HomeMy WebLinkAboutBell Atlantic Mobile Public Utility-Cell Comm Facility-Jan 1998PART HI - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
PROPOSED BELL ATLANTIC MOBILE
PUBLIC UTILITY
CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY
425 WESTPHALIA AVENUE
HAMLET OF MATTITUCK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
Prepared for:
Town of Southold Plannlno° Board
Town Hall
53095 ~[~in Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Prepared by:
Freudenthal & Elkowitz Consulein~o Group, Inc.
368 Veterans Memorial Highway
Commack, New York 11725
(516) 499-2222
January, 1998
PART iii ~ ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
PROPOSED BELL ATLANTIC MOBILE
PUBLIC UTILITY
CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY
425 WESTPHALIA AVENUE
HAMLET OF MATTITUCK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
Prepared for:
Town of Southold Planning Board
Town Hall
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Prepared by:
3~8 Veterans Memorial
C0mmack, New York
(516) 499-2222
J~uary, l~8
PART HI - LONG ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
PROPOSED BELL ATLANTIC MOBILE
PUBLIC UTILITY
CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY
PROJECT LOCATION:
APPLICANT:
LEAD AGENCY:
PREPARER & CONTACT:
425 Westphalia Avenue
Mattituck, Town of Southold
Suffolk County, New York
Bell Atlantic Mobile
c/o Pacbman, Pacbman & Brown
366 Veterans Memorial Highway
Commack, New York 11725
Contact:
Howard Pachman, Esq.
(516) 543-2200
Town of Southold Planning Board
Town Hall
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Contact:
Valerie Scopaz
(516) 765-1938
This Part III Environmental Assessment Form was
prepared by:
Freudenthal & Elkowitz Consulting Group, Inc.
368 Veterans Memorial Highway
Commack, New York 11725
Contact:
Theresa Elkowitz
(516) 499-2222
DATE OF PREPARATION: January, 1998
PART In - LONG ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
PROPOSED BELL ATLANTIC MOBILE
PUBLIC UTILITY
CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY
Table of Contents
Introduction ...................................... 1
Documentation of Need for Project ....................... 4
Potential Land Use Conflicts/Intrusion
on Historical Character of the Hamlet .................... 12
Visual Impacts ................................... 24
Architectural Mitigation ............................. 34
Bibliography ..................................... 35
Figure 1 -
Figure 2 -
Appendix A -
Appendix B -
Appendix C -
Appendix D -
Appendix E -
Appendix F -
Appendix G -
Appendix H -
Site Location Map ........................ 2
Line-of-Sight Analysis Areas ................ 28
Correspondence from Nelson, Pope & Voorhis and Town of Southold
Correspondence Regarding Planning Board Resolution
Affidavit of Philip K. Charalel, Senior Radio Frequency Engineer
Existing and Proposed Cellular Coverage for the Mattituck Area
Proposed Plan, Adjacent Property Setbacks and Properties within 100 feet
and 300 feet of Proposed Bell Tower
Report of Historic Preservation Consultant
Photographs
Simulations of Proposed Bell Tower
Simulations of a Monopole
PART III - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM (EAF)
PROPOSED BELL ATLANTIC MOBILE (BANI)
PUBLIC UTILITY
CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY
425 WESTPHALIA AVENUE
HAMLET OF MATTITUCK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
This documem is a Part III - Environmental Assessment Form (Part III - EAF) prepared to
evaluate the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed construction of a cellular
communications facility by Bell Atlantic Mobile (BAM) at 425 Westphalia Avenue, hamlet of
Mattituck, Town of Southold (see Figure 1 - Site Location Map). The proposed cellular
conmmnications facility consists of a 99 foot bell tower with a 12 ft. x 20 ft. equipment shelter
on a 1,500 square foot lease area.1 The overall parcel from which BAM will be leasing this 1,500
square foot area is approximately 0.31 acres (13,400 square feet) in size.
~Please note that the original BAM application was for a standard monopole with
triangular antenna array. However, during hearings before the Zoning Board of Appeals of the
Town of Southold, BAM offered a bell tower as mitigation. The Planning Board, in its
resolution of November 3, 1997, did not acknowledge this mitigation. Also, the size of the
equipmem shelter has been reduced from the 12 ft. by 40 ft. originally proposed to 12 ft. by 20
ft. which eliminates the need for a side yard variance.
SITE LOCATION MAP
CAPTAIN
MA' FITUC~
11952
~ATTIT~UCK
FIGURE 1 FREUDENTHAL & ELKOWITZ CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
This Part BI - EAF has been prepared in response to a resolution adopted by the Planning Board
of the Town of Southold on November 3, 1997 which was based, in pertinent part, on comments
issued by its consultant, Nelson, Pope & Voorhis, on October 9, 1997 which specifically relate
to the: following:
Documentation of Need for Project;
Potential Land Use Conflicts/Intrusion on Historical Character of the Hamlet;
Visual Impacts; and
Architectural Mitigation.
See Appendix A for correspondence from Nelson, Pope & Voorhis and for the Town of Southold
Planning Board resolution relating to the request for a Part III - EAF for this application. It
should be understood, however, that the commentary issued by Nelson, Pope & Voorhis was
issued prior to the Town's adoption of Local Law No. 26 of 1997, A Local Law in Relation to
Wireless Communication Facilities. Thus, some of the comments contained in the October 9, 1997
correspondence are no longer relevant. This is discussed in greater detail in the section of this
Part III - EAF entitled Potential Land Use Conflicts/Intrusion on Historical Character of the
Hamlet.
3
Documentation of Need for Projoet
The need for the proposed project was outlined in detail by BAiM Senior Radio Frequency
Engineer, Philip K. Charalel, through an affidavit dated October 7, 1997 and submitted in
evidence to the Board of Zoning Appeals. This affidavit included exhibits depicting existing
cellular coverage in Mattituck and expected coverage with the proposed public utility
communications facility at 425 Westphalia Avenue. A copy of the referenced affidavit (which
includes black and white copies of the exhibits) is included in Appendix B. Color reproductions
of the exhibits are included in Appendix C. The following synopsis of the need for the project is
a summary of Mr. Charalel's affidavit with clarifying supplementary information.2
Bell Atlantic is a cellular telephone public utility in the State of New York and a provider of an
essemial public service (see Cellular One v. Rosenbers, 82 NY2d 364 (1993) and Cellular One
v. Meyer, 607 NYS 2d 81 (2nd Dept. 1994). BAM holds a Certificate of Public Necessity from
the New York State Public Service Commission. Today, one in eight Americans use cellular
phones. In order to meet the needs of its customers, which include residents, businesses and
emergency personnel, Bell Atlantic requires a site to provide coverage to its users in the Mattimck
area..As depicted in Appendix C on the figure entitled Existing Cellular Coverage for the
MattintckArea, there is a serious deficiency in BAM's cellular telephone coverage in this area.
:As the need for the project and the site selection process is specialized and technical in
nature, it is not possible for the summary section to be all-inclusive. Therefore, the technical
information contained in the testimony and supporting affidavits prevails over the information
summarized in this Part III - EAF.
4
This service deficiency ("gap") prevents BAM from providing seamless cellular coverage to public
and private users, including police, fire, ambulance and emergency response personnel in the area.
Since cellular communications is used with increasing frequency to report crimes, accidents, fires,
medical emergencies and other threats to persons or property, a deficiency in cellular coverage
represents a demonstrable threat to public health, safety and welfare. By helping to build a
seamless network, the proposed facility will assist in securing safety from fire, flood, and other
dangers in that the cellular radio service provides emergency contact to 911.
BAM is licensed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the New York Public
Servk:e Commission (PSC) to provide cellular telephone service to subscribers throughout New
York. The proposed construction of a public utility cellular communications facility at 425
Westphalia Avenue is necessary for BAM to comply with its PSC mandate to "furnish and
provide with respect to its businesses such inslramantalities and facilities as shall be adequate and
in all respects just and reasonable" (Public Service Law §91). Similarly, the FCC requires BAM
to be legally, financially, technically and otherwise capable of providing reliable cellular service
(47 CFR §22.911 (1991)). With these regulatory requirements, BAM is required to fill gaps in
coverage and improve service in the area around the proposed public utility communications
facility location.
The technology employed by BAM limits the location and type of site that will allow it to comply
with il~ FCC and PSC mandates to provide quality cellular service. The subject site was chosen
based on its ability to integrate into the network of sites to provide seamless and continuous
cellular coverage in the area (see Appendices B and C) and after a careful review of the area
service deficiencies and topography. Bell Atlantic Mobile has determined this site to be well
suited to meet the cellular communication needs of those individuals, private businesses and
numerous public agencies (e.g., police, fire, ambulance) that BAM is obligated to serve in the
area.
The selection of the subject site as a communications facility location and the determination of the
specific height of the bell tower are presented in the October 7, 1997 affidavit of Philip Charalel
(see Appendix B), the highlights of which are summarized below:
Cellular telephone is a method of mobile communications by radio consisting of
mobile units either mounted in vehicles or hand-carried sending to and receiving
signals from fixed base sites. The sites are engineered to cover a very limited area
so that any particular cell will cover the local area but at the same time will not
interfere with another cell operating on the same frequency some distance away.
Neighboring cells operate on a different frequency set to provide a buffer between
cells of the same frequency. This concept, frequency re-use, allows the necessary
system capacity to be achieved which is required to provide a quality grade of
service to the public.
If the coverage between cells provides good overlap, a customer can move from
one cell to an adjacent cell through a process called "hand-off." As a customer
making a call in the vicinity of a cell moves about and, as he or she begins to move
out of the range of the cell, the coverage becomes weaker. (An analogy of this is
television reception on the fringe of the station's coverage area). When this
happens, the cell transfers (hands-off) to the adjacent cell if that cell is present and
has a channel available for use.
To establish the necessary distribution of cells and to help insure that coverage is
uniform, cells are located through the use of an hexagonal grid pattern.
When a cell is missing, coverage is not uniform and service can seriously
deteriorate in that region. Customers typically hear noise, popping, cracking and
other interference.
6
The height of the antennas for a Cellular Telephone Cell Site is determined by a
process of which the following components apply:
Establish the proper general area for the site (known as the "Search
Deficiency Area");
Estimate the appropriate height for locations in the "Search
Deficiency Area" by use of computer modeling tools;
3. Locate candidate sites;
4. Examine the terrain and land cover features in the region;
Using computer modeling methods, study the potential performance
of the candidate cell; and
Analyze the predicted performance of the site, determining if it will
provide quality performance.
The determination of the Search (i.e., Service Deficiency Area) Area is crucial to
the process. It is determined by inspection of the grid, with uniform hexagons
whose size is appropriate to the performance of the cellular system, and by use of
the performance statistics collected within the switching system.
Computer modeling tools which use physical principals to calculate the coverage
of a given height at a given location are made using a data file of ground elevation
which has been determined from maps published by the United States Coast and
Geodetic Survey. Ground cover is determined mostly by physical inspection of the
locality.
7
The predicted coverage information is analyzed to determine the optimum height
needed for the site. Proper balance is sought between the widest coverage and the
minimum interference with the operation of other cells and cellular companies.
Minimum antenna height is crucial in controlling interference.
If the antennas are placed at an elevation which is lower than optimum, coverage
is reduced and more sites will be required to provide reliable service. Therefore,
an optimum height is selected integrating reliable coverage and minimizing
interference.
In the case of the proposed site at Mattituck, an assessment of the relationship to
the site and the surrounding cell sites was made. Below 99 feet, the linkage with
the surrounding cell sites becomes weak and calls can be expected to be dropped
and the coverage is not continuous. Calls will not be "handed-off" properly
(cellular terminology for the process that moves a call from the signal of one cell
to the next) with reliability at less than 99 feet.
The coverage (efficiency) provided by the proposed structure at Mattituck is
optimum at 99 feet above ground.
There is a serious gap in BAM's cellular telephone coverage in the Mattituck area.
A gap in coverage is evidenced by the inability to adequately transmit or receive
calls, by cross-talk or intermodulation that renders a call inaudible.
The gap in coverage that exists in the Mattituck area prevents BAM from providing
seamless cellular coverage to public and private users, including police, fire,
ambulance and emergency response personnel.
8
The gap in cellular service within the Mattituck area is on-going and pervasive.
Mr. Charalel bases this conclusion on personal knowledge gained through his use
of the following tools which RF engineers employ to identify gaps in cellular
coverage: (1) computer modeling (CelCad software); and (ii) drive tests which
measure the actual degradation in signal strength as predicted by computer
modeling.
CelCad software is a decision support tool for evaluating signal related aspects of
cellular system performance. CelCad software is capable of producing a map which
indicates where coverage exists and where it does not.
A map generated with CelCad software showing the gap in cellular coverage that
exists is included as Exhibit "A' (see Appendix B and color reproduction in
Appendix C). This gap map takes into account the operation of the neighboring
cell sites operated by BAM.
To confu-m the coverage gap in the Mattituck area, BAM performed drive tests
through the area. These drive tests involved field measurements of the actual
cellular signal strength in the affected area. The drive tests confirmed that a gap
in cellular coverage exists in the Mattituck area.
The Mattituck site is ideally located to remedy the gap in cellular coverage that
exists in the Mattituck area.
Mr. Charalel's analysis confirmed that the MatXituck site will provide coverage for
the area of service deficiency.
9
A second map generated with CelCad software showing that the gap will be
eliminated when the Mattituck site is brought on line is attached to Mr. Charalel's
affidavit as Exhibit "B' (see Appendix B and color reproduction in Appendix C).
To confh-m the effectiveness of the Mattituck site as well as the computer-based
projections of minimum necessary tower height, a drive test was performed. This
test involved the actual temporary placement of an antenna in the air at the location
and elevation being contemplated. This was done with a mobile construction crane.
The antenna was then activated and readings were taken at locations throughout the
area. The drive test confirmed that the Mattituck site will remedy the gap in
coverage that exists in the Mattituck area, with the lowest possible antenna height.
Cellular service zones are divided into grids of theoretically hexagonal geographic
areas. The hexagon pattern, however, will be distorted and altered by topography
such as hills and ridge lines, and is merely a theoretical tool used for computer
modeling.
In order to maintain continuous coverage, a cell site must be able to "see" the
mobile customer. If there is an obstruction, the radio signal will either bounce off,
bounce back, or be absorbed by the obstruction. Hills, trees, buildings and other
objects all affect the way a signal travels.
These physical limitations in cellular technology affect the number and type of
locations that would qualify to remedy a gap in cellular coverage.
BAM operates several cellular site which border the Mattituck area of service
deficiency. These sites are known as the Riverhead and Cutchogue cell sites (see
Appendix C). The location of these existing cell sites dictates where new sites may
be located when there is a need to remedy a gap in cellular coverage.
10
The coverage gap in the Mattituck area exists despite the operation of BAM's
existing cell sites. Because (among other reasons) the "power output" of these sites
is limited by the FCC, BAM cannot simply "mm up" the power on these
surrounding sites to provide coverage in the Mattituck area of service deficiency.
Thus, limitations in technology, topography and FCC regulations result in a finite
number of alterative sites that may be considered possible candidates in coverage.
Based upon the analyses conducted by BAM, the affidavit prepared by Philip Charalel, Senior RF
Engineer, concluded the following (see Appendix B):
(i) There exists a serious gap in cellular coverage within the Mattituck area;
The Mattituck Site is the best possible location to ensure seamless coverage to be
achieved within the Mattituck area with the shortest possible antenna [i.e., at
lowest height],' and
(iiO
The effectiveness of the Mattituck Site is confirmed by both computer modeling and
actual drive tests.
11
Potential Land Use Conflicts/Intrn~inn on Hi~orical Character of the Hamlet
The Town's consultant, in its comment letter of October 9, 1997 (Appendix A), cited the potential
for land use conflicts and intrusion of the historical character of the hamlet of Mattituck. Relevant
excerpts of the October 9, 1997 comment letter follow:
The land use in the vicinity of the site is a mix of industrial and commercial development
with a limited number of residential uses. The existing industrial uses are small, and are
largely confined to the area to the northwest of Westphalia Road and the Long Island
Railroad. To the south of the railroad tracks, the land use is predominantly commercial
with a mix of retail uses, residences and two churches. Although the subject property is
zoned for industrial use, there are several historic structures within the area, including a
wood frame building on the outparcel in the northeast corner of the site. The project site
is located in a transitional area between two types of land use, and thus there is a potential
for land use conflict between the proposed monopole and this historic hamlet center. In
addition...the existing lot is substandard under current zoning and is occupied by a
preexisting, non-conforming use. The proposed project appears to require a variance, as
it will not be possible to provide the required setbacks of 70, 50 and 20feet for the rear,
front and side yards, respectively. The porn'on of the site containing the proposed building
is only 75 feet in depth, which is not wide enough to allow even the required rear yard
setback, even if the northern lot boundary is considered a side yard rather than a front
yard. Conformance to the Town Code will be determined by the building and planning
departments at the time of site plan review, but preliminary review suggests that the
proposed project is inconsistent with Town land use goals as reflected in the Code, and
thus may result in significant impacts to the character of the area...
12
There are several historic structures in the area of the site, and the proposed project has
the potential to impact the historic character of the local area. The project sponsor has
provided a list of nine structures within 500feet~ of the site which have been identified by
the Society Preservation of Long Island Antiquities (SPLIA) as having potential historical
significance. Although the eligibility of these structures for inclusion on the state or
federal registers has not been determined, they are significant local landmarks and the
proposed project is expected to be incongruent with these historical resources. Of
particular concern are the wood frame building immediately adjacent to the site, which
now houses a real estate office, and the Episcopal Church on Sound Avenue. The
monopole will be clearly visible behind these structures from the predominant viewpoints,
and is located only 50feet from the office building...
As stated in the section of this Part III - EAF entitled Introduction, the Town consultant's
statement in the October 9, 1997 correspondence that "...the proposed project is inconsistent
with Town land use goals as reflected in the Code..." appears to no longer be accurate as the
Town Board of the Town of Southold has amended the Town Code. Specifically, on November
12, 1997, the Town Board adopted Local Law No. 26, A Local Law in Relation to Wireless
Communica~on Facilities. Section 100-160. Purpose, states in part that "wireless communication
facilities are preferred in industrial areas." With regard to the placement of wireless
communications facilities in an industrial district, Local Law No. 26 provides the following:
~Local Law No. 26-1997, which was adopted by the Town Board subsequent to the
October 9, 1997 comment letter by the Town's consultant, requires review of sites within 300
feet of the proposed tower.
13
In Industrial Districts including LI and I_JO, a wireless communication facility is
subject to site plan approval and must meet the following requirements.
Wireless communication facilities on buildings are a permitted use provided
the height of the wireless communication facility does not extend more than
one hundred feet (100') above the existing grade and the wireless
communication facility is located at least one hundred feet (100')from the
nearest property line and three hundred feet (300') from any landmark
property or district listed by federal, state or town agencies.
Wireless communication facilities on Existing Telecommunications Towers
are permitted unless otherwise restricted pursuant to the terms of a prior
special exception approval.
Wireless Communication Facility on Telecommunications Towers are a
permitted use provided the height of the tower above grade does not exceed
one hundred feet (1009 feet above the existing grade and provided the base
of the tower is located at least one hundred feet (1009 from the nearest
dwelling unit and three hundred feet (300') from any landmark property or
district listed by federal, state or town agencies.
A wireless communication facility is a permitted use, not requiring site plan
approval, if located on property owned, leased, or otherwise controlled by
state, federal or town government provided a license or lease authorizing
such facility has been approved by that government.
14
As the proposed public utility communications facility consists of the erection of a bell tower, the
provisions of Item 3, above, prevail. With regard to height, the proposal includes the erection of
a 99 foot bell tower, which conforms with the 100 ft. height limitation. As indicated in Appendix
D, the base of the proposed bell tower would be greater than 100 feet from the nearest dwelling
unit.
Finally, pursuant to the report prepared by J. Lance Mallamo, Historic Preservation Consultant,
which is contained in Appendix E, and the figure in Appendix D there are no landmark properties
or districts listed by federal, state or town agencies within 300 feet of the base of the proposed bell
tower. Accordingly, the proposed public utility communications facility is consistent with the
Town's land use goals as set forth in the recently adopted Local Law No. 26 - 1997 which relate
directly to the proposed application. It is also important to note that the project no longer requires
a special use permit; it is a permitted use pursuant to Local Law No. 26 - 1997.
With regard to the issues of the pre-existing non-conforming use and the need for variances, the
proposed public utility communications facility was reviewed by the Town of Southold Building
Department subsequent to the Town consultant's October 9, 1997 correspondence and after the
adoption of Local Law No. 26 -1997. In its Notice of Disapproval, the Building Department
indicated the need for variances for the side and rear yard, fence height and lot area as the
minimum lot size in an LI district is 40,000 square feet pursuant to the Town Code.
15
With regard to the need for side yard and rear yard variances, the proposed project has been
redesigned such that it meets the minimum side yard requirements. A rear yard variance will be
needed, as a minimum 70 feet is required by Code and a rear yard of 40 feet is proposed.
However, as indicated in Appendix D, the proposed 40 foot rear yard exceeds the established rear
yards of neighboring properties. Therefore, the granting of a rear yard variance will not result in
an adverse impact to the developmem character of the area. With regard to fence height, Local
Law 26 -1997, adopted in November 1997 to regulate wireless communications facilities, has a
minimum fence height requirement of six feet. Thus, it appears that a variance would not be
required. Finally, the subject property does not meet the minimum lot size requirement, however,
it is a pre-existing non-conforming use. Prior approvals from the Town of Southold have
permitted the erection of public utility communications facilities on pre-existing non-conforming
lots (e.g., BAM facility in Cutchogne).
In its October 9, 1997 correspondence, the Town's consultant also raised the issue of the potential
conflict of the proposed public utility communications facility with the historic character of the
area and, particularly, the adjoining wood frame real estate building (Inland Homes) and the
Episcopal Church on Sound Avenue both of which were inventoried by SPLIA.
In order to assess this potential impact, BAM engaged J. Lance Mallamo, an historic preservation
consultam, to evaluate its proposed project relative to the character of the subject site and
surrounding area. To perform the analysis of historic preservation issues, Mr. Mallamo
performed site inspections and reviewed proposed project plans, the State and National Registers
of Historic Places, Town of Southold designated landmarks, and existing and then-proposed
modifications to the Town Code affecting wireless communications facilities.4 The relevant
findings of this report are summarized below and the entire document is included in Appendix E,
which also contains Mr. Mallamo's curriculum vitae.
4The historic preservation consultant's report was prepared in October, 1997 prior to
the adoption of Local Law 26 - 1997. However, at the time of report preparation he had
copies of earlier versions of the then-proposed legislation.
16
Properties on the State and National Registers of Historic Places
Eligibility for the State and National Registers of Historic Places is determined after an
official nomination form is prepared for a specific building, site, district or object. After
a lengthy review process, a documented cultural resource can be recommended to the New
York State Parks Commissioner who functions as the official State Historic Preservation
Officer (SHPO) for listing on the State Register. If approved, the nomination is then
forwarded to federal officials who make a final recommendation to the United States
Secretary of the Interior. There are no direct restrictions concerning privately-owned
property listed on the National or State Register of Historic Places. However, demolition
expenses related to the destruction of a National Register-listed building may not be
deducted from federal individual or corporate income taxes.
Based upon a review of the State and National Registers, the historic preservation
consultant determined that there are no sites, structures, districts, objects, thematic or
multiple resources listed on or determined eligible for the State or National Register of
Historic Places within a 300 foot radius of the proposed bell tower, and no nominations
within the area are being considered.
17
Southold Town Landmarks
The Southold Code allows the Landmarks Review Commission to offer an advisory
opinion or recommendation as to which landmarks or districts may be created or how
alterations to landmarks structures or areas are to be regulated. While the Southold Town
Landmark Preservation ordinance supports the preservation of historic sites and landmarks
within the Town, the law clearly states that "the designation of property as a designated
landmark or historic district by the Town Board...shall not impose any obligation or
responsibility upon the owners thereof, nor shall such designation in any manner restrict
or limit the use, development, repair, maintenance, alteration or modification of the
property by the owners thereof.'
A review of historic landmarks designated by the Town of Southold revealed that there are
no such sites within a 300 foot radius of the proposed bell tower.
Sites Inventoried by SPLIA
Reliance of historic preservation policy on the identification of historic sites, districts, etc.
by SPLIA is uninformed and somewhat misleading. SPLIA does not, on its own, prepare
an official listing of Long Island's historic resources or establish criteria to defme
"historic."
The role that SPLIA has taken has been to coordinate the Historic Resources Survey for
the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) which
seeks to locate and identify potential historic sites and structures within the bi-county
region.
18
SPLIA research assistants and interested volunteers canvas geographic areas and roadways
of Long Island in an attempt to identify buildings and sites that may have historic
importance. Ideally Building/Structure Inventory Forms, commonly known as "Blue
Forms" are prepared by properly trained individuals in conformance with instructions
provided by OPRI-IP. Information on the blue forms is often sparse and can be based on
oral hearsay, a physical "walkabout' or "windshield drive-by" of the property at times by
untrained persons with little substantive historical knowledge, documentation or research.
Furthermore, blue forms may be executed and sent to OPRHP by virtually anyone for any
property regardless of their association with or understanding of the historic or
architectural significance of the site. Although state instructions advise that inventory
forms must be completed in full and that incomplete forms will be returned, this is rarely
the case and most submissions are routinely accepted.
When blue forms are completed and submitted to New York State, the listing is entered
on a statewide computer inventory of potential historic resources without confn-mation by
state officials of the facts as presented. This can become a problem when potentially
historic sites and structures are accepted as historic solely on the basis of the survey
without adequate review or confirmation of the historical record by verified documentary
sources. As an example, in Mastic Beach a 1960s 7 Eleven convenience store and an
A&P supermarket are listed on the statewide inventory of historic sites based on the fact
that the researcher erroneously identified the colonial-style cupolas atop both buildings
with the colonial period of Suffolk County history.
19
Furthermore, the SPLIA inventory has no official status in and of itself and it functions
solely as a preliminary information source. Each site or building/structure in the inventory
must be independently reviewed and confm-ned to authenticate historical integrity by
federal, state and local government agencies before the information presented is accepted
for landmark designation purposes.
The following properties identified on the SPLIA inventory were determined to be within
300' of the proposed Mattituck bell tower (see Appendices D and E). A description of the
character of the buildings on these properties is summarized below.
Ruland Potato House - In violation of state instructions, the form for this
structure is almost totally incomplete with no physical description,
declaration of significance or source idemification included. Despite an
admonition in the State Building/Structure Inventory Form instructions that
incomPlete forms will not be accepted, this entry was apparently accepted
without review though it lacks even the most basic information such as
identification of building materials and fenestration. Judging from its
exterior form, the building in question appears to date from the early
decades of the twentieth century and is typical of hundreds of similar
utilitarian structures built for agricultural-related purposes in the Town of
Southold and on eastern Long Island.
Although retaining its basic two story form with gabled roof, the building
has been altered in a number of ways. It was almost certainly clad and
roofed in unpainted wood shingles originally. Currently, the roof has been
replaced with white asphalt shingles and the shingled siding painted a bright
red color.
20
On the east facade facing Westphalia Avenue, large multi-paned picture
windows have been added on both the first and second stories which
drastically compromise the structure's original appearance, and an
inappropriate colonial-style doorway of recent vintage has been added. The
side walls have also apparently been punctuated by various changes in
window fenestration judging from the "ghosts' of newer shingles easily
detected in the siding pattern. Windows installed on both sides and the rear
are not original and also date from recent times. The addition of
contemporary gutters and leaders, as well as a rooftop antenna further
detract from the original appearance of the building. The use of locally
made "Dtmtile' concrete blocks as indicated on the building form, while
interesting, does not add materially to the architectural quality of the
building. Initial research could not identify historical associations with
persons or events significant in Southold's past.
Bergen and Colman Oil Company Building The original
Building/Structure Inventory Form prepared for this small, one story
concrete block building has been subjected to a number of hand-written
changes and question marks which apparently underscores confusion on the
part of research assistants as to the historical and architectural significance
of the building. The building is typical of thousands of unadorned
industrial/commercial structures built on Long Island in the twentieth
century and its sole gesture to architectural civility is the simple recessed
brick arch over the front door. The door itself is almost certainly not the
original, having been replaced with a six panel colonial-style door of recent
vintage.
21
The historical and architectural significance of the structure relies solely on
the fact that it was standing on the site in 1908 (though it is not confnnned
that this is the actual building on the site at that time) and is constructed of
locally made concrete blocks. No further persons or events significant in
Southold's past and associated with this building could be identified.
Episcopal Church of the Redeemer - This religious property located on
Sound Avenue about 200 feet east of the proposed bell tower site has been
significantly altered several times since its initial construction. During the
past half century the clapboard building was covered in exterior stucco,
buttresses and a bell tower were added, as was a large addition to the rear.
The original wood shingle roof has been replaced by asphalt shingles and
the original windows have been replaced.
Mechanics Hall5 - The rear wing of this structure, located approximately
250 feet from the site of the proposed Mattituck bell tower, apparently
originally stood on the site of the nearby Mattituck Presbyterian Church.
The original structure was moved several times over the years and
eventually was integrated into a Methodist Church constructed in 1896 in
the shingle style. In 1919 the building was acquired by the Mattituck
Council//34, Jr. Order of the United American Mechanics and converted
into a meeting lodge. The large steeple, a major architectural element of
the 1896 addition, was removed after World War II. In 1960 the building
was converted into a community theater and has been used as such since
that time.
SThe actual building is not within 300 feet of the proposed bell tower. However, the
property is within 300 feet.
22
The shingle style was a major architectural movement developed at the turn
of the century in the seaside resort areas of the northeast, particularly on
eastern Long Island. The idiom relied almost exclusively on wood-singled
side walls and roofing which combined to form a unified architectural
composition ideally suited to enhance the natural attributes of prosperous
rural areas. In Southold, the Methodist Church/Mechanics Hall is a good
example of the style's form, but certainly not the freest example extant in
the community. The replacement of the original wood shingle roof with
asphalt shingles and painting of natural shingled siding imparts a distinctly
different appearance than originally intended. Furthermore, removal of the
original steeple has resulted in a significant loss of architectural integrity.
As indicated above and contrary to the Town consultant's assertion, there are no significant local
landmarks in the vicinity of the proposed public utility communications facility. Furthermore,
there appears to be no impact from the proposed Mattituck bell tower on the aforementioned four
buildings identified in the SPLIA inventory. No such buildings will be demolished or directly
impacted as a result of the project and no alternation to character-defined features, distinctive
construction method or original building materials will result. The project as planned is fully
reversible at some future time and the industrial site selected is not within an historic district listed
by federal, state, or town agencies. The bell tower location is also directly surrounded by recent
contemporary buildings or earlier twentieth century structures bearing little architectural or
historical significance.
23
The Episcopal Church and Mechanics Hall buildings are shielded from the bell tower viewsbed
by the presence of other buildings and mature trees on the west side of Westphalia Avenue south
of the railroad right of way. The appearance of the bell tower, when viewing the front or west
facades of either building, should not be readily apparent due to the orientation of the viewer in
relatk>nship to the actual tower location. Construction of the bell tower in the proposed distinctive
bell tower design should also visually impart a dignified appearance to the surrounding area which
accommodates both local viewshed objectives and modem communication needs. In summary,
the proposed public utility communications facility is not expected to result in significant land use
conflicts nor would it adversely affect the character of the area.
The Town's consultant has raised an issue regarding visual impacts that may result from the
proposed public utility communications facility. Thus, a visual analysis was performed to
detem~ine if the proposed public utility communications facility would have a significant adverse
aesthetic impact on the neighboring community. In order to conduct this visual analysis, the
following methodology was employed:
Visual inspection of the proposed cellular communications facility and evaluation
of physical characteristics of the proposed bell tower and equipment shelter;
Visual inspection of proximate areas to determine existing obstructions in the
horizon;
Visual inspection of a recently constructed cellular communications facility to
determine its impact on the community;
· Line-of-sight analyses from proximate areas; and
24
· Visual Simulation Analysis.
Inspection of Proposed Cellular Communications Facility Location
The cellular communications facility is proposed to be situated on the southwest side of
Westphalia Avenue adjacent to the Long Island Railroad tracks. The subject property is
cleared and has one single-story building situated to the north of the proposed bell tower
and equipment shelter location. The area gently slopes away from the railroad tracks and
consists mainly of grass/weeds intermixed with dirt. Overhead utility lines and poles,
mature trees, commercial development and houses are visible along Westphalia Avenue
(Photograph No. 1).6
Inspection of Proximate Areas
Visual inspection indicates that the site on which the cellular communications facility is
proposed to be erected is surrounded by railroad tracks, commercial/industrial uses,
municipal parking and residential uses. The topography of subject site and immediate
surrounding area is relatively level.
Visual obstructions exist in the horizon in the area of the proposed cellular communications
site. These obstructions consist of utility poles and transformers, overhead lines and
buildings along Westphalia Avenue, the surrounding roads and neighborhoods. Large
street and yard trees also exist throughout the area.
6Photographs referenced in this report are included in Appendix F.
25
Inspection of Recently Constructed Monopole Site
In order to ensure a comprehensive visual analysis, a recently constructed cellular
communications site was inspected. This site is located proximate to the northwest comer
of Main Road (S.R. 25) and Elijah's Lane, hamlet of East Mattituck, Town of Southold
and is developed with a monopole. As indicated on Photograph No. 2, the monopole
"blends" with the utility poles, overhead lines and street trees along Elijah's Lane. The
equipment shelter is not visible. It should be noted that the monopole site is approximately
150 feet from the photographer in Photograph No. 2.
As indicated in Photograph Nos. 3, 4 and 5, the presence of the monopole becomes less
evident in the horizon, and the equipment shelter is not visible. In Photograph No. 3, the
photographer is approximately 800 feet from the monopole site. Along with the houses,
trees, utility poles and overhead lines, the monopole is visible, however, it is no more
distinctive than the other utility poles. In Photograph No. 4, the view is approximately
2,200 feet south of the monopole site. Farmland is in the foreground with vineyards and
trees in the background. The monopole can be seen in the horizon above the tree line.
Photograph No. 5 is taken approximately 2,700 feet southeast of the monopole site.
Farmland and snow fencing are present in the foreground with utility poles, overhead
wires, and trees in the background. The monopole is no more distinct than the other utility
poles. This photograph also indicates that the monopole becomes less visible in the
horizon as distance therefrom increases.
Photograph Nos. 6 and 7 depict the view of the monopole site from approximately 1,000
feet. It is clear from these photographs that when trees are present in the line-of-sight,
even if the trees are not as tall as the monopole, the view of the monopole is obstructed.
On the south side of Main Road just east of the intersection with Locust Avenue
(Photograph No. 6), one can see the monopole in the horizon along with the utility poles
and the overhead lines.
26
By moving just 20 feet further to the east, the tree in the foreground obstructs the view of
the monopole (Photograph No. 7). The utility poles and overhead lines are still visible in
Photograph No. 7.
The visual analysis of the recently erected monopole indicates that the monopole is
generally no more intrusive than utility poles and overhead lines. The equipment shelter
is not seen. Furthermore, when trees are present in the line-of-sight, they act as an
effective buffer to intrusions in the horizon. Also, as distance increases, the monopole
becomes less visually apparent.
Line-of-Sight Analyses from Proximate Areas
Four general areas were chosen for the line-of-sight analyses (see Figure 2). These areas
include:
The commerCial, residential and recreational uses along Middle Road (CR
48). The area is situated generally on the north and west of the site and
represents the major view corridor.
The mainly commercial and institutional area generally east of the subject
site between the Long Island Railroad tracks on the northwest, west of Love
Lane and north of Sound Avenue.
The commercial, institutional and residential uses along Main Road,
generally east of the subject site. Main Road can also be considered a
main view corridor.
27
LINE-OF-SIGHT ANALYSIS AREAS
FREUDENTHAL & ELKOWITZ CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
28
The residemial, municipal and commercial area predominantly south of the
site along the southern portion of Westphalia Avenue, Sound Avenue,
Pacific Street and the Long Island Railroad tracks.
These areas were selected because they represent those that are proximate to the site and
have the greatest potential to view the proposed bell tower. In addition, they contain
residential uses that are considered potential sensitive receptors.
Before conducting the line-of-sight analyses, it should be understood that there are a
variety of factors that influence visual impacts. These factors include, but are not limited
to: the orientation of the receptor; the presence of manmade structures; the presence of
mature trees; distance; and other obstructions in the horizon. The fmdings of the line-of-
sight analyses are as follows:
Area 1 - The area along Middle Road is a major view corridor and has mixed uses
including commercial, residential and recreational developmem. The majority of persons
living, working and traveling along Middle Road in the vicinity of its intersection with
Westphalia Avenue would be expected to have an obstructed view of the bell tower as
existing large street and yard trees along with buildings and structures would serve to block
large segments of the view. It should be noted that utility poles and overhead wires exist
along Middle Road and Westphalia Avenue in this area. Thus, the top portion of the bell
tower that may be visible would be expected to blend with the existing obstructions in the
horizon or be blocked from view (see Photograph Nos. 1 and 8 through 12). The
equipmem shelter should not be seen from this area. These photographs were taken
between 110 and 2,000 feet from the proposed cellular communications site.
29
Area 2 - The area is directly east of the subject site proximate to the Long Island Railroad
tracks, west of Love Lane and north of Sound Avenue and has mainly commercial uses and
a church which are adjacent to a municipal parking area. These locations would view of
proposed bell tower amongst the other structures, utility poles, overhead wires and street
trees that exist throughout this viewing area. These existing obstructions would serve to
block or blend with the proposed bell tower (see Photograph Nos. 13 through 16). The
equipment shelter would not be visible. These photographs were taken from 450 to 600
feet from the proposed bell tower location.
Area 3 - Area 3 is characterized by commercial, institutional and residential uses along
Main Road which is a main view corridor in Mattituck. In the area of Main Road east and
south of its intersection with Love Lane, large street and yard trees, numerous structures
as well as utility poles and overhead wires serve to obstruct the line-of-sight toward the
proposed bell tower location (see Photograph Nos. 17 and 19). The equipment shelter
would not be visible. These photographs were taken between 700 and 1,100 feet from the
proposed bell tower site.
Area 4 - This area is situated mainly along Sound Avenue west of its intersection with
Westphalia Avenue and includes views along Pacific Street and the railroad. This area is
a mixture of residential, commercial and municipal uses. Except for the railroad tracks,
this area is characterized by structures, trees, utility poles, and overhead wires which
sometimes would obstruct or blend with the proposed bell tower (see Photograph Nos. 20
through 25). The equipment shelter would not be visible. These photographs are taken
from 350 to 1,000 feet from the subject property. ·
3O
Visual Simulation Analysis
Creative Visuals, Inc., in conjunction with Virtually Real Inc., prepared photo-realistic
renderings of the proposed 99 ft. bell tower. On May 15, 1997, Creative Visuals, Inc. made
an on-site visit to obtain familiarity with the site and its surrounding area. Preliminary
photographs of the facility location and areas of potential impact were taken. Two off-site
points ("View Points") in the immediate vicinity of the site were selected for analysis as
areas of visual impact for photographic representation of a completed bell tower (see
Appendix G):
Description of View Point
Distance to Site
View Point No. 1 - From the parking lot at
the intersection of Westphalia Avenue and
Pike Street, across from the railroad tracks.
View Point No. 2 - From the southeast comer
of Ronte 48 and Westphalia Avenue
280'
433'
Analog photographs of the site from each of the View Points under study were taken. These
photographs also presented reference points for the calculation of the structure's placement,
utilizing a red cone and stake as a benchmark situated at the proposed structure as seen from
each View Point. These photographs were taken on May 16, 1997 between 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m.; conditions were clear and mostly sunny.
The photographs were scanned and then digitized. The site and each View Point were then
located on a digitized USGS contour map. Autocad was used to create a model of the actual
proposed bell tower and monopole, using the dimensions and drawings furnished by BAM
and Engineered Endeavors, Inc., the communications facility manufacturer.
31
A separate 3-D software, 3D studio, was then used to photo-realistically render the monopole
and bell tower as seen from each of the View Points. The communications facility was
assigned "photo-realistic" materials depicting the exact colors and dimensions in the
software's materials editor wherein a photograph of existing similar structures supplied by
the manufacturer was used to facilitate this process. Another software, Imagine Sun,
simulated sunlight on the structures, taking into account the site latitude, date and time of day
of the View Point photographs. Finally, the photo-realistically rendered structures were
inserted into the digitized site photographs.
The photographic simulation (see Appendix G) indicates that the bell tower, when observed
from View Point 1, would be no more prominent than the adjoining utility pole and overhead
lines. From View Point 2, the bell tower would be visible but would blend with the existing
obstructions in the horizon including utility poles, transformers, overhead lines, and trees.
Furthermore, the proposed landscaping around the equipment shelter completely obstructs
the view.
Findings of Visual Impact Assessment
Based upon a review of a recently constructed monopole site; an inspection of the proposed
cellular communications facility location; evaluation of the physical characteristics of the
facility; analysis of potential areas of impact; line-of-sight analyses from proximate areas;
and visual simulation analyses, the following conclusions can be made:
An evaluation conducted in an area where a monopole was recently erected in East
Matxituck indicates that mature trees act as an effective visual buffer. When trees
and/or manmade structures are present in the line-of-sight, even if the ta'ees are not
nearly as tall as the monopole, the view of the monopole is obstructed.
Furthermore, the monopole becomes less visible in the horizon as distance
therefrom increases.
32
In addition, the monopole "blends" with obstructions in the horizon such as utility
poles, overhead lines and trees. In fact, due to its grayish/blue color, it is often
less evident than typical utility poles.
The horizon proximate to the proposed bell tower location is not "pristine."
Structures, utility poles and overhead lines are present in the horizon in many of
the surrounding areas. The proposed bell tower would blend with these existing
utility poles in areas in which the bell tower would be visible.
The major transiem view corridors in the vicinity of the proposed cellular
communications facility site, Middle Road and Main Road, are lined in segments
with mature trees that would serve as visual buffers to the proposed bell tower.
Structures in the line-of-sight would also help to obstruct the view. The equipment
shelter would not be visible.
Persons using the railroad station or the parking area west of and proximate to the
subject property would have a somewhat obstructed view of the bell tower. The
bell tower would be visible when looking from the west along Pike Street, Sound
Avenue and the parking area. The equipment shelter would be screened by
vegetation.
The visual impact of the proposed public utility communications facility on the
historic character of the area has been evaluated (see Appendix E and discussion
in section of this Part III - EAF entitled Potential Land Use Conflicts/Intrusion on
Historical Character of the Hamlet). This evaluation has determined that there are
no properties of historic or architectural significance within a 300 ft. radius of the
proposed bell tower that would be adversely affected. Furthermore, the proposed
bell tower location is directly surrounded by recem contemporary buildings or
earlier twentieth century structures bearing little architectural or historical
significance.
33
In conclusion, the construction of a cellular communications facility at the subject site
would not result in significant adverse aesthetic impacts to the established character of the
community.
Architectural Mitigation
At the time that Nelson, Pope & Voorhis issued its comment letter of October 9, 1997, the site
plan before it consisted of a 99 ft. monopole with associated equipment shelter. To mitigate
potential adverse visual impacts, the architectural design of the facility has been significantly
modified from the originally proposed monopole to a bell tower. As shown in the renderings
prepared by Creative Visuals of the proposed bell tower and a monopole (see Appendices G and
H), the bell tower clearly has more aesthetic interest than the standard monopole and serves to
minimize visual impacts.
To further minimize potential adverse aesthetic impacts, BAM will surround the public utility
communications facility with a black vinyl-clad chain link fence and evergreen plantings. In
addition, a row of white pines (six feet in height) will be planted between the proposed public
utility communications facility and the building to the north (i.e., Inland Homes). Finally, BAM
is willing to construct the proposed equipment shelter with a painted wooden facade to match the
Inland Homes building or with a brick face, as desired by the Town. Implementation of these
measures will serve to mitigate aesthetic impacts to the maximum extent practicable.
34
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Charalel, Philip. Affidavit of October 7, 1997.
Creative Visuals, Inc. Visual Analysis, Proposed Public Utility Structure, Mattituck, New York.
May, 1997.
Nelson, Pope & Voorhis, Correspondence of October 9, 1997.
Orlowski, Jr., Bennett. Correspondence of November 5, 1997 regarding Planning Board
Resolution of November 3, 1997.
Southold, Town of. Town Code.
Telecommunications Act of 1996.
APPENDIX A
FREUDENTHAL & ELKOWITZ CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
Tawa Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. l]ox 1179
Southold, New York 1197)-
Fax ($16) 765-3136
Telephone (516) 765-1938
November 5, 1997
PI.,A1WNL%IG BOAI1D OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTI:[OLD
Matthew E. Paohman, Esq.
Pachman, Pechman & Brown, P.C.
366 Veterans Memorial Hwy.
Commack, NY 1172.5
Re: Proposed site plan for Bell Atlantic NYNEX Mobile - Mattituck
SCTM# 141-3-34
Dear Mr. Pachman:
The following resolutions were adopted by the Soutr~old Town Planning Board at
a meeting held on Monday, November 3, 1997:
BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the
State Environmental Quality Review Act, establishes ttself as lead agency.
WHEREAS, the Planning Board has reviewed the Short Environmental
Assessment Form dated April 4, 1997' and Ihe Long Environmental Asaessment
Form dated June 11, 1997; anti
WHEREAS, it has reviewed the comments of its environmental consultant,
Nelson, Pope and Voorhis, LLC, dated October 9, 1997; and
WHEREAS, this review has indicatecl that the proposed monopole height is 99
feet, and that the visual impacts of the proposed monopole on the historic and
aesthetic aspects of Mattituck's business hamlet; and
WHEREAS, the subject property is one third smaller than the minimum require(I
area within the Lighl Industrial Zoning District, thus making it clifficult to screen
the tower; and
Prooosed sde ~en for NYNEX
November 5 1997
WHEREAS, the a~plicant has not submitted documentation of neecO; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project IDresents a potential visual conflict with the
community's vision for t~e Mattituck Dusir~es$ district; and
WHEREAS, the proiect sponsor has not provided Site Specil'ic mitigation
measures relevant tc the application, ag. archJtecturel mitigation of proposed
monopole; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board wishes to prepare Part 3 of the Long
Environmental Assessrne,nt Form in order to more closely consider the
significance of potential lend use conflicls, visual intrusion on hamlet historical
character ancl cumulative impacts of the proposed project, be it therefore
RESOLVED, that the Soul:hold Town Planning Board, acting under the Slale
Environmental Quality Review Act, as the lead agency makes a determination
that the proposed action i.~; an Unlisted Action; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that/he applicant submit documentation of need
and detai~ed information about lhe proposed mitigation measures including
elevation drawings and artist's renderings and other designs which may be more
in character with the neighborhood that will enable the completion of Part 3
(Evaluation of the Importa~ce of Impacts.)
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that if Ihe applicant chooses not to provide this
information the Planning Board may prepare a Part 3 at the applicanl'6 expense.
Please contact this office if you have any questions regarding the above.
Sincerely,
Bennett Orlowski, Jr,
Chairman
Board of Appeals
Building Dept.
Southold Town Board
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
Suffolk County Department of Planning
NY$OEC - Stony Brook
NYSDEC - Albany
New York State Department of State
Suffolk County Department of Public Works
New York State Depan:ment of Transportation
Suffolk County Water Authority
~CT l? '97 ~c1:03 TObl~ OF SC~JTHOLD
1997
Bermetl Orlow~ki, Ch~rman
Pbnning B~d
53095 Main
179
S(TFM No. 1000-141-3-34,
Dear Mr. Ward.
As per your r~ues~ we have completed a preliminary ~evlew Of~ above r~er~ proj~t
T~ atd ~mpl~ ~i~ti~ are id~tifi~ as follows:
1. R~,ie~ Part 1 LF~F
The parcel has been field inspected by NP&V. The LEAF has bexn r~eW~ ~ ~o~
r~O~ ~ere m~e M n~. A ~py of ~ls.att~h~.
2. l"r~v'e Part II. LF_.4F
The Part II LEAF che~m ha~ bea~ complmed and is also attached. Addllional informalion
conr~mlng our findings is included below
The p~cel ~S been insp~t~ md ~o~tal ~cf~cnces ~n~S the site ~ ~ h~
b~m ~It~. ~c ~tc ~ats of 0.31 a~es of l~ in tbe ~lel of Ma~tuck in ~e To~
of S~thold. Thc ~bj~t ~t¢ is I~t~ on the w~ gde of W~tp~ Ave~e to ~e north of
the Long Isled ~ilro~ lr~:ks It ih ~ L-shap~ p~l ~th .~ ~s~g bu~Om8 n~
OCT :~ '97 ~,~:05 TONal 0~' $O~JTMOLD
Westphalie ^ve~tie, ~nd the proposed monopole ~d equipment sheller would be located to the
ro~' oFtho ]Or eway fi.om tho ro~l. A?--~_s would I~ provided via ~n existing grave[ drive
The proposed, action involves an application for · spedsl use pa'rml ~or a p~olic utility s~ruc-tu~e
in order to construct a 99' monopole £or a oeUular telephone antenna. A.~ shown on the plan~
provided, ~e monopole would be approxima~y 3 fi~et in di,.mo~er with a t~ng~l~ platform of
apptoxin-ately 11 fee~, The EAlc' Part I indicates ~ a I~l! tower ve~uld be constructed to
house tl~ facility, b~ a simple pole design is sbo~ on thc plan. Approximately 1,500 s.f. of
t~o ove~ll parcel w<~ld be I,,?,d to the ptojec~ sponsor. Bell Atltntic NYNEX Mobile. for the
a~e~ma and a 450 s,f, equtpm~st sillier The oxJstlng grnvcl ~o~d would bo utilized for a-':--~ess.
~ ~ chain link fenoe would be immdled around th~ facility to proteot the ant~,~a fi'om
vandalism The a~a of the site is ~oned Light Industrial. iflthough the current 13.400 s.t'. lot is
less than the minimum lm ~ of 40,000 s.£ does not meet t}~ curren~ req~if~'n~n~ tbt
landsc~pin~ and minimum yard s~backs within ~h~ ~oning di~4c, t.
The projc~-t ait¢ i$ ~letive~y fla~ ~ thee Ke nm weighs or o~ ~t l~o~s ~ ~
~m~y. A~din~ to ~e ~te pt~n p~o~d~ ~ the pro~ s~n~[, ~e is s s~ll ~ ~
should no= prat ~t ~n:~r~nts on d~lopmant ~ to the ~1 ~ ~odon ~n~ol
m~ should not ~ n~s~' Thc ~ils on site ~ a mix of C~ and Fill ~ U~ ~s
~ delin~ by ~e S~ol~ Co~ ~il Su~ey, ~th of which =c ch~efi~ of~ w~t0
flt~ ~ ~ils ~v~ ~n ~ely N~r~. ~ ~e Baolo~ of ~ site ~ld n~t I~ ~
pro~ d~iopm~ ~d no =i~ifi~t imp~s =e exp~
ll~e elevation of ~'oundwater b~..neath the ~bj~t ~ is nppro~mntely 3
h~vel (ms1) ~or~ng to thc 19~2 $CDHS ~P, a~ the to~phic
$ to 12 ~t ~e ~1 ~rd~ to ~ ~te pl~, Th~ t~ depth to ~ou~t~ is
ap~i~tely 5 m 9 ~ ~low the su~ with a ~mmum
~t~e~p~nt ar~, This s~ld not prat con~mms ~ ~ pto~ pmj~ ~ mh~
~t~op~t of the si~ ~ht ~ li~t~ The prop~ pr~e~ ~11 ~t
[~. ~d the im~o~ ~di~ ~11 ~ ~, thus, the ~
is ~ m ~
l~olosicll Pasource~
Thc projec~ si~e is ~ p~rtially vacant in~g p~¢~ ~ ~ uno~pi~ b~d~8 ~ the fr~l
of the p~l. ~e ~te ha b~ cl~, and o~y a ~all ~ of sp~ ~y v~nfion is
~ Pale 2
OCTM S7 '9~' ~4:~4 TONN Or 50UT~aOCD
pre~n! This area. which is to thc north of [he proposed equipment ~dtcr, ap~ to ~vc
be~ r~y ~. ~d the ~ i~Jatdy to
r~m~ of ~e ~te is ~ ~v~, ~u~ I~ping Sp~ ~J prat a the ~nt of
di~ ~1~ b~efit flora th~ r~oj~ if~6o~
TI~{ I~d un ia the ~¢btity of~e site is a mix of i~USu'bJ and ~mmer~ d~ao~,, ~ a
lirml~ numar of re~d~tid ue~s. ~e ~n8 indu~ u~ ~ s~l, ~ ~e
~,~ to t~ ~ to ~ no~hw~st cfW~lim ~ ~ the ~n~ Island ~lr~. To ~
~a~ oF ~ ~{mad .~. the la~ u~ is pr~domin~tly ~. ~th a ~ oF ~i
~e ~er~ ~tOnc s~ within t~ ~ i~ludln8 a wo~ ~e buildi~ on t~
~s of I~d u~ ~d ~s ~r¢ is ~teai~l for lad u~ ~s ~W~ ~e pro~
m~po{~ ~d t~ hislofic ~et ~t~. In ~ition, ~ w~ ~ ~v~ ~e ~s6n8 )~
pro~ p~o~ a~ to r~Jm a v~an~, aS it ~]l sot ~ ~ble Io ~ ~
~t~ks oi 30, 50 ~ 20 f~ for ~ ~, from ~d ride y~ds, re~ve~. The ~n 0fth¢
~ conta~ng the p[o~ ~ildin8 is o~y 75 f~t in dept~ w~ch is ~t ~i~ ~u~ to glow
~/en thc ~quir~ t~r y~d sethm:k, even Jf the nonh~ lot boua~ is ~n~r~ a ~de yad
m~ther t~ a Eom y~d. Co~of~ to To~ Code ~11 ~ ~e~in~ by ~¢ ~ii~ ~
pl.~ng de~ts ~ the t~ oF si~c ~ ~e~ew, but prai~ ~ew ~ t~
pro~d pr~e~ is iu~nd~ent ,~t~ To~ ~ u~ g~s ~ r~ ~ the C~ and
may r~lt in ~gnifi~nl imp~ts u3 the ¢~ of thc ~
Visual
The vistai impacts of thc propOst<l project ai-e also likely to be ~ifi~k ~ o~y p~
miti~tion is a~lable b~ oFIhe s~ll ~zt ~d ~g~atioe of the ~j~t pr~e~. Thee
is no ~ree~ng vegaation au the ~te or ~a~m ~lm und~ ~s~g ~u~, ~th~ ~e
~Jj~nt ~ildingS ~U pr~e ~ ~reening. ~tio~ {~d~k{ may offer ~
~B6~o~ how~, ~e proposal ~re wil{ ~ app~t eom ~ of~ ~ou~ng
mr~. The p~ imp~ ~11 b~ to ~ ~om t~ ~ cent~ at ~e M~oo ~ ~vc
L~c ~ ~e S~c~. Pike S~e~ mils alons the ~g Isl~ ~lr~d tr~k~ ~g I~g,
c:[~ ~s or~e proj~t site ~om {~ no~st. ~e pro~ monopolc ~ll ~ d~ly ~b]e
6'om t~s ~s~ive, ~ ~ ~n~ ~1~ ~th ~hc store~oms ortbe la~ c~ ~d the
u~c alon~ Sound A~e, ~d ~ be i~n~ous ~h t~ histo~c Epi~ C~ a~ the
~T ]'/ '97 [~:0~1 TOI~N OF $~IHOLD
co,rn~ of Westphalia Avenue and Sound Avenue. T'aese impacts can be partially mltlg~t,,d
tl~rougb the use of'lands~apin8 to provide screening of the base of ~ pole. but ~e conflict with
t~: hi,:eric sttuctmcs will remain. Distant views fi'om the southwest and wes~ will be screened
by existing vegetation and bufldinl~S, and views fi.om these perspectives w~ll not be sig~ificamly
im~c-ted.
If the project is lpproved, the proposed equipment ~lt~ ~ f~ ~ ~d ~ ~r~
~o help ~ ~s of~ pro~s~ ~no~l~ flora t~ ~I, ~ou~ t~ ~1 ~e ofl~ Io~
~)n~ E~, Pa~ I indi~es ~ n ~11 tower ~ll
~:hou~ the ~t~ site p~ ~ho~ m ~m~d m~opole.
miti~tlon, de~ng on the tower design, ~thou~ t~ s~ute would ~ll ~ ~ ~le.
A m~ me~ ~w~ would ~ cindy in~n~t
prop~ly d~t~ed lower ~h a b~k or wooden f~adc ~8ht
ltL~torie~l ]~d~ou rcL~
'l'l~ere rare several historic structures in the a~a of th= s~tel and the proposed proje~ baa the
poll:11.tial to inlt~aG~ the historic character et'the local ares. Thc l~'ojccl spos~or bas p~ovidcd a.
lss~ of ~i~ structu[es within 500 feet of the site which have been identified by th~ Societ~ los
the Pfesenallon of Lonfl Island Antiquhies ($PLIA.) as having potential historical si~iticance.
Akhuuff, h the eli~bllity of'these struclures for ioclusion on the ~ate or ~ederal r~,iai~s ~ ~ot
b¢~"~ detetmieed, they ~r¢ si~,nil~c:ant k~r~l hmdmarks amd the ptopos~ project is e~pe~-ted to
be incongruent with th~ histo,~cai ~ou~r~cs. Of i~rticLlllll' ¢ol~el~ ate tile wood, fi'lillle
building immcdlalely adjac~e~t to the site, which now hou~ a real eslal~', Office, ~ the
~:piscop~l Church on ~ound Avenue. Tho monopole will be clearly visible behlmd these
s~ructure~ flora the predominant ~4ewpoints, amd is located only 50 feet fi`om lhe o~ce building.
The TuthJll hume to the ~orthwegt of'the intersection et'Westphalia Av~e ~ $ouod Avenue
is al~o located only 250 feet fi`om the proposed monopole, althour, h tl~ rear lot line has a
wooded buffer which would help. scre~ views of the pole The potential for inet, mien of the
propo_,ed monopolc into the hismrlcal characte~ of the Mattituck hamlet should b~ co~slde~ed,
p~uticuiaxiy 8ive~ the open views a)on$ Pike Street and from the we.~bou~d ~ of Sound
Avenue
Other
No cra?lie ~ ~re eXpe,~ed am s result of'the proper, re.41 projec:L as on going maintemamce will
require only two trips per inonth There may be a slight Imp~ on local tra~c during
~sut. tu~ion, lmpa~ts on community services such as polio, fire and stroll dlStd0ts s~ould
aJso be mhtimal. There will be s negligible tax increas~ to provide cOmmunity so'vices, and no
B~ A~Jsmic Spd~:Ld Us~ l~r'mi~
for ~ervic~ is ~xpected. The st~u~'e will bc fcn~..d to mh~m~e thc
~ ~mma~y. the prirne~ concerns related to thc proposed project ~re the po~nti~J for lend
cont~-tA impacts to the hjsto~ca] nature of the hamlet, and v~sunl imj~cts. Impacts to nau~rai
r~our~s are expected to be mimrnaL Due to the sm~ll size of'the lot end lac. k ut' vcgctation on
adjacent propeflie~ to thc north and ~ the potemiaJ for miti;&tion ut' the~ impacts is limited.
The board nu~y wi~ to require a Long Env~ronmenta) A~m~nt Forn~ Pm~ 3 Nm~r. ive and
A:~Jysis which addr_ _~'~ the pm~gi~d land use 0omqicts, impact on h~$torlcaJ resources and
vi~m~ m~rusion whLCh might he c-xpecte~ to result fi'om thc.project as proposed. If the~
por.~rUt~d bnt~cts Me f~und to he s~J'~cant and cannot be mitigated, the prO~osed project may
werran~ I po~itive de, chrnfion. Potandal mitigation end/or alterrmtivex which n~y reduce
a~tv~'se envtronm~nt~d effects includ~ but ~e not Ihnlted to, reduction in size, {nco~porn~io. of
the rower into a compatible ~tru~ture~ and co.location on an existing facility or location at an
elternetive ~ite There is an exi~ttg monopole at the inte~on of Elijah Lane mut
R~utc 2~. which is approxim~toly 8,000 feet ~nst of the site. ff y0~ have any questinn~ or ~
e~y furthe~ input with re~ard to tt,ls matter, plen~ do not he.s~ate to call.
Nelson, Pope & Voorhis. LLC
APPENDIX B
FREUDENTHAL & ELKOWITZ CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
Zoning Board of Appeals : Town of Southold
State of New York : County of Suffolk
In the Matter of the A~plication of'
NEW YORK SMSA LXMITED PARTNERSHIP
d/b/a Bell Atlantic Mobile, Inc.,
a public utility of the State of New York
Premises: 425 Westphalia Avenue
Mattituck, New York
State of New York
County of Westchest~r)
A~F/DAVIT
PHILIP K. C/~ARALEL, bein~duly sworn, deposes and says:
1. I am'a senior radio frequency engineer employed by
New ~ork SMSA Limited Partnership, d/h/a Bell Atlantic Mobile,
Inc., ("BAM#}. I have been involved in radio fre~amncy
engineering for ov~r fourteeun~.(l%)-years~- As a radio frequency
engineer, I am trained to identify g&ps in cellular telephone
coverage and to evaluate the ability of proposed antenna sates to
remedy gaps in cellular telephone coverage.
2. I submit this affidavit in support of the
application of BAM for a special exception approval to permit
construction of a public utility structure, designed to remedy a
gap in cellular telephone coverage that exists in the Mattituck
area within the Town of Southold.
3. The propOsed utility structure consists of a 99
foot tall tower, amd anequi~nu shelter at the base thereof, to
be located at 425 Westphalia Avenue, Mattituck, New York {=he
P.02
"Mattituck Site").
4. ~ is a p~lic utility ~der ~he laws of the
S=a~e of New York ~d it holds a license ~rom the Federal
Co~nlcations Cohesion ("FCC") to serve =he p~lic wi=bin the
To~ of Southold. ~ also has been issued a certificate of
p~lic necessity fr~ the New York P~lic Se~ice C~ssion
("PSC"). ~'s FCC license re~ires t~= it pr~ide cellular
telephone se~ice within the ~e~raphic ~aries of the To~ of
Broo~ven. The re~la~o~ ~n~te for this franc~ee is thru= '
B~ provide a ~a[ity se~ice consistent with PSC and FCC
re~iremen=s. I= is =his st~dard which ~s de=e~ned the
5. The efficien~og =he Mattituck Site ~s a
of the "coverage" of the adjoining sites.
6. ' To ~derstand the efficiency of the e~jec= site
re~ires that the me.rs of ~his ~oa~ ~ders~d certain basic
concepts of :~he tec~olo~ attendant =o cellular telephone
co~icmtions. Cellular telephone ie a method of ~bile
in vehicles or hand-carried sending =o and receiving sisals from
fixed base sites. ~e si~es are e~ineered to cover a
li~ued area so that any particular cell will c~r the lo=al
area but at the sa~ time will not ~nterfere with another cell
oDera=~9 on the same fre~ency s~ distance away. Neig~ri~
1~-~-1997 09: ~A~
P. 05
cells operate on a different frequency es= =o provide a buffer
between cells of the same frequency. This concept, frequenc~ re-
use, allows =he necessar~ system capacity to be achieved which is
required to provide a quality GRADE OF SERVICE to the public.
?. If =he coverage between cells provides good
overlap, a customer can move from one cell =o an adjacen~ cell
through a process called "~D-OFF#. A~ a cusuomermaking a call
in =he vicinity of a cell moves about and, as he or she be~ins to
move out of the range of =he cell, the con, rage becomes weaker.
(An analogy of =hie is a television reception on =he fringe of
the eta=ions coverage area). When this happens, the call
transfers (hands-off) to =he adjacent cell, if that cell is
present and has a channel available for use.
8. To establish the n~cessax-f distribution of cells
and =o help insure that coverage ie uniform, cells ara located
=hrou~h the use of hexagonal grid patter~.
g. When a cell is missing, coverage is not uni£orm
and service can seriously deteriorate in that region. Cus=omer~
typically hear noise, popping, cracking and o~her interference.
10. The height o£ =he an=e~aa for a Cellular
Telephone Cell Site is determined by a process of which =he
3
following components apply:
1) Establish the proper general &rea for the
site (known a~ the "Search Deficiency
_ Area");
Zstimate the appropriate height for
locations in the "search Deficienc-~Area- by
use of com~ute~ modeling tools;
3) Locate candidate si=es;
4) ~xamine the terrain and land cover features
in the region;
5) Usi~ COtll~uter ~odeling m~thoda, study the
potential performance of the cand£~ate cell~
6) Analyze the predicated performance of the
site, determining i~ ~= will provide quality
. performance.
11, The determination o~ the Search Area is crucial to
the process. It is de=ermined by inspec~ion o£ the gTid, with
uniform hexa~ons whose size is appropriate to the performance o~
the cellular system, and by use of the performance statistics
collected within the switching system.
12. tom,outer modeling tools which use phyelcal
princip&ls =o calculate the coverage of a g~ven height a= a given
location are ~ade u~ing a data file of ground ~levation which
have been de~ermlned from maps published by the United States
Coast and Geodenic Survey. Ground cover is determined mostly by
physical i~epection o~ the locality.
13. The predicated coverage information ie&n&lyzed uo
determine the optimum height needed for =he ei~e. Proper balance
is sought between ~he wides= cc~erage and ~he m~nimum
10-~- 19~ 09: 8?P~M
516 543 22'71
=_ d I,S~'£P'sg'f§I Ol 'd'-I 1,1091,101 WOHd l, ldl:'S:lO ~'661-,.S'0-0I
interference'with the operation cf other cells and cellular
companies. Minimum antenna height is crucial in controlling
interference.
lA. If the antennas are placed at a elevetionwhich is
lower than optimum, coverage is reduced and more sites will be
required to provide reliable service. Therefore, an optimum
height is selected integrating reliable coverage alad minimiaing
interference.
15. In the caae of the pro~0eeclaite at Mattituck, an
essessment of the relationship to the site at the surround/ng
cell sites was mad%. A= below .99 feet, the linkage with the
....... surroundimg cell .ai=em-~em~m~:weak and calla can be ex~ected to
be drc~e~and the coverage is not continuous. Calls will not be
"handed-off, proDerly, cellular terminology for the process that
moves a call from the si~nal of one cell to the next, with
reliability at less than 99 feet.
16. The co~erage (efficienc~,) provide~! by the
structure at Mattituck is optimum at 99 feet above ~round.
17. There is a serious gap in BAM's cellular telephone
co,,~a=e in the Mattituck area. A gap in coverage is evidenced
by the inability to adequately transmit or receive calls, or by
cross-talk, or inuermodulatlon that renders a call inau~ible.
18. The ~ap in coverage =hat exists in the Matt±tuck
area prevents ~AM from providing seamless cellular coverage
18--~--199'7 09: ~SAM
516 5~3 22~1
public and private users, including police, fire, ambulance and
emergency response personnel.
19. The gap in cellular service wichln the
area is on~going and pervasive. I base this conclusion on
personal knowled~e, gained through myuse of the following tools,
which ~F engineers en~loy to identify ~apa in cellular coverage:
(1) computer modeling -- in~hie case I used CelCad software; and
(ii) drive tests, which measure the actual degradation in
strength as predicCed by cc~ucer modeling.
20. CelCad software is.a dec/sion su~=port tOOl for
evaluating signal r~latedmspec~s'of cellular system performance.
CelCad software is capable of producing a map which indicates
wherD coverage exists, and where it does not.
21. A~a9 generated with CelCad sof~ware, showing the
gap in cellular covmr&ge that exists in Mattituck is
hereto as ~B=T UA". This gap map takes into account the
operation of the neighboring cell sites opsra=ed by
22. To confirm the coverage gap in the Mattituck area,
BAMperformed drive tests throughout the Mattituck area. These
drive tests involved field measurements of =he actual cellular
signal strength in the affected area. The drive tests confirmed
that e gap in cellular coverage ~ists in the Mat=ituck area.
TNB I~kTTXTUC~C SX~ IS 1~LT~Y
23. The MaCCituck Sics is ideally located in remedy
uhe gap in cellular coverage that exists in the Matt/tuck area.
~4. My a~aly$is confirms that the ~attituck Site will
provide coverage foz the Ma~tituck area.
25. A second map generated with CelCad
showing the gap will be elln~na=ed when the Mattituck Site is
"turned on" is attached hereto ae ~IT
26. To ensure =hat the Ma=~i=uck Site ~uld be as
visually ~obt~si~ as poss~le. I ~erfo~d co~u=er
eA~lan~ons =0 identify the ~ni~m t~r height necessa~
remedy ~he ga~ in coverage, A hsigh~ o~ 100 fee~ was
=0 ~ the ~ni~m n~cee~ heigh=, ~r elev~tio~ would ~o~
p~vide =he r~lred coverage ~d h~er Ciera=ions coul~ cause
inter~r~ce wi~h s~ro~ing si~ee.
27. To confi~ =h~ effec=ivenees o~ ~e Matbi=uck
Site. as ~11 ae cobuyer ~s~ p~jecuione of ~nl~m
~ower heighu, a ~ve =est was ~r~o~d. ~is =es= in~lv~
actu*l te~ora~ ~lace~n~ o~ an an~e~ in =he air,
locablon and elevation~ing conte~lated. This wa~ ~one w~=h a
rea~ings were =aken ab locations throug~u= ~he ar~a. The ~ive
=es= confi~d =~= =he ~ttibuck S~e will re~y =he gap ~n
c~erage ~ha~ exiets in the Ma=~=uck arma, w~h the 1owes=
possible ~=~a height.
28. C~llular se~ce ~ones ~e divided into gri~s of
however, will be distor=ed a~ al=~red by =op~raphy su~
'7
516 54~
,c30'd T~_,=-£L~%9 T G [ Ol 'd'3 t,lO DI,JO± I,IFJdJ L,J,::IGL~: T 0
hills and ridge lines, and is merely a theoretical tool used for
com~ucer modeling.
29. In order to maintain continuous coverage, a cell
site must be able to "see" the mobile customer. If there is an
obstruction, the radio mignal will either bounce off, bounce
back, or be absorbed by the obstruction. Hills, trees,
buildings, and other objects all e:£ect the wmy & signal travels.
$0. These physical limitations in cellular technology
effect the number and type of looations Chat qualify to remedy m
gap in cellular coverage.
31. BAM Operates several cellular sites adjacex2t to
the Mattituck area. These sites are ~nown aa the ~i~F~ ~m~
, and ~rE/'/O ~ ~ cell sites. The location of these
existing cell ~itee dicnate where new sites may be located when
there is a need to remedy a gap in cellular coverage.
32. The coverage gap in the Town of Southold exists
despite the operation of BAM's sites. Because amOng other
re'eons the "Dower output" of these sites is lim/ted by the FCC,
BAM cannot simply "turn up" the power on these surrounding sites
to provide coverage in the Mattituck area. Thus, limitations in
technology, topngraphy, and FCC regulations result in a finite
number of alternative sites chat may be considered possible
c~didates to remedy a gap in cowerage.
33. Based on the foregoing dace and analysis, it is my
516 543 22~1
professional opinion that: (i) there exists a serious gap in
cellular coverage within the Mattituck area; (ii) the Mattituck
Site is the beet possible location to ensure seamless cellular
coverage to be achieved withl~ the Ma~ti~uck ares with the
shortest possible antenna; and (iii) the effectiveness of the
Mattituck Site is confirmed by both com~uter n~deling and hy
actual drive tests.
Based on =he foregoing, the Mattituck Site should be
favormbly considered by tbi~ iionorable Board a~d =he requested
special exception should be granted.
Respect fully submitted,
Sworn to before me this '~
day of October 1997.
Notary Public
1~--~-199'7 09: 1lAM
51~ 5~J
P. 10
C'uichoguc Sil¢
21855 Counlry Rd and Rt.48
Monl~pole
Rix crhcad Site
Route 25. Cablc Vision TWR
Bell Atlantic NYNEX
Mobile
Existing Ccllular Covcragc
for thc Mattituck Arca
Service Color_g~
I Qualit)' Cellular Service
['-~ Below Quality Cellular Service
~lile~
0 1.00 2.00
SCALE: 1:I00,000 08,'13
Ctr chogue Site
211.55 Commy Rd and Rt.48
Mcnopolc
P~oposcd Mattituck Site
425 Westphalia Road
I~,1~ c~hcad Sitc ./
R,mtc 25. Cable Vision TWR . -" []
o
Bell Atlantic NYNEX
Mobile
Proposed CelMar Coverage
for {he Matlituck ,'\rca
Service Color Kc '
[~ 8clm~ Quailb Celh,hlr Scr,. ice
~ile~
0 1.00
SCALE: 1:100,000
2.00
08/13/97 13:26
,/
Education:
Work Experience:
1996 - Pre~ent
1990- 1991
1998 - 1990
1983 - 1987
Philip K. Charalel
26 Hdlltop Road
Congers, N~' 10920
(~14) 268 7440
~[aster of Science in Electrical Engineering. [ 995
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering, 1983
]3angaJore UrtiversAy, BangaJore, India
Sr. RY' Engineer, Bell Atlantic NYNEX Mobile
Responsible for thc Radio Frequency(RF) Design of Cellular
System in the Queens, Suffolk and Nassau counties which includes:
· Identify new cellular sites
· RF Design of new sites
· Re-Design of old sites
· System optimization
· Implementation of new technologies
· Train Associate Engineers
· Testify as RF Expert in Zoning/Town hearings
Manager System Design, Bell Atlant/c Mobile
Responsible for the RF Engineering activities of the Connecticut
ami Western MA region which includes:
· Supervise RI: Engineers and coordinate their activities
* Implement new technologies
· Testify as RF Expert in Zon/ng Fl'own hearings
RF Engineer, Metrophone, Philadelphia
Responsible for the following activities in the Philadelphia region
· .Frequency planning
· Cci/site selection
· FCC filing
· System trouble shooting
· 'rraffk engineering
Systems Engineer, Metronet Communication, Br'~n Mawr, PA
Major responsibilities include system design oflMicrowave links for
telecon'anunJcation application and Cable TX,' system design
RF Design Engineer, Keltron, India
Worked as team leader in the development of Satellite
cortm~unication receivers and CCTV camcra~
APPENDIX C
FREUDENTHAL & ELKOWITZ CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
Cu~ chogue Site
21l 55 Country Rd and Rt48
Mcnopole
Belt Atlantic NYNEX
Mobile
Proposed Cellular Coverage
for the Mattituck Area
Riverhead Site
Route 25, Cable Vision TWR
Proposed Mattituck Site
425 Westphalia Road
Service Color Key
I Quality Cellular Setw'ice
[~ Betow Quatity Celh~lar Service
~iles
0 1,O0 2.00 3.O0
SCARE: 1:100,000 08/13/97 13:26
Cutchogue Site
21855 Counti'~ Rd and <t 48
Mor~opole
Bell Atlantic NYNEX
Mobile
Existing Cellular Coverage
fo1' the Mattituck Area
Ri~ erhead Site
Route 25, Cable Vision TWR
Service Color Key
I Quality Celltdar Service
----]Below Quality Cellular Setwice
0 1.00 2.00 3,00
SCALE: 1:100,000 08/13/97 13:23
APPENDIX D
FREUDENTHAL & ELKOWITZ CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
Proposed Bell Atlantic Mobile
Public Utiliity Communications Facility
425 Westphalia Avenue, Mattimck
Scale 1" = 100'
Base', of Tower
(~) Ruland Potato House
Bergen and Colman Oil Company
Episcopal Church of the Redeemer
Mechanics Hall
Proposed Bell Atlantic Mobile
Public Utility Communications Facility
425 Westphalia Avenue, Mattituck
Scale 1" = 100'
Base of Tower
Q Ruland Potato House
(~) Bergen and Colman Oil Company
(~) Episcopal Church of the Redeemer
(~) Mechanics Hall
LO 3ATION
AV Nu
~EST'pHALIA AVE~E ,,,
. ? ~ .r ~ I ' '1.i;'~ ~,0'1u) '~ ....
~C~ / / ~ ~o~c
/
NOIES /
............................. [3ZA FPIZl ICA ]1(
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
' BLOCK 3 [OT 34
~" '""" '""'"'~ , , MATTITUCK SITE
~. ~.~ASCO BELL ATLANTIC NYNEX
WESTPHALIA AVENUE
QT~/ .......... ~ ~6 . ,
~ 00~~ f ~'
~OrES
I LOT AREA = 13,43726 SF OR 0308 ACRES
2. ~EARING$ REFER ~O SURVEY Of YOUNG & YOUNG, AUG, 13. 1974, AND IO [tLED DEED k ~1594, PD 271.
3. SURVEY WAS PERFORMED MAY 12. 1997
4. 7AX MAP DESIGNATtON IS: DIST. 1000, SECT. 141, BLOCK 3, LOI 34.
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
*~,.~.,,,.~.~,o .~, ~ BLOCK 3, LOT 34
..o..~,.~.,..o.~.~ " WESTPHALIA AVENUE
SETBACKS ~/~¢ ', ,
BELL ATLANTIC NYNEX s~*~:
DISIt?K?T (~1000 fff CTI()N 1,I1 fll (l(!R 0.~ l O~ ,~,I I)H,4WN t~ AJ
wESTPHALIA AVENUE
/ ~ PROPOSED B ~ ~
~ PROPOSED ~ TALL WHITE PINES '
NOILS:
1 LOT AREA - 1~,45726 S F OR 0 508 ACRES
4 lAX MAP OESIGNAIION iS PmSl. lO00, SECT 141, BLOCK ,3, LOF 34.
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
~ "- , ~ ' ~- DELL ATLAH[IC HYNEX
APPENDIX E
FREUDENTI1AL & ELKO IqZ CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
PROPOSED BELL ATiLANTIC COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY
WESTPHALIA AVENUE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
MATTITUCK, NEW YORK
REPORT OF J. LANCE MALLAMO
HISTORIC PRESERVATION CONSULTANT
OCTOBER 9, 1997
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
There are no districts, sites, buildings, structures,
or objects listed on or eligible for the National or New
York State Register of Historic Places within 300' of
the proposed Mattituck Mobile Communication
Facility.
There are no historic districts or landmarks
designated by the Town of Southoid within 300' of the
proposed Mattituck Mobile Coummunications Facility.
REPORT OF J. LANCE MALLAMO
HISTORIC PRESERVATION CONSULTANT
PROPOSED BELL ATLANTIC MOBILE
PUBLIC UTILITY COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY
WESTPHALIA AVENUE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
MATTITUCK, NEW YORK
INTRODUCTION
At the request of Bell Atlantic Mobile. this consultant was asked to provide a
review of historic preservation issues relative to the installation of a proposed Bell Atlantic
Mobile Public Utility Communication Facility in Mattituck, New York. Specifically, the
c~targe presented was to identify and/or confirm the existence of historic buildings or
districts within the project area, located near the intersection of Westphalia Avenue, and
the Metropolitan Transportation Authority right-of-way for the Long Island Rail Road
(Real Property Tax Service Agency Map # 1000-141-3-34), and provide an analysis of
their landmark status relative to the proposed action as affected by current or proposed
legislation of the Town of Southold.
METHODOLOGY
The methodology employed in the preparation of this analysis consisted of the
following:
PLAN REVIEW- In August, 1997 I reviewed the proposed site and design plan
proposed by Bell Atlantic for the planned Mattituck bell tower.
SITE INSPECTION- During the months of August and September, 1997, I
personally inspected the site. located at 425 Westphalia Avenue, Mattituck, proposed for
the installation of the mobile communications bell tower. I further inspected the
immediate surrounding area, particularly noting any buildings or structures of potential
historical or architectural significance within a 300' radius of the planned location of the
be]Il tower. Initial findings were recorded and supplemented with photographic
documentation.
REVIEW OF STATE AND NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES-
A review of all official historic structure, district, object, thematic and multiple resource
designations listed, or deemed eligible for listing, on the New York State or National
Register of Historic Places within the project area was undertaken in September, 1997 to
identify historic structures and sites significant to the state and nation.
REVIEW OF TOWN DESIGNATED LANDMARKS- A review of all official
designations of historic landmarks or districts by the Town of Southold was undertaken in
September, 1997 to identify historic structures and sites within the project area deemed
significant to the town.
REVIEW OF THE SPLIA BUILDING/STRUCTURE SURVEY- An evaluation
of the Building/Structure Inventory Forms for the Town of Southold, prepared by SPLIA
for the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, was
executed in October, 1997 to identify potential historic buildings surveyed within the
project area.
REVIEW OF APPLICABLE TOWN CODES- An analysis of applicable sections
of' current or proposed Town of' Southold legislation was evaluated to identify inherent
historic preservation constraints relative to the construction of the mobile bell tower at the
Mattituck site. The current Historic Landmarks Ordinance and proposed Local Law
concerning Wireless Communication Facilities was reviewed to identify issues pertinent to
the project and its impact on historic resources in the immediate area.
STATE AND NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES
Recognizing the increasing public concern for historic preservation issues
in the United States, Congress passed the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966
wlfich established a National Register of Historic Places. The National Register is the
official list of the Nation's cultural resources worthy of preservation and is part of a
national program to coordinate and support public and private efforts to identify, evaluate
and protect historic and archaeological resources. The National Register is administered
by the National Park Service under the Secretary of the Interior. Properties listed in the
National Register include districts, sites, buildings, structures and objects that are
significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering and culture.
New York State confirmed historic preservation as a matter of public policy
thi'ough the adoption of the New York State Historic Preservation Act of 1983 which
established a State Register of Historic Places. The state provisions virtually mirror those
on the national level although they establish a state level threshold of sigmficance and
provide additional benefits not applicable on the national level.
Eligibility for the State amd National Register of Historic Places is determined
~!er an official nomination form is prepared for a specific building, site, district, or object.
Related thematic or multiple resource nominations which connect historic resources in
cc~ntext can also be considered for listing. A~er a lengthy review process, a documented
cultural resource can be recorrmaended to the New York State Parks Commissioner, who
functions as the official State Historic Preservation Officer (SH?O), for listing on the
State Register. If approved the nomination is then forwarded to federal officials in
Washington, D.C. who make a :final recommendation to the United States Secretary of the
Interior. It is possible that a property listed on the State Register may not be approved for
listing on the National Register, although a National Register property is automatically
listed on the State Register.
Listing on the National R. egister may not occur ifa property owner objects to such
designation In such a case a Determination of Eligibility may be confirmed by officials
at the close of the review process and the nominated property will receive protection fi.om
Federal government actions. Listing on the State Register does not require owner
consent.
The following criteria are used to evaluate properties (other than areas of the
National Park Service and National Historic Landmarks) for listing on the State and
National Registers of Historic F'laces:
lhe quality of stghificance itt American hisloo', architecture, archaeology,
et~'gTneerin,ff and culture is pre~ent in distrtcts, buildin,~s, s~uctures attd o~jects lhat
possess tnte~ily of location, &'s~t, setting, matertals, workmanshtp, feeling and
a. ssociation and
A. that are' associatea' with events that have made a significant contribution to
the broad patterns of our history; or
B. that are'associated with the lives of persons stgnificant in our past,' or
C. that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in pre-
history or history.
Ordinarily cemeteries, birthplaces or graves of historical figures, properties
owned by religious institutions or used for religious purposes, structures that have been
moved from their original locations, reconstructed historic btltldings, properties
primarily commemorative itt nature, and properties that have achieved stgtuficance
within the past 50 years shall not be considered eligible for the National Registen
However, such properties will qmalify if they are mtegral parts of districts that do meet
tP,'e criteria or if they fall withit:~ the following categories:
A. a religious property deriving primary significcatce from architectural or
artistic distinction or historical importance; or
B. a building or struct~tre removed from its original location but which is
si,ffnificant primarilyfor architectural value or which is the surviving structure most
importantly associated with a historic person or event; or
C. a birthplace or grave ora historical figttre of outslanding importance if there
is no other appropriate site or build#tg directly associated with his productive life; or
D. a cemetery that derives its primary significance from graves of persons of
transcendent importance, from age, from distinctive desig?t features, or from a~:~ociation
with historic events: or
d'~. a recottslructed bttild#tg when accurate/), execuled irt a suilab/e em'irottme~tl
attd presented itt a dignified manner as part ora restoration master platt, attd when
olher btti[dtttg or structure wilh the same association has suta'lved; or
P: a property commemorative in relent if design, age, tradition, or ~.'mbolic vahte
has invested it with its own historical significance,, or
G. a property achieving s~gnificance within the past 5O years if it is of exceptional
importance
There are no direct restrictions concerning privately owned property listed on the
National or State Register of Historic Places. However, demolition expenses related to
the destruction of a National Register listed building may not be deducted from federal
individual or corporate income taxes.
Currently there are no sites, structures, districts, objects, thematic or multiple
resources listed on or determined eligible for the State or National of Historic Places
wil:hin a 300' radius of the Mattituck bell tower site and no nominations within the area
are, being considered.
SOUTHOLD TOWN LANDMARKS
The legal protection of historic landmarks and districts dates back over sixty years
when the City of New Orleans designated its Vieux Cane section as the nation's first
official historic district. The adoption of architectural and aesthetic review controls by
government agencies was viewed somewhat skeptically for many years until the United
States Supreme Court affirmed the right of municipalities to protect historic landmarks in
the famous Penn Central v. City of New York case. In that landmark ruling, which denied
the demolition of New York's Grand Central Station, the court held that with thorough
documentation and reasonable conditions, historic preservation restrictions are a valid
extension of the police power inherent in zoning codes.
After the constitutionality of landmark preservation laws was upheld by the
Supreme Court in 1977, many Long Island municipalities adopted ordinances to protect
historic landmarks. Some locations, such as Roslyn Village and the Town of Huntington,
passed or already had in place strict review controls with stem penalties for violations.
Others, such as Southold, passed ordinances that are essentially honorary, in nature
Far from actually regulating building issues related to historic landmarks, the
Southold law allows its Landmarks Review Commission only the courtesy of offering an
advisory opinion or recommendation as to which landmarks or districts may be created, or
how alterations to landmarks structures or areas are to be regulated. While the Southold
Town Landmark Preservation onlinance supports the preservation of historic sites and
landmarks within the town, the law clearly states that "the designation of property as a
desi[gnated landmark or historic district by the Town Board...shall not impose any
obligation or responsibility upon the owners thereof, nor shall such designation in any
manner restrict or limit the use, development, repair, maintenance, alteration or
modification of the property by the owners thereo£"
The Southold ordinance outlines a strict process for the designation of historic
districts and landmarks within the town. But interestingly, an examination of the section
of the law concerning the review of building permit applications appears not to restrict
pertnit review solely to designated landmarks as is the legal norm. Instead the ordinance
refers all permit applications for landmarks "listed by SPLIA [ not defined or identified by
proper name elsewhere in the ordinance], federal, state or town agencies", regardless of
actual designation of the site as a landmark by the Town Board. The fact that the
provisions of the law are purely advisory, with no provisions for mandatory regulation and
enforcement, confirms that the Town of Southold does not prohibit or control the
inappropriate alteration to sites actually designated or proported as historic landmarks.
Therefore, the significance ofgn action by the Southold Town Board in officially
designating an historic landmark: in Southold appears to be a paper honor that is
somewhat irrelevant to the actual preservation of the structure.
A review of historic landmarks designated by the Town of Southold revealed that
there are no such sites within a 300' radius of the proposed Mattituck bell tower location.
SPLIA INVENTORY
The reliance of Southold"s historic preservation policy on the identification of
his'toric sites "listed by SPLIA" is uninformed and somewhat misleading. SPLIA does not,
on its own, prepare an official listing of Long Island's historic resources or establish
criteria to define historic. Instead, the role SPLIA has taken has been to coordinate the
Historic Resources Survey for the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and
Hi~,~oric Preservation which seeks to located and identify potentially historic sites and
structures within the bi-county region. This is part of the initial application procedure for
the State and National Register of Historic Places.
As the coordinator of the Historic Buildings Survey, SPLIA research assistants and
interested volunteers canvas geographic areas and roadways of Long Island in an attempt
to identify buildings and sites that may have histo~c importan~,e. Ideally Building/
Structure Inventory Forms, conunonly knownas ~31ue Forms are prepared by properly
trained individuals in conformance with instructions provided by the New York State
Office of Parks, Re-erealina and }tisior~ Preservalion, Field Services Bureau. But in spite
of the value of this massive effmt to identify potential historic landmarks, the survey
should not be considered as an official list ofdocumented historic structures and sites.
Execution of the blue forms is often sparse at best and information can be based on oral
hearsay, a physical "walkahout" or "winrlghield drive-by" of the sebject property, at times
by 'untrained persons with little in the way of substantive historical knowledge,
documentation or research. Furthermore, blue forms may be executedanfl sent Io New
York State by virtually anyone for any property regardless of their association or
understanding of the historic or architectural sign/ficance of the site. Although state
instructions suggest inventory fo~xns must be completed in full and that incomplete forms
wil]l be returned, this is rarely the case and most submissions are routinely accepted.
When blue forms are completed and submitted to New York State, the listing is
entered on a statewide computer inventory of potential historic resources without
confirmation by state officials of the facts as presented. This can become a problem when
potentially historic sites and structures are accepted as historic solely on the basis of the
survey without adequate review or confirmation of the historical record by verified
documentary sources. As an example, in Mastic Beach a 1960's 7 Eleven convenience
store and an A & P supermarket are listed on the statewide inventory of historic sites
based on the fact that the researcher identified the colonial- style cupolas atop both
buildings with the colonial period of Suffolk County history.
The SPLIA inventory has no official status in and of itself and it functions solely as
a prelinfinary information source;. Each site or building/structure listed in the inventory
must be independently reviewed and confirmed to authenticate historical integrity by
federal, state and local government agencies before the information presented is accepted
for landmark designation purposes.
The following buildings identified on the SPLIA inventory were determined to be
within 300' of the proposed Mattituck bell tower site~
1. Ruland Potato House- In violation of state instructions, the form for this
structure is almost totally incomplete with no physical description, declaration of
significance or source identification included Despite an admonition in the state
Building/Structure Inventory Form Instructions that incomplete forms will not be
accepted, this entry was apparently accepted without review though it lacks even the
most basic information such as identification of building materials and fenestration.
Judging from its exterior form, the building in question appears to date from the early
decades of the twentieth centur2/and is typical of hundreds of similar utilitarian structures
bulilt for agricultural-related purposes in the Town of Southold and on eastern Long
Island.
Although retaining its basic two story form with gabled roof, the building has been
altered in a number of ways. It was almost certainly clad and roofed in unpainted wood
shingles originally. Currently, the roof has been replaced with white asphalt shingles and
the shingled siding painted a bright red color. On the east facade facing Westphalia
Avenue large multi-parted picture windows have been added on both the fist and second
stories which drastically comprovaise the structure's original appearance, and an
inappropriate colonial-style door~vay of recent vintage has been added. The side walls
have also been apparently punctuated by various changes in window £eaxestration judging
fro:va the "ghosts" of newer shingles easily detected in-the siding pattern. Windows
installed on both sides and the rem- are no/original and alsodate from recent times. The
addition of contemporary gutters and leaders, as well as a rooftop antenna further detract
fro:va the original appearance of the building. The use or, locally made "Duntile' concrete
blocks as indicated on the building form, while interestihg, does not add materially to the
architectural quality of the building. Initial research could not identify historical
associations with persons or events significant in Southold's past.
2. Bergen and Colman Oil Company Building- The original Building/Structure
inventory form prepared for this small, one story concrete block building has been subject
to a number of hand-written char~ges and question marks which apparently underscores
confusion on the part of research assistants as to the historical and architectural
si~aificance of the building. The building is typical of thousands of unadorned
industrial/commercial built on Long Island in the twentieth century and its sole gesture to
architectural civility is the simple recessed brick arch over the front door. The door itself
is almost certainly not the original, having been replaced with a six panel colonial-style
door of recent vintage.
The historical and architectural significance of the structure relies solely on the fact
that it was standing on the.site in 1908 (though it is not confirmed that this is the actual
building on the site at that time) and'is constructed of locally made concrete blocks. No
fun:her associating persons or ewmts significant in S0uthold's past with thisbuilding could
be identified.
3. Episcopal Church of the Redeemer- This religious property located on Sound
Avenue about 200' east of the proposed bell tower site has been significantly altered
several times since its initial construction. During the past half'century the clapboard
building was covered in extehor stucco, buttresses and a bell tower were added, as-,vas a
large addition to the rear. The original wood shingle roof has been replaced by asphalt
shingles and the original windows have been replaced.
4. Mechanics Hall- This rear wing of this structure located approximately 250'
from the site of the proposed Mattituck bell tower, apparently originally stood on the site
of the nearby Mattituck Presbyterian Church. The original structure was moved several
times over the years and eventually was integrated into a Methodist Church constructed
in 1896 in the Shingle style. In ][919 the building was acquired by the Mattituck Council #
34, Jr. Order of the United American Mechanics and converted into a meeting lodge. The
large steeple, a major architectural element of the 1896 addition was removed after World
War II. In t960 the building was converted into a community theater andhas been used
as such since that time.
The Shingle style was a ~najor architectural movement developed at the turn of the
century in the seaside resort areas of the northeast, particularly on eastern kong Island.
Tlnte idiom relied almost exclusively on wood-singled side walls and roofing Which
combined to form a tmified archJ.tectural composition ideally suited to enhance the natural
attributes of prosperous rural areas. In Southold, the Methodist Church/IVlechanics Hall is
a good example of the style's form, but certainly not the finest example ex~ant in the
community. The replace of the original wood shingle roof with asphalt shingles and
painting of natural shingled siding imparts~ distinctly different appearance than efi~nally
intended. Furthermore, removal of the original steeple has resulted in a.significant loss of
architectural integrRy.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION
There appears to be no impact fi-om the proposed Mattituck bell tower on the
aforementionecl four buildingsidant~fied inlhe SPLIAinventory. No suchbuildings will
be demolished or directly impacted as a result of the project and no alteration to character-
de:fined features, distinctive construction method~or ~figLnat building materials ~a4ttqesutt.
The project as planned is fully reversible at some future time and the industrial site
selected is not ,afithin an historic districtJisted by SPLIA, federal, stateor townage~ncies.
Ihe bell tower location is also directly surrounded by recent contemporary buildings or
earlier twenfiethc~stmctm:esbeari~g tiitle-a~cb&eomr, al-or historicad~gnificm'tee.
The Episcopal Church and Mechanics Hall buildings,-though within the 300' limit are
shielded from the bell rowe, viewsh0d by sahe prese~me ~f oth~ tmitdings amt mature tre~s
on the west side of Westphalia Avenue south of the railroad fight of way.
The appearance of the belt tower, when viewing the from or west faeadesofeither
building, should not be readily apparent due to the orientation of the viewer in relationship
to the actual pole location. Construction of the bell tower in a distinctive bell tox~er
design should also visually impart a dignified appearance to the surrounding area which
accommodaCesboth local vie~.xl object_iv~ andaglode~q cem_municafioa 4aeeds.
It is the considered opimon of this consultant that there are no properties of
hi,,~toric or architectural significance within a 300' radius of the planned Bell Atlantic
Mobile Communications FaciliEt at Mattituck that would be adversely impacted by the
execution of the bell tower proposal.
Respectfully subm/tted,
I ?
APPENDICES
Ao
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
J. Lance Mallamo Curriculum Vitae
Map of Project Area
Nomination Process, National and State Register of Historic Places
Fact Sheet: National and State Register of Historic Places
List of National Register Listings, Suffolk County, New York
List of Designated Historic Landmarks, Town of Southold, New York
Building Structure Inventory Form and Instructions
SPLIA Building Structure Inventory Forms
1. Ruland Potato House
2. Bergen and Coiman Oil Co. Building
3. Episcopal Church of the Redeemer
4. Mechanics Hall
Photographs of SPLIA Inventoried Buildings
J. LANCE MALLAMO
5 THREE SISTERS HOLLOW
HEAD OF THE HARBOR
ST. JAMES. L.[.. NEW YORK 11780
(516) 862-8725
EDUCATION
Master of planmng. Hunter College of the City Univemi _fy of New York
Honors Graduate. James Felt Memorial Fellow
Relevant course trmning: Historic Preservation. Preservation Planning Theory.
Cost/Benefit Analysis and Statistical Theo~'. Site plamung, Architecture.
Bachelor of Arts. State Uni'~ersit)' of New York at Stony Brook
Honors Graduate. History. Major. Fine Arm Minor
Relevant course training: AaN'anced seminars in European and American History.
New York State History.. Sextior Honors Project in Long Island History., Art History.. 19th
Painting and Sculpture. European and American Architecture: 18th-20th CentUries. Fine Arm of
Colonial America. Social Anthropology. Astronomy. Earth Science.
EMPLOYMENT
September 1997- Present Interim Director. Suffolk County Vanderbilt Museum.
1987-Present, Suffolk Count3.' Historian. County of Suffolk. New York.
Appointed ~, the Suffolk Count)' Executive and Legislature as the official historian
of Suffolk Count)' government. Duties include coordinating activities of Toxin. Village and
Local Historians. records management and acting as chief information contact on all official
requests for information on the histoD' of Suffolk Count).
1983-Present. Director of Historic Services. County of Suffolk. New York.
Responsible for the full adrmnistmtion, restoration, presel'vation~ maintenance, protection
and interpretation of 227 historic landmarks and sites owned and operated ~ the Suffolk Count)'
Department of Parks. Duties include those of Manager of the Historic Trust. plus additional
responsibilities such as the development, design and overnight of all aspects of historic
preservation and interpretive programs including budgeting, fund development, grantsmanship,
public relations and the development of public/private partnerships. Also charged with the
development of policy, recommendations advising the County Executive and Legislature on the
potential impact of proposed government actions on cultural and historic resources within
Suffolk Count.
1980-1983, Manager of the Historic Trust, County of Suffolk, New York.
Inaugurated innovative county government program which mandated appropriate preservation.
restoration and maintenance for designated historic landmarks, sites, archaeological resources.
features and scenic vistas within the Suffolk County Parks system. Duties included preservation
policy, planmng, preparation of nominations to the State and National Regis,em of Historic
Places. and the creation and development ofprognnns necessary to sustain, interpret and
promote historic sites such as publications, collections, exhibits, conferences, seminars and
special events.
AWARDS
New York Slate Historic Prese~ation Award-1989.
Awarded by_ Governor Mano Cuomo for the preservation of cultural and historic
resources within Suffolk CounD'.
Preservation League of New York State- 1989.
Awarded for the developmeut of innovative Landmark Preserve Program developed
bet~veen Suffolk Cotmty and the Friends for Long Island's Heritage.
RECENT PUBLICATIONS
Long IslandArchitectur& Heart of the Lakes Press. 1992.
"Learmng From Long Island: Order and Chaos of the Vehicular Age."
Robert Moses: Single-minded Genius. Heart of the Lakes Press. 1990.
"Robert Moses and the Development of Long Island's State Park~vays."
RELATED PROFESSIONAL EXPEILIENCE
Member or former member of the Board of Directors of the following orgamzations:
Board of Architectural Review. Inc. Village of Head of the Harbor. New York.
Master Plan comnUttee, Inc. Village of Head of the Harbor, New York.
Cou.nb, Historians Association of New York State (Current 1 st Vice-presidenl, Chairman.
Legislative Comnutleo), Friends for Long Island's Heritage. Suffolk Count3., Historical Society,
Suffolk County Archaeological Association. Suffolk Count).' Black History. Association.
Smithtown I-lJstorical Society, Three Village Historical Socieb' (Past Vice-president). County
Executive's Blue R/bbon Task Force on the Vanderbilt Museum. Suffolk Counb' Tercemenmal
Commission..
Member or former member of the following professional orgamzations:
American planmng Association. Association of Preservation Technology, National
Trust for Historic Preservation. New York State Historical Association, Society for Commercial
Archaeology, Society for the Preservation of Long Island Antiquities, American Asso(~ation
for State and Local History, Long Island Museum Association. Association of Suffolk County
Historical Societies.
GtL~qTS
Since 1987 have secured and admthJstrated over $3,000.000 in direct grants and gifts on behalf
of historic properties within Suffolk County Parklands from State and Federal agencies,
Private foundations, corperations and individual donors.
PERSONAL
Forty, five years of age, roamed, five children, excellent health.
Properly Tax Servl(, Agen~:Yl'~' ~"~'J4 .,..
New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation
The Governor Nelson A. Rockefeller EmPire State P!aza
Agency Budding 1, Albany, New York 12238-0001
~he State ar~ National Regis~=_r~ of Historic Places ar~ the official lists of
buildings, :=-tructures, d]~aricts, objects and sites significant in the history,
a---~7.h~'~-.'L--~a, arcbaeolcgy and c~lt~lre of New York and the nation. ~he sa~e eligibility
criteria a~_= used for the State ar~ National Rs~istars.
~ne Nal--ional Historic Preser~ttion Act of 1966 and the New Yo=k State Historic
Preservation Act of 1980 are the e~bling legislation for the National ar~ State Re~ister~
prc~ms. :Eh New York, these prowz?~ms ar~ adm~ by the C~m~issioner of Parks,
Recreation ~u~d Historic Preservation, who is also the State Historic Preservation Officer
~fits of ~.~wci~:
1. P~q. ristered p~uperties and properties determined eligible for the Registers receive
a E~-ure of protection fr~ the effects of federal and/or state agency sponsored,
licensed or assis~ project through a notice, review and ¢~nsultation process.
2. Owners of dCpreciable, certified historic p£uperties may taka a 20 percent federal
inc~e t~x credit for the .costs of substantial rehabilitation as pruvid~ for under
the Tax Reform Act of 1986.
3. Municipalities ar~ not-for-profit o~w~nizations may apply for 50 percent matching
w==nts-in-aid for pr~sezva~=ion ~rk on listed p~uperties (subject to available
fun~_ng) urger the provisions of the Environmenta/ Quality Bond Act of 1986.
4. Registered p~uperties receive priority consideration f~n federal and state
agencies in space rental or leasing.
~ere ~e no restrictions plac~ on private cwners of reg/ster~d properties. Private
property cw~-~ may sell, a/t~r or ¢~-pose of their property as they wish, although an cwner
%~no d~olish~ a certified r~giste~ p=u~_rty may not deduct the c~=-ts of demolition frcn
Sponso~ nust suknit an application and supporting documentation to the Office of
Parks, R~ttion and Historic Preservation cc~cainin~ deter!ed h/storical/arc/~
information ~%ich can be used to evaluate a pru%~_~ry's eligibility for list/rig. If the
property ap~,~rs to m~=t the eligibility criteria, Field Services Bureau staff will advise
applicants hc~ to pl~u~re a~ acceptable ncmination. Upon receipt of a satisfactory draft
ncnt~nation, t~ offio~ will seek the c~-nts of the owner(s) and local officials and
arrange for offic~] review by the State Board for Historic Preservation. The ncmtination,
along with th~ Board's r~ ~-~-ndati~n, is then forwal~ to the C~m~ssioner of Parks,
Recreation and Historic Pr~servatic~. Upon approval by the Commissioner, p~u~erties are
listed on the State Re~ister and n~ainat~d~ to the National R~/is~r. National Register
nominations are subsequently fo~ to the National Park Service and listing is achieved
after approval by the F~=per of the National R~gister. Please note that the National Park
Service will not list an individual, privately owned pro~_rty for which they have r~ived
the owner's Objection.
An Equal Opoort;[n~y/Affirmar~ve ActJon Agency
Hletorl¢ Preservation Field Service~ Bureau
Be. nefi~s of ~.'
of the Na=ic:nal ~ Preservat. ic~ ~ of 1966 ~ ~ the ~riscry
projec~m affec~.~ such ~ru$~r~les.
Eli~ibilitv for federal tax ~o~isicr~. If a ~ is lis~-~ in the
Nat_i~x~d ~is~er, c~r~ain fmd~zal ~ax ~risl~m~ ~my a$91y. ~ ~ ~
~s ~ a ~-~ ~~ ~_~ ~ 27.5 ~ f=
Consid~ra=ion of hi.~.ori¢
Cx=~rol Ac= of 1977.
to the no~.ic~ ~ of ~ 617 of T/'im N~ Yo=k ~ ~"~d.%-=i~
560 NEW YORK NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES 1966 TO !
St. Lawrence Count~---Continued
US Post Office.Canton [US Post Offices in New
York Slate. 1858-1943. 'IR{, Park St., Canton,
11/17/88. A, C. 88002469
US Post Office--Gouvemeur [US Post Offices in
New York Stale. 1858-1943. TR], 35 Grove St..
Gooverneur. 5tl 1/89. A. C. 88002516
US Post Office--Potsdam [US Post Offices in New
York State, 1858-1943.'IR], 21 Elm St.. Pot.sram.
5/11/89, A. C. 88002410
United Methodist Church [Momsrown Village
MPA], Gouveneur St., Momstown. 9/02J82. C,
a. 82004690
Village Park Historic Disrdct, Both sides of Main
and Park SLs., and Park Pl., Canton. 5/06/75, A.
B. C, a. 75002087
Village Park H~oric District (Boundary In-
crease), 7-100 Main SL N. and 70, 76, 80, 90.
Main St. S, Canton, 9129183. A. C, 83001794
Waddington Historic District, Jct. of NY 37 and La
Gms, se St. Waddiagtoo. 5/I8/92. A. C. 92000457
West Stockholm H~odc District, W. Stockholm
and L~vthgston Rds., West Stockholm, 11120179,
A, C, D, 7~3I~
Wright's Stone Slore [Momstown Village MRA],
Main St., Momstown. 9/02/82, A. C, 8200,1691
Steuben County
Addison Village Hail, Tuscarora and South Sis..
Addison. 4123180, C. 80002771
CampbelI-Rumsey House [Bath Village bIPA],
~5 E. S~euben St., Bath. 9130183. B. C. 83001795
Church of the Redeemer, Jct. of Park and Wall
SIS Addison. 11/12/92. C, a. 92001577
Cobblestone House [Bath Village MPA]. PI0 W
Washington St. Barn, 9/30/83. C. g3001796
Davenport LibraR,' [Bath Village MPA], W. Morris
SI Bath. 9/30/83. A B. 83001797
Delaware Lackawanna & Western Railroad Sla-
tion Jcl of Steuben St. and Victor~' tfwy.
Painted Post. 11/21/91, A, C, 91001674
Erie Freighthouse Historic District [Bath Village
MPAJ, Jct. ot Cohocton St. and Railroad Ave..
Bath, 3/18191, A. C. 91000235
GansevoordEast Steuben Streets Historic District
[Bath Village MPA], E Steuben and Gaose-
root{ SIS., Bath, 9130183, B, C, 83001798
Haverling Farm House [Bath Village MPA], 313
Haverling St., Bath, 9/30/83, C, 83001799
Homell Armom., 100 Seneca St.. Homell. 5106/80,
C. 8O002772
Homell Public hbrary, 64 Genesee St., Homell,
2124175, C, 75001230
Jenning's Tavern, 59 W. PuReney St., Cprning,
9120173, A, 73001270
Lan-owe House, S. Main St./US 415, Cohocton.
12107189, C. 89002088
Liberty. Slreet Historic District [Bath Village
MPA], Roughly Libe~ St. trom E. Moms St. to
Haveding St., Bath. 9130183, A, C. 83001800
Market Street Historic District, Market St. from
Chestnut St. to Wall St., Coming, 3/01/74, A, C,
74001307
McMaster House [Bath Village MPA], 207 E.
Washiagton St.. Bath. 9/30/83, B, C. 83001801
Pleasant Valley Wine Company, SR 88, Rheims,
11/18/80, A. C, 80002773
PoRer-Van Camp House [Bath Village MPA], 4 W.
Washington St.. Bath. 9/30183, C, 83001802
Robie. Reuben, House [Bath Village MPA], 16 W.
Washington St.. Bath. 9130183, C, 83001803
Sedgwick House [Bath Village MPA], 101 Hayer-
ling St.. Bath, 9/30/83, C, 83001804
Shepherd, William, House [Bath Village MPA],
Il0 W. Washington Si., Bath, 9/30183. C,
83001805
US Post Office---Bath [US Post Offices in New
York State, 185&1943, TR], 101 IAberty St., Bath.
11117188, K C, 88002454
US Post Office--Coming [US Post Offices in New
York State. I858-1943. TR], 129 Walnut St.,
Corning, 11117/88, A, C, 88002474
US Post Office-Painted Post [US Post Offices in
New York State, 1858-1943, TR], 13.5 N. Hamil-
ton St.. Painted Post. 5/11189, A. C, 88002395
Ward, M. J. Feed Mill Complex [Bath Village
MPA], I-9 Cameron St.. Bath. 3118191, A. C,
91000236
Suffolk Co, nB,
Balcastle [Southampton Village MPA], NW cor-
ner of Hemck and Little Plains Rds.. South-
ampton, 10102/86, C. 86602722
Bald Hill Schoolhouse. Horseblock Rd. Farming-
ville, 7121188, A. C, a. 88001018
Bay Crest Historic Disthct [Huntington Town
MPA], Beech Ave., Valley Rd.. Woodside & Val-
ley Drs., Huntington Bay, 9/26/85, A. C,
85002486
BayJis, M.. House [Humington Town MPA], 530
Sweet Hollow Rd, Mel',iile, 9/26/85 C
85002487
Beach Road Historic Distnct [Southampton Vil-
lage MPA]. Bem, een Shinnecock and Haiseiy
Neck Rds. on Beach Rd. at Bamer Beach
Southampton, 10/02/86. C. 86002723
Beachpend [Stony Brook Harbor Estates MPS],
Smith La., Nissequogue. 8109193. A, C.
93O00698
Beaux Arts Park Histodc District [Huntington
Town MPA], Locust In.. Upper & Lower Drs..
Huntington Bay, 9126185. A, C, 85002489
Beebe Windmill [Long island Wind and Tide
Mills'IR], SE comer o[ Ocean Rd. and Hildreth
Ave., BridgeBampton, 12/27/78, A. C, b,
780019l$
Benjamin, James, Homestead, 1182 Handers Rd.,
Handms, 8/13186, A, C, 86001510
Bethel AME Church and Manse [Huntington
Town MPA], 291 Park Ave., Huntington,
9/26/85, A, C, a, 85002490
Blydenburgh Park Historic District. Blydenburgh
County Park. Smithtown, 8/11/83, A, C,
83001807
Bowem Dr. Wesley, House [Southampton Village
MPA], Beach Rd., Southampton. 10102186, C,
86002699
Bowes House [Huntington Town MRA], 15
bor Hill Dr., Huntington Bay, 9/26/85..~
85002492
Box Hill Estate, NW of St. Jarnes on Moriches
St. James vicinity, 12/04/73, B, C, 7300127t
Bragg, Caleb, Estate, Star Island Rd., Mom
11102187, C, 87001895
Breese. James L. House, IS.5 Hill St., South;.
ton, 4118/80, C, 80002778
Briar Patch Road Historic District [Village of
Harnpton MPA}, End of Briar Patch Rd. a
Georgica Pond, East Hampton, 7/21/8J~
88001029
Brown, George McKe~on, Estate~oindre
[Huntington Town MPA], Brown's Rd., 1
. 0ngton Station. 9/26/85, A, C, 85002493
Brush Farmstead [Huntington Town MPA],
Greenlawn Rd., Huntington, 9/26/85, A
85002500
Buell's Lane Historic D~rid [Village of
Hampton MPA], 47-114 Buell's La., East H~
ton, 7/21/8& C, a. b, 88001027
BuffeR, EiipBas. House [Huntington Town M
159 W. Rogues Path, Centerpo~, 9126185. i
d. 85002495
BuffeR, Joseph. House [Hunhngton Town M
169 W. Rogues Path, Cold Spring Ha;
9/26/85, A. C, 85002497
Bumpstead, John, House [Huntington T
MPA], 473 Woodbury Rd.. Cold Spring Hm
9/26/85, C, 85002499
Burr, Cadl S.. Mansion [Huntington Town M
304 Burr Rd.. Comrnack, 9/26/85, B
85002502
Burr, Carll, Jr.. House [Huntington Town M
293 Burr Rd.. Commack. 9/26/85. C, 85002
By-the-Hathor [Slony Brook Harbor Estates ~
Modches Rd.. Nissequogue, g/09/93. A
93000699
CULLODEN. HM.S Shipwreck Site, Addre~
smcted. Momauk ;icinib., 3/05/79, A
79003795
Carll House {Huntington Town MPA], 79 Wa
Huntington. 9/26/85, C. 85002504
CarlI House {Huntington Town MPA], 380 !
Park Rd.. Dix Hills, 9/26/85, A, C, 85002,,50:
Caril, Ezra. Homestead [Huntington Town M
49 Melville Rd., Huntington Station, 912618
85002506
Caril, Marion. Farm, 475 Comrnack Rd., (
mack, 6/26/79, & C, 79001632
Caroline Church and Cemetery. Jcl. of Dyke
Bates Rds.. Brookhaven, 9109191, C, a
91001148
Chase. William MerdR, Homestead. Cano~
Rd., Southampton, 6/16183, B, C. 8300180~
Chichester's Inn [Huntington Town MPA]
Chichester Rd., West Hills, 9126185, A
85002508
Coid Spring Harbor Library [Huntington T
MPA], I Shore Rd., Cold Spring Ha;
9/26185, A, C, 85002509
Commack Methodist Church and Cem~
[Huntington Town MPA], 486 Towniine
Huntington, 9126185, A, C, a, d, 85002511
~O...~.~NAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES 1966 TO 1994
NEW YORK S61
~o1~ Count~--Continued
&~atlonat Church o1 Patchogue, 95 E. Main
~ Patchague, 4,'01/93. C. a. 93000279
· ~l n, Dasd, Hou~ [Huntington Town
'~2 High SL Cold Spring Ha~or, 9/26/~, A. B,
C. ~2513
..~i~. Na~haaieL Hour, 2~ D~r Pa~ Ave.,
.b~ ~]~ha~. Ho~e. M~II Rd_ Mallkuck.
;~et Ho~, 9~ Beach ~ne. W~hampton
~ch, 3~1/~, C 85~
~ng, ~Y~, ~tate, N of Great River on NY
~, 6~at River vicini~, 1010~73. C, ~1271
?e~aler-~a Mansion [Huntington Town
))nnell, Ha~ ~. Ho~ [Huntington Town
~], 71 ~ust ~.. ~lom N~k. 9/26/~, C,
~16
?t~.den Tanne~ [Huntington Town M~], 210
W Rogu~ Path, Cold Spring Ha~or. 9/26185,
~. C. ~2519
~ Fa~ [Stony Br~k Ha~or ~tatm M~],
Hamor Rd.. N side, at Shep Jon~ ~, Head of
the Ha~or. ~/93, A. C. 93~7~
~ Hampton Village D~tfict [Village of
Hamplon M~, Rounded by Main St. and
;am~ and Woods ~n~. ~t Hampton.
~0~74, C, 74~i309
~ Hampton Village H~tofic D~tfict (~unda~
Incm~ [Village of ~t Hampton
',on~e~ard along Main St. to Newton
~a ~uthw~tward along Ocean and Lee
~ and Pond [~ to Hedges ~ ~t Ham~
,,n 7/21/~ A C 88001032
.:c fihore Road Historic D~strict [Humington
-,wn ',IE~~, E~t Shore R~ Haieske. 9/26/85
'~ C ~5002321
-.tons Seck Light. Eatons Neck Point at Hunbng-
~.n ~y and ~g Island Sound off NY 25A
Huntington. 4/03/73. A, T3~1273
~,~p~ ~ne Historic Dismct [Village ot ~t
Hampton M~], ltl, 117. and 129 ~p~ ~.,
~ Hampton, 7/21/~. C, b. ~t031
~ent, John, Hou~ [Huntington Town M~, 130
O~d Count~, Rd.. W~t Hilis, 9/26/85, A. C,
~2522
Felix N. J., Hou~ [Hunongton Town M~], 235
~haroken Ave, ~hamken, 9/26/85, C,
&5~2523
~eld, Mamhali, I[1 ~tate, ~oyd Ha~or Rd.,
~oyd Ha~or, 4~;0/79, A. C, 7~1~3
R~e Etand ~ght Stabon. Robert Mos~ Cau~wny,
~y Shore viciniD,, 9/I 1/81. Al C, NPS. 81~82
R~t Prmb~eoan Church, 175 E. Main St.. Smith-
low~, I2/23/77, C, a, 77~
Roy& William. House, 20 Wmhington Ave., M~-
~ic ~ach, 4/2 l/T t, A, B, C. N~, 71~66
Frm Corchaag Site, Addr~ R~tncted, Cut-
cho8ue vicint~, 1/18/74. D, 74001308
Foa Golgotha and the Old Burial Hill Cemete~,
~tain St, and N~u Rd.. Huntington, 3/02/81.
C, D, 81~15
Fort Hill Estate, Fort Hill Dr.. Lloyd Harbor.
6/02/&'~, A. C. 88000599
Fort Salonga. Address Restricted. Fort Saloaga vi- cinity, 5121182. A. C, D. 82003406
Gardiner~ Island Windmill [Long Island Wind
and Tide Mills TR], On Gardinem Island, East
Hamploo, 12/27/78, A. C, 78001912
Geoghegan, Chades. House [Huntington Town
MPA], 9 Harbor Hill Dr., Huntington Bay,
9/26/&5, A, C, 85002524
Gildersleeve. Andrew, Octagonal Building, Main
Rd. arid Love I~ne, Mattituck. 8/19176. C.
76001280
Gilsey Mansion [Hunlington Town MPA], 36
Browna Rd., Huntington, 9126185. C. 85002525
Goodale, Capt. C., House [Southampton Village
MPA], 300 Hampton Rd., Southampton.
10102/86. C. 864}02725
Goose Hill Road H~oric Di~rict [Huntington
Town MPA], Goose Hill Rd.. Cold Spnng Har-
bor, 9126185, A. C. 85092528
Green. John. House [Huntington Town MPA],
167 E. Shorn Rd.. Hunlington Bay, 9/26185. C.
85002526
G.'eenpon Railroad Slation. Third and Wiggins St..
Greenport. 7/20/89. A. C. 89000947
Greenpor~ Village Historic District, Roughly
bounded by Stifling Basin. Main. MonselL 2nd.
and Front Sts., Gmenport. 9113184. A. C.
84002973
Halliock Inn, 263 E. Main St., Smithlown. 8/07174,
C, 74001310
Hallock Homeslead. 163 Sound Ave. Nor~hville,
6/07/8~i. A, C. 84002992
Halsey I~tate--Taliwood [Huntington Town
MPAI. Sweet Hollow Rd., Wes~ Hills 9!26/85
C, 85002527
Harbor House Stnn) Brook Harbor Estales 'dPS]
SpnngHo/Io~ Rd Nixsequogu~' 8/09/?:~ AC
930007r} 1
Harbor Road His[oric Dismcl [Huminglon Town
'qpAi. Harbor Rd, Cold Spnag Harbor
9/26/86, A, B C. 85002529
Hamed. John. House [Huntington Town MRA],
26 Little Neck Rd.. Centerport. 912fil85. A. C.
85002530
HamSOn. Wallace K.. E~tate [Huntington Town
MPA]. 140 Round Swamp Rd.. Wesl Hills,
9/26/85, B. C. 8509253I
Havens..lames, Homestead. NY 114, Shelter Is-
land. 4II0/86. A, C, 86090701
Hawkins Homestead. 165 Chnsban Ave.. Slony
Brook vicini~.', 6/09188. A. B. C. b. 88000727
Hawkins. Robert, Homestead, Yaphank Ave., Ya-
phafik. 4110186, C, 86000702
Hayground Windmill [Long Island Wind and Tide
Mills TR[, At Windmill Lane, East Hamplon.
12/27/78, A. C. 78001913
Heckseher Park [Huntiaglon Town MPA],
Bounded by Madison St., Sabbath Day Path,
Main 8L & Prince Ave., Hunbngtoo, 9126185, C,
85002532
Hewlett House [Huntington Town MPA], 559
Woodbury Rd.. Cold Spring Harbor. 9126185. A,
C. &5002533
Homan--Gemrd Hoose and Mills, Jct. Main St.
and Yaphank Rd., Yaphank. 12116188. A. C.
88002761
Hook Windmill [Long Island Wind and Tide Mills
TR; Village o1 Ea~ Hamplon MPA], N, Main St.,
Ea~ Hampton. 12/27/78. A, C. 78001914
House al 200 Bay Avenue [Huntington Town
MPA], 200 Bay Ave.. Huntington Bay, 9/26185.
C 850625.35
House at 244 Park Avenue [Huntington Town
MPA], 244 Park Ave., Huntington, 9/26/85. A.
C, 85002534
Ireland--Gardiner Farm [Huntington Town
MPA], 863 Lake Rd.. Greenlawn, 9/26/85, A, C,
Jagger House, Old Momauk Hw% We~hamp[on,
12/12/7& C, 7~01920
~arv~--~eet Ho~-~ [Hontingtoo Town MPA],
138 Cove Rd,, H~ntrbgtoo, 9/26/~, A, C,
Jericho H~oric D~flct [Village o1 East Hampton
MPA], Mootauk Hwy., Bas~ Hamploo. 7/21/88,
C, gg091028
Jones Road Historic D~bct [Village ol Easl
Hamplon MPA], Along Jones Rd. Irom Apa-
quogue Rd. to Lilly Pond La.. Ea~ Hampton.
7121188, A. C, b, 88001030
Kane. John P. Mansion [Huntington Town MPA].
37 Fanes Lo. Huntington Bay, 9/26/85, C.
85002580
Kennan, Al P, W., House [Huntington Town
MPA], Sydney Rd., Huntington Bay, II106185.
C. 85003502
Ketchum, B.. House [Huntington Town MPA].
237 Middleville Rd., Huntington. 9126/85, C.
85002581
L[TI'LE JENNIE (Chesapeake Bay bageyeh Cen-
terpon Harbor, Ceote~od, 5/12/86 A. C
86091081
Land of Clover [Sion?' Brook Harbor Estales
MPS]. Long Beach Rd. S side. Nissequogue
8109193. A. C. 9300~702
Lloyd Harbor Lighthouse· Entrance to LJoyd Har-
bor, Lloyd Harbor vicinin/. 5/31/89. C, 8900950i
Lloyd, Joseph, House, NW ol Huntington on
Lloyd Harbor Rd., Hunlington viciniLy,
11/07/76, A, C, 76001278
Loagbotham, Na~haniel, House, 1541 Stony
Brook Rd.. Stony Brook, 11116189, A, C,
89002022
Losee. Isaac, House [Humington Town MPA],
269 Park Ave., Huntington, 9126185. A. C.
85002582
Main Stmel H~oric District [Huntington Town
MPA], Main Sb, Cold Spring Harbor, 9126185,
A. C, 85092583
Mallows. The [Stony Brook Harbor Estates MPS],
Emmet Way, Head of the Harbor, 8109193. A,
C, 93000703
Masury Eslale Ballroom. Old Neck Rd. 8, Center
Moriches. 9/11/86, C, 86002513
Miller Place Hisloric District. N. Country Rd.,
Milker Place, 6/17/76, C, 76001281
Mills Pond District. W of St. James on NY 25A. St.
James vicinily, 8101173, C, 73001277
.I
Suffolk County--Contfnued
Momauk Association Hlstohc DLsthcl. E of Mon-
tauk off NY 27 on DeForest Rd., Momauk vicin-
ity, 10/22/76, A. C 76001282
Montauk Manor. Fairmont Ave., Montauk,
8/23/84, A, C, 8400299S
Montauk Point Ugh{house, Montauk Point, East
Hampton vicinity, 7/07/69, A, 69000142
Mootauk Tennis Auditorium, Flamingon Ave. and
I~jemere St., Momauk. 2/08/88, B, C, 88000092
Moran, Thomas, House, Main St., East Hampton,
i0/I5/66, B, NHL fi6o60574
Mount, William Sydney. House, Gould Rd. and
NY25, Stony Brook, 10/15/66, B, NHL 66000575
North Main Street Histodc District Isou{hampton
Village MPA], N. Main SL near CR 39 and Rail-
mad Station Plaza, Southampton, 10102186, A.
C, 86O02730
North Main Street H~onc DLstnct [Village of East
Hampton MPA], N. Main St,, East Hampton,
7/21188, C, a, d, 88001025
O'Dooohue, C. A., House [Huntington Towr~
MRA], 158 Shore Rd., Huntington, 9126185, A
C, 85002584
Oakley, John, House [Huntington Town MPA],
Sweet Hollow Rd., West Hills, 11/06/85, C, b,
85003501
Ockem, Jacob, House, 965 Montauk Hwy., Oak-
dale, 7/10/92. B, 92000838
Old qrst Church [Huntington Town MPA], 126
Main St. Huntington, 11/O6/85, A. C a,
85003500
Old House, The. NY 25, Cutchogue, I0/15/66.
C, O. NHL 66000573
Old 'r'own Green Historic Dlsmct [Huntington
Town MPA], Park Ave.. Huntington, 9/26/85, A.
C. f~002586
Old Town Hall Histoffc District [Huntington
Town NIRA], Main S~ & Nassau Rd., Hunting-
ton 9/26/85. A. C, 85002588
Odenl Historic District. NY 25 Orient 5/2]/76 C
760()1283
Pantigo Road Historic District [\iH,age ot Ea~t
Hampton \IRAJ ~lung Panfigo Rd [rom £g)pt
La. and Accabonac Rd to Amys 1~, Easl
Harupton 7/21/88. C. 88001026
Phvfe. James W and Anne Smith, Estate
Brook Harbor Estates MPS], 87 Stillwater
Ni~quogue, 8109193, A, C. 93000704
Pleasaom House, NY 27. Amagansett, 2/02/84, C,
84002999
Potter--Williams House [Huntington Town
MRA[, 165 Wall gL. Huntington, 9/26/85, A. C
85002579
Prime House [Huntington Town MPA]. 35 Pnme
Ave., Huntington, 9/26/85. B, C, 85002568
Prime---Octagon House [Huntington Town
MPA], 41 Prime Ave., Huntington, 9/26/85,
C 85OO2569
Radio Central Complex, S of Rocky Point on
Rocky Point-Yaphank Rd., Rocky Point vicin dy,
6/2?/80, A. C. 80002777
R&ssapeague [Stony Brook Harbor Es:ares MPS],
Long Beach Rd., S side. Nissequogue, 8/09/93,
A, C, 93000705
Remp, Michael, House [Huntington Town MPA],
42 Godlrey Ln., Greenlawn, 9/26/85, A, C,
850025~0
Rogers Hoese [Huntington Town MPA]. 136
Spnng Rd., Huntington. 9/26/85, C, 85002571
Rogers, John, House [Huntington Town MPA],
627 Half Hollow Rd., Huntington, 9/26/85, A, C,
85002572
Roosevelt, John Ellis, Estate, Middle Rd., Sayville,
I 1/05/87, A. C, D, 87001896
Ryan, William J., Estate [Stony Brook Harbor
tales MPS}, Modches Rd., N~,equogue'
8/09/93, A. C, 93OOO7O6
Sag Harbor ViBage D~ricb Roughly bounded by
Sag Harbor. Rysam, Hamilton, Marsden, Main
and Long Lsiaed Ave., Sag Harbor, 7/20/73, A.
C. T3001274
&~qikos Manor, Momauk Hwy. (NY 27A),
Bay Shore. 11/21/76, A. C, 76~1284
Sain~ James District. On NY 25A. Saim James.
7/20/73, C, a, 73001275
Sammis~ Silas, House [Huntington Town MPA],
302 W. Neck Rd., Huntington, 9126185, B, C,
85002573
Seaman Parm [Huntington Town MPA], 1378
Carlls Straight Path, Dix Hills, 9/26/85. A, C,
85002575
She~ter Istand Heights Historic District. Roughly
bounded by St. Johns St., Tower Hill Rd. Sun-
n~ide Ave,, Meadow PI., Chase Ct. and Dering
Harbor, Shelter Island Heights, 5/07/93. A, C,
93000335
Shelter ~land Windmill [Long Island Wind and
Tide Mills TR], N of Manwaring Rd., Sheiter is-
land, 12/27/78, A, C, b, 78001917
Shore Cottage [Stony Brook Harbor Estates MPSJ,
Harbor Rd.. E side, Head of the Harbor.
g/09/93. A, C. 93000707
Shore Road Historic District [Huntington Town
\IRA], Shore Rd.. Cold 5pnng Harbor. 9/26/85.
~ C ~500257g
Smith Estate. N of Brookha~en al Longwood and
Siodh Rds Brookha~en ~lcmlh 12/]O/RI A,C
Smnb Daniel House [Huntington Town MPA],
]]7 W Shore Rd. Huntington, 9/26/85, C.
~5~X)2576
Smith, Hen~., Farmstead [Huntington Town
MPA], 900 Park Ave., Huntington Station,
9/26/85, A, C, 85002539
Smith, Jacob, House [Huntington Town MPA1,
High Hold Dr.. West Hills. 9/26/85, A, C,
85002540
Smith--Rourke House, 350 S. Countc/Rd., East
Patchogue, 11128189, C, 89002021
Southampton Village Historic District [Southamp-
ton Village MPA], Roughly bounded by Hill
and Main S{$.. Old Town Rd., Atlantic Ocean,
Coopers Neck and Halsey Neck Lns., South-
ampton, 4/25188, A, C. 86002726
Southampton Village Historic Distdct (Boundary
Increase) [Southampton Village MRA[,
Roughly, along Rogers St., Lewis St. and Meet-
ins House Ln on E side of existing distri~
Sou{hampton. 4/12/93, C, 93000239
Sou{hside 5pertsmens Club D~rioL NE of Gre~I
River, off NY 27, Great River vicinity, ?/23/73,
A, C, ~O61272
SL Andrew's Episcopal Chun:h, Main St., Ya-
phank, 9/15/88, A, C, a, 88001442
Stony Brook Grist Mill, Harbor Rd. W of Main SL,
Stony Brook. 8/03/90, A, C. 90001140
Suffolk County Almshouse Barn, Yaphank Ave.,
Yaphank, 9/I 1/86, A, C, 86002512
Suydam House [Huntin~on Town MPA], 1 Fl.
{onga Rd., Cemerport, 10/27/88, A, C, 88002135
Sweet Hollow Prmbylerian Church Pa~onage
[Huntington Town MPA]. 152 Old Countiy Rd..
Huntington, 9/26185, A, C, a, 85002541
Te~--Ketcham Inn. 81 Main St., Center Mor-
iches, 6124193, C. 921300555
Tem/-Mufford House, NY 25, Orient, 2/07184, A, C,
84OO3OO3
Thompson House, N. Count~ Rd., Setauke{,
1107188, A, C, d, 87002283
Titns--Bunce House [Huntington Town MPA], ?
C, oose Hill Rd., Cold Spring Hmbor, 9/26/85, A,
C 85OO2542
Townsend, Henry, House [Hunl~ngton Town
MPA], 231 W. Neck Rd., Huntington, 9/26/85,
A, C, 85002543
Tu{hill. David. Farm~ead. New Suffolk Lane, Cut-
chogue, 11123184, A, C, 84000295
US Post Office--Bay Shore [US Post Offices in
New York State. 1858-1943, TR]. l0 Bay Shore
Ave,. Bay Shore, 11117188, A. C, 88002455
US Post Office--No~thpo,,t [US Post Offices in
New York State, 1858-1943. 'IR]. 244 Main
Nor{hport 5/11/89, A. C. 88002356
US Post Office--Patchogee [US Post Offices in
New York State, I8,58-1943. 'IR], 170 lc Main St.,
Patchogue, 5/I 1/89. A, C, 88002397
US Post Office---Rk,erhead [US Post Offices in
New York State, I858-1943, TR], 23 W. Second
St.. Riverhead, 5/11/89. A, C, 88002424
US Post Office--Westhampton Beach [US Post
Offices in Ne,,.., York State. 1858-1943, TR], Main
St Westhampton Beach 5/11/89. A, C.
88002446
Union Chapel The Grove. Shelter Island Heights,
II/23/84, A. C. a, 84000296
United Me{hodisl Church, S. Ocean Ave. and
Church St., Patchogue, 4/19/84, C, a, 84003006
Vail-Leavitt Music Hall, Pecoaic Ave., Riverhead,
8/25/83, C. 83001809
Van Iderstine, Charles. Mansion [Huntington
Town MPA]. Idle Day Dr., Huntington. 9/26/85,
A, C, 85002544
Van Wyck-Leffetts Tide Mill [Long Island Wind
and Tide Mills TR], 2 mi. NE of Mill and South-
down Rds., Lloyd Harbor, 12/2i'/78, A, C,
78001916
VanderbiR, William K., Estate-F_,agles Nest [Hun-
tington Town MPA], little Neck Rd.. Hunting-
ton, 9126185, A, B, C, 8,5002545
Velzer, N., House and Caretaker's Cottage [Hun-
tington Town MPA], 22 Fort Saiooga Rd., Cee-
terpott, 9/26/85, A, C, 85002546
NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES 1966 TO 1994 NEW YORK 563
~ffolk County--Continued
Village ot Branch Historic DismcL Along N side
of Middle Country Rd.. Branch, 9/11/86 A, C.
86002514
Wainscott Windmitl [Long Island Wind and Tide
Mills TR], On Georgica Association grounds,
Eas~ Hampton. 12/2'7/78. A, C, b. 78001915
Water Mill, Old Mill Rd., Water Mill, 10/I3/83. A,
b. 83004175
Weeks, Charles M, House [Huntington Town
MPA], 76 Mill LO.. Humthgton. 9/26185, C.
85002547
West Neck Road Historic District [Huntington
Town MPA], West Neck Rd.. Huntington,
9126185, A. C, 85002867
WetherilL Kate Armette, Eslale [Stony Brook Har-
bor Estates MPS], Harbor Hilt Rd.. $ side. Head
of the Harbor. 8/09/93, A, C. 93000708
Whitman, Joseph, House [Huntington Town
MPA}, 365 W. Hills Rd., West Hills, 9/26/85. B.
C, 85002848
Whilman, Wait. House [Huntington Town MPA].
246 Walt Whitman P,d. West Hills. 9/26t85, A.
B. C. c. 85002549
Whitman--Place House [Huntington Town
MPA], 69 Chiches~er Rd,. West Hills, 9/26185. B,
C. 85002550
Wickapogue Road Historic District [Southamp.-
Village MPA]. Wickapogue Rd. between
in. and Cobb Rd., Southampton,
A. C, 86002697
Wiggins--Rolph House [Huminglon Town MPA],
518 Park Ave.. Humington, 9/26/85, A C
85002551
WiIliams, Henry. House [Hunling~on Town
MRAl, 43 MilI LO., Huntington 9126185. C,
85002552
Windmill at Water Mill [Long Island Wind and
Tide Mills TR], NY 27 and Halsey Lane. South-
ampton, 12127/78, A. C, b, 78001919
Wood. Hany. House [Hunlington Town MPA],
481 W. Main St., Huntington, 9126185, A, C,
85002553
Wood, John, House [Huntington Town MRA],
121 Md(ay Rd., Huntington Station, 9/26/85, A,
C, 85002554
Wood, William Wooden, House [Huntington
Town MPA], 90 Preston St., Huntington,
9/26/85, B, C, 85002555
Woodcre~t [Stony Brook Harbor Estates MPSJ,
Modches Rd., Nissequogue, 8/09/93, A, C,
93000709
Woodhuil, Charles, Honse [Huntington Town
MPA], 70 Main Bt., Huntington, 9/26/85, C,
850~2564
Wyandanch Club Historic District, Jericho Tnpk.
SW o1 jcl. with Meadow Rd., Smithtown,
8103190, A, C, ~0001143
~ounty
Arlington Hotel, Main St., Narrowsburg, 3/31183,
- A, 83001806
Bloomingburg Reformed Protestant Dulch
Church. NY 1TM Bloomingburg, 1/I0/80, A. C
a, 80002779
Calklns. Ellen,', House [Upper Delaware Valley
MPS]. Co Rd 114. E ol Detaware R. Bddge.
Cocheclon. 11/27/92. C, 92001595
Callicoon Methodist Church and Parsonage [Up-
per Delaware Valley, New York and Penn%P
vania. MPS]. Church S~ (NY 973 S of jcl. wdh
Seminary Rd.. Town o[ Delaware. Callicoon.
11104193. E, a. 93001134
Cochecton Presbyterian Church [Upper Dela-
ware Valley MPS}, Co. Rd. I14, E of Delaware
R, Bridge. Cochecton. 11/27/92. C. a, 92001597
Delaware Aqueduct. Between Ministhk Ford. NY
and Lackawaxen. PA, Mthisink Ford. 11/24/68,
C. NP$. 68000055
Ddaware and Hudson Canal Delaware and Hud-
son Canal. MinLsink. ~icinib. H/24/68. A. C.
NHL 68000~51
Dmke--C'urlis House [Upper Delaware ValJey
MP5I. Co. Rd 114 E of NY 97. Cochecton
4/19/93, 8 C. 92001598
Glen Wild Methodist Church. Old Glen Wild Rd
Glen Wild 5/I0/84. C. a. M0~3035
Grahamsville Historic Dismct. NY 55. Grahams-
ville, 12106/79. A. C. a. d. 79001634
Jeffersonville SohooL Terrace Ave., Jeffersonville.
4128188, A C. 88000519
Kirk House, Kirk's Rd., Narrowsburg. 5110184. C.
b. 84003043
Liberty. Village Historic Disldct. N. Main. Acad-
emy, and [.,aw Sts. Libe¢.'. 4/11/78, C. 78001921
Millan;'ille--Skinne~s Falls Bridge [Highway
Bridges Owned by the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania. Depar~mem of Transportation
TR], LR 63027 o'~er Delaware River at ~,lillan-
ville. Skinne~ Fails 11/I4/88 C. 88002167
Minisink Battlefield [Upper Delaware Valley, Ne*
York and Penns?'lvania. MPS]. York Lake Rd
(Co. Rd. 168) N ol Mimsink Ford. Minisink Ford
vicinity, 9/16/93, A. 93000946
Old Cochecton Cemetery {Upper Delaware Val-
ley MPS], W o1 NY 97, N o1 jct. with Co. Rd. 114,
Cochecton. II/27/92, A, d. 92001593
Page House IUpper Delaware Valley MP5], 59 C.
Meyer Rd., Cochecton, 11127/92, C, 92001601
Pamonage Road Hisloric District [Upper Dela-
ware Valley MPS], Parsonage Rd., Cochecton.
11127192. C, 92001600
Pond Eddy Bridge [Highway Bridges Owned by
the Commonwealth o1 Pennsylvania, Depart-
ment of Transportation TR], LR 51013 over Del-
aware River, Pond Eddy, vicinily, 11114/88, C,
88002170
Reilly's Store [Upper Delaware Valley MPS], Co.
Rd. 114, W o1 jct. with NY 97, Cochec[on.
11/27/92, C, 92001594
Riverside Cemetery [Upper Delaware Valley,
New York and Pennsylvania, MPS], NY 97 SE
of jct. with Church St., Long Eddy vicinily,
11/18/93, C d, 93001226
Rockland Mill Complex, Paten PI., Rockland,
8/23184, A, C, 84003062
St. James Church and Rectory [Upper Delaware
Valley, New York and Pennsylvania, MPS], NY
17B N side. E ol [ct. with NY 97. Town of Del-
aware. Callicoon. 11104193. C. a, 93001135
St. Joseph's Seminar), [Upper Delaware Valley
MPS}, Seminary Rd. W side, Callocoon.
7/08/93. C. a, 93000582
Stone Arch Bridge, N of Kenoza L-ke on NY 52
Kenoza Lake vicinity, 12/I2/76. A, C. 76001285
Vatleau Tavern [Upper Delaware Valley MPS].
Jct. of Co. Rd. 114 and NY 97. Cochecton,
11/27/92. A, C. 92~1599
Tioga County
Akins, Lym~ P., House {Berkshire MPA}. W
Creek Rd.. Berkshire, 7/0~84, C. 84003067
Akins. Robert. House [Berkshire MPA], Main St..
Berkshire. 7102184. C, 84~03069
Bali. J,. House [Berkshire MPAl, NY 38. Berkshire.
7/02/84. A, C, 84003072
Ball, Levi. House [Berkshire MR-X]. NY 38. Berk-
shire. 7102184, A. C, 84003075
Bell. Slephen. House [Berkshire MPA[. Main St..
Berkshire, 7/02/84. C. 84003077
Belcher Family Homestead and Farm [Berkshire
MPA], NY 38. Berkshire. 7/02/84, A. C.
84003082
Bement--Billthgs House, NY 38, N of Newark Val-
ley, Newark Valley, 2/19/9~, A. C. 90~00002
Berkshire Village Historic Dismc~ [Berkshire
MPA], Main St. and Leonard Ave, Berkshire.
7/02184. A. C. 84003086
Buffington. Calvin A.. House [Berkshire MPA].
Depoi St. and Railroad A;e. Berkshire. 7/02/84
B C. 84003089
Collins. Naihanid Bishop, House IBerkshire
MPA], NY 38. Berkshire. 7/02/84, C, 84003096
East Berkshire United Methodist Church [Berk-
shire MPA], E. Berkshire Rd., Berkshire,
7102184, C, a. 84003098
First Congregational Church [Berkshire MPA],
Main St., Berkshire, 7/02184, C, a. 84003101
Ford, Lebpeus, House [Berkshire MPA], Jewetl
Hill Rd., Berkshire, 7/02/84, C, 84003104
Owego Central Historic District, North Ave., Park,
Main, Lake, Court, and Fronm Sts., Owego,
12103180. A, C, 80002780
Platt-Cady Mansion, 18 River St., Nichols, 8/12/76,
C. 76~01286
Royce, Deodalus, House [Berkshire MPA], NY 38,
Berkshire, 7/02/84, C, 84003109
Royce, J. B., House and Farm Complex [Berk-
shire MPA], NY 38, Berkshire, 7102184, A, C,
84003111
'~oga County Courthouse. Village Park. Owego,
12126172, A, C, 72000915
US Po~t Olfice~Owago [US Post Offices in New
York Stale. 1858-1943, TR], 6 Lake St., Owego,
5/I 1/89, A, C. 88002391
US Post Olfice--Waverty [US Post Offices in New
York State, 1858-1943, TR], 434-348 Waveriy SE
Wavefly, 5/11/89, A. C. 88002444
· CONTENTS'
Laurel
Mattituck
New Suffolk
Cutchogue
Peconic
Southold
Cleaves-Kuester House
Reeve-Pim House
Wells-Lyons House
Reeve-Wickham House
Methodist Mission
Old Harbor House
The Old Place
Honeymoon Cottage
Old House
Wickham Farmhouse
]S~avid Tuthill Farmstead
Moore-Lizewski House
Early Colonists House
tqamid House
Ii,dependent Congregational
l:',uckingham-Case-Richmond House
Richard Hallock House
Hurricane Hall
Einstein House
Cutchogue Diner
Isaac Overton House
The Old Castle
Town Doctor's House
'iroseph Reeve House
Abidjah Corey House '
Bayles- Tuthill-Corey House
Joseph Horton House
John Booth House
7
7
8
8
9
9
10
10
11
11
12
12
13
13
14
14
15
15
I6
I6
17
17
18
18
19
19
20
20
(Con,hued)
· CONTENTS ·
(Continued)
Southold
Greenport
O~ent
Historic Sites
Deacon ]ames Horton House
Prince House
Thomas Moore House
First Universalist Church
The Prince Building
Cleveland-Glover-Gagen Blacksmith Shop
Hallock / Currie-Bell House
Pine Neck Barn
Downs Carriage House
The Bayview School
Horton Point Lighthouse
First Presbyterian Church
Jeremiah Vail-Booth House
Fanning-Doroski House
Youngs-Guerlain-Coyle House
Frank ]. McIntosh Residence
Shaw House
Terry-Mulford House
Terrywold
Village House
Webb House
High- Theil House
Gideon Youngs House-
Nathan B. Seidman Residence
Benjamin Franklin's Milestones
The Commoners' Preserve
21
21
22
22
23
23
24
24
25
25
26
27
27
28
28
29
29
3O
3O
31
3I
32
32
33
34
34
BUILDING-STRUCTURE INVENTORY FORM
NYS OFFICE OF PARKS, RECREATION
& HISTORIC PRESERVATION
DIVISION FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION
(518) 47443479
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
UNIQUE SITE NO.
QUAD
SERIES.
NEG. NO.
YOUR NAME:
DATE:
YOUR ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE:
ORGANIZATION (if any):
IDEN'IIFICATION
I. BUILDING NAME(S):
2 COUNTY:
3. STREET LOCATION:
4. OWNERSHIP: a. public []
5. PRESENT OWNER:
() USE: Original:
7. ACCESSIBILITY TO PUBLIC:
DESCRIPTION
8. BUILDING
MATERIAL:
STRU('TURAL
SYSTEM:
kntxvnt
10. CONDITION:
Il. INTE(;RITY
TOWN/CITY: VILLAGE:
b. private []
ADDRESS:
Present:
Exterior visible from public road: Yes ~ No []
Interior accessible: Explain
a. clapboard [] b. stone [] c. brick [] d. board and batten []
e. cobbtestone [] f. shingles [] g. stucco [] other:
a. wood frame with interlocking joints []
b. wood frame with light members []
c. masonry load bearing walls []
d. metal {explain).
e. other
a. excellenl [] b. good [] c. fair []
d. deleriorated []
a. original site [] b. moved [] if so,when?
c. list majtlr alterations and dates (if known):
12. PHOTO:
13. MAP:
HP-1
14. THREATS TO BUILDING: a. none known '~ b. zoning'~l c. roads []
d. developers [] e. deterioration []
f. ,!ther:
I$ RELATED OUTBUILDINGS AND PROPERTY:
a. barnF-! b. carriage house ~l c. garage []
d. privy [] e. shed [] f. greenhouse []
g. !;imp ~ h. gardens []
I. landscape features:
j. other:
16. SURROUNDINGS OF '[HE BUILDING (check more than one if necessary):
a. open land [] b. woodland []
c. scattered buildings []
d. densely built-up [] e. commercial []
f. industrial [] g. residential []
h. other:
I7.
INTERRELATIONSHIP OF BU~;LDING AND SURROUNDINGS:
(Indicate if building or structure is in an historic district)
18. OTHER NOTABLE FEATURES OF BUILDING AND SITE (including interior features if known):
SIGNIFICANCE
19. DATE OF INITIAL CONSTRUCTION:
ARCflITECT
BUILDER:
20. HISTORICAL AND ARCHITECTURAL iMPORTANCE:
21. SOURCES:
22. THEME:
New Yorl~ State Office oli I=ar~s. Recreation an~ Historic Preservation
The Gcverr'or Nelson ~ ,qcc~eteHer Emc~re Siam ¢'aza
,Z~enc/~uHolng I ,~rbany, Ne,~ V'or~ :2238
As part of the initial application procedures for t. he State and
National Register of H~coric Places programs, administered by t~%e New
York State Offic~ of Parks, R~cTmation and Historic Pr~s~--?-vation (OFRHP),
it is necessary to o~lete a building/structure inventory form. This
fcr.~ functions to provide OI~R~p with the detailed information necessa~z to
evaluate the significance of the proposed resource according to 'the
criteria for evaluation ~tablished by t/le National Park Service. .~he
form :~lculd incl,w= details concerrLtng the r~scxlr=e,s location, style and
construction, context for evaluation, and b-~rical and ar~itec-caral
~Cne attached instructions explaJ~ how to c~lete each item on the
buil~h~structur~ inventory form. Visits to y~ur local library, village,
town or county clerk's office and local historical society may be
r~--~,~ary to lccats sources of information as you begin researching t~he
property. In general, as 7m~ ma~erial as ~ible shc~Lld be drawn
primal~; ~c~=s suc~ as deec~, wills, c~sus ~-~rds, old tax lists, court.
records, manuscript collections or published manUscriDts suc.~ as
co~%~ ~r diaries. (kx~a~ r~ may be consulted for
obittLaries, accounts of cornerstone lay/rg, etc. Gazeteers of the state
and acx~am~cs by traveler~ which w~re published periodically through the
nineteenth cenliury provide cc~t~ descriptions of many
Old maps and atlases, when ar~ ~h~-~logically, indicate t. he ~hy~ical
development of an area azld ~ay also ~ ownership of pi~t. er%%,, former
s-~r~et na~es, an~ the cons~-~ic~ h/~ of individual bu~Tdings. This
primary source material will be necessary to document adecA/at~ly
bu/td/ng b.~ry, historic setting, and other notable features cf
P~b] 1?-,h ed ~ ~ ~ as city, ccur~y, r~gicnal and state
histories ~n pr~ide ~ic ~fo~tion ~ ~ ~'s ~ ~,
laadb~g citiz~, ~d ~ hi.oriel ~=s. This seconda~
information can ~
~ri~ ~ ~ ~~ si~fi~.
Landmark ~li~=io~ for ~e t~, city, c~ty or r~ion are
a~ilable for ~ ~ of ~ ~. ~ ~li~tio~ pr~ide basic
information on ~ ~'s a~te~al
co~issions have often conduc=ed prelimina~ su~eys of local
archit~tural ~s~s ~ well. ~is info--rich c~ be ~ef~ in
i~ti~ ~ s~
~ of s~ ~1~
Published seconda~ sources such as Whiffen's
~chit~ ~1~,
a ~ ~ ~ f~ ~lat~g a reso~ to ~jor ar~it~al
tr~_nds. Other scholarly publications that focus on specific
building types, or period construction t~:hniques are also cu~cnly
ava£1a~le. ~ public~ic~s ca~ ~e usef~! i~ e~h~i_~hr~, justi~ylr~,
and clearly e~ucidating ~he nominated property's architec'.ural
sic.~ificar~.
The ~uild/~m-$t.--ucture inventory form ~t ~ c~D%et~ in ~211.
acco~ ~ ~ ~-~ ~ ~ a~ ~i~. A ~le of
Carefully review ~e ~s~io~ ~ ~e ~le as a ~ide for
~1~ %~ f~, ~:~a]]y ie~ ~ 17, 18, ~d 20.
If you have any T~'J~ns about completing ~he Building-Struct,~re
Ir~ry Form, Rlease c=m~ yuur Field P~=~sentativm.
n~,-e. His~.,ri¢ ne=ms usually r~m~=~ =he ~ ~, ~ ~ ~
~= ~ ~ ~, f~ ~le, ~, Jo~, Ho~e (~e Mill
Shop). If ~m ~ld~g ~ a r~, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Pl~sm do not include ~%x map ~, block or plcm numbers ar ~
ex~ inf~-~4~,~ c~ ~,~ Name or Location lines. You can put
su¢~ information, if n~:mssary, urger ~ ~ cx in t/~ u~per laf~ ham/
cc=nar of t. he pacjao
apply, and please do not abbreviate names. No~e under
,v:Lllage"~.~e village, '.~-mlet or ccamunit-~, in which ~.he pr~tmem~y is
-l-
:3. ~
~uil~ are located by
M~the~ 1 - ~ use of str~c m-,~ is preferred. For example: 12 Elm
Road. Do not use the # symbol i~ f~ of the h~use number. Alway~ usa
~ following
Alway~ use a
~ethcd 2 - Sometimes it is not possible to use strme= m~4~. In t_hat
ca~a, use cardinal dir~c~ t~ locata the property precisely using the
following system: s~rmet name, side of the street the ~l~/r~ is
e.g.: ~ Road, north s~-. A f%~=her d~scri~.ic~ is used to locate the
building in relation =o nmazt~ streets cr natural ~ks, e.g.
of, SOUth of," Ha= int~au~-tica~ of," "cg~omitm,"" hundred feet east
of,'"
Scram s~ruc~urms such as lighthouses, summer houses, r~tm ~s, ~d
bridges pr~= ~ial diffi~. ~ ~ ~ d~y ~ a
~4n ~, ~ ~ ~ ~d ~ it, e.g., ~n ~ver ~gh~se;
Route ~; wes= side; a~ ~a~ ~; ~ s~. F~ ~, ~
Identify original ar~ ~%= use of ~.~rty if kr~n, e.g. rms/dent~al,
~.~mrc~, iDolize,l, r~igicus, et=. klso indica~ multiple uses or
If .exterior is not visible fr~m a public road, check '~1o" and briefly
i. md~ca=e ~ne or morro of t~e appreciate exterior w-all coverers.
C=~i~Cm th~.~ sec~ic~ crkly if y~u can bm cmrta/n of the information. Use
the followin~ defini~icms.
a. Wccd f~=~.~ with interlocking Joints: Post-and-beam const_~uction of
heavy ~mhers, often has,d-hewn. M~hmr~ arm fast~m~ed t_~3T~_r with
mor~/s~ and tenon Jo/flea k~ld t~ by ~:cc~en ~.
b. Wood frame with li~c members: S~m~t~wd c%imensic~ 1,-~- f~ sawmills
fastened =c=3~ah~r with ~c~_ne-~ ~.
with ~.Wmr cr poured =~. ~'m ~ll. car:y loads transfer:md by
floor ~nd r~of
2. Cas~-i~ hu!!~q cr franc: ~ or ~ extmricr ~alls of
10. ~:
Based ~ an analysis of ~m exterior ar~ t. he ~c=. U~ ~ foll~g
Good: No apparmn= need for major rmpa~, ~ ~ ne~ of ~=~m
Al~ra-~ic~, ~tions and. changes
listed =hronolcgically. Major a~teraticns
sy~=~, windows, siding materials, and plan. It is not necessary to
include cosmetic c~ (~wllpaper, pain= color) or wirlr~ and pl~ir~
u~daf~s. Also ~,~e any work in progress or proposed work t-ha: will
have an impact ~ =ha ku/idinmJs=~cn=m's irm~3r~ ity.
shee~ if t, he s~ace ~z~mrid~! is nc= sufficie~: t~ ~-~-ibe altarations and
A clear, ovar~ vie~ of ~ b,~d/n~ that illustrates its ~m~-actaristic
~1 ities is essential. A 3/4 view t_hat includes the ~in facade is
ideal. Also include one view of each elevation of t_he building and
indd.ca=a d~rmcti~ of view. Black ar~ w~/ta prlnt~ arm rm~,~;
preferred print size is 3 1/2" X 5." Polaroid pictures arm not
~at/~fac~n~y for arc/~val purDoees. Include cloemups of particularly
sig~ifican= dm~ails. Photos of cu~x~l~ and any other featur~ arm
aT=s~ ~ k~y ~ wit2~ a~%~ in~ica~ ambles of s~ms is
helpful. A~-~h ~ of ~,.~n facs~m ~ ~ blue fozm, at~-s~h additional
county location. All ~h~o~ ~hould be a=~ached with w~itm glue or
Att2~ch a map, as detail~ as ~iblm, in~icat/n~ t-he ~ location of
building and its rmla=ionship to surrounding buildings and
~ow, ~ ~cl~ a ~lm. ~ ~p ~ cl~ly shows roads and
1~1~ ~d ~e ~il~ cl~ly ~~. ~ ~ of ~ (e.g.,
~, ~ ~ ~lm). A~ ~p ~ blue fo~ wi~ no~
AT~:h a scmlm ~ax = ~ ~ ? (ok~able law= y~ 1~ or
county govern= - ~ wi~ ~e ~ p~y ~ offi~ or ~e
pl~i~ ~). Indicate on ~e map ~e legal bo~da~ of the
n~ ~, ~ ~ 1~ of ~ ~ ~ ~, if
scale (~. 1"-100') ~ a ~ ~. ~ ~ of ~ ~, if
14. ~H~2~ %X) mA~l~:
Check all relevant categories,
~ ........ making no=es of whether c~Fonen~s ar~
~=, e.g., e. Sh~ [3]. At~ at least one ~Tto of ea~ related
is appropria~ 'CO include the following ~ of informa=ion in =he
-G-
Carvsd or cas~
6. ~jcr irfaeri~r features::
F~x~ plan,
lh~-rior trim (~ntals, wir~n4 f'~, hardware, li~, ~.)
~1~ ~ a ~ of ~ ~, ~~ ~
].~ of ~le ~ f~ (a ~-~ ~
~ ~; ~ ~ ~) ~ f~ ~f~l~ bl~, ~.)
7. ~sc1'/~ ~ ~y~, s=yle an~ func=i~ of e~ch
8. ~':~m~ri]:~ ~ ~'~n-~m~m ml~c~ (ro~:~aye, contemporary structures,
Nct~ data of initial cc=~.'~-~ic~ c~ t_h/s line ar~ ~km a nots of t,~ date
of ~u~y major a!=era=ic~s ~: ~-~ic~s. If t_~ da=m is nc= dccumen=ed but
Nc~t wh~ was rms~ible f~ e. he design of the builcling. If a pattern
book s=m is k:"x~, please no~m. If i= is an a==ribu=ion, please
person(s) rmsl~/ble fox su~ervisin~ t/~ c~-uc~ic~, such as t. hm
i%~ as a dcubl~ sDac~d ~ o~9~.~ized according to t.he following
~Ine:
~~ This [:aragraDh should constitute a s~ong ~
zrit~ia and within ~ ~=~ ~ (e.g., '~ ~ ~ Offi~
~ ~dh~ly si~fi~ ~ ~ ~d~g ~ple of monaural
civic ~it~e f~ ~e ~lic wor~ ~ ~ ~.. ~ ,~ ~
Homesnead is architecturally and historically significan= as a
dist~is~, l~9~y ~ ~le of ~ly ~~ ~i~ ~ic
Eat5 area of si~ifi~c:m ~= be J~tifi~ ~ ~e fha= ~ ~
~i. ~ ~ ~ld ~ ~ly ~ ~ ~ of si~fi~
The rest of ~he essay should expand upon these
1. A brief ht~ of the ~m/ty and a building history of the
any contributions ~o ~ local ....... ~i~y?. ~ is ~ si~nficancm (if
~) ?
2. ]Discussion of the career and ~ ~f th~ axch/t~c~ ar~ the pl*~ of
=~ prop~ witb/n his/h~r ~-~x (if ~licablm). Was the architect a
~.~-~n-~u~a-r? A loca/2~y ~.,~en~ architect? A mas=mr?
bu~.din~ ~ ~ o~bmr ~rk of ~
region? Is it a rmprmsar~ative ex.e, an ou~ e~.~T, le, a rata
e~n~le, an inrmva~_ivm en~e ~f a s$~.ifi= ~ type?
~,]'lxplang. ticn cf the az~tti~-Ozral ~ in which ~ pr~ is
ar~.~_e~_a~l~.:~. ,.. Whg_~ is ~e placa of ~in building in ~erican
a~, ~, ~~~~? ~ ~, ~ ~ay ~ h~
21. SO~:
Give a limu of books, maqazines, maps, dccummntm, or Dh~ whi~
~mJnl informauic~ ak~u~ ~ k.:~d/r~ usLr~ r, ha fol!~wing form: aur-hor,
r_it_im, place of pu~licatic~l, pu~lJ_~h~r, dat~ of puJ:lica~ic~l. For exmx%:le:
Rsynolci~, J~hn. windmills and Wa~ll~. New York: Praeger P~blisher$,
1970. Mention repository for ~npublished materials or i~ard-to-fj.ud
P!masm leavm blank. ~m F. ts~:ric Prms~rvmr_t~ Field ~i~ ~mau will
complete ~his i~ afar rmvi~g ~e ~fo~tion ~cl~ ~ ~he
TEL: Oct 08,97 t3:41No.OO5 P.IO
103:0.000683
NYS OFrlC~OF PRRICS, R~CREATION
& HISTORIC PR~SSRVATION
DIVISION FOR HISTORIC
(518) 237-8643
Town ol Southo~d/SPtZX
OROI~IIZATION:
1985
O O~ ~
2. COUNTYI Suffolk , TO~N/ClTYzjouthold VILLAGE~ Ma::i:uck
3. ST~T L~TION: 3~ W~s:ohalia A~que
4. OW~M~P: a. ~blic b. private
5. P~SE~ ~ER:__ ~D~SS:
6. USE~ Original=__ Presents
7. ACCESSI~ZLI~ TO PUBLIC: ~terior vts~le f~ public road: Yes__ No__
8. BUI~ING 8. Cli~p~ar~ b. ~=o~e__ c. br$ck__ d. bosrd and bau=e~__
9. STRUCTURAL a. w~od frame with interlocking Joints__
SY~TE}I: b. wood £r~me with light members__
(if kno~%) C. masonry load bering walls__
d. ~tal {explain)
c. It. at major ~lt-rat..t~~ and dates
TEL: Oct 08,97 13:~! No.OO5 P.i~
FROPERTY: Former Ruland Potmt. o Houme
17. INTERRELATIONSHI;? OF BUILDING ~ND SURROUNDINGS:
(£ndicate If bu£1d£nq or Structure ia ~n an hSstorLc d£etrLct)
Loc&=e~ along Long Iele~d Rail Road La M&~ti~uck commercial/induaCr£al
district.
18. OTHER NOTABLE FEATURE8 OF TH~ BUILDING AND SITE:
(include in~erio]= fe&:uree if known]
Built OZ ~ocally-m~de Duntile concrete block= (ice
10310.000397)
19. DATE OF CONSTRUCTION:
ARCHITECT:
BUILDER:
20. HISTORICAL AND ~RCHITSCTURAL IMPORTANCE:
2~. SOURCESt
22. THEME/AREA(S) OF SIGNIFICANCE:
CRITERIA:
LEVel OF SXGNZFX,~CE~ &. loc&l_~
C. national__
TEL: Oct 08,97
~3:36 No.005 P.07
TPiREATS TO RDILDING
f. other
RE~TED O~IIUILDINGS AND PROaRt:
,. .~J. ~r:
:t'$U~OUNDING~ F THE BUILDING (~ mo~ ~n ~e ir~ccc~7~
OTHER NOTABLE FEATURES OF BUI~G CD SITE (~cludln{ mt~m~ ¢c~I'~ ff known):
3~ Corp'n~ ~ac~e~ of Conc~te ~lock~ a large
pl~t at ~ho end of Love ~me on ~tti~ck
The b~es~ ~e'etar~ed by
2DATE OF INITIAL CON~R~WION: 1908
~ID ARCIIITE~LI~L IM~RTANCE:
:The 1'~o~ w~e ~ldi~
Both ~ild:~gs
t SOURC[~: ]~.I.Traveler-Wa$chman 11/24/~3
T,~,.'terv"-ew Elmer ~uland Jr. 298-6458 3/29/86
l*orm prepared by Linda L. Harvey, Reeearch A~sio~ant
Oct 08,97 t$:36 No.005 P.06
· ~ ~.,....., .
I~'~..>~.; ,' .'..:' '" . ~. < :..~;,~;~.-~I' ':':" 'l FOR OFFICE USE ONLY ' ." .
~ ~ , . OIVlSION ~OR HISTORIE ~V~ON : I '~UA~ '
I
I-..' ,~.,,,. ~_ ___.__ ___ __... o
I
I
' ' '"
7. ACC~IBILITY
. -~ .~ ~ ; .. ~.,.~=~:~ ~ ..... -.. _: . - _ -
MAT RIAl ' "'
- ' - '' %-~.~X ~ '.
'J YFRU~URAL' '" .3. w~ frame ~it~
SY~3~ ' b ~ f~ ~h':{i~l:m~mk~{ ~ . . .
- c. I~St. muJo~, al(erati~ and ~tcl (if known):
YOUR
TEL: Oct 08,97 15:55 No.005 P.0S
~A~ ~0 ~i~INC:
d. ~ ~ =. ~t~o~li~ ~
SURROUNDINGS OF THE BUff.DING
d. densely built-up [] ~. ~rmner~al [Z] .
f. indus~M [=] & tesid~llal r"] ,
O'H'[ER NC~FA~LE FEATUF~S OF BUILDING AND SITE (tnctud~ interior
~ ori~inaX sta.t~d glas~ ~d. ndows ~a fl-ont~ over dooz5 and in the
of *,he oh~'g~. 'r~t, erior~ ga~-~l cai2.t.~ and
thin stripe of wood. ~ base~.
~IGNI~ICANCE
19, DATE OF INiTIaL-CONSTRUCTION: 3~7~
AItCHITEC~:
HISTORICAL AND ^R(-"HITE(.~rUR-AL IMFORTANCE;
~ha late erection of m Episeopnl .O~ in this
church et-~n,~4.-~l :Lu 1872 -- re~ee4~the lack of
de~sminatcton~ n.~ ~ 't,l~ts ama ef~'Leng T-l~nd.
21. SOURCES:
I/sT. Chtrles g. Craven~ ID. stor7' o£ Na~tit~.k, L~ X. ~.ew Yo~ puBLished 1906 by
I.
BUILDING
TOWN/C/TY: ~_ .t,~. VILLAGE:
:2. COUNTY;
4. OWNER.SH~P: a. l~l:~k: U h private ~.~ ...............
S. PRESENT OWNER:_ Chin. eh abw~m ADDRB$~:
8. BUILDING
MATERIAL:
9. STRUCTURAL
SYSTEM:
(if
10. CONDITION:
I I. INTEGRATy:
a. dapbo~d::~ b. ,mae []
e. cobblestone n f. shin~J. [~ & stucco f-I
a. wn,-,d frame w~th ml~rlockine j~ints []
b. wood frame wi~h light memben ~
c. rnaso, t~ load ~mrinl~ ~ ~
d. meld (explain)
excellent fllQ b. good f-J c. fair []
c. brick [] fcrdad~dbl~ ba'tt~n r-]
other:
d. deter;orated []
b. moved r'1 ff so,when? ~emea~lal]~ail:f~ I~2. O~tt, gJ.de &,~ea
c. IJst major alterations and dates (LF kflown);a 8'l~eeo ~i.z~'aoe.
t~rder renovod. ZA 1~.,7 iorth end exteaded and ne~ bell and b~l~mmr~e~.
Phe~o of ebb-eh as it fir~ appetrod, ooe: Craven, p. 1~2. ~J. do windeut) ,a~ and
ooXorod glao8, replaced in
]2. PHOTO: 13. MAP:
New York State Office of Parks, Recreation ancl Historic Prese~a~ion
The Governor Nelson A. Rockeleller Emc~re State Ptaza
Agency Builc~ing 1, Albany, New York 1 ~_38-0001
N~m~ ~ati~ ~
Stat~ and Nat'_~m~al RecJist~z~ of W~cc~-ic P!~=~
A n~_naticn sponsor is race,ired to m~it an A[~licatic~ for Technical
~'-~istance with National P~-ter N~nati~ form ar~ a fully
k~_ld/r~/~ (or district) inverfcc~7 form f~r ~h ir~livi~] or
dJ_~_rict p~o~. Applicatic~s are firs~ reviewed by Re~ic~al Field
~-ti~ of the P~--~-7- After this site visit, the applicatic~ is
fc)rw-d.r,-t,:~-I ~ ~ ~-'t2_-"v~y/'}~c~"ta3. ~i~-~.~' Unit serif in ~ for
e%~_~uatic~ of the [~a~_~ty's ir~ity ar~ sigrtificance against the Nationa~
P~ister Criteria for Evaluatic~ (at-tacked). Ful]y ~let~d a~plicatic~s
(¢~cl~i~ May 1 ar~ Nc~-~ 1). ~i~ies fcund to ~ the National
P~ister criteria are given a priority r~tir~ (c~_ a~ list). High
priority p~%--~ will ].~ac~ive t~chr~c~l a.~i.~car~ i~ th~ form of detailed
~-t_ructic~s for prepar~J~ a dra~c Natic~al Re~ister r~inatic~ form ar~
w:Lll be ~igne~ t~ a mes~r of the survey/Nati~ Re~ister staff for
p:~in~. ~-~ of 2Limie~ staffir~, ~ canr~c always provide
~es wherm sufficient _.~m~Catic~ is [=r~r~, a detezminatic~ of
an~.~lly, and staff %,~3cl,-~4., arm adjust-,,,,4 a,.~.~,lin~ly. N~inaticri sp:ansors
a~.~ uxc3~ I:~ it %ri%h ~ offic~ aJ:c~t: ~ lik~ illc~xt of r~-~ivir~
U~hnica~ asai~tancm f~r any give~ ~ ~-ior't~ c ...... i~ of
]~,~n~atic~ of ~t~atic~l
p:~cess requirir~.a substantive knowled~ of ~-ican cu~-~l history,
c~a~criptic~ of th~ r~~ p~-~Lf, a ~.lete ~ of i~ history,
~,~ a critical evaluati~ of its ~ in n~ci~ml, state or local
tu~-t~ry. ~ may be .r~curned to spc~s~rs several ~ for revisic~s in .
15. ~n~w ~ OUTBUU r~INGS AND FROI'ERTY:
16- SURROUNDINGS OF THE Bt.flU)lNG (check mo~t th,,, one if ne~.ssar/):
c.
d. ~ Ix~lt.op 0 e. c~mmemtml I-I
INTERR£LAT]ONSPllP OF BUILDING AND SURROUNDINGS:
VacanT, land ~o
tearer of village. ~e~t~ry)
~& OTH~ NOTABLE FEATURES OP ~L~LD~G AND STYE (~-,~n6 ~t~or features ~k~o~m):
T~e ez~erier 1~30 portion caz~ies older, if mo~ the ori~-=~ , ~eeor~tive elememts:
p~el~eA corner pilaf, ers, panelled ~ melded architrave ~ orig~ entrance doorway
(=ida ne~ visible im photo).
of · laf~r peri.d: b~rge~oaz~s
[9. DATE OE ~NrfL~L CONST~UC~ON:
~STOP~CAL AND ARcHrz'ECTUR.a.L IMPORTANCE:
elssasot~ mrla~d witJa l~t~ l~a ~t~z? decorative trim ~md ~ 18~ e~mz~k
or~.=--r ~o me~t t_he rigorou~ s'.~te ar~ federal standards for dccu~_ntaticn.
~ny .spcr--~orm fir~ it helpftul to engage the services cf a preservation
cc~ultant experi~_~_ in preparing ncminaticn materials. A lis~ of
ccn=-ultants kncman by us to be practicing in New York State is available u~n
red,est.
Revi~ a~d Nc~nation
Onc~ a~ a~-~hle draft n~nina%ion has ~ ~ ~ ~ Natio~
~.~mr/~ ~t ~f, a fo~ ~i~ of ~ p~ ~ ~ N~ York
S~'~ ~ for F~ric P~~
~ g~ly f~ ~ s~ ~ ~ y~. F~-~
~ ~t ~ ~ve ~ ~ of
~'~ ~ ~ o~r ~ all~ for ~
~fi~ ~ ~ci~ in ~i~ of
If rm~.~,~,.ied by the k~ard and ~wed by the State
Pr~ervatic~ Officer, the i~=~:~al w~]] be off~e~a]~y lis~-,~ in t_he State
Re~ist~r of Hi.~.~=ic Places and Dem~*'~ tO the Natic~.l Re~lst.~r. If the
c=~le~-~,~ with/n ~ ~.,~/%s of r~m~natic~. Spc~u~ and offic~]~ w4]] be
nc~tfied at ~h stage of the r~,,~naticn ~ ~ss.
RULAND POTATO HOUSE
BERGEN & COLMAN OIL CO. BLDG~
EPISCOP~4. CI4LW~CH OF THE P~DEEMER
MECHANICS HALL
APPENDIX F
]?REUDENTHAL & ELKOWITZ CONSUl. TING GROUP, INC.
Photograph No. 1: View lookdng southeast on Westphalia Avenue. Note
overhead utility lines and poles, mature trees, connnercial development and
residential property.
FREUDENTHAL & ELKOWITZ CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
Photog_~ph No. 2: View of existing monopole recently
constructed in East Mattituck. Note that the monopole
'*blen. fls~' with the overhead lines and street trees°
FREUDENTHAL & ELKOWITZ CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
Photograph No. :3: Photograph taken along Elijah's Lane
approximately 800 feet north of the monopole, Utility poles~
overhead lines and the monopole are visible in the horLzom
the monopole is no more evident than the other utility poles°
Photograph No. 4: V~ew looking north from Suffolk Avenue
just west of its intersection with Locust Avenue approximately
2,200 feet from the monopole in East Mattituck. Farmland is
in the foreground with vineyards and trees in the background.
The monopole can be observed in the horizon above the tree
FREUDENTHAL & ELKOWITZ CONSU~TfNG GROUP tNCi
Photograph No. 5: View looking northwest from Suffolk
Avenue 500 feet east of Locust Avenue approximately 2.700
feet from the monopole. Farmland and snow fencing are in the
foregrounO with utility poles~ overhead wires and trees in the
background~ The monopole ~s no more evident than a utility
pole,
Photograph No. 6.: View looking west along Main Road just
east of its intersection with Locust Avenue approximately 1,000
feet from the monopole in East Mattituck. The road, utility
poles, overhead wires and trees are in the foreground with
houses, utility poles~ overhead wires and trees in the
background~ The monopole blends with the utility poles~
~o:i_e. rhe=~a? wire_.~_s, a~d trees. __.__ .
FREUDENTHAL & ELKO~ffITZ CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
Photogggph No. 7: The same view as in Photograph Noo 6
except the photographer ts approximately 20 feet further to the
east on Main Road~ The tree in the foreground blocks the ~dew
of the monopole.
FREUDENTHAL & ELK0!gITZ CONSULTING GROUP, INC
Pho~__~graph No. 8: View looking easterly along Middle Road toward the site
i¥om approxkaately 2,000 feet. Utility poles, overhead wires and large trees
obstruct the l~ne-of-sight.
FREUDENTHAL & ELKOWITZ CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
Photo_~ratLh No. 9: View looking westerly along Middle Road toward the site
from approximately 1,200 feet. Utility poles, overhead wires and large trees
btock the line,of-sight.
Photograph No. 10: View looking south at the intersection of Westphalia
Avenne and Middle Road about 600 feet from the subject site. Utility poles,
overhead wlres~ street trees and structures appear in the horizon. ~__~
FREUDENTHAL & ELKOWITZ CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
Photograph No. 1t: View looking south along Westphalia Avenue (north of
Middle Road) about 1,100 feet from the property~ Utility poles, overhead
wires and street trees appear in the line,of-sight,
Photograph No. 12: View looking south off of Westphalia Avenue
approximately 110 feet from the site. Bnildlngs, a utility pole and an antenna
are visible.
FREUDENTHAL & ELKOWITZ CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
~: View looking west from the corner of Love Lane and
Sound Avenue across the parking are approxhnately 600 feet from the project
~ e
location. Trees, structures, utility poles and overhead w~res can be seen m th
horizon.
Ph___otograph No. 14: View looking west over the parking area from beh~d the
stores on Love Lane approximately 450 feet from the site. Structnres, trees,
ntility poles, and overhead wires appear in the horlzon.
k'RtglJDENTH~ & ELKOWlTZ CONSL~LTING GROUP, INC.
Photograph No. 15: View looking southwest along Pike Street just east o~Love
Lane approx~aately 600 feet from the subject proper~ Trees, structures and
overhead wires can be seen in the line,or-sight.
Photograph No. 16: 'View looking southwest along the railroad tracks
approxhnately 550 feet from the site. Trees, struck:ares and overhead wires can
be seen in the horizon.
FREUDENTHAL & ELKOWITZ CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
~Photograph No. 17: View looking west along Main Road east of Rs h~tersection
with Sound Avenue approximately 1,100 feet from the property. Trees,
strnct~es~ affiity poles and overhead wires obstruct the llne-of~s~ght.
Pho~graph No. 18: View looking northeast off of Main Road j~tst south of the
its mtersection ruth Lo e Lane and approximately 900 feet from the proposed
cellular communications facility. Large trees and structures block the view.
FREUDENTHAL & ELKOWITZ CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
Pho~graph No~ 1~: View at the southern end of Love Lane looking toward the
subject site from approximately 700 feet. Stores obstruct the line.o£~sight.
Photograph No. 20: View from Sound Avenue where it intersects with
Westpha~a Avenue looking northwest from approximately 400 feet. Trees and
structures mainly segment or obstruct the line-of-sight.
FREUDENTHAL & ELKOWITZ CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
Photo~No, 2t: View on Sound Avenue from the front of the mu=icipal
center approximately 350 feet from the site. Trees and structures segmen~ the
view of the horizon.
Phot ~r h N . 22: View looldng north along Pacific Street approximately 500
feet [Yom the proposed cellular communications site. Utility poles, overhead
~L~ wir.~s, st_r_Tct_ utes and trees interrupt the line-of-sight.
FREUDENTHAL & ELKOWITZ CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
No. 2~: View where Sound Ayenue intersects the railroad tracks.
Photo_~q'aph No. 24: View from Sound Avenue just west of the r'~ilroad tracks
approximately 700 feet from the sRe. Trees, utility poles a~d structures appear
in the line-of-sight.
FREUDENTHAL & ELKOWITZ CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
Photograph No. 25: View further west along Sound Avenue approydmately
1,OOO feet from -the proposed cellular commtm~cations site. Trees obstruct the
view.
FREUDENTHAL & ELKOWITZ CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
APPENDIX G
FREUDENTHAL & ELKOWITZ CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
View Point I ~ "Bell Tower" From The Parking Lot At The Intersection Of
Westphalia Avenue And Pike Street
Computer Simulated Photo By Creative Visuals, Inc. & Virtually Real, Inco
View Po!nt 2 - "Bell Tower" From The Southeast Corner Of
Route 48 And Westphalia Avenue
Computer Simulated Photo By Creative Visuals, Inc. & Virtually Real, inc.
-]
11
il
APPEr',IDI X A
APPENDIX H
FREUDENTHAL & ELKOWITZ CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
View Point
~ "Monopole" From T~FParking Lot At The Intersection Of
Westphalia Avenue And Pike Street
Computer Simulated Photo By Creative Visuals, Inc. & Virtually Real, inc.
View Point 2 - "Monopole" The Southeast Corner Of
Route 48 And Westphalia Avenue
Computer Simulated Photo By Creative Visuals, Inc. & Virtually Real, Inc.