HomeMy WebLinkAbout1000-142.-1-26
.
APPROVED BY
PLANNING BOARD
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
lei 101'2 r~V/3 /or)'
11/1t!/92 rev/J/Oa3
10/ f? /'}Z r~v/5/0/}J
\
~- -.;..-~ .'~ ..,.-.~ --.- --
SG/rY/C e
6'alraace
- -
PLAN FOR
RIVE-UP BANKING FACILITY
~ TTITUCK SHOPPING CENTER
A T MA TTnUCK, N y:
Scale: 1" = 20'
Sept. 8,1992
r;:.--"'-"'=~'"'-:'C<-''-'''''''
1''"'"'\ R fe) 'c. ,; .,
! 11 u; lb !~: U \'~"J
. I 0 J r'~-" -',", '-"'--'- ,,-
Ii n\! ,
t!1 OE,C, ,2" I /99",2, ., ~l
l ;
Si)' :~,.~-:."'7'~.:--:-..;~~....J
r: --
PC
(51
P. O.
MAIN
SOU THOL 0,
P.C.
92-199
.~
.
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman
George Ritchie Latham, Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L Edwards
SCOTI L HARRIS
Supervisor
Telephone (516) 765.1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
November 4, 1992
Alan A. Cardinale
Mattituck Shopping Center
P.O. Box 77
Mattituck, NY 11952
.-
RE: Bridgehampton National
Bank
Mattituck Shopping -
Center
SCTM~1000-142-1-2
Dear Mr. Cardinale:
The following resolutions were adopted by the Southold Town
Planning Board at a meeting held on Monday, November 2, 1992.
BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board,
acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, make a
determination of non-significance on this unlisted action and
grant a Conditioned Negative Declaration.
RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board issue
conditional final approval and authorize the Chairman to endorse
a site plan that has been revised in accordance with the
Conditioned Negative Declaration and that has been certified by
the Building Inspector.
Enclosed please find a copy of the conditioned Negative
Declaration for your records.
Very trUlY~UrS,
" ~ /s:
~r owski, Jr.9v. /
Chairman
Enc!.
))
.
.
"
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski. Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Lalham. Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
SCOTI L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Soulhold. New York 11971
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTH OLD
Fax (516) 765-1823
State Environmental Quality Review
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Notice of Determination of Non-Signific~ce
November 2, 1992
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the
implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State
Environmental Quality Review Act) of the Environmental Law.
The Southold Town Planning Board, as lead agency, has
determined that the proposed action described below will not
have a significant effect on the environment and a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement will not be prepared.
Name of Action:
Proposed amendment to Site plan for
Alan A. Cardinale Shopping Center for
addition of a drive-up window for
Bridgehampton National Bank
SCTMll:
1000-142-1-2
..
Location:
North side of Main Road, east of Factory
Avenue, Mattituck
SEQR Status: Type I )
Unlisted X)
Description of Action:
To install a drive-up teller window on the westernmost
retail space of the building (Shopping Center) and
standing line facing Factory Avenue.
.
..
.
.
..
Page 2
Conditions for Alan A. Cardinale Shopping Center/Bridgehampton
National Bank
1. The impact of the addition of a drive-up window on
traffic safety will be mitigated by internal
modification of the curbing so that there is at least
20 feet of landscaping and sidewalk between the 24
foot travel aisle and the southerly front of the
bank. This is to be accomplished by extending the
existing curbing the entire travel lane/access to
Factory Avenue accordingly. The south side_pf the
travel lane adjacent to the intersection will be
further buffered by the relocation and addition of the
landscaped islands so that the access is properly
aligned and there is a new landscaped island the width
and depth of one parking space (9' x 19') directly
opposite and parallel to the bank.
Reason Supporting This Determination:
This determination is issued in full consideration of this
criteria for determination of significance contained in 6 NYCRR
Part 617.11, and the following specific reasons:
1. Subject property is zoned B (Business). The proposed
use is consistent with the zoning district. The
project has been compared to the bulk and dimensional
requirements of the zoning district and is found to be
in conformance with these requirements.
2. The applicant has completed a Traffic Impact Study
which demonstrates that the project is not likely to
have an undue burden on either the integral
circulation of the shopping center or the surrounding
road network. The quantified traffic safety impacts
at the intersection of the proposed drive-up exit lane
and the travel lane to the Factory Avenue exit will be
mitigated by shifting the internal intersection 20
feet south of the building to permit greater
visibility to both car drivers and pedestrians.
Further, the relocation or addition of landscape
islands parallel to both extensions on the south side
of the travel lane will lessen vehicular conflicts at
this internal intersection.
.__n.......
~
.
.
~
Page 3
Conditions for Alan A. Cardinale Shopping Center/Bridgehampton
National Bank
For Further Information:
Contact Person: Valerie Scopaz
Address: Planning Board
Telephone Number: (516) 765-1938
cc: Suffolk County Department of Health Services
Suffolk County Planning Commission
NYSDEC- Commissioner Albany
Judith Terry, Town Clerk
Building Department
Applicant
NYS Dept. of Transportation
J
J
'-'I
~
o
>
""
"I>
\
.......
\
~
.......
,
0
0
0
-
,1 ;:.
~ ?-
zl-<
j,O~
~o
~~
.....:I
~Gi~
It: u.l'
o~
l'..u.l
If)~
--<:
~:::>
<0
...JVl
0.
~
I-
-
v".
If)
:c z
I- -
""" "., /"....
\
_?
T ---....- ------., --
:t
I SITE PLAN
Presubmission conference
(within 30 days of written request)
Complete application received
(within 4 months of presub. conference)
Application reviewed at work session
(within 10 days of receipt)
9". )-~ . IV
[iWl1r:;;;-]
~~
I=tl~
Applicant advised of necessary revisions'
(within 30 days of review)
Revised sub mission received
[iWl1r:;;;-]
~~
[iWl1r:;;;-]
~~
Lead Agency Coordination
SEQRA determination
REFERRED TO:
Zoning Board of Appeals
(written c~mments within 60 days of request)
Board of Trustees
~ [;r/
[iWl1r:;;;-]
~~
/
~
I~LI~ rc~
1AiXi'Q~
~~
1AiXi'Qr,:,
~~
1AiXi'Qr,::.,
~~
Building Department (certification)
. Suffolk County Department of Planning /
Department of Transportation -State /
Department of Transportation - Coun;>'
Suffolk County Dept. of Health ,(/ /
Fire Commissioners
Sent:
Received'
RECEIVED:
Draft Covenants and Restrictions
Filed Covenants and Restrictions
Landscape plan
Lighting plan
Curb Cut approval
Health approval
[iWl1rn;;-J
~~
pwqrn;;-J
~~
1AiXi'Qrn;;-J
~~
IAiXi'Qb1
~~
/is'Llr::::::'1
~~
pwqr;:;;;,
~~~
f.ij;O'QIOi(1
~~
Drainage plun
Reviewed by Engineer
Approval of site plan
-Wilh conditions
,
Endorsement of sile'plan
_\ l'\VI\~ Y
\
, ..
..........."'......
Certificale of Occupancy inspection
f.iWL1rn;;-J
~~
One year review
l~LI fiiKl
i
. .
--.--r --......-
~;=;tE"
/.6
516-298-4223
I?K
ALAN A. CARDINALE
REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT & INVESTMENT
P. O. BOX 77
MATTITUCK SHOPPING CENTER
MATTITUCK, L.I., N.Y. 11952
August 25, 1992
Town of Southold
Planning Board
Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
~/(~~
Re.
Site Plan
BNB Drive-up Window
Mattituck Plaza
Dear Mr. Orlowski, Jr. Chairman.
Please find enclosed a completed application as well
as a check in the amount $150.00 covering the above
captioned location. It would be greatly appreciated, if
this application can be placed on calendar for discussion
prior to the September 14, 1992 Board Meeting to assure
that all required submissions are complete.
Very truly yours,
*4Ca~.-~_
Alan A. Cardinale
,....",,~.~-
l
i
t
'n1r-m @ ~ n t
"'",~ i
II AUG2 6 Ig~
[
l...____...
~~n~:T~;:\X -i::
r'; .,' :r; i;'
.
.
"
D
....._""_.,.,.,..
; ,;) r< n
: ,,,JL!.-UL...
Southold. N..Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
rUG 2 6 IS
APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION
Date of Application ~~~~ Filing Fee
New Use Change of ~se ~ Re-Use Extension
Revision-Df an Approved Si~e Plan--- (Date of
Other Specify----
******************
OF SITE PLAN
Date Rec'd
of Existing Use
Approval
Name of Business /#~:rr/ n< ~k' A'4"?-9.
Location of Site ,,:../ "" iU~" 2'- ,,~ ~
Address of Site, if available A":.ctr" ~.r A?~rrir4LC"" d'j
Name of Applicant .4t/f /Y. A. C/f,e.o,,,,,.9~,r
Address of Applicant ,t?o .6',... 77 /??4'T,7K r",:. /I/. v /1'7,....
Telephone ..s-/~- z'~,- V:l 2 ?
Person to be responsible for Construction /?tAd A CA~d"'dA"~.:J7e.
/"'0 ? "':T7',-~CIr At /,,..-...Telephone ..r/~ - 2-9,_ ""2 ~:?
Applicant's interest in site-chec one: OWner of Land ~
Under contract to purchase___
Owner- of- Fee Title to Land .4'::'/9/)/ 4? CAA"LJ,;';.-ur
Address Ra 4?' ?7 ~rr"r<Lr.... .v.p'Telephone ,s-/.(- ;;z.'?I,p. Y...Z~
Site Plans Prepared by ~c;;.uc J"u""";Z_License No. ~,,~ /I'
Address /!' '" 4'".".,. p., , ~/N'..('"o"'~ 11' ~~:.'rclephonc ..r'/~ _ ;;>;; J- - ~;;t!...
*********************
Total Land Area of Site 9; Ae~"J Sq. Ft. Zone District
Existing Use of Site ~4Are~~ Proposed Use of Site
Gross Floor Area of Existing Structure(s) ,/~.,o sqft.
Gross Floor Area of Proposed Structure(s) /~on sqft.
Percent of Lot Coverage by Building(s) ~ Lr~
Percent of Lot for Parking (where applicable) ~4&~~C~
Percent of Lot for Landscaping(where applicable)
Datum(Spccify)U.s.G.S. Other
Has applicant been granted a variance and/or special exception by
Board of Appeals
(.4J
8.9NN
sqft.
sqft.
%
.,7'" .,,-, re. 6r%
/0 %
Case Number Name of Applicant
Date of Decision Expiration Date
Will any toxic or hazardous materials, as defined by the Suffolk County
Board of Health, be stored or handled at the site? ,vo
If so, have proper permits been obtained?
Number and Date of permit issued
NO ACTION (EXCAVATION OR CONSTRUCTION) MAY BE UNDERTAKEN UNTIL APPROVAL
OF SITE PLAN BY THE PLANNING BOARD.
*(~
-p~-
. I till DDD 5i fi- <:! h.t...J U'iA-
T'J,MD -~/p--'T:._ :"l ~f"'-
'-
"
.
.
APPLICANT'S AFFIDAVIT
"
STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
/I,,{4d /9. C',QRO/d.4w.:
and says that he resides at IIJI
in the State of New York, and that
or that he is the
being duly sworn, deposes
dAU~~.t: MA/~. ;Y. ~ C'"rau6AfG
he is the ,owner of the above property,
of the
(Title) (Specify whether Partnership
which is hereby making application; tnat the
or Corporation)
owner or his heirs, successors or assigns will, at his own expense,
install the required site improvements in accordance with Article XIII
of the Code of the Town of Southold for the area stated herein
and that there are no existing structures or improvements on the land
which are not shown on the.~ite Plan; that title to the entire parcel,
including all rights-of-way, have been clearly established and are
shown on said Plan 1 that no part of the Plan infringes upon any duly'
filed plan which has not been abandoned both as to lots and as to
roads; that ho has examined all rules and regulations adopted by the
Planning Board for the filing of Site Plans and will comply with
same; that the plans submitted, as approved, will not be altered or
changed in any manner without the approval of the Planning Board;
and that the actual physical improvements will be installed in
strict accordance with the plans submitted.
Signed~- e.., "
(Owner)
Sworn to before me this
day of
(Notary Public)
19
Signed
(Partner or Corporate Officer and Title)
."..,
\1 f"""
n'fn) ~ @ ~ ~ :1L:_,'"
j II ,... ,
" u ~
\\ ~~~, I: ') F if''' >
,
.
.
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Soulhold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765.1938
i' r,' n \V,
~JltUb'
PLANNiNG ilOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ,
.
',- 2 6 19~"
jt::: ~~,'
SITE PLAN
___'-~.?\L;~':::~~J;;I~';'"
REQUIRED DOCUMENTS ,AND PROCEDURES
I'.'
..
-
Section 100-256. Application elements.
A. 'Submiss,ion ,qf a complete site plan application shall
consist of:'
, . A completed site plan application form.
2. Site plan review hie.' as specified in subsection
B. belpw.
3. A completed Environmental Assessment Form
4. Nine 'copies of the site plan.
5. Four copies of a property survey. certified by a
licensed land surveyor. , ~
6. Proof of Health Department review. ~/.1.
Fees , '
, .
B.
~l
U:-- .
The applic<ltion fee for a new site plan shall be
one hundred and fifty dollars ($150) per acre or
an" froction of 'ln acre thereof. plus two and five-
t~lt,th~IC~111ts t.hoisper square foot of building
D."ea. ..:. "
2. The applic<ltion fee for a revised site plan shall
be one hundred <lnd fifty dollors ($150.00) plus
two ond five-tenths cents ($0.025) per ",,":
~qUaref9ot of building area. .
,Revised June - 1989
.
(
14-16-2 (2/87)-7c
.
.
,
PiG i' r
(
SEQR
,
\
\
\
,
L'-:~3IT~; j
Purpose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an orderly m;wh.!'i, 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 concerllS 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.
617.21
Appendix A
State Environmental Quality Review
FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
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 i~ likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially-
large impact. The form also identifiE!s whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced.
Part 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentially-large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the
impact is actually important.
(
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE- Type 1 and Unlisted Actions
Identify the Portions of EAF completed for this project: 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 supportinll
information, and considering both the magi tude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the
lead agency that:
o A. The project will not result in any large and important impacl(s) and, therefore, is one which will not
have a significant Impact on the environment, therefore a negative declaration will be prepared.
o [3. Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant
effect for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been required.
therefore a CONDITIONED negative declaration will be prepared.'
o C. The project may result in one or more large and important impacts that may have a significant impact
on the environment, therefore a positive declaration will be prepared.
. A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions
. 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
,
e"ART 1-PROJECT INFORMAWN
Prepared by Project Sponsor
NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant effect
on the environment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E. Answers to these questions will be considered(
as part of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any 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 4~"J6r '/~""-"T..... #4r,..",,4,; d4;Vk
~ /?"'..9~ /1. C'/lRiJ ""'-8 '-IE - c...-",""
LOCATION OF ACTION (Include Street Address, Municipality and County)
/??#rr,T<LlCk AA:t4 .41,p,n/ ~O R'''J.re Zt""
NAME OF APPLICANT/SPONSOR ,
t',~N .19. C'/l;('.o ';"';-9 <C!:
ADDRESS
/.'d. 4.". 717' ,l'?/8 rnrit. c-.:-
/77grr~'r" tClC /v. c.
BUSINESS TELEPHONE
(,..,,) ~f1P_ .,.~z.3'
;??'~rrn-d Ck
NAME OF OWNER (If different)
...s ,~_ c .
.-
ZIP CODE
I I '1'.5"'L
CITY/PO
ADDRESS
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION
ZIP CODE
CITY/PO
C'///).v"c dF CC"''''''' 4 C, "''' u.J E: /~_ "'4kt!'.c" ~
r; // Lld.,n",,,,/ ~C'<'~7 /,y.:;!.,J,_)" .o~,_c~.,J.
(:
Please Complete Each Question-Indicate N.A, if not applicable
A. Site Description
Physical selling of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas.
1. Present land use: ~Urban olndustrial ~mmercial oResidential (suburban)
oForest oAgriculture DOther
oRural (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)
3. What is predominant soil type(s) on project site?
a. Soil drainage: 9Well drained % of ~ite
DPoorly drained % of site
b. If any agricl/IIUralland is involved, how many acres of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the NYSc
Land Classification System? acres. (See 1 NYCRR 370). C
4. Arc there bedrock oulcropplngs on project site? DYes rMNo
a. What is depth to bedrock? (In feet)
'I -J-
acres.
PRESENTLY
o acres
AFTER COMPLETION
o acres
o
o
acres
t>
acres
o
acres
acres
<:)
o
acres
o
acres
acres
o
o
'i~
acres
acres
o
9r
acres
acres
acres
d
acres
"
acres
DModerately well drained
% of site
2
-- -
- "'-
5. Approximate percentage of pr.ed project site with slopes:
~O%, %
015% 0 eater.
010-15%
%
%
6. 15 project substantially contiguous to. or co~tain a building, site, or district, listed on the State or the National
Registers of Historic Places I DYes rnNo
( 7.
Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural landmarks?
8. What is the depth of the water table? "'h1 (in feet)
9. 15 site located over a primary, principal. ~r sole source aquiferl DYes ~
DYes
~
10.
11.
Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? DYes ~
Does project site c~tain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangeredl
DYes ~o According to
Identify each species
Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project sitel (i.e.. cliffs, dunes, other geological formations)
DYes ~o Describe
12.
13. Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area?
DYes li1'No If yes, explain ",
14. Does the present siV; include scenic views known to be important to the communityl
DYes ,01lNo
15. Streams within or contiguous to project area:
a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary
16. lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area:
a. Name
19.
Is the site served by existing public utilities? ~s DNo
a) If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? ~s DNo
b) If Yes, will improvements be necessary to allow connection? DYes DNo
Is the site located in an agricultural sJistrict certified pursuant to Agriculture and
Section 303 and 304? DYes [B1(io
15 the site located in or substantially contiguous)O a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8
of the ECl, and 6 NYCRR 6171 DYes ~o
Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes? DYes ~
b. Size (In acres)
( 17.
18.
Markets law, Article 25-AA,
20.
B, Project Description
.
1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate)
a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project sponsor
b. Project acreage to be developed: (....,~.u.. acres initially;
c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped CQ,,,,'" -(Teo acres.
d. length of project, In miles: ,."//l (If appropriate)
e. If the project Is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed ^' Ill-
I. Number of off-street parking spaces existing '1ru ; proposed 'IJIJ
g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour ~ (upon completion of project)?
h. If residential: Numher and type of housing units:
One Family Two Family
<J'.;.
acres.
acres ultimately.
%;
Multiple Family
Condominium
L
Initially
Ultimately
i. Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure ~ height;
j. Linear feet of ,frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy is?
width;
, Pl1""1'-.
length.
fl.c...~
3
,
~._-
2. How much natural material (i..ck, earth, etc.) will be removed from _ite? fl<>.NP
3. Will disturbed areas be reclaim~ DYes DNa ~A .
a. If yes, for what intend..": purpose is the site being rec'laimed?
b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? DYes DNa
c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? DYes DNa ,~
.sQ.""~
4. How many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site? $;"00'" ~13_.
.
5. Will any mature jerest (over 100 years old) or other locally.important vegetation be removed by this project?
DYes @No
6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction N/"
7. If multi'phased:
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 construction? "DYes [Y1<f'0
9. Number of jobs generated: during constructlon~; after project is complete ~
10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project' NUN <-
tons/cubic yards.
(
months, (including demolition).
(number).
month
month
DYes
year, (including demolition).
year.
DNo
11. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities?
DYes
~
If yes, explain
12. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? DYes ~o
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? . DYes ~ Type
14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? DYes 00;;
Explain
15. Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain? DYes ~o
16. Will the project generate solid waste? DYes ~o
a. If yes, what is the amount per month tons
b. If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used? DYes DNo
c. If yes, give name ; location
d. Will any wastes nol go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? DYes DNo
e. If Yes, explain
(
17.
Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste?
a. If yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal?
b. If yes, what is the anticipated site life?
Will project use herbicides or pesticides? DYes
Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? DYes
Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambientyoise levels?
Will project result in an increase in energy use? DYes ~o
If yes, indicate type(s)
DYes
~.
tons/month.
years.
~o
rntC
18.
19.
20.
21.
DYes
~
22. If water supply is from wells, indicate pumping capacity ~Ift gallons/minute. ,ic-u roN"l....J /'_".._.,,,
23. Total anticipated water usage per day 1;'" gallons/day. e
24. Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding? DYes 1Q1<[0
If Yes, explain
.
4
C. Zoning and Planning Information
1. Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision? ~es DNo
If Yes, indicate decis!on required: .
Dzoning amendment Dzoning variance Dspecial use permit Dsubdivision ~te plan
Dnew/revision of master plan Dres6u~ce management plan Dother
2. What is the zoning c1assification(s)of the site? (L$) .t!,u,_a-.J
3. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning?
?
What is the proposed zoning of the site? (ft ) L1'~.rh.."rJ
What is the maximum pOlential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning?
N~
,
Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? DYes DNo
What are the predominant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a Yo !"ile radius of proposed action?
-----
25..Approvals Required:
. ~
City, Town, Village Board DYes
( City, Town, Village Planning Board ~s DNo
City, Town Zoning Board rJY~s ~o
City, County Health Department ~ ~o
Other Local Agencies es DNo
Other Regional Agencies DYes ~
State Agencies liil'fes ~
Federal Agencies DYes
4.
5.
( 6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
.pe
Submittal
Dale
S,re
~/L~/~~
/c.~'V ..9"'~
A'.u ~J~...s. ,oe,.r
/y~,- J;'d"~,
Lf'4";/(/N~ .G-.J..)"n~
..4~.I..f"'" V t'! ..0
0::-
Is the proposed action compatible with .adjoining/surrounding land uses within a Yo
If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed?
a. What is the minimum lot size proposed?
Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of sewer or water districts? DYes
Will the proposed action create ydemand for any community provided services (recreation, education,
fire protection)? DYes Ill'No.
a. If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to hal)dle projected demand? DYes DNo
Will the proposed action. result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels?
a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? DYes
12.
~ DNo
mile?
,v/;
/
~
police,
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~ponso~~A'4 # &.e///"y'~L~ Date ~A-;A,
c.. Slgnature~~_ ~ Title e>?j~r.L.
If lhe aclion is in the Coaslal Area, and you are a stale agency, .complele the Coaslal Assessment Form before proceeding
with this assessment.
.
5
Part 2-PROJECT IMPACTS AND THEIR MAGNITUDE
. Responsi~ility 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. (Jut, 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.
Instruelions (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 si}e?
. DNa ~ES
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 flood way.
. Other impacts
2. Will there be an effectt,. ..,IV U1lique or unusual land foryrs found on
the site? (i,e., cliffs, dunes, geological formations, etc.)~O DYES
. Specific land forms:
6
,
1 2 3
Small to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
ci 0 DYes DNo
6' 0 DYes DNo
~ 0 DYes DNo
0 DYes DNo
ct 0 DYes DNo
rf 0 DYes DNo
~ 0 DYes DNo
0 DYes DNo
~ 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
r
'-
L
'--
("
.
IMPACT ON WATER
3. Will proposed action affect any water body designated as protected?
(Under Articles 15, 24, 25 of the Environmental Conservati9lf law, ECl)
rnf.lo DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
o Developable area of site contains a protected water body.
o Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a
protected stream.
o Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body.
o Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland.
o Other impacts:
4. Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing pt" new body
of water? . 0'NO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
o A 10% increase or decrease in the surface are,.of any body of water
or more than a 10 acre increase or decrease. ..
o Construction of a body of water that exceeds-10 acres of surface area.
o Other impacts:
(
5. Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater -./
quality or quantity? l!'fNO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
o Proposed Action will require a discharge permit.
o Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does not
have approval to serve proposed (project) action.
o Proposed Action requires water supply from wells with greater than 45
gallons per minute pumping capacity.
o Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water
supply system.
o Proposed Action will adversely affect groundwater.
o Liquid effluent will be conveyed off the site to facilities which presently
do not exist or have inadequate capacity.
o Proposed Action would use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per
day.
o Proposed Action will likelv cause siltation or other discharge into an
existing body of water to the extent that there will be an obvious visual
contrast t.o natural conditions.
o Proposed Action will require the storage of petroleum or chemical
products greater than 1,100 gallons. .
o Proposed Action will allow residential uses in' areas without water
and/or sewer services.
o Proposed Action locates commercial and/or industrial uses which may
require new or expansion of existing waste treatment and/or storage
facilities.
o Other impacts:
c.
6. Will proposed action aller drainage flow or pallerns, or surf;ee
water runoff/ []NO ij6'YES
Examples that would apply to column 2
o Proposed Action would change flood water flows.
7
,
[1[;11 to 2 3
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 DNa
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 DNa
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
~ 0 DYes DNo
.
. 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
~
DVES
7. Will proposed action affect air quality?
Examples 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 exceect Sibs. per hour or a
heat source producing more than 10 million BJU'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 endangep!tJ
species? iBNo DVES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. 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. .
. Removal of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habitat.
. Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other
than for agricultural purposes.
. Other impacts:
9. Will Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatene;/' or
non-endangered species? l!iJNo DVES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed Action would substantially interfere with any resident or
migratory fish, shellfish or wildlife species.
. Proposed Action requires the removal of more than 10 acres
of mature forest (over 100 years of age) or other locally important
vegetation.
IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES
10. Will the Proposed Action affect agricultural land reso,llfcesl
[!(NO DVES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. The proposed action would sever, cross or limit access to agricultural
land (includes cropland, hayfields, pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc.)
8
,
2 3'
sn!to Potential Can Impact Be
Mo erate' Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
~ 0 OVes ONo
0 OVes DNa
~ 0 OVes ONo
0 DYes DNa
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVes DNa
I
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVes DNa
0 0 OVes DNa
(
or
"
....
t
.
(
. Construction activity would excavate or compact the soil profile of
agricultural land.
. The proposed action would irreversibly convert more than 10 acres
of agricultural land or, if located in an Agricultutal District, more
than 2.5 acres of agricultural land
. The proposed action would disrupt or prevent installation of agricultural
land management systems (e.g., subsurface drain lines, outlet ditches,
strip cropping); or create a need for such measures (e.g. cause a farm
field to drain poorly due to increased runoff)
. Other impacts:
IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES /
11. Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources? ~O DYES
(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 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 or structure of b&oric. pre.
historic or paleontological importance? ~O DVES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed Action occllrrlllg 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 occlIr in an area deSignated as sensitive for
archaeological sites on the NVS Site Inventory.
. Other impacts:
l
IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION
13. Will Proposed Action affect the quantity or quality of existing or
future open spaces or recreational opportunities? /
Examples that would apply to column 2 liilNo DVES
. The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational opportunity.
. A major reduction of an open space important to the community.
. Other impacts:
9
,
"
~ltO' 2 3
Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
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 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0, 0 OVes ONo
.'
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
0 0 OVes ONo
-------------..,;---- ~--------
IMPACT ON ASPORTATION
14. Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems? /
[]NO Ii'l'YES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Alteration of present patterns of movement of people andlor goods.
. Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems.
. Other impacts:
IMPACT ON ENERGY
15. Will proposed action affect the community's sourc~ of fuel or
energy supply? ~NO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed Action will cause a greater than 5% increase in the use of
any form of energy in the municipality.
. Proposed Action will require the creation or extension of an energy
transmission or supply system to serve more than.:;O 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 vibratiorYas a result
of the Proposed Action? - (}(NO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Blasting within 1,500 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive
facility.
. Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day).
. Proposed Action will produce operating noise exceeding the local
ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures.
. Proposed Action will remove natural barriers that would act as a
noise screen.
. Other impacts:
IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH
17. Will Proposed Action affect public health and safety?1
. riNO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
. Proposed Action may cause a risk of explosion or release of hazardous
substances (i.e. oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) in the event of
accident or upset conditions, or there may be a chronic low level
discharge or emission.
. Proposed Action may result in the burial of "hazardous wastes" in any
form (i.e. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritating,
infectious, etc.)
. Storage facilities for one million or more gallons of liquified natural
gas or other flammable liquids.
. Proposed action may result in the excavation or other disturbance
within 2,000 feet of a site used for the disposal of solid or hazardous
waste.
. Other impacts:
10
,
.11 to 2 3
Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change I....
~ 1'-
0 DYes DNa
0 DYes DNa
~ 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYes DNa
0 0 DYes ONO
0 0 DYes DNa
(
c::
.
.
IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHARACTER
OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD
Will proposed action affect the character of the existing"rommunity?
. [!!'NO 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 prec;dent for future projects.
. Proposed Action will create or eliminate emplclyment.
. Other impacts:
18.
C
- n _~_ ~__
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 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
0 0 DYes DNo
19. Is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy related to
potential adverse environmental impacts? DNO 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 impael(s) is considered to be potentially large, even if the impael(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 objections to the project relate to this impact.
(Continue on altachments)
l
11
.14.14.11 (2,/87)-9<: 617.21 SEaR
. Appendix B .
te Environmental Quality iew
( Visual EAF Addendum
This form may be used to provide additional Information relating to Question 11 of Part 2 of
the Full EAF,
(To be completed by Lead Agency)
vr,,>!"" @ Distance Between
Project and Resource (in Miles)
1. Would the project be visible from: 0.'/. V..lh '12.3 3.5 5+
. A parcel of land which Is dedicated to and available D D D D D
to the public for the use, enjoyment and appreciation
of natural or man. made scenic qualities?
. An pverlook or parcel of land dedicated to public D D D D D
observation, enjoyment and appreciation of natural
or man.made scenic qualities? -
.' D D
. A site or structure listed on the" National or State D D D
Registers of Historic Places?
. State Parks? D D D D D
. The State Forest Preserve? D D D D D
. National Wildlife Refuges and state game refuges? D D D D D
. National Natural Landmarks and other outstanding D D D D D
natural features?
{ . National Park Service lands? D D D D D
. Rivers designated as National or State Wild, Scenic D D D D D
or Recreational?
. Any transportation corridor of high exposure, such D D D D D
as part of the Interstate System, or Amtrak?
. A governmentally established or designated interstate D D D D 0
or inter.county foot trail, or one formally proposed for
establishment or designation?
. A site, area, lake, reservoir or highway designated as D D D D D
scenic?
. Municipal park, or designated open space? D D D D D
. County road? 0 D D D D
. State? D D D D D
. Local road? D D D D D
2. Is the visibility of the project seasonal? (Le.. screened by summer foliage, but visible during other
seasons)
DYes DNo
l
3. Are any of the resources checked in question 1 used by the public during the time of year
during which the project will be visible?
DYes DNo
1
,
---,.op'"----.,.,---'"7-
"
DESCRIPTION OF EXIS. VISUAL ENVIRONMENT .
4. From each Item checked In question I, check those which generally describe the surrounding
environment.
Essentially undeveloped
Forested
Agricultural
Suburban residential
Industrial
Commercial
Urban
River, Lake, Pond
Cliffs, Overlooks
Designated Open Space
Flat
Hilly
Mountainous
Other
NOTE: add attachments as needed
.'
.
Within
.'/4 mile .1 mile
(
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
5. Are there visually similar projects within:
.'/2 mile DYes ONo
.1 miles DYes ONo
.2 miles DYes ONo
.3 miles DYes ONo
. . Distance from project site are provided for assistance. Substitute other distances as appropriate.
.
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.
r
\..
CONTEXT
7. The situation or activity in which the viewers are engaged while viewing the proposed action is
Activity
, Travel to and from work
Involved in recreational activities
Routine travel by residents
At a residence
At worksite
Other
Daily
o
o
o
o
o
o
Weekly
o
o
o
o
o
o
FREQUENCY
Holldaysl
Weekends
o
o
o
o
o
o
Seasonally
o
o
o
o
o
o
e:
2
.
A
.
.
\5fd3p/E- ,~
;J~
516-298-4223
I?K
ALAN A. CARDINALE
REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT & INVESTMENT
P,O, BOX 77
MATTITUCK SHOPPING CENTER
MATTITUCK, LL, N,Y, 11952
August 25. 1992
Town of Southold
Planning Board
Main Road
Southold. NY 11971
~~~~
Re:
Site Plan
BNB Drive-up Window
Mattituck Plaza
Dear Mr. Orlowski. Jr. Chairman:
Please find enclosed a completed application as wei!--
as a check in the amount $150.00 covering the above
captioned location. It would be greatly appreciated. if
this application can be placed on calendar for discussion
prior to the September 14, 1992 Board Meeting to assure
that all required submissions are complete.
Very truly yours.
*4C~
Alan A. Cardinale
!!~ rn @ rn n w c' -:-:;;
\ I
I n j"-["2 .
i JL-,' 6"
I I---sGijTl!OLD 10\:.- .
L-.fill'~.~~jNG flGA;~~_____j
'4-16.4 (2187)-Text 12
PROJECT 1.0. NUMBER
617.21-
Appendix C
State Environmental Quality Review
SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
For UNLISTED' ACTIONS Only
PART I-PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by Applicant or Project sponsor)
SEaR
1. APPLICANT /SPONSOR I 2. PROJECT NAME
/?LAd /7. C4,(!'" ...:,y'4~"G" $4 rr/rtLCK /"CA;Z:~
3. PROJECT LOCATION: .1'-" rt: 2.."-; .-?""... h' ~ ,.- .n;?k
Munlclpallly .&:? .I~, r7L C ~ N ~ County
... PRECISE LOCATION (Street address and road'lntersectlons, prominent landmarks. etc., or provide map)
,sT>>4F '# I /"~~v,,,<.W~ _CC "P/~. .J ..J 6Q"<'~~f (.J ~ r'~'...J ..?,;Wrr;rM C-r
A-rQ A/-'/.... ..<'" ... r4r;~~? 4"r! ~rr"T" c"<' MY, ..f TO -e.. ,or c'.c:.4T "
;,.,. :r,(~ ~"J :r <""" "" of ..r4.,..........""$ .;4'::"'X;9 - ~""... ., J'7l2e - _eA.e mc:r,~,. .4
5. IS PROPOSED ACTION: ~odlflcatlOn/a~etatlon
ONaw o Expansion
8. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY: w
/,1>, '" ~ 64"-<"'-7 7"" &c ~Qd,fi '4 fi.c kJe /l.r fl /1 .6-'7""""'" k:
.Mc,.I../y Nv.. )~n" "''..,j J)/CI vi: ...-.1 .
7. AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTE~" ,,~,rr S:-~hJ t:
Initially 17~ItD J!. S"D"'VI' acres Ultimately acres
8. W0{.ROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS?
Yes 0 No If No, describe briefly ,
9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY~OJECT7
o Resldenllal 0 Industrial Commercial o Agriculture o ParklForestlOpen space OOlher
Describe:
10. DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL, OR FUNDING, NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY (FEOERAL.
STATE OR LOCAL)?
t;2\'ye. ONo If yes, list agency(s) and permit/approvals $4 """",-ve RI!!6-" 1.4,..,c AI. y...rr.,,-..
NHNN ""'1901' 4'c-~..y .4'p,....r. J''''
11- DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTIOU HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL?
0Ya. ONO If yun, list agency name and permit/approval "'e~m,r7'~~ ....sL 4''''4(! A! 7 -
12. ~ESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION?
Ye. 0 No
I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE
AppllcanUsponsor n8me: 4"'''''''''' A1 ~A*~ ,NA~_"r Date: ,/..~A..
/
~~ 'i
Signature:
""".
. OVER
1
If the eetlon Is In the Coastal Area. and you are a state agene
Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this as
.'
PART II-ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSM
A. DOES ACTION ~D ANY TYPE I THRESH
DVes 0No
B. WILL ACTION RECEIVE COOROINATED REVIEW AS PROVIDED FOR UNLISTED ACTIONS IN 6 NVCRR, PART 617.6?
may be superseded by another Involved agency.
DVes D No
(To be completed by Agency)
IN 6 NYCAR, PART 617.121 II yes, coordinate I
lew process and use the FULL EAF.
If No, 8 negallve declaration
C. COULD ACTION RESULT IN ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FOLLOWING: (Answers may be handwritten, If legible)
C1. Existing air quality. surface or groundwater quality or quantity, nolS8 levels, existing traffic patterns. solldwasle production or disposal,
potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly:
C2. Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natura' or cultural resources; or community or neighborhood character? explain briefly:
C3. Vegetallon or tauna, IIsh, shellllsh or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly:
C4. A community's existing plans or goals as officially adopted. or a change In use or Intensity of use of land or other natural resources? explain briefly
..
.
C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be Induced by the proposed acllon? Explain briefly.
CG. long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not Identified In C1.C5? explain briefly.
C7. Other Impacts (Including changes In use of either quantity or Iype of energy)? Explain briefly.
D. IS THERE. OR IS THERE LIKELV TO BE, CONTROVERSV RELATED TO POTENTIAL ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS?
D Ves D No If Ves, e.pleln briefly .
PART III-DETERMINATION OF SIGNIF.l.CANCE (To be completed by Agency)
INSTRUCTIONS: For each adverss sllect Identified above, determine whether It Is substantial, large, Important or otherwise .Ignlflcant.
Each ellect should be assessed In connection with Its (a) setting (I.e. urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d)
Irreversibility; (e) geographic scope; and (I) magnitude. If necessary, ~dd attachments or reference supporting materials. Ensure that
explanations contain sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse Impacts have been Identified and adequately address-9d.
D Check this box If you have Identified one or more potentially large or significant adverse Impacts which MAY
occur. lhen proceed directly to the FUll EAF andlor prepare a positive declaration.
o Check this box If you have determined, based on the Information and analysis above and any supporting
documentation, that the proposed action Will N.Or result In any. significant adverse environmental Impacts
AND provide on attachments as necessary, the..reasons supporting this determination:
Name of lead Alency
Print or Type Name of ResponSible Officer in lead Aaency
Title of Responsible Qflicer
Sianature of Responsible Officer in lead Agency
.
Silnature of Preparer (It different from responSible officer)
Date
2
,
r - .._
TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUfHOLD
Suffolk County, New York Phone 516-765-1801
Southold, New York 11971 Date C; / :f:L 19 R-
RE)1EIVEDOF oJ At:!..AU()/,,,w.1e/ ,d., .If(}/,.pk~--#L. &d.
N~ ~- Dollars$/60,
F~~ ,j>hf)ffth~ .Qo7 -~ ~
44382
Cash D
Check ~ ~ Vo I
By
Judith T. Teny. Town Clerk
NJ~
'---
For
446931
19 ?~ I
TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUfHOLD
Suffolk County, New York Phone 516-765-1801
Southold, New York 11971
nd
Cash D
Check rn/'If ()C,go
By
-.- .;--n
.
.
....,;
Co/1()/t...., 1(~.2-72.,
January 12, 1993
Tom McCarthy stopped by Planning Board office today to pick up
signed plan for Bridgehampton National Bank. I gave him 3
copies.
Plans were signed at a work session on December 21, 1992. They
received,conditional final approval on November 4, 1992.
HP
.
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Lalham, Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
SCOTI L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box I 179
Soulhold, New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
November 27, 1992
John Reimers
New York Telephone Co.
541 No. Ocean Avenue, Room 209
Patchogue, NY 11772
RE: Proposed amendment to
site plan for Cardinale
Shopping Center to add
drive-up for
Bridgehampton National
Bank
East side of Factory
Avenue, N/S of S.R. 25
Mattituck, NY
. SCTM*1000-1000-142-1-2
NYTe1 * 11
Dear Mr. Reimers:
On November 23, 1992, the Southold Town Planning Board
granted conditional final approval to Cardinale's request for an
amendment to the site for Bridgehampton National Bank's new
drive-up teller window.
This amendment to the site may necessitate relocating
telephone pole * 11 away from the entrance in order to improve
vehicular traffic safety at this location. As shown on the
enclosed copy of the proposed site plan, the access from Factory
Avenue must be shifted 20 feet to the south in order to mitigate
the vehicular and pedestrian traffic safety impacts of adding
the drive-up window at this location.
If your office anticipates any problems with relocating
this pole, it would be greatly appreciated if you would notify
Valerie Scopaz of this office as soon as possible, because
construction is slated for completion this fall.
.
.
.
Sincerely,
~;:p( ~~, 9v-1r/s
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
Ene 1.
cc: Victor Lessard, Principal Building Inspector
Arthur Apicello, Long Island Lighting Co.
Alan A. Cardinale, Jr. OWner
Thomas J. Tobin, CEO, Bridgehampton National Bank
.
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
scon L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
I-lEMORANDUM
TO:
Victor Lessard, Principal Building Inspector
Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman 00.:;_-11/5
FROM:
RE:
Amendment to Site Plan for
Bridgehampton National Bank
SCTM * 1000-142-1-2
DATE:
November 19, 1992
Please review the attached amendment (dated as revised
11/18/92) to the Mattituck Plaza (Alan A. Cardinale) shopping
center for certification. This site plan is scheduled to be
approved at the November 23rd public meeting.
Also attached for your information is a copy of the
Conditional Negative Declaration. The Board finds that the
attached plan is substantially in compliance with the
conditional negative declaration and the zoning code.
---
.
.
$u86LE
Pb
RK/
Isl
McCarthy Management
Box 62
Mattituck. NY 11952
-_._'~"
November 19, 1992
f""~ I; GoD r~ lu\':1 L,
,\ \" 15 ..,:D t::1
..1 _,,_....
~" 1~; i .i
;1 r;\ 1
'\:,:\\ f,:OIl I 9 :'?2.
L ;,. ,.,'
1i.1'''l
l
SI)iJTHUU) 1;}\\lN
PL,~.~':N:j\~G E\OKRD
~ ~: I
...:'
; :J i;
~'
Southold Town Planning Board
Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
RE: BridgehamPton National Bank
Dear Mr. Orlowski,
Enclosed are six copies of our amended site plan for
the Bridgehampton National Bank drive through facility in
Mr. Alan Cardinale's A&P shopping center in Mattituck.
These site plans have been revised as a result of a
meeting with your Planning Board and staff in a work
session on Monday November 16, 1992.
Specifically, the points that were addressed and that
have been amended on the plan refer directly back to Mr.
Cardinale's concerns of November 12, 1992. We respectfully
request the Planning Board to accept this amended site
plan and alter the conditional Negative Declaration and
~Conditional Approval with a resolution at your next
meeting on Monday, November 23, 1992.
The following changes have been made:
1. The face of the curb at the drive through exit
into the parking area now reflects 20' from the front of
the building,
2. The corresponding exit onto Factory Avenue is also
shifted 20' to the South.
3. We have extended the crosswalk to the safest area
possible, just inside the protected area of the curb at
the front of the exit to provide for adequate visibility.
4. We have added a low profile planter box to control
the flow of pedestrian traffic to the crosswalk area.
5. We have eliminated the island, removed a parking
stall and added striping to maintain the required
clearances for the east-west traffic within the center.
6. We have added pedestrian warning signs at the
entrance to the crosswalk.
7. We have noted that the utility pole is to be
relocated, with the new location to be selected by New
York Telephone. We request the assistance of your staff
with the utility companies and correspondence that may be
necessary to have them moved at no. charge to us.
.8. We have shown a sidewalk to the front entrance of
.
the unit facing Factory Avenue.
.
We feel that we have addressed all of the concerns of
Your Board and request that we receive the approval as
noted above.
Tjm/
cc:AACjr
BNBpres
BNBf ile
Sincerely,
Thomas J.McCarthy
.'
.'
.
.
~u.a F) LE"
r:bsr-~
I L E ~'0~'~:~'/'0'~'~ ~.~~.~.~.~.~.?8 58........~~~~....~.~0m~r~~;g:;::n::uu................nUUi:...:.........:.............::...........
E AD AGE~.C'!.:....:.......":~ ~.~.~.~..................:~:~.~:7....~.~:....0~.00~~.;g::;::::~:~:~.~~;~:.T:~~.2SG..........:.............:.....::....:.:... ..................
FF I CE "or SOARD:....P 1 ann"i ng So.s.r.d................ ...........::::..:...::::::::......:.....:...:::..::::::::::::::.:...:.::.y><...:.....:::..:...........:..........................
................:....................::.............................::..:......:..:.:.:.:::::::::::::: .........:..CLASS . ....U....Un 1 i s t ed" ............ ..................... ...............::::::::::..
T I T~.~.. :...~ili::t:~~~~:~:~.~.~.~.~.....~~t....~t:~j.....::.:...........H...........i.i.::::iiirr~:~:::...~.:..iii.;.;;...::.:;.;........:!!!!.!.:....:.:.:!...!:.:...:!:..'..........'............
~sc~.tt~.~~~~..Add a drive-,:,p window t~ the Bridg;;'hampton National Sank in the
.......
....,....................
................,........
................................ ..,......................
.................. ...........................
.........."...................
............................... .....................
.............. ............".. ......,.........,............
..............,..,.....
.......................
............."........
....." .............."...
..................,.............
......,...................................,.
...........................................
........,.".."..................
..............,,,,................
............................
................"
::.TCond i t i onedH::T
.....::::::Resc i ndedH::.::::....:.::::::::::.
li~i~:~.~:~~~~.~~;.~~.~.~:~;~;~:~;~;~;~;lillllill!!I!!1!~;~;),:;~:~),;~~!illli!!!!!!!I!!!I!li!lllli:::::::
.......................................,............................"....,.........................., ...................,.,..............................
,...................................,................................................,................ ...................,....,.,....,."......................
................................................ .... ........... , .... ...........",
...,...,...................................."................................,.............................,......................................... ..................
........................., .....................................'....".........................................................,............................,.,... ..............
....,................. .............,. ... ................ ......................................................................
......................................................,.. ....................,....................................,... .......,...........
".."...,..............................".,..'...................... .........................,...,.,........................,.,...".,.,.,..................,..,..,..
.................."...............................,................".. .........................................,...........,.,....................
....................................."."..".......,.................. .........................................................,.,...",.............. ............,..,...........
....... '.,. ........ ..........................................................................,..................................'..
.................................,.......,.....,.....,..... ......................... .......,....................". ........ ..............,.,...
"".................................................................,...,.."."""....................,..".,.........................",",..,.,....................
...,..,......"...."..........................'.........".,....................."".,.,.,...,.....,..... ...,.,,,.,.................... ....................................
...................................................................,..".."".." ........................,...".......................""""..,....................... ,...................
.................................................................................................,...........................................................................
............................. .... .,...................... .................................,......................................... ...................
..".",..",.,.,.,........... ,...,,,........,.....................,,....,,,.................,,.............................,........................
..................,.....,.,...,.,.............. ................................................,.",.,..............................................................................,.........
...................,...............,..."",.",....,..,........,............,...,...........................",.................................................................",....................
........................"..............................................,...............................................................................,.........................................,.,."...
IMPORTANT
>>
F:i:J..e
N"L1mber:
N:J..-473800-00858
Use the above number in all
correspondence about this action!
To the Lead Agency:
The above information confirms that filings on the described
Negative Declaration were officially received by, and entered in the
SEQR Repository on the date(s) shown in the box headed DATE RECEIVED
above. The date and time in the second line show when this
document was printed. Please check the information above carefully,
For corrections or questions contact Charles Lockrow, (518)457-2224,
or write to:
SEQR Repository
NYSDEC Division of Regulatory Affairs
50 Wolf Road, Room 514
Albany, NY 12233
,
Town of SOUTHOLD
Planning Soard
53095 Main Road-P.O. Sox 1179
Southold, NY 11971
NOV I 8
.'
.
.
McCarthy Management
Box 62
Mattituck, NY 11952
$IJ8(;LE
Pb
fl</
Isl
i"~; Wi ;;:: , ,::
Lb 1...,1] ,_.1 1..'.. :._~........
"',.,...~-,,~.~...........-...--~
November 19, 1992
Southold Town Planning Board
Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
NOVI9\992: !
~.
~~.....-l
~- .
,~n' \T,1i-~1 il F~'",::'4
PLhj;~;::'f;t tK;';::\q
RE: Bridgehampton National Bank
Dear Mr. Orlowski,
Enclosed are six copies of our amended site plan for
the Bridgehampton National Bank drive through facility in
Mr. Alan Cardinale's A&P shopping center in Mattituck.
These site plans have been revised as a result of a
meeting with your Planning Board and staff in a work
session on Monday November 16, 1992.
Specifically, the points that were addressed and that
have been amended on the plan refer directly back to Mr.
Cardinale's concerns of November 12, 1992. We respectfully
request the Planning Board to accept this amended site
plan and alter the conditional Negative Declaration and
Conditional Approval with a resolution at your next
meeting on Monday, November 23, 1992.
The following changes have been made:
1. The face of the curb at the drive through exit
into the parking area now reflects 20' from the front of
the buildi ng.
2. The corresponding exit onto Factory Avenue is also
shifted 20' to the South.
3. We have extended the crosswalk to the safest area
possible. just inside the protected area of the curb at
the front of the exit to provide for adequate visibility.
4. We have added a low profile planter box to control
the flow of pedestrian traffic to the crosswalk area.
5. We have eliminated the island. removed a parking
stall and added striping to maintain the required
clearances for the east-west traffic within the center.
6. We have added pedestrian warning signs at the
entrance to the crosswalk.
7. We have noted that the utility pole is to be
relocated. with the new location to be selected by New
York Telephone. We request the assistance of your staff
with the utility companies and correspondence that may be
necessary to have them moved at no charge to us.
8. We have shown a sidewalk to the front entrance of
,J">
.
.
.
the unit facing Factory Avenue.
We feel that we have addressed all of the concerns of
Your Board and request that we receive the approval as
noted above.
Sincerely,
Thomas J.McCarthy
Tjm/
cc:AACjr
BNBpres
BNBfile
"(
.
.
l'
ALAN A. CARDINALE
REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT & INVESTMENT
P.O. BOX 77
MATTITUCK SHOPPING CENTER
MATTITUCK, L.I., N.Y. 11952
November 12,
Southold Planning Board
Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
~I t:Jt
~ 516-298-4223
p~ (j)
~
rn @ ffi 0 W rn ~I
f"",
, U! j
NOV I 3 1992'
n
Lrr,
I
sn '-, ,- . . I I'
i".,.<]'" ;''''T'!
pc/.La: c:'ciL__...J
Re. BNB Drive Through
Mattituck Plaza
Dear Mr. Orlowski.
I am in receipt of the Planning Board's letter dated
November 4, 1992 covering the above captioned. I have
several problems that will be incurred by adhering to the
listed conditions. I would appreciate the opportunity to
review same at the next work session, in the event the
Planning Board is unable to meet my concerns.
I respectfully ask the Planning Board to review the
concerns listed below.
1. The maximum width that can be realized would be
fifteen feet as shown on our most recent submission.
A. Lease Restrictions- The curb extension and curb
sweep would interfere with the Radio Shack Store.
B. Excessive Cost- The curb extension would force a
Lilco/Telephone/Cable pole to be relocated as
well as considerably more escavation, landscape and
asphalt work.
C. ATM Machine- Landscaping would block ATM Machine.
Can not relocated because of entrance and layout
limitations.
D. Visibilitv
1. Placing anything other than a low knee
wall and warning sign to divert pedestrians
would contradict the original purpose for
extending the curb.
2. A 15' extension would allow the driver to stop
at the pedestrian walk and provide a full view
of all shopping center traffic. Extending the
curb an additional 7' would allow the entire
vehicle to be visible.
E. Liabilitv- The addition of a separate island in
this instance would only be a danger. The
shopping center was not designed with the intention
of using multiple islands to control the flow of
traffic. The addition of one island of this
nature (low landscaping) helps the driver see other
vehicles, but not the island itself. A
driver could loose control of a vehicle because of
contact with this island.
Page 1 of 2
"
..
. ',."
.
.
Page -2-
F. Warnina Sians & Pedestrian Walk-The Town's
consultant agreed that these would control the new
traffic flow. Islands were not discussed.
G. Parkina Space Loss
I trust the Planning Board can understand my concerns and
will be able to approve the existing site plan. Thank you.
Very truly yours,
/%4(/ ,t--.J
Alan A. Cardinale Jr.
SENDER:
SUBJECT:
SCTM#:
COMMENTS:
.'
.
.
SUBMISSION WITHOQT COVER LETTER
~~
o(l/D,
Ie{ 2.- - / - ~
frr~
;..: :
NOV - 4 1992
r
....J
....'
~;::::ILe::
t;S /
tU:..
.:: ..,.'u','..:.___.....;"".~~_
~ .
CRAMER, V~ I~OCIATES
ENVIRONMEN~G CONSULTANTS
.
SUI3F1tE
~
November 2, 1992
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
Southold Planning Board
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971
Re:
Brid~ehampton National Bank
Mattltuck, New York
Traffic Impact Study
Dear Mr. Orlowski:
1DJ~'~aWJ'
U1fOV-I~
'\!
;,>
if
At your request, we have reviewed additional comments provided by Dunn
Engineering Associates (DEA) in their letter of October 26, 1992 regarding the above
captioned traffic impact report and offer the following comments:
Directional Distn1JUtion
DEA has provided the explanation for their determination of directional distribution based on surrounding
development and supported it with recent traffic volume counts during the Friday PM peak period. The
explanation is satisfactory.
Caoacitv Analysis
DEA has modifed the capacity analysis summary matrices to include the level of service determinations for easy
comparison among the three conditions analyzed. Inspection of the revised matrices confirms previous
conclusions that while there are some delays currently experienced (particularly at the southbound left turn
movement), the proposed project does not significantly degrade existing conditions.
DEA conducted an investigation of whether a traffic signal is warranted now or in the near future for the
intersection of Main Road and Factory Avenue. They concluded that the traffic conditions cannot satisfy the
traffic signal warrants in the New York State Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices.
Site Access and Circulation
DEA has provided additional information concerning existing operations within the center's parking field.
Details on site access, parking stall occupancy during various peak conditions, turnover and circulation are
satisfactory to demonstrate that the site currently functions properly.
The addition of the drive-up window proposed for Bridgehampton Bank may cause safety concern with respect to
vehicles proceeding westbound on the northern parking lot aisle, due to limited east facing site distance of
vehicles egressing the proposed drive-up window. Furthermore, there is potential conflict between vehicles
entering the Factory Avenue site access, and vehicles egressing the proposed drive-up window. In order to
alleviate these conflicts, it is recommended that the existing Factory Avenue site access be shifted southward to
provide improved site distance and allow a queuing area for vehicles exiting the drive-up window and entering the
circulation of the parking field. This modification should be performed in conjunction with a stop sign for
vehicles exiting the drive-up window, a painted stop line, an east-west sidewalk, and a pedestrian warning sign.
54-2 NORTH COUNTRY ROAD, MILLER PLACE, NY 11764 (516) 331-1455
~\.
..
.
.
Bridgehamton Bank
Proposed Drive-up Window
The DEA addendum supports the fact that the loss of parking stalls which would result from this improvement is
not significant when compared with the improvement in site circulation. Design details should he submitted to
the satisfaction of the Pbnning Board in connection with the southward shift of the Factory Avenue site access.
*
*
*
*
Based on the information submitted, this review and the Board's deliberation, we
believe it would be appropriate for the Planning Board to consider issuance of a Conditioned
Negative Declaration. The reasons provided above may be incorporated into the
Conditioned Negative Declaration as the reasons for the determination.
Thank you for the opportunity to be of service to the Planning Board, and please do
not hesitate to call if you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
, .
. ~
/..,> /,
R,t".;:'; IF } -' I
Charles J. Voorhis, CEP, AICP
CRAMER, V
ENVIRONMENT
OCIATES
G CONSULTANTS
PageZ oCZ
l
.
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Latham, Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
SCOTT" L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
State Environmental Quality Review
CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Notice of Determination of Non-Significance
November 2, 1992
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the
implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State
Environmental Quality Review Act) of the Environmental Law.
The Southold Town Planning Board, as lead agency, has
determined that the proposed action described below will not
have a significant effect on the environment and a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement will not be prepared.
Name of Action:
Proposed amendment to Site plan for
Alan A. Cardinale Shopping Center for
addition of a drive-up window for
Bridgehampton National Bank
SCTMlI:
1000-142-1-2
Location:
North side of Main Road, east of Factory
Avenue, Mattituck
SEQR Status: Type I )
unlisted X)
Description of Action:
To install a drive-up teller window on the westernmost
retail space of the building (Shopping Center) and
standing line facing Factory Avenue.
"
.;
)
.
.
Page 2
Conditions for Alan A. Cardinale Shopping Center/Bridgehampton
National Bank
1. The impact of the addition of a drive-up window on
traffic safety will be mitigated by internal
modification of the curbing so that there is at least
20 feet of landscaping and sidewalk between the 24
foot travel aisle and the southerly front of the
bank. This is to be accomplished by extending the
existing curbing the entire travel lane/access to
Factory Avenue accordingly. The south side of the
travel lane adjacent to the intersection will be
further buffered by the relocation and addition of the
landscaped islands so that the access is properly
aligned and there is a new landscaped island the width
and depth of one parking space (9' x 19') directly
opposite and parallel to the bank.
. Reason Supporting This Determination:
This determination is issued in full consideration of this
criteria for determination of significance contained in 6 NYCRR
Part 617.11, and the following specific reasons:
1. Subject property is zoned B (Business). The proposed
use is consistent with the zoning district. The
project has been compared to the bulk and dimensional
requirements of the zoning district and is found to be
in conformance with these requirements.
2. The applicant has completed a Traffic Impact Study
which demonstrates that the project is not likely to
have an undue burden on either the integral
circulation of the shopping center or the surrounding
road network. The quantified traffic safety impacts
at the intersection of the proposed drive-up exit lane
and the travel lane to the Factory Avenue exit will be
mitigated by shifting the internal intersection 20
feet south of the building to permit greater
visibility to both car drivers and pedestrians.
Further, the relocation or addition of landscape
islands parallel to both extensions on the south side
of the travel lane will lessen vehicular conflicts at
this internal intersection.
t
.
.
Page 3
Conditions for Alan A. Cardinale Shopping Center/Bridgehampton
National Bank
For Further Information:
Contact Person: Valerie Scopaz
Address: Planning Board
Telephone Number: (516) 765-1938
cc: Suffolk County Department of Health Services
Suffolk County Planning commission
NYSDEC- Commissioner Albany
Judith Terry, Town Clerk
Building Department
Applicant
NYS Dept. of Transportation
SENDER:
SUBJECT:
SCTM#:
COMMENTS:
:
.
.
- ,
SUBMISSION WITHO~T COVER LETTER
c:Jl&- ~
orVf},
Icf )... - I - 2.-.;.
?rr~
,~.~-., '-~-'-"~
, '1"; _~~~lj iU. :,"{.JL i ;':'~;
~.' J , "
.j
;;
,- ,"
, ;
; :'/ - ,I '
a .- _~__......._...,
")(lLf>IOLD '~C~.':"J J'
_.~~lLLt:~'~L~)~:-:iL ,,_,~__
...~,
"",:.
~r-:/Le:
~ /'
ICK..
,_,"-.';'~-.' _-;.0..."",,-,
I 1&
CRAMER, V
ENVIRONMENT
OC!A TES
G CONSULTANTS
~
.
SUf;f'lw
et3
~
November 2, 1992
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
Southold Planning Board
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971
Re: Brid~ehampton National Bank
Mattltuck, New York
Traffic Impact Study
Dear Mr, Orlowski:
At your request, we have reviewed \dditional comments provided by Dunn
Engineering Associates (DEA) in their let er of October 26, 1992 regarding tbe above
captioned traffic impact report and offer tJ ,e following comments:
rJm@8~\'IJ~
II ~Il)
U_ NO\! - 2 :=2
('7;'1
Ii\i
'., .
;]ii
i J 1
~'
SOU I HOLD TOWN
PLANNING BOARD
Directiollal o.-s!,,111111011
DEA has providod thc 'e"l'lanation fot their dotermi 1alion of directional distribution based on furrounding
do\'dopmonc and supported it with recent tri,flic \'ollnle eo~nts during the Friday PM peak period. The
explanation'is satisfactory.
Capt/clrv Anall'sis.
DEA has modif<d the capacity aoa1i'sis summary m; trices to include the level of service doterminations for easy
comp:lrison among the three conditions anal)"lcd. I ;~pcclion of the reviscd matriccs confitms l,rcviOuS
conclusions that while there arc some delays curren: ly experienced (particularly at the southbound left turn
movcment), (he proposed project docs nol sisnifical lly dq:;radeer.hting conditions.
DEA conductcd 3D investigation of wh<'lher a traffic ~ignal is warranted now or in the near future for the
intersection of Main Road and Factory Avenue. 'l'h 'y concluded that the traffic conditions cannot s3tisfy the
traffic signO\! warrants ill the New York State Manu, I of Uniform Traffic Control Devices.
Site ACCfH and Circulariofl
DEA has provided additional information eoncerpjr; cxi~ting operations within the CCnter'~ parking field.
Details on sitc acccss, parking stall occupancy duri.'.. various peak conditions, turnover and circulation arc
satisfactory to demonS!fal,e thatthc sile currently fu. cctions properly.
Thc additioll of the driyc.up window proposed for E 'idgeharnpton Bank may eause safoty conec,rn with rc~p~ctto
vehicles proceeding westbound on the northern parl ;ng lot aisle, due to limited cast facing site distancc of
vehicles egressing the pmposed drive.upwinJow. F :rthennore, Ihere is potential conniet betw,:cn vehicles
entering the Factory Avenue site acccss, and vehick egressing thc propo~cd drive-up v,indow. In order to
alleviate these conffidS, it is recommended that the, xisling Factory Avenue sile access be shiftc:.! southward to
pro\iJe improved site dist;mce a",; allow a quouing. rea for vchides cxitio!: the drive-up window and entering the
eircuI.tion of the parking field. This modification sl ould be performed in conjunction wilh a slop sign fOf
vehicles exiling the .;lrive-up wind"w, a painted StOp ine, an east-west sidewalk, and a pcdestrian warning sign.
54.2 NORTH COUNTRY ROAD, M LLER PLACE, NY 11764 (516) 331-1455
.
.
Bddllthamlon Bank
Proposed Drive-up Window
The DEA addendum suppc:!s the fact that the loss ,f parking stalls which would result from this improvement is
not significant when compared with the irnprovcmelt in site circulation. Design details should be submitted to
the satisfaction of the Planning Board in connection wilh the SO,uthward shift of the Factory Avt,nue site access.
...
.
...
...
Based on the information submittel, this review and the Board's delibe'ration, we
believe it would be appropriate for the PIa lning Board to consider issuance of a Conditioned
Negath'e Declaration. The reasons provid ld aoove may be incorporated into the
Conditioned Negative Declaration as the r :asons for the determination.
-,.
. Thank you for the opportunity to bl of service to the Planning Board, and please do
not hesitate to call if you have any questiOl s. .
Very truly yours,
" /'/ ./
.' ,.>:,,/.r'l /' J
/."",;- , /..'.1'''-
~4v'.'Y -",", .... J J I
,.' p....--~' "'~' '.' ,l.~,;""" ,
, .'
Charles J. Voorhis, CEcP, AICP
~~~~ SOCIA TES '
, r;, NG CONSULTANTS
~ .. , ~~\
Page 1 011
~~ //cf/~
~
.
.
St.<.6Piur
,..~
tISv'
,e.K.
.
,*
.
STATE OF NEW YORK
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY
HAUPPAUGE, N.Y. 11788
JAMES A. KUZLOSKI
REGIONAL DIRECTOR
FRANKLIN E. WHITE
COMMISSIONER
october 28, 1992
Mr. Bennett Orlowski
Town of Southold Planning
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Board
Dear Mr. Orlowski:
D/It'B
1000-142-1-2fP
Our Case No. 92-233
Suffolk Countv Tax Map No.
Route 25. Mattituck
Your October 14. 1992 Submission
The subject material will be reviewed
staff. He can be contacted at (516)
questions.
by Mr. J. Lentini of my
360-6020 if you have any
For us to commence our review, we will require five additional
copies of the subject Traffic Impact Study and six copies of
detailed site plans incorporating the information enumerated on the
attached sheets. We are particularly interested in the site's
internal drainage, inasmuch as we do not permit runoff from private
property onto the State highway system.
Please send these materials to our Regional Permit Engineer, Mr.
vito Lena, at the above address.
Thank you for your cooperation concerning this matter.
Very truly yours,
JAMES O. FREIN
Regional Traffic Engineer
Attachment: Site
JOF:JL:JS
m @ ~ 0
___",~,o,-"---"-''''9_
WI -I(~ C;\t
'w _., I h I'
Li';
"~,Ii
'<,J,
':d.l!
ill
OCT 3 0 1992 i:...J
\
soun:OLD TOWN
PLANNING BOARD
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER
.
.
J1-7-11
Site Plan Requirements:
.
, .
, .A.
Location and dimensions of existing highway pavement, curb, sidewalk,
median, median openings, guide rail, utilities, traffic signs, traffic
signal equipment, right-of-way lines and property lines.
B.
Existing and proposed buildings and appurtenances.
c. Design features to be incorporated in proposed construction or
reconstruction:
1. Width, pavement type and thickness of driveways.
2. Radii of driveway returns and other points of curvature.
3. Driveway grades or profile view of driveway, indicating low point
on private property.
4. Angle of driveways relative to the roadway center line.
5. Dimensions of roadside control islands and driveway medians.
6. Dimensions and elevations of curb and sidewalk relative to the
edge of pavement.
7. Location of authorized traffic signs and proposed advertisement
signs.
8. Existing and proposed pavement markings. Transition lengths must
be determined on the basis of guidelines enumerated in the New
York State Highway Design Manual.
9. Existing and proposed traffic signal equipment.
D. Existing and proposed drainage features:
1. Size, type and grade of driveway culverts.
2. Highway drainage structures.
3. Direction of surplus water flow on applicant's property.
E. Distance from each existing and proposed driveway on the site to:
1. The nearest side road in each direction if within 1000 feet.
2. The nearest driveway on adjacent properties.
3. Streets, roads, or driveways opposite the site.
4. Adjacent property lines.
F. North directional arrow on each applicable sheet.
f
,
.
.
.,
;.. G. ,.,Maintenance and Protection of Traffic plans and/or figures cited from
Part 302 of the New York State Manual of Uniform Traffic Control
Devices. We will recommend any necessary lane closing restrictions.
To allow for snow and ice control along the jobsite by State forces,
the contractor shall schedule his work in accordance with the
following:
,
1. No drums, cones, barricades and other traffic control equipment
shall remain in a location where they will interfere with or be
disturbed by a snow plowing operation. The work must be scheduled
to afford the safe removal of such devices when necessary.
2. Drainage frames, grates and covers shall not be adjusted in a
travel lane unless the final pavement course is placed prior to
the onset of snow and ice weather. Steel plates, etc. shall not
protrude above the adjacent pavement. If any of these protrusions
exist in a non-travel lane prior to a snow and ice condition, then
temporary asphalt ramps must be placed so that for every one inch
of rise, there is a six foot run of ramp.
.H. Details of internal traffic circulation, parking, traffic control
devices and any proposed additional pavement lanes or widening. For
major projects involving such pavement work, the plan sheets must be
standard 22 inch by 34 inch size and placed in the order specified on
page 21-3 of the New York State Highway Design Manual. Oversize
sheets with cluttered or illegible information are not acceptable in
any case. If any traffic signal appurtenances are disturbed by
pavement work, they must be shown on the plans and restored. All
submissions must be prepared by a licensed professional engineer,
architect or land surveyor. If we do not receive revised plans within
six months, we will consider this project inactive and will require a
brand new submission.
I. For resubmissions, revisions must be highlighted in red or another
characteristic color to facilitate our review. Each copy of the plans
must contain the highlighted resubmissions.
D E. . eA .
unn nglneenng SSOclates
Consulting Engineers
66 Main Street
Westhampton Beach, N.Y. 11978
516-288-2480
~ff(ud
f~ /
/!,K
October 26, 1992
Mr. Bennet Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
Southold Planning Board
Town Hall
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971
In) ~ @ ~ G 11J.~..~
illn OCT 2 i 1992 \ 0 \
.
SOUTHOlD TOWN J
PLANNU,iG BO,.RJL...._.
Re:
Traffic Impact Study
for Proposed Bridgehampton National Bank
Mattituck Plaza
Mattituck, New York
Dear Mr. Orlowski:
We have reviewed the comments on the subject traffic study made by Cramer, Voorhis &
Associates in their October 16, 1992 letter to you.
We are pleased to provide the following additional information requested in that letter.
Directional Distribution
The directional distribution has been determined by reviewing existing turning movement counts
and analyzing development patterns in the surrounding area.
It is estimated that the Mattituck Plaza Shopping Center attracts customers within a 2 mile radius.
This area encompasses the hamlets of Laurel and Mattituck. Based on a review of the
development patterns in these communities, it is estimated that approximately 25 percent of the
market area population is located north of Middle Road and west of Mattituck Creek. Thus, 25
percent of the traffic from the drive-thru bank was assigned to the north on Factory Avenue.
It is further estimated that approximately 40 percent of the market area population is located to
the east of the shopping center and will use Route 25 to the east, while 35 percent of the
population is located to the west of the site and will use Route 25 to the west.
To confirm these patterns traffic counts were taken at the various access points to the shopping
center and are presented in Figure 1.
.
,)
.
Mr. Bennet Orlowski, Jr.
October 26, 1992
Page 2
Capaci\}' Analysis
The capacity analyses have been revised as requested. Revised analysis sheets and summary table
are included as Attachment A
As requested we have done a traffic signal warrant analysis at the intersection of Route 25 and
Factory Avenue. The Traffic Signal Warrant Check Sheet is included as Attachment B. This
location does not currently meet the minimum vehicular volume warrant or interruption of
continuous flow warrant for a traffic signal as presented in the N.Y.S. Manual of Uniform Traffic
Control Devices. Traffic volumes on Route 25 exceed the minimum volume requirements for
signalization, however, the traffic volumes on Factory Avenue are approximately 40 percent of the
vehicular warrant requirement and 75 percent of the continuous movement warrant requirement.
We do not believe signalization is currently warranted at this location, and will not be warranted
as a result of the additional traffic generated by the drive-thru bank.
Site Access
We concur that safety for traffic exiting the bank drive-thru could be enhanced by providing a stop
sign and a painted stop line on the pavement for exiting vehicles. A warning sign for pedestrians
on the sidewalk would also be useful.
Figure 2 shows the existing Mattituck Plaza Shopping Center and parking field. The shopping
center consists of approximately 117,000 square feet of building area. It is anchored by an A &
P supermarket, a Genovese Drug Store and a movie theatre.
The shopping center has three major access points and two secondary access points. The major
access points include the westerly and middle access drive on Route 25 and the southerly access
drive on Factory Avenue. The westerly Route 25 access drive accommodates approximately 20
percent of the shopping center traffic, while the middle Route 25 access drive accommodates
approximately 45 percent of the shopping center traffic. The southerly access drive on Factory
Avenue accommodates approximately 30 percent of the shopping center traffic.
The secondary access points include the easterly Route 25 access drive that services the North Fork
Bank drive-thru and the rear service area and the northerly Factory Avenue access drive that
accommodates primarily delivery vehicles. Approximately 5 percent of the shopping center traffic
uses these access drives.
.
.
Mr. Bennet Orlowski, Jr.
October 22, 1992
Page 3
There are 503 parking spaces available at the shopping center. Based on field observations the
following peak parking occupancy estimates are presented:
Summer Saturday evening.
Summer daytime.
Non-summer Saturday evening -
Non-summer daytime -
85% occupancy
60% occupancy
40% occupancy
40% occupancy
A parking occupancy study done on Friday, October 23, 1992 between 11:00 A.M. and 6:00 P.M
showed a peak occupancy of 35 percent between 1:00 and 2:00 P.M. Based on the data from this
survey it is estimated the typical daytime customer is parked at the shopping center for
approximately 45 minutes.
Traffic flow and circulation within the shopping center is good. Traffic aisles are wide enough for
two way traffic flow and there are no operational or safety problems. In general, the northerly part
of the parking field is used most frequently with the southwesterly part being sparsely occupied
during most time periods.
If there are any questions or you require additional information, please call.
cerely, \
/ ~ ~ Si",-\
ICHARD A. STRANG, P.E.
Associate
RAS/lam
L920501
P92081
cc: Charles J. Voorhis, Cramer, Voorhis & Associates
Attachments
w
:)
z
w
~
>
IX:.
~
(.)
i!
~ 119
(36%)
93
..
(32%)
~, 4~ le
"l l 1
.( .
~l l- 80
{" .
MATTITUCK PLAZA
3Jl30.
~ 4
631174
::J l '
, 108
25 J
55 J
MAIN ROAD (NYS ROUTE 25)
KEY:
(%)=% OF TOTAL SHOPPING CENTER TRAFFIC
FIGURE 1
EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES
MATTlTUCK PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER
FRIDAY. OCTOBER 22.1992
4:30-5:30PM
~
N
I
_j2127
. L.
...
1 J
o
123
· (42%)
135
..
(40%)
.
.
ATIACHMENT A
.....-.-...-...-,-...-,-...-,-..,-,..-,-,..-,-...-.-.-,-.-.',.....",............
........'.............,..'..,..'......,.....,..'.........'...........,.........,.....,..'.
."............".................................
................~Q!!i~"I!~..........
_1I111~
......"."..."."..",.. ...................... ..................,-...-..-.
..................",. ..................... ."...........................
....1>>..../ .........$AT..) .1l.M.)$A'i")
Southbound to Eastbound Left Turn
From Factory Avenue
7.10
24
64
75
52
E
F
Southbound Thru on Factory Avenue
6.60
11
13
104
79
E
E
Southbound to Westbound Right Turn
From Factory Avenue
5.90
54
83
494
472
A
B
Combined Southbound Approach
89
160
165
102
E
F
Northbound to Westbound Left Turn 7.10 4 12 66 50 E E
From Sigsbee Road
Northbound thru on Sigsbee Road 6.60 2 13 101 79 E E
Northbound to Eastbound Right Turn
From Sigsbee 5.90 40 39 426 323 B C
Road
Combined Northbound Approach 46 64 266 120 C E
Eastbound to Northbound Left Turn 5.20 73 67 583 562 A A
From Main Road
Westbound to Southbound Left Turn 5.20 38 42 523 409 B
From Main Road A
TABLE A
Unslgnallzed Intersection Capacity Analysis Summary
Main Road at Factory Avenue
1992 ExIsting
.
.
ATIACHMENT A
....,......,....................,......,......,......,-'.....-'...,.-'...,-'...,.-'.....-'...,..'.-.,.-'.-.,.-'.-...
.................................,......................
............................ "..
............................................................
...............................~.........
..ANTJ..... .. ....0. ..lp..'I!I.... .ifE. .....D.. ..........
......","._ . ,', ",n.""
........ ." . -. .......
.....~......... &...~......$IHQU.....~..........~...................~~.........
............ ....................
...... ... ,... ........................ ..........................
P,ij.iii$~'1'; ...p.J.4.i$Ai". .........ip.IL ) SAT}
Southbound to Eastbound Left Turn
From Factory Avenue
7.10
26
66
69
51
E
F
Southbound Thru on Factory Avenue
6.60
11
13
97
78
E
E
Southbound to Westbound Right Turn 5.90 55 86 484 461 A B
From Factory Avenue
Combined Southbound Approach 92 165 153 100 E F
Northbound to Westbound Left Turn 7.10 4 U 60 48 E E
From Sigsbee Road
Northbound thru on Sigsbee Road 6.60 2 13 94 78 E E
Northbound to Eastbound Right Turn
From Sigsbee 5.90 42 40 413 309 B C
Road
Combined Northbound Approach 48 65 255 119 C E
Eastbound to Northbound Left Turn 5.20 76 70 571 549 A A
From Main Road
Westbound to Southbound Left Turn 5.20 39 43 510 395 A B
From Main Road
TABLE A (Coord.)
Unslgnalized Intersection Cspaclty Analysis Summary
Main Road at Factory Avenue
1993 No Build
.
.
ATfACHMENT A
."."................--..-..--...'.....'.............
....-".",.,.,.,---_..,.,.............,.......,.,--...'..
.-...-....,-....-.-..................-............'.....,...................,.....,.......'.
........II!~~~.
VOWMSi.ii
..,...............,.-,.....~..~..~..~..~..............
.........-.....-..--.--.............,. ',--,''''
BHi~.lftgp.....~....}. i
.......,................-.--...........................
............. .............
....................." ".......--.,..
.--------.----.--_.........................
............e,..............................~'I',
................"..........----,-.
...........--.-........-.-.--.....-.........................
--.-----,--................................
.........."".".........,-....----.---.-.---.........
........,-..-.....,..................................
..............T......"'"....."........................
}~:)~:)}::r:-u: ::I;ft:U~. :::\.:::}:(:}::
.........................................................
.-..-....-..................................
.......,..,..,...-,...-..--------.----..-.-..... .
rrVocUMii}
.....,..,..,.".,..,.,..,..,-...,..,.....-....
...........-.....----.-.....,..............................
. . ................................
......,..,.".,....,..,.......,.........-,--,...
~~!1jG~~~991
....,..........
..,..--,--...--.--.----,--
...P.M.........$A'..1I'...
........... .. ...............
:::.-:,:.::::.:::.:::: "~ . ~:::.::-:::::':::-::::::-::.:,:.-..-:.x<:::::::
..,--......--,--,-- .-- ...--,--.,...,...,.."..
............p;U:. .......................$A't......i...
Southbound to Eastbound Left Turn
From Factory Avenue
7.10
37
73
66
50
E
F
Southbound Thru on Factory Avenue
6.60
11
13
94
77
E
E
Southbound to Westbound Right Turn 5.90 64 93 481 459 A B
From Factory Avenue
Combined Southbound Approach 112 179 139 98 E F
Northbound to Westbound Left Turn 7.10 4 12 56 47 E E
From Sigsbee Road
Northbound thru on Sigsbee Road 6.60 2 13 90 77 E E
Northbound to Eastbound Right Turn
From Sigsbee 5.90 42 40 413 309 B C
Road
Combined Northbound Approach 48 65 246 117 D E
Eastbound to Northbound Left Turn 5.20 86 77 565 544 A A
From Main Road
Westbound to Southbound Left Turn 5.20 39 43 510 395 A B
From Main Road
TABLE A (Coot'd.)
Unslgnallzed Intersection Capacity Analysis Summary
Main Road It Flctory Avenue
1993 Build
.
.
ATTACHMENT A
'::':,:"':::::::,";::',:;,:':::':"':::'::;,:::::,:::::,:::::,:;:::,::::,:;:::,::,::::",,:::::,::, :::;:,:(::::::::;,;:,:;,;:(::',;:,:',;:',;:::'(:':;:;,':;;':::':;:;:::::;:;:::;,;:;:::;::::.
lro1I11_~IMI.
.....,........,.............,.........,..,........,..,..,..-','--","--','--','--','-'-" '.".'-".:."-".:.".:-,.".:.',"."'.,.','.,.".,...',:.-,-,,.........:..,..;..,..:.......-...',....'.:.
..~.~H!g.lft99m..~~!g!!~H9~6~
........................
.........sAT. ....pjVLi...sAf,
1992 Existing
Westbound to Southbound Left Turn 6.50 13 16 634 569 A
Out of Mattituck Plaza A
Westbound to Northbound Right Turn 5.50 116 133 995 995 A A
Out of Mattituck Plaza
Combined Westbound Approach 129 149 940 922 A A
Southbound to Eastbound Left Turn 5.00 90 104 999 999 A
From Factory Avenue A
1993 No Build
Westbound to Southbound Left Turn 6.60 13 16 628 560 A
Out Of Mattituck Plaza A
Westbound to Northbound Right Turn 5.50 120 137 994 995 A A
Out of Mattituck Plaza
Combined Westbound Approach 133 153 939 921 A A
Soutbbound to Eastbound Left Turn 5.00 93 108 998 998 A A
From Factory Avenue
TABLE A (Cant'd.)
UnsignalIzecllntersectlon Capacity Analysis Summary
Factory Avenue at Mattltuck Plaza Access Drive
1992 Exlstlng/1993 No Build
.
.
ATIACHMENT A
'<;::'::,',:,:,:::,:,:,:,:,',::',':':',':',::':::::::,:::,:::::,:,:::::::::::;::::::::::::::,::::
iNTiClPA~J
:":":,,:',,,,:';:,::,,::,:,::/:,,,;,:,::;,:;):,::::::}::;:;:::,:,:,:::::;:;,;:;:::::;:::
~~M~I
.m91.9M~1
...............-......
.--.-................. .........................
..........SA'''"jp,M;
.....................,'....,'..,.....,.-'..-'-.,.-'-.,'-...-'-...-'-.,.-.-..'-...-'.--,....-.'...-.'--.-.
,..,...,.....,.,,-,..,..-,.-,...,---,--,............,......,....
· ........................P. PTE.t........~. !n........4ll.i.......................
...............................,.....--.-.-...........
............................. ._,_____.n
.......-.......-.-..._-.................................
. ...............Y....OL..U... M......E.............
.-.--.-....... ..... ................
............,.... , " . .-............
:::::;::::::::::::::::,::::::::. ,:' -:. ,'-, ",: , , },)',::::',;:::',:::)
..Hi91~lm~!
......,..,..............,...
} > SAT'
. ...............
1993 Build
Westbound to Southbound Left Turn 650 33 31 551
Out of Mattituck plaza 612 A A
Westbound to Northbound Right Turn 550 126 142 975 982 A A
Out of Mattituck Plaza
Combined Westbound Approach 159 173 868 862 A A
Southbound to Eastbound Left Turn 5.00 108
From Factory Avenue 93 995 996 A A
TABLE A (Cant'd.)
Unslgnallzed Intersection Capachy Analysis Summary
Factory Avenue at Mattituck Plaza Access Drive
1993 Build
.
.
ATTACHMENT A
FACTORY AVENUE AT MATTITUCK PLAZA ACCESS DRIVE
.
.
1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1
*********************************************************************
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
---------------------------------------------------------------------
AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 30
PEAK HOUR FACTOR..................... .9
AREA POPULATION...................... 150000
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET......... MATTITUCK PLAZA DRIVEWAY
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET....... FACTORY AVENUE
NAME OF THE ANALYST. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . DUNN ENGINEERING ASSOC. VJD
DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy) . . . . . . 10-23-92
TIME PERIOD ANALYZED. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PM.PEAK
OTHER INFORMATION.... 1993 BUILD CONDITION
MATTI TUCK PLAZA
INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL
---------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION .
MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: NORTH/SOUTH
CONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND: STOP SIGN
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
---------------------------------------------------------------------
EB
WB
NB
SB
LEFT
27
o
76
THRU
o
96
72
RIGHT
103
23
o
NUMBER OF LANES
---------------------------------------------------------------------
EB
WB
NB
SB
LANES
1
1
1
.
.
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
Page-2
---------------------------------------------------------------------
PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS (ft) ACCELERATION LANE
GRADE ANGLE FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS
------- ---------- ---------------- -----------------
EASTBOUND -----
WESTBOUND 0.00 90 20 N
,NORTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N
SOUTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N
VEHICLE COMPOSITION
% SU TRUCKS % COMBINATION
AND RV'S VEHICLES % MOTORCYCLES
----------- ------------- -------------
EASTBOUND
WESTBOUND 0 0 0
NORTHBOUND 0 0 0
SOUTHBOUND 0 0 0
CRITICAL GAPS
TABULAR VALUES ADJUSTED SIGHT DIST. FINAL
(Table 10-2) VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL GAP
-------------- -------- ----------- ------------
MINOR RIGHTS
WB 5.50 5.50 0.00 5.50
MAJOR LEFTS
SB 5.00 5.00 0.00 5.00
MINOR LEFTS
WB 6.50 6.50 0.00 6.50
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
---------------------------------------------------------------------
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... MATTITUCK PLAZA DRIVEWAY
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... FACTORY AVENUE
DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALySIS..... 10-23-92 ; PM PEAK
OTHER INFORMATION.... 1993 BUILD CONDITION MATTITUCK PLAZA
.
.
CAPACITY AND LEVEL-OF-SERVICE
Page-3
---------------------------------------------------------------------
POTEN- ACTUAL
FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE
RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY
MOVEMENT V (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c = c - V LOS
P M SH R SH
------- -------- --------- ------------ ------------
MINOR STREET
WB LEFT
33
649
612
>
> 868
>
612
>
> 709
>
579 > A
>A
849 > A
RIGHT
126
975
975
975
MAJOR STREET
SB LEFT
93
995
995
995
902
A
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... MATTITUCK PLAZA DRIVEWAY
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... FACTORY AVENUE
DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALySIS..... 10-23-92 ; PM PEAK
OTHER INFORMATION.... 1993 BUILD CONDITION MATTITUCK PLAZA
.
.
1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1
*********************************************************************
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
---------------------------------------------------------------------
AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 30
PEAK HOUR FACTOR..................... .9
AREA POPULATION...................... 150000
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET......... MATTITUCK PLAZA DRIVEWAY
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET....... FACTORY AVENUE
NAME OF THE ANALyST.................. DUNN ENGINEERING ASSOC. VJD
DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy)...... 10-23-92
TIME PERIOD ANALyZED................. SATURDAY PEAK
OTHER INFORMATION.... 1993 NO-BUILD CONDITION MATTI TUCK PLAZA
INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL
INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION
MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: NORTH/SOUTH
CONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND: STOP SIGN
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
---------------------------------------------------------------------
EB
WB
NB
SB
LEFT
13
o
88
THRU
o
76
135
RIGHT
112
26
o
NUMBER OF LANES
---------------------------------------------------------------------
EB
WB
NB
SB
-------
LANES
1
1
1
.
.
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
page-2
---------------------------------------------------------------------
PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS (ft) ACCELERATION LANE
GRADE ANGLE FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS
------- ---------- ---------------- -----------------
EASTBOUND -----
WESTBOUND 0.00 90 20 N
NORTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N
SOUTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N
VEHICLE COMPOSITION
---------------------------------------------------------------------
% SU TRUCKS % COMBINATION
AND RV'S VEHICLES % MOTORCYCLES
----------- ------------- -------------
EASTBOUND
WESTBOUND 0 0 0
NORTHBOUND 0 0 0
SOUTHBOUND 0 0 0
CRITICAL GAPS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
TABULAR VALUES ADJUSTED SIGHT DIST. FINAL
(Table 10-2) VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL GAP
-------------- -------- ----------- ------------
MINOR RIGHTS
WB 5.50 5.50 0.00 5.50
MAJOR LEFTS
SB 5.00 5.00 0.00 5.00
MINOR LEFTS
WB 6.50 6.50 0.00 6.50
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
-----------------------------------------------------------~---------
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... MATTI TUCK PLAZA DRIVEWAY
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... FACTORY AVENUE
DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALySIS..... 10-23-92 ; SATURDAY PEAK
OTHER INFORMATION.... 1993 NO-BUILD CONDITION MATTI TUCK PLAZA
.
.
CAPACITY AND LEVEL-OF-SERVICE Page-3
---------------------------------------------------------------------
POTEN- ACTUAL
FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE
RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY
MOVEMENT v (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c = c - v LOS
P M SH R SH
------- -------- --------- ------------ ------------
MINOR STREET
WB LEFT 16 600 560 > 560 > 544 > A
> 921 > 768 >A
RIGHT 137 995 995 > 995 > 858 > A
MAJOR STREET
SB LEFT 108 998 998 998 890 A
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
---------------------------------------------------------------------
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... MATTITUCK PLAZA DRIVEWAY
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... FACTORY AVENUE
DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALySIS..... 10-23-92 : SATURDAY PEAK
OTHER INFORMATION.... 1993 NO-BUILD CONDITION MATTITUCK PLAZA
-- -...-....--......
____u_.._____
.
.
1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1
*********************************************************************
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
---------------------------------------------------------------------
AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 30
PEAK HOUR FACTOR..................... .9
AREA POPULATION...................... 150000
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET......... MATTlTUCK PLAZA DRIVEWAY
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET....... FACTORY AVENUE
NAME OF THE ANALYST. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . DUNN ENGINEERING ASSOC. VJD
DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy)...... 10-23-92
TIME PERIOD ANALyZED................. SATURDAY PEAK
OTHER INFORMATION.... 1993 BUILD CONDITION
MATTlTUCK PLAZA
INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL
---------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERSECTION TYPE: T-INTERSECTION
MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: NORTH/SOUTH
CONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND: STOP SIGN
TRAFFIC VOLUMES
---------------------------------------------------------------------
EB
WB
NB
SB
LEFT
25
o
88
THRU
o
88
135
RIGHT
116
26
o
NUMBER OF LANES
---------------------------------------------------------------------
EB
WB
NB
SB
LANES
1
1
1
.
.
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
Page-2
---------------------------------------------------------------------
PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS (ft) ACCELERATION LANE
GRADE ANGLE FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS
------- ---------- ---------------- -----------------
EASTBOUND -----
WESTBOUND 0.00 90 20 N
NORTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N
SOUTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N
VEHICLE COMPOSITION
---------------------------------------------------------------------
TABUIAR VALUES ADJUSTED SIGHT DIST. FINAL
(Table 10-2) VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL GAP
-------------- -------- ----------- ------------
MINOR RIGHTS
WB 5.50 5.50 0.00 5.50
MAJOR LEFTS
SB 5.00 5.00 0.00 5.00
MINOR LEFTS
WB 6.50 6.50 0.00 6.50
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... MATTITUCK PLAZA DRIVEWAY
NAME OF. THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... FACTORY AVENUE
DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALySIS..... 10-23-92 ; SATURDAY PEAK
OTHER INFORMATION.... 1993 BUILD CONDITION MATTITUCK PLAZA
.
.
CAPACITY AND LEVEL-OF-SERVICE Page-3
---------------------------------------------------------------------
POTEN- ACTUAL
FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE
RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY
MOVEMENT v (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c (pcph) c = c - v LOS
P M SH R SH
------- -------- --------- ------------ ------------
MINOR STREET
W8 LEFT 31 590 551 > 551 > 520 > A
> 862 > 690 >A
RIGHT 142 982 982 > 982 > 840 > A
MAJOR STREET
S8 LEFT 108 996 996 996 888 A
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... MATTI TUCK PLAZA DRIVEWAY
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... FACTORY AVENUE
DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALySIS..... 10-23-92 : SATURDAY PEAK
OTHER INFORMATION.... 1993 BUILD CONDITION MATTlTUCK PLAZA
Attachment B -
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT CHECK SHEET
Faca Ave. .
FILE: Mattituck Plaza
LOCATION: Main Road (Route 25)
. Mattituck
'fawn ot Sout:hold
JATE: lO/Zl/YZ
I. MINIMUM VEHICULAR VOLUME WARRANT 8th HIGHEST HOUR VOLUME
0 8~ll:o approach speed 10 85"';' approach speed > 40 MPH
40 MPH or less or population < 10.000
LANES AVAILABLE VOLUME
Chec k Maior Street Minor Slreet Maior Street Minor Street MET Maior Street Minor S!ree!
Warrant Observed Warrant Observed Warrant QbSI!Ned Warrant Observed
V One On. 500 /4b 150 :>b NO 350 105
2 or r.1ore On. .00 1'0 470 In<
2 or More 2 or More 600 200 420 140
On~ 2 or More 500 200 350 140
'. INTERRUPTION OF CONTINUOUS FLOW WARRANT 8th HIGHEST HOUR VOLUME
LANES AVAILABLE VOLUME
Ct:ec~ Major Stre~t Minor Street Maior Stre~t Minor Stn~et MET Miliar Sire'?! I :.1inor S:reel
Warrant Observed Warrant Observed Wart:]"t Observed Warrant Q~ser'/ed
-X On. On. 750 7M; 75 'lh Ni1I 525 53
2 or More On. 900 75 630 53
2 or More 2 or More 900 100 630 70
On. 2 or More 750 100 525 70
'. MINIMUM PEDESTRIAN VOLUME, 8th HIGHEST HOUR
(40 MPH or 10,,)
Malor Street Volume 80th Ap;Jroaches Maior Stre~t VotlJme Both Aporoaches
0 Mall < 4' Wide 0 Mall > 4' Wide MET 0 t.1all < 4' Wid, 0 Mall > 4' Wid~
W~rrant.. I Observed Warrant O~served Warrant I Observed Warrant Observed
600 I 1000 VEH 120 I 700
PedeSlfl.1n.s Crossing Warrant Observed Pedestrians CrosslO~ Warrant O~served
Maior Street ISO flla10r Street 105
(oyor 40 MPH)
.. SCHOOL CROSSING USE 2nd HIGHEST HOUR
(40 MPH or 10,,)
800 V EH 250 PED.
560 V EH
(oyor 40 MPH)
175 PED.
COMBINATION OF WARRANTS (TO BE USED WITH ACCIDENT RECORD)
MET
rAlnlmum Vehicular Volume. Speed < 40 MPH (Volume F.1.:ter O.BO)
Minimum Vehicular Volume, Saeed > 40 MPH-'Volume Fact lr 0.561
Interruotion of Ccntinuou~ Fl:)w. Saeed < 40 MPH {Volume Factor 0.80'
InterrulHion at ContlOuou.s Flow, Speed > 40 MPH (Volume Factor 0.561
rAimmum Pedestrian Volume Flow. Saeed < 40 MPH (Volu~e Factor O.BO)
Minimum Pedestrian Volum~ Flow, Speed ::; 40 MPH (Volume Faclor 0.561
~TE ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE/REMARKS
I OE5CRIPTION AGENCY DATE RECm.1MENOATION
Oist T.E.
S. PolIce
M.O.
By:
DPW-128
.
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
SCOlT L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Fax (516) 765-1823
O~tober 7.0, 1992
Alan A. Cardinale
P.O. Box 77
Mattituck Shopping Center
Mattituck, NY 11952
RE: Bridgehampton National
Bank
SCTM*1000-142-1-2h
Dear Mr. Cardinale:
The following resolutions were adopted by the Southold
Town Planning Board at a meeting held on Monday, October 19,
1992.
RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting
under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, take lead
agency in its review of this unlisted action.
The Southold Town Planning Board will take additional time
until its next meeting on November 2, 1992, to make a
determination on the environmental significance of this unlisted
action pending Planning Board's review of a report from its
environmental consultants.
It Would be helpful if you could provide us with the
additional information requested by our consultant in his
report, a copy of which is attached for your information.
Sincerely,
~~,,9.//s
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
Encl.
.
, - ~\ /If/k,e
CRAMER, V09RHI~ qOCIATES
ENVIRONMENTA~\\V:' NG CONSULTANTS
, vl/u III
.
~f/(...(:
October 16, 1992
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
Southold Planning Board
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971
Re: Review of Traffic Report and Short EAF
Amended Site Plan for Alan A. Cardinale
Shopping Center (Addition of Drive-up for
Bridgehampton National Bank
SCTM No. 1000-142+2
--..
, c-::l ,...~'"
!; I;" It
", ,.,~" 1 j ;
',I
\".~ I" (.' .,.
, !5 '-'
j I D J\-~"--'
lln1l'.
IdU t'
I --- .-,'-.--
I -"
~
. 'i
, !.
'.,...... i
I
. ~,..~_'
Dear Mr. Orlowski:
At your request, the Traffic Impact Study prepared by Dunn Engineering Associates
for the above captIOned application was reviewed with particular focus on the ap(llicant's
request to provide a drive-Ill type bank in an existing retail center and the traffic Impact it
may have on the center's parking field and the adjacent public roadways.
In addition, we are in receipt of the Short EAF included with the application. In that
we are recommending that additional information be (lrovided with regard to the Traffic
Impact Study we propose to await additional informatIOn prior to completing the review of
the Short EAF. Following are our comments with regard to the Traffic Impact Study.
Methodolol!V
The methodology employed for the analysis is sound, using principles recognized and
employed by the traffiC impact analysis profession. Traffic data was collected during the
summer months and adjusted to August peak conditions, where necessary, using seasonal
adjustment factors to present a worst case scenario for analysis. The peak periods of Friday
afternoon, 4:30 to 5:30 PM, and Saturday midday, 11:00 AM to 12:00 noon, were the
selected analysis periods. The intersection of the center's access drive closest to proposed
bank and the adjact:nt side street, Factory Avenue, as well as the intersection of Route 25,
Main Road, (which runs along the principal frontage of the center) with Factory Avenue
were analyzed for adverse impacts.
Sil1ht Distance
The area surrounding the project site is generally flat with no significant horizontal curves in
the roadways. Hence, si~ht distances at key intersections, particularly along Main Road, are
good, exceeding the mimmum standards established by AASHTO (American Association of
State Highway & Transportation Officials).
Page 1 DC 4
54-2 NORTH COUNTRY ROAD. MILLER PLACE, NY 11764 (516) 331-1455
.
.
.
Trame Study Review
Bridgehampton Natioual Bank
Accidents
The three year accident history evaluation revealed no significant pattern of safety problems.
The intersection of Main Road and Factory Avenue averaged three (3) reportable accidents
per year, which is in the expected range.
Trin Generation
Trip generation calculations were based on the rates contained in the Trip Generation
report, 5th Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, a widely
recognized and accepted source of trip generation rates. Since a temporary walk-in bank is
being replaced by a drive-in bank on the site, the traffic generated by this project is the
difference of the total trips generated by the two different bank types, i.e., the drive-thm
activity. Although the bank is not presently considering offering Saturday business hours,
examination of the Saturday peak period was included along with the weekdaYJ'eak period.
The rates demonstrated that peak activity occurred on Friday between 4:30 an 5:30 PM
when superimposed on the local roadway activity.
Directional Distribution
In distributing the generated traffic to the local road system, the report states that it was
"based on the existmg distribution pattern of turning movements" at the study intersections.
This is the logical and customary methodology employed for directional distribution,
however, it is not clear how the directional distribution was derived and supporting details and
an explanation is requested to substantiate the results.
Assignment of the generated traffic to the roadways was accomplished by applying the
directional distribution results to the trip generation traffic volumes. Assignments were
made for the weekday and Saturday peak period conditions.
Canacity Analvsis
Intersection capacity analyses examining the projected 1993 background volumes !lli!s. the
project generated traffic were based on the methodologies for unsignaIized intersections
contained in the Highway Capacity Manual. Transportation Research Board Special Report
209.l2B5. This methodology is the professionally recognized procedure employed by
transportation specialists world-wide. Capacity analyses were performed for the existing
1992 traffic condition, the 1993 No-Build condition (i.e., without the project) applying a 3%
growth factor to the 1992 traffic counts, and finally for a 1993 Build condition (i.e., WIth the
project) with the project generated traffic added to the 1993 No-Build traffic.
It should be noted that several minor discrepancies were contained in the traffic volume input
data for the cap,acity analyses provided in the appendix. These discrepancies are not expected
to have a sigmficant impact on the final results of the analyses. For clarification purposes
the discrepancies are listed as follows:
e\~~AI/IIi
CRAMER, VO RHt ~Ij) SOCrATES
ENVIRONMENT~ '~0 ~ :~G CONSULTANTS
Page 2 of4
-
.
.
Traffic Study Review
Bridgehampton National Bank
1) Friday--1993 Build Condition
Movement Listed Volume Corrected Volume
wb left 23 27 (11 + 16)
wb right 102 103 (98 + 5)
nb thru 91 96 (79 + 17)
2) Saturday--1993 No-Build Condition
Movement Listed Volume Corrected Volume
wb right 125 112 (109 x 1.03)
..
3) Saturday--1993 Build Condition
Movement Listed Volume Corrected Volume
wbleft 29 5(13+12)
wb right 130 116 (112 + 4)
nb thru 93 88 (76 + 12)
In sununarizing and presenting the capacity analysis results, it would be helpful to provide the
infonnation within the body of the report. Additionally, it would be infonnative to include the
Level of Service detenninations, along with anticipated and potential volumes already provided,
for the intersections under the various analyzed conditions.
The Friday PM peak was analyzed as the worst case scenario and found not to create
significant adverse impacts for the study intersections. However, it should be noted that
during the Saturday 11~00 AM to 12:00 noon peak period, the Factory Avenue southbound
left turn movement onto Main Road is currently experiencin~ minor delays. The project is
expected to add 6 vehicles per hour to that movement (54 eXIsting + 6 additional = 60 total)
which will not significantly add to those delays.
Although the report cites the delays at the Main Road/Factory Avenue intersection, there is
no investigation on whether a traffic signal would mitigate those problems. An examination of
whether traffic signal warrants can be satisfied now or in the near future should be included in
the report.
Site Access
The report considers three alternative access arrangements for the drive-thru window. We
concur with the reconunendation for utilizing the Alternative A plan. It satisfies the storage
requirement (although the double lane entrance should be reduced to a single lane, still
providint: storage for five vehicles) and provides adequate sight distance. Alternative C could
be considered if the double lane were reduced to one lane. That, however, would provide
storage for only four vehicles, one less than the Town requirement for five vehicles.
Although the report states there is adequate sight distance for traffic exiting the drive-thru,
the safety of that operation could be enhanced by providing a stop sign and a painted stop line
on the pavement for exiting vehicles, and warning signs and markings on the sidewalk for
pedestrians around the comer from the exiting vehicles.
~\AI//i
CRAMER, V .... RHI.$ Wi.. SOCIATES
ENVIRONMENT~"/ \~~G CONSULTANTS
Page 3 or4
~
.
.
Traffic Study Review
Bridgehampton National Bank
Site Circulation
The report concludes that the traffic generated by the drive-thm which exits into the center's
parking field will not adversely affect oferations within the site. Indeed, it is expected that a
drive-thru vehicle will exit at the rate 0 one vehicle every three minutes durin~ the Friday
peak period, and one vehicle every four minutes during the Saturday peak penod. It is also
reasonable to expect those drive-thm vehicles wishing to exit the site will use the westerly
site exit onto Factory Avenue rather than traversing the parking field to utilize the exit
directly onto Main Road.
.-
However,for the analysis of the impact on the project generated traffic on the parking field to be
more meaningfu~ more information on the existing parking field is needed. Additional details
and examination on the parking layout, circulation patterns, tumover and adequacy of the
number of stalls provided is required for a complete project review. In addition, the site plan
provided to our office for reView did not include the parking and circulation scheme for the
existing shopping center, nor did it include the proposed amendment for the Bridgehampton
National BaTik. Please provide a copy of the site plan amendment in connection further review
of the parking layout, existing circulation, tumover and adequacy of parking for the overall site as
noted above.
Conclusion
Subject to review of the additional information requested, the traffic impact analysis is sound
with some minor exceptions as noted. Additional information relJ.uested is highlighted in
italics in the above comments. Further review is warranted to venfy if the proposed site
plan amendment is an acceptable use of the site from a traffic safety perspective.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
CRAMER, v~Ys ASOCIATES
ENVIRONMENytf~ \!~G CONSULTANTS
Page 4 of4
. .
CRAMER, V~ J'A;'OCIATES
ENVIRONMEN~G CONSULTANTS
,
.
./
~HL-c,
October 16, 1992
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
Southold Planning Board
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971
Re: Review of Traffic Report and Short EAF
Amended Site Plan for Alan A Cardinale
Shopping Center (Addition of Drive-up for
Bbt~hamPton National Bank
S No. 1000-142-1-2
N'~'~_"''''''~ ~''';;
"~ r;i~~ t
100 m f'
n~:g
Dear Mr. Orlowski:
At your request, the Traffic Impact StudYJrepared by Dunn Engineering Associates
for the above captIOned application was reviewe with particular focus on the ap~licant's
request to provide a drive-ill type bank in an existing retail center and the traffic Impact it
may have on the center's parking field and the adjacent public roadways.
In addition, we are in receipt of the Short EAF included with the application. In that
we are recommending that additional information be ~rovided with regard to the Traffic
Impact Study we propose to await additional informatIOn prior to completing the review of
the Short EAF. Following are our comments with regard to the Traffic Impact Study.
Methodolov;y
The methodology employed for the analysis is sound, using principles recognized and
employed by the traffic impact analysis profession. Traffic data was collected during the
summer months and adjusted to August peak conditions, where necessary, using seasonal
adjustment factors to cresent a worst case scenario for analysis. The peak periods of Friday
afternoon, 4:30 to 5:3 PM, and Saturday midday, 11:00 AM to 12:00 noon, were the
selected analysis periods. The intersection of the center's access drive closest to proposed
bank and the adjacent side street, Factory Avenue, as well as the intersection of Route 25,
Main Road, (which runs along the principal frontage of the center) with Factory Avenue
were analyzed for adverse impacts.
Siiht Distance
The area surrounding the project site is generally flat with no significant horizontal curves in
the roadways. Hence, si~ht dIstances at key intersections, particularly along Main Road, are
good, exceeding the mimmum standards established by AASHTO (American Association of
State Highway & Transportation Officials).
Page 1 of 4
54-2 NORTH COUNTRY ROAD, MILLER PLACE, NY 11764 (516) 331-1455
.
.
Traffic Study Review
Bridgebampton National Bank
Accidents
The three year accident history evaluation revealed no significant pattern of safety problems.
The intersection of Main Road and Factory Avenue averaged three (3) reportable accidents
per year, which is in the expected range.
Trip Generation
Trip generation calculations were based on the rates contained in the Trip Generation
report, 5th Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, a widely
recognized and accepted source of trip generation rates. Since a temporary walk-in bank is
being replaced by a drive-in bank on the site, the traffic generated by this project is the
difference of the total trips generated by the two different bank types, i.e., the drive-thru
activity. Although the bank is not presently considering offerin~ S"aturday business hours,
examination of ihe Saturday peak period was included along WIth the weekday peak period.
The rates demonstrated that peak activity occurred on Friday between 4:30 and 5:30 PM
when superimposed on the local roadway activity.
Directional Distribution
In distributing the ~enerated traffic to the local road system, the report states that it was
"based on the existIng distribution pattern of turning movements" at the study intersections.
This is the logical and customary methodology employed for directional distribution,
however. it is not clear how the directional distribution was derived and supporting details and
an explanation is requested to substantiate the results.
Assignment of the generated traffic to the roadways was accomplished by applying the
directional distribution results to the trip generation traffic volumes. Assignments were
made for the weekday and Saturday peak period conditions.
CaDacity Analysis
Intersection capacity analyses examining the projected 1993 background volumes Ilhis the
project generated traffic were based on the methodologies for unsigna1ized intersections
contained in the Highway Ca.pacity Manual. Tr3llllPortation Research Board Special RtWort
2ll2. ~ This methodology is the professionally recognized procedure employed by
transportation specialists world-wide. Capacity analxses were performed for the existing
1992 traffic condition, the 1993 No-Build condition (i.e., without the project) ap'plyin~ a 3%
growth factor to the 1992 traffic counts, and finally for a 1993 Build condition (i.e., WIth the
project) with the project generated traffic added to the 1993 No-Build traffic.
It should be noted that several minor discrepancies were contained in the traffic volume input
data for the cap'acity analyses provided in the appendix. These discrepancies are not expected
to have a sigmficant impact on the final results of the analyses. For clarification purposes
the discrepancies are listed as follows:
CRAMER, v~ .J'~OCIATES
ENVIRONMENT~~G CONSULTANTS
PageZ of4
.
.
.
Trame Study Review
Brldgehampton National Bank
1) Friday--1993 Build Condition
Movement
wb left
wb right
nb thru
Listed Volume
23
102
91
Corrected Volume
27 (11 + 16)
103 (98 + 5)
96 (79 + 17)
2) Saturday--1993 No-Build Condition
Movement
wb right
Listed Volume
125
Corrected Volume
112 (109 x 1.03)
3) Saturday--1993 Build Condition
Movement
wb left
wb right
Db thru
Listed Volume
29
130
93
Corrected Volume
5(13+12)
116 (112 + 4)
88(76 + 12)
In summarizing and presenting the capacity analysis results, it would be helpful to provide the
information within the body of the report. Additionally, it would be informative to include the
Level of Service determinations, along with anticipated and potential volumes already provided,
for the intersections under the various analyzed conditions.
The Friday PM peak was analyzed as the worst case scenario and found not to create
significant adverse impacts for the study intersections. However, it should be noted that
during the Saturday 11:00 AM to 12:00 noon peak period, the Factory Avenue southbound
left turn movement onto Main Road is currently experiencin~ minor delays. The project is
expected to add 6 vehicles per hour to that movement (54 eXIsting + 6 additional = 60 total)
which will not significantly add to those delays.
Although the report cites the delays at the Main Road/Factory Avenue intersection, there is
no investigation on whether a traffic signal would mitigate those problems. An examination of
whether traffic signal wan-ants can be satisfied now or in the near future should be included in
the report.
SW: Access
The report considers three alternative access arrangements for the drive-thru window. We
concur with the recommendation for utilizing the Alternative A plan. It satisfies the storage
requirement (although the double lane entrance should be reduced to a single lane, still
providiny, storage for five vehicles) and provides adequate sight distance. Alternative C could
be constdered if the double lane were reduced to one lane. That, however, would provide
storage for only four vehicles, one less than the Town requirement for five vehicles.
Although the report states there is adequate sight distance for traffic exiting the drive-thru,
the safety of that operation could be enhanced by providing a stop sign and a painted stop line
on the pavement for exiting vehicles, and warning signs and markings on the sidewalk for
pedestrians around the comer from the exiting vehicles.
CRAMER, V~ IAsOCIATES
ENVIRONMEN~G CONSULTANTS
Page 3 of4
.
.
.
Traf1Ic Study Review
Bridgehampton National Bank
Sili: Circulation
The report concludes that the traffic generated by the drive-thru which exits into the center's
parking field will not adversely affect operations within the site. Indeed, it is expected that a
drive-thru vehicle will exit at the rate of one vehicle every three minutes durin~ the Friday
peak period, and one vehicle every four minutes during the Saturday peak penod. It is also
reasonable to expect those drive-thru vehicles wishing to exit the site will use the westerly
site exit onto Factory Avenue rather than traversing the parking field to utilize the exit
directly onto Main Road.
However, for the analysis of the impact on the project generated traffic on the parking field to be
more mem:WWu~ more information on the existing parking field is needed. Additionii/ details
and examinatIOn on the parking layout, circulation patterns, turnover and adequacy of the
number of stalls provided is required for a complete project review. In addition, the Site plan
provided to our office for reView did not include the parking and circulation scheme for the
existing shopping center, nor did it include the proposed amendment for the Bridgehampton
National Bank. Please provide a copy of the site plan amendment in connection further review
of the parking layout, existing circulation, turnover and adequacy of parking for the overall site as
noted above.
Conclusion
Subject to review of the additional information requested, the traffic impact analysis is sound
with some minor exceptions as noted. Additional information re'l.uested is highlighted in
italics in the above comments. Further review is warranted to verify if the proposed site
plan amendment is an acceptable use of the site from a traffic safety perspective.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
CRAMER, V
ENVIRONMENT
OCIATES
G CONSULTANTS
Page 4 of4
,.'
- "'''''~' IA' .
, . ,'~. "~A1f Vb oelA TES
:'!1'.^'-' r~~' G CONSULTANTS
"'~5 ~
.
$tI Jt;f'itf
~/
i(k
October 16, 1992
:..~;. 'Jennett Orlowski, Jr.
'~:lairman
,; "'Jt;lCo~O Pia:ming Board
, <'in th',,!, 5::095 Main Road
',\). B;)J( 1179
r""th01~, NY 11971
L"
~. '-.
Review of Traffic Report and Short EAF
f\rnended Site Plan for Alan A. Cardinale
Shopp,ing Center (Addition of Drive-up f( r
Bridgehampton National Bank
ScrM No. 1000-142.1-2
!'"'i~ ffi @ ~ U \~ ~.W\f:!
, ;' '~r')il ~ I
GGT i ::J ,,,,de- U
SOUTHOLD TOWN
PlANNING BOARD
,)(;<1r :Vir. Orlowski:
A.t yo",r request, the Traffic Impact Study pre,P,ared by Dunn Engineering Associates
, " th~ ,1bove captlOncd application was reviewe I with particular focus on the apflicant's
.'J,;t '/) vwvide a drive-m type bank in an exi, ling retail center and the traffic Impact it
. ,'.v l~ ,le, or, ;je center's parking field and the s. ljacent public roadways.
':. ,,j,;:dor.. we are in receipt of the Short EAF included with the avplication. In that
"" ,,(. r~cor:.mending that additional informati< n be t'rovided with regara to the Traffic
.. '"P~" ,')t,.lIiy we propose to await additional inf, lrmatlon prior to completing tbe review of
. .,c :;;r: -.n E,\F. Following are our comments wih regard to the Traffic Impact Study.
M.jhQQ~
,',e m,',bodology employed for the analysis is s< undo using principles recognized and
.. ',.\o:!f;d by the traffic impact analysis professi( n. Traffic data was collected during the
"r;)Ff u m(,nths and adjusted to August peak co ,ditions, where necessary, using seasonal
,.u'.'n~.:t (;\,:tor5 t08resent a worst case scena 'io for analysis. The peak periods of Friday
.,'i' ..nr., .'-:30 to 5:3 PM, and Saturday middll 1,11:00 AM to 12:00 noon, were the
~ ,'e .j ~..l<<lYois periods. The intersection or th: center's access drive closest to proposed
. ,'\!':\o :he adjacent side street, Factory Aven Ie, as well as the intersection of Route 25,
,:..:. ~'C ::d, {which runs along the principal frOI tage of the center) with Factory Avenue
0, :~e ..:!:llyzed for adverse impacts.
su.:ht Distantt
T\..e 8"ea surrounding the project site is general y flat with no significant horizontal curves in
:,.; rC:1dw<:y:,: Hence, ~i~ht dIstances at key int~ rsections, particularly alo.ng Main R.oa,d, are
yd, c:;'ee~ 109 lhe IDlnlmUm standards estabh hed by MSHTO (Amencan ASSOClallon of
;,\t~ Yighway & Transportation Officials),
Fage lof 4
54-2 NORTH COUNTRY ROAD. MillEr' PLACE. NY 11764 (516) 331.1455
.= . II ..-..-.... .. J'=>' 'II..... ..-..
. ~~
.
.
Treffic Study Review
Bridgobampton Natlol\8l Bank
&-~ldlill.u
lrj/' ft I e ~ yea,r accident history evaluation revea' ~d no significant pattern of safety pro,blems.
~';:'~, .r,t ~'s.~cti.on of Main Road and Factory Ave: lue averaged three (3) reportable aCCidents
V! .\'.~'F. whkh is in the expected range.
'.... ""'1' a':""
.-i....;~._~~i':.,\;w
" 'h" g;' ,;cral;k>n calculations were based on the i lies contained in the Iri.\2 Generation
',lU:. ,'.r. Edition, published by the ~nstitute o.f rransport~tion Engineers, a wid~ly ,
',.C';' !eJ .U1d accepted source of tnp generatIc n rates. Since a temporarx walk.m bank IS
:,~ i.:~ l''i.>iaced by a drive-in bank on the site, thE traffic generated by this project is the
iifle:er.ce of the total trips generated by the twe different bank types, i.e., the drive-thru
,:~~ti\'itv. fJthougb the bank is not presently com idering offerin$ Saturday business hours,
':.liumir':ltion ;)f the Saturday peak period was iDlluded along With the weekday peak period.
:1 ( n:es lie;nonstr.ated that peak activity occur: ed on Friday between 4:30 and 5:30PM
\ 'lQ,Jf'.orlmposed on the local roadway activit,'.
~ ' , ' ' ll' t 'b f
" __ . ."~: ;r<r .u IS rl U Ion
; ,"~' '~d :{~ the generated traffic to the local: oad system. the report states that it was
. ',5":' ';,1 :11.;' ~xistrng distribution pattern of tur ling movemel!ts" a.t the stlldy, int~rsections.
,'" i, ':le i{.gICa! and customary methodology e npJoyed for dlfccl10nal dlstnbUlIOn,
, :)')\'L'1.l, it i:. not clear how the directional distriblflon was derived and supporting details and
,"1 .:'p;r, ."Uio 'I is requested to substantiate the res/Its.
\ssigl'ment of the generated traffic to the roadvays was accomplished by applying the
,::'-)':titXd.l Jistribution results to the trip gener~ tion tramc volumes. Assignments were
(U.~~ for the weekday and Saturday peak perio{ conditions.
, "~p',."" An,,1vtl.
.J..';i,.,;.:.,......J.Jr t:-'....e.!.H.I..,l...aZ.W
,:1.,: ,,~(,,:on capacity analyses examining the PI'{ jected 1993 background volumes J2lns the
. ,<"... i>f,lh~rated traffic were based on the met' lodologies for unsignalized intersections
, 1:' ','.; "l~d in the Hififw<\y Capadty MamW. IDl'lSportation Research Board ~1a1 Report
~J:1.1:d,;'.. Tt.is met odology is the professionaly recognized procedure employed by
,rilmV'ltatil:>n specialists world-wide. Capacity lI1aly'scs were performed for the existing
~9S2 tr..ific condition, the 1993 No-Build condit on (i.e., without the project) applyint:: a 3%
gro,:"th fa~tOr to the ~992 traffic count~ .and fim lly for.a 1993 BuHd,conditi?u (i.e., With the
,J[<);e~t) With the project generated tnuflc adde{ to the 1993 No-BUIld traffiC.
" '.';,-di be noted.that sc,wal mbl?rdL~crepanci( > w~re containe~ in the trC!!fic volume input
":" f,/ 'he. ;ap"aclfy <!nat'ses prOl'lde~ In the app :n.JIX. These d!screpanc!~s a~e not expected
, ,'; : . a "..:'11~Cal).t In:pact on the fmal results: 'I the analyses. For danflcatlOn purposes
, : . 'J',,,r'>p',:'l':les are bted as follows:
~\.~'
ff/~.""~
:~:';"':'c':~, Vi", ':RH SOCIATES
; ;\',1'1:.:, !MrJ"~~#J, G CONSULTANTS
Page %or 4
_..- . ~ . -..... ,....... ..~
.....,. - . --
---,,'t"<""''''"'N_'''~
"_t':"'.,.",~~"~,,",,,""="
. .'
.
.
Traflle Study RevIew
Brldgehampton Natlonal Bank
1) Friday--1993 Build Condition
Movcmcm
wblcft
wb right
Db thru
Listed Volu'!!!:
23
102
91
Corrected Vo1um<<
27 (11 + 16)
103(98 + S)
96 (79 + 17)
{) Saturday--1993 No.Build Conditi( n
M(wemcnt
wb risht
l.i\tcdVol..ll.!!lJ:
125
Com'clod Volume
112 (109 x 1-0:~)
3) Saturday--1993 Build Condition
Movement
wbldt
wbright
ub thru
~d Volum~
29
130
93
COftcct~ yoluQC
5(13+12)
116 (112 + 4)
88(76 + 12)
.. . ".~' ~'-~'ng and presenting the capacity aM ysis results, it would be hr:lpfu!to provide the
".... -.G" 'vi:hinlhe body of the report. Additi, nally, it would be informative to includtt the
" ,.! S:;",i;e determinations, along with antici. )(lled alld potential volumes already provided,
. 'f ',' ,,'.1crs,..:tions under the various (malyzed cc 'Idi/ions.
:':i<O ;:'j;.;ar rM peak was analyzed a..~ the worst ;ase scenario and found not to create
",[,~i:i, ant adverse impacts for the study interse ;tions. However, it should be noted that
'l'jrir.g the S:lturday 11:00 A.i.\.1 to 12:00 noon pe lk period, the Factory Avenue southbound
,c:! ,mIl movement onto Main Road is currentl:' experiencin$ minor delays. The project is
'-VF ?(t:d to add 6 vehicles per hour to that mov lment (54 eXlsting + 6 additional", 61) total)
" ',~(; "",m not significantly add to those delays,
, ;,:', u.;nllj'~ report dtes the delays at the Mair Road/Factory Avenue intersection, there is
", ,r ;c?U! ~n on whether a traffic signal would onitigate those problems. All exam/Ilalloll of
, ., .:; , r :nff = signalwwrants can be satisfied no ~ or in the near future should be included in
l.,_ r"{Oft
,'U~ ~<';;;l:.Si
The l~p'.)rt considers three alternative 8,ccess ar :anc>ements for the drive.thru window. We
::oncm with the recommendation for utilizing tl e Nternative A plan. It satisfies the storage
r~qui~cment (although the double lane entrance :hol/ld be r.?duced to a single lane, still
! '01 fdi.'lJ stomge for five vehicles) and provides ~ dequate sight distance. Alternative C could
).'': cu",deNd if the double lane were reduced 1:) one Jane. That, however, would provide
.' "-,3,, icr enly four vehicles, one less than the fown requirement for five vehicles.
'_':1" ,;. th,o report states there is ade'1uate sig lt distance for traffic exiting the drive-thru,
, 'P,'~;' cf ':wt ojJCration could be enhanced by providing a sfop sign and a painted stop line
~ ,;.;, ..,e'llentJor exiting velzic/l:s. (me! warning signs ard markings Of! the sidewalk for
.'" ':.1~ ("ourul tlle comer from the exitiilg vd lcles.
=--\~
,f;;'-=>, "'
( !',:.~i!':li, V(~l""nH . "SOCIATES
i;," :. ("r'l~.~Hr;~, i NG CONSULTANTS
ruse 3 of 4
...".. . II ...-..-.... .. ....:::0", ~ ..t.-, -=- r:o...
..,....",__e.T_,-...n
.
.
.
Tl'llm, Stud)' R."lew
Brldl;ehamptoD National Bank
. '-'I J t'
__:1 t} \..-iff-I~__a.J(Ul
" 'C~'" ':.;V' ludes that the traffic generated by the drive-thru which exits into the center's
. '1(. j' irj .";1! not adversely affect operations v 'ithin the site. Indeed, it is expected that a
. 'l:.~'. ';,'1' -Ie wm exit at the rate of one vehk e every three minutes durin~ the Friday
: .,1. f;'.1 ,;~, a,\d one vehicle every four minutes, uring the Saturday peak penod. It is also
. ..s~.~: r ~ :c expect those drive-thru vehicles wls ling to exit the site will use the westerly
'" ~ 'xit '~I.to Fa~tory Avenue rather than traversi 19 the parking field to utilize the exit
(' ,ect.y .Jnto }'fam Road.
-
rON/ever,!?, :,~le analys~ of the i!npact on th~ p,rojct g~nerated !raffic on the p~~king field!o be
"".-'" mec"!mgjul, more IIlfOrmatlon 011 the eXlStln/J Jark./1Igfield IS needed. AddItIOnal details
..' : . :.;,~':. inatfofJ 0.'1 the parking layout, circulation: Jattems, turnover and adeq'~acy of the
, ',16.,:>[ r:alJ's provided is required for a complete project review. In addition, the site plan
, '. ,; :;t.G tv OL,r office for reV1ew did not include t le parking and circulation scheme for the
..' ,. :~:prir.g center, no,r did it include th.e pr .posed amendn~ent for th~ Bridgehamp,ton
, I;.~' ::anK. PleaseR'?vld~ a copr of the site pi m ~mendment III cOl~nectlonfurther ,ev!I,M
. 'o' .r ; ", ..i.iJ iryout, e.xzstmg clrculatwn. turnover I, nd adequacy of parkmg for the overal! site as
','~1 ~l,~.,J;:,e.
C.".n;tll..5&,'!
:: It je:t ~o rcyiew of the .additional informa!i?n r< quested, ~he traffic imo~ct ~nalysis is ~ound
. ',h home mllior exceptIOns as noted. Add~tIOrya mformatlOn reG,1.!e~ted IS hlghhghte? In
;1;- h the above comments. Further reView IS varranted to venty If the prqposed site
" " ;.J.1'TJdment is an acceptable use of the site' rom a traffic safety perspective.
;; YOL: have any questions, please do not h :sitate to call.
~
LAtv:i.OR. v....l~~ J'ASOCIATES Page4ot4
;0' ,'il~.:; '''ftrN~~G CONSULTANTS
- . .. . - -.. - . ~ "....... . - ..~ --- - .
.
,
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Lalham. Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
SCOTI L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Soulhold. New York 11971
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OP SOUTHOLD
Pax (516) 765-1823
October 14, 1992
~homas J. Tobin, President
and Chief Executive Officer
Bridgehampton National Bank
Main Street
P.O. Box E
Bridgehampton, New York 11932
Dear Mr. Tobin;
I have read your letter regarding the site plan application
that was submitted by Alan A. Cardinale on behalf of
Bridgehampton National Bank.
The traffic impact study was forwarded to our consultant
for review and comment. When the consultant's report is
received, the Planning Board will need to review it.
Consequently, we do not anticipate reaching a decision on either
the environmental impact or the site plan amendment at the
October 19th meeting.
If you have additional concerns, please do not hesitate to
call me at 727-3595 between 7:30 A.M. amd 3:00 P.M. Also,
Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner, is available to answer technical
questions about the application at 765-1938.
Sincerely,
~ ~'7/vS
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
.
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
SCOTI L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
October 14, 1992
Vito F. Lena, Regional Permit Engineer
State of New York
Department of Transportation
Veterans Memorial Highway
Hauppauge, NY 11971
RE: Amended Site Plan for
Alan A. Cardinale Shopping
Center: Addition of
Drive-In Window for
Bridgehampton National Bank
N/s Route 25, E/s
Factory Avenue, Mattituck
SCTM# 1000-142-1-2
Dear Mr. Lena:
A review of our file indicated that your agency may not
have been copied with the Lead Agency Coordination Request for
this project. Enclosed please find a copy of same and a copy of
the Traffic Impact Study, along with our apology for the
oversight.
If you have any questions, or require further assistance,
please contact this office.
Sincerely, ~
~~7'V'~
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
EncIs.
f I,'..,
j
"
J PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
t' Bennell Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Latham, Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
. .
SCOIT L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Soulhold. New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
SEPTE,rl BEt< IS 19'1.;[
. )
RE: Lead Agency Coordination Request
Dear Reviewer:
The purpose of this request is to determine under Article 8
(State Environmental Quality Review Act-SEQRA) of the Environmental
Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617 the fOllowing:
1. Your jurisdiction in the action described below;
2. Your interest in assuming the responsibilities of lead
agency; and
3. Issues of concern which you believe should be evaluated.
Enclosed please find a copy of the proposal and a completed
Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) to assist you in your response.
Project Name:
Pr<o Po se Q..SILff, Pi 19 rI EoR T3tR/OGi Ill'll?! PToli
-,..JATloti 19L.: R f1r1 K ~c::rV11!E 1000 - !.t.2. -I - ;L
Requested Action:
J't?<> po 56 P SirE fi.d-rl Pol{ 61'1/'1/< /In!) ~dl';'eu p
W~~OOl1/ I;:' %-:;'~ gm:: VA~:;''7 {fcut.l)/lY //y
fI1 -nTI'f<:., " of I/1G. CG'/7T. .
SEQRA Classification: ( ) Type I
( X) Unlisted
Contact Person: .E. G. I<!ASSriE R.
(516)-765-1938
.-'
l <f' '"
-,.t;
..
~
I
..
1
II
,
.
.
The lead agency will determine the
impact statement (EIS) on this project.
the date of this letter, please respond
have an interest in being lead agency.
need for an environmental
Within thirty (30) days of
in writing whether or not you
Planning Board Position:
<i) This agency wishes to assume lead agency status for this action.
( ) This agency has no objection to your agency assuming lead agency
status for this action.
( ) Other. < See comments below).
Comments: /rlST/J?tl'7T/'&/j or ])~/VE _ t1 f w//"I Do","" tv/~L
R f cp L/ I'~ {; E'/'/rJ;/;'11 T/'o,/ 0 f J.. I'fI'lIJ f:, c 11 P//'fG //1 f"/to/'t I
'11J R V rile:: triG 1'1 R€ SI ()EnT/PiL. D/s/~{cr: .,E ;<r"TTrr/JrFI
w/J-L .cIYTE,IL 1/') SHofPl/XG C&/7TE~ P4~KidG ;"'07:
Please feel free to contact this office for further informatio~.
~od.
~cnnctt Orlowcki, Jr. ~
Chairman
cc: ~oard of APP~als
BG3ra sf TrUGt~e6
If- Building' Department
Southold Town Board
Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services
NYCnI::C :J LuL.) Brook
NYSDEC - Albany
S.~. "ppt of FuLlic Work~
IT. g. .'.rmy CorEl of Eagin<:'cL:; ;v,: j
M 'X g. DCElt. ef Trd.h~vu.<. LaLioli / ~ ~ /"'/'1"/72-
* Maps are enclosed for your.!cview
Coordinating agencies
.-./
.
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
SCOTI L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
October 14, 1992
Charles Voorhis
Cramer, Voorhis & Associates, Inc.
54 North Country Road
Miller Place, New York 11764
Re: Amended site plan for
Alan A. Cardinale Shopping
Center (Addition of
Drive-Up for
Bridgehamnpton National
Bank
SCTM * 1000-142-1-2
Dear Mr. Voorhis:
As per our conversation earlier today, I have enclosed a
copy of the short environmental assessment form for your use.
If you find you will need more information from the
applicant, I will so notify the applicant.
Sincerely,
~~/~/t/:s
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
14.16.4 (2f87)-Text 12
PROJECT 1.0. NUMBER
617.21.
Appendix C
State Environmental Quality Review
SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only
PART I-PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by Applicant or Project sponsor)
SEaR
1. APPLICANT ISPONSOR I 2. PROJECT NAME
/f'tC,-Jd .-9. C,-J/C.o "N-4C.~ ~4 rr;",u.cK /'&;(4
3. PROJECT LOCATION: ~"TY z..r; ~"",,;,y. "e.. ,f;,.//: ?k
Munlclpallly ~ - -, ru eM" .N' J County
4. PRECISE LOCATION (Street eddress and road'lntersectlons, prominent landmarks, etc., or provide map)
-.%T>-.tE" "#It I /,-<~,",H,,",'<:; _cc ~iC-_ "'J 4Q~~":J' (.J, ri~~....J ~'r;rMC-.r
A,.r-9 n/-'';oY ,("... ... /4cn'~? 4"'r! .4U'rr,'?"<< c'" MY, ~T> .e.. "J c!.~4r ~
11...- ;r;{.,. .eJ"J r c-~'" of ">-1.,..-.. oVS ~4?~..g _ ~oV.o ., rFae - _eA.I(! mcr,,~;, ~,
5. IS PROPOSED ACTION: .
o New o Expansion ~odlflcallon/a~e~atlon
6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLV: ~
4,..~ .tJ4"U":':; ;1'.. &d ~t:1.:1'fi' '04 p.t: k.J~ /7J' J:. / ( <5/.7...,.10"- .-
,Me, d./)' /NC ,)tld ""...,,, z>,c, oJ e ,,-.I .
7, AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTE~" I'1!"L'r "'~'" (!
Initially /7R"'ADl! ~~ acres Ultimately acres
8. W~AOPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS?
Yes 0 No If No. describe briefly ,
9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITV~OJECT?
o Residential 0 Industrial Commercial o Agriculture o Park/Forest/Open space DOlhe'
Oescrlbe:
10. DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL, OR FUNDING, NOW OR ULTIMATELV FROM ANV OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCV (FEDERAL.
STATE OR LOCAL)?
lia've. DNa If yes, IIsl agency(s) and permlUapprovals $4""""''''1/': .,e~ "'" ~4 ,..,c AI. y../' rltJrl!
t'AJ~~NN A/ 19 J' 4ct!t'~ ..df'.,.,......e.. ."...
11. DOES ANV ASPECT OF THE ACTIOIl HAVE A CURRENTLV VAllO PERMIT OR APPROVAL?
[!iJV... DNa If YI!O. list agency name and permiUapproval ;'~AtAf, rr~[Q "" L 4'...."'"."'7 -
12. ~ESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION?
Ve. 0 No
, I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MV KNOWLEDGE
Applicant/sponsor name: 4"'094" A1 ~A"'IJ'NA~,r Oate: F/..~A..
,,~~ /
~
Signature:
-
, If the aellon Is In the Coastal Area, and you are a state ageneJ;r~~\1l'~lfll~_Jhe-~,-
Coastal Assessment Form belore proceeding with this as'r~~!J1ent
, OVER 'IUlIC' "'.- . ~ ,', \'
1 '
, --'
~OUT:<i! [! '~G\:;\l
. p; t.'_lt'I:;l";~ ,?p.~,:;l!-.-_....~;
-v___~_l
) """'c 1
,,' :-...1'
\ I ~
.
PART II-ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESS
A. DOES ACTION ~D ANY TYPE I THR
DYes @No
B. Will ACTION RECEIVE COORDINATED REVIEW AS PROVIDED FOR UNLISTED ACTIONS IN 6 NYCRR. PART 617.61
may be superseded by another Involved agency.
DYes DNo
C. COULD ACTION RESULT IN ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FOLLOWING: (Answers may be handwritten, If legible)
C1. Existing air quality. surlace or groundwater quality or quantity, noise levels, existing Irafflc patterns, solid waste production or disposal,
potential for erosion, drainage or floodIng problems? Explain briefly:
~ (To be completed by Agency)
-' IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.127 If yes, coordinat
..law process and use the FULL EAF.
If No, a negative declaration
C2. Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeoloolcal, historic, or other natural or cultural resources; or community or neighborhood character? Explain briefly:
C3. Vegetation or launa, flsh, shellfish or wildlife specIes, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly:
C4. A community's existing plans or goals as olllclally adopted, or a change In use or Inlenslty of use 01 land or other natural resources? Explain briefly
.,
.
C5. Growth, subsequent development. or relaled activities likely 10 be Induced by Ihe proposed acllon? Explain briefly.
C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other eUects not Identified In C1.C5? Explain briefly.
C7. Other Impacts (Including changes In use of either quanllty or type of energy)? Explain briefly.
0, IS THERE, OR IS THERE LIKELY TO BE. CONTROVERSY RELATED TO POTENTIAL ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAlIMPACTS1
DYes 0 No II Yes, explain briefly .
PART III-DETERMINATION OF SIGNIF.ICANCE (To be completed by Agency)
INSTRUCTIONS: For a-8ch adverse effect Identified above, determine whether It Is substantial, large, Important or otherwise significant.
Each effect should be assessed In connection with Its (a) setting (I.e. urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (C) duration; (d)
Irreversibility; (e) geographic scope; and (f) magnitude. If necessary, a.dd attachments or reference supporting materials. Ensure that
explanations contain sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse Impacts have been Identified and adequately addressed.
o
o
Check this box If you have idenllfied one or more potenllally large or significant adverse Impacts which MAY
OCCUL. lhen proceed directly to the FULL EAF andlor prepare a positive declarallon.
Check this box If you have determined, based on the Information and analysis Bbove and any supporting
documentation, that the proposed aclfon WILL NOT result in any, significant adverse environmental impacts
AND provide on allachments as necessary, the'reasons supporting this determination:
Name of Lead ^Bencv
Prinl or Type Name of Responsible Ollicer in lead ^aency
T iUe of ResponSIble Officer
Signature 01 ResponSible Officer in lead ^Bency
Sianalure of Preparer (If different from responsible officer)
Date
,
2
~
'1 --
.
~~~
~~~IJJ~:"'.i ~
(~ t,,',' , ~
~ i,.~ ;;.c:,
Q ','. '.- ..
en i'; .' :z:
i2,,'~'f,i ~
~ ~ ':" - ,,~~,
\;~;~~V
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Latham, Jr.
Richard G, Ward
Mark S, McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
seOTI L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
October 6, 1992
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
Cramer, Voorhis & Associates, Inc.
Environmental and Planning Consultants
54 N. Country Road
Miller Place, New York 11764
RE: Bridgehampton National
Bank, Mattituck
SCTM~1000-142-1-2
Dear Messrs. Cramer and Voorhis:
The Planning Board has received the $650.00 review fee from
the applicant for the above mentioned site plan. Please proceed
with your review.
The purchase order will be sent to you under separate cover.
If there are any questions, please contact Planning Staff.
Sincerely,
,~ ~>14~~.
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
Enc 1.
-t
. .
516-298-4223
ALAN A. CARDINALE
REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT & INVESTMENT
P. O. 80 X 77
MATTITUCK SHOPPING CENTER
MAT TIT U C K, L.I., N. Y. 1 1 952
October 5, 1992
Southold Town Planning Board
Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
. / "
(ALc..,K' In. /v'l..~.(..<.e-t..-
Re. Traffic Study
Review Fee
Dear Mr. Orlowski.
Enclosed please find my check in the amount of $650.00
covering the review of the Traffic Study by the Town of
Southold's consultants. In addition, as per your request,
the current parking spaces being used within the Mattituck
Plaza is 512. Please advise if any further information is
required for a October 1992 approval. Thank you.
Very truly yours,
.~4{~if
Alan A. Cardinale .
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski. Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
~,,'ll,U,fF,Ol~tl ~\
~II"" l2-.
~ ". ~.
-..: ,c,. ,'?,
~ .',~ '. ;...c.
Q ~. ,"' ~-.. ..
~\\ " ~, ~"y
-h ~. s:.~
~QI '. ->.~"
~ .. ".". ~ AY
~pPiV
II '/;'1<1-;Vo~ 7;;"~
. ;Yff";"'" . ~ ~~.
r~~~~.
..'
.
.
SCOTI L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Fax (516) 765-1823
October 2, 1992
Alan A. Cardinale ;z.<i f' - <{ '2.2-3,
Real Estate Management & Investment
P.O. Box 77
Mattituck Shopping Center
Mattituck, NY 11952
RE: Proposed site plan for
Drive-Up Window for
Bridgehampton National
Bank
Mattituck Plaza, Mattituck
Zoning District: General
Business (B)
SCTM>> 1000-142-1-2
Dear Mr. Cardinale:
The Planning Board has received from its environmental
consultant an estimate of $650.00 to review the traffic.study.
If you wish to proceed, please submit a check in this
amount made out to the Town of Southold.
If you have any questions, please contact the office.
Sincerely,
~~ tirb~I<7/.G-
Bennett Orlo~ski, Jr.
Chairman
cc: Victor Lessard, Principal Building Inspector
.';;"
.
.
..5<<t31'l c...c
;J 13 ./
rS
t?K..
Bridgehampton National Bank
Main Street. P.O. Box E . Bridgehampton, New York 11932 . (516) 537-1000 . FAX: (516) 537-2021
THOMAS). TOBIN
President & Chief Executive Officer
October 6,1992
Mr. Bennet Orlowski
Southold Planning Board
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Dear Mr. Orlowski,
I'm writing to you in regard to the pending application for site plan approval in
Mattituck Plaza for the Bridgehampton National Bank.
Alan Cardinale Jr. has forwarded to me a copy of his letter to the Planning Board
dated October 1, 1992 and I would like to echo his thoughts expressed in this
correspondence.
We have attempted to provide as expeditiously as possible, all of the required
information stipulated by the Planning Board. I would hope that your board can
reach a decision in regard to our request during your October meeting.
If there is any further information required, I ask that you please do not hesitate to
contact Mr. Cardinale or myself.
Thank YV"lJ..
Sincerely yours,
--jQ~.~jft2
..-4
_--. r"\ \
~\\n ~. \~"
'. / I?. ~ :b., \
'. \1. ~ 13-~--'- . ".
'~r-\S'- .
, \\ .
",1\1.. \
'\ ,\' 1'IIf...1 \c$l. " \
\1l~' ....-J \
l\.l._._~~\:i-\ \
,",~".\'D \,:.,~ ,... ...-
'::'I^\\\~~ii.\,'-;.., U\"';""~
.;....' ..'" 'I" ..'~:. ~ ',J -........-
?i.r\1:4.""'" ...-'"
Thomas J. Tobin
President and Chief Executive Officer
TJT / ad
cc: Scott Harris, Supervisor
Southold Town Board
Southold Town Attorney
t
. .
St1L3Fi r..E'
e~V
516-298-4223
/(1(
ALAN A. CARDINALE
REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT & INVESTMENT
P. O. BOX 77
MATTITUCK SHOPPING CENTER
MATTITUCK. L.I., N.Y. 11952
October 5, 1992
Southold Town Planning Board
Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
tk.e t~ ~
Re. Traffic Study
Review Fee
Dear Mr. Orlowski.
Enclosed please find ay check in the aaount of $650.00
covering the review of the Traffic Study by the Town of
Southold's consultants. In addition, as per your request,
the current parking spaces being used within the Mattituck ~
Plaza is 512. Please advise if any further inforaation is
required for a October 1992 approval. Thank you.
Very truly yours,
~4{~
Alan A. Cardinale
......_- "j
r:..---r------..~..,~.."-.." '. l
1r''''I ~ ~ iJ :i !
1\ 0 1..---_c"...-....~.
IUu\ ocr -~99~
soun;ol_D J ~;\ ':"'i,
PLIV'I~~;ji~ i';'..~,';:___....
.
r
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski. Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Latham. 1r.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
SCOrf L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
October 2, 1992
Alan A. Cardinale
Real Estate Management & Investment
P.O. Box 77
Mattituck Shopping Center
Mattituck, NY 11952
RE: Proposed site plan for
Drive-Up Window for
Bridgehampton National
Bank
Mattituck Plaza, Mattituck
Zoning District: General
Business (B)
SCTM* 1000-142-1-2
Dear Mr. Cardinale:
The Planning Board has received from its environmental
consultant an estimate of $650.00 to review the traffic study.
If you wish to proceed, please submit a check in this
amount made out to the Town of Southold.
If you have any questions, please contact the office.
Sincerely,
~~~~,'7/G
Bennett Orlo~ski, Jr.
Chairman
cc: Victor Lessard, Principal Building Inspector
4
. .
S1I819ce-
~~29B~4223
th.l
ALAN A. CARDINALE
REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT & INVESTMENT
P.O. BOX 77
MATTITUCK SHOPPING CENTER
MATTITUCK, L.I., N.Y. 11952
October 1, 1992
Southold Planning Board
Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
Re:Mattituck Plaza
Store #1
Bridgehampton National Bank
Dear Mr. Orlowski Jr.:
This letter will serve to confirm my conversation of
September 18, 1992 with Ms. Scopaz. As the Planning Board
is well aware, Bridgehampton National Bank and I have
endeavored to cooperate in every way possible to assure an
expedient resolution and approval for the above captioned
application. I can not over emphasize the importance of
our receiving the required site plan approval by the
Planning Board at the October 1992 meeting. In addition to
our letters of correspondence, numerous calls and personal
dialogue between the Planning Board and Thomas McCarthy
(BNB Representative) and myself have been made to confirm
that all aspects required for the above application have
been met. Bridgehampton National Bank and I have spared no
expense and exhausted the cooperation of our surveyor,
architect and traffic engineer in order to meet the timely
deadlines. In addition, we have not disputed any of the
requirements the Planning Board has imposed in order to
obtain an October 1992 approval.
We respectfully request the cooperation of the
Planning Board assuring an October 1992 resolution.
Thanking you in advance, I remain.
Very truly yours,
cc: Southold Town Board
cc: Southold Town Attorney
cc: Thomas Tobin, President, CEO
Bridgehampton National Bank
/i!{~~J
/~ f~~' ?rz-~ .
~5ZJIv~~
~'
~~~
SENDER:
SUBJECT:
SCTM#:
COMMENTS:
.
.
SUBMISSION WITHOUT COVER LETTER
~~~
6(1/8
1+::< - )-;;..,
7~
~~~
".-
/{n\JU& @ D WT(;~
IiUj SEP 2 I IWl i J)
;&UTHOLO TOWN j
NNING BOARD
....'
..
(, v~~ JAs!ATES
A"MEN~~~G CONSULTANTS
.
lXt~AGc
/Q'<c
September 22, 1992
Mr. Robert Kassner
Town of Southold
Main Road
P.O.Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971
Re: Mattituck Plaza Drive-up Bank
Traffic Impact Study Review
Dear Bob:
li2- - I - J..
As per your r(~quest. this letter provides a fee quotation for services regarding the review of
the above ref(~renced Traffic Impact Study.
Services proposed include: a detailed review of t Ie Traffic Impact Study and a letter
outlining recommendations, need for further eva usdon and conclusion,.
We propose to conduct this review for a fixed fel of $800.00, and can begin immediately
upon authorization to proceed. -
Please advise at your earliest convenience if you Ni~h us to proceed with this project. Please
call if you have any questions.
?u: ~ -u~. #1r-LMr o.K..lw;.<(')
~~~7V c~/~-'~
~.
fu) I ~ @ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I
\ill1 SEP 2- '2. \992 \~
SOUTHOLO lOWN
PLANNING 60>,RO
~i4.2 NORTH COUNTRY ROAD. MILLEF PLACE, NY 11764 (516) 331-1455
~p.~ s,.~o~~_ ~ ~l 4.~oo^r~~wo~~ Z~:6
3n1.. Z6-ZZ;-d3$
I,'
.
"
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennell Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Latham, Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
SCOTI L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
SfPTE,rlI3E~ IS 19 '1;L
)
RE: Lead Agency Coordination Request
Dear Reviewer:
The purpose of this request is to determine under Article 8
(State Environmental Quality Review Act-SEQRA) of the Environmental
Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617 the following:
1. Your jurisdiction in the action described below;
2. Your interest in assuming the responsibilities of lead
agency; and
3. Issues of concern which you believe should be evaluated.
Enclosed please find a copy of the proposal and a completed
Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) to assist you in your response.
Project Name:
~o Po se ~s~~
r--/ATlorllJi.: 1] fl/'"f K
PL t!JrI For< T31{f.Gf)/J'fJPJPTOli
sc:r/#1#/ooo- .;J.-I-;;L
Requested Action: fA'" post" P SITE fj./1rj Fo~ 8/1/'1/< IJrlf) e.t/t/eu p
;~~~~~::: .;:;~~rp/;: :;:;!&Z (ftUt.1J//L I/Y
SEQRA Classification: ( ) Type I
( X) Unlisted
Contact Person: V. G. 1<(1i S SJi E R
(Si'6) -765-'1938
"
1\
<
.
.
The lead agency will determine the
impact statement (EIS) on this project.
the date of this letter, please respond
have an interest in being lead agency.
need for an environmental
Within thirty (30) days of
in writing whether or not you
Planning Board Position:
()() This agency wishes to assume lead agency status for this action.
( ) This agency has no objection to your agency assuming lead agency
status for this action.
( Other. (See comments below).
Comments: /rlST/JL.JI'JT/O/'f or Vt(/V!3 - t1 f w//1 Dotv' w/~L
Rfql./r'~t fj,/I?)I~I'9Tior/ of J-J1rt1J ScriP/riG //1 hfoNt.
'i /JRV rll~I/'IG r1 RE SIOE/"/T/'ri'- D/ST..elcr: ?;;(/TTtt/JfF/<
/v'ltL frtTEA- 1/') S/foffl/"t"G c&./ITE~ Pt?~K/>/G J...oJ:
Please feel free to contact this office for further information.
~od.
~'nnott O,'o.,k', Jr, ~
Chairman
cc: ~sard of Appeals
B03ra of Tras~~e~
':f Building' Department
Southold Town Board
Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services
lPlCDIJC 3 L\Jl~Y Brook
NYSDEC - Albany
s.r. n~rt gf FuLl~~ Wo~ks
U. a w .?.rHlY Cor~ of EngiIl<:~J.. s 0 1/
N v :;;. DeJ3t. sf 'l'ra""l'VL LaLiolI / ~ ~ /"'/'/'/,2-
* Maps are encloscd for your,!cview
Coordinating agencies
14.16.4 (2IB7)- Text 12
PROJECT 1.0. NUMBER
617.21-
Appendix C
State Environmental Quality Review
SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
For UNLISTED' ACTIONS Only
PART I-PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by Applicant or Project sponsor)
SEQR
1. APPLICANT ISPONSOR I 2. PROJECT NAME
/?b?N 4. C;l7,e.a ,;;y' /.7 c~ .-?1.,? rr/ ra. CK /'6?X4
3. PROJECT LOCATION: /f,,, TY 2-. ~4' ~ "e.. J;'/'/:' ?k
Munlclpellly ~ - ~, ru' c~ .-v. '" County
4. PRECISE LOCATION (Street address and road'lntersectlons, prominent landmarks, etc., or provide map)
o,J" "'ut iF' #- I /,'<~""O"-"<:; ~c~ ~'~. "'J 6O'<'C-<f GJ"r~s'''.-..J ~"r;rMc"",
/t:,.~"1 A/.#/'" ,<'... ... /4cr"~7 4~ ~rr/rl< c '<' MY, ...r T> -e CO ,.1 d.c:..4r ..
h." r,{", .eJt"J :r ..~"" <.f ..r -1.,..,.~ -v ~ .....4?~..g _ ~""'... ~ rr-elf: - _C'4,f! mcr...-rl' ~.
5. IS PROPOSED ACTION: -
o New o Expansion ~OdlflcatlOnfa~e~atlon
8. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY: ~
4,-o~ 6/7"-c,c:; ru .{ c:- t/?7Dd,P '4 p.., k-.re: /?J ..,t::. /1 .54""#'" e
.uc,2./y ".,y C ,)"'d ':"'J z>,c,oJe ,^, .
7. AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTE~9 ~.t"4"r ~",... ~
InlUally /7/r*'ADL S"'C'D"" acres Ultimately acres
B. W~ROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS?
Yes D No If No. describe briefly ,
9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY~OJECT7
o Residential 0 Industrial Commercial o Agrlcullure o Park/Forest/Open space OOthe'
Describe:
10. DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL, OR FUNDING. NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY (FEDERAL.
STATE OR LOCAL)?
!;?Ye. ONO If yes, list agency(s) and permit/approvals .6'''1 ""K;";& ",e~6-u ~4"~ .N. y.J' r;,r..
, i!Ai""'IV'N HI9~ 4c~..v J,.,,......e_:J~ ..-
I
11. DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTIOU HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL?
0y.. ONO If yEln, list agency name and permit/approval /'e~"'" rr~~ -...f€" 4'A-4e..tl -
12. ~ESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION?
Ye. 0 No
I I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE
I
Applicant/sponsor name: A"~4,y A' eA~"" ,NALt:" Date: 'p/"~h,
~~ ------ /
,...--., ":/'
Signature;
-
III the action Is In the Coastal Area, and you are a state agencJ,lr>~Q\ll~le~L.theL
Coastal Assessment Form belore proceeding with this ass S8ment
, ~ 1 ~.
O~ER l. ; L:,.0
souT:.;(JL[1 TG~!N
! r'~ ~,~jt.l"~'~!,~_~p,~>;-!O
-.~.,._-._.,,-- "_..~" .
-'--."~;"~:1 i
Oil
J '\
\ '-."'"
t
-'
....~,J
.
~-
PART II-ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESS
A. DOES ACTION ~D ANY TYPE I THAES
DYes i.!jNo
B. WilL ACTION RECEIVE COORDINATED REVIEW AS PROVIDED FOR UNLISTED ACTIONS IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.67
may be superseded by another Involved agency.
DYes DNo
C. COULD ACTION RESULT IN ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FOLLOWING: (Answers may be handwritten. If legible)
C1. Existing air quality. surface or groundwater quality or quantlty, nols8 levels, existing traffic patterns, solid waste producllon or disposal,
potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? explain briefly:
\J" (To be completed by Agency)
. .J IN 6 NYCAR, PART 617.121 If yes, coordinate
..Iew process and us. the FULL EAF.
II No, . negative declaration
C2. Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources; or communlly or neighborhood character? Explain bristly:
C3. Vegelallon or faune, flllh, Ihflllllsh or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly:
C4. A community's exlsllng plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change In use or Intensity of use 01 land or other natural resources? Explain briefly
.-
.
C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be Induced by the proposed acllon? Explain brlelly.
C6. Long term, shorl term, cumulative, or other effects not Identified In 01-C5? Explain briefly.
C7. Other Impacts (IncludIng changes In use of either quanllty or type of energy)? Explain briefly.
O. IS THERE, OR IS THERE LIKELY TO BE. CONTROVERSY RELATED TO POTENTIAL AOVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS?
o Ves 0 No If Yes. explain briefly .
PART III-DETERMINATION OF SIGNII:ICANCE (To be completed by Agency)
INSTRUCTIONS: For eiich adverse effect Identified above, determine whether It Is substantial, large, Important or otherwise slgnlflcant.
Each effect should be assessed In connectlon with Its (a) settlng (I.e. urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d)
Irreversibility; (e) geographic scope; and (f) magnitude. If necessary, add attachments or reference supporting materials. Ensure that
explanations contain sufficient detail to show that all relevanl adverse Impacts have been Identified and adequately addressed.
D
o
Check this box If you have Identified one or more potentially large or significant adverse Impacts which MAY
occu<. lhen proceed directly to the FULL EAF and/or prepare a positive declaration.
Check this box If you have determined, based on the Information and analysis above and any supporting
documentation, that the proposed acUon WILL NOT result In any'slgnlflcant adverse environmental Impacts
AND provide on attachments as necessary, the'reasons supporting this determination:
Name of Lead Agencv
Print or Type Name of Responsible Ollicer in Lead Agency
Title of Responsible Officer
Signature of Responsible Officer in leild Agency
Signature of Prepare, (If different horn responsible officer,
Date
. '
2
.
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
SCOlT L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Telephooe (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTH OLD
September 15, 1992
Town Hall. 53095 Main Rnad
P.O. Box 1179
Soulhold. New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
Alan A. Cardinale
P.o. Box 77
Mattituck Shopping Center
Mattituck, New York 11952
/
RE: Proposed Site plan for
Bridgehampton National Bank
SCTM#1000-142-1-2
Dear Mr. Cardinale:
The fOllowing resolution was adopted by the Southold Town
Planning Board at a meeting held on Monday, September 14, 1992.
Be it RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board,
acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, start
the lead agency coordination process on this unlisted action.
The coordination process is being started with the
understanding that a traffic study will be submitted as part of
the environmental assessment form.
The Planning Board requires that the entire shopping center
site plan be submitted showing the proposed drive-thru window
and new curb cut.
Until the traffic study and shopping center site plan are
made a part of the assessment materials, the environmental
review cannot be completed.
Please do not hesitate to contact this office if you have
any questions regarding the above.
Very truly yours,
,'2 -r-f-. /17 ,. / ,1
,LJ;I>MA / VtfO-VWH', fl.
Bennett Orlowski, Jr. ....,
Chairman
SENDER:
SUBJECT:
SCTM#:
COMMENTS:
.
.
SUBMISSION WITHOUT COVER LETTER
T!-w1 (JII L Cth
~~
1<fJ.--/-J-
r~
fJt3
1%/
~!P p(c ~~
7 Iv /1 v-
--""\"\.
--"',-, \
..f';~'\ ~" \" \..
".,.,>^-~ .~. ,,\\' \., .. '.\ "
"'" ~ ."', \\ \', -..... '-,"', , , "
......"..- ,::) -'\' \, ~,';.-",.........' \', -',
-""''' no " ,-
~~\. " '.'
1~ ~^",,"~....-
-\~\ ~
'\"', \ \
,', '\' cl'l"I \
\~\;':;:\ ,,1-'
J!;'I.... ", ,0'"
\ \,....-c:;,
\ /'
..--.
....'
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
.
.
SCOTT L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
Fax (516) 765-1823
July 15, 1992
Alan A. Cardinale
P.O. Box 77
Mattituck Shopping Center
Mattituck, NY 11952
RE: Proposed site plan for
Drive-Up Window for
Bridgehampton National
Bank
Mattituck Plaza,
Mattituck
Zoning District: General
Business (B)
SCTM* 1000-142-1-2
Dear Mr. Cardinale:
The Planning Board has reviewed your alternate plans for
the proposed drive-up window which you presented to the Board at
its work session of July 13, 1992.
The Planning Board reaffirms its position about the traffic
conditions in the shopping plaza. If an application were to be
submitted, the Board will require a traffic study as part of its
review.
fee.
If you wish to proceed, please submit an application and
Sincerely,
-;?~AOxr-~ ~/v:$.
~~~~~-~r~owski, Jr.
Chairman
cc: Victor Lessard, Principal Building Inspector
..
.
.
.
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
Bennett Orlowski. Jr., Chairman
George Ritchie Latham. Jr.
Richard G. Ward
Mark S. McDonald
Kenneth L. Edwards
scon L. HARRIS
Supervisor
Telephone (516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box I 179
Southold, New York 11971
Fax (5 I 6) 765-1823
June 30, 1992
Alan A. Cardinale
P.O. Box 77
Mattituck Shopping Center
Mattituck, NY 11952
RE: Proposed site plan for
Drive-Up Window for
Bridgehampton National
Bank
Mattituck Plaza,
Mattituck
Zoning District: General
Business (B)
SCTM# 1000-142-1-2
Dear Mr. Cardinale:
The Planning Board has received your letter of May 27,
1992, in which you propose a single drive-up window for
Bridgehampton National Bank within store # 1 (formerly
Rosselli's Bakery) at the above mentioned shopping plaza.
The Planning Board feels that conditions in the
shopping plaza are such that the additional traffic generated by
the drive-in would result in an unsafe situation at that
location. The Board therefore does not recommend the addition of
this particular use at this location.
If you wish to proceed with this application despite our
recommendation, please deposit a check and application as soon
as possible.
Sincerely,
~4&/~0 9"'.//s
Bennett Orlowski, Jr.
Chairman
cc: Victor Lessard, Principal Building Inspector
t"... ~,-"
..-~ - '~
.
"
,~
''''T" -~'7,'""".,,'-~:'__
, -~.,..,_",.'" ',,' C',~
...:5~rVlce
en fretJ) c<'
~ ..
C') -+. ~.
;!b.,.,
0 ~
:::0
""(
~ ~
~ "
'\) I~
, i
.
,
~ ~
" ~ ~ ~ \ I
I> ~ .
c r; T
, ~
~ Of'
\ p tl~
"-
:b It
/":
~ It
~
~
!lJore
EXISTING
BUILDING
l~
, ,
, ~ ,
9,'\
H
Cone-
wC\..lll::.
...
---
\ p~/.5I//71
\ ?O-I-/(//J:}
\
\
\
PLAN FOR
DRIVE-UP BANKING FACILITY
AlA T17TUCK SHOPPING CENTER
A TAlA TTITUCK. N. Y.
Scllle: 1" := 30'-
June 9, 1992
Juns 16,1992 (revision)
",_,__r _~_.- ''':~.''
.,..-,~
00 EJ: ~ 91: E rn
"
SOUTHOLD TOWN
PLANNING BOARD
92-799
.
i
.,
~-
ALAN A. CARDINALE
REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT & INVESTMENT
P.O. BOX 77
MATTITUCK SHOPPING CENTER
MATTITUCK, L.I., N.Y. 11952
516-298-4223
~f:>FiLE)
(ft"i P
P6
1(1:::.-./ INS
Lis
May 27. 1992
Southold Planning Departaent
Main Road
Southold. NY 11971
Re. Mattituck Plaza
Site Plan-Drive-up
Dear Mr. Orlowski Jr..
Pursuant to ay telephone conversation with Mr. Kasner.
I respectful offer for your preliainary review a site plan
for a single drive-up for Bridgehaapton National Bank
within store .1 (foraerly Rosselli's Bakery) within the
Mattituck Plaza. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Thank you for your consideration in this regard.
Very truly yours.
/YtAC~
Alan A. Cardinale Jr.
IM~~U~~
1\ n\ ''''1' 9 1992 l~
l...J\...lL
-- .
LASER FICHE FORM
Planning Board Site Plans and Amended Site Plans
SPFile Type: ?)n1'~17~
Proiect Type: Sfte-PlanS'
Status: Final Approval
SCTM #: 1000 - 142.-1-26
Proiect Name: Bridqehampton National Bank Drive-U
Address: NYS Route 25 & Factory Avenue. Mattituck
Hamlet: Mattituck
Applicant Name:
Owner Name: Alan Cardinale
Zone 1:
Approval Date: /~/:;J.119OL
SCANNED
JUt 2 2007
Records Management
OPTIONAL ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
A date indicates that we have received the related information
End SP Date:
Zone 2: Zone 3:
Location: Mattituck Shoppinq Center
SC Filinq Date:
C and R's :
Home Assoc:
Rand M Aqreement:
SCAN Date:
:::'l.<.J!,FI~
~
. C') I ;=:r
by~l)Je "~~'~~f':'t
r .__- .~:\ '\
"----........... , . . Is
~ \ ~~e>r ~ '~l
~~u<; ~ i1
,
,'>.~-~~,~.~,~,~_._.",. ,
,(r~'1 f: (,) F ) -:., .
"'II e, ,,', , ~
!. j L i ,-"'---"~-"~-,;, .
~, ~'.<
1/ III
., -, uUL DEe, , ,/992 ,
SQUTHOlDicivN---J I
PLANNING BU:-:~iD
-'~'~--'_....J
sltUf'J
\
.,.
,
.
.
I
.\
I
I
I
I
f
.
."'-- ,
.-",'.'
~
r:t
~
~
~..-'...
,
~~eep \ Co
l}JIIS~
,~..__.
'4
~
~
~
Nl
t.l
:{.
v.
..., '"
'~~-'t:l"--:,' l'\
.~:, ~. P--I
~ ::.~ ~
" (^", ......
P ~ ~
.. ~ ~/
~ ,~ ~:i~
p ~ J
/ ~o 'b
, ~.~ ~
~ 10, I)
, !) '"
~
~
,~,
\lj
.
~
\.<
~
l)'
,~
,
EXIS TING
"
\
l
~ ~ BUILP/NG i
~ ~' 1~ 'i,,: T CP-k'~) I
t,l " J :.__~, I Il
~. ~ '( t'. \' '1' LJ,.-' J" ......,
~ 'i. - ---:to C;,,_ "
{~\' i.U 1ta- i" l
. ~ L ..~
",~~ /. , ~v'r'T
""dJ'~d1
;'if.Jt
..)o.._~~
.
I
I ~\-
i( l""""'W\~ Jc.\
j ~~l~~ \ .)
.
, i~~
":i:~
c
. .
11'''; , .
..... -,#IA~I.~' '__/Of, ".,~:~
., ."".". ...'W. ...11
-.........-&. - - ....-..
" -~"p tf ,:l
.J.... ~L.- ,
.. .--. ~ .
~ . ~ '\ #1-'1.....
/ .~- \ r::::H~0t
" I. -~. /' "", 'PI I,~
'-v''''''',,' (J , lll\~v :.....
.J." ;.t1>.1/1/#- J' (
y"II...+" ~
--- 7
' :r.o_ I
/;!ll2- 'f""
p 1,"1
., il'" I
. ;".
---
~
... ..-
.
--'
~ 11 }
.. 1\
(~
lot
).
.<, ,>O\~)
r-
~,..
DEC-11-92 FRI
9:54 WARD ALSOCIATES P.C.
P.e.t1
WARD ASSOCIATES, P.C.
Landscape Architects, Architects, Engineers
1500 Lakeland Avenue
BOHEMIA. NEW YORK 11716
Fax: (516) 563-4807
(516) 563-4800
t'9sut -ra-
FAX TRANSMITTAL
l.._')t~ '_"""_
owL) cr <;;'~LQ_._.__.._.
NUMBER OF PAGES INCI.UDING TRANSMITTAL ~
rii." 6l-"\"\':';~'~ -J:....;..- __..._.._u....__..
1........1....---... ...-.-. - - . -- ....-..
Auu.II(IN
I
..' ri" -"'-" .udc.' ..--.-......---..
"" ..I[\.flJ.Il.~_......_ ......_...__.__.
!....~~. . .. .--.--......
I"-~:" .-- .~~::~=..~. =.=-~--- ..-.=
t----..-- --.--.---. ...---- --.----. -.--...
L... ....__...__._
TO
WE ARE SENDING YOU 0 AttaChed 0 Undor scp.rato over vla.,...,.......___...__the follcwing items:
>
o ShOP drawings
c:J Copy of leller
o Prints
:i Chango order
U Plans
r:J ______
r::J Samplos
CI Specifications
~..IES. I-_._~AT~,...
NO.
, ,..,_.~!.~.~~~~!~,~.~.,_.--....".,..........--
\ \ 1.. ~ 10- ~ L ......::>u.~~=f~i5~=..@'2::i.~LQcl..--_=:__..._.=.~____..____=
....."-..,..".....,,., ~--,.,,-'-----_......_._-
---
. -... "-"-"-." ........------..-.---..... -'---'-'--
...._,-~...'_....~..._-..,_.--..__._-_.. ..-.....
. THESE ARE TRANSMITTED 8S checked below:
o For approval
o For your use
Cl As requested
o For review and comment
o Approved 8$ s,.bmltted
o Approved as n.ted
L:J Resubmit_copies for approval
Cl Submit_copies for distribution
CI Return_ccrrected prints
rJ Returned for ( "'cctions
o
_ ~_. ~4._.._.....,.'''.,.._,____,....,,,....,,..."._......._.....,..,_____..___.__._
Cl FOR BIOS DUE
REMARKS_ _._
_H ,.._____ CJ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER ILOAN TO US
___H__,.__...,"_ '.'4'._... "_'._'. .___.
,...,-'"".....,..~" ......,'-"" .-,....--,-".--.-....-......-. ....---- .-
-".._.._~_... .______..._.___n..__.__....__.........,._,.....,_."""'_ ._.,.'""",__.
.. . '_4_"',,,._.,.,,,,.,_ .-_... _,_~......_ ..,,_ _.. '...._._......._ 0..__".""._._..
...--_.._.__..__. .....u....._.."'........
,....,-'..,-----_._--_...-,..-"_...--......,,,
."..." ,._._~-- -..------
--_.._~--,_..--"
." --'.'.,'" "'_....~........._.._....._-..-..."~-_.. '._" ." ....--...'.---..... ~ _. ..-. --. .---... -.
...~_._'_..,,>~,.__.....~_..._...._---....--_..._--
... .,,-.....-.....-.--- .----.-.
---...,-"""-_....._."...."'........."".~_._........_.....,,'-_......._---..--- ............-.....-..
.,-_...__.~-..,--'_.,_._-_..--....._..._~...._..-....----_._-
-- -_.-'--..__"_..""h~_'_,_",.,"_~.,_",
..--......, ....""-"...._.,-~..._,..,.."-._.....
COPY TO
--.-----..
~.-
SIGNED:
., .".. . .... ..~ ..... .. ...... I.'" ... ~. ..4 ,
-.....
-' ; I? t' ().. t1 C tI'
~/,
I/J~./ -'- ~
....,..-
1""~Qm . '-t:LLU'l1 \... J....."vt::,'-",..:.'. , .
J.
.
I
I
1
1
I
I
~
()
o
~
""\
/y/o
~FiI...C
FAy 't;;)) w l/
-
~
~r'
~i hJ
, ~J
~ ~
,6...... .'..,
~
n
~...
~
/
i~f~
. . t ~
~ ..\
:~ '"
~l
. "
';f') i)'~
,,~ ~ ~
. ^, ....
i~ t ~ 11
.,0 ~ I
~! ~ J
~
~
,.. il
~. ;:,
". "
It, .
I ~
l
\
~
~ ~~
"
~ k
,
"
~. \
~
,
\ p
,
:to ~
iti
~ ~l
:r
')'l~
.1 ,.
it II
.r t
,
:r~
J';I'I:"~
\
---
EXISTING
BUlL DINe,
";,,,;".
~
---..-
_ e.tJ
. 'f~
, 11,.1 '^!t
II'
Pi AN FOR
DRIVE-UP BANKING FACILITY
MA rTlrUCK ,';HOPPING CENTER
A T MA rrlTUCK, N. Y.
Sel ,,,, 1" It 20'
St pt. 8,7992
II/ID/'t r'Y'J(~'"
'/1"1') r""'NJ
/011'/'" re",s,,,,,.)
~.-
\~
PECONIC SUIIV~'YOR$, P.C.
1"61 76$ . ~oe"
,.. O. 'OX 905'
/.lAIN ROAD
SOUTHOLD, No t: /lilT'
'.
_... .AA
-
.
~.
,
,j ,
:i!REQYI1l.El1ENTS _~o.~,.,S.IJ'~ PLANE~E_l:l~.~,!,S__~_-'::ERTIFICATION
I: I ~_.,~..-.__..--.
t,iSECTION-BLOCK-LOT TAX MAP NUNBERS I"/:L- 01- :1..("
- :i NAME & ADDRESS OF OWNER OF RECORD
- ;:INAME & ADDRESS OF PERSON PREPARING MAP
I'
, t
~"DATE, NORTH POINT AND WRITTEN & GRAPHIC SCALE
::1
~,iDESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY & INFORMATION TO DEFINE BOUNDARIES
i
I
~ 'ii LOCATIONS, NAMES & EXISTING WIDTHS OF ADJACENT STREETS & CURBS
"~!
- "I LOCATION & OWNERS OF ALL ADJOINING LANDS, AS SHOWN ON TAX RECORDS
I"
! :
- "J LOCATION & PURPOSE OF ALL EXISTING AND PROPOSED EASEMENTS
- t'! COMPLETE OUTLINE OF EXISTING DEED RESTRICTIONS APPLYING TO PROPERTY
"BK..,'d,.. H...... rV;,,.;
'B~J\J Ie {
)
. .
~
"":
;'1 EXISTING ZONING
--.;1
'AREAS SUBJECT TO FLOODING OR STORM WATER OVERFLOWS
t,:
- : : WATER COURSES, M.l\RSHES, WOODED AREAS, TREES 8" IN DIAMETER OR HaRE
~ '!ANY BUILDING WITHIN 100' OF PROPERTY
I
'J PAVED AREAS, SIDEWALKS, VEHICULAR ACCESS TO PUBLIC STREETS
I
;EXISTING SEWERS, CULVERTS, WATERLINES WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO PROPERTY
,
, '
"'" ',i FENCING LANDSC-\"PING AND SCREENING
'-....J '! PROPOSED BUILD~NGS OR STRUCTURAL H1PROVEMENTS
~:IOFF STREET PARKING AND LOADING AREAS
,I
"
-' I OUTDOOR LIGHTING OR PUBLIC ADDRESS SYSTEMS
~~IOUTDOOR SIGNS'
~I 239K SIDEWALKS LOCA'rIONS IHDTHS: SIZE OF Wi,TER AND SEWER LINES
'I .
(]) 'i:.:s41V~ ~ j)~,..;ift..l JA., /?l- X~ '-
,I .
~':! ~lJ~.i U pi....... ~ ~ p.~ 'Z :z~
i:i-.l~ ~...u~ ~;~~~i ]
'I \ c
j \~~..\Q,,'L..
, I
,
I
,
~
"'--~'ft-[~"fi:-In '\
~ 'J I: ij \'
.....'.",~' --~~._".
~ f,
NOV 2 3 1992
J
.
.
.
.
15
~
JIll
I
EXISTING BUILDING
w
~
>-
~
~
()
~
.
EXISTING BUILDING
26
32 31
\ \ \\
"
~E. ~6)
"$ v.O
\.~,
. FIGURE 2
SITE PLAN
MATTITUCK PLAZA
SHOPPING CENTER
MATTITUCK. NEW 'teRK
APPROx. SCALE: 1"=80'
oo~o
~tlP
TOTAL PARKlING = 503 SFll'CES