition, the neighborhood consists of improved lots similar In design and scope with respect to the distance from wetlanda/surface waters which have not resulted in any negative impacts to the surrounding environment 3 Albert J. Krupski, President • �Q'a'UFFO(�C • James King, Vice-President .jQ OG Town Hall 53095 Route 25 Artie Foster P.O. Box 1179 Peggy A.. Dickerson Ken iy Z Southold, New York 11971-0959 "O � .F y�l� QQt Telephone (631) 765-1892 Fax(631) 765-1366 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BOARD OF TRUSTEES: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD --------------------------------------------------------------- In the Matter of the Application of —Itfo 7-- --------- -- ---------------------- COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) STATE OF NEW YORK) AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING residing at srr �a.rY.y(� �ivC /4(d being duly sworn, depose d y: That on the //flay of •'Rtw , 2005, I personally posted the property known as by placing the Board of Trustees official poster where it can easily be seen, and that I have checked to be sure the poster has remained in place for eight days prior to the date of the public hearing. Date of hearing noted thereon to be held On O'►owil 7;Q� Dated: Z3 Zoos (signature) Sworn to before me this 20'"day of1e9_ic-,200S— t Public Matthew I (vans Notary Public of New York No. OlIV6053859 oualified in Suffolk County commission Expires January 22, 2Q)7 Board of Trustees Application COASTAL EROSION APPLICATION DATA N/A Purpose of Proposed Activity: Are wetlands present within 75 feet of the proposed activity? No Yes If Yes, how much material will be excavated? (cubic yards) How much material will be filled? (cubic yards) Manner in which material will be removed or deposited: Describe the nature and extent of the environmental impacts reasonably anticipated resulting from the implementation of the project as proposed. (Use attachments if necessary) 4 NOTICE TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER BOARD OF TRUSTEES, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD In the matter of applicant: Sim H. Mol► SCTM # 1000 - 090 - 02 - 001 YOU ARE HEREBY GIVEN NOTICE: 1. That is the intention of the undersigned to request a Permit from the Board of Trustees to: Applicant proposes to construct a private single family dwelling (three bedrooms; 1, 061 square foot t "'footprint"); attached rear deck (506 square feet ±), pervious driveway; retaining wall (155.0 linear feet t); and sanitary system, including the placement of 169 cubic yards of clean fill. 2. That the property which is the subject of Environmental Review is located adjacent to your property and is described as follows: s/a Nest Lake Road; Bayview; Town of Southold NY 3. That the project which is subject to Environmental Review under Chapters 32, 37, or 97 of the Town Code is open to public comment. You may contact the Trustees Office at 765-1892 or in writing. The above referenced proposal is under review of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold and does not reference any other agency that might have to review same proposal . OWNERS NAME: Sim B. Moy MAILING ADDRESS: 106 Mulberry Street; Apt. 7 • NY NY 10013 PHONE # (212) 431 - 8531 Enc. : Copy of sketch or plan showing proposal for your convenience. 5 M1 , U.S. Postal Servicei.. -n CERTIFIED MAIL, RECEIPT Cc (DOmeStic Mail Only;No insurance Coverage Provided) GStEENftlIT, f(Y j}�y, M1 Pn"sge $6:Postal Service :) '.�Posimdra 1 RECEIPTED MAIL surance Coverage Provided) , estic Mail Only;No In �. �_ viii , USE v 5 A _ CO E2.30 UNIT ID: 0932 --- -,��- `—` ---- M1 Postage C,pn w 1 'yl. hA. - ------- o cemisaFee �rMP?01 Qox 6-71 -------- - . -------- --------- E3 Rstum Rede u Fe) �y~„ •�O (EndorsameM Required).3 Re9triCt6d Delhrery Feek: R"W Lrl (EndoreerrwntRequired) ,a Total Postage&Fees %2 Ur'PS Sam To rpo ApcABar No.0.i"'"' or O. l30X 6.71. or PO ciiy,s"reie;ziw.d --------------------------------------------------_--------.......... Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. Newman Village, Suite E, 2322 Main Street, P.O. Box 2003, Bridgehampton, New York 11932-2003 (631) 537-5160 Fax: (631) 537-5291 Bruce Anderson, M.S., President Via Certified Mail August 25`", 2005 Mr. Merlon Wiggin, PhD P.O. Box 672 Greenport, NY 11944 Re: Moy Trustee Application Situate: West Lake Road; Town of Southold, New York SCTM#: 1000-090-02-01 Dear Mr. Wiggin, At the public hearing of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold on August 24`h, 2005, a request was made by said Board that a copy of the above referenced application and the Groundwater Flow Analysis be made available to you. To fulfill that request, please find enclosed herewith: 1) Copy of subject Wetland Permit Application (with LWRP Assessment form); and 2) Copy of the Groundwater Flow Analysis for Moy Property prepared by this firm at the request of the Board. If you have any questions regarding this matter, feel free to contact this office at any time. z t��L� William J. Lohn enclosed cc: S. Moy 0 0 f Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. Newman Village, Suite E,2322 Main Street,P.O. Box 2003, Bridgehampton,New York 11932-2003 (631) 537-5160 Fax: (631) 537-5291 Bruce Anderson, M.S., President Via Reeular Mail August 26, 2005 L, � i-z� Mr. Albert J. Krupski, President Town Hall AUG P.O. Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 gouthA Tarvn Board of Trustees Re: MOYAppliication Situate: s/s West Lake Drive;Bayview; Town of Southold,NY SCTM#: 1000—090—02 -001 Dear Mr. Krupski, As per the request of your Board concerning further notification of adjacent property owners in the manner of the above referenced application,please find attached: (1) Original Certified Mail Receipt and copy of same; and (2) Copy of the Letter which was mailed to Mr. Merlon Wiggin, PhD. Kindly review the enclosed items. Should you have any questions concerning this matter,please feel free to contact this office at any time. Thank you as always for your attention and consideration. Sincerely, William J. Lohn attachment cc: D. Moy PROOF OF MAILING OF NOTICE ATTACH CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS Name: Address: PLEASE REFER to the ATTACHED ADDENDUM STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK Matt D. Ivans - Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. residing at Newman Village; Main Street, Bridgehampton, NY , being duly 'sworn deposes and says that on the day of 2005, deponent mailed a true copy of the Notice set forth in the Board of Trustees Application, directed to each of the above named persons at the addresses set opposite their respective names; that the addresses set opposite the names of said persons are the address of said persons as shown on the current assessment roll of the Town of Southold; that said Notices were mailed at the United States Post Office at Bridgehampton, that said Notices were mailed to each of said persons by (certified) (registered) mail. MATT D. IVANS Sworn to before me this day of , 2005 Notary Public 6 Board of Trustees Application County of Suffolk ) State of New York ) BEING DULY SWORN DEPOSES AND AFFIRMS THAT HE/SHE IS THE APPLICANT FOR THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PERMIT (S) AND THAT ALL STATEMENTS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE TRUE TO THE BEST OF HIS/HER KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF, AND THAT ALL WORK WILL BE DONE IN THE MANNER SET FORTH IN THIS APPLICATION AND AS MAY BE APPROVED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF TRUSTEES. THE APPLICANT AGREES TO HOLD THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD AND THE TOWN TRUSTEES HARMLESS AND FREE FROM ANY AND ALL DAMAGES AND CLAIMS ARISING UNDER OR BY VIRTUE OF SAID PERMIT (S) , IF GRANTED. IN COMPLETING THIS APPLICATION, I HEREBY AUTHORIZE THE TRUSTEES, THEIR AGENT (S) OR REPRESENTATIVE (S) , TO ENTER ONTO MY PROPERTY TO INSPECT THE PREMISES IN CONJUNCTION WITH REVIEW OF THIS APPLICATION. Signature SWORN BEF RE ME TH S jy�r yr �w(// DAY OF/ --2:z 2004 otary Pu li THOMAS Y.WONG Notuy Public State 0t New Yok No.01 W043331 W Qualified In New M Coin Commission Expose March 30,200 7- 7 Board of Trustees Application AUTHORIZATION (where applicant is not the owner) S/M 4 I, NOY , residing at 106 Mulberry Street; Apt. 7; Nen York, NY , do hereby authorize Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. to apply for (Agent) permit (s) from the Southold Board of Trustees on my behalf. /� 2�, / �. Owner' s signat re) 8 0 0 ,4-,6-4(9/95)-Text 12 617.20 SEQR PROJECT I.D.NUMBER Appendix C State Environmental Quality Review T ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only PART 1-PROJECT INFORMATION o be completed b licant or Project sponsor) 1. APPLICANT/SPONSOR 2. PROJECT NAME Suffolk Environmental Consulting,Inc. MOY 3. PROJECT LOCATION: Municipality Town of Southold County Suffolk 4. PRECISE LOCATION (Street address and road intersections,prominent landmarks,etc.or provide map) s/s West Lake Road;Bayview; Town of Southold,NY (SCTM#: 1000—090—02-001) 5. IS PROPOSED ACTION: New ❑ Expansion ❑ Modification/alteration 6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY: Applicant proposes to construct a private single family dwelling(three bedrooms; 1,061 square foot t`footprint");attached rear deck(506 square feet t);pervious driveway;retaining wall(155.0 linear feet f);and sanitary system, including the placement of 169 cubic yards of clean fill. 7. AMOUNT OF LAND EFFECTED: Initial) <0.15 acres Ultimate) <0.15 acres S. WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS? ® Yes ❑ No If No, describe briefly 9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT? ®Residential ❑Industrial []Commercial ❑Agriculture ❑ParklForestlOpen space []Other Describe: Private single family residences with related appurtenances. 10. DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL,OR FUNDING,NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCY(FEDERAL,STATE OR LOCAL)? ®Yes ❑No If yes,list agency(s)and permitiapprovals Suffolk County Department of Health Services;New York State Dept.of Environmental Conservation approval. 11. DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTION HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL? ❑Yes ® No If yes,fist agency(s)and permit/approvals 12. ASA RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION? ❑ Yes ® No I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Applicant/sponsor name: Matt D.Ivans—Suffolk Environmental Consulting,Inc.Date: 1/26/05 Signature: IT the action Is in the Coastal Ares,and you are a stab agency,cornpleb the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessmerd OVER 1 0 PART IF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT o be completed by A enc' A. DOES ACTION EXCEED ANY TYPE I THRESHOLD IN 6 NYCRR,PART 617.12? If yes,coordinate the review process and use the FULL EAF. YesNo 13. WILL ACTION RECEIVE COORDINATED REVIEW AS PROVIDED FOR UNLISTED ACTIONS IN 6 NYCRR,PART 617.67 If No,a negative declaration may be superseded by another involved agency. Yes ❑No C. COULD ACTION RESULT IN ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FOLLOWING: (Answers may be handwritten,if legible) Cl. Existing air quality,surface or groundwater quality,noise levels,existing traffic patterns,solid waste production or disposal, potential for erosion,drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly: C2. Aesthetic,agricultural,archeological,historical or other natural or cultural resources; or community or neighborhood character? Explain briefly: C3. Vegetation or fauna,fish,shellfish or wildlife species,significant habitat,or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly: C4. A community's existing plans or goals as officially adopted,or change in use or intensity of use of land or natural resources? Explain briefly: C5. Growth,subsequent development,or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? Explain briefly: C6. Long term,short term,cumulative,or other effects not identified in C1-05? Explain.briefly: C7. Other impacts(including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy)? Explain briefly: D. WILL THE PROJECT HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS THAT CAUSED THE ESTABLISHMENT Or A CEA? Yes []No D. IS THERE,OR IS THERE LIKELY TO BE,CONTROVERSY RELATED TO POTENTIAL ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS? ❑Yes ❑No If yes,explain briefly PART 111-DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE(To be completed by Agency) INSTRUCTIONS: For each adverse effect identified above,determine whether it is substantial,large,important,or otherwise significant. Each effect should be assessed in connection with its(a)setting(i.e.urban or rural); (b)probability of occurring; (c)duration; (d) irreversibility; (e)geographic scope; and(1)magnitude. If necessary,add attachments or reference supporting materials. Ensure that explanations contain sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse impacts have been identified and adequately addressed.If question D of Part II was checked yea,the determination and significance must evaluate the potential Impact of the proposed action on the environmental characteristics of the CEA. Check this box fl you have identified one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts which MAY occur. Then proceed directly to the FULL EAF and/or prepare a positive declaration. ❑ Check this box if you have determined,based on the information and analysis above and any supporting documentation,that the proposed action WILL NOT result in any significant adverse environmental impacts AND provide on attachments as necessary,the reasons supporting this determination: Name of Lead Agency Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer Title of Responsible Officer Signature of ResponsibleOfficer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer(d different From responsible officer) 2 r Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. Newman Village, Main Street, P.O. Box 2003, Bridgehampton, New York 11932-2003 (631) 537-5160 Fax: (631) 537-5198 Bruce Anderson, M.S., President Hand Delivered E C is, January 27, 2005 JAN Mr. Albert J. Krupski, President Town Hall Tum P.O. Box 1179 South lltl Boar d eoff Tmstestees Southold,NY 11971 Re: MOY Property Situate: s/s West Lake Drive;Bayview; Town of Southold,NY Shelter Island,NY SCTM#: 1000—090—02 - 001 Dear Mr. Krupski, This Firm represents Mr. and Mrs. Moy, owners of the above referenced property, who are seeking all required regulatory permits to improve thereon. In order to do so, approval from your Board is required. Enclosed herewith please find a completed Wetland Permit Application. Application contents are as follows: (1) Town of Southold Trustees Wetlands Permit Application; (2) Short Environmental Assessment Form; (3) Photographs of subject property, indicating the location of all proposed structures thereon(two [2] sets); (4) Location Map for easy reference(two [2] copies); (5) Survey of subject property,prepared by FOX LAND SURVEYING, P.C., indicating all proposed structures thereon, last dated January 20, 2004 (two [2] copies); and (6) Check made payable to the Town of Southold in the amount of$250.00 covering the requisite application fee. By way of this correspondence, and on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Moy, I request that you commence review of this application and schedule for the next available Board of Trustees meeting for permit issuance. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, or require additional information, please feel free to contact this office at any time. Thank you in advance for your cooperation. Sincerely, /Ivans Ma attachment cc: Mr. & Mrs. Moy Town of Southold LWRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM A. INSTRUCTIONS 1. All applicants for permits* including Town of Southold agencies, shall complete this CCAF for proposed actions that are subject to the Town of Southold Waterfront Consistency Review Law. This assessment is intended to supplement other information used by a Town of Southold agency in making a determination of consistency. *Except minor exempt actions including Building Permits and other ministerial permits not located within the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area. 2. Before answering the questions in Section C,the preparer of this form should review the exempt minor action list,policies and explanations of each policy contained in the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. A proposed action will be evaluated as to its significant beneficial and adverse effects upon the coastal area(which includes all of Southold Town). 3. If any question in Section C on this form is answered"yes", then the proposed action may affect the achievement of the LWRP policy standards and conditions contained in the consistency review law. Thus,the action should be analyzed in more detail and, if necessary,modified prior to making a determination that it is consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the LWRP policy standards and conditions. If an action cannot be certified as consistent with the LWRP policy standards and conditions, it shall not be undertaken. A copy of the LWRP is available in the following places:online at the Town of Southold's website (southoldtown.northfork.net), the Board of Trustees Office,the Planning Department, all local libraries and the Town Clerk's office. B. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSED ACTION SCTM# 090 02 001 The Application has been submitted to(check appropriate response): Town Board ❑ Planning Dept. ❑ Building Dept. ❑ Board of Trustees 1. Category of Town of Southold agency action(check appropriate response): (a) Action undertaken directly by Town agency(e.g. capital construction, planning activity, agency regulation, land transaction) ❑ (b) Financial assistance(e.g. grant, loan, subsidy) ❑ (c) Permit, approval, license, certification: Nature and extent of action: Applicant proposes to construct a private single-family dwelline (3 bedrooms); attached rear deck: pervious driveway: retaining wall: deposition of clean 511• and sanitary system, all within subject property. Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 3. Enhance visual quality and protect scenic resources throughout the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section IH—Policies Pages 5 through 7 for evaluation criteria ® Yes ❑ No ❑ Not Applicable Subject proposal will not adversely impact the visual quality of the surrounding area in that the surrounding area is currently comprised of properties improved with single-family dwellings of similar, if not larger, size. Scenic resources, assumedly views of Little Peconic Bay to the south, are not at risk due to the property being situated at the end of West Lake Drive which results in only one adjacent parcel,to the west, which potentially be impacted, and which is also owned by the applicant. Furthermore,this policy could not preclude the legal creation of this property as a building lot. Attach additional sheets if necessary NATURAL COAST POLICIES Policy 4. Minimize loss of life, structures, and natural resources from flooding and erosion. See LWRP Section III—Policies Pages 8 through 16 for evaluation criteria ® Yes ❑ No ❑ Not Applicable Subject proposal will fully comply with Policy 4 in that the property is currently improved with a bulkhead along the southern and eastern property boundaries, as well as to the north, along the northern edge of West Lake Drive. Accordingly, the property is substantially protected from flooding and/or erosion and therefore will not result in any form of loss of life, structures,and natural resources from flooding and erosion, as a result of subject proposal. Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 5. Protect and improve water quality and supply in the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III -Policies Pages 16 through 21 for evaluation criteria ® Yes ❑ No ❑ Not Applicable Subject proposal will comply with Policy 5 in that the property will utilize public water,as well as to install an efficient sanitary system, compliant with the requirements of the Suffolk County Department of Health Services. Accordingly, no adverse impacts to either the water quality and/or water supply of Southold Town are anticipated Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 6. Protect and restore the quality and function of the Town of Southold ecosystems including Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats and wetlands. See LWRP Section III—Policies; Pages 22 through 32 for evaluation criteria ® Yes ❑ No ❑ Not Applicable Subject proposal will comply with Policy 6 in that the improving of this lawfully created residential building lot is to be designed to meet the environmental guidelines and requirements of both the Town of Southold Board of Trustees and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and consequently,will maintain the integrity of the surrounding ecosystem. Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 11. Promote sustainable use of living marine resources in Long Island Sound,the Peconic Estuary and Town waters. See LWRP Section III—Policies; Pages 57 through 62 for evaluation criteria ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 12. Protect agricultural lands in the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III—Policies; Pages 62 through 65 for evaluation criteria ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 13. Promote appropriate use and development of energy and mineral resources. See LWRP Section III—Policies; Pages 65 through 68 for evaluation criteria. ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Created on 5125/05 11:20 AM 0 Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. Newman Village, Main Street, P.O. Box 2003, Bridgehampton, New York 11932-2003 (631) 537-5160 Fax: (631) 537-5198 Bruce Anderson, M.S., President Hand Delivered June 28, 2005 Mr. Albert J. Krupski, President Town Hall P.O. Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Re: MOYApplication Situate: s/s West Lake Drive;Bayview; Town of Southold,NY Shelter Island, NY SCTM #: 1000—090—02 - 001 Dear Mr. Krupski, As per your request concerning the above referenced application, please find attached: (1) Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRJ) Consistency Assessment Form. Kindly review and include with our pending application regarding subject property. Should you have any questions concerning this matter, please feel free to contact this office at any time. Thank you as always for your attention and consideration. Sincerely, Matt D. Ivans D � � � � nn attachment U D JUN 2 8 2ppy Southold Town Board of Trustees cc: D. Moy Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. Newman Village, Suite E, 2322 Main Street,P.O. Box 2003,Bridgehampton, New York 11932-2003 (631) 537-5160 Fax: (631) 537-5291 Bruce Anderson, M.S., President np July 26, 2005 D C U Mr. Albert J. Kru ski President 2 1 2005 D p JUL Town Hall P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Southold Town Board of Trustees Re: MOY Application Situate: s/s West Lake Drive;Bayview; Town of Southold, NY Shelter Island, NY SCTM#: 1000—090—02 -001 Dear Mr. Krupski, As you know, this Firm represents Mr. Moy, owner of the above referenced property, who is pending approval from your Board to improve thereon. In order to fulfill the completeness of our application, please find enclosed: (1) Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Assessment Form; Kindly include the enclosed item within our pending application package and finalize the review of same so that we may be scheduled before the next available Town of Southold Board of Trustees meeting. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, or require additional information, please feel free to contact this office at any time. Thank you as always for your attention and consideration. Sincerely, Matt D. Ivans enc. cc: S. Moy Town of Southold tes, � � \, C DLWRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENL 2 � 2005A. INSTRUCTIONS outhold Town1. All applicants for permits* including Town of Southolproposed actions that are subject to the Town of Southistency Review Law. This assessment is intended to supplement other information used by a Town of Southold agency in making a determination of consistency. *Except minor exempt actions including Building Permits and other ministerial permits not located within the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area. 2. Before answering the questions in Section C, the preparer of this form should review the exempt minor action list,policies and explanations of each policy contained in the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. A proposed action will be evaluated as to its significant beneficial and adverse effects upon the coastal area(which includes a]I of Southold Town). 3. If any question in Section C on this form is answered"yes",then the proposed action may affect the achievement of the LWRP policy standards and conditions contained in the consistency review law. Thus,the action should be analyzed in more detail and, if necessary, modified prior to making a determination that it is consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the LWRP policy standards and conditions. If an action cannot be certified as consistent with the LWRP policy standards and conditions, it shall not be undertaken. A copy of the LWRP is available in the following places: online at the Town of Southold's website (southoldtown.northfork.net),the Board of Trustees Office, the Planning Department, all local libraries and the Town Clerk's office. B. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSED ACTION SCTM# 090 - 02 001 The Application has been submitted to (check appropriate response): Town Board ❑ Planning Dept. ❑ Building Dept. ❑ Board of Trustees 1. Category of Town of Southold agency action(check appropriate response): (a) Action undertaken directly by Town agency (e.g. capital construction,planning activity, agency regulation, land transaction) ❑ (b) Financial assistance (e.g. grant, loan, subsidy) ❑ (c) Permit, approval, license, certification: Nature and extent of action: Applicant proposes to construct a private single-family dwelline(3 bedrooms); attached rear deck: pervious driveway retaining wall,• deposition of clean fill; and sanrtary system, all within subiect property Location of action: s/s West Lake Road; Bavview, Town of Southold,NY Site acreage: 0.2 acre f Present land use: Improved only with wood bulkhead Present zoning classification: 2. If an application for the proposed action has been filed with the Town of Southold agency, the following information shall be provided: (a) Name of applicant: Sim H.Mov (b) Mailing address: 106 Mulberry Street—Apartment 7; New York.NY 10013 (c) Telephone number: Area Code (212 )431 -8531 (d) Application number, if any: N/A Will the action be directly undertaken, require funding, or approval by a state or federal agency? Yes ❑ No ® If yes,which state or federal agency? DEVELOPED COAST POLICY Policy 1. Foster a pattern of development in the Town of Southold that enhances community character, preserves open space,makes efficient use of infrastructure,makes beneficial use of a coastal location,and minimizes adverse effects of development. See LWRP Section HI—Policies; Page 2 for evaluation criteria. ® Yes ❑ No ❑ Not Applicable As indicated within Policy 1, "Development that does not reinforce the traditional land use pattern of the Town of Southold would result in a loss of the community and landscape character of Southold.', this prosect is a proposal to improve upon a vacant lot situated in a neighborhood consisting primarily of similarly-sized single-family dwellings within similarly-sized properties. The proposal as designed will not result in adverse effects to the surrounding environment in that the project has been designed in such a way as to maintain or exceed all required regulatory conditions associated with improving on a lot situated in proximity to the surface waters surrounding the Town of Southold. In addition, the surrounding neighborhood is comprised of older residential dwellings which have existed harmoniously within this area for years and have not resulted in any form of adverse effects to the surrounding environment. Accordingly, we believe that this project is consistent with this policy. Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 2. Protect and preserve historic and archaeological resources of the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section HI—Policies Pages 3 through 6 for evaluation criteria ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Applicable Policy 2 is not applicable in that subject lot and the surrounding neighborhood cannot be deemed a substantial historic and/or archaeological resources. Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 3. Enhance visual quality and protect scenic resources throughout the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III—Policies Pages 5 through 7 for evaluation criteria ® Yes ❑ No ❑ Not Applicable Subject proposal will not adversely impact the visual quality of the surrounding area in that the surrounding area is currently comprised of properties improved with single-family dwellings of similar, if not larger, size Scenic resources assumedly views of Little Peconic Bay to the south are not at risk due to the property being situated at the end of West Lake Drive which results in only one adjacent parcel to the west which potentially could be impacted and which is also owned by the applicant Furthermore this policy could not preclude the legal creation of this property as a building lot. Attach additional sheets if necessary NATURAL COAST POLICIES Policy 4. Minimize loss of life, structures, and natural resources from flooding and erosion. See LWRP Section III—Policies Pages 8 through 16 for evaluation criteria ® Yes ❑ No ❑ Not Applicable Subject proposal will fully comply with Policy 4 in that the property is currently improved with a bulkhead along the southern and eastern property boundaries as well as to the north along the northern edge of West Lake Drive Accordingly, the property is substantially protected from flooding and/or erosion and therefore will not result in any form of loss of life, structures, and natural resources from flooding and erosion as a result of subject proposal Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 5. Protect and improve water quality and supply in the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III - Policies Pages 16 through 21 for evaluation criteria ® Yes ❑ No ❑ Not Applicable Subject proposal will comply with Policy 5 in that the property will utilize public water, as well as to install an efficient sanitary system, compliant with the requirements of the Suffolk County Department of Health Services Accordingly, no adverse impacts to either the water quality and/or water supply of Southold Town are anticipated Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 6. Protect and restore the quality and function of the Town of Southold ecosystems including Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats and wetlands. See LWRP Section III—Policies; Pages 22 through 32 for evaluation criteria ® Yes ❑ No ❑ Not Applicable Subject proposal will comply with Policy 6 in that the improving of this lawfully created residential building lot is to be designed to meet the environmental guidelines and requirements of both the Town of Southold Board of Trustees and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and consequently, will maintain the integrity of the surrounding ecosystem. Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 7. Protect and improve air quality in the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III - Policies Pages 32 through 34 for evaluation criteria ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Applicable Subject proposal is not applicable in that the proposal is simply to improve subject property with a typical single-family dwelling and related appurtenances which historically do not result in any form of adverse effects to air quality. Accordingly, this proposal is not applicable with this policy. Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 8. Minimize environmental degradation in Town of Southold from solid waste and hazardous substances and wastes. See LWRP Section III—Policies; Pages 34 through 38 for evaluation criteria. ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Applicable Subject proposal is not applicable in that the proposal does not involve disposal and/or transportation of solid waste, hazardous waste, toxic pollutants, petroleum products. Attach additional sheets if necessary PUBLIC COAST POLICIES Policy 9. Provide for public access to,and recreational use of,coastal waters,public lands,and public resources of the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III—Policies;Pages 38 through 46 for evaluation criteria ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Applicable Subject proposal is not applicable to this policy in that the proposal will not impede any access to the surface waters in and around subject property and/or become detrimental to the recreational use of the surrounding resources. Attach additional sheets if necessary WORKING COAST POLICIES Policy 10. Protect Southold's water-dependent uses and promote siting of new water-dependence uses in suitable locations. See LWRP Section III—Policies; Pages 47 through 56 for evaluation criteria ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Applicable Subject proposal is not applicable in that the proposal does not involve a water-dependent use (i.e. marina aquaculture, etc...). Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 11. Promote sustainable use of living marine resources in Long Island Sound,the Peconic Estuary and Town Waters. See LWRP Section III—Policies;Pages 57 through 62 for evaluation criteria ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Applicable Subject proposal is not applicable in that the proposal does not involve any form of marine resource management (i.e. commercial fisheries, recreational fisheries aquaculture etc ) Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 12. Protect agricultural lands in the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III—Policies;Pages 62 through 65 for evaluation criteria. ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Applicable Subject proposal is not applicable in that the proposal does not involve agricultural lands (i.e. the conversion of farmland, the establishment and/or maintenance of new coastal agricultural production etc ) Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 13. Promote appropriate use and development of energy and mineral resources. See LWRP Section III—Policies; Pages 65 through 68 for evaluation criteria. ❑ Yes ❑ No ® Not Applicable Subject proposal is not applicable in that the proposal does not involve the conservation of energy resources on a commercial level and/or the promotion of alternative energy sources proper maintenance of fuel storage facilities and/or the extraction of mineral extraction Attach additional sheets if necessary Created on 5125105 11:20 AM 100 Crossways Park West Woodbury,New York 11797 tel: 516496-8400 fax: 516 496-8864 April 13,2006 Ms. Heather Cusack Environmental Technician Town of Southold Board of Trustees P.O. Box 1179 Southold,NY 11791-0959 Subject: Review of Groundwater Flow Analysis for Moy Property Dear Ms. Cusack: Camp Dresser&McKee (CDM) has completed our review of the document entitled, "Groundwater Flow Analysis for Moy Property" dated August 15,2005 prepared by Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. h1 addition to our review,a site visit was conducted in which the conditions at the site were observed. Our review focused on the assessment of groundwater flow conditions at the property and the location of the proposed sanitary system with respect to West Lake and Little Peconic Bay. Although the document is thorough,particularly with respect to the discussion regarding groundwater flow direction,several concerns associated with the water levels used for the proposed sanitary system have been identified: • According to both the Suffolk County Standards for Approval of Plans for Construction of Sewage Disposal Systems for Single-Family Residences(hereafter referred to as Suffolk County Standards) and 10 NYCRR Part 75-A,the bottom of the leaching pool must be at least two feet higher than the maximum seasonal water table elevation. Since the sanitary system will be located at the approximate location of Well #5,water table elevations at Well #5 should be used for design. Although using Well #5 data is mentioned in the text,the actual elevation of the water table shown on the drawing does not correspond to the maximum level measured. The groundwater elevation of 1.5 feet above mean sea level shown on the drawing appears to be measured from a test-pit located down-gradient of the proposed sanitary system. From the data listed in Tables 1 and 2,the maximum measured groundwater elevation at Well #5 is 2.59 feet above mean sea level (as measured 6/28/05). Using this value as the maximum water table elevation,the sanitary system design (using elevations shown on the survey)needs to be revised. consulting-engineering-construction-operations COM Ms. Heather Cusack April 13,2006 Page 2 • In addition, since the area is under tidal influence, groundwater elevations measured at high tide are required to be used in the design. • Finally,it should be noted that the water table in very shallow groundwater systems, such as the system on the North Fork,is quite sensitive to changes in precipitation. Groundwater elevations for this report were measured during late-June and early-July of 2005. Groundwater elevations are typically higher in the spring than during the summer months, as a result of a higher rate of recharge during the non-growing season. In addition,water levels were measured during a year of below average precipitation for June. Based on the precipitation gage at Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL),long-term average precipitation during June is 3.51 inches,while recorded precipitation at the BNL station for June 2005 was only 1.48 inches. Following a wet period,it is likely that maximum water table elevations will be higher than 2.59 feet above mean sea level at high tide. Should the sanitary system be installed using summer 2005 water levels as maximum levels, the sanitary system may flood after a wet season. "High seasonal groundwater' refers to the maximum water level measured during a wet season(spring). • The separation distance between the proposed sanitary system and the surrounding surface waters does not appear to be within those specified by 10 NYCRR Part 75-A or Suffolk County Standards. Unless prior approval has been issued by NYSDEC for these reduced separation distances, septic tanks must be at least 50 feet from surface waters and leaching pools must be 100 feet from surface waters. Our review confirmed that,based upon available data,groundwater flow direction is to the west-southwest,and using the measured water levels,sanitary effluent will discharge to the inlet of West Lake and Little Peconic Bay. Impacts to surface waters (West Lake and Little Peconic Bay) are addressed in the report by calculating travel time and assuming that approximately 98% of BOD,—1040% nitrogen,85-95% phosphorous and up to 99.99% of fecal coliforms will be removed by the sanitary system(based on the Onsite Wastewater Treatment Manual,published by EPA). However,there are no calculations (mass balance estimates) to estimate the nutrient contribution from the Moy property. From measured water levels, groundwater flow direction is predominately to the west, discharging to the inlet of West Lake. Although the inlet has a high degree of tidal flushing, during periods of high tide,water is flowing into the lake,carrying with it any contaminants in the groundwater discharge that discharges into the inlet. A calculation of flow contribution to the lake from the Moy property would be useful to determine any impact on the lake. C�Mwm Ms. Heather Cusack April 13,2006 Page 3 Specific review comments are listed in Attachment A. Based upon the review of"Groundwater Flow Analysis for Moy Property',dated August 15, 2005, the following recommendations are offered: ■ The design shown on the drawings shows a seasonal high groundwater table elevation of 1.5 feet mean sea level. This level is not the maximum water level measured at Well #5. The maximum water level measured at Well #5 should be used for design of the sanitary system, although the true seasonal maximum is likely higher than the summer 2005 levels that were recorded. ■ Since water levels were recorded in the summer of 2005,during below average precipitation conditions,they are not likely to reflect the high seasonal water levels. It is recommended that additional water levels be collected at the site, preferably during a wet period in the spring and a day or two after a significant rain event. As required,these water levels also must be measured at high tide to provide more representative values of seasonal high water table elevations.Summer 2005 water levels are likely lower than the seasonal high water table elevation and the sanitary system may flood during wet periods. If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to contact me at(516)496-8400 (Tuesday and Thursday) or (732) 225-7000 (Monday,Wednesday, Friday). I can also be reached via e-mail at: orourkede@cdm.com. Very truly Daniel O'Rourke Project Hydrogeologist Camp Dresser&McKee Inc. cc: Mr. Bruce A. Anderson(Suffolk Environmental Consulting,Inc.) Mary Anne Taylor, P.E. (CDM) C�Mwm Ms. Heather Cusack April 13,2006 Page 4 Attachment A- Detailed Comments 1. In Section II, Materials and Methods,page 2,line 6- The lengths of these test wells were 9ft for Wells #1 and#4,and 8ft for Wells#2, 3 and 5 a. Well screen intervals(either depth or elevations) would be useful. . 2. General on groundwater elevations a. The time of measurement would be useful so that estimated tide stage can be compared to the measurements. Direction of flow should be determined for each independent set of data,as opposed to an overall average,although the results do not differ significantly from those shown on Figure 6. 3. Tables 2,4 and 6 should indicate depth to groundwater (inches from top of casing). 4. In Section IV,page 11, the text mentions that the water table is 5 feet below the surface at Well#5. Groundwater elevations from the test pits prior to well installation should not be used for design. Using the groundwater levels measured in Well#5, the maximum measured water level is 2.59 feet above mean sea level,which corresponds to approximately 3.74 feet below the surface (the approximate distance to the top of the well casing from the ground surface is V-8",as measured during the site visit). 5. In Section IV,page 11,although there is mention of Haven Loam having a permeability of 1.315 in/hr, there is no mention of a percolation test,which is required under both the Suffolk County Standards and 10 NYCRR Part 75-A. This may have been dismissed in this case,however,given the sandy soils in the area. 6. Section IV,page 12- the Dupuit equation- q is flow per unit width (not area) and K is the hydraulic conductivity. It is not clear how the groundwater velocity of 37.826 ft/day was calculated. The value of K used (4,937.66 ft/d) is more than an order of magnitude higher than what is typically used for surficial sediments on Long Island. Therefore, the groundwater flow rate is inaccurate. If using the permeability mentioned on page 11 (1.315 in/hr), the hydraulic conductivity in the vertical direction is approximately 2.6 feet per day. Using a horizontal to vertical anisotropy ratio of 100:1,horizontal hydraulic conductivity is estimated at 260 feet per day. In addition,ho and hl in the equation are groundwater heads,not aquifer thickness. Also,note that density variations between fresh and salt-water have not been accounted for and calculating groundwater flow by Dupuit Ms. Heather Cusack April 13, 2006 Page 5 assumptions alone is an approximation(need Dupuit-Ghyben-Herzberg relationships to account for density differences). James F. King, President �ISO �oTown Hall Jill M. Doherty,Vice-President h0 53095 Route 25 Peggy A. Dickerson P.O. Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971-0959 Dave Bergen H Q % i� Telephone(631) 765-1892 John Holzapfel 3 COUNTI Fax(631) 765-6641 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES March 27, 2006 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Mary Anne Taylor, P.E. CDM 100 Crossways Park West Woodbury, NY 11797 Dear Ms. Taylor: Enclosed is a copy of the Groundwater Flow Analysis for the Moy property. Bruce Anderson of Suffolk Environmental Consulting has approved your proposal to review the document. Sincere„ Heather Cusack Environmental Technician Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. Newman Village, Suite E,2322 Main Street,P.O. Box 2003, Bridgehampton, New York 11932-2003 (631) 537-5160 Fax: (631) 537-5291 Bruce Anderson,M.S.,President March 23, 2006 Mary Ann Taylor, P. E. CDM 100 Crossways Park West Woodbury,NY 11797 Re: Moy MAR 2 4 2006 Situate: West Lake Drive, Southold SCTM #1000-90-2-1 Dear Ms. Taylor, This Firm represents Sim Moy who owns the premises referenced above and made application to the Southold Trustees for a wetland permit to construct a single family dwelling. I am in receipt of your letter proposal modification to Heather Cusak of the Trustees and enclose a copy for your easy reference. I also enclose a check made payable to CDM in the mount of$1750.00 in satisfaction of your proposal. By copy of this correspondence, I am requesting that the Southold Trustees forward one copy of the Groundwater Flow Analysis for Moy Property dated August 15, 2005 for you review and opinion pursuant to your proposal. Kindly expedite your review of our groundwater report and respond directly to the Trustees copying this office. Sincere) , Bruce A. Anderson i Cc. J. King, President, Southold Town Trustees D. Moy 02/07/2006 09:13 7656641 BOARD OF TRUSTEES PAGE 01 mmmw�MOM, 1 W Croctwiys Pad west _ y/ MW,y.New York 11197 rI' tel: 31606-9e6D I ��•\1 �f fac 516 FEB - 3 2006 January 31,2006 — - ITf Ms.Heather Cusack Southold Board of Trustees P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Subject-. Letter Proposal Modification Dear Ms.Cusack: As you requested last week,Camp Dresser Br McKee(CDM)has modified our letter proposal describing technical review of a property owners groundwater assessment to include a site visit. CDM's scope of work would now include: 6 Review of the document(approximately 20 pages)prepared by the property owner's consultant, describing their assessment of groundwater flow conditions at the property,particularly the location of the proposed septic system with respect to the coast; 6 Visual survey of the property to obtain a first-hand view of conditions and the relative locations of the proposed facilities and water resources(no intrusive activities will be conducted); • Evaluation of the conclusions of the document with respect to our understanding of the groundwater flow system near the coast,based upon our experience working with the County on the Main Body groundwater flow model and the salt water/fresh water interface models,other local experience and conditions observed during the site visit; 9 Prepare a letter report documenting the results of our evaluation in a clear,concise manner. The evaluation may confirm the results of the property owner's assessment, may identify additional field work that would be required to confirm the property owner's assessment of the local groundwater flow field,or may present an alternative representation of local conditions based upon existing information. W It�VLOM9eJ6nitlro,.oeL cnK,I11ng.rn9ineerin9'conIINction-o9rwtons 02/07/2006 09:13 7656641 BOARD OF TRUSTEES PAGE 02 ti Cm MS.Heather Cusack January 31,2006 Page 2 It is anticipated that this review could be completed within two w e s of preparatioOf the n would be document,and that the review,site visit,evaluation and letter rep P P budge exceed$1,750. 1,az d additional meetings have been anticipated in the completed at a cost not to ex development of the projec t. If you have any questions,or would like to discuss the project further,Please don't hesitate to call me at(516)496-8400• We look forward to hearing from you soon. Very truly yours, 6A..' Ca. Mary Anne Taylor,P.E. Associate Camp Dresser&McKee cc: K. Kelly D. O'Rourke W IT,%YLORGW W4'W(DO x SUFFOLK ENVIRONMENTAL 8326 CONSULTING, INC. P.O. BOX 2003 BRIDGEHAMPTON, NY 11932 / 5p 5g5/21a PAY DATE Z TO THE ORDER OF $/ p,,�yy�cy DOLLARS g Tem s[leeol rc co[Ixrr NAS ONDn K FORD AoorAAm , /iI&yf t M II■00832Com 1:0 2 140 54641: 24 000137 ov RESPONSE TO THE COM REPORT CONCERNING THE M ©Y PROPERTY Prepoeed by twOolk laWrvanowntal fine Ohig, Inc. Dow 7/ This document is in response to the Camp Dresser & McKee report dated April 13th, 2006 analyzing the Groundwater Flow Analysis for the Moy Property prepared by this Firm Comment: "From the data listed in Tables 1 and 2, the maximum measured groundwater elevation at Well#5 in 2.59 feet above mean sea level(as measured 6/28/2005), Using this value as the maximum water table elevation, the sanitary system design (using elevations shown on the survey) needs to be revised." Response; The Suffolk County Sanitary Code says the following: "In areas subject to tidal action, groundwater elevations shall be measured at mean high tide and be so noted on plana'. Therefore, the maximum measured groundwater elevation shall not be used in design of the proposed sanitary system. The mean high tide groundwater elevation measurement of 2.44' shall instead be used. This will indeed necessitate a change in the sanitary system design. To maintain the minimum separation of 6' between the top of the leaching ring cover and finished grade, said finished grade will have to be raised to 8.44' (from 7.5') above mean sea level. This will cause only a minor change in the amount of fill required. The resubmitted plans reflect this change. Comment: "In addition, since the area is under tidal influence, groundwater elevations measured at high tide are required to be used in the design." Response; See above response. Comment: "Finally, it should be noted that the water table in very shallow groundwater systems such as the system on the North Fork, is quite sensitive to changes in precipitation...... "High seasonal groundwater"refers to the maximum water level measured during a wet season." Response: In order to address this comment, the groundwater elevation was re-measured for all wells at 6:18PM (high tide) on May 22nd, 2006 after nearly 5 consecutive days of rain. Those measurements are as follows: Well #1: 1.20' Well #2: 1.86' Well #3: 2.18' Well #4: 1.08' Well #5: 2.12' As can be seen, the groundwater elevations measured in May of 2006 after an exceptionally rainy period are lower than those measured in June of 2005. In addition, it is commonly understood that groundwater located near surface waters is less sensitive to changes in precipitation. Therefore, redesigning the proposed sanitary system assuming a mean high tide of 2.44' is more than adequate. Comment: "The separation distance between the proposed sanitary system and the surrounding surface waters does not appear to be within those specified by 10 NYCRR Part 75-A or Suffolk County Standards. Unless prior approval has been issued by the NYSDEC for these reduced separation distances, septic tanks must be at least 50 feet from surface waters and leaching pools must be 100 feet from surface waters" Response: Any septic system placed on subject premises would require variance relief from Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS). SCDHS has established a Board of Review to hear and render a determination on such applications. Typically, copies of local and State wetland permits are submitted in connection with the application to SCDHS. Comment: "Our review confirmed that, based upon available data, groundwater flow direction is to the west-southwest, and using the measured water levels, sanitary effluent will discharge to the inlet of West Lake and Little Peconic Bay.....A calculation of flow contribution to the lake from the Moy property would be useful to determine any impact on the lake." Response; Please refer to the following current aerial photograph of the Moy property and the surrounding area: As can be seen, there are 11 dwellings directly surrounding West Lake, and therefore there are 11 sanitary systems discharging into West Lake. Most of these dwellings have existed for many years and therefore contain sanitary systems that are not up to current code. In addition, many of these lots contain turf that extends all the way to the wetland boundary (allowing lawn treatments to run off into West Lake). Despite these conditions, West Lake currently exists in a state of relative good health compared to some of the other surface waters of Southold Town (e.g. the main branch of Jockey Creek). This is due to the tidal flushing that occurs as a result of the inlet from Little Peconic Bay. It is our contention that the effluent from one properly designed and installed sanitary system will have little to no effect on the existing nutrient balance of West Lake. This contention is further supported in that only a portion of the effluent leaving the proposed sanitary system will enter West Lake only half the time as a result of tidal action and groundwater flow direction. Therefore, mass balance estimates and flow contribution calculations are not warranted. Comment: "The design shown on the drawings shows a seasonal high groundwater table elevation of 1.5 feet mean sea level. This level is not the maximum water level measured at Well#5. The maximum water level measured at Well#5 should be used for design of the sanitary system, although the true seasonal maximum is likely higher that the summer 2005 levels that were recorded." Response: As previously stated, Suffolk County Sanitary Code dictates that groundwater elevation be measured at the mean high tide, not the season maximum. In addition, it has been shown that the groundwater elevation actually decreased after a period of increased precipitation. Therefore, a redesign of the sanitary system using a groundwater elevation of 2.44' (mean high tide) is more than sufficient. Comment: "Since water levels were recorded in the summer of 2005, during below average precipitation conditions, they are not likely to reflect the high seasonal water levels.....Summer 2005 water levels are likely lower than the seasonal high water table elevation and the sanitary system may flood during wet periods" Response: As previously stated, Suffolk County Sanitary Code dictates that groundwater elevation be measured at the mean high tide, not the season maximum. In addition, it has been shown that the groundwater elevation actually decreased after a period of increased precipitation. Therefore, a redesign of the sanitary system using a groundwater elevation of 2.44' (mean high tide) is more than sufficient. Comment., "Well screen intervals(either depth or elevations) would be useful." Response: There are no well screens installed at subject parcel. However, the five test well logs were included in the Groundwater Flow Analysis in Appendix B and indicated depths of the individual wells. Comment. " The time of measurement would be useful so that estimated tide stage can be compared to the measurements Direction of flow should be determined for each independent set of data, as opposed to an overall average, although the results do not differ significantly from those shown on Figure 6." Response: The measurements were taken at high, mid, and low tides and were stated as such. The date and tide stage can be cross referenced to ascertain time of day if need be. Direction of flow was determined for each independent set of data, and as stated by the CDM report, did not differ significantly from the direction of flow calculated from the overall average. The findings were presented as such to be less confusing and provide a better overall picture of situate groundwater dynamics. Comment; "Tables 21 4 and 6 should indicate depth to groundwater(inches from top of casing)." Response: Depth to groundwater can be found easily by subtracting the stated groundwater elevation from the individual well elevations. An explanation of this procedure was included in the Methods and Materials section. Comment: "In Section IV, page 11, the text mentions that the water table is 5 feet below the surface at Well#5. Groundwater elevations from the test pits prior to well installation should not be used for design. Using the groundwater levels measured in Well#51 the maximum measured water level is 259 feet above means sea level, which corresponds to approximately 3.74 feet below the surface (the approximate distance to the top of the well casing from the ground surface is 1'8'; as measured during the site visit)." Response: As previously stated, Suffolk County Sanitary Code dictates that groundwater elevation be measured at the mean high tide, not the season maximum. Again, the sanitary system design and fill requirements will be reworked assuming the mean groundwater elevation of 2.44'. Comment; "In Section IV, page 11, although there is mention of Haven Loam having a permeability of 1.315 in/hr, there is no mention of a percolation test, which is required under both the Suffolk County Standards and 10 NYCRR Part 75-A. This may have been dismissed in this case, however, given the sandy soils in the area." Response: The presence of Haven Loam and its permeability were ascertained using the Soil Survey of Suffolk County. This resource has been utilized countless times in application processes with the Suffolk County Department of Health Services and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Both of these agencies accept the data contained in said resource. A permeability test would therefore be unnecessarily redundant. Comment: "Section IV, page 12 — the Dupuit equation — q is flow per unit width (not area)and K is the hydraulic conductivity. It is not clear how the groundwater velocity of 37.826 tt/day was calculated.....Also note that density variations between fresh and salt-water have not been accounted for and calculating groundwater flow by Dupuit assumptions alone is an approximation (need Dupuit— Ghyben —Herzberg relationships to account for density differences." Response; The CDM report was correct in pointing out that q is in fact discharge per unit width and not per unit area. However, this was merely a typo. "q" was calculated per unit width. In addition, the Dupuit equation was applied in this case for its temporal output so as to provide an estimate of the travel time for the processed effluent from the leaching rings to surface waters. It is commonly accepted that the Dupuit-Forcheimer equation is used to produce only an approximation of groundwater flow rate. However, for thin aquifers with low slopes, the inaccuracies are negligible. The CDM report states that the reported K value for the aquifer is an order of magnitude higher than what is typically used for Long Island sediments. The K value was obtained from the Soil Survey of Suffolk County, an accepted resource for soil data. However, if a K value that is an order of magnitude lower than reported is used in the equation, simple algebra dictates that the rate of groundwater flow would be less than reported. This fact, because of increased time allowed for dilution of the processed effluent, would further validate our contention that the proposed sanitary system will have no adverse effects on the situate surface waters. The CDM report states that the calculated groundwater flow is inaccurate. The report then estimates groundwater flow by applying an anisotropy ratio of 100:1 to the reported permeability rate of 2.6 ft/day, yielding a flow of 260 ft/day. This is 7 times the rate calculated in the Groundwater Flow Analysis. In other words, the CDM report multiplied a rate of vertical flow through unsaturated soil by 100 to yield the horizontal flow through saturated soil. The resultant flow rate is so exaggerated as to cause undue and unacceptable error. This conversion fails to takes into account the slope of the aquifer, which is slight (0.012). If a flow rate of 260 ft/day is placed into the Dupuit equation using all other existing data, the groundwater elevation at Test Well #4 would have to be 1.415 ft belowsea level which it clearly is not. It is our contention that the flow rate reported in the Groundwater Flow Analysis is more accurate than the estimated flow rate in the CDM report. Finally, the density differences between fresh and salt water were not accounted for as this information was well outside the scope of this report. The Groundwater Flow Analysis was concerned with adequate processing of the effluent from the proposed sanitary system and the travel time of the effluent to the edge of the property as it relates to dilution, not with occurrences at the interface of the situate aquifer and situate surface waters. This Firm continues to stand by the findings of the Groundwater Flow Analysis for the Moy Property for the following reasons: • After a period of increased precipitation, the groundwater levels at subject parcel actually decreased. • The nutrient contribution from the proposed sanitary system will he negligible as a result of bacterial processing, dilution in groundwater and tidal flushing. • Use of the Dupuit — Foreheimer equation to determine groundwater flow rate and therefore effluent travel time was meant as an approximation (albeit an accurate approximation). This statement of effluent travel time was meant to illustrate sufficient time for dilution in groundwater of the minute amounts of remaining oxidizable substrates. • The direction of groundwater flow was confirmed by the CDM report. As stated in the report, over 95% of the bacterial processing of effluent from sanitary systems occurs in the dry soil above groundwater. As this sanitary system is designed by a licensed design professional and will he (upon adjustment for groundwater elevation at high tide) compliant with current sanitary code, it must be assumed that the effluent will he almost entirely processed by the time it reaches groundwater. Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. therefore respectfully requests the Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold to issue the requested permit as it has been shown that the proposed sanitary system at the Moy property will function properly and will cause no adverse effects the situate surface waters or groundwater. Transmittal cm Raritan Plaza I, Raritan Center Edison, NJ 08818 Tel: (732)225-7000 APA 2 4 2006 Fax: (732)225-7851 To: Ms. Heather Cusack From: Dan O'Rourke OrganizatioN Southold Board of Trustees Address. P.O. Box 1179 Date: April 17,2006 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Review of Groundwater Flow Analysis for Moy Property Job#: Via: Mail. X Ovemight Courier Enclosed please find: Letter report— 1 hard copy For your information X Approved For your review Approved as noted For your signature Returned to you for correction Message: Ms.Cusack, Please find the enclosed letter report documenting our review of the document entitled, "Groundwater Flow Analysis for Moy Property' dated 8/15/05, prepared by Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions. I can be reached in our Edison, NJ office Monday,Wednesday,and Friday(732-225-7000)or in our Woodbury, NY office Tuesday and Thursday(516-496-8400). Regards, Dan O'Rourke Sign , � r h e,, Southold Board of Town Tru a , r i tTotvn Hall,53095 Route 25: p i Southold N Y= r U .' il �1)ear JIJY{gWama. Yh rM�� `,jrl e collaUvel1atyon to Q t o wet1..lsndswP Applicatioq of SIM — y Pl d to A new.Stn a PAntiI dweHill the non tarn ng weUandslot 750 West Lake td.Southold SCTM(90-2 1 zs'Gs. . , cs Our Communityhas several concerns w]iich are is every manon ner,,eslstent with the Hoards mandate for hr. evaluating A project build on the 1)evoloped Coast Policy as well as the Natural Coot policy ase r r� we feet strongly that this undeveloped.irregular R non confo in lot aitson i pem11su4 of land with water surrounding the site end the cesspools are wlthln5 feet of sensltiXeweyandi This distance `� - AQj violates Yohcy'a q,5 do $o the N oU n maadatc,to protect improYe:� ,, 4� ' ..Water qua try 36+. rte?, « NStural[esourtxs � � Town of Southold ecosyrtem � "'y Pn 1` �" FnrUlermore there is no�oestioa at to �lr ''such a roject Iohttes all the reasons why„ edand r x; v�'. "' Codes are drafted in the first place, '�, � " '. i'�Y� ' We also would like to point out that this certainly Is riot,a situation where hardship could be argued, A The adlaceat lot is owned by Ute PeUUonee's husband and not St 7ohA's Episcopal Church (as cglreseated oa the projoct ovavtew survey.)These lots have beon;in the ands same,hfor r t 4 �g y , aPP Years without any prior Attempt to GCVC40P thin r r x . f r: Our mutation has ban advL at thin proJ�at has afs4;nlised enough eonarn with;trie., on of ,Town AdvisoryCouncil that they*lntrved to, cad Qf i.. . I ds erml outdo some iddIUonal concerns oar March 15,2005 h The concern with raising the aepUe steep and iti roximity to the water table , +4z rs�. <4r � rr Cancan witb►buffer uy r �' ., ' , ,t � r" '�'', o Status of«sting bulkhead . w � *�� w „ 1 .' .'i!'} y dt�r� {� '' f,' JjW....��'S,1.St3�YF?r Iaf/F � i? ,, Q'rv. i rLY t'fY A,Y�,•,,�1� In view of all these negative potential osteomas,we strongly arge the Beard of Town to a —� th%would i6 ibeir_OWA�r. UA¢y 8 iQ,,gpp�tbjs'petlt' P,for a Wetlands Pam , . =s •.n.:w q� � . �or?�no� 1qn' ell M p� ,. 6s' C� , West Lake sociatin Inc. .xay,.�>•j.gr*+4 '1k'F# .� fY�� W,�q��Kr`�+'"�� � Y t e 'frog q{x , fi�3Ml f' •. > Y a � q e i !I'.rq�[�1 � � v AyB�l�2005>� a t '�i �t}ik✓r p't'% rt i�4{ n3'P* $oUWOW'Board ofTvW4 T "�'". + t, t+ pr11 Town Hall,53095 Routa25 4 SoutholdNY ��� y �t YF vd x N} a 1e ' v Dear Sirs/Madams r?Ls . 5 i Y ' .>,rd17 �j a° w ;4, r• ,!' R"i' jet"'S Weallectivdy imploreyon to d the Wetlan FermlR AppGcattoq pf Sim Moy b constrict} ". W4, ` anew Single Familydwellingaa ihenon coq is "ds lot(st AK 750 Wcst fake rd.Sauk &SCTM 690.2-1 t y r our Community has several COAeO[na whirrb era in"every manner ean;istept with Qu Hoards mandate for w evaluating aprojxibased on thaDewoloped Cwst ya=well u WaNWaal Coastpolict��a "+' We fed strongly that this aadeveloped,hregul�f� San faimfn�bt ills ens a peninsnTF oflsod w�Ih wain sacrouading the to4o the cpspoola amrdthn 45 6eot gis�ttsittvti Wsttand! Thb�lis�inop a<<, ALONE rlolateaYglicy';dS 6"�t�i4N�stbsdPoUmandate protect iiia -Watergwhtyl -t! -Natural rces resou -Town of Southold eeaaystems d 5 u+M It 4 b f nn Furthermore there Is no qued im that to approve such a project violates all the reasons why Wetland Coda are drafted n the fust lace 4, t P sr� ° 1 �. w We also would like to point ep an that thh ce<fainly 4 ant a situatum wham hardship could he argued r The adjacent lot Is owned by the Fod,fim r'abas6md wd not St.John's Fpiscopal Chore]!(as�+�ti, $ 4 tepresatedantheprojectp�- u%irey.)1Lesg kava lienipthelamakendsfor:ap " Y > .years without any pr 61110mpt to develop th33 .k�`^ :•r 1?• ':troy j' r' Yr Ourawbadcabas w Town Advisory Comiell Mal tPey l tp �aSont e k * 3 acme ad¢rtiooal WnCR6S on lfarch 15 t d , w r w c X74 >�s,-.xF'�` t"�. J,Z"" ' +�n a •' /T�h��eeone= Ilhtaisi<Igthq nod wtbfwatar-tabtei` �4�5r Y. G Ceram with * —coneera with a buffer era status ortXWmgbapeha a T!'t.{7 In vieworallthaenegative �poten�itWontoopse� oatroegtY!rgalkeBoardofTo�va ai i F7 t yy 47 777vr"117 jo+tj "t'. 7T T '>S l' ,.i. _ .w... `. ..- ,� ....-` ,NFA 4 ♦. i.i..li. .- " F'�,.a �-4AX P;pti wOlk ' x. rs.1 I _t.,t 4, l'sGi1CRR� S C�»f$rt.P .3 f , t, 4t,ve3v PAM-0 to ,. <A So �a k ens► { - L' 7 C Y c._dn tiP'(`i�y� 5 Y'�� 1 rof ' �'(..}rgr-• �i+P, +t, 1 "P#15t, r 5 �1 0% PR�s EBr�AKe,k i�'oc�j�c� zl ys k rTTL p�corf/c JBA�r4 a. v 1r- - yy yJ t 4�N 2�i_ flp MC �m R AnYgJr� Southold Board of Toxin TNatea Y "`x ws x ;Town 11x14 53095 Route 25 r» x Southold N.Y. 7 Sti Ihn n "a"h :V N. ,r V i x Dar Sirslhfadams � We collectively implore you b dipit 0Y4 the Wetlands Permit AP an ors Moy b wnstrnct = , _i new Single Family dwelllag on a non-conform g wedands lot located 750 West Lake rd.Southold.SCTM 490-2-1 f Our Community has several concerns which are in every manner,consistent with me Boards mandate for evaluating a project based on the DeyolOped Cont Policy as well as theNatural Coast policy. We feel strongly that this undeveloped.irregular alt nonconforming lot sits on a peninsula of land with WSW surrounding the site and the cesspools aro within 45 fat of sensitive wetlands.Thisdistance �j,Qj�vIolatea Pulley's 4,S alt 6 of the Vi Policy mandate b protect do lmpravr, f 1 r '�'Y.•water quality. Natural resources -Town of Southold ecosystems a`> Furthermore there is no question that to approve such a cd violates all the rams why Watlaud s Cada aredrafted in the fust plus L r We also would like to point out that this cominly is not a situation whom hardship could be wgaed.�' The a4jaant lot is owned by the Petitioner's husband and not St.John's Episcopal Church (n represented on the projed overview survey.)These lots have been in the sane hands 5or approzsimately 40 years without any prior attempt hi "' .. Oar ergatiation bas hers advixd,drat th projod has also raised enough eaacern with the Sontltold y Town Advisory Council that th 'moved to y ofthii lug .. do l one March Y S . some additional concerns an March l5,2005 —The wncera with raising iba septic system and its proximity to the water-table, — Concern with drainage —Concern,withabuffer arw — Status ofeaisting bulkhead N. In view of all time negative potential outomek wro atran sr Bond of rows T t4 tbaY w9nid in too owe is d this ped' for Wedands Perm F r c 1, x. v K. West Lake A.s�c�ati�n Inc ^<'% rYtkrro%+ id$ d <+i �'M•. a {Z $.LrJ�LLe P1C$Sy 1:8IIC ,J ✓ :;.,,r t bfn e.l S ,�Mz. 'x. �'i u / •, '. rri`fi >h� l M, x a 3x .y+1 M 4 1 f v r I txr I 3t. Augru�t}l�2,42003 v" Southold Board orTown itus _ g r,. Town Aa11,53095 Routo 25 ` ", Southold N.Y. '";... AX Dear Sin/Madams . ; tr •n4'f we collectively imploroyon m t the Wetlands Permit Apphatim OMNI 1ZoY to construct a new Single Family dwelling on the aoatoafoim bands lot located at -.e I � t' •: e.rk ._ Iso wast Lake rd.sou"d.scnM at9q-z_l Our community has several conceroa Vile are in every manner,consistent with the Bonds mandate for ,;A N,v , evaluating a project based on theDfvolopcd coot ouch as . as theNatual Coot poliq�Y,14 " We tbel strongly that this andeveloped,_hxgular do 9on�anfa'aning lot stb on a peatnsolf ofbadsnm wator ding the site read the ctispoola aiesvhhta"4S i oflxnsitive wettandi This 4isjaaoe M*� vIohdes Polky's 4;5&6 o[theNrdural Croat Polley mandate to poled imptove; -water quality, rt Natural resources _ -Town of Southold eemystems. Furthermore there is no question that to approve such a project violates all the reasons why wetland Codes are drafted in the first p[ux "-<°^ i •" n � r `t�, We also would like to point out that this certainly knot a situation where hardship could be argued- The adjeceat lot is owned by tha Petitioncesbusband and not St.John's Episcopal Church - represented an the project oX". u!tel')These Gave hem fa the same hand*far.ap 0 ayearswlthoutecyPriorattempttodevelopthislot;,; } } ` " t`�� ' w yy Own hst><as�dvl mat m project bas also d to rsrked enough con `«m wlt6 the Soathol� G a `r ' i Town Ad�.f�..p ComtcD that t�r siM c l s r �j�wappr�+a�y r ry�j�✓e+ rt fi • •�! r� tirOYgl m Y"-Sx 3t h-• ' aem6 adtiONi Concerns On, .15 - '" The concern*t aismYme" gstmganditsprosimitaitnth*water-tabta Coocan with drama$-tr: i r r 9 M alt y C.f sw hes tt 4 • j 4 Cmocra with a bli}k!s►C�, r' �' � • ^` �' � �q f y, v� "` �, - status ofedstinx bulkhead "� Ly i '♦S ft� 4.4 Y l.'� YaY F�l ^� '"'p�C�.AI'S n '�st•%.s�;'�,•._ ox� '/ "� r r}# is view of all theseae�tiw potential ontoomea tie ufonglY mga the BoarQ otTmva'Trustees r taw". meyweuidmthe$gwan Fr gip+ t s A ++ v +r :u k4.:rr. - r �LTji ••�; �•k�Yvrki.'{ CsF,QARP 6 . c/r3�Ckvq v1 onras b �ePoxtC _ ,S�;� ',, �• . ?fir= 82 wrt� l t4l^aa21 T � l�n..� • /�0��1� � p t �M1•r�� �OW�(1.S G.� ;i;:' '. � . ,,;. .^ ".j rtryN x Gx/�Y Yl�`R�'t t •,.� ~it'll`I ,' K 4f..�`�'�P�db a MST�. r �. '•..- PR�s EffT�AMtoc��((� Z l ys �C/TTCe PeCaN/c /BA�'rCA. 50��- oAp %L+y //971 t v , ,,, d Axa:• ,. ,.�. ^ .w ,•�s}S r s �t e � DMS. � k-x` i u aC c" 3 •A:,,a A ♦�, , 'am ,A /l '«c�i� vr a 'y ° . ?rf ' ,s:a�A � A+ : . ���R���ro��• • 1 �� a«, . dew a „ 1 _ Ism Y. A i4 alt:! a r 4 D r. µ. . i3 Myq F S 441Pf jr _r V 1 .::N t ..jt c i T, '),. t:. Ay LSjti•. , _ -r.' +ri " D � - •�^zt. A Y �`,... ,.rya.♦��� ��'A wT-:. h nv'# I •I '•4 a AOA f 1 Y.. n9a1. �t•lf � � �b�p ti .r itFa s i`x is�' } e"�,,e• q S ! _ l9?, y Wilt •.lei � ,—.. .�. I �w l 4 f ,�� 1 ' .. � �a^9e�""'I"'"�"�^g3'R?•m��.+'nczma.'. . - {I_�'fa .'Y ; AF •• LL ueui'W�_Lb..a...eL2Lk... . West Lake Association Inc. 2145 Little Pewtric Bay Lane Southold,N.Y. August 12,2005 Southold Board ofTown Trustees Town Hatt,53095 Route 25 Southold N.Y. Dear Sirs/Madams We collectively Imploreyento dismorove the Wetlands Permit Application of Sim Maytocoadaa a new Single Family dwelling on the aca-conforming wetlands lot located at: 730 West Lake rd.Southold.SCTM#90-2-1 Our Community has several concerns which arc in every manner,consistent with the Boards mandate for evaluating a project based on the Developed Coast policy as well as theNIUaral Coast poRey. We feel strongly that this anderaloped,irregular Z nat-ccaforming lot silt m a penInsda of land with water surrounding the ate ad the compoob are wahla 43 feat ofsensitive wetlands.This distance AWM violates Pnlh y's 4,S d 6 ddie Natural Coast Policy mandate to protect d:improve; -Water quality, Natural resources -Town of Southold eco*Vens. Furthermore them is no question that to approve such a project violates a8 the reasons why Wedand Codes are drafted in the first place. We also would Rhe to point art that this certainly is ad a situation where hardship could be argaed. The adjacent lot is owned by the Petitioner's husband and not St.Doha's Episcopal Chumb (as represented on the pr*ct overview aurvey.)These loll bare been in the same hands for approximately 40 years without any prior attempt to develop this lot. Our organization has boa advised Poet Ibis projed has also mhed enough eoneerrt with the Southold Town Advisory Cantil that they moved to recommend l�lp�oftbis wcttsads permit.voicing some additional coneeras on Nardi 13,7005: = - —The concern with ratstag the septic system and its proxhaily to the water-table. —Concern with dninega —Concern with a buffer area � Status of existing belliUm! in view of all thea negative potential auto 1 es,we strongly arge the Board of Town Trupees to ad as they would in their awe community tkarmthis po ition for a Washouts Permit r 7 J0+tj t" aamciT�1, h M ---- - `'ady;�Gr9/1e �' ��r � • SDf �.4AIt P;pti �•✓ omas Ra �eeo«ic F, Ln C*�•itA0 s . chsk Vn gzr w4s� (.r� /to�(4;ltja✓� 1`c( f�nr\e QvoW:nSG %",�/a 7 f) w rte, ,kT /� f —fit 76s ,t f ter ��- p Fe , UfIVrkA:KfA6roc,Tnc) zlys A/Tr4e pzrCaNle ,BAY1.A. 60UTk0/�A, /l-)Oe 11?71 ;a; t f r = esfkasopisayon� �� L i t y� _•t` 1of-��]"NA1�s :t ��f',� '13 �y hYY�A3 +fwx• i 1 tttc�Btt � S? L w ✓r M 3 n ) ! f August 12,2005 �4r t — „x , �y. y Southold Board of Town TNslees ,. Fc Scu jaiA ° Town Halo 53095 Route ZS • 4 f f+f „„ BUet p t esIn Southold N.Y. Dear SirslMadams 0.1t We collectively implore you m is Ula Wetlands Permit Application of Sim Moy m consWct k 1 Y -}` �:a new Smgle Family dwelling On the noniarformin wetlands lot located at:, g 9• J Y,n moi• ° ,A 3'At 'y Y°ryyr64�. � A4tll11 0 V .a. 750 West Lake rd.Southold.SCTM 1190-2-1 Our Community has several concerns whicb are in every manner,consistent with the Boards mandate for evaluating a project based on the DevoloPed Coast Policy as well as the Natural Coast policy. We feel strongly that this undeveloped,irregular Ik non-conforming lot sits on a peninsula of land with water surrounding the site and the cesspools are within 45 fcet of sensitive wetlands This distance ALONE violates Policy's 4,5&6 of the Natural Coast Policy mandate to protect do improve, t t stxYy"41 9, f ,t -Water quality, , Natural resources -Town of Southold ecosystems. Furthermore there is no question that m approve such a reject violates all the reasons whY We<land#X Codes arc drafted in the first play, 4i We also would like to point out that this certainly Is oot a situation where hardship could be The adjacent lot is owned by the PcUtioner'a husband and not St.John's Episcopal Church (as . represented on the project overview survey.)new lots have been In the same hands for approximately 40 years without any prior attempt to develop,tfiis l:.M LyyvlJ GLr 'J .. Our organisation has been advised thaEthis prgjeet has alsp raised enough ecacern with the Southol� Town Advisory Council that thcy moved to recommend drs of this wetlands permit,wiclag some additional concerns on March 15,2005 ' i.4.. n �'Yr'��, � Sift&+ikiq ,"• ' .; - —The concern with raising the ieptic system and its proximity to the table . —Concernwithdrainage Concern with f buffer ares:p ' f�JSn 4.yn 1 f'f£F atLhitr .�FA '�: - Status of existing bulkhead Y w o- In view of all these negative ge the of they would in their own Mmun'ny Aisay tential wthis petition nrfor a W�Perin Trustees to as �7iz4 t 4 F ' a ,a err ,Xt; X�Q 1,� � .p•� i . ,� � 'l r. 414 ILA M 1A1 �3 �J d�< ,'exi w,t� , r ,,� fir^} Li 0 , Ft�C6y�Cewctc�v'1� Tt.rac G1;: �.1 ! M 80.A1.t� � Y Y irl:,.lt2' .�c,. rite x••Tx x ' tSr 1 YµS4+�jJri nl-:�`., ' '•�I tkJ o `if ° h: ,' ' `rt t r .. West Lake7Elstn Inca .� q �,T���e r�k ♦ 173 �ri`�U r �-' r 4;X"�,Jtll w..�..u � F `"� u 15 KA i i� ': t S+j+W'"�Faw'AT!' g >'Mi "� ,;'r` `#-'�1 �t "'! ' 4 iT i,N"M• �',: , '� >A n� a 1 •�F- � k , r n wY }6��9r a a § 4 r August 22t 2005 A a t �r3��zL p, c } m �� w Southold Board of TO"' Truisdecs Ty' $is a, t tit ` .. Town Hall,$3095 Route 25 "G Southold N.Y. Dau SiislMadam: we collectively imptorayou to dl the Wetlan&PermitApplicatioo of Sim May bstr ounuot :. anew Single Family dweliing on the nontonforloing da lot located kt ter;+t 75o West Iske rd.Southold SCM M2-1;, 1 r` rP i, �i w , tin Our Community has several concanu which aro in every manner,enroistent with tlwe Boards mandate for R , evaluating a project based ao thaDevoloped Coast POft as weD u WaNaturai Coastpolict We fed strongly that this andarelo.a.a7 �...a.a�hart dG 9ou-conformin lot ails ca 4 M=�of wudh Y".:!e,''�•i" W� it v P`-j ware surrounding;the site'and the pesspools am within 45 Feet ofsr;nsittve wetlands This dislauoe? ALMviolatca Policy's 4,S d 6 of the Natund Coast Polled mandate to protect improve; 'f f °4 > -Water quality, `' -Natural mouroc; -Town of Southold ecosysnmi' Furthermom there Is no question that to approve snrh a project violates all the reasons why Wetland , Codes are drafted in the first We also would like to point out thairthls eettainly knot a aituatioau whoa hardship could be argued.. The adjacent loth owned by the Petitioner•:husband and not SL John's Episcopal Church represented OII ih0 protect oXavkrr sunray)Thew have been in the=8 bands for ^'.W4N"•ver 3 %Xr ••( ,• R�r 30 aJ n years without any prior att�ptto develop thislot 'f " " M ` Our ergambation has bee advised but the pr4jxt of alto eAOagh Qoacem with�OrSoaduol� , �, F` Town Adviamy Council that theF�lnoveAW art - oithit wetlands tome additimal eonoans on hfarch 45 w —The conoe�ro.Lwtth raising the sYsteND sett ovatertebie #" COnC[rn wJ♦W� �Comm%nth a buffer area Status Of=is&&bouts i4 /Y view ofall�areYYpa�YpotenttWcdcomye r,�eetlmglytagetheBaardofTo�m�Tnuteea !1 s.��'W'�,CTS";i,`S r`o7 wWq:♦Y tb ".,.� �' t� 3f a ,f,�tts av':: i ". — t v ♦ � Y fti�r3l� fad .Y.; 'y r i c�r}',r.! ,, Y;rr f ♦y I Tt',ra '�1��4,♦. n>!,t'ax'.< S, x'" ♦'�.' r� +":;�Y rim Az Jcp SCt-�.UAX Pi Dti w GERARD S cprsq , _W I , P 65 ?Pfih1,NA 4w. 4 s PROS ESrAnlC 'Abfiocl ys ^ tTTC� P�CaNic �BA�',CA.. -. T n IR,07e V (7 u/�n -:. w,"r.. 'k �tAi's s � ► .° ,,,. vh. �� ,•,7t.=wtwerrEc.,. �Nkm � �' 1 �•,� 1 T k . � x .G',%e Mi ' a t ` tr JY ? � r ' '%f mak. ,1 c*"l: h4�"11W • N7Nt` Southold Board of Town Tfurte y / r frusi ' ,Town Hall,53095 Route ZS i .tr + ' r4: ".SoutholdNY.' °A; v c a asp xD r F, ti f ryD'eu SlnlMadSyamsQ , t We colWet! y implore you m!il�Pl 4 WellandawPermlt Applrcation of Sun Moy to , a new SM o Family dwellln oa a non formin�aetlarids lot I tet!a' rSr , 1 :R Ow Community bas several concerns whIoh aro in every manner,wnsistent with the Boards mandate for ' evaluating a project based on the 1]evoloped Coast policy es weU u theNatufal Coast policy ?z,k'+a h. r;;We feel strongly that this nadewloped Irngular dE non confort�ning lot alt;oti a peauuoIi of land wi k z water awrouadtag the site and the cesspools an vrlthin5.fact of sensitive wetland�'Thlt distance a 5. violates Policy's 1,5 A o eN =am pteadate to protect d„im rave y'y' "p1 pM ,q i t 't' Yir'3iN,rv ,l , , �. :S r d' -Wats Ualr , 1 u R I' �pt ey .W ri"Mr� 5r" r Q kn1 I a .fix �' i,§ k �l �>ar^VN hi•r� �! :+ pr Natural resOw r� '4" Mr � Town of Southold ewaystemxa � ,, � � Farthermoro there u no quea{ton that to u! rove sack a oJect violates all the reasons why wetlaad� s � r b We also would like to point out that this-certainly is not;a situation where hardship could be argued The adjacent lot is owned by the PetiGoaer'a husband and not St john's Episcopal Church (asF r� , ;represented on the project overview survey.}These lob haw bees in the same heads for approsimetel 4 .�', .+', � ��4e : �� ''; +` yea.�swithout any pries attempt to devw this Ourorgaaimtion has boo advis �t thit proJt�nas alsr�gaited eaongh deem wIt4 t�q „. 1 r a Town Advisory Couact116atnoyed to end • dt{}oorovel gf thi 1 ds ani ficin t thcyh 7Y some additional concerns on Marcfi 15,2005 —The concern with raisiog the septic,system urd Ib roxintity tothewater=table,� ,., t• � 1 �� ^� t Ceneern with i buffer ares{. � ,�1�, � j �'� ' Status of existing bulkhead x� �.�,,, , . ��"�.an• r V�i•�>�`� '-a, u $ 'YRYYn Crr'; �� � - 1 1 F vv+.s �r In view of aU these negative potential outcomes;wa strongly urge the Board`of Town Trustors to4?Wi, a theywould in{belt owaSRlpeluuity dEdthis petition for s Wulurda Perm ;_ �1Ly 7 CI Qo5sce, tyOt�D\hl °�1a 1'11 ^ �;L +lY+n++�+.' z+•na.a.r ..y .c ., .. i u� �tH 1M/N .•.r� y� t� NuF• �� - a�'� 3• �_14Lt� � *'.. r ..�5'ad s - Xtra' � `, F k. ,:?,v,:. . ,- .i•6eh.S1A.'..�ir.�.aa �°n` s,a.- ..� 1 'sti.�Y:.R+Ar x ..- .r, West Lake,Assocatin a e w,,.a,��•�YF 'k zy,1F..?:ARwa�t• R v � E tt vi' r 6_" -• ny+ off ..((': "• . r+ i�._ r . 1r Aagrrat�� 2)005.-, , . ..: .�i�� ' �'.�.' bN.f.�iT �•tk u e •> a ter: `•r�1*a�•1M d➢� ��' ./+ Southold Board of Town Tr-utm Town IUIL 53095 Route 25 r A tl e.., Southold N Y. " r o y Y� •..:'.C�re.. a�} �31 P Rt�6�1 4u1""�+k�tlb "'A'�1. �'"��� � F v'^p�� { f.,. {IWL Sirs/Madams Y we collectively Imploreyou tot Wa Wetlands 11amltAppiTatia�Pfsbn Moy ro , . a new Single Family dwelling on the aon•coq tpo iso west 1&U rd.SmWd.SCTU#W2- Our Community has several c oncerna which aro in avery manna,consistent with WC Hoards mandate for evaluating a project used on thaDevoloped Cont oltey u well u WaNatural Cout poUPt t> We feel strongly that thio andewJoped,iueguhu qan eonfonpin6 lPt nits on a pentnmla of land wttlt ' water surrounding the site and the cesspools are whh[s 45 t'cet`,ofseasitive wcftdsThis dis�auoa? •' ALONE Violates PaUcy'a 4,.5 R 6 oftho Natural Ca,ast Policy mandate to protm Ak improve; ywtr: £'�, 1,12, -waterquoity, Natural resources 'r -Town of Southold eeaeystema.; Furthermore Were Is no question than to approve such a project violates ail the seasons why Wetland Coda an drafted in the We also would like to pointart flat this certainly isnot a aituatian where hardship could be argued. , The 4aceat lot is owned by the PetItiona's hus6md and not St.John's Episcopal Church (u_ ropreseatod on the proieot p� Y•)'ibese , have itiem is the sama hands for.ap oxrm _ '� yearswithout anypdar amtodevelopthLrj"f f� _M� raisedraerr{ �OSoolfi W ° �' \ R td1 t TY.IY AYaYTYJW4WW. t� �!'a`S7""' drtM+` W 4�� r� '""'aoma additional Coataana oa,Afateb,l5 1Ywriw! MI�M� 4 1 � � � � ll necomcQn with ralarngth � , Wd to venter,-ti�0'�• 7�nt}x t dw' . � 'bx� ,�� S h Ctm=n WIW —Coommn with a butfa — Status orexistiny bunca � ""`t In view of all Wore aegattve pot anal wtoomes;wa atlnegly rage the Bond of Tovr�Trustors not u =F t> 4"�''` ¢ « „ , t krR, rsat , e. Ep •,�:� 11L >,N ti . sus C40 D Q� ak/l'e0'1�� r• AO S G�'I'S�6Y & t Its, N OMa6 tC M1 , ala 'Y t/x .N,• ! *, 4 -/ a P I ' /30,GtK(W .� ,r+YaP�� -,vOW�l1.S („a e�t�; �a .. 1.. x, se �a� f , rl ►> t ( 7cr 765 , � a'."34�7r�A1�7,;`5�'7�.w�G ��'��SC.o' t b aa7?+:�}"•fP"!} ' �°+5;.. Y `)� �'d}��p��� R �p,ry 2C,�! ata:°' il{p'�R�tlt'1a;M+RrR i• ,.:�+,.,>� ,:. PRs �gT 'AfC /1SCoc zly�s �BAj�,CA.. ��„x TG�'<,J t'JH// , 't, Y �fA.p>nor• fws,...ek° 4 '%+ ',b!»,ut ,al.,., ciL "9.M'.,: CEDAR BEACH PARI SITUA�E AT ' �c /9s2 BAYV/EW 6p—a" Q,Ee,.d TOWN OF SOUTHOLD 9p NE YoRt< Scale 200 feet=t inch �r Nors: \/ pimonsions / ir..rl r v P'. T e ie-a F, A P s y L ANO o f O. H. H o T r ^k C U G � r 0 0 LAKE 4 E N°fe: Lofs .+how,by m mber Edwin N.B own of Bayview, Southdd NY"ji/eJ i,. S,///k 6 _C/arf-'s o-jfce. SUBOIV/S/ON MIP CEDAR BEACH PAR: SITUATE AT ��00 �nol o l 92 y Town/ of SdumoLD 9D NEW YORK Sca/e ZOO feet=/inch Nors: Pimcnriona a f irie9a/ar/of arm aPProrimarc ony o F� e L / F � N A P a V. ^ V LANG OF 0. H. HO RTi G r rs o X V fI"/,', LAKE R S ..��\ \ //9 //B• a ..� � � ' 9�a Aced _ a Natc.: Lora ..hown Hy murob�r ar 1,fr,.., r i v � , V ory • 1 A . P C N � E � O P F O PArti is �F� �� •°Q/ Corr /SS 's✓ o A o i�n ��q � r� �)SII S 21 1,51 30 ," 12, � os iZj 2 aV x� j•, Q`•Sse Qo N 47 36 "'� Q, S/ a .8 •'/ 46 � of a9 ���,•, � A 73 ef 76 ,aoi r8 J87 B/a 'Bo °79 e. 82 - 833 30 .90 8 S O N c y B ,9 w Y �s Q SAS e C i84 ° �QO '83 y e \ 0o t 7P �� _ ER v � k `r` t9 � O \\ ,167 0 FI FILED DEC 19 2 5y /hlY bis rno� W,, ppa0e by me cam octva/ Ju11 s�cq,n/l/l,,V Sect/S,/926. P/Ycrtiona/Ener xS�ueyor (u; '1�rr6 N Y.Sfote Liccarc Nd,/5bZ �-i-een� ,-Y N Y WEST LgKE 4fy Q: co W EDGENEUY C. > w� Q ES f' T �qKE PROP. Patwaus -i— --_�_y �. 70.43'S0•E Lc/ cy/ 77.04'i , �"�___ gt°a°sm _ r pRaP�RE7A"m WALL EL% I .^. "_ i N7043'S0`W FE � `. STOW xoaw�r 1 � ' , ST FT � -� i ! O 300.00' I T_,i i ��t MELL r i h Ott c , FE . DP t(L-aoo i ; Fi.r..J cp Cp mO „ i iI pROOQ�s�N,T``-� it O o 6.fY 'ARy r I NOTES- }.� I pRoO. po.. II CE] 1. TOTAL AREA = 8.861 S.F. (ADJACENT AREA) �' s 10 2. 0 = SPIKE SET, REBAR FOUND. ' �s ; 1 mIN THE OFFICE OF TH AR BEACH PARKO FILED op 3. SUBDIMSON MAP O E CLERK OF SUFFOLK COUNTY x'..401..8. P.,�.�• TOWN OF SOumoLD 9 p NEW YORK ' Seale ZOO fev, /inch- •{ !rya )M I. Oimenrionr a f it/<9u/ir�rr ora pPP.an/r+.re onyE,� . ri �M1LT. / �p � �"rS �s�Bclrkr' Ya + Y 7 F r #F,� P V G 3t r dti tg/ Y. I :i j 1 n I•. Vr k. ue L } i�/ LAKE V i26 /mss ;l/.• / so �� / 1 22. l \�-�.��`\ / / o�R? o •'. •mac � .0 /`;. U" s .y F I r �✓ 'a ' /Yate+ L)fa ahown by member)r/rUrr in circ/e wra thaa<on f4 �' i Ma�No./ f Pod)f Pro�+)rry of Edwin N.Brown rt Bayvian, ;•{ Y Sovthds /V.Y' in Sv/rfo/k Covn y.l/eo4Y k PECONIC ASSOCIATES9 INC. ENVIROMMMM PLANNERS & CONSULTANTS P. O. Baz 672 Greenport, Per Lark 11944 Telephone (631)477-0030 Paz (631)477-0198 November, 3, 2005 z-PAIL: peconicafoptonLime.net Southold Town Trustees Lo P. 0. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OV — 3 20c SUBJECT: Application of Sim H. Moy West Lake Road; Southold, New -- 1000-090-02-01 Enclosed as requested are more readable covenants and restrictions that apply to the best of our knowledge to subject lot. Sincerely, PECONIC ASSOCIATES, INC. Merlon E. Wiggin, Ph.&E7 President Cc: West Lake Association " 399,-STATUTORY FORM fn. drV Of a r,. �__�. t.a'l.r�et a _ �' YcdG��x�tsaplCisYzd�Xi�Ulaf-:ZXN3cy7.`: ' I Per,t of the firs!part, and PLOi2EIJ L'I: ?-IO1.i,il., residini at 'I� Longhand, State o: Nee+ 'erk, / I , party of file second earl, II � I that the partr of the lrrst part, zu rnaszdetaiion of i � I I CNE HUbIDl?rte (y100.O0) Dollars, i lawful mowy of the United States, i paid by the par7y of the seroozd par 1, du::.hereby rant and release auto the parlhof the second part, her heirs and assigns forever, x Alt that certain plot or parcel of land, in the gown o'_' Southold, j County of Suffolk and State of Idew York, which is com_oosed of Plot :k NO 92 and the easterly lhalf of plot Ido 93 and ell the land lying _ to the north thereof, to the south':;riy boundary of F'ainc,.ven Inlet, j as shown upon a certain map entitled "Subdivision l; +.o of Cedar I Beach Park, situate at Bay Viera, Town of Southold, 'e,e :'orb:", surveyed September 15th, 1926, by Otto 17. Ven Sizyl., and filen in the Office of the Clerk o_ ounty , hecenher 1Gth, 1:27, as Map No. 90, ihich is bounded and decor_bed c - B oI ;fiI1*G at a point ii. i,hF oroLv,,ary hirhwate r.; 'hale I Peconic Ray, fcrmed by tike n t .,ct, un then + r of 1 e r o.wn through the niadle o" ,aid of c. 3 nd ru ns t ace ', H u! no degree , 42 minutes east ehra rh the raid iie ,i id lot I0.93, !. 159.88 feet; thence o'ntina nr, o: tic sial.; el _. e 4v ieet to the highwat cr .tine o" an ii le'; Shown on he _u.c _ raven 'nl et; and thence rannin, , _'_`_ cic..a l,e l.a r.s: n 'F, of _td inlet 190 feet more les-j, tc' the 3edar cl, 4 horn on the said thence alonj Sha hi ia.. :r 1 ne- of said i Cedar Beucb F,3 i-bo:r and o the n_ain Il.iet t 1 �n:::� .rinds and tame .,10 �aet r,n.:re or less to -Attie thi,noe a-on:, the l.i.ne of t'a? . • n h' t sodic I nu to ss -'eet curve or le..s tc _ �.i. U '�11u3. I Til 11 I Tee Y-A.—STATUTORY FORM An M'xrmnly Deed Widl F 1 Ca yr,n �r , }'. + n — ,f 1917,1 -c M1.11 -n made lite c. day of ,lu7I- nineteen hundred and!went; 7WPtUtPPri i:li L ci. J. -`. v:ith its office ,a - . street, Borough of �- n:tatt ,1, 'Jt;. , u..tri,r j "� I ' � Sca�yn-rotrartrtS�x�r���zlaxa6x:tuzlcxt5t't party of the firsl part, t and FLORENCE residing at ae78 Giverside µ;venue, aroityville, LongTsTanaate of Netiv "fork, r party of the second part, I 3NtttW99Pt#, that the early of the first part, rn conszd'erabon of I. 1 a ONE HUNDRED (4100.00) Dollars, xi^ I - lawful money of the United States, I �• 1 � I stir ) pazd by the party of the,second part, does hereby -rant and release unto the parlr of the second part, r: ,{ her heirs and assigns forever, e �(( that certain plot or parcel of land, int he Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, which is composed of Plot z'. NO 92 and the easterly half of plot NO 93 and 11 the land lying to the north thereof, to the southerly boundarf of Fairhaven Inlet, as shown upon a certain map entitled "Subdivision Map of Cedar Beach Park, situate. at Bay View, Town of Southold, New York", surveyed September 15th, 1926, by Otto 59. Van Uuyl, and filed in +`^ the Office of the Clerk of Suffoli; County, December 19th, 1927, as 7 Map No. 90, which is bounded and described as ollows:- - BEGIN1vING ata point in the orainary highwatermark of Little Peeonic Bay, formed by the intersection therers.th of a line drawn through the middle of said Lot No. 93, end runnin=, thence NORTH no degrees, 42 minutes east throughthe mid-life of said Lot P'o.93, 159.88 feet; thence continuing on the saae course 40 feet to the .' highwater .line of an inlet shown on the said TRµp es ?airhaven Inlet•-- ; ! and thence running � C lis.;: ' t-,Y along the hi bkµivater line of said s Inlet 190 feet more or less, to the edar Bsac ^rbor shown on the .said !slap• thence 0I72112RZY along the high, er lire of said Cedar Beach Harbor and of the train Inlet „i:e>_r 3o a:a tt e same in � y:. and turns 310 feet more or less to Little Peeo is F3a,r, and thence WESTEELY along the highwater lisle of Little _cdc;nic Bay as the same winds: and turns 200 feet more or less to the nyint or place of beginning. A` til 1 h 1 t tt t. r f, Iy 'j.r t part wa, a r s ,hat >>he Inlets bounding of re- o TE:Lti .r Jl rL . ft6i z slide :.,a�T are to remain as now located r I' I i,c e closed At any time. �! ' CGS,. "t +..-it a •ae,out for ingress and e�.res s over all streets, ;tom rca , dri,a a 1.. as laru aoa-nl olu said map; and also the right of ia6 e ,a o s-•s in and to any of the Inlets, Basins or Harbors i,.. or. s 1 an to rajor a boat or boats ill Jedar Beach Harbor. ,�- i1 C'GJ i:%i i ,t). OIL tic right, title .and interest of the seller if Any r ollc tO salad in wont of said premises udder water in thePeaoni Bay, " ants all sellers ri.perian rights thereto. oi'zJLCT to covenants and restrictions of record and as hereinafter nett i forth.: And to.outstanding easements of ingress and agrees, If any, In aq to that portion of Inlet Way lying North of Plot #03. a t_ y - rIi R with the ri.zht, to run with the land, to use and enjoy. Sn conzariLth ociers enjoying similer rights and privileges, those p rtionj fi i of 3edar Beach Park., which have been or may hereinafter be set aside or r. r�.0 ,tf purposessubject to rights, reservations, rules and regu atfor ,. a,,: heli lerafter setfort'l. PUT RE311IICTI0 NEI. I' r- I Exce ,t as hereinafter stated only a dwellin house g may. be ereat'ed r main ained on plot No. 92 and the easterly half of plot No. 93, mon �.T fullr described above. , No drelling house shall have a flat or Hansard roof or roofoS "- oJI cthe than a gable, gambrel gambrel or hip roof. No building or other structure shall be erected on the..aforesaid gs4sa - no alr alterations shall be made in a building or other structure ereo ed thereon, and nothing else shall be done materially affecting thea ance of the aforesaid premises, except according to plans (innludi S ' exterior color scheme, grading plan, planting plan and`loaation pl ) shich shall have been approved by the seller and Edwin H. Brown, E q. + Tdo dl�ellib� snail be created or maintained on said plot unless it hall cost 3t Least ix thous nd N'6,000.00) dollars to construct at the psesVt O st of rMtel-iels and labor, unless exterior plans and des,the nor 4 ee �llir. lr>u::e of less cost shall be a_eproved in writing. by, he ellg•f ra Lewin H.Brown, i,sq. __ 1;o d-.le l ing h.;use shall be erected or maintained on said plot within fon••- feetO .-.e Peconie Bay front or within twenty five feet of any other I waterfront or within t:renty five feet of any road front or within ten feet 1of any other bcandnry. a �. blO oi�her buildiaL except a private garage shall be erected or maintained upon any of said plots unlessa boat house. Wo p ivy or ?lnv -ind may be erected or maintained as a separate str otur j . upuaisly of said plots. For all sewage must be used a septic tank or a t.. cesslit— , conibired -.�itn e ;reuse trap. Deo b�.Isiness of an,, kind ma.i be cunducted upon said plot. ` Pc mater-ais shall be scored or litter to be allowed to remain upon any + Y F'l'A,i Of any sewage or refuse or any liquid or substance discharged Sato or de Loosited in Peconie Bey, 3heltor Island Sound or other waters. 9 rt I '.Thet lno persons or p,-raon shall have the right or privilege to moor any 3 vessel boat raft or bathine3 float or• Y.eep any other thing or build any doc2c er botit boa3e al's any or th - neor to alter in any way a fi of t'7e pxasesxnasgxase:3s:xianxsi-na channels which have been dredged Oa or e �c_;1 is of tr alccc err_ i,. lie7rtnibotie de.:crabed or to d's- u a^;e es;.pt/ - a alge o • - 17 Other HaL(.r ial or substance what ver l �v +II into n i c ^ei o. :nT ,arh= ,_ vatr , boiuidruq tiny 'art of said. pie as o , ,ar c . acs �a. a. e .aa 1 be r;a de by th % or d, _aJ;ed water way _nd of tr-s lo` 3"111 be, uv .o- t&-e on LITTLE PECCNIC AY, FAIRHAVEN INLET a THE INLE4' I ----------- i ♦ M I 4 -4...... 1........-.�u.e�—moi..a.._.. .. � { i T - -� r; :. �..'t ,. ne locatior, o .o animals e'-'cel t I ' The use and endoy;..erti .' the 0i,u s . 3ha1l ! be limited to those -l. r cn 1 a; icer 1 ,moo * ,Sar of the. ,A Cedar Beach Park 00imi. ity _...Uoe_ _ t.,c _'..�� izaci r, t .,reef, or of the "edar Becoh Inn. The membership of the ed '.r Her.ch -01,i it '>�- q =1 1ye limited " ! to the owners o£ grope. ty sold by the P tai ].c� ,�-i c ,rr,,tion, its. ii successors or assigns. T; e seder reserves forever tai rs:rht o a t or improve id -epair all I dredged channels,, and to mod7xy tle fu -u.,,, r 1.�._nti rrs. f P. TOGLT:�t with the ap urten-io and ;v.i the es a o and rights of the party of the first part in and to said nresr.Sses., TO II:LVE :,I]!) TO HOLD the rremices here i E- :atv'u ionto t i, party of the second part, her heirs and as3lgns forev • I' i n I� til Pi j1Ad the party of the first part covenants as follows: Iii � Sirs1.—That the party o%Hee fust is seized of the said prel�zzses its fee stnzble, and has � good rreht to convey the same; li spS Ottlilta.—Thad the party of the second part shall quietly �ijoy the said premises: �lliiCll.-7hat the said premises are freefrom zncurabr¢nce.; apeent as aforesaid. ter.; NDlff14.—That the party of the first part will execute or j�vcizre any lwih.i necessary i assurance of the title to said premises: 1 Niftit.—That Hie party o for first part will forever warroni the title to said premises. In Witness W4PYPnf, the party of the first part has an, d ris angorah sial to &hernaih aoi ,d, and tbrse h,ra,ats to be s�r,nrd by its dul- Put/tori^r l r'/)io✓ the day and , i 1 gar fir a ab,n,v fruWen. ryrrry �, ✓ ;, j I ni4 ai 'I f RtlR,-6 uNOYPFWV I'O•tlLMA e..eo. Jvu4e-OLe eM kA. nPJ ...... Pa ¢ 1 0.h.ple, of G•NO®IMn. R9R.t.w.x grne.r.. F V �� 1 j dart. :P, i r•.,,,, i.y 1 7 ; ,:, � ��i� � � �1►���g made 1/u y day of NUVi.LM, 14}, nineteen undyed and tv enty nine. S. P. muLz RM,LT COR7 1u.TION •; ; a domestic-corpoatiOil 1 I with its office tend p`rineip,al plc e of business at AM 'fat 42nd Street, Borough of I.anhattan, Cit , County rnd : tateiof New York. i Party of the first part, k and FLORENCE HOSrL1N residing at jri7$ Silversid Avenue, Amtty�ille, Long�Ts� , u afe; of New York, 1ar1 �f the s nd part, e n Y w {fttPHBP#{{, that the party of the h t part, in can rideration oy a y' A ONE HUNDRSL ('.y100.00) Dollars,'.: I i 1% lawful money of the United States, c= � I patd.by the early of the secondpail,dors hereby grant ' and release unto the early of the second part, her heirs and asnih nr joreveq. All that oartain'�, Plot or parcel f land, in the Town or ,3quthold, ', County of Suffolk, and State of Piet York, Whil It is composed of Plot NO 92 and the easterly half of plot NO 93 ant all the hand ,lying to the north the eon f, to the southerly boundt ry of Fairhaven Inlet, ?' as shown upon a certain map entitl,'ed 'tSubdiv sion tiap. of Cedar Beach Park, situate at Bay View, town of Southold, New York" ' surveyed September 15th, 1928, by 'Utto 17. Val Tuyl, and £ilea in the Office of the Clerk of Suffolk County, L oember 19th, 1927, es, . c" Map No. 90, which is bounded and described a. follows: BEGINNING at a point in the ordinaqry hifhtvat r mark of Little I I Peooni.c Bay, Formad by the inters e'cti.on therewith of a line drawn through the middle of said Lot No.'s. 93; and r nuinf; thence NORTH no degrees, 42 minutes east through the mid-line of said lot No.93, 159.88 feet; thence continuing oil the same, curse 40 .feet to the highwater line of an inlet shovrn on the said r ,p as "Fairhaven Inlet.; ; and thence running 1G -I'i:iFi.:i;:_ti;l t{longr the h �lartaterline of said Inlet 190 feet more or less, to the Cedar Beach "arbor shown on i the said Lap; thence �.AU'21111LY along the hit• tater Line of Said Cedar Beach S�arbor end of the lriairt Inlet tl.e r co as the sr_t,te winds i and turas 510 feet core or less to Little FeToaie Bay; ane, thence 1ES F:LY along- the n.i ;hwater line of Little Pay as the same I winds ana turas 200 feet more or less to ttie iihoi.r_t or gi ce of I beti.nnin6. ' I I i i I ^..�.:.m..._.•w1.,......._-,.L�.......,.�.Y�,,.,,..�t...,�u:: _. ._ .: L ,..,..._� ;:;-. . ._ ,,ia L..,.,.,w_.. :.:-. ,{_.s..,or:...,6.a.�eu..;.1' . l:,.l .,...a,.» : 'Jil-ty of _ ji. ..-t part, warrants tjjaL the Inle s bounding afore- 01 -1-1 ;,rut, tiyaT are Lo rem in as now coated lt �- c. .,.I c C10Sed $�. ally time. Por ingress rindear essov r all titre ts, I', 1x� xu di7v� ,•.a I.A1 -s so laid dowel 021 suia map;.,a d also the ri ht bi il.gress and e:;xeas in and to '.aay, of the Inlets, asine 'or Harbor s I 'I pli staid r, gip, .old to la,cr a boat or boat:a in 0edar. Beach Harbor. '{ fG 1'fl2i ith all ;hE: right, title ,.nd interest of tine seller, if any I 11,d in in of saidprerlises under hater in the Pe ottie .Ha� r+, I and all >e.Lic.x.3 riperien. rights thereto. ?� GT,JSCT.'- ta covenants aiffi .reatrictions of record an ae'hereina tar set '' oMth And tooutstanding easements of Ingress and dgrtles, iP ariy, to that portion of Inlet Vlay lying North of Plot `9�5. jJC, [ i rt vtl,ti tile right, to run lvi tar the land, to use and:enjoy in it { ormou iSith of ers en�oylne similar rights and privileges, tho a porta a , r edrr Peaoh Park, which have ,been or may hereinafter be set aside. f oxl,lunity purposes subject to rights,, reservations, Pulse and egulatiQti "I as, her,.i�iafter setfort'.1. � LGT IiESTRTO^_TO:ri ' 'xcel>t as hereinafter stat ad only,a,dwelling house be ereo 'ed or I "'k ' intained on plot No. 92 and the easterly half of p of No. 93 more I ully described above, . To, dwe:lling house shall have a flat or mansard roof r `roof:`of any +kla r ther than agable, gambrel or hip roof. ,. - lo.building. or other structure shall be erected on' t a 4forean d'pre58 V' o'alterations shall be made in a building or other truoture regs: l ;` hereon, and nothing else shall be done materially ,a fectIng t e app .; oe of thelaforesaidpremises, eitaept according to lass .:(ario uding xterior color scheme, grading plat, plattingplaad looatio plexi) d , ' Moll shall have been approved by tie seller and Ed w n H. Brow , Esq. � c dwellilip shall be erected or maintained on said p of unless it shall, II I,! oat at le of Gix thousand (tp6,000.00) dollars to oo struct at the ': ° , b" resent cost of materiels and labor, unless exterior plane and design1W f ? er a dwellIaG house of less cost shall be approved in prating, b�the feet eller, and Ldwin ,1.Brown, Lao.0 d rell:ine muse' shall be erected or nainteined on aid plot ithin foo of tie Pecollic Hay front or within twenty five feet of any other 1 ate,front or within tcenty five feat of any road front or within ten eet of anyother bcundnry. I UII io, other buildin.,r except a private garage shall be e eoted 'or aiatain�d { upon any of said plots unless n bnn.thouse. `N *o! privy of any kind may be erected or maintained as a separat 'struot> r 1! rpon any of said plots. For all sewage must be used a.:septio ank or a i ess vrol combined with a grease trap. Ili Flo business of any kind may be conducted upon said plot. - z ILo rn ter'_als shall be stcmed or litter to be allcmied, to remain upon any plat, or any sewage or refuse or any liquid or substance discharged into 1. or deposited in Peoonie 3ny, Shelter. Island Hound or, other wat rs. '$ne:.t no persons or person shall have the right or privilege to moor any { Vt srl., beat fait a bathinp float Or keep filly other' thing or build any ! " d+ r,k r., boat ho tie in any of th,, chm n+12 or to Olt er in any way any - a, t} ohanuels which have been dredged on oxh to ary of Ulte prce•r of li.rcel., hereinabove described or to dis- + bl, r-rov Brut ! any so-Mage of tiny other matol.alc ori substance whatever li 7+ -..+er - o(51,u"r.,elz. r, .ny other .,raters boulldinC an onrcu' :,J,6 ,;l.c,tr : art of said pieces o . , hall f be rp deY the < llzr o::' lq os' .....la arod,.ecl enr.nraels or Cir edged rater -ways. E „f t!iic plot shall be itc, vronta'.,e 1 AiRHplrFN INLET 2.jii THE INLLI' I I -F �. I t� I� fP ... r .* u tc.t-k , :f.. .e.�$ t d. 01r,L P`?l� ultlah-all *ion o is o, thus 4 3r ^ t n" IIS, i ,.11,E G li at'e r 1 G 1. I11 C ..I CI J� 8 o'i" the dwelliu* !. No work shall be done -j .r : a'y'e c ' b 't-11 ;n r b.-Pc e t ,-, re rs thereof � have been anu oved x11 r In r :.e id I1. Dl t 1, Th.'a i to alp?roval sha11 deter rit s it:. rc litec i x e, it., oe'.tio , cn L,e p=ot ai d p. the looation o.. its Pnitrulloe -4• No animals exoept household pets may be kept up)n any pot. } 1. � The use and enjoyment ,' the CoLmllulity Property at Oeda4Ecc.ch Park shal g be limited to those iDersons, who are the meriber in ;ood sunning of tho krw C Cedar Seaoh Park Coslmunity .lssooi::ttio�1, the aut1orized euests. thereof, or of the. Cedar Bench Inn $,, 'Il The membership of the ped r„ Bench Conrainity,,,,ss ,oiationl he 17. be limi�ad , :., �' to the owners o£ property sold by th 7.P.ldulle Realty, Gdzpmption, tsl successorsor assigns. I The seller reserves forever tae right to alter, improveand repair all `i dredged ohannels,yandto modify the foregoing restrictions. - ' TOGI;TFM.with the appurtenances and, ll the estate and 'frights!of the ' party of the first% part in+and to a d Premise TO I AVi e1ND TO I?OIA the' premises :her in greute unto t4 pirt� of diel -4r . 'second part, her heirs and' assigns_ ever. ? 11dD the par*of the first-part covenants a follows; Strat.—7hat the party qf the first rk setae I of the said pi ensues tri fke niaNe' and has ^z� good right to convey the same; I IOHOO.—Thal the party of the second pat shall quietly enjoy,that rain pregtzsrs: That the said pre»taserarefree japmiitctembrai s; oxdep as aforesaid�I, ' ,} 301IC14.—That the party of the first part will execute oi Procure anq Juriher neerssary assurance of the title to said premises. f' Niffil. -That the party o`the first part will forever war ant'the hllk to Said premises. ' IE I I bt 91unron Wilerrit'f, the party of the first part 1 ras rarr.>r f rir wiper ah. Veal to hr herrmeto adixed,and thrse pie r*nis to be srgncdby its dell,aotborr cd nj}icrr the day and ' 1t i T."m•firm abrv-Tm Well. T. P. u I, ,l• PreSiiYen't/ '' S LSI i y = I M1 4t Lit" NOW, m $t yar. I n i�a e 14th dT) of Nor F3TILti<;1 rlILMc: r� w. ndr+,,and t �en¢y.:riiri I`'f T.P.1,1L7 TJ'Lt bewFl d,+1, ,L Yn uidd i,u5Ca+d.!�=;t'_•rt '+ resides in BOROUGH IF IdIAl`t&lT'¢'ANS CUITTY ND •a. LL Jr 1,1.1 : x t Y time is the Pretiderit of 7.P.i1{U72 Ti tLTY''CO L �iTON• " F+ thr. .{ tir,,,:, �. cedin,a.ed whir4'exe.bit ;'he.Ictegoing instrnWen}p that le knows the +'•i' + :.+d ux,- c Elim;that the seal affixed 0 said instrtment is such corporate sea ;that',it was so n!'aT rf it r t'..ur":o{ D1Pe Ot oTe of said cor,�oration,amd t he si�ed p: i�lL6 -I, e:.,::-. c b r Cf;:oyA•r, I `koT<PV pUPLM,dU[EN[ rvN yyFPk`MO:'tiF7 i h�+' I` ' nUSFNF COIINTV RE OK £8! A eiOA N911 So.COUoT OL E PFF� NII.:S CMINYV CLFRP ormlA f.p.O1 Cex1 ncJTE FILED IN 6FFOLN CWNTr F:LtTIflGATR FILE at TPNE{C dolim a My PPNMINION UINN MAr"m REnM H i, 4 Ilia y'yµI lily y 3; I { T i *8" BTFTOTOf1Y FOPM 4 qoF p Jl,ae uvn rto J+l Crr=OknNr v nuenap ab . t II L vea>h ,Corypp��a,= 36H�iPnHO gTxaer. Nav� v nn .� I ", �� �gwtM � YnpeN.e{ PAGE 77: adc�hey; F f 'i' g + i'a �' f�� �' j ,",'•lrzrl`er�c'+z It I rzd' tp . :� ` f rTCz ,: rt+ +�t") ion 1 r4 _a",t f ar�y oJ'tlre gust part, and ( li,� It 1�<ul, „'a,ty ai .,u' u ., , .c .l Gork r I parlO V,the seroud part, Mot toe k 'l One MOW uz'Ad ( r1v'.JJ) - - - Dollars, it1?urfitlbilk YAJt�tfiF �lirtMtf,Ssio*d tne '� atl"rt ,encl ✓�1i .1>> c .n;.tr�+'ratk.ae, 7 : 1 � 1 � . 1 a 'pjrtrl by thb par7"�ohtlie secandpoit(does heikbl 4,ront and release auto the AwhIoNhe second part, - �r... _ - - - - - - - - - thF'r lolls,..,^� - ti - - a�rd aesryYjs ffn ever, ,' A1{ those oerta.in Plots or ,ac1Je't: 0 1^,)d, r 2` ed-r 'e^cit PIP , & 'o o , t.yl,st :.o ;, ns nwld' 9rlarl r?T i >I 6 ri1 ('1. �.--,—� pert^9.n fa A .. gat AYl10 7o,TO et rj,." „ aiholdI a 1. Y kk 3 ,yV U � 3 t177� +1 i�'1 0 t0 '( 'Ian TuV1,:'. , hea w,') 131),'VI yoX k Y 1.311:t=1� iS,.., Ua:loe of `he ^l r', of the : .,z + of .,a Y:, , k t,, nu ter..:0 :PC 11 with t. Gpeenint for U a t o•r .t , l I of in. z .c 1 ear Jr .6 np CI .� '. Cti^ '1• , ..•1' < 1.Y. k` °:r � .Iir.i .Y'. of .n! r ."_..a min. ,f r,r ,c .1 Mai OV it'.r"a=t'+ 'r h. + g11 ) rules 'n"l Pir. _ L_...���� <<.. . tact onl+T. , a° ,nj Wr. .tae tin r t") IA - in diell!w, Wim, UNA hiv , = POa k aL 310 Pjof oil r ,of of , c.t;ti . �k 11, balbrel or hip IV,f, y ft1 t! y.. ToP�oIi, i th sfo - [i izL a w it 1 t?3+Se I n } t, Yt 1C o '+• r+{ +r. 2')" Bdpcaptl ' ' *- c _ ,c resin Cl,n, ; 'r it =: kc �;I , c+T !) iv lY, 11 ;vw i ,.n ,C cvod by, of seld,pllot u w t 1'" r v n} �. w• .! i1 cfi2 CP,Ry YG Ir �1F1 Yt SCt tt the �ersil �- ". -ne for -- {• 11°v ` +.' G+ 1 00 'ar +•,y v o�av'!fifp�,ttt+tl v:;' h:! tice Bel er ar, r , rryni tP i! ? ,or �cr^� h of =•+ia phot t LU 1.CI ,.Yh 7il, ts'irr It pP "r t�.ilarA tY mit-, five- f.at,�', v ,r ;+ c 1 t �' u b r't t7�yz,f1'i�t�fv5 f otr,of Pavy rcAdfrog, I* o ol; lly , tw lin cnc �» areotex or. rap I 1 + io to .1+ � i illf .,r ✓, �9 �9 7 C41`l v to �a^'6' u ,+t,'-,c'n,. �tF'il eagaF dap. r<6d ".. y 1.. nt }'07 4in l Y7 4 + l r�Tlt57� w; L�t•,l""y 'L5 un ryh e» i�. (i rt h9 5§d Fl. u��,'tiC - °- !� iY` 4," a . oor+i �"` i v 1�, e.ed to'.rer zin ,upon any ,s + o � u 1 ter„ Ito r. �{ * r vvo' r any, lv_ Dict or: uvv '' vGa lBc:7si n@d int R r j:. 1 tar la] ,as �6U Or other V9gt0r8 r t ',rlra# x r n' �r�bn+enI ef�y �'v rr t+� rriniira+ tq r�o any ,a v aw'ti o t w , '.� L ' n Y or T:a )� _rty ot1; r 61iIn5 or oCfi7,Qi„ any , t: clloxn i or, to eltpr it & ! tta.j ' y of to e*1;): of the ;piadea v Ion 'a n �a ' or, tG i 1011'vell �r eirpt9 ny seiVsLe or _ i r�,.... I . i 1 ` ' �1 ,� try x t to 'hi+�q ch v�nel • or any 'll, ` r r nt l „ a! r 7 7 t. t an, . ria a qx p6 oeia 0 1^nd n, d n r s 1 r ' o,, th� eel ler. of any poripn _ ISI C . 1 Yi 1 + ^ro 1 w/6e v - • - t� 01 .1'iJ_ pl,,�, sli �� itv front? ,,e on Coder Bae¢h Rped. C_sy v r "..t }. +.l n' piste an^ L aonfolrr, to on t i ,_i!e h ''or 'le plrnaI t kn s l;v 1r r rr. irowp�, 'sac,:. 7 TI �].t V �., Mori 4li tYlle rilotl on V.-n'7_ - r -'. � :i ., a 1-,,. ch Y v lc vel' p^v on , uQ 'xo to 11-,,P or 7, + , be 11*�i .rad tt dnt 'III 1 AJi}DWeLLkl'E. N�r� qy A a1. r V PE.. D - f '3 14": k o Yp�S � ' �, , �p k`I$v:�?/I the khp'ttrtalfanus,aekdarl the esdgt'e arad attyhts f the party of the fiXst part ttt,,� laaad 7S',ikedlhases s ,� AP➢,4�(6 •k�*r�A'r'k .m? � �'g� f�f C �` �1. � � �{ �� � t.{ .. .. Y°1'�'� � .. � � , "• l 1 1�A H{tC 8tf 1p1 rthe #sea here;n g" ntsd upto'dhr rtf o(tk<a�ecaud At f ' 1 gin; t „• ' ' - - Y h:.ii k 1.3_•:, d ass4us forever. 1 0, . x gal r �i. <} r+ �� az 'r T a✓� I '�l I ? Y , I� till , t. h I - I t ` ��' { ta/�tle�tr2 yat cn3 caagr 6�fodfaprls; a , i- n y pl,y I n l 1 TkatIt AiYi oflJiFflratase{ee o�fhesa+ mrmr:h a M-441 db / ayabta'�and has s n . 4 �u T rF3 � y i l4 ajNth' q.� 't shall.?reu!! erljby 'r'hs 3a:r?¢ri!rasa r ra`.. . ¢' J frletacamda s, Pu .,r. aecros 1cl} ni ij : �.�„ '2Yt�d�g ,d�rl"Y of%1hd fira{pa{J �Ita11 exeCrta or proiirf's 7ip�%;further',ueersaary i' ass rR*O ir' ehe title to sdtd prsti+txes:t II i l That the Mr7 of 1/re fir's!.Ohl sold!forever war out the.414,00 sazdpremrser. ' �' �tl 1WF�11PH �1'rR.U ,'t/e prir'tYof the first part las taasrd Ud Inrfarretr scat is J. to bo-herr unto a>}i.red, and tliese hr eaads to to sagrred by Its az 7 rdh.,,wtn I oIii", 'tkr dal'alld itear jirtt abJz+r Yur itlra.. I r I C I � I AAY A� I � 1� ✓r �,+s - lrefr r� s t„, mr. nineteen hundr d and f enty. ni 8 f il. r4 ". •t h� � lr�+"Prs"S!It ° nt.roSc�Hn CG '1'i m*i.A?' a.i tom knov�il tv �` ` r,, nc J,''SrS' ht 's• `""f' "i t ! �fsraal de in ;37 4 W, �tG1 y9 W . - r., A',`. R � tSN n fif Q1a a JIM,— : s ,i° cm nov t�,ra>}.'tGg4 th 7 '`rt y ^f t a! he knowexi " affied;to flatiti*" A ^ th ' w,h'3`°�uroa5+r .. .' rry?c > A 'that �e`4i'�iie f1 t 1t t a ra t.$ OW Y _� "'�`�'S ,1F:X - � 6 °t�� � .v rt las) 'i ✓ s +"de dei Vr `Pr oan f 6 K7Pr Z 100"N VA "an t ty( Y 1 P Y y r+�- AGA,i a� 3 5,!( s F '4 •ke Y TT+SrK1y f t . ° •` t `I t 7'+ plpy -i !s `�di�' ����4�`11 "r � " � � •_ yi _klv, k . t armor �1$tlr Qq n 1 i I I Y r t ;iklI ,lam, < t C t s 9f atif%F q �1, tr s ' R' r r' rl�t s a S� , e��Il{ a it i&V SO 010 P t 1. �I i "I r � 1 } at , fl I 4 tr I I I 4 fid, 1 I , 1 . �*-fit *yF�'�t� '��.Z'��' '� g�ti= ��� :.. �}'�tsi a Y✓b a�R�,h l > F b'��, "P a��l{�y -i — �t a,rd,r rry M NO d'^ r � 'k?`d�r e,"`r'lt5' fi�" sari tC x4>F1'cf``r ri 'rir tttl ��F > k -�g. F ,d';F .= n * a�<t� 1 alt c} Ca+ al o- inGF.,tpz• �` a a+,�' u y .it i { 1 y "L;"ail kry rF'I a ", 9 4 �r5S.4 n i' �`� *w rJ. r°r� AM, P �3'- 5E� QfEYY t es � r a�� t» r ,xk 3rr7Yof cCdpar6 a. i t F r rm,r n /r s `<, f � tu*'�,j `, f rTJ 3R F 4 N 3+ .ayit t A yrYx1� A 7L/Yon-0 , v �i ° Gxn Fa t lad{ ih xirrz 5ax'rr f � x�; �N Dollears 3 t 't' TP du , X} Fti* x1ebfyk+ptt Sld YET m bugY i c v Y t �. kF t z S � ����� r krv`�mtr ty.i xar'� G �. ,g 1'(Ys^P<'�i �5^'�" +r v a i t. � �' � § � ay %(�l t aA�'�n,ta rol i�setn �+�arlgtY6�s leeYeby,,�rau ^1'a '�� �"�. � 1 � Ltftf�.0 it9tNrl f � � ��i ieKrjfl<;t d � , vl }i, n�'�� n K rYr d ossf res jorvver, ,c 1.1 up Objnl. n . )Ls i e G a' slyti t a �' 'Ri t � ki t <4 t w' L. Y �. 9� C .' mr'3=& 'y �r'3r# ✓+�' a r � Cw w +� r� t artt i4� n nv r ^p5 1� ° � ?'1 a;r�� � La C m♦ S r� ° } r � � t I �� I �� � . t�Mq't� k r��n1�� _ ��"vL. 1� w•�^k���, 1 Lg�'` �-... ,1i � ., � � � y1+4 ,' $ - 46riil Fl, G�$k$�'a` � `"'•' P `" a& 1 m..,b x + 4=� » ',� „nR� ;r , N V �4 r �, yg4Yrplij9.tt "t3(grTLj'3" qT 7 li "4., a�` ` � Q�r }�} E .3: 1� F t s I t 7i "'F 114 'C + fr2'P✓Y'`v�(ytr � i'� I i xi 4'c" "ht"sv4 �E, fi a.Ci' rib S'1�3 rr — .a•- .BYa}1*,yg}�yS.�[ L}1 �7G�.QSw Ee� v° �,' wJ fSrC � x L ) ;' � I '.: � I`'Ix6":n45i"rYl 6, ,E�I � tr K,ab , + `G; ,r•I C t 6OitlB FT�lrN I,tat �n .(.Ir J t0 .'j, Oil A71yY y„y�SSr F 1 L ( l � ST ti Wiry6yrkl 5,.. `sx V' 33G�> Y< T � t I It p", a; t$t .1! w, br Pl q�¢�'°t. 0��r � ' e� Ixr FM��y' 1^ `SA`�FY�,� �) �.✓ k �fi�u�k _ fir I,cno �} arrt! 4 ,t 1 '' p 1 ' k'y v+rt�t�J+ 4 7 �IlT °� 1 �gvnx¢rF, xrA:fI "IF mY t c r z 1 rnS SSS: 7r t n 1 20 p 7 R4IF rt I�yy�{oy�eY' e<o���;�1 pr{�sha gietly rntoY fAks N, %rr F: 1 k 'ti ,i � 5 n F�TRQf'�Hit3eS rrY (reEhWlbli7Fn"w4,4q' t f r, v 6- �f or¢�feaer�rxeies assiaa��$am of tfie tette to s?5sd�fnues:� �. � � a t �Sfi$tj t "It thefh>jl of the fi9st fart w$d"foxe�"er wayFaxt the h1 Jo sa�ld�VefJ! �f ;,+�, yl r asY. it . yIN a a ,tte� rtY of the f�irsz'�fart lfas Caxset{ i{s loY�b heray. g�£tt�se*/�x} "asaFvi d'hYo� "laolrp �"n'_ i A.- u� frsr a + y¢�a , - k f j'M'' 'M'Yart, IP ' i' �4�arPgy � "� d� W?4 k� �v13l.Yi Afbt4Kf t14 t Vn J # R v ryr 1vfR' F a Title No. `1281-2963 trictive covenants, conditions, casements, or leases of record, if any, are set forth below. � yp MULLER REALTY CORPORATION DATED: 7/13/32 RECD: 7/31/32 HOFFMi?N MULLER LIBER: 1661 MP 577 :CT to covenants and restrictions of record and as hereinafter ,r£h. 'HER with the right, to 'run with the land, to use and enjoy in �n with others enjoying similar rights and privileges, those ons of Cedar Beach Park, which have been or may be hereinafter, side for Community purposes , subject to rights , reservations, and regulations as hereinafter setforth. PLOT RESTRICTIONS >t as hereinafter stated, only a dwelling house may be erected or -ained on plot n 113 , more fully described above . ,elling house shall have a flat or mansard roof or roof of any other then a gable, gambrel or hip roof. gilding or structure shall be erected on the aforesaid premises , terations shall be made in a building or other structure erected -on, and nothing else shall be done materially affecting the app- ice of the aforesaid premises , except according to plans (includ- -xterior color scheme, grading .plA„ planting, plan and location which shall have been approved by the seller and Edwin H. Brown, his heirs , and assigns. !elling house shall be erected or maintained on said plot unless all cost at. '_east $6 , 000 .00 to construct, at the present cost of -ials and labor, unless exterior plans and designs for a dwelling of less cost, shall be approved in writing by the seller , and H. Brown, Esq. , his heirs and assigns . tellina house shall be erected or maintained on said plot within y feet of the Peconic Bay front or within twenty-five feet of ,ther water front, or within twenty-five feet of any road front -hin ten feet of any other boundary. -her building eigept a private garage shall be erected or maintain- . 'on any of saidkgta',.un less a boat house. -ivy or any kind may be erected or maintained as a seperate struct- 1pon any of said plots.,,-< For alb.- sewage must be used a septic tank -esspool combs �greasa trap. Isiness of ..,ashy k lr ' Y be conducted ;upon said plot. CONTINUED. . . . . . . ' TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY and PIONI [JI NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY PAGE 2 No materials shall be stored or litter to be allowed to remain upon any plot, or any sewage or refuse orliquid or substance discharged into or deposited in Peconic Bay[, Shelter Island Sound or other waters. That no persons or person shall have the right or privilege to moor any vessel , boat raft or bathing float or keep any other thing or build any dock or boat house in any of the channels or to alter in any way any of the channels which have been dredged on or close to any of the the pieces or parcels hereinabove described or to discharge or empty { any sewage or any other materials or substance whatever into any channels , or any other waters bounding any part of said pieces or parcels of lands and that no conveyance whatever shall be made by the seller of any port- ion of said dredged channels or dredged water ways . The front end of this plot shall be its frontage on LITTLE PECONIC BAY and MIDWAY ROAD. GARAGES AND BOAT-HOUSES Any garage or boathouse erected on this plot shall conform to the style of the dwelling house . No work shall be done on any garage or boathouse before the plans there- of have been approved in writing by the seller and E . H. Brown , Esq . , his heirs , and assigns . This approval shall determine its architecture, its location on the plot and the location of its entrances . . No animals except household pets may be kept upon any plot . COMMUNITY PROPERTY The use and enjoyment of the Community property at Cedar Beach Park shall be limited to those persons kho" are the members in good standing of the Cedar Beach Park Community Association , the authorized guests thereof or of the Cedar Beach Inn. The membership of the Cedar Beach Community Association shall be limited to the owners of property sold by the J. P . Muller Realty Corporation, its successors or assigns. + The seller reserves forever the right to alter , improve and repair all dredged channels and to modify the foregoing restrictions . r 1 _. ._ _._.. ._ .... . .. . .,. ._.�..,,.. .. _..� n ,�ui -n ♦r AT In Al Ar T-1-1 r. 11.1011 r.l A%IrF rnAIon 1,!V e t: ocw ;bnraTe a►�ln rtv—, �zc'rloils LI13'r11 1160 cp 2314, " . 3U13,1T0T, also, to the follo'sinl; restrictions xhi'oh'n shall run wlzh the lend until the enc: Of the term of Paid mortgr_; e, +13 follows: Sk,EPT as hereinafter etr_ted) only n elaclling `houga may be erootod or Wirtained on an;; n''. the plots into Y+hich' 'thd above de'^bribed prCmt6dh r;r 111 l:r' eu"divided. `r0 diea11�1ng house shall have flat or man:anrd roof, or roof of nny kind other than r_ gable, gambrel or hip eco£. No d-,Yelling house shall be creeted 'or mjlntained on any of said plots unless s it shell cost at leant X6000. to construct at the prasentci .i 'cost or mM11-eriels and labor, anloss exterior plans and 'de- 'signs for a duelling hOuce of less co,5t :,brill be ar•provedt 'in writing by said r'dwin 11. Brown anti by Queens operators' Corporation, Ina. , during the con-tinuance of the said mort- gage ,1nd thereafter by .Ucena Operators Cor.,Oration, Inc.- r Ito dcselling house shall be erected or maintained on any' of said plots within 40 fent of any peconie say front or -within 25 feet of any other Bator front or '.Athin 25 feet of any ' .r6ad *front or within 10 feet of any other boundary. Pio other *building except ,a private.'garage 1311;,.11 be erected or �na1n= i `tallied upon any'of said 'plote unless a boat house. Every garaZe tuid every boat house 'must conforse to the style 'of 'tlie duulling_}xouse on the•-ortt4s3 _plot. No r;arage not incorporated qn the same building a3 a dsvelli»lr houses' shall be n"reek 'the gator or road front of any ,of ploto 'than 75 feet;.. ♦i,,. „i nortrnr to'o. a,AI/.",r'1 me LIgXt1l[li?4 �G1 I>♦I I}yuu, Viuyr1 uuu,.+u.p wu wuu k may be uroovod or saain,uined on an;; of the Moto into r+hioh' ! ' thd nbnve dcsbribrfl pr talAF iy rrihli Lr. GU1%dlvidC(% 770 diu617ing ,� .I houl3o cplall hj.re . flnt or mannnrd roof, or roof of any -kind M other than a gable, gambrel or hip roof. No dwelling, house shall be err•oted 'or m:, intrined on any of said plots unless it shnll eo:3t at least 96000. to construct at the present'd j 'cost or mlatericilsa andlr,�box, hniess exterior plans nnd 'de- 'signs for a d rellin[; houso of lees cor3t sbnli be e.r•pxoved in writing by said Fdain it. Brogan and by (:ueonc Operators' Corporation, Inc. , during thn continuance of the said mort. t gage and thereafter by Queens Operators Corporation,' Ino.= 13o dwelling; house shallbe exacted or maintained on any Of j said plots within 40 fent of :any peconic Bay front or within t 25 feet of any other :;tater front or sithin 25 feet of any _ road 'froat or 'aiithin 10 feat of any other bOundury. No other t ' 'building except a private gsr•rag a rater 11 be erected or main twined upon any of said plots unless a boat house. ruvery c garage and every boat house ' must co*=orm to the atyle 'of 'tbe F dwelling; house on the same plot. Mo garage riot incorpiora.ed t in the same buildings, as a dciellingc house; taheall be nenrer`sto' 'the stater or road front of any 'of 13:Ad plots than 75 feet, i unless in the middle of the length of the Mot or nearer td'o• any other boundary line than 5 fort. No privy of any kind" 11 % 6 may be erected or maintained as a separate otructure upo6r-i ; any of staid: plots. -or all oetnitrc; must be used a 'oeptio(taulc or oesarlKsaa + o�abissed With .e. grease trap/ 1:o'unitnalta:ezoopt household`.peta alar .bo"' , pt. upon any plot. No business of any.: i 1 ♦ i r7 r ! Vf t a r 11° rIK\+ 4 `'Ar < r 1 r r 1 1, r l ..,•1'�^e , \ `1 s `,1`_Y.1�'''l,l��l\1 N�r r!`+'.�`.1'e.�gOellt`<�rrri l -rI.0'.t•l7t1�y 5rSP�tF l�'r?�!ijillrr�•r•�1r1 tiy�,rItr`�1,lr�, 7+,n 1!., (1r•1\,r, J,r+r 1T!1,r1vl .rr`��` 1 � r Y t yl "I 1 + • r 1 •, b•l.. •.. .. ..11 r•1 . tr �.- 5�.r ' 1:11 I�t'lr rr�, 4 ...'il.`� ?° r. ,�A.�. r kind, mny be conduet° d upon any of ;;aid plots oxoept that +° the business of a pl•:; aician may be conduoted anywhere except that on a plot froatililg A'11- jar 3r•)ch at ita aanotion pith 4� Bay view. Road, thu buol)aeas of innk )por )day be conducted 5 and alcso thennle of fool nu;)n?inn an!i hou c?.old necr,nr>itie8 f; f=� to xtraidr:nt:1 of the prr..niaen hexcir:-abcvc) c)c)^(;ribcQ and s. excont thy: cottn-rs appurtenant to such inn rruy U•c ercotod f. t and :daintained on said t)lot :LIA llaed in conract .on :71th the f inn provided, 1108ever,' that (,:rh r,.` trod rottagrc shall `Ool� r; ! ; +r form to tail thH rostri•otionsr here7.n made-• czcc)nt a to nizeR of plots and numbora of bulldln3n u;,on plo;z. `?o materiale" . shall bo etorod 'or litter to be all.o:rycd to rem:,in upon any, ,. . .; plot, or any an. .3 or rrfu:;e or any licuid or t;ubstanco diachar cd Lato or d::porltccl in ^eco tc Mly, sholt:sr. Inland Found or any other :mtaro. No per sono nhal ' lu)ve ;?:^ right or privilcEo to r_oor any versi:l, bout raft or bathins float or keep any other t'1ing, or building; :)y doc:c or bort louse in nay of the Channels or to ob:3:ruet or atter in :any way ; • f ii.'1 •Y•. -1 any of tho ch:aww1a !vhioh have been (lredgeil on or rlose to+ any part of the prer..i>es hereinabove (1eeoribed or to die-"• '1 -x, charge or empty any srvv){;9 or any of r)i:r or zu.b i istance whc.tever into ^-econiC Pay, .^..helter Island Found Into any Channels or any other uaterr bounding, any part of•'..(i•, eaid prernioeo and thaLt no couve,jo.nee3 whatever a`.all be made..:" by the party, of the second part of any portion of said dredged ohanueln or drored crater r.nys before the r;ylatCnt.of the aa4 ;tooXtgago.. For every plot having a water front the ' end o11 the''�11tQ7� atats]l be construed an tho front of said plot and for every other plot the end on the boundary road shall'. be conotrucd the front. The Qucena operutorc7 Corporation, Ino. 11l'1Ll IOa7,ntr111]k;ll On f)lI1Cl i?.LUQ iU{il I1;Nl to L(A � • con— inn pr.ovt'90c10 ho;7evor,' that cr..eh r,,` 'u:id cot': +•l;rn ahnll '' Yorcn to o17, t}je r.nEttrintioncj horri.n made) cxcapt nn to 1326" of plots nd nulnbnr.n of buildin„c U."on ploLc. `io aexiale)'x: " shall bo rtarrd or litter to bre ;i11.n.7cd to rc:a:>Sn upan any `, • plot, or any 315•r11!;0 or rcfu::e or any 11(-;uid or I„ub2,t. I discharged Into or dcpcaited in 'lecon'.e T:ay, ihlata* Ia7atld .: Sound or other xntora. No 1):0-aon3 I1b1,.11 ivzve the right i , ., venticl. `bo;jt r;jft or ba: jir. ; float or privi_r�•c to r_�or any ,' ! or g;_l:p c:l:� c,�itcr t'ting or buildin; (1001c or bort 'Lo in any of the cl-m 1cla or to oblatruc: or alcor to :joy way a any of the ohannals”-AXob have be*cn dreciieu 01 or close to, any pert of theprer..l.Das'"hc°rc:innbove desc.ibad or to dis r, charge or empty any ss}rnf;3 6r,."any ot,hl;r maccri<,1e or stance whatlever into ?econiC Pay, ^'.1eltrr Island '.ound or :>': . into any Chaanela or any othex waterc boun6inr, any part. oP: y ++ �:. gald prlerciae•n t_r;d thiLt no cou`rey:).nc:; w4atevr.r a u'1 be rcnde ; by the part y of the c::cond part 01 my portion of Daid dred,;ed 'chaanel:t or dreLfUed cater rt,..ys before the PaYment;.ofr' the aid mortg:{;e. 1'cr every plot having a i%ater front the God on the ',voter Dhall be construed :1.,3tho front of said plot slid for every other plot the end on the boundary road shall ....: be conot.rucd the front. `Phe Queeus Qperatorc Corporation. Ino. a shall forever have the sole right to ultcr, improve and xe- Y pair all dredged channels. 'Phe ..00113 opcl•r-torti Corporation, ,F zne,."a1 11 o�rc�er•. have thosole; rii;ht to trodify the fore— , ' gpr0Lutriti� a4na after the continuance Of acid IrortQago* 9Ui3sZ�"�( a,7.00 ' to rights of the public in Day View `t " :�:• i Road and Cedar Beach Rend. w*r \ , rr 1 1 .(a�� u• t �'l' 1 " }TT�r. .'� 11 ,I '�F {{} ' t. • ,.. �t •r.� 1 itl,4tr�eNilt ij t.,rA '^ri .c .�•'-".!- tt'�.t cctA.�, 1 CUEJUT, elso to rights of persons who have %bought plots of land from the partics of the first part subsequent to December 15,1925 the date of the con- tract pursuant to it this dnte is We. 9UBJr.CT, also, to a right of way in favor of N William IA. Beebe and others related to him between his or their Cranberry Patch, Fhich iG located near the piece or parcel II and Cedar Leach Road. CU3J'3CT, also to agreomnnt made for maintenance for r.�. • � , ;zit c,. telephone and electric lighting liners nor on parts of pxemisar. hereinabove described. too . Y. 1• t 'i L �• 1, ,t r T'�1r. "t t-Sv�[Y!p(IY,.X1Y a � X11' er . + ' G�1 w 7 I 9 - t� ♦•�l GI rl n , 1`V�:�n � x:`r•kt'�1�"1� •[�, ir'. %LI �a}���1� ��� gY,I�N�, '�9•d`��j �I � tttl ,\}~P � I+ 11w 'r' 1�-t ! 1 :,y +1fo- [r. ,: A I , d. r rtt t� .l P:� rZ- �f } n+e �I�SaJ J.SN'} :kr.(•�hr�i > ��j =� + yy, Ii T ',Y ,K'fi`; . Y �Slt 'r r.� [Y �' t � � r tnfi l' trM N � t 1 \ S .. t ♦• . � a. 4 � <t•i , Aa, y cw 1 tJ ,P t S+ fwf 1 , 1 � } Cu,,�`t �y(��}��r[}� .�1is��1 l�� +r��g` •f,{Y4 .,,� \ , tt .i. y, ary ABY r ,r.,� [ ,ta '.y;iw«� I:[.i`1 . I t • i , 1., f.',., ,e rT -� it r%v i +A, r - � § � ww 4K t �1i� r r a ,rlt rlY,t1• �4 yI�I X"�I�1.1�'t nw y+'[^r}.: �h ` rt�^, N • i.A,I t •!' .r,y.'A7 .I.7'v�'jY 4•, �� r , �y �,( +rvn �• 4C r ♦ 3 It FS Sr a1 fit, " Kih•[b1•-.�•ti` ,/'j_� •Lt, .y" y,:t� t.:r A.� SA' },�f +l , . IIi'�r I♦ ���. 1� 1•.I ,�.1< RF- 4{ ,j, i�1 M Jf�,r �-}`+;yl"Sili J' o Aflrf.uCil+faT�'RP\/'ytr1�°J�� �1°} [ - J t l t• '.t.,� e++t[ .,1 '. NIM +T�.�:�t1l.s ` �.�� t �r �l�w Y ��i t- ' >>I• �. � r171�1' i [ t.{ .1 . [ .. �C•, xe, ..�._.NO.I .In,j �'•• T{' 4+t,�^ ''PI„ y. . ,. + };' , .wr ' 1 It ;L P5v� ` �+ . ` 4 t'�y fj~<4: ,; IIJ � }� r `r• t 1.. , `. .L , y� 5+� [[w . . RAI Y"t�`Yy+�1"�� �P �,"1. 64 �t�.'tri'i IK • ' t f� �[t K -[ f+ 1P, ♦"\, h/ S' ! [ f.`(�71j1 kuA +1,i!!!fi .K ){y�� y•t-^,\ w� .l\•ri�;•t�Y� I i}�tSt�..�'¢r 'ASI• t�, �Jr ,�,� 31 �Y r r , v •ti .,'I IF�� Sd�. `* 3 t'!IA'}' LAt. v �r r el �' yf • 4 * c " tt y.• t 't' yJ• �..�YR:f` *� '�IA i' \, r,.. 1 rf 4., t t . X;. of ,\1 . "dqr t , •., C" xl �1 F v 13 w � ' yt i`p0 &z 1.61(0) 16 O y e 2.3110 Q • $AXG^IPEfl A 1#V7 � � BRSIN r CE04R o 1 z U 1 t.xua ' \ lx INA a A LIIId y :n .rn �\\ • na 11 - turn OF z O :,a CEDARswrxolo O r 4 Powr u m e<lnue"u.n w s rrnx rc swrxnD Y A ,�+: r 1le a Y 4.5.(dp z> zc rsoro Ictal WESTYr LAKE x a :,• zJ CF04 xa zo 16 uv: i na v. R M1 P x• b- r v6 Q\� ll 1.9 d mrcmnc„ r,.oi —L—i1�U— \ 28 M ,a rO vI A 18 'J//� SWrx0.D I a \'p a. 1 I g, 6 13.1 as � I•„ ,.. � ao+ 27 a •+ r. 4x6 � .a x.l � :p, �� � �� _—I I w ..., ,.. • 2 a . ,. �. I is 1s zo zr a ,� m. ai F I I � 1= Itruci 16 lz 1a � is xD 21 xz 1.um 6 tr zJ I = _ xa ,e &1 /yamHE I _ A NECK BAY xA L x�n..,a. 11 r°a.xw:,.,r .w- ®.1n, --- ar w,.a,1r --sex— »x.+w:...n. _.—_ waess m, o...°.rse. ns wwrFn.<s cy E e....� w. �— o.axr.s...nw 1211 s.na O ..x..x.,a. --' - w.:.mxx.,s —"O-- ,xx . x,. ,v6 ner,...e asxxc.:: NOTICE © COUNTY OF SUFFOLK E TOWN OF c 2 _ ,_ d ,,,,, R°' �, Real Property Tax Service Agency r _ sunr[xuv¢,ur[xlmx,sxc a+ E s,...:,v..a -••�___ Yr 0•...: .. w.,.,r ,m,wxt,t... —_ —_ ra..m.e,4..—_.—_ ton 'I WFOLKll011 aF um rW6rcric Y � r YF11fFU - .wu Count Center Riverhe N T 11901 N e ra ¢„s6 61FFax caen nx xIr a Fxaarlo Y D w xl nw e. 1x.i 11m v itu '••: r• —___ .sx,n u. —_r—_ n.w.u,...u. ..—_ wuu[[ ..srt.1,u III,Wff.TM Rarrw RRG6[N OF . » p r�x�r.a ial Is<1 ,.n a. —____ —_s__ 1a¢eno+lnn ru s6xnc[,¢rex. scx.F x FEET, p ur Demo xo L— � mwFxxu cap 100 Crossways Park West Woodbury,New York 11797 tel: 516496-8400 r "' fax: 516 496-8864 FEB - 3 2006 January 31, 2006 Ms. Heather Cusack Southold Board of Trustees P.O. Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 Subject: Letter Proposal Modification Dear Ms. Cusack: As you requested last week,Camp Dresser &McKee (CDM) has modified our letter proposal describing technical review of a property owner's groundwater assessment to include a site visit. CDM's scope of work would now include: • Review of the document(approximately 20 pages) prepared by the property owner's consultant, describing their assessment of groundwater flow conditions at the property, particularly the location of the proposed septic system with respect to the coast; • Visual survey of the property to obtain a first-hand view of conditions and the relative locations of the proposed facilities and water resources (no intrusive activities will be conducted); • Evaluation of the conclusions of the document with respect to our understanding of the groundwater flow system near the coast,based upon our experience working with the County on the Main Body groundwater flow model and the salt water/fresh water interface models, other local experience and conditions observed during the site visit; • Prepare a letter report documenting the results of our evaluation in a clear, concise manner. The evaluation may confirm the results of the property owner's assessment, may identify additional field work that would be required to confirm the property owner's assessment of the local groundwater flow field,or may present an alternative representation of local conditions based upon existing information. W\TAYLOMSoutholdrey doe consulting-engineering-construction-operations Ms. Heather Cusack January 31,2006 Page 2 It is anticipated that this review could be completed within two weeks of receipt of the document, and that the review, site visit,evaluation and letter report preparation would be completed at a cost not to exceed$1,750. No additional meetings have been anticipated in the development of the project schedule and budget. If you have any questions, or would like to discuss the project further,please don't hesitate to call me at(516) 496-8400. We look forward to hearing from you soon. Very truly yours, Mary Anne Taylor, P.E. Associate Camp Dresser& McKee cc: K. Kelly D. O'Rourke W iTAYLOR%Southoldm.d.c t-A M 100 Crossways Park West Woodbury,New York 11797 tel 516496-8400 fax: 516496-8864 January 12, 2006 Ms. Heather Cusack Southold Board of Trustees P.O. Box 1179 JAN 17 2006 Southold, New York 11971 Subject: Document Review Dear Ms. Cusack: It was a pleasure speaking with you last week to discuss the Town of Southold's need to retain an environmental consultant to provide a technical review of a property owner's groundwater assessment. Based upon your description of the property owner's proposal to build a home and accompanying septic system on a property located near the coast,Camp Dresser&McKee would: • Review the document(approximately 20 pages) describing the property owner's assessment of groundwater flow conditions at the property, particularly the location of the proposed septic system with respect to the coast; • Evaluate the conclusions of the document with respect to our understanding of the groundwater flow system near the coast,based upon our experience working with the County on the Main Body groundwater flow model and the salt water/fresh water interface models, and upon other local experience; • Prepare a letter report documenting the results of our evaluation in a clear,concise manner. The evaluation may confirm the results of the property owner's assessment, may identify additional field work that would be required to confirm the property owner's assessment of the local groundwater flow field, or may present an alternative representation of local conditions based upon existing information. It is anticipated that this review could be completed within two weeks of receipt of the document, and that the review,evaluation and letter report preparation would be completed at a cost not to exceed$1200. No meetings or field work have been anticipated in the development of the project schedule and budget. Document code consulting-engineering construction operations Ms. Heather Cusack January 13, 2006 Page 2 If you have any questions, or would like to discuss the project further,please don't hesitate to call me at(516) 496-8400. We look forward to hearing from you soon. In the meantime, I am enclosing some background literature about CDM for your information. Very truly yours, Mary Anne Taylor, P.E. Associate Camp Dresser&McKee cc: K. Kelly D. O'Rourke Document Code Ab. Overview of CDM An employee-owned company,Camp Dresser&McKee(CDM)is a full- service global firm specializing in consulting,engineering,construction,and operations to help clients improve the environment and infrastructure.With $600 million in client revenue and 3,600 professionals in over 100 domestic and international offices(see Figure 1-1),CDM maintains the size,stability, and resources to successfully undertake a diverse range of projects. The CDM parent firm began serving clients in 1944,when the late Thomas R. Camp established a consulting practice. In 1947,Dr.Camp—a Professor of Sanitary Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology—founded the partnership of Camp Dresser&McKee with his associates,Herman G. Dresser and Dr.Jack E.McKee.The original Camp Dresser&McKee Inc.was formed in 1970 as the succeeding parent organization. Since 1947,CDM has provided the full range of services,including water, wastewater,water resources,environmental management,and solid waste to public,private,international,and federal clients,setting the pace for the evolving environmental engineering and remediation industry.Projects range from small,short-term solutions to complex,ongoing environmental and infrastructure management programs,but they all share a common focus: CDWs driving philosophy of providing exceptional client service and building long-term relationships. From big-picture program and infrastructure management,to initial studies and design,through i„ construction and operation,CDM's project teams integrate the appropriate multidisciplinary resources and streamline all efforts throughout the entire project life cycle.For every project,we incorporate our total 4 _ - quality management(TQM)processes,address issues of health and safety and community relations,and CDM works in partnership with each client to help Position ourselves as strong client advocates during our clients realize visions and cost-effectively meet regulatory strategy development and negotiations. Project goals. The result is the best total solution for each and every client. cm 11 w�wrscoMC Pany Pm Re aoc Section 1 Company Profile 11—,,K Inyn 'i iN C.1.oD W4+xu.Ml I1t^vBr.W wM6e CM.W N.P MN -IMI,pA.MI �• CO L...KS MM,w4e.W, I I -COYmG+a CH M.--Nv �� VMlle.KBr PNOM UI fryry NV Nrx—x`WA--- r MWNM.OM LY4 N NY 1i 1 Pprypr.(/r,PA RI . IprµV NCyNMN NY CP E MA WMrf\.Pq 1 Md'C MR INh..NV Nr+ V 4.Nv Wr•ul r.�..x.oA 11 r� I u '. Pexacec zrn Oa.Ww. CA—� I 11 • — 1 a,.um N: Ne+Wrvn VW. • � (: alin9lon.Vr1 I N¢nY a.Vq {Iw•er•OW.G —Paou5m11w K Qb4G � ouon.Kv MMW. C Nr'ly. N M CNwnna.V� �N N IOrrCO A[� /� Pa N f I pMMlry,y Cjly.Ul( ( Atl-"CA •_ WIY.rz ! II �( ► 14 1 -\�� .YTX e 1 MOAa.il ylgrnr rl ��1'� Sarawla IL •�,y,, �Fol Nr•:--I ! 7 1 R. 1 _ T _ Figure 1-1 With an extensive network of worldwide offices, CDM has the size,stability,and resources to successfully undertake a wide range of projects. Staff Resources CDM is staffed by more than 3,600 professionals whose academic credentials, work experience,and career goals are focused on the environmental science and engineering field.In addition to extensive staff resources in our major practice areas,CDM has specialists in the fields of air quality,meteorology, noise,hydrogeology,geophysics,architecture,geochemistry,agronomy, toxicology,industrial hygiene,risk assessment,health and safety,financial analysis,and community relations.CDM's uniformity of purpose and Cm 1-2 W:MT DM Canpam/PIOM..Eoc Section 1 Company Profile diversity of scientific disciplines have created a reserve of skills,resources, and collective experience that is highly respected and unmatched in our field. CDM's Services As a full-service consulting firm,CDM offers a variety of environmental engineering and management services to a wide range of municipalities, authorities,public-and private-sector clients, Our clients Ienjoybenefit the of a government entities,and industries.CDM services including the following comprehensive services: II . -. .n and Treatment have supported projects ranging from small pilot- Water Resources : scale studies and specialized consultation to complex Solid Waste Management I regional studies requiring a multidisciplinary Drinking Watet approach.These services have been provided to Environmental Management and Rernediation agencies,authorities and municipalities throughout the country. The CDM staff is thoroughly experienced in all phases of design engineering, construction management,and environmental study related to: ■ Wastewater management ■ Water resources ■ Solid waste management ■ Drinking water ■ Environmental management and remediation. Wastewater Management More than ever before,water quality protection is a mandate for municipal agencies responsible for wastewater management.At CDM,our wastewater management approach over the last decade has broadened to also encompass the objective of turning wastes into valuable resources.Water reuse systems are providing highly treated reclaimed water for urban and agricultural irrigation,groundwater recharge,and industrial uses, thus conserving limited fresh water supplies. Wastewater sludges are being converted to biosolids products for beneficial reuse. And,aging collection systems are being upgraded and rehabilitated. CDM's engineers and scientists are specialists who have led in the development and application of new technologies for wastewater collection,treatment and beneficial reuse.Knowledge and expertise go into every solution we offer,from collection system Award-winning Mamaroneck WWTP in WestchesterNew Countyinto design and rehabilitation to biosolids management Cm 1-3 w�HRACDM tympany ammne aoc Section 1 Company Profile and wastewater reclamation and reuse. For over five decades,CDM has worked closely with municipal wastewater agencies throughout the world in planning and engineering wastewater facilities and water quality control. CDM's comprehensive wastewater management services include: ■ Facilities planning ■ Collection system design and rehabilitation ■ Collection system planning ■ Treatment process selection and design ■ Biomonitoring and toxicity testing ■ Public/private partnering ■ Air toxics evaluation/control ■ Clean Air Act compliance ■ Continuous emissions monitoring systems ■ Sludge and biosolids management ■ Water reclamation and reuse ■ Permitting and compliance negotiations ■ Project finance ■ Optimization services ■ Water quality monitoring and modeling ■ Procurement services ■ Project delivery ■ Operations and maintenance(O&M)services Water Resources Today's communities face greater water resources demands than ever before. In the past,most water resources programs were project-specific,focusing on a particular problem area. Now,to meet the varying needs of current populations and to plan for changing future,communities must take a comprehensive approach to water resources management by developing integrated and cost- effective programs that both protect and maximize water resources. CDM is the overall Program Manager for the Rouge River CDM's environmental engineers and scientists are National Wet-Weather Demonstration Project—the first specialists who have led the development and federally funded"wet weather'demonstration program. implementation of various types of comprehensive CWM 1-4 W:UNTS\CAM Cwn wPmre Section 1 Company Profile water resources management programs,including: ■ Watershed management ■ Integrated resources management ■ Stormwater master planning and facilities design ■ Combined sewer overflow control strategies and facilities design ■ Program financing For over five decades,CDM has worked with federal,state,and local governments and a myriad of stakeholders to identify water resources needs and develop implementable solutions that are technically sound,compliant with regulatory requirements,and financially sensitive to each client's budget. Solid Waste Management Community officials know that foresight and planning are necessary to address their solid waste challenges. Accordingly,CDM specializes in helping communities plan their complete solid waste management programs. Our professional solid waste planners and engineers help local governments,either individually or in conjunction with neighboring communities,set priorities based on current waste management practices,population projections,and budget constraints. CDM designs flexible frameworks that provide for the appropriate combination of collection,transportation,waste reduction,recycling, composting,energy recovery and landfilling,and frameworks that guide the development of the financial program to support the plan. Based on over five decades of solid waste management S 7 p experience,CDM's solid waste planning services cover the legal,social,and institutional aspects of solid waste collection,processing,and disposal. We assemble project teams that include planners,financial analysts, community relation's specialists,lawyers,and engineers to ensure that solid waste approaches are technically CDM's design of the Canal Road Water feasible and economically and environmentally sound Treatment Plant for the Elizabethtown Water and acceptable to the community.And by emphasizing Company in New Jersey received design recycling and waste reduction as key components of excellence awards from the American Academy of every plan,we elicit community participation as well as Environmental Engineers and the New Jersey Consulting Engineers Council. support. Cm 1-5 W WM CDM Company Pm to doe Section 1 Company Profile Drinking Water CDM has provided expert engineering in every aspect of water quality technology investigations,development,pilot testing,facility design,and operations since the firm's inception in 1947.Thomas R.Camp,a technical innovator in the field of water treatment,broke new ground in the engineering theories of sedimentation,mixing,and flocculation processes, and filter technology.CDM has continued to advance both theoretical and practical applications of important water treatment technologies,including plate and tube settlers,multi-media filters,direct filtration,membrane technologies,adsorption,oxidation,and disinfection. CDM focuses on a multi-barrier approach to water quality that addresses protection of the water source,effective water treatment and disinfection, and reliable delivery of safe drinking water.The firm has designed supply and treatment systems all across the United States and in locations around the world.We have assisted water agencies in creating and upgrading efficient,non-corrosive delivery systems.Whether managing a fast-track design/build approach,applying state-of-the-art use of advanced technologies,or conducting Safe Drinking Water Act(SDWA)informational seminars,CDM water specialists are fully dedicated to providing full-service water treatment services to our clients everywhere. Environmental Management CDM has been a leader in environmental management,encompassing the full range of services to private industry. From permitting and small-scale studies,to multi-media remediation programs using innovative technologies, CDM's environmental management services include: ■ Site remediation and restoration ■ Waste minimization ■ Air quality assessment ■ Compliance support (permitting,monitoring, audits,and materials management) ■ Hi - uri water As environmental consultant, CDM provided p environmental support to the Central Artery project systems in Boston. ■ Industrial wastewater treatment ■ Stormwater permitting and management ■ Underground and aboveground storage tank management ■ Risk assessment cm 1-6 W:WRMCDMCanPe,ly Pm IeU Section 1 Company Profile ■ Industry-specific services,such as chemical processing,paper and pulp, utilities,pharmaceutical,communications,petrochemical,food and beverage,transportation,metals,electronics,marine transport,mining, and agribusiness. Support Services and Facilities Computer Resources As a full-service consulting firm,CDM has state-of-the-art high technology systems and possesses all the necessary equipment and support facilities to analyze,research,report,display,and produce data and information collected for engineering and environmental designs and studies. CDM's engineering support equipment and services include financial technical support,computer networks,CADD capabilities,libraries,and report production equipment. CDM currently uses more than 3,000 computers firm-wide.Standard configurations include Microsoft Windows-based personal computers at the desktop,technical workstations running Microsoft Windows NT Workstation.CDM's computer facilities are networked both within each office and among our offices nationwide.Additionally,worldwide access to the CDM network is provided via dial-up communications and the Internet. CDM's computer systems run a diverse range of engineering and scientific applications,office automation,and group productivity applications, personal productivity applications,and management and project information systems. Communications Network. A wide area network links all CDM offices for communications and electronic file transfer. The backbone of this network is a high-speed,T1 leased line. Every CDM office has immediate access to these computer systems,making firmwide design resources available for every project.The systems can be accessed from PCs,Macintoshes,and Unix systems for maximum use of hardware and software capabilities,and high-speed data transfer allows us to expedite work on projects.This sophisticated communications system allows us to be instantly linked with all CDM offices. Computer Programs. CDM has developed and maintains a large library of engineering computer programs. Programs related to the following disciplines are included in this library: environmental engineering, hydraulics,solid waste,combustion engineering,structural engineering, statistics,engineering specification production,geographic databases,and large-scale modeling.The modeling applications cover such areas as basic hydrology,urban and rural runoff,water supply and distribution,waste treatment,stream quality,estuary and ocean models,reservoir models, groundwater models,and economic models. CDM t-7 W.'dtl�Canpvry Pm .E c Section 1 Company Profile Support and CADD Facilities. CDM combines solid engineering capabilities with state-of-the-art high technology systems.Our computer-aided design and drafting(CADD)systems within CDM allow rapid and accurate delivery of design solutions. The power of the computer is applied to develop complete engineering designs that meet the client's needs and regulatory requirements. CDM is experienced in the most recent version of AutoCAD 2000,allowing us to be fully compatible with our clients.CDM has AutoCAD stations in all major offices.CDM is very experienced in the use of AutoCAD systems.We currently own several hundred AutoCAD licenses,which are integrated with more advanced design and analysis packages such as ArcCAD from ESRI,all civil and architectural Softdesk modules from Autodesk,and Cybernet water distribution models from Haestad Methods. r hi addition,CDM has its own set of CADD and graphics 1 standards and associated menu system used by our CADD - L operators and subconsultants.CDM also has the capability to translate between CADD systems.CDM's software packages include basic drafting software,as well as specialty application packages for architectural and d ,I engineering design.In addition,we have software for x' saa� M1performing process and instrumentation drawings,plant �fJtr" piping,and for engineering site design(3-dimensional .: sn topographic models allowing cut and fill computations and grading design). a' - Geographic Information System(GIS)Facilities. CDM offers extensive GIS facilities throughout the firm.All GIS The GIS developed by CDM for the Hackensack facilities access networked high-speed color laser printers, Meadowlands Development Commission provides planners with tools to balance economic growth digitizers,pen plotters,small format color scanners,OCR, with environmental protection. HP ink-jet plotters,high-speed laser plotters,and large- format black and white scanners.CDM maintains GIS applications that are accessible to GIS projects nationwide over the CDM network.GIS software includes AutoCAD Map,Intergraph,Geomedia, ArcCAD,ArcView,MapInfo,WinNT,TCP/IP,NFS,and others. InfoCenter Formerly the Herman G.Dresser Library,the InfoCenter is the hub of knowledge that drives CDM's research and project efforts.Our information professionals have access to countless technical references and publications and are constantly improving the way that engineers and scientists electronically retrieve and use information.We support internal training programs by providing material that allows us to keep our engineers and scientists current.As a result,we are able to field the best team in the industry. CDM 1-8 wWlS mCa 'WdB Section 1 Company Proft Of particular importance to the consulting staff is access provided through the InfoCenter's automated literature search capability that covers over 400 bibliographical and numerical databases.Using this capability,project personnel can survey technical,scientific,and commercial literature contained in databases worldwide.Staff members can efficiently select and retrieve abstracts and texts that are pertinent to particular project needs. Although the cost to the patron is minimal,these literature searches can be accomplished more quickly and thoroughly than other conventional document search methods. In addition,the InfoCenter also provides current local,state,federal,and international regulations and standards to ensure those technical personnel have electronic access to the most up-to-ate design and legal requirements in their area of expertise. As an ancillary service,the InfoCenter is responsible for selecting and supporting regulatory software distributed throughout the organization.Our technicians maintain links to key agencies,such as the EPA,so that documents and forms are always at our fingertips.Probably the InfoCenter's greatest asset is its flexibility and desire to change to meet the evolving needs of technical staff.As the information age draws toward maturity it is imperative that we constantly improve our knowledge base and find even more effective ways to disseminate the information that keeps us on top. Geotechnical Laboratory CDM maintains a full service geotechnical testing laboratory located in Cambridge,Massachusetts,to both support our geotechnical and geoenvironmental projects as well as a"standalone"service for clients.The laboratory staff is comprised of geotechnical engineers,soil scientists and technicians.All testing is performed in accordance with American Society of Testing Materials,the American Association of State,Highway and Transportation officials,and the American Petroleum Institute standards. Quality Assurance Program To ensure the proper application of specialized engineering expertise for all clients,the firm makes use of its technical specialists.At key points during each assignment,project personnel are required to meet with the specialists to present and discuss their findings,recommendations,or designs.Since it is not the intent to establish rigid policy,the meetings serve as an open forum for discussing innovative techniques and approaches,and as a clearinghouse for providing guidance to project engineers,junior engineers,and designers. The specialists provide preliminary and final review of concepts,contract plans,layouts,and project reports and are responsible for issuing internal memorandums concerning the latest technology. Specialists maintain channels of communication with sources of technical information both inside and outside the firm,as well as technical files for new products,processes, and techniques.Specialists make field trips to inspect CDM projects and cm 1-9 W WIT=MCompe"y Pmfilewc Section 1 Company Proft those of other firms,and they review on site,new processes in pilot-or full- scale operation.Specialists perform many of the functions referred to as value engineering,both in their direct examination of a specific project's features and in their monitoring of current developments in processes, equipment,and technology. CDM t-to W � A "DmN - „ q._ Supporting Leading-Edge Biopharmaceutical Development WWM-0442 (Rev.9/2004) • SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES ' OFFICE OF WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT - SUFFOLK COUNTY CENTER AUG 2 3 RIVERHEAD,NEW YORK 11901 2006 (631) 852-2100 NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION-RESI NTIAL - +��-�tw"v. - TO: SUFFOLK ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING H.S. REFERENCE NO.: R10-05-0024 P.O. BOX 2003 PROPERTY LOCATION: CEDAR BEACH PARK BRIDGEHAMPTON, NY 11932 LOT 119 The plans for your proposed sewage disposal and water supply systems have been reviewed and the following will be required prior to further processing of the application for approval to construct. PLEASE RETURN A COPY OF THIS FORM WITH ANY RESUBMISSION. NOTE: CHANGES TO PLANS MUST BE MADE BY A LICENSED DESIGN PROFESSIONAL (I.E. SURVEYOR, ARCHITECT OR ENGINEER). 1 ELIMINARY APPROVALS-OTHER AGENCIES N.Y.S. Dept. of Env. Cons. 1:1 Sewer District Approval SEQRA Determination-Town own Wetlands/Drainage/Zoning ❑ S.C.D.H.S.Vector Control RA Other: 2. PLAN DATA AND INFORMATION REQUIRED 3 prints of revised plan required withEj Indicate on plan the specific location(s) [with Indicate any surface waters within 300' design professional's original stamp measurements] of all water supply wells and of plot; show wetlands limit as flagged and signature septic systems (within 150' of all property by NYSDEC and/or Town Application form incomplete: lines) or state if dwellings are connected to Survey,plan,test hole,grading plan,etc. See note(s)below public water must be based upon NGVD (1929), USC&GS Datum Li Application Fee:$ Minimum separation distances not maintained: Sewage disposal system undersized for proposed number of bedrooms Submit floor plans Show area for 50% expansion of sewageRetaining wall must be designed by P.E. di osal s stem or R.A. Surveys must be no larger than Show highest recorded groundwater and Comer elevations/test hole elevation 11"X 1 T' calculations Indicate area of lot(sq.ft.) Show proposed sewage disposal system/ Show test boring and location on plans/ Show proposed lot ft.) water supply well/water service line Test boring inadequate on lan location(s)on plan See remarks below S.C. Tax Map Number required •k . Test well required on your lot as per attached Grading plan showing invert elevations bulletin of sewage disposal system, foundation Public sewer stub location from n, Show location of existing water/sanitary and final grade (by licensed design sewer district shown on plans facilities professional) ElSurrounding property - vacant or Submit letter from water district indicating Slope exceeds standards: 15%maximum improved (within 150' of all distance to nearest public water main and within 20' of sanitary system, including property lines) availability expansion See enclosed Form WWM-043, Show sanitary system design based upon See additional comments on marked-up Notice of Non-Conformance highest ex cted oundwater elevation See enclosed 3 THER/REMARKs: APPLICATION PROPOSES 4 BEDROOMS BUT PROPOSED SANITARY SYSTEM IS NLY GOOD FOR 3 BEDROOMS. REVIEW OF THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUESTED MAY RESULT IN THE NEED TO MODIFY THE PROPOSED WATER SUPPLY AND/OR SANITARY SYSTEM DESIGN. FURTHER INFORMATION MAY ALSO BE RE UIRED FOR REVIEW BY THIS DEPARTMENT. DATE PREPARED: February 25, 2005 REVIEWED BY: John DiGiuseppe No. WWM-043 (Rev.1/2004) SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES OFFICE OF WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT SUFFOLK COUNTY CENTER RIVERHEAD,NEW YORK 11901 (631) 852-2100 NOTICE OF NON-CONFORMANCE-RESIDENTIAL TO: SUFFOLK ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING H.S. REFERENCE NO.: R10-05-0024 P.O. BOX 2003 BRIDGEHAMPTON, NY 11932 PROPERTY LOCATION: CEDAR BEACH PARK LOT 119 This application is not being processed for approval as submitted because it does not appear to conform with the s ds/requirements of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code as indicated: 1. ® e stallation of a subsurface sewage disposal system(s) is not permitted when: The proposed system will be less than 100' from neighboring well(s); proposed well, surface waterd/or wetlands. The existing subsoils on the site contain meadow mat, bog, silts, clays or other impervious materials which extend below the groundwater table or existing subsoils in the area are unsuitable for the proper functioning of the system. ❑ The groundwater or drainage conditions are unsuitable for the proper functioning of the system. ❑ The population density equivalent exceeds the limit of one single-family residence per one-half and/or one acre. ❑ A public sewer system is available. 2. ❑ The installation of a private water supply well is not permitted when: ❑ A public water supply is available. ❑ The groundwater supply in the area is inadequate for individual water supply wells. ❑ The proposed well will be an insufficient distance from proposed or existing sewage disposal system(s). 3. ❑ The parcel(s) being applied on are apparently part of a realty subdivision or development, as defined in Article 6 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code, which has not been approved by the Department for the method of sewage disposal and water supply. Prior to further processing of the application, it will be necessary that the owner(s) of the overall property file a realty subdivision or development map with this office. Application forms are enclosed. 4. ❑ The proposal is not in conformance with the conditions of the approved realty subdivision or development map. 5. ❑ OTHER/COMMENTS: If this matter cannot be resolved, you may request a variance from these standards by applying to the Department's Board of Review (forums and instructions enclosed). Prior to applying to the Board of Review,the residential application must be completed. . ............ ----------- ....----... ... -------- ................... .. ......--_.....................__.. ......................_.,............................. .. ........... _.., DATE PREPARED. February 25, 2005 I REVIEWED BY. John DiGiuseppe • COUNTY OF SUFFOLK STEVE LEVY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES BRIAN L HARPER,M.D.,M.P.H. COMMISSIONER DAVID G.GRAHAM,M.D.,M.P.H. Eumii m M.HAawNGTON,ESQ. CHIEF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER DEPUTY CoMMIssiONER To: Ms Heather Cuscack,Town of Southold Date: 4/7/2006 Re: Groundwater Flow Analysis,Sim Moy Comments of the Report titled Groundwater Flow Analysis for Moy property are as followed; Section IV par 2 The elevation difference between the wells is compared assuming the distance between the wells is equal. This is probably not true and the distances are not provided. Section IV par 8 Cores reveal that grey organic clays and bogs are present between 4-8 ft and the aquifer may not represent your typical medium sand unconfined aquifer . The clay material and bog could affect drainage of the septic system waste. Section IV par 9-equation Value for coefficient of permeability of 4,937.66 it per day is to high for determining groundwater flow. Typical values for long Island are 0-500 ft/d.Therefore the time of travel calculations are off. The clays and bogs present at the site may cause problems with the drainage of septic waste also they may impede the vertical flow of waste into the aquifer and short circuit the systems effectiveness in breaking down and dilute waste stream. The SCDHS Office of Waste Water Management has been notified of these concerns and they will be taken into account during their review process. Regards Ron Paulsen Hyrogeologist Suffolk County Department of Health Services Office Of Water Resources 124 Yaphank ave, Yaphank, NY •Office of Water Resources Division of Environmental Quality 360 Yaphank Avenue,Suite I C Yaphank,NY 11980 Phone: (631) 852.5789 Fax: (631)852.5787 Albert J. Krupski,President so Town Hall James King,Vice-President h0 53095 Route 25 Artie Foster iL P.O.Box 1179 Ken Poliwoda COS T Southold,New York 11971-0959 Peggy A. Dickerson • ,O Telephone(631)765-1892 COU►M Fax(631)765-6641 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD December 29, 2005 Mr. Ron Paulson Suffolk County Department of Health Department of Water Resources, Suite 3 360 Yaphank Ave. Yaphank, NY 11980 Re: Groundwater flow analysis, Sim Moy Dear Mr. Paulson, The Board of Trustees requests that you and your department review the enclosed document. The next public hearing on the proposed house is January 18, 2006; if you can get something back to us by then that would be great. If not, we look forward to your review, as soon as is possible. Thank you very much. Please call this office with any questions. Sinq$rely, Heather Cusack Environmental Technician James F. King,President `` IMF Town Hall Jill M. Doherty,Vice-Presideng h0@ �. 53095 Route 25 Peggy A. Dickerson # # P.O. Boa 1179 So old,New York 11971-0959 Dave Bergen ell- A Q Telephone(631)765-1892 John Aolzapfel Fax(631)765-6641 BOARD OF TOTRUSTEES TOWN OF SO OLD Southold Town Board of Thistees Field/Inspection/Worksessio Report Date/Time: Name of Applicant: Jim Name of Agent: { PM Property Location: SCTM#& Street Brief Description of proposed action: c Type of area to be impacted: / y !/Saltwater Wetland _Freshwater Wetland III Sound Front �/Ba Front — Distance of proposed work to edge of above: Pq/of Town Code proposed work falls under: U _Chapt.97 Chapt. 37_other Type of Application: —Wetland_Coastal Exosibn_Amendment_Administrative _Emergency Info needed:,� Lakc '(1e �tet- 25� 3o 4* &9AQo henitic6,1 _1 �a�cI- -P 1` Modifications: Conditions: Present Were: _/ ing _/J.Doherty_P.Dlcketson D. BergenvJ.Holzapfel Other: Mailed/Faxed to:' (Date: 41 gOFF0jjt h TY Telephone Town Hall (631)765-1892 N Z 53095 Route25 O P.O.B6z H79- Southold,New York 11971-0959 CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL TOWN OF SOUT14OLD At the meeting of the Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council held Tues., March 15, 2005, the following recommendation was made: Moved by Don Wilder, seconded by Jack McGreevy, it was RESOLVED to recommend to the Southold Town Board of Trustees DISAPPROVAL of the Wetland Permit application of SIM MOY to construct a single-family dwelling, attached rear deck, pervious driveway, retaining wall and sanitary system. Located: 750 West Lake Rd., Southold. SCTM#90-2-1 The CAC recommends Disapproval of the application because of the following reasons: - The concern with raising the septic system and the proximity to the water table. - The concern with drainage. - The concern with a suitable buffer area. - Status and condition of the bulkhead is unclear. Vote of Council: Ayes: All Motion Carried w. Cusack, Heather From: Paulsen, Ronald [Ronald.Paulsen@suffolkcountyny.gov] Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 12:37 PM To: Cusack, Heather Cc: Rapiejko, Andrew Subject: Report Groundwater flow analysis for Moy property KEN Paulsen,Ronald.vd Ms Heather Cusack Comment of the Report titled Groundwater flow analysis for Moy property are as followed; Section IV par 2 The elevation difference between the wells is compared assuming the distance between the wells is equal. This is probably not true and the distances are not provided. Section IV par 8 Cores reveal that that grey organic clays and bog is present between 4-8 ft and the aquifer may not represent your typical medium sand unconfined aquifer . The clay material and bog could effect drainage of the septic system waste. Section IV par 9-equation Value for coefficient of permeability of 4,937.66 ft per day is to high for determining groundwater flow. Typical values for long Island are 0-500 ft /d. Therefore the time of travel calculations are off. The clays and bogs present at the site may cause problems with the drainage of septic waste also they may impede the vertical flow of waste into the aquifer and short circuit the systems effectiveness in breaking down and dilute waste stream. Regards Ron Paulsen Ron Paulsen-Hydrogeologist SCDHS-Division of Environmental Quality MAR 3 1 2006 Office of Water Resources 360 Yaphank Rd-Suite 1C Yaphank ,NY 11780 631-852-5774 <<Paulsen, Ronald.vcf>> 1 James F. King, President • ��OF SOpl0,/- Town Hall Jill M. Doherty,Vice-President `O 10 53095 Route 25 Peggy A. Dickerson * * P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Dave Bergen G Q John Holzapfel ' �� Telephone(631) 765-1892 l,�'COU Fax(631) 765-6641 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD August 30, 2006 Mr. Walter Hilbert, Chief Engineer Suffolk County Health Department Department of Wastewater Management 360 Yaphank Ave. Suite 2C Yaphank, New York 11980 Dear Mr. Hilbert: The Board of Trustees has concerns about an application for a proposed sanitary system within our jurisdiction. The location is 750 West Lake Road, Southold, SCTM# 90-2-1; the name of the owner is Sim Moy. Please advise the Board if you have the same application before you, and if not please notify this office when you receive an application. The Board of Trustees would like to discuss the review of this proposal with your department. Thank you very much. Very Truly Yours, aures F. King, Presid nt Board of Trustees JFK/hkc James F. King,President ��OF SOUryo Town Hall Jill M. Doherty,Vice-President 53095 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Peggy A. Dickerson Southold,New York 11971-0959 Dave Bergen John Holzapfel Telephone(631)765-1892 %,ly�,oU '� Fax(631) 765-6641 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 18, 2006 Mr. Bruce Anderson Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. P.O. Box 2003 Bridgehampton, New York 11932 Re: Letter regarding Sim Moy file West Lake Road, Southold SCTM# 90-2-01 Dear Mr. Anderson: I am in receipt of your letter of September 7, 2006 regarding the above referenced file. The copies that you have requested from the file are ready to be picked up. The memo that you refer to in your letter was an intra-agency communication that was not part of the file. The Moy file is available for review between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. in the Trustee Office. The minutes of the Trustee meetings are available on Laser fiche, which can be accessed from the computer in the Town Clerk's office and the computer in the Building Department. Copies of minutes are available at $0.25/copy. Please contact this office for any further information. Sincerely, � . Heather Cusack Environmental Technician James F. King, President ��OF SOUTy� Town Hall Jill M. Doherty,Vice-President 53095 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Peggy A. Dickerson Southold,New York 11971-0959 Dave Bergen G O John Holzapfel Telephone(631)765-1892 COUHty, Fax(631) 765-6641 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 7, 2006 Mr. John DiGiuseppe Suffolk County Department of Health Services Office of Wastewater Management 360 Yaphank Ave., Suite 2C Yaphank, New York 11980 Re: H.S. Reference No. : R10-05-0024 Cedar Beach Park, Lot 119 Dear Mr. DiGiuseppe: The Board of Trustees has concerns about an application for a proposed sanitary system within our jurisdiction. The location is 750 West Lake Road, Southold, SCTM# 90-2-1; the name of the owner is Sim Moy. The Board has received a copy of a Notice of Incomplete Application for the above referenced application before you on this parcel. Please contact the Board of Trustees regarding this proposed sanitary system. Thank you very much. Very Truly Yours, James F. Ki , President Board of Trustees JFK/hkc August 19,2006 James King Dave Bergen Peggy Dickerson Jill Doherty John Holzapsel Dear Members on the Board of Trustees,Town of Southold,NY: I received notification on August 14, 2006 of a public hearing,on August 23, 2006,referencing the Moy property, West Lake Rd.,Bayview,Town of Southold, SCTM # 1000-090-02-001,application to construct a 1,061 square toot single tardy dwelling, 506 square foot deck,with attendant sanitary system. Although 1 am the adjacent property owner and would be permitted to speak at the meeting, l am unable to attend as 1 will be out of town,and ask that this be read for the recorded minutes. I understand that this application is still outstanding because,prior to tonight's meeting,it had been presented to last year's board. That board had asked for and received a second review by Camp,Dresser and McKee of Woodbury,NY, a firm independent of Suffolk Environmental Consulting,Inc., representing the applicants. While CDM has reviewed the proposal and sent their findings and recommendations to the board members,addressing the groundwater flow and elevations, it appears that Suffolk Environmental Consulting, in responding to them, has concluded that this project is still safe and viable. I am concerned with the response from SEC,Inc.,to CDM's request for a calculation of flow contribution to West Lake from the Moy property being useful to determine the sanitary effluent impact on the lake. I agree that this would be a reasonable request for information on which to base a valid decision. However,the response is based on general assumptions and comparisons, stating that there are 11 dwellings with sanitary systems surrounding the lake, already discharging into it,and that only a portion of the proposed sanitary system will enter the lake only half the time, as a result of the tidal action and groundwater flow direction. (Perhaps,I should be happy to know it's not sixty percent of the time!) This argument diminishes the policy in force. In this instance, the"it's just one more'rationale could very well become the`one too many"result, emerging only after the fact. Suffolk County Department of Health Services Office of Wastewater 'Management bas also reviewed the Uroundwater plow Analysis and made comments W, consider during their process. I share the concern that the clay present in the core will prevent proper drainage on this site. I would like to know their final statement. As I mentioned in a letter to last year's board,the sanitary system, as illustrated on the survey,is not in compliance with surface water setbacks as stated in town code. It was also noted by CDM that prior approval from NYSDEC would otherwise need to be acquired. The revised property survey of the applicant's project that I received with the notification does not indicate a change with respect to this issue. Town Chapter 97 states a leaching pool setback of 100 feet, a septic tank setback at 75 feet. The town will still have to grant large variances, if it deems the water flow research acceptable. That same West Lake Association Inc. 2145 Little Peconic Bay Lane Southold NY. 11971 9/16/06 RE: Sim Moy Wetlands Permit Application SCTM#1000 090 02 001 West Lake Association Inc. wishes to thank the members of the, Southold Town Trustees for your forbearance, in reviewing this application. Our association represents 14 of 19 homeowners/property owners, who front on and who share the common use of West Lake with the Moy's. Some of us swim in it, some clam it, some fish it, some crab it, and a number of us boat from it. Mr. Moy's family enjoys all the aforementioned. We as waterfront residents of West Lake are concerned regarding the installation of any sanitary or other system that would, potentially have an adverse impact on the water quality of West Lake. It seems to us that locating a leaching field system closer than the code required 100' without any specified mitigation is setting a bad precedent. Also, as more of the details of the application were reviewed and made public, it has become apparent that, incorrect and inaccurate information has been submitted. Ie., the number of bedrooms, Soils data, and flow calculations. The one thing this application and subsequent reports do agree upon, is that the effluent will flow to the South West side of Lot 119, the tidal channel connecting West Lake to Peconic Bay. In light of the above we hope our concerns will be considered in your reaching a decision. Fere Peter Gunn (pies.) West Lake Association Inc. o�g�FFO(�coG ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE ti� y� Town Hall, 53095 Main Road TOWN CLERK x P.O. Box 1179 REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS Southold; New York 11971 145 MARRIAGE OFFICER WO Telephone ( 765-65-1 RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER y�Q! � Telephone (631) 765-1800 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER southoldtown.northfork.net OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC ACCESS TO RECORDS INSTRUCTIONS: Please complete Section I of this form and give to Town Clerk's Office (agency Freedom of Information Officer) . One copy will be returned to you in response to your request, or as an interim response. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SECTION 1. TO: yLQ.W 1 l-,L (Department or Officer, if known, that has the information you are requesting. ) RECORD YOU WISH TO INSPECT: (Describe the record sought. If possible, supply date, file title, tax map number, and any other pertinent information. ) VLtil��A (5�T�^ Ik- MO - 90 A - t) / Jy ,A- 'JO IOU- b0WV 1M jj�JCCUVOJUKJOA-O nk SW S0106,/ F� ooww W> i o. tJ (w?L,%s�� �t ,�r , ) tie 1w�� C.0 S Wt-u- wi n, j t121ti iv Nj �tS OF ALL, tikk�-TWJGs (M i?9-r rPU C Signature of Applican -kK l ta) iAj Printed Name: 0I(,1- L (� -! u'4 � IN Us Ste, Address:L<�Vf'F. et,)v. (AN-) . Z003 ; �t��er]rn�'v�N, �U'� i� �( � " Mailing Address (if different from above) : Telephone Number: O Date: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ [ ] APPROVED RECEIVED [ ] APPROVED WITH+ DELAY* , [ ] DENIED*;rr SEP 7 2006 Elizabeth A. Neville Date Freedom of Information Officer Southold Town Cier4 * If delayed or denied see reverse side for explanation. PECONIC ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNERS h CONSULTANTS P. O. Boz 672 Greenport, Nev cork 11944 Telephone (631)477-0030 Paz (631)477-0198 B MAM. peconicafcptaar=e.net Attn: Southold Board of Town Trustees Applicant: Sim H. Moy Comments from Peconic Associates representing the West Lake Association. 1. The survey should accurately depict the location and width of the"right of way" identified as West Lake Road(see attached sub division map. Some of the plot restrictions are included in the following language; "No dwelling shall be erected or maintained on said plot within forty feet of the Peconic Bay front or within twenty five feet of any other water front or within twenty five of any road front or within ten feet of any other boundary". The proposed structure does not comply with all of these restrictions... 2. As the owner of the above covenants and restriction is considered the West Lake Association, any departure from these C&R's would require permission from the owner, in this case the West Lake Association. The applicant has not done so, including the proposed use of the West Lake Drive"right of way" as driveway. 3. As the Ground Water Flow Analysis shows the ground water levels fluctuating with the changing tide levels and as the hydraulic gradient depictions do not include the expected ground water elevations in place within the raised ground level and as both the DEC and the Health Department will have significant input in the approval of the sanitary system, suggest that the Trustees, so as to make efficient use of their time, delay their review of this project until the above referenced agencies have done their review. qlerely on E Wiggin Pres LAND OWNERS ABSTRACT CORP. 501 S.Broadway Hicksville,NY 11801 (516)822-1234 (516)822-1409—fax October 12,2005 BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF SOU HOLD PO Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 IRE: Ownership of Streets in and around the inlet Southold,NY Dear Trustees: On behalf of Peter Gunn,President of the West Lake Association and myself as well as most members,we would like this information to be considered on the variance on the above captioned property. Before the developer went into foreclosure,he sold off pieces of land which the description describes the property to front on the street not to the middle line of the street. This shows the developers intent to leave the streets open. (See Copy of deed enclosed) There was a case Law David H.Black vs.Village of Green Island which when the developer was deeding out monuments which described property to streets—not to the center line of streets- it was found that the streets were to stay open. As to the ownership of streets the Covenants and Restrictions(enclosed)state the Association owns any common areas. The street should be considered a common area. The Association at that time was named CEDAR BEACH PARK COMMUNITY ASSOCATION. West Lake Assocation was formed to maintain our side of the Development as Cedar Beach Park Community Association was not maintaining properly. The Association collects a yearly dues from maintaining all streets. The Covenants and Restrictions state that the street should be 33 feet wide. This again shows the ownership and intent to keep street open. If certain streets are taken then we would be denied access over certain streets to the inlet,bay and beach. We were guaranteed ingress and egress over all streets. This would cut us off of our right to walk down any street and use the inlet,bay or beach. Again C&R's were given to guarantee our right to the inlet,bay and beach and over all roads. There is also a document that I believe the town of Southold adopted part of It's the New York State Coastal Management Program which Southold took into consideration when protecting their waterfronts and access to the water. In Chapter 13 Section 600.5 regarding public access policy where the Town are in encouraged to protect public access. In this case,public access would be the owners of West Lake Association. Anyone looking to take street should be getting permission from the Association as we own the Streets not the Town. We all hope you take this information and make the proper decision. MARITIME & ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS Peconic Associates,Representing West Lake Association August 22,2006 Southold Town Board of Trustees P.O.Box 1179 AUG 2 2 Southold,NY 11971 Re: Moy Application West Lake Road SCTM# 1000 090 02 001 The following review comments are in reference to the report conducted by CDM, entitled: Review of Ground Water Flow Analysis for Moy Property, SCDHS: Ground Water Flow Analysis, Sim Moy and responses by Suffolk Environmental Consulting Inc. L Both the CDM report and the Suffolk County Department of Health Services sited very specific concerns that we feel were not all specifically addressed by Suffolk Environmental Consulting. These include the following: a. The type of soil and its permeability. As the site obviously contains fill material one cannot assume that the site soil is Haven Loam. As them are apparently no record of either permeability or percolation tests,how can sanitary flows be determined? b. Sanitary effluent effect on West Lake. How can it be ASSUMED that•there will be no impact on the water quality of West lake without mass balance estimates and flow contribution calculations as suggested by CDM. c. Amount of fill required. Our calculations for required fill would go from the original 169 cubic yards to 240 cubic yards or a 60%increase. This should not be considered a"minor change". 2. In addition to the above concerns,apparently neither CDM nor SCHDS,has for the recorded replied to the responses submitted Suffolk Environmental. Urge that the Town Trustees take no approval action until this has been done. Respectfully submitted nic Associate's Merlon . Wiggin President PO BOX 672 • GREENPORT, NY 11944 • TEL: 631-477-0030 • FAX: 631-477-0198 E-MAIL: peconica@optonline.net West Lake Association 2145 Little Pecouic Bay Lane Southold,N.Y. 11971 Southold Board of Town Trustees, PO Box 1179 Southold, 11971 RE:Moy Property West Lake Road Bayview,Town of Southold SCTM# 1000-090-001 Dear Sirs/Madams, This letter is to serve as a reminder;that at the August 2005 Trustees public hearing on the above referenced property,West Lake Association presented to you,a signed petition of Objection.A copy is hereto attached.In our letter we pointed out that the submitted survey in this application indicated the adjacent homeowner to be St.John's Episcopal Church.West Lake Assoc.Inc took the liberty to research, the tax office of Southold only to find that there was no such entity in the town and further that the adjacent lots 117-118 have always been in the name of Mr.Dia Moy,the applicants husband.West Lake Association feels that the adjacent property misidentification is deliberately misleading and sufficient cause in itself to deny this application.Further we agree with the findings of the Town Advisory Council which recommended disapproval.We strongly suggest your own verification,and remediation. /*/um4 (pres.West Lake Association) CC.Mr Danial Mooney Esq. 11700 Main Rd. Mattituck N.Y. pUG 2 2 2006 West Lake Association Inc. 2145 Little Peconic Bay Lane Southold,N.Y. August 12,2005 Soalbold Board of Tam Trades Tam MI,53095 Raub 25 Soulbdd N.Y. Den ShaMednos WeCollectively hoplereYou b dmWelandaPermit Application ofSim Moytoandrud a new Single Family dwepbg an the oontaobrming watbnds int bawd at 750 Wag Late rd.Saidwid.SCTM 190-2-1 Our Community bas several co0 muse which are w every manna,oomM t whh de Bands maadab for evaluating a project toed an doDavaloped Corot Policy a well on RiwNdmd Cow policy. We Fed dmn*dat db sadv dopeC irnplr t son aooferming lat db an a peoimda of had wldi man areorodisg Rile site and de cenpools me*%U 45 fad efsasitive wdlands.This Mance ALONRvWdmPbWS4,5d6 ofWeNaturalCowPalleyomidatoprdattimprove; -Wwrveft, -Nmrd serourca -Tors of Soadmld eaoaysbwa Frdwom Gane b 80gWWM Bad b sppmve mi a project vlobtm dl de rases why Wdaad Coda we drafted is de&at plant. We also world Mm to point out slat d s mtaisy is net a situation wbom hrdaby could be argued. The adjacat tat in n a by de PaMbear's l udasd and apt SL lobe's Bpboopd Church (aa raprmated on*e pr4octamview amg.)Tbae ift have baa to*e moa hands for approximately 40 yam wMamt my prior attempt todevdop thin 10L Or ergaa®tbn l m baa advbed dad dia pmjod bm oho robed omegb eoscom wit de Swadiom Tam Advisory Caroli dud day moved to spannedAmonewal oftb wegande permit,wining some adds iorl spares an Match 15,2005: —Thseosoaa uric seisieg tine septk as ' and itsprodmity b die wNa-aeWa —Caplin wih drainage Como wid a bd W ams a"oferustmg wumd bview Gram dame,segdvepdmtideducation,westo *updaBondoFTasmTMAMbadas d ywouldin*airawneommuftAmidispdMoofaraWedmdsPermit i PECONIC ASSOCIATES, INC. ENV MOMOMM . P7AMMRS ii. CONSULTANTS P. O. Zion 672 Gzvenpart, Now r02* IZ944 Telephone (631)477-0030 Paz (631)477-0198 8-RAIL: peoan3cap0Pton1in0.aet December 21, 2005 Southold Town Trustees P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY SUBJECT: Application of Sim H. Moy West Lake Road; Southold, New York 1000-090-02-01 The West Lake representative has been advised that the applicant claims ownership of the right-of—way in front of the applicant's property referenced above. The West Lake Association strongly disagrees with this position and claims ownership in accordance with the Suffolk County Tax Map(see attached). So as not to waste the Trustees time suggest this application be tabled until submitted to a mutually agreed to Title company for a determination of the right-of- way ownership. Sincerely PECONIC ASSOCIATES r on iggin, Ph • .E. President Cc: West Lake Association August 19, 2006 James King Dave Bergen Peggy Dickerson Jill Doherty AUG 2 3 John Holzapsel 2006 Dear Members on the Board of Trustees, Town of Southold, NY'c I received notification on August 14, 2006 of a public hearing, on August 23, 2006, referencing the Moy property, West Lake Rd., Bayview, Town of Southold, SCTM # 1000-090-02-001, application to construct a 1,061 square foot single family dwelling, 506 square foot deck, with attendant sanitary system. Although I am the adjacent property owner and would be permitted to speak at the meeting, I am unable to attend as I will be out of town, and ask that this be read for the recorded minutes. I understand that this application is still outstanding because, prior to tonight's meeting, it had been presented to last year's board. That board had asked for and received a second review by Camp, Dresser and McKee of Woodbury, NY, a firm independent of Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc.,representing the applicants. While CDM has reviewed the proposal and sent their findings and recommendations to the board members, addressing the groundwater flow and elevations, it appears that Suffolk Environmental Consulting, in responding to them, has concluded that this project is still safe and viable. I am concerned with the response from SEC, Inc., to CDM's request for a calculation of flow contribution to West Lake from the Moy property being useful to determine the sanitary effluent impact on the lake. I agree that this would be a reasonable request for information on which to base a valid decision. However, the response is based on general assumptions and comparisons, stating that there are 11 dwellings with sanitary systems surrounding the lake, already discharging into it, and that only a portion of the proposed sanitary system will enter the lake only half the time, as a result of the tidal action and groundwater flow direction. (Perhaps, I should be happy to know it's not sixty percent of the time!) This argument diminishes the policy in force. In this instance, the"it's just one more"rationale could very well become the "one too many" result, emerging only after the fact. Suffolk County Department of Health Services Office of Wastewater Management has also reviewed the Groundwater Flow Analysis and made comments to consider during their process. I share the concern that the clay present in the core will prevent proper drainage on this site. I would like to know their final statement. As I mentioned in a letter to last year's board, the sanitary system, as illustrated on the survey, is not in compliance with surface water setbacks as stated in town code. It was also noted by CDM that prior approval from NYSDEC would otherwise need to be acquired. The revised property survey of the applicant's project that I received with the notification does not indicate a change with respect to this issue. Town Chapter 97 states a leaching pool setback of 100 feet, a septic tank setback at 75 feet. The town will still have to grant large variances, if it deems the water flow research acceptable. That same code states that the residence setback is 100 feet from the wetland boundary. It is not met in either case of the West Lake inlet or Little Peconic Bay bulkheads, resulting in yet another large variance. (Research into the past board history involving construction on West Lake property adjacent to the applicants, indicates the board had felt a 7 feet variance for a structure wall would be too critical for the ecosystem.) Also, the proposed driveway does not meet the 50 feet setback requirement. In relation to this issue, the proposed driveway does not appear to be on the surveyed property. It is beyond this project's property boundary, in the Cedar Beach Park roadway named West Lake Drive, leading to the inlet bulkhead. If the town approves the project, do the applicants acquire this by default due to the location of the proposed driveway on drawings? Does a code exist permitting this? I realize adjacent properties notification of the applicant's proposal to the town board meeting agenda must be made at least 7 days in advance. I can't help but feel that waiting until then is a tactical move by the notifying party to limit my opportunity for proper research and successful rebuttal outcomes on my part, as appreciative as I am of the time to express my views. From the dates on correspondence relating to this application, it appears all other parties/firms involved have had ample time to respond to each new development. I would also welcome the chance to be thorough. In addition, I feel that placing this application on the agenda of a summer meeting is highly advantageous to the applicant, being that many people are unable to attend due to vacation time, possibly preventing full expression of opinions on the subject matter. Current policy of the Town of Southold, in place to protect,preserve, maintain and hopefully improve the condition of the wetlands, and for guidance in deeming acceptable projects, indicates this application fails to conform to several provisions as noted above. I look to the board to be staunch in the execution of the policy currently in existence. Thank you for allowing time to express these concerns. Sincerely, Sarah Sowinski Herman 825 West Lake Drive (Road) Southold, NY 24 Bancroft Road Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 (845) 505-0797 Southold Town Board of Trustees West hake Association Inc Re:Moy, SCTM3 1000-090-0�-001 2145 little Peconic Bay Lane Analysis of S.E.C, Inc. Responses to CAN rg�Sevp�q mments Southold,N.Y. 11971 It would seem to West Lake Association Inc. that"Suffolk Environmental Consulting" has stated before and is saying again in a very exaggerated, convoluted, and distorted way that Water will seek its own level, Water runs down hill, and in the case at hand,the addition of this waste effluent,will only add pollutant to, West Lake Pond 12 hrs.a day and Peconic Bay for the remainingl2hrs. This would be coincident with the tide. All the above mentioned should be accepted universal truths. This seems to be where the truth stops. The responses of Suffolk Environmental in answer to the CDM report is inconsistent false and misleading. There are a total of 15 dwellings directly surrounding West Lake, not"11 as stated", and then the S.E.C, Inc. response states that"all these 11 systems are discharging into West Lake". They go on to say, "most of these dwellings have existed for many years and don't meet current code", i.e. separation distance to the wetlands of 100'.None of this is true. Of the 15 homes,4 may not meet current code and 1 of these 4 is MR. Moy's home lot# 117-118.No surrounding home is, "Discharging To West Lake". The response goes on to say"many lots have turf extending to the wet lands boundary", again 4 do and 11 do not. Mr. Moy's lot combined with this proposed lot 119 constitute, at a minimum 400 ft. of turf extending to the wetlands boundary, as it already does. This response states, "The mass balance estimates and flow calculations are not warranted". What Suffolk Environmental Consulting is saying to this board and the public is"The Solution to Pollution Is Dilution", and from West Lake Homeowners Association perspective,that is not acceptable. S.E.C, Inc. says that even with all these nonconforming systems the health and water quality of West Lake, as compared to other surface waters in the town, is good. Without performing a detailed water quality and sediment analysis, one cant be sure that pollutant load from this system will not in fact t be"the straw that breaks the camels back"...also the town cannot change the past but new adopted requirements of separation, etc., are there to protect future health of all bodies of water in the area and should be strictly enforced by state, county and town. Another response that doesn't ring true is that lot 119 permeability calculations are based on the soil survey of Suffolk County. An overlay review of the Cedar Beach Park subdivision map dated Sept 15 1926, drawn by Otto W.Van Tuyl,clearly shows that the entire area of ground,North of and bordering on the proposed septic field structures, is filled in material. It can not be assumed,that this area, which gets considerably larger and infringes deeper into lot 119 going west,to be "Haven Loam". Enclosed is a copy of the original subdivision map so you can make your own assessment. Last but by no means least please refer to the first response that based on a MHW Ground water elevation measurement of 2.44' Finished grade should be raised from 7.5' to 8.44'above mean sea level. "This will cause only a minor change in the amount of fill required". The area in question is approximately 50'x40'=80cu yards/l ft rise in elevation. The old pian indicates a required 169 cubic yards for a 3'rise in elevation to top of wall. We submit that this would conservatively require 240 cubic yards. Subtracting 40 yards of volume for 7cesspools and 1 septic tank structure and adding the additional rise of 1' would bring the total fill required to 280 cubic yards. "This minor change", raises the fill requirement 60%above the original calculation of Suffolk Environmental Consulting Inc. es ly, West eter G�(pres.) Southold Town Board of TrusteesAUG 2 3 2006 West Lake Association Inc Re:Moy, SCTM3 1000-090-02-001 2145 little Peconic Bay Lane Analysis of S.E.C, Inc. Responses to CDM review/comments Southold,N.Y. 11971 It would seem to West Lake Association Inc.that"Suffolk Environmental Consulting"has stated before and is saying again in a very exaggerated, convoluted, and distorted way that Water will seek its own level, Water runs down hill, and in the case at hand,the addition of this waste effluent,will only add pollutant to, West Lake Pond 12 hrs.a day and Peconic Bay for the remainingl2hrs. This would be coincident with the tide. All the above mentioned should be accepted universal truths. This seems to be where the truth stops. The responses of Suffolk Environmental in answer to the CDM report is inconsistent false and misleading. There are a total of 15 dwellings directly surrounding West Lake, not"11 as stated", and then the S.E.C, Inc. response states that"all these 11 systems are discharging into West Lake". They go on to say, "most of these dwellings have existed for many years and don't meet current code", i.e. separation distance to the wetlands of 100'. None of this is true. Of the 15 homes,4 may not meet current code and I of these 4 is MR. Moy's home lot# 117-118.No surrounding home is, "Discharging To West Lake". The response goes on to say"many lots have turf extending to the wet lands boundary", again 4 do and 11 do not. Mr. Moy's lot combined with this proposed lot 119 constitute, at a minimum 400 ft. of turf extending to the wetlands boundary, as it already does. This response states, "The mass balance estimates and flow calculations are not warranted". What Suffolk Environmental Consulting is saying to this board and the public is"The Solution to Pollution Is Dilution", and from West Lake Homeowners Association perspective,that is not acceptable. S.E.C, Inc. says that even with all these nonconforming systems the health and water quality of West Lake, as compared to other surface waters in the town,is good. Without performing a detailed water quality and sediment analysis, one cant be sure that pollutant load from this system will not in fact t be"the straw that breaks the camels back"...also the town cannot change the past but new adopted requirements of separation,etc., are there to protect future health of all bodies of water in the area and should be strictly enforced by state, county and town. Another response that doesn't ring true is that lot 119 permeability calculations are based on the soil survey of Suffolk County. An overlay review of the Cedar Beach Park subdivision map dated Sept 15 1926, drawn by Otto W.Van Tuyl, clearly shows that the entire area of ground,North of and bordering on the proposed septic field structures, is filled in material. It can not be assumed, that this area,which gets considerably larger and infringes deeper into lot 119 going west,to be"Haven Loam". Enclosed is a copy of the original subdivision map so you can make your own assessment. Last but by no means least please refer to the first response that based on a MHW Ground water elevation measurement of 2.44' Finished grade should be raised from 7.5' to 8.44'above mean sea level. "This will cause only a minor change in the amount of fill required". The area in question is approximately 50'x40'= 80cu yards/lft rise in elevation. The old plan indicates a required 169 cubic yards for a 3'rise in elevation to top of wall. We submit that this would conservatively require 240 cubic yards. Subtracting 40 yards of volume for 7cesspools and 1 septic tank structure and adding the additional rise of I' would bring the total fill required to 280 cubic yards. "This minor change", raises the fill requirement 60%above the original calculation of Suffolk. Environmental Consulting Inc. Oeter %t2 ly,West (p es.) r raMes� in /David Bergen / Peggy Dickerson /Jill Doherty/John Holzapsel Saithmd Tae+nDear Mem ers of the Board of The Board of Trustees,Town of Southold,NY �: der; af?rasters We were present at the Trustee's meeting on Wednesday,August 23,2006,as members of the West Lake Association and in opposition to Dai / Sim Moy's application for a new house.We were extremely upset and offended by some of Mr. Moy's statements. He accused us of not wanting his new house because it would affect our view. This is absurd,we're keenly aware that not wanting something has absolutely nothing to do with what can and should legally be done, e.g. the three lots across from our home on Midway Drive. We obviously don't want them built on but had no difficulty accepting the board's decision once the survey had been done. Mr.Moy implied that we were involved in some vandalism at his home— an incident concerning a broken window and a dead fish.This is categorically untrue—we were unaware of this unpleasantness until Mr. Moy spoke of it.We are not vandals. Mr.Moy accused us, and all of you,of being racist,an accusation that is bizarre beyond description: totally unfounded,patently untrue and with zero historical reference. Mr. Moy's tirade certainly did nothing to change our minds about his cesspool,. which remains but 48%in concurrence with Town code. We would not look forward to "incidental percentages" of effluence seeping into the lake or bay depending on the tide. Not did Mr-Anderson's fanciful leap into a smoke screen of math,physics and chemistry alter our thinking. We urge you to reject Mr. Moy's application. Thank you for reading this. Jerry&Tippy Case 505 W. Cedar Pt Drive August 24,2006 cc: Dai Moy Ck�,+Peter Gunn Merlon Wiggin LAND OWNERS ABSTRACT CORP. 501 S. Broadway Hicksville, NY 11801 (516)822-1234 (516)822-1409—fax October 12,2005 EE 71 771 BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF SOUTHOLD 'Po Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 RE: Ownership of Streets in and arouSouthold,NY Dear Trustees: On behalf of Peter Gunn,President of the West Lake Association and myself as well as most members,we would like this information to be considered on the variance on the above captioned property. Before the developer went into foreclosure,he sold off pieces of land which the description describes the property to front on the street not to the middle line of the street. This shows the developers intent to leave the streets open. (See Copy of deed enclosed) There was a case Law David H.Black vs.Village of Green Island which when the developer was deeding out monuments which described property to streets—not to the center line of streets-it was found that the streets were to stay open. As to the ownership of streets the Covenants and Restrictions(enclosed)state the Association owns any common areas. The street should be considered a common area. The Association at that time was named CEDAR BEACH PARK COMMUNITY ASSOCATION. West Lake Assocation was formed to maintain our side of the Development as Cedar Beach Park Community Association was not maintaining properly. The Association collects a yearly dues from maintaining all streets. The Covenants and Restrictions state that the street should be 33 feet wide. This again shows the ownership and intent to keep street open. If certain streets are taken then we would be denied access over certain streets to the inlet,bay and beach. We were guaranteed ingress and egress over all streets. This would cut us off of our right to walk down any street and use the inlet,bay or beach. Again C&R's were given to guarantee our right to the inlet,bay and beach and over all roads. There is also a document that I believe the town of Southold adopted part of. It's the New York State Coastal Management Program which Southold took into consideration when protecting their waterfronts and access to the water. In Chapter 13 Section 600.5 regarding public access policy where the Town are in encouraged to protect public access. In this case,public access would be the owners of West Lake Association. Anyone looking to take street should be getting permission from the Association as we own the Streets not the Town. We all hope you take this information and make the proper decision. This letter is given for informational purposes only. ,Land Owners Abstract Corp has no liability to any information supplied or the outcome of the case. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Y u, nni . Quinn. September 20, 2005 Albert J. Krupski James King ! � I Artie Foster Ken Poliwoda c a Peggy A. Dickerson ` L Dear Members of the Town of Southold,Board of Taut es. I attended the town board meeting of 8/24/05 when you were presented with further information about a requested Wetland Permit application from Sim Moy, 750 West Lake Road(a.k.a. Drive), SCTM 90-2-1, item#18 on the Wetland Permits agenda from that evening. Bruce Anderson of Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc.,made a presentation on the most sensitive issue,the septic system, on behalf of Mrs. Moy, in order for the board's consideration to issue a variance to current code. Their project for an additional 1061 square foot house, 506 square foot deck with septic system on a small parcel adjacent to their current home, does not meet the variety of setbacks in existence for tidal wetlands. The testing to determine water flow after a breach in the system has shown the movement to take 18.75 hours for vertical flow to groundwater and 3.75 days for horizontal flow to move south(to the Peconic Bay)and southwest(towards the inlet). These are results. On what basis are they acceptable? It was stated that there would be no impact on the creek/lake just 42 feet(one of the unmet 100 foot setbacks)to the north because water would flow in the opposite directions. Yet the creek/take would be impacted as the tidal water flows from the bay to the inlet into the creek/lake's ecosystem, one that counts the obvious birds and fish among the wildlife that does exist on the peninsula and creek/lake, contrary to statements referencing wildlife at the last meeting. When discussing the impact of this application, and the possible pollution if there was a breach in the septic system, a comment was made that it is just one house amidst an ecosystem that could be(and is)polluted by any of the thousands of homes between Cedar Beach and the North Road. Each of those homes is"just one house". If that position is brought to bear weight in the decision process,policy can be easily ignored, resulting in a situation tantamount to the effect of the policy in force. Construction permitted because testing was performed at the next level, weakens policy creating conditions that were supposed to be prevented. If the septic research is deemed acceptable by the board,there are two other setbacks on the survey submitted with the application, which are not being met. The residence is approximately 30 feet from the bay and inlet bulkheads(100 feet policy setback)and driveway approximately 25 feet from the north edge (50 feet setback policy). These appear to be rather large variances. Research into the history of past boards involving construction on this same creek/lake, for lots in the vicinity of this application, will show the board felt a 7 feet variance for a structure wall would be too critical for the ecosystem. Reviewing current policy publication to protect and preserve the wetlands, and for guidance in deeming acceptable projects,this application fails to conform to any of the three policy discrepancies. I look to the board to be staunch in the execution of the policy currently in existence. Sincerely, zo��4 4�� 4-'C� Sarah 9owinski Herman 825 West Lake Drive(Rd) Southold,NY 24 Bancroft Rd. Poughkeepsie,NY 12601 (845) 505-0797 Aerial Addendum to the DANERI I APPLICATION ION MAN�. 1 Sto Frame - Struc sere to be } j Removed 000 .. : 100 ,. Proposed Dwelling Wetland Setbacks Existing Dwelling: 25.6' Proposed Dwelling: w/ porch: 45.8' Lot 13: 39' Lot 12.4: 38' Lot 35: 34' Lot 19: 30' Lot 16: 37' Lot 17.2: 39' Average: 36.17' ' 1 1 1 1 • : i 1 / 1 so f WEST LAKE . r oA i v � , 1 1 11 • �,- . • ,-: .� p �. '!, ,; � ,, 5 a. s� �� s 4� N F C 5, = 4q- .,"SO y�x ,�,,�� r }1{-� + ♦� .,�•, r` t' �' o 'h t a�`-x I^ �i at: � ..5[ `irY ,'t ^F $ �'(• '+.•p��,� ��n(. y4M psi J \y ,t 3ax�Y iIt-a d•�l .h = Merck-F 2005 Field Insp n lay1 13 i 13 2:12PM ldweh-I.3, 2005 Field Insp n Il 9 1 til.fir. e V�Mvw 13 2:13PM MOY Property Situate: s/s West Lake Road; Bayview; Town of Southold, NY SUM #: 1000 - 090 - 02 - 001 (Photo taken on January 20, 2005) DWELLING/DECK / NITARY,SVUEM.. Photo indicating the staked locations of the proposed deck and dwelling, as well as the proposed sanitary system. Photo taken from the northeastern corner of subject property, facing southwest, overlooking Little Peconic Bay. MOY Property Situate: s/s West Lake Road; Bayview; Town of Southold, NY SCTM #: 1000 — 090 — 02 — 001 (Photo taken on January 20, 2005) DWELLING DECK Photo indicating the staked locations of the proposed deck and dwelling. Photo taken from the northwestern corner of subject property, facing southeast, overlooking Little Peconic Bay. MOY Property Situate: s/s West Lake Road; Bayview; Town of Southold, NY SCTM #: 1000 - 090 - 02 - 001 (Photo taken on January 20, 2005) Photo indicating the staked locations of the proposed deck. Photo taken from the northwestern corner of subject property, facing southwest, along the existing timber bulkhead, overlooking Little Peconic Bay. MOY Property Situate: s/s West Lake Road; Bayview; Town of Southold, NY SUM #: 1000 - 090 - 02 - 001 (Photo taken on January 20, 2005) AA M1_,Y_d , \Mol DWELLING �---- DECK sr: S" Photo indicating the staked locations of the proposed deck and dwelling. Photo taken from the southwestern corner of subject property, facing southeast, along the existing timber bulkhead, along the shoreline of Little Peconic Bay. MOY Property Situate: s/s West Lake Road; Bayview; Town of Southold, NY SCTM #: 1000 - 090 - 02 - 001 (Photo taken on January 20, 2005) maim W- DWELLING Photo indicating the staked locations of the proposed deck and dwelling. Photo taken from the southwestern corner of subject property, facing northeast, facing toward West Lake Drive. MOY Property Situate: s/s West Lake Road; Bayview; Town of Southold, NY SCTM #: 1000 - 090 - 02 - 001 (Photo taken on January 20, 2005) Photo indicating the existing bulkhead and the approximate location of the average high water mark. Photo taken from the southwestern corner of subject property, facing southeast, along the shoreline of Little Peconic Bay. MOY Property Situate: s/s West Lake Road; Bayview; Town of Southold, NY SCTM #: 1000 — 090 — 02 —001 MAPQV[Sr i; N BayMeW Rd 5 Oi=�00On y O ry Proposed Construction o Access Route u � N m 4 WdWW pkWY Ce.ADl Beath Rd Lasq bland 4 Rd • ............................... ........ .. 1 DY p •••. Orchard In c c �® p Vtr W; Privafr 7ero. 2• S` m j o O _ k C7 cedar 0 & �c m � � oopc AeaeA a. coaD{y. m......: -. . .. .. .....-.. . -- 4 :. i cedar Pop,Rd E 200 MapQuest ;4i 20W NA SITE �R CEDO I, Uh PQIrr rxM>WMae » t e v s » pESf a » � n a a x s s Vent. (;ry RESPONSE TO THE CDM REPORT CONCERNING THE MOY PROPERTY Prepared by Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. Date: ********* This document is in response to the Camp Dresser & McKee report dated'')ALIS- 2 3 2006 Z 13"', 2006 analyzing the Groundwater Flow Analysis for the Moy Property prepared by this Firm daatr,r, d Tc,,,e ._..__d of Trustees Comment.• "From the data/fisted in Tables 1 and 2, the maximum measured groundwater elevation at Well#5 in 2.59 feet above mean sea level(as measured 6/28/2005). Using this value as the maximum water table elevation, the sanitary system design (using elevations shown on the surve),)needs to be revised." Response. The Suffolk County Sanitary Code says the following: "In areas subject to tidal action, groundwater elevations shall be measured at mean high tide and be so noted on plans . Therefore, the maximum measured groundwater elevation shall not be used in design of the proposed sanitary system. The mean high tide groundwater elevation measurement of 2.44' shall instead be used. This will indeed necessitate a change in the sanitary system design. To maintain the minimum separation of 6' between the tap of the leaching ring cover and finished grade, said finished grade will have to be raised to 8.44' (from 7.5� above mean sea level. This will cause only a minor change in the amount of fill required. The resubmitted plans reflect this change. Comment. "In addition, since the area is under tidal influence, groundwater elevations measured at high tide are required to be used in the design." Response. See above response. Comment., "Finally, it should be noted that the water table in very shallow groundwater systems such as the system on the North Fork, is quite sensitive to changes in precipitation...... "High seasonal groundwater"refers to the maximum water level measured during a wet season." Response: In order to address this comment, the groundwater elevation was re-measured for all wells at 6:18PM (high tide) on May 22rd, 2006 after nearly 5 consecutive days of rain. Those measurements are as follows: Well #1: 1.20' L Well #2: 1.86' � C4 Well #3: 2.18' Well #4: 1.08' Well #5: 2.12' As can be seen, the groundwater elevations measured in May of 2006 after an - exceptionally rainy period are lower than those measured in June of 2005. In addition, it is commonly understood that groundwater located near surface S waters is less sensitive to changes in precipitation. Therefore, redesigning the proposed sanitary system assuming a mean high tide of 2.44' is more than adequate. J Comment.• "The separation distance between the proposed sanitary system L.,and the surrounding surface waters does not appear to be within those specified by 10 NYCRR Part 75-A or Suf1`olk County Standards. Unless prior approval has Q been issued by the NYSDEC for these reduced separation distances, septic tanks S P must be at least SD feet from surface waters and leaching pools must be 100 feet from surface waters" R EC ro pe g . th of er on- i e r I d r the u ea r" for ar t etl ar no of s par J Comment., "Our review confirmed that, based upon available data, groundwater flow direction is to the west-southwest, and using the measured water levels, sanitary effluent will discharge to the inlet of West Lake and Little n Peconic Bay.....A calculation of flow contribution to the lake from the Moy property would be useful to determine any impact on the lake." _ 3 ID S c 1D L-t� C, S l S Response. Please refer to the following current aerial photograph of the Moy property and the surrounding area: off s J MOOD S'fiG3 9 As can be seen, there are 11 dwellings directly surrounding West Lake, and therefore there are 11 sanitary systems discharging into West Lake. Most of these dwellings have existed for many years and therefore contain sanitary systems that are not up to current code. In addition, many of these lots contain turf that extends all the way to the wetland boundary (allowing lawn treatments to run off into West Lake). Despite these conditions, West Lake currently exists in a state of relative good health compared to some of the other surface waters of Southold Town (e.g. the main branch of Jockey Creek). This is due to the tidal flushing that occurs as a result of the inlet from Little Peconic Bay. It is our contention that the effluent from one properly designed and installed sanitary system will have little to no effect on the existing nutrient balance of West Lake. This contention is further supported in that only a portion of the effluent leaving f the proposed sanitary system will enter West Lake only half the time as a result of tidal action and groundwater flow direction. Therefore, mass balance estimates and flow contribution calculations are not warranted. Comment, "The design shown on the drawings shows a seasonal high groundwater table elevation of 1.5 feet mean sea level. This level is not the maximum water level measured at Well#5. The maximum water level measured at Well#5 should be used for design oft4e sanitary system, although the true seasonal maximum is likely higher that the summer 2005 levels that were recorded." Response: As previously slated, Suffoik County Sanitary Code dictates that groundwater elevation be measured at the mean high tide, not the season maximum. In addition, it has been shown that the groundwater elevation actually decreased after a period of increased precipitation. Therefore, a redesign of the sanitary system using a groundwater elevation of 2.44' (mean high tide) is more than sufficient. Comment: "Since water levels were recorded in the summer of 2005, during below average precipitation conditions, they are not likely to reflect the high seasonal water levels.....Summer 2005 water levels are likely lo"r than the seasonal high water table elevation and the sanitary system may flood during wet periods„ Response; As previously stated, Suffolk County Sanitary Code dictates that groundwater elevation be measured at the mean high tide, not the season maximum. In addition, it has been shown that the groundwater elevation actually decreased after a period of increased precipitation. Therefore, a redesign of the sanitary system using a groundwater elevation of 2.44' (mean high tide) is more than sufficient. Comment, "Well screen intervals(either depth or elevations) would be useful." Response; There are no well screens installed at subject parcel. However, please find attached herewith the five test well logs prepared by McDonald Geoscience indicating the depths of the individual wells. Comment: "The time of measurement would be useful so that estimated We stage can be compared to the measurements: Direction offlow should be determined for each independent set of data, as opposed to an overall average, although the results do not differ significantly firm those shown on Figure 6." Response: The measurements were taken at high, mid, and low tides and were stated as such. The date and tide stage can be cross referenced to ascertain time of day if need be. Direction of flow was determined for each independent set of data, and as stated by the CDM report, did not differ significantly from the direction of flow calculated from the overall average. The findings were presented as such to be less confusing and provide a better overall picture of situate groundwater dynamics. ment, "Tables 2, 4 and 6 should indicate depth to groundwater(inches m top9°casing)." Response: Depth to groundwater can be found easily by subtracting the stated groundwater elevation from the individual well elevations. An explanation of this procedure was included in the Methods and Materials section. Comment: "In Section IV, page 11, the text mentions that the water table is 5 feet below the sun�rce at Well#5. Groundwater elevations mfom the test pits prior to well installation should not be used for design. Usinx3 the groundwater levels measured in Well#5, the maximum measured water level is 2.59 feet above means sea level, which corresponds to approximately 3.74 feet below the surface(bye approximate distance to die top of the well casing from the ground surface is 1'8, as measured during the site visit)." Response: As previously stated, Suffolk County Sanitary Code dictates that groundwater elevation be measured at the mean high tide, not the season maximum. Again, the sanitary system design and fill requirements will be reworked assuming the mean groundwater elevation of 2.44. Comment: "In Section IV, page 11, although there is mention of Haven Loam having a permeability of 1.315 in/hr, dere is no mention of percolation test, which is required under both the Suffolk County Standards and 10 NYCRR Part 75-A. This may have been dismissed in this case, however, given the sandy soils in the area." Response: The presence of Haven Loam and its permeability were ascertained using the Soil Survey of Suffolk County. This resource has been utilized countless times in application processes with the Suffolk County Department of Health Services and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. Both of these agencies accept the data contained in said resource. A permeability test would therefore be unnecessarily redundant. Comment: "Suction IV,,cage 12—Me Dupuit equabon—q is flow per unit width (not area)and Kis the hydraulic conductivity. Itis not dear how the groundwater velodty of37.826111day was calculated......Also note that density variations bebs een fresh and salt-water have not been accounted for and calculating groundwater flow by Dupuit assumptions alone is an approximation (need Dupuit—Ghyben —Herzberg relationships to account for density differences" Response; The CDM report was correct in pointing out that q is in fact discharge per unit width and not per unit area. However, this was merely a typo. "q"was calculated per unit width. In addition, the Dupuit equation was applied in this case for its temporal output so as to provide an estimate travel time for the processed effluent from the leaching rings to surface waters. It is commonly accepted that the Dupuit-Forcheimer equation is used to produce only an approximation of groundwater flow rate. However, for thin aquifers with low slopes, the inaccuracies are negligible. The CDM report states that the reported K value for the aquifer is an order of magnitude higher than what is typically used for Long Island sediments. The K value was obtained from the Soil Survey of Suffolk County, an accepted resource for soil data. However, if a K value that is an order of magnitude lower than reported is used in the equation, simple algebra dictates that the rate of groundwater flow would be less than reported. This fact, because of increased time allowed for dilution of the processed effluent, would further validate our contention that the proposed sanitary system will have no adve effects on the situate surface waters. �i The CDM report states that the calculated groundwater ow is inaccurate. The report then estimates groundwater flow by applying a anisotropy ratio of 100:1 to the reported permeability rate of 2.6 ft/day, yieldi a flow of 260 ft/day. This 7 times the rate calculated in the Groundwater ow Analysis In other words, the CDM report multiplied a rate of vertical through i���a l by 100 to yield the horizontal flow through sato soil I ' r is id convention. I is conv7?ir account the slope of the aquife It is our con a flow in the Groundwater S' ew Aflalq is is ccurate than mated flow rate in the CDM report. q, Finally, the density differences between fresh and salt water were not accounted for as this information was well outside the scope of this report. The Groundwater Flow Analysis was concerned with adequate processing of the effluent from the proposed sanitary system and the travel time of the effluent to the edge of the property as it relates to dilution, not with occurrences at the interface of the situate aquifer and situate surface waters. This Firm continues to stand by the findings of the Groundwater Flow Analysis for the Moy Property for the following reasons: • After a period of increased precipitation, the groundwater levels at subject parcel actually decreased. • The nutrient contribution from the proposed sanitary system will be negligible as a result of bacterial processing, dilution in groundwater and tidal flushing. • Use of the Dupuit— Forcheimer equation to determine groundwater flow rate and therefore effluent travel time was meant as an approximation (albeit an accurate approximation). This statement of effluent travel time was meant to illustrate sufficient time for dilution in groundwater of the minute amounts of remaining oxidizable substrates. • The direction of groundwater flow was confirmed by the CDM report. As stated in the report, over 95% of the bacterial processing of effluent from sanitary systems occurs in the dry soil above groundwater. As this sanitary system is designed by a licensed design professional and will be (upon adjustment for groundwater elevation at high tide) compliant with current sanitary,code, it must be assumed that the effluent will be almost entirely processed by the time it reaches groundwater. Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. therefore respectfully requests the Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold to issue the requested permit as it has been shown that the proposed sanitary system at the Moy property will function properly and will cause no adverse effects the situate surface waters or groundwater. James F. King,President ��0 SO(/Ty0 Town Hall Jill M. Doherty,Vice-President 53095 Route 25 y Peggy A. Dickerson T P.O. Box 1179Southold,New York 11971-0959 Dave Bergen G Q John Holzapfel 0 �� Telephone(631)765-1592 l''COu '� Fax(631)765-6641 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMO August 22, 2006 To: Board of Trustees From: Heather Cusack Environmental Technician Re: Sim Moy application SCTM# 90-2-1 I have reviewed the file on the above referenced application. The following is my interpretation of the information regarding ground water flow in that lot as per the report from Suffolk Environmental Consulting, the Health Department and CDM's analysis, and the subsequent review by Suffolk Environmental Consulting. Please find attached to this memo the comments on the Groundwater Flow Analysis report written by Ron Paulsen, Hydro geologist for the Suffolk County Health Department. Based on my analysis of these documents the applicant has not sufficiently proved that the proposed septic system will not fail or cause a significant adverse impact to the aquifer, or the movement of nitrogen and phosphates into the open waters of Peconic Bay. One problem is the permeability of the existing soils, not the distance to groundwater. The clay material could affect the drainage of the septic system waste. The flow of waste is affected by the clays, causing problems with drainage and the breaking down of the waste. These soil conditions and water conditions, surrounded on three sides by surface waters, will make a septic system less efficient in treating wastewater. The processes of microscopic organisms in soil breaking down the biological contaminants in a septic system only work if the soil is not saturated with water. If the soil is too wet biological breakdown may be incomplete and nutrients may move greater distances and possibly into surface waters. Even systems that are in compliance with the health department may allow nutrients to reach the water. CDM's review indicates that the groundwater flow analysis is not comprehensive enough to determine that the amount and quality of effluent that will reach the open water and the aquifer. The quantity coming from the Moy property was not calculated. I have attached CDM's report, written by Daniel O'Rourke, Project Hydro geologist. Please inform me if you would like a more detailed analysis from me of these documents. November 15, 2006 Mr. Bruce Anderson Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. P.O. Box 2003 Bridgehampton, New York 11932 Re: SIM MOY 750 WEST LAKE ROAD, SOUTHOLD SCTM# 90-2-1 Dear Mr. Anderson: The Board of Trustees took the following action during its regular meeting held on Wednesday, November 15, 2006 regarding the above matter: WHEREAS, Suffolk Environmental Consulting as agent for SIM MOY applied to the Southold Town Trustees for a permit under the provisions of the Wetland Ordinance of the Town of Southold, application dated January 31, 2005, and WHEREAS, said application was referred to the Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Coordinator for their findings and recommendations, and, WHEREAS, the Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council recommends Disapproval of the application for the following reasons: - The concern with raising the septic system and the proximity to the water table. - The concern with drainage. - The concern with a suitable buffer area. - Status and condition of the bulkhead is unclear. And, WHEREAS, the Town of Southold Senior Environmental Planner and Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Coordinator has recommended the proposed single-family dwelling, attached rear deck, pervious driveway, retaining wall, and sanitary system be found INCONSISTENT with the following Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Policy Standards: 5.1, 5.3,5.4, 5.5, 6.3, and which recommendation attached hereto, 2 and therefore be found INCONSISTENT with the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan ("LWRP"), and, WHEREAS, numerous Public Hearings were held by the Board of Trustees with respect to said application, with the first one on March 23, 2005, at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard, and, WHEREAS, the Board members on multiple occasions personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question and the surrounding area, and, WHEREAS, the Board has considered all the testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application, and, WHEREAS, the application does not comply with the standards set forth in Chapter 275 of the Southold Town Code, and, WHEREAS, the Board has determined that the project as proposed will have a detrimental effect upon the health, safety and general welfare of the people of the Town, and, WHEREAS, the proposed deck is located 27' from the bulkhead along the inlet to West Lake, the proposed house is located 30' from the bulkhead along the inlet to West Lake and 31' from the bulkhead along Little Peconic Bay, the proposed septic tank is 24' from the bulkhead along the inlet to West Lake, the proposed cesspool is 40' from the wetlands, and the proposed driveway is 2' from the bulkhead, and, WHEREAS, the minimum setbacks in the Chapter 275, Wetlands and Shoreline of the Town Code, Section 275-3.D. that apply to any and all operations proposed on residential property within the jurisdiction of the Board of Trustees are as follows: (1) Residence: 100 feet (2) Driveway: 50 feet (3) Cesspool: 100 feet ` (4) Septic tank: 75 feet 1 �J And, WHEREAS, the u ' c roperty i ded b ' surface sof To on three sides, , HEREAS, the subject property' of a coastal ecosystem that is seasonally ( flooded, a dynamic system that is sus tible to saltwater intrusion and shifting sand, rd, WHEREAS, the coastal ecosystem, Peconic Estuarand the surrounding waters of UWest Lake encompass a significant habitat and envi nnyent and in order to protect this unique habitat the statutory setbacks set out in the Town.Code must be followed in connection with this uniquely situated property, and, a IL-*� t, A 41�\� tAlt tlos� WHEREAS, these wetland systems are typically found within and comprise an intertidal 4 , alt marsh/beach ecosystem and, V t HEREA'S'the urpose of Chapter 275 is to ensue or l the residents of the Town of Southold the protection and preservation of these wetlands and that their values, including protection of the surface waters and ecology of the intertidal waters, groundwater, flood control, and plant and wildlife habitat, which would be harmed by the development as proposed in the application, and, I t WHEREAS, Chapter 275. ecXt .of the Southold To Code mandates the prevention of the loss or deg of fish, shellfish, an other beneficial marine organisms, wildlife, and vegeta the natural habit thereof, and, WHEREAS, the minimum setbure prot ion of these wetlands are 100 feet for a residence and 100 feet foing p Is, d, WHEREAS, the disturbance ofastal a iro ent and the nutrient enrichment from runoff from lawns and setems reatly aX of valuable wetland species, and,WHEREAS, information from ts Local Wation ► \ �cluding Section (ii) Flooding Areas of Speify this location as primary area of concern for e , environmentarotection of habitat and wetlands, and, WHEREAS, a document submitted by the applicant titled "Groundwater Flow Analysis for Moy Property" was reviewed by Ron Paulsen, a Hydro geologist with the Suffolk County Department of Health Services and and Daniel O'Rourke, Project Hydro geologist of Camp Dresser and McKee, a consulting engineering company and both the document to contain discrepancies, and, NOW THER FORE BE IT 5 RESOLVED, hat the Board of Trustees find the application of Sim Moy to be INCONSISTENT with the °LWRP", and, /I ,.1/4\ V 0/1 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees DENY the application of Sim Moy to construct a single-family dwelling, attached rear deck, pervious driveway, a retaining wall, and sanitary system, and, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this determination should not be considered a determination made for any other Department or Agency, which may also have an application pending for the same or similar project. Very truly yours, r � �� 4 James F. King President, Board of Trustees JFK: hkc November 15, 2006 Mr. Bruce Anderson Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. P.O. Box 2003 Bridgehampton, New York 11932 Re: SIM MOY 750 WEST LAKE ROAD, SOUTHOLD SCTM# 90-2-1 Dear Mr. Anderson: The Board of Trustees took the following action during its regular meeting held on Wednesday, November 15, 2006 regarding the above matter: WHEREAS, Suffolk Environmental Consulting as agent for SIM MOY applied to the Southold Town Trustees for a permit under the provisions of the Wetland Ordinance of the Town of Southold, application dated January 31, 2005 nd p ��'� ��✓oP�'1F-f-C� WHEREAS, said application was referred a Southold To n Conservation visory Council and the Local Waterfront Rev' ization Program Coordinator for their findings and recommendations, and, WHE a Southo/IdConservation Advisory Council recommends Dis p o the applir the following reasons: o cernVith he septic system and the proximity to the water table.- c ncen�withe. e _oncer"it a suitable buffer area. ° I' a on i i of the bulkhead is unclear. And, - ✓ �O� q �QVyf WHEREAS, the Town of Southold Senior Environmental Planner and Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Coordinator has recommended the proposed single-family dwelling, attached rear deck, pervious driveway, retaining wall, and sanitary system be � found INCONSISTENT with the following Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Policy Standards: 5.1, 5.3,5.4, 5.5, 6.3 which recommendationrattached hereto, and Q�G� 2 therefore be found INCONSISTENT with the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan ("LWRP"), and, WHEREAS, numerous Public Hearings were held by the Board of Trustees with respect to said application, with the first one on March 23, 2005, at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard, and, WHEREAS, the Board members personally viewed n multiple occasions nd are familiar with the premises in question nd the surroundin WHEREAS, the Board has considered all the testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application, and, WHEREAS, the application does not comply with the standards set forth in Chapter 275 n� of the Southold Town Code, and, WHEREAS, the Board has determined that the project as proposed wil'II/l ect,the health, safety and general welfare of the people of the Town, and, e L T-Yi WHEREAS, the proposed deck is located 27' from the bulkhead along the inlet to West Lake, the proposed house is located 30' from the bulkhead along the inlet to West Lake and 31' from the bulkhead along Little Peconic Bay, the proposed septic tank is 24' from the bulkhead along the inlet to West Lake, the proposed cesspool is 40' from the wetlands, and the proposed driveway is 2' from the bulkhead, and, WHEREAS, the minimum setbacks in the Chapter 275, Wetlands and Shoreline of the Town Code, Section 275-3.D. that apply to any and all operations proposed on residential property within the jurisdiction of the Board of Trustees are as follows: (1) Residence: 100 feet (2) Driveway: 50 feet (3) Cesspool: 100 feet (4) Septic tank: 75 feet And, WHEREAS, the subject property is surrounded by intertidal surface waters of the Town on three sides, and, WHEREAS, the subject property is part of a coastal ecosystem that is seasonally flooded, a dynamic system that is susceptible to saltwater intrusion and shifting sand, and, WHEREAS, the coastal ecosystem, Peconic Estuary, and the surrounding waters of West Lake encompass a significant habitat and environment and in order to protect this unique habitat the setbacks set out in the Town Code must be followed and, 3 WHEREAS, these wetland systems are typically found within and comprise an intertidal salt marsh/beach ecosystem, and, WHEREAS, the purpose of Chapter 275 is to ensure for the residents of the Town of Southold the protection and preservation of these wetlands and that their values, including protection of the surface waters and ecology of the intertidal waters, groundwater, flood control, and plant and wildlife habitat, s4"01 be harmed by the development as proposed in the application, and, ( p __ o WHEREAS, Chapter 275. Section 12B.of the Southold Town Code mandates the prevention of the loss or degradation of fish, shellfish, and other beneficial marine organisms, wildlife, and vegetation or the natural habitat thereof, and, WHEREAS, the minimum setbacks to ensure protection of these wetlands are 100 feet for a residence and 100 feet for leaching pools, and, WHEREAS, the disturbance of the coastal environment and the nutrient enrichment from runoff from lawns and septic systems greatly accelerate the loss of valuable wetland species, and, WHEREAS, information from the town's Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan, including Section (ii) Flooding and (iv) Areas of Special Concern, identify this location as a primary area of concern for erosion, environmental protection, and protection of habitat and wetlands, and, WHEREAS, a document submitted by the applicant titled "Groundwater Flow Analysis for Moy Property" was reviewed by Ron Paulsen, a Hydrogeologist with the Suffolk County Department of Health Services and and Daniel O'Rourke, Project Hydrogeologist of Camp Dresser and McKee, a consulting engineering company and both found the document to contain discrepancies, and, e.) NOW THEREFORE BE IT , v. ',, RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees DENY the application of Sim Moy to construct a single-family dwelling, attached rear deck, pervioudriveway, retaining wall, and J sanitary system, and, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this determination should not be considered a determination made for any other Department or Agency, which may-also application pending for the same or similar project. Very truly yours, James F. King President, Board of Trustees ' 4 JFK: hkc -- S, mo L-, jpqs Co w�` L" � � Sim Moy So be it Resolved, Septic location Water on 3 sides Size of lot (quarter acre) Setbacks Vf-� LIA Albert J. Krupski,President a0F so James King,Vice-President 0� Ury�l Town Hall O 53095 Route 25 Artie Foster 1 .If, P.O. Box 1179 Ken Poliwoda O T Southold,New York 11971-0959 N Peggy A. Dickerson G Telephone(631) 765-1892 Fax(631)765-6641 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES November 15, 2006 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Mr. Bruce Anderson Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. P.O. Box 2003 Bridgehampton, New York 11932 Re: SIM MOY 750 WEST LAKE ROAD, SOUTHOLD SCTM# 90-2-1 Dear Mr. Anderson: The Board of Trustees took the following action during its regular meeting held on Wednesday, November 15, 2006 regarding the above matter: WHEREAS, Suffolk Environmental Consulting as agent for SIM MOY applied to the Southold Town Trustees f t fa c,ovsrrz e r �q- F,rwi c./ c[/r.=y / *ffAoyd.sml) ,eAlfYl DECK[ /°2s w o c s �� �cr.x.s WHEREAS, said application was referred to the Southold Town Conservation Advisory s1,917" Council and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Coordinator for their findings and recommendations, and, WHEREAS, the Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council recommends Disapproval of the application for the following reasons: - The concern with raising the septic system and the proximity to the water table. - The concern with drainage. - The concern with a suitable buffer area. - Status and condition of the bulkhead is unclear. And, WHEREAS, the Town of Southold Senior Environmental Planner and Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Coordinator has recommended the proposed single-family dwelling, attached rear deck, pervious driveway, retaining wall, and sanitary system be found INCONSISTENT with the following Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Policy Standards: 5.1, 5.3,5.4, 5.5, 6.3, and which recommendation attached hereto, 2 and therefore be found INCONSISTENT with the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan ("LWRP"), and, WHEREAS, numerous Public Hearings were held by the Board of Trustees with respect to said application, with the first one on March 23, 2005, at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard, and, WHEREAS, the Board members on multiple occasions personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question and the surrounding area, and, WHEREAS, the Board has considered all the testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application, and, WHEREAS, the application does not comply with the standards set forth in Chapter 275 of the Southold Town Code, and, WHEREAS, the Board has determined that the project as proposed will have a detrimental effect upon the health, safety and general welfare of the people of the Town, and, WHEREAS, the proposed deck is located 27' from the bulkhead along the inlet to West Lake, the proposed house is located 30' from the bulkhead along the inlet to West Lake and 31' from the bulkhead along Little Peconic Bay, the proposed septic tank is 24' from the bulkhead along the inlet to West Lake, the proposed cesspool is 40' from the wetlands, and the proposed driveway is 2' from the bulkhead, and, WHEREAS, the minimum setbacks in the Chapter 275, Wetlands and Shoreline of the Town Code, Section 275-3.D. that apply to any and all operations proposed on residential property within the jurisdiction of the Board of Trustees are as follows: (1) Residence: 100 feet (2) Driveway: 50 feet (3) Cesspool: 100 feet (4) Septic tank: 75 feet And, WHEREAS, the subject property is surrounded by tidal wetlands on three sides, and, WHEREAS, these wetland systems are typically found within and comprise an intertidal salt marsh/beach ecosystem, and, WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees found the proposed action does not comply with the purpose of Chapter 275 which states," It is the intention of this chapter to ensure for the citizens of the Town of Southold the protection and preservation of its wetlands and that they shall be regulated in order to maintain their values, including water pollution control, groundwater, flood control, and protection of wildlife habitat and plant habitat", and, 3 WHEREAS, a document submitted by the applicant titled "Groundwater Flow Analysis for Moy Property" was reviewed by Ron Paulsen, a Hydro geologist with the Suffolk County Department of Health Services and and Daniel O'Rourke, Project Hydro geologist of Camp Dresser and McKee, a consulting engineering company and both found the document to contain discrepancies, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, for the reasons stated above, that the Board of Trustees finds the application of Sim Moy to be INCONSISTENT with the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program, and, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE the application of Sim Moy to construct a single-family dwelling, attached rear deck, pervious driveway, retaining wall, and sanitary system, and, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this determination should not be considered a determination made for any other Department or Agency, which may also have an application pending for the same or similar project. Very truly yours, James F. King President, Board of Trustees JFK: hkc Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. Newman Village, Suite E,2322 Main Street,P.O. Box 2003,Bridgehampton, New York 11932-2003 (631) 537-5160 Fax: (631) 537-5291 Bruce Anderson,M.S., President July 5, 2006 Mr. James King, President Southold Town Board of Trustees Town Hall P.O. Box 1179 J U L 6 20C Southold,NY 11971 Re: Moi Survey Situate: West Lake Road Bayview,Town of Southold SCTM#: 1000-090-02-001 Dear Mr. King, As you know,this Firm represents the owner of the above referenced property who is seeking approval from your Board to construct a new single family dwelling with attendant sanitary system thereon. At the request of your Board,this Firm prepared the Groundwater Flow Analysis for the Moy Property to ascertain the effectiveness of the proposed sanitary system. This analysis was subsequently forwarded to Camp,Dresser& McKee(CDM) for analysis. This office is in receipt of the report prepared by CDM concerning the Groundwater Flow Analysis. After a thorough review of the CDM report,this Firm has prepared a response which you may find enclosed herewith(three [3] copies). In addition,please also find enclosed revised surveys prepared by Mr. David Fox last dated June 260i,2006 (three [3] copies) which reflect a change to the sanitary system design. Kindly review the enclosed items and add this matter to the agenda for the July 19th, 2006 meeting of your Board. If you have any questions,please don't hesitate to contact me. Thank you as always for your attention and consideration. Sincerely,(jk�� 9 Iac�ICX, William J. Lohn Encl. Cc: D. Moy \ I CV \� \ MAP OF P,20PEc2rY � �- SU12VEYE0 P-0e I S 1 M H. MOY 4T i BgYV1EWF— TOWN OP SOUT!-IOLO, N_Y. , i I j OF NE W E S T I I � �p\GK V yN r0� A E I S1Y �o < • LOT 143 LAND Sparfidq •I- i `, � � ordinar - I v remartty �'_�= � --_. 4--�• rail fence �•, - r r o - g�-�'�'"'___ phracrmrfes ,tr � 6 • WEST LA1GE - ,E'OA.D •m :a �ff 5.70'43'50"E. -767 3 I I b n Scale: 30 ,_ / „ lp *LoT (l8 LOT ll7 a i o = pipe B ILo-(- nurctfaer5 skown re fir -{-o � J LGT 11 —t "Map Of Cedar Beach Pada, I Z � � °j I r (ed i ri +he Su otic Co.G/erks i ` -- ------ , Su ffol(c Co. Tax Map Glesignafror-r: i V Dish. (000,SeC4. 090, 61k. 2, Fuel. t - N DA! vv. I Mo> I vi timber bulkheaa' I 93.3 IT—:-- I �f m I Surveyed Cec 28, f994 L ITTLE I PECONIG I BAY COOG-OICL V,4NTu-rL, P C . jjJJ �� Licensed Lar-rd Sur-vEyors 6reenpa f New York i i , i Groundwater Flow Analysis for Moy Property J Situate: West Lake Drive Southold, NY 11971 SCTM#: 1000-090-2-1 l Prepared by Suffolk Environmental Consulting 8/1512005 I Table of Contents I. Purpose II. Materials and Methods III. Results A) Average Groundwater Elevation at High Tide ± j B) Average Groundwater Elevation at Mid Tide - C) Average Groundwater Elevation at Low Tide D) Overall Average Groundwater Elevation and Resultant Flow based on Hydraulic j1 Gradient 1 IV. Discussion and Analysis 1 V. Conclusion ! VI. References VII. Appendix . I 1 l i 1. Purpose This firm represents Sim Moy who proposes to construct a 1060 ft2 3 bedroom single family dwelling on pilings with a proposed 506.24 ft2 wooden deck which runs along the southern and western sides of the proposed dwelling, and a proposed septic system that is sized to the proposed dwelling at the parcel in question. The proposed septic system is the minimum septic system specified in the Suffolk County Sanitary Code. During the public hearing regarding this matter of May 20th, 2005, the Southold Town Board of Trustees expressed a general concern that the proposed septic system may significantly impact i adjacent surface waters. The purpose of this report is to examine the potential impact of the proposed septic system by: = i 1) Determining the direction of groundwater flow at subject parcel; _ j and 1 2) Examining the effect on surrounding surface waters caused by i the proposed septic system. I i j H. Materials and Methods Five areas over the parcel (including one adjacent thereto) were selected for the installation of test wells. The locations for test well installation were chosen to reasonably determine the variation in groundwater elevation so that the direction of groundwater flow could be determined. Five (5) test wells were installed by McDonald Geoscience in accordance with the pre-selected locations. l The lengths of these test wells were 9ft for Wells #1 and #4, and 8ft for Wells #2, i 3 and 5. All test wells were surveyed in the field by Fox Land Surveying to determine their elevations, and then plotted on subject survey with their individual elevations indicated [Appendix A]. In addition, 1929 NGVD Datum was applied to all measurements of elevation. Depth to groundwater was then determined by inserting measuring stakes into each of the five test wells so that the top of the stake was flush with the top of the well, and then measuring the distance from the top of the stake (which is now analogous with the top of the test well) to the top edge of the water mark appearing on the stake. The groundwater elevation I at each test well was then determined by subtracting the depth to groundwater from the top elevations of each test well [Appendix C] determined by Fox Land Surveyors [Appendix A]. Because of subject parcel's close proximity to situate surface waters, the r potential for fluctuation of groundwater elevation exists. To approximate the variance of groundwater elevation with respect to tidal influences, measurements j of depth to groundwater at each well were taken at high tide, mid tide and low 1 tide for three (3) tide cycles, combining for a total of 45 measurements of depth to groundwater. Groundwater depths were then averaged for each well at each tide condition to provide an average groundwater elevation for each well at each t tide condition. The average groundwater elevations for each well at each tide condition were then averaged to obtain an overall groundwater elevation for each test well. Direction of groundwater flow was then determined by plotting the five (5) overall groundwater elevations on an elevation dependent flowchart. Points of ! equal groundwater elevation were then connected with elevation isolines. - Straight lines were then drawn perpendicularly through points of equal elevation on different isolines in the direction of decreasing elevation. The direction of these lines indicates the direction of groundwater flow [1]. The effect on the surface water to which the effluent would flow was determined by analysis of current research from the Peconic Estuary Program and the Brown Tide Research Initiative. i r I Ill. Results Figure 1: Survey prepared by Fox Land Surveying last dated May 1g1", 2005 of Moy Property Indicating Location of Test Wells installed by McDonald T Geoscience [Appendix B]. Note: Survey also shows the elevations at the tops of the wells. WEST LAKE • � Hole#2�� . , Hole#I ®� WEST L "• '�\�"""` � ; ---- _!4K,E DRIB Hole#3 Hole#5 7 L _ .. . _L new St. Johns EPI qn� y - Ntoae•3j'�' Be* ssW B I \ LITTLE PECONIc BAY 1E51 XqE DATA /Ilt Table 1: Top Elevations (ft) of Test Wells as Determined by Fox Land Surveying, l May 19", 2005. ' Hole # 1 2 3 14 5 Elevation ft 7.91 7.66 7.43 8.50 8.0 I i A: i Table 2: Elevation Measurements Taken During High Tide on 6/27/2005, 6/28/2005 & 6/29/2005. Well#1 Well#2 Well#3 Well#4 Well#5 1 60 f{ 6/27/05 66 12/16 45 4/16 81 67 4/16 64 6/28/05 63 8/16 60 41 77 8/16 15/16 67 i 6/29/05 69 62 6/16 47 8/16 82 8/16 15/16 66 I Average 1 66 3/16 61 1/16 44 9/16 80 5/16 11/16 i Table 3: Groundwater Elevation (ft) Based on Average Depth to Water at High Tide (value obtained by subtracting the depth from the top elevation). 1 Well # 1 ;2.57 3 4 5 Elevation of Test 7.91 7.43 8.5 8 Well (ft) Depth to Goundwater ft 5.52 3.70 6.70 5.56 Groundwater Elevation ft 2.39 3.73 1.8 1 2.44 i t i I i i i + r Figure 2: Graphical Representation of Groundwater Elevation based on Average High Tide Measurements. Note: numbers in boxes are the well # and the groundwater elevation at each well respectively. Well#2: 2.57 ft O f Well#1: O Well#5: O Well#3: O 2.39 ft 2.44 ft 3.73 ft Well#4: O 1.8 ft l 1 B: Table 4: Elevation Measurement Taken During Mid Tide on 6/21/2005, 6/23/2005 & 6/28/2005. i Well#1 Well#2 Well#3 Well#4 Well#5 r 78 63 6/21/05 12/16 12/16 56 81 69 6/23/05 75 1/16 64 8/16 56 4/16 87 69 1 78 59 67 6/28/05 12/16 64 4/16 14/16 89 4/16 12/16 Avera a 77.52 1 64.17 57.38 85.75 68.58 Table 5: Groundwater Elevation (ft) Based on Average Depth to Water at Mid ' Tide (value obtained by subtracting the depth from the top elevation). i Well # 1 2 3 4 5 1 Elevation of Test 7.91 7.66 7.43 8.5 8 Well (ft) Depth to Goundwater ft 6.46 5.35 4.78 7.15 5.72 Groundwater Elevation ft 1.461 2.31 2.65 1 1.361 2.28 Figure 3: Graphical Representation of Groundwater Height based on Average _ Mid Tide Measurements. Note: numbers in boxes are the well # and the groundwater elevation at each well respectively). Well#2: O 2.31 ft Well#1: O Well#5: O Well#3: O 1.45 ft 2.28 ft 2.65 ft Well#4: 0 1.35 ft C: i Table 6: Elevation Measurements taken During Low Tide on 6/21/2005, 7/7/2005 -- @ t7:15am & 7/7/2005 @ t4:10pm. Well#1 Well#2 Well#3 Well#4 Well#5 6/21/05 77 5/16 63 8/16 56 2/16 87 69 55- 7/7/05 77 4/16 63 2/16 14/16 87 2/16 67 4/16 86 7/7/05 76 8/16 64 56 15/16 [!%ff52 5/16 Avera a 77.02 63.54 56.00 87.02 Table 7: Groundwater Elevation (ft) Based on Average Depth to Water at Low Tide (value obtained by subtracting the depth from the top elevation). Well # 1 21 3 4 5 Elevation of Test 7.91 7.66 7.43 8.5 8 Well (ft) Depth to Goundwater ft 6.42 5.30 1 4.67 7.25 5.71 Groundwater Elevation ft 1.49 1 2.35 2.761 1.251 2.29 Figure 4: Graphical Representation of Groundwater Height based on Average Low Tide Measurements. Note: numbers in boxes are the well # and the groundwater elevation for each well respectively). Well#2: O 2.36 ft Well#1: O Well#5: O Well 43: O 2.29 ft 2.76 ft . I I Well#4: 1.25 ft O l D: Table 8: Depth to Groundwater (in) from Top of Test Well Determined from the Tide Based Averages Well Well Well Well well 77.52 64.17 57.38 85.75 68.58 77.02 63.54 56.00 87.02 68.52 66.17 61.04 44.58 80.33 66.71 Avera a 73.57 62.92 52.65 84.37 67.94 Table 9: Groundwater Elevation (ft) Determined from the Tide Based Averages (value obtained by subtracting the depth from the elevation). i Well # 1 2 3 41 5 Elevation of Test 7.91 7.66 7.43 8.5 8 Well (ft) Depth to Goundwater ft 6.13 5.24 4.39 7.03 5.66 Groundwater Elevation ft 1.78 1 2.42 3.04 1.47 2.34 Figure 5: Graphical Representation of Groundwater Elevation Determined from the Tide Based Averages. Note: numbers in boxes are the well # and the t� groundwater elevation for each well respectively. I Well#2: O E 2.42 ft Well#1: O Well#5: O Well#3: O 1.78 ft 2.34 ft 3.04 ft Well#4: O 1.47 ft ' I . V i 1 I i J w.e c.rm Wa*s ` \ \ 4._-I 1� \ \ q epi 2b>S 1 2.66 iy6 2>e 3 A W ' 2a6 aaee - '� � is ao6 c /L 284>S II� L E�Q�round�_waterflovv Lmmm for•WW Ialke Road wn a(Southold,NY (pLOB 02-001 CD Proposed Sanitary System Suffolk Environmental Consulting,Inc. {> Phone: (631) Fax: (631)637-5291 L P.O.Box 2003•Bridgehampton•NY•11932 DATE: _ 111112 5 >+n�ne m;esq SCALE:. L=2d Legend DRAWN BY: Ma . _lOd wing fl� Curved Lines=Groundwater Elevation IsolineS a>mao tion Each r t r.,.. •_a Arrows=Direction of Groundwater Fbw along the Elevation Gradient OF 'All Numerical Values ore In Feet(it) m ❑ IV. Discussion & Analysis As with any substance that exists at as a liquid at standard temperature and pressure, groundwater flows from regions of higher elevation to regions of • , lower elevation. As can be seen in Figure 6, the same convention applies to the groundwater at subject parcel. The high point of groundwater elevation exists around Well #3, and the low point of groundwater elevation exists at Well #4. In other words, groundwater will flow from the eastern section of subject parcel towards the western section. This convention is more easily seen if the overall direction of groundwater flow is broken down into the two basic vector components: movement along the x-axis, and movement along the y-axis. The flow of groundwater (GW) will start at the high point, Well #3, and move downhill. From Well #3, the GW can flow to either Well #2, Well #1, or Well #4 as all potential flow points exist at lower elevation than that at Well #3. The elevation difference between #3 and #2 is 0.62ft, and between #3 and #1 the difference is 1.26ft. As the difference is i greater between #3 and #1, more of the GW will flow in that direction. The GW that does flow towards #2 will again be pulled in a southerly direction as GW will also flow from #2 to #1 along an elevation difference of 0.64ft. Again, GW can also flow from #3 towards #4 along an elevation difference of 1.57ft (the largest separation of the hydraulic gradient). This is greater than the elevation difference between #3 and #1, which is 1.26ft. As with the previous scenario, that difference will cause more GW to flow in the direction of#4. As 1 can be seen, the existing vector components of GW flow will cause said GW to migrate towards the western corner of subject parcel. The largest vector component of groundwater flow is that of the southerly pull towards Well #4, resulting in all other components of situate groundwater flow to be pulled in that direction. The same trend can be seen in groundwater elevations calculated from the averages of individual tide conditions (see figures 2 -4). 1 As can also be seen from the hydraulic gradient, the location of the proposed sanitary system places it directly in the middle of GW flow from the ' eastern section to the western section of subject parcel. Therefore, effluent generated by the sanitary system will also flow in two directions. Firstly, it will flow along the elevation difference of 0.56ft between #5 and #1 (and also along the total elevation difference of 1.26ft between #3 and #1, #5 being in between I the two). The resultant effluent will also flow along the elevation difference of 0.87 between #5 and #4 (and also along the total elevation difference of 0.95ft between #2 and #4). The elevation difference is greater between the proposed sanitary system and Well #4 than it is between said system and Well #1, meaning more effluent will flow towards #4 than towards #1. In other words, because the proposed sanitary system is located in the middle of the hydraulic gradient, the resultant effluent will flow in the same direction as the GW. Before the effect of the effluent on situate surface waters can be determined, the state of said effluent when it reaches said water must be determined. To accomplish this, the time frame of effluent dissension to the GW, and the time frame of effluent migration into Little Peconic Bay must be determined. As can be seen from the test well data provided by McDonald Geoscience 1 [Appendix B], the top of the water table is located approximately 5ft below the surface at Test Well #5, which is at the center of the proposed sanitary system location. According to the Suffolk County Sanitary Code [Appendix G], the bottom of the leaching pools for a one-three bedroom single family dwelling "shall be a minimum of 2ft above high seasonal groundwater" and the top of the leaching pools "shall be between 6" and 12" below grade". Seasonal high groundwater is approximately 5ft below surface, thereby causing the septic = effluent to travel a distance of 2ft to the groundwater. According to the Test Well data sheet for Well #5, that 2ft distance is through pale brown fine to coarse sand. Predominant soil is Haven Loam having a 0 -2 % slop according to the Soil Survey of Suffolk County [1]. Haven Loam Soils have an average permeability of 1.315 in/hr. Thus, the effluent will take 18.25hr to travel the 2ft from the bottom of the leaching pool to the water table. It must be noted that effluent leaving exiting the top of the leaching pool could take as long as 36.5hr to travel that same distance, giving said effluent twice the amount of time for natural soil processing. However, for this study, the worst case scenario will be assumed in that effluent is only leaving the bottom of the leaching pool. This time span is of greatest importance as the unsaturated soil above the water table is where most of biological nutrient removal takes place. On site sanitary systems function in the same manner as sewage treatment facilities. Raw effluent is first allowed to settle in the septic tank. This ! allows solids to sink to the bottom where bacterial action digests them over time. Bacterial action in the septic tank also begins the process of reducing the biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) of the effluent. The remaining effluent exits the septic tank into the leaching pools. As the effluent travels out of the leaching 1 pools into the surrounding soil, natural action of soil bacteria removes more of the BOD, and begins to remove other nutrients. This includes the removal of usable nitrogen and phosphorus compounds, which are essential nutrient i requirements for plants, including algae. According to the EPA's Onsite Wastewater Treatment Manual, "when properly designed, sited, constructed, and I maintained conventional onsite wastewater treatment technologies effectively reduce or eliminate most human health or environmental threats posed by pollutants in wastewater." Numerically speaking, and again according to the EPA guidelines [2], that means removing --98% of BOD, -10-40% of usable nitrogen, -85-95% of phosphorus, and -99-99.99% of fecal coliforms. As this sanitary system will be designed by a licensed professional, it should be assumed that it will meet or exceed these standards. As can be seen from the Test Well data sheet for all the Test Wells [Appendix B], the water table at subject parcel is an unconfined aquifer with no aquacludes or apparent aquatards. This being the case, the rate of flow for the I situate groundwater can be described using the Dupuit-Forcheimer Equation, which is, q = K/2x(hoz— h12) [3], where: R q = discharge/unit area ho= vertical distance (ft) between top of aquifer and bottom of aquifer @ Well#5 hl= vertical distance (ft) between top of aquifer and bottom of aquifer @ Well#4 x= horizontal distance (ft)separating the Wells I K= Coefficient of Permeability(4937.66 May[1]) Calculation utilizing this equation yields a flow rate of 37.826 ft/day. Given the distance of approximately 98 ft the groundwater and effluent must travel before their release into the situate surface waters, a time span of 2.59 days is required ` to cover that distance. Adding that time to the 18.25 hr required for the effluent to be degraded and reach the groundwater results in a total time of 3.35 days for the effluent to travel across subject parcel and reach Little Peconic Bay. During this time, the processed effluent will become further diluted as it enters the relatively large volume of the groundwater. According to the Peconic Estuary Program (PEP) and the Brown Tide Research Initiative (BTRI), the exact causes of Brown Tide Blooms are elusive and not completely understood. The PEP has provided a short list [Appendix D] of some of the major accepted criteria that affect the Brown Tide organism, Aureococcus anophagefferens: _ I Compared to other algae, Brown Tide can photosynthesize under extremely low light conditions. i Brown Tide usually acts like an autotroph (plant), producing its own food through photosynthesis. However, in low light conditions, Brown Tide may behave like a heterotroph (animal) metabolizing organic carbon and i nitrogen. Brown Tide bloom onset conditions may be optimized by elevated ratios of available dissolved organic nitrogen (high "DON") in surface waters, with respect to the supply of dissolved inorganic nitrogen (low "DIN"). These nitrogen constituents may be related to groundwater inputs and weather patterns — onset conditions could be optimized in a dry year (low DIN supply from groundwater) that follows a wet year. Clams and other suspension-feeders can exert significant feeding pressure on phytoplankton, including Brown Tide at low levels. In an experimental setting, hard clams have been shown to play a pivotal role in determining whether Brown Tide blooms become established. Numerous BTRI reports have indicated that there are also weather related factors associated with blooms of the algae. In other words, there are myriad factors associated with the onset of a Brown Tide Bloom. The concern of this report is weighted on the nutrient side of the equation. Even in this subset of the problem, there are abundant factors affecting the growth of Aureococcus anophagefferens. This can be seen in a report from 2004 by Profs. Gordon T. Taylor and Sergio Sanudo-Wilhelmy of the Marine Sciences Research Centerat SUNY, Stony Brook [4]. This report makes it clear that the nutrient requirements for a Brown Tide Bloom exist as a web of complex factors that affect the bloom as a system and not as individual factors. For example, nutrient loads can affect Aureococcus anophagefferens directly, or the loads can affect organisms that compete with the Brown Tide Algae. The different kinds of nutrients that can affect this organism include, but are not limited to dissolved organic nitrogen, dissolved inorganic nitrogen, dissolved organic carbon, metal concentration, and salinity. As mentioned, these nutrients can promote growth of subject organism, 1 inhibit growth, and promote and inhibit growth of competing organisms. In a BTRI report from 1999 by Sariudo-Wilhelmy, Hutchins & Donat [Appendix E], data suggested that over the course of a bloom, the nutrient loads that promoted growth in the beginning of the bloom, had no affect, or in some cases inhibited 1 growth of Aureococcus anophagefferens at the middle and end of the bloom. The overall tone of current research on the problem of Brown Tide is that there needs to be more research. Everything from light conditions to the concentration of other aquatic bacteria can affect the Brown Tide organism in a variety of different ways. In certain blooms, insufficient flushing of the water in question has been placed as the culprit. In others, the influx of nutrient loaded surface runoff has been allegedly responsible. At this point, the understanding of this organism and the problems that it causes is insufficient to place causality on ] a single factor. I i , I V. Conclusion 1 It is the conclusion of this report that the installation of the sanitary system in question will have little to no effect on the surrounding surface waters. This is the case for the following reasons: The location of the proposed sanitary system will cause the resultant effluent to flow along the established hydraulic gradient in a westerly direction approximately towards the western corner of subject parcel. It will take 3.35 days for the effluent to travel that distance. The majority of the biochemical processing of the effluent will occur during the 18.5 hr time period when the effluent is traveling from its exit from the leaching pool toward the top of the water table. The processing in question will remove from the effluent the majority of the BOD, phosphorus, and fecal coliform content, along with a large portion of the usable nitrogen content, all of which are items of human health and environmental concern. Once the effluent has reached the situate groundwater, it will be further 1 diluted as it is entering a relatively much larger volume of water. i . Upon reaching the Bay, the processed dilute effluent will have an indeterminate affect on the body of water. Septic effluent discharge in the area where the greatest degree of tidal flushing is exhibited (see Figure 7) . These areas include the mouth of the creek, which is dredged, and the surface waters of Little Peconic Bay. No stagnant waters exist along the points of septic discharge. 2 I f i i i . e Figure 7: 2004 Aerial Photograph of Subject Parcel l I As can be seen from this 2005 New York State GIS aerial photo, the status of the I surrounding area can be classified as developed. There are dwellings located on every visible lot contiguous with Little Peconic Bay. These dwellings are required ! to have sanitary systems that are similar to the proposed sanitary system in size, construction and proximity to surface waters. The same convention can be applied to the shoreline of West Lake. There has not been a reported j groundwater or surface water contamination (algal or coliform) caused by the f myriad existing sanitary systems whose effluent is also flowing into the surrounding surface waters. Nor has there been any reported contamination in Little Peconic Bay caused by the thousands of similar closely situated sanitary systems that surround nearly the entirety of the Bay. Placement of a well designed sanitary system at subject parcel will have no detrimental impact on the surrounding surface waters, in that fecal coliforms and algal nutrients have been properly removed and diluted. VI. References: 1) Soil Survey of Suffolk County, New York; United States Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service&Cornell Agricultural Experiment Station; April, 1975. 2) Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems Manual; Office of Water, Office of Research and Development; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA/625/R-00/008 February 2002. 3) Water in Environmental Planning; Dunne, Thomas& Leopold, Luna B.; W.H. Freeman and Company, New York, NY; 1978. i 4) Influence of Groundwater Constituents on Initiation of the Brown Tide in the Peconic Bay i System, Profs. Gordon T. Taylor and Sergio Safludo-Wilhelmy, Marine Sciences Research Center, SUNY, Stony Brook, NY 11794, 2004. hftp://www.oeconicestuary.ora/Groundwater BT.odf. I i . i i i . 'i VII. Appendix A. Survey of subject parcel prepared by Fox Land Surveying last dated May 19`", 2005. B. Test Hole Data Sheet for Holes 1-5 prepared by McDonald Geoscience dated May 6'", 2005. lC. Procedure for Determining the Direction Groundwater Flows prepared by Idaho State University. D. Overview of Brown Tide prepared by the Peconic Estuary program; hftp://www.r)econicestuary.or-q/BrownTide.htmi. E. 1999 Brown Tide and Symposium Overview, Brown Tide Research Initiative, 1999. htto://www.seaarant.sunysb.edu/BTRI/Report4.odf. . I f I . f l i i i i APPENDIX A t . i McDONAZD GEOSCIENCE Box 1000•Southold,New York 11971 • (631) 765-3677 TEST HOLE DATA SHEET Name: SEC Moy MW1 Surveyor: Location: Southold Tax Map Number: 1000-90-2-1 Project Description: MW Date: 5/6/05 Mixed sand and loam i i Pale brown fine to coarse sand SW -------- 5.0 ' Water in pale brown fine to coarse sand SW ------ 7 ' Water in grey organic clay OL 9 ' Comments: Monitoe Wells (5) . . . . . . . *111111111111400 fi . MCDONALD GBOOSCWNCU Box 1000• Southold.New York 11871 • (631)7853677 TEST HOLE DATA SHEET Name: SEC Moy MW2 Surveyor: Location: Tax Map Number: Project Description: Date: 5/6/05 Mixed sand and loam i -------- 3 ' Pale brown fine to medium sand SP ------ 9.7 ' Water in pale brown fine to medium sand SP -------- 5 ' i Water in grey organic clay OL 8 ' Comments: 9 j , . a MCDONALD GEOSCIEIVCE Box 1000•Southold,New York 11971 • (631) 766.3677 TEST HOLE DATA SHEET Name: SEC Moy MW3 Surveyor: Location: Tax Map Number: Project Description: Date: 5/6/05 :i Mixed sand and loam ------ 3.3 ' Water in mixed sand and loam Water in brown bog Pt -------- 6' Water in brown clayey sand SC 81 Comments: 1 i j6. MCDONAZD GEOtSCIENCE Box 1000•Southold, New York 11971 • (831)785-3877 TEST HOLE DATA SHEET Name: SEC Moy mg MW4 Surveyor: Location: Tax Map Number: Project Description: Date: 5/6/05 Mixed sand and loam ------ 5 ' Pale brown fine to coarse sand SW i; ------- 5.8 ' i p Water in pale brown fine to coarse sand SW Water in grey organic clay OL 9 ' Comments: Rk l it 1 McDONALD . € Box 1000•Southold,�YaSt197C�8C31)765-3877 TEST HOLE DATA SHEET Name: SSC Moy MW5 Surveyor: Location: Tax Map Number: Project Description: Date: 5/6/05 Mixed sand and loam Pale brown fine to coarse sand SW -------- 4.7' Water in pale brown fine to coarse sand SW -------- 7' Water in grey organic clay OL 8' Comments: ' F A-s 1 APPENDIX C How to Determine the Direction of Groundwater Flow Page I of ' A How to Determine the Direction of Groundwater Flow M Deb mWaing the Direction Ground Water Fiou Ground water usually flows inward•and eventually drains into,streams•rivers•and lakes.The flow of ground want In aquifers dans roil always mirror the flow of water on the surface.The(allowing steps chow haw to determine the dirertfon ground water is flowing and the hydraulic gradient within an unconfined of aquifer: Sudote � eievattax79SIL t3rvk"*='Q3R L Det rminn the water Surface table elevation at three Incaoionr. 77io R. Tb do this subtract the depth to f)rpthep water from the surface elevation NOW Water-Oft at each well.Can year find the suater.17 R. water tahkclevatirmhrmchof Depth to anter.30It the three wells shown in figure 17 ri W utossr[alis elevation aoatertable w 10n —• — no" L rdeisvaltron 11)seQ 01ee I Wd3 SR' I The well locations from step one arc shown in figure 2.The difference in water table elevations between arch 0(1114?wells is determined by subtracting the watur table elevation of a well with a higher elevation from the water table elevation of a well with a lower elevation on each of the straight lines connect- Ing the wells.These elevation dlffervmYs are divided up Into avlual increments as shown in figure 2. 1.lbter table elevation levels have been placed im the figure by adding the initial water level to u a 112 each Increment.Draw straight a 1 lana•%connecting the inc femenis which have the name values. These lines reprwnt the water 1� los �3 lableconhiurs. b tpL job Tog T 70 ,r Itlae Rl 6t>Q 6Va b b 0 ra b � Stip I The ground water will flow from higher elevations he lower elevations in the direction of maxi• mum change in vlovalinn.'I'hc line pvrpendiaular to the straight limes which amnecl the elevation Increments imlicatant the dirrtion that ground water flows. Thr vertical change in ground water ehvaliem over horizontal distance,in the dinaYhm of ground water flow.is called the hydraulic gradient.It can be determined for this example using the following equation: Water Table Elevation Change , tin the direction of Row) - Hydraulic Gradient Horizontal Distance between measurement points Thfs'mram the water table elevation decreases by_ feet for every foul 11%.ground water flows. Diagram courtesy of the Idaho Division of Environmental Duality http://imnh.isu.edu/digitalatlas/hydr/concepts/gwater/gwflow.htm 6/29/2005 APPENDIX D Brown Tide Page 1 of 3 r f Brown Tide Overview i Causes of Brown Tide in the Peconics Status of Brown Tide in the Peconics I PEP Brown Tide management goals Water quality sampling j What the PEP is doing to reduce the effects of Brown Tide I j Overview Brown Tide is a bloom (excessive growth) of small marine algae (Aureococcus anophagefferens). Although algae of many types are found in all natural freshwat and marine ecosystems, blooms of the Brown Tide organism literally turn the watc deep brown, making it unappealing to swimmers and fishermen alike. While not harmful to humans, the presence of the Brown Tide is a problem for bay scallops< I eelgrass, and to a lesser degree other finfish and shellfish. Brown Tide is unlike rr other algal blooms because of its unusually high concentrations, the extent of are covers and the length of time it persists. Soon after Brown Tide blooms began in 1985, the population of bay scallops declir significantly, leading to a near collapse of the commercial shellfishing industry in Peconics. Many people considered this to be a "warning shot across the bow"for estuary and its watershed. As more is learned about Brown Tide, it becomes clear that both the estuary's problems and their solutions are characterized by the interrelationship among habitat, living resources, water quality and humans. Understanding and resolving what causes the Brown Tide problem will likely require small steps on many fronts sustained over a long period of time by many stakeholders, from homeowners to farmers to sewage treatment plant operators. Causes of Brown Tide in the Peconics Numerous theories have been investigated, but scientists still do not have a clear explanation of what causes Brown Tide blooms. Some accepted research at this p concludes that: • Compared to other algae, Brown Tide can photosynthesize unde http://www.peconicestuary.org/BrownTide.html 8/15/2005 a Brown Tide Page 2 of 3 J extremely low light conditions. a Brown Tide usually acts like an autotroph (plant), producing its own food through photosynthesis. However, in low light j conditions, Brown Tide may behave like a heterotroph(animal) metabolizing organic carbon and nitrogen. a Brown Tide bloom onset conditions may be optimized by elevai ratios of available dissolved organic nitrogen (high"DON") in surface waters, with respect to the supply of dissolved inorganic nitrogen (low"DIN"). These nitrogen constituents may be relat jto groundwater inputs and weather patterns—onset conditions could be optimized in a dry year (low DIN supply from groundwater) that follows a wet year. a Clams and other suspension-feeders can exert significant feedin pressure on phytoplankton, including Brown Tide at low levels. an experimental setting, hard clams have been shown to play a pivotal role in determining whether Brown Tide blooms become established. j Status of Brown Tide in the Peconics + Brown Tide blooms persisted in high concentrations for extended periods in all or part of the Peconics from 1985 through 1988, 1990 through 1992, 1995, and 1997. Brown Tide has not bloomed in high concentrations in the Peconics since then, but continues to be an important management topic, especially as efforts are mounte, restore shellfisheries and eelgrass. In 1982, the harvest of 500,000 lbs of bay scallops from the Peconic Estuary accounted for 28%of all U.S. commercial landings and had a dockside value of$1. million. After the appearance of the Brown Tide in 1985, the bay scallop populati was virtually eliminated. lPEP Brown Tide management goals -} a Determine environmental factors responsible for Brown Tide blooms e Develop and implement strategies to prevent or mitigate Brown i Tide, and its effects on estuarine resources e Restore the natural resources affected by Brown Tide What the PEP is doing to reduce the effects of Brown Tide Continued research, monitoring, and information sharing is needed to find out the l cause of Brown Tide and actions that can be taken to prevent, or at least mitigate the effects of Brown Tide. Google- Last modifled on 31281 II _L I http://www.peconicestuary.org/BrownTide.html 8/15/2005 Research Project Briefs; Culturing Andersen: Multiple Culture Isolates Also examining the ITS region, Drs.Joseph (Xenic and Axenic), Biodiversity and Stabile and Isaac Wirgin(in their ECOHAB Ultrastructure of Aureococcus project examining"Genetic Variation in Brown anophagefferens. Tide Cultures and Water Samples from Long Island and New Jersey"see BTRI Report ?' Number 2 for a summary),obtained results While investigating the genetic variability of consistent with those of Andersen's team. By Aureococcus anophagefferens,this team of examining both ITS(ITS1 and ITS2)regions,and h f; researcers made two new discoveries. In one two genes from the ribosomal DNA,this project strain of A.anophagelferens,they found a cell wall set out to determine if them are genetic differ- (see figure on p.2);and in all strains studied,they ences among New York and New Jersey brown documented genetic variability in the internal tide isolates and DNA obtained directly from transcribed spacer(ITS)sequences of the riboso- brown tide water samples before and during a mal DNA. The Provasoli-Gui I lard National Cerner bloom. Their DNA sequencing results confirm for Culture of Marine Phytoplankton(CCMP)has that there is genetic variation within and among 17 strains of A.anophagefferens from various bays cultured isolates,and among field samples. across Long Island from which investigators can Analysis of the Long Island isolates and field choose samples(or cultures)for experimental samples suggested that the 1985 strain from purposes. This team is also hopeful that a new Long Island(CCMP strain#1784)was more suite of antibiotics will help to establish in the lab similar to 1995 brown tide bloom samples than the still elusive axenic strain of brown tide. the other Long Island cultured isolates. Addi- Previously,A.anophagefferens was described as tional experiments are being performed to naked or without a cell wall. While examining a confirm these results. In addition,the Long previously studied strain from Long Island, Island and New Jersey isolates are genetically however,a distinct cell wall was discovered. The distinct. One interpretation of these results is makeup and structure of this cell wall are as yet that A. anophagefferens is a recently evolved unknown. The cell wall appears to have a species. This is consistent with the appearance reticulated structure.However,the reticulated of brown tides in northeastern US embayments. nature may be an artifact caused by sample preparation for electron microscopy. If the cell Wddfors&Robohm:Isolation and Propagation of the wall is not reticulated,then it may act to protect the brown tide cells in the sediments during non- Brown Tide Alga,Aureococcus anophagefferens, bloom periods. Adetailed description of the cell Using Dialysis Culture Techniques. wall's structure and molecular composition requires considerable work outside the original The dialysis culture technique was successfully used to scope of this project. produce bacteria-free cultures of two non-brown tide Although itis not known if Aureococcus under- isolates. Nevertheless,by the end of this project establish- sexual s odnown at an ing bacteria-free cultures of A.anophagefferens had still goes Pr y point during its oven unsuccessful. Efforts to establish new isolates of A. life history, ITS sequences appear to be important for sexually reproducing organisms in that anophagefferens were hampered by relatively low densities organisms that differ in their ITS sequences are not in the Peconic Estuary during the sampling seasons(1997- orgai ableorga mate successfully. To investigate differ- 98). The investigators suggested an explanation for their ences in ITS sequences,this team employed a new results. A.anophagefferens appeared to increase produc- technique called heteroduplex mobility assay tion of mucus when stressed(see Keller&Sieracki page 4), (HMA),which amplifies gene sequences. Another such as when exposed to antibiotics. This mucus produc- technique used,called denaturing mads..gradiegel tion caused A.anophagefferens populations introduced electrophoresis(called can resolve single base into the dialysis cassettes to stick to inside surfaces,rather differences. The results showed that several than remaining in suspension where they could grow different sequences were present,but not al I the normally. strains have the same"different"sequence. Ultimately,the dialysis culture technique did work Furthermore,al I of the strains seemed to share one successfully with non-A.anophagefferens algae producing sequence hypothesized to be the functional ITS single algae,bacteria-free cultures. However,since this sequence. These results demonstrate that technique did not work with A.anophagefferens,no further Aureococcus has highly unusual ITS regions dialysis culture work will continue with brown tide.This compared to other eukaryotic organisms. project has been concluded. Report#4 3 Research Project Briefs : Ecology Keller&Sieraeld:Physiological Ecology of developed succession from larger cells in April to the Brown Tide Otganistn,Aureococcus smaller picoalgae cells in late May(see Quantuck f anophagefferens&their new initiative: Bay graphs). For both years,a niche developed in early May that was filled by a non-brown tide Measurement of Bacterial Biomass in the picoalga called Synechococcus,which appears to Brown Tide StudyArea. be the superior competitor in these systems. For the [ niche to open to other picoalgae, including A. This study focuses on the period of bloom initiation anophagefferens,some factors)such as nutrient and the factors that result in the eventual dominance limitation or grazing activity may be required to of A.anophagefferens in Long Island coastal eliminate or dampen Synechococcusgrowth and ' embayments. The approach was two-pronged. accumulation,therefore allowing other algae to fill First,this team examined the complete microbial the picoalgal niche, community throughout the prebloom period in In an accompanying non-BTRI project,funded r several areas where brown tides have occurred. directly by New York Sea Grant,these researchers They were searching for differences between brown are investigating the bacteria associated with brown and non-brown tide populations. Secondly,this tide by comparing samples from brown tide blooms team established cultures of A.ariophagefferens, and in non-bloom areas. Higher bacterial numbers ' I other co-occurring picoalgae,and the were consistently found in Quantuck Bay,a non- microzooplankton that may feed on these algae to bloom area, in both 1997 and 1998. In the examine interaction and competition between the Aureococcus bloom areas(West Neck Bay in 1997 I microbial players. and Great South Bay in 1998),bacterial numbers This team has also established a variety of picoalgae were much lower but the cells were very large and and micrograzers cultures from Long Island Bays: elongate. As a result,bacterial biomass was Quantuck,Shinnecock and Flanders. This comparable for the two areas. Associated with the community work revealed that the relative diversity elongate bacteria was a matrix of extracellular and seasonal succession of phytoplankton in these mucus that could result in filtration problems and systems was similar between locations and between clogging of the feeding mechanisms of shellfish and years(1997-98). There appears to be a well- other filter-feeding organisms living in these environments. It now appears that the abundance 2,000 of bacteria is not correlated with brown tide. Quantuck Bay 1997 Instead,a unique bacterial assemblage may exist in 1,500 - a symbk#ic relationship with A.anophagefferens, ❑Bacteria Phototrophs E Heterotrophs rather than in competition for resources(see BTRI Report Number 3,p.8). 1,000 Utilizing these cultures,the final year of this project will examine the photosynthetic and growth characteristics of Aureccoccus in comparison to co- 500 occurring phytoplankton that are similar in „h2 ` physiology and size. This team will also investigate U grazing by the microzooplankton on the brown tide 0 ' a y organisms June May and the co-occurring phytoplankton to w April I I determine if Aureococcus is selectively avoided. E 2,000 m Quantuck Bay 1998 1,500 Measurements of carbon biomass in Quantuck Bay �I 1,000 in two sampling years 1997-1998.A biomass low point was observed in early May in both years and appeared to represent a transition period from "1k larger to small algae in the system.These 500 " ," patterns were also observed in Flanders and Shinnecock Bays. (Phototrophs a phytoplankton; heterotrophs–micrograzers). 0 April I May I lune—� 4 Brown Tide Research Initiative SUMMARY The summer of 1999 represents the the bays of Long Island, a seasonal size- last field season for most of these class shift in phytoplankton from larger projects. Since the first BTRI report sized cells in April to smaller sized cells in March of 1998, the research in May can play a factor in setting the directions of individual projects have stage for a brown tide bloom. Although been greatly influenced by the still in the preliminary research phase, communication among teams in the investigations into brown tide-associ- BTRI network, other investigators, ated bacteria may provide insight into and by the data and samples pro- the mechanisms affecting filter feeding vided to the researchers by the organisms and its persistence in Long Suffolk County Department of Health Island bays. Aureococcus's ability to Services, all of which highlight the exploit organic substrates, possibly as strength of this scientific network. supplied by other phytoplankton, and to Different strains of A. grow on multiple nitrogen sources anophagefferens clearly demonstrate seems to give this alga a competitive signs of genetic variability and a cell edge when other environmental condi- wall may be present at some point tions are right. While toxicity varies during Aureococcus' life history. In among brown tide culture strains, some strains clearly inhibit filter feeding and suppress tissue growth of some bivalves. The finding that some bivalve filter feeders are affected by Aureococcus numbers of about 35,000 cells per milliliter, an order of magnitude lower than previously suspected, suggests that A. anophagefferens may have been impacting Long Island bays before the first blooms appearing in 1985. The role groundwater plays in bloom devel- opment is still unclear and may be site specific. However, it is clear that groundwater flow can greatly affect the chemical constituents in Long Island bays. Grazing pressure, not bay flush- ing, seems to have controlled Rhode 2 Island's Narragansett Bay brown tide event. Progress has been made in development of a brown tide biomarker, especially one based on sterols. These results have provided a few more brown tide puzzle pieces and changed xf the shape of previous pieces helping to I !a identify their proper place in the bloom puzzle. The next BTRI Report, sched- uled for the spring of 2000, will present the conclusion of BTRI Phase I and �. introduce the new projects of BTRI Phase II. Gilbert's turbidostat, a continuous culture system that has two sensors on each culture flask monitoring turbidity and chlorophyll. See Glibert report, page S. 10 Brown Tide Research Initiative KEY TERMS biogeochemistry a branch of negative growth reflects a decrease in geochemistry that is concerned with the optical or light transmission signal of ' biologic materials and their relation to the turbidostat(only observed at night). earth chemicals in an area; the science The reduction in signal may reflect a studying changes in the earth's chemical change in the cellular optical properties constituents as mediated by living (such as the carbohydrate reserves) ' organisms(e.g., bacteria). during the night. At this time, this chemical flux the concentration of a reduction is not believed to be due to a — particular constituent multiplied by the loss in cell density(numbers). flow or seepage rate of the water entering reticulated having or resembling a the bay. If the flow rate is high, then the network of fiber or lines. ' flux of that constituent is also high. The siderophore high affinity iron chelators, flux of a particular constituent is a produced by freshwater and marine function of its concentration and flow or bacteria, to aid in iron uptake under seepage rate. iron-limited conditions. ' electron microscopy the technique used stationary growth phase the period to produce an enlarged image of a tiny following logarithmic growth phase object that utilizes an electron when cell division remains relatively ' microscope, an instrument that uses a constant for at time. beam of electrons focused by an electron symbiotic an interrelationship between lens. This type of microscopy is necessary two different organisms in which the t when items or features are too small to be effects of that relationship is expressed imaged by light. In this case, the image is as being harmful or beneficial; an created by the bend ing/reflection of an intimate association in which organisms ' electron beam rather than a light beam. of more than one species live together. eukaryotic cell a cell with a distinct The association may be beneficial to membrane-bound nucleus. both (mutualism), beneficial to one with ' histopathology a branch of pathology no effect on the other(commensalism) that deals with tissue changes associated or beneficial to one with harmful effects with disease or toxic effects. on the other(parasitism). HPLC High Performance Liquid turbidity the clarity of a liquid as Chromatography, commonly used for the measured by the amount of suspended separation, identification, purification and material (i.e., particulates such as ' quantification of chemical compounds. sediments, phytoplankton, colloids, etc.) logarithmic growth phase the period of in a volume of water. Turbidity reduces growth during which the population the depth of light penetration in a water grows at an exponential rate. column. microzooplankton small animals (or animal plankton) in the size class 20- ' 200pm that are carried with the motion of the currents. Report#4 9 KEY TERMS biogeochemistry a branch of negative growth reflects a decrease in geochemistry that is concerned with the optical or light transmission signal of biologic materials and their relation to the turbidostat(only observed at night). earth chemicals in an area; the science The reduction in signal may reflect a studying changes in the earth's chemical change in the cellular optical properties constituents as mediated by living (such as the carbohydrate reserves) organisms(e.g., bacteria). during the night. At this time, this chemical flux the concentration of a reduction is not believed to be due to a particular constituent multiplied by the loss in cell density(numbers). flow or seepage rate of the water entering reticulated having or resembling a the bay. If the flow rate is high, then the network of fiber or lines. flux of that constituent is also high. The siderophore high affinity iron chelators, flux of a particular constituent is a produced by freshwater and marine function of its concentration and flow or bacteria, to aid in iron uptake under seepage rate. iron-limited conditions. electron microscopy the technique used stationary growth phase the period to produce an enlarged image of a tiny following logarithmic growth phase Object that utilizes an electron when cell division remains relatively microscope, an instrument that uses a constant for at time. beam of electrons focused by an electron symbiotic an interrelationship between lens. This type of microscopy is necessary two different organisms in which the when items or features are too small to be effects of that relationship is expressed imaged by light. In this case, the image is as being harmful or beneficial; an created by the bending/reflection of an intimate association in which organisms electron beam rather than a light beam. of more than one species live together. eukaryotic cell a cell with a distinct The association may be beneficial to membrane-bound nucleus. both (mutualism), beneficial to one with histopathology a branch of pathology no effect on the other(commensalism) that deals with tissue changes associated or beneficial to one with harmful effects with disease or toxic effects, on the other(parasitism). HPLC High Performance Liquid turbidity the clarity of a liquid as Chromatography, commonly used for the measured by the amount of suspended separation, identification, purification and material (i.e., particulates such as quantification of chemical compounds, sediments, phytoplankton, colloids, etc.) logarithmic growth phase the period of in a volume of water. Turbidity reduces growth during which the population the depth of light penetration in a water grows at an exponential rate. column. microzooplankton small animals(or animal plankton) in the size class 20- 200µm that are carried with the motion of the currents. Report#4 9 NEW INITIATIVES Giner: GCMS Detection of Sterol Bricelj: Cytotoxic Effects of Brown Biomarkers for Aureococcus Tide &other brown tide work. anophagefferens. This team has been looking at brown tide affects This team of investigators is developing on several bivalve species and is trying to gain another type of biomarker based on sterols to insight into the nature of any observed toxicity identify brown title in field water and by histopathologically evaluating bivalves sediment samples. Within the short duration exposed to brown tide. By measuring mussel of this project and after developing laboratory feeding,this team found a marked difference in Procedures,these researchers successfully cell toxicity among the three brown tide isolates established a convenient and sensitive tested. Two 1995 isolates showed 100-to 250- method for the Gas Chromatog- fold inhibition of feeding relative to the controls. raphy-Mass Spectrometric The third isolate,from 1985,did not affect (GCMS)analysis of Aureococcus mussel feeding. The presence of other nutritious sterols. Three A. food did not alleviate the effects of brown tide anophagetferens cultures on feeding Experiments evaluating the toxicity suppl led from the Boyer and of Aureococcus over its life stages showed that Andersen groups and the Texas 'older"algae(stationary growth phase)caused a brown tide organism, greater inhibition of feeding rates than did the Aureoumbra lagunensis,have "younger"(early logarkhmic growth phase) been successfully analyzed. To even in the presence of nutritious algae. Al- date,the Z-isomer of 24- though feeding rates were affected,no histo- propylidene-cholesterol remains pathological evidence of toxicity was found in a unique biomarker for any of the four bivalve species tested, The Aureococcus(see BTRI Report digestive glands of bivalves exposed to Number 3). To better establish Aureococcus were comparable to controls this,the sterol composition of a (starved animals)indicating that the effect of a related species will also be brown tide is more like starvation,and thus analyzed. different from other harmful algae. The 1999 field season will find Short-term growth experiments on hard clams a this team very busy. All 17 showed that Aureococcus densities of only Dr.JOSE L.Giner strains of Aureococcus available 35,000 cells per milliliter were sufficient to cause from the CCMP(Andersen)wil I be tested with harmful effects such as inhibition of clam this new technique. Since much of the work feeding,even in the presence of nutritious algae. so far was carried out in the winter,detection Long-term growth experiments on hard clams of Aureococcus in seawater will be tested this and mussels showed that the 1995 brown tide summer. In future projects this team plans to isolate mixed with nutritious algae was highly collaborate with geochemists to explore the toxic to both bivalve species at high(one million historic occurrence of brown tide and see if cells per milliliter)and moderate(400,000 cells climatic changes have influenced these per milliliter)concentrations. Tissue growth rates blooms by examining sediments for these of hard clams were completely suppressed at unique sterols. cell densities of 400,000 cells per milliliter. Although sterols are essential nutrients to Growth by the third week did improve,suggest- many marine organisms, it is unknown ing some acclimation over time to relatively low whether any marine organisms can metabo- Aureococcus concentrations(80,000 cells/ml). lize the highly unusual sterols found in In summary,feeding rates of some bivalves are Aureococcus. The inability of shellfish to suppressed at moderate to high concentrations metabolize Aureococcus sterols could help of toxic Aureococcus strains but were main- explain the shellfish population decline and tarred at cell densities below about 20,000 cell other ecological impacts of brown tide. This per milliliter. team hopes to collaborate with others to study the metabolism of uncommon marine algal sterols. 8 Brown Tide Research Initiative McDONALD CaMOBNCB Box 1000•Southold,Now York 11971 • (831)785-3877 TEST HOLE DATA SHEET Name: SEC Moy MW1 Surveyor: Location: Southold Tax Map Number: 1000-90-2-1 Project Description: MW Date: 5/6/05 Mixed sand and loam Pale brown fine to coarse sand SW -------- 5.0 ' Water in pale brown fine to coarse sand SW ------ V Water in grey organic clay OL 9 ' Comments: Monitoe Wells (5) . . . . . . . .OWNW00 { McDONALD GEOSCHUVCU Box 1000•Southold. New York 11871 • (631)765-3677 - TEST HOLE DATA SHEET Name: SEC Moy MW2 Surveyor: Location: Tax Map Number: Project Description: Date: 5/6/05 Mixed sand and loam -------- 3 ' i Pale brown fine to medium sand SP -------- 4.7 ' Water in pale brown fine to medium sand SP -------- 5 j Water in grey organic clay OL 3 v ! 8 ' Comments: MCDONALD GBQSC ENCU Box 1000• Southold,New York 11971 • (831)766.3677 1 TEST HOLE DATA SHEET - Name: SEC Moy MW3 a Surveyor: Location: Tax Map Number: Project Description: Date: 5/6/05 :i Mixed sand and loam ------- 3.3 ' Water in mixed sand and loam Water in brown bog Pt Water in brown clayey sand SC 8 ' Comments: 1 ii 4 4 McDONALD GEOSCIENCE Box 1000• Southold,New York 11971 • (631)7653677 TEST HOLE DATA SHEET Name: SEC Moy Hug MW4 Surveyor: ! Location: i Tax Map Number: Project Description: Date: 5/6/05 Mixed sand and loam Pale brown fine to coarse sand SW ------- 5.8 ' i - 3 Water in pale brown fine to coarse sand SW ,j Water in grey organic clay OL J 9 ' ' Comments: r McDONALD Box 1000•Southold,New York 11971 • (631)766-3677 TEST HOLE DATA SHEET Name: S9C Moy MW5 3 $UfVByOf: Location: Tax Map Number: Project Description: Date: 5/6/05 Mixed sand and loam Pale brown fine to coarse sand SW ------ 4.7 ' Water in pale brown fine to coarse sand SW -------- 7' Water in grey organic clay OL i 81 Comments: 4w.1 t i Tyf ` APPENDIX C How to Determine the Direction of Groundwater Flow Page 10 1 0 Ix 0I\\ How to Determine the Direction of Groundwater Flow Determining the Direction Ground Water Roun Ground water usually flows loward,and eventually drains into,slmansk nw s,and lakes.The lbw of ground water In aquilen don not always mirror the flow of water on the surface.The folbwing steps show how to determine the ditedlun ground water is flowing and the hydraulic gradient within an unconfined aquifer: Surface Steroce (Isvotiar.743 f t. 9wv~.7113 it Sbp L Determine the water Surface table elevaliom at three locaUona 740 R. To do this subtract the depth to Dt lb it water tmm�the surface elevation Depth to WON-Oft at each well.Can you find the water.17 R. Uapthto water table ekwalkn frn cap each of touncap-So tt. TaOM IItORM tabli the three wells shown in figura I2 ebvctlon. water touts Baer tobk elevation r. F(glirs 1 olavaion �_ WM4 Ulwl 1 IIIA 3 ^OI' A The well fixations from step one am shown in figure 2.The difference in water table elevations between each of the wells is determined by subtracting the water table elevation of a well with a higher elevation from the water table elevation of a well with a lower elevation on each of the straight titws connect- Ing the wells.Then elevation dlffvmnvtb am divided up Into equal increments as shown in ffgun•7. Water table elevation levels have been placed to the figure by of adding die initial water level to WON each Increment.Maw straight a 1 lines connecting the increments s p, which have the same values. FlptR �� UM These lines mpmrenl the water b4S l� �rsrs°" 73 tableamtoum ' e OQa a 706 log 7 l UW#1 6 d 700 692 69a 6 o so no Rid/ A The ground water will flow from higher elevations to lower eievalhms in the direction of maxi- mum change in elevation.The lite perpendicular to the simight limes which connect the elevation incren ants indicates the dirvrhon that jinxed water flows. The vertical change in gn+und water elervalton over horizontal distance.In tie dln%ttkm of ground water flow.is called the hydraulic gradient.It can he detcrmirad for this example using the following equation: Water Table Elevation Change tin the direction of flow) Hydraulic Gradient Horizontal Distance between measurement points This means tlw water table eltvalion dcererxs by_ feet for every fool tlm•grstnd water flows. Diagram courtesy of the Idaho Division of Environmental Quality ) http://imnh.isu.edu/digitalatias/hydr/concepts/gwater/gwflow.htm 6/29/2005 I 1 APPENDIX D Brown Tide Page 1 of 3 i } Brown Tide . l Overview Causes of Brown Tide in the Peconics Status of Brown Tide in the Peconics PEP Brown Tide management goals Water quality sampling What the PEP is doing to reduce the effects of Brown Tide Overview Brown Tide is a bloom (excessive growth)of small marine algae (Aureococcus anophagefferens). Although algae of many types are found in all natural freshwat and marine ecosystems, blooms of the Brown Tide organism literally turn the watc _ deep brown, making it unappealing to swimmers and fishermen alike. While not harmful to humans, the presence of the Brown Tide is a problem for bay scallops z ( eelgrass, and to a lesser degree other finfish and shellfish. Brown Tide is unlike rr other algal blooms because of its unusually high concentrations, the extent of arei r covers and the length of time it persists. } Soon after Brown Tide blooms began in 1985, the population of bay scallops declir significantly, leading to a near collapse of the commercial shelifishing industry in Peconics. Many people considered this to be a "warning shot across the bow"for estuary and its watershed. As more is learned about Brown Tide, it becomes clear that both the estuary's problems and their solutions are characterized by the interrelationship among habitat, living resources, water quality and humans. Understanding and resolving what causes the Brown Tide problem will likely require small steps on many fronts sustained over a long period of time by many stakeholders, from homeowners to farmers to sewage treatment plant operators. Causes of Brown Tide in the Peconics Numerous theories have been investigated, but scientists still do not have a clear explanation of what causes Brown Tide blooms. Some accepted research at this p concludes that: . Compared to other algae, Brown Tide can photosynthesize undt http://www.peconicestuary.org/BrownTide.html 8/15/2005 Brown Tide Page 2 of 3 r extremely low light conditions. a Brown Tide usually acts like an autotroph (plant),producing its own food through photosynthesis. However, in low light conditions, Brown Tide may behave like a heterotroph(animal) metabolizing organic carbon and nitrogen. a Brown Tide bloom onset conditions may be optimized by elevai ratios of available dissolved organic nitrogen(high"DON") in surface waters, with respect to the supply of dissolved inorganic _ nitrogen(low"DIN"). These nitrogen constituents may be relat to groundwater inputs and weather patterns—onset conditions could be optimized in a dry year(low DIN supply from groundwater) that follows a wet year. a Clams and other suspension-feeders can exert significant feedin pressure on phytoplankton, including Brown Tide at low levels. an experimental setting, hard clams have been shown to play a j pivotal role in determining whether Brown Tide blooms becomf - established. 1 Status of Brown Tide in the Peconics Brown Tide blooms persisted in high concentrations for extended periods in all or ? part of the Peconics from 1985 through 1988, 1990 through 1992, 1995, and 1997. 11 Brown Tide has not bloomed in high concentrations in the Peconics since then, bui continues to be an important management topic, especially as efforts are mounte, restore shellfisheries and eelgrass. In 1982, the harvest of 500,000 lbs of bay scallops from the Peconic Estuary accounted for 28%of all U.S. commercial landings and had a dockside value of$1. - i million. After the appearance of the Brown Tide in 1985, the bay scallop populati was virtually eliminated. PEP Brown Tide management goals 1 a Determine environmental factors responsible for Brown Tide blooms a Develop and implement strategies to prevent or mitigate Brown Tide, and its effects on estuarine resources a Restore the natural resources affected by Brown Tide 1 What the PEP is doing to reduce the effects of Brown Tide Continued research, monitoring, and information sharing is needed to find out the cause of Brown Tide and actions that can be taken to prevent, or at least mitigate the effects of Brown Tide. Last modified on 3/28) http://www.peconicestuary.org/BrownTide.html 8/15/2005 r APPENDIX E SeaYwd C New Yolk Report#4 November 1999 1999 BROWN TIDE and SYMPOSIUM OVERVIEW i j The third annual Brown Tide Research At the symposium, Initiative Informational Symposium, hosted by a Newsday reporter(far right) 1 New York Sea Grant,was held on April 10, discusses BTRI 1999 at Westhampton Beach High School in initiatives with . i Westhampton, New York. The sill (clockwise)NYSG'sy research- Assistant Director i ers,guests and Interested citizens who ` �' Cornelia Schlenk, attended made this year's symposium a Brown Tide / success. Presenters traveled from as far north Outreach Specialist Patrick Dooley and as Maine and as far south as Virginia. Susan Banahan, project manager During the symposium, researchers summa- from NOAA's rized progress on the eight BTRI projects, Coastal Ocean other New York Sea Grant funded research Program and member of the - related to brown tide,and an Ecology and BTRI investigators Drs. Patricia Glibert and BTRI steering Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms David Hutchins reported scattered and committee. (ECOHAB) investigation(see Andersen, page relatively low brown tide numbers of 3). Dr. Michael Reynolds,from Brookhaven Aureococcus anophagetiemns in Barnegat National Laboratory, presented the BTRI Bay, NJ,and Delaware's Assawoman and network of investigators with a description of Chincoteague Bays. Investigators from the BNL's capabilities and the latest data in his BTRI network will assist in the investigation of talk entitled"Brown Tide Monitoring Buoys: these blooms. As of July 1999,the bays of Real Time Observations on the World Wide Long Island remained relatively free from I Web"(http://www.oasd.bnl.gov/peconic). As brown tide. A complete summary of 1999 was true last year, an investigator workshop brown tide bloom activity will be presented in was held prior to the public symposium to the next BTRI report. provide the BTRI teams and other brown tide This report builds on BTRI Reports Numbers researchers a networking forum.They pre- resents results from other brown sented their results, discussed new ideas, 1, and 3, p tidee research and sets the stage for the final mapped new research directions,and planned the final field season of their projects field season of the BTRI Phase I research effort. Report#4 follows the same format as the previous issues for easy project tracking. Boldfaced terms are defined under Key Terms adding to those defined in the Brown tide researchers(I.to r.)Josh L.Giner,Robert Andersen, David Caron, earlier reports. Maureen Keller and Darcy Lonsdale at the 1999 BTRI Informational Symposium. BTRI and Other Report/4 Brown Tide Investigators Writer: Patrick Dooley Editors: Barbara Branca Cornelia Schlenk Bigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences, ME Horn Point Environmental Paul Focazio Dr. Robert A. Andersen Laboratories, MD Designers: Barbara Branca Dr. Maureen Keller University of Maryland Sharon O'Donovan Dr. Michael Sieracki Dr.Patricia M.Gilbert BTRI Steering Committee: Brookhaven National Laboratory, NY Dr.Todd M. Kana Dr.Julie La Roche (guest scientist) lona College, NY Cornelia Schlenk,Chair, NYSG Dr.Joseph Stabile Rklwd Balla,US Environmental College of Marine Studies, DE Protection Agency,representing the University of Delaware Institute for Marine Peconic National Estuary Program(PEP) Dr. David A. Hutchins Biosciences, Susan Banahan, NOAA Coastal Graduate School of Oceanography, RI Halifax, Nova Scotia Ocean Program University of Rhode Island Dr.V.Monica Bricej i Vacant,Representative,Town level Dc Theodore J.Smayda Kemeth Koet tner,NYS Dept.of Marine Sciences Research EnvironmentalConservation, i Centel; NY representing New York State „rp> u - (, SUNY at Stony Brook Dr.Robert Nuzzi,Suffolk County Dr. Darcy J. Lonsdale _ Dept.of Health Services,representing Suffolk County Dr.Sergio Sof udo-Wilhelmy Roger Tollefsan,NY Seafood Council. Northeast Fisheries Science representing SSER and PEP Citizens Center CT 1 Advisory Committees NOAA1NMFS William Wise,Marine Sciences Dr.Richard A.Robohm Research Center,SUNY Stony Brook, Dr.Gary H.Wikfors representing the South Shore Estuary Reserve(SSER)Council Old Dominion Uniltersity VA John Donat SUNYCollege of Environmental Science and i Forestry, NY New York Sea Grant is part of a national network of universities Dr.Gregory Boyer meeting the challenging Dr.Jose L Giver ernironmental and economic needs Woods Hole Oceanographic of the coastal ocean and Great lakes Institution, MA regions.Unique among the 29 Sea Grant programs nationwide because Dr. David A.Caron it has both marine and Great lakes I shorelines,New York Sea Grant _ engages in research,education,and technology transfer to promote the understanding,sustainable development,utilization,and conservation of our diverse coastal resources.NYSG facilitates the 't . transfer of research-based information ,` f`,.` * Aureococcus to a great variety of coastal user A ; , a ` a distinct cell wall.q, ` �'e anaphaaefferens cell with - groups which include businesses, federal,slate and local government '� "h 'W_ Photo by RobertAndereen decision-makers and managers,the media,and the interested public. New York Sea Grant Staff Director:Dr.lack Mattice Asoclate Director.Dale Baker ......�'....w �a�� a,,,�-_ �,.a. e�- AobtraDirector:C coelia Schlenk To yyanalaaae rete ng Yti Ytom dit r S" ComnNeator:Barbara Branca ,..rn,rr" Project Ani#ra&BTRI OWewh specialist:Patrick Dooley 2 Brown Tide Research Initiative Research Project Briefs: Culturing Andersen: Multiple Culture Isolates Also examining the ITS region, Drs.Joseph (Xeric and Axenic), Biodiversity and Stabile and Isaac Wirgin(in their ECOHAB Ultrastructure of Aureococcus project examining"Genetic Variation in Brown Tide Cultures and Water Samples from Long anophagefferens. Island and New Jersey"see BTRI Repot Number 2 for a summary),obtained results While investigating the genetic variability of consistent with those of Andersen's team. By Aureococcus anophagefferens,this team of examining both ITS(ITS1 and ITS2)regions,and researchers made two new discoveries. In one two genes from the ribosomal DNA,this project strain of A.anophagefferens,they found a cell wall set out to determine if there are genetic differ- (see figure on p.2);and in all strains studied,they ences among New York and New Jersey brown documented genetic variability in the internal tide isolates and DNA obtained directly from transcribed spacer(ITS)sequences of the riboso- brown tide water samples before and during a mal DNA. The Provasoli-Guillard National Center bloom. Their DNA sequencing results confirm for Culture of Marine Phytoplankton(CCMP)has that there is genetic variation within and among 17 strains of A.anophagefferens from various bays cultured isolates,and among field samples. across Long Island from which investigators can Analysis of the Long Island isolates and field choose samples(or cultures)for experimental samples suggested that the 1985 strain from purposes. This team is also hopeful that a new Long Island(CCMP strain#1784)was more suite of antibiotics will help to establish in the lab similar to 1995 brown tide bloom samples than the still elusive axenic strain of brown tide. the other Long Island cultured isolates. Addi- Previously,A.anophagefferens was described as tional experiments are being performed to naked or without a cell wall. While examining a confirm these results. In addition,the Long previously studied strain from Long Island, Island and New Jersey isolates are genetically however,a distinct cell wall was discovered. The distinct. One interpretation of these results is makeup and structure of this cell wall are as yet that A.anophagefferens is a recently evolved unknown. The cell wall appears to have a species. This is consistent with the appearance reticulated structure.However,the reticulated of brown tides in northeastern US embayments. nature may be an artifact caused by sample preparation for etectrort mWroscopy. If the cel I Wikfors&Robohm:Isolation and Propagation of the wall is not reticulated,then it may act to protect the brown tide cells in the sediments during non- Brown Tide Alga,Aureococcus anophagefferens, bloom periods. A detailed description of the cell Using Dialysis Culture Techniques. wall's structure and molecular composition requires considerable work outside the original The dialysis culture technique was successfully used to scope of this project. produce bacteria-free cultures of two non-brown tide isolates. Nevertheless,by the end of this project,establish- Although it isnot known if Aureococcus under- Alth sexual reproduction at any point during its Ing bacteria-free cultures of A.anophagefferens had still goelife history, ITS sequences appear of t important proven unsuccessful. Efforts to establish new isolates of A. anophagefferens were hampered by relatively low densities for sexually reproducing organisms in that in the Peconic Estuary during the sampling seasons(1997- organisms that differ in their ITS sequences are not 98) The investigators suggested an explanation for their able to mate successfully. To investigate differ- results. A.anophagefferens appeared to increase produc- ences in ITS sequences,this team employed a new tion of mucus when stressed(see Keller&Sieracki page 4), technique called heteroduplex mobility assay such as when exposed to antibiotics. This mucus produc- (HMA),which amplifies gene sequences. Another tion caused A.a ha 9�erens populations introduced used,ed,called denaturing gradient gel �P electrophoresis(DGGE),can resolve single base into the dialysis cassettes stick inside surfaces,rather differences. The results showed that several than remaining in suspension where they could grow different sequences were present,but not all the normally. strains have the same"different"sequence. Ultimately,the dialysis culture technique did work Furthermore,all of the strains seemed to share one successfully with non-A.anophagefferens algae producing sequence hypothesized to be the functional ITS single algae, bacteria-free cultures. However,since this sequence. These results demonstrate that technique did not work with A.anophagefferens,no further Aureococcus has highly unusual ITS regions dialysis culture work will continue with brown tide.This f compared to other eukaryotic organisms. project has been concluded. Report#4 3 Research Project Briefs : Ecology Keller&Sieraeld:Physiological Ecology of developed succession from larger cells in April to the Brown Tide Orgarusm,Aureococcus smaller picoalgae cells in late May(see Quantuck anophagefferen &their new initiative: Bay graphs). For both years,a niche developed in Measurement of Bacterial Biomass in the early May that was filled a non-brown tide picoalga called Synechococcus,which appears to Brown Tide Study Area. be the superior competitor in these systems. For the niche to open to other picoalgae, including A. This study focuses on the period of bloom initiation anophagefferens,some factors)such as nutrient and the factors that result in the eventual dominance limitation or grazing activity may be required to of A.anophagefferens in Long Island coastal eliminate or dampen Synechococcus growth and embayments. The approach was two-pronged. accumulation,therefore allowing other algae to fill First,this team examined the complete microbial the picoalgal niche. community throughout the prebloom period in In an accompanying non-BTRI project,funded several areas where brown tides have occurred. directly by New York Sea Grant,these researchers They were searching for differences between brown are investigating the bacteria associated with brown and non-brown tide populations. Secondly,this tide by comparing samples from brown tide blooms team established cultures of A.anophagefferens, and in non-bloom areas. Higher bacterial numbers other co-occurring picoalgae,and the were consistently found in Quantuck Bay,a non- microzooplanlRon that may feed on these algae to bloom area, in both 1997 and 1998. In the examine interaction and competition between the Aureococcus bloom areas(West Neck Bay in 1997 microbial players. and Great South Bay in 1998),bacterial numbers This team has also established a variety of picoalgae were much lower but the cells were very large and and micrograzers cultures from Long Island Bays: elongate. As a result,bacterial biomass was Quantuck,Shinnecock and Flanders. This comparable for the two areas. Associated with the community work revealed that the relative diversity elongate bacteria was a matrix of extracellular and seasonal succession of phytoplankton in these mucus that could result in filtration problems and systems was similar between locations and between clogging of the feeding mechanisms of shellfish and years(1997-98). There appears to be a well- other filter-feeding organisms living in these environments. It now appears that the abundance 2,000 of bacteria is not correlated with brown tide. Quantuck Bay 1997 Instead,a unique bacterial assemblage may exist in 1,500 a symbiotic relationship with A.anophageffereris, ❑Bacteria ®Phototrophs E Heterotrophs rather than in competition for resources(see BTRI Report Number 3, p.8). 1,000 Utilizing these cultures,the final year of this project will examine the photosynthetic and growth characteristics of Aureococcus in comparison to co- 500 occurring phytoplankton that are similar in physiology and size. This team will also investigate U grazing by the microzooplankton on the brown tide p organisms and the co-occurring phytoplankton to i April I May I June—i determine if Aureococcus is selectively avoided. E 2,000 m Quantuck Bay 1998 1,500 '.a Measurements of carbon biomass in Quantuck Bay 1,000 in two sampling years 1997-1998.A biomass low point was observed in early May in both years and appeared to represent a transition period from f' larger to small algae in the system.These 500 .°'ter^ patterns were also observed in Flanders and *? Shinnecock Bays. (Phototrophs-phytoplankton; heterotrophs- micrograzers). 0 i April I May I lune—{ 4 Brown Tide Research Initiative Research Project Briefs: Ecology ' Gldtert&Kana:Mechanisms for Nutrient This team also found that A.araphageffereu grows and Energy Acquisition in Low Light: well on nitrate,urea,and some amino acids,but Successful Strategies ofAureococcus does not grow well on ammonium. Ea Aurcomm a to grow on nitrate or urea,it requires anophagefferens. enzymes called nitrate reductases(see BTRI Report Number 2:Boyer)and ureases respectively. - The overall goal of this project is to characterize Typically,when cells are grown on nitrate,the the photosynthetic and respiratory rates and enzyme to process urea(urease)is not found. - nitrogen uptake,capabilities of laboratory clones Howew,,A.anophagaTerens expresses the urease of A.anophagefferens under a range of I ight and enzyme when grown on both nitrate and urea. - nutrient growth conditions. The hypothesis has Since ureases can be measured under growth on a been that competitive success may be contingent range of nitrogen sources,this suggests that ureases on the ability of A.anophagefferens to supple- may serve more than one function in A. ment photosynthesis with heterotrophic uptake of anophageffavis, yak will continue examining organic compounds. This team has made the regulation of ureases and other nitrogen considerable progress attaining these goals. assimilation enzymes. As previously reported,A.anophagefferens has proven to be exceedingly difficult to culture. Although bubbling the cultures significantly enhances A.anophagefferens'growth,maintain- Caron&Lonsdale:Microzooplankton-Mesozooplankton ing consistent growth has been difficult To Coupling and Its Role in the Initiation of Blooms of overcome this problem,this team developed a Aureococcus anophagefferens(Brown Tides). continuous culture system based on maintaining the culture at constant ttabid4 called a turbidostat(see photo). Each culture flask has In 1998,this team conducted two 2&3.sR experiments as two fiber-optic sensors linked to a computer that described in were Reports Number 2 o 3. Repeatable monitors turbidity,chlorophyll,and regulates the conditions v�ere created in some meoncosm treatments that flow of growth media. Utilizing this new led to the initiation r brown tide. Contrary to 1997 results, technology, it could be seen that A. Some labor with hard clams did not develop brown tide. anophagetferens showed a negative growth Some laboratory experiments may offer an explanation. At upon the onset of darkness. During the I ight non-bloom concentrations of A.anophagefferens(e.g., less cycle,growth resumed. When the investigators than 100,000 ceVml),hard clam feeding rates were added an organic substrate(glucose+acetate)to depressed even if 8n alternate algal food source was also the system,there was a two to three fold net present. When brown tide cell densities surpassed 35,000 enhancement of growth relative to the controls. cells/ml,filter feeding ceased(see Briceb this report). These Nighttime growth loss was also sharply dimin- investigators suggest that,compared to 1997,the lower ished with the addition of organics. These results brown tide starting concentrations(5,000 to 6,000 cellstml) clearly demonstrate that organic supplements can and the relatively higher grazing pressure by the larger hard increase A.anophagefferens's growth rate. clams prevented bloom formation in the 1998 experiments. Using a range of methods to compare A. This group has developed a bay-wide working hypothesis anophagefferens'photosynthetic physiology to from these results. The rapid decline in bivalve population in similar algae this team found that A. Long Island bays during the decades prior to the first brown anophagefferens and another dinoflagellate, tide in 1985 may have led to a significant reduction of Prorocentrum minimum,have a carbon to grazing pressure on phytoplankton, including the size-class oxygen ratio reduced by about half compared to of A.anophagefferens,allowing the onset of brown tide. This many other phytoplankton. This signifies that reduction in benthic grazing resulted in a shift in control from these two algal species do not maintain a balance the filter-feeding benthic organisms to a pelagic microalgal between photosynthesis and respiration. There is consumer. According to these investigators,the interactions either a carbon deficit or excessive oxygen among the pelagic microalgal consumers may play a central production. A carbon deficit is consistent with a role in determining the success of Aureococcus in planktonic meed to supplement photosynthesis with an communities. If this hypothesis holds true,then the overall additional carbon source,such as by organic health of the benthic community has significant uptake as described in the previous paragraph. consequences for the occurrence of brown tides in Long Island waters. Report#4 5 Research Project Briefs: Bloorn Triggers Sailudo-NMelmy,Hutchins&Donat:Biogeochemical and Results from field experiments,designed to Anthropogenic Factors that Control Brown Tide Blooms:The evaluate the importance of DOC, DON, DIN, iron Effects of Metals and Organic Nutrients in Long Island's and p on the g of A. anophageffe to gefferens during a a tw wo month brown tide Embayments;and Sanudo-Wilhelmy's:Impact of Interstitial and bloom in West Neck Bay,support other BTRI Groundwater on the Chemical Composition of Surface Waters of results. This team found that the nutrients,which Long Island's Embayments. stimulated the growth of A.anoptWeffererrs, changed over the course of the bloom from organic carbon to nitrogen. In contrast, non- This team of investigators has performed brown tide phytoplankton growth was consistently considerable field and laboratory research on the enhanced by nitrogen additions. Hence,nitrogen dynamics of brown tide bloom initiation and the additions decreased or had no effect on the biogeochemistry of the Long Island estuaries in relative abundance of A.anophagefferens among which blooms occur. In the final year of this phytoplankton. Brown tide's growth was study,they will continue their work in West Neck Increased by additions of dissolved organic Bay,Great South Bay,Quantuck Bay and again carbon,which also augmented the growth of collaborate with the Caron&Lonsdale group's heterotrophic bacteria(see Glibert). mesocosm study measuring an array of inorganic aril organic parameters. The NYSG funded(torn-BTRI)new initiative During 1998,elevated nitrate was measured in projecthgintroduced in BTRI Report rs investigating 9 the groundwater seepage in Flanders Bay has now West Neck Bay during the peak groundwater been completed.This study looked at how flow period. This nitrate input was followed by a nutrients,organics,and trace metals(aluminum, phytoplankton bloom of various species. In July, copper, magnesium,cadmium, iron and silver)in brown tide bloomed when the supply of nitrate _ groundwater can change and influence bay levels from groundwater decreased. Phytoplankton of these parameters based on groundwater blooms preceding brown tide may have supplied seepage rates. Results indicate that groundwater Aureococcuswith organic nutrients. This study can supply nitrate and copper at concentrations concludes that rather than repressing brown tide, over three times greater than levels found in the groundwater inputs to West Neck Bay can open water of Flanders Bay. Seepage rates can stimulate Aureococcus growth by initiating also play a significant role in altering the chemical phytoplankton blooms prior to brown tide which flux to groundwater entering the bay and can thus supply to Aureococcus remineralized organic impact bay productivity. nitrogen(see graph below). Brown Tide Bloom Development in West Neck Bay 6x10' West Neck Bay's groundwater-supplied nitrate 30chlorophyl Brown Tide during the late spring fueled a mixed density phytoplankton bloom shown on the graph as -- sxlos increased chlorophyll levels. In June, groundwater 325 nitrate 0,., E and light levels decreased ending this mixed ,„ phytoplankton bloom and resulted in a single- . 4x IO v species brown tide bloom. ,.z0 O T 3x105 c Graph and data by Christopher Gabler V15 v .a s to- 00 0 2x105 $ 2 m 5 x105 0 Ox lou Apr 25,98 May 25,98 Jun 25,98 Jul 25,98 6 Brown Tide Research Initiative Research Project Briefs : doom Triggers Boyer&La Roche:Fertedoxin and minimum FCR activity needed to support maximum Aureococcus Flavodoxin as a Metabolic Marker for Iron growth. This may be important in obtaining necessary iron and may Stress inAureococcus anophagefferens. change the iron story for Aureococcus. Little is know about the iron pool available to Aureococcus,and most organic iron complexes As rem loos BTRI Re can be reduced by FCR. Accordingly,further field experiments will ported prey ports,this team be designed considering these new results. of researchers continues to explore several methods to develop a metabolic marker for iron- stress to determine if iron I imits growth of A. ' anophagMerens.Currently,the best results have been obtained using a ratio that indicates a change in photosynthetic efficiency.This Smayda:Analysis of Physical Chtfiltical and Biological Conditions i method has been used by members of the Associated with the Narragansett Bay Brown Tide. Sanudo-Wilhelmy team and is routinely i incorporated into sampling protocols as a This study examines a two-year measure of iron limitation in Boyer's laboratory. data set,collected in Providence A Preliminary studies have shown that Narragansett Bay from 1985-87, Sabin Point Aureococcus also produces Flavodoxin under N from a physical,chemical and Nayatt Point iron limitation.This team's focus has been on biological perspective,to +e`R' establishing methods to measure both ferredoxin explain the 1985 Rhode Island 0 s and Flavodoxin using both HPLC and antibody brown a(see e BTIults Report 4 techniques. For ferredoxin measurement, support su flushingas the Mount several HPLC ion exchange columns are primary cause of the 1985 a1° i Hope currently being evaluated. In order to perfect brown tide outbreak Thus,this 40' 1 0 y isolation techniques for these proteins, large group has turned its focus to the 0 t1 amounts of cellular material are needed.Since role nutrients may have played B isolating the proteins has been problematic,this in this bloom event. Supporting group is currently exploring the use of antibodies ppct1 g for the purification of ferredoxin and Flavodoxin. other BTRI findings, z Work has begun to test the use of antibodies Aureococcus abundance in Narr nettwas nerall prepared against fen edoxin from spinach and 9e y antibodies against Flavodoxin isolated from greater in higher salinity bay Phaeodactylum,marine algae used in previous waters with loaves nutrient However, nutrient and 41' P studies by La Roche and coworkers. These levels. 30' flavodoxin antibodies cross-react with salinity levels in this system are Flavodoxin isolated from Aureococcus. Once associated with river discharge, these analytical details have been worked out, complicating the brown tide the methods can combined and used as an growth rates suggests two story. An analysis of calculated Narragansett Bay indicator of iron limim itation. possibilities. First,a possible Rhode Island Sound Boyer's laboratory has also looked at the washout"of cells occurred in mechanisms by which A.anophagefferens the more rapidly flushed 71'20' obtain its needed iron. Other recent work has region of the bay preventing an shown that over half of the marine bacteria accumulation of Aureocnmrs Stations in Narragansett Bay,RI,sampled tested produce siderophores to assist in iron that might be expected for the during the 1985-1987 brown tide surveys. uptake described in BTRI Report#3. However, nutrient-salinity oonditlons present. there is no evidence that A.anophagefferens Secondly,growth losses(brown tide uses siderophore production to obtain iron. Any losses due to cell transport downstream)rather than growth repression siderophores produced thus far would I likely could account for the observed spatial distribution of Aureoco= stem from the bacteria associated with brown abundance. Preliminary results on the relationship between the domi- tide(see Keller and Sieracki).Ferric chelate nant grazer on brown tide(the copepod Acartia torso in this system)and reductase(FCR)is a key enzyme for the uptake Aureococcus abundance suggest that gazing processes prior to and of iron.Extensive FCR characterization in during the 1985 event controlled the observed Aureococcus abundance Aureococcus has suggested that FCR activity is and distribution in the bay. Continued analyses of this data set can solidify extremely important in the iron dynamics of these results and possibly present insight into the Long Island and New Aureococcus.Results suggest that field Jersey bloom events. populations contain about 10,000 times the Report#4 7 WEST LAKE �$ "PPRoz N.w.u. El8 ` 1 WEST ., —SNTOA LAK E p ' _ (33_ / -- MnDE _ PROP. PERVIOUS -S70#43 '50"E v m 77.04.1`— PaE — PROPOSEDwAri ./ EL-5,, -0- Z i PROPOSED RETAINING WAIL I N7 3 i I / \� NCP \ i` j , Q 1 ST 7-- CP DP 15 me.00 CP CP 1 �- e t 30 p. 1 1 PorroOSE� �._i S15�S'WITARY itccp - 241 ,�� / C OR' AYOUS I Ic aLOCAT, SERA w " >Ex yy Sl. M . PROPOSED 3 Lot 119 tao V 1 T i TEL-8.5 a u b 0 n "0co i N10 39'330w r N69- 34 yy EL-7.0 89.93 Iq -�-�� F LITTLE PECONI C BAY TEST HOLE DATA McDONALD GEOSCIENCE DEC. 20, 2004 EL-8.2 0.0 Cl COVER MIXED SAND TO GRADEAND LOAM GW HOUSE EL-1.5 4.7 F 1 F05 WATER IN /—FINISHED GRADE MIXED SAND a-a> AND LOAM a-�.o 7.0 CRAWL SPACE '.w wu mow[*unto wru WATER IN a_e.a BROWN SOG rPe.� z-xa � y 't °ma x�� 13.p al ----r ___6�__ T'o WATER IN o. __ 1" BR01M SILTY _ SAND 15.0 EL-15 WATER IN SEASONAL HIGH PALE BROWN GROUND WATER FINE TO SEPTIC TANK CESSPOOL COARSE SAND 1000 GAL. 17.0 VEST LAKE ti,,a CO �O Q q0 AVRRDX N.W.M. ',I .\ Y 1 I \ s1uF Aftt�A,gs AS 4 11114L T SAKE \ „�- QXa�NmVFMm 9r ,j -- (33_WIDE � v� _PROP. Pot _D � DIV Wwous WAY 77 Q4' Ld 4:5.1 / i / _ PRCPOy�- WA AS M O AIN _ . a PROPOSED WT / _•__ E,oSiN� �G WA(1 / �_ WATER WAN � N I N70-4 -W E70giryD stD,g RDADwAr FE / a' i i 1 b ^" O 300.00. I Ne 1 DP 45-900 j 1f El iL� CP USED FIE 1 PROPOS STSIEM ARY / �2�1 i NOTES: CE] 1. TOTAL AREA 8,861 S.F. (ADJACENT AREA) Oft 2. 0 - SPIKE SET,•= REBAR FOUND. se 3. SUBDIVISION MAP 'CEDAR BEACH PARK- FILED �°R0pM1 y6 per , IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF SUFFOLK COUNTY ry/ WATER ON DEC. 20. 1927 Lot 118 4. ELEVATIONS SHOWNAS FILE HE HEREON sO7Eh mc ARE REFERENCED TO DAElt W"/&1C WATEp St• JohnN.G.V. DATUM Or. formerl 5. THIS PARCEL ISWITHINFIRM ZONE AE(EL 8) AS ` SL 1929). o B Epscopol Church DILINEATED ON FIRM BOUNDARY MAP NO. 3610300169 0 LAST DATED MAY 04, 1998. 1QO. d 6. APPROAMATE FILL REQUIRED = 169 CUBIC YARDS 7. ADJACENT LOT COVERAGE:REQUIRED (FOR SANITARY). i H HOUSE = 1,061 S.F. ` DECK - 506 S.F. sDe ^ TOTAL = 1,567 S.F. OR 17.7% , I / w 89.93' MAY 19, 2005 Loc NaNlaRnc WE1Es APR. 11, 2005 DEG AmEmmmTs JAN. 20, 2005 PMV.STR,1CIURM DATE DEC. 06, 2004 r JOB N0:2OD4-744 CERTIFIED TO: SIM MOY Survey for. P4t`OF fs'pW"o to Y SIM MOY y � TEST HOLE DATA McDONAW GEOSCIENCE Lot 119, "Cedar Beach Park" DEC. 20, 2004 A y ,• EL-8.2 0.0 Bayview " MIXED SAND GW AND LOAM E4.7 L=1.5 Town of :......-%�4 M XED SAND Southold r s AND LOAM 70 Suffolk County, New York DAVID H. FOX, L.S. P.C. N.Y.S.L3. /50234 "T.W EW WATER IN PDX LAND SURYBnNC BRO,I„ Bob S,C,T.M.: 1000-090.00-02.00-001.000 64 SUNSET AVENUE -s= 13.0 20 G 20 WESTHAMPTON BEACH, N.Y. 11978 BRA SLTY I I 1 1 (631) 288-0022 SND SCALE:IN. ' ts.0 2Q uNAUTHaNUEo AL1FFAliM ort ADmnoN ro n,s surtTcv IS , MKAl4lN CISCOM )309 M ST. TIK KN TQIK TE WATER IN E9e .0 uW.OZOM of THis SI"�Er uAv Not 9EAAaNO PALE BROWN T LAND suLKTOMs m«Eo sw.ae FINE TOEweosssE.� SHALL NOT BE CCN9IDER[p TO 9E A VALID TRUE OOPv. COARSE SAND cEanrcwTroH x,wwTEo HpiEON sHAu NUN oxtT To 1HE xnsoH roN WT,oW THE suRVEr is T,TEOAREO.NO ON HK 17.0 9EFIALI ro THE nTL[ cOHPA, OOVEgN,p�TAL ADEN" .0 LINbNc QSA&ON LI$TEp HENCpI ANo To TIN: ASSIZ. OF THE LENdIq WSZ4I N. CERTRICATON ARE NOT 1...... .. TO ApgnoNAL wmTU11011a OR A/95EWlHT ONNERS. DWO: 2004-744 �r WEST LAKE F , � _ o � LoI 0 FISSION ANN W €m \ Q WEryµpSp EDGE OF ¶p p WESTLA S ROLH EN ON _,N IINCq ApY KE , ,/ .\ ON aCi 3>. 2 S0, R. INC. V� �\ \ \ Z— WOIW ,S70"43'50"E PROPOSEDWA1ER M 4117Z04'/ / AS, _AIN _ EL=5.1 /b-E PI RI WAIL —_ Exsnxc'A,E'bgry — N Y ei"'isl I �-- i i N7043'50"W exiSRNG SRPNF 1,OWL, N FE {CP i rA J 1 61 CP I I\ ST AFS ` h 300.00' 30' a s 0 ���I i,I PROPOSED SANITARY i ( SSEM NOTES: / FBI p 1. TOTAL AREA = 8,861 S.F. (ADJACENT AREA) PERK ' si DRIvEWAy°ps I PROPI 2. 0 = SPIKE SET,0= REBAR FOUND. IT 1b CH PARK' FILED Rs"O,HOUSE fx-SEpRppM°N N°� - �, 3 N THE OFFICE OF. SUBDIVISION MAP "THE ACL RKA OF SUFFOLK COUNTY PROP V Wq�' ON DEC. 20, 1927 AS FILE NO. 90 'S&"ER, OwEUINc Lot 118 4. ELEVATIONS SHOWN HEREON ARE REFERENCED TO _ w/rupuc wA>Ery n0 N.G.V. DATUM (MSL 1929), St. Joh W or. former) 5. THIS PARCEL IS WITHIN FIRM ZONE AE(EL 8) AS O 1 _?ROPOSED pE 3 OS EPiSCRO y DILINEATED ON FIRM BOUNDARY MAP NO. h F A Church 3610300189 G LAST DATED MAY 04, 1996. Z Lot 719 100, B. APPROXIMTE FILL REQUIRED 80 CUBICYARDSREQUIRED FOR SANITAR . T ➢\IRFR I Ly 7. ADJACENT LOT COVERAGE: /oes W HOUSE = 1,061 S.F. E�G.50 wEu o DECK - 506 S.F. =s sa 0 TOTAL = 1,567 S.F. OR 17.7% N1089'36"09' -FA, WRIT ODER" 3 W N69 44'34"W EL-7,0 TIE LRI I JUNE 26, 2006 REvsED PROP SEPnC AwRS, HLN, 89 93, MAY 19, 2005 Loc, A.PITORmO wEUS APR. 11, 2005 CEC AMENCUENTIR P t JAN. 20, 2005 PRPP smncnRES 4• GATE: DEC. 08, 2004 JOB NO:2004-744 CERTIFIED TO: P SIM MOY LI rr�E �� O�s�V �A PECONIC Survey for: `4'p��;Tuiw , A Y TEST HOLE DATA Sim MO Y MPDGNAL° GEOSCIENCE Lot 119, "Cedar Beach Park" 4 DEC. 20, 2004 At f EL=8.2 0.0 0.1 COMER MIXED SAND Bayview HOUSE i0 GRACE GW AND LOAM 47 Town of FF.10.5 FINISHED GRADE EL=1.5 WATER IN Southold E-FE MIXED SAND a / AND LOAM Suffolk County, New York DAVID H. FOX, L.S. P.C. N.YS.L.S. x!50234 CRAWL SPACE gET.,,,,,,ID. ,. 7'° FOX LAND SURVEYING ,p °' WATER IN S.C.T.M.: 1000-090.00-02.00-001.000 //-/^ o E,7o BeDwN aoc 64 SUNSET AVENUE , TIS:E„�EA.ID/ 13.0 ,0 WESTHAMPTON BEACH, N.Y. 11976 TOR —_ —T e/-oa WATER IN _o p _ i"' BROWN SILW —_ - --- - (631) 288-0022 A ; SAND 150 -; i> _ 9CALE:1"-20 - IS A ROTATION OASIS HE I- 11 11' 1 AW 0911 STATE EL=2.4 WATER IN rED OF THIS SI I PRO HOT BARRITIG SEASONAL HIGH PALE BROWN ALL u0T ED CONSIS ao To Eo A VALID TITLE EOFY ' mu GROUND WATER FINE TO SEPTIC TANK CESSPOOL COARSE SAND JUL 6 2008 PERSE1 FOR WHIAT TIE F-1 IS PIEPIFIF -H .11 11J yIND GI 17.0 TME 5,�ID5EIDLE,NT OROFFE .IDID.rIDIRAE��I.rnr _� � .rte Su©oiv7sFoN MAP CEDAR BEACH PARK :31 ru/9TE AT oh h . �5• • ; - E3,�Yvicw �� TOWN OF 3OU771OLD �� o --- -I; - NEW I�OFiF< F rc /dor l�r AUG 23 V6 ''l;' IIS' I' fect- /i/e/. 10 1.3 16 et_ �F-- r - 6�✓-_[ _ - •laz � o . � Dimn.n✓/+s ✓ art uL,r Gds✓re ,�Pmai+n.de un/y. ,jl II -'- =.1� 1 ^vc h .��///'''" _ ° C°"E '�� A .R ". ., °• ' /g Q Cpq� W, O.'\ `' a,y CSNMA/unr/rY 27 � •` (fYI NEAGH s 23 ° � /SB :�I` R ,e• `-.o "\• C,, V, Ors YA z, p/�3 W /S9 -�r .y r` ° ;•tt• " '� HHS/N 22 ° 2 a ro /7 \' /sR° ry/ t•� / a •Z. e� e r IW /`7 0/4//./ /SG � 8e/ d.."• :�; r : ! - , p /G/ . %� � /72 : /sem' " z a p \;^ •za 9. I o •.. Z !�a ;'Q/, _•' ,. �_ •O\� + / �/� 'mac,,, 30 (+' ¢ /6.2 I+i /79 ..._ ✓ \ 20 20 O n•- y 'h /6¢r,"� 4 /5y Nr Q l n �x s ti A � 1 \ i'^ f �s 1,.. 'l � •\�, Imo,. ' % LAivo oF' H. Ho Rror 1✓ 167 O 37 \ a" 49 Q �d• •. .mss^ l �._JI I I . � � ,•. �' . PrG 39 E Fl G H 'c\ ' V / Vii • ,'' /�� i �j144 ox/ '� +dor . m d" �c• Q' 1'<V \ 'Ps f / e•e n rc f js/'v�\� g 76.e z o ` -' :\�C r •I r 0 G WE 5 7 u" pP / �, ' %rI/ C •/3 ' ,42 P 6E 53 ., v 7/ L H ry E /• � ,r ^ U jY' 3 sb `' F St 7� 7 73 ' ,. e. "`�F /�7 /F/✓ 4 ` /yam r,' 66 UErt;, ,,�E . n3 �^8 ' ° ( 5' _ _�_ ,,4 _ _. - � .� � a ;JI' • 4. ` e YS'7 r ✓J ,•i � .f E•. 9 s 1-1 " . „ F �6S I "•. 2p /�3� krh .. f„',�.. 2 �1. gs .., ` .S o /S- C� e w6�• 60 ° 75 z /z/ r C`i o • -p'^ O¢ o ./S2 E' 76 7.,” e , S A s T //6 Y a 80 79 •✓ i' ° 8 91 3 'p, T T -. /O7 /ob /a.q- •s a ' a, . / rc` ., Nrrr+`�t J•j - : V . O 0 9 .� :9L 9 , Y _ 56 A 9 f ..J t to •y.; i" Note Oda ✓/lowrr by mvmbrr'or/rflrr in cir:/c arc rl:✓+c en ,E' --- '; 'MnP No / ' F✓rf f,Fr7 rrfy f�EdtrGrN 6.ncw ✓r E+yv. C O / her'eby certify thof M/J malawasmade N by me from 4CIU91 JWr✓eyJ CO e/es Sept/S 11926. / �" tJ1/anti/El�r aSu/rcyor: "I - � �..yM1. S u1hwJ 'NY Fr/ /, SvJ/ N. Y. folk v✓ r1y Orrnt 6r N-''Slate Llawe No.ISM Grei? �