HomeMy WebLinkAbout1000-22.-3-15.1 (2)
r
... ",
~
-- - ~
t
. .
t
APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF PLAT
e Planning Board of the Town of Southold:
The undersigned applicant hereby applies for (tentaiive) (final) approval of a subdivision pIa
accordance with Article 16 of the Town Law and the Rules and Regulations of the Sourhold Tc
Planning Board, and represents and states as follows:
1. The applicant is the Owner of record of the land under application. (If the applicant is not
owner of record of the land under application, the applicant shall state his interest in s
land under application.)
2. The name of the subdh'ision is to be .<:Qy~ .~iif::h .:e:~:tP.W~. .. . . .. . . . . '" . . . . " . . . .. " .
..............................................................................................
3. The entire land under application is described in Schedule "A" hereto annexed. (Copy of de
suggested.)
4. The land is held hy the applicant under deeds recorded in Suffolk County Clerk's office
follows:
Liber ... ;t..O,~li1. '" .. . . .. . .... Page .O.q~~................. On
......................
Liber .",...................... P:tge
On
......................
.......................
Liber ........................ Page
On
......................
.......................
Libcr ........................ PGge
On
......................
.......................
Liber ........................ I)age
On
...'....................
...."..................
as devised under the Last \\'ill and Testament of .....................................
or as distributee ...................................................... .". .... . . . . . . ..".. .
...............................................................................................
5. The area of the land is . .~l?:~.~4?....... acres.
6. 1\11 taxes which are licns on the land at the date hereof have been paid except ............
...............................................................................................
7. The land is encumhered by '" . One
mortg-ag-e (s) as follows: -
(a) Mortg-~g-c recorded in .Liber )..4~9P........ Pag-c " .~~?........... in orig-inal amount
of S:4.,.QQQ..QQO... nnpaid amount S 4, DD.o,OOO. . . . . . . . . " held by N<?F~ .f9,r:~ .J??!1.~ . . "
& Trust C9... address 25. wve. Lime. Matti.t;lJc1<. N.Y...,'
........... - ......f:!:..................................
......................................................
(h) ~r(Jrtg:lg-c recorded in Liller......... Pag-c ..
.....................
in original amoun:
......
of .............. lIItpaid amolln"t $...... ........."..... held by ......... :".............
..............
addrcss .................
........
......................................
'.
...",
1: .'
..:...=--
.r
.
.
(c) lIrortg-age recorded in Liber .............. Page ................ in original amQt
of .............. unpaid amount $...... . ....: . .. .. .... '" held by ....................
. .. .. . . .. . . " " . '" . .. address .................................'.......................
8. There arc no other encumbrances or liens against the land except NQlJ~.................
......................................................................................
9. The land lies in the following :zoning use districts .l,l.:-Il.Q...................,.............
.......................................................................................
10. No part of the land lies under water wheth er tide water, stream. pond water or otherwise, e:
cept . J''ll'i. ~AQ\'/I:l. PJI.IJ1Sip. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . : . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . : . . .
11. -The applicant shall at his expense install all required public impro\'Cmcnts.
12. The land~) (does not) lie in a Water District or Water Snpply District. ::-.rame of Di,
trict. if within a District, is .............. ~ . . " .. .. .. .... .. .. . . . . .. . . .. .. . " " . . ..... .. ..
13. \Vater mains will be laid by ...........................................................
and (a) (no) charge will be made for installing said mains.
14. Elcctric lines and standards will be installed by L::mg. Islar.lQ. Light..i.n'3"' Ccrnpany. .....
.....................................
and (a)
.{-) charge will be made for installing'sait
lines.
15. Gas mains will be installed by ............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
and (a) (no) charge will be made for installing said mains.
r..lu. If streets shown 011 the plat arc c.;l~ill1ed by the applicant to he existing' public streets in the
Suffolk County IIig-hway systcm, annex Schedule "n" hercto. to sho\',,' samc.
17. If streets shown on 'the plat are claimed by the applicant to be existing pnblic streets in the
Town of SOlllhnJd IIig-hway system, annex Schedule "C" hercto to show same.
JS. There are no exi,tillg' bllilding'S or <tructure, on .the land which arc not 10eate!1 and shown
on the plat:
l~. \\'llere the plat ,how" prtll'",,'d ,treets which arc extel"i,,", of 'treets "" adjoillillC: slIb-
di\'ision lllaps heretofore i~Il'(1. ,there ;~rc 110 I'e:->el"ve stripi.::_~~.t the elld of the streets nn said
c.:xisting lIlaps at their conJt1IJl.:llOlt, with the proposed sl@:lS.
20. [n the e,,"r,e of the,e proceedillC:s, the appli"""l will offer I'r"o; of title as reqllired h)' Sec.
:U5 of the j\cal Prop~rt)' Law. .
21. S::!Jmit a C()P)' of proposed deed fnr lot5 ~ll()wi:l':": all r{'~tril.tilln:-;, CO\"CI1::J.IIB. etc. "\lInl.~x
Schednle "D".
.
'.~., . ".. '.. .'
-," .
.
.
22. The applicant estimates that the cost of grnding nnd required public improvements will
$.......... as itemized in Schedule "E" hereto annexed and reqnests that the maturity of
Performance Bond be fixed at ............ .:: yenrs. The Performance Bond will be written
a licensed surety campan)' unless otherwise shown on Schedule "F",
DATE ....... ~.~.........., 19<!f
. .}1f~I.Z?.~~.... .... ......... ........
(Name of Applicant)
BY~.~..~.~......
(Signnture and Title)
. .?P9.. .~~r.~. ~ y .~'!tJ...
(Address)
ST:\TE, OF NEW YORK, COL'~TY OF, ...... .~i~~.t...... ....,,55:
On t7 J........ ..?'f?f!::. dny 01"...... .a~.........,., 19,.~., helore lne personnlly carr
!~.<,.,. k C (~ . k. hi' .,...., I' '1 .,. d"
....... ~""''''-Y';-7.... .... .. .. . . .. .. . . . . . . '" .. .. to me no\\ n to c t lC lIlul\ luua CCscn leu lO:m \\ 1
executed the ioreg-oing- instrument. and acknowledged that
-{
....'\....., executed the same.
~-~--
... - . ClIlIIIr
":' .. OIL 11. t.
.............................
STATE OFNEW YORK. COUNTY OF.......,'.................... 55:
On the................ dny ............ of .............., 19......, before me personnlly cnm,
. .. ........... .', '" ..... to me known. who being by me duly SWOrn did de-
IHISC and sa}' that........ .'... resides at ~o. ....................................................
.............................
that.......................... is the........ ..~
, . . . " . . , . . . . . .. . . " of ...,..............,..........,........,..................................
the (cJrporatiull described in and which l'xectllcd t lit., r(lrt'gui'II.~ instrlllllent; that ............ kno\\"s
tJll' :-'l'al oi said L"tJq1Oration: that the !'ieal aifixed by onll'r of the bl)~~,<J of director:' of said l'orporatitJn.
.~ & .
:ll:d : 11:ll ............ sig'T1ed .............. name thereto hy like order.
"
XOlnr)' Pt;bli~"""""""""""""""'"
~ ~
~y lor t~1k'II~IO'\'
(D'I~ \)
14.16.212;l\7)-7c
. r ~....:._~__
,. .~..
State Environmental Quality Review
FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
Purpose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine. In an orderly
or action may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer. Frequent.
ly. there are aspects of a project that are subjective or unmeasureable. It is also understood that those who determine
sIgnificance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may be technically expert in environmental
analysis. In addition. many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting
the question of significance. .
The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination
process has been orderly. comprehensive In natLlre. yet flexible to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action.
Full EAF Componenls: The full EAF Is comprised of three parts:
Part 1: Provides objective data and Information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic project
data. it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3.
Part 2: Focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may Occur from a project or action. It provides
guidance as to whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially.
large Impact. The form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced.
Part 3: If any Impact in Part 2 is identifiprt "' r"tenti~Il.,..larKe. then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the
impact is actually Important.
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE- Type 1 and Unlisted Actions
Idenlity Ihe Portions of EAF completed for Ihis projee!: 0 Part 1 0, Part 2 OPart 3
Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF (Parts 1 and 2 and 3 If appropriate). and any other supporting
information. and considering both the magitude and importance of each impact. it Is reasonably determined by the
lead agency tliat: . .
o A. The project will not result in any large and important impact(s) and. therefore. is 'one which will not
have a significant Impad on the environment. therefore a negalive declaration will be prepared.
o B. Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment. there will not be a significant
effect for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART J have been required.
therefore a, CONDITIONED negative decla~ation will be prepared.'
o C. The project may result in' one or more large and Important Impacts that may have a significant impact
on the environment. therefore.. positive declaration will be prepared.
. A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions
Name of Action
Name of lead Agency
Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer
Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer (If different from responsible officer)
Date
1
.
t",RT 1-PROJECT INFORMATIOI~
.
..
Prepared by Project Sponsor
NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant effect
\ on the environment. Please complete the entire lorm~ ParlS A through E. Answers to these questions will be considered
as part 01 the application lor approval and may be subject to lurther verification and public review. Provide any additional
inlormation you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3.
Itls expected that completion 01 the full EAF will be dependent on Inlormation currently available and will not involve
new studies, research or Investigation. II inlormation requiring such additional work 15 unavailable. so Indicate and specily
each instance.
NAME OF ACTION
SUBDIVISION SKETCH PLAN (COVE"BEACH ESTATES)
LOCATION OF ACTION tlnclude Slr,,1 Addr..., Municipality .nd Counly)
MAIN ROAD, EAST MARION TIO SOUTHOLD SUFFOLK COUNTY ,
NAME OF APPlICANTISPONSOR I BUSINESS TELEPHONE
HAROLD R. REESE ( )
ADDRESS
855 SUNRISE HIGHWAY , .
CITY/PO I STATE I ZIP CODE
LYNNBROOK, NY 11<;6,
NAME OF OWNER (II dlll."nl) ... . I BUSINESS TELEPHONE
I )
ADDRESS
CITY/PO I STATE I ZI~ CODE
.
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION
REALTY SUBDIVISION 04 lots)
-
Pluse Complete bch Question-Indicate N.A, if nol applicable
A. Site Description
Physical selling of overall project. both developed and undeveloped areas.
1. Present land use: DUrban olndustrial oCommercial oResident;al (suburban)
oForest oAgriculture oOther
96.4
acres.
I1!JRural (non.larm)
Z. .Tolal acreage of project area:
APPROXIMATE ACREAGE
Meadow or Brushland (Non-agricuhural)
Forested
Agricultural (Includes orchards. cropland. pasture. etc.)
Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24. 25 01 ECl)
Water Surface Area
Unvegetated (Rock, earth or liII)
Roads, buildings and other paved surlaces
Other (Indicate type) Lawns & Landscaping
3. What is predominant soil type{s) on project sitel Haven
a. Soil drainage: DWell drdined 100 % of 1ite
OPoorly drained % 01 site
b. II any agricultural land is involved. how many acres of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 01 the NYS
land Classification System! NI A acres. (See 1 NYCRR 370).
4. Are there bedrock outcroppings on project site! DYes \llINo
a. What is depth to bedrock! NI A (In leet)
PRESENTlY
10
69
o
4
o
12
1
o
AFTER COMPLETION
9
51.4
o
4
o
12
7 6
12
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
....eres
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
Loam
OModerately well drained
2
% of site
=O.'0'lo_~_~'O .=IIl-I;~'.
=15% or grelll~r ---2_ %
6. Is prolect substantially contiguous to, or contain a building. site. or district. listed on the State or the N,lllon,1
Registers of Historic Places! DVes IXINo
7. Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural landmarks! ::;Ves =No
8. What Is the depth of the water table! 0-25 (in feet)
9. Is site located over a primary. principal. or sole source aquifer! !9Ves DNo
10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area! DVes KlNo
'I . .
1,. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered!
DVes KlNo According to
Identify each species
12. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site! (i.e., cliffs, dunes. oth~r geological formations)
IlDVes DNa Describe Cliffs
.'
ljectlwith slopes:
10
O'
..
, ApprO\:mate percentage oi proposel
13. Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area!
DVes KINo If yes. explain
14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community!
DVes Il1INo
15. Streams within or contiguous to project area:
a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary
N/A
16. lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area:
a. Name Long Island Sound & Dam Pond.
b. Size (In .acres) N / A
17. Is the site served by existing public utilities! R]Ves DNo
aJ If Ves, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection! roVes DNo
bJ If Yes, will improvements be necessary to allow connectionl roves DNo
18. Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets law, Article 25.AA.
Section 303 and 3041 DVes I1lINo
19. Is the site located i,; or substantia'lly contiguous to a 'Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8
of the ECl, and 6 NVCRR 6171 DVes Ii1INo
20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastesl DVes egNo
B. Project D.escrl.ptlon
1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate)
a. Total contiguous acreage. own~.dor controlled by. project sp.onsor
b. Project acreage to be developed: 58.5 acres initially;
c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped 37.9 acres.
d. length of project, in miles: N/ A (If appropriate)
e. If the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed N/ A
f. Number of off.street parking spaces existing 0; proposed 68
g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour 9 (upon completion of projectll
h. If residential: Number and type of housing units:
One Family Two Family
,4
34
96.4
58.5
acres.
acres ullimately.
%;
Multiple Family
Condominium
Initially
Ultimately
I. Dimensions (in feel) of largest proposed structure N/ A height:
j. linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy is!
width;
N/A
length.
ft.
3
. .
2. How much natuml malNial (ik ....,K. earlh. elc.) will be removed from the s,..( 0 tons/cubic y.rds
3. Will disturbed aredS be reclaimed! ~Ves DNo ON/A
a. If yes. for what Intend ." purpose is the site being reclalmedl Roadside Shoulders & Landscaping
b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamationl I9Ves DNo
c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation I 29Ves DNo
4. How many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs. ground covers) will be removed from sitel 20.6 acres.
5. will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or otber locally-important vegetation be removed by this project!
DVes Il!lNo .
6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction
7. If multi-phased: Nt A .
a. Total number of phases anticipated
b. Anticipated date of commencement phase 1
c. Approximate completion date of final phase
d. Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases!
8. Will blasting occur during constructionl DVes IlONo
9. Number of jobs generated: during construction ;><;
10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project 0
11. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilitiesl
48
months. (including demolition).
(number).
month
month
DVes
year, (including demolition).
year.
DNo
; after project is complete
o
DVes
IXINo
If yes, explain
12. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved I DVes /DNo
a. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage. industrial. etc.) and amount
b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged
13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal Involved! Il!lVes DNo Type Sanitary Sewage
14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal! DVes IiaNo
explain
15. Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain! I![JVes DNo
16. will the pr6ject g~nerate solid wastel IXIVes DNo
a. If yes, what Is the amount per month 6. 1 tons
b. If yes. will an existing solid waste facility be used! IiaVes DNo
c. If yes, give name Cutchogue Landfill - ; location Cutchogue
d. Will any wastes not go Into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill! DVes IXlNo
e. If Ves,' explain
17. Will the project Involve the disposal of solid waste! DVes ClINo
a. If yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal! tons/month.
b. If yes, what is the anticipated site lifel years.
18. Will project use herbicides or pesticides! liiIVes DNo Lawns
19. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)! DYes ClINo
20. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels! DYes' KlNo
21. Will project result in an increase in energy use! lOVes DNo
If yes, indicate type(s) Electric
22. If water 'supply Is from wells, Indicate pumping capacity 10 gallons/minute.
.23. Total anticipated water usage per day 1.0200 gallons/day.
24. Does project Involve local, State or Federal fundingl DYes 29No
If Ves, explain
4
, . ' ,
, ",\"
:Is, API!IO\Jlf Reqll.'"d:
.
City, Town. \'iIlu~e B<>artJ
City. Town. Vllla~e Planning BOMd
Citv. Town Zonins Board
City. Count~. Health Department
Other local Agencies
Other Regional Agencies
State Agencies
Federal Agencies
~.Yes ::::JNo
lOVe! DNo
eVes ii1lNo
!CiVes DNo
KJVes DNo
IlOVes DNo
IXIVes DNo
DVes ~No
.
Submittal
Date
Type
CLUSTER & ZONE CHANGE
SIlBDTVTSTON
OCT. lQ8'5
SUBDIVISION
CAC
COIlNTY PLANNTNG
NY.c; ORr.
C. Zoning and Planning Information
1, Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision! ~Ves DNo
If Ves, Indicate decision required:
elzonlng amendment Dzoning variance Dspecial use permit !9subdivision Dsite plan
Dnew/revision of master plan Dresource management plan Dother
2 What Is the zoning c1assification(slof the site! AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL 'A I
, c-l G~N~HAL INDUSTRIAL
3. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning!
35 RESIDENTIAL LOTS &'tNDUSTRIAL COMPLEX
4, What Is the proposed zoning of the site! AGRTr.lILTllRAI. RF'5:TORNTTAT 'A'
S. What Is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning!
, 50 RESIDENTIAL LOTS t
6. Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses In adopted local land use plans! lOVes DNo
7. 'What are the predominant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a Yo mile radius of proposed action!
RESIDENTIAL/AGRICULTURAL AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL 'A'
8, Is the proposed action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses within a Yo mile!
9. If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed! i4
a. What is the minimum lot size proposed! 40,000 SQ. ft.
Will proposed action require any authorization(sl for the formation of sewer or water districts! DVes I9No
Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recrealibn, educalion, police,
lire protectionl! !:JVes DNo
a. If yes, Is existing capacity sufficient to handle prolected demand! KJYes DNo
W.iII the proposed action result In the generation 01 traffic significantly above present levels!
a. If yes, .i,s the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic! DYes
10.
11.
12.
~Yes
DNo
DYes
DNo
!9No
"
D. Informational Details
Allach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse
impacts associated with your proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or
avoid them.
E. Verification'
I certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge.
Applicant!Sponsor Name HOWARD W. YOUNG Date March 17 I 1988
Signa lure Title I.Hnd Survevor
If lhe ulion Is In the Coaslal Area, and you are a slale agency, complete Ihe Coastal Assessmenl Form before proceeding
with Ihl. a..e55menl.
..
5
/
.
.
.
14-16-2 (2[1\7)-7c
'r
SEaR
r,
,.
State Environmental auallty Review
FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
Purpose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine. in an orderly manner, whether a project
or action may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer. Frequent.
ly, there are aspects of a project that are subjective or unmeasureable. It Is also understood that those who determine
significance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may be technically expert in environmental
analysis. In addition. many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting
the question of significance.. .
The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination
process has been orderly, comprehensive in nature. yet flexible to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action.
Full EAF Componenls: The full EAF is comprised of three parts:
ParI 1: Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic project
data, it assists a reviewer in the analysis that lakes place in Parts 2 and 3.
ParI 2: Focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action. II provides
guidance asIa whelher an impacI is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether il is a potentially.
large impact. The form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced.
Part 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identifiprl .< f'otenti~lly.lar~e, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the
Impact is actually important.
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE- Type 1 and Unlisted Actions
Idenlify the Portions 01 EAF completed for this project: 0 Part 1 O. Part 2 oPart 3
Upon review of Ihe Information recorded on this EAF (Parts 1 and 2 and 3 if appropriate), and any other supporting
information, and considering both the magitude and importance of each impact. it is reasonably determined by the
lead agency that: ' .
o A. The project will not result In any large and importanl impact(s) and, therefore, is 'one which will not
have a significant Impact on the environment, therefore a negalive declaration will be prepared.
o B. Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment. there will not be a significant
effect for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been required.
therefore a CONDITIONED negaUve declaraUon will be prepared.'
o C. The prolect may result In' one or more large and importantlmpacls that may have a significant Impact
on the environment, the ref ore " positive declaraUon will be prepared.
. A CondiUoned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions
Name of Action
Name of lead Agency
Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer
Signature of Responsible Officer in lead Agency Signature of Preparer (If different from responsible officer)
Date
1
", .
.
.
~~RT 1-PROJECT INFORMATIOI.
Prepared by Project Sponsor
NOTICE: This document is designed to a..ist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant effect
. on the environment. Please complete the entire form~ Parts A through E. Answers to these questions will be considered
as part of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additional
information you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and J.
It is expected that completion of the full EAF will be dependent on Information currently available and will not involve
new studies. research or Investigation. If information requiring such additional work is unavailable. so indicate and specify
each Instance.
NAME OF ACTION
SUBDIVISION SKETCH PLAN (COVE"BEACH ESTATES)
LOCATION OF ACTION (Includ. St,..t Add"". Munlclpallly and County)
MAIN ROAD EAST MARION TIO SOUTHOLD SUFl'"OLK COUNTY
NAME OF APPLICANT/SPONSOR I BUSINESS TELEPHONE
HAROLD R. REESE ( )
ADDRESS
855 SUNRISE HIGHWAY , .
CITYIPO I STATE I ZIP CODE
LYNNBROOK, NY 11'56,
NAME OF OWNER (II dllll..nl) " I BUSINESS TELEPHONE
( )
ADDRESS
CITY/PO I STATE I ZI~ CODE
-
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION
REALTY SUBDIVISION (34 lots)
.
.
Please Complete Each Question-Indicate N.A. if not applicable.
A. Site Description
Physical setting of overall project. both developed and undeveloped areas.
1. Present land use: ~Urban olndustrial oCommercial oResldential (suburban)
oForest oAgriculture oOther
96.4
~Rural (non-farm)
2. .Total acreage of project area:
APPROXIMATE ACREAGE
Meadow or Brushland (Non-agricuhural)
Forested
Agricultural (Includes orchards. cropland, pasture. etc.)
Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24. 25 of ECL)
Water Surface Area
Unvegetated (Rock. earth or 1111)
Roads. buildings and other paved surfaces
Other (Indicate type) Lawns & Landscaping
J. What is predominant soil type(s) on project site? Haven Loam
a. Soil drainage: DWell drained 100 % of site oModerately well drained
oPoorlydrained % of site
b. If any agricultural land is involved, how many acreS of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the "'YS
land Classification Systeml NI A acres. (See 1 NVCRR 370).
4. Are there bedrock outcroppings on project sitel DVes Il!lNo
a. What is depth to bedrock! NI A (in feet)
acres.
PRESENTlY
10
69
o
4
o
12
1
o
acres
AFTER COMPLETION
9
51.4
o
4
o
12
7 6
12
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
Jeres
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
% of site
l
'::U.10% _~_ % .=IIl'I;~'.
=15% or grClll~r ----5_ %
6. Is project substantially contiguous to, or contain a building. site. or district, listed on the State or the N.lllon.1
Registers of Historic Places! DYes IXINo
7. Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural landmarks! ::;Yes =No
8. What Is the depth of the water table! 0-25 (in feet)
9. Is site located over a primary, principal. or sole source aquifer! I!9Yes DNo
10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist In the project area! DYes KlNo
'r . . .
11. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that Is identified as threatened or endangered?
DYes '~No, According to
Identify each species
12. Are there any unique or unusual land lorms on the project sitel (i.e., c1ills, dunes. oth~r geological lormations)
IXIVes DNo Describe Cliffs
~ A.ppro,:mate percenlag~ oi propose(
'ject stvith slopes:
10
g.
,.
13. Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation areal
DVes KlNo If yes. explain
14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community!
DYes tilINo
15. Streams within or contiguous to project area:
a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it Is tributary
N/A
16. lakes. ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area:
a. Name Long Island Sound & Dam Pond,
b. Size (In ..cres) N / A
17. Is the site served by existing public utilities! K1Yes DNo
a) II Yes. does sullicient capacity exist to allow connectionl I!!JYes DNo
bl II Yes, will improvements be necessary to allow connectionl I!!JYes DNo
18. Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets law. Article 25-AA.
Section 303 and 3041 DYes Il!INo
19. Is the site located in or substantia'lly contiguous to a 'Criiical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8
of the ECl. and 6 NYCRR 6171 DYes IiaNo
20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes!
DYes
I!9No
B. Project D.escrl.ptlon
1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate)
a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project sponsor
b. Project acreage to be de~elop~d: 58.5 acres Initiall'y;
c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped 37.9 acres.
d. length of project. in miles: N/ A (If appropriate)
e. If the project is an expansion. indicate percent of expansion proposed N/ A
f. Number of oll.street parking spaces existing 0 ; proposed 68
g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour 9 (upon completion of projectll
h. If residential: Number and type 01 housing units:
One Family Two Family
,lJ
3lJ
96.4
58.5
acres.
acres ultimately.
%;
Multiple Family
Condominium
Initially
Ultimately
i. Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure N/ A height;
j. linear leet of frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy is!
width:
N/A
length.
ft.
3
__!.o
.
.
o
tom/cubic y~rd,
2. How much naturi,1 malNial (i.,'. '...K. earth. etc.) will be removed from the "..I
3. Will disturbed areas be reclaimed! ~Yes DNa ON/A
a. If yes. lor what Intend ... purpose is the site being reclaimedl
b. Will topsoil be stockpiled lor reclamationl /ElYes DNa
c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled lor reclamation I /ElYes DNo
4. How many acres 01 vegetation (trees, shrubs. ground covers) will be removed from sitel 20.6 acres.
5. Will any mature lorest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this project!
DYes Il9No .
Roadside Shoulders & Landscaping
6. II single phase project: Anticipated period 01 construction
7. II multi-phased: Nt A .
a. Total number 01 phases anticipated
b. Anticipated date of commencement phase 1
c. Approximate completion date of IInal phase
d. Is phase 1 lunctionally dependent on subsequent phases I
8. will blasting occur during construction I DYes IKINo
9. Number 01 jobs generated: during construction ;:><;
10. Number 01 jobs eliminated by this project 0
11. Will project require relocation 01 any projects or facilitiesl
48
months. (including demolition).
(number).
month
month
DYes
year. (including demolition).
year.
DNo
; after project is complete
o
DYes
IXINo
" yes. explain
12. Is surlace liquid waste disposal involvedl DYes 19No
a. II yes, Indicate type 01 waste (sewage. industrial. etc.) and amount
b. Name 01 water body into which ellluent will be discharged
13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved I I8IYes DNa Type Sani tarv Sewal1:e
14. Will surlace area 01 an existing water body increase or decrease by proposall DYes IiiINo
Explain
15. Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plainl I1>lYes DNa
16. Will the project g~nerate solid wastel IXIYes DNa
a. II yes, what is the amount per month 6.1 tons
b. II yes, will an existing solid waste lacility be usedl IiiIYes DNo
c. If yes, give name Cutchogue Landfill - ; location Cutchogue
d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or Into a sanitary landfilll DYes IXINo
e. II Yes.. explain
17. Will the project involve the disposal 01 solid wastel DYes DaNo
a. II yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal! tom/month.
b. II yes, what is the anticipated site Iilel years.
18. Will project use herbicides or pesticides I IiiIYes DNa Lawns
19. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)! DYes CilNo
20. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levelsl DYes' KINo
21. Will project result in an increase in energy usel IOYes DNa
II yes. indicate type(s) Electric
22. II water 'supply is from wells. indicate pumping capacity 10 gallons/minute.
,23. Total anticipated water usage per day 1.0200 gallons/day.
24. Does project involve Local. State or Federal lundingl DYes I1>lNo
II Yes. explain
4
.
- --.- ----.-- -----
; . .
25. 4pp'ro\Jls R.q~.""d:
Type
City. Towll. Vill,,~e (';oartJ !.Yes :JNo CLUSTER & ZONE CHANGE
City. Towll. VillaGe Planning BOMd RiYe! ONo SIlROTVTSTON
City. Town Zonin.. Board eYes ii11No
City. Count~. Heahh Department EYes ONo SUBDIVISION
Other local Agencies KJYes DNo CAC
Other Regional Agencies I&JYes DNo mllNTY PI.ANNING
State Agencies IXlYes DNo NY!",' m,r.
Federal Agencies DYes ~No
Submillal
Dale
OCT. 198')
C. Zoning and Planning Information
1. Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision! Il!JYes DNo
If Yes. Indicate decision required:
e!lzonlng amendment Dzoning variance Dspecial use permit I9subdivision Dsite plan
Dnew/revision of master plan Dresource management plan Dother
2 What Is the zoning classification{sJof the sile! AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL 'A'
. 0-1 G~N~RAL INDUSTRIAL
3. What Is the maximum polential development of Ihe sile if developed as permilled by the present zoning!
35 RESIDENTIAL LOTS & 'INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX
4. What 15 the proposed zoning of the site! AGRICllT.TIlRAI. RR<;TORNTTAT 'A'
S. What Is the maximum potenlial development of the site if developed as permilled by the proposed zoning!
. 50 RESIDENTIAL LOTS t
6. Is ihe proposed action consistent with Ihe recommended uses In adopted local land use plaris! lOVes DNo
7. 'What are the predominant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a ';' mile radius of proposed actionl
RESIDENTIAL/AGRICULTURAL AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL 'A'
8. Is the proposed action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses wilhin a Yo mile!
9. If the proposed action is the subdivision of land. how many 10ls are proposedl 14
a. What is the minimum lot size proposed! 40,000 SQ. ft.
Will proposed action require any authorization!s) for the forma lion of sewer or waler districts! DYes I9No
Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreatibn, educalion. police.
lire proteclion)! ~Yes DNo
a. If yes. is exisling capacity sufficient 10 handle projected demand! IOYes DNo
W.iIIthe proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels!
a. If yes, .i.s the existinG road network adequate to handle the additional traffic! DYes
I9Yes
DNo
10.
".
12.
DYes
DNo
I9No
"
D. Informational Details
Allach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse
impacts associated with your proposal. please discuss such impacts and Ihe measures which you propose to miligate or
avoid them.
E. Verification
I certify that the Information provided above is true 10 the best of my knowledge.
ApplicantlSponsor Name HOWARD W. YOUNG DaleMarch 17, 1988
Sianature Title l.,md Survevor
If lhe ulion 15 in Ihe Coaslal Area. and you .re a st.le agency. complele Ihe Coaslal Assessmenl Form before proceeding
with Ihl. assessmenl.
..
5
,
14-16-2 (2jl\7)-7c
.
.
.
SEQR
State Environmental Quality Review
FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
Purpose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine. in an orderly manner, whether a project
or action may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer. Frequent-
ly. there are aspects of a project that are subjective or unmeasureable. It is also understood that those who determine
significance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may be technically expert in environmental
analysis. In addition. many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting
the question of significance.
The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination
process has been orderly. comprehensive in nature, yet flexible to allow introduction of information to lit a project or action.
Full EAF Components: The full EAF is comprised of three parts:
Part 1: Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic project
data. it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3.
Part 2: Focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action. It provides
guidance as to whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially-
large impact. The form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced.
i'art 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identifipcl a< potentially-large. then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the
impact is actually important.
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE- Type 1 and Unlisted Actions
Identify the Portions of EAF completed for this project: 0 Part 1 O. Part 2 OPart 3
Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF (Parts 1 and 2 and 3 if appropriate], and any other supporting
information, and considering both the magitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the
lead agency that:
o A. The project will not result in any large and important impact(s) and, therefore. is 'one which will not
have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a negative declaration will be prepared.
o B. Although the project courd have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant
effect for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been required,
therefore a CONDITIONED negative declaration will be prepared..
o C. The project may result in' one or more large and important impacts that may have a significant impact
on the environment, there! ore a positive declaration will be prepared,
. A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions
Name of Action
Name of Lead Agency
Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer
Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer (If different from responsible officer)
.
Date
1
PART'-PROJECT INFORMATION .
Prepared by Project Sponsor
NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant effect
on the environment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E. Answers to these questions will be considered
as part of the application for approval and may be subject to further veriiication and public review. Provide any additional
information you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3.
It is expected that completion of the full EAf will be dependent on information currently available and will not involve
new studies, research or investigation. If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specify
each instance.
NAME OF ACTION
SUBDIVISION SKETCH PLAN (COVE BEACH ESTATES)
LOCATION OF ACTION (Include Str8el Address. Municipality and County)
MAIN ROAD, EAST MARION TIO SOUTHOLD. SUFFOLK COUNTY
NAME OF APPLICANT/SPONSOR I BUSINESS TELEPHONE
HAROLD R. REESE ( I
ADDRESS
855 SUNRISE HIGHWAY
CITY/PO I ~TE I ZIP CODE
LYNNBROOK, 11<';/)'
NAME OF OWNER (II dltferent) I BUSINESS TELEPHONE
I I
ADDRESS
CITY/PO I STATE I Zl~ CODE
-
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION
REALTY SUBDIVISION (34 lots)
.
Please Complete Each Question-Indicate N.A, if not applicable
A. Site Description
Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas.
1, Present land use: DUrban Dlndustrial DCommercial DResidential (suburban)
Dforest DAgriculture DOlher
96.4
(lgRural (non-farm)
2. Total acreage of project area:
APPROXIMATE ACREAGE
Meadow or Brushland (Non-agricultural)
forested
Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland, pasture, etc.)
Wetland (freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24, 25 of ECl)
Water Surface Area
Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill)
Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces
Other (Indicate type) Lawns & Landscaping
acres.
PRESENTlY
10
69
o
4
o
12
1
o
acres
AfTER COMPLETION
9
51.4
o
4
o
12
7 6
12
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
..leres
acres
acres
acres
acres
acres
3. What is predominant soil type(s) on project site? Haven Loam
a. Soil drainage: DWell drilined 100 % of s.ite DModerately well drained % of site
DPoorly drained % of site
b. If any agricultural land is involved, how many acres of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the NYS
land Classification System? NI A acres. (See 1 NYCRR 370).
4. Are there bedrock outcroppings on project site? DYes ~No
a. What is depth to bedrock? NI A (in feet)
2
. , Appro\;"nate percentage oi proposed prOject. with slopes:
.
-010'" 85 ,... --Ill!""
,-. - 10 ____ .'0 _ - ),'u
=15% or greater --2_ 1)0
10
0'
,0
6. Is project substantially contiguous to, or contain a building. site, or district, listed on the State or the National
Registers of Historic Placesl DYes OONo
7. Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural landmarksl :::;Ves =No
8. What is the depth of the water tablel 0-25 (in feet)
9. Is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aquiferl fl9Ves DNo
10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project areal DYes KlNo
11. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered?
DVes ~No According to
Identify each species
12. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, oth~r geological formations)
I&IVes DNo Describe Cliffs
13. Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation areal
DVes IONo If yes, explain
14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community?
DVes IXINo
15. Streams within or contiguous to project area:
a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary
N/A
16. lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area:
a. Name Long Island Sound & Dam Pond b. Size (In -acres) N / A
17. Is the site served by existing public utilitiesl flVes DNo
a) If Ves, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connectionl ~Ves DNo
b) If Ves, will improvements be necessary to allow connection? ~Ves DNo
18. Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets law, Article 25-AA,
Section 303 and 304? DVes ~No
19. Is the site located in or substantially contiguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8
of the Eel, and 6 NVCRR 6171 DVes IiaNo
20, Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastesl
DVes
fl9No
B. Project Descri.ption
1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate)
a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project sponsor
b. Project acreage to be developed: 58.5 acres initially;
c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped 37.9 acres.
d. length of project, in miles: N/ A (If appropriate)
e. If the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed N/ A
f. Number of off.street parking spaces existing 0 ; proposed 68
g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour 9 (upon completion of project)?
h. If residential: Number and type of housing units:
One Family . Two Family
i4
34
96.4
58.5
acres.
acres ultimately.
%;
Multiple Family
Condominium
Initially
Ultimately
i. Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure N / A height;
j. linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy isl
width:
N/A
length.
ft.
3
.
t
tons/cubic y~rds
~. How much natural matprial (i.t. -'.1ck, earth. etc.) will be removed from the site!
3. Will disturbed areas be reclaimed? ~Yes DNo ON/A
a. If yes, for what intend .'. purpose is the site being reclaimedl
b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation! I9Yes DNo
c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation! !9Yes DNo
4. How many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site! 20.6 acres.
5. Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this project!
DYes Il9No
Roadside Shoulders & Landscaping
6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction
7, If multi-phased: NI A
a. Total number of phases anticipated
b. Anticipated date of commencement phase 1
c. Approximate completion date of final phase
d. Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases I
8. Will blasting occur during construction I DYes IlCNo
9. Number of jobs generated: during construction ;><;
10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project 0
11. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities!
48
months, (including demolition).
(number).
month
month
DYes
year, (including demolition).
year.
DNo
; after project is complete
o
DYes
IXINo
If yes. explain
12. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved! DYes I9No
a. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) and amount
b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged
13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involvedl DYes IXINo Type Sanitarv Sewage
14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? DYes caNo
Explain
15. Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain! mYes DNo
16. Will the project generate solid waste! IXIYes DNo
a. If yes, what is the amount per month 6.1 tons
b. If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used? caYes DNo
c. If yes, give name Cutchogue Landfill - ; location Cutchogue
d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill! DYes IXINo
e. 11 Yes, explain
17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste! DYes ClINo
a. If yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposall tons/month.
b. If yes, what is the anticipated site life! years.
18. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? caYes DNo Lawns
19. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)! DYes ClINo
20. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels? DYes KlNo
21. Will project result in an increase in energy use! IlCYes DNo
If yes, indicate type(s) EJ.ectric
22. If water .supply is from wells, indicate pumping capacity
23. Total anticipated water usage per day 1.0200 gallons/day.
24. Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding! DYes
If Yes, explain
10
gallons/minute.
!9No
4
25. App'rO\.ll~ Requ....,d:
City. Town. Viil..~e Boar";
City. Town. Villa~e Planning BOil,d
City. Town Zoning Board
City. Count\. Health Department
Other Local Agencies
Other Regional Agencies
State Agencies
Federal Agencies
.
1>. Yes :JNo
l{iYe, DNo
=Yes iiaNo
ijYes DNo
KlYes DNo
1&1 Yes DNo
IXIYes DNo
DYes ~No
.
5ubmitlal
Date
Type
CLUSTER & ZONE CHANGE
SlJRDTVTSTON
OCT. 198')
SUBDIVISION
CAC
COlJNTY Pf ,ANNTNG
me: m::r.
C. Zoning and Planning Information
1. Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision? !9Yes DNo
If Yes, indicate decision required:
e9zoning amendment Dzoning variance Dspecial use permit !9subdivision Dsite plan
Dnew/revision of master plan Dresource management plan Dother
2 What is the zoning classification(s)of the site? AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL 'A'
. c-l GENERAL INDUSTRIAL
3. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning?
35 RESIDENTIAL LOTS & INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX
4, What is the proposed zoning of the site? AGRTr,m,'I'lJRAT. RK<:;TTlJ::N1'TAI I A I
5. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning?
. 50 RESIDENTIAL LOTS <
D. Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? lOVes DNo
7. What are the predominant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a V. mile radius of proposed action?
RESIDENTIAL/AGRICULTURAL AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL 'A'
8. Is the proposed action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses within a V. mile? !9Yes DNo
9. If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed? '14
a. What is the minimum lot size proposed? 40.000 sq. ft.
10. Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of sewer or water districts? DYes 19No
11. Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police.
fire protection)? !9Yes DNo
a. If yes. is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? KJYes DNo
12. Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? DYes KINo
a. If yes. is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? DYes DNo
D. Informational Details
Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse
impacts associated With your proposal. please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or
avoid them, .
E. Verification
I certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge.
Applicant!Spon or Name H WARD W. YOUNG OateMarch 17, 1988
Signature .HA__.d Title 1 ,md Survevor
If the action is in the Coast
with this assessment.
u are a slale agency, complete Ihe Coastal Assessmenl Form before proceeding
5
Part 2-PROJEC.PACTS AND THEIR MAGNITU.
Responsibility of lead Agency
General Information (Read Carefully)
o In completing the form the reviewer should be guided by the question: Have my responses and determinations been
reasonable! The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst.
o Identifying that an impact will be potentially large (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessarily significant.
Any large impact must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine significance. Identifying an impact in column 2 simply
asks that it be looked at further.
o The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of impacts and wherever possible the threshold of
magnitude that would trigger a response in column 2. The examples are generally applicable throughout the State and
for most situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be appropriate
for a Potential large Impact response, thus requiring evaluation in Part 3.
o The impacts of each project, on each site. in each locality, will vary. Therefore, the examples are illustrative and
have been offered as guidance. They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each question.
o The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question.
o In identifying impacts, consider long term, short term and cumlative effects.
Instructions (Read carefully)
a. Answer each of the 19 questions in PART 2. Answer Ves if there will be any impact.
b. Maybe answers should be considered as Ves answers.
c. If answering Ves to a question then check the appropriate box (column 1 or 2) to indicate the potential size of the
impact. If impact threshold equals or exceeds any example provided, check column 2. If impact will occur but threshold
is lower than example, check column 1.
d. If reviewer has doubt about size of the impact then consider the impact as potentially large and proceed to PART 3.
e, If a potentially large impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated by change{s) in the project to a small to moderate
impact, also check the Ves box in column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction is not possible. This
must be explained in Part 3.
IMPACT ON LAND
1. Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site?
. DNO DVES'
Examples that would apply to column 2
o Any construction on slopes of 15% Illr greater, (15 foot rise per 100
foot of length), or where the general slopes in the project area exceed
10%.
o Construction on land where the depth to the water table is less than
3 feet.
o Construction of paved parking area for 1,000 or more vehicles.
o Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally within
3 feet of existing ground surface. .
o Construction that will continue for more than 1 year or involve more
than one phase or stage.
o Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than 1,000
tons of natural material (i.e., rock or soil) per year.
o Construction or expansion of a sanitary landfill.
o Construction in a designated floodway.
o Other impacts
2. Will there be an effect t,. .."y ulHque or unusual land forms found on
the sitel {i.e., cliffs, dunes, geological formations, etc.)DNO DVES
o Specific land forms:
6
1 2 3
Small to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 oVes oNo
0 0 oVes oNo
0 0 oVes ONe.
.
IMPACT ON WATER
3. Will proposed action affect any water body designated as protected!
(Under Articles 15, 24, 25 of the Environmental Conservation law, ECl)
DNa DVE5
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Developable area of site contains a protected water body.
. Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a
protected stream.
. Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body.
. Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland.
. Other impacts:
4. Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body
of water! DNa DVES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any bodV of water
or more than a 10 acre increase or decrease.
. Construction of a bodv of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area.
. Other impacts:
5. Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater
qualitv or quantitv! DNa DVES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed Action will require a discharge permit.
. Proposed Action requires use ofa source of water that does not
have approval to serve proposed (project) action.
. Proposed Action requires water supply from wells with greater than 45
gallons per minute pumping capacitv.
. Construction or operation causing anv contamination of a water
supply svstem.
. Proposed ~ction will adverse'" affect groundwater.
. liquid effluent will be convey"d off the site to facilities which presently
do not exist or have inadequate capacity.
. Proposed Action ,",ould use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per
day.
. Proposed ".ction will likelv cauS<' siltation or other discharge into an
existing body of water te. (be exter,t that there will be an obvious visual
contrast to naturai conditions.
. Proposed Action will require the storage of petroleum or chemical
products greater than 1,100 gallons.
. Proposed Action will allow residential uses in areas without water
and/or sewer services.
. Proposed Action locates commerCial and/or industrial uses which may
require new or expansion of existing waste treatment and/or storage
facilities.
. Other impacts:
6. Will proposed action alter drainage f:ow or patterns, or surface
water runoff! DNa DVES
Exa..'lples lnat would apply to column 2
· Prov.sed Action would change flood water flows.
7
1 2 3
Small to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVes '. ONo
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVes DNa
-
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVes DNa
.
o Proposed Action may cause substantial erosion.
o Proposed Action is incompatible with existing drainage patterns.
o Proposed Action will allow development in a designated flood way.
o Other impacts:
IMPACT ON AIR
7. Will proposed action affect air quality! DNa DVES
hamples that would apply to column 2
o Proposed Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips in any given
hour. '
o Proposed Action will result in the incineration of more than 1 ton of
refuse per hour.
o Emission rate of total contaminants will exceed Sibs. per hour or a
heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour,
o Proposed action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed
to industrial use.
o Proposed action will allow an increase in the densitv of industrial
development within existing industrial areas.
o Other impacts:
IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS
8. Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered
species! DNa DVES
hamples that would apply to column 2
o Reduction of one or more species listed on the New Vork or Federal
. , list, using the site. over or near site or found on the site.
o Removo' of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habitat.
o Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other
than for agricultural purposes.
o Other impacts:
9. Will Proposed Action substantially affect no~.threatened or
non-endangered species! DNa DVES
hamples that would apply to column 2
o Proposed Action would substantially interfere with any resident or
migratory fish, shellfish or wildlife species.
o Proposed Action requires the removal of more than 10 acres
of mature lorest (over 100 years of age) or other locally important
vegeta tion.
IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES
10. Will the Proposed Action affect agricultural land resources!
DNa DVES
hamples that would apply to column 2
o The proposed action would sever, cross or limit access to agricultural
land (includes cropland, hayfields, pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc.)
8
1 3
Small to PotenUClI Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVes DNa
,
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 OVes DNa
,
0 0 OVes ONo
.,
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVE;s DNa
,
"
o Construction activity would excavate or compact the soil profile of
agricultural land,
o The proposed action would irreversibly convert more than 10 acres
of agricultural land or, if located in an Agricultutal District. more
than 2.5 acres of agricultural land.
o The proposed action would disrupt or prevent installation of agricultural
la~rl management systems (e.g.. subsurface drain lines, outlet ditches,
strip cropping); or create a need for such measures (e.g. cause a farm
field to drain poorly due to increased runoff)
o Other impacts:
IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES
11. Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources? DNa DYES
(If necessary, use the Visu.al EAF Addendum in Section 617.21,
Appendix B.)
Examples that would apply to column 2
o Proposed land uses. or project components obviously different from
or in sharp contrast to current surrounding land use patterns, whether
man-made or natural.
o Proposed land uses. or project components visible to users of
aesthetic resources which will eliminate or significantly reduce their
enjoyment of the aesthetic qualities of that resource.
o Project components that will result in the elimination or significant
screening of scenic vhiws known to be important to the area.
o Other impacts:
IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES
12. Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure of historic. pre-
historic or paleontological importance? DNa DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2 .
o Proposed Action occurring wholly or partially within or substantially
contiguous to any facility or site listed on the State or National Register
of historic places.
o Any impact to an archaeological site or fossil bed located within the
project site.
o Proposed Action will occur in an area designated as sensitive for
archaeological sites on the NYS Site Inventory.
o Other impacts:
IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION
13. Will Proposed Action affect th.. quantity or quality of existing or
future open spaces or recreational opportunities?
Examples that would apply to column 2 DNa DYES
. The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational opportunity.
o A major reduction of an open space important to the community.
o Other impacts:
9
.
1 2 3
Small to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
-
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
.
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 eVes ONo
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYes DNa
.~~
,
IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION
14. Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems I
DNO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
· Alteration of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods.
· Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems.
· Other impacts:
IMPACT ON ENERGY
15. Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or
energy supplyl DNO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
· Proposed Action will ca\lse a greater than 5% increase in the use of
any form of energy in the municipality.
. Proposed Action will require the creation or extension of an energy
transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two family
residences or to serve a major commercial or industrial use.
. Other impacts:
NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS
16. Will there be objectionable odors. noise, or .vibration as a result
of the Proposed Actionl DNO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Blasting within 1,500 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive
facility.
. Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day).
. Proposed Action will produce operating noise exceeding the local
ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures.
. Proposed Action will remove natural barriers that would act as a
noise screen.
. Other impacts:
IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH
17. Will Proposed Action affect public health and safetyl
DNO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed Action may cause a risk of explosion or release of hazardous
substances (i.e. oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) in the event of
accident or upset conditions, or there may be a chronic low level
discharge or emission.
. Proposed Action may result in the'burial of "hazardous wastes" in any
form (i.e. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritating,
infectious, etc.)
. Storage facilities for one million or .more gallons of liquified natural
gas or other flammable liquids.
. Proposed action may result in the excavation or other disturbance
within 2,000 feet of a site used for the disposal of solid or hazardous
waste.
. Othp.r impacts:
10
~
..
-.,---- r-
~
1 2 3
Small to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
"] 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYes ONo
.
-
'O~ 0 DYes ONo
0 . 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONe
0 0 DYes ONe
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYes ONe
0 0 DYes ONe
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONO
0 0 DYes ONe
IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHARACTER
OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD
18. Will proposed action affect the character of the existing community?
DNa DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. The permanent population of the city, town or village in which the
project is located is likely to grow by more than 5%.
. The municipal budget for capital expenditures or operating services
will increase by more than 5% per year as a result of this project.
. Proposed action will conflict with officially adopted plans or goals.
. Proposed action will cause a change in the density of land use.
. Proposed Action will replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures
or areas of historic importance to the community.
. Development will create a demand for additional community services
(e.g. schools, police and fire, etc.)
. Proposed Action will set an important precedent for future projects.
. Proposed Action will create or eliminate employment.
. Other impacts:
1 2 3
Small 10 Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large MItigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
t
.
",
19. Is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy related to
potential adverse environmental impacts? DNa DYES
If Any Action in Part 2 Is Identified as a Potential Large Impact or
If You Cannot Determine the Magnitude of Impact, Proceed to Part 3
Part 3-EVALUATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS
Responsibility of Lead Agency
Part 3 must be prepared if one or more impact(s) is considered 10 be potenlially large, even if the impact(s) may be
mitigated.
Instructions
Discuss the following for each impact identified in Column 2 of Part 2:
1. Briefly describe the impact.
2. Describe (if applicable) how the impact could be mitigated or reduced to a small to moderate impact by project change(s).
3. Based on the information available, decide if it is reasonable to conclude that this impact is importan!.
To answer the question of importance, consider:
. The probability of the impact occurring
. The duration of the impact
. Its irreversibility, includi'ng permanently lost resources of value
. Whether the impact can or will be controlled
. The regional. consequence of the impact
. Its potential divergence from local needs and goals
. Whether known objections to the project relate to this impact.
(Continue on attachments)
11
-,- -
-
--~-
, . SEaR
. 617.21
Appendix B
Ztate Environmental Quality Review
Visual EAF Addendum
14.14.l1 ~:"o1)-9o:
This form may be us"d to provide additional information relating to Question II of Part 2 of
the Full EAF.
(To be completed by Lead Agency)
, ,
Visibility
1. Would the project be visible from:
. A parcel of land which is dedicated to and available
to'the public for the use, enjoyment and appreciation
of natural or man.made scenic qualities?
. An overlook or parcel of land dedicated to public
observation, enjoyment and appreciation of natural
or man-made scenic qualities?
. A site or structure listed on the Nationai or State
Registers of Historic Places?
. Slat" Parks?
. The Slate Forest Preserve?
. Nalional Wildlife Refuges and slate game refuges?
. Nationai Nalural Landmarks and olher outslanding
natural fealures?
. Nalional Park Service lands?
. Rivers designaled as National or Slate Wild, Scenic
or Recreational?
. Any transportation corridor' of high exposure, such
as part of the Interstate System, or Amtrak?
. A governmentally estaolished or designated Interstate
or inter.county foot trail, or one formally proposed for
establishment or designation? .
. A sUe, area, lake, reservoir or highway designated as
scenic?
. Municipal park, or designated open space?
. County road?
. State?
. Local road?
Distance Between
Project and Resource (In Miles)
Q.V. V..'/z '12.3 3.5 5+
o 0 0 0 0
o
o
o
o
o
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
2. Is the visibilily of the projecl seasonal? (I.e., screened by summer foliage, bul visible during olher
seasons)
DYes ONo.
3. Are any of the resources checked in question I used by the public during the time of year
during which lhe project will be visible?
DYes ONo
1
I'
f
4
~
DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING VISUAL ENVIRONMENT
4. From each item checked in question I, check those which generally describe the surrounding
environment.
Within
.'/. mile .1 mile
Essentially undeveioped
Forested
Agricultural
Suburban residential
Industrial
Commercial
Urban
River, Lake, Pond
Cliffs. Overlooks
Designated Open Space
flat
Hilly
Mountainous
Other
NOTE: add attachments as needed
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
5. Are there visually similar projects within:
.'1> mile DYes DNo
.1 miles DYes DNo<
.2 miles DYes DNo
.3 miles . DYes DNo
. Distance from project site are provided for assistance. Substitute other distances as appropriate.
EXPOSURE
6. The annual number of viewers likely to .observe the proposed project is
NOTE: When user data is unavailable or unknown, use best estimate.
CONTEXT
7. The situation or activity in which the viewers are engaged while viewing the proposed action is
Activity
Travel to and from work
Involved in recreational activities
Routine travel by residents
At a residence
At worksite
Other
Dally
D
D
D
D
D
D
Weekly
D
D
o
D
D
D
FREQUENCY
Holidays'
Weekends
D
D
D
D
D
D
Seasonally
D
D
D
D
D
D
2
-
c.'_~-
'-;:~'~:7;:"':'~",.".
>-:':'',,;>';\
L ~; ):.;:1\
,\,. .; ,~,'
"~'h;>" ':/Y
".t'll . .' ~_
~"
.
~..- ~
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O, Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765.1938
-~,.-'-~
"
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
March 3, 1989
Kenneth Coenen
Hampton Manor Assoc.
P.O. Box 308
Manorville, NY 11949
RE: Cove Beach Estates
SCTM #1000-22-3-15.1 & 18.3
Dear Mr. Coenen:
// The following action was taken by the Southold Town
I Planning Board on Monday, February 27, 1989.
RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board hold over
the determination of granting an extension. A determination on
the extension will be made at the March 13, 1989 Planning Board
meeting.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact this office.
~-,trU1Y yours,
/~ ,.- -: / /": /"/
~.~\ < "
(/'.,BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR.'
CHAIRMAN
1/},/1
cc: David Emilita
jt "c3Lf 3~7A;\
.........-
t
-
Hampton-Manor Associates, Inc.
P.O. Box 308 rn m & m u w m m
Manorville, New York 11949 D n
FEB 2 2 1989 U
(516) 878-1031
February 21, 1989
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman
Southold Town Planning Board
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 11 79
Southold, N.Y. 11971
Re: Cove Beach Estates
FEIS
Dear Chairman Orlowski:
I am in receipt of a letter dated February 14, 1989 from
David Emilita requesting an extension of 60 days in which to
prepare the Final Environmental Impact Statement for Cove
Beach Estates. This request is quite strange in that Mr.
Emilita has 45 days from the date the 10 day comment period
ends following the public hearing in which to prepare the
FEIS (February 16). As of the 14th, the 45 day time period
had not even begun, yet he is requesting an additional 60
days to complete his work.
On behalf of my client, I must protest the granting of
any extensions of time in which to prepare the FEIS. Section
617.3(1) (General Rules) requires "Agencies shall carry out
the terms and requirements of this Part with minimum
procedural and administrative delay, shall avoid unnecessary
duplication of reporting and review requirements by
providing, where feasible for combined or consolidated
proceedings, and shall expedite all SEQR proceedin~s in the
interest 2f prompt review." (emphasis added) Further,
Section 617.3(m) states: ~I!~ per!eds in ~~!~ !'.~~ may be
~~~~!!~~~ ~ mu~1;1.~! ~greement between ~!! ~!!9.~!!~ ~nd ~he
!~~~ ~g~!!9.YL~~~~ (emphasis added)
The applicant will not agree to any extensions of time
for which to prepare the FEIS at this time.
According to Part 617.14(i), a Final Environmental
Impact Statement must consist of: "the draft EIS, including
any revisions or supplements to it; copies or a summary of
~
t
the substantive comments received and their source (whether
or not the comments were received in the context of a
hearing); and the lead agency's responses to all substantive
comments. The DEIS may be directly incorporated into the
FEIS or may be incorporated by reference."
Because the DEIS, and supplements exist, and few
comments were received on the document, (one from the Office
of Ecology prior to the hearing, from the North Fork
Environmental Council at the hearing, followed by written
comments, and one additional set of written comment from a
Mr. Farrell), I believe that the responses to said comments
as required for a FEIS should not be so time consuming that
they cannot be made within the 45 day period mandated by
Part 617. (My own responses to all of the comments submitted
were prepared in less than 2 days) In order for the Planning
Board to grant an extension of time in which to prepare the
FEIS, you must determine that the additional time is
necessary to prepare the statement adequately. The granting
of additional time in which to prepare the document should
only be given, if at the end of the mandated period of time,
significant prog~ess has been made in the preparation of the
document, and only an extension of time which would allow the
document to be completed. Thus far no progress has been made
regarding the preparation of the document, and I believe the
Planning Board should mandate that the document be prepared
within the 45 day period.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter,
please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
~-~~
Kenneth C. Coenen, AICP
President
cc: Harold Reese
David Emilita
.
.
-
~
Hampton-Manor Associate
P.O. Box 308
Manorville, New York 11949
~
~ 0 W ~
rn
FEB '2 2 1989
(516) 878-1031
SOUTHOLD TOWN
PLANNING BOARD
February 20, 1989
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman
Southold Town Planning Board
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, N.Y. 11971
Re: Cove Beach Estates
Responses to Comments on
the DEIS.
Dear Chairman Orlowski and Planning Board:
This letter is written to provide responses to the
comments which were provided to the Planning Board regarding
the Cove Beach Estates DEIS. Comments were received from the
North Fork Environmental Council by letter dated February 15,
1989, from the Office of Ecology of the Suffolk County
Department of Health Services by letter dated December 19,
1988 and from Martin Farrell (7) in a memorandum dated
February 16, 1989.
~9.~nts 9.!. !he !9.~!~ !:9.~!. !!!!~.!:E9.!!~!!!~!. Council (N!:EC)
The following comments were made by the North Fork
Environmental Council.
1. "All lots should be developed well away
preferably 100 feet -- from salt and fresh-water wetlands."
2. "The wetlands boundaries should be staked by the New
York State Department of Environmental Conservation."
3. "All wetlands in the development should be protected
as open space, with buffer zones against pollutants."
4. "All lots should conform to coastal erosion
management regulations and to the federal management flood
zone,"
5. "All lots should have adequate drainage for
cesspools, so as not to affect the wetlands."
t
.
Chairman Bennett Orlowski
February 20, 1989 Page 2.
6. "How does the developer plan to prevent road
runoff?"
7. "What does the present water analysis show?"
8. "How will the extensive stand of wild mountain
laurel on the property be protected?"
9. "How does the developer plan to provide for
emergency exits, with only one road for ingress and egress?"
10.
agreement
developer
town?"
"Will open space be restricted by covenants in
with the home owners' association, or will the
consider dedication of these open spaces to the
Responses to !FE~ Co~~~~
1. The New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation has issued a wetland permit on the subdivision
plans as they exist. Such permit allows building envelopes
within 75 feet of the wetlands, however, the likely building
area on the lots so affected will be well in excess of the 75
foot minimum. In addition, construction on the individual
lots will require wetland permits and will be subject to
further review at that time when actual construction
proposals are presented.
2.
the DEC
of the
issued
above.
The wetland boundaries do not need to be staked by
at this time. There is no dispute as to the accuracy
wetland boundary as it is shown, and the DEC has
permits for the subdivision. See also the response
3. A great majority of the wetlands contained on the
subject property are protected as open space within the
subdivision. Only proposed lot # 19 has any wetlands within
the boundary of the lot, and the amount of wetlands is less
than 3,000 square feet. All wetlands are adequately
protected by buffers from areas proposed for construction as
conditioned by the DEC permit.
4. All lots do or will conform to the coastal erosion
management regulations and to the federal management flood
zone. See the additional mitigation measures proposed
.
.
Chairman Bennett Orlowski
February 20, 1989 Page 3.
section of the DEIS. Also, each of the individual lots
created as a result of the subdivision will be required to
meet the regulations regarding coastal erosion and flood
zones prior to issuance of building 'permits.
5. All lots will have adequate drainage for the
placement of cesspools, this will be assured by the Suffolk
County Department of Health Services who will inspect each
sanitary system installation for compliance with their
regulations. If unsuitable material is encountered during
excavation for the sanitary systems, such material will be
removed and replaced by clean sand and gravel to comply with
the Department of Health Regulations.
6. The developer cannot "prevent" road runoff, however,
provisions have been included within the plans for drainage
areas where runoff from the roads will be channeled.
Drainage plans will be subject to review and approval of the
Town Engineer for adequacy.
7. Water analysis of the existing test wells on the
subject property has been done for previous Department of
Health submissions regarding this property. The analysis of
the samples showed that the water is of such quality that it
is fit for drinking purposes. Previously, the Suffolk County
Department of Health Services had approved a 56 lot
subdivision on the Cove Beach Estates property. Now, with
only 34 lots proposed, the quality of the water underlying
the property will be further insured.
8. The "extensive stand" of mountain laurel found on
the property will be protected by the same clearing
restrictions proposed for the development as a whole.
9. With only one access point to Main Road, the
developer has limited opportunities to provide additional
access points. There is a possibility that the road can be
continued to the west, through adjacent properties as they
develop in the future.
.
.
Chairman Bennett Orlowski
February 20, 1989 Page 4.
10. The open space will be restricted by easements
preventing further subdivision, and controlling the uses to
which the open space may be utilized whether the property is
conveyed to a homeowners association or to the Town of
Southold. No decision regarding the disposition of the open
space lands has been made by the developer at this time.
Comments of Mr. Farrell
1. Test Holes 2, 5 and 6 indicate poor drainage which could
affect Dam Pond.
2. Road and parking area runoff will drain directly to Dam
Pond creating the potential for impacts.
3. Lots 19, 32, 33, and 34 are located in Carver Plymouth
Soils which have severe limitations for sewage disposal and
alternatives to this impact have not been addressed.
4. Water quality has not been evaluated.
5. Traffic evaluation is not as complete as usually required
and does not include peaks for the ferries to Plum Island and
Connecticut.
6. The common cattail, Typha latifolia, was observed and not
included in the vegetation list.
7. The State is on record that a rare plant grows on the
site and an independent consultant should be hired to
ascertain whether it in fact grows on the property.
8. The American Woodcock and Red Throated
recently observed at the project location.
Loon may be an endangered species.
Loon have been
The Red Throated
9. Nothing is mentioned where suitable habitat would be for
wildlife relocating away from the project area.
10. Nothing is mentioned regarding the removal and disposal
of the existing pavement from the property, and the
enviro~mental impacts of such removal and disposal.
.
.
Chairman Bennett Orlowski
February 20, 1989 Page 5.
11. Alternatives of 5 and 10 acre lots were not considered
as alternatives, nor was the retention of the site as
parkland considered.
12. Water consumption estimates contained in the DEIS are
too low.
13. No mention is made regarding the potential for in ground
fuel tanks and their potential environmental impact.
14. The park and recreation area contains some wetlands and
how would these wetlands be protected.
15. There is no mention as to how the barrier beach between
Long Island Sound and Dam Pond will be protected.
16. Wetland boundaries shown are inaccurate.
17. Building envelopes are shown right up to the bluff
lines.
18. Some building envelopes lie within the flood plain.
(lots 6 - 13, 19 and 34).
Responses to Farrell Comments
1. See response to NFEC comment # 5 above.
2. Runoff will be prevented from entering Dam Pond from
the driveway and parking area of the Park and Recreation
parcel by installation of drainage structures. Such drainage
plan will be subject to review and approval of the Town
Engineer.
3. Soils information, including the map provided in the
DEIS was taken from the Soil Survey of Suffolk County. In
that document the map shows the soils in the area that Mr.
Farrell speaks of as being Carver Plymouth Soils with slopes
of 15 - 35%. However, according to the topographic map of
the site, and actual field conditions, the slopes in the area
do not approach the 15 - 35% indicated in the soil survey. I
can only assume that the soil survey is in error regarding
the labeling of this particular section of the county. The
.
.
Chairman Bennett Orlowski
February 20, 1989 Page 6.
actual conditions in this area indicate a slope ranging from
3 - 15% for this soil grouping which, would indicate only a
slight to moderate impact from the installation of sanitary
disposal fields.
4. See response to NFEC comment # 7 above.
5. The traffic implications of this proposed
development are very minor indeed. From actual field
observations, traffic even during "peak" conditions from
ferry operations operates at a steady flow. The addition of
34 cars into this flow at the peak hour for this development
(regardless if it coincides with the peaks of the ferry
.operation) will not adversely affect the flow of traffic.
Again, as stated in my October 24, 1988 letter to the Board,
Main Road has a capacity of between 12,000 and 14,000
vehicles per day it is operating at less than 1/3 of that
level at this time. The increase in traffic from this
subdivision will not result in even a ten percent increase in
local traffic, nor will it adversely affect the overall
capacity of the road.
6. The Common Cattail, Typha latifolia, is likely to be
found on the property. It was inadvertently left off of the
species list of vegetation found on the site as it does occur
on the fringes of the tidal wetlands.
7. New York State is not "on record that there is a
rare plant, Angelica lucida, that does grow on the site",
what the Significant Habitat Unit of the State Department of
Environmental Conservation has stated is that a specimen was
collected from the vicinity of the site in 1924. The actual
collecting location was not determined. Following receipt of
this information, I contacted Dr. Stephen Clemants at the
State Wildlife Resources Center at Delmar. Dr. Clemants
carefully described the plant and an extensive field
investigation was undertaken. No individuals of Angelica
lucida were observed on the property. The bulldozing of
portions of the site would not result in the plant appearing
in such cleared areas as the plant is normally found in a
habitat of beaches and rocks along the sea, and not on
cleared lands.
8. Contrary to Mr. Farrell's contention that the
.
.
Chairman Bennett Orlowski
February 20, 1989 Page'.
American Woodcock and Red Throated Loon were omitted from the
DEIS, both of these species are included in the docu~nt in
the Migratory Birds discussion in the Appendix to the
original DEIS.
9. This item is discussed in detail in the October 24,
1988 letter to the Planning Board as a response to comments
made by the Suffolk County Office of Ecology.
10. The removal of the existing pavement from portions
of the site where such removal is necessary will be
accomplished using bulldozers and dump trucks. The asphalt
material will be used on site as a sub-base to the proposed
roads or taken to a licensed sanitary landfill, either the
Town of Southold landfill or one specifically licensed to
accept only construction related debris.
11. The discussion of alternative development followed
the mandates of the scoping session held regarding this
project. Development of 5 to 10 acre lots is not a
reasonable alternative development which is feasible for the
project sponsor. Retention and development of the property
as parkland would require some level of government to acquire
the property and develop the site as parkland. This
alternative would require the acquisition of the land by
either the Town, County or State, none of which apparently
has stated an overwhelming interest in acquiring the
property. Development of the site as parkland, should it be
acquired by a level of government, would not be without
impacts which should be discussed in a DEIS, should this be
accomplished.
12. The section of the DEIS where Mr. Farrell refers
this comment to actually states "more than 125 gallons of
water are expected to be consumed per household on a daily
basis..;" Mr. Farrel is in error when he states that only
125 gallons are to be consumed per household per day.
13. There is no mention in the DEIS regarding in ground
fuel tanks, however, should the Planning Board wish, the
developer will agree to a covenant which prevents the
installation of underground fuel tanks for the individual
homes to be constructed.
.
.
Chairman Bennett Orlowski
February 20, 1989 Page 8.
14. There are some wetlands located within the park and
recreation parcel. These wetlands should not be impacted at
all as a result of the development of the property in that
they will be protected by the same buffers that apply with
the existing permit conditions.
15. No measures were proposed to protect the barrier
beach between Long Island Sound and Dam Pond. The
development of Cove Beach Estates proposes no structures on
or near the barrier beach, nor does the development of the
property contemplate any impacts whatsoever to the barrier
island. In researching the erosion patterns in the area, it
was found that the shoreline which includes the Cove Beach
Estates property is among the most stable of any found on
Long Island. The erosion rate in the area does not foresee
any erosion problems resulting from the development of the
property in question, nor does the erosion rate signal that
any damage is imminent to the barrier island in question.
16. See responses to the NFEC comments above.
17. Proposed mitigation measures discussed in the DEIS
and which will be incorporated into future subdivision maps
have proposed building envelopes be restricted from those as
shown on the sketch plan map to extend no closer than 100
feet from the top of the bluff. The map prepared for the
sketch plan was dated prior to the Coastal Erosion
requirements, therefore the DEIS did consider the effects of
these requirements and made a recommendation to limit the
building envelopes.
18. As with the comment above, the restrictions
suggested in the Mitigation Measures sections of the DEIS
will result in building envelopes on lots 6 - 13 and lot 19
being free from the threat of normal flooding. On lot 34,
there is ample room on the property for the siting of a house
which is not within the designated floodway, however, it
should be noted that federal flood regulations do not
prohibit construction within floodways, however, what
construction is proposed must be floodproofed (elevated) in
such a way that the residence is protected from base floods.
~
.
Chairman Bennett Orlowski
February 20, 1989 Page 9.
Comments of the Office of Ecolo~y
The Office of Ecology, by letter dated December 19,
offered several comments on the DEIS, including addenda.
summary of these comments is as follows:
1988
The
1. Alternative development plans, The Office of Ecology
requests additional alternative development proposals,
including attached multi-family residences, greater
clustering or total public acquisition of the site.
2. The ODE requests clearing restrictions to provide maximum
protection of the site's vegetation.
3. The ODE requests landscaping restrictions which would
only allow the landscaping with native species of trees and
shrubs.
4. The ODE requests open space dedication of the site's
shoreline areas seaward of the 10 foot contour line.
5. The ODE requests provisions to allow non motorized public
access to the site's shorelines.
Re~~~!!~ !!:? th!! Q!!!'9.!! !:?! Ecolo~y Co~nt~
1. Discussion of alternative development plans within
the DEIS was consistent with the requests of the Town of
Southold in the scoping session documents prepared by the
Town's consultant. As to total public acquisition of the
site, no government has yet to come forward with any
proposals for acquisition of this property. As to
consideration of tighter clusters of residential development
or attached unit development, the Town Planning Board has the
authority to request these development alternatives.
2. Clearing restrictions have been proposed within the
context of the DEIS <see pages 62 and 63).
3. I have no comment regarding landscaping restriction
which would require the use of native species of trees and
shrubs.
~
.
,
Chairman Bennett Orlowski
February 20, 1989 Page 10.
4. Open space dedication of the shoreline areas seaward
of the 10 foot contour line is'out of the question from the
developer's standpoint. No building is being proposed in
this area, and, should scenic or conservation easements be
imposed on the property in question, their open space status
will be assured without the dedication of the property.
5. I have no comment regarding public access to the
shoreline areas, except to say that they are proposed for
private ownership, <excepting the park and recreation parcel)
and it would be up to individual owners to allow access along
their property to the general public. Recent court decisions
in California have questioned this type of requirement for
public access without compensation to the property owner.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
This concludes the responses to the comments which were
received by the Southold Town Planning Board within the
authorized comment period following the public hearing on the
DEIS. We expect that these responses will be helpful to the
Board in the preparation of the Final Environmental Impact
Statement on this proposal. Should there be any further
questions regarding the content of this letter, please do not
hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
~L~
Kenneth C. Coenen, AICP ..
President
cc: Harold Reese
David Emilita
.
COMMENTS ON COVE BEACH ESTATES
EAST MARION, NEW YORK
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
I~~D J
Uil~b >~
SOUT ,~ ,
PU.' JkkNl) f
----_:
February 16, 1989
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
1. Test Holes No.2, 5, and 6 indicatet poor drainage
which could mean that the leachate from these sites
would go into Dam Pond rather quickly. HaY~impacts to
Dam Pond been addresSQ:!from this potential?
2. Apparently road run-off and parking run-off from the
park area will drain directly into Dam Pond. The
impacts from this run-off do not seem to have been
assessed.
3 Lots 19, 32, 33, and 34 are located in Carver Plymouth
Soils, WhlCh, according to the D.E.I.S., ha.esevere
limitations for sewage disposal. (See page 14 of the
D.E.I.S.) The alternatives to this impact do not seem
to have been addressed.
4. Water quality of the site has only been estimated and
not been evaluated. Shouldn't tests be made to
determine if the water is suitable for residential use,
and meets all of the new t.P.A. requirements?
5. The traffic evaluation is not as complete as usually
required, and also does not take into account the Plum
Island and Cross Sound Ferry peaks and ~''''impact on
ingress and egress. Most of the local residents
concern is that during these periods the highway is dt
its saturation level.
6. The Common Cattail, Tydha Latifolia, is observed
growing in some of the low, wet depressions, and was
not listed under the vegetation.
7. The State is on record that there is a rare plant,
Angelica Lucida, that does grow on the site. T~iRk
-+ITa t Th e a p p \.9~ 0 f the D. ~. I . S. s h 0 u I d bed e I aye d
until Spring, ~hl~h the Town can hire an independent
authority to determine if this rare plant in fact does
stlll exist on the site. This is particularly
important because of the recent bulldozing of the site
that would give this plant a chance to re-establish
itself during the coming growlng season.
.
.
8. The American Woodcock, Philohela Minor Obs. and the Red
Throated Loon, Gauia Stellata Obs, a 18~ which may
be ~ endangered species, have-oeen recently observed
at the project location. Neither of these have been
included in the D.E.I.S.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1. The D.E.I.S. states that species that will not be
compatible to development will relocate to a more
suitable habitat. But, nothing has been given as to
where this suitable habitat might be.
2. There is a considerable amount of existing asphalt
pavement that would have to be removed and disposed of,
but there is no mention made as to now this would be
done without an environmental impact, as it contains
asphalt and tar materials.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Alternatives of five (5) to ten (10) acre lots, or that
it be retained and developed as parkland, were not
included.
. IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF NATURAL
RESOURCES
1. The D.E.I.S. states that one hundred twenty-five (125)
gallons of water are expected to be consumed per
household per day. This is far too Iowan estimate,
which is nearly one hundred (100) gallons ~ capita.
2. There is no reference made to potential impact to
in-ground fuel tanks, and the irreversible impact +t ~i-u'1
could have on existing ground water.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
1. Apparently the park and recreation area includes some
of the wetlands. There is no indication of how these
areas would be used, and how the wetlands would be
protected from irreversible damage.
2. There is nothIng to indicate what measure would be
employed for the protection of the barrier beach
between Long Island Sound and Dam Pond, the loss of
which would have a tremendous impact on the Bay.
3. Wetland boundaries as shown may be inconsistent with
the actual wetlahd boundaries. Also, there are paved
roads that are less than seventy-five (75) feet from
the wetlands area.
2
.
.
.
4.
Bui Iding envelopes. are shown to be right up to the
bluff lines. Thi~~inconsistent with the D.E.C.
requirements for set-back from bluff lines.
5 .
Apparently, building lot envelopes for lots 6 through
13, 19, and 34 are within the flood .JJJane.fld-lV>
Based on the comments above, request that the subject
D.E.I.S. be considered incomplete and not responsive to the
environmental impacts that would occur if this project was
to proceed.
f/!..~171-J/
--Ph'1S/~ C hc-:r-
AJ.i Iph; C/""V
C/.,,..cL, Cd,! I/S30.
(~t!-d. add,.. aorolM,,,;' )
Ma ffrft-d... 119)2
,--+ (\
v \1{ \
),I \(\
~rr
3
.
.
fD)R",r;>n!i~-'
~I" F:~1t::... ".
._~
SOUTfIOLD roWN
PLANNING BOARD
;-'I.
;""
eb. 15, 1989
outhold Planning Board
ain Road
~outhold, NY, 11971
Ladies and Gentlemen:
The North Fork Environmental Council would like
to make some comments and offer some questions on the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement of Cove Beach Estates before the close
of the public comment period. The following are the areas of our
concern:
* All lots should be developed well away --
preferably 100 feet from salt- and fresh-water wetlands.
* The wetlands boundaries should be staked by the
New York State Department of Environmental Conservaticn.
* All wetlands in the development should be
protected as open space, with buffer zones against pollutants.
* All lots should conform to coastal erosion
management regulations and to the federal management flood zone.
* All lots should have adequate drainage for
cesspools, so as not to affect the wetlands.
* How does the developer plan to prevent road
runoff?
* What does the present ~ater analysis show ?
* How will the extensive stand of wild mountain
laurel on the property be protected ?
* How does the developer plan to provide for
emergency exits, wwith only one road for ingress and egress?
* Will open space be restricted by covenants in
agreement with the home owners' association, or will the developer
consider dedication of these cpen spaces to the town ?
Thank ycu for this opportunity to participate.
MORTH FORK
EMVIROM~EMTAL
COUMCIL
Sincerely,
~O"...l C uJ....c'-~.A.
Ronnle Wacker --
President, NFEC
a nonprofit organization
for the preservation
of land, sea, air and
quality of life
Route 25 at Love Lane
PO Box 799
Mattituck, NY 11952 1-
/; .~ ,'<:~
516.298.8880 1 ,,'-!
~l},; ')'J'
.
.
S41
SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES INC. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
S41
February 14, 1989
~u~u~~
FEB \ 51989
I
S0U1t10LO lOWN
PL~NN\NG BO~RO
Bennett Orlowski,Jr., Chairman
Southold Town Planning Board
Town Hall
531!J95 Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
Re: Cove Beach FEIS
Dear Mr. Orlowski:
Pursuant to Section 617.8 (e) (2) (i) of 6 NYCRR Part 617 of the
State Environmental Quality Review Act, and in light of the
extension of time granted for the public comment period, we
request a 61!J day extension for the preparation of the FEIS for
the above mentioned proposal.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES, INC.
(8o.u((i~.~. &Lita~
David J.S. milita, AICP
Principal Planner
dms
23 Narragansett Ave. Jamestown, RI 02835 (401) 423-0430
-'/.2.
~
PAGE 2
.
FEBRUARY 6, 1989
PLANNING BOARD
Mr. Orlowski: Public Hearing on the Draft
Statement on Cove Beach Estates. Proof of
Suffolk Times and the Long ISland Traveler
time everything is in order for a hearing.
COLments on the Draft Environmental Impact
start on my left.
Environmental Impact
publication in the
Watchman. At this
Are there any
Statement? I'll
Ronnie Wacker: I represent the North Fork Environmental Council.
What I would like to address myself is Habitat. There was mention
of various species that might be endangered. It is only recently
that we have become aware of what we're doing to planet earth,
how chopping down rainforests in Brazil destroys the entire
species and affects climate in our part of the world, how bull-
dozing one hundred acres in Southold Town destroys the habitat
of many different animals and birds. We don't even know exactly
how this affects our own species - man, but we are learning that
we are all interdependent.
On the Dam Pond property there are various endangered and
threatened species. That we do know. It may sound funny to
hold up an entire project because it may destroy the Yellow
Warbler or the white-tailed deer of the least tern or the
green-backed heron or the little housefinch. Our previous
president expressed the attitude of many of us years ago when
he said "if you've seen one redwood tree, you've seen them all."
But apparently, as we are learning, birds, animals and
plants have an interconnection. You can't say what is the
importance of a green-backed heron when we can't even figure the
importance of man in the scheme of things or even why he is on
earth.
Suffolk County legislature has recently become aware of
the importance of habitat and is now considering a bill to con-
trol building in areas in which habitat may be destroyed by
construction.
Time magazine gave over its man of the year cover story to
a searching exploration of an endangered species - Planet Earth _
in which it warned that earth may have a limited time in which
it can support life unless we all do an about-face in our attitude
that the natural resources of earth, land and water are limitless.
The state Department of Conservation has been asked to
include the Dam Pond property on its list of properties for ac-
quisition. The County Office of Ecology has found twelve species
of birds on the site, three of which are endangered, threatened
or of special concern in New York State. There are a number of
plant species on the property on the New York State Protected
Plant Species list. ,
The time has come for all of us to work together,~o preserve
properties like Dam Pond that are important to the t&m. What we
might all be doing is writing letters or otherwise tugging on the
sleeve of the DEC to urge immediate action on the acq~isition.
This may be our last chance to preserve this extraordinary and
impo~tant area of Southold Town.
~,
._--~.
(;
(
c
.
.
'/3
PLANNING BOARD
PAGE 3
FEBRUARY 6, 1989
c
Mr. Orlowski: Any comments from my left? Any comments from
the center section here? Any comments from anybody? Any
comments from the board? Mr. Mullen? None. Mr. Latham?
Mr. Latham: Just one. Wasn't this area zoned industrial
changed to residential?
Mr. Orlowski: I believe that on the master plan it was
automatically done.
Mr. Latham:
o .K..
It should be stricken off this map
Mr. Orlowski: I think it was done. Mr. Ward? None.
Ms. Scopaz? No, any comments I'll send in by the 16th.
Mr. Emilita do you have any comments? No. O.K., the
comment period will stay open until February 16th, so
if there are any comments they can be addressed in writing
to the board. At this time, I think we can attain a resolu-
tion so Dave can start the Final Environmental Impact Statement.
Mr. Ward: Subject to completion of the comment period.
Mr. Latham: Second.
(
Mr. Orlowski:
on the motion?
O.K., motion made and seconded.
All those in favor?
Any questions
Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Mullen, Mr. Latham.
Mr. Orlowski:
hearing closed.
Opposed? So ordered. O.K., I'll declare this
Thank you for coming.
Mr. Orlowski: The board to set Monday, February 27th, 1989 at
7:30 p.m. at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, as
the time and place for the next regular Planning Board meeting.
Mr. Latham:
So moved.
Mr. Mullen:
Second.
Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded.
motion? All those in favor?
Any questions on the
Ayes:
Mr. Mullen, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward.
Mr. Orlowski:
Opposed?
So ordered.
l
,
IH;AI. Nuun;
Notkr of IJubfic" Hesrin.
NOTICE IS HEREBY
(liVEN 111m purSUUnll() Sl'l'litlll
276 of Ihe Town l.aw, .1 puhlk
hearing will be held hv the
SllUlhold lhwn PI.llluing Ikl.m.l.
al I he Town Hall. M.lin Ro;:u.l.
SOlllhold. N"w York in solid
Town 011 Ihe 61h day of
Fchruary. 1989011 the question
of the following:
t:O(} p.m. Public hearing on
I he Dmfl EI1\'ironmClllallmpacl
SHHCI11ClH wilh rcspcl'l 10 Co\'e
Heal'll ESIi.lll's, loeUled at I he
Town of SOUl hold. COlll1l\' of
Suffolk, and lhe Slate of New
\("k. Suft"lk County Ta, Map
No. 1000-22-3-15.1 & 18.3.
SEQR leud agelll')' is lhe
SOluhold Towll Planning Board.
Copies of Ihe Draft Environ-
mental ImpacT Statement arc on
file", the Office of lhe Southold
Town Planning Board. Town
Hall, Main Road, Southold
New )ork. and may be rc\'ic\\'~
cd during regular business
hours.
Any person desiring to be
heard on the above mailer
should appear at (he time and
place specified.
Dated: January 9, 1989
BY ORDER OF THE
SOUTHOLD TOWN
PLANNING BOARD
BENNETT ORLOWSKI JR.
CHAIRMAN
IX, 1/19/89 (26)
.
.
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
STATE OF NEW YORK
55:
Patricia Wood, being duly sworn, says that she is the
Editor, of THE LONG ISLAND TRAVELER-WATCHMAN,
a public newspaper printed at Southold, in Suffolk County;
and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy,
has been published in said Long Island Traveler-Watchman
once each week for. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ./. .. weeks
. ....
" /'1 '"
successively, commencing on the. . . . . . . . . . .. .........
day of.. .. .'-.)~."':':':':'7....., 19. (,'7. ~
~ ~ ,
, ,-~
.~. . . . .( . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .l, '-" . . T. ~~.
. /f:;;(
Sworn to before me th IS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . day of
/"1 .f"'J'
......'./4~':"1........ ,19....
// 'j'
)
/..~ / J: k
,............... .!~-.<7.~-!?r:<.:~ c../;.... r:- .'.~<-!-~~-(-~..
Notary Pub I ic
",", '
:~)\ :L, ~~~,'rl;~:':1f)ER
LiC, ~",. !.~: r-.!-;;,v Yul{
i.]Ci;,
/:;;:
{h:' ' ,-: :~U!'CiIK C:C:Wj'i1y ,A
" '''''' - (. .~, .3 0' 'i j;..-'
LC.l!d.".......:.~ (, .
r fn'1 i~
110..; ,_..L'
" ..<';
j, '.
,
,
it.!
2 3 U39
. ~~..",J
,
'.u ;t!i::W
~
LEGAL NOTICE
Notice of Public Hearing
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN dun
pursuant to ~276.0f the Town
Law, a public . will be beld by
the Scuthold Towil Planning Boon!,
at the Town ,-. "hin Road,
Southold, Ne~ .Lurk 10 said Town on
the 6th day of February, 1989 on the
question of the following:
1:00 p.m. Public hearing OIl the
Dnft Environmental Impact _ State-
ment with respect to Cove Beach EI-
tates, located at the Town of
Soothold, County of SoffoUc, and the
State of New Yotk. Suffo1lt County
Tax Map No. 1000-22-3-15.1 '"
18.3.
SEQR lead agency is the Southold
Town Planning Board. Copies of the
Draft Environmental Impact Slate.
ment are on file at the Office of the
Southald Town YJannlllg Board,
Town Hall, Main Road, Southald,
New York, and may be reviewed dur-
ing regular business hoon.
Any penoo desiring to be hean! 00
the above matter ohooid _... the
time and place specified.
Oat.ed: January 9, 1989
___uJiYORDEROF
TIlE SOUTIlOW TOWN
PLANNING BOARD
BENNETT ORLOWSKI. JR.
CHAIRMAN
6166-1T1l2
STATE OF NEW YORK)
)SS:
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK)
r.nri!'<t i n~ r.ontF>nt.o of Mallltuck,'
said County, being duly sworn, says that he/she Is Principal
Clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a Weekly Newspaper,
published at Matlituck, In the Town of Southold, County of
Suffolk and State of New York, and that the Notice of which
the annexed Is a printed copy, has been regularly published In
said Newspaper once each week for.-L.. weeks
successively, commencing on the 12 day of
January 19~9
Principal Clerk
Sworn to ore me this Je+-
day~of UAv'--;:.-
-jll ,(;~
~/~;2::'::.L0 /__ -.a.----. re"
:P5'
19 f~l r;v ~~,~:~?Y :~,' ,g~~~~:~~t~ew y,-:, ,
'Ji)!';:-'
n--'
;.: ''''.;--;J()\.J' _
r"r'r~kl',& ')
'-'. '""'C7/ '7 (
.
.
S41
SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES INC. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
S41
;;
6
TO: Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman
Southold Town Planning Board
FROM: Szepatowski Associates, Inc.
DATE: January 25, 1989
RE: Cove Beach DEIS
We have reviewed the above reference DEIS and the following are
SAI's substantive comments with regard to this document. The
comments are referenced by page numbers, when applicable.
Pg. 16-20 - Tidal wetlands flagging needs to be established and
verified by the NYSDEC at this point in the SEQR
review process or the expired NYSDEC Permit supplied
in the DEIS renewed with a reference to the
appropriate plan being presented in the DEIS.
Pg. 21 It is not shown whether the site will support
development without public water. Test well data
should be provided for the test wells shown on the
subdivision plans and a mass balance analysis using
the Cornell WALRAS model or subsequent refinements
to assess future recharge conditions.
Pg. 30 More up-to-date traffic counts and analysis need to
be provided. If unavailable, the applicant should
provide these and have the NYSDOT verify the counts.
Pg. 32 Test hole #6 reveals hardpan and hardpan and sand to
9 I (sea level) on Lot 13. The developabili ty of Lot
13 and of lots 10-15 as well may be difficult due to
poor drainage conditions for septic effluent. More
detailed soil testing or a tighter cluster of lots
away from this area is necessary.
23 Narragansett Ave. Jamestown. RI 02835 (401) 423-0430
Pg. 34
Pg. 39
Pg. 39
Pg. 42
Pg. 42-3
Pg. 45
Pg. 48
.
.
Coastal Erosion Hazard Area and Federal Emergency
Management Flood Zones boundaries should be plotted
on the subdivision plat to determine whether
proposed building envelopes are indeed buildable.
Lots 12 and 13 are in danger of flooding during
severe storms. Additional setbacks need to be
incorporated on Lots 5-11. Building envelopes
should exclude areas exceeding fifteen percent
slopes to mitigate impacts to the topography.
FOllowing an assessment of test well data, a full
calculation of nitrate recharge to the groundwater
under the site should be made, as mentioned above.
It is not possible at this juncture to determine the
potability of water at full development without this
calculation.
The DEIS states that it is expected that all of the
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
(SCDOHS) regulations regarding sanitary sewer can be
met, however, the test boring data provided indicate
this may be a problem.
Routine street cleaning of the roadways within the
development is indicated as a mitigative measure for
minimizing groundwater contamination resulting from
road runoff. Exactly what in quantitative terms
does this mean? If the roads are to remain private,
how will this be enforced? Covenants and
Restrictions proposed for the Homeowners Association
should be provided.
The assumption is made that the homes will be
seasonal, second homes. What if they are not? An
analysis should be made regarding school age
children and the existing enrollment in the East
Marion School District.
updated traffic counts need to be integrated into
this discussion. A more thorough analysis of the
intersection with Route 25 needs to be presented.
The cul-de-sac at Lots 1 and 2 needs to be
redesigned to be placed entirely on the site being
subdivided.
Municipal cost/benefits need to be calculated.
There should be a construction staging plan to
indicate mitigation measures to prevent erosion,
etc., during construction.
.
.
Pg. 49 No mention is made about the vegetation which was
already removed. Re-constructive planting must be
made in order to correct the destructive operation
which previously occurred on the site. A landscape
plan for the re-planting should be provided.
Pg. 52 The DEIS states that there will be 34 vehicular
trips as a result of this subdivision. This needs
to be verified with specific formulae or reference
to ITE Trip Generation Data.
Pg. 53 The DEIS states that the proposed open space will be
supplemented with expected non-clearing of large
portions of individual lots. This must be
substantiated by the placement of easements within
the lots which restrict clearing. Adjacent
easements on lots will provide a contiguous corridor
for wildlife as well. On page 62 a clearing
easement is indicated as a recommendation by the
preparer, however, it should be a requirement. A
revised subdivision plan to include this easement
should be provided. Unless a method of enforcement
of such easements and covenants is provided
satisfactory to the Town, such methods are not true
mitigation measures.
Appendix 1 No plan accompanies the 21 Nov 86 NYSDEC letter.
The permit # 1~-84-~7~1 expired on 31 Dec 88 and
does not refer to the plan under review. Thus it
may be possible a currently valid NYSDEC permit does
not exist for the plan being considered. This needs
clarification.
There should be a discussion of the disposition of
the pavement material of the existing roadway that
is not being proposed for use in the subdivision
road system.
It is noted that the proposed subdivision has lot
sizes which average approximately 63,~~~ square
feet. To satisfy the intent of the cluster concept,
the open space should be 5~% of the total area with
lot sizes half of the required minimum lot area.
Therefore if the lots sizes were reduced to 4~,~~~
square feet of upland area, additional open space
could be preserved.
.
.
Recommendation -
It is recommended that the applicant respond to:
a) the above mentioned points and b) any other
comments received during the public comment period.
The lead agency's preparation of an PElS would be
assisted by the technical input provided by the
applicant.
~T"L"~\) i~C;/ L'-"cZ ~''^''(~~
.
I! 7/0 (
LEGALS NOTICE
Notice of Public Hearing
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to Section 276 of the
Town Law, a pUblic hearing will be held by the Southold Town
Planning Board, at the Town Hall, Main Road Southold, New York
in said Town on the.' 6th day of Feb:(uary, 198 <J'c on the question
of the following:
-1:00 p.m. Public hearing on the Draft Environmental Impact
Statement wicn respect to Cove Beach Estates, located at the
Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, and the State of New York.
Suffolk County Tax Map No. 1000-22-3-15.1 & 18.3.
SEQR lead agency is the Southold Town Planning Board.
Copies of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement are on file
at the Office of the Southold Town Planning Board, Town Hall,
Main Road, Southold, New York, and may be reviewed during
regular business hours.
Any person desiring to be heard on the above matter should
appear at the time and place specified.
Dated: January 9, 1989
BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN
PLANNING BOARD
/
BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR.
CHAIRMAN
PLEASE PRINT ONCE ON THURSDAY January 12, 1989 AND FORWARD ONE
(1) AFFIDAVIT TO THIS OFFICE, THANK YOU.
COPIES SENT TO:
Long Island Travler/Watchman
Suffolk Times
f\ (- (, I'r('i;'~
, \ __SA (.....--
!~~LXr -- CHl Li) lV 6
\"I'.C
~ ~
J II, /XQ
-~-~----/-
LEGALS NOTICE
Notice of Public Hearing
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to Section 276 of the
Town Law, a public hearing will be heJd by the Southold Tmm
Planning Board, at the Town Hall, Main Road Southold, New York
in said Town on the ,:6'th day of Feb:cuary, 19 8 ~ on the question
of the following:
,1: 00 p. m: Public hearing on the Draft Environmental Impact
Statement wi~n respect to Cove Beach Estates, located at the
Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, and the State of New York.
Suffolk County Tax Map No. 1000-22-3-15.1 & 18.3.
,.,
SEQR lead agency is the Southold Town Planning Board.
Copies of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement are on file
at the Office of the Southold Town Planning Board, Town Hall,
Main Road, Southold, New York, and may be reviewed during
regular business hours.
Any person desiring to be heard on the above matter should
appear at the time and place specified.
Dated: January 9, 1989
BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN
PLANNING BOARD
BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR.
CHAIRMAN
.
PLEASE PRINT ONCE ON THURSDAY January 12, 1989 AND FORWARD ONE
(1) AFFIDAVIT TO THIS OFFICE, THANK YOU.
COPIES SENT TO:
....
Long Island Travler/Watchman
Suffolk Times
.
.
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
January 11, 1988
Kenneth Coenen
P.O. Box 308
Manorvil1e, NY 11949
RE: Cove Beach Estates
SCTM #1000-22-3-15.1&18.3
Dear Mr. Coenen:
The following actions were taken by the Southold Town
Planning Board on Monday, January 9, 1989.
RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board extend the
public comment period from January 18, 1989 to February 16, 1989.
RESOLVED that the Southold Tmm Planning Board set Monday,
February 6, 1989 at 1:00 p.m. at Southold Town Hall, for a
public hearing to the addendum to the Draft Envrionmental Impact
Statement.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact this office.
Very truly yours,
.,/?
{./ ' . .
~:NNETT ORLOWSKI,JR.
CHAIRMAN
!
/7(;7
/// j~
,.--
,:/
cc: See attached list
jt
ON
.
Copies mailed to:
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
NYS Department of Environmental Conservation
Thomas C. Jorling, DEC Commissioner
Judith Terry, Town Clerk
Building Department
Board of Appeals
Board of Trustees
David Emilita
.
.
-
,
TELEPHONE
(S 16) 765-1938
.
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
MEMORANDUM
TO: All involved agnecies
FROM: The Planning Board
RE: Revised Draft Environmental Impact. Statement for Cove Beach
at East Marion. SCTM #1000-22-3-15.1&18.3
DATE: December 20, 1988
The fOllowing action was taken by the Southold Town
Planning Board on Monday, December 19, 1988.
RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board deem the
Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the above mentioned
subdivision complete.
The thirty day comment period ends January 18, 1989. The
Public Hearing will be held within the public comment period.
When the date is set you will be notified.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact this office.
Copies mailed to:
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
NYS Department of Environmental conservation
Thomas C. Jorling, DEC Commissioner
Judith Terry, Town Clerk
Building Department
Board of Appeals
Board of Trustees
David Fmilita
.
.
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
December 20, 1988
Kenneth C. Coenan
Hampton-Manor Associates, Inc.
P.O. Box 308
Manorvi11e, NY 11949
RE: Cove Beach Estates
SCTM #1000-22-3-15.1&18.3
Dear Mr. Coenan:
The fOllowing action was taken by the Southold Town
Planning Board on Monday, December 19, 1988.
RESOLVED that the Southo1d Town Planning Board deem the
Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the above referenced
subdivision complete.
The thirty day comment period ends January 18, 1989.
Enclosed please find comments from the Department of Health
Services, dated December 19, 1988, that the Planning Board would
like you to address.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact this office.
;:Sve(/ry-trulY yours,....__ '/ t?
-<,~ "':: / ../
'j / -
.>' ,i ,;' /J'"
/---C "-/ / // i
U~t-KfiL;:/P (J/ ~{';/tv--I/t- . .
BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR.
CHAIRMAN
cc: David Emi1ita
enc.
jt
f'
SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES INC.
.
SAI
SAI
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS & LAND USE PLANNERS
December 19, 1988
',;} i-:J ,.'"""\
'! ! G ! ~ 1
.._.w.~_.__~! f,;
. I!
2 7 1988
Mr. Bennett Orlowski
Town of Southold
Town Hall
53095 Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
.....~~,i
Re: Cove Beach Estates DEIS
Dear Mr. Orlowski,
We have reviewed the Suffolk County Department of Health's
comments dated 28 September 1988, and the response to same by
Hampton-Manor Associates dated October 24, 1988.
Technically speaking, a draft EIS does not become circulated
among the involved agencies until it has been accepted by the
Lead Agency. Thus some of the comments by the SCDHS are largely
on content usually made during review of the DEIS. In view of
the SCDHS comments, premature or not, substantial work may be
required of the applicant to satisfy the depth of analysis
requested by SCDHS. However, the real question before the Board
tonight is, "Is this DEIS adequate and sufficient for review?".
Your Town Planner mayor may not share our opinion, but it is
our opinion that the DEIS is adequate for review. It may need
substantial upgrading and expansion, but until all the comments
on it have been submitted, a piecemeal review of it will not
serve to produce the "hard-look" required by SEQR.
In conclusion, the DEIS does not contain fatal flaws or
omissions to further holdup the review process.
Sincerely,
SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES, INC.
..
David J.S.
Principal P
DJSE:mt
23 Narragansett Ave. Jamestown, RI 02835 (401) 423-0430 Office (401) 423-0037 Fax
//--?-:Jl
/-Y
--.
.
New York State Department ot Environment
Building 40-SUNY, Stony Brook, New York 11794
(516) 751-7900
November 17, 1988
Francis J. Murphy, Supervisor
Town Hall
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Dear Supervisor Murphy:
.~~
..
Thomas C. Jorllng
Commissioner
Thank you for your letter of October 31, 1988 concerning Dam
Pond in the Town of Southold. The Department is aware of the
development pressure in this area and shares your concern for
this environmentally sensitive project.
The Region I Office is currently in the process of
categorizing, evaluating, and ranking in priority order the
acquisition nominations received on Long Island. The most
sensitive projects are forwarded to the Land Acquisition Project
Review Committee, for evaluation against similar projects
nominated from across the State.
The properties outlined in your letter will undergo this
review process to determine the natural resource values of the
project. I assure you, your comments and concerns will be
considered during this process. Thank you for your dedication to
the State's land acquisition program.
Sincerely,
/''-
0/
Y/J "
~~~
Peter J.' Frank
Forester, Stony Brook
j
.~ (
..... ;'
'/;;"Y1/C
PJF:sjmr
-. -. ----- --
-
.
.
765-1801
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
OPEN SPACE COMMITTEE
Town Hall
SouthOld, NY 11971
November 10, 1988
Fral1cis J. Murphy, Supervisor
Town of Southold
53095 Main Road
Southold, N. Y. 11971
Dear Mr. Murphy:
At our meeting of November 3, 1988, the Open Space Committee
expressed unanimous endorsement and support to your proposal of
October 31, 1988 to the Department of Environmental Conservation
to protect the Dam Pond ecosystem by acquisition of adjoining
wetlands. We are convinced that transfer of the lead agency status
to the Planning Board is a salutary measure.
If any of these unique properties is appropriate for open space
acquisition, our committee is ready to give such a proposal full
consideration.
FAR:JW
Sincerely,
:;tl..e o!.e",-~('/Ic Q. IC~'-.o= fjI;}/
Frederick A. Ross, Chairman
Southold Town Open Space Committee
cc - Robert Greene, Permit Administrator
Arthur Kunz, Acting Director, Suffolk County Planning Department
Frank Panek, D.E.C.
Southold Town Planning Board
Conservation Advisory Committee
Board of Trustees
Open Space Committee
.
S41
~ @ ~ D 1117 rs'-);;,\
~ 15 I n I
;ii!i
NOV239!8 I"U
l~-,' i
SOUTHOLD rov~
PLANNiNG BOMW
-~--- "-~..".
SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES INC. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
S41
November 21, 1988
Bennett Orlowski, J~., Chairman
Town of Southold Planning Board
Town Hall
53095 Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
Re: Cove Beach DEIS
Dear Mr. Orlowski:
Based upon review of the above mentioned DEIS and supplemental
information, we are requesting a 3D-day extension for determination
of completeness.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES, INC.
4z.~ fB reSol"\-:c>/\ .j;. "II&{ ~iD V"lo-t
r12GoC\'" <;,A"I <iV -1""". "t\.-.'s. let\e~
Wqc;, ....n"t bU"t". &y'\-,,,..i<>1'\ ....,(~c..f)y
QVQi\~a .
'-,
"
\'. ..j"'/ 'I'
I \ "'. i (_. ",,"", !. I iA
.L):..llU.0 __LJ,1, ','i)./\.i'V "
David J. . Emilita, AICP
Principal Planner
dms
23 Narragansett Ave. Jamestown, RI 02835 (401) 423-0430
.
.
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765.1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
~lEMORANDUM
TO: All involved agnecies
FROM: The Planning Board
RE: Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Cove Beach
at East Marion. SCTM #1000-22-3-15.1&18.3
DATE: November 16, 1988
The following action was taken by the Southold Town
Planning Board on Monday, November 14, 1988.
RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board take a
thirty (30) day extension for reviewing the Revised Draft
Environmental Impact Statement from November 25, 1988 to
December 25, 1989.
A determination as to completeness will be made on
December 19, 1988 as this is the last meeting within the thirty
(30) days. Please respond before December 19, 1988 on the
completeness of this document or let this office know if you
need more time for review.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact this office.
Copies mailed to:
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
NYS Department of Environmental conservation
Thomas C. Jorling, DEC Commissioner
Judith Terry, Town Clerk
Building Department
Board of Appeals
Board of Trustees
David Emilita
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold. New York ll97l
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1938
\
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
November 16, 1988
Kenneth C. Coenan
Hampton-Manor Associates, Inc.
P.O. Box 308
Manorville, NY 11949
RE: Cove Beach Estates
SCTM *1000-22-3-15.1&18.3
-
Dear Mr. Coenan:
The fOllowing action was taken by the Southold Town
Planning Board on Monday, November 14, 1988.
RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board take a
thirty day extension for reviewing the Revised Draft
Environmental Impact Statement from November 25, 1988 to
December 25, 1988.
A determination as to completeness will be made on
December 19, 1988 as this is the last meeting within the thirty
(30) days.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact this office.
2~~9r:~~c~~~,~~:?:/t?
t ,0 .,,/, /'. ' , "
/, ./~-,/. .'.. -../., L..:..... '//,.:'.--,j..........,-~._--,~.t.........-'
....~ i" .~. " ,_./ ._'_" ",
.{1
/,/
,/
BENNETT ORLOWSKI ,JR.
CHAIRMAN
cc: Harold Reese,Sr.
jt
i
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P,O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765.1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
~lEMORANDUM
TO: All involved agnecies
FROM: The Planning Board
RE: Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Cove Beach
at East Marion. SCTM #1000-22-3-15.1&18.3
DATE: November 16, 1988
-
The following action was taken by the Southold Town
Planning Board on Monday, November 14, 1988.
RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board take a
thirty (30) day extension for reviewing the Revised Draft
Environmental Impact Statement from November 25, 1988 to
December 25, 1989.
A determination as to completeness will be made on
December 19, 1988 as this is the last meeting within the thirty
(30) days. Please respond before December 19, 1988 on the
completeness of this document or let this office know if you
need more time for review.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact this office.
Copies mailed to:
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
NYS Department of Environmental conservation
Thomas C. Jorling, DEC Commissioner
Judith Terry, Town Clerk
Building Department
Board of Appeals
Board of Trustees
David Emilita
D
.
,-
,.
. -
FRANCIS J. MUR
SUPERVISOR
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1800
SOU1HOLD 10WND
PLANNING BOAR
TOWN HALL. 53095 MAIN ROAQ
P.O. BOX 1179
SOUTHOLD. NEW YORK 11971
OFFICE OF THE SUPERVISOR
TOWN OF SOUTH OLD
October 31. 1988
Mr. Harold Berger. Regional Director
Department of Environmental Conservation
S.U.N.Y.. Building 40
Stony Brook. New York 11790
Dear Mr. Berger:
.~.
At this time, would like to request of you that portions of the
following properties around Dam Pond be placed on the list of possible
acquisitions of land under the Environmental Quality Bond Act in Southold
Town.
SCTM #
1000-22-3-15.1
1000-22-3-18.3
1000-22-3-19
1000-22-3-20
1000-22-3-21
1000-22-3-22
1000-22-3-23.1
1000-23-1-2.2
1000-31-5-1. 2
1000-31-5-6
1000-31-5-7
1000~31-5-10
1000-31-5-26
The Town's main objective in requesting the placement of these
properties on the list is to preserve the wetlands surrounding the Pond
itself. Therefore, we are not requesting purchase of the entire premises of
any of the parcels noted above. but, rather. the fresh and tidal wetlands
and a suitable buffer of one hundred feet adjacent to the edge of, the
wetlands.
Enclosed you will find a tax -,(!lap and supporting documentation as to the
environmental sensitivity of Dam Pond. The documentation was prepared for
the Town by the Office of Ecology of the Suffolk County Department of Health
Services.
Further. Robert Greene. Permit Adrn,i,nistrator at the DEC's Albany
office. has in his possession a draft environmental impact statement for the
.
.
.
Mr. Harold Berger
Page 2
Town of Southold
October 31. 1988
proposed subdivision development known as Cove Beach Estates. which is
located on parcels 1000-22-3-15.1 and 1000-22-3-18.3.
The Town has also been in contact with Mr. Greene about the proposed
subdivision applications on parcels 1000-31-5-1.2. 1000-22-3-19. 20. 21. and
22. On those applications. the Planning Board is requesting the transfer of
lead agency status from the DEC to the Planning Board.
If additional information or an aerial photograph of the area is needed
by your office. please do not hesitate to contact me at 765-1800 (or the
Town Planner at 765-19381. Please expedite this evaluation as this parcel
is under developmental pressure. In light of this intense development
pressure around the pond. the assistance of your office would be greatly
appreciated.
FJM:rbw
encs.
cc: Richard Ryan
Robert Greene. Permit Administrator
Arthur Kunz. Acting Director. Suffolk County Planning Department
Frank Panek. DEC
Southold Town Planning Board
Conservation Advisory Committee
Board of Trustees
Open Space Committee
Town
.~
".-'>OP
.
.'
",
.
.
,
LIST OF PROPERTIES AROUND DAM POND AND THEIR OWNERS
SCTM #
3-
1000-22~\15.1
1000-22-3-19
1000-22-3-20
1000-22-3-21
1000-22-3-22
1000-22-3-23.1
1000-23-1-2.1
1000-23-1-2.2
1000-31-5-1.2
1000-31-5-6
1000-31-5-7
1000-31-5-10
1000-31-5-26
and 18.3 Harold Reese & Others
855 Sunrise Highway
Lynbrook, New York 11563
Joseph F. Gazza
3 Ogden Lane
Quogue, New York 11959
Bernice Lettieri
48 Cayuga Road
Yonkers, New York 10710
Joseph F. Gazza
same as above
Grundbesitzer Corp . & Ano.
same as Gazza address
Charles S. Gillispie
Box 267
East Marion, New York 11939
Mary Ruth G. Whiteh~ad
6 Stone Tower Lane
Barrington, Rhode Island 02806
Charles S. Gillespie
same
Andrew Lettieri
48 Cayuga Road
Yonkers, New York 10710
Sonja Stein
68 Longridge Road
Plandome, New York 11030
Althea C. Reybine
East Marion, New York 11939
Joseph L. Townsend, Jr.
216.,..Main Street
Greenport, New York 11944
Edna Brown
East Marion, New York 11939
.
,1c~ t,~ 1'1 e"" / r:.., "=rs ~/" . '" . ',: ')1(' .
4/ ,-o/../-k2::. unOhrt'~ cI~~'" '!-
;,~ 1./4/ G~'.t wl...' 6"dl& I't r"<yr' ty
#/4fC, :
. .'
i?'z.
. \
.:;.'''-'' .
..,,~<(".
%"
",,""-
:..: ....~
,.:,;:~~~
.;.' "".." .
".,J',.', "*'" .', .~. .
",.'" '.\J,~.,i;! ..'1"-,
., .: ',''',ll or.;a'l If . .,,~ ',".' \1 "
.~,.,:r_~""~,,.,., ,'I" ,. '1' ~ ..'u:..'..;...'.,
:':~:;.}&~~,~WL~;:':"~r~;r~'~i~'} '".t~.,:'\:
.,..,~."'["';" ,"","J'/ ! '{[S' .".,~,,' \'\ I~ f' ".. '0 i...,
"', 'I_,'I;~'" \~"'\'~"",4,.' ..fl'\" I.. 'II. -- i.,('..,..,.
'"..:, ., 0'/ .~tJ&"" ."J . .\' ,J;'. ....i"'. ',,->.,,' ~..,
-;; :"~'~' ....~~~~.I"./~'/!:..%"...~..._,..'.~.,~~.~.~jo.. '~.}'
_', _ ...t.:.,.......,? .X~i~~-...{\'.. ':' ~~~'''l''IJ''~''-''''''\'
'd.'. o:::'-~.. ~ 1~.; ;,:~t~111\'t1;"Y~~~~. ~t;h:'
'. . ,~{ ~'..J....(~ ~1.1~.'''..t\. ...~',t\"l.;.:....
......;'.: ,;,__:~_ -':"~; ,.~..;.... . ,It:.!~,';::,':.d\:'l.'\.:..e:.
~'..':'''''"~,:",, . :<<!".~~:;.1, ;,e:~"':',\,,:- "C.'
~I:"-"'-" 'i '1'-.,.. ,..:' . ' ,~~'...- .~':-'_.:";~,..1.;,
"",",,,~'~<---1.~ ,:'; 7{<1'~.~ . ',- - J. "'""' , ,.....~':.: ~..... "" ,,'t.""
t{:>-~~~J;~-~.;,~~: ';./' "-/{ ~~..,~,::tl" ..:.~~:'y.~~6~::;,'~~~~:~~~::i::)
ik~'o' ;,.1:":"~,....\,~--.. "';_'l'~!-'. .f..t:- ~ . /1' ,',',-,
1'7,":;~"~'f.'-":,~-.'.. ,_:.',;.:--, ,'t~~:" ,;-.~.,. " "~-'- :,;;.~:,~,;
"~,-,.,, ",.v,,',' r' J"','J,-""''"lt'i_",r.,\~r.;/-.....{;""
t],~}.,."--(~ ~:,; .,~,,;' '..-':. -: -,:., ~ ";'~:.?:~~i.lc:r-~l: ~";;i':~t;~~:~~ .
~.,..::-';~,:,~'~~)-:...~ -~1'.~d'",,; ~~::,,-;~.,\_:....(~ Io(:("~~:t""''''<i~
,"',.;"'__'____' <.....j.~~ '~_~......;.. .".;_ ""':~'." ,,':,'~__,~.X\Y""'\
1l'./ ,._._\,., ..~.:c..-'-'''''"'',. ,...:z.,1'."'''l' ::t:,,~.," _..-,~..,~ ~ \
~:.0:~';':":7l:,-"'I" ,_"l -.v-.' r' '.,':.., , ,I>' 4;~ ":"; _ '~-ff-~~' c! l'e'~
~.,,-,':.i< ,.!~ ~J,j"\'::,,".\""-;'/ '..- ":~ ~'r.,~"<L~'l~,~,(j;
~"'~J."Jr'-~~ .......~.,,~~' '" ''''~1') ~fi:'r
~~,:~~:,..:~,;,:,-:'I-,...- :.'y.'~ ;.'- '.:,' ~-',':~~"..">:'~' /(.~~~.-\~..l ,,':/-
q . .
'J."i?itW:;:,:.}.,; \.... ..1.
~:-;l1,.:~::'f..::'\~';'~~,~~::\-~. ':.-:
. .
;k~ /'0'<-:; ..en" 'f1 o?:r/u~.", '" T.-0I4/
CIU..~ ",~-d 6.'k'/s I~/,~...-J/
Y'
/T Z <( 6
\
y.<~ !oj) ",~/tb<d /1Gro:<J .j.(~k~
e.4~::r s""~ JJ,"'"C //7"'-'" t n;., s' R )/
#7-;((;
!?OUTlrt){.tJ: ,t:J",,.. /J~.' ,...
I!cw/o,d) ~~t'I,<:AfI /1<.roSr ~
?r eAr? ftJc~P,,,,,,/ /1/'Co-f/r'4,,{,K
#$'-:1"
i{'
,
,..,
fl:".,
.....:P~l
'4j~~~i!
, .
.\ ~r
:1
.,j.:
'. ',1'
i
.:(
.'
i'
~ ,,:-';": I':: ;'.:"< "
: ..::;;~~W2~.i.
'!fjf:(~~\?
..:);:,b;:;j!;.,.
1'~.i;F:":
I
Ii
I
I
,
. i
,
I
I
!
J{e", ~dfJ ,{;'00/"/4 "..r/ ,,/ ;/'01./ k I;"~ d
,,4rc/1 /9o;-_~ I,{. ;t. ".~K /"'rcr7
("h.d Ir ~c... 10 II. ,ver/l.)
/I'~t ~
It'(.
N
.,
II g',.,:, 1 i
..',:~': .. .~, . . l r .
~,r,: 1':;, L ' :J:,i,,t '.;
"~IYJ-;~,\,~ ~'ll'~..h I '
;'''' ~ ., ' ." '';' I ,
','.<
.'
, -' i:,;, 'i:~'::l, <~ ~;I;~ I
. .~ . "J,,' '''i Ii ,.it
.': <v, :''''I*i;'~l ~I:r
.....". ."/.,1.,.
. .,:~.:,;~t.;:~:~' ,; li~
: .. ..", < ,'....< ..,
, ,- -, ,"-..:' l,t' ';I~ 1 '.-
.', " "';;',:,'
~".
. ;
[
i
j
!
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
i t/.C<v J,dJi'f Sd~'~<:A; I p'
>" I, 'K Ii-i.. Tff'l-
"~
"
.COUNTY OF SUFi=OLX
.
~
K~^':^' ~--"
.,' ~ ",
.' .. ,"
,,;, ~ _,.,if
~~...'. ",;;';:;-"
~
Patrick Halpin
SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES
DAVID HARRIS. M.D.. M,P.H.
COMMISSIONER
March 24, 1988
Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner
Town of Southold Plannin9 Department
53095 Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
RE: Office of Ecology Field Report of Property at Dam Pond
Dear Valerie:
I am writing you in reply to your letter of March 14 to Louise Harrison
of our office concerning the above-referenced field report, I have enclosed a
copy of this report, as per your request. Please note that this field report
refers to the property corresponding to the Harold Reese subdivision applica-
tion (SCTM: #1000-22-3-15.1 & 18.3). The Office of Ecology is currently
reviewing applications for the other tax parcels mentioned in your letter (i.e.
SCTM: #1000-22-3-19, 20, 21 & 22). Should we gain further significant natural
resources information on these parcels, we will forward it to you.
I hope 'that the enclosed field inspection report is helpful to you in
your evaluation of the area for EQBA acquisition. Should you have any
questions concerning this report, please feel free to call me at 548-3056.
iZ!l'R - :0 =! if
Neil R. Giffen ~~
Environmental AnalY~ 1.1
Bureau of Environmentau
Management
Office of Ecology
NRG/ilmf
Ene.
COUNTY CENTER
~'VERt-<EAD -'.I Y I 190'
"~
Bfilff~
':~
Nt-.)_
.- a ~D co
. .
l~f6'~~f?~W
ju () _ j.<1 .
It /-" t1,
,I I' !i it
10 .J Q' [.j t; ['j
Ul (J i11) 1
..., ru r1 .. r' ..
"'k, I" ."
Iv ~ 1 fD
~ d t;f ":'~
rt m 5 l.(]
J'.l pj ,," t1
I' ,I "1 ()
.J ~) k
td. j'
fI MD,'J f.i.J
ru ,t1 \ t1
. \ HI
'U [I N .,
'j I O' n
~ "j 11 (D
1>1 :0 ro '0
[D.B" D
~' f-
~l ; "I 8 f
fJ l~ -
(fj 'fl
." ()
R
Q
pi
t1
I~
,{ D
[)
I"
ru
cr.
~I
~
I.
n
".
w
9
n
to
1iI
"
"
w
'u
"
:~I-J
'n
CJ,
F'
d
Cl
"
ru
L
t
I
)
II
t.J
en III
o
/-'. --/
I~ 5"
rr rl
:rlf f;:!,
ill ,
li1
:r.
Hl I'l
o ,
r, i,
.J 13
p, ,lot
o fl
;.J
'U
C! ~J
.r n
:~
!-" ~~
rt '7"
II> ('Jj
'0 l-i
:P 1.1
('" '.J
\
I
- ')
71i
'IS]
I
{
,<
Y fR
It]
.....J m In
:;HnH
ijlli1 'j li1
t1 [I ~ rj
III r.!5 [.
1-1 [,1 rl Lil
(l) Ll
~ .. ~
g lB IB
>:
...
D
IT
o
o
~ - ~
+:>l.JN
~HHhj
ID Lil lt1 .
U tlJ
(J. rt rt .
() 1" Ij. .~
:J ,-,':
Lil Lil 1I1 P
.
()
~ ~ .~
IB lB -h~
o
~ ~ .0'
I-'
5' 5'~,
<: <: :J
f, f,"
t1 t1
00
1111
... p.
l~. B. z
o
(f)(f)
HHO
fiH1
AA><:
HHffi
f,'11J
~/ ?: 1:1
;j ..j ''''!
m8fJ
6, rn ~
ill1 "'
'j..J l.J !-'.
'-'j l'" 'h
.. I'.
nJ [)
Hf.J
fOr..
o
K" :J
.
t"
.
:~
~
.
!1l
~
m';
oj
fl
."
t<;
rD
(fJ
z<'
o rl f'
r.:l ) .
,So..Jt-1,-"
-:1.1 j:>
I'
fiJ
,<
ID
In
o
. .
J
roE'
I-II fb
f~ In
fHr-
[) CD
W
1iI
's: t-,.
tu,l
'0 ClJ
~I-
III
.J (l.
J LJ.
, 0
t'
1 ::J
g
o
o
g,
~,j
ill
I:'~
~ :i-'
(l. I:-'
,
NO
o C)
'1 'D
foUl
,', tJ
~f,
I
(I ~
3m
" ~1:
:r: ,-,
3 rJ
- Ij
-r{ I!~
(, fJ
~ Cn
f- ',j
II
u
C^
~)z
-- 0-<
o
,<
ru
In
[]
"
~
~
.
tI1 :"'E'
to
In
f?7l7li;'
,J ftg to r,:
;J fD CD
ru 1 ,. rt
~ !g ~. ;{ f!].
LI n 0 en rl
.. [I} I~t ill II>
.~ " ~-: ru
tu ~ ill P.
'0 I:: 11 Ll.
.. rl ~ 0
r'" ,...
b b b
'j Cl.
I'. tn 0
q 11
..... t1
'@ 8
~ fl
ftl ~
n.
.J ~
.<:
~j
t?
.il
~l
fJzW~
rll 0 I'
In
U11.l
t;;I!J~J
I'. t-i
U ,I"
, "
t.. FJ
() (Il
:1 ',j
.<;
rD
In
0'"
- o~
o
.<;
rD
III
~
o
~
I"
li1
tJ
f~
I'
I"
III
Ii
~
.1
"
0'
M
fJ
~
",
r;;
"
\'7
'r_ z
:.. IT
':0
,
~
.,
.<
ID
'n
~
1.O co -J 0) U1 oJ. W
. ...
LHP >-3 E,' h'
.q Cl ~ !:: r. Cl
(Jl (Ill'. ~ fl)
n f? r~. ~'f I-~ f!
p '(1 rt 0
!:3 :0 -11,'~ ~J
P. .T_ ..
W" g~;:t
'0 0.. \1 <,
-').. &
'4 ." If,
11. J ri/ ~
<j.J l&l 2
I) - '"
I D
N .1,
"
.
... 1-
"
u 3 .\
P I
f -:Xl 0'
"
-- "
~" ?
, '-'
,
-/
"
:7
II
-1
v
"
j
[A
u
C
?
N~
'0'0
1111
00
LJ,LJ.
~ ~
ii?1i1
tn ~
n ill
It "
,.
.u
f!
8r
1:'0
7
o
"
(; AI
j ;',
,1
,
"
r~'
::b-
"
(j
\
JV
)J .J I~' i )
1 Ul lO
( 'n ",,!.Pc
IU l~ n. I.... I~
In I, (J.
'R f, !J1 :': ~.
:J (I Ifl I'
n.;J'r! () ()"
fll ell :J'...:
,1'J'1
n iU f I) (Ii
II) III I' t. .
d 0 '\I (J
If .. ~) (tl
o .0., tJ
h' 'R
D (n
i: ~
. -+J.
,.:
'0
~u
,1
1--1
I
:V
:J
ID
'1
IJ
,,-
,.'.
,I
11,
lJ
tj
III
rt
"
lJ
:J
~
tl
t;J
iil
'l'
f'l
.1
Ii
n
~
m
n
'"
'3
~Prt?
'J 1~,t1
('1" I"
t~ n 11
d
Oom
~~ !i
,1
I~J f'J 0
~ Uti,
~~ft
;;: t-~ lu
~ ,,-
m r)
;.j .
'j:l {/l
f-o ~
''; '.
:e t-".
!V f,J .
"' In
r.J
~. ;:j ?co J
~
~
zC:
z;!
z~
"'",
"'...
ii
li'W
=
(, ;
J.,
'.
Gil
.Nil
~
.
"I :1;
> en
..
..'
e.
".
, 1:'
-.......
I.
~ .
-
. ,.~
. '- '~"
.
J ~.........
. "'.
c
-j
"
.
.
2t.:.='2.::!..:
'--
=-'.::::":-:~e!:::~... Y!3.r...2,-:;=.7.::::
--Ic:-=":"..---.....~,T ':1=-:::.......-=....
-...... -----.. -- -.'-
't'.
?:::::.:
:>............
- ~~~
~.~:.:.s:.::
1.
~\\u\~, ,((,<,II'!!:;
\ I 'I j I
d- '. "' D \ . W\ J \'. 1)\)\"(1\
,ve:.c:..':~: (\ '!J.-/, ( (\a.',-r
,v"'N !-\-'.h (
T~7.e :
Ca~~:
2_
J.
4.
~.:.::=s
(':';'j)
L 'Y,^ )
, ;)
"-7 I -:l ~
sU--==:..:....:::.=..::q .~s.s.
Ces-=:..~:::..=::
J
( %
c:s'..:-e..:..'::;=.e.!:'C ,
c..~....:=..=:3.c:.:=
. 'e=:.o::
aC.~a.c:=::.~
:::,..~::::
---,
\.-
------.
\ 'f\.Q...
'r<.l\ "J..
. I
---
t"'r. \, ,I
-i
-.11,."
. -'
j
:1
'S'r.[ 7"__.'\1\ 9 ~ (' _-,)
'''\o( ..1.....:.1__
-::
I.~^
, 0
e~=.)
,,-
-'
~
o I..'/' .':.. ". I, '~I
~
'-....,
,.-." \,
~'---~
,r? ~_ 1 )',.." .,....-.:-
. v '__, \
C)
::L..:
)"_"o,ul.
f'
-, "''''-.:-.:;:--"''"-
'1
~. or /,J
<::s
::>1"\<)-"
-" ':"\'~_1. (- ?
6.
s..~e'!:::..~ (v"'E';e~c.7e
b...ai:.:...:..:;.:::, e~=.)
c::::",,-e.!:"
; - .. ~
~~es/ :;:===:.....:..es,
lc::3.=-::::'
_.:
~.
.N€~-~ ,
s:.:;.. ::.2.-==-~ .:=-==~/
), -Y,
~.'
v
)
.-
~~"--
~' ,
. ~
J....:S.^.\N~,"'~~
, ,
\Jw;....~~.
\~
,-...,.j
'!
1 ,':"
..(....
-L'
IrS<.- \ ~:Vl'-
r~-'--'fo-.
")"" ';;''';Y' -:I~) <:SI...'
\\ - -,
~:. --:'> -'_::;J..;-:;-::"'''-
.~.',"t"'"
,"\ Cj'
rJ I)')").. \/,,-{'-,
I.
--3
-....:p-~ ==
-'-- -
~-:22.::2'i
i-it
;'"'I-~
;-"''''./.'2.5
OJ .1.,<
.' .,~- .,.,.......
,
):-()- /.
-L" '1
\ \OO~
~ f_-.J \
1...v..Z:-:-\ ~. y\ -:1.5
~
-;C:"l'f:,.
L:':""
,
--~
""'..:
.-....
\~
~_: )v .).
)
'./r--.
GD
,',
r'-
,-,
;,', '" ~./J.
......,
.::-
-..
c
'l....
--
y ,. ,~.~,.
j--------
-"
'.-i€~.2!:=:
(s:::;:-"
~.........-."..--:-~
-'::"''::"'--_._~-
~c,;e
S-":=:e~' " ) ,
- - .
Ce, ....""::1--=--
-.------
:;./: --r
~
fY
<~~.....
a.
.::C~~:::::
-=::-;a,
c.~""-~
~-
',;,,-a :=:==::cc:-":
a CCSe.='7at':"Cr:S:
Ccve.:-:: -s;e
o u.1. S;::r-->--~
,', ~ \0.~', ~~.b ~
~;....,-y;>--
0\& 'V~
~'~'J~~ r-~ \T~.....
'"t ~~~..<.lc-
\,-:", >. '^--
T- R..JL /' ;\.
- ~o..,l.~
B,~LY-.r~
'b\~~
~,,'~ ~ ~
N.-.-~ M,~
~\ \-
~,,; -s..<:::rr'\ ""^'\
'5 .,..:, \ "'.1. " ~iJ <:
_.,.~
~.\?::-l:::'~~
S ~'" -sV1- ~
0r- ' ,. I
- .r', .1......, :--.~..?; (.\'<)O':r> 7
-..l"~:_ 'tr,,:,"~ '
Do.-......'t~ "'"
~1\!\....('-~
.
F'''Y"'
-........-
RJ o~
i2>\:..Jc () ~
'fl\+\"-c...-\?V'W~
- -\
":::'-""^' "^-' ~
-J+n.-~ W 0 \.l &
'S d- S"" ...t....:>-A--'
0'
I s~,..-',-;__ ~
,
~",.Ai".", -fl o:-R.l'. S
~
~",,-,u>.cr&
(,,-~~ -'1Y-L~
\.\;~ ~~ ~">
, - \. <::3"
~'1~~'O-t...""("Y" ~
S """-.'D-tv-,-- '-\
<.....::, ~
'-~ \<.-~1.C~
~r~'~~
\l..o-;ca... V"'J"" ",-,:0...-..
\\\Jo~'-" Y'l': ,? ..)-r
.
J .,"
"
.'
,.
.
..
. ::: ~ ,... -::
-f\u.- -~ V,r<"7:J
Rd-'c.<.\'tv) w',d~L
,G,->,-...::,~ . F '!,
( '" .- q.:.. \; \ __ --r -U./'
--ru;::t' ('(<.~, 1"-/.,) h,,~- ,
l0o<>&. \''^V'~\ '-C,
E:'~<:.,,~ C'".:"-~
~~ c..~\c\y'&
'Ia. \ ~ W c./ \;)\Q.'Y'
~'f'(\~~' c..~Y\ R~6-7~""'-+
~ . ()
N",";:\-'r,'L-yy., ~~d..-........0l
c.'--r.,\,"'-~ \"v'\.r~
\"j\;~<.. --\- ~ [JQ,z,'V' (-ty~-\
~
D -,..." ( , "~'
C~""'J t\.;v-\~ S'~)
C'""'~ l.,.,,-,.,
CO-('(\V'r\\TY..... \~--'/\
(,..~?.V'\ - 'b~<\~! M<:..V",)f\.
\ ~-
'-~~ \ Q..""'rV,,\
c:'oz-;-T-; , ''-k\\.n--~~::,...-
, /' Q, 1/ "
- '--",.rI\V',...JJ-o..... "l "- \ kA3t'(\,<,:>~,
- r0""+.....=---'" 1'--,y-uJ-~
p,~ l..-0.v~
i'v~",)",_,",',~,-----: ~
. ::...-... \-..:::.~-.),,~
P,,-c,,.....'-"'.'\ c:'olu2I,:,~\
I...-. '\ '
\'N~ T\~ ~ ....
N...::r,-":"\~~'..-v\ Cy...-.:~
,_, ,
'--.:.',J-=t.- ...........,.-f'--(.\~ W..,.',,',
X 4-I'~-"",-
" " , " .
";:....x-\.N\........--'......~ S\:J-LiL~
(\:) '... - .
"'~-"-'5' ".~ \;y....)~
.---' --
- .
.:..-:.::.=-::--_"":".2:'.":.:. _
'.1;: - -:.-~,-.=.__
... -"--'-..-.. ~
::::=.: ~~;S?:::C:C:~1 ?5--=::::
1 0 ~ Ec=:lcgic3.1 Be!:ef:. ~3 :
L- flccd/s'i:or::1 c:::rc::-81
I reS=2=.~':"C~
I ~,,~._;>~-
- -=--.,-...--
t=3.;::;:i.-:<;
-...
.l.L a;:e..~ s;:aC2
/
I v I ;:ol2.u-:.:.cn c:::rc=cl
I I educ.3.t.:..on
11. E::.dange==d:
~~,-~,~"'
~ ..----..
:-r;I__~,,~, ~"
, -. .------..
~..,;;,.;";~
~ "'.1..-.......---
.
J .~.
,,~
_ q:'-::~-:'::'..'"c.":2=
r=::::a=-;2
=~e ::3.":"...:.:"3._
C::=.::::.:::'
1 2 . T:rrea. 'C=-~ed:
13.. Sf€c:..es oi S~.:.al Ccnce.=::.:
14.. E::.dange=ed, t~re.::.te!led,. rare, or vul.:1e~3..ble plan-=s:
15 .. Rec::-::::3~1:ion Uses:
L- f:.shi--:g
I I shellfishi.::g
L- hu..'":~':g
I I I:ca c:.::g
Efna=e
I I t...-:;.;:ping
Si:::ciy
16. Is t.'u.s land FCS;:=d?
\\)>J
17 .. Phc'C::~3.'9:--..ic
~~~~~C~, e~=..)
Infc~aticn (pr.ot~a~h~,
~1~~,~ ~..yL.--r'
nUIT~e= of phc~~s
/
, / i ~.::.::g
I I
...,....~.:::::l.
I.........
, ,/I~"'<=:a.'n
t.3...k:2...':,
s...:.bj~,
Ac~~ic~al Di~~sicn:
18. G2!:e..'"":!1 Cc:.l.2..':w:
~.'-' \ \ cL<r \,-.l en,jz- +~., C-v'-'~)'\
Dl\,,~ :;~ ~?~-:c +~vJSi..',y..
" '0_" I ~
---t"1'-.L \j ":NX"'-'Sr'\ t---'t ~ -:::. C
r;-"I 1\
~V~I'
r
T~<
';:,. ''''''~ b ~
- ()
~--r \J Q.O.::
--L-O n
\ l ,...X_~...tX:.
- "
~I
\.,..)1 \ V, v....
. I
W..L\L~
~>M\~
.
.
J ,.(
Bur'22.!..:. c:: .::.';.?:. -cr.~I"'l-'" i \b,",~r-.::.,.....,:::.""_
- ...._._~_. ..............-:--..-..-
.
"
F:=-:
I:!S=~C':':C~.1
~::-::,,..,=....
-""",,"- ~..~
,
pp.....1=ZT I::: - ?CS7 TI!S?SC':':S~ ,';::;'1.:::;:.3
1. E.-;,~.~~=c:'.::-:e::":.2..2. C'2~c::-";:::-::': Crt :
\""\-,L -stt-<.. ~~o-V'''--''_ "- "",-v-,~ DI; ~ CftYY\Y'<''v'':~''_-'.' \I"... {,V
f<\""'.,J, ~ -\'\'.... n\)y-~{I~"-~or'" ~.,..-,,"-....- J; +~ ~;\-h "s ~ ~'w-i-;'r '.~
___tt7Y'""-. $"-"""~~' -TI"</I' o,...-r.-v+>s 0;;.) ~-< p,mdJ-:v'-.u---. \"'~
\ -L. (\ -,~ LG :\ , ,,~. \ \' ....0 () n , ""L
,-=~\"'<Y\ ~ $"",,'1'\<..,<"'/\ Ut:N"~ "'''' --,."'"'- +.~_ ,^,~"""<YV~ ~~ "^'J IJrn, '
\J~(" ~,& ;'Y\~/ y~ c>J<.) $z-<VI~<UPA.M ) f-rl'"d ~Q
~'rM.\"-X ~ ~ ~...~~"->~..~ ~. .~~~ ~'\ --;),'-:- ~4\,t1_,,,"C
~\,,~ ",-r.<..,^- "'V'~ 'I~--:-v O~ W:;,~~ w~--"- V'Ad'2.Y3'7<:1V'.>., ~
, ~~ I L. \\ I, ~, ~ -..l,...-
\ -, "'.o,v'-C ~......u cu.. '0" .:R.'Y"'_e.-T '-"'>'-"'~. Lx,v-""i"....,~.~ ~-:>-r
---D~""~.\ ' ~ ~ J ~
olJ.. ~,~) V~V.'.L,~.N',.." ~ ~~~ v1.r~ c.. l.-~~ \I~~
b Uh ~(Q.D.. Ji;~ l.--:c" ~. Sv'\~-u..'<"~:;--~ ~ R.-YI ~ --;
....l;-\"'Q.. 't:},.,,j,,L ~. ~ "-"' ~ a.-r~ u..1--rr",-, -\<,,,,,- S~ \'rr.....v'_ 0.... k
~ ,,' ~ """"" r,-~O r-. +~~ 'S"~,,'-"-'o.."S.c~ ~M 4""-. \.0.'_~"" ~'- 0';:'
::s '). ~ ~ ~-' '. .... . -lL. , ~
- ~-"'i ~~ ~JO''''~ ~~-,,^' I ,~/ j)~~ o-vJJ \>"',vV- .'IVw-~ s.-o-~
~~;,,, y.,0-()'~~ p\Y"\l'~,-,,-, ;:~ ?~-1-~~ ',~ "'- 5~'l_K~ r~
\..... ~""'- .....,,Jl.,.)S1..; :)'" 0-"- D...1.. ~. 5,.;:9:)-. ~ -\2...... ~2 1-5 V- ~;L'
.:: ~ E:::~.l.CC'::":::2.1 Valt1!2S ;lr;.d Ccr:C2~S: (disc..:s.s_~cn) \ -c::::s ((
\'\-..... o"("':~~:"'-L -+'3--...) \..-:>.ti.~ 6--<.....;,. " . ~ \
, IS D"i-. 'I"\.CJ.-\~~'- ,,' '_,-.
.' 2l\.\' ' ..j' '-'
':~~~:u ~b~~' ~ S~J;:~~ ~"~r~'0~_~. ~~ v~~~_'-'-~,~,
\ \ ~ ~,~ -.. T ~-, ~ c.L"J.lZ.Y"..=z::
,;" "u.';;'i'-~ W""-y" Gc-r\.$-.~' -'~ ' \. '1" \ r'",
-- .-- --r-'r Q... -yr";"""ty.;L ::S ~,~. \ _ , "-.)
\ 'r,',S Q,"'-..LL>- ~^"'...,~~ \ \; \:J. S; ',-4- - ,; ,r..'{',,~~
\'r,.-L \::c\,,':::5:' ~ \,,~ A ~rJ. " - V C<. VG.~'~ O\- V',I 6) r;~ ~~
, \ '~ '~J--"'~' G..Yw.4., .:z.<,1.1.:.- 4--. \ .')' ~ " , 1
\'f\ ~.~ ......-,.-,,1. -, \) -, \,... \.~,-'~,f..--.,-,'''C~',V..:.2''1S!l--
........... ~- \ r"..Q_ c;,:..-,",(,"""Q...~~ ,,~ I J \', \1, . . .-
. '" \ ~ --:-"'..J.- G' V ' ,
~ 3-~~ ,'~. ~./":-~ .G..-.-.~ ::!:-~<''',_, ~ "D_, 'I'~\\S I J-{~'-_"" ;-..~
. " ~~..;- c:';/J!..LV-,- \0 ~~
c~-f\-S~\'l~,^ "")~ ~"'-Sl- CL-r ., ~
- ~)\. ~,
.\.) ,e.:I\"i,'t.,....,~a..:::t...~ r.. /' ~ ~.\ .
',--~j' :..:..-(,',.,,,,, \"::"""-^. ',( ",
,- --/ -V'
6~ ';)A \2',Jj) v~..o~,,;-,\. Ie -\--;~.9- .v""""--''-..-'- '}:-, l ,....Jl.-"..: '.
~\&. \=:M \S ~'('. M 'S~ ~ ~~ QX\;,\;""'-+; hz.~,;'--\ ..
~, ~~ ~
(}:,,,-T \r.~-L u..~. ~ --=-(j'^ -'!~ --1l ~-';, ~~~',j~ -::.f'r~ :r/'~"'~
w~ S;O,~y~ --V"^-..c1L ~--<:''''''r-'\'\'''''_'~ V~'- ~^' .;Sv,,~~~........J
~ 0 ~ '~
"-'UY'\ .
..
,',
~~ -.u.j)
\
-, 4.. I' \'
\ 'f'\-L \~, ~r::.fl~('~ t:>-
\ "" \ ~
sZ~~
V
,)
-,~
, .
, ,
'5 \-r-z
\~ Y'j :^.4 V-.J-:-"
<::::.
:s )-rr..z..
.
6:':=2.::\..:'C:
.
J -. ~.
,,~
2.....::::.=:;::.';E;.;.':2.~
\1~"""c::,-,=-r-c.""-
................--..---
F:~ DrS?::':::':C:I ?E:?':'?'":'
,.
3. P~~~e~ 2~a~~2~~sn (dis~ss ~o~e~~~3~ ~T.;3~3. =C~~ S:'=2-~~e~:.~~s ar.~
c":'"T.U..i.:.'C:".~e, Wl-:'.:: =es;:ec-:. t.:> v-a:u.:::.c: cu-~ ;....c.rf ~cc..e' 0;:-.. 1
1""-5 y-:~. '.N" ~ \ 'L\;"".~~-\ -5,\~~~~,~~^~~ lr-i'~~d \. h uJ~.:w'.:. ~i~
d~~~ ~\'YC~ Q.~. .5~~_~C'^7_ ~ 'rZ~ ~~.'^-
-S'~~;;::C-'ci2..-~~ )../h l.0\\dl,k dlv--<..:rs.,.-..X...,U o-r- 17'V.... ~.
~ ~2:Y~.,Y', +~ ,~1J1 O-"'...Lv.. ~J5 ~~-..l..^ o~
&: ~~ ~~ ~~ ,\,,-~~ ~Y\\)~.'.::,~.\\'(..~ Q..Y')>VTr\ (Y~
'Se.&;""~~ ~;c'~. ~A~o/-+'~\ e-o-n~:'1-yV) ',S -\-k ~:i;J,1i:
~~ Q..--r.:l~, '~--i::"-..L ~ ~~ a./rJ:J. &-LS-\-"'-~; In :::1--c-,~
~k '14 h-';~.,..';,.....'n (....~c:-....,;:;:cc... c::-";'hlo !IU.'-~ca+-.;en ~:::)C:'~"'-~C:: Fe"'" ,.....,.../""\~e~'
. ---~~'--'-.. ...........-'---.;>> _ ~~~ '-. -w.....--- J, l.'==-:;:~__ _ ... ::-_'-'....; __,
?'" -S S ,\--Jb. """~.~----,,, 't<\Q.."-.SU/'..;2.r_ 'r" ~', l:j ~V<" J-vv-,-- ~,-+r^"" ') ~
7<, s7~. S;trr b~"']\""~; ~0 SC~ ~_ ;:>-? ~\~~0:, ::~
S'04~ ~-- ~ 't>,<=-;. Q~~~.. :s.~r-,"'\;"~,c...<~;\Y\ ~'.
~ \.~~~ .9,7~) ~d:J.~~~1: ~ ~'-;"- ~~~~ rc:,~ lYY\~j.o-:-
w' \cSI\\ ""'- ~,~ :i0 'P":>-v,~ (), c.... ~''^.rJ::'-./\..- '\, <,<-,." ~ ~:Jt:::
^ ~" \. (\'~ -l- ~ ..J I .() ~ 0 "I
C>-:iJ- ~\ \'\..c...:J...::~ \ 'X~- \'f\ --:-'~ )~-r""" ~ 0 I p<.' ~/'~ r l./trr. a:.....
~~~J,~,,~ u'\ ~ f\~ \ - ~
Narre
t\),;, \
R.
G:, , \I' ~I'.
T:.-=.2.e
-,-. -------'- . .
\--'-' 'I '. -,;-.~ "I('~'L...j
!II. : I ---L.
~i'~0t....~-:,.;..\
\i
Na.n:.e
T~""la
-'---
"--0
,""',,-
T..;.....lQ
0\ .\:. \ Rc.\7. \ (\
\ \ ,U) \<;: - '1 ,~\ 'I ....__
Si,.........":l~.......:::l \.,
-"._~-- \\
.~! \~( ~,
J C':2.-=2
\
,. " I
~OUNTY OF SUFFOLK
.
...,.~~~~~
/;~"'''.. >"'0.,
~f/ Vii.'>' ';:,"
",.... ""11I
,;~l. -:. ; F>~,
~~"~~'.-~:h'"
'\.~~:~: :~~'.)\j1"
~~..
PATRICK G. HALPIN
SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE
,
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES
DAVID HARRIS. M.D.. M.P.H.
COMMISSIONER
March 29, 1988
Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner
Town of Southold
53095 Main Road
Southold, NY 11972
RE: Dam Pond Subdivision, Field Inspection
SCTM# 1000-22-03-19 through 22 and
1000-31-05-1
Dear Ms. Scopaz:
As part of our department's review of the above-mentioned application, the
Office of Ecology has conducted a field inspection of the subject property. I
have enclosed a copy of our field inspection report which I hope will be helpful
in your site analysis and provide the information you requested in your letter
of March 14, 1988.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide you with natural resources data
pertaining to the subject site. Should you have any q'uestions or require
additional assistance, plese feel free to contact the Office of Ecology at your
convenience.
.
Sincerely, n.
((~J xl M~,,-
Robert S. Deluca
Biologist
Bureau of Environmental Management
Office of Ecology
RSD/ta
Enclosure
..~
I!DJI ~ [~ ~ fl Vi ru ,~1
I~Ul '.3 ;,.
, OlffiiOU)l OW N
iUUNING BOARD
COUNT'" CENTER
RIVERHEAD. N..... 11901
fJtJ _
.. Cl \0 OJ
to' it: r. ~[( ~; [(4 .~
lu () . IJ. "
r' 1-' c: . C 1 ~ ~
" I' " Ib '.
'" ,J q, ,1,".J "
Ul,,~Li"!l,J
"11> r' .. It
rr'n I' ,J'
'" f" 1 /U
,<; d t~ ,.
II: !~ ,}
, It ,C) "\
,J 'u P1 \
r: ID] ~,
Hi. ct
I'
'u I' n
I-j .r P
'j ,J
tl :U fO
liJ ,f~ I,
~; I:
~ l J j
Ui\
In
',J
.i'n
II
,-
"
,,)U'
o' "\
f"1
',.
']
I,
I'
r,
,
"'1' ,
/U
-_'"_
E=l~D
1?1
,I.
"Cr
,.
!U
t'
.---.- I
:';:::'2),
'"
'n
'{I
"
{I
r
"
.J
, i'
~' ol
" 0
" {lJ
s. 'p
" .J
b
~ fJ
\" 'n
II II
Ii
'I
~
I'
I~
, P
,J
I'
,J
/U
,,,
/,
"
"
'"
,
In ....
o
t.. 51
'r P
,. ~J
Irf J.
ffi f'
It, PI'
C] II
f; I]
n, ,IJ
o F1
."
rt III
,J' C-l
/U ~J
,u: ~:
,~
I!
" (J,
'q ~- (
II
:::;: 'J
~
"
>.
~:
"
[}
~- I';
I"
o
.--;
~ Ik [I
"[
'I ;1) \II
~~ L;' [(II"'
I,] .
" [I ~ I'
r III J
11 I.; 1'1 I,;
W ,I
f" .. 11
U IJ IB
if
[I
-- -~ --
,I--lolf') _
:0 I-I I~l IIJ ~ III tl
ID (/l il. ~i( 0
u I'J ~ h rtl
, f t II' ',"1' 'n
n J' I:~ .
fA I.: t; :I~ 'lit H:
I ";: c~ (l)
I',' 0' ' If
Ii IlJ (Jj
Ill" I" ,~. 'J' I',
II .I) Ii' {I
n 'e lU
E' I" {), ",
,1 .J' J .. IU
1-';::J --J n.
1",. '-1'_1.
.z , ()
,J 1 I t~.
.. "'\ 1 IJ
'1 1
Q' u'
<:
J'
[,
.J
n
,
''I
,
II;
.
"'
,
1"1'
IJ .J
N N
It rl
II (J
tJ tJ
I~ I~
t,j'lr
(I) el)
'1"1"]
rl rl -
Eli,j .~
, 'liD
Ij I] ,
Ilil!,i~
;:l;-j t':'l
:i!p~
i J 11,::
" , I'
1]11 I,
/"
"11.1
I:I/!
II
k' :J
..
if ~i ""-
~~I,~
'I','"
-- i:
t; ,~
~:
"
,J
'J
r"
?i
I;,
',J
JI,l.
jl1
I,; In 1\
Ig I J ~
LJI'(
.;..-'i
0' ,~
I?)L
l~ I-
lu (
'"
,
elk.
f1
fl
[I.!
::;' ,
ro' ,
1':'11
.1 ~.J
n. ~1
n()
n tl~
to bJ
(Il II 'I
1-'
I~ l;1
-:S. II.
~ rJ
II ~
rJ
'01
..,
i'f
f]
,~
rD
In
rS'l
Cl
tiJ
'J ~ r-J
: 11
m
o '{j '0 ~~
;'/IU\ ill rf
. I" f' '"
!~ ,J I;'!:. (fj
11,1 dill I"
Il n () n I'
" ILl '1 /II II
",
.. .: /ll
Iii 'l~ nJ n.
'Il F.j1 LJ.
.. (I .. 0
,I II t~.
() .1 .J
" /1,
I' 110
" '1
'. ~J 'j
'I) (
1:'11:
~: '!. v
111,J '4
n,
'''1",
I~
"J
"
loj
.f1
t.,
'II
r. '/ I J
{" 0" I'
" .
C11n' I>.
I;'U'~J'
I', I
II I"
I' ~ .
, rJ
I) eJl
:J '-1
" J-
h-;
I~
f'-", ' "
- h< ....:~
/J
,-;
I[i
In
~
[:;1 '
,I
"--
PI
,
:
n n tJJ ~~ n
. , . . 0
W
In
tq ifj~: tOr w I-t
IJ: I, cl [l. ,,~ ,I'
'1"1' ~ll I~ J' I~ '"
G 'J Ul
Ii ,I '!: !) f1 U
~' !~;' s"/'J I"
! fl 1 b "0,
JI I . .3 L I.
, .. - ()
I", - [~ 0 I;
fl _. -=----- II t1 I
., """ E'
lil t ,1
I;; ~. ~
I I, W III \'~
fJ tu I:J" ~
I' 0 l'~
I. n 0 I,~
P 11, 'J -
:~" I f1
b .. ,~
:r' ~.I ~
" !~ fi
I:]
! 11
d
~,j
Q. ~j
[;j
p'!
tn
J.
~.
b~
[1
,~
Ig
o
'0
l;l
(
(i'
co 'I a, tn .,. l..J
, ,
',' nO-'.] t-'I-'
I,,' rd jo I' c, C,
'il 1;1 1 ,: I) II
III J) 1'- J.I
fl r:) ,", if.: I!
!J f' "1" I)
II III ;II.':J
~ n,:r~... .. .,
':;:: II nil ..-..
lu r I ~~. rl
1(1 {J.. (I
D ,
~. "'I -Ii ~ ~j
~I '. " g '~
n ~- r~ l:
,(,
n,
~ '-
w
"
,..
(I ~
:(
G
o ~
o .:1
,
c.
~ t
Co
"I ~'
f,)-..
'U 'u
11 '1
() t)
1'1 t.
:1 !1
n .~
f1> ^,
(I) Ej
n 10
"
'II
i! ~
I) ~
;J l
..
v..
,"
.):,
,
.~ Q-
,b
~,
:\" S...
.... S
'-,
') '.
~
~\ ~
"
'J
-.
"
.
'u
!"
,1
, I
l[l
Ii
i"
'1
,.'
I
!-/
It.
I)
!j
I'
r'
"
I)
:'
fJ
WOn
C' '11 II>
'd II '11
fq 1_.' [,.
c: 1.1 d
() () ("
"1 "1,1
rl
t~J p~ 0
<~ ( ) tl.
I'j tt
,10:1:
"!-l1O
;; t., t~.
I~ [I
;1 ,J
'p' en
f' I~
Ii; j;
h. n
~j III
i;) ..w
p
jry
;1
.
I)
Ii)'
'.
'"
n
'i
n
~
'.,
f:!
,)
'"
;J
() I~l 1-,) ).. ~u
(J .J 1~' '0 m
11 III ro '[) I)
If 'fl J-. 1-. III
III I~ n. I'. 1--
In'l I}.;
'H I. !J' :.: p;.
:J II Itl I'
(l.:l'r! II (l
f11 . '1 :J ,.:
,1 'j,
.Irl III t ,) III
{II Pj I;:; I ; J
II :, :1 l\l '
(J .... (J
.
f:.,
I' <-
, l
"
,. ~
rl
..:
.:::~' :,;
~ t f.,
~ ..
~ ~';
N
.:---
" r:
-
<>
"J
.
.
2u.=:::.=.~ .== =:,...:::::..=::::.::-.e!"::::.::.1. ';'~...3.';=.-::s-:":
c:::::..: Q!S?::'::':::,! ?E:?':~:,
...
p~~::
- C~i :3:= .;'1'!.=u:.:':.s:~
,
1. Cal:2: Jk'f/<rp
I '
2_ T.:...7.e: 2:JO t1~
I
).
Wea-=-~==: ~(""F
/
V",ci:rw /tJ-lrl"'!J/'
I
4.
T:.."'::c: (':':v): :::~o...........
-J
Su===:.:...~==-"':c Ar== Cesc::.:..;~::::.
5.
(%
ce'l'Te..:.c;=e:':: ,
c..~c--==
:.!.S2.S
~~
~-
ac j ace.:::::
=..-==
--,
e'C=. ) : UtJ.lrH: I'tlu/r" /1.. f VaCJrJIA"r/ (.t.t':k' ,4._'.,.r~-I ) i (h c1~~ /"'--r" d ~
I ~ I ~
A4r'(.J.,//"'A I ~ I
,
,.. J
ft1VTf/: /,.., ~ "";- nt, ',__ 0';"',.,5,' I., /r" r:rI,..., -1..../
,
" ~",I ~'" I.d....... )
"
,.
.. 7
,c:,
Svrh.
~4.1,
r: o--I'ff~ 1.//
",,1 Ay ...,./, l.J "*"'( ,...14/ "d rrl_rJ_/I ,,0;..,"; CW .vdO.::/~",:J
/) ls-'/-/~~' Ay.cI~/.._ /(<'f<if~' I", Io"'<r .f7</';-....1 G:r'~ /Tal AcuJ,l ,,(0')
6 C:'-~"''-;''''(''~=''I''"~-'';''1e <::::"':"':::1"" ......-l:::!..:I-._.....~:.":o.c: lc~"''';-'''' 0;
.. _......~-_.. Y~,:,~-I.- >1=.0., ......:-~___I ~.....___, ........._......._
habi-=.2.~, e'!:=.)
(sJ",II.d:f.,I J..,/~...1
. ),
'c.J,"'ud""~cl.
rol.Dllt
"..~
...;e~..::s, sig.
r'2.c.=-d
- ,
-:::l.::I---~c: '
---_I
,y'"
:;;..,
_ J(,./'
J
-f./o-f,d..,;;n..,.1i~
rzzz;;J
-...---. -'--
0"" Pa"O
5,., - lM,!./ S...I,;&.1'/..I,
l/I'LAAJ!J KEY
: E.Ar'! S"UL.S~itJ.V
: C;.j/<' WoodlA",d
free ~rM
J:-.....: .t., :::rJ J Gro....11. ''''~VQ''(
c:::::I: ';.t,,~. [""'''4 I.~""
......--'. (~"~_4"" "l_d T'r..../i
~
~
7. Is t...;.....e.:-= a
----
~a7 ;-0;:11'-:::.---0
.------
l'es
::: tic. z..
(Si:C"'..; a~;:===,~-:-.::.::: 1..:..::::..-= a.cc,,'e c= c::.
~:ey..), ce..E...":e.3.'C~ by:
8.
Ec~-:: t::~, ce=~~ cf wa;::~=cc:.t:
.~..
I- ~ /~ ,#,rfC.;.-C
_. "',72">';", 7zy.r,r..
"'''41).,<lh",,,, n""4.J '}'P"~ 0;.. F
,
.... " , ',,',
9-. C=s~ta-:..:=::s:
C=ve.=::..-:::e
SA/r/l"/51 ,.,
'"
-----,.- - - -
i..
'''';::-;;~ ,--.-."
br/,J!P<<.<.Sr._/IVrl C;I,.J~ v...JJ
/ / $107.
(,...d"rlu ~(AI'A/;'-1 A~A)
OAt. Alo~d/-'"
Zo7(J
-.:::"""-'(--
7I-Ct':; ;:;;;--
'~-.;... --- ".
z,7,
.
--....--
)~
fA<' I,"'A 1'-'" !"N(
I' 1'1/1."nV:I/~A
Gro~ dJ</ I, uS ~
1'1"",1, ~/c/~
I'/',^".....If:l Cd__wv:(
J
,
..,. ,... ~~".. I _ ~.
(,t,c!: /rX.~' I "'do' Y
UA".K etu/"/
6,.//'<'/""(
,-,I.!c OA
j'IA. 'II"
fiA J...~j70?o." .y.
o
,4d~ >;'-
- I f"'U.
j'Y"" <oK.. "^/'
(,IAa 0'< ~
red c."d~r-
,(,6ro..<A / If,,;&' /
a.uk.., oJ..~
tVi"ld .n.<""'A"-
"I. 5/.J+-t4L
,"/'
!;o/".!~7<> Sf-
<;~;IA ~ ~f'- I'rl'~.f
~'--
.tl-'llk "'...;
V',Su/"",,_ r
~'l:.'
w','k "'.. I:
r<.d ..,Ai.
+- ::'-. '-"'~~~:':'~;'=5;:->;:':
t::.u/."_/c-d.;' J"'/ tn1d.
~j4~A ",...,e
"~
.
.1
....~ '~I..
,
..;:"-":
J"".I 61"", <"'..-
j~) s'j'",rrd_ t
r;oI-t.n:A.Jlcc:l ""'Z" "'''''-I-cr- (t1A_ /~...~
j",.Iu- I.;."". c/<d J<<II
'(,,://'] Cr./I .
rCd''''':7ccl ~"(U'_";
~~~.:=- I.~~~~_I.(
!'It/Ie J'.-<JYI
<1"'. ~)
.,-.......... ...
lel/o,", -/'tll"'<d wAfI./cr- vr, "1,,,....".)
A~~,.,L.-Q,.., Cra&4J
"'''.//1'} 010"'-
Cd.&-f_-...J JrAJL j4.
LuJ< ;:"'- ;{
/10; I.! q'"4i c.....,,.. "j;...,A I
red ,!;< (s<-A+)
,-,L..I..I-d,,, <lea (I.-Ad,)
/I-.cr,C-A"'P /"0/",''7
6/"<..;''''7
b/4C/ ~C'o__..-..l c.l-.: j.. Q/": <:
/,
,
.'" ." ~~ ....."'-
~,. .....:__.,n ~~...~",..~,.~';;"~.n
-'*'al"U-_';-', c.I...-<
j"-
Co..._"'.... I:;,....~c.r-
w____..... ;,.-A':' ~6.
..
..
'.'.,
;O.:....:..:.:=-::~ c=::.~=3..
"
10.
S::=lcq~=':
'"':~ccc/s-=:::::::
z
see'; '7.-=':'-.-=
~.J...."..;..<.
11 . E::~q~:d:
12.
""h....::l:::z~:::.ro~.
...--------.
13.
Sce-::.:..es 0=
14.
E::.canqe=e':i,
.
.
-' --
.....__u_
.:.:::::'=:::-_72:-. -:'3._
'.:;:: - '::,.....~~:.--
. -.--- -"--" ..
:~;.s?:::'::'::~1
--...-....
---_...,
5e...o;,e=~~:
.......---....
-......-........
y
f.j,.i"
, J..' ".~II
1"'..;..JJi~
~:~~_.~~
~..._-_..
S:-:::":"'~='."c. ::2.:"
re-::=-==.::.:.::::.
r"~::'='==e
---........ ....-
--.........-.-
~
....-_......-
.-----
c....,:::,....
s;aC2
. .... -. .
S;:=~_=.:.~n
=--===
....--.-.--.
--....---.
_ r.h^iJ1
, )(. =".-,-,--
~_..._-.........
TX wi..:.:::..:..:..==
-
'If (C'?",-"
/
...l ;.--....,.. -1 /J~
S~:.a2.
r,.......,.....~........_
..................--...
/'~ f I~.
oJ
v
d<~
0;:......:
",4 II
Aid,.....
~--
.
~c/l..;
-::::==a. ::=~ec,.
---::I
_Cl.__ ,
. . .
,..,....,~ I ....O'-"'l..... L ~
v..._...______
or
?l.a.::::z:
15. Re='=.=::'':':::l Uses:
1--
-. e"'~_"'"
...----.-..-::
=:~~~"::;
! ~~:..r:g
P:--.::-==:;=3.;;:::'::
r~-~~::::., e~=..)
.J..~/ ~~ ~
f. -.I:':')? :"1"" ""/.,0/... r/ -; /,-.
;..~,.;.; -:":":::-2.2. D~C'"...:s.s:.:::::
L-
s...:;':22.~:..st..:_::=
~ ::':';-:.:....::-;
cc. ~-~-.....
---"'''"'
~=::=
na~2 S'::"..:.::y
J2;f tr_';::C'"NTI
.
- - .
~-==.=:-.z.-=.:..=:;.
(c::c-==c=:=.::i1e=, :lC':i:e= c:: :;:::=-==3 -:..::Li.:::=::.
- ;,~ -7'/-,/--
"cz-../.",;/l ~.7 /r.~
o
~h .'-_: ~ _.. _'~.'
, /
s...:.=:~,
~7 ':Vcr/
.:J,'Jl.u
J,4..rO"'JV
-/- ,,.~ / (".~ .~
d_l" ij/-4_ -'"":~
4" ... ."L. i:i 'r
-"7
o
:,;./.... "c:~J'i:...u_u
/'~/"" J L ~r.<r ....:.......-v
/
..,-r;;
~
/r-;J ~~r-,
~
. ....,..-~
..
<
".",.
"
.
.
. .
:l_._,_:=.__=,_, :--:-_' -_.-....._-~_._~._-.':":._:._; "
- - - ~ ..a.-~S'2..'7.e.-::.
:--~-.
~.!S:?EC':":C:\' ?-=-::.:~':'
P.<:',R':
- ?Cs:'
TI.!S?:::C::CN .~~':':'~3
1 .. E::".--:.=,:::,.:;.e:-:"':22. De5':::::'==':":::::
71." svtial ;dr?<'t/ d ct..r~,Id?~ed;;- e.wf s"u.L<r,.....,.lco~ A~c1 "'~ ...,,-1.-0<. /"'-<.
.;;,"". n... s,l... iJ t.Ard....c:I 5r A. "jd", k d 1<:1../ ~ lIArd '-~.<.I, r7$ ,;' "-/~,~"- Iv--
p;,_ 7' f ch/~r-<r d {r.~... ~ f k ....Jltr~....s/ /"",1."" f ~ /.-<4/ 0=< ,#.,~ .-,1''''''' ~j""5
,t4 G4Jt'<f"IN....~.Ii /'~~:.....1-11.cr""'fnl...~7 w.4e-.c.~.-7/j <oY.-~d /''Vt?!Y-r ...-""Z:.........,4.f C.3'-''-'v-'?''.r ,.;;
. '0 '_'. ~ /
~I../":r (;~d.d<.r4r cI c",,,.~/,>- f ""~.f.<r~ "'.s f vc/i:.J:";:;~~ i;:',,:.. i r.k).
/..,~rro~ k~o'" ~""s/.J .~/---.., -14. A<<Of r~cl r A~ Su.tj~ /;"4C<./ .....,c:I ,1t"/"'6-1<(
C,,"'- #li &/..Iu (/I. ,f"",) /""''i"''....~. 7"t;r .ot,<A/.rco_ "'cod/~ 01 erk.,d< /l....14..."d ",,01 ~~J '''''-~;=r''/.t'
/~ I.. ~ ,.,.d"",- "',., I (..aod/~",cI f I~ c- /Jrd 6/44-J ~7'''''I,y.. .
~ 1C''''''.101~1' /€' J':.',(,. ..1.$<./''-<7 ...,.....';;<<1..., A h... /".......- Y~4'<' #{;)'-././4J~/ (,,'"'-i
.A~cl 6'd",_k/-,,"",- "', I" ~."Ao4'O I 1""'-5.
/1 S_A// 1,'/"/ Cr7:JZ.; /"j"'L!s- J!... /ri"-u-:r ,o(/O-<r ti:; /lorllv-<- 1:-,.-1;11<<. ,.;.", her...... Ti<. ~~ ~
"'/r"'" /.. 4.-.... ~_ /&oIJ./'/<:.I',,-17 I. ~..,.ol h'7 ,",Cu.J J /?:lA d I. ao""; A~d /"e0<<4" /<i? ",,,,,It -eAr'
/",:,~,"s'"k 1/~ ,..1<:. T/..y d')_'<!41-~ "";'7 w.I' AA 'l.cJ'''",,", I "~<:Av~ /;''V """'- .;:;-, 4d 14. <",<~ A" ,,/:..:...
I.h d-/"-L-I-Ccn",,<..'<;;...,-I~ ~;"'~"". '711~ ~J/""Ckf-'/>-/o~ I'~r'o.~-;' "~r;o 14o'<>Ad-;y"'~d
,P"'v.-..... /'O;...d-I;. ,!-cI.. / 1-"" <1../--.... >'. /~ ""',-/c-", >"" I 6';it. <./'<<. i.
2.. E==2.c-=:.~ Va2.'..::=.5 2!"'':: c...~::=-~-s: (disC"~3icn)
/h",,,,,/ C=~k,c.,.,-~/ 1<'4/""" CV';';; Jrk "'ro, ,q ~.s,,/-I<J7..~ 0.1/.,,<-1.'-<:, h.d../,,; I /.
J 6 a<;",~. /.
~ s.kl"'-"'~"dr:5j'1~./...~/cI,J,I."<I"'''''/Ah<'' ."
N . / ' \.::../t" ~O~o;::/.4-t.,J e~/
//A/i-c' 'l ~7 e-oI'K " .4n::..1S ~ ./.(.;, .J / ';~~'.M.: ~ //4"0') .) """"'<l 4 .
b i/ ~ ;(.GG:}.II74,. or-A,..,If L..-Ar..... I l'
~ eAr/' /","" rc..-.e: J.
/" .>v<~,r,o.." 1 ,.-,,,,,,,, '<><.;{, I-
/i'Jd n::d;{; L'/' /"",v, J ~ '7 ?:4V'lo.,d~~J tC AM;'
.:;)"'5-~ /f N<::J/..;.s4. r'L../ 'o/~ d..,c.r;. ;f;. -'-< /~ -}4~C:'~-'1;"<'/"0"-'~ 141V.(r l~4:"""$ dt.--I
wuo. "'6",~ .J . .<-<>-, cn'r'A/f~k."-"r4A"'V>y-.\. J/ - " 1
-<-v ~.., I~ I/N::...~.IYf 14- f'fi. //,( / / --- 1- -L~...1/-^"""1 ~ A ,-70-/:" -!...J Ic" c..:;/.",.. {.II"-
/ /._ . ./ ~ .... A ~~I".."'o dk // / -n 1(.,,5:
10<... ....., " //,.f /'''.4 A.-K- L .I//J ' ,Y Ok/',', ''< I~'<--'" _7 /b... s / /
r r D ....1'./ t/.h:.. , nod..r.: / '6 '-0 A .seo.-t:r_/
/1-1/ .E '/ ,/"""c, <"-,,,,, T~", /16u.,o'~~ .
rr, T~r= d~ ~ c(7 .J"'->4// _--< / /
... 6 ......,~/.J0"l......~.t.1,
n. ,norlh 'C~; /' ',. '
p-!,I "'>v ""'rr-'.~ f II J..I '...'.' ,,,,,iJ/.r,,-,,, .
I ,dv.<..;.Ij' t...<.4 !'.I" / ~ ;1'<..~' j';"'I.4 f":'u';: I A.
. ?-JI,r 6..--./,A/, ZI .-J ' /, ""-1 01"~.r? ,,,/o-/;,/o/"'4rd .~-i.<': /.-.<..1,,,
,/) / I) 0 0 ~...., ;4.- ') A-o 01 ,"'.. /. '/ /. I, () r
'""'- ,).'rc. // -4/;", <:..oj, I. I . - ~ "-. V",c;,~/ ""'O".......l~. ~/d'. 7];.J firc..,p
re""'/" S~-c.v.-,,- AS ""'c::: /.~.If rf, ri:z ,o7U/I-: } I,J 0-
.,;: c/...' I. I 1 "'" '" A~ f~'C"<1,,I
_v,;Q .' .I'dV1 >"".:lo /;;)JJ""7 /lA r(.,......,/ 4,.(; /-o,f ..it . , .
r;k A1A I off;::; /1 6 ./ ""- I"dJJ,t.J"f l' ';j ;,.~d~~/,,_ o.,;-,,t~, -/04>
, /' ~~ ,.c.., .7( I~ tl.. k../,....,.,.,d ;f;,<'/';""'J' <9 c.....".,.-.-,-l<-.-:;.. /, .J r/ '/~ /"
~ d [(,~. "')" ~C:~.~ lJ'~ 7sl(
/ /"~.... ....c4>H r<..ad ,-,,/1 ~ ~/~U<:. r///j., 'l ""...-.s/.) It.., . (j. I" / /.
(0 ~ ~ 0 6/ ~s ~ ..4-" d ,ht'.JCA9i! ~if'/) )"~r ."..;""
") ~..., <;cd<_~r..l_ A-,q' C'O',<Yl J:"""l71 I. It. s..,Ici 'ft./../ C"'-"-^ I
1 .
,.. .,~. .
" ." ~. " .
.
.
:':':=~=.:":' == 2=::::...::~::..~~~.:.. ~'a-~"~=-:=::~
= --=--.... ~;E?:::::'::~~! ?2=-:?':'
:l.
P=="",=-==
-",-, ..--.....-
_"c._~___..
(c.:.s=:..:.ss
;:c~;::~.:~l i..;;:ac-~,
::C-:.::
. . -.
'='.-:":'-"-~'-._"'-
---- -------
a;:-'
C'''=:':'':'a::.:..~le, w:.~-: =~S;;~ ~o ~..-a':'Ll=S CU~-:'eC a-~ve:'
/fJ I'ri"o-d ""-l'rj'<::<.1 ......., y <!/,....,... k A fj",.t<:<.o--n I C::Y"<7"" t .rv~JJ,."". ( hA 5..1.0 ~ -"'Ad
/Erik,- d:rl"r!, .A ;O_/':.I'~ ///<t.d r'.~I.'-"6 ... 1.-./..1 C='L,(
n;O-"f",-1 c,o.... 6c ~,,-*<.-I h ')o,vIAoI.I./'~l S/<.r.....w_1u- r"""l:f r'.#~/"''''' if
I. tz,., /?".; -d .'i.J env;rd/V.$ /.... ...",.' ,
[I.:://..,/"</ jLJ-. <.l...h.r-c.....d../,""I:":"O/ ",,,/ ~ s"ilo6~ ~ ~P"'~ r:...,~ /'''''''')
,1 c:.,..,vc-> t,...... I s",JS~rhcJl. ~;I""./ 6'c.,",~ dJF"/ 'iJ k""J.
i
"I:
---
4. ~..:..===.-:.:.=: \~.: :::'c:.:ss .::c.ss:.=.l.~ :ni-::.;a::.:.c..""l !Ile2.S~=.s == ;:==je~;
J. CftJJ/cr/~ f /r"l"ClJ.e d Ck1,1s ",... ;oryn:/"/"y ""r/C.., 17' Ok.! /fJ ;I~ h.r"o
t..J/""J./-....... r cleAr.) ~J/r;"<.I-",< I. I"'<>'<c.e. /1",1",,"_1 :.(,.1-1 ,0J{ A...,d no; 14.... '( sk-...~....;..,..
;'1.-,15 ;./U..,/, yC'rl:c:-ck.; ~Cr/;j7!""") !. t/A.... ,.g., d
]. /lA,t,-...,,,,,, S-c It",dJ fro,", /31/ ,AlYJ/Jd"c.. "';;<-/'" h- cI ,(.d, / to-< Ik, dr
u tJec/,'L-/'O,/ ~1 ,1'.._1'& ;1<4 i,'k. /JDr ;"?c.-...,It1'A.I ";"r/.", ;r(,- "'AJf_",- ,od/.~
t. '6 6 / V' /' ~ rc<Yr:-4.,{d""
Name i:.~r-"I ,<;. IJ~L/J("/3
NaIre
'.'
7':.("((1<=;,.,./
<.J
T:'~e
~-'a
..1.___
Na.'!E
T.:.-::.2.e
~/ .4 fl Z.
S~C".2.::-':=~
3k.~/7?
(/ Ca-:=
":"'-
..
t
4
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
SOUlhold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
MEMORANDUM
To:
All involved agencies
from:
The Planning Board office
Re:
Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Cove Beach
Estates
Date:
October 26, 1988
Enclosed please find a copy of the response to the comments
made by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services
regarding the above mentioned project.
Please forward your comments as to the completeness of
this document.
-.-
cc: David Emilita
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
Suffolk County Planning Commission
NYS Department of Environmental Conservation
Thomas C. Jorling, DEC Commissioner
Judith Terry, Town Clerk
Building Department
Board of Appeals
B6ard of Trustees
.
,
,
STAGE 1A ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY
OF THE
COVE BEACH ESTATES
A T EAST MAR ION
TOWN OF SOUTHHOLD
SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK
ill ~@~O\Yl~ 00
OCT 41988
SOUTH OLD TOWN
PlANNING BOARD
BY
GEARY ZERN
PREPARED FOR
HAMPTON-MANOR ASSOCIATES, INC.
P. 0, l'lQ;\'-'\(lfI
MANORVILLE, NEW YORK 11949
CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEYS. INC
P. O. BOX 614
VERPLANCK, NEW YORK 10596
914 737-1970
.
.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION..................................... .1
GEOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
PREHISTORY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2
HISTORy.......................................... .2
CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
B I BL IOGRAPHY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
.
.
INTRODUCTION
Cove Beach Estates is located on the North Fork of Long
Island in the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New
York. It is in the hamlet of East Marion. The Hamlet
of Orient, the last community on the North Fork, is
located to just east of the site.
The area has a rich history going back to the late
l630s. The prehistory of the area is known mostly from
private collections which indicate occupation as early
as 11,000 Years Before Present (BP). Recently, a
Paleo-Indian point 10,000 to 11,000 years old was found
in a survey in Riverhead (Torano, Personna 1
Communication) .
GEOLOGY
The North Fork of Long Island is part of a glacial
moraine and outwash complex formed during the late
Pleistocene. As the continental glaciers melted, sand
and grave 1 deposits formed in front of the moraines. In
some areas loess deposits are reported (Torano,
Personnel Communication). The Cove Beach Estates
property is typical morainal/outwash topography. Along
the Long Island shore south, the land is rolling with
numerous, small dry basins. Further to the south, the
land becomes flat, sloping in that direction.
Along the shore, the beach is composed of gravel from 2
to 10 centimeters in diameter. This beach is formed
into a series of gravel ridges stepping up from the
water to about 5 meters above sea level. The sound face
of the beach is steep, about a 45% slope, and there is
sand at the water line. Logs and other storm debris
litters the top of the gravel ridge which is from 5 to
12 m wide. On the south side of this beach ridge is a
depression between it and the morainal deposits. The
property is bordered on the east by Dam Pond which
appears to be dammed naturally on the north side by the
gravel beach. The maps included in the report are
consistent with observations in the field indicating
that the south end of the pond was naturally dammed by a
sand bar. Whether or not the pond had an inlet on the
south side in prehistoric times as it does now is
difficult to tell but this does seem likely.
To the southwest of the property is Marion Lake, a
natural pond. This pond probably formed in a kettle
hole left by the retreating glaciar. In Orient Harbor,
to the east of the property, is a depression which may
have been a lake during prehistoric times. This area
was probably not flooded by salt water until roughly
5,000 BP.
.
.
PREHISTORY
The prehistory of eastern Long Island is poorly
understood. Few excavations have been undertaken in the
East Marion area. Most knowledge is from local
collections, most of which have not been examined by
archaeologists (Barcel, Personnel Communication).
Although the Southold Museum reports having collections
from East Marion they have not been catologued at this
time and cannot be characterized as to period or
cultrure.
Two collections are deposited at the museum. The George
Morton Collection apparently comes from the area around
Marion Lake. Contained in twelve large boxes, it has
not yet been catologed and discribed by the Curator,
Ellen Barcel. The George Penny Collection is from the
area but has no documentation. It has not been
catologed at this time. The Morton collection seems to
indicate that habitation was concetrated around the
lake, which would have provided a ready access to
potable water as well as other freshwater resorces.
HISTORY
The Rev. Epheron Whittaker, in his 1881 History of
Southold, reports that the Purchase of Southhold was
made of the Indians here as early as August of 1640 and
the Rev, John Youngs and his companions came about that
time. The exact date of the purchase and first original
European settlement is unsure. Griffin (1857) and
Munsell (1882 report generally the same events but
speculate as to an early date. Since the original
documents were apparently lost, the date is likely to
remain uncertain.
The early settlement of the area is poorly documented.
Munsell reports that Orient is the most fertile part of
the town, which would explain the early settlement in
that area.
The earliest map of the area found is a coastal survey
dating to 1838 (See Fig. 2). It shows East Marion, then
East Rocky Point, with settlement along the road and no
houses in the Cove Beach property. The building located
at the outlet of Dam Pond, then Mill Pond, is probably
the mill located. A Coast and Geodetic
Survey map drawn almost 50 years later (see Fig. 3),
shows a village very little changed. A few more houses
appear along the road, but woods and fields still occupy
most of t~e area to the north of the village. By 1909,
Belchertly Atlas of Suffolk County (on file, Suffolk
County Offices) shows the St. Thql~S Childrens Home
located north of the village, along the shore. During
.
.
the walkover of the property, no foundations
corresponding to this institution were found and it
seems likely that they were located to the west of the
property.
During the early 20th century, the site apparently had some
structures on it. Although no structures are shown on
the 1928 map (see Fig. 4), a road is indicated and the
names F. Corinth and Burkin appear on the map. No
building locations are shown. A 1943 U. S. G. S.
quadrangle map revised in 1947 (Fig. 5) shows three
buildings at the end of the road which enters the
property. The 1957 quadrangle shows no structures on
the property although the road is shown.
CONCLUSIONS
All indications from the literature search are that the
Cove Beach Estates property was not the location of
human habitation during prehistoric or historic times,
with the possible exception of the early to mid- 20th
century. This late occupation was probably limited to
summer cottages since no foundations were observed
during walkovers of the site. Historic era uses seem to
be limited to fann fields and woodlots.
The lack of potable water on the site and the presence
of sites in the area around Marion Lake indicates that
prehistoric occupations were probably limited to that
area. Although the property would certainly have been
used for hunting and gathering activities, any
indications of this activity would be limited to
scattered small specialized sites which produce small
quanities of cultural material. This kind of site tends
to be difficult to find in field survey due to its small
size. In addition, this type of site, if it did exist
on the property, would probably not be of National
Register significance.
In conclusion, it should be emphesized that all
indications are that uses of the property in both
historic and prehistoric times has probably been limited
to nonhabitational activities and that any 20th century
uses would not be of significance. No further work is
recommended based on the information obtained from this
literature search.
3
.
.
B I BL IOGRAPHY
Anon.
1929
Atlas of Suffolk County,
Stewart, New York
New York.
Dolph and
Barcel, E.
Personnal Communication.
Griffin, Augustus
1857 Griffith's Journal. Augustus Griffith, Pub.
Southold, New York
Tarano, F, Personna 1 Communication.
Whitaker, Rev. E.
1881 History of Southold. No publisher, Southold, New
York.
Maps
United States Coast And Geodetic Survey
1838 Coastal Map of Long Island.
1883 Coastal Map of Long Island.
United States Geological Survey
1947 Orient Quarangle.
1957 Orient Quadrangle.
4
~~
79
.. ,
72
"
..
..
..
36
3'
2e
.3
36
39
,60
37
,0
e.
37
3.
31
1.~
... ;'-.
,~"
/
3'
/
69
e_
/
/ .e
~8
;,0'......;-
,.
HARBOR
'6
16
17
2
2
'..-~ 2
10
"
......
17
m~ 16
GAR'D~NERS
17
7
,
'25
BA y I~"O
10 ~-I<>~ \
'727 17'30"
md published by the Geological Survey
II photographs by photogrammetric methods
,en 1954, Field check 1956
I from USC&GS charts 363 (1956)
~. *b
~ GN
".
231 MILS \ ',"
31MlLS
I
,
1000 0 1000
- - -
5
- - -
SCAlE 1:24000
o
I MILE
2000
3000
'000
5000
6000
7000 FEET
.
o
1 KILOMETER
--- -
1927 North American datum
ed on New York coordinate system,
Connecticut coordinate system
,I Transverse Mercator grid ticks.
,e
FIG.
1. ORIENT QUADRANGLE,
1957.
CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET
DOTTED LINES REPRES~NT 5-FOQT CONTOURS
NATIONAL "GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929
DEPTH CURVES AND ~OUNOINGS IN FEET-DATUM IS MEAN lOW WATER
SHORELINE SHOWN REPRESEtlTS THE "PPROXIM"'T~ UNE OF MEAN HIGH WATER
THE MEA'" RANGE o~ TIDE IS APPROYIM.I\TE:l Y 3.. FEE~_
;,.,rli..",t.. "..la..tarl fa.....a ......A f:aJ,I 10___.
UTM GRID AND 1956 MAGNETIC NORTH
OECLlNA!ION AT CENTER OF SHEET
__.' '. .",...~~~~d\.-i'~,~..~::-:...'
ft'~ ;'.... ".:..; ::..-:...~~.;: '
C\/
.
-,
'..
"-
'J / J
':/
/
/
/
.
/
,
/
/
I
,
/
'---------- I
-------- ;
.
I
,
~.... ,."
"
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
^
. ..
,.,.";".s.-- :.':
" ,..fli...'
..,
t '.,
J'o, "
~ r," ( . 1 ~
~, -,. ~., .....('~~ ~ . \-....-
.. .
. ,..... ......., .....
~l( ~. ..:. ..' .-..-' ,i
PQ-l' it 'l(~
. t' ,
I _~_... _..,
, ~t \..' . . I ·
. ~ r-i II .Gld-
". ~"."!i\.. . ..\
:I!\\ ~ ,.,.. . !
~. 1
,-\ "
/\..!~ ~
.
..
,.
.
.
.' -
I _~_ .
, -.... ~ "..
.----.-....: ." ...
.- '.' '. I'
r-::. t." ... t.
.. J. ' ~
. , '... "'."
.. : r ~ ,,,..,;"", ~..'
. ; :: '.. .... ..
\
;:'
.
: f.';
. .
.............r
. . ~ . ,':-. ", ~-' .;:'. ,- .
.t....:t~
".,-,.
,. .... ,...
." ,'''', ..........: r~
"li, .'.. ,"
":".;' /
;') ,o^.. ... .,.,
't ......... .' . .... II"') ..r.r~ ......
,0.... . .~ . ) fl' .~. ~.. u'. :i"-g.,.,
.;:, ;.':", ~ - \~. ...,.... ....... 'I.- .'...... '.y~
".r.... /t('r.~.. '..,' ~~..
to ~ .. . ",. -, ...., \ -a:
.. \ ",,"'::" ....... ,. '\ . ," ~'" ~." :--
.... . -.- . . ~ ."'t..~ ....~.'
. ,.... ',-.' .~... \,;.~ ....:-
'r ','.. -~""-'__.:..'_ ..~. .
. . .......,~
:....'.....,. ;{~FlG. 2. COAST. AND
~"\'~:'&~"';'. ";..~"' ...,.-'. ~
,. ;4It~ '"71!, "'''''''"f\Il r .-I
"r 1",,, ~ .....r ~r
..../.. .......... .' ',4 /' . -".'
.,"
-"
-/
/-.
. .-
.,' -
/
/
./
GEODETIC SURVEY MAP,
'V
1838. SITEIS~IRCLED.
.
"
"
.:'
~li
. -
&';<;:-;
"".;.,
.; . . ~"TI
; ~U'..f...
'.,.. ~\""'d
?t ::~,i~ I
;:'~"".1
.R~ "'J .
!~' ,""
.~., -,
:':9"SJ.----
?-~
.Ji',
..~..
b :....r
:. ~,~
,~t?r---
., ,
:":"':. ~ .
~il,~:1
~..,
,;6.i
. 0" r---
~r.:~~
'iIJi~
.,.~
1~ .
'!.l1V~1 .
~.,;L___
~
Ii.
...
----..
'.
'-.
'..............
"
'-
.
1/
o
If
r"
FIG. 3. COAST AND GEODE'HC SURVEY MAP,-1883.
,"
~ ;
, ~
, ,
, ,
.... .
; "~~!~l~{~;"~
"
./~
~
...t;1 D .~.... -~
A ~.'I
, . .~ ~ ~ "i ~
". ~ ' . J ~. ~ ':] t'
.:1/'-,"_ ' ~ f ~ I ~ t.
.' L :YL.. '.L/k '( io Ii" \.t:1I f' I"
'zz7 -rt8r q,. ~lJ ~~ '<{ ~ \;~
r'U,'",,>>, 'q ~'j 'Y , .~ ~;,
!~ ~ I; ~ j
~ ~ 4. 7"u~h;
':~6! Ed~,
, . -- "~,
.c.EdJW~
. .H
,\~
iJ:~~
L. H. #4/Ar.
. ..e,
.-i?
,j
o
~r.? }
o
"
SEE PAGE30
".!
/
7
l'
"
COUNTY, 1929,..."
Iv
,
'-..:..).
o
/
1.,..-
Elille
Lon!
+
ORIENT
HARBOR
Browns I
21'00.
;
ST./lLlHG 1.1 M'
20'00.
19'00.
18'00.
I
,.
SCALE 1: 24,000
o
1 Mill
tap Service (AM). War Department.
lerelltcr GrId added. 1947. Copied I"
,mpiled by the Army Map ServiCe by
USC&GS, USGS. U. S.Engine.r
1942. Map field checked 1942.
1000 SOO 0
, - - - - -
1000 SOO 0
- - - - -
1000
2000 Meters
1000
2000 "'.rds
CONTOUR INTERVAL 20 fEET
DATUM IS MEAN SEA LEVEL
TRANSVERSE MERCATOR PROJECTION
1927 NORTH "ME RICAN DATUM
tt,lf'ded,d"we.tbtrfOld
FIG:~'5';'ORTENT QUADRANGLE, 1947.
..
CONSTRUCTION ABANDONED
Dot,lble Illck Sin,le Irick Double trick
*'**"***_ ....... t:..*****
."
,....
~
_'...'lS..
Old .____ <::::0::&
Slreel;Clrlineinstre.t_ ~-.
~ ---- ............... -..-..-...
kurlinl
-
~ Inlennill."I..kt~
. Ifll.uniltenlstr...._
< 0..
.., R.pfds;fIHs
:=J lIrl'lJpids.ncfl.1!s-
:=J S..mp,.,rsIl_
:=J Roeks I.astl .t .. lid,_
:=J Wharl,pier
:=J M.n.m.deshO'llinl_
REPRINTED FROM MIUTARY EDITION FOR CIVIL USE 1950
SOLD AND DISTRIBUTED BY U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, WASHINGTON 25, D. C.
"""Oll..ft .UIiI DICUIiI"T10Jl I'"
'0. clInu OF '"IU
..O...IiI....L ...GltlTICCH"IiIGI
.
.
Hampton-Manor Associates, Inc.
P.O. Box 308 fO)
Manorville, New York 11949 ~J
(516) 878-1031
OCT 2 :J 1988
1:~:.1
. ~. I
, I
,J J j
'-'
~@~~\17~
SOUTHOLD TOWN
PLANNING BOARD
October 24, 11::1:::,B
Mr. Pennett Orlo'd~-:;k-:t, Jr. Cba:Lrman
Town of Southold Pla~nin? Board
53095 Main Road
Southold. N.Y. I.J.791
He: I~cve Beach Estates.
DE I :~~
Dear C.haj.rrnan Orlow:3kj.:
Thj::;:: letter wi 1.] '3erVe a:3 a rt~:3pDn;.'_::;'::~: to '~CJ:rJ1nent'3
regardin,g the Draft Environmental Impact ;~:t.ateTD.ent made by
the ,'~'::uffolk CounTY Depa.r-tment of Healt"b .~-)ervl'~~'e'3 ~ Department
of Ecolcg~l by l,ett~?r dat,t~lj Sf'~pTembel' 2.3, 19058 and t:he
CDYDmf-~nt~:; DftbE~ TO'tin Plann"'"r, Valerie i=':;'::::'::Jp.:'tz, in -3- ffif::::ffiC)Y'::';tndu.!;:!.
dated October 17 1988.
Fir~3t., I 'vl':Juld lil':8 to register a '='omplaint re~:arding
the nrocedures followed bv the staff of the Planning Board
-;.-'e:?:ardi,n,g "this mattE";r. In all prevIous correspondc:n(.:'~; (Vi th
tlH? Town rega:::-ding this DEIS, I was E.,ent ',:;Cipie::; l"Jf all
(:;orre::;pClnde.nc(C': resardin:;; .the DETS as ':'3Don a~3 -+:b,?y w\:::!:"'e
rec:eived by the Planning Boay-d. Howevert \^lh,,:'Tl sub~:::,tant:i.ve
(,:cJl1l!nents were received l.:,y the :-:::taff CHi ,sepi:,::'?mber 29) 19Ei.'3, TIO
I,::OPY wa:.c::: forwarded t.o J!lt?, t}-Jl.J'~ I felt ill, Pl-f:':'F!ared tc:; re-::::pOl'lc1
d.irectly to 1:.he cOlIunent~::3 at the PlanTl.~,ng' EClard meeting of
Octo'ber l7, 1geE\. I apprel:::'ial~,.':'! Eill Dr thf'2 pa2:::t effort'::;; 0:1:
the staff regarding this proie'~t. and ~ hope ~hat future
comments wj.ll be ~~;ent dir,?,:::-+,}V to me wi~.:hout d',,:,lay '30 that.
appropriate responses I~an be readied.
I believe the urocedures mandated in Part 1517 and w1thiJl
thf'~ Tnwn C:o(:le Cha.pter 44 (E~-L'1j t~onmeTl+:a.l Quality R.eview have
not been fo:lowed by the staff of tbe F'lanning Board with
reQ;ard "t;.Q th"? revie'yl elf this Dt~aft. Fnvl.::-.cJnmeT;tal Imp,'3...=t
St,atern,,:::n...t.
It
the responsibility of the Lead Agency +:0
. -
determine whether a DETS i~ .-nmplete prior to issuing th0
dOC1Jment to other invDlved a,'~'en,I'-::1.f'~S for the:i.r re'1iev,1 rPar-'t:
617 Section 617.10 e and Se,=tj.on 44-10 of the Southold Tow~
Code) Thus, the dav the Town distributed the Cove Bea,:h
DEIS to the oth81' involved a7en,~ies, it was putti,ng those
.
.
agencies on notice, pursuant to 617.10 that the DEIS had been
considered complete by the Lead Agency. A not ice of
completion should have been prepared, posted and published
concurrent with the distribution of the document to the other
involved agencies.
By following the proper procedures, the Office of
Ecology, as well as other involved agencies would not receive
the DEIS until the document i,s accepted by the Town. If the
Town has accepted the document as complete, and the comments
received from the Office of Ecology are to be considered a
review by an involved agency pursuant to Part 617.10, the
responses to th.e comments contained in this letter should
then be considered as a portion of the Final Environmental
Impact Statement for this project.
Qf!i~_~ Qj_ g~el~gy = ~~_~:lE~.!:~:t~. 9.f ~~E~_emQ~~ 28. 1988
The following are responses to the comments :made by the
SCDHS - Office of Ecology.
Item I.
Sanitary Code
The Office of Ecology is concerned that the DEIS did not
include a detailed discussion of the County Health Department
regulations and requirements, and the method of compliance
with such regulations and requirements.
Re::::,porlse:
I am ,sure that the Suffolk County Department of Health
Services is well aware of its own regulations and
requirements and does not need to re-read them within each
DEIS which is reviewed by the agency, however, in the
interest of providing the reque,sted material to the Office of
Ecology, a copy of Article 6 of the Sanitary Code is attached
to this letter and should be incorporated by reference into
the DEIS.
The major requirements pur:3uant to Article 6 are a:3
followE,:
1. Sewage Facilities
a. Individual lot ':Sizes mU:3t be at least 40,000 square
-2-
.
.
feet i.n size.
b. The property is in an area where subsoil and
groundwater conditions are conducive to the proper
functioning of individual sewerage system:3.
c. The individual sewerage systems comply with the
Suffolk County Department of Hea 1 th Services Standards.
2. Individual Water Facilities
a. All parcels in the subdivision are at least 40,000
square feet in size.
b. Individual wells can provide an average yield of 5
gallons per minute.
c. The individual wells will comply with the
Department l s current standardE,.
The application of Cove Beach Ee,tates, to the be,st of my
knowledge compliee. with all of the requirements for the
issuance of permits from the Department of Hea 1 th Service:3
for indi vidua 1 sani. tary systems and indi vidua 1 we lIs to
service the propoe.ed lote..
The comment of the Office of Ecology is the equivalent
of a.sking an applicant to reproduce the entire zoning code
and subdivision regulation:3 of a municipality and as:3essing
the method of compl iance with each of the requiremente.
contained therein. Rea:3onable assumptions must be made by
the various reviewing agencies that the requirements of other
agencies must be met if a project is to receive approvals for
it to proceed,
I tern 2.
Site Description and Subdivision Details
The Office of Ecology comments that subdivision maps
were not presented with the DEIS. Additionally, no road
profiles or drainage calculations were submitted.
Response, The Office of Ecology obviously had copiee. of the
subdivision map in its possession or else other comments
pr(-~sented in their letter- could not have been made. However.
additional c:opies of the subdivision map are attached to this
letter for distribution purposes.
-3-
.
.
Regarding the issue of road profiles and drainage
details, these items have not as yet been prepared for the
subdivision. They are required during the Preliminary Plat
review stage of the Town, and the application is not yet at
that level of review.
Item 3.
Wildlife Resources
The Office of Ecology makes two comments regarding
wildlife resources; the first deals with the potential
relocation of species and the elimination of breeding
habitats, and the second comment discusses the role of
landscaping in providing increased food opportunities for
wildlife.
Re:3ponses:
Regardi ng the is:3ue of wi ldl ife re locat ing away from the
project site during and following development of the subject
property, I maintain that some individuals will be able to
relocate to both on site and off site locations. Admittedly,
as stated in the DETS, certain :3pecies will be more affected
than others. There are three impacts to wildlife resources,
all of which are discussed in the DEIS. First some habitat,
and consequently some individual specimens will be eliminated
by the implementation of the propo:3ed, or any other,
development plan for the property. Second, some species and/
or individuals will choose to relocate to different areas of
the site or off-site and attempt to establish themselves
against e:3tablished populations. Third. some species and
individuals will adapt to the new surroundings, both during
and following development of the property.
Regarding the issue of landscaping, let me first state
that no comprehensive landscaping plan 1:3 being propo:3ed by
the applicant. It is the intention of the applicant to
develop the subject property and offer opportunities to the
individual purchasers of the lots to build their own homes"
As to the land:3caping of the 34 individual homesites, we
believe that it is impossible to dictate specific landscaping
plans to individual lot buyers. With respect to the comment
that landscaping will provide additional food opportunities,
I believe that the comment as stated in the DEIS is a valid
evaluation of the situation. My experience has been that
individual landscaping plans contain both native and non
native plant material, some of which is suitable source of
-4-
.
.
food for a variety of wildlife. The entire concept of
landscaping material providing both a source of food and
cover for wi ldl ife i'3 neither new or radica l, in fact I
believe it is accepted theory in fields as diverse as
wildlife 'biology and landsca~e architecture,
Regarding the issue of managed turf, one of the
additional recommendations proposed for minimizing potential
environmental impacts is a recommendation that 1 imi ts the
amount of cleared and turfed area on each of the individual
parcels of land,
Issue 4.
Freshwater Wetlands
The Office of Ecology claims that there is no discussion
of the potential impacts to the small fre'3hwater pond located
south of lot 34, resulting from subdivision road
construction.
Response:
The subject freshwater pond is actually an irrigation
well dug in 1948 (see appendix #4), It is a small body of
water surrounded by steep slopes and a 4 - 6 foot high berm.
The physical characteristics of the pond are not conducive to
wildlife usage, primarily due to the almost vertical slopes
surrounding the pond. As noted in the DEIS, no freshwater
wetland vegetation was observed surrounding the pond,
primarily due to the steep slopes. As presently proposed,
the subdivision access roadway will be constructed within
several feet of the pond, with roadway construction cutting
through a portion of the 4 - 6 foot high berm surrounding the
pond. There will still be some berm surrounding the pond,
and no impacts are anticipated to the pond due to siltation,
erosion or runoff as the pond itself will be protected by the
existing berm, There are no anticipated impacts to the
wildlife values of the pond, as the area is presently
unsuited for wildlife and conditions are not expected to be
any different following construction,
Issue 5.
Cumulative Impacts
The Office of Ecology requests consideration of the
development of adjacent property. and the impacts thereof be
discussed within the context of the impacts of the
-5-
.
.
,
development of the Cove Beach Estate Property.
Response:
The developments of Cove Beach Estates and Dam Pond are
separate and distinct proposals, joined only by their sharing
of common boundar-ie::;, The developer of Cove Beach Estate:3
has no control over the physical characteristics of the land
of the other deve lopment, the proposed layout of the adj acent
deve lopment; or- any impacts which mayor may not r-esul t from
the development of the adjacent tract of land. Each project
must be addressed separately on the merits of the individual
applications.
Basically, the Office of Ecology is requesting a Generic
Environmental Impact Statement (GElS) within the context of
Part 617, Section 617.15. To my knowledge, the Town of
Southald has not commissioned a GElS regarding these separate
actions.
The is:sue of coordinated development between the two
properties is discussed within the context of the. DEIS
prepared for Cove Beach Estates <see pages 58. 62 & 63). In
these areas, the adjacent property is discussed and the
recommendation is made regarding coordinated access for the
adjacent properties. Other than this discussion, it would be
inappropriate to comment regarding the development of the
adjacent property in any other way except for the preparation
of a Generic Environmental Impact Statement, prepared by or
for the Town of Southold.
Another aspect to consider is the fact that the Town of-
Southold has granted the Dam Pond development a determination
of non-sig-ni f iC,:ince for port ion:=: of the ir development on
12/17/84.
Issue 6.
The Office of Ecology complain:s about the discu:s:sion of
alternative development plans, and the number of alternative
plans considered.
ReSpOTIE;e:
The Town of Southold, in it':3 :3coping Ee:38ion documents
-6-
.
.
those presented within the DEIS. As the lead agency, the
Planning Board obviously has the authority to request or
reject certain development alternatives for the property in
question. The preparer of the DEIS for Cove Beach Estates
was merely ccmplying with the directives of the Town Planning
Board in the discussion of alternative development plans.
Issue 7.
Cultural Resources
The Office of Ecology requests that the archaeological
2.urvey of the property be incorporated into the DEIS prior to
acceptance of the doc;ument.
Response:
The archaeological survey has been prepared, submitted
and distributed. The 2urvey found that there was little
likelihood for any archaeological remains to be found on the
subject property.
Issue 8.
Additional Cormnents
The Office of Ecology contends that the following issues
are not discussed; bluff protection, waterfront lots and
beach access, drainage and slopes, open space protection and
recreational areas designation.
Response:
The issue of bluff protection 15 discussed on pages 34
and 62.
The issue of "waterfront lots and beach access" is a
rather broad topic, and it is unclear as to the specific
requests of the Office of Ecology. The development propo:3al
proposes the creation of a total of 13 waterfront lots, each
including a portion of the beach located on the property.
Additionally, a separate waterfront area is proposed to be
set aside as a park and recreation area offering access to
the beach for the remainder of- the future lot O'V'lners.
The issue of drainage and :31opes ic discussed on pages
1, 15, 32, 34, 39, 47, 48, 50, 54 and 61 of the DEIS.
-7-
.
.
The issue of open space protection is discussed on pages
1, 3, 44, 53, 54 - 57, 60 and 63 of the DEIS and open space
areas are shown on the propo~3ed development plans.
The issue of recreational area designation is discussed
on pages 1, 3, 61 and 63 of the DEIS and is shown on the
proposed development plans.
g':'.~~!'c:t:~ of .'{",-l~,::l~ ::;o:o.':'.:2"'-"-L Town !:'l"'-!'c~~r:: 12",-:t:~.~. Qo:o.:t:':'.Q~r:: EL
1988
The Town Planner, in her memorandum of October 17, 1988
indicated three items of deficiency in the DEIS. TheE;8
comments are addressed below:
Item 1.
Subdivision map
The Town Planner requests a copy of the proposed
subdivision map be enclosed with each DEIS.
Response: Additional copies of the subdivision map are
being delivered to the Town for distribution with the DEIS.
Item 2.
Water Supply Data
The Town Planner requests additional data
water resources found on the subject property,
supplying test hole data for the property.
regarding the
including
Response:
With regard to the water supply found on the Cove Beach
Estates property, let me first state that the map found on
page 22 of the DEIS was inadvertently unlabeled as to the
source. The source of the map was the Suffolk County
Department of Health Services water table map for 1987.
The USGS information presented in the DEIS was meant to
be repre,;sentative of the expected conditions found at the
project location. Although the data presented was from
elsewhere, the natural groundwater conditionr3 are not
expected to vary greatly from the data presented. The USGS
has not conducted extensive ,;studies of the North Fork of Long
-8-
. .
Island, particularly within the Town of Southold. The last
specific report in the area is from 1963.
Discussions held with staff at the local USGS office
found that there is an overall lack of inforrMtion available
regarding the groundwater resources of eastern Southold Town.
One study currently underway concentrates on the rate of
groundwater movement on the North Fork we,st of the Village of
Greenport. Even this study which will not be available for
perhaps 18 months will not be specific to the Ea.st Marion
area.
Regarding site specific conditions, test hole data
requested by the Town Planner is included in the DEIS at page
13 and on the proposed subdivision map. Te,st well,s have also
been installed on the subject property. The data from these
wells can be found at the Suffolk County Department of Health
Services, the agency ult.imat.ely responsible for permits
regardi ng water supply and l3ani tary waste disposal.
Item 3.
Traffic Data
The Town Planner requests that more recent traffic
counts be used for the discus;sion of traffic impacts. She
suggests that data is available from either 1987 or 1988.
Response:
The data presented in the DEIS is directly t.aken from
t.he Town Mast.er Plan prepared in 1984. At the time of
preparation of the Master Plan, the counts were the most
recent. and highest. counts available. The New York State
Department of Transportation was contacted to see if any more
recent counts were available for the area in question. More
recent counts were taken during 1984 on Route 25 somewhere
between Middle Road on the West and Narrow River Road in
Orient. This stretch of road includes the more heavily
t.raveled sect.ion of Route 25 adjacent. t.o t.he Village of
Greenport.. The estimat.ed average annual daily traffic
for t.he 1984 count showed 4,300 vehicles along t.his sect.ion
of roadway.
I do not believe that the almo:3t three fold increa:3e in
traffic from the figures presented in the DEIS is indicative
of the conditions actually found in East Marion. Regardless
of the correct figure, Main Road is operating at very
-9-
.
.
acceptable levels of service and far below the estimated
capacity of 12,000 - 14,000 vehicles per day. My opinion
remains the same regarding the traffic impact of the
proposed development of Cove Beach Estates, the minor
increase in overall traffic as a result of the development of
the property as currently planned will not result in any
reductions in the level of services found on the local
roadway.
Regarding the 1987 or 1988 traffic counts alluded to in
the Town Planner's memorandum, no such traffic counts exist
on an official level,
*
*
k
*'
t.
*
*
t
k
*
~
I be 1 ieve that the various commentE:, presented to the
Board by the Office of Ecology and the Town Planner have been
addressed in this response. As previously noted, these
responses should be considered as a portion of the Pinal
Environmental Impact Statement for the project, pursuant to
the prevailing regulations found in Part 617 and Ch,apter 44
of the Town Code. '
I would request that this matter be placed on the
agenda for the next Planning- Board meeting so that the lSS'i..leS
raised regarding this procedure can be clarified.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
~(;Pe-o
--
Kenneth C. Coenen, ATC?
President
.'
.
.
(18:1.4)
SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES
CODE OF ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS
CONCERNING REALTY SllBDIVISION, DEVELOPMENT
AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION PROJECT,
WATER SUPPLY AND SEWAGE DISPOSAL FACILITIES
AR'l'ICLB 6
RDLft smDIVISIOlfS, DBVBLOrftIK'OLS,
AIlD C7.rIDR COlhn:1dA.'T~OR PROJBCTS
Section
601
602
609
Definitions
Department Approval of Realty Subdivision,
Development, or Other Construction Project Plans
Applications for Approval
Filing Requirements
Sewaqe Facilities Requirements for Conventional
Single-Family Residential Realty Subdivisions
and Developments
Water Facilities Requirements for Conventional
Single-Family Residential Realty Subdivisions
and Developments
Sewage Facilities Requirements for Construction
Projects Other Than Conventional Single-Family
Residential Realty Subdivisions and Developments
Water Facilities Requirements for Construction
Projects Other than Conventional Single-Family
Residential Realty Subdivisions and Developments
Variances
603
604
60S
606
607
608
Section 601
Definitions
As used in this code, unless the context otherwise requires:
a. Clustered Realty SUbdivision means a realty subdivision consisting
of one or more relatively undersized parcels, which is desiqned in such a
manner so s to allow a substantial unimproved portion of the tract to
stand open and uninhabited.
b. Co rcial or Industrial Center means a realty subdivision or
development to be used for non-residential purposes.
c. C "^ity Seweraqe Systea means a system utilized for the
collection and disposal of sewaqe, or other waste of a liquid nature,
including the various devices for the treatment of such wastes, serving
more than one parcel whether owned by a municipal corporation, private
utility, or otherwise.
d. C "^ity Water Systea means a source of water and necessary
appurtenances together with a distribution system serving more than one
parcel, whether owned by a municipal corporation, private utility, or
otherwise.
~.
.
.
e. Depart-.n~ means the Suffolk County Depar~ment of Heal~h Services.
f. Ile'nlloper means any person or group of persons, or any legally
cognizable en~i~y or entities or any combination of the foregoing, who:
(1) is undertaking or participating in ~he establishment
of a realty subdivision or o~her construction project:
(a) either individually, or
(b) pursuant to a conunon scheme, plan or venture, or
(2) owns, acquires, possesses, con~rols or creates a
development or other construc~ion project.
g. o...Lop.en~ means two, three or four contiguous parcels located
wholly or partially within the County of Suffolk, or any tract of land
located wholly or partially within the County of Suffolk which has, is or
will be divided in~o ~wo, ~ree, or four identifiable parcels.
h. GrOUDdIfa~er lIa...gomen~ Zone means any of the areas delineated in
Suffolk Coun~y by ~e "Long Island Comprehensive Waste Treatment Management
Plan (L.I. 208 Study)," as revised by the "Long Island Groundwa~er
Management Plan,. and subsequent revisions adopted by the Board identifying
differences in regional hydrogeologic and groundwater quality conditions.
The boundaries of the Groundwater Management Z ones are set forth on a map
adopted by ~e Board, filed in the Office of ~he Commissioner in Hauppauge,
New York.
i. Individual Sewerage Sys~e. means a single system of piping, tanks,
or other facilities serving only a single parcel and disposing of sewage or
other liquid waste into the soil of such parcel.
j. Individual Wa~er Sapply Sys~e. means a single system of piping,
tanks, or other facilities together with a source of water intended to
supply only a single parcel.
k. Mul.ti-FlUIily Rousing means dwelling units designed for occupancy
by more ~han ~wo separate family units.
1. BoD-Residential Parcel means a single body of land or single
building plo~, si~e or unit, zoned for other than single-family residential
use, which is located wholly or partially within the County of Suffolk any
point on ~e boundary line of which is less than one-half mile of the
boundary line of ano~er such parcel in the same tract.
m. other Cons~ru~iOD Proje~ means other than a conventional single-
family residential subdivision or developmen~, including, but not limited
to clus~er subdivisions, condominiums, two-family residences, mul~i-family
housing, commercial or industrial cent6rs and projec~s, whether or not
there is a spli~ of land involved.
n. Popola~iOD Densi~ Bqaivalen~ means an expression of the quantity
of domestic sewage in terms of the calculated popula~ion per unit area
which would normally contribute the same amount of sewage.
- 2 -
.
.
.
.
o.
Realty Subdivision means a realty subdivision as defined in
1115 of the Public Health Law of the State of New York and Section
of the' Environmental Conservation Law as such statutes may be
from time to time.
Section
17-1501
amended
p. Residential Parcel means a single body of land or single building
plot, site or unit, zoned for single-family residential use, consisting of
five (5) or less acres, which is located wholly or partially within the
County of Suffolk any point on the boundary line of which is less than
one-half mile of the boundary line of another such parcel in the same
tract.
q. Sewage Collection and Treatment Systems means the structures,
devices and processes installed for the purposes of collecting, treating
and disposing sewage and sludge.
r. Subsurface Sewage Disposal Syste. means the septic tank and
leaching pools and interconnecting piping.
s. Tract means any real property, including contiguous parcels of
land, which is held, owned, controlled or possessed, either singularly,
jointly, commonly or otherwise, by a person or group of persons, or any
legally cognizable entity or entities, or any combination of the foregoing,
who are acting with reference to such body of land in concert or as part of
a common scheme, plan or venture.
t. Two-Fa.ily Residence means a dwelling unit designed for occupancy
by two separate family units.
Section 602 Department llpproval of Realty Subdivision, Develo~t,
01: other Construction Project Plans
1. No developer shall after the effective date of this article:
a. engage in the creation of a realty subdivision, or sell, rent,
offer for sale or lease any parcel in a realty subdivision unless
Department approval has been obtained of the existing or proposed
water supply and sewage disposal facilities in the subdivision;
b. engage in the creation of a development, or lease, rent, give,
devise, or otherwise dispose of any parcel in a development, or erect
or cause to be erected any permanent building on any parcel in the
development unless Department approval has been obtained for the
existing or proposed water supply and sewage disposal facilities in
the development I
c.
cause to
has been
disposal
engage in the creation of a construction project, or erect or
be erected any ,permanent building unless Department approval
obtained for the existing or proposed water supply and sewage
facilities.
2. A tract of land which is divided shall constitute a development or
realty subdivision notwithstanding:
- 3 -
.
.
a. the method or purpose of such division, or the allowable types
of use applicable to such tract, whether commercial, residential,
industrial, or other authorized use under local ordinances;
b. the method used to describe such tract whether by metes and
bounds, or by reference to a map of the property, or otherwise.
SectJ.cm 603 lIppl1cations for Approval
1. Applications for Department approval of existing and/or proposed
water supply and sewage disposal facilities, as required by Section 602
above, shall.
a. conform with the standards and regulations prescribed in this
code; and
b. conform with all other Department bulletins, regulations, and
requirements1 and
c. be made on forms provided by the Department; and
d. be accompanied by such maps, plans, reports, specifications,
and data as the Department may require or direct.
2. Plans other than those for community water and/or sewerage systems
shall indicate water and/or sewerage systems located upon each parcel.
3. Plans other than those for community water and/or sewerage systems
shall not propose to furnish water to more than one parcel and/or dispose
of sewage from more than one parcel.
4. Where the developer proposes to obtain and furnish water supply
and/or sewerage facilities for a realty subdivision, development, or other
construction project by connection to an existing community water and/or
sewerage system, the developer shall supply the Department with a
certification in writing by the owner of the utility that such facilities
will be furnished and kept available in good operating condition for the
realty subdivision, development, or other construction project.
5. The Department, in its discretion, may require the developer to
furnish a performance bond to the owner of such utility conditioned upon
the developer's making connection to the utility within a specified
reasonable period of time.
SectJ.on 604
Fll1D9 Requ1r_ts
Every developer who obtains Department approval of a realty
subdivision or development, as required by Section 602, shall thereafter
file a map of such realty subdivision or development, bearing the stamp of
approval of the Department, in the Office of the Clerk of the County of
Suffolk within six (6) months of the date of approval of the Department.
- 4 -
.
.
Section 605 Sewage Facilities Jlequir_nts for Conventional Sinqle-
I'a.ily llAI8idential Realty Subdivisions and DeveloplEnts
1. . A community sewage system method of sewage disposal is required
when any of the following conditions are present:
a. the realty subdivision or development, or any portion thereof,
is located within an existing sewer district,
(1) This requirement shall apply in the absence of proof
satisfactory to the Department that the develper cannot effect
arrangements for the installation and/or connection of the
sewerage system to the existing sewer district.
b. the realty subdivision or development is located in an area
where the subsoil or groundwater conditions are not conducive to the
proper functioning of individual sewerage systems,
c. the realty subdivision or development is located outside of
Groundwater Management Z ones III, V and VI, and any parcel in the
realty subdivision or development is less than 20,000 square feet in
area, unless the realty subdivision or development meets the
population density equivalent requirements of paragraph 2a of this
section; or
d. the realty subdivision or development is located within
Groundwater Management Zones III, V or VI, and any parcel in the
realty subdivision or development is less than 40,000 square feet in
area, unless the realty subdivision or development meets the
population density equivalent requirements of paragraph 2b of this
section.
2. Individual sewerage systems may be approved by the Department as
to the method of sewage disposal provided all of the following conditions
are met:
a. the realty subdivision or development is located outside of
Groundwater Management Zones III, V and VI, and all parcels of the
realty subdivision or development consist of an area of at least
20,000 square feet, or the realty subdivision or development has a
population density equivalent equal to or less than that of a realty
subdivision or development of single-family residences in which all
parcels consist of an area of at least 20,000 square feetl
b. the realty subdivision or development is located within
Groundwater Management Zones III, V or VI, and all parcels in the
realty subdivision or development consist of an area of at least
40,000 square feet, or the realty subdivision or development has a
population density equivalent equal to or less than that of a realty
subdivision or development of single-family residences in which all
parcels consist of an area of at least 40,000 square feet,
c. the realty subdivision or development, or any portion thereof,
is not located.within an existing sewer district and is located in an
area where subsoil and groundwater conditions are conducive to the
proper functioning of individual sewerage systems I and
- 5 -
.
.
d. the individual sewerage systems comply with the Department's
current Standards and the minimum State requirements as set forth in
10 NYCRR, Part 75, to the extent applicable to Suffolk County; and
e. the requirements of Section 606 hereof are complied with.
Sectioa 606 Water Facilities Requirements for Coaventional Sinqle-
I'allil)' Residential Realty Sahdivisiona and Devel~t
1. A community water system method of water supply is required when
any of the following conditions are present:
a. the realty subdivision or development, or any portion thereof,
is located within an existing water district or service area; or
b. the realty subdivision or development is reasonably accessible
to an existing water district or service area; or
(1) This requirement shall apply in the absence of proof
satisfactory to the Department that the developer cannot effect
arrangements for the installation and/or connection of the water
system to the existing water district or service area facilities.
c. individual wells cannot provide an average yield of five (5)
gallons per minute of fresh, potable water; or
d. groundwaters in the area are non-potable, or potentially
hazardous, or
e. any parcel in the realty subdivision or development is less
than 40,000 square feet in area.
2. The following are minimum requirements for community water
systems:
a. Community water systems shall be capable of delivering water
at an average rate of 100 gal/capita/day when service connections are
unmetered, or 75 gal/capita/day when service connections are metered.
b. Community water systems shall be designed to deliver water
meetinq the quality requirements of the New York State Sanitary Code.
c. Community water systems shall provide for continuity of water
service to the satisfaction of the commissioner.
d. The community water supply system shall have at least two (2)
separate wells as a source of supply.
e. Community water systems shall have at least one day's
available storage at design average consumption.
6 -
.
.
f. The relevant provisions of Part 5 of the New York State
Sanitary Code and Bulletin 42 of the New York State Department of
Health entitled "Reconmended Standards for Water Works" will be the
basis upon which all plans, specifications and reports for community
water systems will be reviewed for approval by the Department.
3. Individual water supply systems may be approved by the Department
as the method of water supply for a realty subdivision or development,
provided all of the following conditions are met:
a. all parcels in the realty subdivision or development consist
of an area of at least 40,000 square feetl and
b. the realty subdivision or development, or any portion thereof,
is not located within an existing water district or service area and
is not reasonably accessible thereto, and individual wells can provide
an average yield of five (5) gallons per minute of fresh potable
water I and
c. the individual water supply systems comply with the
Department's current Standards and the minimum State requirements as
set forth in 10 NYCRR, Part 75, to the extent applicable to Suffolk
County.
Section 607 Sewage Facilities Requirements for Construction Projects
other 'l'han Conventional Single-Family Residential Realty
SUbdivisions and Developments
1. A community sewerage system method of sewage disposal is required
for other construction projects when any of the following conditions are
present:
a. the construction project is located within Groundwater
Management Zones III, V or VI, and the population density equivalent
is greater than that of a realty subdivision or development of single-
family residences in which all parcels consist of an area of at least
40,000 square feet,
b. the construction project is located outside of Groundwater
Management Zones III, V and VI, and the population density equivalent
is greater than that of a realty subdivision or development of single-
family residences in which all parcels consist of an area of at least
20,000 square feet,
c. the construction project, or any portion thereof, is located
within an existing sewer district,
(1) This requirement shall apply in the absence of proof
satisfactory to the Department that the developer cannot effect
arrangements for the installation of the sewerage system to the
existing sewer district.
d. the construction project is located in an area where the
subsoil or groundwater conditions are not conducive to the proper
functioning of individual or subsurface sewerage systems.
- 7 -
.
.
2. Individual or subsurface sewerage systems
Department as to the method of sewage disposal for
provided all of the following conditions are met:
may be approved by the
a construction project
a. the construction project is located within Groundwater
Management Zones III, V or VI, and the population density equivalent
is equal to or less than that of a realty subdivision or development
of single-family residences in which all parcels consist of an area of
at least 40,000 square feet;
b. the construction project is located outside of Groundwater
Management Zones III, V and VI, and the population density equivalent
is equal to or less than that of a realty subdivision or development
of single-family residences in which all parcels consist of an area of
at least 20,000 square feet;
c. the construction project, or any portion thereof, is not
located within an existing sewer district and is located in an area
where subsoil and groundwater conditions are conducive to the proper
functioning of individual or subsurface sewerage systems; and
d. the individual sewerage or subsurface systems comply with the
Department's current Standards and the minimum State requirements as
set forth in 10NYCRR, Part 75, to the extent applicable to Suffolk
County.
Section 608 Water Facilities Requireaents for Construction Projects
other '!'han Conventional Sing-le-Family Residential Realty
Subdivisions and Developments
1. A community water system method of water suppply is required when
any of. the following conditions are present:
a. the construction project, or any portion thereof, is located
within an existing water district or service area: or
b. the construction project is reasonably accessible to an
existing water district or service area; or
(1) This requirement shall apply in the absence of proof
satisfactory to the Department that the developer cannot effect
arrangements for the installation and/or connection of the water
system to the existing water district or service area facilities.
c. individual wells cannot provide sufficient yield of freshwater
meeting Department requirements or standards; or
d. groundwaters in the area are non-potable, or potentially
hazardous; or
e. the construction project has a population density equivalent
that is greater than that of a realty subdivision or development of
single-family residences in which all parcels consist of an area of at
least 40,000 square feet, or any residential parcel that has an area
of less than 20,000 square feet.
- 8 -
.
.
2. The following are minimum requirements for community water
systems:
a. community water systems shall be capable of delivering water
at an average rate of 100 gal/capita/day when service connections are
unmetered, or 7S gal/capita/day when service connections are metered.
b. Community water systems shall be designed to deliver water
meeting the quality requirements of the New York State Sanitary Code.
c. Community water systems shall provide for continuity of water
service to the satisfaction of the commissioner.
d. The community water supply system shall have at least two (2)
separate wells as a source of supply.
e. Community water systems shall have at least one day's average
. storage at design average consumption.
t. The relevant provisions ot Part S of the New York State
Sanitary Code and Bulletin 42 of the. New York State Department of
Health entitled "Recommended Standards for Water Works" will be the
basis upon which all plans, specifications, and reports for community
water systems will be reviewed for approval by the Department.
3. Individual water supply systems may be approved by the Department
as the method of water supply for a construction project, provided all of
the following conditions are met:
a. the population density equivalent of the construction project
is equal to or less than that of a realty subdivision or development
of single-family residences in which all parcels consist of an area of
at least 40,000 square feet, and all residential parcels consist of an
area of at least 20,000 square feet eachl and
b. the construction project, or any portion thereof, is not
located within an exis~ing water district or service area and is not
reasonably accessible thereto, and individual wells can provide
sufficient yield of fresh, potable water meeting Department
requirements and standards: and
c. the individual water supply systems comply with the
Department's current standards and the minimum requirements of the New
York State Sanitary Code.
Section 609 Variances
1. The Commissioner of the Department of Health Services, in his
discretion, upon written application, may grant a variance from a specific
provision of this code, in a particular case, subject to appropriate
conditions, where such variance is in harmony with the general purposes and
intent of this code, after such variance application has been considered by
a Department Review Board.
- 9 -
.
.
2. Requirements of this article shall not apply to:
a. realty subdivisions which have previously been approved by the
Department or the New York State Department of Health, and have been
filed in the Office of the Clerk of the County of Suffolk;
b. developments or other construction projects which have
previously been approved by the Department;
c. developments or other construction projects, other than realty
subdivisions, which have been approved by a town or village planning
or zoning board of appeals prior to January 1, 1981, and which met the
requirements of the Department in effect at that time;
d. density requirements for one-family residences on parcels
which appeared as separately assessed on the Suffolk County Tax Map as
of January 1, 1981, which presently constitutes a buildable parcel
under applicable municipal zoning ordinances and which met the
Department requirements in effect on January 1, 1981. No automatic
waiver of these requirements of this article shall be granted where
five or more of such parcels are owned by a developer.
* ... ... ... ...
Adopted 11/19/80
Amended 4/15/81
Amended 6/3/81
Amended 6/24/81
Amended 1/12/83
Amended 4/9/86
Amended 6/25/86
Amended 1/14/87
Amended 3/4/87
- 10 -
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1938
.
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
MEMORANDUM
To: All involved agencies
From: Planning Board office
Re: Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Cove Beach
Estates
Date: October 5, 1988
Enclosed please find a copy of the archeological study to
be included in the Draft Environmental Imapct State for Cove
Beach.
Please forward your comments as to the completeness of
this document by October 17, 1988. Please respond by same date
if you need an extension of time.
cc: David Emilita
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
Suffolk County Planning Commission
NYS Department of Environmental Conservation
Thomas C. Jorling, DEC Commissioner
Town Board
Judith Terry, Town Clerk
Building Department
Board of Appeals
Board of Trustees
.
.
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(S16) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
October 18, 1988
Kenneth C. Coenan
Hampton-Manor Associates, Inc.
P.O. Box 308
Manorville, NY 11949
RE: Cove Beach Estates
SCTM *1000-22-3-15.1&18.3
Dear Mr. Coenan:
The following action was taken by the Southold Town
Planning Board on Monday, October 17, 1988.
RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board deem the
Draft Environmental Impact Statement incomplete on the grounds
that if fails to provide specific information that the Suffolk
County Department of Health Services had requested at the time
of the scoping session. (See enclosed Suffolk County Health
Services report dated September 28, 1988 and recieved by this
office on September 29, 1988).
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact this office.
Ver.y_.truly
/- ~.."
///
/-.." \ ,-
/ ,< .~ ,> .......
,..... ~,._.~...1.rf"..r'",~""
yours,
j
".
/
/
/i'
/',/
/ ,
,"/
.. h
,/) /t'/
I~' t'/' l,/
/---< ,..--/i'
t z~ "''''/l/
.> ,~.,' ......,~.--_..
BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR.
CHAIRMAN
,>.'-
enc.
cc: David Emilita
Harold Reese
jt
} lH'<fr>'6Lo '?-! 0 \. '5c..:tn.~ ~k.\
h""'-<'ld.. J a\~ JV\<<N- -\<0 1-14\01.1 Q.o::se,
Lot'! ~(\C\clSG?~ \cO\ ~- J-- l(elY\ett., Co
.
.
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
Planning Board
Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner
Cove Beach Draft Environmental Impact Statement
October 17, 1988
Comments have been received by Dave Emilita, Consultant
to the Board on this DEIS. He is recommending its acceptance
for public review.
However, the Suffolk County Health Department has sent
as strong recommendation that the draft not be accepted on the _
grounds that it fails to provide specific information that the
department had requested at the time of the scoping session.
I was unable to contact Dave to confirm whether he had
been sent a copy of the County's letter. It is possible that
he was not aware of their position at the time of his notifica-
tion to the Board.
It is suggested that the Planning Board not accept the
draft statement in its present form. Since the applicant was
informed of the information needs of the Health Department at
the scoping session, he should be asked to provide that infor-
mation.
If the Board requests of the applicant to provide the
requested information, I would like to take the opportunity
to ask the applicant to address three deficiencies in the
current draft. First, a copy of the proposed subdivision
layout should be included in each draft document. Second,on page 22,
the water information provided refers to a study by the U.~.
Geological Survey in 1982. Perhaps more current and site
specific data could be presented, such as recent test hole
data, to support assertion that there is sufficient water
quantity onsite for the proposed project. Third, the traffic
counts referred to on page 30 use traffic counts from 1979.
Date from 1987 or 1988 should be used instead.
) .
S41
SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES INC. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
S41
~
00
October l~, 1988
Iffir~o; ~ ,8 ~ f I@
L J I
SOUTHOLD TOWN
PLANNING BOMW
-_.._~
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
Southold Town planning Board
Town Hall
53~95 Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
Re: Cove Beach Estates (Archaeological Study)
Dear Mr. Orlowski:
We have received the above mentioned Study and have reviewed
same with respect to our letter to you of September 12th.
The archaeological study can now become part of the cultural
assessment and made a part of the DEIS. The DEIS can now be
considered complete At your next meeting you may authorize the
filing of a notice of completeness and commence the formal
review period. Please keep us posted of any action you may
take. Thank you.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our
office.
Sincerely,
SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES, INC.
~~.A. rJrxAPdrcC<<ITJ
David J.S. Em~l~ta, AICP
Principal Planner
DJSE:mt
Z3 Narragansett Ave. Jamestown, RI 02835 (401) 423-0430
.
.
Hampton-Manor Associates, Inc.
P.O. Box 308
Manorville, New York 11949
(516) 878-1031
mE
r:~r @
rx:r
Oct.ober 4, 19i3i3
M'r. Bennf--?tt Orlowski. J:r-., Chairman
Southold Town PJ,anni.ng Board
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
p, O. Box 11.79
Southold, N.Y. 11971
He: Cove Beach Estates
Draft Environmental Im;)act
Statement
DeElr Chairman Orlc!\'vslrj:
Attached please find 15 copi.es of the archeologi~al
<;::,t1.2dy which was prepared to be included ir~ the Draft
F,lrJi ronmenta 1 Impact St3tement for C,ovE:Beach E:=::tate:3.
Accardi,ng .to your letters of .September 26, 1(~.s8. and
,:::eptember :;~g, 1988 and David Emi.l ita's letter of September
L~::. J,98g~ thi~~.::; st1Jdy is ne(::E~~.:;:.;sar-y to begin the formal revl.ew
pyoces-=, for the document;, Upon submission oJ this material,
I aSSUJTI\? the '~,O day ti::nc~ period will ::;:;tart from this dat:e
Under separate cover, I am forwarding a copy of the
archeological stlldy to David Emilita for his review.
Sb.oulcl there be a.ny que~~tio"!l::; regard.ing this do,.:c-ument:,
or the main POl-ti.CJn (Jf the Draft Environmental Impact:
i'3taternent, "Dle.3'?;e cio not h<:?si tate to contact me.
"::incerely.
~C--~. __
Kenneth C. C0811en, AICP
President
.. J;"
. .
.
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
.
rn ~~~ow~ ill
SED ;:) 1988
SOUTHOLO TOWN
PLANNING BOARD
PATRICK G. HALPIN
SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES
DAVID HARRIS. M.D.. M.P.H.
COMMISSIONER
September 28, 1988
Ms. Valerie Scopaz
Town of Southo1d Planning Departrrent
53095 Main Road
Southo1d, NY 11791
RE: eave Beach Estates, Draft Environmental Inpact Statement (DEIS)
S.C.T.M.#: 1000-22-3-18.1
smHS Subdivision Afplication: "eave Beach"
Dear Ms. Scopaz:
The Suffolk County Department of Health SeI:Vi.ces (smHS) has received a
copy of the above-referenced DEIS. Based on our preliminary review of the
document, we find it incomplete and therefore, inappropriate for the
purposes of clecision-making. We are concerned particularly with the lack of
detail and attention to site-specific characteristics, design details, and
presentation of alternatives.
In addition, we believe the document responds inadequately to the
specific scoping reccmnendations outlined by our agency in a letter dated
June 16, 1988 (we have enclosed an additional copy of this letter for your
COI1IIeI1i.ence) ; nWefee1 - the-- seeping infonnation requested is inportant to the
evaluation of the proposed action and should be provided by the awlicant.
The specific concerns and reccmnendations of our department regarding
the Suffolk County Sanitary Code (sesC) and our envirormental review of the
proposed action are briefly outlined below.
I. SANITARY CCDE
A. The document does not provide the detailed discussion of SCSC
requirements and proposed methods of compliance requested previously by
our agency.
B. The document does not discuss water supply requirements or availability
for the proposed action as requested previously by our agency.
II. SITE DESCRIPTICN AND SUBDIVISICN DETAILS
A. The document fails to provide a detailed subdivision plan which is
necessary for project evaluation and generally required as part of the
COUNTY CENTER
RIVERHEAD, N.Y. 11901
Letter to Valerie Scopaz
September 28, 1988
Page 2
.
.
inpact statement pursuant to NYCRR Part 617 .21 (Scoping Checklist) of the
state EnvirormerJtal Quality Review Act (SEQRA).
B. The doctment does not detail road profiles, drainage catchment areas,
and design specifications for drainage and recharge facilities as
requested previously by our agency.
III. WIIDLIFE RESOURCES
A. We believe the document's discussion of wildlife "relocation" as a
result of constmction activities requires clarification. The doctment
should reflect the fact that residential development of the site will
eliminate breeding o:wortunities for displaced species. other similar
habitats, regardless of proximity and available food and cover,
acconunodate defended territories of species-types found on the subject
property, and in all likelihood, are at their natural carrying
capacities. We believe, therefore, that surrounding habitats are
largely limited in their ability to accept additional individuals
displaced from an ever-increasing nunDer of developnent projects.
B. The document states that the proposed action and its associated
landscaping "will increase the overall plant diversity on the property,
and will, to sare degree offer I\'Ore food opportunities to the wildlife
on the surrounding site" (p.35). The ability of the proposed action and
its landscaping design to mitigate habitat loss is impossible to
evaluate without a comprehensive landscaping plan for the overall
action.
If the site's proposed landscaping design is intended to provide the
habitat mitigation as suggested by the cIocurrent, it should be incorporated
into the DEIS for evaluation. Such a plan should strive to maximize the use
of native species and minimize managed turf.
IV. FRESHWATER WETLANDS
The doctment provides no discussion of the potential impacts to the
small freshwater pond located south of lot *34 (as indicated on Preliminary
Map of 4/8/87) resulting fran subdivision road constmction. Our specific
concerns and recommendations were outlined previously and should be
ad::Iressed in the DEIS.
V. aMJIATIVE IMI?ACTS
The document does not provide any substantive discussion of the
proposed development project located along the site's southeastern border
known as Darn Pond (SCTM * 1000-22-03-19,20,21,22 and 1000-31-05-1) as
requested previously by our agency.
We feel =nsideration of the adjacent developrent is warranted because
of its proximity to the subject site, and its resulting potential for
similar secondary, long-teJ:Ill and synergistic negative emrirornnental impacts
on wildlife habitat, surface waters and wetlands and open space.
Letter to Valerie Scopaz
SeptE!li::>er 28, 1988
Page 3
.
.
We believe the necessity for cumulative inpact evaluation is supported
clearly in NYCRR Part 617.15 (e), which states in pertinent part that
"agencies should address not only the site specific impacts of the
individual project under construction, but also, in more general or
conceptual tenns, the cumulative effects on the enviroIllleIl.t and the existing
natural resource base of subsequent phases of a larger project or series of
projects which may be developed in the future."
VI. ALTERNATIVES
We do not believe the two altematives outlined in the document are of
sufficient scope or detail necessary to provide for carparative assessment.
We note that our agency had requested that the DEIS provide design details
and site plans for proposed altematives.
Our soaping camnents also had asked that alternative designs seek to
maximize natural and cultural resources protection, address the potential
for public acquisition, and be presented in an objective manner. We do not
believe the alternatives presented reflect these recatm3Ildations.
In acld.ition, we note that our scoping recommendations expressed our
position that alternatives which unquestionably have greater inpacts than
the desired action are inappropriate. The document, however, in its
discussion of the only development alternative (standard developrent.)
states that "without question, the standard development would impact the
environment more than the proposed action." (p.54)
VII. CULTURAL RESOURCES
We do not believe the DEIS for the proposed action should be considered
to be complete until the historical resources survey is completed and
incorporated into the docI.mlent for review.
Failure to evaluate the findings of the historic resources survey at
the earliest stage of a project's envirorunental review could result in
otherwise avoidable delays and significant design alterations at the final
stages of review.
VIII. ADDITIONAL aMENTS
In addition to the above-stated comments, our agency has previously
outlined concerns in the areas of bluff protection, waterfront lots and
beach access, drainage and slopes, open space protection, and recreational
areas designation. The majority of these concerns were expressed in our
coordination response letter of June 1, 1987, and reiterated in our soaping
recatm3Ildations letter of June 16, 1988. We do not feel that these issues
have been addressed sufficiently in the DEIS and encourage the Town to
request acld.itional information which responds to the above-nentioned issues
for inclusion in the DEIS.
letter to Valerie Scopaz
September 28, 1988
Page 4
.
.
IX. ~
We find the DEIS for the proposed action incatplete for the purpose of
detailed evaluation and info:tmed decision making. We recoomend, therefore,
that the Town request infonnation from the awlicant which responds to the
stated concerns of our agency.
We appreciate the opportunity to review this project. Should you have
any questions, please feel free to contact the Office of Ecology at 548-
3060.
Sincerely,
.~ Af .ilL
,-
Robert s. DeLuca
Biologist
Bureau of Environmental
Manayt:2LI::LJ.t
Office of Ecology
RSD/ amf
cc: vito Minei, P .E.
stephen Costa, P.E.
Louise Harrison
Charles Lind, SC Planning Department
Robert Greene, NYSDEC
Frank Panek, NYSDEC
Charles Hamilton, NYSDEC
George stafford, NYSDOS
Ene.
.
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
.
PATRICK G. HALPIN
SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES
DAVID HARRIS, M.D.. M.P.H.
COMM15StONER
June 16, 1988
Ms. Valerie Soopaz, Town Planner
Southo1d Town Plannin;r Departnent
Southo1d Town Hall
53095 Main Iload.
Southold, New York 11971
RE:
Colle Beach Estates, ~i.nq Rt:....aLO.""'.clations
S.C.T.M. I: 1000-22- -18.3 and 15.1
SOlHS Subdivision JlI:plication "Colle Beach"
Dear Ms. Soopaz:
The Suffolk County Department of Health Services has received the
positive declaration of significance dated May 23, 1988, for the above-
referenced project. We wish to su!:lni.t the following concerns of our agency,
and the issues we would like to see addressed in the forthcoming Draft
Envi.ronmantaJ. Inpact statement.
SANITARY CCDE
A. Catprehensive Review
The SCDHS maintains jurisdiction over the final location of water
SlWlY and sanitary sewage disposal systems. We recarmand, therefore, that
the cIocunent provide a detailed discussion of the regulations and catpliance
requirements of our agency as they apply to the proposed development
projects and to potential alternatives to proposed actions in the study
area.
In addition, the document should outline the Article VI zq:plication
status of subject action and explain the proposed method of CCIIpliance with
the awropriate requirements of the Suffolk COunty Sanitary Code (SCSC).
B. Water Supply
The document should discuss the water supply requirements for the
overall project area and dem:>nstrate water supply availability.
COUNTY CENTER
RIVERHEAD, N.Y. 111101
.
.
Letter to Valerie SOOpaz
June 16, 1988
Page 2
II. NM'URAL RESCllRCES
A. wildlife Habitat Identification and Protection
1. The document should provide a detailed assessment of the study
area's terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. This section of the
study should provide a detailed cover map of the study area and
include the results of an on-site species inventozy. (The document
should not contain merely a predeteDllined list of probable species
fOUlld in habitats similar to the subject study area.)
In addition, the dates of all field studies and qualifications of
the individual(s) c:onductiIlq the investigation should be included in
the doclnent for review.
2. The cIoc:ument should identify potential short- and long-term iDpacts
to wildlife species and habitat as a result of the proposed actions.
Information pertaining to rare and endangered species, habitat
fragmentation, area-sensitive species, and loss of indigenous
natural camunities is inportant to this discussion.
3. The document should evaluate (in detail sufficient for CCIlpClrative
assessment) project design alte=atives which maximize protection of
contiguous natural areas and provide for the highest diversity of
natural habitat types. We axe especially concerned about the full
protection of areas providing habitat for rare and endangered
species.
4. Sources of infOJ:lllation pertainiIlq to ram, threatened and endangered
species should be stated in the OEIS.
We recommend the discussion be supplemented with information
obtained fran the regional office of NYSDEX: and the New York State
Natural Heritage Program. The Natural Heritage Program offers a
Significant Habitat InfOJ:lllation Service (518-439-7486), and can be
contacted at the following ad:Iress:
New York state Natural Heritage Program
Wildlife Resources Center
Delmar, New York 12054
B. New York state Regulations and Requirel1leats
1. Developnent of the project area will be subject to regulation and
review by the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation (NYSDEX:), pursuant to Articles 24 and 25 (Freshwater
Wetlands Act, Tidal Wetlands Act) of the New York State
Environmental Conservation law, and Article 42 of the New York state
Executive law (Waterfront Revita.1ization and Coastal Resources Act).
'1'he DEIS should outline the regulatory requirements of the State
pursuant to the above legislation and discuss how the proposed
projects affected by this regulation will satisfy State permitting
standlu:ds and policies.
" '
Letter to Valerie Scopaz
June 16, 1988
Page 3
2. The doClmant should provide a detailed base map of the study area
which incJ.udes NYSDEC-approved wetland delineations, and their
respective reguJ.ato>:y J.im:its.
C. Alternatives
.
.
The DEIS should provide ~e design alternatives with site plans
which are suitable for oatparative assessment.
We recx:mnend that alternative designs seek to maximize protection of
the study area's natural and cultural resources c01'lpl:ehensive1y, and be
presented in an objective manner. Alternatives which unquestionably have
greater i1lpacts than the desired actions are inappropriate.
Based on the size and natural resource sensitivity of the subject
parcel, we believe the doCl.ment should 93pJ.ore acquisition for preservation
as aIOOng'the alternatives to the proposed project. We would SURXlrt such an
alternative as this property's best use.
D. Q.muJ.ative Inpact:s
As we understand it, the property adjoining the subject parceJ.' s
sout:heastem border has been proposed for a residential. subdivision known as
Dam Pond (SClM 11000-22-03-19, 20, 21,22 and 1000-31-05-1). We believe the
potential CUIUl.ative i1lpacts on -':lands, wiJ.dlife habitat, and open space
are sufficient to warrant i1lpact evaluation of the Dam Pond and Cove Beach
Estates appJ.ication collective1y.
We recolllllend, therefore, that the DEIS discuss these two projects and
their potential i1lpacts as a single overall action in detail sufficient for
technical assessment.
The follawin;r concez:ns of our clepartuent were outJ.ined previously in
our letter of June 1, 1987, perta.in:i.nq to the subdivision application
of Harold Reese. We do not beHeve they have been sufficiently
addressed by the current subdivision design and mterate them for your
cot'IIIeI1i.enoe .
E. Tidal Wetlands
We recOlllllend the full protection of the site's tidal wetlands and
regulated adjacent upland area. We encourage max:inun wetJ.and set:backs be
inposed on all clearing, construction, and filling activities associated
with site dsveJ.opnent:.
F. Freshwater Ponds
A small freshwater pond on the site is located i...-ii n.ely south of lot
134, at an elevation of 0.5 feet. The pond is approximately 50' x 70' and
is surrounded by a mature oak forest, and provides water and food for upland
wildlife. We reCOlllllend full protection of this pond and object to the
proposed road design. This design offers no buffer betueen the road's edge
and the pond boundary. It will require filling imnediately adjacent to the
water body.
I.
Letter to Valerie Sccpaz
June 16, 1988
Page 4
The deposition of fill, coupled with road runoff, may result in
sedimentation and pollution inpacts to the small pond and reduce its value
to wi1dli.fe and as a natural feature. The road should be redesigned to
leave the existing buffer of b:ees in place. '!his action would reduce the
inpacts of pollution as -U as those of hunan activity associated with site
developnent .
.
.
The pond also may be subject to inpacts fran runoff associated with the
drainage easement located south of Lot '34. Should lot drainage and
stOJ:Jllliater runoff be di.J:ected to this easement, the natural direction of
flow will be immediately to the pond, wheJ:e it could reduce water quality.
We recx:mnend the this drainage easement be eliminated and be added as an
additional cpm spa.oe and water quality buffer for the pond.
G. Bluffs
To reduce devel~...nt-related erosion on the bluffs, lie recx:mnend that
the bluffs be preserved in their natural state as dedicated open space.
Furthermore, we support the proposed bluff setbacks of 100 feet and
encourage the imposition of clearing restriction within the designated
setback axea.
H. Waterfront Lots and Beach Aooess
1. We object to the inclusion of low-lying beach areas within the
designated property boundaries of Lots f1 through '13. These areas
are highly dynamic and subject to coastal erosion hazards as a
result of natural and maanade foroes. Such erosion can result in
extensive damage to property and natural resouroes. Inclusion of
such areas within delineated property boundaries often encourage
structural developnent, which may needlessly compound natural
resource iDpacts and property loss due to coastal erosion. We
recommend that the existing boundaries for Lots 11 through 113 be
redesigned to exclude areas that are seawaro. of the 10-foot contour
line and that such areas be maintained in their natural state as
dedicated cpm spa.oe. The town also should consider the value of
securin;r pI.1blic access to this axea in its review of the project.
2. To reduce potential runoff from impervious surfaces and related
erosion iDpacts, the prq:>osed ""i Jdin;r envelopes should be redLloed
<p:eatly and situated at least as high as the 10-foot oontour line.
3. Resident access points to the beach area should be consolidated,
especially in the vicinity of the vegetated bluffs. The subdivision
plan should provide designated pedestrian access easements to be
located along areas of minimal topograhic relief. Any structural
designs for such areas (boardwalks, stairs, etc.) should be
subnitted by the awlicant.
I. Drainage and Slopes
1. M.1ch of the site is characteri.zed by highly irregular topographic
relief. To evaluate the storage capability and infiltration
potential of the proposed recharge areas, the applicant should
depict each basin and its contributing drainage area. Runoff
Letter to Valerie SCq:laz
June 16, 1988
Page 5
potential fran each drainage area should be detexmined and calculations
subnitted for nw.i.ew.
.
.
2. The applicant should provide detailed road prOfiles, drainage
designs and eel' en' ..tions for the suJxlivision road. Drainage designs
should include appropriate plans for the installation of catch
basins and leaching pools neoessa%y to maintain all nmoff on site.
J. Open Space and Recreational AI:eas
1. The subdivision design should demonstrate mitigation for
developnent-wlated inpacts to coastal erosion areas, freshwater
wetlands, bluffs and natural habitats.
2. Conditions of open space dedication should be cIescril:led in the DEIS
and provide for pez:manent, undistudled natural areas.
3. The prqlOSed park and xeo:eation _ should not encroach into the
site's regulated tidal wetlands. A substantial buffer bebleEln the
Dam Pond tidal wetlands and the _ of active xeo:eation should be
mainta.i.ned..
4. The proposed access road and parkinq _ should be constructed of a
pervious material to minimize erosion and nmoff inpacts to tidal
lietlancls .
5. If any structures are prqlOSed for the active xeo:eation _, they
should be indicated on the suJxlivision map.
We appreciate the opportunity to outline the infonnation and areas of
0Cln0e!:n 'We would 1iIce to see addressed in the DEIS. We look forward to
reviewizlq the cIoCl.ment when it is OCIIpleted.
Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact the Office
of Ecology at your convenience.
S:inoereJ. y,
~ .;.' M~
Robert S. 11et'!Ca
Biologist
LOuise W. Harrison
Supervisor, Bureau of
.. Environmental Management
Office of Ecology
PSD/lIIIlf..
cc: Vito Minei, P .E.
stephen Costa, P.E.
Charles Lind, SC Planninq
Frank Panek, ID:'SJ:)OC
Robert Greene, ID:'SJ:)OC
George stafford, ID:'SOOS
.
.
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 76.5-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
September 29, 1988
Kenneth C. Coenan, Principal
Hampton-Manor Associates, Inc.
P.O. Box 308
Manorvi1le, NY 11949
RE: Proposed Draft Environmental
Imapact Statement for the
Cove Beach Estates
SCTM #1000-22-3-18.3,15.1
Dear Mr. Coenan:
The Planning Board, under seperate cover, has fowarded to
you correspondence from its environmental consultant. The Board
is in agreement with the recommendation that the DEIS will not
be reviewed for completeness until the archeological study is
submitted to this office.
This letter supercedes the September 26th letter from this
office, inasmuch as that letter did not state the Planning
Board's position clearly.
z;;;a
BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR.
CHAIRMAN
v
cc: Harold Reese
jt
.
.
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516)765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
September 26, 1988
Kenneth C. Coenan, Principal
Hampton-Manor Associates, Inc.
P.O. Box 308
Manorvil1e, NY 11949
RE: Proposed Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for the
Cove Beach Estates
SCTM #1000-22-3-18.3,15.1
Dear Mr. Coenan:
The Planning Board is forwarding to you the enclosed
correspondence from its invironmental Consultant. The board is
in agreement with the recommendation that the DEIS be considered
incomplete until the archeological study is submitted to this
office.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact this office.
Kery ly yours, '~;1
c:::T1 y .'
Mv>"r'fT 0", '- ./ .
BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. ~.
CHAIRMAN
enc.
cc: Harold Reese, Sr.
jt
.
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1938
.
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
MEMORANDUM
TO: Suffolk County Department of Health
Suffolk County Department of Planning
Comm. Thomas Jorling, NYS DEC
Robert Greene, NYS DEC
FROM:
Planning Board Office
RE:
Draft Environmental Impact Statement for
Cove Beach Estates
DATE:
August 29, 1988
Enclosed please find a copy of the Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for Cove Beach Estates. This document has
just been received for review by the Planning Board and the
Town Board to determine whether it should be accepted as
complete. Comments as to the completeness of this document
must be received within thirty days of the date of this
memorandum.
t
.
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
August 31, 1988
David Emilita
SAI Associates,Inc.
23 Narragansett Avenue
Jamestown, Rhode Island 02835
RE: Cove Beach Estates
SCTM *1000-22-3-18.3 & 15.1
Dear Dave:
The following action was taken by the Southold Town
Planning Board on Tuesday, August 30, 1988.
RESOLVED that the Southo1d Town Planning Board send the
Draft Environmental Impact Statement to David Emilita, Planning
Consultant, for his review. This document was received by this
office on August 29, 1988. This parcel is on 96 acres located at
East Marion.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact this office.
BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR.
CHAIRMAN
cc: Harold Reese
jt
~,~'
'"
--II
"j' PF 3.i, (3/73) Standard N.Y.B:r.U. Form aOOS-Warranty n....d witb Full Co\'eollcts.lndivirlnal or Corporation .
I CONSI;U TOUR LAWYER:~.EI'ORE SIGNING THI~ 'RUMENT-THIS INSTRUMENT SHOULD BE us.. aT LAWYERS ONLY.
, '.81"5 -'1.14,..: . .
. tnl. ,L1 r..,::, o...J ~.. __
,
l?--'
THIS INDElIITURE. made the I 9 p, day of
NOJ/!!'...,!,..,..
fi 4 .
nineteen hundred and seven;:'y-six
'tI.I'!I~
1'Y,1'I.'-~ BETWEEN DOROThY E. COOK, residing at 441 l':ast 20th Street, New York, N. Y. ,
individually and as Executrix of the Estate of GEOEGE C. COOK, JR.
(~> ,:-.<. .-.
r~.! ("'. ",,, :_,"
~ .' \.. ...).~ "
L_o-r
,..-......
UL~..
8
,."......,
: '"'"T-''''' ('---'f -,_:)~
! I 'I' ,,)'
l..._....."'._..... ."..,_.l_~"a
Ii
""-'i~l 'I
..! .' ~
~ _ 1 _ '__
._._.,~. ~.l
~i.3,
I
j-
-J, ')
!/..1
"",-'~"""",
i f::"~
'._1
party of the first part, and DOR01'llY E. COOK residing at 441 East 20th Street, New York, N.Y.
( !
J:,
'I
(
~)
a:::,
~
~
0")
/J
/"
A....../
,-
"
v
~arty of the second part,
. WITNESSETH, that the party of the first pArt, in =i<:!cretion of Ten ($10)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
dollars,
k"
\;.'.
~
'\
.J
lawful money of the United States, and other good and valuable considerations
paid
by the party of the second part, does hereby grant and release unto the party of the second part, the heirs or
successors and assigns of the pany of the second part forever,
\
. ";,
\.
\:, ALL that certain plot, piece or parte! of land, with the buildings and improvements thereon erected, situate,
lying and being iA-tll. at East I-larion, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State
of New York, bounded and described as more particularly set forth in SCHEDULE A _
DESCRIPTION OF PRU1ISES annexed hereto, as part hereof
'l'HI:: PRJ::MISI::S Iln'EllDED TO BE CONVEYED IlERi:.'UNDER being the same premises conveyed
by Cameron C. Cook and George C. Cook, Jr., as grantors,to George C. Cook, Jr.,
as grantee DY deed dated November 2, 1968 and recorded in the office of the
Clerk of Suffolk County on November 4, 1968 in Liber 6449, Cp 514, except as in
said SCHI:DULl:: A hereof othen-:ise provided.
\
\
I
L
RE~~VED
$--...-
ReAL ESTAn:
-1
i
I
\
,
1..]6':;';7
II
I
!I
~
1\
\\
N'
.,
'.,I(J
TR/-\" W:;::,I-j{ T IV~
SUFFOLK
COUNTY
'"t;:r.ORn!=f'\
IIOV 22 197B
"'."'"
. _. c'- ., ^;\:an~/_')N
lE5\ ~., .'. ,.,. . .
, ,> ":"~'" 0:Jyf:"'l
__._..,l"~~-" -
"":'-",.'.J
,
)
~,::
!
I
i
I
i
,
!
J
U,i:ii8145 i~(:149
.
warranty Deed with Full Covenants
GRANTOR,
Porothy E. Cook, individually and as <;xecutrix of the
~state of George C. Cook, Jr.
Dorothv 1::. Cook
_~9 v.."'~'" / '1, 1976.
GM..T~I;:
DAT!::,
SCHEDULJ:; A
DESCRIPTIO.. OF PRJ:;MISES
PARCJ:;L I:
ALL tl.at certain plot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and im-
provements thereon erected, situate, lying and being at East Marion, Town of
SoutilOld, County of Suffolk and State' of New York, bounded and described as
follows: Northerly partly by land of YOill'g and Rowe, and partly be land
formerly of F.L.R. Francisco, easterly partly by land formerly of Samuel H.
Tuthill and partly by land. of Adelaide Tuthill, soutllerly be land formerly
of F.L.R. Francisco and westerly by land now or formerly of William H. Griffing.
TOGE'l'HJ:;R witll all rights of way or easements appurtenant to the said
i
,
premises.
i
1
PARCEL II: I
ALL that piece or parcel of land, situate, lying and being in East Marion, Town:
of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of :;e'" York, bounded and described as
follows: north by farm land of ~nsel V. Young; east by other land of the
party of the second part (~dwin H. King), south by Adelaid Tuthill Estate and
west by wood land of Samuel H. Tuthill Estate.
TOGETHER with all rights of way or easements appurtenant to the said
premises.
PARCJ:;L III
All those certain tracts, or parcels of land, and woodland, situate, lying
and being in the Town of Southold at J:;ast Marion, County of Suffolk and state
of New York, bounded and described as follows: Parcel No.1)
BJ:;GINNING at a stake on the northeasterly corner of lands now or formerly be-
longing to Sophia brooks, THENCE RUHNING westerly along the northerly side of
,
lands now or formerly of Sophia Brooks, 160 feet to a stake THENCE in a northerlyf
direction along the easterly side of lands now or formerly of S.lIarrron Tuthill,. i
774 feet to a stake; THi::,KE easterly along the soutllerly side cf land formerly
of ;lathaniel O. Edwards, 160 feet to a stake; THENCE in a southerly direction i
. ,
along tile westerly side of lands now or formerly of Cynthia and Lucretia Tuthill'.l
782 feet to the point or place of Beginning.
r~nr:cE'l'HER w' t a 'hts of wa or easements a urtenant to the said I,
premises.
Parcel ;10. 2) Westerly by land now or formerly of Orange Petty and the
heirs of Frederick ". Tuthill; northerly by lands formerly of Johnatha11 Truman
and George Tuthill, 401.94 feet, more or l~ss, easterly by lands formerly of
Johnatilan' Truman and George Tuthill, 183.14 feet, more or less, and soutilerly
by land formerly of George L. Edwards and Edward S. Edwards, 266.44 feet, more
or less, said premises being of irregular shape.
TOGETH~R with all rights of way or easements appurtenant to the said
I
i
j
prenuses.
PARCEL IlIA:
ALL those certain plot, piece or parcel of land, situate, lying and being in
the Hamlet of East Marion, Town of Southold, COill1ty of Suffolk and State of
New York, bounded and described as follows: BEG~,INGat a pipe set on th~
.
fi.
i
I
I
. ":>';"i!~,~11W
". ~, . "\,...,I,'.......,."l11.~:w,'."
, ,. .... 1<1 ;; I:'-:~' ";)''':~'''h1
iii'.t\I . m"" \.... "" '., :,,,'.\>\I~i
, . I " ., rl): ~ ", '....." , ~~I' '1'
, " \.' I \ 'I" ' 1',. ,\1.... to', ;;i."..J~ t'" II,~,. ,,~'.!'~I~';"" ..":.~ 0;:;',:"
'11l'J..u.~~'..I..'l',.,~.""'" ...~i~.ltla""'iI&~l:oo/~ ~'\io...&,,"<I'"""'~.;':;.'':R'. 'M: ALBf:.RTSO B';:tWlI" ,;i,II"'II~l'i~;.)~f '.~." .~.WiiL.
" l\.:-> I" - ty .~"", .t' ,~~
~,;ECORDEn HOV 22 1976 _~ __ {"1...rl<Qf~~__,',. .,"..;...,.
814- 1"'1'
r"'" -< .'..... .. J
L1Bu; ;) ;"f;t ;)u
.
.
\iarranty lJeed I<ith !:'ull Covenants
GRANTOR:
Dorothy E. Coole, individually and as Executrix of the
Estate of George C. Coole, Jr.
Doroth.l E. Cook
H~ ~~'T.t'.c. I~ 1976.
,
i
,
I
I
'I
I
I
GRANTEE:
OAT!:::
easterly line of land of Adelaide Tuthill ~state and at the northwesterly
corner of land conveyed by L Theron Edwards to Edwin a. King and RUNNING
thence along said land of Adelaid Tuthill' Estate,North 110 46' 10" West,
660.98 feet; thence along land of Ray Vrooman, North 110 50' 50" West, 111.10
feet to the sou~1westerly corner of land conveyed by Nathaniel O. Edwards to
Edwin H. King; THENCE along said land conveyed by Na~laniel O. Edwards to
Edwin H. King, North 760 49' 50" East, 20.02 feet to the southwesterly corner
of land ~1is day conveyer by Edwin H. King to Irving Latham; THENCE along other
land of Irving Latham, formerly of C&orge L. !::dwards, two courses, as follows:
(1) South 110 46' 50" East, 529.71 feet; THENCE (2) North 780 46' 30" East,
137.75 feet to other land of Irving Latham, formerly Daniel E. Tuthill;
THENCE along said other land of Irving La~lam, fortrei!ly of Daniel E. Tuthill,
South 110 13' 30" East, 247.31 feet to the northeasterly corner of said land
conveyed by LT. Edwards to Edwin H. King; THENCE along said land conveyed by
LT. Edwards to Edwin H. King, South 800 20' 50" West, 155.50 feet to the
point of BEGINNING.
:J.'OGETHER with all rights of way or easements appurtenant to the said
premises.
I
i
PARCEL IlIa: ,I
ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, situate, lying and being at
East Marion, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, bounded
and described as follows: PARCEL ONE: Beginning at the northeasterly
corner of lands now or formerly of Nathaniel O. Edwards; RUNNING THENCE Westerly
along the northerly side of land of Nathaniel O. Edwards, 160 feet to a stake;
THENCE RUNNING northerly along the easterly side of lands now or formerly
belonging to S. Harmon Tuthill and Mrs. Vrooman, 774 feet to a stake; THENCE
easterly along the southerly line of lands now or formerly belonging to
S. Harmon Tuthill and partly by lands of John W. Brown, 160 feet to a stake;
THENCE in a southerly direction along the westerly side of lands now or formerly'
belonging to the late Cynthia and Lucretia Tuthill, Deceased, 782 feet to the
point or place of beginning. PARCEL TWO: northerly by land now or formerly
of Edward S. Edwards; easterly by land formerly of Johnathan Truman and
George Tuthill; southerly by lands now or formerly of Jedidiah Rackett and
westerly by lands now or formerly of Orange Petty and the heirs of Frederick H.
1uthill; EXCEPTING THEREFROM: ALL that certain piece or parcel of land, situate,
lying and being in the Hamlet of East Marion, Town of Southold, County of
Suffolk and State of New York, bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at
a point on the westerly line of land of Irving Latham formerly of Daniel E. Tut-
I.
hill, and at the southeasterly corner of land conveyed by Nathaniel O. Edwards "
i
to Edwin H. King and RUNNING THENCE along said land conveyed by :lathaniel O. 1
I
Edwards, to Edwin H. Kinq, three courses and distances as follows: (ll South I
760 49' 5.0" West, 142.98 feet to the northeasterly corner of land this day'!.,
conveyed by Irving Latham to Edwin H. King, thence (2) North 100 52' 10" West'l
269.74 feet; THENCE (3) North 780 46' 30" East, 141.21 feet to said westerly j'
line of land of Irving La~lam, formerly of Daniel E. Tuthill; THENCE along said
westerly line of land of Irving Latham, former"ly of Daniel E. 1'uthill. South 110
13' 30" East, 264.89 feet to the point or beginning. ' '. '
TOGJ.TllER with all rights of way"or easement appurtenant to the said premises!;'
PARCEL IV:
ALL ~1at certain plot, piece or parcel of land, situate and lying and being in
- 2 -
"
(
"' ,
~ , .
":','.',' """"',"",,-,;:_',',',,,-,,",\,,'~~""\"
.~().l\j;.:I':I:",t.i~i~:'i'i:..~i~~:f.:":'ibi,,_ii~Dl:~""'~;;':';;f.~;;""~E~it;;~.' ALBER,1S0 "
~ECORDED HOV 22 1916_ _ . {"~tkQf~~.
.,-
0,' .': ~r~\1l:f~;
:',,~:::;'J:./>~:,:i~.:':'
":'i,'~1.~"
. .,!;;:\~~
,xJl.\l~',
.:";"
I
:'.1'
,
\.
1"
!.
!m8145 i~(~151
.
.
~' ,
"
\~arranty Deed Iii th Full Covenants
GRANTOR:
l)orothy E. Cook, individually and as Executrix of the
Estate of George C. Cook, Jr.
DorothY, E. Cook
!'Yo "4''2_ I~ 1976.
GRANTEE:
DATE:
the Hamlet of East Marion in the Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and
state of New York, bounded and described as follows: northerly by a right of
way, easterly partly by land now or formerly of the East Marion Disposal
Company, partly by land of Mildred Foster and partly by land of Frank Gowan
and Margaret Gowan, southerly by the Main Uigh'Hay and westerly by land of
Emma Schafer, formerly of S. Harmon Tuthill.
TOGETHER with all ri.,ghts of way or easements appurtenant to the said
premises.
,
I
I
I
f
SUBJECT to a Right of \Vay, nmning in favor of Edwin Ii. King, which Right of
Hay is approximately 8 feet in width and runs from the north side of Main Road,
approximately 386 feet in a northerly direction along land now or formerly of
Cowan, Ketcham and Matthews to the land of the grantor, formerly land of East
Marion Disposal Club.
EXPllliSSLY EXCLUDED FROM THE AFOREGOING IS THE FOLLOWING:
ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, t~gether with the buildings
and improvements thereon erected, if any, situate, lying and being at East Marion
in the Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, bounded and
described as follows:
BEGrimING at a concrete monument situated at the southwesterly COrner of
the hereinafter described premises which monument also marks the northwest
corner of premises now or formerly of K. Ketcham said point also being distant
the following t...,o (2) courses and distances from a point on the northerly
line of Nain Road where same is intersected by the westerly line of land now
i
!
or formerly of Cowan;
(1) North 9 degrees 27 minutes 00 seconds ~Iest 124.20 feet;
(2) North 10 degrees 01 nunutes 00 seconds West 263.40 feet and from
said true. poin t or place of m;GHlN IiiG.
RUNNIl'G TllEilCE North 11 degrees 50 minutes 40 seconds ;'Jest along the
easterly line of a Rigilt of \~ay 262 feet to land of George C" Cook ,Estate;
THENCE along said last mentioned land North 78 degrees 09 minutes
L
;
!
I
20 seconds East, 149.94 feet to land now or formerly of Irving C. Latham;
THENCE South 11 degrees 13 minutes 30 seconds East, along land now or
- 3 -
- '" '" "'.'. I".
, 'J"':" ' "Jlllll;lJI"" ,.,l!!~'
'l' I , ;&' . " " .' I. ( , . ,'. ';"'-~~~""",O'N',\. <II! ~,"I J~ ~'~'''J
":"-" . *iW....iII\_.."''''II...a.....~.-.'''''" ..JIt>WllIIlM<i\lllfl"",",,,,",,">ilAW<"'STi::::;" M AlBt:RTSO ,\;,'" 1:'\':~~h
~:EC 0 ROE D.. HOV 22 1976 L~\.1r\<"of~.~Jt~~i1~~:f
'-.-<-.1.. ~:"!^_",,,-~,"'........;..____....~...._~
", ',~~r~~i~T
"'l' r,:,\#,,:,~j,'
,t~1:~! ii" ;,~~i~!fi';.
" :,~~y;t~!~
"','l,(,rf
'.~,:;
...:_', 'f;,~;:'
I:
L!SE~ 81 45 ';1,!~152 .
.
,
Warranty !.leed \,ith Full Covenants
GRANTOR,
Dorothy E. Cook, individually and AS Executrix of the
Estate of George C. Cook, Jr. I
Dorothv E. Cook
....'9 ",;~~~ 1'1, 1976.
GRAi'/TEE:
DATE:
formerly of Irving C. Latham and M. Brown Estate 277.54 feet to a monument
and land now or formerly of K. Ketcham;
'l'Hl:;j:~CE South 84 degrees 11 minutes 10 seconds West, along said last
mentioned land 147.75 feet to the point or place of BEGINNIHG.
- 4 -
I
t
,
';, .'
'"
'bO>"';iI';;':~'i;"'lr- ;"I'IU'~" ,"~~*k~~'!i'''~~~Uli';$''"'''''~'''''iB{t':C*~tRl;-;~{~i\
tlOV 22 1976 L~~ ~~ly ..,I,
RiCOR
j
\" );:;}t~~
~~: ,:;~,~~,I\rd
. " '/::\jll,l:!/
"':~;~:
11.' . +-..... -1 .L4~~
rt' S -r ~ S' J' /n e ~~__~.___:._.._=_-~ '\
[) {'J i :if 2 - ((j /1'*3') -'" \\
De ..re,
/'1 -#: T- JI
/lit ?it C -I ~ 0 6 -- J. 2 -J '-J
Vi 9
"i, 1 cf () He I /"
IJJJfJ:Jfn e,.{ r 2266
/
R, 0 I {}j, a f f /L1 a 1:'1 f(a d. /
!fS..:e,JfJ''''' f'1"l -It 2-
~---~-,~,-,---._.~,--~.~.,...-..,---.........~~.,,,",.-
D (J- f #- L C (j II tr ]')
D~ -Ie I
M 11- T-J/
/t( #- C -/tf()i} - ;..). - J';" ? /
Vi '1
r. 97J /Ie ~
11- J'J'e -rJ' /)7 ~'1 f {J {f 6
p{ (JIU), 0-/-1 )i~,~, R,jdc/.
,
\
\
,
\
\
\
\
I.
I
;
.
,
\ '
.
.
r
i
!
~ /e.f Pt.-I ~ -e -Mr;.,,"~I}<"
17i. t\...
~nt7)
6 K<gf7"~,
i/ _c.",
.( ! f
fO. /<!J/'''~
\,. t
.
.
S41
SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES INC. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS & PLANNERS
S41
September 12, 1988
Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman
Southold Town Planning Board
Town Hall
53095 Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
Re: Cove Beach Estates
DEIS
Dear Mr. Orlowski:
We have received the above mentioned DEIS and have reviewed
same.
The author states that an archaeological study as part of the
cultural asssessment will be submitted under separate cover and
made a part of the document. Until this study has been
submitted, this document shall not be considered complete or
even reviewed for same. Also, no time clock should begin until
there is a submission being reviewed for completeness.
Upon receipt of the archaeological study, we will commence
review of the material for completeness.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact our
office.
Sincerely,
AICP
:dms
23 Narragansett Ave.
Jamestown, RI 02835
(401) 423-0430
.
.
~-\.
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1938
'"-~
----;
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
September 14, 1988
Harold Reese, Sr.
Reese Bros. Inc.
855 Sunrise Highway
Lynbrook, NY 11563
RE: Cove Beach Estates
SCTM #1000-22-3-15.1 & 18.3
Dear Mr. Reese:
The following action was taken by the Southold Town
planning Board on Monday, September 12, 1988.
RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant a 30
day extension, from September 28, 1988 to October 28, 1988, for
the review of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact this office.
V~lY yours/) ~ )((/ /
17~MV>:tpf~A:--. ... :1
BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR.
CHAIRMAN
cc: David Ernilita
jt
.'-
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1938
.
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
August 5, 1988
Jonathan Wiggins
Sales Manager
Ferry Hills Associates, Inc.
23650 C.R. 48
Peconic, New York 11958
Re: Proposed Major Subdivision
of Cove Beach Estates and
adjoining property of
Dorothy Cook, East Marion.
Dear Mr. Wiggins:
With regard to your letter of July 21, 1988, the developer
of Cove Beach Estates must address the question of access to
adjoining landlocked parcels. The Terry parcel is one such
parcel. One of Mrs. Cook's properties, specifically SCTM#
1000-22-3-9.1, mayor may not be landlocked. It is not known
whether that property has access to the existing right-of-way on
its western border. This matter will have to be addressed in the
draft environmental impact statement. In any case, I repeat Mr.
Ernilitia's assurances to you of May 26, 1988, as you reported
them in the second paragraph of your JUly 21st letter.
However, be aware that the developer cannot be required to
provide direct access to Mrs. Cook's other lot SCTM# 1000-22-3-5,
because this lot does not adjoin the proposed development at all.
I trust this answers your questions.
Sincerely,
~~/
Valerie Scopaz
Town Planner
cc: Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman
David Ernilitia, Szepatowski Associates
Nickolaos Spanos
Kenneth C. Coenen
[H
REAL TOR-
. .
ff~~~, cine.
35650 County Road, Rte. 48 reconk, N.Y. 11958
Licensed Real Estate Broker (516) 765-5200
July 21, 1988
Planning Board Chairman
Mr. Bennett Orlowski Jr.
Town of Southold
Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
Re: 1000-22-3-5 & 1000-22-3-9.1
Dear Sir,
On June 1, 1988 I sent a letter to Southold Town about
the property belonging to Mrs Dorothy Cook. The Town had
blocked her development rights due to an access problem that
had come to pass due to the development of other properties
off the Fire Road that ajoins her property; leaving her for
all intents and purposes land locked.
During my conversation with Mr. David Emilita on May
26, 1988 he assured me that the Town would not overlook her
property and furthered that it was The Planning Board's job
to make fair decisions for all parties involved and that the
Town tries to unlock any land locked parcel when granting
approvals.
To date my letter has not been answered. Recently, a
client of mine, Mr. Nick Spanos spoke to Ms Valerie Scopaz
of the Planning Board. She told him that Mr. Harold Reese'
proposal was going through without any provisions to gain
developmental access to the Cook property.
If this is true it is certainly not fair to leave to Cook
property land locked. Please let me know the status of the
Cook property by responding to this letter.
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully,
cf'J~n~zt::
Sales Manager
.
.
RECEIVED BY
SUUJG~~GY~ blAl'~~~V
DATE v's. (r2-<f~
S41
SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES INC. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS & PLANNERS
S41
June 16, 1988
Ms. Valerie Scopaz
Town Planner
Town of Southold
53095 Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
Re: Cove Beach Estates
Dear Ms. Scopaz:
Enclosed, for your records, is the scoping package for the above
mentioned proposal.
A copy of this will be forwarded to both Howard Young and Harold
Reese as well.
If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES, INC.
DJSE:mt
Enclosure
23 Narragansett Ave.
Jamestown, RI 02835
(401) 423-0430
.
.
COVE BEACH ESTATES
June HI, 1988
A scoping session was held at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road,
Southold, NY 11971 on Friday, June 10th. The session began at
11:50 a.m. The purpose of the meeting was to advise the
applicant what would be required in the DEIS for the proposed
subdivision.
Attendees were: Planning Consultants David Emilita and Diane
Schultze of Szepatowski Associates, Inc. (SAI), Harold Reese,
applicant, Howard Young, Surveyor, Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner,
Melissa Spiro, Planner, Ilene pfifferling, Secretary to the Town
Trustees, and victor Lessard, Executive Administrator.
It was noted that a Part I LEAF had been submitted by the
applicant. The Planning Board had prepared the Parts II and III
and made a determination of significance on May 23, 1988.
There was general discussion over the need for a DEIS. Mr.
Emilita explained that the Planning Board as lead agency has
requested a DEIS. A DEC permit was submitted, however, it was
noted that the DEC is only an involved agency. The elements as
noted in the scoping checklist (see attached) as well as those
noted below are to be included in the DEIS.
S41
SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES INC. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
S41
.
.
WETLANDS
Mr. Emilita requested that the freshwater wetlands be flagged
with the exact wetland line superimposed from prior surveys.
There are wetlands on site which were partially man made. Mr.
Reese explained that there was an irrigation well on the site as
well. In review of the file it was found that the Trustees had
conducted a field inspection and made recommendations with
regard to the wetlands on the site. The impact of the road
construction on the open space, recharge and wetland area was
also questioned.
SLOPE ANALYSIS
The focus should be on the topography for siting houses as well
as the flood insurance zones.
ON-SITE WELLS
A description is to be provided. The Suffolk County Department
of Health Services approval on the wells is to be submitted.
SURFACE WATER
The storm drainage impact on the surface water of Dam Pond is to
be discussed.
ENDANGERED SPECIES
An inventory is to be conducted. Consideration should also be
given to the clearing on the site which may have destroyed
habitats.
ACCESS
Access onto Route 25 with an assessment on traffic and safety is
to be discussed. Access for the Terry Parcel is to also be
considered as well as coordinated access with the parcel to the
east.
S41
SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES INC. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
S41
.
.
EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING
The change of zone currently pending before the Town Board for
part of this parcel is to be noted. Fire protection, impact to
recreational facilities, visual impacts and a historic and
archeological assessment of the area are also to be included.
ALTERNATIVES
The following alternatives are to be discussed:
1. The project.
2. The standard yield for the site
3. No action alternative.
Significant Impacts in the Part II and Part III as noted also to
be discussed.
S41
SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES INC. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS
S41
617.21
Appendix D
State Environmental Quality Review
Scoping Checklist
.
'"
.t.
.
,'"
14-14-9 (2/87)-9c
;3
cove~ ~
IOjUN-ecce SEaR
RECEIVED BY
""'" ~'\'" C' "',r" BO!R')
SG~tl~ 10210 l'19'88' ~_~
i~'A ,
)
The following checklist of topics is intended
as a starting point for developing a detailed scope
for a project-specific Draft Environmental Impact
Statement. Typically, no one project will require
a discussion of all the topic areas contained in this
document. Through the scoping process, the list
of topics should be refined to reflect issues unique
to the proposed project. Topic areas may be de.
leted, added or elaborated upon, to arrive at the
final scoping document.
The purpose of the checklist format is to iden-
tify the basic topic areas of the Draft EIS. This is
accomplished by reviewing the list and placing a
check in the box located to the left of these topics
which should be discussed. The model scoping
checklist can also be used as a worksheet,
including comments, suggestions and identifica-
tion of the particular example(s) that are relevant
to a detailed discussion of the topic or issue that
has been checked. Conversely, those topics which
are not checked, are issues not associated with the
project and may be eliminated from discussion in
the Draft EIS.
The next step is to expand the list to include
or elaborate on those topics unique to the pro-
posed project. A blank sheet is included at the end
of the checklist for such additional information.
The scoping process involves several steps in
addition to compiling a list of topics. Scoping also
includes discussions on the quantity and quality
of informaton required and the methods of obtain-
injJ that data.
NOTE: This check list was designed to be
used in conjunction with the section on scoping
contained in SEQR Guideline-Draft and Final
EIS's. It is also important to emphasize that this
checklist should serve only as a model to assist in
the scoping of a Draft EIS. It should not be used
as a substitute for actively scoping Draft EIS for
a specific project.
)
CD Cover Sheet "'7
All EIS's (Draft or Final) shall begin with a
cover sheet that includes:
A. Whether it is a draft or final statement
B. Name or other descriptive title of the
project
C. Location (county and'town, village or city)
of the project
D. Name and address of the lead agency
which required preparation of the state.
ment and the name and telephone number
of a person at the agency to be contacted
for further information
E. Name and address of the preparers of any
portion of the statement and a contact
name and telephone number
F. Date of acceptance of the Draft EIS
G. In the case of a Draft EIS, the deadline
date by which comments are due should
be indicated
(jj) Table of Contents and Summary
A table of contents and a brief summary are re-
. quired for Draft and Final EIS's.
The summary should include:
A. Brief description of the action
B. Significant. beneficial and adverse im-
pacts. (issues of controversy must be
specified)
C. Mitigation measures proposed
D. Alternatives considered
E. Matters to be decided (permits, approvals,
funding)
oc
4iD Description of the Proposed Action
Place a check in the box to the leftdf those
topics to be included in the draft EIS.
" A. PROJECT PURPOSE, NEED AND
BENEFITS
1 . Background and history
2. Public need for the project, and
municipality objectives based on ad-
opted community developments plans
3. Objectives of the project sponsor
'4. Benefits of the proposed action
a.) social
b.) economic
~s t:d- tr~\at bouJai,,{ .If;
12.clw, 4:.'~ roo' lnWtk:4Ls .
'.=
1
".
..,
.
:.:--.
J(l B. LOCATION
1. Establish geographic boundaries of
the project (use of regional and local
scale maps is recommended)
2. Description of access to site
3. Description of existing zoning of
proposed site
4.0ther:
lQ C. DESIGN AND LA YOm
1. Total site area
a.) proposed impervious surface area
(roofs, parking lots, roads)
b.) amount of land to be cleared
c.) open space
2. Structures
a.) gross leaseable area (GLA), if
applicable
b.) layout of buidings (attached,
enclosed, separate)
c.) site plans and profile view
d.) material storage
e.) drainage plans
f.) above/underground pipelines
g.) staging area for material handling
3 . Parking
a.) pavement area
b.) number of spaces and layout
4. Other:
~ D. CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION
1 . Construction
a.) total construction period anticipated
b.) schedule of construction
c.) future potential development, on
site or on adjoining properties
d.) other:
Operation
a. e of operation
b.) sel; Ie of operation
c.) other:
G c. CLO.3.::I~c. /\I1U y()3 f CLOGHRI!: Ph. ^ 1>1'3
(for projects of planned limited life such as
landfills)
~ F . APPROVALS
1 . Req.uired changes or variances to the
zoning regulations
2. Other permit approval or funding
reguirements.
@ Environmental Setting -07
Place a check in lile box to the left of those
topics to be included in the Draft EIS.
Natural Resource
~ A. GEOLOGY
.
composition and thickness of
subsurface material
e pies:
-dep 0, and nature of, bedrock
formations d impermeable layers
-occurrence n extractive
mineral resource
-usefulness as constru
material
b.) earthquake potential
gJ 2. Surface
a.) List of soil types
b.) discussion of soil characteristics
examples:
-physical properties (indication
of soils hydrological (infiltration)
capabilities)
-engineering properties (soil
bearing capacity)
-agricultural properties (soil
profile characteristics) when agri.
cultural land resources are involved
c.) distribution of soil types at project
site
d.) suitability for use
examples:
-agriculture
-recreation
-construction
-mining
e.) other:
~ 3. Topography
a.) description of topography at project
site ~I A.a' .
examples: .,. Op.e- .......'11101 S
-slopes "'1 ~o/C) 6l0pt~
-prominent or unique features
b.) description of topography of sur-
r1UI~~~rJ ~f.4~ F'j~'"
~ B. WATER RESOURCES"~'De.G-
l5i2 1. Groundwater 6onl!.
a.) location and description of aquifers
and recharge areas
examples:
-depth of water table
-seasonal variation
-quality
-quantity
-flow
b.) identification of present uses and
level of use of groundwater
examples:
-location of existing wells
-public/private water supply
-industrial uses
.",
-agricultural uses
i,=.
2
(
l
".
.
.
..
(
~ 2. Surface water -species presence and abundance
a.) location and decription of surface -age
waters located on project site or -size
those that may be influenced by the -distribution
project -dominance
examples: -community types
-seasonal variation -unique. rare and endangered
-quantity species
-classification according to New -value as habitat for wildlife
York State Department of Health -productivity
b.) identification of uses and level of ~ 2. Fish, Shellfish and Wildlife
use of all surface waters a.) list of fish, shellfish and wildlife
examples: species on the project site and
-public/private water supply within surrounding area, including
-industrial uses migatory and resident species
"':"'agricultural uses b.) discussion of fish, shellfish and
-recreational wildlife population characteristics
c.) description of existing drainage examples:
areas, patterns and channels -species presence and abundance
d. discussion of potential for flooding, -distribution
siltation, erosion and eutro- -dominance
phication of water supply -unique, rare and endangered
species
-= '-. " -productivity
0 I.Climate ~ 3. Wetlands
a.) discussion of seasonal variations
and extremes a.) list wetland areas within or contiguous
examples: to the project site
-temperature b.) discuss wetland characteristics
-humidity examples:
-precipitation -acreage
-wind -vegetative cover
-classification
0 2. Air quality -benefits of wetland such as flood
a.) description of existing air quality and erosion control, recreation
leveis
examples: ..0 E. nGf'\.1\..uL TClK,.,b. nJ:"c::nlIRCES -
-list the National and State Air I.Soils
Quality Standards for the project a.) list soils by name, slope and soil
area and the compliance status group ranking within NYS Land
for each standard Classification System
:.:- .~- '. b.) identification of existing sources (1 NYCRR 370)
or pollutants-fixed or mobile b.) number of acres within each group
c.) identification of any sensitive c.) location of site on soil survey map
recepters in project area 0 2. Agriculturai land management
examples: system(s)
-hospitals, schools, nursing a.) inventory of existing erosion
. . homes, parks controi and drainage systems
d.) description of existing monitoring
program (if applicable) examples:
-subsurface drain lines
~D. TERRESTRAL AND AQUA TIC ECOLOGY -outlet/diversion ditches
'C:Jl"::"7
ril 1. Vegetation -strip cropping
a.) list vegetation types on the project -diversion terraces
site and within the surrounding area b.) reiationship of proposed action to
b.) discussion of siFe vegetation existing soil and water conservation
characteristics plans (if applicable)
examples:
'~"P
3
~
.
o 3. Associated operations
a.) number and lypes of farm
operations on and adjacent to site
examples:
-dairy
-grain
-orchard
b.) type and proximity of farm
related facilities
examples:
-storage units/barns
-sorting/packing houses
-refrigeration units
-roadside markets
c.) access to cropland (including
detached fields)
d.) access for farm equipment to
public roads
Human Resources
)Cl A. TRANSPORTATION
lilJ I. Transportation services
a.) description of the size, capacity
and condition of services
examples:
-roads, canals, railroads, bridges
-parking facilities
-traffic control
-access/egress from site
b.) description of current level of use
of services
examples:
-a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic
flow
-vehicle mix
-source of existing traffic
o
o
~ B.
~
description of the current avail.
bility of service
b.) de . tion of present level of use
3 . Pedestrian e onm.,nt
4.0ther:
LAND USE AND ZONING
I . Existing land use and zoning
a.) description of the existing land
use of the project site and the
surrounding area
examples:.
-commercial
-residential
-agric~f(ural
-business
-retail
-industrial
-vacant
b.) description of existing zoning of
site and surrounding area
"77
.
c.) description of any affected agri-
cultural district or other farmland
retention program boundary in and
surrounding the site
lilt 2. Land use plans
a.) description of any land use plans
or master plans which include
project site and surrounding area
b.) discussion of future development
trends or pressures
o 3.0ther; Ci\aI'lS~ ~C-I~A.
~ C. COMMUNITY SERVICE (for this section
include a list of existing facilities and a
discussion of existing levels of usage and
projected future needs)
o I. Educational facilities
o 2. Police protection
~ 3. Fire protection
o 4. Health care facilities
o 5. Social services
5il 6. Recreational facilities
o 7. Utilities
o 8 _ Public water supply
o 9. Solid waste disposal
o 10. Sewage treatment facilities
o II.Other:
I . Population characteristics
discussion of existing population
meters
exam s:
-distribu
-density
-household size a composition
b.) discussion of projectio
lation growth
o 2. Other:
~ E . CULTURAL RESOURCES
~ I _ Visual resources
a.) description of the physical char-
acter of the community
examples:
-urban vs. rural
b.) description of natural areas of
significant scenic value
c.) identification of structures of
significant architectural design
~ 2. Historic and archaeological resources
a.) location and description of historic
areas or structures listed on State
or National Register or designated
by the community, or included on
",Statewide Inventory
'=
4
~
(
See.
Part
lI.*ID
$
1'05. ~"'.
(
l
b.) identification of sites having
potential si(1~ifjcant archaeological
value include results of cultural
resource survey, if conducted
identification of existing level of
'se in the community
iden . tion of major sources of
noise
examples
-airports
-major highways
-industrial/commercial faciiI
_D 1.0Lllo;;;r.-
@ Significant Environmental impacts
Identify those aspects of the environmental
setting in Section IV that may be adversely or
beneficially affected by the proposed action and
require discussion.
@ Mitigation Measures to Minimize Environ-
mental Impact.
Describe measures to reduce or avoid poten-
tial adverse impacts identified in Section V. The
following is a brief listing of typical measures used
for some of the major areas of impact.
Natural Resource
D A. GEOLOGY
] . Subsurface
a.) use excavated material for land
reclamation
b.) use facility wastes (ash, sludge) for
land reclamation
c.) other:
2. Surface
a.) use topsoil stockpiled during
construction for restoration and
landscaping
b.) minimize disturbance of non-
construction sites
c.) design and implement soil erosion
control plan
d.) other:
3. Topography
a.) avoid construction on areas of steep
slope
b.) design adequate soil erosion
devices to protect areas of steep
slope
c.) other: '0=
D B. WATER RESOURCES
1 . Groundwater
a.) design/modify.system of treatment
for stormwater runoff of wastewater
prior to recharge of groundwater
b.) maintain permeable areas on the
site
5
Dc.
D D.
.
c.) institute a program for monitoring
water quality in adjacent wells
d.) require secondary or tertiary con-
tainment of products/wastes
e.) contingency plans for accidental
spills
f.) other:
2. Surface water
a.) ensure use of soil erosion control
techniques during construction and
operation to avoid siltation
examples:
-hay bales
-temporary restoration of vege.
tation to disturbed areas
-landscaping
b.) design adequate stormwater
control system
c.) construct/modify sewage treatment
facilities
d.) restrict use of salt or sand for road
and parking area snow removal
e,) avoid direct discharges to surface
water resources
f.) require secondary or tertiary
containment of products/wastes
g.) contingency plans for accidental
spills
h.) other:
AIR RESOURCES
] .Air quality
a.) assure proper construction
practices
examples:
-fugitive dust control
-proper operation and mainten.
ance of construction equipment
b.) design traffic improvements to reo
duce congestion and vehicle delay
c.) install and ensure the proper
operatip!) of emission odor control
devices
d.) initiate a program for monitoring
of air quality
e.) other:
TERRESTRAL AND AQUATIC ECOLOGY
1. Vegetation
a.) restrict clearing to only those areas
necessary
b.) preserve part of site as a natural
area
c.) after construction, landscape site
with naturally occurring vegetation
d.) purchase open space at another
location and dedicate to local
_,!,"":~overnment or conservation
organization
. ,
2. Fish, Shellfish and Wildlife
a.) provide adequate habitat (shelter
and food) for remaining wildlife
species
b.) schedule construction to avoid
sensitive periods of fish, shellfish
and wildlife cycles
c.) other:
D E. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
I.Soils
a.) select/design project to avoid
viable agricultural land
b.) reclaim disturbed agricultural soil
profiles for agricultural purposes
c.) schedule activity when crops are off
fields and soil is firm
d.) other:
2. Agricultural land management systems
a.) re.establish access drives, fence-
lines and any disturbed land
management systems
b.) re.establish any disturbed erosion
control and drainage systems
c.) install soil and water management
practices to restore or enhance
soil drainage and stability
d.) preserve open space for agricultural
use
e.) develop lease back arrangements to
allow continued agricultural use on
all or portion of site
f.) other:
Human Resources
D A. TRANSPORTATION
1. Transportation
a.) design adequate and safe access
to project site to handle projected
traffic flow
b.) install adequate traffic control
:'f devices
c.) optimize use of parking areas
d.) encourage car pooling and oper.
ation of facility during non.peak
traffic times
e.) qesign special routing and
restricted hours for delivery truck
traffic
f.) other:
2. Public transportation
a.) adjust public transportation romh
and scheer-Liles to service the facility
b.) encourage use of public transpor.
tation by using illcentive programs
for employees or by selliilg tickets
in facility
c.) other:
.
D B. LAND USE AND ZONING
1 . Existing land use and zoning
a.) design project to comply with
existing land use plans
b.) design functional and visually
appealing facility to set standard
and precedent for future surround.
ing land use
c.) other:
D C. COMMUNITY SERVICES
1 . Police protection
a.) minimize local police protection
responsibilities by providing private
security force
b.) provide security systems, alarms
for facility
c.) provide equipment, funds or ser.
vices directly to the community
d.) other:
2. Fire protection
a.) use construction materials that
minimize fire hazards
b.) incorporate sprinkler and alarm
systems into building design
c.) provide equipment, funds or ser.
vices directly to the community
d.) other:
3.Utilities
a.) install utility services underground
b.) incorporate water saving fixtures
into facility design
c.) incorporate energy-saving
measures into facility design
d.) other:
D D. CULTURAL RESOURCES
1 . Visual resources
a.) design exterior of structure to
physically blend with existing
surroundings
b.) minimize visual impact through
thoughtful and innovative design
of lighting and signs (consider:
height, size, intensity, glare and
hours of lighting operation)
c.) design landscaping to be visually
pleasing and to serve as a buffer
between surrounding land uses,
parking areas, operational equip.
ment and facilities
d.) other:
2 .'Historic and archaeological resources
a.) Prepare a plan, including measures
to mitigate impacts to historic/
archaeological resources through (
data recovery, avoidance and/or
,restriction of project acti\4ities
'.=
6
.,
.
.
b.) develop measures to convey cui.
tural information to the community
(e.g. through scientific/popular
reports, displays)
c.) preserve architecturally signifi-
cant structures and make an
adequate permanent photographic
and statistical record of those that
must be destroyed
d.) other:
3 . Noise
a.) schedule construction/operation
to occur during "normal business"
hours minimizing noise impact
during sensitive times (early morn-
ing, night)
b.) assure adherence to construction
noise standards .
c.) design berms and landscaping to
block and absorb noise
d.) other:
~ Adverse Environmental Effects that Cannot
be Avoided if the Project is Implemented
Identify those adverse environmental effects
in Section V that can be expected to occur regard-
less of the mitigation measures considered in
Section VI.
(ijj) Alternatives
This section contains categories of alterna.
tives with examples. Discussion of each alternative
should be at a level sufficient to permit a compara.
tive assessment of costs, benefits and environmen-
tal risks for each alternative. It is not acceptable
to make simple assertions that a particular alter-
native is or is not feasible. Identify those categories
of alternatives which should be included in the EIS
by placing a check in the box located to the left
of the topic.
D A . ALTERNATIVE DESIGN AND
TECHNOLOGiES {'d L.llel~
] . Site layout '34 10 ..J
c.) density and I cation 0 structures
b.) location of access routes, parking
and utility routes
2. Orientation
a.) compatibiiity with slope and
dra!nage plJtterns
b.) site size and set back requirements
2. Technology ==
a.) pollution control equipment
b.) innovative vs. proven technologies
4. ~\ix of activities _ .
a) addition of businesses which would
affect the operational nature of the
facility
{
.
(
<...
El. AL I C.Kllt\ I I v r. ~J I ~
] . Limiting factors
a.) availability of land
b. suitability of alternative site to
a omodate design requirements
c.) avai ility of utilities
d.) suitable arket area
e.) compatibili with local zoning and
master plan
f.) compatibility wit
cultural districts
g.) compatibility with reg nal
objectives
h.) accessibility of site to tran orta-
tion routes and service popula . n
[] -;: AI TJ:'DNATI\/J:' il1.1ii:
] . Increase or decrease project size to
minimize possible impacts
2 . Increase or decrease project size to
correspond to market and community
needs
U D. ALIEf-<NAllvE C8P'I5:T~"(Tlf""'\NI
0PIS:R 11 TIO~ ~CWe:9~b.IMG
] . Commence construction at a different
time
2. Phase construction/operation
3. Restrict construction/operation work
schedule
g C. /,L TCR~L\Try [ LAf 15 M8C
] . Suitability of site for other uses
a.) other types of commercial uses
b.) other types of industry
c.) different types of housing
d.) agricultural use
e.) other:
l&I F. NO ACTION
] . Impacts of no action
a,) effect on public need
b.) effect on private developers' need
c.) beneficial or adverse environmental
impacts
D G. OTHER:
@ Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of
Resources
Identify those natural and human resources
listed in Section IV that will be consumed, convert.
ed or made unavailable for future use.
-H. 8.....nlll I..J li:-g d",p"_a.! (:r "'''''r I" !.:.bl.:.)
Describe in this section the potential growth
aspects the proposed project may have. Listed on
the next page are examples of topics that are typi.
cally affected by the growth induced by a project.
1""_~
7
.'
D A. POPULATION
1 . Increases in business and resident
population due to the creation or
relocation of business
2 . Increases in resident population due to
the construction of housing
D B. SUPPORT FACILITIES
1 . business created to serve the increased
population
2. Service industries created to supply
new facility
DC. DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL
1 . Introduction or improvement of infra.
structure (roads, waste disposal, sewers,
water) to service proposed project
2. Creation of further growth potential
by construction of improved infra.
structure
D D. OTHER:
,V' ~ffi1!l~...... lI.... eJ:...... "'lid e"'....._. .i":~'" nf
Energy Resources (if applicable)
Identify the energy sources to be used,
anticipated levels of consumption and ways to
reduce energy consumption. The examples listed
below are typical issues to be considered when ad.
dressing this topic.
D A. PROPOSED ENERGY SOURCES AND
ALTERNATIVES
DB, ANTICIPATED SHORT.TERM/LONG.
TERM LEVELS OF ENERGY
CONSUMPTION
D C.INDIRECT EFFECTS ON ENERGY
CONSUMPTION
1 . Increased dependence on automobile
use
2. Increased levels of traffic due to
proposed project
D D, ENERGY CONSERVATION MEASURES
1 . Design methods to reduce fuel use for
heating, cooling and lighting
a,j conventional technology
examples:
"-insulation
-thermo pane windows
-use of low wattage lights
b,) innovative'technology
examples: ..~
-heat I'"mps
-solar panels
-wind energy.
-use of waste heat fro.Ff1 an
industrial plant
-use of recycled materials
~
c.) efficient layout
examples:
-orientation of structures in
relation to summer and winter.
sunlight
-clustering of structures to
maximize common walls
-shortening of utility runs
-shared insulation and heating
2 . Indirect energy benefits
a.) location and design of facility to
accomodate mass transit
b.) use of shuttle buses
c.) location of facility to minimize
travel distance
D E.OTHER:
XII ,___.h...........L....f 811C;Hc;HIQIJ1~ 1..(....1 -,,:^...
In certain situations involving major develop.
ments (such as an oil supertanker port, a liquid
propane/natural gas storage facility, a resource
recovery facility or a hazarduous waste treatment,
storage or disposal facility), information regarding
reasonably foreseeable catastrophic impacts to the
environment may not be available. Such informa.
tion may be unavailable because the means to ob.
tain it are unknown or the cost of obtaining it is
exhorbitant, or because there is uncertainty about
its validity, If such information is essential to an
agency's SEQR finding, the EIS must:
A. Identify the nature and relevance of such
unavailable or uncertain information; and
B. Provide a summary of existing credible
scientific evidence, if available; and
C. Assess the likelihood of occurrence and
consequences of the potential impact,
even if the probability is low, using the.
oretical approaches or research methods
generally accepted in the scientific
community.
This assessment should be applied only where
reasonably foreseeable'catastrophic, impacts to the
environment are possible and it is not intended to
be applied in the review of such actions as shop.
ping malls, residential subdivisions and commer.
cial facilities even though the size and scale of
some'such projects may be extensive,
@ Appendices
Following is a list of materials typically used
in support of the EIS.
A. List of underlyinn, .tudies, reports and
information considered and relied on in preparing
statement
B, List all federal, state. regional, or local
agencies, org~nizations, consultants an9 private
I
',=
8
.
.
p
D
Southold. N. Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
June 28, 1988
Harold Reese
Reese Bros. Inc.
855 Sunrise Highway
Lynbrook, N.Y. 11563
SCTM #22-3-18.3 - Cove Beach Estates
Dear Mr. Reese:
Enclosed please find the Suffolk County Department of Health
Services review of the above mentioned subdivision.
Please address these issues in the Draft Environmental Impact
Statement.
If you have any questions. please do not hesitate to contact
this office.
cc: Howard Young
Enc:copy of Letter
/~F'
.
..
,
(
~
c
(
.
1
.
persons consulted in preparing the statement
C. Technical exhibits (if any) at a legible scale
D. Relevent correspondence regarding the
projects may be included (required in the Final
EIS)
Additional Draft EIS Scoping Topics
Indicate any additional topics for discussion
in the Draft EIS. Attach additional sheets if
necessary.
,~
-=
..,....
9
'if'
.
>.
CO!TY OF SUFFOLK
.
",,":'I.:NED BY
3~~~~U~I~~~~U~
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES
DATi
(So
&_]. ,,1Jr'
ARRIS, M.D.. M.P.H.
")MMISSIONER
Ms. Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner
Southold Town Planning Department
Southold Town Hall
53095 Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
BE: Cove Beach Estates, Scoping Recamlendations
S.C.T.M. t: 1000-22-3-18.3 and 15.1
SCDHS Subdivision JlI::plication "Cove Beach"
P6~
,-!, vJi)'
f\JJJtt1v (JJI _
~
,
Dear Ms. Scopaz:
The Suffolk County Department of Health Services has received the
positive declaration of significance dated May 23, 1988, for the above-
referenced project. We wish to subnit the following concems of our agency,
and the issues we would like to see addressed in the forthcoming Draft
Envirannental Inpact statanent.
SANITARY CXDE
A. Cooprehensive Review
The SCDHS maintains jurisdiction over the final location of water
SUFPly and sanitary sewage disposal systems. We reccmnend, therefore, that
the cIoc1.:Inent provide a detailed discussion of the regulations and ccnplianoe
requirements of our agency as they apply to the proposed development
projects and to potential alternatives to proposed actions in the study
area.
In addition, the document should outline the Article VI awlication
status of subject action and explain the proposed method of carpliance with
the awropriate requiranents of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code (SCSC).
B. Water Sut:Ply
The document should discuss the water supply requirements for the
overall project area and deroonstrate water SUFPly availability.
COUNTY CENTER
RIVERHEAD, N.Y. 11901
Letter to Valerie Scopaz
June 16, 1988
Page 2
.
.
, 0'
II. NM'1J.RAL RESOOOCES
A. wildlife Habitat Identification and Protection
1. The document should provide a detailed assessment of the study
area's terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. This section of the
study should provide a detailed cover map of the study area and
include the results of an on-site species inventory. (The document
should not contain merely a predetennined list of probable species
found in habitats similar to the subject study area.)
In addition, the dates of all field studies and qualifications of
the individual (s) conducting the investigation should be included in
the docurtent for review.
2. The docurtent should identify potential short- and long-term illpacts
to wildlife species and habitat as a result of the prcp:>sed actions.
Information pertaining to rare and endangered species, habitat
fragmentation, area-sensitive species, and loss of indigenous
natural carmunities is iIlportant to this discussion.
3. The document should evaluate (in detail sufficient for cooparative
assessment) project design altematives which maximize protection of
contiguous natural areas and provide for the highest diversity of
natural habitat types. We are especially concerned about the full
protection of areas providing habitat for rare and endangered
species.
4. Sources of infonnation pertaining to rare, threatened and endangered
species should be stated in the DEIS.
We recommend the discussion be supplemented with information
obtained fran the regional office of NYSDEC and the New York State
Natural Heritage Program. The Natural Heritage F:t.'-":l.LcdII offers a
Significant Habitat Infonnation Service (518-439-7486), and can be
contacted at the following address:
New York state Natural Heritage Program
Wildlife Resources Center
Delmar, New York 12054
B. New York state Regulations and Requirements
1. DevelClpleI1t of the project area will be subject to regulation and
review by the New York State Department of Environmental
Conse1:vation (NYSDEC), pursuant to Articles 24 and 25 (Freshwater
Wetlands Act, Tidal Wetlands Act) of the New York State
Environmental Conse1:vation Law, and Article 42 of the New York state
Executive Law (Waterfront Revitalization and Coastal Resources Act).
The DEIS should outline the regulatory requirements of the State
pursuant to the above legislation and discuss how the proposed
projects affected by this regulation will satisfy State permitting
standards and policies.
Letter to valerie Sa:Jpaz
June 16, 1988
Page 3
.
.
2. The document should provide a detailed base map of the study area
which includes NYSDEC-approved wetland delineations, and their
respective regulatory limits.
C. Alternatives
The DEIS should provide awropriate design alternatives with site plans
which are suitable for c:ooparative assessment.
We reccmnend that alternative designs seek to maximize protection of
the study area's natural and cultural resources conprehensively, and be
presented in an objective manner. Alternatives which unquestionably have
greater inpacts than the desired actions are inawropriate.
Based on the size and natural resource sensitivity of the subject
parcel, we believe the document should explore acquisition for preseJ:Vation
as am:>ng the alternatives to the proposed project. We would support such an
alternative as this property's best use.
D. Cumulative Inpacts
As we understand it, the property adjoining the subject parcel's
southeastern border has been proposed for a residential subdivision known as
Dam Pond (SClM #1000-22-03-19, 20, 21,22 and 1000-31-05-1). We believe the
potential CUlIUlative inpacts on lietlands, wildlife habitat, and open space
are sufficient to warrant inpact evaluation of the Dam Pond and Cove Beach
Estates awlication collectively.
We recommend, therefore, that the DEIS discuss these two projects and
their potential inpacts as a single overall action in detail sufficient for
technical assessment.
The following concerns of our departIrent were outlined previously in
our letter of June 1, 1987, pertaining to the subdivision awlication
of Harold Reese. We do not believe they have been sufficiently
addressed by the current subdivision design and reiterate them for your
convenience .
E. Tidal Wetlands
We recommend the full protection of the site's tidal wetlands and
regulated adjacent upland area. We encourage maximJm lietland setbacks be
inposed on all clearing, construction, and filling activities associated
with site dellelop:nent.
F. Freshwater Ponds
A small freshwater pond on the site is located imnediately south of Lot
134, at an elevation of 0.5 feet. The pond is awroximately 50' x 70' and
is surrounded by a mature oak forest, and provides water and food for upland
wildlife. We recommend full protection of this pond and object to the
proposed road design. This design offers no buffer between the road's edge
and the pond boundary. It will require filling imnediately adjacent to the
water body.
Letter to Valerie Scopaz
J\me 16, 1988
Page 4
.
.
, ,
The deposition of fill, coupled with road runoff, may result in
sedimentation and pollution iJtpacts to the small pond and reduce its value
to wildlife and as a natural feature. The road should be redesigned to
leave the existing buffer of trees in place. This action would reduce the
iJtpacts of pollution as well as those of human activity associated with site
developnent .
The pond also may be subject to inpacts fran runoff associated with the
drainage easement located south of Lot #34. Should lot drainage and
stontWclter runoff be directed to this easement, the natural direction of
flow will be immediately to the pond, where it could reduce water quality.
We reocmnend the this drainage easement be eliminated and be added as an
additional open space and water quality buffer for the pond.
G. Bluffs
To reduce developnent-related erosion on the bluffs, we reocmnend that
the bluffs be preserved in their natural state as dedicated open space.
Furthermore, we support the proposed bluff setbacks of 100 feet and
encourage the imposition of clearing restriction within the designated
setback area.
H. Waterfront Lots and Beach Access
1. We object to the inclusion of low-lying beach areas within the
designated property boundaries of Lots #1 through #13. These areas
are highly dynamic and subject to coastal erosion hazards as a
result of natural and manmade forces. Such erosion can result in
extensive damage to property and natural resources. Inclusion of
such areas within delineated property boundaries often encourage
structural development, which may needlessly cOlIFound natural
resource impacts and property loss due to coastal erosion. We
reconunend that the existing boundaries for Lots #1 through #13 be
redesigned to exclude areas that are seaward of the la-foot contour
line and that such areas be maintained in their natural state as
dedicated open space. The town also should consider the value of
securing public access to this area in its review of the project.
2. To reduce potential runoff from illF9rvious surfaces and related
erosion impacts, the proposed building envelopes should be reduced
greatly and situated at least as high as the la-foot contour line.
3. Resident access points to the beach area should be consolidated,
especially in the vicinity of the vegetated bluffs. The subdivision
plan should provide designated pedestrian access easements to be
located along areas of minimal topograhic relief. Any structural
designs for such areas (boardwalks, stairs, etc.) should be
sul:mitted by the awlicant.
I. Drainage and Slopes
1. Mlch of the site is characterized by highly irregular topographic
relief. To evaluate the storage capability and infiltration
potential of the proposed recharge areas, the applicant should
depict each basin and its contributing drainage area. Runoff
letter to Valerie Scopaz
June 16, 1988
Page 5
.
.
'... ~ ,)'
potential fran each drainage area should be determined and calculations
sutmitted for review.
2. The applicant should provide detailed road profiles, drainage
designs and calculations for the subdivision road. Drainage designs
should include appropriate plans for the installation of catch
basins and leaching pools necessary to maintain all nmoff on site.
J 0 ~ Space and Recreational Areas
1. The subdivision design should demonstrate mitigation for
develcpnent-related inpacts to coastal erosion areas, freshwater
wetlands, bluffs and natural habitats.
2. Conditions of open space dedication should be des=ibed in the DEIS
and provide for pennanent, undisturl:led natural areas.
3. The proposed park and recreation area should not encroach into the
site's regulated tidal wetlands. A substantial buffer between the
Dam Pond tidal wetlands and the area of active re=eation should be
maintained.
40 The proposed access road and parking area should be constructed of a
pervious material to minimize erosion and nmoff inpacts to tidal
wetlands .
5. If any structures are proposed for the active recreation area, they
should be indicated on the subdivision map.
We appreciate the opportunity to outline the infonnation and areas of
concern we would like to see addressed in the DEIS. We look forward to
reviewing the docurrent when it is catpleted.
Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact the Office
of Ecology at your convenience 0
Sincerely,
{U/ -Y.' A2~
Robert S. DeLuca
Biologist
Louise W. Harrison
Supervisor, Bureau of
Environmental Management
Office of Ecology
RSD/amf-
cc: vito Minai, P.E.
stephen Costa, PoE.
Charles Lind, SC Planning
Frank Panek, NYSDEC
Robert Greene, NYSDEC
GeoJ:ge stafford, NYSDOS
.
t,-r-?~V
Harold A. Reese
855 Sunrise Highway
Lynbrook, N.Y.
June I, 1988
Planning Board
Southold, New York
Gentlemen:
We are in receipt of the map of Cove Beach with suggested changes. While
these might have some merit, we are at a loss to understand why there should
be any changes at all.
The 34 lot subdivision as submitted had been the result of months and months
of work by Young & Young; the Planning Board, and Mr.Frank Weber, the original
owner, and in their opinion was the best use of the land.
In going through the minutes of various meetings that we have had with the
Board, we have not found one single adverse comment regarding this layout.
On the contrary, every single suggestion was in favor of i~ such as at the
meeting of January 12, 1987 and these are direct quotes:
Mr. Orlowski stated, " That this propert,)'has been before the Board for a long
time and the Board has made a lot of inspections down there. He also noted
that there was a map submitted by the previous owner for 34 lots which had
received sketch plan approval. He stated that it was the consensus of the
"
Board that the 34 lots was a layout that the Board preferred.
"
Mr. Orlowski stated that the sketch submitted for 34 lots, after careful review
and a lot of work by the Board, they felt that it was a good plan and a good
layout. Mr. Orlowski stated that the Board preferred the plan for 34 lots
and that plan had received sketch. A new submission would require starting
at sketch plan where the sketch with 3~ lots had already received sketch plan
II
approva 1.
-1-
~
.
-
Mr. Orlowski stated, "That the Board felt that 34 lots were sufficient
given the site, and that was what the Board would like to see."
Mr. Orlowski stated, "That the Board members have walked this property
many times, and were familiar with the site, and the Board would like
to see Mr. Reese pursue the 34 lot application made by the previous owner.
r"r. Bryer staterJ, "That when the 34 lots were reviewed, it could be
considered because there was some circulation with in the subdivision.
Mr. Orlowski stated, "That although Mr. Latham was not present he had
expressed that he would rather that the 34 lot subdivision was pursued."
At the meeting Februarv g, 1987
Mr. Orlowski stated. " It tells us something. But we still feel with a
-
yield map with 34 lots that this is a good layout."
With regards to the wetlands, at this same meetinq,
Mr. Brver: I had a question on the tidal wetlands. This area is tidal
over there. D.E.C. will flag that.
Mr. Young; Yes, we did it already. We had it on the previous application
with the original Cove Beach application. That was where that area came up.
Mr. Bryer: Thisline is from the D.E.C.?
Mr. Young: Yes, they are, they were staked by an environmental consultant
and reviewed by the DEC and accepted by them. That is not on here, not on this
map, but that can be transferred on it. They don't do it anymore. They ask
-2-
..?
.
,
us to do it and they will review it. But, in any case, they did review
the wetlands, in fact they made a change a little bit. It has been done,
I can put that on.
At another meeting we had with Mr. Latham and Mr. Orlowski it was
stated that if we persisted with the 40 lot application, a demand would
be made for an impact statement.
Since we have accepted the 34 lot layout, shouldn't the request for an
impact statement be rescinded?
We would especially like to appeal to the Board to reconsider all tne
above mentioned facts--all of which can be verified - and give us their
consent to accept their own 34 lot layout and let us proceed with this
project.
Respectfully yours,
t4~L
Harold Reese
HR:gm
-3-
-
D
f' LE Cop]
Southold, N.Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
June 23, 1988
Szepatowski Associates
David Emilita
23 Narragansett Ave.
Jamestown, RI 02835
RE: Cove beach Estates
SCTM# 1000-22-3-l8.3and 15.1
Dear Dave,
Enclosed please find the Suffolk County Department of Health
Services comments on the above mentioned subdivision for your review.
Please let us know if we should send this to the applicant
so that it can be included in their preparation of the DEIS.
Thank you for your assistance.
BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR.
CHAIRMAN
617.21
Appendix D
State Environmental Quality Review
Scoping Checklist
, ,
.
.
~
,".'
14-14.9 (2/87)-9c
;3
Co\Je~ ~
IOjLNecee 'SEQR
)
The following checklist of topics is intended
as a starting point for developing a detailed scope
for a project-specific Draft Environmental Impact
Statement. Typically, no one project will require
a discussion of all the topic areas contained in this
document. Through the scoping process, the list
of topics should be refined to reflect issues unique
to the proposed project. Topic areas may be de-
leted, added or elaborated upon, to arrive at the
final scoping document.
The purpose of the checklist format is to iden-
tify the basic topic areas of the Draft EIS. This is
accomplished by reviewing the list and placing a
check in the box located to the left of these topics
which should be discussed. The model scoping
checklist can also be used as a worksheet,
including comments, suggestions and identifica-
tion of the particular example(s) that are relevant
to a detailed discussion of the topic or issue that
has been checked. Conversely, those topics which
are not checked, are issues not associated with the
project and may be eliminated from discussion in
the Draft EIS.
The next step is to expand the list to include
or elaborate on those topics unique to the pro-
posed project. A blank sheet is included at the end
of the checklist for such additional information.
The scoping process involves several steps in
addition to compiling a list of topics. Scoping also
includes discussions on the quantity and quality
of informaton required and the methods of obtain-
ing that data.
NOTE: This check list was designed to be
used in conjunction with the section on scoping
contained in SEQR Guideline-Draft and Final
EIS's. It is also important to emphasize that this
checklist should serve only as a model to assist in
the scoping of a D"raft EIS. It should not be used
as a substitute for actively scoping Draft EIS for
a specific project.
)
CD Cover Sheet ."c._'
All EIS's (Draft or Final) shall begin with a
cover sheet that includes:
A. Whether it is a draft or final statement
B. Name or other descriptive title of the
project
C. Location (county and town, village or city)
of the project
D. Name and address of the lead agency
which required preparation of the state-
ment and the name and telephone number
of a person at the agency to be contacted
for further information
E. Name and address of the preparers of any
portion of the statement and a contact
name and telephone number
F. Date of acceptance of the Draft EIS
G. In the case of a Draft EIS, the deadline
date by which comments are due should
be indicated
<ll> Table of Contents and Summary
A table of contents and a brief summary are re-
- quired for Draft and Final EIS's.
The summary should include:
A. Brief description of the action
B. Significant, beneficial and adverse im-
pacts, (issues of controversy must be
specified)
C. Mitigation measures proposed
D. Alternatives considered
E. Matters to be decided (permits, approvals,
funding)
4ID Description of the Proposed Action
Place a check in the box to the lefr df those
topics to be included in the draft EIS.
.~ A. PROJECT PURPOSE, NEED AND
BENEFITS
1. Background and history
2. Public need for the project, and
municipality objectives based on ad.
opted community developments plans
3. Objectives of the project sponsor
. 4. Benefits of the proposed action
a.) social
b.) economic
r:-tass ct tr?iat boz.,tJail'~ -It
EAu>, 4:. '!\; 'loo' L~fefJaLs ' ,
f,=~~_.
1
-.
'.','
.
....
J([ B . LOCATION
1 . Establish geographic boundaries of
the project (use of regional and local
scale maps is recommended)
2. Description of access to site
3. Description of existing zoning of
proposed site
4. Other:
~ C. DESIGN AND LAYOUT
1. Total site area
a.) proposed impervious surface area
(roofs. parking lots. roads)
b.) amount of land to be cleared
c.) open space
2. Structures
a.) gross leaseable area (GLA). if
applicable
b.) layout of buidings (attached,
enclosed, separate)
c.) site plans and profile view
d.) materiai storage
e.) drainage plans
f.) above/underground pipelines
g.) staging area for material handling
3. Parking
a.) pavement area
b.) number of spaces and layout
4.0ther:
~ D. CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION
1 . Construction
a.) total construction period anticipated
b.) schedule of construction
c.) future potential development, on
site or on adjoining properties
d.) other:
Operation
a. e of operation
b.) sdi Ie of operation
c.) other:
EI c. CL03{j~~ I'\I'IU 1'0:51" e:LOCHRC Ph. A I>IS
(for projects of planned limited life such as
landfills)
~ F . APPROVALS
1 . Req.uired changes or variances to the
zoning regulations
2. Other permit approval or funding
reguirements
@ Environmental Setting
Place a check ii'dile box to the left of those
topics to be included in the Draft EIS.
Natural Resource
jlJ A. GEOLOGY
.
composition and thickness of
subsurface material
e pies:
-dep to, and nature of, bedrock
formations d impermeable layers
-occurrence n extractive
mineral resource
-usefulness as constru
material
b.) earthquake potential
J(I 2. Surface
a.) List of soil types
b.) discussion of soil characteristics
examples:
-physical properties (indication
of soils hydrological (infiltration)
capabilities)
-engineering properties (soil
bearing capacity)
-agricultural properties (soil
profile characteristics) when agri-
cultural land resources are involved
c.) distribution of soil types at project
site
d.) suitability for use
examples:
-agriculture
-recreation
-construction
-mining
e.) other:
~ 3. Topography
a.) description of topography at project
site SI A .
examples: Op-t- lVIIi~1 S
-slopes ..,., ~% ~opt~
-prominent or unique features
b.) description of topography of sur.
r9,.un,ding a'it'a,..."., II. U
VeUnClr'\Ic "'"1:0....., tl~1"1
~ B . WATER RESOURCES.. !-J.4 ~D6.G-
l5i2 1. Groundwater 6one.
a.) location and description of aquifers
and recharge areas
examples:
-depth of water table
-seasonal variation
-quality
-quantity
-flow
b.) identification of present uses and
level of use of groundwater
examples:
-location of existing wells
-public/private water supply
-industrial uses
-agricultural uses
. .
=-,-=.
2
(
l
.~ \
.
~
.
(
~ 2. Surface water -species presence and abundance
a.) location and decription of surface -age
waters located on project site or -size
those that may be influenced by the -distribution
project -dominance
examples: -community types
-seasonal variation -unique, rare and endangered
-quantity species
-classification according to New -value as habitat for wildlife
York State Department of Health -productivity
b.) identification of uses and level of ~ 2. Fish, Shellfish and Wildlife
use of all surface waters a.) list of fish, shellfish and wildlife
examples: species on the project site and
-public/private water supply within surrounding area, including
-industrial uses migatory and resident species
"':"'agricultural uses b.) discussion of fish, shellfish and
-recreational wildlife population characteristics
c.) description of existing drainage examples:
areas, patterns and channels -species presence and abundance
d. discussion of potential for flooding, -distribution
siltation, erosion and eutro- -dominance
phication of water supply -unique, rare and endangered
~ _. n,,, species
-productivity
0 1.Climate ~ 3. Wetlands
a.) discussion of seasonal variations
and extremes a.) list wetland areas within or contiguous
examples: to the project site
-temperature b.) discuss wetland characteristics
-humidity examples:
-precipitation -acreage
-wind -vegetative cover
-classification
0 2. Air quality -benefits of wetland such as flood
a.) description of existing air quality and erosion control, recreation
levels
examples: ..0 E. A\..IKI.......Ul..l ~R:.b. D!:'c::n{fRCES .-
-list the National and State Air 1.Soils
Quality Standards for the project a.) list soils by name, slope and soil
area and the compliance status group ranking within NYS Land
for each standard Classification System
b.) identification of existing sources (1 NYCRR 370)
or pollutants-fixed or mobile b.) number of acres within each group
c.) identification of any sensitive c.) location of site on soil survey map
recepters in project area 0 2. Agricultural land management
examples:
-hospitals, schools, nursing system(s)
homes, parks a.) inventory of existing erosion
- control and drainage systems
d.) description of existing monitoring
program (if applicable) examples:
-subsurface drain lines
~D. TERRESTRAL AND AQUA TIC ECOLOGY -outlet/diversion ditches
-=
Iil 1. Vegetation .." -strip cropping
a.) list vegetation types on the project -diversion terraces
site and within the surrounding area b.) relationship of proposed action to
b.) discussion of sife veg!,tation existing soil and water conservation
characteristics plans (if applicable)
examples: ..
.~
'F~"
3
.-. .
.
-,
o 3. Associated operations
a.) number and types of farm
operations on and adjacent to site
examples:
-dairy
-grain
-orchard
b.) type and proximity of farm
related facilities
examples:
-storage units/barns
-sorting/packing houses
-refrigeration units
-roadside markets
c.) access to cropland (including
detached fields)
d.) access for farm equipment to
public roads
Human Resources
~ A. TRANSPORTATION
~ 1. Transportation services
a.) description of the size, capacity
and condition of services
examples:
-roads, canals, railroads, bridges
-parking facilities
-traffic control
-access/egress from site
b.) description of current level of use
of services
examples:
-a.m. and p.m. peak hour traffic
flow
-vehicle mix
-source of existing traffic
description of the current avail.
bility of service
de . tion of present level of use
o 3. Pedestrian e onm~nt
o 4. Other:
~ B. LAND USE AND ZONING
~ 1, Existing land use and zoning
a.l description of the existing land
use of the project site and the
surrounding area
examples:
-commercial
-residential
,. .C' ~...>
-agricultural
-business
-retail
-industrial
-vacant
b.) description of existing zoning of
site and surrounding area
.
c.) description of any affected agri-
cultural district or other farmland
retention program boundary in and
surrounding the site
iii 2. Land use plans
a.) description of any land use plans
or master plans which include
project site and surrounding area
b.) discussion of future development
trends or pressures
o 3.0ther; Oia~S4r ct-~C-l\-o^
~ C. COMMUNITY SERVICE (for this section
include a list of existing facilities and a
discussion of existing levels of usage and
projected future needs)
o 1. Educational facilities
o 2. Police protection
~ 3. Fire protection
o 4. Health care facilities
o 5. Social services
5il 6. Recreational facilities
o 7. Utilities
o 8. Public water supply
o 9. Solid waste disposal
o 10. Sewage treatment facilities
o 11. Other:
4
(
SeB
Part
lLtm
~
l'os,l)c:c..
(
l
b.) identification. of sites having
potential si!,cificant archaeological
value include results of cultural
resource survey, if conducted
identification of existing level of
ise in the community
ident . ation of major sources of
noise
examples
-airports
-major highways
-industrial/commercial fadli
_D 1.0tlu:;......
@ Significant Environmental impacts
Identify those aspects of the environmental
setting in Section IV that may be adversely or
beneficially affected by the proposed action and
require discussion.
@ Mitigation Measures to Minimize Environ-
mental Impact.
Describe measures to reduce or avoid poten.
tial adverse impacts identified in Section V. The
following is a brief listing of typical measures used
for some of the major areas of impact.
Natural Resource
o A. GEOLOGY
1 . Subsurface
a.) use excavated material for land
reclamation
b.) use facility wastes (ash. sludge) for
land reclamation
c.) other:
2 . Surface
a.) use topsoil stockpiled during
construction for restoration and
landscaping
b.) minimize disturbance of non.
construction sites
c.) design and implement soil erosion
control plan
d.) other:
3 . Topography
a.) avoid construction on areas of steep
slope
b.) design adequate soil erosion
devices to protect areas of steep
slope
c.) other: '=
o B. WATER RES0URCES
] . Groundwater
a.) design/modify system of treatment
for stormwater runoff cf wastewater
prior to recharge of groundwater
b.) maintain permeable areas on the
site
.
c.) institute a program for monitoring
water quality in adjacent wells
d.) require secondary or tertiary con.
tainment of products/wastes
e.) contingency plans for accidental
spills
f.) other:
2 . Surface water
a.) ensure use of soil erosion control
techniques during construction and
operation to avoid siltation
examples:
-hay bales
-temporary restoration of vege.
tation to disturbed areas
-landscaping
b.) design adequate stormwater
control system
c.) construct/modify sewage treatment
facilities
d.) restrict use of salt or sand for road
and parking area snow removal
e,) avoid direct discharges to surface
water resources
f.) require secondary or tertiary
containment of products/wastes
g.) contingency plans for accidental
spills
h.) other:
DC. AIR RESOURCES
1 . Air quality
a.) assure proper construction
practices
examples:
-fugitive dust control
-proper operation and mainten-
ance of construction equipment
b.) design traffic improvements to reo
duce congestion and vehicle delay
c.) install and ensure the proper
operatio!). of emission odor control
devices
d.) initiate a program for monitoring
of air quality
e.) other:
o . D _ TERRESTRAL AND AQUATIC ECOLOGY
1. Vegetation
a.) restrict clearing to only those areas.
necessa ry
b.) preserve part of site as a natural
area
c.) after construction. landscape site
with naturally occurring vegetation
d.) purchase open space at another
location and dedicate to local
,$overnment or conservation
organization
,,=>
5
"
.
2. Fish. Shellfish and Wildlife
a.) previde adequate habitat (shelter
and feed) fer remaining wildlife
species
b.) schedule censtructien to' aveid
sensitive perieds ef fish. shellfish
and wildlife cycles
c.) ether:
AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
I.Seils
a.) select/design preject to' aveid
viable agricultural land
b.) reclaim disturbed agricultural seil
prefiles fer agricultural purpeses
c.) schedule activity when creps are eff
fields and seil is firm
d.) ether:
2. Agricultural land management systems
a.) re-establish access drives. fence-
lines and any disturbed land
management systems
b.) re.establish any disturbed erosien
centrol and drainage systems
c.) install seil and water management
practices to' restere er enhance
seil drainage and stability
d.) preserve epen space fer agricultural
use
e.) develep lease back arrangements.to-
allew centinued agricultural use en
all er pertien ef site
f.) ether:
Human Reseurces
o E.
o A. TRANSPORTATION
I. Transpertatien
a.) design adequate and safe access
to' preject site to' handle projected
traffic flew
b.) install adequate traffic cantrel
devices
c.) eptimize use ef parking areas
d.) encaurage car paaling and aper-
atian af facility during nan-peak
traffic times .
e->. qesign special rauting and
restricted haurs far delivery truck
traffic
f.) ather:
2. Public transpartatian
a.) adjust public transpartatian routes
and sdi'ed'uies to' service the facility
b.) enceurage use af public transpar-
tatian by using incentive pragrams
far emplayees ar by seriiilg tickets
in facility
c.) ather:
0 B. LAND USE AND ZONING
I . Existing land use and zening
a.) design project to' camply with
existing land use plans
b.) design functianal and visually
appealing facility to' set standard
and precedent for future surreund-
ing land use
c.) ather:
0 C. COMMUNITY SERVICES
I . Pal ice protectian
a.) minimize lecal palice protectien
respansibilities by providing private
security ferce
b.) provide security systems, alarms
far facility
c.) pravide equipment. funds er ser-
vices directly to' the cammunity
d.) ather:
2. Fire pratectien
a.) use censtructien materials that
minimize fire hazards
b.) incarporate sprinkler and alarm
systems intO' building design
c.) pravide equipment. funds ar ser-
vices directly to' the cammunity
d.) ather:
3.Utilities
a.) install utility services undergraund
b.) incarparate water saving fixtures
intO' facility design
c.) incarparate energy-saving
measures intO' facility design
d.) ather:
0 D. CULTURAL RESOURCES
I . Visual resaurces
a.) deSign exteriar af structure to'
physically blend with existing
surroundings
b.) minimize visual impact through
thaughtful and innavative design
af lighting and signs (cansider:
height, size. intensity, glare and
haurs af lighting aperatian)
c.) design landscaping to' be visually
pleasing and to' serve as a buffer
between surraunding land uses.
parking areas. eperatianal equip- .
ment and facilities
d.) ather:
2 .'Histaric and archaealagical resaurces
a.) Prepare a plan, including measures
to' mitigate impacts to' histaric/
archaealagical reseurces through (
data recevery, aveidance and/er
restrictien ef preject aCN\4ities 'r~;=-,
6
"
,',
.,
"
b.) develop measures to convey cui.
tural information to the community
(e.g. through scientific/popular
reports, displays)
c.) preserve architecturally signifi-
cant structures and make an
adequate permanent photographic
and statistical record of those that
must be destroyed
d.) other:
3. Noise
a.) schedule construction/operation
to occur during "normal business"
hours minimizing noise impact
during sensitive times (early morn-
ing, night)
b.) assure adherence to construction
noise standards
c.) design berms and landscaping to
block and absorb noise
d.) other:
<iZii) Adverse Environmental Effects that Cannot
be Avoided if the Project is Implemented
Identify those adverse environmental effects
in Section V that can be expected to occur regard-
less of the mitigation measures considered in
Section VI.
G!i:> Alternatives
This section contains categories of alterna-
tives with examples. Discussion of each alternative
should be at a level sufficient to permit a compara-
tive assessment of costs. benefits and environmen-
tal risks for each alternative. It is not acceptable
to make simple assertions that a particular alter.
native is or is not feasib:e. Identify those categories
of alternatives which should be included in the EIS
by placing a check in the box located to the left
of the topic.
D A . ALTERNATIVE DESIGN AND
TECHNOLOGiES ~d u lel~
1 .Site layout 0 '34 /0 ..J
e.) density and I cation of structures
b.) location of access routes, parking
and utility routes
2. Orientation
a.) compatibility with slope and
drainage pdtterns
b.) site size and set back requirements
2. Technology ,=
a.) pollutan control equipment
b.) innovative vs. proven technologies
4. !>\lx of activities
a) addition of businesses-which would
affect the operational nature of the
facility
{
.
(
c
B. AL1'c.t(I1r.llv~ .:)1 I f!;
1 . Limiting factors
a.) availability of land
o. suitability of alternative site to
a omodate design requirements
c.) avai ility of utilities
d.) suitable arket area
e.) compatibili with local zoning and
master plan
f.) compatibility wit
cultural districts
g.) compatibility with reg nal
objectives
h.) accessibility of site to tran orta-
tion routes and service popula . n
o ~ AI TJ:"DN A TI\/~ 'i171i
1 . Increase or decrease project size to
minimize possible impacts
2 . Increase or decrease project size to
correspond to market and community
needs
U D.
ALTERNAtivE COPIET~"rT'OW
OP~R.... TIOPi ~C:FI~Q{dLlr>tG
1. Commence construction at a different
time
2. Phase construction/operation
3. Restrict construction/operation work
schedule
C. /',L TCRPI,\TI'v'E: LA! in ~8C
1 . Suitability of site for other uses
a.) other types of commercial uses
b.) other types of industry
c.) different types of housing
d.) agricultural use
e.) other:
NO ACTION
1 . Impacts of no action
a.) effect on public need
b.) effect on private developers' need
c.) beneficia~ or adverse environmental
impacts
D G. OTHER:
-
g
ISI F.
@ Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of
Resources
Identify those natural and human resources
listed in Section IV that will be consumed, convert:
ed or made unavailable for future use.
-1(. 8.':'-nll. 1...;1 It:ii~B A....pn...ts Cf ~rrli!.!..LL)
Describe in this section the potential growth
aspects the proposed project may have. Listed on
the next page are examples of topics that are typi.
cally affected by the growth induced by a project.
,y.
7
.
, .
t'
D A , POPULATION
1 ,Increases in business and resident
population due to the creation or
relocation of business
2, Increases in resident population due to
the construction of housing
D B, SUPPORT FACILITIES
1 ,business created to serve the increased
population
2, Service industries created to supply
new facility
DC, DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL
1 ,Introduction or improvement of infra.
structure (roads. waste disposal, sewers,
water) to service proposed project
2, Creation of further growth potential
by construction of improved infra.
structure
D D, OTHER:
IVl t::'fh!L....... 1I..... 8....... una e""..~_ l&':'^" .....f
Energy Resources (if applicable)
Identify the energy sources to be used,
anticipated levels of consumption and ways to
reduce energy consumption. The exampies listed
below are typical issues to be considered when ad.
dressing this topic,
D A. PROPOSED ENERGY SOURCES AND
ALTERNATIVES
DB. ANTICIPATED SHORT. TERM/LONG.
TERf;' LEVELS OF ENERGY
CONSUMPTION
D C . INDIRECT EFFECTS ON ENERGY
CONSUMPTION
1 . Increased dependence on automobile
use
2. Increased levels of traffic due to
proposed project
D D. ENERGY CONSERVATION MEASURES
1 . Design methods to reduce fuel use for
heating, cooling and lighting
a.) conventional technology
examples:
'-insulation
-thermopane windows
-use of low wattage lights
b.) innovative technology
examples:
-heaF(."mps
-solar panels
-wind energy
-use of waste heat f!'1m an
industrial plant
-use of recycled materials
c.) efficient layout
examples:
-orientation of structures in
relation to summer and winter
sunlight
-clustering of structures to
maximize common walls
-shortening of utility runs
-shared insulation and heating
2 . Indirect energy benefits
a.) location and design of facility to
accomodate mass transit
b.) use of shuttle buses
c.) location of facility to minimize
travel distance
DE. OTHER:
XII '\___...............L....f a'luvallal.A~ 1.,[.... -~;........
In certain situations involving major develop.
ments (such as an oil supertanker port, a liquid
propane/natural gas storage facility, a resource
recovery facility or a hazarduous waste treatment,
storage or disposal facility), information regarding
reasonably foreseeable catastrophic impacts to the
environment may not be available. Such informa.
tion may be unavailable because the means to ob.
tain it are unknown or the cost of obtaining it is
exhorbitant, or because there is uncertainty about
its validity. If such information is essential to an
agency's SEQR finding, the EIS must:
A. Identify the nature and relevance of such
unavailable or uncertain information; and
B. Provide a summary of existing credible
scientific evidence, if available; and
C. Assess the likelihood of occurrence and
consequences of the potential impact,
even if the probability is low, using the.
oretical approaches or research methods
generally accepted in the scientific
community.
This assessment should be applied only where
reasonably foreseeable catastrophic. impacts to the
environment are possible and it is not intended to
be applied in the review of such actions as shop.
ping malls, residential subdivisions and cammer.
cial facilities even though the size and scale of
some' such projects may be extensive.
@ Appendices .
Following is a list of materials typically used
in support of the EIS.
A. List of underiyinn, .tudies, reports and
information considered and relied on in preparing
statement
B. List all federal, state, regional, or local
agencies, organizations, consultants q,np private
'-.
'---;=.
8
.
. ,
{
.
(
~
c
persons consulted in prep.aring the statement
C Technical exhibits (if any) at a legible scale
D. Relevent correspondence regarding the
projects may be included (required in the Final
EIS)
Additional Draft EIS Scoping Topics
Indicate any additional topics for discussion
in the Draft EIS. Attach additional sheets if
necessary.
..",.
,.~.~'
',~-"
9
,.
(' ,> ,?'
.
~~.u:~~
~~~
RECEIVED B
SUm"UlU lU'lm P\J.~~\~G RU~R~$ ~ _ -'7- ~
.,
(
,
SEQR
Negative Declaration
Notice of Determination of Non-Significance
Lead Agency:
Address:
Town Board
Southold Town Hall
Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
Project # (if any)
Date: 5/13/88
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 (and local law # Chpi- _ 44 if any) of the imple.
menting regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review) of the Environ.
mental Conservation Law. .
The lead agency has determined that the proposed action described below will not have a
significant effect on the environment.
Title of Action: Change of zone for Harold Reese
SEQR Status:
Type I
Unlisted
o
[Xj
Description of Action:
Change of zone from "C-l" Genral Industrial to "A"
Agricul ture - Residential on 27.2 acres at East.'.'c.-
Mc:rion.
....:..~.
Location: (Include the name of the county and town. A location map of appropriate scale is also
recommended) ~.
Main Road, East Marion, in the Town of Southold and County
of Suffolk. See attached location map.
~:-'
(^lto!lch additional pages as neededl
C-12
.
.
, .
/
(
,
SEQR Negative Declarat ion
Page 2
Reasons Supporting This Determination:
See attached Part II and Part III
For Further Information:
Contact Person:
Address:
Phone No.:
Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold
516/765-1801
Copies of this Notice Sent to:
Commissioner. Department of Environmental Conservation. 50 Wolf Road. Albany. New York
12233.0001
Appropriate Regional Office of the Department of Environmental Conservation - Stony Brook, NY
Office of the Chief Executive Officer of the political subdivision in which the action will be princi-
pally located .
Main office and appropriate regional office (if any) of lead agency...
Applicant (if any)
All other involved agencies (if any)
Southold Town Building Department
Southold Town Planning BoardV--
Town Clerk's Bulletin Board
Harold Reese
Suffolk County Department of Planning
"f--
.~
.=
~
NOTE Negative Declarations lor Unlisted.Actions need not be riled with DEe or any other age~q: (see! 617. 7(a)).
(.13
r~~. _. - '. '''.-
~. .
. .
.
J .
: '~\'f>.2 (2.'II7)-7c
.'
..-..-,.~~
.
.
.,
1117.21
Appendix A
Stlte Envlronmentll aUlllty Review
FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
SEaR
Purpos~: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine. in an orderly manner, whether a project
or act.on may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always ~asy to answer. Frequent.
Iy. there aie aspects of a project that are subjective or unmeasureable. It is also understood that those who determin~
significance mal' have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may be technically expert in environmental
analysis. In addition. many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting
the question "f. ~ignificance
The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination
process has been orderly, comprehensive in nature. yet flexible to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action.
full EM Compon~nts: The full EAF is comprised of three parts:
Part 1: Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic project
data. it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3.
Part 2: Focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may Occur from a project or action. It provides
auidance as to whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially.
large impact. The form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced.
Part 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identifien .< !,~!enti~n,.la.~~. then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the
impact is actually important
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE- Type 1 and Unlisted Actions
Identify the Portions of EM complet~d for this proi~ct: KI Part 1 KI Part 2 KlPart 3
Upon review of the informallon recorded on this EAF (Parts 1 and 2 and 3 if appropriate). and any other supporting
information, and considering both the magitude and importance of each impact. it is reasonably determined by the
lead agency that:
rx A The project will not result in any la~ge and important impact(s) and. therefor~ is one which ...iII not
have a signif,cant impact on the environment. therefore a negativ~ d~c1aration ...iII be 'prepar~d.
o B. Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant
effect for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been required.
th~'refore a CONDITIONED negative d~c1aration ...iII be prepared."
o C The project may result in one or more large and important impacts that may have a significant impact
on the environment. therefore all positi\'e decbration "".i11 be prepare-d.
. A Conditioned :-';egalive Declaration" only valid lor Unlisted Actions
Chanqe of Zone for Harold Reese
~amt' 01 ActIon
Southold Town Board
~im\l' 0: I ('ad Agt'nC\
y:ra!1c i s_~!1~.::J?EL-_.
I'nnllJ/ 1 \f;'. .....ln1l' I.' R"'PtHl'lh:I' UtilI I" II; I t.ad :\1o-:1.t1\ \
Supervisor
lllk nl Rl'''pllll...dll,. ()nll t'r
SI~natLHt' of RI'~II:Jn,d")II' O,ilu'r In lead Agt'll< \
S'gn^ture 01 PH'par,'r (If d,'f,'rent from re;pnns,ble officer)
~,-")
. .
UJ1tt
,
. 2-PROJECT IMPACTS AND .IR MAGNITUDE
Responsibility of Lud Agency
. .
r
-:
General Information (Read Carefully)
. In completing the form the reviewer should be guided by the question: Have my responses and determinations been
rusonablel The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst.
. Identifying that an impact will be potentially large (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessarily significant.
Any large impact must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine significance. Identifying an impact in column 2 simply
asks that it be looked at further.
. The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of impacts and wherever possible the threshold of
magnitude that would trigger a response in column 2. The examples are generally applicable throughout the State and
for most situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples andlor lower thresholds may be appropriate
for a Potential Large Impact response, thus requiring evaluation in Part 3.
. The impactS of each project, on each site, in each locality, will vary. Therefore, the examples are illustrative and
have been offered as guidance. They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each question.
. The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question.
. In identifying impacts, consider long term, short term and cumlative effects.
Instructions (Read carefully)
a. Answer each of the 19 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there will be any impact.
b. Maybe answers should be considered as Yes answers.
c. If answering Yes to a question then check the appropriate box (column 1 or 2) to indicate the potential size of the
impact. If impact threshold equals or exceeds any example provided, check column 2. If impact will occur but threshold
is lower than example, check column 1.
d. If reviewer has doubt about size of the impact then consider the impact as potentially large and proceed to PART 3.
e. If a potentially large impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated by change{s) in the project to a small to moderate
impact. also check the Yes box in column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction is not possible. This
must be explained in Part 3.
IMPACT ON LAND
1 Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site?
III NO DYES
hamples that would apply to column 2
. Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise per 100
foot of length), or where the general slopes in the project area exceed
10%.
o Construction on' ;'and where the depth to the water table is less than
3 feet.
o Construction of paved parking area for 1,000 or more vehicles.
o Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally within
3 feet of existing ground surf ace.
. Construction that will continue for more than 1 year or involve more
than one phase or stage.
o Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than 1,000
tons of natural material (i.e., rock or soil) per year.
. Construction or expansion of a sanitary landfill.
. Construction in a designated floodway.
o Other impacts
2. Will there be an effect t,. ...IY un,que or unusual land forms found on
the site? (i.e., cliffs. dunes, geological formations, etc.)Ii()NO DYES
o Specific land forms:
6
1 2 3
Small to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
. '.
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
.
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
,-,,,","
.
IMPACT ON WATER
3. Will proposed action affect any water body designated as protected?
(Under Articles 15, 24, 25 of the Environmental Conservation law, ECl)
[3(NO DYES
hamples that would apply to column 2
. Developable area of site contains a protected water body.
. Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a
protected stream.
. Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body
. Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland.
. Other impacts:
4. Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body
of water? C!!NO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
· A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water
pr more than a 10 acre increase or decrease.
. Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area.
. Other impacts:
S Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater
quality or quantity? IZINO DYES
hamples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed Actioll will require a discharge permit.
. Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does not
have approval to serve proposed (project) action.
. Proposed Action requlf~s water supply from wells with greater than 45
gallons per minute pumping capacity
. Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water
supply system.
. Proposed \ction will adverse" affect groundwater.
. liquid effluent will be conve\',"! off the site to facilities which presently
do not exist or have inadeqUate capacity.
. Propo)ed Actio" \o\ould use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per
day.
. Proposed ."'.ction willli"'f'lv c.:.w,', siltation or other discharge into an
existing body of W.3.t~r tc. (l ~ f'xtC"-,1 that there will bf' an obvious visual
contrast '0 nciturai conditions
. Pro~o~~d Action will requHf:' the storage- of petroleum or chemical
products greater than 1,100 gallons
. Proposed Action will allo'w residential uses In areas without \-vater
and/or sew('r services
. Proposed ActIon locat(>'. (on1n1I.'r(1<!.! and/or industrlJI U<'(,5 whIch mav
require new or {>),pan<>I01l nY:;'),lqirlg waste trf'cltnwnt and or 51 or age
fac IIltlt'S
. Other Impacts'___
6 Will nroposed action allt'r drainage .:(1\\ or patterns, or <.urfact'
WdlPr runoffl ~NO ::en s
[Xi:" ',ples tr.at would app:y to column '2
. PH ~'('s(.d Action would rhani;t-' f:ood \\d:er i1o\\'5
7
.
1 2 3
Small to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 . 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
-
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 QVes DNa
0 0 DVes DNa
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYes oNo
0 0 oVes oNo
~.
0 0 C!Ye<. DNo
:
..., ~ CYe~ [JNo
- : -
r
.
. Proposed Action may. cause substantial erosion.
. Proposed Action is incompatible with existing drainage pallerns
. Proposed Action will allow development in a designated floodway.
. Other impacts:
IMPACT ON AIR
7. Will proposed action affect air qualityl QtNO DYES
Eumples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips in any given
hour.
. Proposed Action will result in the incineration of more than 1 ton of
refuse per hour.
. E,nission rate of total contaminants will exceed Sibs. per hour or a
heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour.
. Proposed aciion will allow an increase in the amount of land committed
to industrial use.
. Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial
development within existing industrial areas.
. Other impacts:
IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS
8 Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered
speciesl IZJNO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. ReductIOn of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal
list, using the site. over or near site or found on the site
. Removo' of any portion of a critical or significant IYildlife habitat.
. Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other
than for ~Ilricultural purposes
. Other impacts'
9 WoIl Propo,ed Action sub,tanllall\, affect non.threatened or
non.endangpred Spt'CI('S] lXINO
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed Actton would substantially interfere with any resident or
migrator\, fish, shellfish or wildlde species
. Propo~ed ActIOn requirn the removal of more than 10 acres
01 mawn: f.ort.", (0\'('1 l(l(l ypars of age) or other locally Important
\,('gC'{illlOn
DYES
"'~
IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES
10 V\'11 1 ttH' PruT)(/\!'d A< lion atft'ct agricultural land re~Ollr(('s'
~!';O [1)[ S
E14lmpll'S lh.tl \\()uld illll'l\, to column 1
. lh(' pr(JI)()~t'd.l( lion \\ould "pvt". cross 0.' lImit ilccess to agricultural
land (-In(lud{'~ (Iopt.lnd. h."fl(>ld'). pastur('. \-'lnr\ard. orchard, etc)
8
.. - ---- ,.--..-'-. ----
.
1 2 3
Small to Potentipl Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact . Impact Project Change
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
,
D D DYes DNo
D D . DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
0 0 DYes ONo
D D DYes ONo
D 0 q':es DNo
D D DYe, DNo
D D DYes DNa
-;>
C .--' Q C\e, ONo
..
.
IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHARACTER
OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD
18 Will proposed action affect the character of the eXISting community?
DNa craYES
Eumples that would apply to column 2
. The permanent population of the city, town or village in which the
project is located is likely to grow by more than 5%.
. The municipal budget for capital expenditures or operating services
will increase by more than 5% per year as a result of this project.
. Proposed action will conflict with officially adopted plans or goals.
. Proposed action will cause a change in the density of land use.
. Proposed Action will replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures
or areas of historic importance to the community.
. Development will create a demand for additional community services
(e.g. schools, police and fire, etc.)
. Proposed Action will set an important precedent for future projects.
. Proposed Action will create or eliminate employment.
. Other 'impacts:
.
1 2 3
Small to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
!XI 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes DNo
19. Is there, or is there likely to be. public controversy related to
potential adverse environmental impacts? mNO DYES
If Any Action in Part 2 Is Identified as a Potential Large Impact or
If You Cannot Determine the Magnitude of Impact, Proceed to Part 3
Part 3-EVALUATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS
Responsibility of lead Agency
Part 3 must be prepared if one or more impact(s) is considered to be potentially large, even if the impact(s) may be
mitigated.
Instructions
DIScuss the folloWIn& for each impact identified In Column 2 bf Part 2:
1 Briefly describe the impact
2 DeSCribe (If applicable) how the impact could be mitigated or reduced to a small to. moderate impact by project change(s)
3 Based on the information available, decide if it is reasonable to conclud~ that this impact is important.
To answer the question of importance, consider ...;:.;;
. The probability of the Impil;ct occurrtng
. The duration of the Impact
. Its irrt>verslbilJty, including pNmanently lost r{'sour(e~ of \alup
. Whether the Impact can or will be controlled ~
. The regional C"onseqUl'nce of the Impact
. It~ pot(>ntlal dlvt'rgenc(> from local npeds and goals
. \\'hclher known Obl€'cllonS 10 the IHoJed r(.liltl' 10 thiS impJct
(Continue on attachmentl)
'1
.........,
.
.
PART III
Impact on Growth and Character of Community or Neighborhood
The proposal is in agreement with the proposed zoning map
and land use plan. Although the proposed action will
increase the allowable density from 10 acre lot size to
2 acre lot size, the uses permitted in the "A" - Residential-
Agricultural Zone are less detrimental than uses which would
be permitted in the C-l General Industrial Zone.
The land proposed for the change-of-zone is presently included
in a development proposal under a separate SEQR review process.
...,:.,.
'<~7
....
.
".
· Construction activity would excavate Dr compact the soil profile of
agricultural land.
. The proposed action would irreversibly convert more than 10 acres
of agricultural land Dr, if located in an Agricultutal District. more
than 2.5 acres of agricultural land.
. The proposed action would disrupt Dr prevent installation of agricultural
laorl management systems (e.g , subsurface drain lines, outlet ditches,
strip cropping); Dr create a need for such measures (e.g. cause a farm
field to drain poorly due to increased runoff)
. Other impacts:
IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES
11 Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources? [2NO DYES
(If necessary, use the Visual EAF Addendum in Section 617.21,
AppendIX B)
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed land uses, Dr project components obviously different from
or in sharp contrast to current surrounding land use patterns. whether
man-made or natural
. Proposed land uses, or project components visible to users of
aesthetic resources which will eliminate or significantly reduce their
enjoyment of the aesthetic qualities of that resource
. Project components that will result in the elimination or significant
screening of sceniC views known to be important to the area
. Other impacts
IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES
12 Will Proposed Action impact any site Dr structure of hIStoric, pre.
hIStoric Dr pil~ontological importance? . Ell NO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2 .
. Proposed Action occurring wholly or partially within or substantially
contiguous to any facility or site lIsted on. the State or National Register
of historic places
. Any Impact to an archaeological site or fossil bed located within the
proJ€'ct Site
. Proposed ActIon will occur in an area designated as senSItive for
archM,ologlcal SIIes on the ~) S Site lnvt-'ntory
. Other Impacts
IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION
13 \\'111 ProPOl,l'O ,\{ lion cllTl~[t ttH' qlJ,lntltv or Qualll\, 01 eXisting or
lulurf> opf'n Sp.l(tY~ or f('( rhltlonal op~_)Qrtunltt(>s?
hamples that "ouid ,'PIlI\ to '_olumn 2 iXNO DYES
. 1 h(' rwrmJn(>nl fOr('c/o,>lHe of a iuturl' ({'ut>ational opportunIty
. A malor reductIon 01 In oprn spa(t' Important to the community
. Other Impacts
Q
.
1 2 3
Small to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 - 0 DYes ONo
0 O. DYes DNo
0 0 L-Y{') ON"
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 cD DYes ONo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes ONo
.
IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION
14 Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems1
[XNO DYES
hamples that would apply to column 2
. Alteration of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods.
. Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems.
. Other impacts:
IMPACT ON ENERGY
1 S. Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or
energy supply? IllINO DYES
hamples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed Action will cause a greater than S% increase in the use of
any form of energy in the municipality.
. Proposed Action will require the creation or extension of an energy .
,ransmission or supply system to serve more than SO single or two family
residenc,es or to serve a major commercial or industrial use.
. Other impacts:
NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS
16 Will there be objectionable odors, noise. or .vibration as a result
of the Proposed Action? 1'9 NO DYES
hamples that would apply to colum~ 2
. Blasting within 1.SOO feet of a hospital. school or other sensitive
facility
. Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day).
. Proposed Action will produce operating nOISe exceeding the local
ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures.
. Proposed Action will remove natural barriers that would act as a
noise screen.
. Other impacts:
IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH
17 will Proposed Action affect public health and safetyl
Il()NO
DYES
hamples that "ould apply to column 2
. Proposec Action may causE" a risk of explosion or release of hazardous
substances (i e oil, pestIcides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) in the event of
accldf:>nt or upset condItions, or there 'may be a chronic I?w level
dISchargt.' or emission
. Proposed Action may result in thf' burial of "hazardous "'3stes" in any
form (I e tOXIC, poi<iorlous, highly reactive, radioactive. irritatIng,
mit;>( lIOUS, t't( )
. StOfJgt. fat 1l111t'S for ont' million 01 morf> gallons of liquified natural
gas Of olhpr llammabl(> hqulds
. PropoH.d .)ctlOn mJ.... r(,~lJlt In the e~ca.....atjon or other disturbance
Within 2.000 feet of a lite u,ed for the di,po,al of solid or hazardous
wa~t(.
. Ot!v'r Impacts
10
.
."
1 2 3'
Small to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
"] 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
-
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 .- 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYe, ONo
0 0 DYes ONO
~,,~~
0 0 DYes DNo
LONG
.
->'j-
~
\
\
\
\
,
\
\
.
, \~~lj i
\
S
ou~o
.,'.
\
.
.\ \
\\ '0 ~~\~\.. ,
~~"'" '
~
'-~
-.........
.,
., ~
,
,
, ...,,"c'"\
.../'\'
.
,
ZONING
USE
() Is-,.
File
. .,.
\
a
'"
;:
I ~ ~
~I ~;
e~
... -
~~
ct3
'"
"-
<:
,.\
..-\,
....\
....A
/).,
..,).
...A
.....:>.
,).
....\
,/:.,
.A
...i.
".-A,
....-1
.~
"
,,~
MARION
LAKE
LOCATION
MAP
SCALE""
, '600'
--~)
\
\
...
.
,.
~J' ..
I
"II
l I
,
.. -
--~
-
j
.~., 'j
.r
1.r, r!~
j ~'.. -
8
,
,
1.
J'I
NEll 1"01'.K STATE DEP ARnlEN'l' OF ENVIRONME::-ITAI.
Regulatory Affairs Unit
Buildine 40, SUNY--Rooc 219
Stony Brook, New Yo~k' 11794
(516) 751-7900
1
CONSER\~ rION
,.
,
I
1
I.
I'
, I:
, Ii
J I!
j I,
,
, I
~ ! ~
i
Perrott
tlO., Location
10-84-0701, East
> v.''''
i
,
I
,
i
i
M~rlon
I
November 21, 1ge6
. j
RE:
I
I,
I. '
I
,
'\
,
,
I ~ I
Dear ~1r. I ~eese: !
.! t
XXX You~ recent request to extend the above permit has been reviewed pursuant
to6IIYCRR, Pare 621. It has been determined that there has not been a material
chan~e in 'environmental conditions, relevant technology or applicable law or
re~u1ations since the issuance of the existing permit; therefore, the expiration
date is ~tended to December "31. 1988. i i
I, "
.~x You~ recent request to modify the above permit has been r~viewed pursuant
to 6tIYCRRi Part 621. It has been determined that the proposed mqdifications will
not substantially change the Scope of the permitted actions or tqe existing
pernit cOlfdit1ons. d
. I, 'I
Ther"fore;' the permit is amended to authori:l:e: i
SUOC.1Vl,slon or~?6.4- acre:; (al)prox) into :34 resldentl.l1 lots, each In
exces~or on~ ac~eplus open space and retent~on parcel:;; in accord_
ance wl,~h plan on survey by H.w.yoang With latest revised date of
ScPCe::nbpI' 2.5, 1986 (:;eo: attached) II .
'! il
I j: "
This letter is an amendment
. at the joll.' site.
r
All ocher 'Ferms and
. !,
Ii'
II
I,
II
I,
.1
I'
'I
!:
"
AttachmF;nt. .
I'
ern: DDR; co:' s
Sent to: I:
I
.1
Cove Beach' Estate's
c/,,) 11.1', iii:1rola Reese
Beese Bros~ Inc.
oJ) ::;un.rl:ic HIv'J:.
Lyr.brook, N.Y.1156)
AHE~:OIn:::'!T TO PERl'IIT
Ie
t?
to the original permit and as such,
conditions
/"
rema~n as written in the
IIhall be
11
originslipermi~.
il
I'
Very truly yours, I
~ IT ;2::41u
AJ.:t:::::: Regional i
Permi't Adll11nistrator j
posted
'~
.
I
--..!....-.
~
.
.
t' [~\- ~<'{:~,~~, ~
., ,."'. !'
'" .
\,.';~J
_~~'_H~I!,!--"
RECEiVED BY
SOUl~O.~ TOWN PlANNING BOARU
- ! 1 lCiQl1 . /'
v...,~j V
DATE
Ni-dlae 1 J. Cuddy
RegiOn~ector
Date: ~/ff
I
STATE OF NEW YORK
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
VETERANS HIGHWAY
HAUPPAUGE, N.Y. 11788
Franklin E. White
Commissioner
Gentlemen:
The site plans for the above noted project have been reviewed by this
office.
Please be advised that before a Highway Permi t can be issued at this
location the item (s) checked below must be forwarded to the Permit
Department.
Check or money order to the State of New York for $
~
Bond (sample enclosed) for $
~~,
~
tud-.
'A-~ '~~4
a,PF~~'~
'Z~
H.R.THYBERG
Regional Permi t
Region 10
A A// ./'
Engineer ~
c!!.C!." ~ ,~~, Ii
. . ~ Jl..y. II??/
~
.
Southold, N.Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
May 23, 1988
NOTICE OF SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT
Pursuant to the provision of Article 8 of the Environmental
Conservation Law, Part 617 of Title 6 of the New York State
Codes, the Southold Town Planning Board, as Lead Agency, does
hereby determine that the action described below is an unlisted
action and is likely to have a significant effect on the
environment.
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION
Realty subdivision of 96 + acres into 34 single family
building lots, located on-Main Road, East Marion, Town of
Southold.
REASONS SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION
Construction is proposed on slopes of 15% or greater and due
to the general topography of the site there are several lots
which are questionable as building lots.
The tidal wetlands of Dam Pond and adjacent areas on the
subject property are regulated by the New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation. Maximum wetland
setbacks should be established on all construction
activities associated with the development. The proposed
action will also likely cause siltation and erosion into the
existing smaller freshwater ponds, as well as, the wetlands
around Dam Pond. The road layout should also be revised to
avoid disturbing the freshwater pond at the south side of
Lot No. 34. Roadway construction is proposed in a designated
floodway, which can be mitigated by project design change.
There are 12 species of birds on the site, 3 of which are
listed by the NYSDEC as endangered, threatened, or special
concern species throughout the state. There are also plant
species on the site which are on the NY State Protected
Plant Species List.
. NOTICE OF SIGNIFICAN~FFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT "'/23/88 PAGE 2
The proposal will be in sharp contrast to the current
surrounding land use, and will significantly reduce the
aesthetic qualities of the site.
The site may contain important prehistoric or
paleontological resources which should be addressed.
The proposed action will affect the quantity of future
public open space and recreational uses.
The proposed action may result in major traffic problems
since 34 residential units will enter and exit the
subdivision via one access. This could also present an
impact for fire and emergency vehicles who need access into
the subdivision.
The proposed action will affect the character of the
existing community since it will eliminate an area which has
a historic importance to the community.
A previous, similar proposal for this site received a
positive Declaration which included a recommendation from
the Suffolk County Department of Health Services Office of
the Ecology for a positive declaration pursuant to SEQRA.
Addition comments from this recommendation include:
The site contains more than 12 acres of pristine
intertidal marsh adjacent to Dam Pond.
The subject parcel is one of Southold's largest
undeveloped properties adjacent to Long Island Sound.
It contains a substantial number of sensitive natural
features, including: approximately 2,000 linear feet
of shoreline, bluffs, tidal wetlands, freshwater ponds
and highly irregular topographic relief.
Further information may be obtained by contacting Jill Thorp,
Secretary, Southold Town Planning Board, Town Hall, Main Road,
Southold.
Copies mailed to:
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
Suffolk County Department of Health Services Office Of Ecology
Suffolk County Planning Commission
NYS Department of Environmental Conservation
Supervisor Murphy
Thomas C. Jorling, DEC Commissioner
Southold Town Clerk
Southold Town Building Department
Southold Town Board of Appeals
Southold Town Board of Trustees
Town Hall Bulletin Board
1
.
p
D
Southold, N. Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
June 3, 1988
RE: Scoping Session
There will be a scoping Session on Harold Reese, Cove Beach Estates
located in East Marion, on Friday June 10, 1988 at 11:00 a.m.
cc: Building Department
Town Attorneys
Zoning Board of Appeals
Supervisor
Town Clerk's office
Trustees
D.fL
.--...,
( . .
. S41 Ltd.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS & PLANNERS
.
.
S41
April 19, 1988
Mr. Bennett Orlowski Jr.
Chairman
Southold Town Planning Board
Town Hall
Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
Re: Cove Beach Estates at East Marion
Dear Mr. Orlowski,
I have made a review of the LEAF, Part I, for the above mentioned
proposal, which you referred to me. Please find enclosed a
completed Part II and Part III, as well as, a recommended
positive declaration.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
SZEPATOWSKI ASSOCIATES, INC.
,
DJSE:mat
m D \VI rn
m
1,,,~ t
Enclosures
(C.Vb
v\\}~
23 Narragansett Ave.
Jamestown, RI 02835
(401) 423-0430
~--,/
/
.
-- '--,.---- --~ - -
II. ',: .
/
/
;
"~
'.
p
,
or
1>0
r 1>
':'.1:j
_ 0
=2
II
Ol ;;:
o 1>
0_ "tJ
<
"'-.
"
"
'''~
"""""~,
.
"
"
~
u_
_.__......~
..;..:._._..:.....:...___\c........"""""
~ -
;:;..'"--:,....."...
r
. .
,
,'~,'2.E 121811-9c
617.21
Appendix E
State Environmental Quality Review
POSITIVE DECLARATION
Notice of Intent to Prepare a Draft EIS
Determination of Significance'
seaR
Project Number SCTM# 1000-22-3-18.3 & 15.1
Date 19 Apr 88
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article
8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act) of the Environmental Conservation Law.
The Southold Town planning Board , as lead agency,
has determined that the proposed action described below may have a significant effect on the
environment and that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will be prepared.
Name of Action: Major Subdivision of Harold Reese to be known
as Cove Beach Estates.
SEQR Status: Type I 0
Unlisted 5a
Description of Action: Realty subdivision of 96 + acres into
34 single family building-lots.
Location: (Include street address and the name of the municipalitylcounty. A location map of appropriate
scale is also recommended.)
Main Road, East Marion, Town of Southold
See attached location map.
-_::-....
,-:-:- .:,.,~~:-_-':::':;:~';;",;:;';'=~"",~~-_,"",,-,
,."._.",."~."',,-, .......>-..._,.:..c
-::.~., ;----~.~'-_....-.....,.._~_.,.....-
"
.
.
SEaR Positive Declaration
Page 2
Reasons Supporting This Determination:
see Parts II and III attached
For Further Information:
Contact Person: Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman
Address:
Town Hall, Main Road, Southold
Telephone Number: 516/765-1938
A Copy of this Notice Sent to:
Commissioner, Department of Environmental Conservation, 50 Wolf Road, Albany, New York 12233-0001
Appropriate Regional Office of the Department of Environmental Conservation
Office of the Chief Executive Officer of the political subdivision in which the action will be principally
located.
Applicant (if any)
Other involved agencies (if any)
,
.....
"-
!,.i,J6-2,'(;.I\?l-?C
"
.
"--+""-.
. '-,""~,... ~k""... ~""""'""'''',"-'''':'''.''''_''' ...'~...._'" ,-._ ;,. .._ _","_._.... '__'_"_';"~"'_'~"_ ... ".
.
.
..
1117.21
Appendix A
Stlte Envlronmentll aUlllty Review
FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
SEaR
Purpose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an orderly manner, whether a project
or action may be signifIcant The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer. Frequent-
ly, there are aspects of a project that are subjective or unmeasureable. It is also understood that those who determine
significance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may be technically expert in environmental
analysis In addition, mdny who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting
the question Gf-~ignificance
The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination
process has been orderly, comprehensive in nature. yet flexible to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action.
Full EAF Components: The full EAF is comprised of three parts:
Part 1: Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic project
data, it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3.
Part 2: Focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action. It provides
guidance as to whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially-
large impact The form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced.
Part 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identifiprl "' !,0!enti"!!.,-lo,~e, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the
impact 15 actually important
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE-Type 1 and Unlisted Actions
Identity the Portions of EAF completed for this project: IXI Part 1 Oil Part 2 [XPart 3
Upon review of the information recorded on thIS E AF (Parts 1 and 2 and 3 if appropriate). and any other supporting
information, and conSIdering both the magi tude and importance of each impact. it is reasonably determined by the
lead agency that
o A The prolect wtll not result in any large and important impact{s) and, therefore, is one which will not
have a Slgnlf lCant impact on the enVironment, therefore a negative declaratio~ will be 'prepared.
o B Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment. there will not be a signifICant
effect for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been required.
therefore a CONDITIONED negative declaration will be prepared."
!Xl C The projpct may result in one or more large and important impacts that may have a significant impact
on th(-, enVironment, therefore a positive declaration ",ill be prepared.
. A CondItioned ~f"gatlvf' Declaration is only valid tor Unlisted Actions
Cove Beach Estates
:'\,amt' 01 Action
Southold Town Planning Board
'\;.lnl.' 01 I Pdd ,'\gt'nn
~ll~n!lett O;r;Jo}'lskLJr. _~_m~_~_
Chairman
Prill! or \\r~I' ""dP)"" ~'.''':lr'f:''I!.', (HII' ,or I' l,'ZlC! :\/.-:1'1< "
'\ II!' (., Rt',pl,'~"ddl ()!!.1. t'~
Slgnaturt' of Rt'''li~lfl'dhl,. OTII(t'r In It'ac1 Agt'l1\ \
SI~n<l!l1r(' ot Prl'part'r (If dlttf'rt>nt from re~ponslblp offICer)
Dei!!
1
Part 2-PROJE.MPACTS AND THEIR MAGNITeE
Responsibility of lead Agency
General Information (Read Carefully)
. In completing the form the reviewer should be guided by the question: Have my responses and determinations been
reasonablel The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst.
. Identifying that an impact will be potentially large (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessarily significant.
Any large impact must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine significance. Identifying an impact in column 2 simply
asks that it be looked at further.
. The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of impacts and wherever possible the threshold of
magnitude that would trigger a response in column 2. The examples are generally applicable throughout the State and
for most situations. But. for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be appropriate
for a Potential large Impact response, thus requiring evaluation in Part 3,
. The impacts of each project. on each site, in each locality, will vary. therefore, the examples are illustrative and
have been offered as guidance. They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each question.
. The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question.
. In identifying impacts, consider long term. short term and cumlative effects.
Instructions (Read carefully)
a. Answer each of the 19 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there will be any impact.
b. Maybe answers should be considered as Yes answers.
c. If answering Yes to a question then check the appropriate box (column 1 or 2) to indicate the potential size of the
impact. If impact threshold equals or exceeds any example provided, check column 2. If impact will occur but threshold
is lower than example, check column 1.
d. If reviewer has doubt about size of the impact then consider the impact as potentially large and proceed to PART 3.
e. If a potentially large impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated by change(s) in the project to a small to moderate
impact, also check the Yes box in column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction is not possible. This
must be explained in Part 3.
IMPACT ON LAND
1. Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site?
DNa ~YES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise per 100
foot of length), or where the general slopes in the project area exceed
10%.
. Construction on land where the depth to the water table is less than
3 feet.
. Construction of paved parking area for 1,000 or more vehicles.
. Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally within
3 feet of existing ground surface.
. Construction that will continue for more than 1 year or involve more
than one phase or stage.
. Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than 1,000
tons of natural material (i.e., rock or soil) per year.
. Construction or expansion of a sanitary landfill.
. Construction in a designated floodway.
. Other impacts
2. will there be an effect t'. ...IY un.que or unusual land forms found on
the site? (i.e., cliffs. dunes, geological formations, etc.)DNO IKIYES
. Specific land forms: Cliffs, wetlands
6
1 2 3
Small to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
0 129 129 Yes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 K]Yes DNo
.
",
IMPACT ON WATER
3. Will proposed action affect any water body designated as protected?
(Under Articles 15, 24, 25 of the Environmental Conservation law, ECl)
DNO DlYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Developable area of site contains a protected water body.
. Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a
protected stream.
. Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body.
. Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland.
. Other impacts:
4. Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body
of water? ~NO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water
~r more than a 10 acre increase or decrease.
. Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area.
. Other impacts:
5. Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater
quality or quantity? DNO OlIVES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed Actioll will require a discharge permit.
. Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does not
have approval to serve proposed (project) action.
. Proposed Action requires water supply from wells with greater than 45
gallons per minute pumping capacity
. Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water
supply system.
. Proposed 'ction will adverse', affect groundwater.
. liquid effluent will be conve\,,-d off the site to facilities which presently
do not exist or have inadeqUate capacity.
. Proposed Action ,",auld use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per
day.
. Proposed ,A.ction will likplv C.'.us" siltation or other discharge into an
existing body of wat~r tc (t ~ extc:".t that there will be an obvious visual
contrast ~o naturai conditions.
. Proposed Action will require the storage of petroleum or chemical
products greater than 1,100 gallons.
. Proposed Action will allow residential uses in areas without water
and/or sewer services.
. Proposed Action locates comm(>Tctal and/or industrial uses which may
require new or expansion of existing waste treatment and/or storage
faCilities
. Other impacts:___
6 Will proposed action alter drainage i:ow or patterns, or surface
watN runoff? DNO ~y[S
h. -'pies tnat would apply to column J
. pf( v,scd Action would change flood \\'dter flows
7
.
1 2 3
Small to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNa
0 ~ ~Yes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
rn 0 DYes IXINo
Q9 0 DYes IZINo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNa
IXI 0 DYes 69No
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 IZI IZIYes DNa
0 0 DYes oNo
0 0 DYes oNo
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYe, oNo
,
,
n n eYes DNo
w -
_ -'--'--_.... :~~ ...;:...~;.;. ~......:- _.;..;......:..;.~..~_~~.....;.;;;;..;_.;.;;c;..,;;..;..;~;_..:,';_~,._.. ..~i:_-~;..;.""".....'-"- ..~.. ....._.- _.:-..~
.
. Proposed Action may- cause substantial erosion.
. Proposed Action is incompatible with existing drainage patterns.
. Proposed Action will allow development in a designated floodway.
. Other impacts:
IMPACT ON AIR
7. Will proposed action affect air qualityl rnNO DYES
hamples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips in any given
hour.
. Proposed Action will result in the incineration of more than 1 ton of
refuse per hour.
. Emission rate of total contaminants will exceed Sibs. per hour or a
heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour.
. Proposed action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed
to industrial use.
. Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial
development within existing industrial areas.
. Other impacts:
IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS
8. Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered
species? DNO ~YES
hamples that would apply to column 2
. Reduction of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal
list. using the site. over or near site or found on the site.
. Remov.' of any portion of a critical or significant \vildlife habitat.
. Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other
than for hricultural purposes.
. Other impacts: Prolect .si te has. r'l1 n::"!rlny nppn
cleared, causing wildlife habitat damaqe
already.
9 Will Proposed Action substamially affect non-threatened or
non-endangered species' DNO ~YES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed Action would substantially interfere with any resident or
migratory fish. shellfISh or wildltfe species
. Proposed Aclion requires the removal of more than 10 acres
of mature I.orest (over 100 years of age) or other locally Important
vegetatIon
IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES
10 Will the Propm,'d A( t.on afft.ct agricultural land resourcesl
~NO [1YES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Thr proposed action would ~f>ver. cross or limIt access to agricultural
land ,,"cludes cropland. hayflelds. pasture. vineyard. orchard. ete)
8
.
1 2 3 .
Small to Potentil'1 Can Impac\ Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
0 IZJ IillYes DNo
0 0 DYes oNo
0 ~ IKlYes oNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes oNo
,
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 Iill !jUYes DNo
0 1!9 I!9Yes DNo
l5ll 0 [JYes DNo
0 0 ~Yes DNo
0 KJ KJYes DNa
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNa
.
".
. Construction activity would excavate or compact the soil profile of
agricultural land.
. The proposed action would irreversibly convert more than 10 acres
of agricultural land or, if located in an Agricultutal District, more
than 2.5 acres of agricultural land.
. The proposed action would disrupt or prevent installation of agricultural
la~rl management systems (e.g., subsurface drain lines, outlet ditches,
strip cropping); or create a need for such measures (e.g. cause a farm
field to drain poorly due to increased runoff)
. Other impacts:
IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES
11 Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources? DNa QQYES
(If necessary, use the Visual EAF Addendum in Section 617.21,
Appendix B.)
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed land uses, or project components obviously different from
or in sharp contrast to current surrounding land use pallerns, whether
man-made or natural.
. Proposed land uses, or project components visible to users of
aesthetic resources which will eliminate or significantly reduce their
enjoyment of the aesthetic qualities of that resource.
. Project components that will result in the elimination or significant
screening of scenic views known to be important to the area.
. Other impacts:
IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES
12 Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure of historic, pre-
historic or paleontological importance? DNa KlYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed Action occurring wholly or partially within or substantially
contiguous to any facility or site listed on the State or National Register
of historic places
. Any impact to an archaeological site or fossil bed located within the
project site.
. Proposed Action will occur in an area designated as sensitive for
archaeological sites on the NYS Site Inventory.
. Other impacts: A study would have to be conducted
with regard to the possible archaeoloqical
resources.
IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION
13 Will Proposed Action aiiect the quantity or qualitl' of existing or
future open sp~(es or recreational opportunities?
Examples that would apply to column 2 DNO KlVES
. The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational opportunity.
. A major reduction of an open space important to the community.
. Other impact'
9
.
1 2 3
Small to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
0 0 DYes oNo
0 0 oVes oNo
0 0 oVes oNo
0 0 oVes oNo
0 IZJ IKIVes DNa
0 IZJ !rlVes oNo
0 IXI IKIVes DNa
0 0 oVes DNa
0 0 oVes oNo
0 0 ~Yb ON"
0 0 oVes DNa
0 Q9 Q9ves DNa
IZI 0 KJVes DNo
IZI 0 !rl Ves DNo
0 0 DVes DNo
>
.'
.
IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION
14, Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems?
DNa IKIYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Alteration of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods,
. Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems,
. Other impacts:
IMPACT ON ENERGY
15. Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or
energy supply? i:llINO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed Action will cause a greater than 5% increase in the use of
any form of energy in the municipality,
. Proposed Action will require the creation or extension of an energy
~ransmission or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two family
residences or to serve a major commercial or industrial use.
. Other impacts:
NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS
16 Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or ,vibration as a result
of the Proposed Action? IKINO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Blasting within 1,500 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive
facility.
. Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day),
. Proposed Action will produce operating noise exceeding the local
ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures.
. Proposed Action will remove natural barriers that would act as a
noise screen.
. Other impacts:
IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH
17 Will Proposed Action affect public health and safety1
OlINO
DYES
Examples that wOuld apply to column 2
. Proposed Action may cause a risk of explosion or release of hazardous
substances (ie. oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) in the event of
accident or upset conditions, or there may be a chronic low level
discharge or emission.
. Proposed Action may result in the burial of "hazardous wastes" in any
form (ie. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritating,
infectious, ete )
. Storage facilitIes for on~' million or more gallons of Iiquified natural
gas or other flammable liquids
. Proposed action may result in the excavation or other disturbance
within 2,000 feet of a Site used for the disposal of solid or hazardous
waste
. Other impacts:
10
.
. '0,
1 2 3'
Small to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large MItigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 liD Yes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
"] 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONo
0 0 DYes ONO
0 0 DYes ONo
j
--..----y
.
"
IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHARACTER
OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD
18. Will proposed action affect the character of the existing community?
DNa r;oYES
ham pIes that would apply to column 2
. The permanent population of the city, town or village in which the
project is located is likely to grow by more than 5%.
. The municipal budget for capital expenditures or operating services
will increase by more than 5% per year as a result of this project.
. Proposed action will conflict with officially adopted plans or goals.
. Proposed action will cause a change in the density of land use.
. Proposed Action will replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures
or areas of historic importance to the community.
. Development will create a demand for additional community services
(e.g. schools, police and fire, etc.)
. Proposed Action will set an important precedent for future projects.
. Pwposed Action will create or eliminate employment.
. Other impacts:
.
1 2 3
Small to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
Kl D DYes DNo
ill D DYes ~No
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
D D DYes DNo
19. Is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy related to
potential adverse environmental impacts? DNa iXIYES
If Any Action in Part 2 Is Identified as a Potential Large Impact or
If You Cannot Determine the Magnitude of Impact, Proceed to Part 3
Part 3-EVALUATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS
Responsibility of Lead Agency
Part 3 must be prepared if one or more impact(s) is considered to be potentially large, even if the impact(s) may be
mitigated.
Instructions
Discuss the following for each impact identified in Column 2 of Part 2:
1 Briefly describe the impact
2 Describe (if applicable) how the impact could be mitigated or reduced to a small to moderate impact by project change(s).
3 Based on the information available, decide if it is reasonable to conclude that this impact is important.
To answer the question of importance, consider.
. The probability of the impact occurring
. The duration of the impact
. Its irreversibility, including permanently lost resources of value
. Whether the impact can or will be controlled
. The regional consequence of the impact
. Its potential divergence from local needs and goals
. Whether known obJection; to the project relate to this impact
[Continue on attachments)
11
~
.
.
PART III
Impact on Land
Construction is proposed on slopes
the general topography of the site
are questionable uilding lots.
s 7.
of 15% or greater and due to
there are several lots which
Sp~~ifi~ally, let~ 1 4, and
There would also be an impact on the unique land forms on the
site, specifically, the wetlands and bluffs. Some existing
wetlands on the site had been destroyed by construction activity
and as a mitigating measure it is strongly recommended that a
reconstructive landscape plan be submitted for the areas
affected. The bluffs should be protected against clearing and
construction in order to reduce erosion.
Impact on Water
The tidal wetlands of Dam Pond and adjacent areas on the subject
property are regulated by the New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation. Maximum wetland setbacks should be
established on all construction activities associated with the
development. The proposed action will also likely cause
siltation and erosion into the existing smaller freshwater ponds,
as well as, the wetlands around Dam Pond. Mitigation measures
should be used to lessen the impact of construction on these
areas. The road layout should also be revised to avoid
disturbing the freshwater pond at the south side of Lot No. 34.
The proposed action will increase the stormwater run off due to
the impervious surfaces created. Lot and road drainage should
also be proposed to protect the critical environmental areas.
Erosion control measures should be used during road construction
to prevent siltation into the wetlands. Roadway construction is
proposed in a designated floodway, which can be mitigated by
project design change.
,
.
.
Impact on Plants and Animals
There are 12 species of birds on the site, 3 of which are listed
by the NYSDEC as endangered, threatened, or special concern
species throughout the state. The proposed action will affect
these species in that it may remove a portion of the habitat and
interfere with these resident wildlife species. There are also
plant species on the site which are on the NY State Protected
Plant Species List. These species should be identified prior to
further clearing activities so as to avoid their disturbance to
as great a degree as possible.
Impact on Aesthetic Resources
The proposal will be in sharp contrast to the current surrounding
land use, and will significantly reduce the aesthetic qualities
of the site. The construction of 34 single-family residences may
eliminate the scenic views which are important to the area,
particularly from the water.
Impact on Historic and Archaeological Resources
The site may contain important prehistoric or paleontological
resources. An archaeological study should be conducted to
determine any such resources.
Impact on Open Space and Recreation
The proposed action will affect the quantity of future public
open space and recreational uses. It will mean the permanent
foreclosure of a future recreation opportunity and a reduction of
an open space area important to the community. There is a sound
front parcel proposed for a possible future dedication to the
Town, however it is outside of the subdivision1 and, unless the
roads within the subdivision are also dedicated this parcel would
not have an advantage to the Town.
.
.
Impact on Traffic Problems
The proposed action may result in major traffic problems since 34
residential units will enter and exit the subdivision via one
access. This could also present an impact for fire and emergency
vehicles who need access into the subdivision. The surrounding
lots should be reviewed with regard to possible street
connections for circulation. The parcel now or formerly of
Spencer Terry Jr., appears to be landlocked and a street
connection should be considered to that property as well.
Impact on growth and Character of Community or Neighborhood
The proposed action will affect the character of the existing
community since it will eliminate an area which has a historic
importance to the community. The development will create a
demand for additional community services. There is, also, likely
to be public controversy related to the potential adverse
environmental impacts of the project.
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
t
j-l-!:;;~;l:;'/:;-'~'~~.
'j" -~\).\' '-'-l"j ,') 'C,
P~1~N~~~P~~?
~ '.i"H"~' -..,
TO~d'l O'lsg~. Mp;LD
S~['F~..t\.seo Nr\
'~.'I}./. ','\0 t
" ..-__'at. J\
-< -. r"'"
It
Enclosed please find a copy of the entrance detail for Cove Beach
Estates at East Marion.
Southold, N.Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
Board of Trustees
Planning Board
Cove Beach Estates,
May 19, 1988
SCTM# 1000-22-3-18.3
~,~j
\.......
D
southo1d. N.Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
May 11, 1988
Harold Reese
855 sunrise Highway
Lynbrook., NY 11563
RE' Cove Beach Estates
SCTM *1000_22-3-18.3,15.1
Dear Mr. Reese'
Enclo,ed plea,e find a mar<ed coPY of Cove Beach .,tate'
showing the revisions that should be made on the map.
GenerallY, the placement of the entrance road ,bould pc changed,
along .ith the relocation of ,ome of the lot' [,ee map).
""e top of the bluff roll,t al'o be ,hoWO along .ith the 100'
set back. of the building envelope.
If yoU have anY questions, please do not hesitate to
contact this office.
very trulY yours,
~~Lr:w~~
CHAIRMAN
r
enc,
jt
- ---- - -------
.
D
Southold. N.Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
May 9, 1988
New York State Department
of Transportation
State Office Building
Veterans Memorial Highway
Hauppauge, New York 11788
Attention: Mr. Vito Lena
Permits Section
RE: Proposed Road Work
Cove Beach Estates
SCTM #1000-22-3-18.3
Dear Mr. Lena:
On May 3, 1988, this office received the original letter
pertaining to the above mentioned subdivision, which is
addressed to you. We have enclosed this letter incase you have
not yet received it.
We have kept a copy for our files.
If you have any questios, please do not hesitate to contact
this office.
jt
Very truly yours,
/3010 7U..-H;- C%ia-LcLJNh
BENNETT ORLOWSKI ,JR. "
CHAIRMAN ~
J
(1
YOUNG 'lJ> YOUNG
400 OSTR1\NDER 1\ VENUE
RIVERHE1\D, NEW YORK Il9Q'
MAY
.
~ ,\",()('l
'~', "',,0
v '-......
. . - - ,"'::1.- 1-
'L l.'-' c '
< -
p':..;.l~{
616-727-2303
, '" '
(;.: /-1.)
~
HOW1\RD W. YOUNG
LanA &...wyo.
ALDEN W. YOUNG
PCOfellsi.onal Enqi.neG~ 'ijo Land S1.lNeyOt'
April 29, 1988
New York state Department
of Transportation
state Office Building
Veterans Memorial Highway
Hauppauge, New York 11788
Att:
Mr. vito Lena
Permits section
Re: Proposed Road Work
Cove Beach Estates
N/S Route 25
E/O stars Road
East Marion, T/O Southold,
New York (85-0888)
Dear Mr. Lena:
permission is hereby requested for installation of new
curbing and sidewalk reconstruction, at the above referenced
location.
Enclosed please find four (4) prints of the Subdivision
Sketch Plan prepared for Cove Beach Estates, for your use.
As discussed, a 1" = 20' scale drawing, of the proposed
roadwork, is also enclosed.
If you have any questions regarding this request, please
call me.
Very truly yours,
c:t/;-t'7rU;d e. U'c-~C
Thomas C. Wolpert, P.E.
TCW/kak
EJlC.l.
~)
Mr. Harold Reese
.
.
SMITH, FINKELSTEIN, LUNDBERG, ISLER AND YAKABOSKI
HOWARD M. FINKELSTEIN
PIERRE G. LUNDBERG
FRANCIS J. YAKABOSKI
FRANK A. ISLER
SUSAN POST ROGERS
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW
456 GRIPFING AVENUE, CORNER OF LINCOLN STREET
P. O. BOX 389
RIVERHEAD, N. Y. 11901
(~16) 727-4100
REGINALD C. SMITH
1926-1983
April 14, 1988
Planning Board
Town of Southold
Southold Town Hall
53095 Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Harold Reese v. Planning Board of the
Town of Southold ~ Co~lZ- lli) ~<>c.&+ /'f\o..norJ
Gentlemen:
I am writing at this time to advise you that on
the 11th day of April, 1988, the petitioners, by their
counsel, filed a Notice of Appeal to the Appellate Division
in connection with the above reference matter. We will keep
you advised as the situation progresses.
Very truly yours,
'RANC"~BO'K'
FJY;dkw
cc: Town Board,
Town of Southold
00 rnO\Ylrn m!
APR 18_
th,
.
.~'
.AA-('F;T~. .
~k t-&.4 /I~"-..
~ C~"~#~~
/
,
.MAY
3 1988 \/
10305 Main Road
P.O. Box 1B3
East Marion, NY 11939
April 29, 1988
Southold Town Planning Board
Town Hall
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Gentlemen:
There are two projects under consideration in and near East
Marion that give rise to grave concern among local residents
interested in maintaining the quiet, charming quality of life
presently enjoyed.
The proposed Greenport Commons on Route 25 will require tearing
down trees for an unwanted and unnecessary shopping center. The
proposed fast food restaurants means increased traffic congestion
and litter. Greenport Commons will forever alter the natural
environment at that site.
The Cove Estates project in East Marion is of even greater
concern. There is fear of irreversible environmental damage if
upwards of 24 homes are built on that property. The resulting
water and sewage problems plus traffic congestion would forever
alter the desirable characteristics of this unique town. No one
would object to a few custom homes, but 24 or more homes is
totally inappropriate use of the land.
Also a good argument could be made to continue allowing public
access to the beautiful beach there, regardless of what is built.
I sincerely hope that the greed of a few will not override the
interests of present residents concerned about the vanishing,
natural environment and quality of life on this end of the North
Fork.
S:l5:i/~
Robert D. Pedersen
.
Frank A. Kujawski. Jr.. Pres.
HENRY P. SMITH
JOHN M. BREDE MEYER, III
John Bednoski. Jr.
ALBERT KRUPSKI, JR.. Vice-President
.
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1892
BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 728
Southold, New York 11971
TO: Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner
FROM:
Town Trustees
DATE:
April 28, 1988
M--
As per your request, please be advised of the Trustees findings
regarding the following applications:
! /FRANKLINVILLE HOMES - 1000-125-2-2.2 - Trustees found no
evidence of wetlands - no jurisdiction.
STYPE BROTHERS AGENCY - Trustees determined they have no
jurisdiction.
./THORTON SMITH
on the site.
to the pond.
~DBM COMPANY - 1000-55-6-15.1 - Trustees are to contact the C.A.C.
after it is staked for inspection.
- 1000-121-1-1-,p/019 - The Trustees found a pond
There is to be no grading on the top of the slope
vtOVE BEACH ESTATES - 1000-22-3-18.3 - New access appears to be
far enough away from the wetlands.
IJOSEPH GAZZA - 1000-22-3- (19-22) 35-5-1.2 - Trustees will
refer this matte'-qtb the C.A.C. for recommendations.
.......
.
T
Southold. N. Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
April 26, 1988
Mrs. Judith Terry
Town Clerk
Southold, NY 11971
RE: Change of Zone
Harold Reese
SCTM #1000-22-3-15.1
Dear Mrs. Terry:
The following action was taken by the Southold Town
Planning Board on Monday, April 25, 1988.
RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board recommend
approval to the Town Board on the proposed change of zone from
"C-l" General Industrial District to "A" Residential and
Agricultural District on the property located on the northerly
side of Route 25, East Marion, NY.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact this office.
Very truly yours,
(;e1!/LdC uA1~~LdL) i~
BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. .
CHAIRMAN
cc:
Supervisor Murphy
Town Board
Planning Board
Gary Mc~an
)/~
jt
.
Southold. N. Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
April 13, 1988
Michael Hall
Young's Avenue
Southold, NY 11971
RE: Cove Beach Estates
SCTM *1000-22-3-18.3,15.1
Dear Mr. Hall:
The following action was taken by the Southold Town
Planning Board on Monday, April 11, 1988.
RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board declare
itself Lead Agency under the State Environmental Quality Review
Act.
RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board send the
Long Environmental Assessment Form to Dave Emilita for review.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact this office.
Very truly yours,
0~ {)drn~J'i
BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR~
CHAIRMAN t
jt
.
Southold, N.Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
April 12, 1988
Dave Emi1ita
Szepatowski Associates Inc.
23 Narragansett Ave.
Jamestown, RI 02835
RE: Cove Beach Estates
SCTM# 1000-22-3-18.3, 15.1
Dear Dave;
Enclosed please find Part 1 of the Environmental Assessment
form for Cove Beach Estates. The map was previously sent to you.
The following resolution took place at the Planning Board's
April 11, 1988 public meeting:
RESOLVED to send the Long Environmental Assessment form to
Dave Emilita for review.
Very truly yours,
BENNETT ORLOWSKI,
CHAIRMAN
; <1,.,
Jl~
.
D
Southold, N.Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
04/12/88
Environmental Analysis Unit
DEC, Building 40, Room 219
SUNY
Stony Brook, NY 11794
RE: Cove Beach in East Marion
SCTM # 1000-22-3-18.3,15.1
Gentlemen:
Enclosed please find a completed Long Environmental
Assessment Form and a copy of the map of the Major Subdivision
of Cove Beach.
This project is unlisted. We wish to coordinate this action
to confirm our initial determination.
May we have your views on this matter. Written comments on
this project will be received at this office until May 12, 1988.
We shall interpret lack of response to mean there is no
objection by your agency in regard to the State Environmental
Quality Review Act, and our agency will assume the status of
Lead agency.
Very truly yours,
80~d~'"),,
BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR.6f-
CHAIRMAN
t-
v
Enc:
cc: Department of Health Services
.
D
Southold. N.Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
To: Board of Trustees
From:Planning Board
RE: Cove Beach Estates SCTM *1000-22-3-18.3
Date:April 4, 1988
Enclosed please find the resubmitted sketch plan for Cove
Beach Estates.
This will be scheduled on our April 11th meeting for Lead
Agency Determination as an unlisted action.
Please review the wetlands line, submit your comments to our
office.
,
.
Southold. N.Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
April 4, 1988
Dave Emilita
Szepatowski Associates, Inc.
23 Narragansett Ave.
Jamestown, Rhode Island 02835
RE: Cove Beach Estates
SCTM i 1000-22-3-18.3,15.1
Dear Dave:
Enclosed please find the Environmental assessment form and
map of Cove Beach Estates for your review.
At our April 11th meeting this will be scheduled for Lead
Agency Determination as an unlisted action unless we hear
otherwise from you.
Very truly yours,
;8~ ~~cfr;'
BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. A-
CHAIRMAN
cc: Howard Young
Michael Hall
jt
IJYOUNG'
YOUNG
.
400 08TR1\NDER 1\ VENUE
RIVERHE1\D, NEW YORK 1190'
516-727-2303
ALDEN W. YOUNG
Pcofe..ional En.gU1.ee~ 'tfo Land. Su,t'IJ'eyot'
March 17, 1988
Mr. Harold Reese
855 Sunrise Highway
Lynbrook, New York, 11563
HE: SUBDIVISION SKETCH PLAN MAP OF COVE BEACH ESTATES C85-0888)
Main Road, East Martian, Town of Southold, New York
Dear Mr. Reese:
Enclosed herewith, for your use, are sixteen (16) prints of the
above captioned subdivision sketch plan and the completed
-
Environmental Assessment Form.
Very truly yours,
#uve> ~d.. L0. Jo<-z-"--"a
Howard W. Young
HWY~
Encs.
HOWARD W. YOUNt
LaM Su..eyo.
-- '" .
. ,
~
.
nOWAHD ~t. I"l~R r:].~Tr:l~
PIEHHE G. LL'KDBERG
l"HA:!\CIS J. YAKAEOSKI
FRANK A. ISLER
SUSAN POST ROGERS
SMITH, FINKELSTEIN, LUNDBERG, ISLER AND YAKABOSKI
ATTOR:KEYS AND COl.JNSELORS AT LAW
456 ORIFFI::\G AVEKt7E, CORNER OF I,TNCOL:K STREET
P. O. BOX :)89
RIVERHEAD, K. Y. 11901
1r">16} 727-4100
REGINALD C. SMITH
H~2fi'19B3
February 11, 1988
Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Planning Board
Southold Town Hall
53095 Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Dear Mr. Orlowski,
Pursuant to our discussion yesterday morning, I am
enclosing herewith photostat of Memorandum Decision in the
matter of Reese v. Planning Board dismissing the Reese
Petition.
The Court determined that your Board acted in a
timely and proper manner when it determined that the
developer should provide an environmental impact statement.
We will be submitting our Judgment to the Court
within the very near future.
Very ruly yours,
~
FRANCI J. AKABOSKI
FJY;dkw
enc.
cc: Judith Terry, Town Clerk
m ~,: ~ ,ii: ~m
';f.<;.t.
tt
.
'.'
MEMORANDUM
SUPREME COURT, SUFFOLK COUNTY
SPECIAL TERM I.A.S. Part IX
x
In the Matter of the Application of,
BY
ALFRED M. LAMA, J.S.C.
HAROLD REESE and HAROLD REESE, JR.,
DATED
Febru;]ry l~
, 1983
Petitioners,
_ against -
THE PLANNING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF
SOUTHOLD, BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR.,
Chairman of the Planning Board of the
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, and the TOWN OF
SOUTHOLD,
INDEX NO.
MOTION DATE:
SUBMISSION DATE:
87-17300
September 21, 1987
October 6, 1987
~lOTION NO.
19 CDISPSUBJ
Respondents.
x
CORWIN & MATTHEWS" ESQS.
Attorneys for P~titioners
71 New Street
Huntington, New York 11743
FRANCIS J. YAKABOSKI. ESQ.
^ttorn~y for Respondents
456 Griffing Avenue, Box 389
Riverhead, New York 11901
.
This Article 78 petition seeks to annul a determination of the Planning Board of the
Town of Southold which held that petitioners' subdivision was a Type I action under the
New York State Environmental Quality Review Act and to direct that the Planning Board finc
that the project is a Type II action.
Petitioners are the owners of a 96 acre parcel of real property at Main Road, East
Marion and seeks to divide it into 40 lots. On July 16,l987, the Southold Town Planning
Board passed a resolution declaring that they were the lead agency and that this was a
Type I action requiring a draft environmental impact statement.
Petitioners argue that the subdivision docs not [it the guidelines of a Type 1 actio
set forth in 6 NYCRR Section 617.12(b) (5) (ii) and that the determination was not made
within twenty (20) days of the receipt of the application or any addition~l information
reasonably necessary to make that determination as required by 6 NYCRR Section
617.6(a)(I)(iii).
The record before the Court indicates that the parcel contains 3.994 acres of tid~l
wetlonds, freshwater ponds and bluffs facing Long Island Sound. The Planning Boord
commenced a coordinated review under SEQRA and r~cejvcd dO Jlldlysis [rom the Sllffolk
County Department of Health Services, Bureau of Ellvironmcllt, Office of Ecology. The SCDlli
rccC'l,:mcndcd a positive declaration be made pu.rsu.Jnt to SFQR.\. On Jllly 6, 1<!87 th(' PLlnnil
Board issuf'd il positive declaration, dcotermining th;lt the slI{)diviSlon action is ;1 Type I
Land subdivisions, even minor, ,lrc T:-'(lc' I JctLol1s if tli(''.' ml~ct cr'rt'lin thrf'~~hollls
under 6 N.Y.C.R.R. 617.l2. If they do not meet such throsholds then the actions are
classified as "unli.sted .Jctions", This subdivision should not h<lve Ol'cn clas:;ificd a Typ
-~
,
.
- Page 2 -
REESE v. TO\.~I OF SOUTIIOLD, ORLOWSKI
Indox No. 87-17300
I since it requests forty (40) units but should have been classified as ~n Unlisted Aetior
requiring review under SEQRA (Matter of OiVeronica v. ^rspn~ult, 124 A.D.2d 442.
In determining whether a pl~nning board acted properLy requesting an environmental
impact 5tatc~ent, the Court must consider whether the Board malic a tllor~ugh investigation
to identify relevant environmental concerns and made a reasoned elaboration on the basis
of its dctcr~ination. Inland Vale Farm. Company v. Stcrgianopoulos, 104 A.D.2d 395, 478
N.Y.S.2d 926.
Since the impact of this proposed subdivision met many of the criteria enumerated in
6 N.Y.C.R.R. 6l7.ll(a)(1)-(11), the planning board's action in requesting environmental
impacl statcment..w.:Js not illegal, arbitrary or capricious. (lIomr-s v. N.Y.St.,te Urb"ln Div..
69 A.D.2d 222, 418 N.Y.S.2d 827.)
Finally, the Planning Board's SEQRA determination was timely. Timing requiroments can
be extended to make review, within reasonable bounds. (rehan v. Serivanti, 97 A.D.2d 769,
.
468 N.Y.S.2d 402.)
The petition is dismissed.
Submit Judgment.
fl~
J. S.C.
t
ilttBt iJrOB. Inr.
aS5 SUNRISE HIGHWAY
L YNSROOK
,N. Y. 11563
S16.!593-l5200
-
.flIIA........ J....- ,,- I '1lr& .
~~cf ~-e~. LcJl
~~~J \-.-,--j.
(Vb!-- h.I~ ~ e"..ry
l.N~ ~cl ~ it. ~~ tl.o
~~,,-_ .t "-' I:vJv- \I ~-.:. C G a...~ ~) ...;
'i:t....:\- ~ C~c\ ~ 0t' ~ ~ c(,.. ~
, 1-"' ,-,>o:lw ~ h ~C\ ,......P- ~ <l-
NN k-v-'" \).. C- ~{-t\.. .,5. ~ I ~ '" "v
I\!W-""- ,,"" <r/ ~ ~~' ,;:t 'i"'--' ~-,
.fLu _ <<__ t ~ -v.,. "tI-'-~~"V t;L J.. ". ""
(~k'1v-
~ "-"'~ h
'kv t-t f.I ~ c-<L
-, Yt
~~H ~ 11Il'"\'.\...\..
~\H\
~\~R \ L\ \00&; ;
>
r
,
.....-_1_'_'_'..... _1_t_...._t_I_I_I_I_r_I_I_r_......._I_'_...~t_,_ _...... _ _4
, TOWN CLERK i
, TOWN OF SOUTIIOLD i
! Suffolk County. New York 516 - 765-1801 N~ 26022' i
i / / /:' Southold. N. Y.1l971 ~!-<l119UI
RECEIVED OF Y(lt l.. t-€.-c~~,a..- !
~, /..:b'L "" ~ X}U' ..I.. ( % Dollars aLL? '7 (h) 1.." I
IFOP~J~-V ,fr~l_=-_C1Y-:~ r3~--J~/t',.;t, r- II
T. Terry. Town Clerk
( :'Uck-,=_
.~a= ~_..<;~e~.E~.t!L~d.... ......By, _.,......,....,......1
....... ...,. - --.............-~......_I. w,_ .,_ A
TOWN CLERK "".,.- _I_~._T_'_I_.
I TOWN OF SOUTHOLD i
! Suffolk County. New York 516 - 765-1801 N? 26840' I
, ~~~ ,'o."'oW. N. Y. ll"~ D.c-<- J\I'-'lL1
~OF_~;~ 6~ , ~ ' !
::) :j1 ~q Li 00, IO~. J)ftlrrs " d () () o. 00 I
For ' _ Ecr-fLCL~~3..~ ~ Cr--<- ~ &;L" I
, Judith T. Terry. Town CIt'rk ;
C"h O_.~.J::;~~,~1iLi~_,_...,_.~..... ~ Lv dA-
~1_1_1_I_l_I_'_'_'_
...-............... -. .'__1- I _ .-...._.............. _,_ ................._... .W1_....-......_.....
I TOWN CLERK .
I TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Suffolk County. New York 516,- 765-1801 N? 26a27'
~,' /? Southold, N. Y.1l971 ~ ~19~, :
RE ,EIVED OF _~ /f'. 'fl-=..<2- ~~ I
;'-'t..<~_ ,~-::b~ O~;;tV-Dollars ILa2So(J ;
For S~~~~ ~~-t'~ E'd" !
~ . .
J ilh T. Terry. Town Clerk i
.~":~. .C'::~~,[li1!.?i...,_ ... ..By. i
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~DW~l?i
.
') 'c Ic'
: ,- ,.--,
JE
......)
SOUTHOLD TOWN
PLANNING BOARD
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
FOR
COVE BEACH ESTATES
A proposed 34 lot single family residential subdivision
located in the East Marion section of the Town of Southold,
Suffolk County, New York.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
DEIS g~g~!~~~ ~y~
Town of Southold
Lead !g~~o:e.Y.:..
Southold Town Planning Board
Town Hall
Main Road
Southold, N.Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
~ea~ !g~go:e.Y ~~g~~o:e.~
Person:
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
(516) 765-1938
DEIS ~~~E~~~~ For:
Harold Reese, Sr.
855 Sunrise Highway
Lynbrook, N.Y. 11563
DEIS ~~~~~~~ ~Y.:..
Hampton Manor Associates, Inc.
186 Wading River Rd.
P.O. Box 308
Manorville, N. Y. 11949
!g~go:e.Y !o:e.o:e.~E~~g~~ ~~~~~
Comments Due By:
30 Days From Acceptance Date
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
II.
I I 1.
IV.
V.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
--- -- ----
Summary.
Introduction
Description of Proposed Action
Environmental Setting.
A. Soils.
B. Topography
C. Vegetation
D. Groundwater.
E. Wildlife Populations
F. Traffic Conditions.
G. Archeological Resources.
Short & Long Term Environmental Imp~cts
A. Soils.
B. Topography
C. Vegetation
D. Groundwater.
E. Wildlife Populations
F. Traffic Circulation.
G. Loss of Open Space
H. Other Impacts.
Adverse Impacts Which Cannot Be Avoided
A. Soils.
B. Topography
C. Vegetation
D. Groundwater.
E. Wildlife Populations
F. Traffic Circulation.
G. Loss of Open Space/Other Impacts
VI. Alternatives to the Proposed Action.
I
I
I
A.
B.
Standard Subdivision Plan.
No Action Alternative.
.if'
!':~&~
1
2
3
6
6
15
16
21
25
30
31
32
34
35
39
40
42
44
45
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
56
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
VI I.
VIII.
IX.
X.
XI.
XI I.
Irreversible and Irretrievable Cownitment
of Natural Resources . 57
Growth Inducing Aspects of
Proposed Action.
Use and Conservation of Energy
Mitigation Measures.
A.
B.
As Proposed in Design.
Additional Measures Proposed
References
Appendices
Tidal Wetland Permit issued by DEC
Letter from DEC Wildlife Resource Center
Description of potential rare plant
Correspondence with Mr. Irving Latham
List of Migratory Birds
Resume of principal DEIS preparer
58
59
60
60
62
64
I
I
I
I
~~~!:Y
I
The subject of this Draft Environmental Impact Statement
is a subdivision of approximately 96 acres of property into
34 residential lots. This document addresses the impacts
which will occur or would be expected to occur as a result of
the subdivision and long term occupation of the property.
I
I
Significant impacts associated with the development of
the subject property include; clearing of natural vegetation,
erosion of some soils found on the property, modifications to
the existing topography, modifications to wildlife habitat
and the long term loss of open space. Significant beneficial
impacts include; preservation of tidal wetlands and other
open space, provision of recreation facilities, protection of
the significant wildlife habitats and increase in the tax
base and tax revenues to the locality.
I
I
I
Several measures have been designed into the proposed
subdivision. These measures include; use of clustering to
preserve open space, preservation of tidal wetlands, design
of the roadway system to avoid steeply sloped areas,
inclusion of a recreation area and a requested rezoning of a
portion of the property from Industrial C-l to residential.
Additional mitigation measures are suggested within the
appropriate section of the document.
I
I
Alternatives considered as part of the process of
preparation of this document included a standard development
of the property as well as the no action alternative.
Representatives of the Town of Southold limited the
discussion of alternatives to these two issues.
I
I
Among the issues which must yet be decided are the
acceptance and processing of this document, a decision on the
part of the Town Board regarding the requested rezoning of a
portion of the property from C-l to residential, a decision
on the part of the Planning Board regarding the preliminary
subdivision, and ultimately the final approval, associated
referrals and approvals from the Suffolk County Planning
Commission, the New York State Department of Transportation,
etc., and a decision from the Suffolk County Department of
Health Services regarding the water supply and sanitary waste
disposal. A tidal wetland permit has already been issued
from the Department of Environmental Conservation for the
development of the property as currently proposed.
I
I
I
I
-1-
I
I
I
I
I. Introduction.
I
This Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) has
been prepared at the request of the Town of Southold Planning
Board as part of an application for approval of a realty
subdivision known as Cove Beach Estates. This document has
been prepared by Hampton - Manor Associates, Inc. using
subdivision plans developed by Young & Young, land surveyors
of Riverhead, N.Y.
I
I
I
The "Intent and Purpose" of the State Environmental
Quality Review Act, Part 617, contains provisions which
allows all regulatory agencies to,
I
"... conduct their affairs with the awareness that
they are stewards of the air, water, land and living
resources and that they have an obligation to protect
the environment for the use and enjoyment of this and
all future generations." 6NYCRR Part 671. lb.
I
I
Therefore, in the evaluation of a proposed action, a
regulatory agency may request the preparation of a DEIS,
whose purpose on any given project is to;
I
1. Identify the existing natural condition of the
site.
2. Ident ify and document ant ici pated impacts
resulting from the implementation of the proposed
project.
3. Identify measures taken, or which could be taken
to lessen or mitigate identified impacts.
4. Investigate alternatives to the proposed action.
I
I
The role of the DEIS is not to be an advocate for any
specific development plan, but rather identify the impacts
which can be reasonably expected to occur with the completion
of the proposed action.
I
I
I
The information presented in this DEIS represents an
extensive analysis of the subject property, and the proposed
development plan, in order to provide the various regulatory
agencies charged with the review of the project the necessary
information to make and informed decision. It is hoped that
this DEIS meets the purposes and requirements of SEQRA amd
addresses the questions arising from the proposed
development.
I
I
-2-
I
I
I
I
I
I I . Q.esc!:..!.E:!o.!Q!'o Q!. :!;Q~ !'E<:J.P9.'2~90 ~<:e.:1o!.9..~
I
I
Mr. Harold Reese, Sr., owner and developer of the
property known as "Cove Beach Estates" proposes to subdivide
the 96.3847 acre property into 34 single family residential
building lots pursuant to Section 100-136 of the Southold
Town Code. The property is located in the hamlet of East
Marion, Town of Southold and is bordered by Long Island Sound
to the north and Dam Pond to the east. Access to the
property is via a proposed subdivision road, approximately
5,600 feet in length with frontage on Main Road (NYS Route
25). The proposed access roadway will be constructed to Town
of Southold specifications and may be offered for dedication
to the Town following construction.
I
I
I
The "Cove Beach Estates" property contains a variety of
habitats within its boundaries, ranging from upland deciduous
woods, to tidal wetlands to beaches and bluffs. In an effort
to provide protection to the wetlands located on the
property, no development is proposed in these sensitive
areas. Utilizing the cluster development provisions of
the Town of Southold, the applicant proposes to preserve a
total of 37.9 acres or 39.3% of the site for open space and
recreational purposes. The open space areas include
wetlands, beach frontage and overgrown agricultural land.
The developer intends to create a homeowners association for
future residents, and intends to convey title to the open
space and recreational areas to the homeowners association.
I
I
I
Residential lot sizes proposed for "Cove Beach Estates"
range in size from 40,000 to 92,000 square feet.
I
I
I
I
-3-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I '
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
!
H
~
~
~ ~
~ e5
e5
~
~
p.,
@
p.,
~ ~ ><
8g~
co
-4-
I
U1
I
ORIENT
IS
HARBOR
'"
.~M
k21
IS
IS
IT
IS
\
I IT
"'--:I IS
GARD["~ERS
-..........,.
":;, t~;::;Ui!~~~~~9
,0
..:.....:::\;;:~~:g
o
''22
. Geological Survey
''25
:(GREENPORTJ ;726
tJ~tJ~", NE
17'30"
730000 FE!::T (cor
:~I'/~~c-::.':'';; ::.. '.~,
*
,
I'A~ i
~ GNI
\ '[
"
SCALE 1:24000
I 0
1
1000 0 1000 2000 3000 '"""
- - -
I 5 0
- - - - -
- -
I MILE
:rammetric methods
1956
'63 (1956)
I
5000
6000 7000 FEET
1 KILOMETER
n
I
I
I
I
III.
~g~!~~gmeg~al ~~~~!ng
I
The property proposed for the "Cove Beach Estates"
development contains a variety of site conditions, diverse
soils, vegetation, land and geological characteristics. The
scope of the proposed project as well as the diversity of
natural conditions requires an in depth and accurate
assessment of the existing natural conditions. A detailed
description of the "Cove Beach Estates" property follows.
I
I
A.
Soils.
I
The soils information used for the analysis of the
subject property has been taken from the Soil Survey of
Suffolk County, prepared by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. In addition, test
hole data for 6 test holes has been included (see proposed
development map for locations of test holes). On the "Cove
Beach Estates" property a total of 11 indivisual soil
associations and features have been identified by the Soil
Conservation Service. These are as follows:
I
I
I
Carver Plymouth sands, 3-15% slopes (CpC)
Carver Plymouth sands, 15-35% slopes (CpE)
Deerfield sands (De)
Plymouth Loamy sands, 0-3% slopes (PIA)
Plymouth Loamy sands, 3-8% slopes (P1B)
Plymouth Loamy sands, 8-15% slopes (P1C)
Riverhead Sandy Loam, 0-3% slopes (RdA)
Haven Loam, 0-2% slopes (HaA)
Tidal Marsh <Tm)
Gravel Pit (Gp)
Beaches (Be)
I
I
I
In addition, the Soil Survey notes an escarpment along
the entire frontage of Long Island Sound.
I
A detailed description of the soil types found on the
property is provided below.
I
~~~~~~ ~lY~~~~~ ~~g~~
3-15% slopes (CpC)
I
These soils are mainly on rolling moraines, however,
they do occur on the side slopes of many drainage
channels on the outwash plains. small areas of these
soils on the moraines are as much as 25% gravel
I
I
-6-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Carver Plymouth Sand (8 - 15% slope) CpC
Carver Plymouth Sand (15 -35% slope) CpE
Deerfield Sands De
Plymouth Loamy Sand (0 - 3% slopes) PIA
Plymouth Loamy Sand (3 - 8% slope) PIB
Plymouth Loamy Sand (8 - 15% slope) PIC
Riverhead Sandy Loam (0 - 3% slope) RdA
Haven Loam (0 - 2% slopes) HaA
Tidal Marsh 'lin .
Gravel Pit Gp
Beaches Be
Scale 1" = 600'
-7-
I
I
I
I
throughout, especially along the crests of low ridges.
In a representative profile, a thin layer of leaf litter
and partly decayed organic material is on the surface.
Below the surface is a layer of dark grey sand about 3
inches thick. Subsurface layer is grey to light grey
loose sand to a depth of 8 inches. The subsoil is loose
sand to a depth of around 22 inches. It is brown in the
upper part and strong brown in the lower part. the
substratum is loose sand that contains some gravel to a
depth of 60 inches.
I
I
I
Carver soils have very low available moisture capacity,
and natural fertility is low. The hazard to erosion is
slight to moderate on these soils. These soils are
droughty, with the root zone being located mainly in the
upper 30 to 40 inches. In some places, slope is a
limitation to use.
I
I
~~~~~~ E!Y~~~!~ ~~~~~L !~=~~~ ~!~~~ i~E~~
I
These soils are almost exclusively on moraines, except
for a few steep areas on side slopes along some of the
more deeply cut drainage channels on outwash plains.
The soil characterists found in this grouping are
similar to those for CpA and CpC soils, except that the
gravel content is greater and can make up to 15% by
volume of the soil itself.
I
I
The hazard to erosion is moderate to severe on these
soils. They are maturally droughty and their fertility
is low. Moderately steep to steep slopes are a
limitation to use.
I
I
E!Y~~~!~ h~~~Y ~~~~~
0-3%, 3-8%, 8-15% slopes (PIA, PIB, PIC)
I
The Plymouth series consists of deep, excessively
drained coarse textured soils that formed in a mantle of
loamy sand or sand over thick layers of stratified
coarse sand and gravel. These nearly level to steep
sloping soils are throughout Suffolk County, on broad,
gently sloping to level outwash plains, and on
undulating to steep moraines. Native species of
vegetation consist of White Oak, Black Oak, Pitch Pine
and Scrub Oak. Plymouth soils thed to be droughty, and
I
I
I
I
-8-
I
I
I
I
to have low to very low available moisture capacity, and
natural fertility is low. The root zone is generally
contained within the upper 25 to 35 inches of the soil
column. The hazard to erosion is slight in Plymouth
Loamy Sands.
I
I
g~~~~g~~~ e~~~Y h~~~
0-3% slope (RdA)
I
The Riverhead series consists of deep, well drained
moderately coarse textured soils that formed in a mantle
of sandy loam or fine sandy loam over thick layers of
coarse sand and gravel. These soils occur throughout
Suffolk County in rolling to steep areas on moraines and
in level to gently sloping areas on outwash plains.
Native vegetation consists of White Oak, Black Oak, Red
Oak and Scrub Oak. Riverhead soils have a moderate to
high available moistrue capacity.. Internal drainage is
good. permeability is moderately rapid in the surface
layer of the subsoil, and very rapid in the substratum.
Natural fertility is low.
I
I
I
I
Deerg~1~ e~~~"".L "<'Q~2-
I
The Deerfield series consists of ddeep, moderately well
drained, coarse textured soils. This nearly level soil
is found throughout Suffolk County in depressional
areas, or on the borders of lakes, ponds or tidal
marshes and the wetter soils that are adjacent to these
areas. Deerfield soils are generally found on the
outwash plain.
I
I
Deerfield soils have a very low available moisture
capacity in the surface layer and the upper part of the
subsoil. Permeability is rapid throughout the surface
layer of this soil and the subsoil layers. A seasonal
high water table is at a depth of about 18-24 inches
below the ground surface. The hazard to erosion is
slight, and the natural fertility is low. Generally,
the soil has been left in woodland with adjoining areas
of wetter soils.
I
I
I
Haven Loam 0-2% slope
(HaA)
I
The Haven series consist of deep,
well drained medium
I
-9-
I
I
I
I
textured soils that formed in a loamy mantle over
stratified coarse sand and gravel. These soils are
throughout Suffolk County, but most areas are between
the two terminal moraines on outwash plains. Natural
vegetation of this soil grouping includes White Oak,
Black Oak, Red Oak, Scrub Oak and Pitch Pine. Haven
soils have a high to moderate available moisture
capacity. Naturill fertility is low. Permeability is
moderate in the surface layer and subsoil, and rapid in
the substratum.
I
I
I
I
In a representative profile, a thin layer of leaf litter
and decomposed organic material on the surface layer
exists in the wooded areas. Below this lies a dark,
greyish loam about 3 inches thick. The subsoil is dark
brown, to strong brown, friable loam to a depth of about
28 inches with the substratum being loose gravel and
sand to a depth of 55 inches.
I
I
The HaA soils are found mostly on outwash plains.
hazard to erosion is slight.
The
I
The soil is extensively used for crops. Because of the
nearly level slope and ease of excavation, most areas of
this soil in the western part of the county are being
used for housing developments and industrial parks.
I
Gr~~~l ~!~~ i~E~
I
Gravel pits are open excavations that have been made for
the purpose of mining sand and gravel. These pits range
in depth from 8 or 10 feet to more than 100 feet. The
sides of the pits generally are left nearly vertical and
the bottoms are level.
I
I
Abandoned pits are not suited to farming. Most of these
areas are in a cover of native, natural vegetation.
Houses have been built in some of the larger pits.
I
~~9.~~E!!l~~~~
I
Escarpments are made up of bluffs that have slopes
greater than 35%. Most areas are along the north shore,
but a few are near Shelter Island Sound. The soil
horizons have not formed in this actively eroding
I
I
-10-
I
I
I
I
material.
is devoid
generally
feet.
Except for a few scattered areas, this unit
of vegetation. Height of the excarpments
ranges from about 20 feet to more than 100
I
I
The material in the excarpment is sand along the north
shore. Many escarpments have large boulders embedded in
the soil, which roll to the beach as the escarpment
erodes. Escarpments are used by some species of
songbirds for habitats.
I
I
Beaches (Bc)
I
Beaches are made up of sandy, gravelly or cobbly areas
between water levels at mean high tide and the base of
the dunes or escarpments. Slopes are nearly level in
most instances, but it can be as high as 15%. In most
places along the bays, the beaches are sandy with
varying amounts of gravel within.
I
I
Tidal Marsh (Tm)
----- -----
I
Tidal marsh is made up of wet areas that are throughout
Suffolk County around the borders of calmer embayments
and tidal creeks. These level areas are not inundated
by daily tide flow, but they are subject to flooding
during abnormally high moon or storm tides.
I
Tidal marsh has an organic mat on the surface that
ranges from a few inches to several feet in thickness.
The organic mat overlies pale gray or white sand. In
many places the projele of the marsh is made up of
alternating layers of sand and organic material as a
result of sand deposited on the organic mat during
abnormally high storm tides.
I
I
I
These very poorly
kind of farming.
for certain types
drained areas
They are best
of wildl ife.
are not suited to any
suited to use as habitat
I
-11-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
I
.
I
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
TEST HOLE LOCATIONS
1
6
5
4
Scale In = 600'
-12-
,-
-------------------
I
I-'
W
I
Gr. W
'lEst IDle ill
Loam
Fine
Sand
Sandy
Clay
f- - - - -
Sand &
Gravel
0.0
'lEst IDle #2
2.0
Sandy
Clay
Loam
Hardpan
f----~-
Coarse Sand
Gravel &
6.0
Gr.W
20.0
22.0
TEST HOLE DATA
SEE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR LOCATIONS
0.0
'lEst IDle #3
6.0
Loam
Gravel
& Sand
Fine
Sand
wi th Grave
8.0
18.0
24.0
0.0
'lEst IDle #4
Loam
5.0
Sand
9.0
and
Gravel
18.0
NOT TO SCALE
0.0
17.0
'lEst IDle #5
4.6
Topsoil
Sandy
Loam
Hardpan
and
Rock
Large
Gravel
0.0
'lEst IDle #6
0.0
0.5
Hardpan
Hardpan &
Sand
-----
Brown
Sand
I..
15.0
7.0
7.0
10.0
9.0
12.0
15.0
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Limitations ~!. Soils for Town an!! Country ~lanni~g
The following table is adapted from the Soil Survey of
Suffolk County, prepared by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, (April 1975)
Sewage Disposal Homesites Streets, Lawns &
Fields Parking_~~~~~~g~~~~E~
Carver SLIGHT SLIGHT TO MODERATE TO
Plymouth TO MODERATE SEVERE SEVERE
Sand (CpO MODERATE
Carver
Plymouth SEVERE SEVERE SEVERE SEVERE
Sand (CpE)
Deerfield
Sands <De) MODERATE MODERATE MODERATE MODERATE
Plymouth
Loamy SLIGHT SLIGHT SLIGHT SEVERE
Sand (PIA)
Plymouth
Loamy SLIGHT SLIGHT MODERATE SEVERE
Sand (PIB)
Plymouth
Loamy MODERATE MODERATE SEVERE SEVERE
Sand (PIC)
Riverhead
Sandy SLIGHT SLIGHT SLIGHT SLIGHT
Loam (RdA)
Haven
Loam (HaA) SLIGHT SLIGHT SLIGHT SLIGHT
Tidal
Marsh <rm) SEVERE SEVERE SEVERE SEVERE
Gravel
Pit (Gp) VARIABLE, NO INTERPRETATIONS MADE
Beaches
(Bc) SEVERE SEVERE SEVERE SEVERE
-14-
I
I
I
B. :!.opo~gy
I
The topography found on the "Cove Beach Estates" site is
quite varied. Elevations range from 0 at mean high water
along Long Island Sound and along the shoreline of Dam Pond
to a high point of 40 feet above sea level in the
northwestern portion of the site.
I
I
Landward of the shoreline along Long Island Sound is a
bluff rising in elevation to between 10 and 30 feet above sea
level. The southwestern portion of the site is nearly level
at an elevation of 27 feet. The westernmost protion of the
property is characterized by former gravel mining operations
where large pits have been dug. These pits are as much as 20
feet deep. The northwestern portion of the property is also
characterized by former mining operations, although the
extent of extraction was not as great as on other areas of
the site. The easternmsot portion of the property, bordering
Dam Pond is relatively flat and gently sloping toward Dam
Pond. Much of the property is characterized as being of
rolling topography.
I
I
I
I
The majority of the site consists of slopes of less than
15%, however, small areas in areas characterized by former
mining operations contain localized slopes in excess of 15%.
I
I
Coastal erosion is always a concern when a site has
frontage along Long Island Sound. The location of this
particular property is between 2 sites mentioned in the
Coastal Erosion Subplan for Nassau and Suffolk Counties,
Rocky Point and Truman Beach. Rocky Point is located
approximately 4,000 feet west of the subject property while
Truman Beach directly borders the subject property on the
east.
I
I
Historical records for these locations show that they
have a relatively stable shoreline. At Rocky Point
historical records show beach erosion of less than 1 foot per
year during the period of record. Truman Beach actually
shows an accretion of less than 1 foot per year of material.
I
I
It is safe to assume that the shoreline found on the
subject property is not going to vary to any great degree on
an annualized basis as a result of shoreline erosion or
accretion. The possibility always exists of devastating
coastal erosion during periods of intense storm and tide
activity.
I
I
-15-
I
I
I
I
I
C. '{~get~!:Io!!
I
Several different general vegetation associations
been identified on the "Cove Beach Estates" property.
associations are as follows:
have
These
I
Upland decidious forest
Old Field/Disturbed area
Freshwater Wetland
Tidal Wetland
Shoreline/Maritime association
I
I
Of these five associations the tidal wetlands are the
most ecologically significant. The tidal wetlands situated
on the property are associated with the larger Dam Pond
wetland system to the east of the subject property. The
largest of the vegetation associations found on the property
is the upland decidious forest. This area, appears to be
second growth woodland for much of its area includes a great
number of native vegetation and also supports significant
numbers of non-native species. The Old Field/Disturbed areas
consist of land formerly used for agricultural purposes as
well as land formerly used as a gravel pit. Freshwater
wetlands on the subject property consist of two very small
man made ponds. These small water bodies are virtually
devoid of any wetland vegetation as the sides of the pond are
very steeply sloped. In the easterly pond a significant
algae growth was noted during field inspections. The final
category of vegetation found on the property is the
Shoreline/Maritime vegetation association. This association
encompasses the Long Island Sound Shoreline along with the
area directly adjacent to the shoreline. Portions of this
land have been cleared of underbrush in the recent past.
I
I
I
I
I
I
Within the !l:El~!!<i !2~g.t<il"'':l~ !:.ore~:!:. the following species
of vegetation have been identified during field
investigations. (The listings for the various vegetation
associations are not to be considered an exhaustive list of
every plant growing within this area, rather it is a
representative list of the dominant species found in the
area) .
I
Trees
---
I
Quercus rubra
Quercus alba
Quercus velutina
Red Oak
White Oak
Black Oak
I
-16-
I
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
VffiEI'ATION ASSOCIATIONS
-
Scale In = 600'
'.
.
.
-17-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Carya spp.
Betula populifolia
Betula lenta
Acer rubrum
Robina pseudo-acadia
Sassafras albidium
Rhus glabra
Cornus florida
Prunus serotina
Juniperus virginiana
Hickory
White Birch
Gray Birch
Red Maple
Black Locust
Sassafras
Smooth Sumac
Flowering Dogwood
Wild Cherry
Red Cedar
Shrubs & Groundcover
------ - -----------
-
Vaccinium vacillans
Ilex verticillata
Chimaphila maculata
Chimaphila umbel lata
Epigaea repens
Rhus glabra
Cladonia cristatella
Aquilegia canadensis
Lonicera japonica
Poa spp.
Festuca spp.
Hemepocallis fulva
Lycopodium
Rubus spp.
Low - bush Blueberry
Winterberry
Spotted wintergreen
Pipsissewa
Trailing Arbutus
Smooth Sumac
British Soldier Moss
Columbine
Vine Honeysuckle
Grasses
Grasses
Day lily
Clubmoss
Blackberry/Raspberry
~
I
I
I
Within the Old ~i~l~~Qi~~~~~~~ area association the
following species have been identified.
Iree'2, I! e.hrub'2,
Juniperus virginiana
Robina pseudo-acadia
Acer rubra
Carya spp.
Betula populifolia
Myrica pennsylvanica
Sassafras albidium
Rhus glabra
Quercus ilicifolia
Red Cedar
Black Locust
Red Oak
Hickory
White Birch
Bayberry
Sassafras
Smooth Sumac
Scrub Oak
I
I
I
Vines & Groundcover
----- - -----------
Lonicera japonica
Vine Honeysuckle
-18-
I
I
I
I
Taraxacum officinale
pteridium aquilinum
Vitis spp.
Solidago spp.
Trifolium spp.
Daucus carota
Cirsium spp.
Taraxacum spp.
Ambrosia spp.
Rubus spp.
Poa spp.
Fescuta spp.
Common Dandelion
Bracken Fern
Wild Grape
Goldenrods
Clover
Queen Anne's Lace
Thistle
Dandelions
Ragweed
Blackberry/Raspberry
Grasses
Grasses
I
I
I
I
Within the I!~~l ~~~l~g~ vegetation association, the
following speicies have been identified.
I
Spartina alterniflora
Spartina patens
Distichlis spicata
Juncus Gerardi
Iva frutescens
Baccharis halimifolia
Phragmites communis
Low Vigor
Salt Meadow Grass
Spike Grass
Black Grass
Marsh Elder
Groundsel Bush
Common Reed
I
I
No inventory of species was taken within the ~~~~g~~~~~
Wetland association due to the fact that the wetland areas
------
found are extremely small in area, and no freshwater wetland
vegetation was observed within the small ponds. As
previously noted these ponds are man - made and only algae
was noted within the easternmost pond. The vegetation
surrounding the ponds on the steep slopes is indicative of
the surrounding upland decidious forest.
I
I
The final vegetation association is the
Shoreline/Maritime association. Within this association the
following species have been identified.
I
I
Juniperus virginiana
Robina pseudo-acadia
Acer rubra
Toxicodendron radicans
Myrica pennsylvanica
Prunus maritima
Rosa rugosa
Lathyrus maritimus
Daucus carota
Solidago sempervirens
Red Cedar
Black Locust
Red Maple
Poison Ivy
Bayberry
Beach Plum
Rugosa Rose
Beach Pea
Queen Anne's Lace
Seaside Goldenrod
I
1
I
-19-
I
I
I
I
I
Cakile edentula
Ammophila breviligulata
Sea Rocket
Beach Grass
I
I
As previously mentioned, this vegetation association
inludes the shoreline of Long Island Sound as well as the
uplands immediately adjacent thereto. In the northwesterly
corner of the property, this association also includes areas
which were formerly gravel pits. These areas have
experienced a second growth of vegetation following the
mining activity, and this growth is a combination of upland
forest with a maritime association mixture, probably due to
the proximity of Long Island Sound.
I
I
The Wildlife Resource Center of the New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation has raised an issue
regarding the potential for existence of rare plant on or
near the subject property. This plant, Angelica lucida, is a
tall plant, between 4 and 6 feet high and is similar in
appearance to Queen Anne's Lace (Daucus carota). A specimen
of this plant was collected on or near the high bluffs in the
East Marion region in 1924.
I
I
Following notification of the potential for existence of
this plant, two additional field surveys were conducted in
the shoreline and bluff areas of the site where the plant
could be expected to be found. No findings of this potential
species were made during the field investigations.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-20-
I
I
I
I
D. Groundwater
_n________._._._._
I
I
The location of "Cove Beach Estatesll has low relief
elevations ranging from approximately sea level along the
northern coast to 35 feet above sea level in the central
portion of the property. The groundwater elevation is 1 to 2
feet above sea level (see contour map of the water table,
March 1987, prepared by Suffolk County Department of Health
Services) .
I
The depth to the groundwater supplies on Cove Beach
Estates ranges from zero feet within the wetland area up to
35 feet in the central portion of the property.
I
In general, the depth of the freshwater aquifer is
dependent upon the differences in density between the fresh
groundwater and the underlying saline groundwaters.
Underlying the "Cove Beach Estates" property there are three
general aquifers; the Upper Glacial, the Magothy, and the
Lloyd aquifer. It is believed that only the Upper Glacial
aquifer presents opportunities for water supply development
for domestic purposes. According to the Ghyben - Herzberg
equation, the interstices of the sand deposits are filled
with fresh water to a depth at which the fresh water
displaces the saline groundwater to a depth proportional to
the differences between their densities. The average density
of seawater is 1.025 gm./cubic centimeter; when expressed in
this equation, the results indicate that for each foot above
mean sea level, the freshwater would extend approximately 40
feet below. Therefore, on this property where the water
table elevation ranges from 1 to 3 feet above MSL, the fresh
groundwater supplies below will range in thickness from
approximately 40 to 120 feet.
I
I
I
I
I
I
Due to the site's vacant nature, the quality of the
groundwater underlying the development parcel is expected to
be relatively free from contamination. Chemical quality of
the water in the upper glacial aquifer has been estimated in
the 1982 U.S. Geological Survey report as follows:
I
I
I
-21-
I
!.
.
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
COVE BEACH ESTATES
I
I
I
I
I
HEIGHT OF WATER TABLE ABOVE MEAN SEA LEVEL
-22-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Silica
Iron
Manganese
Calcium
Potassium
Magnesium
Sodium
Bicarbonate
Sulfate
9. 6 mg/l
.47 mg/l
.20 mg/l
4.0 mg/l
1.0 mg/l
2.6 mg/l
9.2 mg/l
18.0 mg/l
6.2 mg/l
Chloride
Flouride
Nitrate
Phosphate
Dissolved Oxygen
Dissolved solids
Total Hardness
Specific
Conductance 155.0 umhos/cm
19.0 mg/l
0.0 mg/l
0.62 mg/l
0.01 mg/l
6.7 mg/l
77.0 mg/l
23.0 mg/l
Groundwater movement on the subject propert.y is
generally to the north, t.oward Long Island Sound, as the site
lies north of the groundwater divide on the North Fork, (See
map) .
-23-
1
I
.;,
,"
/;'
<1}_
lS-
(,
,'"
/;'
I
s -
/)01/,:
~~~.
~~ 1't~II~~"
"_-......._:r,~;"
0"
. ~'f!a
.",,--:
~~,
----.--_.
,'0','. -. '-- ""0' '-
.- ,'" . .~" :(,. ........'"
-"'~_J6--___41,{ \ If
\ --....., '~',
'---'-~-----===--=6(1
'-
'"
I""
-~_._----. ",,-'.
"., Dr" ;#""
, *Vl:-"'J!
\ :(eo,1J"! "t.- 8{>,}..
., '1;--""a ..,:l!" I;. (I)
.. \. ll.' ..... . ~...~
\ '--, / '--. "" '<+., ' ~ O~')
'0', "s'->l~'(-) cr----..'::""", I --'!)~;:~"I
"0",' Jf. \ ,;0 ',. ~ >A. (
.,,..' j) 1l"1I '~'-"'.0 "('I~_
""'<1 ,/,\, "-'-.: / r---"'''J1 I "-\ \"onO' {'
_, \s', \..., ('\ ( "1..- -J?-.:::-~- : ....'" ,,~
~_ ',' (<, L .~, I'd f' "" ':---... $);- ".'t'
,,_, :~':\:~~~~,,~_:,~-:'.~;~~~~~:,~: .==~~~~. L '"
, ,- --.""~~ ~
O l>( """ :."("I"'~
~_.--t'.J-') ",.,,^'r-- I....... 'I -"o'O__..e...",__ . .~:~ .
( Jf.,. '0"-.1\ IJ -'I!
~u..-'---
1..--, -____._n. -----~.-- --------,..,,<'1 I ;'\
'r'~A, " .' ';"4' : \
""II - ~'(1~
-
"""~.~"J
I
1
'"
'..
""(/
'"''
~
,
G
'" "'. '/'r",.
1 S L S"I)"
A 't'p PI)
-N '" C".t,p
"'. D S
'"
'" 'fir"
"" '/'c.,. ~.," ""d"
'"
""11
"i",,. "',~,.
".,0'
"~'11
'/"'"''
'''f/
".'11
'-''''':~l~ __--
".,,,
'"Or
".'11
~.,~
'''r4,.
i~',:'~-'c
I.,,;
I.,
....
,,?~ ~/'__; __I'lIq,
"?11
1"11
'I
I.,,,
""<,
'."ff
1..,<,
I..,,,
"?11
J.,,<
"."/
1~?11
.....
""11
-_.~/
"r.11
J",('
J~,<
I
fP
() <70<
C>) <1(,.
.;,
^':
'..
"
SHOWING ALTITUDE OF WATER TABLE, SPRING 1971
-24-
I
I
I
I
E. ~il~li!~ ~9E~l~~i9~~
I
The wildlife populations on and surrounding the "Cove
Beach Estate~' property have been assessed by direct field
observation on several dates during the month of July, 1988
and by utilizing general wildlife population data for the
region. The area of observation included the subject
property, the abandoned agricultural fields to the east, the
Dam Pond wetland system and the Long Island Sound shoreline.
Field observations were conducted during a variety of weather
conditions, including clear weather, cloudy conditions and
wet, rainy conditions. Direct observation of all likely
species found in the area was not possible, due to the
changing seasonal populations of wildlife and the limited
manpower available to undertake the project. Even
considering these limitations, a wide variety of wildlife, or
evidence of their presence was observed.
I
I
I
I
For reporting purposes, the wildlife populations
generally observed or expected to be found are grouped below
by habitat and according to the following code:
I
1 = Upland Forest
2 = Open Field
3 = Shoreline habitat (includes the Long Island Sound
shoreline as well as the Dam Pond wetland system)
I
I
Species which were directly observed or evidence of their
habitation on or near the subject property are noted with (0)
following the common name.
I
Co~ Name
Scientific Name
Habitat
---
Mammals
-------
I
White-tailed Deer (0)
Eastern Cottontail (0)
Chipmunk (0)
Grey Squirrel (0)
Red Bat
Big Brown Bat
Hoary Bat
Little Brown Bat
Raccoon
White Footed Mouse
Meadow Vole
Norway Rat
Odocoileus virginianus 1,2,3
Sylvilegus floridans 1,2,3
Tamias striatus 1,2
Scuirus carolinensis 1,2
Lasiurus borealis 1,2,3
Eptesicus fuscus 1,2,3
Lasiurus cinereus 2
Myotis licifugus 1,2,3
Proycon lotor 1,2,3
Permyuscus leucopus 1,2,3
Microtorius pennsylvanicusl,2,3
Rattus norvegicus 1,2,3
I
I
I
I
-25-
I
I
I
I
I
House Mouse
Opossum
Masked Shrew
Short-tailed Shrew
Eastern Mole
Star-nosed Mole
Meadow Jumping Mouse
Red Fox
Striped Skunk
I
I
g~E~!!~~ ~ !~Eg!Q!~~~
I
Green Frog
Fowler's Toad
Gray Treefrog
Eastern Spadefoot Toad
Red-bellied Snake
Eastern Garter Snake (0)
Eastern Box Turtle (0)
American Toad
Red-backed Salamander
I
I
I
Birds
----
I
Osprey (0)
Sharp-shinned Hawk
Red Shouldered Hawk (0)
Red-tailed Hawk
Ring-necked Pheasant (0)
Quail
Scarlet Tananger
Brown-headed Cowbird (0)
Common Grackle (0)
Northern Oriole (0)
American Redstart
Red-winged Blackbird (0)
Ovenbird (0)
Yellow-rumped Warbler (0)
Yellow Warbler
Black & White Warbler
Starling (0)
Blue Jay (0)
Cedar Waxwing
Golden-crowned Kinglet
Hermit Thrush
Wood Thrush
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mus musculus
Didelphis marsupialis
Sorex cin.ereus
Blarina brevicanda
Scalopus aquaticus
Condylura cristata
Zapus hudsonius
Vulpes vulpes
Mephitis mephitis
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2,3
1,2
2
2
1,2
1,2
1,2
Rana clamatins 1
Bufo woodhousei 1
Hyla versicolor 1
Scaphiopus holbrookii 1
Storeria occipitomaculata 1
Thamnophis sirtalis 1
Terrepene carolina 1
Bufo americanus 1
Plethodon cinereus 1
Pandion heliaetus
Accipiter striatus
Buteo lineatus
Buteo jamaicensis
Phasianus colchius
Colinus virginianus
Piranga olivacea
Moluthrus ater
Quiscalus quiscala
Icterus gallbula
Stegophaga ruticilla
Agelaius phoniceus
Seiurus aurocapillus
Dendroica coronata
Dendroica petechia
Mniotilta varia
Sturnus vulgaris
Cyanocitta cristata
Bombycilla cedorum
Regulus satrapa
Catharus guttatus
Hylocichla mustelina
-26-
3
1
1,2
1,2
1,2
1,2
1
1
1,2
1
1
2,3
1,2
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
I
I
House Mouse
Opossum
Masked Shrew
Short-tailed Shrew
Eastern .Mole
Star-nosed Mole
Meadow Jumping Mouse
Red Fox
Striped Skunk
I
I
I
~~E:t:g~",,- I! A!IlEI1JJ)J<itlE'l
I
Green Frog
Fowler's Toad
Gray Treefrog
Eastern Spadefoot Toad
Red-bellied Snake
Eastern Garter Snake (0)
Eastern Box Turtle (0)
American Toad
Red-backed Salamander
I
I
Birds
-------
I
Osprey (0)
Sharp-shinned Hawk
Red Shouldered Hawk (0)
Red-tailed Hawk (0)
Ring-necked Pheasant (0)
Quail
Scarlet Tananger
Brown-headed Cowbird (0)
Common Grackle (0)
Northern Oriole (0)
Amer ican Red,;;tart
Red-winged Blackbird (0)
Ovenbird (0)
Yellow-rumped Warbler (0)
Yellow Warbler
Black & White Warbler
Starling (0)
Blue Jay (0)
Cedar Waxwing
Golden-crowned Kinglet
Hermit Thrush
Wood Thrush
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mus musculus
Didelphis marsupial is
SoreR cinereus
Blarina brevicanda
Scalopus aquaticus
Condylura cristata
Zapus hudsonius
Vulpes vulpes
Mephitis mephitis
1,2,.'3
1.,2,3
1,2,3
1,2
2
2
1,2
1,2
1,2
Rana clamatins 1
Bufo woodhousei 1
Hyla versicolor 1
Scaphiopus holbrookii 1
Storeria occipitomaculata 1
Thamnophis s,irtaU.s 1
Terrepene carolina 1
Bufo americanus 1
Plethodon cinereus 1
Pandion heliaetus
Accipiter striatus
Buteo lineatus
Buteo jamaicensis
Phasianus colchius
Colinus virginianus
Piranga olivacea
Moluthrus ater
Quiscalus quiscala
Icterus gallbula
Stegophaga ruticilla
AgeJ.aius phoniceus
Seiurus aurocapillus
Dendroica coronata
Dendroica petechia
Mniotilta varia
Sturnus vulgari'3
Cyanocitta cristata
Bombycilla cedorum
Regulus satrapa
Catharus guttatus
Hylocichla mustelina
-27
.3
1
1,2
1,2
1,2
1,2
1
1
1,2
1
1
2,3
1,2
1
1
1
2
1
1
1.
1
1
I
I
I
I
Snowy Egret
Little Blue Heron
Black Crowned Night Heron
Glossy Ibis
Mute Swan
Canada Goose (0)
Mallard (0)
Black Duck
Pintail
Green Winged Teal
Blue Winged Teal
Wood Duck
Bufflehead
Canvasback
Common Goldeneye
Greater Scaup
Ruddy Duck
Red Breasted Merganser
Hooded Merganser
Common Merganser
Common Loon (0)
I
I
I
I
I
I
Egretta thula
Florida caerula
Nycticorax nycticorax
Pelagadis falcinellus
Cygnus olor
Branta canadensis
Anas platyrynchos
Anas rubripes
Anas acuta
Anas crecca
Arras discors
Aix sponsa
Bucephala albeola
Althya valisineria
Bucephala clangula
Althya marila
Oxyura jamaicensis
Mergus serra tor
Lophdyted cucullatus
Mergus merganser
Gavia immer
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
:3
3
:3
3
3
3
3
Of the species actually observed on and surrounding the
property, or that are possible inhabitants of the area,
several are listed on the New York State list of endangered,
threatened and special concern wildlife species. These
include:
I
I
Endangered
Piping Plover
Least Tern
I
Threatened
I
Osprey
Red-shouldered Hawk
Common Tern
I
Species of Special Concern
Common Loon
Short-eared Owl
Charadrious melodius
Sterna antillarum
Pandion haliaetus
Buteo lineatus
Sterna hirundo
Gavia immer
Asio flammeus
I
None of these species has been directly related to the
subject property by the Wildlife Resources Center of the New
York State Department of Environmental Conservation.
I
I
-28-
I
I
I
I
However, during several of the field inspections conducted on
the property the Osprey and the Common Loon were observed in
and above the waters of Long Island Sound along the shore of
the property. The Osprey was also observed nesting on
platforms in Dam Pond to the east. The other species which
are possible in this location were not observed on the
subject property, despite many hours of field observation,
particularly along the shoreline.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-29-
I
I
I
F.
Traffic Conditions
------ -------------
I
Traffic Access
-------- ------
I
Access to the proposed development of "Cove Beach
Estates" will be from Main Road (New York State Route 25)
which the property has frontage on. Main Road is the only
public road which the property has access to.
I
Main Road is a two-lane, State Highway with a pavement
width of approximately 20 feet and paved shoulders. Main
Road is the principal artery serving the eastern portion of
the Town of Southold. Horizontal and vertical alignment of
Main Road is adequate at the proposed intersection with the
subdivision access road. Sight distance is in excess of 250
feet in either direction at the proposed intersection site.
I
I
.
Exl~~l~g I~~i!!~ YQ1~~~~
I
The Southold Town Master Plan Update Background Studies,
transportation section contains information regarding traffic
volume along Main Road in the area of the proposed
subdivision. Traffic count data was obtained from the New
York State Department of Transportation for the Master Plan
Update.
I
The following information pertains to Route 25 on the
stretch of roadway between Hallocks Road and Orient Point.
Traffic counts were taken on June 18-25, 1979 and are the
most recent and highest counts available.
I
I
Eastbound average weekday high AM hour 7:00-8:00 160
Eastbound average weekday high PM hour 12-1 & 4-5 70
Westbound average weekday high AM hour 8:00-9:00 50
Westbound average weekday high PM hour 4:00-5:00 200
Eastbound high hour count on Friday 7:00-8:00 AM 170
Eastbound high hour count on Saturday 9 AM - 2 PM 80
Eastbound average weekday total 920
Westbound average weekday total 910
Two-way average weekday total 1,930
Estimated Average Annual Da 11 y Traffic (AADT> 1,591
I
I
I
Based on the amount of traffic shown in the above
survey, and recent site observations, Main Road is operating
at very acceptable levels of service on a full time basis.
I
I
-30-
I
I
I
I
G. !;:<::!!~~9.l9.g:!.9~l g~~9.'!~C:E!~
I
The potential for historical or archaeological resources
on the property will be discussed in a supplement to this
document. The supplement, prepared by Cultural Resource
Surveys, Inc., state certified archaeologists, will be
incorporated by reference to this document upon its
submission to the Town of Southold.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-31-
I
I
I
I
IV. ~Q~~~ and ~~~g Term ~~~!~~~~~~~~l l~p~~!~~
A.
Soils
-----
I
The development proposed for the "Cove Beach Estates"
property will cause both short and long term environmental
impacts upon a portion of the soils on this 96+ acre
property. The impacts to the soils will be primarily due to
the clearing of natural vegetation and road construction
activities.
I
I
eQ~~~ I~~~ l~p~~!~
I
The removal of natural vegetation from the portions of
the site where construction activities for roads, and
ultimately, single family residences, will expose the
underlying soils to the natural forces of wind and erosion.
This will result in the likelihood of short term erosion of a
portion of the soils thus exposed. In addition, site
clearing activities will increase the likelihood of
sedimentation of the lower elevations of the property due to
erosion and runoff unless appropriate controls are taken to
lessen these normal impacts. In general, the soi Is found on
the property are not severely constrained regarding erosion.
The steeply sloped portions in the northwestern section of
the property would be the most severely impacted. Erosion
control measures such as minimixing the extent of clearing,
revegetation of exposed soils and the use of haybales to
protect drainage channels would act to protect against any
problems.
I
I
I
I
I
~~~g Term l~p~~!~
I
Long term impacts to the soils on the property will
occur as a result of the paving of roadways, driveways and
the construction of the residential buildings and
accessories. Construction activities will permanently cover
the soils with impervious material, thereby eliminating the
absorptive and recharge capability of the soils thus covered.
Approximately 3.6 acres of the site or 3.7% of the entire
property will be committed to impervious road construction.
Additionally approximately 6% of the individual lots created
as a result of the subdivision will be covered by some form
of impervious building, driveway or parking area. Thus,
approximately 10% of the entire 96+ acre property is expected
to be covered by impervious material following the long term
development of the property. The impact of the loss of water
I
I
I
I
-32-
I
I
I
I
I
recharge capability will be lessened to a great degree due to
the installation of a positive drainage system along with
gutters and drywells for the individual residences.
I
Anticipated landscaping activities on individual lots
will also have a long term impact on some of the soils on the
property. Some of the soils found on the site have
constraints to the installation of lawns and landscaping. As
such, it will become necessary to improve the soil to some
degree in order to permit these activities. This improvement
is expected to take the form of either importing topsoil to
the affected areas or mulching the existing soil with natural
material to improve the soil qualities. These impacts could
be considered a long term impact of a slightly positive
nature because the improved soil will be able to support a
wider range of vegetation.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-33-
I
I
I
B. Ic:J.12c:J.g~~J?gy
I
The variable topography of the property will be impacted
by the development as currently proposed. Construction
activities for the roads and eventual houses will cause some
short and long term impacts to the topography. Both short
and long term impacts are likely.
I
I
~gc:J.~~ Term 1~12ac~~
I
Short term impacts created by the development of the
site will be associated with the alterations of the sloping
areas for the purposes of constructing roads and drainage
facilities. For the most part, the design of the road system
incorporates the natural terrain by using the lesser sloped
areas for access road purposes. Some exceptions are present,
especially in the northwestern portion of the property where
the proposed roadway crosses some steeply sloped land. Cut
and fill in this section will smooth the slopes for the
installation of the proposed road.
I
I
I
Construction of the individual homes on most of the lots
will result in minor changes to the topography as building
areas are leveled to accomodate buildings. Most of the lots
have slopes less than 15% and the modifications to the
topography will be minor. Several lots in the northwestern
section of the site contain slopes in excess of 15% and the
resultant changes to the topography will be greater in this
area. The topographical changes to lots will be impacted by
the individual preferences of the lot owner as well as the
chosen design of the residential structures.
I
I
I
No short term impacts are expected to the amount of
shoreline erosion/accretion as a result of the development of
the property.
I
hong I~~~ 1~12~~~~
I
The principal long term impacts due to modifications in
the topography are associat..dwith the permanent nature of
the changes described above. In the long term the site's
principal topographical feature, the bluffs found along the
Long Island Sound shoreline will be protected in their
natural state. As a result of the protection of the bluffs,
changes in the rate of coastal erosion/accretion are not
anticipated as a result of the development.
I
I
-34-
I
I
I
I
C. ~".g".i~i:t,91!
I
I
Both short and long term impacts to the vegetation found
on the "Cove Beach Estates" property can be expected as a
result of the implementation of any devlopment plan.
e~ori Term 1~2~~i~
I
I
Short term impacts to the vegetation found on the
property will be primarily due to the removal of nat.ural
vegetation for construction of the required subdivision
improvements as well as the eventual individual homes.
Natural vegetation so cleared will be replaced by some
impervious material and some pervious material. Some cleared
areas will be landscaped with bot.h turfgrass as well as
native and non-native plant material.
I
I
Vegetat.ion cleared for road and construct.ion purposes
cannot be replaced due to the permanent nature of the
resulting improvements. Areas cleared for construction
activities but not built upon can be replanted with turf or
otherwise landscaped. As previously described in the Soils
section, the importation of topsoil or the conditioning of
soil may be undertaken on some of the lots. It is expected
that approximately 40% of t.he individual lots will be cleared
of natural vegetation with the implementation of this
development. Of this, approximately 1/4 will be covered with
impervious material. The remainder of the cleared portions
will be either turfed, landscaped or both. Including roads,
the development of this property will likely result in the
removal of approximately 20-23 acres of vegetation from the
site. Of this amount of clearing, the majority of the
cleared land will be revegetat.ed at some time.
I
I
I
I
The result of the implementation the proposed plan, the
importation of addit.ional landscaping material will increase
the overall plant diversity on the property, and will, to
some degree offer more food opportunities to the wildlife on
and surrounding the site.
I
I
Development will occur on the site within primarily the
upland decidious forest, the maritime vegetation association
and the old field/disturbed areas. Within these vegetation
associations, no rare or endangered plant species
were identified during field inspections. It is not expected
that the development will adversely impact any rare or
endangered species.
I
I
-Jj-
I
I
I
I
A short and long term negative environmental impact
which cannot be avoided is the removal of an unknown quantity
of plants listed on the New York State Protected Plant
Species List. The plants identified on the subject property
are not to be considered as rare or endangered. Some of the
species wich fall into this category include the following:
Corn us florida Flowering Dogwood
Myrica pennsylvanica Bayberry
Chimaphila maculata Spotted Wintergreen
Epigaea repens Trailing Arbutus
I
I
I
I
The species listed above are found throughout the upland
portions of the site in varying densities. Some individual
specimens of these species will be permanently removed as a
result of construction activities.
I
The Environmental Conservation Law, Section 9-1503
dentitled "Removal of Protected Plants" states:
I
"No person shall, in an area designated by such list or
lists, knowingly pick, pluck, sever, remove, damage by
the application of herbicided or defoliants or carry
away ,:!,.!.~Q~~~ ~Q~ ~~!!~~!!~ ~! !Q~ ~~!!~E: ~Q~!:'~~!l_ any
protected plant. An offense under this section shall be
a violation, punishable by a fine of not to exceed
twenty-five dollars." (Underlining added for emphasis)
I
I
~~!!g I~E:~ l~E~~~~
I
The most positive of the long term impacts to the
vegetation on the subject property is the protection of the
tidal wetlands on the site as permanent open space. Other
long term positive impacts involve the other open space area,
and the vegetation thereon, which will be preserved.
Additionally, with appropriate building controls along the
bluff front lots, the preservation of bluff and shoreline
vegetation will be assured.
I
I
I
The replacement of some of the vegetative material
removed for construction purposes will be both a long term
positive as well as negative impact. Replacement of cleared
vegetation with turfgrass is likely to require significant
maintenence, along with fertilizer, herbicide and pesticide
use. The use of these chemicals could have long term
negative impacts to the groundwater underlying the property.
I
I
-36-
I
I
I
I
I
The addition of landscapIng material wIll increase the
diversity of plant life on the property and will offer
increased food to the area wildlife.
I
Long term negative impacts will be primarily associated
with the removal of vegetation and its replacement wih
impervious material and structures. This impact is
unavoidable should the plans be approved and implemented.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-38-
I
I
I
I
D. Groundwater
I
I
Changes in the groundwater quality will likely occur as
a result of the proposed development. It is anticipated that
these changes will result from two direct sources of
contamination entering the hydrological system; recharge from
sanitary disposal systems for individual houses and recharge
of storm water runoff. It is expected that the overall
quality of the groundwater will deteriorate slightly as a
result of the implementation of the development, however, the
development will meet all applicable standards of the Health
Department to protect the overall health and safety of the
population. The impacts to the groundwater underlying the
"Cove Beach Estates" property will be both short and long
term impacts. In the short term, a gradual reduction in the
groundwater quality will be evident when occupation of the
site begins, while in the long term, contamination levels are
expected to be maintained within applicable standards.
I
I
I
I
I
The construction, and ultimate occupation, of 34 single
family residences on this 96+ acre property will alter the
quality of the natural groundwater recharge to some degree.
It is anticipated that nitrogen loading to the groundwater
will occur from the recharge of sewage disposal effluent from
the individual homes and from the perclation of rainfall
through grassed and landscaped areas, carrying nitrogen from
fertilizers and pet wastes. Due to the size of the
individual lots, as well as the topographic elevations of the
property to be built upon, it is expected that all of the
Suffolk County Department of Health Services regulations
regarding sanitary disposal facilities can be met. These
standards have been Implemented to protect. t.he potable water
supplies within the County.
I
I
I
I
It is anticipated that to some degree, changes in the
qualit.y of the groundwat.er supplies underlying t.he subject.
property wi 11 occur wi t.h t.he implemententat ion of the
development proposal. Recharge of the st.ormwater runoff may
introduce to t.he underlyIng waters small quant.ities of oils
and greases, hydrocarbons, road salts, nitrates, phosphates,
ethylene glycol from ant.ifreeze, and coU.forms from animal
wastes, all of which are normally associated wit.h road
runoff. Routine sampling of high volume storm water recharge
basins throughout Suffolk Count.y has not. found signifIcant
incident.s of serIous groundwater contaminat.ion as a result of
road runoff. Rout.ine street cleaning of the proposed
roadways within the development will provide a measure for
minimizing the amount of contamination resulting from road
runoff.
I
I
I
I
-39-
I
I
I
E. ~!l~lif~ ~9E~l~~l~g~
I
The proposed development of the subject property will
cause both short and long term impacts to the wildlife
populations inhabiting the property and its environs. Some
wildlife species will be affected by actual displacement
caused by the construction of the roads, houses and
accessories. Other species will exhibit avoidance behavior
and move to unaffected portions of the property or other
nearby sites, either undeveloped or preserved during and
after construction related activities.
I
I
I
egor~ I~~~ 1~2~~t~
I
In the short term, it is expected that the impacts to
the wildlife will be as a result of the direct removal of a
portion of the wildlife habitat on the property, and from the
noise generated by the construction activities. Avoidance
behavior will occur due to human occupation of the site.
I
I
The major impact to the wildlife will be as a result of
the direct loss of habitat and the modifications of a portion
of the existing habitats. Such loss will take place due to
the clearing and construction activities for the roadways, as
well as home construction. Noise will cause some species of
wildlife to migrate to unaffected portions of the subject
property or adjacent sites.
I
I
Some individuals of less mobile species will probably be
eliminated as a direct result of the construction activities.
This is due to the inability of the animal to rapidly
relocate to areas unaffected by direct construction activity.
An example of this impact is the Red-backed Salamander. This
species, and others in a similar situation are not expected
to be totally eliminated from the subject property due to the
extent of preserved property remaining following the
development of the site, however the total number of
individuals will be reduced. Other mobile species such as
birds and mammals have the ability to relocate within the
site or to adjacent sites as construction activities or other
occupation interferes with their habitat. These mobile
species are expected to relocate rather than be eliminated.
I
I
I
I
I
~~gg Term l~E~~~~
Long term changes to the wildlife populations are
I
-40-
I
I
I
I
I
expected as a result of the development of the "Cove Beach
Estate~' property. These impacts include a shift in the
population diversity on the site as species tolerant of human
occupation will become more prevalent, while the species not
tolerant of humans will become increasingly rare. These non
tolerant species may relocate to preserved portions of the
property if suitable habitat exists, or be forced elsewhere
where adequate accomodations can be found. Overall, the
entire population of wildlife found on the property is not
expected to be drastically changed as a result of the
development of the site. Several factors relate to this
expectation; first, the increase in landscaping material will
allow for a greater diversity of food available to the
wildlife, secondly, while some species will move from the
site, other tolerant species will move to the property.
I
I
I
I
Regardless of the amount of food available, or the
amount of preserved habitat, some species which do, or may,
inhabit the property will relocate to more suitable habitat
and become nothing more than an occasional visitor to the
site. Examples which fall into this category are the White-
tailed Deer, Opossum and Red Fox.
I
I
With the occupation of the 34 proposed residences, the
introduction of domesticated animals such as dogs and cats
will have some negative impacts to the existing wildlife
population. These pets, should they run loose are expected
to chase, capture and kill some species of wildlife,
particularly small mammals and birds. This impact on
wildlife is a long term negative impact which cannot be
avoided as a result of the implementation of the proposed
plans.
I
I
I
Development of the property should have no long term
impact on the observed species of rare, endangered or
threatened wildlife found on the property. Species observed
include the Osprey and the Common Loon. Both of these
species are primarily water birds and their habitat should
not be affected by the proposed development. The Osprey is a
frequent inhabitant of the property, and nests along the
shores of Dam Pond near other residences and the Orient Point
Causeway. It's habitat will not be disrupted by the
development of the property. The Common Loon was observed
swimming in offshore waters on 8/2/88. Its presence in the
area during this time of year is unusual and perhaps a chance
occurance. The development of "Cove Beach Estates" should
not disturb this birds offshore habitat in any way.
I
I
I
I
I
-41-
I
I
I
F. Traffic
I
The proposed development of "Cove Beach Estates" will
consist of a total of 34 single family dwellings. UsIng
information obtained from the Institute of Transportation
Engineers, Washington, D.C., it is estimated that this
development will generate approximately 34 vehicle trips
during each morning and evening peak traffic hour. Peak
hours, from information contained in the Southold Town Master
Plan Update Background Studies occur between 7:00 and 8:00 AM
and between 4:00 and 5:00 PM.
I
I
I
I
During the morning peak traffic hour, approximately gO';"
(or 31 vehicles) of the site generated traffic will leave the
property and 10% of the site generated traffic (or 3
vehicles) will enter the property. During the evening peak
hour 80% of the site generated traffic will enter the
property while 20% will leave the property.
I
I!:~!.g<e. .!.!!'E~<e.~~
I
The immediate short term traffic impacts will be as a
result of constructIon activities on the subject property.
Construction vehicles are expected to comprise most of the
site generated traffIc in the short term. It is difficult to
adequately predict the total volume of construction related
traffic at this time due to uncertain construction schedules.
I
I
In the long term, following the construction and
occupation of all of the proposed homes, which is expected to
occur over a period of years, the addition of 34 vehicles to
the local road network during each of the peak hours is not
expected to adversely affect the flow of traffic in the area.
The level of service of the local roadways is not expected to
decline as a result of the implementation of the proposed
development plan.
I
I
I
It should be noted that the anticipated traffic
generation is based on studies done on typical suburban
residences. Actual traffic generation from the development
of this property is expected to alter the traffic generation
pattern, reducing the typical weekday generation, while
increasing the typical weekend generation due to the fact
that the proposed development will likely be second
home/recreation homes with weekend and seasonal occupancy.
This alteration in site generated traffic patterns is not
expected to adversely affect the capacity of the local road
network to accommodate the increases expected.
I
I
I
I
-42-
Traffic safety problems associated with the construction
of the proposed access roadway will be alleviated to the
greatest extent possible. As proposed, the intersection to
be created will conform in all respects to the Standard
Intersection found in the Code of the Town of Southold,
that the intersection to be constructed at right angles
the existing roadway, the actual corners will have a 25
radius and adequate sight distance is present in both
directions. Additionally, as the proposed roadway will
intersect with a State Roadway (Route 25) the State
Department of Transportation will review the proposed
intersection from a safety standpoint.
I
I
I
I
I~~ffi~ ~~f~iY
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-43-
in
to
foot
I
I
I
I
G. Loss 9f QE~~ eE~~~
I
The development of the "Cove Beach Estates" property
will cause a long term loss of open space within the Town of
Southold, and the hamlet of East Marion in particular. Final
approval and subsequent development of the site will, in all
likelihood preclude the purchase of the entire parcel for
park and/or open space purposes by any governmental agency or
not-for-profit organization. This is due to an increase in
value of the property once all necessary approvals are
secured and the map is filed. No governmental agency or not-
for-profit organization has, to date expressed a serious
interest in the purchase of the entire parcel of land.
I
I
I
The negative impacts created by the loss of open space
has been reduced to a degree by the preservation of
approximately 37 acres or 39% of the entire site as open
space. When figuring areas within lots which will not be
cleared as a result of construction activities, at least 50%
of the entire property will remain natural. The reserved
areas and open space encompass portions of all of the major
habitats found on the property. Therefore, the impacts
associated with the development will be mitigated to some
degree by the preservation of portions of all of the
significant habitats.
I
I
I
I
A portion of the property surrounding each of the
proposed houses is expected to be cleared and landscaped for
aesthetic purposes. These landscaped areas will have a
limited function as open space within the development
portions of the property. It is anticipated that a large
percentage of each of the individual lots will remain in
natural vegetation, thereby creating the appearance of open
space between residences. In addition, construction of the
individual residences is expected to occur over a period of
years, thereby reducing the short term impacts of the loss of
open space.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-44-
I
I
I
I
H . Q:Ie~E!!:. l!'lE~",-:le~
I
The approval and ultimate occupation of "Cove Beach
Estates" will result in a number of other short and long term
environmental impacts. Some of these impacts will be
positive, while others will be negative. These impacts are
discussed below.
I
Tax Revenues
--------
I
The implementation of the proposed development will
result in additional tax revenues collected by all levels of
government which have taxing authority over the proposed
development. These include; the local school district, the
Town of Southold, Suffolk County and the State of New York.
A portion of the total tax revenue will be a direct result of
local real estate taxes, while other revenues will be
generated as a result of mortgage and transfer taxes, sales
taxes, etc.
I
I
I
The demands for Town, County and Fire district services
are expected to increase slightly as a result of this
development while the demands on the local school district
will probably be unaffected.
I
I
The increase in tax revenues is expected to more than
offset the amount of public services required as a result of
the occupation of the subject property. Several factors
contribute to this conclusion, first, the location of the
property lends itself to development as a high priced
exclusive area where tax revenues are expected to be high,
secondly, the development will likely be comprised of second
or vacation homes only occupied during a portion of the year
which will reduce the year round service requirements and
third, the development of the site will include on site
recreational facilities thereby lessening the need for
provision of these services from the local governments.
I
I
I
e~!.!<! ~~~:leE!. Q.E!.~E!.!:.~g~~~}2!~E~~~l
I
The implementation of a development plan for this
property will result in an increase in the amount of solid
waste generated within the Town of Southold, and will require
the disposal of the waste generated. Averages of the amount
of solid waste generated per capita is 5 pounds per day.
This solid waste consists of approximately 50% household
I
I
I
-45-
I
I
I
I
refuse and 50% bulky items such as furniture, refrigeratDrs
and Dther large items. The sDlid waste generated as a result
Df this develDpment will be dispDsed of at the Town landfill.
I
In addition to the normal residential refuse,
construction activities will generate considerable
and construction related debris which will need to
disposed of.
the actual
clearing
be
I
I
The productiDn Df sDlid waste will fluctuate with the
Dccupancy Df the individual hDmes. Again, mDst Df the hDmes
will be seasDnal and/or part time Dccupancy hDmes thereby
lessening the Dverall impact. The dispDsal Df sDlid waste in
the TDwn landfill will reduce the useful life Df the landfill
tD SDme degree, which is cDnsidered a lDng term negative
impact. With the pending state mandated closing Df the
landfills Dn Long Island, additiDnal means Df sDlid waste
dispDsal will have tD be implemented. The waste generated by
this propDsed development will have tD be considered by the
Town Df SDuthDld in any alternative dispDsal plans being
cDnsidered.
I
I
I
NDise
I
I
The develDpment Df the subject prDperty will result in
an increase in Dverall noise levels both Dn the site and in
the immediately surrDunding area. In the shDrt term, nDise
levels will increase as a result of cDnstructiDn activities,
including site clearing, grading, road constructiDn and hDuse
cDnstruction. Noise levels bDth on the site and in the
surrounding areas are expected frDm these activities. Noise
will also be generated by cDnstruction traffic both on and
Dff the site. Maximum nDise levels should be generated by
cDnstructiDn activities fDr the planned rDads. NDise frDm
the cDnstructiDn Df single family hDmes will be spDradic over
a period of years.
I
I
I
UpDn completiDn of the cDnstructiDn activities, the
noise generated Dver the long term will be associated with
the Dccupancy Df the individual residences, (recreation,
outdoor activities, landscaping and nDrmal maintenance) alDng
with a slight increase in traffic related nDise.
I
I
I
-46-
I
I
I
v.
~~~~~~~ I~E~~~~ ~~!~~ ~~~~~~ Be ~~~!~~~
I
A.
Soi Is
I
Wi th the deve lopment of the "Cove Beach Estates"
property it is expected that some erosion of soils will occur
during the construction phase of the roads, and to a lesser
extent the individual residential structures. Erosion may
cause local sedimentation problems, particularly in low lying
areas within the construction zones. As with any
development, erosion will take place during construction
activities, especially when the soils are left bare by the
removal of vegetation. Erosion control measures may lessen
any potential impacts. Little construction of roads will
take place on slopes which are in excess of 15%, thereby
limiting the potential for erosion.
I
I
I
I
The permanent loss of the water absorption capabilities
of the soils covered by impervious structures is an adverse
impact which cannot be avoided. The severity of the impact
will be lessened by the installation of drainage facilities
for the roads as well as leaders, gutters and drywells for
the proposed houses, which will recharge a great deal of the
water previously recharged through the soils.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-47-
I
I
I
I
I
B. !~E~~~E~Y
I
Construction of the proposed roadways, driveways,
parking areas, individual residences and any recreational
accessories will require some regrading of the natural
topography. Minor cutting and filling activities will occur
throughout the property to facilitate the construction
activities. The result of the reshaping of the topography,
other than the changes themselves, will be the increased
potential for erosion, especially on side slopes where cuts
and fills will be made. The risk to erosion is primarily
during the construction phase of the project, until exposed
soils are revegetated as expected to reduce the potential
impact and improve the site aesthetics.
I
I
I
I
Alterations to the site topography are unavoidable with
the implementation of the proposed plan of development, the
impacts are thought to be minor in nature. With most of the
proposed housesites on slopes of less than 15%, and careful
siting and design on those sites where more steeply sloping
land exists, the impacts to the topography will be lessened.
Revegation of exposed soils and slopes immediately following
construction activities will also lessen any potential
impact.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-48-
I
I
I
I
C. '{",-g,,~at~9!l
I
The principal adverse ilnpact which cannot be avoided
concerning the vegetation on the subject property is the
removal of natural vegetation for construction purposes. It
is expected that approximately 24% of the site may be cleared
of vegetation for construction of roads, driveways, parking
areas and home construction.
I
I
Associated with the removal of natural vegetation on the
property will be the removal of an unknown quantity of plants
listed on the New York State Protected Plant Species list.
Removal of a limited quantity of these species found on the
property should not have an undue adverse impact on the
viability of the species on the property. It is expected
that substantial populations of these plants will remain on
the property, both within individual lots and within the open
space areas. They are likely to remain within individual
lots because they, for the most part, are flowering plants
which future owners are likely to preserve on their lots.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-49-
I
I
I
I
D.
Groundwater
-----.--.-.-------
I
The impacts to the groundwater as a result of the
development of the subject property are considered to be
unavoidable adverse impacts. These impacts include a
reduction in overall water quality caused by the disposal of
sanitary wastes generated form the r~sidential homes, as well
as the percolation of rainwater and irrigation through
landscaped areas which have been fertilized. Storm water
recharge may also contribute to the deterioration of the
overall water quality under the property.
I
I
I
The introduction of other contaminants, such as
cleaners, solvents, hydrocarbons, etc., will probably occur
to some limited degree, however, under normal conditions and
proper usage and handling the extent of the contamination
from these sources is considered to be minor.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-50-
I
I
I
E. Wildlife
I
The expected impacts to the wildlife populations on the
"Cove Beach Estates" property are considered unavoidable
adverse impacts directly related to the development and
occupation of the property. Changes to the wildlife
populations will result from two major factors;
I
I
A.
Construction activities and occupational
disturbances to the property wIll cause the
relocation of less tolerant species to preserved
habitat on the property or to nearby preserved or
undisturbed property.
I
I
B.
Removal of natural vegetation by construction
activities will cause a shift in wildlife use of the
site. Vegetation used by wildlife for natural cover
and food will be removed from the site.
I
I
As discussed earlier in this document, a change in
wildlife diversity is expected to occur. Principal changes
will be a move to more tolerant species inhabiting a majority
of the site which will be the subject of the development
activities.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-51-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
F. Traffic
The development of "Cove Beach Estates" will cause a
slight increase in the volume of traffic on Main Road and
other local roadways. Peak hour traffic increases will
result in an average of 34 additional vehicle trips as a
direct result of this subdivision. If the potential for
development of adjacent property, <presently landlocked) is
added, the resulting peak hour traffic increase is expected
to be 43 vehicle trips.
The addition of this traffic is an unavoidable adverse
impact, although it is not expected to affect the level of
service presently existing on Main Road. No realignment of
existing roadways, or other traffic related improvements is
expected as a result of this proposed action.
....."",. .",i<;l;" ,~,.~.c.",.,,~ ..~" -"""",." ....,....~ -, .p.' -..-. .. '.-" .... ..'
/-,.'
.....-."',...._~...-.,...-.j,......"..;.."-""_....-.";,.;.~:~,,<
:._:"""".!&iiliillii...,&i\W"
~'7,",:i
;:~!"'"
..,'" --
~~-
I
I
I
G. Loss of gE~g eE~~~
I
The approval and subsequent development of the proposed
plans for this property will result in a permanent loss of
open space within the Town of Southold, and the hamlet of
East Marion. Approximately 60% of the property will be
devoted to non-open space uses such as roads and individual
home sites. On the proposed plans, the preservation of
approximately 40% of the property for open space and
recreational purposes is advocated. This amount of property
will be supplemented by the expected non r;learing of large
portions of individual lots, thus creating the appearance of
additional open space.
I
I
I
I
The approval of the proposed development will likely
result in the site being unavailable for purchase by any
level of government, or not-for-profit agency for park or
open space purposes. No plans for the purchase have been
seriously advocated for this property.
I
I
H.
Q:t;,h~!': I mE~sc:t:_'?
Generation of Solid Waste
I
The approval of any development plan for this property
will result in the generation of solid waste. Solid waste
will occur during the construr;tion phase of the project, as
cleared vegetation and other construction related debris will
need to be disposed. Long term occupation of the site will
result in the generation of solid waste from the daily
lifestyles of the occupants of the property.
I
I
Noise
I
The development of the site will result in an inr;rease
in the ambient noise levels on and surrounding the property.
Noise will be generated during the construction of the roads
and homes. Noise will also be generated by the daily
activities of future residents.
I
I
An increase in traffic related noise is expected during
both the'construction phase of the project as well as the
long term occupation of the property.
I
I
-53-
I
I
I
I
I
VI. ~l~~~~~~~~~~ ~9 ~g~ f~~29~~~ ~~~~9~
I
During the scoping session held between representatives
of the Town of Southold and the project sponsor, the
discussion of alternatives to the proposed action were
limited to analysis of the proposed project, the standard
yield plan for the property and the no action alternative.
I
A.
e~~~~~~~ ~~~~l9P~~~~
I
A standard development plan for the property in question
has been prepared by Young and Young. This plan proposes
that the property be developed into 40 single family dwelling
parcels, each of which is a minimum of 80,000 square feet in
size. Lot sizes range from 80,000 square feet to 210,000
square feet. The internal road design for the standard
development is quite different from that proposed as the
actual subdivision. Considerably more road is required with
the standard development. No open space or other reserved
area is proposed with the standard development. The Town of
Southold limited the discussion of alternatives to a 34 lot
standard subdivision, a plan for which does not exist,
although conceptually the plan would be similar to the 40 lot
standard plan. Discussion regarding this alternative will
refer to a potential 34 lot standard plan similar to the 40
lot plan which has been drawn.
I
I
I
I
I
Without question, the standard development would impact
the environment more than the proposed development. Clearing
for the construction of roadways, driveways and parking areas
would be more extensive with the standard development plan.
The extra clearing would impact the degree of soil erosion
and sedementation potential. The extra roadway would result
in the permanent removal of extra vegetation, and would
likely require additional landscaping and turf to improve the
aesthetics of the development.
I
I
I
Impacts to the groundwater on the site will be greater
in magnitude, due to the potential for creating larger turfed
areas with the standard development plan. Less area of
natural vegetative cover will .be available for the
percolation of rainfall.
I
Impacts to the wildlife populations will be greater with
the standard plan as more vegetative clearing and destruction
of habitat will take place. With no open space preserved,
wildlife will be forced to relocate away from the property in
I
I
-54-
I
I
I
I
order to survive.
I
Traffic impacts would be virtually identical to those
identified with the proposed development plan. Impacts
regarding solid waste generation would be greater during the
construction phase and virtually identical during the
occupation of the project. Noise generation during
construction would similarly be greater than with the
proposed plan as additional construction time would be
necessary while long term noise generation would be the same
as with the proposed plan.
I
I
I
In short, the standard development of the property would
have significantly greater impacts to the soils, topography,
vegetation, groundwater and wildlife populations. During
construction, impacts would be greater with the proposed plan
in the areas of solid waste generation and noise. Long term
occupation of the site would produce similar impacts with
respect to solid waste generation and noise when the two
alternatives are compared. Traffic impacts would be
virtually identical and not of great significance.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-55-
I
I
I
I
B. No Action Alternative
-- ---~ ---,~--------
I
The no action alternative, basically leaving the
property in its present state must be considered. This
alternative will result in nothing more than the status quo.
No impacts would be expected to the soils, topography,
vegetation, groundwater, wildlife populations, traffic
generation, noise or solid waste generation. Tax revenues
generated by the property would be maintained at their
present levels. The long term preservation of the property
would be considered to be a positive environmental impact.
I
I
The no action alternative does not provide for the needs
and objectives of the property owner. The ability to realize
an economic return for the property would be eliminated by
this alternative. The costs of carrying this parcel of land,
including taxes, insurance, interest, etc., make the
development of the property an economic necessity. Should
the no action alternative be considered as a feasible,
desired and necessary alternative to the development of the
property, it is believed that reasonable economic
compensation to the owner would be required.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-56-
I
I
I
I
VI I.
Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Natural
---------.----- ---.-----------..- -----~------ -------
'Resources
I
The development of the "Cove Beach Estates" property
there will be the irreversible commitment of natrual
resources both during the development and during the long
term occupation of the property. The following is a listing
of resources will be committed to use with the development of
the site.
I
I
h~~~ Approximately 60 acres of property will be
permanently committed to roads and house sites. This
represents approximately 61% of the subject property. The
approval of the development plans will likely commit this
resource to be residential property as opposed to open space
or parkland if purchased by a governmental agency or not-for-
prof it agency.
I
I
~I:l.!l~ Coverage of approximately 10% of the subject
property for roads and impermeable structures will
irreversibly remove these soils from performing any drainage
and runoff absorptive functions.
I
I
~~g~~~~!I:l.~ Natural vegetation will be permanently
removed in areas where roads, driveways, parking areas and
houses will be constructed. The cleared vegetation will be
irreversibly committed to the long term changes to the
property.
I
I
~~~~~ More than 125 gallons of water are expected to be
consumed per household on a daily basis following the
occupation of the subject property. Water is proposed to be
supplied to the site via the use of individual wells located
on the residential lots.
I
~~~~gy Energy, in the form of electricity or fossil
fuels will be required for the construction activities on the
subject property, as well as during the long term occupation
of the site. Fossil fuel energy will also be committed to
the development of the property for transportation purposes
for the future residents.
I
I
Construction Material and Labor Once used for the
constructlor;:-of-the-"Cove'-Beach -Estates" development, the
various building products and construction supplies as well
as the labor necessary for construction will be permanently
committed to this property.
I
I
I
-57-
I
I
I
V I I I.
Q~~~~g 19~~~lgg ~~E~~~~ ~f ~g~ ~~~~l~E~~g~
I
The development of the "Cove Eeach Estates" property
will represent a medium term growth in the Town of Southold,
and in particular, the Hamlet of East Marion of 34
residences. This will represent new growth within the Town.
I
I
I
The development does not lie within an area that
requires the extension of any roads or public utilities to
service the site. Only internal subdivision roads are
proposed and utilities can be extended into the site from
their location along Main Road. The internal road layout may
induce growth on adjacent properties, especially if access is
granted to landlocked property to the east and in the north
westerly portion of the site. Should access be granted to
the property now or formerly of Spencer Terry, Jr.,
additional growth induced as a result of this subdivision
would be an addional 2 residential lots. Should access be
granted to the land now or formerly of Joseph Gazza and
Joseph Eoken, an additional 15 acres could be developed,
which would yield a maximum of 7 building parcels under
existing zoning regulations.
I
I
I
I
I
The development of the subject property will result in a
direct growth of 34 residential units, constructed over a
period of years. Additional growth which may occur as a
result of this subdivision, and the granting of access to
landlocked property would be a total of 9 additional units.
Therefore, the maximum growth within the Town of Southold as
a result of the development of this property, and adjacent
sites would be a total of 43 residential units.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-58-
- ------- -----
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IX. Use and Conservation of Ener~y
As proposed, the development of "Cove Beach Estates"
will create an overall increase in the amount of energy
consumed within the Town of Southold. Individual residential
units will consume electricity for lighting and other
purposes. For heating, the individual resident will comsume
either oil, natural gas or electricity. In addition,
gasoline and/or diesel fuel will be consumed to provide
transportation for future residents of the property.
During construction, energy in the form of oil, diesel
fuel, gasoline and electricity will be consumed for normal
construction activities.
Existing and projected supplies of electrical energy, as
will be provided by the Long Island Lighting Company for the
site are anticipated to be adequate enough to meet the peak
needs for the proposed development. No new electirical
producing capacity will be required as a direct result of
this proposed development.
.
-59-
I
I
I
I
x. ~~~~g~~!e~ ~~~~~~~~
A.
~!~~g~~~e~ ~~~~~~~~ l~~e~2e~~~~~ !~~e ~~~ ~~~~g~
I
A number of mitigation measures, intended to reduce the
potential environmental impacts of the proposed development
have been incorporated into the design of the subdivision, or
are otherwise required as conditions to other permits. These
mitigation measures are described below.
I
I
1. The most obvious mitigation measure is the election
by the project sponsor to process the proposed subdivision as
a "cluster" development. This allows the preservation of
significant open space as a result of the development plans.
As currently proposed, approximately 39 acres of the property
will be retained in perpetuity as permanent open space and/or
recreation areas. Additionally, it is expected that
significant portions of the proposed lots will also function
as open space when development is complete.
I
I
I
2. Preservation of the tidal wetlands found on the
property is also a mitigation measure intended to alleviate
potential environmental impacts. The subdivision design as
proposed will retain all of the tidal wetlands found on the
subject property as permanent open space. Additionally,
building areas in close proximity to the tidal wetlands are
regulated by the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation. A Tidal Wetland permit has been issued by the
Department allowing for the subdivision of the property as
proposed. Aside from the standard mitigation techniques
contained in all Tidal Wetland permits, special conditions to
the permit were also issued. These special conditions are as
follows:
I
I
I
I
a.
There shall be no disturbance to vegetation or
topography within 50' of the tidal wetlands line (or
seaward of the existing ten foot contour elevation
line where this line is closer than 50') shown on
the referenced plan by excavation, filling, grading,
clearcutting or establishment of treated lawns.
I
I
b.
Any additional construction seaward of the 10'
contour elevation line or seaward of the "average
line of top of bluff" shown on said plans will need
additional application and approval prior to
commencement of work.
I
I
I
-60-
I
I
I
I
3. Design of the proposed interior roadway system
taking advantage of less steeply sloped areas, for much of
its design, reduces the potential erosion impacts associated
with the development of the property.
I
4. Inclusion of proposed recreation area within the
subdivision. The inclusion of a recreation area, the beach
located in the northeastern portion of the property is a
mitigation measure designed to reduce reliance on the
existing recreation facilities within the Town of Southold.
I
I
I
5. The requested rezoning of a portion of the subject
property from its present Industrial C-l designation to
residential is a mitigation measure designed to preclude any
commercial or industrial use of the property. Commercial and
or industrial uses usually have greater impacts to the
environment than do residential uses.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-61-
I
I
I
I
B.
Additional Recommendations
I
I
Several additional recommendations are hereby ffi3de in an
effort to improve the existing subdivision design and to
further mitigate potential impacts. These recommendations
are as follows:
I
1. Establish a "bluff line" along all of the present
Long Island Sound front lots at either the top of the bluff
or at elevation 10'. Move the potential building areas on
lots 5 - 13 via the use of a building envelope to at least
100' landward of the bluff line. This recommendation will
accomplish several things, first, the immediate shoreline
will be protected from development, secondly, the potential
for damaging beach vegetation from construction activities
will be eliminated and thirdly, the proposed homes will be
offered greater protection from the effect of shoreline
erosion <although this has not been identified as a
significant issue).
I
I
I
This recommendation will also reduce the amount of
vegetation clearing which could take place on the property.
The land included within the 100' setback could be further
protected by the use of scenic or conservation easements
which would prevent the clearcutting of vegetation.
I
I
I
This recommendation will also lessen the potential
visual impacts of the development from those who view the
site from the waters of Long Island Sound.
I
I
2. Reduce the length of the short cul-de-sac giving
access to lots 11 - 13 and the proposed park and recreation
area by approximately 100 feet. Access to parcel 13 and the
recreation site would then be via flag lots to the shortened
cul-de-sac. This recommendation will result in fewer
construction related activities taking place in close
proximity to the tidal wetlands found near the terminus of
the roadway, and will reduce the total amount of vegetation
clearing for road purposes.
I
3. On proposed lot 19, the 75 foot setback from the
edge of the tidal wetlands should be protected by the use of
a scenic or conservation easement.
I
4. Provide a means for access to the adjacent
landlocked properties. This recommendation, while not
I
-62-
I
I
I
I
I
necessarily being a mitigation measure does improve the
design of the subdivision and eliminates potential problems
for the present and/or future owners of the landlocked
property. Access could be provided to the property on the
east via a 50 foot right of way located between proposed lots
16 and 17. Presently, there Is a 30 foot right of way
leading to the open space at this location. The 50 foot
right of way recommended would infringe on lot 16, thereby
creating a somewhat smaller lot. An alternative access
arrangement could be accomplished several hundred feet north
of the Main Road intersection where development could be
coordinated with the property to the east. Access to the
landlocked property on the west could be obtained via a right
of way located between proposed lots 30 and 31. This right
of way could be either 40 or 50 feet in width and would
reduce the size of both lots 30 and 31.
I
I
I
I
I
5. Protect the proposed open space parcels by the use
of scenic or conservation easements, along with the
dedication of these areas to the proposed homeowners
association. These areas could also be dedicated to the Town
of Southold or to a not-for-profIt organization who will
maintain the property for conservatIon purposes.
I
I
6. Institute a vegetation clearing program whereby
individual lots could only be cleared of a certain percentage
of lot area to make room for necessary improvements. This
could be accomplished by deed restrictions, or easements.
I
7. Erect one or two additional platforms for Osprey
nesting on the shoreline of Dam Pond. This mitigation
measure would increase the likelihood of additional Osprey
breeding in the area of the subject property and will help to
propagate the species.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-63-
I
I
I
XI.
References
--------_.-
I
The Audobon Society, g~~!~~~ ~!~~~L An ~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~L
McGraw-Hill, New York, 1988.
I
I
The Audobon Society, ~!~l~ ~~!~~ !~ ~~~!~ ~~~~!~~~ ~!~~~
g~~!~~~ g~g!~~L Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. Publishers, New York,
1977.
I
The Audobon Society, ~!~l~ Q.~!~~ !~ ~~~!~ ~~~~!~~~ g~E!!l~~
~ ~~E~!~!~~~L Alfred A Knopf, Inc. Publishers, New York 1979.
I
Britton and Brown, ~~ lll~~!~~!~~ ~l~~~ ~f !~~ ~~~!~~~~
~~!!~~ e!~!~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~L Three Volumes, 1970.
.
Bull, John, ~!~~~ ~f ~~~ !~~~ e!~!~L Doubleday/Natural
History Press, Garden City, N.Y., 1974.
Bull, John, ~!~~~ of the New York ~~~~, Dover Publications,
Inc. 1964.
I
DeChiara and Koppleman,
Hill, Inc., 1978.
Site ~l~~~!~g e!~~~~~~~L McGraw-
I
Gleason, Henry Allan, ~~~ ~~!!!~~ ~ ~~~~~ lll~~!~~!~~ ~l~~~,
New York Botanical Gardens, Hafner Publishing Co., Inc.,
1963.
I
Group for America's South Fork, Inc., Land Use ~l~~~!~g
Ha~~booksL unpublished, 1975.
I
I
Hughes, Henry B., Kieth S. Porter, ~~~~ ~~~ ~~~ Q.~~~~~ ~~~~~
~~~lIty !~ !~~ ~!~~ ~~~~~~~ ~! e~~:!:.~~!flE:!:.~~L Water Resources
Program, Cornell university, Ithaca, N.Y. May, 1983.
Institute of Transportation Engineers, I~!E Q.~~~~~!!~~L Third
Edition, 1983.
I
I nter-Sc ience Research Assoc iates, I nc. Draft Environmental
l~ac:!:. e!~~~~~nt !~~ Ih~ Q~~~~ g~!~!~L 1983~-- -------------
Jain, Urban, Stacey, g~~!~~~!fl~~!~ll~E~~! ~~~lY~!""L
Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1977.
I
Koppleman, et.al.,
Ih~ ~~~g l~l~~~ 208 e!~~YL 1978.
I
-64-
I
I
I
I
I
Koppleman, et.al., ~ ~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~ ~~~E~~~ for ~~~~~~ and
Suff~1:.~ l:::.~~ntie.~L March, 1978
I
I
Marsh, William M. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~1:.Y~~~ for Land Use and
~~~~ ~~~~~~~gL McGraw-Hill, Inc. 1978.
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, ~
~:rCRg !'.~~~ ~~l Iid~~ ~~g~~<!~ Ie.~!!<! !!:~~ g~g~~~g~~~L August
20, 1977.
I
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation 6
NYCRg ~~~~ ~lZ ~~~~~ ~!!~~~~!!~~~~~1:. ~~~~~~Y g~~ie~~
I
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, The
~~~g Handbook, March, 1982.
I
Peterson, Roger Tory, ~ ~~~~<! Q~~<!~
~~<! l:::.~!!~~~~ ~~~~g ~~~~~~~L Houghton
1980.
to the Birds of Eastern
-- ---- ----- -- -------
Mifflin Company, Boston,
I
Petridies, George A.,
Houghton Mifflin Co. ,
~ ~~~~<! Q~~<!~ to Tres and ~g~~~~L
1972.
I
Raymond, Parish, Pine & Wiener, Inc. ~~~~~~ !'.~~~ !!:E<!~~~L
~~ckgrou~<! ~~~<!~~~L I~~~ ef ~e~~g~1:.<!L March 1984.
I
Raymond, Parish, Pine & Wiener, Inc. ~~~te~ Plan !!:E<!~~~L
SU~~L Town ef ~e~th~1:.<!L April, 1985.
Simmonds, John 0., ~~~~g~~~E~L McGraw-Hill, Inc.
1978.
I
Town of Southold, Town Code.
I
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service,
Soil Survey ~f Suf!g~~ CountYL ~~~ YO~~L April, 1975.
Wernert, Susan J., Editor, ~e~:!:.g ~~~~~~~~ ~!!<!!!f~L Readers
Digest Association, 1982.
I
I
I
-65-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENCICIES
1. Tidal Wetland Permit issued by DEC
2. Letter from DEC Wildlife Resource Center
3. Description of potential rare plant
4. Correspondence with Mr. Irving Latham
S. List of migratory birds
6. Resume of principal DEIS preparer
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NEU YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION
Regulatory Affairs Unit
Buildin8 40. SUNY--Room 219
Stony Brook, New York 11794
(516) 751-7900
November 21, 1986
RE: Pemit No., Location 10-84-0701. East Marion
Cove Beach Estates
c/o Mr. Harold Reese
Ree.se Bros. Inc.
1:l55 Sunrise HWY.
Lynbrook, N.Y.11561
AHENDHENT TO PERMIT
DearrtIr. Reese I
~ Your recent request to extend the above pemit has been reviewed pursuant
. to 6NYCRR, Part 621. It has been detemined that there has not been a material
change in environmental conditions, relevant technology or applicable law.or
regulations since the issuance of the existing pemit; therefore, the expiration
date is extended to December 11. 1 'l88
~x Your recent request to modify the above pemit has been reviewed pursuant
to 6NYCRR, Part 621. It has been detemined that the proposed modifications will
not substantially change the scope of the pemitted actions or the existing
permit conditions.
Therefore, the permit is amended to authorize:
subdivision of 96.4 acres (approx) into )4 resident1al lots, each in
excess of one acre plus open soace and retentton oarcelsl 1n accord-
ance with plan on survey by H.W.Yofing with latest rev1sed date of
Seotember 25. 1986 (see attached)
This letter is an amendment to the original permit and as such, shall be posted
at the job site.
~l other tems and conditio~ remain as written in the original permit.
'\..
Very truly yours,
Attachment.
CTH:DDR:co's
d/A.,jJ / -j~.
t/' V~t~ate Reg~al
Pemit Administrator
;
.: Sent to:
ul
/f.. .'
/ . ~ .
I
I
'PERMIT NO.
NIW YflW"': SlAH lllPARIMlNl OF [NVII\ONM[NTAL UJNS[RVATION
I
10-84-0701
PERMIT
I
B
UNDER TIlE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION LAW
ARTICLE 15. (Prol~cli{)n fit Walrr) 0 ARTICLE 25, (Tidal Wetlands)
ARTICLE 14, (rreshwall~r Wrlland..;J 0 ARTICLE 36. (Construction in flood Hazard Areas)
Main Road, P.O. Box 953, Cutchogue, NY 11935
------ -----~--_._-_._.__._---_.
L()C^1I0~ Of PROJECT (Section of slrf'Jll1. lid,1I w('lland. dam. building) Long Island Sound and Dam Pond, north of lands nm.
-"-r:..-Lorme,bYu.~p.e.nS'_e.rTer,'y, JE:. west of Main Road. <m:S. R9u~e.u~?J, East Marion, New York
UI "CRIPlION or I'RlJ)[CT
S.lIh.~L(Y.i~,,-_-,,_.6<J.:t._?S.,-c..p,,-r_ceL:i.~~.".5_4. clusterc.d.--,-esi.<!..ent:i.al building lots and 12 reserved areas
I'lKMrI 1))\JlD 10
Cove Beach Associates
I
A6iJRlSS Or--i:;ER~\Ti'''-i~'-----~
I
I
1"J!JTIil J-'L_\llHJ_~y_el(ll)~~cI ~_rg3sl~___.1,~Qi-!~t slr.:}t ll_~tr_yctll r~?_~_~_p_ar\<.in.La rea cons truction in accordance:
wi.Ul sit.c plan on surv-"Y.jJ.Y_XQllngu9n939UI.1g with latest revised
I COMMUNllY NAME reily, rown, VilI.1,::r) J TOWN
~.!t~'~~yl!gt~2.~- - -- ------ ------ -riA "_.,,,,"_,,"'_o~-thO.l1-~AM NO.
LSulJ:.oJL_.._ ___~___~__n._ _.. . _..
GENERAL CONDITIONS
I
I
I
1. Thl" prrmillee shall file in Ihe uffice of the appropriate Regional
Pt'rmil Administrator, a notice of intenlion 10 commence work at leasl 48
II\llJls in adv.1n("e 01 the time of (ommence'm~nl and shall .1150 nolify him
IJrornplJy in writ in/< of the completion of th~ work.
2. The pfOrlllilled work s 11;11 I be subj{'ct 10 inspNliun by an alllhorizf"d
11'lJrrsentalive of the Deparlment of Environmental Con"Nvation who may
ordN Ihe work suspended if thl:" public intf'r~5t so requires.
I
I
J. As a condition of IhE' issu.lnce of this pprmit, lhr applicant has ,IC.
(('pr"d expressly, by thp ex{'(ution of the applicalion, lhp full Irgal rt"spon-
silJllily fOl all damages, dirt'Ct or illdirecl, of whatev{"1 nature, and by whom-
evrr suffered, ;trbing out of Ihe project described hNrin and has agrf",~t1 10
indE'mnify and save harmll.'ss lhe Slale from suits, actions, damagfOS .mll
costs of every nam~ and d<-scrip!ion rt'sulling hom Ihe said proiect.
4. Any ma!erial dr("dgt'd in the prosecution of Iht' work hf"rein permitted
~h.lll be removfd ev('nly, wilhoul It'aving largl:' r('luse rliles, ridges across the
bl'd of Ihe waterway or flood plain or deep holes that may have a lendency to
cause injury to navigable channels or 10 Ihe banks of th~ watNway.
S. Any material 10 be deposHed or dumped undN this permit, either in
rh(' walerway or on shore above high-water m.uk, shall be deposiled or dumped
. at thr lo(ality shown on the dr.1wing herE'IO altilchrd, and, il so [lI"(>scribed
thl'lf:'on, within or behind a good and substantial bulkhead or bulkheads, such
as will prevent escap!' of Ihe material into the waterway.
6. There shall be no unreason.lble interlf>tence wilh navigation by the
work hrrein authorized.
I
I
I
I
i. That if future operations by the Slale of New York require an .11leralion
in the posHion of the structure or work herein aUlhorized, or if, in the opinion
of the Df.'partm('nl of Environmenlal Conservation il shall caust' unreasonable
obslruclion 10 Ihe free naviAalion of said walers or ftood flows,or endangt'r
ihe he.1lth, salr-Iy or Welfdf(' of It\{' pt'opJe ollh<.' StalC', or loss or deslruclion
of Ihp n.1lural resources of lhe Slale, the owner may be ordered by the Deparl-
.1lenf 10 remove or aller Ihe slructural work, obstruclions, or huards caused
'h..rf>by wilhout l?xpens(, 10 the Statl'; and if, IIpon the t'xpiration or r('vocalion
)f this permit, the slruClure, fill, excavation, or olhf'r miXliliration of the
.vtllf'r(ourse ht'rrby aulhorilf'd Sh,111 not bE:' complrlc-d, Ihe ownf'rS shall,
.\lthOlJl nDensl' 10 thl' SIJIt', ,1I1tllo stich t').[I'I1! and ill ~Ulh limp .l"d 1Il,100ler
IS rht, Dl'pdrtmenl of [nvitonnwJ1IJl Cons{'tvation may r('Quirt', remove all or
In} 1J0rrioriof Ihe uncompleled !',lructure or fill and r("slorr to its former
andition Ih!' naVi{;.lbJe and flood rapacity of the walrrcoursf>, No claim shell!
>!' f!1,ulp .1g,linsl t/lf' SLlle of N(.w York on account pf ilny SIKh r('maval or
illl'ldrion.
I
I
I
I:: .:n.t{{l.'-:Ol':,
date of October 3, 1984.
PERMIT EXPIRA nON OA TE
December 31, 1986
8. That Ihe Slale of New York shall in no case be liable for any dama
or injury to the structure or work herein authorized which may be caused by
result from fulure operations underlaken by the Slate for the conservation
improvement of navigation, or for other purposes, and no claim or right
comprnsalion shall accrue from any such damage.
9. ThaI if the display of lights and signals on any work hereby aulhoriz
is not otherwise provided for by law, such lights and signals as may br pr
scribed by the United Stales Coast Guard shall be installed and maintainl
by and allhe expense of the owner.
10, All work carried oul under this permit shall be performed in accc
dance with established engineering practice an~ in a workmanlike manner.
11. If grantE:'d under Articles 24 or 25, the Department reserves the rig
to reconsider lhis approval al any lime and after due notice and hearing
continue, rescind or modify this permit in such a manner as may be found
be just and equitable. If upon the expiration or revocafion of this permit, Ii
modification of the wetland hereby authorized has not been completed. II
applicant shall, without expense to the Slate, and 10 such exlent and in suo
lime and manner as the Department of Environmental Conservation may requir
remove all or any portion of the uncompleted structure or fill and restore Ii
site to its former tondilion. No claim shall be made against the Stale of Ne
York on accounl of any such removal or alteration.
12. This permit shall not be construed as conveying to the applicant al
right to trespass upon the lands or interfere with the riparian rights of othei
to perform the permitted work or as authorizing the impairment of any right:
title or interest In real or personal properly held or vested in a person not
parly to the permil.
13. Thl:' permittee is responsible for obtaining any other permils, a!
provals, lands, easements and rights.of-way which may be. required for Ihi
projec!.
14. If granled under Article 36, this permit is granted solely on the basi
of Ihe reQuiremt>nls of Article 36 of the Environmental Conservation Law an,
Part 500 of 6 NYCRR (Construction in Flood Plain Meas having Special Floo.
Hazards - Building Permits) and in no way signifies that the project will b:
free from flooding,
15. By acceptance of this permit Ihe permillee agrees that the permii
is conlingenl upon strict compliance with the special conditions on Ih;
reverse side.
I. I SPECIAL CONDITIONS
16. There is to be no disturbance to vegetation or topography within 50' of the tidal
wetlands line (or seaward of the existing ten foot contour elevation line where this
line is closer than 50') shown on the referenced plan by excavation, filling, grading,
clearcutting or establishment of treated lawns.
1
1
17. Any additional construction seaward of the 10' contour elevation line or seaward of
the "average line of top of bluff" shown on said plans will need additional
application and approval prior to commencement of work.
1
1
1
1
SEE ATTACHED CONDITIONS A - J
1
1
1
1
I'
1
1
1
1
1
1
nRMIT ISSUE DA TE
December 7, 1984
Alternate
PERMIT AOMfNISTRA TOR , ^OORE55
G,~{t.",-~ jGq:i Ilr~{t l"'-&~O llL..{\ IS
Bldg. 40, SUNY--Rnom 219
St(ln!' Brnpk, NY 1179/1
1
I
I
,)
"1
:'1
.1
I
'1
I
I
.1
I
'I
.,
I
I
I
I
;111
SUPPLEliEHTAP,Y SPECIAL COllDITIOl!S
The following conditions apply to all permits:
If any of the permit conditions are unclear, the permittee shall contact
the Division of Regulatory Affairs at the address and telephone noted below.
A copy of this permit or approval and approved project plans and supplement-
ary conditions shall be available at the project site whenever authorized
work is in progress.
The permit sign enclosed with the permit or a copy of approval letter shall
be protected from the weather and posted in a conspicious location at the
work site until completion of authorized work.
At least 4G hours prior to commencement of the project, the permittee shall
complete and return the top portion of the enclosed receipt form certifying
that he is fully aware of and understands all provisions and conditions of
this permit. ~ithin one week of completion of the permitted work the
bottom portion of that form shall also be completed and returned.
For projects involving activities to be accomplished over a period or more
than one year, the permittee shall notify the Regional Permit Administrator
in writing at least 48 hours to the commencement of resumption of work each
year.
If project design modifications take place after permit issuance, the
permittee shall submit the appropriate plan changes for approval by the
Regional Permit Administrator prior to undertaking any such modifications.
The permittee'is advised that substantial modification may require submiss-
ion of anew application for permit.
All necessary precautions shall be taken to preclude contamination of any
wetlands or waterway by suspended solids, sediment, fuels, solvents,
labricants, epoxy coatine, paints, concrete, leachate or any other
environmentally deleterious materials associated with the project work.
Any failure to comply precisely with all of the terms and conditions of this
permit, unless authorized in writing, shall be treated as a violation of
the Environmental Conservation Law.
The permittee is advised to obtain any permits or approvals that may be
required from the U.S. Department of Army Corps of Engineers, New York
District, 26 Federal Plaza, New York ITY 10C07, (Attention Regulatory
Functions Branch), prior to commencing work authorized herein.
The granting of this permit does not relieve the permittee of the responsib-
ility of obtaining a Brant, easement, or other necessary approval from the
Division of Land Utilization, Office of General Services, Tower Building,
Empire. State Plaza, Albany, t~ 12242, which may be required for any
encroachment upon State-o.~ed lands under water.
r.egional Permit Administrator
NYS Department of Environmental COllS. ....
Bldg. 40, SmlY--Room 219
Stony Brook, NY 11794
(516) 751-7900
\0-lSe10-1('\
I
I
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Wildlife Resources Center
Delmar, New York 12054
I
~
I
July 25, 1988
Thomaa C. Jorllng
Commissioner
I
Mr. Kenneth C. Coenen
Hampton-Manor Associates, Inc.
P. O. Box 308
Manorville, New York 11949
I
Dear Mr. Coenen:
I
I
We have reviewed the Significant Habitat Program and the Natural
Heritage Program files with respect to the proposed Cove Beach Estates
residential development in the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New
York.
We have identified the following potential concern:
I
*Rare Plants*
I
AnRelica lucida, Angelica, was collected from the vicinity of the
proposed site in 1924. The actual collecting location cannot
precisely be determined. Angelica is extremely rare in New York
with fewer than six sites known. Additional information regarding
this plant may be obtained by contacting Dr. Steven Clemants at
the above address or phone (518) 439-7488.
I
I
I have enclosed a copy of the current New York State list of
Endangered, Threatened and Special Concern species as you requested.
I
Our files are continually growing as new habitats and occurrences
of rare species and communities are discovered. In most cases,
site-specific or comprehensive surveys for plant and animal occurrences
have not been conducted. For these reasons, we can only provide data
which have been assembled from our files. We cannot provide a
definitive statement on the presence or absence of species, habitats or
natural communities. This information should not be substituted for
on-site surveys that may be required for environmental assessment.
I
I
I
I
I
New York Natural Heritage Program is supported in part
by The Nature Conservancy
I
I
I
I
I
This response applies only to known occurrences of rare animals,
plants and natural communities and/or significant wildlife habitats.
You should contact our regional offices(s), Division of Regulatory
Affairs, at the address(es) enclosed for information regarding any
regulated areas or permits that may be required (e.g., regulated
wetlands) under State law.
I
I
If this project is still active one year from now we recommend that
you contact us again so that we may update this response.
I
If we can be of further assistance please do not hesitate to
contact us.
I
Sincerely,
(10~ (t), (~aY(
J~hn W. Ozard)
~r. Wildlife Biologist
Significant Habitat Unait
I
I
JWO:jp
Encs.
cc: H. Knoch
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Uj"
U M DELLI FERAE
Only the following thrct' 1'l(l<'CIt'l!. (Name 8 met(' BI(('ration of Thapsia. B Europc:m l('nUll of Umbdlifetfl.) The first
of our llpedt's if! 80metimes ron(u8("d wilh <<pecics of Zitia. but may be dislinguisht'd by the entin'l)" pedicellate ftowna as well
BII by tht' wing('d fruit.
Basall('aves simple or once lernnh',
Basal Bnd cauline leave8 once tethale or twice l('rnale,
Ultimate Jeaf-at>gm('nts ovate to Innccolate, 8crrate or ind8("d (8('(' iIIUtttration).
Ultimate leaf-aegmentslinear to oblong.
!;
Fr~it oblong or elliptic, Battened dorsally; dorsal and intermediate ribs corky, prominent, acute or narrowly winged;
lateral ribs b-oadly winged. Oil-tubes 1 or 2 in the intervals, 2-4 on the commh;~ure. Umbels large. compound;
involucre or a few narrow or foliaceous bracts or lacking; primary rays numerous. Umbellets small and densely lowered;
bractlets several, narrow, more or less scarious. Sepals none. Petals white. Branched perennial herbs, glabrous
below. puherulent in the inflorescence, with twice or thrice ternate~pinnately compound leaves and deeply lobed or
incised leaflets.
1. ThAlpium trifoliatum (L.) Gray. Stems !iparingly
branched, 3-8 dm. ta1l, glabrous or nearly so. Basal
leaves simple, broadly ovate, usually cordate at base, or
occasionally ternate like the cauline. Stem-leaves ordi-
narily pinnate with 3 leaflets, freQucntly with 5 leaflets,
rarely the lateral leaflets again 2-3 lobed; leaflets ovate
to lanceolate, 4-8 cm. long. Umhels long-peduncled, 3-8
COl. wide. Fruit ellipsoid, 3.5-5 nUll. long, about three-
fourths as wide, including the broad wings.
Dr)' or moist wood!;, R. I. to Minn. and S. D., s. to Ga.,
La., and Okla. June, July. Consi~ts of two forllls similar
in habit and structure. the one with purple or browni!;h-purple
flowers, most abundant eastward and in the Appalachian re-
gion [T. allrt"uttt var. alropurpureulII, Gray], the other with
yellow f1owClii, not extending so far s, but usually the only
form known Tram Ind. west. [T. alfrC14t11, Gra)'.]
2. Thaspium barbinode (Michx.) Nutt. Stem up to
1 m. tall, branched above, always pubescent around the
upper nodes with minute stiffish hairs. Basal and prin-
41.
CONIOSELlNUM Hoffm.
1. T. trifoliatum.
2. T. 6orbinod,..
3. T. fJi""alifid14m.
cipal cauline leaves twice pinnate or ternate-pinnate, the
leaflets ovate to 1311ceolale, serrate or incised. Umbels
commonly 3-6 cm. wide, at anthesis scarcely surpassing
the leaves. Flowers pale yellow or crcam.color. Fruit
ellipsoid, 4-6 mm. long, the latcral ribs and some of the
dorsal and intermediate ribs broadly winged.
Mlli!;t or dr). woods and prairies, N. Y. to Ont. and Minn.,
s. to Fla. and Okla. June.
3. Thaspium pinnatifidum (Buck!.) Gray. Stems up
to 8 dm. tall, minutely puberulcnt at the nodes. Basal and
principal caulille leaves twice pinnate or ternate.pinnatc j
leaflets 1-3 em. long, deep!}' lobed or di\'ided into narrowly
ohlong segments. Umbels 2-6 em. wide; bractle:ts nar-
rowly linear, mostly longer than the pedicels. Petals
yellow. Fruit ellipsoid, 3-4 mOl. long, narrowly winged.
Mountain woods. N. C, Ky., and Tenn.; reportr:d from
S\\'. O.
Hemlock Parsley.
About 10 species of the n. temperate and arctic zones; three others occur in w. N. Am. (Name compounded from those
of the two umbelliferous genera Con.ium and Sdin.um.)
1. Conioselinum chinense (L.) BSP. Stem varying
from stout to very slender, 4--15 dm. tall. Leaf-blades
deltoid in general outline, the larger 1-2 dm. long, on
elongate petioles, mostly 2-3 times compound, the upper
once or twice compound, on short, broadly winged peti-
oles; leaflets lanceolate to o\"ate, 1.5-4 em. long, pinnatifid.
Umbels few, 3-12 cm. wide. long-peduncled; primary rays
and pedicels numerous. Fruit elliptic or oblong, 4-5.5 mm.
long, half to two. thirds as wide.
Swamps, bog!;, wet ledges, and wet meadows, Lab. and Nf.
to Minn., s. to Pa., Ind., and la., and in the mOlmtains to
N. c.; reported from Mo.; al!;o in the w. states, w. Canada,
Alaska, and e. Siberia. Aug., Sep.
42. ANGELICA L. Angelica.
Fruit oval, oblong, elliptic, or orbicular, usually flattened dorsally; ribs conspicuous, the lateral usually the siron"ger,
either all winged, or the lateral winged, or in one species all merely acute and corky. Oil.tubes various. Umbels very
large, compound; bracts none or few and linear; primary rays numerous. Umbellets densely many~flowered; bractlets
few to many, linear or filiform. Sepals minute or none. Flowers in our species white or greenish white. TaB, stout,
perennial herbs, with long~petioled, pinnately decompound, basal leaves and progressively reduced upper leaTes, the.
uppermost often bladeless.
About 50 species of the n. hemisphere and New Zealand; J8 others occur in w. or n, N. Am. (Name from the Latin;
angelus, an angel.) The terminal leaflets are uf';uallv cuneate at base and confluent with the next pair below. In a kchnical
classification of the species. the first and last are placed together. having numerous oil-tubes and the seed loose in the ~ricarp;
the other two have few oil-tubes and seed adherent to the pericarp. A. sylvestris L., a native of Europe, has been reported from
Cape Breton Island.
Lateral ribs of the fruit with thin flat wings; plants not coastal.
Leaflets acute or acuminate; sheaths of the upper cBuline leaves rounded or auriculate at the summit: hypan-
thium and fruit glabrous or very minutely granular.
Leaflets merely acute, with a very narrow, pale or colorless, usuaIJr strictIy entire margin; fruit rounded at
the base. J. A. atroprpurea.
Leaflets acuminate, without differentiated margin. always minutely and roughly ciliate; fruit cordate at the
base. 2. A. tn,u;nala.
Leaflets obtusc; sheaths of the Upper leaves tapering gradually to the summit; hypanthium and fruit distinctly
pUberulent. 3. A. m'lt"u?so.
Lateral ribs of the fruit thick and corky, resembling the dorsal ones but larger; plant strictly coastal. 4. A.luclda.
I
i
I
i
.
I ;
,
;
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
-
J'ARSLEY Jo'AMJL\
u..~~
634
--T
UMBELLlFERAE
1. Angelica atropurpurea L. Stem stout, up to 2 m.
tall, glabrous or nearty so to the umbels. Lower leaves
1-3 dm. long, 011 long petioles. the upper smaller, less
compound, on shorter petioles, or the uppermost reduced
to bladcless sheaths only; leaflets ovate to lanccolate,
4-10 em. long, acute, sharply serrate. thinly margined and
rarely ciliate, glabrous or minutely puhesccnt beneath.
Umbels 1-2 din. in diameter j primar}' ra)'s 20-45. the
outer widely spreading or decurvcd. thinl).' puhcsl:cnt.
Fruit oblong.elliptic, 4-6.5 111m. long, rounded at base,
glabrous, the lateral wings thin, flat, and broad.
Swamps and wet woods, Lab. to Minn., l'i. to Del., W. Va.,
and Ind. June-Aug.
2. Angtlica triquinata Michx. Stem Shl\lt, up to 1.5
m. tall, glabrous below and at base of the rays, usually
scaberulous below the umbellets. Lower leaves 1-3 dIll.
long, the upper much reduced, with broad sheathing peti.
oles, or the uppermost bladeless; leaflets lanceolate to
oblong, 3-8 cm. long, acuminate. coarsely toothed, the
margiJl_ not differentiated and minutely ciliolate. Umbels
6-15 ~m. wide; primary rays 13-25, the outer widely
spreading but not decurved. Fruit ohlong-elliptic, 5-7
mm. long, cordate at base, glabrous, the lateral ribs
prominently winged.
Mountain woods, Pa. to N. C. and Tenn. July-Sep. lA.
Curlisii, Gray, B. &: B., Small.]
- "I'
i-.C- '.
~_i
__i
I
.~ I
3. Angelica venenOSB (Grecllwa)') F('rn. St('m up to
2 m. tan, becoming fin('ly canesC('llt abov(' and in the
umhe!. Principal I("a\'es long-pctioled, 1-2 dOl. long, the
upper reduced, on short sheathing petioles tapering gradu-
ally to the sUlllmit, or the uppennost reduced to sheaths
only; leaflets oblong to elliptic, ,'ar)'ing to lanceolate,
2-4 COl. long. obtuse, find)' serrate. llmhds 5-]5 em. in
diameter; primary ra)'s 20-.15. Pedicl'1s and hypallthium
pubescent. Fruit obloll~-elJipti(', 4-7 ml11. long, cordate
at base, sparsely puhescent along the wingless dorsal
rihs; latnal rihs winged.
Dry woods and thicKet~. Mas~. to Minn.. s. to Fla. Miss
and Ark. July, Aug. [A. vilfosa, Gray, B. 6' B.: Smali;
Rydb.J
4. Angelica lucida L. Stem ~tout, 5-10 dm. tall, gla-
brous. Lower leans long-petioled, 1-3 dm. long, the
upper much reduced, their short petioles with very broad
dilated sheaths, or the uppermost redu('("d to sheaths ontv'
leaflets ovate, commonly 4-7 Clll. long, acute or obtu;'e:
sharpl}' and irregularly serrate, especially above the
middle. Umbels few, long-peduncled; primary rays 20
or more, 3-10 cm. long, ascf'nding, puberulent. Fruit el.
liptic or oblong. 5-9 nun. long, the rihs all very prominent.
corky, acute but not winged, contiguous at base, the
lateral ones somewhat the wider.
Beaches and rocks along the sea, Long Island to Labrador'
also on the Pacific coast and in e. Asia. June-Aug. [CoelO-:
pleurllm acfaeifoliltm, Gra}., B. & B.]
43. LEVISTICUM Koch. Lovage.
Fruit oblong or elliptic, dorsally flattened; lateral ribs winged; dorsal and intermediate ribs prominent, acute, but
not winged. Oil-tubes 1 or 2 in the intervals, 2-4 on the commissure. Umbels compound; bracts and bractlets several,
lanceolate, reflexed. Sepals none. Petals yellow or greeni~h yellow. Perennial herbs with the aspect of Angelica,
with twice or thrice pinnately compound leaves.
Three species of Eurasia. (An old Latin name derived from the Greek lithostikon. a plant-name of unknown application.)
..........
1. Levisticum officinale Koch. Stem 1-2 m. tall.
Upper leaves progressively reduced and less compound,
the uppermost sometimes simple; leaflets narrowly to
broadly cuneate and entire in the basal half, the distal
half triangular, acute, sharply serrate or incised. Umbels
.
.
-~
3-10 cm. wide. Fruit elliptic, 5-7 mm. long, about half
as wide.
Native of Europe; cultivated for its aromatic fruit and
occasionall)' escaped in many widely scattered stations. July,
Aug. [Hil'Posclillll>>1 Levisticum, B. & B.]
44. ANETHUM L. Dill.
Fruit oblong or elliptic, dor!;ally flattened: ribs prominent, the dor!;al and intermediate narrow, the lateral con-
spicuou!;ly winged. Oil-tubes solitary in the intervals, 2-4 on the commi~!'.lIre. Pmbcls compound, terminal and
lateral, overtopping the leaves; primary rays numeroll!'.; involucre and involuccl usually lacking. Sepals none. Petals
yellow. Strongly scented annual herbs, the leaves pinnately dissected into numerous filiform segments.
Two species of Eurasia. (Anethon, the ancient Gr('i'.-k name of Dill.)
1. Anethum graveolens L. Stem up to 15 dm. tall,
branched above, glahrous and more or less glaucous
throughout. Leaves o\'ate in general outline, the lower
long-lletioled, the upper shorter-petioled and smaller;
leaf-segments 5-20 mm. long. emhels up to 15 em. in
diameter; primary rays usually 30-40, widely spreading,
about equal. Fruit 3-5 mm. long, ahout half as wide.
Native of s. Europe; cultivated cOnlmerciallv and in kitchen
(rardt'ns and escaped into waste gruund almosi throughout the
U. S. and in man)" other countries. Jul}", AuI'.
45. OXYPOLIS Raf.
Fruit elliptic or ohlong to nearly orbicular, strongly flattened dorsally; dorsal and intermediate rib!; filiform: lateral
ribs expanded into a thin or thick wing and hearing a lon~itudinal nerve near the pcricarp, the fruit therefore apparently
exhibiting 5 filiform ribs. Oil-tubes solitary in the intervals, 2-6 on the commissure. Umbels few, loose and open,
compound; hrarts and bract lets few, linear or filiform, or lacking. Sepals minute or none, Petals white. Erect glabrous
herbs of marshes, from a clu!'.ter of tuberous roots; leaves once pinnate or reduced to bladeless phyllodes.
-
~
-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
iltnt ~rOB. Inr.
8S!' SUNRISE HIGHWAY
L YNBROOK, N. Y. 11 !58S
!!l18-593.52oo
July 8, 1988
Mr. Irving Latham
Main Road
Orient, New York
Dear Mr. Latham:
The Ecology Department of Suffolk County has raised some questions about
the two bodies of water labelled A and B on the attached map which is a
part of the subdivision known as Cove Beach Estates.
. ,
The Russe11s ( former owners of Cove Beach) have stated that at one time
these were irrigation wells and suggested that I contact you because they
were under the impression that when you were farming this area you needed
water for the crop you were growing and that you dug these wells for
tha t purpose.
Well number A was for the farm land on the East and Well number B for the
area in the West.
Would you be kind enough to verify these statements giving the date if
possible when you actually dug these wells and how long you used them.
Thanking you, I am
Very truly yours,
11~~d ~
Ha ro 1 d Reese
HR:gcm
I
I
I J
...
I ~./
I~.
I ~.
I
, ,
,
I
I
I
I POND
I
I
I
I :b
I
I
I . I
, ....
\
I
I ,
.,.
, .
'. ,
,
_ -.T....
~ _xM
"\ ... <;.1'. !_
';'000 '
ID" . .
j' .
2,3/--
. '"
\ (DOl
.4
-
! /90'
-
_.
-
- /
, -
, .
-
S. 2:lo30'Q6"E.
----.........._----
-
.~.
@
2.
,
.....;.--
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
41995 Main Road
Orient, New York 11957
July 8, 1988
Mr. Harold Reese
Reese Bros. Inc.
655 Sunrise Highway
Lynbrook, New York 11563
RE:
IRRIGATION WELLS AT COVE BEACH ESTATES, EAST MARION
Oear Mr. Reese:
In regard to your recent letter about the questions
raised by the Ecology Oepartment of Suffolk County about
the two bodies of water, labeled A & B on your map which
is included in the subdivision known as Cove Beach Estates:
The bodies of water (A & B) are man made. B was dug
in 1948 by me and was used as an irrigation supply for my
farming operations. It was in service for approximately
fifteen years, 1948 through 1963.
A was dug by Latham Sand & Gravel for the farming
operations of Mr. Boken in 1958 and was in service until
approximately 1973.
Hoping this serves to clarify any questions in regard
to the origin of these ponds.
R0:;U~YM~v
-~Ving C. Latham
ICL/jmj
I
I
I
MIGRANT BIRDS
I
The following species of birds are migratory species on
the east end of Long Island. This list has been prepared to
show the birds which may migrate and utilize property on
eastern Long Island for food and/or shelter. This list
includes species which have been known to visit this area,
although not specifically migrating at the time of
visitat1.on.
I
I
I
M1.gration is generally thought of as a seasonal
occurance, however, the m1.grat1.on patterns of ind1.v1.dual
species can and do differ. Some spec1.es may begin migration
1.n late w1.nter, wh1.le others beg1.n in late spr1.ng or early
summer. Thus, dur1.ng any particular calendar year, some
spec1.es may be migrat1.ng almost any day of the year.
I
I
On eastern Long Island the heaviest concentration of
bird m1.gration occurs dur1.ng the spring and fall, although a
number of spec1.es can be found migrating through the area at
almost any t1.me.
I
The listing below contains birds wh1.ch have been
frequently s1.ghted 1.n the area during migrat1.on. The l1.st
includes some spec1.es identified on the Cove Beach Estates
property, however, 1.t 1.s unknown whether the spec1.es s1.ghted
on ,the property were residents, visitors or migratory
species. A reasonable assumption would be that all three
categories are represented 1.n the actual observations. This
list excludes spec1.es wh1.ch are rarely found, or for wh1.ch
there have been extremely few sight1.ngs. Also not 1.ncluded
are spec1.es wh1.ch are "acc1.dent1.als" in this area, as they
are not representative of normal condit1.ons.
I
I
I
I
Common Loon
Red-Throated Loon
Red-Necked Grebe
Horned Grebe
Pied-B1.lled Grebe
Cory's Shearwater
Greater Shearwater
Sooty Shearwater
W1.lson's Petrel
Gannet
Great Cormorant
Double-Crested Cormorant
Gavia immer
Gav1.a stellata
Podiceps grisegena
Podiceps aur1.tus
Pldilymbus podiceps
Puffinus diomeda
Puffinus gravis
Puffinus griseus
Oceanites oceanicus
Morus bassanus
Phalacrocorax carbo
Phalacrocorax auritus
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Great Blue Heron Ardea herodias
Green Heron Butorides virescens
Great Egret Casmerodius albus
Snowy Egret Leucophlyx thula
Louisiana Heron Hydranassa tricolor
Black-Crowned Night Heron Nycticorax nycticorax
Yellow-Crowned Night Heron Nyctanassa violacea
American Bittern Botaurus lentiginosus
Brant Branta bernicla
Snow Goose Chen hyperborea
Blue Goose Chen caerulescens
Mallard Anas platyrhynchos
Black Duck Anas rubripes
Gadwall Anas strepera
Pintail Anas acuta
Eurasian Tealq Anas crecca
Green-Winged Teal Anas carolinensis
Blue-Winged Teal Anas discors
Shoveler Spatula clypeata
European Widgeon Mareca penelope
American Widgeon Mareca americana
Wood Duck Aix sponsa
Redhead Aythya americana
Ring-Necked Duck Aythya collaris
Canvasback Aythya valisineria
Greater Scaup Aythya marila
Lesser Scaup Aythya affinis
Common Goldeneye Bucephala clangula
Bufflehead Bucephala albeola
Oldsquaw Clangula hyemalis
Harlequin Duck Histrionicus histrionicus
Common Eider Somateria mollissima
King Eider Somateria spectabilis
White-Winged Scoter Melanitta deglandi
Surf Scoter Melanitta perspicillata
Black Scoter Oidemia nigra
Ruddy Duck Oxyura ,Jamaicensis
Hooded Merganser Lophodytes cucullatus
Red-Breasted Merganser Mergus serrator
Turkey Vulture Cathartes aura
Sharp-Shinned Hawk Accipter striatus
Cooper's Hawk Accipiter cooperii
Red-Tailed Hawk Buteo ,Jamaicensis
Red-Shouldered Hawk Buteo lineatus
Marsh Hawk Circus cyaneus
Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrinus
Pidgeon Hawk Falco columbarius
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Sparrow Hawk
Ruffed Grouse
Virginia Rail
Sora
Conunon Gallinule
American Coot
Ki lldeer
American Golden Plover
Black-Bellied Plover
Ruddy Turnstone
American Woodcock
Common Snipe
Whimbrel
Spotted Sandpiper
Solitary Sandpiper
Willet
Greater Yellowlegs
Lesser Yellowlegs
Knot
Purple Sandpiper
Pectoral Snadpiper
White-Rumped Sandpiper
Bairds Sandpiper
Least Sl'\ndpiper
Curlew Sandpiper
Dunlin
Short-Billed Dowitcher
Long-Billed Dowitcher
St il t Sandpi per
Semipalmated Sandpiper
Western Sandpiper
Buff-Breasted Sandpiper
Hudsonian Godwit
Sanderling
Glaucous Gull
Iceland Gull
Great Black-Backed Gull
Ring-Billed Gull
Laughing Gull
Bonaparte's Gull
Forster's Tern
Common Tern
Roseate Tern
Least Tern
Royal Tern
Caspian Tern
Black Tern
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Falco sparverius
Banasa umbel Ius
Rallus limicola
Porzana carolina
Gallinula chloropus
Fulica americana
Charadrius vociferus
Pluvial is dominica
Squatarola squatarolas
Arenaria interpres
Philohela minor
Capella gallinago
Numenius phaeopus
Actitis macularia
Tringa solitaria
Catoptophorus semipalmatus
Totanus melanoleucus
Totanus flavipes
Calidris canutus
Erolia maritima
Erol ia me lanotos
Erolia fuscicollis
Erolia bairdii
Frolia minutilla
Erolia ferruginea
Frolia alpina
Limnodromus griseus
Limnodromus scolopaceus
Micropalama himantopus
Freunetes pusillus
Ereunetes maur i
Tryngites subruficollis
Limosa haemastica
Crocethia alba
Larus hyperboreus
Larus glaucoides
Larus marinus
Larus delawarensis
Larus atricilla
Larus philadelphia
Sterna forsteri
Sterna hirundo
Sterna dougallii
Sterna albifrons
Thalasseus maximus
Hydroprogne caspia
Chlidonias niger
I
I
I
I
Black Skimmer Rynchops nigra
Mourning Dove Zenaidura macroura
Barn Owl Tyto alba
Screech Owl Otus aslo
Snowy Owl Nyctea scandiaca
Long-Eared Owl Asio otus
Short-Eared Owl Asio flammeus
Whip-Poor-Will Caprimulgus vociferus
Ruby-Throated Hummingbird Archilochus colubris
Belted Kingfisher Megaceryle alcyon
Yellow-Shafted Flicker Colaptes auratus
Yellow-Bellied Sapsucker Sphyrapicus varius
Downy Woodpecker Dendrocopos pubescens
Eastern Kingbird Tyrannus tyrannus
Western Kingbird Tyrannus verticalis
Great-Crested Flycatcher Myiarchus crinitus
Eastern Phoebe Sayornis phoebe
Traill's Flycatcher Empidonax traillii
Eastern Wood Pewee Contopus virens
Tree Swallow Iridiprocne bicolor
Bank Swallow Riparia riparia
Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica
Fish Crow Corvus ossifragus
White-Breasted Nuthatch Sitta carolinensis
Red-Breasted Nuthatch Sitta canadensis
Brown Creeper Certhia familiaris
Winter Wren Troglodytes troglodytes
Long-Billed Marsh Wren Telmatodytes palustris
Mockingbird Mimus polyglottos
Catbird Dumetella carolinensis
Brown Thrasher Toxostoma rufum
Robin Turdus migratorius
Hermit Thrush Hylocichla guttata
Veery Hylocichla fuscescens
Eastern Bluebird Sialia sialis
Golden-Crowned Kinglet Regulus satrapa
Ruby-Crowned Kinglet Regulus calendula
Water Pipit Anthus spinoletta
Cedar Waxwlng Bombicilla cedrorum
Solitary Vireo Vireo solitarius
Red-Eyed Vireo Vireo olivaceus
Black and White Warbler Mniotilta varia
Yellow Warbler Dendroica petechia
Cape May Warbler Dendroica tigrina
Myrtle Warbler Dendroica coronata
Chestnut-Sided Warbler Dendroica pensylvanica
Blackpoll Warbler Dendroica striata
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Pine Warbler
Prairie Warbler
Ovenbird
Connecticut Warbler
Yellowthroat
Bobolink
Eastern Meadowlark
Red-Winged Blackbird
Common Grackle
Brown-headed Cowbird
Scarlet Tanager
Rose-Breasted Grosbeak
Purple Finch
Roufous-Sided Towhee
Savaannah Sparrow
Sharp-Tailed Sparrow
Seaside Sparrow
Vesper Sparrow
White-Crowned Sparrow
White-Throated Sparrow
Swamp Sparrow
Song Sparrow
Lapland Longspur
Snow Bunting
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Dendroica pinus
Dendroica discolor
Seiurus aurocapillus
Oporornis agilis
Geothlypis tirchas
Dolichonyx oryzivorus
Sturnella magna
Agelaius phoeniceus
Quiscalus quiscula
Molothrus ater
Piranga olivacea
Pheucticus ludovicianus
Carpodacus pur pure us
Pipilo erythrophthalmus
Passerculus sandwichensis
Ammospiza caudacuta
Ammospiza maritima
Pooecetes gramineus
Zonotrichia leucophrys
Zonotrichia albicollis
Melospiza georgiana
Melospiza melodia
Calcarius Iapponicus
Plectrophenax nivalis
I
The principal reference for this discussion of migratory
birds is Ig~ ~l~~~ ef ig~ ~~~ Ye~~ ~~~~, by John Bull, Dover
Publications, 1964.
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
KeI\neth C. Coenen
186 Wading River Road
Manorvi11e, N. Y. 11949
I
~~~~~~!~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~
I
1971-1972 MontclaIr state College, Upper MontclaIr, N.J.
1972-1974 Long Island UnIversIty, Southampton Center,
Southampton, N.Y. B.A. Environmental Science
I
!:EQ!.~~~!Q!!':'.l g~p~!: :Ie",I!",,,,
I
1974-1980 Research DIrector, Group for AmerIca's South Fork,
Inc. Bridgehampton, N.Y. 11932
I
ResponsIble for land use issues and environmental
reserarch for a not for profIt corporatIon. Issues Involved
included; potable water polley, residential and commercial
land development, farmland preservation, ecological resource
protection, parkland policy and shorelIne protectIon.
Supervised student Intern program for the organIzation
I
I
1980-1982 Environmental Planner, Frederick P. Clark
Associates, Rye, N.Y. 10480.
I
Partial responsibilItIes included preparation of wetland
maps for the Town of Darlen Ct.., environmental management
plan for the VIllage of Mill Neck, N.Y., subdivision design
for several developments in Westchester Count.y, traffic and
parkIng study for the Washington HeIghts/ Inwood area of
Manhattan. Consulting Town Planner for the Town of Pound
RIdge. Assisted In the preparat ion of severa 1 lOa.) or
environmental impact st.atement.s and a plan for the fut.ure of
Hempstead Harbor for the Town of Nort.h Hempstead. Prepared a
business area plan for t.he four major busIness dletl-icts in
the Town of East Hampton.
I
I
I
1982-1984 Senior Environment.al Planner, Inter-ScIence
Research Associates, Inc. Southampton, N. Y. 11968.
I
Involved with the desIgn and processing of subdIvision
applications, preparation of Environmental Impact Statements
for several major development project.s, business area study
for 10 minor business areas in the Town of East Hampton and
an Environmental Study of the Lake Montauk drainage basin.
Involved with master plan reviews and zoning ordInance
revIews for several clients.
I
I
I
I
I
I
1985-1987 General Manager, Clause Planning Concepts, Inc.
Southampton and Mattituck, N.Y.
I
I
Duties included the preparation and processing of
subdivision plans, senior citizen housing plans, affordable
housing plans, commercial sIte plans, preparation of
environmental studies and real estate consultation for a
variety of projects located on eastern Long Island and in
southwest Florida.
I
I
1988 President and owner of Hampton - Manor Associates, Inc:.
Consulting firm providing planning and zoning consultation,
environmental assessment and permit processing.
Personal Data
I
Born: March 18, 1953 Paten301l N..J.
Married with two SOilS, expecting third child in October 1988.
Achieved rank of Eagle with the Boy Scouts.
Executive Board member and general manager with the
Manorville Athletic League, Inc.
Hobbies include outdoor recreation, reading and coin
collecting.
I
I
I
~~~f~~~!~g~l ~~~~~~~~!p~
American Planning Association
American Institute of Certified Planners
I
I
J
-
I