The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPBA-07/16/2007 . KENNETH L. EDWARDS MARTIN H. SIDOR GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND MAIliNG ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS JERILYN B. WOODHOUSE Chair OFFICE WCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD AGENDA RECElVro Special Meeting July 16, 2007 4:30 p.m. JUL 1 7 2C07 S0!)~1. "r.r ,. . .. , " . '. : ~-. PL-. !f'~., ,.J SITE PLANS - STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT Lead Agency Designation: The Heritaae at Cutchoaue - This proposed residential site plan application is for the development of a Planned 55+ Active Adult Community consisting of 139 detached and attached dwellings of approximately 2,000 sq. ft. each; an 8,840 sq. ft. clubhouse; a 1,160 sq. ft. swimming pool; two 3,200 sq. ft. tennis courts; a 2,400 sq. ft. maintenance garage; a gazebo; a gatehouse; 322 parking spaces, of which 278 are associated with the individual dwelling units and 44 are associated with the clubhouse and recreational facility; 197,043 sq. ft. of man made ponds to serve as natural drainage basins/irrigation systems; 1,162,022 square feet (27.676 acres) of landscaping; and various other site improvements including road pavement, patio and sidewalk improvements, on a vacant 46. 17-acre parcel in the Hamlet Density (HD) Zoning District located on the n/w corner of Griffing Street and School House Lane, approximately 1,079 feet n/o the Main Road, in Cutchogue. SCTM#1 000-1 02-1-33.3 Determinations: The Heritaae at Cutchoaue - SCTM#1000-102-1-33.3. I . , J. PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS JERILYN B. WOODHOUSE Chair KENNETH L. EDWARDS MARTIN H. SIDOR GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND MAltiNG ADDRESS: P.O. Box II79 Southold, NY II971 OFFICE WCATION: Town Hall Aonex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD July 17, 2007 Charles Cuddy, Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Proposed Residential Site Plan for The Heritage at Cutchogue Located on the n/w corner of Griffing Street and School House Lane, approximately 1,079 feet n/o Main Road, in Cutchogue SCTM#1 000-1 02-1-33.3 Zone: Hamlet Density (HD) Dear Mr. Cuddy: The following resolutions were adopted at a meeting of the Southold Town Planning Board on Monday, July 16, 2007: WHEREAS, this proposed residential site plan application is for the development of a Planned 55+ Active Adult Community consisting of 139 detached and attached dwellings of approximately 2,000 sq. ft. each; an 8,840 sq. ft. clubhouse; a 1,160 sq. ft. swimming pool; two 3,200 sq. ft. tennis courts; a 2,400 sq. ft. maintenance garage; a gazebo; a gatehouse; 322 parking spaces, of which 278 are associated with the individual dwelling units and 44 are associated with the clubhouse and recreational facility; 197,043 sq. ft. of manmade ponds to serve as natural drainage basins/irrigation systems; 1,162,022 square feet (27.676 acres) of landscaping; and various other site improvements including road pavement, patio and sidewalk improvements, on a vacant 46.17 -acre parcel in the Hamlet Density (HD) Zoning District located on the northwest corner of Griffing Street and School House Lane, approximately 1,079 feet north of Main Road, in Cutchogue. SCTM#1000-102-1-33.3; and WHEREAS, on December 11,2006, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to Part 617, Article 6 of the Environmental Conservation Law acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, initiated the SEQR lead agency coordination process for this Type I Action; therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, establishes itself as lead agency and, as lead agency, has reviewed the project and prepared a Determination of Significance for this Type I Action pursuant to Part 617.4 (b)(5)(ii); and be it further The Heritaqe at CutchoQue . ' .l , Paqe Two Julv 10. 2007 RESOLVED, that because the proposed action may have potentially significant impacts on the environment, the Town of Southold Planning Board, as lead agency, hereby adopts 617.20 Appendix A, Part 2 and 3 of the Long Environmental Assessment Form and adopts a Positive Declaration for the proposed action; and be it further RESOLVED, that pursuant to Article 617.8, scoping will be required for the action; and be it further RESOLVED, that pursuant to Article 617.13 of the 6NYCRR, Part 617 State Environmental Quality Review Act, the applicant will be financially responsible for costs incurred for the review and website posting of the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements by the Town of Southold. Enclosed is a copy of the Positive Declaration, dated July 16, 2007, for your records. Additionally, as indicated above, scoping shall be required for the action. Please provide a Draft Scope for distribution to all involved agencies. Also enclosed are copies of Part I and II of the Full Environmental Assessment Form for your review. If you have any questions regarding the above, please contact this office. Very truly yours, ~~se Chairperson Ene. cc: Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Building Department Southold Town Clerk for Southold Town Board Scott Russell, South old Town Supervisor Southold Town Board of Trustees South old Town Engineer Mark Terry, LWRP Coordinator Commissioner, NYS DEC New York State Department of State NYSDEC - Stony Brook New York State Department of Transportation Suffolk County Water Authority Suffolk County Planning Department Suffolk County Department of Public Works Suffolk County Department of Health Services Army Corps of Engineers Architectural Review Committee Environmental Notice Bulletin File Any person requesting a copy KENNETH L. EDWARDS MARTIN H. SIDOR GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND MAIliNG ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Sauthald, NY 11971 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS JERILYN B. WOODHOUSE Chair OFFICE WCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Sauthald, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD 14-12-8 {3/99)-9c SEQR State Environmental Quality Review POSITIVE DECLARATION Notice ofIntent to Prepare a Draft EIS Determination of Significance Project Number: 1000-102-1-33.3 Date: July 16, 2007 This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 ofthe implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act) of the Environmental Conservation Law. The Town of Southold Planning Board as lead agency, has determined that the proposed action described below may have a significant impact on the environment and that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will be prepared. Name of Action: The Heritage at Cutchogue SEQR Status: Type 1 Unlisted x Scoping: No _ Yes l If yes, indicate how scoping will be conducted: Scoping Sessions will be conducted at the Town of South old Town Hall located at P.O. Box 1179,53095 State Road 25, Southold, New York. , SEQR Positive Declaration PUl!e2 Description of Action: The proposed action is to site plan a 46.16 acre parcel into 139 single family detached and attached, age restricted, residential units. Location: The subject property lies in the hamlet of Cutchogue, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, State of New York. The subject property consists of a vacant 46.16-acre parcel located on the northwest comer of Griffing Street and School House Lane, approximately 1,079 feet north of Main Road in Cutchogue. The site is currently zoned Hamlet Density (HD). Reasons Supporting This Determination: This proposed action may cause a potential significant adverse impact on water, impact on plants and animals, agricultural resources, aesthetic resources, archeological resources, transportation and growth and character of community and neighborhood. A comprehensive review must be conducted to determine the potential impacts of the proposed action. Relevant areas of concern include: (1) The potential impacts to existing ground or surface water quality or quantity, noise levels, flooding, leaching or site drainage. I. The proposed action will allow high density residential use in a area which may not have adequate public water and community (public) sewer. (2) The potential impacts due to increase in traffic and trip generations assessed to: real traffic data analysis for the land use category, existing surrounding land uses, traffic volumes and routing patterns and limited ingress and egress points to primary and secondary roads. (3) The potential impact of the removal or destruction oflarge quantities of vegetation and fauna; substantial interference with the movement of any resident of migratory fish or wildlife species; substantial adverse impacts on threatened or endangered species of animal or plant (if present), or the habitat of such species; or other significant adverse impacts to natural resources. I. The proposed action may affect threatened and endangered species. 2. The proposed action may substantially affect non-threatened and non endangered species. (4) The potential hazards to human health. SEQR Positive Declaration Pal!e3 (5) The potential impacts of a substantial change in the use, or intensity of use, of land including agricultural (including the permanent loss of Type I agricultural soils), open space or recreational resources, or in its capacity to support existing uses. (6) The potential impacts to the impairment ofthe character or quality of important archeological, aesthetic resources or of existing community or neighborhood character. I. The proposed action may impact a site of prehistoric or historic importance. 2. Construction will continue over a three year period. (7) The assessment of a no action alternative. A detailed narrative outlining these concerns is attached. For Further Information: Contact Person: Mark Terry, Principal Planner Amy Thiel, Senior Planner Address: P.O. Box 1179,54375 State Road 25, Southold, New York 11971 Telephone Number: 631-765-1938 A copy of this notice must be sent to: Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Building Department Southold Town Clerk for Southold Town Board Scott Russell, Southold Town Supervisor Southold Town Board of Trustees Southold Town Engineer Mark Terry, LWRP Coordinator Commissioner, NYS DEC New York State Department of State NYSDEC - Stony Brook New York State Department of Transportation Suffolk County Department of Health Services Suffolk County Water Authority Suffolk County Planning Department Suffolk County Department of Public Works Architectural Review Committee Army Corps of Engineers Environmental Notice Bulletin File Any person requesting a copy 617.20 Appendix A State Environmental Quality Review FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM Purpose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an orderly manner, whether a project or action may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer. Frequently, there are aspects of a project that are subjective or unmeasurable. It is also understood that those who determine significance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may not be technically expert in environmentai analysis. In addition, many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting the question of significance. The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination process has been orderly, comprehensive in nature, yet fiexible enough to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action. Full EAF Components: The full EAF is comprised of three parts: Part 1: Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic project data, it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3. Part 2: Focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action. It provides guidance as to whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially-large impact. The form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced. Part 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentially-large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the impact is actually important. THIS AREA FOR LEAD AGENCY USE ONLY DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE -. Type 1 and Unlisted Actions Identify the Portions of EAF completed for this project: 12] Part 1 12] Part 2 [2] Part 3 Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF (Parts 1 and 2 and 3 if appropriate), and any other supporting information, and considering both the magnitude and importance of each impact. it is reasonably determined by the lead agency that: DA The project will not result in any large and important impact(s) and, therefore, is one which will not have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a negative declaration will be prepared. Os 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. ' 0C 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 Heritage at Cutchogue Name of Action Town of South old Planning Board Name of Lead Agency Chair lcrilyn w'oodhouse Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency vebsite JULY 17,2007 Date Page 1 of 21 PART 2 - PROJECT IMPACTS AND THEIR MAGNITUDE Responsibility of lead Agency General Information (Read Carefully) I In completing the form the reviewer should be guided by the question: Have my responses and determinations been reasonable? The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst. The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of impacts and wherever possible the threshold of magnitude that would trigger a response in column 2. The examples are generally applicable throughout the State and for most situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be appropriate for a Potential Large Impact response, thus requiring evaluation in Part 3. The Impacts of each project, on each site, in each locality, will vary. Therefore, the examples are illustrative and have been offered as guidance. They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each question. The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question. In Identifying impacts, consider long term, short term and cumulative effects. Instructions (Read carefully) a. Answer each of the 20 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there will beany 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 equais or exceeds any example provided, check column 2. If impact will occur but threshold is lower than example, check column 1. d. 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. e. If reviewer has doubt about size of the impacl then consider the impact as potentially iarge and proceed to PART 3. f. If a potentially large impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated by changers) 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. 1 Small to Moderate Impact 2 Potential Large Impact 3 Can Impact Be Mitigated by Project Change Impact on land 1. Will the Proposed Action result in a physical change to the project site? NoD YES 0 Examples that would appiy 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%. D D D Yes DNo D 0 Yes DNo 0 0 Yes ONo 0 0 Yes DNo 0 0 Yes DNo 0 0 Yes DNa Construction on land where the depth to the water table is less than 3 feet. o Construction of paved parking area for 1,000 or more vehicles. o Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally within 3 feet of existing ground surface. o Construction that will continue for more than 1 year or involve more than one phase or stage. D Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than 1,000 tons of natural materiai (i.e., rock or soil) per year. o Page 11 of 21 .r " 1 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated by Impact Impact Project Change Construction or expansion of a santary landfill. D D DYes ONo Construction in a designated floodway. D D DYes ONe Other impacts: D D DYes ONe I 2. Will there be an effect to any unique or unusual land ferms found on the site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, geological formations, etc.) 0NO DYES Specific land forms: D D DYes DNa I j Impact on Water 3. Will Proposed Action affect any water body designated as protected? (Under Articles 15, 24, 25 of the Environmental Conservation Law, ECL) mNO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 0 0 DYes DNa Developable area of site contains a protected water body. Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of 0 0 DYes DNa a protected stream. Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water 0 0 DYes DNa body. Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland. 0 0 DYes DNa Other impacts: 0 0 DYes DNa I I 4. Wili Proposed Action affect any non-protected existing or new body of water? DNa BYES Examples that would apply to column 2 0 n DYes DNa A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water or more than a 10 acre increase or decrease. Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface 0 0 DYes DNa area. Other impacts: 0 0 JIlYes DNa The proposal involves the creatioh ofa 197,043 sq. ft. man made pond. Page12of21 1 2 3' Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated by Impact Impact Project Change 5. Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantHy? DNa IIlVES Examples that would apply to column 2 0 0 OVes DNa Proposed Action will require a discharge permit. Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does not 0 [!l [!lves DNo have approval to serve proposed (project) action. Proposed Action requires water suppiy from wells with greater 0 0 OVes DNa than 45 gallons per minute pumping capacity. Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water 0 0 Dves DNa supply system. Proposed Action will adversely affect groundwater. 0 [!l [!lves DNo Liquid effluent will be conveyed off the site to facilities which 0 0 Dves DNa presently do not exist or have inadequate capacity. Proposed Action would use water in excess of 20,000 gallons 0 [!] [!lYes DNo per day. Proposed Action will likely cause siltation or other discharge into 0 0 Dves DNa an existing body of water to the extent that there will be an obvious visual contrast to natural conditions. Proposed Action will require the storage of petroleum or 0 0 DYes DNa chemical products greater than 1.100 gallons. Proposed Action will allow residential uses in areas without 0 [!] [!] Yes DNa water and/or sewer services. Proposed Action locates commercial and/or industrial uses 0 0 DVes DNa which may require new or expansion of existing waste treatment andlor storage facilities. Other impacts: 0 0 OVes ONO I Page 13 of 21 ., .. 6. Will Proposed Action aller drainage flow or palterns, or surface water runoff? DNa G]VES Examples that would apply to column 2 Proposed Action would change flood water flows 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: 1 Small to Moderate Impact 2 Potential Large Impact 3 Can Impact Be Mitigated by Project Change 0 0 Dves DNo 0 0 Dves DNo 0 0 Dves DNo 0 0 Dves DNo 0 G] G]ves DNo The proposed action involves the installation of approximately 15 acres of impervious surface on the site that is entirely pervious and vegetated. IMPACT ON AIR 7. Will Proposed Action affect air quality? DNa G]VES 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 exceed 5 Ibs. per hour or a heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour. Proposed Action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed to industrial use. Proposed Action will allow an increase in the density of industrial development within existing industrial areas. Other impacts: 0 0 DVes DNo 0 0 DVes DNo 0 0 DVes DNo 0 0 DVes DNo 0 0 DVes DNo 0 G] [!] Yas DNo The proposed action could result in moderate to large air quality impacts (suspended particulates/dust) due to construction activities over a three-year period. IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS 8. Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered species? DNa G]VES Examples that wouid apply to column 2 Reduction of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal list, using the site, over or near the site, or found on the site. Page 14 of 21 o G] G]Ves DNo 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: r IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES 11. Will Proposed Action affect aesthetic resources? (If necessary, use the Visual EAF Addendum in Section 617.20, Appendix B.) DNa !IJVES 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: I IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 12. Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure of historic, prehistoric or paleontological Importance? DNa !IJYES Examples that would apply to column 2 Proposed Action occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any facility or site listed on the State or National Register of historic places. Any impact to an archaeological site or fossil bed located within the project site. Proposed Action will occur in an area designated as sensitive for archaeological sites on the NVS Site Inventory. Page 16 of 21 1 2 3' Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated by Impact Impact Project Change 0 0 OVes DNo o o Dves DNo j 0 0 OVes DNo 0 0 DVes DNa o !IJ !IJVes DNo o o OVes DNa I o o Dves DNo o o DYes DNo o o DYes 0 No . , , . 1 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated by Impact Impact Project Change Removal of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habitat. 0 D DVes DNo Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, 0 0 OVes DNo other than for agricultural purposes. Other impacts: 0 0 0ves DNo I 9. WiIi Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or non- endangered species? DNa ElVES Examples that would apply to column 2 0 0 IIlVes DNo 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 0 0 OVes DNo mature forest (over 100 years of age) or other locally important vegetation. Other impacts: 0 0 DVes DNo I .1 IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES 10. Will Proposed Action affect agricultural land resources? ONO ElVES Examples that would apply to column 2 0 0 OVes DNo The Proposed Action would sever, cross or limit access to agricultural land (includes cropland, hayfields, pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc.) Construction activity wouid excavate or compact the soil profile of 0 El ElVes ONo agricultural land. The Proposed Action would irreversibly convert more than 10 0 0 OVes DNa acres of agricultural land or, if located in an Agricultural District, more than 2.5 acres of agricultural land. Page 15 of 21 1 2 3' Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated by Impact Impact Project Change The Proposed Action would disrupt or prevent installation of 0 0 OVes DNo 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: 0 0 OVes DNo I J IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES 11. Will Proposed Action affect aesthetic resources? (If necessary, use the Visual EAF Addendum in Section 617.20, Appendix B.) DNa IIIVES Examples that would apply to column 2 0 0 OVes DNo 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 0 0 DVes DNo 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 0 III [!]Ves DNo significant screening of scenic views known to be important to the area. Other impacts: 0 0 @Ves ONo I I IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 12. Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure of historic, prehistoric or paleontological importance? DNa 0VES Examples that would apply to column 2 0 0 DVes DNo Proposed Action occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any facility or site listed on the State or National Register of historic places. Any impact to an archaeological site or fossil bed located within 0 0 DVes DNo the project site. Proposed Action will occur in an area designated as sensitive 0 0 DVes DNo for archaeological sites on the NVS Site Inventory. Page 16 of 21 .' I' Other impacts: On December 30, 2005 the applicant submitted a report titled Cultural Resources Assessment The Hamlet at Cutchogue (July 1989). The report recommends further study. 1 2 3 Small to Potentiai Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated by Impact Impact Project Change 0 [!] [!]Ves DNo IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION 13. Will proposed Action affect the quantity or quality of existing or future open spaces or recreational opportunities? DNa 0vES Examples that would apply to column 2 The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational opportunity. A major reduction of an open space important to the community. D D D III III D [!]Ves DNo IIlves DNo DVes DNo Other impacts: I IMPACT ON CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS 14. Will Proposed Action impact the exceptional or unique characteristics of a critical environmental area (CEA) established pursuant to subdivision 6NVCRR 617.14(g)? III NO DVES List the environmental characteristics that caused the designation of theCEA. Examples that would apply to column 2 0 0 DVes DNo Proposed Action to locate within the CEA? Proposed Action will result in a reduction in the quantity of the D D DVes DNo resource? Proposed Action will result in a reduction in the quality of the D D DVes DNo resource? Proposed Action will impact the use, function or enjoyment of the 0 0 OVes DNo resource? Other impacts: 0 0 DVes DNo Page 17 of 21 1 Small to Moderate Impact 2 Potential Large Impact 3 . Can Impact Be Mitigated by Project Change IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION 15. Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems? DNa GVES Examples that would apply to coiumn 2 Aiteration of present patterns of movement of people andlor goods. Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems. 0 G GYes DNa 0 G GVes DNa 0 0 DVes DNa Other impacts: I IMPACT ON ENERGV 16. Will Proposed Action affect the community's sources of fuel or energy supply? DNa ElVES Examples that would apply to coiumn 2 Proposed Action will cause a greater than 5% increase in the use of any form of energy In the municipality. Proposed Action will require the creation or extension of an energy transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two family residences or to serve a major commercial or industrial use. 0 0 OVes DNa 0 G G]Yes DNa Other impacts: I o o OVes DNa NOISE AND ODOR IMPACT 17. Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or vibration as a result of the Proposed Action? DNa GVES Examples that would appiy 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). 0 0 OVes DNa 0 0 OVes DNa 0 0 E]ves DNa 0 G GVes DNa 0 0 DVes DNa Proposed Action will produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures. Proposed Action will remove naturai barriers that would act as a noise screen. rher impacts: n~~.~ -10 ".,,'" .. .. 1 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact 8e Moderate Large Mitigated by Impact Impact Project Change IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH 18. Will Proposed Action affect public health and safety? o NO 0VES Proposed Action may cause a risk of explosion or release of 0 0 DVes ONo hazardous substances (I.e. oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) in the event of accident or upset conditions, or there may be a chronic low ievel discharge or emission. Proposed Action may result in the burial of "hazardous wastes" 0 0 OVes ONo in any form (I.e. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritating, infectious, etc.) Storage facilities for one million or more gallons of liquefied 0 0 DVes ONo natural gas or other flammable liquids. Proposed Action may result in the excavation or other 0 0 OVes ONo disturbance within 2,000 feet of a site used for the disposal of solid or hazardous waste. Other impacts: 0 0 0Yes ONo The proposed action could result in moderate to large public health impacts (suspended particulates/dust, safety impacts) due to construction activities over a three-year period. IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHARACTER OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD 19. Will Proposed Action affect the character of the existing community? ONO 0VES 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.) Paga 19 of 21 0 0 DVes ONo 0 0 OVes ONo 0 0 EJYes ONo 0 0 DVes ONo 0 0 DVes ONo 0 GJ GJVes ONo Proposed Action will set an important precedent for future projects. 1 2 3' Smalito Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated by Impact Impact Project Change D 0 DYes DNo G] D @Yes DNo 0 0 DYes DNo I Proposed Action wili create or eliminate employment. Other impacts: I 20. Is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy related to potential adverse environment impacts? DNa G]YES 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 Pilge 20 of 21 ,. " Part 3 - EVALUATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS Responsibility of Lead Agency Part 3 must be prepared if one or more impact(s) is considered to be potentially large, even if the impact(s) may be mitigated. Instructions (If you need more space, attach additional sheets) 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 reasonabie 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. See Attached. Page 21 of 21 PART 3 -EVALUATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS THE HERITAGE AT CUTCHOGUE SEQR POSITIVE DECLARATION Lead Agency: Contact: Town of Southold Planning Board Jerilyn B. Woodhouse, Chairperson Town of Southold Plalming Board 54375 NYS Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 July 16, 2007 Address: Date: This notice is issued pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review - SEQR) of the Environmental Conservation Law and Chapter 44 of the Town Code of the Town of South old. The lead agency has detenl1ined that the proposed action described below may have a significant impact on the environment. This determination provides a description of the proposed project and outlines the considerations of the Board in making this determination: Title of Action: The Heritage at Cutchogue Cutchogue, New York Type 1 SEQR Status: Location: SCTM No.' The subject property lies in the Hamlet ofCutchogue, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, State of New York. The subject property consists of a vacant 46.17 -acre parcel located on the northwest corner of Griffing Street and School House Lane, approximately 1,079 feet north of Main Road, in Cutchogue. The site is cun'ent1y zoned Hamlet Density (HD). 1000-102-1-33.3 " " Determination of Significance Heritage at Cutchogue Residential Site Plan Application Descriotion of the Prooosed Action: This proposed action requires residential site plan approval for the development of a Planned 55+ Active Adult Community consisting of 139 detached and attached dwellings. The development is proposing affordable and market rate homes. The market rate homes are approximately 2,000 sq. ft. each and include a two (2) car garage. The project contemplates 278 parking spaces for the residential units; 260 parking spaces are allocated in the garages of the market rate units; 18 off- street parking spaces are allocated for the proposed affordable units. The proposed parcel is a vacant 46. 17-acre parcel in the Hamlet Density (HD) Zoning District located on the northwest comer of Griffing Street and School House Lane, approximately 1,079 feet north of Main Road in Cutchogue. Adjacent to the subject parcel are single-family residential properties to the west, farm and single-family residential properties to the north, farm property to the east and a mobile trailer park to the south. The proposed action also includes a clubhouse complex containing an 8,840 sq. ft. clubhouse, a 1,160 sq. ft. swimming pool, two 3,200 sq. ft. tennis courts, a 2,400 sq. ft. maintenance garage and gazebo. The clubhouse wiII consist of a community room with a food preparation area for catered events, game room, exercise room, manager's office, locker room and cabana. The clubhouse complex includes 45 parking spaces, including 2 handicapped parking spaces. Additionally, the proposed clubhouse complex includes a 15' x 45' loading dock and dumpster. A network consisting of 197,043 sq. ft. of man made ponds and water circulation fountains is proposed to serve as a natural drainage/stoffinvater collection system. These retention ponds are proposed to be used as water supply for on-site landscape irrigation and water levels are to be maintained through the use of on-site wells. The proposed action consists of ], I 62,022 squarc feet (27.676 acres) of landscaping, including the requited minimum 30' landscape buffer along the property lines to the east and north and a 40' landscape buffer along the western property line. The proposed action includes various other site improvements including road pavement, patio and sidewalk improvements. The proposed action includes a security guard boothlgatehouse at the entrance of the community. Currently, the proposed action provides for a single entrance, including a connection of Spur Road to the west with School House Lane and Griffing Street to the south. Additionally, there is a proposed emergency access road that connects to Bridle Lane. The proposed action includes individual and shared sanitary systems. The proposed density and design will be subject to review and approval by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services. Additionally, a series of catch basins and wells are proposed throughout the site. Reasons Supportinl! This Determination: I. The site has been evaluated in accordancc with the Criteria for Deternlining Significance as contained in SEQRA 6NYCRR Part 617.7 (c). The proposed action has been evaluated through review ofthe following materials: Page 2 of 12 Determination of Significance Heritage at Cntchogne Residential Site Plan Application · Site plan, ERSAP, and yield map prepared by Nelson & Pope · Architectural drawings and landscape plans prepared by Charles W. Kuehn, Architect · Part I and II ofthe Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) · Site plan application · Traffic Impact Study and supplemental traffic information prepared by Nelson & Pope · Environmental Assessment Review prepared by Suffolk Environmental Consulting, Inc. · Cultural Resources Assessment prepared by Robert J. Kalin (Archaeological Services Inc.) · Independent site inspection · Various correspondence from involved agencies · Planning Board deliberation on materials supplied by the Applicant, the Consultant, and Planning Staff and concerns made known to the Planning Board regarding potential impacts. Based upon this thorough review, the Planning Board identified potential significant adverse environmental impacts in cOlll1ection with the proposed project. Additional supporting findings are provided below. The narrative below correlates with Part 3 Evaluation ofthe Importance of Impacts Form. 1. Impact on Land: Construction that will continue for more than olle year. The proposed action would be constructed over a three-year phase construction schedule. The work will include the removal of vegetation from 46. I 7 acres. A development in which construction occurs over more than one constmction season (usually Spring, Summer and Fall) to complete subjects the natural environment and community to construction-related impacts. The impacts (erosion, pollution, noise, dust, traffic and safety) may be significant. The anticipated construction, including constmction schedule and duration, materials and storage/staging area, water and sewer systems connections, proper handling of constmction waste, hours of operation and construction vehicle routes should be further evaluated. The term of impacts wiII be short and are expected to occur over the construction term. 5. Impact on Water: Public water is supplied to the Town of Southold by the Suffolk County Water Authority (SCW A). However, the site itself is not specifically connected to public water. The SCW A has not issued a Letter of W ater Availability for the action. The closest water main to the site is located on Depot Lane, northeast of the property. The main is served by the Suffolk County Water Authority's Evergreen Pump Station to the north and the State Route 25 transmission main via Bridge Lane and County Route 48. The applicant proposes to connect public water to the proposed project by extending a distribution line from the Depot Lane transmission main, 780 feet along Depot Lane south, and 1,137 feet west along Schoolhouse Road to the site. The potential long tenn impacts of this project with regard to water supply (including affects on the Evergreen Pump Station) and water quality must be assessed as the Town is faced with a limited Page 3 of 12 .. .. Determination of Significance Heritage at Cutchogue Residential Site Plan Application water supply. In addition the project must be assessed to the Suffolk County's Water Supply Plan for the Town of Southold. The proposed project will require a Letter of Water Availability from Suffolk County Water Authority. Proposed action will adversely affect groundwater. Proposed action will use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per day. Proposed action will allow residential uses in areas without water andlor sewer services. In 1978, the Long Island Regional Planning Board published the Long Island Comprehensive Waste Treatment Management Plan (208 Study). The 208 Study identified eight (8) hydrogeologic zones in Nassau and Suffolk Counties. These zones were distinguished based upon differences in underlying groundwater flow patterns and water quality. The site lies within Groundwater Management Zone IV. The site is not served by public sewer. Sanitary disposal is proposed to be managed by on-site underground sewage leaching systems. The total proposed sanitary flow for the project is 21,615 gallons per day. The Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SCDHS) allowable flow is 22,625 gallons per day. Consequently the proposal meets SCDHS Article 6 requirements, however, it is important to note that the properties located to the north and west of the site are served by private wells and impacts to groundwater, including subsurface directional flow must be evaluated. In addition, potential impacts to the shallow aquifer, the Suffolk County Water Authority's Evergreen Pump Station and existing water supply infrastructure must also be evaluated. Will Proposed Action alter drainage flow or patterns, or surface water. The action will result in the creation of impermeable surfaces where none exist. The placement of fill has the potential to change drainage patterns in the project area. 8. Impact on Plants and Animals: The proposed action may substantially affect non-threatened or non-endangered species. The proposed action would substantially interfere with any resident or migratory wildlife species. The proposed project will result in the clearing of ",46.17 acres of early successional habitat, causing localized impacts to vegetation and wildlife. Clearing and development impacts to vegetation and wildlife are cumulative and need to be taken into consideration. The loss of vegetation and associated impacts would be long term and irreversible. The proposed action may affect threatened and endangered species. Before a detennination can be made about the possibility of impact mitigation, it must be determined if species exist on-site. The applicant has not conducted an endangered and threatened species survey nor has provided a response from the New York State Natural Heritage Program specifYing the presence or absence of such species. If species exists on site, the potential impacts to such species could be significant or large and further Page 4 of 12 Determination of Significance Heritage at Cutchogue Residential Site Plan Application evaluation is necessary. If species of concern are found to occur on site, it may be possible to avoid the identified areas through re-design of the project. 10. Impact on Agricultural Land Resources: The parcel is comprised of Haven Loam (HaA) 0 to 2 percent slopes; Haven Loam (HaB) 2 to 6 percent slopes; Riverhead Sandv Loam (RdB) 3 to 8 percent slopes and Plymouth Loamy Sand (PIC) 8 to 15 percent slopes. Dominant soil grOUPS include Haven Loam and Riyerhead Sandy Loam. Both Haven Loam and Riverhead Sandy Loam soils are well suited for crops. Haven Loam is a Type I Agricultural Soil. If the action is approved the. loss of these soils would occur. The loss would be long-tenn and irreversible. 11. Impact of Aesthetic Resources: Project components that will result in the elimination or significant screening of sceuic views known to be important to the area. The proposed action may result in the pennanent loss of aesthetic resources (successional, old field habitat and open space) important to the community. The potential impact is long tenn and irreversible. Mitigation of impacts could include the clustering of single family units into multi-family units to create open space and maximizing vegetative buffers along the perimeter of the property. 12. Impact on Historic and Archeological Resources: Other: The project is located within a district of intensive pre-historic aboriginal habitation. The National Historic Site of Fort Corchaug as well as several other well documented prehistoric sites are located within a short distance to the parcel. The proposed action may impact a site of archeological importance. The New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (NYS OPRHP) has not evaluated the proposed project to detennine if it is within an archeological and historically sensitive area. On December 30, 2005 the applicant submitted a report entitled Cultural Resources Assessment The Hamlet at Cutchogue (July I 989)(Attacbment B). The report recommends that "Further study in the fornl of subsurface testing should be conducted to evaluate the potential... .for the impact to both prehistoric and historic cultural evidence". Consequently, the presence or absence of archeological resources on site is unknown and, further assessment is required. If the action will impact archeological/cultural resources, it may be possible to re-design the project to avoid such areas. 13. Impact on Open Space and Recreation: The permanent foreclosure of a future recreatioual opportunity. A major reductiou of an open space important to the community. The proposed action would result in 46.17 acres of future recreational opportunity. The loss is potentially significant, long tenn and irreversible. Further assessment is required. Page 5 of 12 .' , ' Determination of Significance Heritage at Cutchogue Residential Site Plan Application Mitigation to reduce such impacts could include the redesign of the project and clustering ofthe single family units into multi-family units to create open space that could be used for public recreational use. Further, the proposed action would result in the permanent, irreversible loss of 46.17 acres of future open space. The loss is potentially significant, long term and irreversible. Further assessment is required. Mitigation to reduce such impacts could include the clustering of the single family units into multi-family units to create open space and maximizing buffer widths along the perimeter of the parcel. 15. Impact on Transportation: Alteration of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods. The proposed project may result in unsafe pedestrian movement from the subject parcel to nearby public streets due to the lack of existing pedestrian infrastructure and the proximity of the action to the Cutchogue Hamlet Center. Proposed action will result in major traffic problems. Other: The applicant submitted a traffic analysis of the proposed action entitled "Traffic Study The heritage of Cutchogue" (July 2006). The mitigation proposed in the report is invalid. The proposed use is expected to increase traffic generation upon full development of the site as compared to existing conditions. Due to the increased traffic volumes and limited ingress and egress points from the site to primary and secondary roadways, an increase in trip generation on the site may have a significant or large impact on the area roadways. The applicant submitted a traffic analysis of the proposed action entitled "Traffic Studv The Heritage ofCutchogue" (Julv 2006) (Attachment A). The applicant hired Dunn Engineering Associates P.c. to perform a peer review of the traffic impact study. The peer review indicates that the study makes several mitigative assumptions to minimize impacts of traffic. Item 3, lines 6 through 9 states that "It should be noted that the results of the capacity analyses results for the intersection of Main Road at Depot Lane and Main Road at Griffing Street indicate that these two intersections are currently operating at less than desirable levels of service. At Depot Lane, the southbound approach to this intersection currently operates poorly, and traffic generated by the project will result in an increase in the delays incurred by vehicles on this approach. The study assumes that a traffic signal is to be installed by the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) at this location, and that as a result the intersection will operate at improved level of service. As discussed further on this report, the NYSDOT has no plans to install this traffic signal at this location." The review concludes that"... based upon the information that the NYSDOT does not anticipate the installation of this traffic signal, the study's assumption that site traffic and existing traffic will access Main Road via Depot Lane is not valid". I'age 6 of 12 Determination of Significance Heritage at Cutchogue Residential Site Plan Application Based upon the above, the mitigation proposed within the report is invalid. Further, because the access to the proposed project is restricted, it is the position of the Planning Board that the proposed project combined with other nearby existing developments may create a cumulative impact on critical intersections and a more detailed traffic impact study is warranted. Further, traffic modeling, based upon comparable communities of the type proposed that have been implemented on Long Island, should also be conducted. In addition, the following concerns have also been identified: l. Page 4. The study fails to consider addressing the possibility of development (housing) of the other Hamlet Business zoned parcels in proximity to the parcel in question. 2. Page 4. The study fails to qualify what level of impact or substantial degradation in Level Of Service (LOS) is if the LOS from an F to F at an intersection results. 3. Page 6. The study fails to qualify the seasonal adjustment factors of 1.14% & 1.19%, the groups used and how they were they established by the NYSDOT. The study is unclear if the seasonal adjustment factors are qualified to real traffic counts and land use representative of the locale. 4. Page 6. The seasonal adjustment factors differ on a monthly basis, the study applied a 14% factor to the weekdays and a 19% factor to the weekend volumes; the selection of the factors by the NYSDOT is unexplained. It is unclear if the factors are representative of the locale. 5. Page 7. Figure 3. The calculations could not be duplicated at the intersection of Griffing and State Route 25 (using the traffic count data and the seasonal adjustment factor). 6. Page 8. The analysis of Table 3 indicates that "rear-end collisions may be an indication of congested conditions or driver inattention and slippery/wet road conditions." Although the statement is made, no mitigation is proposed, which suggests that the congested conditions are acceptable at pre-build conditions and acceptable after-build conditions. The statement warrants further explanation. 7. Page 14. The study indicates that currentlv the Main Road and Depot Lane intersection operates at a poor level of service (LOS F) during the PM and Saturday peak hours due to heavy traffic volumes on Main Road. It can be expected that following the build out of 139 units, the LOS would continue to worsen. Appendix D. Capacity Analysis/Level of Service Worksheets & Summary Table indicates that the level of service decreases in the Build Analysis 2007. The LOS at the southbound left turn currently operates at an F, following the Build Analysis the level of service Page 7 of 12 , . Determination of Significance Heritage at Cntchogne Residential Site Plan Application again operates at F. The decrease of the LOS is a result of the increased vehicle trips in the area resulting from the proposed site plan. The significance of change relative to impacts from a LOS F to F is unclear and should be further explained. 8. Page 15. Currently Main Road and Griffing Street operates at as a LOS F and E in the PM and Saturday Peak Hours. Appendix A indicates that the southbound approach operates at a LOS ofF under current conditions and following Build Conditions. Again, the significance of degradation at the intersection/impact is unclear and requires further evaluation\ and or mitigation. 9. Page 16. The annual growth factor obtained from NYSDOT is 1.8%. The Planning Board questions if the growth factor takes into account land use and rate of development indicative of Eastern Long Island or the Town of Southold. 10. Page 20. The Planning Board rejects the modeling of trip generation for the proposed action to Elderly Housing (detached) nationwide traffic modeling criteria used in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Elderly housing (detached) is restricted to senior citizens and may contain special services (medical facilities) on site. Additionally, in a December 11, 2006 letter to the Planning Board, the response to Comment # I indicates that Land Use: 251 Senior Adult Housing-Detached statistical data was used. The two documents conflict. The action is proposed as an "Active Adult Community". The Planning Board is requesting that real data from a comparable use (Active 55 and older condominium community) located on Eastern Long Island be used to base the study trip generation modeling. 11. Page 20. Is the AM peak hour used in the ITE Land Use Code for Elderly Housing (Detached) the same time as the AM peak hour used in the actual traffic count performed by Nelson & Pope (the same applies to PM peak hour and Saturday peak hour)? Would using different hours result in inaccurate data? 12. Page 22. The 2007 Site Generated Weekday AM Traffic Volumes indicate that 6 vehicles will exit to Griffing Road and the State Road 25 intersection, 3 vehicles would exit Spur Road and 9 vehicles would exit the site via Schoolhouse Road and continue to the County Road 48 and the Depot Lane intersection. The vehicle trips seem low and routing unrealistic. The Planning Board questions the analysis and requests that real data be obtained and used (where possible) to model the vehicle trips and routing. Page 8 of 12 Determination of Significance Heritage at Cutchogue Residential Site Plan Application 13. Page 31. The study proposes mitigation (traffic control at Depot Road and Main Road). Mitigation of expected traffic impacts validates that the action may result in a potentially si~ificant or large impact and needs to be further addressed. As confirmed with the NYSDOT the proposed above traffic control is not an option to mitigate traffic impacts. Alternative mitigation of traffic impacts must be evaluated and proposed. 14. It is the Planning Board's position that the study fails to analyze the impact ofthe vehicle trips from Highland/Crown Land and Schoolhouse using Spur Road (if it is opened) as a means to access downtown Cutchogue and/or pass through to Depot Lane/C.R. 48 and NYS 25. 15. The traffic impacts if Spur Road is opened! not opened have not been adequately addressed relative to the NYS Route 25 & Griffing Avenue intersection. 16. Other access alternatives should be considered. Such as, access directly from the proposed site to Depot Lane through the property to the east. Based upon the above, concerns and operations; the impact of increased traffic generation and the ability of area roadways to accommodate such traffic, vehicle access points (including emergency) and circulation and routing must be further evaluated. 16. Impact on Energy: Proposed action will require the creation or extension of an energy transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two-family residences or serve a major commercial or industrial use. The proposed project involves an increase in energy use. The increase in energy use could be significant. Impacts to local facilities should be analyzed. Mitigation to reduce the impacts of energy consumption could include building homes to Energy Star and Leadership in Energy and Envirorunental Design (LEEDS) standards and/or applying dark sky standards to lessen the impact of energy consumed on-site. 17. Noise and Odor Impact: Proposed action will produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures. Proposed action would remove natural barriers that would act as a noise screen. A potential moderate-to-Iarge impact of (noise and dust) resulting from clearing of the parcel and construction activities, traffic and erosive forces (wind, rain etc...) will occur to the adjacent community during the three-year phased construction schedule. The anticipated construction, including construction schedule and duration, materials and storage/staging area, water and sewer systems connections, proper handling of construction waste, hours of operation and truck routes should be further evaluated. Page 9 of 12 " " Determination of Significance Heritage at Cutchogue Residential Site Plan Application Mitigation to lessen noise impacts could include the establishment of start and end times for all construction activity, using alternative construction or operational methods, equipment maintenance, selection of alternative equipment, physical barriers, siting of activities and by establishing greater set backs. Mitigation to lessen dust impacts could include the clustering of the single-family units into multi-family units to create open space, maximizing buffer width and planting of buffers with dense vegetation along the perimeter of the parcel and implementing a phased clearing plan and planting of cover crops (grasses) following the clearing of areas. 18. Impact on Public Health A potential moderate to large, short term impact to the health of adjacent property owners from (noise and dust) could occur due to the clearing of the parcel, construction activities and traffic. Impacts to the surrounding community must be mitigated during the three- year phased construction schedule. Mitigation to reduce noise impacts could include the establishment of start and end times for all constructions activity. Mitigation to reduce dust impacts could include the clustering of the single family units into multi-family units to create open space, maximizing buffer width and planting buffers with dense vegetation along the perimeter of the parcel. 19, Impact on Growth and Character of Community or Neighborhood: Proposed Action will conflict with officially adopted plans or goals. The site is currently vacant, undeveloped land located in an area that contains a mix of residential, agricultural and comrnercialland uses. The dominant land use in the area is residential with developments located to the north, southeast and west of the site. The Hamlet ofCutchogue Business Center is located directly south of the site. The proposed application is generally consistent with the surrounding land uses. In February 1994, the parcel was part ofa review of Hamlet Density Zoning in Southold Town. At that time, the Executive Summary stated "Due to its location just north of the hamlet's traditional center, this parcel, when developed, is likely to strengthen the hamlet." The subject site is zoned Hamlet Density (HD) District. The purpose ofthe HD Residential District is to pennit a mix of housing types and level of residential density appropriate to the areas in and around the major hamlet centers, particularly Mattituck, Cutchogue, Southold, Orient and the Village of Greenport. The district requires a minimum lot size of 20,000 sq,ft. with community water and 10,000 sq. ft. with community water and sewer. Lot coverage of25% of the lot area is permitted with a minimum livable floor area of 850 sq. ft. per dwelling unit. Pursuant to Article XI, Cluster Development of the Town of South old Town Codc, there is no clustered open space proposed in the site plan design, however, should the Plmming Board consider a cluster site plan with attached housing, a smaller development area would be established resulting in clustered open space and/or preservation of environmentally sensitive features. Page 10 of 12 Determination of Significance Heritage at Cutchogue Residential Site Plan Application Although. significant conflicts with land use or zoning are not expected, the proiect's compliance with the Town of South old Town Goals and planning studies undertaken within the Town over the past 20 vears must be further evaluated. specificallv those adopted after 1994. Applicable planning studies are listed below: (a) Parks and Recreation & Open Space Plan (1982) (b) Master Plan Update, Background Studies (1984) (c) Master Plan Update (1985) (d) Town of South old Comprehensive Plan (1985) (e) USIUK Stewardship Exchange Report (1991) (f) Special Groundwater Protection Area Plan (1992) (g) Southold Town Stewardship Task Force Report (1994) (h) Stewardship Task Force (1994) (i) Seaview Trails of the North Fork (1995) G) Peconic Estuary Program (1995) (k) Economic Development Plan (1997) (I) Southold Township Planning Initiates (1997) (m) Community Preservation Project Plan (1998) (n) County Route 48 Corridor, Land Use Study (1999) (0) Farm and Farmland Preservation Program: (1983-2002) (P) Southold Town Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy (2000) (q) Water Supply Management & Watershed Protection Strategy (2000) (r) Scenic Southold Corridor Management Plan (2001) (s) Blue Ribbon Cornnlission for Rural Southold (2002) (t) Town of Southold Generic Environmental Impact Statement (2003) (u) Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (2005) (v) Town of Southold Hamlet Study (2005) (w) Community Preservation Project Plan (2006 Update) (x) The Long Island North Shore Heritage Area etc. Development will create a demand for additional community services (e.g Schools, Police, Fire etc.) On June 20, 2007, the Planning Board received a letter from the Cutchogue Fire District indicating that the "Board agrees with the placement of the 8 hydrants". However the access to the site has not been resolved and must be further evaluated. No response form the Southold Police Department has been received to date. The ability of the Cutchogue Fire Department to access the sitc, and the ability of the Southold Police to provide protection and timely response to the proposed development must be further evaluated. The site's unique proximity to the hamlet center, traffic concerns and loss of agricultural land may be affected by the proposed project and insufficient information has been provided in which to accurately assess significant environmental impacts that may be associated with the proposed project. Anticipated adverse impacts do not appear to be minimized or mitigated to the Page 1] of 12 .. , . Determination of Significance Heritage at Cutchogue Residential Site Plan Application maximum extent practicable. Alternatives to the proposed action that will reduce potential impacts should be examined. For Further Information Contact: Jerilyn B. Woodhouse, Chairperson Town of South old Planning Board 54375 NYS Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southo1d, NY 11971 Telephone: (631) 765-1938 Page 12 of 12 ATTACHMENT A Dunn Engineering Associates P.c. Letter (March 2007) 86/85/2887 12:45 6313639880 "I"I"O'\!'Q~: U fa nszn. "\ . . I I i I ! I ! I I ,I 1 1 I ! l,Il.Wf4 e.~.l"LCl"';U'1Il.<< PAGE 132/86 Dunri Engineering AclIo,-_,...J, P.C. --......- ..... 8ItWet ............. iUah, H.V.1MI U'.'UIlII n1411N144 ... - ,-,-,---- - -- ~.....~-,--'-.....,-~_.,~--~- . ..., 'AV tA; MI.f~ 30,2001 ~or- ":0:=0, 'k,' . \u t\\ JUN - b 2007 \ I ~C' ~-,!j" Snlj';:\,'>J! ,.,',',;':i!l .__.,!2~~~..;;~": J r(i .~ ) 1 \1 )) J" The Horltage It ClllOhllgut 1 721-D N\lIIll 01>0... Avec MedfOtd, NY' 1116;) MmtiOl1; Pale 11.. lJoritipo 4<l.'~.u,-',",'-""""-"-''''''''_.''---'''--'--''''' 1.......____- ke, 1'ra1li~ lmpact Stlldy The Hetitagc at CoIcboglile Culchcrll"e, New Yl\lk o...r ML Grippe: 1iI1lCCQtIIar1oe il-!th ;yoUr reqll<:S~ 0_ EIlgineering ^"\>Cum. (DBA) b.& COIllplcted our review of lbl>irallic ltmjjst SWy ptIlfImd. for the alxrve project by Nelsoc Ilrld! Pope ImglA_llII4 SIl!V~' Th~ otudy,lbJed1u1y200<i, Willi 5lIllmittCd in CilIIl(l~!IIilh1h~ p~ Hat,. .. Cut.chQi!'"hOll1linS, cfe"eIopment loc~ CIJl Grifllll $tieul ill ~, New Vatk, IlJd MS b:rtmlW.l 10 aval.lWe~l>e polt>n1ial 'traffic impoct of tbe projlltl on 1he S\Itt'ollllding _"",,,*y network. As sucb,toe 1l1l\ill< issues are trip gcnCl1ltiOll, trtd1i" imp"~ mdlllfety. In addition, a! l'OqUCSIOId, VIlli di.&c\l&Sod th<i' prt1~ IllId m. 1nffic Impact $1"<:1)' with reprcS_ti_ of tlle N_ Yor1c SUIte Dlll>6rtl:l!mrt otTl'.,uplno:tion. 'rue roUo"inJ prwm~ (he.l"Os\1~ M Ollt elfam in this regard. 1. In the TlIailic lm)'Ml:.! Stwl', the _ lnlffit estUna1lld 10 be gcneol1lla1 b,y the proposed develOlJl1l<<nt ......, b~ OIl infotmlllioll 'li'= Ih<:. "f"lrl Trip ~~ 7t.EditiOll, pu.bbth~ li<y lheln$limte of TGlJo;potllItillll ~, Lmd Use Code :m., :Elderly Hiruldnt. WM ulll4ed. Tbis mell1odology ill Ille industry slllll<lanli for trip ~OI) lm2!yscs. and \IX ofLandU"" COOt2S115~ OIllIlIoprillm fortlm lIl'Plicltloo. ~, T,..fllo imp"'" ...aly>" iethe tlllffi. Imp"'" StIldy "'en COiIIll"",...1liiDg IIOftwan: b..... on tht roothodologlll$ setfotlh In l.bC r~OlUliOll ~ '8olin1's. 2000 JUehny C1lpJIcity MlI#lW, A. rmow .of lh$oe 1IMIYIes lndioolEs'sldlltd iuptt5. 1nIffi. aolltl.1.llutilized lIllbe mjl\l~.. wm adj~ed Iott:flect pQk.1o:\QoIl8l tn.ffiiQ llO\Ve,. aDd vniumes atiUzed iIlth~ aIIalyees fur f'utun: y~ ~ t4!llSIfod \llling ilpproprlllte g.trwIb facIcts. Thmftj"e. the 05/05/2007 12:45 6313b99080 .V~./Z$O' Of, U tld. l88U(~ .....,..' -,. ",- Mr.<h'iJIpo Menlh 1(), 1007 P.3 tmm ~ l1ttallh.. NYSDOT'8 "'ladililli1lll>G.s.alisSlld prior 10 gl'IIl:ltin8 t:Iulit ~, a petlll'il fmm NYWOT 'II'Iltbll ""Iuitod Ie iPWl tile line. l.n lln:amlit}', we :/mll.lbl.t 1be "l'raffiefulplWt SlIldy by NoIitOll lIllcl J'fIpa tt.as l>llIm JIl~ ill ~...nth &iM<lIud4 fur~lWll$oftAi4 ~ :II1d lIIlIt cbo ~t;U moai3kd with thepwject han bilcn qpl'<lplill.Jl;y l~tigMed. the slildl' kktllified pt\1;ect ~ 011 lite ~tiOl:lS or MMllbd lI.t Grlllln Slnltt and MaiIllWtd at Depcjt I..ml1:. "I'lIich wO'lld tie mitipl~ b:y lheinstdlsti<m ofa traffic fi$lJ:allll)cpol1:.alle. H"OIIlli:. bued 01\ the i\I.li'lftnllSiOll thal NYSDOT dOl!lll'lO't anliciplll~ tllClllstaUflfioll tiC lhis de dpal, the gtudy'. ~/JlC thliI: Ilt$lnlfI1i, ~<l. u;lflm8.ll'Uile "';11 ~en MRlllll.olld via. ~ Laine ill !lOt valid. 'nwaiol'6, li1lIllJd~ pooi: 1M. of knice mid the ~. ISSCltJlIlCd willi ~ PlOjtet'S lnlIffil: 011 _e twojll~oos,dllllllqb 1lIil:wl:. will ffIlIllliG _lllglUd.1'he iasta1lIslIm OeM. ~ to rtOl1bl>01l!l41~fltlll.1l1<<ne,u taqae1l* byl'lYSOOt. does lllil tlI'Jlii!C.lll mitigate Ib_ poW'ltvellI of GlroIice, ~ cjQcs.1;IOt1ppCm lobe WlIl1'Illttd baled. Vllln~lllll eOjllCity ar>lIlJlllOS IW1lIta PR'$ciited .ill th~ illldy. A$ ~.c4. .... rec:omrlI~d. )'Oil ~lt tlIbllt_ Ill! l"A>lUiGetedd..alrablelrytlile tOWll prlor II> pI'~ 1'l1l"1k you f"..lIlis<<lpjlortunity l<>. be of um.:e. If~u Iw.'e lIIIy quetlliOll"OI' "oed any fW1Ilet informJili~", 1l1oe!lceol1~. s~ Vioo<ll'Ol ColTlldlj E~ VC:to UQllZO PZ7{l:l(l 1111 . -.. 1l~1II - PAl%: 134l0b - , . ATTACHMENT B Cultural Resource Assessment The Hamlet at Cutchogue (July 1989) CULTURAL RESOURCES ASSESSMENT (DOCUMENTARY SEARCH AND FIELD INSPECTION ) THE HAMLET AT CUTCHOGUE CUTCHOGUE SOUTHOLD TOWNSHIP _____,-::,:;--___,,:"0'-'--';-:-;..::1 f" Ie;. (," 1'0 , , " l-, In l'_~l , , - .'- ~ Vi ~..n~ . ~ .' j \'1 .., , i i I ......---.-j )"-;1 DEe 3 0 2005 SUFFOLK COUNTY. NEW YORK , I "-' . ---------... "-- " ROBERT J. KALIN JULY 1989 ARCHAEOLOGICAL SERVICES INC. BOX 1522, ROCKY POINT. NEW YORK 11778 --------------------- 17 ROSEVILLE AVE. ~r. JAMES, NEW YORK / 11870 -------------------- TEL: 516-744-8047 PAX 516-744-6617 THE HAMLET AT CUTCHOGUE Southold, New York ABSTRACT The Hamlet at Cutchogue 1S located north of Schoolhouse Lane in the Village of Cutchogue. The property is of generally low relief with an elongate depression and a small enclosed basin that at times holds standing water. The project area is located within a district of intensive prehistoric aboriginal habitation. The National Register of Historic Places site at Fort Corchaug, the Baxter Site and the Solecki Site are located within a short distance of the subject parcel. The subject parcel is well within the near- hinterlands of these well documented sites. It is in this surrounding area where special purpose camps and satellite sites are likely to be found. A subsurface testing program should be initiated to evaluate the potential for prehistoric evidence on the parcel. In regard to historic sites, a number of these, including the National Register of Historic Places site known as the Old House of Cutchogue (1660). the Old Place (1680), the Wickham house (1700), and others are located within six- tenths of a mile of the center of the parcel. In addition, the pre-180D Hargrave house and several mid-19th century vernacular farm houses, including the SPLIA cited and underscored Aldrich house (pre 1873) are located immediately adjacent to the subject pa~cel. Consequently, The Hamlet at Cutchogue site has potential for recovery of historic evidence related to early settlement and past farming activities. Further study in the form of subsurface testing should be conducted to evaluate the potential of this proposal for impact to both prehistoric and historic cultural evidence. / ,r'/) "7~ /7okvltq. ~. /9f5 AS! 1 THB HAMLBT AT CUTCHOGUB Southold, New York EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Hamlet at Cutchogue is a 46.2 acre proposed development site located north of Schoolhouse Lane in the Village of Cutchogue, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York. An elongate depression trends across the central portion of the project. A small enclosed basin is located in the southwestern portion of the gully system which may have held standing water in the past. Several farm roads are evident within the property. They probably served as access roads during the period that the parcel was cultivated. Some are presently overgrown with brush. The project area is located within a district of intellsive prehistoric aboriginal habitation. The National Register of Historic Places site at Fort Corchaug as well as several other well documented prehistoric sites are located within a short distance of the subject parcel. The proposed project is well within the foraging zones of these sites, an area where special purpose camps and satellite sites are likely to be found. In reference to historic places, a number of these, including the National Register of Historic Places site known as the Old House of Cutchogue (1649-1660), the Old Place (1680), the Wickham house (c 1700) and others are located within a fraction of a mile of the parcel. In addition. the pre 1800 Hargrave house and several mid-19th century vernacular farm houses are found immediately adjacent to the subject parcel. One of these, the Aldrich-Kurczewski farm is recorded in the Society for the Preservation of Long Island Antiquities as an exceptional and very well preserved example of the type. The Hamlet at Cutchogue site has potential for recovery of both prehistoric and historic cultural evidence. Further research and study in the form of subsurface testing and analysis should be conducted to evaluate the potential impact of the project on both prehistoric and historic cultural evidence. ASI 3 &~~ ...~~~u~~ n~ vu~~nu~un Southold, New York PROJECT INFORMATION The Hamlet at Cutchogue is a proposed development site, consisting of 18.7 hectares (46.2 acres) and located north of Schoolhouse Lane in the Village of Cutchogue, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York. The plan calls for the construction of about forty condominiums, a clubhouse, recreation area, and access roads. A an approximately 1.4 acre buffer area is planned for the northwestern corner. ASI 5 Southold, New York ?\..B Soil Map /)~ (00 ).. <..., "'... 11 Soil patterns in vicinity of the subject parcel. After Warner, et, al. 1975. (Ha A = Haven A soils, PIC =Plyrnouth C soils, Rd B = Riverhead B soils.) ASI 7A Southold, New York Indian Hemp Milk Weed Grasses Little Bluestem Grass Timothy Foxtail Forest Zone The Oak~Pine forest Forest zone of (Kuchler the subject 1970) . parcel is: Northeastern Man-made Features Several farm roads are evident within the property. They probably served as access roads during the period that the parcel was cultivated. Some have been unused for several years and are presently overgrown with brush. Al terat. ions Aside from clearing and farming the land and providing access roads to the fields for agricultural purposes, few signific3Ilt alterations were observed. Previous Surveys None are known to have been conducted. ASI 9 THB HAMLBT AT CUTCHOGUB Southold, New York barns and out buildings appear to be in an almost unaltered state." (See SPLIA Files Southold, Cu 93: 18, also See Addendum). The Conklin-Gorman house is adjacent to the subject parcel on the north. It was the second Post Office in Cutchogue and appears on the Chase 1858 and Beers 1873 maps (See SPLIA file in Addendum). The F. M. Mc Carthy house, another mid 19th century farm house continues to stand to the northwest of the subject parcel, along the east side of Alvahs Lane, within 1 km of the Hamlet at Cutchogue site (See SPLIA CU 88 and Cu 89). A number of other houses listed in the SPLIA files are within a short distance of the project (See SPLIA Map and Insert in Addendum). MAP REFERENCES I . IRe, .!'1:lAlil'.R "-i 1.Q.h F 0 u r t h Boo k. I 689, by J 0 h nTh 0 r n ton. This relatively crude map of the area does depict the major features of the north fork. such as: Robins Island. Hog Neck. Little Hog Neck (not named). and with some imagination. Broadwater Cove, East Creek, Wickhams Creek and West Creek. Cutchogue is not indicated. See Map Figure 1. 2. The New England Coasting Pi,lot,L 1734. Southack. This map indicates the presence of Southold Village and (by house symbols) the location of East Cutchogue to the east of Little Hog Neck. near Hog Neck Bay. Further residential symbols Occur on the north shore facing the Sound. See Map Figure 2. 3. The William Fadden ~ QL 1779 is not as accurate as the Southack map and tends to represent the coastline rather fancifully. Its function was apparently not for coastal piloting, but probably for general informational or land advertisement use. It does represent interior features such as roads and village centers in somewhat more detail than the earlier maps which emphasized maritime travel. Southold is noted. as is Hog Neck. Cutchogue. a thriving community by this date. is not noted on the map. See Map Figure 3. 4. E..Lan li ~ IslanA ill New YorJs. Government '. North Ameri~ The scale is 6 miles to an inch. British Map of Long Island. Revolutionary War Period. No Date. No Author noted. On file at SUNY, Stony Brook Historic Map Collection. This map was carefully drawn and the outline of the Island and the main drainage systems are close to modern representations. If the increments figured along the length of the map are in inches, as one suspects, then the map is quite accurate for cartography of its time. It represents the distance from Old Man's (Mount Sinai) to Horn Tavern as about 13 miles, while the actual distance. using contemporary ASI 11 Southold, New York 9. The Chase ~ Q..t 1858 provides some information on the residents and property owners. This map documents the ~~~l~~~~~ ~r t~~ l~t~lll 1~~11~ 1~ ~~rl~ ~~t~~~~ij~1 ~~~ other surnames other than (J. T.) Gould are noted in the area. The T. Conklin house is noted but not attributed to an owner. while the Aldrich house is not represented. A number of residences and shops are indicated along both sides of ~ain Street. No structures are noted on the subject parcel. See Map-Figure 9. 10. The Beers Comstock ~!lSl Cline ~ 2i.. 1873. This map clearly notes the major land holders in the area east of Alvahs Lane and west of Depot Lane, north of Main Street; the area within which the subject parcel is sited. G. Aldrich is noted as owner-resident on a parcel in the southeast corner of this area. We can presume that Aldrich, r. J. Conklin. and N. Champlin were probable owners of part 0~ all of the subiect parcel at about this period. No structures or residences are noted for the subject parcel. ~ee ~ap-figure 10. 11. B G lene r [jX.'te.. M"..J' 2i.. .190.9. in d i cat est h e pre s e nee 0 f the Aldrich property. house and barn. The property to the south \~as that of J(as) Wickham. C. Williamson owned adjoinillg propel~ty to the west. Williamson I s and Aldrich I s property ad ioilled the Dayton Estate to the west. The parcel that COffiDrlses the present Hamlet at Cutchogue probably consists of part of both the G. Aldrich Estate and the C. Williamson property. See Map-Figure 11. 12. ..".t..L'Ls. Q.f.. Suf....foJk_ County,_ Dolph and llewart 12..l.2.., indicates little change over the 1909 map. The Aldrich parcel lS listed as the Aldrich Estate. We may assume that by this date George Aldrich was deceased. Wickham and Dayton continue to own large portions of adjoining property. ~otable is the increase in Polish and other Slavic surnames in the record. Apparently the period between 1909 and 1929 lias one of intensive acquisition of property by relatively recent immigrants to Cutchogue. See Map-Figure 12. 13. ~ ~ Army ~ Service. Southold Quadrangle. 1947. This map depicts little change for the subject area. It notes the elongate depression that dominates the topography of the subject parcel. The presence of a new school. a new church (Our Lady of Ostrabrama), and a cemetery are all noted in the 3rea immediately surrounding the subject property. No structures are depicted within the subject parcel. See Map- Figure 13. ASI Southold, New York THE DIVIDENDS At a Town Meeting held November 20, 1661. it was decided that all common lands at Oysterponds (Orient). Corchaug (Cutchogue). Mattatuck (Matti tuck) and Occabauck (Aquebogue-- lands west of Mattituck to the Brookhaven Line) be divided into lots so as to encourage development of outlying lands and at the same time providing that the common land should continue to be used as common pasturage. It seemed convenient to make three great divisions of land. One of these. east of the settlement and extending to Orient was known as Oysterponds. A much larger "Dividend'! lying to the l~est of this was known as the Corchaug Dividend, which extends to Canoe Place at Mattituck. The Occabauck Dividend was divided into three areas, one in the east known as the First Division in Occabauck and the Second and Third Dividends to the west. all the way to Wading River (Craven 1906: 28-29). At the time of the great division there were according to Craven (op. cit.: 29). about 51 heads of households in Southold. There were 38 Lots in Occabauck and nineteen owners. The Lots were large, extending from Sound to Bav. forty rods wide (660 feet) and each containing two- hundred and fifty acres or more. Those settlers allotted lots in Occabauck were William Wells (3 lots). John Budd (4 lots). John Swazey (4 lots); Joseph Horton (4 lots). William Halliock (Hallock) was listed as being allotted 2 lots. Ihe Corchaug Lots did not extend from Sound to Bay but were divided by the King's Highway. Those north of the I!ighway ( in the area of the Hamlet at Cutchog~e) were about )0 rods wide (495 feet) and tapered to the Sound and about 100 to 120 acres each. South of the highway, the land of the Corchaug Dividend lies in six large "necks" which were separated by creeks opening from the Bay: the most easterly is Poole's Neck, and toward the west-- Robin's Island Neck. Corchaug Neck, Fort Neck, Pessapunk Neck and Reeve's Neck. The Corchaug and Fort Necks were the home ground of the local Indians. On Corchaug Neck was the site of their village and on the other--appropriately called Fort Neck--they built a stockade or fort where they would retire with the women and children, in time of conflict. A hollow in the ground. some three or four rods (50 feet) across, surrounded by traces of an embankment still marks the site of the fort on the east side of the neck, near the creek that separates it from Robin's Island Neck (See Craven 1906). The settlers found the necks --for the most part-- already cleared land. Since the land was level and tillable and needed only plowing, while surrounding wooded land had to be cleared---a very laborious process-, the land on the Necks was very valuable and it quickly became cut up into small twenty acre lots. For many years a twenty acre lot in this ASI 15 Southold, New York Brookhaven settlement, which adjoined Southold on the west at Setauket (there was no Riverhead until after the Revolutionary War) was established and a "Setacut Road" was built through the woods soon after that date. to that settlement. This latter road was to become the North Road. A record of its pathway is preserved in Liber A. p.142. Suffolk County Deeds... an "Act of the Govern't Councill and Representatives of the Colony of N Yorke made in ye second veare of reign of our sovergn Lady Anne" (1703)... .for ye laving out Regulating clearing and preserving publick common typ.h Havs throughout ye sd Colony!'...... ,. The high way from va to\1118 of Southold to ye westward farms on ye north side to be va usuyal road to Mattatuck and soe on ye northside of ye ]~O!ld in ve way lately marked out to ye usual road leading to Richard !lowells and from thence in ye usual road to ye beach .nd 50 on ve beach to ye fresh pond and to ye place called ~,' a din ~~ r i v e r !1 Thus we can assume that by the early part of the 18th lE~ltjr'- the lalld that was to become the Hamlet at Cutchogue i~as 1~3rt of a thriving settlement with several homes, and was ~iel: ~erved by public roads and by sheltered waterways. THE ALDRICH FAMILY from several sources, we know that the Aldrich family, probable first settlers and early owners of much of the subiect parcel, were early residents of the Town. lhe first mention of the Haldrich (Aldrich) name occurs in a 1683 rate list for the Town. In it Peter Haldrich (Aldrich) is listed. ["A rate list for 1683 lists the following names: William Reeves. Thomas Tuston, Theophilus C:url~in. Thomas Mapps, James Reeves, Thomas Terril, Peter Ualdriag (Aldrich), Thomas Osman, William Ha1iock. Thomas HRliock. John Swazey. Joseph Swazey"(Craven 1906:68-69).1 r~ter may have arrived from the New Haven Colony or from England sometime after 1662. By 1683 he was a tax-paying member of the colony. Sometime prior to 1683 he had married ~ne of the daughters of John Swazey and taken up residence. probably on a parcel originally allotted to John Swazey and noted as the second or double lot of John Swazey in the first dividends. We know that John Swazey did not live on that lot--he resided on a lot further west--and his will. drawn in 1091 does not list this lot ---thus we may assume that sometime prior to 1692 he had sold or given this parcel to hi. son-in-law, Peter Aldrich. It is likely that Peter was th~ t~rst to clear and build a home there. Peter Aldrich dled soon after Swazey's death in 1692. The Aldrich family continued to reside in the western end of Southold, west of Howards Creek in Mattituck. In time. members of the Aldrich ASI 17 .........."".....""....."" Southold, New York Aldrich's management until at least the first decade of the ~Oth century. By the third decade of this century the property was listed as part of the George Aldrich Estate (See ~ap-Figure 12). The estate was divided up among heirs. and the farm as well as a substantial amount of the land was inherited by George Young. Portions of the original farm may have been sold at this time by other heirs. We presume that the western part of the Aldrich farm became a significant portion of the present Hamlet at Cutchogue property. Other eleme!lts may have come from the Willamsoll and Dayton estates. ~T. Kurczewski. a Polish immigrant. first settled in Philadelphia and later moved to Cutchogue where he met his w~fe. married. and found employment as a farm laborer on the f!Bet Estate. Later. he worked for Mr, George Aldrich as a field ha!ld and teamster on the Aldrich farm. during the -early ~'art of the century. He conti!lUed on after the death of Mr. .t41drich. Hhile it 1135 managed by ~r. Young. Kurczewski 's jsughte~. Bertha. remembers the place as a child. where her ~~ther worked and where she sometimes accompanied him on his choreE. According to her. it was mallaged as a general farm. !!~r father worked the fields l~ith horse-drawn machinery. ~ilt cows were raised. as well as field crops grown, such as ~o~atoes and cabbages. Young.. who had other lands and wished to sell the Aldrich property. encouraged Kurczewski to buy the farm. According to Bertha, his daughter. Kurczewski, though he loved the place. could not afford it at that time. L\'entually. the farm was sold to the Sinuta family who had another farm in Orient where they resided. According to Bertha Kurczewski, they did not live on it or work it. but :OUtiIlued to live in East ~arion. A number of families rented the farm house from the Sinutas over a period of Years. At one time a Mr. Baxter lived there and later it :~as used as the residence and office of a physician -- Dr. Linowitz. Kurczewski continued to work on the farm and lease some of the farm land Over this period. Around 1940, at the urgings of the Sinuta family. who were eager to sell. Mr Kurczewski purchased the property which has been in his family since that time. At the present. Miss Bertha Kurcze'~ski is the owner. She proudly claims that she m3intains the house and buildings. as well as a substantial aarden and parts of the surrounding proper-ty by her own labor. (B. Kurczewski. pers. comm. July 1989). VISUAL INSPECTION A visual inspection was conducted in July 1989. At th2t time a videotaped record of the inspection was produced. ~his js available from Archaeological Services Incorporated. ~ost of the study area ~s crop land or former crop land. A brushy gully extends through much of the central portion of the subiect parcel. The vegetation in this area suggests ASI 19 THB HAMLBT AT CUTCHOGUB Southold, New York SUMMARY The Hamlet at Cutchogue proposed development site. is an 18.7 hectares (46.2 acres) parcel located north of Schoolhouse Lane in the Village of Cutchogue. Town of Southold. Suffolk County. New York. The subject property is of generally low relief. An elongate depression trending N 400 W cuts across the central portion of the project area for a distance of about 300 to 500 meters. A small enclosed basin of less than six meters (20 feet) elevation and about 15 meters in diameter is located in the southwestern portion of the parcel. This may hold standing water at times. The soils of the parcel are a mosaic-like pattern of Riverhead. Plymouth and Haven soils. About 38% of the project area is Riverhead B and Plymouth C soils while the remaining 62 percent of the parcel is Haven A soil. The project area is mostly well drained. However, there is a closed basin in the southwest corner of the parcel that is poorly drained. The vegetation, at the time of the field inspection (July 1989). was determined to consist of two botanical communities: former farm field and post agricultural forest. About 10% of the parcel is wooded and the rest (90%) is fallow or abandoned farm field and crop land. The vegetation of the open fields consists of various grasses and forbs common to this area. The wooded zone occupies the gully area and consists of maple and cherry and other species common in a post-agricultural woodland. Several farm roads are evident within the property. They probably served as access roads during the period that the parcel was cultivated. Some are presently overgrown with brush. The project area is located within a district of intensive aboriginal habitation. The National Register of Historic Places site at Port Corchaug as well as several other well documented prehistoric sites are located within a short distance of the subject parcel. In terms of historic sites. a number of these, including the National Register of Historic Places site known as the Old House of Cutchogue. and several others of near contemporary age are located within a kilometer of the parcel. In addition. a pre 1800 house and several mid-19th century vernacular farm houses are located immediately adjacent to the subject parcel. One of these. the Aldrich-Kurczewski farm is recorded in the Society for the Preservation of Long Island Antiquities as an exceptional and very well preserved example of the mid-19th century farm. ASI 21 Southold, New York SENSITIVITY ASSESSMENT Prehistoric The subject parcel 1S in a general area of intensive 2borigi~al activity. Several large, well documented sites are found Kithin a half-hour walk of the subject parcel. Thus ~cc0rding to present archaeological models. it is located 1iell within the normal acti,"ity zone (or near hinterland) of m0r~ thall Ol!e prehistoric residence site. These hinterland areas liere used for huntin~, exploitation of natural. mineral, and plant resources, and sitina of special purpose ~no satellite campsites. ~odern archaeological theory underscores the importance of these I'off site" activity zones a~d satellite camps in developing a more realistic. complete, u!ldEr~tanail1g of the culture, settlement patterns, and ~d2Pt2tions of prehistoric native Americans. The Hamlet at ::~t(110gUe Da~cel has potential for recovery of prehistoric cultu~al e~idence due to its proximity to prehistoric coastal a~ld ~5tuarille r~sidence bases. the presence of an enclosed b~3i~ which may have held standing water in the past. and ~~l-.i~ollmeIltal variatiol1S which enha!ICe exploitation of game, ~jl~eral and plant resources, f! i. s J: (l L' i c lhough no structures '~~re documented for the parcel. it ,~ !!l 2!1 area illtensivelv used for over three centuries. ~cuthe~n portiollS of the parcel closer to ~ain Street were ~robablv cultivated bv early settlers who were allotted ~rODerty along ~ain Street. ~ineteenth century farmers were active ~est of Depot Lane. The parcel has potential for recovery of historic evidence related to past farming activities. such as field lines. ditch and mound boundaries a~d ~ossible outlying structure sites. RECOMMENDATIONS Further studv in the form of subsurface testing should ['8 conducted to evaluate the potential of this proposal for imr,act to both prehistoric and historic cultural evidence. ASI 23 Southold. New York l q l3:l Soil Patterns and Prehistoric Sites on Long Island. New York. Sub to ~gn ilL _the ~_Q.rt)l~l!l!.1;.~ Al bany. New York fuchlGr. A. W. '- 'i7 (I PCl.t,.~_ntcLa.L NiJLU+:',;> L Y~Jl..L'lJ.i Clll~ In: The :-:fa t i ona 1 Atlas of the United States. U. S. Department of the Interior. Washington. D. C. pp. 89-91. :.urcze\~ski. Bertha 'J~~ Personal Communication. Cutchogue. Lives on Depot Lane ~l~htfoot. Kent: Robert Kalin. Owen Lindauer a.lld Lillda Wicks 'i~{; Coastal New York Settlement Patterns. ~~~ ~n. ~ 0 rt h~.iJs t. )j o. 30 p p 59 - 8 2 . ~_~ther. Fredrick G. . 'I" The Refugees of 1776 from Long l.s.I,aItd to CConnect~~__1.Jt. J. B. LYOll Co., Albany, ~eh' Y01-t -_~_'..0.:'-2m'J!:. Fr3!1cis 1~31, Discover.lng sites unseen. In: Ady._?.Jl~__E:'_-?_ in -\r<;:.h_~_~_otQ~_i.c_~;tl .~ei:rLQ_d '~_JJd_ Iheqr:..Y--, ed: ~ichael Schiffer. pp 22J-229. Vol. 7. Academic Press. );eh' York. 2!"l':,=,. Jack 9tJ Regional sampling in archaeological survey: The 5 tat i 5 tic alp e r s pee t i v e. In: A d van 1;:_~ ~_ i._It ll,J:_<;.hiL~_Q12.&iJ~..--'Ll. tlLt_h O_Q ';>]lst I l)_~_(),J;:l~ Ed: :-l i c h a e 1 Schiffer. pp 289-386. Vol. 6. Academic Press. New York. 1'.:;1.1mer. E. .:..::) /! 9 LaNrence Fjg,ldpQ.9J!. 9-1:.. .:or a t u [iLJ.. His t.9 r .Y.~ W hit t1 e s e y House. McGraw-Hill Book Company, ~ew York 664 pp. .:. .:" :-ke r . l'f::2 0 Archur C. T_hg p,r,';J:U:,-"g_l.Q.KiQiJ.l !U-iLtCl.r..Y. pf ~e1f. Y.QLL.. Part 2. )jew York State Museum Bulletin Nos. 237. 238. Univ. of the State of ~ew York. ~. Y. State ~useum. Albanv, New York. .:."0attie. Donald CuIrass .: % t, A N a 1; u La 1 Hi s t SO. I Y 0 t 'I'_r e. os. See 0 n d Ed i t ion. Houghton Mifflin Company. Boston. :-lass. ASI 25 Ll1~ llA~~~L AL 0VL0nV~UC Southold, New York Whittaker. Epher (Rev.) 1. t~ H 1 Hist9J-Y 9_f Sou.tDQJ'L. ~.I..Lt.s .FjJ.5_,-g~!U;Jlry. Printed for the Author. Southold. New York, \,>'V3tt. EOl1ald J, - ~)77 The Archaic on Long Island. A!1JLgJ.,~_ Qf. to_h,st N~..w York AC_"-(:I~!!!Y ()f 9_cieJ.'-".f!:>" 288: 400-410. MAPS _~!l()n (:'1)76-1'80 p.l._a.!) of 10n_g If.l.an.d In. ~eh' '(9.rJz ~_Q.Y_~_.LD.mJ~_n_t,. ~orth America. British Revolutionary War Era ~ap. ~o date, no author. Scale Six miles to the inch. ."_ !l,j l.~ e . 7 ,~ 7 John S\1,rve,\' 9_.f S_()_LlJp_~rnpt_9JJ I.Q_5~_D_.I Southampton. New York. On File: SlNY. Stony Brook, Historical :V:ar Collectlon. ~e3~champs. WIlliam v l~.q., ~ar_ qJ_ t_h,e Territorial DivisioD_$_ ,Q.J th.~_ AboLi_gi.n~_~ ,oJ ~'L~.~" Yg,r.lsJ .c],rca 1_9.Q~ Univ. of State of New York. Wm. ~ Beauchamps: 1899 Beers. F. W. 1873 .~..tl a 5 qJ 1,qllF LS)o."J]<L. F. W, Be e r s Pu bl i shi ng Co. Brooklyn. N. Y. nelcher and Hyde l('O~) Atlas of S}Jffo1k County. L"ng 151-"'.1''-9.. $.Q.\!!Ld Shore. Bel~her Hyd~, Vol 2. 1909, New York, 1 .., 16 At las 0 f 0 ce aJJ Sl}9J" () f S u f tQJ 1<. Y.2.11Jlll~ Eastern Section. Belcher Hyde, New York ~: U r r [1. II. 1. ~"! _ ;J Atlas of New York Stgte, York. Stone and Clark. New L.~ u :.: :.: 3vid l-l, l e ~ ~"l ~'ap of the. CO.1!I1,ty of Suffolk. Published by the Surveyor General, Albany. ~ew York ASI 27 ~outhold. New York i!alsev. 192q William Donaldson RgcolHtructio!t !1Jl2JLlL:Ll'/ateLmilt 1:~ Wainscot~ 16'0-1650. Maps drawn by Godfrey H, Baldwin, In: Sketches tl Local tlistory.. Re-published: The Yankee Book Peddler, Southampton, New York, 1966. Available at the Suffolk Historical Society, Riverhead. !-l u 1 s e . 1797 Isaac Map of 13;:ookbay".!l To_w.n.~.hipL Suffolk County. Long Island, :-!vde.' .ll'elcher ~8:J(, Ana,s. oJ sU.U...9_1_1<:. g.QJJn_ty. ~ew York. E. Belcher Hvde. Inc.. ~ew York ~I~' 2 e. E. Bel c her i)'1 Atla~ of Suffolk County. Part of Riverhead snd Southold, ~ew York. E. Belcher Hyde, Inc,. ~ew York. _!~ 7 Atlas of the >;;orth '3_hore. of '3uffoll; ('oun.ty. Western Section. 1917 (E, Belcher Hyde 1917) J;.;ffervs. Thomas 17t,t< ~t~.P_s_. of th_~ North Amerlcan C_olonies. Published by Thomas Jefferys. London, England _~~ J t.: her. H. W . ll?'] :2 GM>19.Ki ~.aJ" ''La.R. o.t .!.&lJg lsJ.a.Jlcl. To pogra ph i c survey by J. Calvin Smith. ~'(ontresor. John <(" 1776-1780) N.a.P 01. Q,9.~.s.1;1!l. ){eJi Revolutionary War. Brook ~ap Library. Y.Q..rkL. Drafted during the No exact date. (Stony SUNY, Stony Brook) P.ornans. Bernard 1 7 7 7 ~s.E. Q.f. Q9JUl!LcJ: i c \J..1:_ and. A<! i a c.~_ll1:. 1A!l~ Amsterdam. 1777. Reprinted by Covens and Mortimer from a 1780 original. (Stony Brook ~ap Library. SUNY, Stony Brook) :'mlth. j, Calvin .1. I_I _\ I) q ~_9..L9K.i_~._ _~AR. 21, .k9 rll:~ t~l_~:uL<i. J. B. C. 0 1 ton and Company. New York ASI 29 \ ~~ ":- \ \' "', \ \ '. '-. """1U~n '--1 , I, '. \/ / \ '> /- '''..;( " .......... -~. \,.~ / -. .-- / ..........., / I / / 31 1. The English Pi1~ Pourth Book, 1689, by John Thornton. ~ , . . . . lI. t~ ~~~ 39 9. Chase 1858 .,0 :r:2 i~ 1J~ r ~~ ,,- 40 Jl,;II.I' " '.. till .,.,,1 c ,., \ p. " c ^ <: '--C. ~ ~ -' . , ~ -' : , ------ ,. ". ~. ""II~ . "'" ---:," 'I:V'lcij',!,(li , , I r- , 1!lL!u., f I 1., ~, / /.'\ ' ,"II., "', .J . "i I .r--, Ie lu . " ;';,'h,ll J/lfl'l I (I; i ~ ..: I I'!1rl1 Ij n '.', ., ',.' .;~. :.11.1 jl i r I i 111\1' '.' ""'. " , y.. 'I". ':". ',"'" <~,. ".~~ /~ ~.. ~ :; uo c --<: -l" ;l Q . , '?, ... ..-...~ I,. '. /,.1,.,..,. I.....l,,::..,:' !.. ~ - ~ ".' ., r I \.. L.' '.',., r" ~, ):-~' r.' ""'''''__ ~ - '"- , " "'. ~ '..,'" 'I . , '. \,:~<>- :.\1 I' I " ~'[)11 I.,of' ,\",111 .'. It 1 ' r,.:'. .~;:::::::--:':':':::~--":'--~ . . l (, " ~ 37 7. ~ ~ Coastal Survey in 1836. \).) C,'i') I'iJ "',", ""~, "", . . " . lIlt" ,/, /";, / / ;" I I / /~ f oL'"uu)j I ~"7~6<~ ~\ ~, ~ i r \ , / ij\ Irl;L1 /'j '>- ~ .~ " . ~> ~ '" , \ ~ ,'- ~ ~ 'f-. .- , o!'"_~'~ " ~'" ~'''' ...... ... " '\ , ,,' ~ t ~~ ";, '"'-.. ~ '\ ..' ;.:,- ~, ,. \. \ :::l:: '" , . - .. '" ~'\ ~" ... ~ ~\ .~ ~ .~ ;.. ; ~~ ~ " 't '- 1. ~, ~. \ V ,. "- ct -: ~ L&.I ~~ a:: " oq; '" " I- : V \ a~h'~c.-",,,;~ ,,;,a: '0. t; \ - '<f , "" ~ , ; I f / "" . 'I -, '" , ~ ~ <:::-. ~ ~ '" ,~ ,/_; / I.f'''~ ~, My :' '~ _ " ," ~ ~ ',' , ~,~ l.;:..-f........., ~ s-.. '- ~ '\ ~. I -""~ \ ,t ~ ~... " 'v'J" "- .~'i~ j l ~\ l.(11~ " ' '\; :0.- ~( ~-,.., ~. 1..... \'~ ~ .,,';. ~ ~ .. ':l ';,. ~ ;.. ~ ~ ~ ' ,r ~ ,~ ""'.. " \ 'I. " , " ~~ ~ " '(1 '. , " >.. I~ Ir . :, l~ c '\\ r ~ . l~\ '\ 1 ) ~ ~ f "\ I , ) i . J~ 7'\ , - ~ ..,........'''''4 ":....,. ~fr;,~~ '" '~"/';-- \. ..0:.../ '-"<'0<:::: i I '~ ? I'D --? "'""--~>-"", Y "4_." , - -' 1y ." -;!. i - ~ ~w/y\. . \------.....'" y"'" ~-!) .1 '~:'::~r/ \. ", ,-~ \ "'--"'---.. f ~ " " 1...'J:. tr:.R:. 'I ~ !i: t \ ':> " ~ PROltC,l t..\\~" <l ~ ~ 1 Q I) \Il"~ '\ 'r--~ '? -. I.. ~ \1\ iJ ~ ~ ~ i ~ 'G \ ," ~OS cl NO ScALe AP~I 1~C>9 t;,.......c.....~ ~Vl>.. "'.:;.... J!:. AT"I-....SO ..... 1Il1>"'F......~ c.",..,tJT"Y $~L.)r,jl> ~~ClRt:: , , . " / ,/ , / ,/ ~., <:., ., .,,, "" "" . -- ~+ ~ " ~~~ .. '" . . . , " o '" ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (J t , o " , u~ ~~~ "-0 43 13, !L... h A!:m..Y. M-~l2. Service lt2.1ttA.Ql.Q.. Ouadran..1e llll ')0' 29'00' \ 28'00' ....COw €;r/",,,.Ol K 0..5._______ ,. . 37.0 36.0x ( ,. ( 41.0 37.5 '0 o o ~\\~~ 39.5 () L 47 SPLIA File part of Key Map of Cutchogue .. " ...._~ ,. L @ . ., ,t~..~ . .~ ~"(." , ",..., eu 9' '.:'~,~. :,'" . ,;,111 , , ( " " / t , II ,\ ,I I I', I I, I. ,..IIi ,. 14, . THREATS TO BUILDING: a, none known ~ b. zo~ing 0 c. rcads 0 d. developers 0. e. deterioration 0. : f. other: ' ;:"i'" -~'" ,...;;.:,..,.......':~. " . 15. RELATED OUTBUILDINGS AND PROPERTY: ,," ...... . a. barn~ b. carriage house 0.,: ,.c, garage 0 d. privy 0 . e. shed [J . '.r..'ireenhouSe 0 '.: g, shop 0 ' h'. gardens 0 ,;:'.:> ': " i. landscapefeatures:~ft6iP~i'gbor at "/._ j. other: . '. '.. .. .... ". 16. SURROUNDINGS OF THE BUILDING (check more than one if necessary): . ',: .:.'....'... ,. a. open land i:!!:J '.: b. woodland 0. "i':""'" ," :'.j" e ,,.,;/'.,' .;' " . c. scattered ,buildings' 0 .:,.'.... '-:-" :.:',:/'~:>;~;.:-; _'. '.' .... ../. d.densely buill.Up 0.": commercial 0. ,: . . r. industrial 0. g. residential 0. .. '.' ',.,:..,,,.:.. h.other: original fence and posts '., '. ,,,,,::,,,.,.,, property.. . . ',. ^',;.r J7. INTERREI:ATIONSHIP OF BUILDING AND SURROUNDINGS: . (Indicate if building 'or slructure is in an historic district) r. . ~ i-/"~' ,.". ,', ,- "..' i.;~:)j _...' 'piCll:et 'fe'rice' ". , ",~...-- rear of'" ~ Y.,;: ,}'~L' ".< . .-'- ;:'~'..:f:.'~' ')"'';. -" _.~ ",--,,' '. :~.&trr :,\" ',' ",' SIGNIFICANCE '.. ..'. :::.;'~~::>~':;'C~19. . DATE OF INITIAL CONSTRUCTION: Built prior to 1873 ",,;. <. ,'~', '''r~~<;(~.~.';J.:~ '_~'-'}~, -:: , _ _.. ~~~;;bf~~~$~~"~;l:"m':'''' ~\~_-~CHITECT: .. , " :""" .... -, -~. '-.-' .,~~:., :.j~::',:,;; .,":: ~:~:;.<::.~'.}>~~:'.':'~-.i'<~'i :>r{;'~... .,-;::.)!.{b'~,:'~.::.~i.~..."..._,._} .~.:'.h,.~;[,.,:,]~.:./00 :.,.>:.. ,-".. ,- ,,,_. ;~-'-.c:" ";.~:;'i'.::.;, ~ .~. to...;' , ,-J' . ~ -y.~. , . . ~~~~~'*1i.:;:;;;>'~~'" BUILDER: " "r., . . \~ :',~(~~,~'.i:':,~:,:',_,; -:.'~:~~~,:~:?i:'l~(' ..,~~~.~,:.;i~'i.~~:P,,,;,:.....~-.,... . ;__.",.:' .'. ,~- :, c,..... ',:" ..~I~""~~O:...;,HIST6RIC^L AND ARCHiTECTURAL IMPORTANCE:'~:"H: "~.'..... :-""";:""".: ::~. ,,' '.. :, " .~';. .'iy'').?;:',,<:''::'':;~This t'flenty six acre working farm,provides aD exceptional",.; . ~'""';'~~"'''~'''example of the mid 19th century farm. The farnbouae and all . '. "". barns and out buildings,appear to be in an almost unaltered '...,.'._ state .' .... '\' ,i . .. .,.......,. - ':_v -... ~~.' :"'., . .. . , .. :',. 'v;"J:\\,.'; -. ". ' .. ';':';':,.'::~.:')~~~ .;~~ ;~- . .' "'\ '-.' ( .:. ,I . . ~-'~ {.':~~{\~~~:~ at' froJjt of \~:.:,; .;...... .. .... .. 18. OTHER NOTABLE FEATURES OF. BUILDING AND SITE (includj'ng inlGrior fealures if known): T'flo and ODe half story, three bay,sj.de entrance plan,gable '~'l~" roof bouse.Oce and a half story 'fling on south,lI/i tb centered.... entrance door. Semi 'flrap arround porch.Original chimeya. . ..., T'wo over two windows. .. .... ~ . . ", ',........ .,' ..; ,"., .; , ~. ", . ,I 21. SOURCES: Intervie'fl 'flith Miss Kurcze'flsky '3/7/66 by John E. Remsen Beers Comstoct Atlas of Long Island 1873 ''''.. Cu 9: - '.I .. Aldrich farmstead Orl~lnal oarno ana QW~ ~~~~Qtno5 From South East Roll B Neg 12 From North Roll B Neg 1~ ~.:. .', . ~~ I . . ,~.t~1yJ . ......li.~, '.:;,_;:,,~tr~l ....1-...~ .~'i~~ ~'::~ ~:~);. ..........""' . :..'t\,"~iY;; ..,....,... ".: ~'. :: ...,......1\ ; : :.~ .{ . ;'::"'~";I ; ,.T~~.,.;... '''-i";f'.~ ::~'''~~ . .0;. :,/:~.~. ":". '. ."::~ ..:..;.::.:'; :~: ~"~A~1~ .... '>. . ;:>~.~:..:'>~~ , ","" " .~..'.J:~~ -,,:~~:,~~; ":~.~',;:;jft ,;':1:''''''''';;61 . r>~~I";'i ~' :~.,. t1,.tif. . "'I';",~ . . ',.-.. ./ .' . . ., ;:' . ~.'" . . ~ . 21. SOURCES. :<~;'i~.,' . . .-;.,...-~~~.;-;-,~ ..i :;~:::22. . THEME l..-::..,~~r' ,~:,.i~(.; ;':.l'::' J'orm "'';!-'fl ;t;.,~..\.~ .,." ';'.""< "~';,". ...., ~ ~\(f.~?~' ~~.. , .' < -\t..;.~~ _:. ' .',}~.:. :: ';~.I "