Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
McGoldrick, Neil (3)
Atbrr t J. Knrpeki, Prcaident Jnmen Kin(!, Vice-Preairlent [lenry Smith Artie Fnnfer Ken Polin•oda ~osurrvt,r~o~ ~ s~ N W • !~ ~'y~ip! ~ Sao BOARD OF 1'O«'N TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOU'I'IfOLb Town hell 63095 Route 26 F.O. Rox 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0969 Telephone (831) 785-1892 Fnx (831) 785-1388 O(Iice Use Only _Coastal Erosion Permit Application -Wetland Permit Application •_/~ Major _ Minor Waiver/Amendment/Changes -'Received Applic tion~/]~[(j3_ _~Received Fee:S %t"ompieted Application Incomplete _SEQRA Classification: Type i_Type II_Unlisted _Coordinafion:(date sent) /CAC Referral Sent: 3 03 _~ISate of Inspection: ~ 63 Receipt of CAC Report:_ Lead Agency Determination: _Technical Review: ,~Pilblic Bearing Held: 3b Q3 Resolution: iJ,_ ~ 1 , ?003 Board of Trustees NanleofApplicant Neil McGoldrick Address 86 Second Avenue, Garden City, N. Y. 11530 Number:( ) 516-248-2429 5u(i'olk County Tax Map Number: 1000- 116-4-16.4 PropertyLocation:_ R.O.W. off of New Suffolk Avenue, Mattituck (provide LILCO Pole #, distance to cross streets, and location) AGENT: Douglas M. Soffe (If applicable) Address: 233 Seventh Street, Garden City, NY 11530 ~~ X, a~~\~~ Phone: ,516-294-1996 ~[ti~ 5) .-~}y~' ~0`6S ~ard of Trustees Applicati• GENERAL llA7'A Land Area (in square feet): * 1 . 5 acres ' Area Zoning: R - 4 0 Previous use ofproperty:_ SYdgle"family dwelling, brtended use of property: same Prior permits/approvals for site improvements: Agency Date N. Y. S. D. E. C. 1996 h 1999 Southold Town Trustees unknown No prior permits/approvals for site improvements. I Ias any permiUapproval ever been revoked or suspended by a governmental agency? No Yes If yes, provide explanation: Project llescription (use attachments if necessary): Please see attached r r Applicant proposes to reconstruct in kind in place existing ( 7~~" timber groin located at the western end of the applicant's property and as depicted on the llydrographic survey prepared by Sea Level Mapping last dated 2/_15/03. There is no filling involved with project. Hoard of Trustees Application WE'}'LANUlI'ItUS'i'EE LANDS APPLICATION DATA Purpose of the proposedoperations:__ Rernnsrrnrrlon of an existing _ timber groin Area of wetlands on lot: 0.15 a c r e square feet Percent coverage of lot: n / a Closest distance between nearest existing structure and upland edge of wetlands: n / a feet Closest distance between nearest proposed structure and upland edge of wetlands: n / a feet Does the project involve excavation or 611ing7 No x yes If yes, how much material will be excavated? 0 -cubic yards How much material will be filled? 0 cubic yards Depth of which material will be removed or deposited: 0 feet Proposed slope throughout the area of operations: 1 : 1 Manner in which material will he removed or deposited: _ n / a Statement of the effect, if any, on the wetlands and tidal waters of the town that may result by reason of such proposed operations (use attachments if appropriate): As proposed project shall have minimal impacts during the time of the reconstruction ± 2 da s .~ • • ' Law Offices Douglas M. Soffey 233 Seventh Street Garden City, New York 11530 Joseph E. Soffey Of Counsel Ted: (S16) 294-1996 Fax: (516) 294-1085 April 16, 2003 Board of Town Trustees Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Route 25 Southhold, NY 11971-0959 Re: Southold v. McGoldrick Gentlemen: Enclosed please fmd the affidavit together with the authorization with respect to Mr. Goldrick's pending application. Very truly yours, ~~ ~_ Douglas M. Soffey Enclosure DMS:mra APR 1 7 ~ t~, 0,1!19/09 WED 15:18 FAR 518 785 1988 Southold Ton~nACCOUnt 1n6 ~. Bo~ of Trustees Application ~~Ad County of-ssstfol7t State of New Xork /1/~~~ ~ ~ C ~~/C~ BEING •DULY SWORN llEPOSES AND i\FFIRMS THAT HE SHE IS THE APPLICANT FOR THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PEIiMITIS) AND THAT ALL STATEMENTS. CONTAINED HEREIN ARE TRllE TO THE BEST OF HZS/HER KNOWLEDGE AND $ELIEF, AND THAT ALL WORK WILL BE DONE IN THE MANNER SET FORTH IN 'PHIS APPLICATION AND AS MAY BL' APPROVED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF TRUSTEES. THE APPLICANTC AGREES TO HOLD THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD AND THE TOWN TRUSTEES 11ARl~II,ESS AND FREE FROM_ ANY AND ALL DAMAGES AND CLAIMS ARISING UNDEiIt OR BY VIRTUE OF SAID PERMITIS)., IF GRANTED- IN COMPLETING THIS APPLICATION, I HERESY AUTHORIZE THE TRUSTEES, TOEIN5PECT T.HE PREMISESSINrCONVJUNCTZON~IT~AEVIEW OFYTHISP~~ APPLICATION. ~ ,(f\/ Sigdature BEFORE ME THIS ~ ' 4`~ DAY OF /~>~R / L ~ ~ ~~ SWORN TQ_-_ FFEY NawYark Qualified in Nassau County / Ge( Commission F~cpiras March 18, ta_.. APR ~ ? 2003 7 of Town X005 ;, ~l _~ 00/19/09 WED 15:18 FAX 518 785 1088 Southold Town AccountlnB ~ 004 . ' ~ - Bos of Trustees Application . AUTHORIZATION (where the applicant i5 not the owner) I Neil McColdri~k __residing at 86 Second ~r~ ~ - (print owner of property) (mailing address) Garden City, NY 11530 do hereby authorize JMO Environmental (Agent) Consulting Services to apply for permit(s) from the Southold Board of Town Trustees on my behalf. ~s sig ature) V ~. ~~~~ D, B L Board Law Offices Douglas M. Soffey 233 Seventh Street Garden City, New York 11530 Joseph E. Soffey Of Counsel Tel.: (516) 294-1996 Fax: (516) 294-1085 Apri12, 2003 Board of Town Trustees Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 Route 25 Southhold, NY 11971-0959 Re: Southold v. McGoldrick Gentlemen: Enclosed herewith please find the Affidavit of Posting which is required to be filed in connection with the above referenced matter. Very,,truly yours, ~~ ~~~f Douglas M. Soffey Enclosure DMS:mra APO " 4 2003 _, ~ F t id P ki O(,~~ pS~F en res , Albert J. Krups t id oG ~o~ en James King, Vice-Pres y ~ Hemy Smith p Artie Foster Ken Poliwoda N ~ ~~, • ~'T' ~o! ~ Sao BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BOARD OF TRUSTEES: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD In the Matter of the Application of COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) STATE OF NEW YORK) I, ~,~LiL ~~~C ~~r~~7~.~C/~ , ~f4r 1~ ~ ~ t~~'I N.`~ being duly savor , depose Town Hall . 53095 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631)765-1892 Fax (631)765-1366 r C tI,TJ l~ ~ 1 say: That on the-3f ~ day o ~~ , 2l) property known as 7 ~~Q lU ~ w' by placing the Board of Trustees easily be seen, and that I have has remained in place for eight public hearing. Date of hearing ~r_LOC~.~o~t ~ .l~D Pm. Dated: Sworn to befo `~, .day of ~,1 ~~~~~~~ Notary public 03, I personally posted the official pos er where it can checked to be sure the poster days prior to the date of the noted thereon to be held ~rtQI~(1 13d~ dOQ3 ~ ~ ~~ (sign ture) this 200 3 C~ C~ ~ ~ '~i--~~ , New York at', ~~ 3 AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING racirlina at i~ ,ma Town of Trustees i) F ~l '' Y ~ . ,.~ ~ ~ ~ Ire` i ,I ,'~. k ` ,r~~~.:. °~.~'.~' .` ' ~ l ,i :'',~~~ . ~ ,5 ~ rJ~ 2' y , . ..i~ ' ~ ca M CO i ,~t'~y~, 1. ~~ i r i „~ ~~ fir.' ~~~. , ,~ ~rl~/- ; may.. r~A9 r~ , + ~~`~1. 1 ~~ 1 ,~ W ''~^". W i. .. s - ~~~ -'t 641 ~i ~ ~~ ~ 6~9~ .~ ~~~~. ., o _ -.~ r~ STATE OF NEW YORK ~y ~ ~ ~ ~I DEPARTMENT OF STATE D Lea D 41 STATE STREET ALBANY, NY 1 2 23 1-000 1 ~,' ' ,I f'~"" _ Apri 18, 0 3 ~~ GEORGE E. PATAKI .~)~.~.~,{ GOVERNOR S~WHQwer RV Il)F $TATE R'l~i.l- - -'.~~e~ Mr. Glenn E. Just J.M.O. Consulting P.O. Box 447 Quogue, N.Y.11959-0447 Re: F-2003-0264 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers/New York District Permit Application Neil McGoldrick -Reconstruct Groin Great Peconic Bay, Town of Southold, Suffolk County NYS DEC #1-4738-00265/00001 Request for Necessarv Information and Data Dear Mr. Just: The Department of State received your Federal Consistency Assessment Form and consistency certification and supporting information regarding the above matter on March 31, 2003. Pursuant to 15 CFR Part 930.58, the following data and information is necessary to enable the Department of State to adequately assess the coastal zone effects of this proposed activity: In our March 20, 2001 letter concerning F-2001-0182 (enclosed) we identified the minimal submission requirements. Your policy analysis stated conclusions instead of assessing the effects of the activity upon the erosion policies and did not state how the activity is consistent with each policy. Beaches and nearshore areas are natural protective features that help safeguard coastal lands and property from damage, as well as reduce the danger to human life, resulting from flooding and erosion. The following coastal policies must each be addressed: POLICY 11: BUILDINGS AND OTHER STRUCTURES WILL BE SITED IN THE COASTAL AREA SO AS TO MINIMIZE DAMAGE TO PROPERTY AND THE ENDANGERING OF HUMAN LIVES CAUSED BY FLOODING AND EROSION. POLICY 12: ACTIVITIES OR DEVELOPMENT IN THE COASTAL AREA WILL BE UNDERTAKEN SO AS TO MINIMIZE DAMAGE TO NATURAL RESOURCES AND PROPERTY FROM FLOODING AND EROSION BY PROTECTING NATURAL PROTECTIVE FEATURES INCLUDING BEACHES, DUNES, BARRIER ISLANDS AND BLUFFS. WWW.005. STATE.NY.US • E-MAIL-. INFO~DCS. STATE. NY.US POLICY 13: THE CONSTRUCTION OR RECONSTRUCTION OF EROSION PROTECTION STRUCTURES SHALL BE UNDERTAKEN ONLY IF THEY HAVE A REASONABLE PROBABILITY OF CONTROLLING EROSION FOR AT LEAST THIRTY YEARS AS DEMONSTRATED IN DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS AND/OR ASSURED MAINTENANCE OR REPLACEMENT PROGRAMS. POLICY 14: ACTIVITIES AND DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING THE CONSTRUCTION OR RECONSTRUCTION OF EROSION PROTECTION STRUCTURES, SHALL BE UNDERTAKEN SO THAT THERE WILL BE NO MEASURABLE INCREASE IN EROSION OR FLOODING AT THE SITE OF SUCH ACTIVITIES OR DEVELOPMENT, OR AT OTHER LOCATIONS. POLICY 17: NON-STRUCTURAL MEASURES TO MINIMIZE DAMAGE TO NATURAL RESOURCES AND PROPERTY FROM FLOODING AND EROSION SHALL BE USED WHENEVER POSSIBLE. Policy #12 requires that ifactivities or development is undertaken in or in proximity to natural protective features one must ensure that all such adverse actions are minimized. Reconstruction of structures, inadequate site planning, or other similar actions which fail to recognize their fragile nature and high protective values, lead to the weakening or destruction of those landforms. Please submit information indicating whether the proposal is or would be reasonable and necessary considering reasonable alternatives to the proposed activity and the extent to which the activity requires a shoreline location. We have enclosed an aerial photograph with the apparent location of the proposed work circled in red. There does not appear to be any structures located on the upland above the groin. Please describe the need for the proposed structure to be reconstmcted. If there is a need, please analyse the appropriateness of the present location and whether a shorter groin would suffice. Please provide a copy of the property survey and a deed copy that supports the survey and indicating the extent of ownership. Please provide the information requested above as soon as possible. If this necessary information and data is not provided within thirty days of the date of this letter, the Department of State may close the file regarding this proposed activity. If the Department closes the file and does not concur with the consistency certification provided for this proposed activity, the consistency provisions of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act prohibit federal agency authorization of the activity. When communicating with us regarding this matter, please refer to our file #F-2003-0264. Please call me at (518 ~~ 474516 if you have any questions. Since~~rel~~yJl, ~ ~ /~ ~'.c~C~Gr~~-cam ~--~`~~"u"~.a:v~ William Feldhusen Coastal Resources Specialist ~ Consistency Review Unit Enclosures c: DEC/Region 1 -John Pavacic COE/NY District -Marc Helman Town of Southold -Albert Krupski / } 4- DEPARTMENT OF STATE George & I'ataki Governor Alexander F Treadwell Secretary of Stare Mr. Glenn E. Just J.M.O Environmental Consulting O.O. Box 447 Quogue, New York 1 1 95 9-0447 U'~" Divisiaz of Coastal Resources 41 State Street Albany, NY 12231-0001 March 20, 2001 Re: F-2001-0182 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers/New York District Permit Application; Emanuel Bonomo -fixed dock, ramp and float Meetinghouse Creek Town of Riverhead, Suffolk County Dear Mr. Just: On March 12, 2001 we received a Federal Consistency Assessment Form (FCAF) that you prepared and a copy of the join[ U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation permit application that you prepared regarding the above-referenced proposal. You did no[ provide us with the summary narrative assessment required by Section D of the FCAF. That information should have included information indicating whether the length of the proposed structure and the depth of water it is proposed to reach at its seaward end is appropriate, in the area where it is proposed. We have asked you to provide the narrative assessments required with an FCAP many times, over a period of several years. Por activities proposed to be undertaken in the coastal area, and outside of the coastal area if [he activity would affect any coastal resource or use of the coastal area, federal regulations in 15 CFR Part 930, Subpart D, require such assessments to be submitted with applications for federal authorizations. Those regulations require consistency certifications and assessments to be submitted to the involved federal agency and the Department of State at the same time. Such assessments are required to: 1) support a certification, by an applicant for federal agency authorization, that what [he applicant is proposing has been assessed for its effects on, and is consistent with, the relevant enforceable policies oCNew York's Coastal Management Program, and; 2) demonstrate how the proposed activity affects and how the activity is consistent with the relevant policy, and; 3) provide a basis for the State's concurrence with or objection to that certification. Without such an assessment, staff in this Division spend considerable time and effort preparing materials to support an applicant's consistency certification, in order Cor this Department to concur with consistency certifications that you provide. We can no longer afford to prepare and will not prepare assessments that you are required to provide pursuant to federal regulations, and we will not process Cedcral permit applications and consistency certifications Crom you without the required assessments and information to support them. Our Consistency Review Unit has been instructed to make certain that you provide the appropriate assessments. If that material is not provided in future submissions, we will return the materials to you without reviewing them and concurring with your consistency certifications pursuant to IS CPR Part 930. ICneccssary and appropriate, we will assist you in the preparation oCassessments. Our file regarding the above-referenced matter will be held open for thirty days from the date of This letter. ICwc Voi., illAI I71 LI11111 i.~~rSll 173.'J61 -mod ttV~Inl~idm Ja<.u~u. ~~ ~~ ~~ <I~~..r~m .n u./.-.i V..d ~c,. ,, himl Glenn E. Just J:M.O. Environmental Consulting March 20, 2001 Page 2. do not receive the analysis required by Section D of the FCAF that your prepared for this proposal, within thirty days from the date of this letter, we will close our file regarding this matter. If we close the file and do not concur with your consistency certification for this or future proposals, the consistency provisions of the federal Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) and implementing regulations in 15 CFR Part 930 prohibit the Corps from authorizing the proposal(s). To discuss this matter and avoid problems with this and future submissions to this Department and other agencies, you are encouraged to contact me as soon as possible at (518) 473-2470 (e-mail sresler@dos.styate.ny.us). Sincerely, ven C. ester Supervisor of Consistency Review and Analysis New York Coastal Management Program SCR/bms Consistency Review Unit COE/NY District -James W. Haggerty NYSDEC/Region 1 -John Pavacic NYSDEC/Region 1 -Charles T. Hamilton Hydrographic Survey Prepared for: Niel McGoldrick '•,ID Near SGT* 1000-I16-4-16.4 „~~,, Mattituck, New. York Lat: 40 - SG - IG I? „~ `; .; Long: l2 - 30 - OI Tide Ran e: 2.5' +/- .,~ ~~ ~'• o Datvm: M~L NGVD'2G „'.'_~,. -13';~~ ' oq o3 Tg ~~'~ -15,,~ . P~/~, ~~\ ' ~ ID ~~ 10 VO ,Oq ~.-IS ,,~. I~r; f O~ V -~k Oq \ Land of H. 8 H. Olsen O.O 43 -03 0 .. ,, q oe - - -~~-..__-._-_~ -_ ,-- __-_- -. _.-... ______.-_- - -1p -13 - - - - ~o SGT# 1000-I16-4-16.4 Land of McGoldrick N W~E s Ib 1 ' GRAPHIC SCALE I"= 60' p ~~~od~ MAR 3 1 2003 D a SouthoM Town Board of Trustees i O Ib Ol -30 Ib Is. P oD . _ ~ ~' - - ~~ , OD O 'OD _I9 <j -1D --ritT a.IS ` `\ -13 yyy\ -Ob ~ -Ob K.` -I t QY` _.3 \ .D 4 \ -0D . _ new -I.l '\ \ \ '09 -10 I I I _I I qq I~ -'--- - I.b - -- 14 IS-_----" --- - - - -- - - - new i .-t O 40 -Iq -31 ,.- -3D Ib// ___ o - - - - ~ ~ -~3 za e-]b _~a r -- -Iq -OS -03 -19 -3D 4< - - - - bo ID -1D 03 4D 06 -13 00 b9 -OD l 13 -05 -,q -Oq -t~- - ~~---OA---. 'l3 _, I -3D -33 a~' r~ _~b ~ -96 MAPPING b EAST MAIN STREET RIVERNEM. NY 11901 PHONE 516-T7T-315'1 Sheet I Of I OD ]I~~ ~~ JIb -0] -06 -03 -06 - /, _~D f.,~ OD ``ff// -OD ~Y -05 9q t.~, ' y -13 r~` ~ "' ~ 0 -2D .].I -I4 -] I -] 9 -3 ~3 -95 -9 a -91 THIS PLOT WAS DEVELOPED FROM SURVEYS OP 02-IS-03 ROBERT +'. FOX, NY5 Lice 50191 ]48/]003 O.Ob.53''^r \\W uom~arb\slm\MCGplO-kgro 4b _~, a o r,; 'v o ~i ~ .3 ~ , ° r, aN ~~ ~v b a~ r.b~ ~ ~ n ... 'a ~ ~~ CJ ~ 0.y lam' ... ~ ~+ N .~ a. a y v] .~ ~ -o ~Q o ~ a ~ ~• ~' ~ o ~ ¢,~c ~ ~ .~ a~°'o 0 3 ~ ~ c ~ v .M a'c~-~~ ~o ~' w ~ ~ °~ ~ o ~ .~ a, . ~ x ~, ~~ ~ p ~c~~od~ ~1AR 3 1 2003 D 3XIOX10 CC c,N ~~ Southold Tawn Board of Trustees f ` 6X6 WALE A1-IV'lx2~_ ~ ~ ~~ n PILE ~OT~M__..__..___....-.-.___.~. :4' 2 nc z Applicant: Neil McGoldrick Purpose: Groin reconstruction Datum: Apparent Low Water Location: Private road off of 1Vleadow Beach Lane Quogue, New York __ __ _ _ _. S TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Rob, could you just amend this to include the planting? ROB: Yes. TRUSTEE SMITH: I'll make a motion we close the hearing. TRUSTEE KING: Second. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'll make a motion we approve the application that we approve the new plans as submitted dated and received 3/25. TRUSTEE SMITH: Second. ALL AYES 5. En-consultants Inc., on behalf of ~~y~y requests a to hydraulica y redge~nirregular area 55+/-' max. through the inlet of Hall's Creek to a max. depth of 5' at MLW, at a 1.3 slope. Approx. 2,000 c.y. of 100 sand spoil to be pumped 1) up drift of existing 80' groin on subject property, and 2) down drift of groin at end of Dean Drive to east. Extend existing 70' groin on west side of inlet by 80' to minimize future shoaling of creek mouth and inlet. Located: Private Road off New Suffolk Ave., Mattituck. SCTM #116-4-16.4 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak in favor of the application? ROB: i don't have anything new to add to the record from the last meeting. The Board had asked for some information and asked for soundings, which I submitted this afternoon. That's just a rough aerial sketch of the approx. locations and then for the groin fields I have attached 3 more aerial photos the Board can hold onto which shows the entire groin field and that's fresh. Other than the same issues that were discussed on record of the last meetings I have nothing new to add to that. Tom Samuels may have something on the situation of the water samples on the east end. We got together with GNS to set up the stations. I'll let Tom take over at this point. TOM SAMUELS: I went and met the mayor of Dean Drive on Sunday, a Mr. Taylor, who some of you may know. We went over the possibility of filling the groin field in front of Dean Drive. I took photos of the groins. I also came up with, actually inadvertently, in the coastal geodesic survey. The last time the Federal Government was in Peconic mapping and doing soundings, was in 1979 and low and behold, what do i see but a channel dredged into Hall's Creek crossing the Deep Hole Creek. Undoubtedly at that time it was done by the County. Because the County had those two big dredges. You can see where they actually cross (indicating on map to Trustees). They dredge well out into the Bay in those days, 12' deep X 100' wide. They no longer dredge any deeper than 6' because of DEC's jurisdiction stops at 6'. It's outside their jurisdiction. So if they were to give you a permit to dip to 12' today you wouldn't get a DEC permit. The problem is you've got to get through the first 6' to get to the 12'. So you have another incident where you need Solomon or Pandora's Box or something else to get beyond the regulatory mechanism. The only other comment I'd like make is, is when you look at this whole situation, if your gonna build groins you can't build isolated ,_... ~,~__-: ~ .__ ~ ! groins. You have to build groin fields. Because. if you don't build a groin field then you have effects on neighboring property. Theoretically groin fields are the way to go. I might point out that some of the more successful ones on the beach at Paradise Point is probably the best one that I can think of. Their all low profile groins. The intention of this one is it's gonna be a low profile groin. So that we'll have wave wash over it and the intent is not to build the beach on Mc Goldrick's side but merely to maintain the channel for some length of time. You can't give any guarantees as to what length of time that channel will stay open. But, again, we looked at it with the idea that the groin protects two and half times its length. That's the Corps of Engineers doctrine. In other words 100' groin protects 250' of property. That's the way they decide how long the groin should be on the Atlantic Ocean or where ever they build. A groin 80' in length will protect back to the middle groin on the Mc Goldrick property which is presently buried. It was buried in the last dredging and the reason for that is at that time, and you know, A1, you've been around a long time now, this application originally was before the Board when Jay Bredemeyer was here, and so on and so forth. In any event, the 80' will have a shadow, get back to the middle groin on Mc Goldrick property, hopefully we won't have to do this .again and again and again. The middle groin on the Mc Goldrick's property was not repaired because the DEC insisted that the dredge spoil go to the up pit side. Which is the wrong side. That's not unique. Wickham is another one where they put it on the wrong side for 40 years. In any event, i think we're finally getting to the position where everybody is so sick of it the rationality of what we're tying to do seems to be pretty consistent with the Coastal Management Plan that was proposed by the Town and the State, and so on and so forth. I think its a good project. I spoke to my grandchildren about it because they went last summer to the Cedar Point program at Cedar Point about the value of wetlands. it's amazing how much they have learned up there. And here we have a Town Creek, although there is some question of part of ownership, and I really don't want to get into that, because it doesn't make any difference to God, of a creek which is putrefying, as high bacterial and fecal and cola counts, the soundings have started again. We can't around in there because we can't get a boat in there. But we're not taking soundings with bottles off the bridge and around the edges, which is not the best place to take them because the water is too shallow. We're using wadders and stuff to get out a little bit. But you will readings before dredging is done and readings after it's done. If we can get this creek flushed twice a day, the bagmen should be really happy and should be opened up again. I'm sure the DEC will open it up again.- And I have hopes in the future that the County and the State will do water quality testing in the creek. They can't do it now because they can't get a boat in there to do .it. I spoke to Jay Bredemeyer some time ago and he thinks that they can be included in the program because they are doing water quality testing all the time for the State. They claim they ;~ ~~ v ~. ,~ don't have enough money to do it themselves. In any event I think it's a very good project and I think it's environmentally sound and it's in the best interest of the Town and the environment. The immediate property owners on either side of it (changed tape). TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Can you tell us which is the down drift there. There doesn't seem to be any down drift. TOM: Well look at the other jetties, look at the pictures I gave you tonight. What side is it building on? That's shoal. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: But why is that there? TOM: Because the channel's been closed. There's no interchange. As Ken pointed out at the last meeting, that the outer channel remain viable. Where we started. I would have liked to start it further out into the Bay into that. When i went down and did the soundings at your request, the outer channel is still viable. That's all we're .trying to recreate. It's not a major dredging project. But it's definitely down drift west to east. I could have asked Mr. Taylor to come tonight, because he complained to me that various people from the DEC would come around and claim the literal drift was in the other direction. But if you look at the groins, it's as obvious as the nose on your face. I think. I'm not disparaging anybody that disagrees, but that's the case. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI:. I think, from what you submitted, it looks like the shadow would be on Mr. Mc Goldrick's property. It would create via a new groin. TOM: It will build out to the end of that groin in a scallop fashion back to the center groin. Some of it will bypass in time. This is not a one time thing. it's gonna have to done again, just like all the creeks. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Extended again, or dredged again? TOM: No, dredged. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think our big concern here is it's effect on neighboring properties, not only on Mr. Mc Goldrick's but to the east and west. Would it be unreasonable to grant a permit with a condition that if it causes severe erosion on the neighbors property then it has to be removed. TOM: You can always do that. That seems to be the way things are going in Southampton, where the same........the big problem is with stipulations on removal, you can make all the stipulations you want, and then when the time. comes it is so difficult to prove and then the homeowners get litiginous and there you go again. The problem is as I see it is that this Board or any other Board has to face making a decision. The decision here is not......the beach front properties. The decision here is that tidal wetlands for Halls's Creek worth saving. That's the decision. I say it is. I say take a chance that it is gonna have to be dredged again. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think that's why......and I don't if we're convinced that that's much more of a cure than what's there already. It's not just gonna fill it again in a month and then your gonna be back again. TOM: It won't fill in a month. And it won't fill in in a year. And it won't fill in in two years. But I have to have ~~ _,~', r ' something to work with. Last time, I didn't have anything to work with. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: That would be my concern is that it's damaging to neighbors properties. TOM: Which neighboring property? Down drift, or up drift? TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Any neighboring property. TOM: Well if it's down drift it's gonna help them. Because we're in a pre-filled groins that exist. For the first twenty years that I have been in this business, when you apply for a jetty like in Paradise Point, that groin field, that low profile groin field, which has actually saved their beach with no down drift affects at Cedar Point, the Corps of Engineers always require that the jetty be pre-filled. By that I mean you build a jetty you fill it......your not stealing sand from somebody else. The Dept. of State comes along and says, 'Oh no, your killing bentic organisms because your putting sand in the for-shore. So they stopped that. Despite the fact that the Corps of Engineers have studied and studied in Vicksburg, recovering of bentic organisms in this situation. Ken probably knows what the answers are. A year and a half total recovery. Nature abhors a vacuum. If your gonna put a beach underwater, your gonna have bentic organisms growing on them. We're not covering eel grass. So give it a shot and save one of Southold's wetlands. I personally think the wetlands along New Suffolk Ave are the prettiest in the Town with the exception of possibly some in Orient which you can't see because the phragmites is as high as an elephants eye. ROB: What we're trying to accomplish here is just to minimize or mitigate the amount and the pace at which the sand is gonna come down as it travels from west to east into that creek. Obviously we have to dredge it to clear it out. What we're trying to do with the groin is to minimize the frequency of times that that has to be dredged. We're not suggesting that that very healthy system is suddenly gonna loose sand and the creek will never have to be dredged again. But what the groin will do, it will trap more of that sand. That's the very reason why this Board and most of the other agencies always denied groins because they say it will keep sand from getting down drift. In this case that's exactly what we want to do. In every case that's exactly what the applicant wants to do. In most cases there is not enough sand down drift so it ends up scouring those beaches down drift. So the only time you can really establish that you can extend a new groin or build a new groin without damaging the down drift beach is to establish that there is enough sand in the system that it will avoid that. I think that you now have close to two dozen aerial photographs that I just handed Mr. Foster, there's a shoal that extends almost 200 feet out to sea down drift. There's a ton of sand, literally in that system. There is no way....you would have to work very hard to convince someone to look at those photos and say that that's a starved down drift beach or that that beach can become starved by extending this one groin. That's all we're trying to do. We're trying to minimize the number of times it has to be dredged as long as it doesn't do any damage. I think that without saying anything here, those aerial photographs substantiate the fact that there's enough sand in that system that there will be no damage to the down drift beach. Obviously groins don't and can't damage beaches because those are the beach that replenish it. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: How and wide is this 80'. How did you come to the 80' figure? ROB: I came to the 80' because I looked......it was a subjected decision based on examining all those photographs and looking at that system and just the experience of looking at other groin systems. If you extend the groin too short it's not gonna make a substantial enough difference and it's not gonna mitigate the situation enough. If you make it too long, then it's gonna reach the point where if it was extending out say 200' instead of 125' then you get to the point where your gonna be increasing that up drift shoal way too far out and your gonna be changing the whole system substantially. I came up with somewhere in a range between 70 and 90' that would be able to function accordingly. And that's where the 80' came in. If the Board feels that 5' or 10' shorter or longer would be better we would be willing to consider it. It's an attempt without harm. TRUSTEE FOSTER: I want ask Tom what do you think about the 80' in your experience, in 30 seconds or less. TOM: Yes, this is not rocket science. It's not terribly difficult. You have to make some educated calculated guess. And that's what everybody does. Your dealing with silly putty. Your dealing with the shifting sand bottom. It changes every day. The soundings I took two weeks ago are different now. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Well this is your field Tom. You should know if any body does, that's why I asked you. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: My suggestion would be to get a survey of beach elevations before the project. Your not talking about pre-filling are you? ROB: No. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Get a beach elevation before and after. At that groin. Also at the one to the east. Just east of Suter's house. And give it two years or 5 years and see how the beach elevation has changed and if it dramatically changed I'd ask you to remove that 80'. TOM: On the deliverance of those elevations, as you know summer is approaching and piping plover season is approaching. We'll give you those elevations. I'm interested myself. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Well actually we should have it on both groins of Mr. Mc Goldrick's and then the one to the east. We really need them. TRUSTEE POLIWODA: Since the range is 70 to 90' why don't we go to 70'? TRUSTEE FOSTER: Well they did their homework, and it won't make that mush difference. TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I think if scours Mr. Mc Goldrick's property that's gotta be his call. TRUSTEE SMITH: i'll make a motion to close the hearing. TRUSTEE KING: Second. ALL AYES ~~; ;` . ,; ~' TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: I'll make a motion to approve the application of Neil Mc Goldrick to dredge in an irregular area 55' in width in the inlet of Hall's Creek to a max. depth of 5' MLW at a 1.5 slope, approx. 2,000 c.y. of 1008 sand spoil to be pumped up drift of existing 80' groin on subject property, and down drift of groin at end of Dean Drive to the east, extend existing 70' groin on west side of inlet by 80', and survey elevations to be taken on two existing groins on Mr. Mc Goldrick's property and one existing groin to east that extends out into the Bay before the project is started. TRUSTEE KING: Second. ALL AYES J.MO. Consulting on behalf of requests a to reconstruct with ", 340+/-' of timber bu c ea a ackfill with 75+/- c.y. of clean sand from upland source. Located: Bay Ave., Mattituck. SCTM #122-3-15.1 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak in favor of the application? TRUSTEE KING: Are they gonna straighten that out where it is really bellied out? GLENN JUST: Yes. TRUSTEE SMITH: I'll move to close the hearing. TRUSTEE FOSTER: Second. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KING: I.'ll make a motion we approve the application. TRUSTEE SMITH: Second. ALL AYES 7. .M.O. Consulting on behalf of~~ requests a I~ to construct a sing e m y dwelling, sanitary system, water line, driveway, patio and garage. Located: ROW of Peninsula Road, Fishers Island. SCTM #10-3-12 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: Is there anyone here who would like to speak in favor of the application? GLEN: I'd just like to point out a few items that aren't clear on the plan. There will be a 35' natural buffer area between the tidal wetlands line in which this particular case is MHW mark. The second is that they coaxed out the distance for the sanitary system. It's well in excess of the required 100' by the Health Dept. TRUSTEE SMITH: I'll make a motion we close the hearing. TRUSTEE KING: Second. ALL AYES TRUSTEE KING: I'll make a motion to approve the application. TRUSTEE SMITH: Second. ALL AYES 8. J.M.O. Consulting on behalf of ~ requests a ~,~ to construct a 4' X 100' fixed docc to be 3 1/2' above mars , a 4' X 20' ramp and an 8' X 20' float, cut a 4' X 50' path and construct a 4' X 15' set of stairs to access dock. Located: Clay Point Road, Fishers Island. SCTM #3-1-6 TRUSTEE KRUPSKI: This application will be postponed until the April meeting. 9. Proper-T Services on behalf of ~ requests a to construct a deck attached to house and a 12' X ~c~ - vv~ - 9~ 4~ United States EPA 842-8-93-004 Environmental Protection Agency December, 1993 Office of Water (4504F) ~=~EPA Volunteer Estuary o ~ , Monitoring: ~ ~y~ A Methods Manual ti( - Printed on <. •~ - ~~~~ ~ ~ - Recycled PePer Chapter 2 These plants benefit estuarine species directly as food and habitat and indirectly by helping to main- tain the viability of the ecosystem. Their photosynthesis adds DO to the water and [heir leaves and roots help buffer the shoreline against erosion. The plants also assimilate nitrogen and phosphorus, reducing the dele- terious impact of excess nutrients. Unfortunately, over the past several decades, submerged aquatic vegetation has fared poorly in many of our nation's estuaries. Areas once covered by thick beds of these plants may have little or no vegeta- tion remaining. No[ all healthy estuarine and near coastal areas have [he physical and chemical properties necessary to support SAV. In areas [ha[ can, however, these plants often serve as a barometer of estuarine ecosystem health. By monitoring the status of these plant populations over time, we can better determine the estuary's vitality. Bacteria Fecal coliform bacteria live solely in the intestines ofwarm-blooded animals, including humans. Al- though [he bacteria are not harmful to man, the presence of these organisms in water may indicate possible sewage contamination and [he presence of pathogens. These pathogenic bacteria pose a significant threat to human health. Contaminated water can cause disease either through direct contact, which threatens recreational water users, or by ingestion of contami- nated shellfish. The pathogens may cause diseases such as dysentery and typhoid fever. Areas polluted by fecal coliform or other harmful bacteria are off limits to shellfish harvesting. Livestock, inadequate wastewater treatment plants, leaky septic systems, sanitary landfills, and stormwater runoff are common sources of fecal coliform and other bacteria. Although slates routinely monitor the waters and shellfish in their estuaries and along their coasts for high levels of specific bacteria, they cannot monitor every cove, beach, and inlet. Volunteer monitoring data for bacteria can significantly improve [he state's assessment of waters which are safe for water sports and recreational and commer- cial shell Fish harvesting. 18 References Committee on a Systems Assessment of Marine Environmental Monitoring, 1990, Managing Troubled Waters: The Role of Marine Environmental Monitoring, National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 125 pp. Kaill, W.M. and J.K. Frey, 1973, Environments in Profile: An Aquatic Perspective, Canfield Press, San Francisco, 206 pp. Pritchard, D.W., 1967, "What is an Estuary: A Physical Viewpoint," in: Estuaries, G.H. Lauff, ed., American Association for the Advancement of Science, Publication No. 83, Washington, D.C., 757 pp. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992, Monitoring Guidance for the National Estuary Program, EPA 503/8-91-002, Washington, DC. Za7 N 19 Chapter 2 these phy[oplankmn die, sink, and are decomposed by oxygen- consuming bacteria, DO levels near ~e bottom plummet. Under the orst conditions, the bottom waters fan estuary turn anoxic (without succeeding chap[ersin much greater detail. Naturally, more descriptive variables, such as temperature, salinity, and site observations, also have a role in characterizing the estuary. Discussions of these variables follow in Chapter 3, Setting the Stage. 0 0 Dissolved oxygen The level of dissolved oxygen (DO) in an estuary is one of the most important factors controlling the presence or absence of estuarine species. Dissolved oxygen is crucial for most animals and plants except for a small minority which can survive under anaerobic (no oxygen) conditions. Both animals and plants require oxygen for respiration-a process critical for basic metabolic processes. During daylight hours, plants add oxygen to the water by photosynthe- sis. At night, when photosynthesis ceases, plant respiration continues to consume oxygen and produce carbon dioxide. Animals respire around [he clock, taking up oxygen 16 continuously. This day-to-night shift in total oxygen consumption means that while surface waters often become supersaturated in DO during the day, DO can drop precipitously a[ night. Dissolved oxygen levels in an estuary also fluctuate widely due to seasonal and climatic variations as well as human influence. As water temperatures rise in spring and summer, [he capacity of the water to hold DO (also known as its satura- tion level), declines. In short, warm water cannot hold as much oxygen as cold water. The salinity of the water also affects DO saturation; as salinity rises, DO saturation levels drop. Low DO diminishes [he capability of water to support life since almost all aquatic species are dependent on oxygen for survival. When DO declines below threshold levels which vary depending upon the species, mobile animals must move [o waters with higher DO; immobile speces often perish. c ^ u ; .... Nutrients: Nitr ett~nd~ Phosphorus ~ Nitrogen and phos ~u~ are o of the many nutrients I for [he survival of aquatic ; _ 13i = "' gen's primary role iZ~s protein synthesis; Ian this substance in photosynthesis. Phosphorus is critical for metabolic processes which involve the transfer of energy. In estuaries where human impact is minimal, either nitrogen or phospho- rus is usually in limited supply. Human activities, however, often drastically change the chemistry of estuarine waters. An overabundance of nutrients, particularly nitrogen and phosphorus, can trigger uncon- trolled growth of phytoplankton (minute floating plants) or algae- often referred to as blooms. Nutrient levels in an estuary are closely related to the level of DO in its water. Excess nutrients cause a proliferation of phytoplankton which may crcatc a daily increase of DO in the surface waters. When 17 d Aquatic n (SA V) aquatic plants are portant elements of estuazine stems, providing shelter and abitat for many aquatic species and food source for many others. Fish nd shellfish often use beds of aquatic plants as nursery grounds where their young find protection and ample nourishment. CITIZEN MONITORING DATA SHEET Date of Sampling: Volunteer Name: Time of Day: a.m. or p.m. Site Name: SITE CONDITIONS (Check one item under each category except under "Other," in which you should check all that apply.) Wind: Calm _ Slight Breeze _ Moderate Breeze _ Windy Weather: Clear _ Partly Cloudy _ Overcast _ Rainy _ Drizzle _ Fog _ Snow Wind Direction: N NE E SE S SW W NW Air Temperature: _ °C Rainfall: Weekly Accumulation (in inches) _._ Tidal Stage: Flooding _ High Slack _ Ebbing _ Low Slack _ Water Surface: Calm _ Ripples _ Chop _ Swells _ Water Color: Med. Brown Dk. Brown _ Red-Brown Green-Brown Green Yellow-Brawn Other Smell: Sewage _ Oily _ Fishy _ Rotten Eggs _ None _ Other Other: Sea Nettles _ Dead Fish _ Dead Crabs _ Algal Bloom _ Oil Slick _ Ice _ Debris _ Erosion _ Foam_ Bubbles _ Other WATER QUALITY MEASUREMENTS Secchi Disk: meters Hydrometer (uncorrected): _ °C Water Temp. in Hydrom. Jar: _ °C Salinity: 96° Dissolved Oxygen: Test 1 _ppm Test 2 Time spent doing above sampling: General Comments: Water Depth: _._ meters Water Temp. in Bucket: _ °C Hydrometer (corrected): _°C pH: ppm Average: _ ppm Signature: Ib IS U U L~ D unfl ~ 2 2ooa (Source: unknown) May 21 03 01:31p Soffe~ ~Soffey 516-294-1085 p.2 .. Joseph E. Soffey Of Counsel Tel.: (S16) 294-1996 Fax: (Sl6) 294-1085 May 21, 2003 VIA FACSIMILE 631-765-1366 Town of Southold Board of Trustees PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Attn: Charlotte Cunningham RE: McGoldrick aaAlication for groin reconstruction Dear Ms. Cunningham; Please be advised that I am hereby requesting that Mr. McGoldrick's matter, which is returnable this evening, be adjourned until June 18, 2003, at which time the Board of Trustees will have their next meeting. I am presently endeavoring to obtain the information needed by The Board at the last meeting and simply need some additional weeks in order to provide the Trustees with same. The company that we are using for the survey is Sea Level Mapping of Southold. If you have any questions, please call me upon receipt hereof. Very ly your , e ,~ Do glas . Soffey '~ LaW Of~rceS Douglas M. Soffey 233 Seventh Street Garden City, New York 11530 May 21 03 01:31p Soffey d Soffey 516-294-1085 p.l • < ~"~°'~ LAW OFFICES DOUGLAS M. SOFFEY 233 Seventh Street Garden City, New York 11530 TeL No.: 516-294-1996 Fax No.: SI fi-294-1085 FACSIMILE CORRESPONDENCE DATE: TO• FAX: FROM: May 21, 2003 Charlotte Cunningham 631-765-1366 Douglas M. Soffey PAGES: 2 (includin¢ cover sheet) RE: Town of Southold v. Neil McGoldrick ..._.~ - .._ ., Telephone (631) 765-1892 o~g~FPOC,~~~ z O • ~ ~1,ik'~'a~~. Town Hrll. 53095 dtaia Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold. New. Yak 11971 SOUTHOLD TOWN CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL At the meeting of the Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council held Wednesday, April 16, 2003, the following recommendation was made: Moved by Don Wilder, seconded by Tom Schlichter, it was RESOLVED to recommend to the Southold Town Board of Trustees DISAPPROVAL of the Wetland Permit application of NEIL MCGOLDRICK to reconstruct inkind/inplace existing (70') timber groin located at the western end of the applicant's property. There is no filling involved with project. Located: R.O.W. off of New Suffolk Ave., Mattituck. SCTM#116-4-16.4 The CAC recommends Disapproval of the application because the reconstruction is unnecessary and may cause the inlet to close-up. Vote of Council: Ayes: All Motion Carried I Y McGaldri~k - Mattituck 1130 HRS l7MAR'03 J. r. ~ ~ ~ .: - - - - ~.f- ~ y~ - _ V ~_ _ s ~ .- ~ ~ _~ _ ' !~`~~ r .J~r ~~ ~~ _ ~- mss. ~ ~ ~ _ \ ~- ~ _ ._ .~~ ~/ .N • " __ -'. -1 I ~ ~' ~ - , . Quogue, New York SHEET r d MaH ~ i ~~~3 / Southold Town Board of Trustees •~ • .. .~ -j Si .... j 3 McGoldrick - Mattituck 1130 HRS 17MAR'03 ~-_- 1 ~~~ ~r ~ ~ ++K. r y :.' + ~ ~'~. - - - - ~. . ~ ~; ^~. ~ ` ` ' ' • r ~ ~ . ~~` .rte .~, + ~ ` ~ `. w - ~ ~s4 r : .S ronmenfa! Consulting Quogue, New York Hyd rog ra ph ic'Su rvey Prepared for: Niel McGoldrick Near SGT 1000-II6-4-16.4 Mattituck, New York Lat: 40 - 5q - Iq Long: 72 - 30 - OI Tide Ran e: 25' +/- Datum: M~L NGVD'2q ,its, d.l . , `•10 ~.• ~~ ilk ' O] ,,`' I',:'r, .13'` m .a;'~ ; ,~ r~ `,Ij'~•, \ SGTtt 1000-IIb-4-20.1 ~~ o - -' ~^ ~' '~ \ Land of H. d H. Olsen -19 •• 19 ~~ ID ~VV O4 ~-15 ~•,• / •. I.I IdAA 3 1 X03 U ' .,~, p, ,~- .5 `, ,Z`,D9 MAPPING 10 OD '. OD LI,~, bII _.-' qq - _____., OD 09 _-.-.-'" -IS ~ "TIC O -' 3 -~~ - - G° ~ '-f ~ V' qb -Ol '. - Ob -03 -Ob .-_ _-_Lb - -OB /• -]D _ - \\ 45 _ -/~rJY - IS IS--- - ---- s,Lw -----]D ~---------L9 ~~ ' f.U .. -].I ~ ~' ~, -JD (~16~ -35 -~ q ^ ~ -1b y -]9 -]5 -1 q ^ 05 -Ib ~r. -OB ` `\ -0B \ -I] \ -13 \ a1 ,_. '\ \ \ O4 -ID ' / O / / .- 4b -09 _Il 09 '. -]D IL 16 ~ 1 li 0~ -19 Ib bl -20 Ib 15, ~' - - - ____-„ - ---- bD NtY - - ~~ .. -3D OD Q b8 -19 _ __ 5 -le -ti~~ - _15 -06 4-, -O9 --- -~-~~ - ' ' -.-- -0.9 ..' -13 -] I 2D N W~E S 43 09 -09 IO 03 ' Ob -OD -13 on -p9 13- q -Oa LstY ', -p,~:w -133 Q ~, `~ _I, V \ G -] I -'° ~ 0 -]O a~' -fib G ~ ~ -1.9 -] a -21 <3 -jb -95 -].I GRAPHIC SCALE I"= 60' -]B -31 -0< -3 ~ 6 EA$T MAIN STREET RIVERHEAD, Nr u9ol THIS PLOT WA5 DEVELOPED vHONE 516-1]T-3T$T FROM SURVEYS OF 02-IS-03 Sheet I Of I ROBERT H. FOX, NYS Licr SOi~ Z/IB/]0p3 O.Oi:53P1! \\Hp clwnmerbKlm\MCGObr9.[To M I ~ Ii ! w I I • t~ /// I. •YY I ;;:'~ I, ew IJV In s •Yr "' e ttr I C ~ ,:.. _ h ~ 3 .: .` . • I _ ~ .a\u Y ~V F ~ +~ Ynsr. ~ ' t ~ . ~ • .. _ ... • ~ 1 ~•~ ,~ •w ... .4 •1 -- ~I~1 .~ ~ \:ir v 1 ~ ~1• 'N t - ~ _ ~ .rl ' :: ..~ T y . r. _ 4 `~ ' ~ ~ y tsD -- .a. 3~ J .wt ' , ~' r •P. J {{ ~ ~~ t I • ~~ • (~ ~ 7A :~ ICp~ ~~~~~ ~~ agt ~ + ~~~ l M as r.~ `_..\~-s.~ __~ N..N..~...~ ~... _ ..~~ _ -_- ~._ L a WW ~ ~ f W Mt J e.,.. / • IY1 s' Y..NI ~,,.±s -~ ' I i '_ V nsa t ~ ,-t i 7 V+O /~ ~ \ / • I ~ ..~ ~f'1 ,/ .tr.l ~ 1 .. '+ ` I ~.~ ~ \wl I "' \ ..,.. 1 a !~ I i i I t - _ ~l ~ :1<3 ~ ~ 1 ~ J tM.l 1 t• i "'•'" V1 a „tw L ~ ' _ ~i •MN . \nt•M _ ti Yn 11 .~ p ~`/~ _. L G ~ 0 4~ •~",.., ~ • W ~ ••M•1 ~ i \ ~ ~ N1 •J P~ It W Y i ..~NI ,,; n ~. U ~J N YI.1 «: srla 0 Iwa Y.\:r• Ir• » s~ ~ •.Nt Y 4.1.1 YO• •• \ 1Y1.1 _ ` • lWY ~ v W YM 1~ ` WNI • YI _\\~ recavlr ~ ti •"" Q R pl~~ •0 4N1 • GMEKT1 ~ OGV `~ ~ `(~.,~ L-E~ ~ Cc t ~Y s'l _..._ °'•" © COUNTY OF SUFFOLK +~~ ~+T~~ ""~~ .~.~ N. _~ __._._. Roel haorW Taa SYniar Ay.ncT I 1 6 .G~,~,•.w~,..<-.-"-_'e^_'-- _ - r- ,....~.- ...• ~. _ - ! _. -~_ ._ ::+ew t-~ ~.... a ..R_.. _ ..a , _ __ _ __... _ _. _... _ JCVf\ 14-16-2 (9195)-7c 617.20 • Appendix A State Environmental t]uality 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' Tectt hat are subj cNve or untmeasureable!gt is' also ~understoodsthatythose N ho determ ne ly, there are aspects of a p of significance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may not be technically expert in environments analysis. to addition, many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader.concernssffecting the question of significance. licants and agencies can be assured that the determination The full EAF is intended to Drovide a method whereby app process has been orderly, comprehensive In nature, yet flexible enough to allow introduction of information to fit a protect or action. Full EAF CBmponents: The full EAF is comprised of three parts: Part 1: data~at asssts avrevewer in theoanalysis thatutakes'placero^eParts 2 and~3e. By identifying basic project Part 2: Fu dance as to whether an impact s Ikely to beconsideredrs all toumod ate or~whether ttis a potentially- g large impact. The form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduce . Part 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentially-large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the impact is actually important. DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE-Type 1 and UnlistP dt fiction OPart 3 Identify the Portions of EAF completed for this project: ^ Part 1 ^ Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF (Parts ~ 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: ^ A. harvepaosignifictalnt impaction the envvonmenrtnthereforema negative declaraftion will be prepared. not ^ B effect gor th s Unl ited Actaonabecausenthe m tigfation measuresvdescribed mPART 3 have been regfui ed, therefore a CONDITIONED negative declaration wit) be prepared.' , ^ C. The project may result in one or more large and important impacts that may have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a positive declaration will be prepared. • A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions Name of Action Name of Lead Agency Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer(If differentfrom responsible officer) Date PART 1-PROJECT INFORMATION I Prepared by Project Sponsor ` NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant effect on the environment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E. Answers to these questions will be considered as part of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additional information you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3. It is expected that completion of the full EAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not involve new studies, research or investigation. If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specify each instance. NAME OF ACTION LOCATION OF ACTION pnclude Street Address, Munldpallty and Counlyl R.O.W. off of New Suffolk Avenue NAME OF APPLICANT/SPONSOR Douglas N $Offey 9USINESSTELE°HON ADDRESS t 1516-294-1996 233 Seventh Street CITY/PO Garden City NYE 11530 NAME OF OWNER pl dllfarenp , 'L~t4E~"-4L'~i 2 9 cm/Po ien City INSTATE 21P1t~~ OF ACTION 1 Please see attached Please Complete Each Question-Indicate N.A. if not applicable ~-" A. Site Description Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas. 1. Present land use: ^lJrban ^Industrial ^Commercial CAResidential~suburban) ORural (non-farm) ^Forest OAgriculture ^Other 2. Total acreage of project area: acres. APPROXIMATE ACREAGE ~ 0, 9 Meadow or Brushland (Nonagricultural) PRESENTLY +AFTER COMPLETION forested --- -- acres 99 _~- acres Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland, pasture, etc.) - - acres .____~- acres . Wetland (Freshwater or tidal es per Articles 21, 25 of ECL) ~ ~- acres ~_ acres ----. Water Surface Area t 3 1 __ acres 1~____-__ acres -- 5 Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill) t 0 --- acres acres Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces t 0. 1 acre s acres Other (Indicate typel Lawns + acres ~--______ acres = 0 - 3 acres 3. What is predominant soil t p ) ype(s)on roectsitet~c(Beaches) CpE(carver &p - 0. 3 -------- acres lymount Sands) Tm(Tidal a. Soil drainage: ^Well drained80 % of site OModerately well drained 10 arsh) ^Poorly drained 10 % of site % Df site b. If any agricultural land is involved, how many acres of soil are clas ifi d i s e a Classification System? n~a acres. (See 1 NYCRR 370). w thin soil group 1 through 4 of the NYS Toppings on project sitef OYes ~No '•edroekl ~ r;nn (in feet) 2 Applicant proposes to reconstruct in kind in place existing ( 70") timber groin located at the western end of the applicant's property and as depicted on the Hydrographic survey prepared by Sea Level Mapping last dated 2/15/03. There is no filling involved with project. 3~ 5. Approximate percentage of proposed project site with slopes: ®0-10% 1 ()fl % D10-1S% ?; D1S% or greater % 6. Is project substantially contiguous to, or contain a building, site, or district, listed on the State or the National Registers of Historic Places? ^Yes %)No 7. Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural Landmarks? DYes YJNO ± 5 8. What is the depth of the water table? (in feet) 9. Is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aquifer? ~3Yes DNo 10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? -DYes ^No . 11. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangeredf L)Yes DNo According to Belt Identify each species Piping plovers may utilize beach for feeding 12. Are there any. uni ue or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, other geological formations) ^Yes ~o Describe 13. Is the ~° ject site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area? L7Yes DNo If yes, explain Numerous homes locateQ on waterboriy. 14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community? DYes DNo 15. Streams within or contiguous to project area: n / a a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary 16. Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: a. Name Hall's Creek (Tidal hletlands) b. Size (In acres) ± 100 17. is the site served by existing public utilities? DYes ~7N0 a) If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection) ^Yes DNo b) If Yes, will improvements be necessary to allow connection? ^Yes ^Ne 18. is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 304? ^Yes ~7N0 19. is the site located in or substantial) contiguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 of the ECL, and 6 NYCRR 617? Yes DNo 20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes? DYes ~JNO B. Project Description 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) a. Totai contiguous acreage owned o~ controlled by project sponsor # ± 1 . 5 aches. b. Project acreage to be developed: ~_ acres initially; - 0. 2 acres ultimately. c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped - 1 . 4 5 acres. d, length of project, in miles: n~a (If appropriate) e. If the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed n/a er5. f. Number of off-street parking spaces existing 5 ;proposed n / a , g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour n/a (upon completion of project)? h. If residential: Number and type of housing units: One Family Two Family Multiple family Condominium Initially one Ultimately one i. Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure n / a height; width; length. j. Linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy is? n~a ft. 3 2. {low much natural material (i.e., rock, earth, etc.) will be removed from the site! n . -~_ tons/cubic yards 3. Will disturbed areas be reclaimed? OYes ^No b1N/A a. II yes, for what intended purpose is the site being reclaimed) b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation! ^Yes ONo c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation! OYes ONo 4. {fow many acres o/ vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be remo~:ed from site! ~ r acres. 5. Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other Iocallyimportant vegetation be removed.by this project) Oyes 61No 6. It single phase project: Anticipated period of construction 3 months, (Including demotition). ' 7. II multi-phased: n/a a. Total number of phases anticipated (number). b. Anticipated date o/ commencement phase 1 month c. Approximate completion date of final phase month Year, (including demolition). d. Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases! ^Yes ONo Year. 8. Will blasting occur during construction) OYes ,UNO 9. Number of jobs generated: during construction 3-5 ;after project is complgte ~ _ 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project ~ 11. Will project require relocation of any projects or faciliNest Oyes )E]NO If yes, explain 12. Is surface liquid waste disposal Involved! OYes ONo a. If yes, Indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) and amount b. Name of water body Into which effluent will be discharged 13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved! ^Yes ~No Type - 14. Will surface area of an existing water body Increase or decrease by proposal? Explain 15. Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 fl d I ' byes l]No year oo p amf OYes 16. Will the project generate solid waste! OYes ONo a. If yes, what is the amount per month tons b. If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used! OYes ONo c. II yes, give name location d. Will any wastes nol go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill) e. II Yes, explain 17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste) OYes ~)NO a. If yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal) tons/month. b. If yes, what is the anticipated site life) years. 18. Will project use herbicides or pesticides! ^Yes ~iN0 19. Wilt project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)I L(3Yes ONo 20. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels) Yes 21. Will project result in an Increase In energy use! OYes L3No If yes ,indicate type(s) 22. If water supply is from wells, indicate pumping Capacity n /a gallons/minute. '?. Total anticipated water usage per day n /a gallons/day. 24. Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding) OYes UNo If Yes, explain _ , OYes ^No ONo 4 25. Approvals Required: Submittal Type Dafe City, Town, Village Board ^Yes ONo City, Town, Village Planning Board ^Yes DNo City, Town Zoning Board DYes ONo City, County Health Department ^Yes ^No ^ Other local Agencies Yes DNo Southold Town Trustees y~T'-'- Other Regional Agencies DYes DNo State Agencies 'Yes DNo ~1.Y.S.D.E.C. %N.Y.S.D.O.S. 2/91 Federal Agencies ~4es ^No -uQnnn 2/9 C. Zoning and Planning Information 1 . Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision? DYes ~lo If Yes, indicate decision required: " Ozoning amendment Ozoning variance Ospecial use permit Osubdivision ^site plan Onew/revision of master plan Oresource management plan Dother 2. What is the zoning classification(s)of the site? n -4f) 3. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning? - le famil dwelling 4. What is the proposed zoning of the site? n/a 5. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning? n/a 6. Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? 'Q~es ONo 7. What are the pr@dominant land use(s) and zoning cl~^>ifications within a ~/. mile radius of proposed action? 4;no1e family dwellings - R~l~?1n, 8. Is the proposed action compatible with ad(oining/surrounding land uses within a r/. mile? ~s ONo 9. If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed? n / a a. What is the minimum lot size proposed? 10. Wiil proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of sewer or water districts? DYes o 11. Wiii the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police, fire protection)? DYes ~1'Jo a. If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle pro)ected demand? OYes ONo 12. Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? ^Yes No a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? pYes ONo D. Informational Details Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse impacts associated with your proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or avoid them. E. Verification 1 certify that the in r lion p ovid above is true to the best of my knowledge. ApplicandSponsor Na G1 n E. J t _ Date 2 Signature Title Agent II the action is in the Coastal Area, an~ u are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form btfore proceeding with this assessment. // 5 1~ 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) ONO ^YES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Developable area of site contains a protected water body. • Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a protected stream. • Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water ¢ody. • Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland. • Other impacts: 4. Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body of water? ONO ^YES Examples that would apply to column 2 • 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 area. • Other impacts: 5. Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity? ONO ^YES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action will require a discharge permit. • Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does not have approval to serve proposed (project) action. • Proposed Action requires water supply from wells with greater than 45 gallons per minute pumping capacity. • Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water supply system. • Proposed Action will adversely affect groundwater. • Liquid elfluent will be conveyed off the site to facilities which presently do not exist or have inadequate capacity. • Proposed Action would use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per day. • Proposed Action will likely cause siltation or other discharge into 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 chemical products greater than 1,100 gallons. • Proposed Action will allow residential uses in areas without water andlor sewer services. • Proposed Action locates commercial andlor industrial uses which may require new or expansion of existing waste treatment andlor storage facilities. • Other impacts: 6. Will proposed action alter drainage flow or patterns, or surface water runoff? ONO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action would change flood water flows. 7 1 Small to Moderate Impact 2 Potential Large Impact 3 Can Impact Be Mltiaated ey Project Change ^ ^ ^Ves ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ V ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ • ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No 1 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact. Pro(ect Change • Proposed Action may cause substantial erosion. ^ ^ ^Yes ^No • Proposed Action is incompatible with existing drainage patterns. ^ ^ ^Yes ^No • Proposed Action will allow development in a designated floodway. ^ ^ ^Yes ^No • Other impacts: ^ ^ ^Yes ^Nd IMPACT ON AIR 7. Will proposed action affect air quality( ^NO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips in any given ^ ^ ^Yes ^No hour. • Proposed Action will result in the incineration of more than 1 ton of ^ ^ ^Yes ^No refuse per hour. • Emission rate of total contaminants will exceed 5 lbs. per hour or a ^ ^ ^Yes ^No heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour. • Proposed action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed ^ ^ ^Yes ^No to industrial use. • Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial ^ ^ ^Yes ^N development within existing industrial areas. o • Other impacts: ^ ^ ^Yes ^No IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS 8. Will Proposed Action affect !ny threatened or endangered species? - pN0 ^YES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Reduction of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal ^ ^ ^Yes ^No list, using the site, over or near site or found on the site. • Removal of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habitat. ^ ^ ^Yes ^No • Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other ^ ^ ^Yes ^No than for agricultural purposes. • Other impacts: ^ ^ ^Yes ^No 9. Will Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or non-endangered species? ONO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action would substantially interfere with any resident or ^ ^ ^Yes ^No migratory fish, shellfish or wildlife species. • • Proposed Action requires the removal of more than 10 acres ^ ^ ^Yes ^No of mature forest (over 100 years of age) or other locally important vegetation. , IMPACT ON AQRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES 10. Will the Proposed Action affect agricultural land resources? ONO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 •^~~sed action would sever, cross or limit access to agricultural ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ' ~~d, hayfields, pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc.) 8 JCUh 14-16-2 (9195)-7c 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. Frequent- ly, there are aspects of a project that are subjective or unmeasureable. It is also understood that those Nho determine significance may have little °ho have knowledgean one paeticular areanmay not be aware of the b oaderrconcerns affecting analysis. In addition, many the question of significance. licants and agencies can be assured that the determination The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby app process has been orderly, comprehensive in nature, yet flexible 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: de a~at assn avrevieweann theoanalysis thatutakeslplacer nleParts 2 andr3e. By identifying basic project Part 2: gu'dance as to whethertan impact s Ikely to be considerednsmall toumod ate or~whether it i~a pore tially- 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. pETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE-Type 1 and UnlistP dt fictions^Part 3 Part 1 ^ Identify the Portions of EAF completed for this project: ^ ro riate), and any other supporting Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF (Parts 1 and 2 and 3 if app P, information, and considering both the magnitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the lead agency that: ^ A. The project will not result in any large and important impact(s) and, therefore, is one which wi not have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a negative declaration will be prepared. ^ B effect for th i UnI sted Actonabecausenthe m t gation measur svdesaibed rn PART 3 have been regfu ied, therefore a CONDITIONED negative declaration wilt be prepared.' ^ C. The project may result in one or more large and important impacu that may have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a positive declaration will be prepared. • A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions Name of Action Name of Lead Agency Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer (If different from responsible officer) Date PART 1-PROJECT fNFORMATION Prepared by Project Sponsor NfJjICE' This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant effect on the environment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E. Answers to these questions will be considered as part of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additia~al information you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3. It is expected that completion of the full EAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not involve new studies, research or investigation. If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specify each instance. NAME OF AC710N LOCATION OF ACTION pnclude Slreel Address, Munlclpallly and County) R.O.W. off of New Suffolk Avenue NAME OF APPLICANT/SPONSOR Douglas M Soffey SUSINESSTELE~NONE ADDRESS I ) 516-294-1996 233 Seventh Street ctrnvo Garden City s7arE zlPCOo NAME OF OWNER pl dlflerenl) NY 115 3 ADORESSell i9cGoldrick B~iN~ssT~t4E~N4~+~29 cmroo Garden City ~TE 11g ~3U DESCRIPTION OF ACTION 1 Please see attached Please Complete Each Question-Indicate N.A. if not applicable I A. Site Description Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas. 1. Present land use: pUrban ^Industrial ^Commercial L~Residential jsuburban) ORural (non-farm) OForest OAgriculture Other 2. Total acreage of project area: acres. APPROXIMATE ACREAGE ~ 0 9 PRESENTLY +AFTER COMPLETION Meadow or Brushland (Non-agricultural) 0 9 Forested acres acres Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland, pasture, etc.) acres acres . Wetland (Freshwater or tidal ss per Articles 24, 25 of ECL) ~~- acres ~__ acres Water Surface Area t acres ~__ acres 1.3 1.3 Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill) t 0 5 acres ~~_ acres Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces *-0 i - acres ~~_ acres Other (Indicate typel Lawns + ----- acres ~__,___ acres --0--~_ acres - 0. 3 acres 3. What is predominant soil type(s) on project site? ~clBeaches) CpE(carver &plymount Sands) Tm(Tidal a. Soil drainage: pWell drained80 e/ of site OModerately well drained 10 -~`~arsh) OPoorly drained 10 % of site % of site b. If any agricultural land is involved, how many acres of soil are classified within soil group ~ through 4 of the NYS - a Classification System? n a acres. (See 1 NYCRR 370). Toppings on project site? ^Yes UNO `~edroek? + Fnn (in feet) 2 Applicant proposes to reconstruct in kind in place existing ( 70") timber groin located at the western end of the applicant's property and as depicted' on the Hydrographic survey prepared by Sea Level Mapping last dated 2/15/03. There is no filling involved with project. 5. Approximate percentage of proposed project site with slopes: ®0-10% 1 ()() % ^10-15% g; ^15% or greater 6. Is project substantially contiguous to, or contain a building, site, or district, listed on the State or the National `Registers of Historic Places? ^Yes g1No 7. Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural Landmarks? ^Yes `r~NO 8. What is the depth of the water table? 5 (in feet) 9. Is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aquifer? ~3Yes ^No 10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? -{Yes ^No 11. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered? )Yes ONo According to selt Identify each species Piping plovers may utilize beach for feeding 12. Are there any. unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, other geological formations) ^Yes l~No Describe 13. Is the c~oject site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area? ®Yes ^No If yes, explain Numerous homes located on waterbotly. 14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community? L~Yes ^No 15. Streams within or contiguous to project area: n/a a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary 16. Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: a. Name Hall's Creek (Tidal hletlands) b. Size (In acres) 17. Is the site served by existing public utilities? ^Yes ~7N0 a) If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? ^Yes ^No b) If Yes, will improvements be necessary to allow connection? ^Yes ^No ± 100 18. Is the site located in an agriculturya.l, district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 304? ^Yes ~.INO 19. Is the site located in or substantialll(,contiguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 of the ECL, and 6 NYCRR 617? ®Yes ^No 20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes? ^Yes ~`JNO B. Project Description 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) a. Total contiguous acreage owned o~ controlled by project sponsor $ ± 1 . S acres. b. Project acreage to be developed: - 0' 2 acres initially; - 0 • 2 acres ultimately. c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped ± 1 .4 5 acres. d. Length of project, in miles: n / a (If appropriate) e. If the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed n/a ef,; f. Number of off-street parking spaces existing 5 ;proposed n / a , g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour n/a (upon completion of project)? h. If residential: Number and type of housing uniu: One Family Two Family Multiple Family Condominium Initially one Ultimately one i. Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure ~~ height; width; length. j. Linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy is? n/a ft. 3 2. How much natural material (i.e., rock, earth, etc.) will be removed from the site? ___n o___ tons/cubic yards 3. will disturbed areas be reclaimed? ^Yes ONo IZ1N/A a. If yes, for what intended purpose is the site being reclaimed? b' Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? ^Yes DNo c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? pYes pNo 4. How many acres o/ vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be remo•:ed from site? ~ acres. 5. will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed~by this project? Dyes QDNo 6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction 3 months, (including demolition). 7. if multi-phased: n/a a. Total number of phases anticipated (number). b. Anticipated date of commencement phase 1 month year, (including demolition). c. Approximate completion date of final phase month year. d. Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases? DYes ^No 8. Will blasting occur during construction? DYes ~C~No 9. Number of jobs generated: during construction 3-5 ;after project is complete ~ 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project 0 , 11. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? ^Yes ~.7N0 If yes, explain 12. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? OYes ONo a. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) and amount b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged 13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? ^Yes Flo Type 14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? flYes ~No Explain - 15. Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain? ^Yes No 16. Will the project generate solid waste? pYes ^No a. If yes, what is the amount per month tons 6. If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used? DYes pNo c. If yes, give name location d. Will any wastes nol go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary IandfillP ^Yes pNo e. II Yes, explain 17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste? ^Yes ~)NO a. If yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposalt tons/month. b. If yes, what is the anticipated site fife? years. 18. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? ^Yes B'7No 19. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)f l~lYes pNo 20. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels? (DYes pNo 21. Will project result in an increase in energy use? DYes ~7N0 I( yes ,indicate type(s) 22. If water supply is from wells, indicate pumping Capacity n /a gallons/minute. ?. Total anticipated water usage per day n /a gallons/day. 24. Does project involve Local, State or Federal fundingf ^Yes L1N0 I( Yes, explain , 4 25. Approvals Required: Submittal Type Date City. Town, Village Board pYes ^No City, Town, Village Planning Board ^Yes ^No Ci[y, Town Zoning Board ^Yes ^No City, County Health pepartment ^Yes ^No ' Other local Agencies ~JYes ^NO Southold Town Trustees 2 91 Other Regional Agencies ^Yes ^No State Agencies 1~'Yes ^No N. Y. S. D.E.C. %N. Y. S.D.O,S. 2/91 Federal Agencies ~es ^No rrsnnp 2/91 C. Zoning and Planning Information 1. Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision? ^Yes ~lo If Yes, indicate decision required: `\ ^zoning amendment ^zoning variance ^special use permit ^subdivision ^site plan ^new/revision of master plan ^resource management plan ^other 2. What is the zoning classification(s)of the site? u -/,(1 3. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning? sa a- ~nQle family dwelling 4. What is [he proposed zoning of the site? n/a 5. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning? n/a 6. Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? ~es ^No 7. What are the predominant land use(s) and zoning clr~sifications within a Y. mile radius of proposed action? si~nolP family dwellings - R#~~a. 8. Is the proposed action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses within a '/. mile? 'Yes ^No 9. If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed? n / a a. What is the minimum lot size proposed? 10. Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of sewer or water districts? ^Yes o 11. Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police, fire protection)? ^Yes (~(Jo a. If yes, is existing capac`it`y sufficient to handle projected demand? ^Yes ^No 12. Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? ^Yes No a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? ^Yes ^No D. Informational Details Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse impacu associated with your proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or avoid them. E. Verification I certify that the inf r lion p ovid ~ above is true to the best of my knowledge. ApplicanUSponsor Na G1 to E. J t Date 2 Signature Title Agent If the action is in the Coastal Area, a u are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment. 5 1~ 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) ^NO ^YES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Developable area of site contains a protected water body. • Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a protected stream. • Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body. • Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland. • Other impacts: 4. Will proposed action affect any non•protected existing or new body of water? ^NO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • 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 area. • Other impacts: 5. Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity? ^NO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action will require a discharge permit. • Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does not have approval to serve proposed (project) action. • Proposed Action requires water supply from wells with greater than 45 gallons per minute pumping capacity. • Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water supply system. • Proposed Action will adversely affect groundwater. • Liquid effluent will be conveyed off the site to facilities which presently do not exist or have inadequate capacity. • Proposed Action would use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per day. • Proposed Action will likely cause siltation or other discharge into 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 chemical products greater than 1,100 gallons. • Proposed Action will allow residential uses in areas without water andlor sewer services. • Proposed Action locates commercial and/or industrial uses which may require new or expansion of existing waste treatment andlor storage facilities. • Other impacts: 6. Will proposed action alter drainage flow or patterns, or surface water runoff? ^NO ^YES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action would change flood water flows. 7 1 Small to Moderate Impact 2 Potential Large Impact 3 Can Impact Be Miticated By Project Change ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ~ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No • Proposed Action may cause substantial erosion. • Proposed Action is incompatible with existing drainage patterns. • Proposed Action will allow development in a designated floodway. • Other impacts: IMPACT ON AIR 7. Will proposed action affect air quality? ONO OYES 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 lbs. per hour or a heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour. • Proposed action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed to industrial use. • Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial development within existing industrial areas. • Other impacts: IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS 8. Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered species? ^NO ^YES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Reduction of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal list, using the site, over or near site or found on the site. • Removal of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habitat. • Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other than for agricultural purposes. • Other 9. Will Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or non-endangered species? ^NO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action would substantially interfere with any resident or migratory fish, shellfish or wildlife species. • Proposed Action requires the removal of more than 10 acres of mature forest (over '100 years of age) or other locally important vegetation. IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES 10. Will the Proposed Action affect agricultural land resources? ONO ^YES Examples that would apply to column 2 ~~nosed action would sever, cross or limit access to agricultural ' ~~d, hayfields, pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc.) 1 Small to Moderate Impact 2 Potential large Impact. 3 Can Impact Be Mitigated ey Project Change ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^Nd ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No 8 ___. _ __ atu„ 14-16.2 (9195)-7c 617.20 l Appendix A Stale Environmental Quality Review FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: FORM Purpose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine. in an orderly manner, whether a project or action may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer. Frequent- ly, there are aspects of a project that are sublective or unmeasureable. It is also understood that those Hho determine not be technically expert in environmental significance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may analysis. In addition, many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader,concernsaffecling the question of significance. licants and agencies can be assured that the determination The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby app ' process has been orderly, comprehensive in nature, yet flexible 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. ey identifying basic project data; it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3. Part 2: guiriance as to whetrhertan impact s Ikely to be considered small toumod ate or~whether ittis a potentially- large impact. The form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or redriced. Part 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentially-large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the impact is actually important. DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE-Type 1 and UnlistP dt fiction OPart 3 Identify the Portions of EAF completed for this protect: ^ Part 1 ~ orting Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF (Parts 1 and 2 and 3 if appropriate), and any other supp information, and considering both the magnitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the lead agency that: O A havepa signif c'alnt impactton the envgo menrtnthereforema negat veddeclanftion will be phepared. no !] fi effect for th s Unl sled A taonabecausenthe mitigation measuresvdescribed nhPART 3 have beentregfui edt therefore a CONDITIONED negative declaration will be prepared.' , p C. The project may result in one or more large and important impacts that may have a significant Impact on the environment, therefore a positive declaration will be prepared. • A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions Name of Action Name of Lead Agency Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer (If different from responsible officer) Date PART i-pgO~ECT INFORMATION Prepared by Prtiject Sponsor NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant effect on the environment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E. Answers to these questions will be considered as part of the application for approval and maybe subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additional information you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3. It is expected that completion of the Full EAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not involve new studies, research or investigation. If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specify each instance. NAME OF ACTION LOCATION OF ACTION ryneluds Slrael Addrasf, MunlelPallly and County) R.O.W. off of New Suffolk Avenue NAME OF APPLICANT/SPONSOR Dou 188 M. Soffey BUSINESS TELETHON ADDRESS I ) 516-2~4-1996 233 Seventh Street ----- clTrrpo Garden City STATE 21P COD€ NAME OF OWNER ryf dlflarenQ NY 1153U Neil McGoldrick ~ B~1NESS TFIEENONE29 ADDRESS 71b L4tS L4 CITY/PO Garden Ci )ESCRIPTION OF ACTION i'pi Please see attached Please Complete Each Question-Indicate N.A. if not applicable A. Site Description Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas. T. Present land use: OUrban ^Industrial OCommercial L)9Resldentiallsuburban) ^Forest OAgriculture DOther 2. Total acreage of project area: _ APPROXIMATE ACREAGE acres. Meadow or Brushland (Non•agricultural) Forested Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland, pasture, etc.) Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 21, 25 of ECL) Water Surface Area Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill) Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces Other (Indicate type) Lawns ORural (non-farm) * 0. 9 PRESENTLY +AFTER COMPLETION acres 0.9 _ acres acres --*--~--L.~ _ acres ----~ _ acres t 1 ~ t 0 -- 5 _ acres -----_._ - acres t 0.1 .acres + 0 3 acres ~-~-__. acres ~__. acres ~--~,-. acres -~-~-~.._ acres -~----.__ acres - - acres - 0.3 3. What is predominant soil t p I --------- acres ype(s)on ro'ectsites~c(Beaches) CpE(carver Splymount Sands) Tm(Tidal a. Soil drainage: OWell drained80 % of site ClModerately well drained 10 arsh) ^Poorly drained 0 °~+ of site 1. % of site b. If any agricultural land it involve how many acres of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the NYS a Classification Systems n~a acres. (See 1 NYCRR 370). Toppings on project sites ^Yes L'~No ':^drocks ~hnn (in feet) 2 Applicant proposes to reconstruct in kind in place existing ( 70") timber. groin located at the western end of the applicant's property and as depicted on the Hydrographic survey prepared by Sea Level Mapping last dated 2/15/03. There is no filling involved with project. 5. Apprpximate-percentage of proposed project site with slopes: ®0.10% 1 (1() % ^10-15% ?; O15% or greater % 6. Is project substantially contiguous to, or contain a building, site, or district, listed on the State or the National Registers of Historic Places? Oyes $INo 7. Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural Landmarks? OYes ~7No + 5 8. What is the depth of the water table? (in feet) 9. Is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aquifer? ~7Yes ONo 10. Do hunting, /fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? -f~1Yes ONo 11. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered? ~IYes ^No According to selt Identify each species Piping plovers may utilize beach for feeding 12. Are there any. uni ue or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, other geological formations) ^Yes l~o Describe 13. Is the Project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area? ~lYes ^No If yes, explain idumerous homes located on waterboay. 14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community? f~Yes DNo 15. Streams within or contiguous to project area: n/a a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary 16. Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: + a. Name Hall's Creek (Tidal kiatlands) b. Size (In acres) 100 17. Is the site served by existing public utilities? ^Yes ~JNO a) If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow Connection? OYes ^No b) If Yes, will improvements be necessary to allow connection? OYes ^No 18. Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 304? ^Yes ~]NO 19. Is the site located in or substantial)yy,,contiguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 of the ECL, and 6 NYCRR 617? f'_9Yes ONo 20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes? ^Yes ~)NO B. Project Description 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) a. Total contiguous acreage owned o~ controlled by project sponsor # ± 1 - 5 acres. b. Project acreage to be developed: - 0' 2+ acres initially; 0 • 2 acres ultimately. c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped - 1 .45 acres. d. Length of project, in miles: ° ~ a (If appropriate) e. If the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed n/a gs. f. Number of off-street parking spaces existing 5 ;proposed n / a , g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour n/a (upon completion of project)? h. If residential: Number and type of housing units: One Family Two Family Multiple Family Condominium Initially one Ultimately one i. Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure n /3 height; width; length. Linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy is? n~a ft 3 2. flo.v much natural material (i.e., rock, earth, etc.) will be removed from the site) (Lb tonslcubic yards 3. wilYdisturbed areas be reclaimed) ^Yes ^No tC1N/A a. If yes, for what intended purpose is the site being reclaimed) ' b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamatlont ^Yes ONo c. wilt upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation- OYes ONo 4. How many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be remo~:ed from site? ~ ~ acres. 5. wilt any mature /orest (over 100 years old) or other locally-Important vegetation be removed~by this projectf ^Yes 01No 6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction 3 months. (including demolition). , 7. If multi-phased: n/a a. Total number of phases anticipated (number). b. Anticipated date of commencement phase 1 month year, (Including demolition). c. Approximate completion date of final phase month year. d. Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases) OYes ^No 8. Will blasting occur during constructionf OYes ~UNO 9. Number of jobs generated: during construction 3-5 ;after project Is complete ~ 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project ~ 11, Will project require relocation o/ any projects or (aclliHesf OYes ~]NO If yes, explain 12. Is surface liquid waste disposal Involved) pYes ONo a. 11 yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) and amount b. Name of water body Into which effluent will be discharged 13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involvedf Oyes ~)NO Type 14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal) byes ENO Explain 15. Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plaint OYes No 16. Will the project generate solid waste) ^Yes ONo a. if yes, what is the amount per month tons b. II yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used) ^Yes ONo c. If yes, give name ; location _ d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill) pYes C1No e. If Yes, explain 17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste) ^Yes 'UNO a. If yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal) tons/month. b. II yes, what is the anticipated site life) years. 1B. WIII project use herbicides or pesticldest OYes B7No 19. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)) K7Yes ONo 20. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels) Yes ONo 21. Will project result in an increase fn energy uses OYes ~`1N0 If yes ,indicate type(s) 12. If water supply is from wells, indicate pumping capacity n/a gallons/minute. '?. Total anticipated water usage per day n /a gallons/day. 7~ 24. Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding) OYes L1No If Yes, explain 4 25. RpprovaJs Regeired: City, Town, Village Board City, Town. Village Planning Board City, Town Zoning Board City, County Health Department Other Local Agencies Other Regional Agencies State Agencies Federal Agencies ^Yes ^No ^Yes ^No ^Yes DNo ^Yes Yes ^Yes Yes fifes ^No DNo DNo Submittal Type Dale Southold Town Trustees 2 9 DNo N. Y. S. D. E.C. %N. Y.S.D.O,S. 2/91 ^No Qgnnn 2/91 C. Zoning and Planning Information L' 1 . Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision? ^Yes ~}Vo If Yes, indicate decision required: •••///~~~ Ozoning amendment ^zoning variance Ospecial use permit Osubdivision ^site plan ^newlrevision of master plan Dresource management plan Oother 2. What is the zoning classification(s)of the site? u -4n 3. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning? oomo_ a;nQle family dwelling 4. What is the proposed zoning of the site? n / a 5. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning? n/a 6. Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? 'Qfes ^No 7. What are the pr2dominant land use(s) and zoning cl>•ifications within a r/ mile radius of proposed action? S,ng7e family dwellings - Ra['w9~~ 8. Is the proposed action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses within a r/ mile? ~s DNo 9. If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed? n/a ' a. What is the minimum lot size proposed? 10. Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of sewer or water districb? Dyes o 11. Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police, fire protection)? ^Yes ~No a. If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? DYes ^No 12. Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? ^Yes No a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? DYes DNo D. Informational Details Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. II there are or may be any adverse impacts associated with your proposal, please discuss such Impacu and the measures which you propose to mitigate or avoid them. E. Verification 1 certify that the in r lion p ovid above is true to the best of my knowledge. ApplicanUSponsor Na G1 n E. J t _ Date 2 Signature Title -..Agent - ~~/ ~ -r If the action is in the Coastal Area, an~ u are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment. // 5 ~~ IMPACT ON WATER 3. Will proposed action affect any water body designated as Drotected? (Under Articles 15, 24, 25 of the Environmental Conservation Law, ECL) ONO ^YES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Developable area of site contains a protected water body. • Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a protected stream. • Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water pody. • Construction In a designated freshwater or tidal wetland. • Other impacts: 4. Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body of water? ONO ^YES Examples that would apply to column 2 • A 10% inc+ease or decrease in the surface Brea 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 area. • Other impacts: 5. Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity? ONO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action will require a discharge permit. • Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does not have approval to serve proposed (project) action. • Proposed Action requires water supply from wells with greater than 45 gallons per minute pumping capacity. • Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water supply system. • Proposed Action will adversely affect groundwater. • Liquid effluent will be conveyed off the site to facilities which presently do not exist or have inadequate capacity. • Proposed Action would use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per day. • Proposed Action will likely cause siltation or other discharge into 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 chemical products greater than 1,100 gallons. • Proposed Action will allow residential uses in areas without water and/or sewer services. • Proposed Action locates commercial and/or Industrial uses which may require new or expansion of existing waste treatment and/or storage facilities. • Other impacts: 6. Will proposed action alter drainage flow or patterns, or surface water runoffr ONO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action would change flood water flows. 7 1 Small to Moderate Impact 2 Potential Large Impact 3 Can Impact Be Mitigated lay Project Change ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes . ^No ^ ^ ,Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ • ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ^ ^ ^Yes ^No Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact. Project Change • Proposed Action may cause Substantial erosion. ^ ^ ^Yes ^No • Proposed Action is Incompatible with existing drainage patterns. ^ ^ ^Yes ^No • Proposed Action will allow development in a designated floodway. ^ ^ C)Yes ^No • Other impacts: ^ ^ [)Yes ^Nd IMPACT ON AIR ' 7. Will proposed action affect air quality ONO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips in any given ^ ^ ^Yes ^No hour. • Proposed Action will result in the incineration of more than 1 ton of ^ ^ ^Yes ^No refuse per hour. • Emission rate of total contaminants will exceed 5 lbs. per hour or a ^ ^ ^Yes ^No heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour. • Proposed action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed ^ ^ ^Yes ^No to industrial use. • Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial ^ ^ ^Yes ^No development within existing industrial areas. • Other impacts: ^ ^ ^Yes ^No IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS 8. Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered species? ~ ^NO ^YES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Reduction of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal ^ ^ ^Yes ^No list, using the site, over or near site or found on the site. • Removal of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habitat. ^ ^ ^Yes ^No • Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other ^ ^ ^Yes ^No than for agricultural purposes. _ • Other impacts: ^ ^ ^Yes ^No 9. Will Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or non-endangered species? ONO ^YES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action would substantially interfere with any resident or ^ ^ ^Yes ^No migratory fish, shellfish or wildlife species. , • Proposed Action requires the removal of more than 10 acres ^ ^ ^Yes ONo of mature forest (over 100 years of age) or other locally important vegetation. IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES 10. Will the Proposed Action affect agricultural land resources? ONO ^YES F.samples that would apply to column 2 •^~~sed action would sever, cross or limit access to agricultural ^ ^ ^Yes ^No ' ~~d, hayfields, pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc.) 8 Hydrographic Survey , Prepared for: Niel McGoldrick ;, , ,•, '•, Near SGT# 1000-116-4-16.4 `.,z'•, Mattituck, New York ` Lat: 40 - Sq - Iq I~~,~ •~ Long: l2 - 30 - OI o~ ~.• a , Tide Ran e: 2.5' +/- ~ ' , .~ ~"`" ` •' @ L N6VD 2q Datum: M i3 • 0 ,~,, ~ •s o : 04 .,4 I~ a~,., nB ~~ m : ~ ~ ~ ~. Y ~ O `IS 10 ~ I.O ~ .p4 12 ~, ,42-coq IA ~oa O.O 03 Iq _ -03 i5 09 OB -19 . ..: I~ 13 _ __. I, ,.,00 !~ .oY'n. SGT 1000-II6-4-16.4 Land of McGoldrick SGT 1000-II6-4-20.1 Land of H. 8 H. 015en 02 00 1 -OS ~,~~, -. oe 03 b ~ -0b r~3B _ ~j/\ -OB '3 ~ o, Ob 00 cs ` `\ yu\Q -O B \ Y 3 \. \ -oB `_ '\ \ 0 / J / -,',J S I6 -_ f'W• __- I4 -- -- i5 ~~ -. -.. -. - - ( - - ~ W - -\i~~ _ -~ -20 -Ig ^,y 21 ~ti, zo I6 ~ ___--/ 0 --- ^~j QS -3< 36 35 39 I9 PREPARED 6Y~ SEA LEVEL MAPPING 6 EAST MAIN STREET RIVERHEAD, NY 11901 PHONE 516-T2T-3lS Sheet I Of I N W~E s GRAPHIC SCALE I"= 60' 4 F '~ m I, O 19 16 Ol 20 ~. NV~. la Is,' P -oe '--_- ~ E,t7' _OB O -OB -19 IB (=d q~h; -0B ~s Ib 13 Il 13 ALW 09 O -O 5 06 09 F-r) ~.I -Ob -0.3 ~____ _ __. 49 -. -09 - `O9 0 -0.3 20 06 OB II 13 -0q 00 09 13 -0s ~ -04 f>tY `' -zl la ~W-- ~ 3 ~ ~ V I JJ 09 13 GO~•~G ~, le 2O " V C` 20 a~' ~6 G r ~ IQ =1 ~a 3a 36 4= 3= ~B 31 34 - ~_ ;. ;. THIS PLOT WAS DEVELOPED FROM SURVEYS OF 02-IS-03 ROBERT H. FOX, NYS LiGtt 50197 2/IB/]003 O.O].04PM \\Hp clammer\d\slm\MWOlgrkpro