Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTR-8364 James F. King, President Q~g11FFf)ct Town Hall, 53095 Main Rd_ Bob Ghosio, Jr., Vice-President ? lly~ P.O. Box 1179 Dave Bergen ° Southold NY 11971 Wo John Bredemeyer Telephone (631) 765-1892 Michael J. Domino Fax (631) 765-6641 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD YOU ARE REQUIRED TO CONTACT THE OFFICE OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES 72 YOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF THE WORK, TO MAKE AN APPOINTMENT FOR A PRE-CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION. FAILURE TO DO SO SHALL BE CONSIDERED A VIOLATION AND. POSSIBLE REVOCATION OF THE PERMIT. INSPECTION SCHEDULE Pre-construction, hay bale line 1st day of construction % constructed Project complete, compliance inspection BOARD OF SOUTHOLD TOWN TRUSTEES SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK J[~PERMIT NO. 8364 DATE: JANUARY 22, 2014 ISSUED TO: NASSAU POINT PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION PROPERTY ADDRESS: END OF BAYVIEW ROAD OFF NASSAU POINT ROAD, CUTCHOGUE i i SCTM# NONE AUTHORIZATION Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 275 of the Town Code of the Town of Southold and in accordance with the Resolution of the Board of Trustees adopted at the meeting held on January 22, 2014, and in consideration of application fee in the sum of $500.00 paid by Lehnert Construction, Inc. and subject to the Terms and Conditions as stated in the Resolution, the Southold Town Board of Trustees authorizes and permits the following: Wetland Permit for the as-built 17'6" vinyl retaining wall connected to adjacent properties; and for the as-built 4' wide x 6' long beach access stairs, and as depicted on the site plan prepared by Lehnert Construction, last dated February 11, 2014, and stamped approved on February 11, 2014. I IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said Board of Trustees hereby causes its Corporate Seal to be affixed, and these presents to be subscribed by a majority of the said B Lrdasf this date. I o~gUFFI$,~co f~. O Charles J. Sanders- recused i FW TERMS AND CONDITIONS The Permittee, Nassau Point Property Owners Association located at the End of Bayview Road Off of Nassau Point Road Cutchogue, New York as part of the consideration for the issuance of the Permit does understand and prescribe to the following: 1. That the said Board of Trustees and the Town of Southold are released from any and all damages, or claims for damages, of suits arising directly or indirectly as a result of any operation performed pursuant to this permit, and the said Permittee will, at his or her own expense, defend any and all such suits initiated by third parties, and the said Permittee assumes full liability with respect thereto, to the complete exclusion of the Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold. 2. That this Permit is valid for a period of 24 months, which is considered to be the estimated time required to complete the work involved, but should circumstances warrant, request for an extension may be made to the Board at a later date. 3. That this Permit should be retained indefinitely, or as long as the said Penmittee wishes to maintain the structure or project involved, to provide evidence to anyone concerned that authorization was originally obtained. s 4. That the work involved will be subject to the inspection and approval of the Board or its agents, and non-compliance with the provisions of the originating application may be cause for revocation of this Permit by resolution of the said Board. 5. That there will be no unreasonable interference with navigation as a result of the work herein authorized. 6. That there shall be no interference with the right of the public to pass and repass along the beach between high and low water marks. 7. That if future operations of the Town of Southold require the removal and/or alterations in the location of the work herein authorized, or if, in the opinion of the Board of Trustees, the work shall cause unreasonable obstruction to free navigation, the said Permittee will be required, upon due notice, to remove or alter this work project herein stated without expenses to the Town of Southold. 8. That the said Board will be notified by the Permittee of the completion of the work authorized. 9. That the Permittee will obtain all other permits and consents that may be required supplemental to this permit, which may be subject to revoke upon failure to obtain same. 10. This permit does not convey to the permittee any right to trespass upon the lands or interfere with the riparian rights of others in order to perform the permitted work nor does it authorize the impairment of any rights, title, or interest in real or personal property held or vested in a person not a party to the permit. QF SU(/T~o • Town Hall Annex John Bredemeyer, President h0 54375 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Michael J. Domino, Vice President l~f Southold, New York 11971-0959 James F. King C40 Charles J. Sanders ~O~ Telephone (631) 765.1892 ~~yCO,,~ Fax (631) 765-6641 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD January 22, 2014 Mr. Robert Lehnert Lehnert Construction 6700 Aldrich Lane Mattituck, NY 11952 RE: NASSAU POINT PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION END OF BAYVIEW ROAD OFF NASSAU POINT ROAD, CUTCHOGUE Dear Mr. Lehnert: The Board of Town Trustees took the following action during its regular meeting held on Wednesday, January 22, 2014 regarding the above matter: WHEREAS, Lehnert Construction on behalf of NASSAU POINT PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION applied to the Southold Town Trustees for a permit under the provisions of Chapter 275 of the Southold Town Code, the Wetland Ordinance of the Town of Southold, application dated October 24, 2013, and, WHEREAS, said application was referred to the Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council and to the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Coordinator for their findings and recommendations, and, WHEREAS, the LWRP Coordinator recommended that the proposed application be found Inconsistent with the LWRP, and, WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees has furthered Policy 6.3 of the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program to the greatest extent possible through the imposition of the following Best Management Practice requirements: issuance of permit on structure; and WHEREAS, a Public Hearing was held by the Town Trustees with respect to said application on January 22, 2014, at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard, and, WHEREAS, the Board members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question and the surrounding area, and, 2 • • WHEREAS, the Board has considered all the testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application, and, WHEREAS, the structure complies with the standards set forth in Chapter 275 of the Southold Town Code, WHEREAS, the Board has determined that the project as proposed will not affect the health, safety and general welfare of the people of the town, NOW THEREFORE BE IT, RESOLVED, that for the mitigating factors and based upon the Best Management Practice requirement imposed above, the Board of Trustees deems the action to be Consistent with the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program pursuant to Chapter 268-5 of the Southold Town Code, and, RESOLVED, that the Board of Trustees approve the application of NASSAU POINT PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION for the as-built 17'6" vinyl retaining wall connected to adjacent properties; and for the as-built 4' wide x 6' long beach access stairs, and as depicted on the site plan prepared by Lehnert Construction, last dated February 11, 2014, and stamped approved on February 11, 2014. Permit to construct and complete project will expire two years from the date the permit is signed. Fees must be paid, if applicable, and permit issued within six months of the date of this notification. Inspections are required at a fee of $50.00 per inspection. (See attached schedule.) Fees: $50.00 Very truly yours, o 'P., dvJ~ John M. Bredemeyer III Y President, Board of Trustees JMB/amn John M. Bredemeyer 111, President gypFp(~ Town Hall Annex C Michael J. Domino, Vice-President 54375 Route 25, P.O. Box 1179 James F. King e3 = Southold, NY 11971 Charles J. Sanders Telephone (631) 765-1892 Fax (631) 765-6641 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: Lehnert Construction for Nassau Point Property Owners Association Please be advised that your application dated 10/24/13 has been reviewed by this Board at the regular meeting of 1/22/14 and your application has been approved pending the completion of the following items checked off below. XX Affidavit of Posting and Proof of Mailing of Notice Attached with Certified Mail Receipts Pre-Construction Hay Bale Line Inspection Fee ($50.00) 15t Day of Construction ($50.00) %Constructed ($50.00) XX Final Inspection Fee ($50.00) Dock Fees ($3.00 per sq. ft.) Permit fees are now due. Please make check or money order payable to Town of Southold. The fee is computed below according to the schedule of rates as set forth in Chapter 275 of the Southold Town Code. The following fee must be paid within 90 days or re-application fees will be necessary. You will receive your permit upon completion of the above. COMPUTATION OF PERMIT FEES: TOTAL FEES DUE: $ 50.00 BY: John M. Bredemeyer III, President Board of Trustees " ? fir, ~ ~ •j'~t ` 1~e" (.,,j~. ~ t"r ~ 7. ~ . ~ ~ + ~ w . , ~ , ~ • 3 ~f' a ) h~ ~ ~ ~V` : u.~1 1"1'r. `t ..a,,. '~tt r • - t v ~•'4 . •j'.i„'i i' q , i'?•n t i r 1/_~'.+ .1 ~ ~ tom, r r~~''+tn r Z ~ .W'1~• e . Zia 4~ h 1y S f "t ~ '`O J l . , ~ F. •••SS~7y~ . i p ~4',r' Y ~ f ~ i . 1i 11~LI ~ ,'s,._ r 'fv f . ,Fy~r y, ~r'~,? 11 . :.dr it u~. e 1 + To the Trustees of the Town of 14thold • I ask that you accept this letter instead of my appearance. I am an attorney on trial in Supreme court Nassau County on trial in the case of Stanco v Albanese Index No 24830/09 and cannot appear in person. If the Court adjourns the case for any reason, I will personally appear at the hearing. I reside at 2715 Nassau Point Rd, one home from the right of way. I have read the letter from Mr and Mrs Monaghan and their two neighbors to the trustees and would like to support the opposite opinion. The bulkhead built by the Wackers is a very good improvement to that area of the right of way. Before Sandy, I had the best bulkhead in the area. But the Palmeri bulkhead (between myself and the right of way) was smaller than mine. My neighbors to the other side also had a smaller bulkhead. When Sandy hit, my bulkhead was fine, but the water went over both my neighbors' bulkheads, flooded my property from the sides and washed out the landscape that way. Since Sandy, both my neighbors built bulkheads even stronger than mine. Two points. 1. 1 don't have a dog in this fight. Bulk heading the right of way or not has no effect on my property. 2. If the right of way is not bulkheaded, the next storm will severely damage both Palmeri and Wacker and the right of way itself. Both Palmeri and Wacker have built wonderful bulkheads that will repel anything short of the next Noah incident. The water will have nowhere to go except up the right of way, spill over to the Palmeri/Wacker properties and wipe them out from the sides. The damage to the right of way will be greater than Sandy. Remember the Wacker/Palmeri bulkheads were nothing and so the water equally attacked the entire area in Sandy. Without the right of way bulkhead, the water will have only one place to go. With respect to the claim in the Monaghan letter that the stairs make access difficult, I'd suggest an on site visit. I remember the piles of stones that accumulated at that spot on occasions. It's my opinion that the stairs make the right of way easily accessible for people and kayak type small boats as well. Regardless of what decision you make, I want to state that the statement in the Monaghan letter that the Wackers installed that bulkhead for selfish purposes is not just wrong, it's mean spirited and disgraceful. I have listened on many an evening to my next door neighbor Felix Palmeri telling me of the history of that area and Nassau Point for the 40 years he's lived there and times before that that he knew of. I've only been there for 12 years. Felix has told me of countless stories of the dedication of the entire Wacker family, especially Mrs Wacker to Nassau Point. That bulkhead was built at their expense for the good of the entire area. They had their bulkhead guy there and could've told him to stop at their line. No new buyer of their property would know the difference. They had him keep going for all the right reasons and not an ounce of selfishness. Further, in my first seven years I had many conversations with Mr Wacker. I've also come to know the sons. I'm disappointed in my neighbors signing a letter with that charge. 1 The claim that it blocks their vietorders on the insane. Look at it froothe street. The Goldmans signed that claim. My belief is that it was the Goldmans who called the Wacker sons and asked for permission to take down some Wacker trees to improve the Goldmans' view of the water. The Wackers gave permission immediately. That's the kind of neighbors the Wackers have always been. Look at it with an open mind and see if the area isn't much improved. Respectfully submitted, Bob and Jackie Sullivan t 2 The claim that it blocks their vieporders on the insane. Look at it fropthe street. The Goldmans signed that claim. My belief is that it was the Goldmans who called the Wacker sons and asked for permission to take down some Wacker trees to improve the Goldmans' view of the water. The Wackers gave permission immediately. That's the kind of neighbors the Wackers have always been. Look at it with an open mind and see if the area isn't much improved. Respectfully submitted, Bob and Jackie Sullivan 2 To the Trustees of the Town of Othold • 1 ask that you accept this letter instead of my appearance. I am an attorney on trial in Supreme court Nassau County on trial in the case of Stanco v Albanese Index No 24830/09 and cannot appear in person. If the Court adjourns the case for any reason, I will personally appear at the hearing. I reside at 2715 Nassau Point Rd, one home from the right of way. I have read the letter from Mr and Mrs Monaghan and their two neighbors to the trustees and would like to support the opposite opinion. The bulkhead built by the Wackers is a very good improvement to that area of the right of way. Before Sandy, I had the best bulkhead in the area. But the Palmeri bulkhead (between myself and the right of way) was smaller than mine. My neighbors to the other side also had a smaller bulkhead. When Sandy hit, my bulkhead was fine, but the water went over both my neighbors' bulkheads, flooded my property from the sides and washed out the landscape that way. Since Sandy, both my neighbors built bulkheads even stronger than mine. Two points. 1. 1 don't have a dog in this fight. Bulk heading the right of way or not has no effect on my property. 2. If the right of way is not bulkheaded, the next storm will severely damage both Palmeri and Wacker and the right of way itself. Both Palmeri and Wacker have built wonderful bulkheads that will repel anything short of the next Noah incident. The water will have nowhere to go except up the right of way, spill over to the Palmeri/Wacker properties and wipe them out from the sides. The damage to the right of way will be greater than Sandy. Remember the Wacker/Palmeri bulkheads were nothing and so the water equally attacked the entire area in Sandy. Without the right of way bulkhead, the water will have only one place to go. With respect to the claim in the Monaghan letter that the stairs make access difficult, I'd suggest an on site visit. I remember the piles of stones that accumulated at that spot on occasions. It's my opinion that the stairs make the right of way easily accessible for people and kayak type small boats as well. Regardless of what decision you make, I want to state that the statement in the Monaghan letter that the Wackers installed that bulkhead for selfish purposes is not just wrong, it's mean spirited and disgraceful. I have listened on many an evening to my next door neighbor Felix Palmeri telling me of the history of that area and Nassau Point for the 40 years he's lived there and times before that that he knew of. I've only been there for 12 years. Felix has told me of countless stories of the dedication of the entire Wacker family, especially Mrs Wacker to Nassau Point. That bulkhead was built at their expense for the good of the entire area. They had their bulkhead guy there and could've told him to stop at their line. No new buyer of their property would know the difference. They had him keep going for all the right reasons and not an ounce of selfishness. Further, in my first seven years I had many conversations with Mr Wacker. I've also come to know the sons. I'm disappointed in my neighbors signing a letter with that charge. t To the Trustees of the Town of Southold, I am helix Palmeri, the neighbor who lives on the right of way in question for approximately 40 years. The Wackers have been there for approximately 50 years. I have read the letter sent to you by my neighbors, Bob and Jackie Sullivan. Their letter is accurate in all respects and I agree with it in all respects. I am writing this letter in support of the bulkhead installed by the Wackers because l am being treated for cancer and currently undergoing chemotherapy each week which prevents a personal appearance. Thank you for your consideration. Felix R. Palmeri 1 would like to first apologize for agreeing to fund this project before the permit was in place. After the storm, we had multiple problems with a washed out property, no electric, no furnace and 8 large truckloads of flotsam on our property. Our permit went through on an emergency basis, and we should have realized that the NPPOA permit application would take longer and should have checked. As for the environmental impact of the project and long run public interest, I'd like to make the following points: Virtually all of the east side of Nassau Point is bulkheaded. The two exceptions were this right of way (ROW), and the Old Menhaden ROW, a quarter mile to the south. As you can see from the pictures, the Old Menhaden ROW, is an egregious source for storm water run-off. The ROW by our house was similar, serving as a storm water conduit from Nassau Point Rd. into the bay. Furthermore, several times a year, our property would flood from the right of way. We use no fertilizers on our property, but future owners might someday, in which case, it will be washed into the bay. This bulkhead clearly shuts off a significant source of road run off and nutrient loading into the bay- a stated goal of Southold Town. The alternative, suggested by Mr. Monaghan of building a spur perpendicular to the shoreline similar to our neighbor-Dr. Palmeri, is not practical in our case, since our property is lower than the right of way, it would have to run much 75-100 feet back to stop the flooding into our property. This would be an eyesore and do nothing to stop the regular storm water run-off into the bay. As for the letter from Mr. Monaghan, It's so full of exaggerations, that I don't know where to start. We've owned this property for 44 years as well as several other properties in the community with no plans to sell. This concern over a right of way that they used so infrequently, that I wouldn't recognize the Monaghans or Goldmans is I saw them on the street, is baffling. As for the facts of the letter, it strains credulity to suggest that we would or could hoodwink the NPPOA into believing that there was a bulkhead there all along which we were merely offering to repair. You are being asked to believe that they have never set foot on the property. And, of course, one can only marvel at the optimism of a family who send children too young to navigate a set of stairs off to swim and play in the bay by themselves. After superstorm Sandy, we hauled 160 cu. Yards of debris to the dump. This consisted of timbers of every conceivable dimension matted through an 18 inch layer of plastic and organic matter. These timbers bristled with sharp nails which posed a very real threat for anyone walking through it. The open ROW leaves a rout for a repeat of this scene as the land behind it and the Wacker property are very low lying. NPPOA has a right and responsibility to alleviate this potential liability. Lastly, on a more personal level, we are greatly saddened by the tone of Mr. Monaghan's letter. It suggests that we acted with no concern for our neighbors. Superstorm Sandy forced many hard decisions on us and we took steps we deemed in the mutual interests of the town, surrounding property owners and ourselves. With our house inundated, the first we heard from them was rumors months later that they were dis-satisfied with the bulkhead. Where were they when this was going on? Was a phone call too much effort? In the 44 years that we have lived here, we have always had the best relations with our neighbors. We rescued countless boats moored in front of our house and been cheerful to those who actually have used the right of way, despite their occasional intrusions onto our property. I think the lack of signatures on Mr. Monaghan's letter bears this out. Thanks for your time. Jim, Chris, Jon, Tim and Tom Wacker rAN 2 2 2014 ~U A BO 04+1 s udd • 0 To the Trustees of the Town of Southold I ask that you accept this letter instead of my appearance. 1 am an attorney on trial in Supreme court Nassau County on trial in the case of Stanco v Albanese Index No 24830/09 and cannot appear in person. If the Court adjourns the case for any reason, 1 will personally appear at the hearing. I reside at 2715 Nassau Point Rd, one home from the right of way. I have read the letter from Mr and Mrs Monaghan and their two neighbors to the trustees and would like to support the opposite opinion. The bulkhead built by the Wackers is a very good improvement to that area of the right of way. Before Sandy, I had the best bulkhead in the area. But the Palmeri bulkhead (between myself and the right of way) was smaller than mine. My neighbors to the other side also had a smaller bulkhead. When Sandy hit, my bulkhead was fine, but the water went over both my neighbors' bulkheads, flooded my property from the sides and washed out the landscape that way. Since Sandy, both my neighbors built bulkheads even stronger than mine. Two points. 1. 1 don't have a dog in this fight. Bulk heading the right of way or not has no effect on my property. 2. If the right of way is not bulkheaded, the next storm will severely damage both Palmeri and Wacker and the right of way itself. Both Palmeri and Wacker have built wonderful bulkheads that will repel anything short of the next Noah incident. The water will have nowhere to go except up the right of way, spill over to the PalmeriNVacker properties and wipe them out from the sides. The damage to the right of way will be greater than Sandy. Remember the Wacker/Palmeri bulkheads were nothing and so the water equally attacked the entire area in Sandy. Without the right of way bulkhead, the water will have only one place to go. With respect to the claim in the Monaghan letter that the stairs make access difficult, I'd suggest an on site visit. I remember the piles of stones that accumulated at that spot on occasions. It's my opinion that the stairs make the right of way easily accessible for people and kayak type small boats as well. Regardless of what decision you make, I want to state that the statement in the Monaghan letter that the Wackers installed that bulkhead for selfish purposes is not just wrong, ft's mean spirited and disgraceful. I have listened on many an evening to my next door neighbor Felix Palmeri telling me of the history of that area and Nassau Point for the 40 years he's lived there and times before that that he knew of. I've only been there for 12 years. Felix has told me of countless stories of the dedication of the entire Wacker family, especially Mrs Wacker to Nassau Point. That bulkhead was built at their expense for the good of the entire area. They had their bulkhead guy there and could've told him to stop at their line. No new buyer of their property would know the difference. They had him keep going for all the right reasons and not an ounce of selfishness. Further, in my first seven years I had many conversations with Mr Wacker. I've also come to know the sons. I'm disappointed in my neighbors signing a letter with that charge. t n GQF,PV.E 1 uu{ JAN222014~ The claim that it blocks their view borders on the insane. Look at it from the street. The Goldmans signed that claim. My belief is that it was the Goldmans who called the Wacker sons and asked for permission to take down some Wacker trees to improve the Goldmans' view of the water. The Wackers gave permission immediately. That's the kind of neighbors the Wackers have always been. Look at it with an open mind and see if the area isn't much improved. Respectfully submitted, Bob and Jackie Sullivan 2 To the "'trustees of the Town of Southold, 1 am Felix Palmeri, the neighbor who lives on the right of way in question for approximately 40 years. The Wackers have been there for approximately 50 years. have read the letter sent to you by my neighbors, Bob and Jackie Sullivan. Their letter is accurate in all respects and I agree with it in all respects. 1 am writing this letter in support of the bulkhead installed by the Wackers because 1 am being treated for cancer and currently undergoing chemotherapy each week which prevents a personal appearance. Thank you for your consideration. nD[E L- P N 2 2 2014 fJJ~ Felix R. Palmeri ar+ p "r Y ~ D D January 20, 2014 JAN 2 1 2014 JJailiud 'lUnii Trustees To the Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold, We are the immediate neighbors of the northernmost Nassau Point right-of-way, which is just south of Vanston Road off of Nassau Point Road. While some of us have owned and enjoyed our homes for over 30 years, even the newest homeowner of the group grew has spent decades on the North Fork having spent summers here since childhood. Some of us now live here year round while others are primarily summer residents. We are writing to object to the construction of a bulkhead built across the right away by the Wackers on property owned by the Nassau Point Property Owners Association (NPPOA), a community group to which each of us belongs. We also seek the removal of the bulkhead. Since we recognize that the NPPOA is strapped financially and approved its construction because of an admitted error by one of the NPPOA board members, we as neighbors and members of the organization have even offered to help fund the cost of the bulkhead's removal. When Sandy hit in 2012, like everyone else we were faced with damage to our properties. There was, however, no permanent damage done to the right-of-way (see pictures). While the right-of-way, which we as a group have long maintained as the NPPOA has neither the funds nor the manpower to do it, was littered with debris from the storm, it was completely intact. Instead of "hardscaping" or bulkheading common along much of Nassau Point's waterfront, the right-of-way had natural "softscaping" with pebbles, sea grasses and sand that absorbed and dissipated the force of the storm. Yes, there was water covering much of the right-of-way and when the water receded it left all sorts of flotsam behind. There was, however, no scouring and since there was no bulkhead there was no structure to repair. One of our group removed all the debris and took it to the dump returning the right-of-way to its previous, natural state. Shortly after cleaning up from Sandy, we were shocked and irate when we discovered a bulkhead had been built across the right-of-way. We subsequently learned that the Wackers had contacted the NPPOA and were given verbal authorization to extend the bulkhead across the right-of-way in order to supposedly protect their property. The officers of the NPPOA involved in the decision mistakenly believed a bulkhead already existed there and that the Wackers were merely offering to repair it at no expense to the NPPOA. As neighbors who use the right-of-way, we were stunned. None of us had been informed. No notice was given. No calls were made to the neighbors by the Wackers or by the NPPOA. In fact, the Wackers have not even approached or called any of us since then though they are well aware that we are irate. It was only when we investigated at the end of last summer that we discovered that the work had proceeded without a permit and that the Town was not aware of the bulkhead either. If the Wackers and the NPPOA had sought a permit, we would have been notified and given an opportunity to voice our objections before any work had started. In fad, executive board members of the NPPOA have told us that they would not have approved the bulkhead if they had known none existed in the first place. Unfortunately, the bulkhead is now in place. We want it removed and the right-of-way returned to its previous condition. It serves no purpose. The bulkhead fixed a problem that did not exist. Approving its existence because it is already in place is an affront to the normal approval process designed to protect property holder rights. The Wackers and their contractors were well aware that there was no permit for the work and that the permit that had been granted only allowed them to return their property to "pre-storm condition"; the permit did not extend to the right-of-way. By skipping the permitting process, they avoided tipping their hand regarding their plans and alerting the neighbors. We believe that the Wackers took the action they did because they are in the process of putting the house on the market and want to improve it resale value. The better solution is for them to run a return or an 1. off their bulkhead perpendicular to the shoreline as Dr. Palmeri has done. Allowing residents to bypass the permitting process and build what they want with no consideration of the rights and views of their neighbors and then allow them to ask for forgiveness once caught is a practice that must be stopped. We have all used the right-of-way for years. We have carried kayaks, Sunfish, and Hobie Cats down to the water to be launched. We have used it as an entry and exit point for walks on the beach. We have fished from there. Our children have not only learned boating skills but have learned to be independent too as it was easy for them to navigate their way to the water and back as there was no obstruction. Elderly parents and grandparents were easily able to make their way down to the shore to walk or watch their children and grandchildren. And while we are the Nassau Point residents most impacted, there are many other residents that have used it over the years. Now, the bulkhead has changed all of that. With the bulkhead there and stairs to navigate, access is no longer convenient for children, the elderly or those with kayaks and small sailboats. The right-of-way survived the wont storm of the last 30 years intact as it had survived all the other storms during the 30+ years we have observed the right-of-way. If it remains, the bulkhead will have to be maintained, stairs replaced, and the romp that the NPPOA has suggested as a compromise measure to placate us as neighbors and try to make amends for the error of an NPPOA executive board members will have to replaced as well. The bulkhead detracts from what was the sole natural right-of-way on Nassau Point. We have no objection to the Wackers seeking to protect their home or increase its resale value. What we do object to is the surreptitious fashion with which they shirted around the permitting process to construct a bulkhead that detracts from the value of the homes of their neighbors and the beauty and utility of a community-loved and well-used right-of-way. We implore you to deny the permit request for the bulkhead, mandate that it be removed and the property be returned to its previous condition. Respectfully submitted, Ken & Meg Monaghan Shannon & Deb Goldman Jamie & Jodi Carse Photo 1: Right of Way During Sandy ' k ~ ti o o t • ~ " r - ~ s~, ~ ~ ~ it y Irv ! + J, ` , _ y~ Ip. •E p A. DEC 1 0 2013 December 9, 2013 _ Si1u[I10i~ ,py,fi To the Trustees of the Town of Southold, Board of Thistees We are the immediate neighbors of the northernmost Nassau Point right-of-way, which is just south of Vanston Road. While some of us have owned and enjoyed our homes for over 30 years, even the newest homeowner of the group grew up as a North Fork summer resident and now lives here year round. We are writing to object to the construction of a bulkhead built across the right away by the Wackers on property owned by the Nassau Point Property Owners Association (NPPOA), a community group to which each of us belongs. When Sandy hit last year, like everyone else we were faced with damage to our properties. There was, however, no permanent damage done to the right-of-way (see pictures attached to separate email). While the right-of-way, which we as a group have long maintained as the NPPOA has neither the funds nor the manpower to do it, was littered with debris from the storm, it was completely intact. Instead of "hardscaping" or bulkheading common along much of Nassau Point's waterfront, the right-of-way had "softscaping" with pebbles, sea grasses and sand that absorbed and dissipated the force of the storm. Yes, there was water covering much of the right-of-way and when the water receded it left all sorts of flotsam behind. There was, however, no scouring and since there was no bulkhead there was no structure to repair. One of our group of neighbors removed all the debris and took it to the dump returning the right-of-way to its previous, natural state. We were shocked and irate when we discovered a bulkhead had been built. We subsequently learned that the Wackers had contacted the NPPOA and were given verbal authorization to extend the bulkhead across the right-of-way in order to supposedly protect their property. The officers of the NPPOA involved in the decision mistakenly believed a bulkhead already existed there and that the Wackers were merely offering to repair it at no expense to the NPPOA. As neighbors who use the right-of-way, we were stunned. None of us had been informed. No notice was given. No calls were made by the Wackers or by the NPPOA. In fact, the Wackers have not even approached or called any of us after the work was done even though they are well aware that we are irate. It was only when we investigated over the course of the summer did we discover that the work had proceeded without a permit and that the Town was not aware of the bulkhead either. As part of the permitting process, we would have been notified and given an opportunity to voice our views before any work had started. The bulkhead is now in place. We want it removed and the right-of-way returned to its previous condition. It serves no purpose. Approving the right-of-ways existence because it is already in place is an affront to the normal approval process designed to protect property holder rights. The Wackers and their contractors were well aware that there was no permit for the work and that the permit they had been granted only allowed them to return their property to "pre-storm condition"; the permit did not extend to the right-of-way. We believe that the Wackers took the action they did because they are in the process of putting the house on the market and want to improve it resale value. The better solution is for them to run a return or an L off their bulkhead perpendicular to the shoreline as Dr. Palmeri has done along his property line on the other side of the right-of-way. Allowing residents to build what they want with no consideration of the views of their neighbors and the permitting process and then asking for forgiveness later is a practice that must be stopped. We have all used the right-of-way for years. We have carried kayaks, Sunfish, and Hobie Cats down to the water to be launched. We have used it as an entry and exit point for walks on the beach. We have fished from there. Our children have not only learned boating skills but have learned to be independent too as it was easy for them to navigate their way to the water and back as there was no obstruction. Elderly parents and grandparents were easily able to make their way down to the shore to walk or watch their children and grandchildren. And while we are the Nassau Point residents most impacted, there are many other residents that have used it over the years. Now, the bulkhead has changed all of that. With the bulkhead there and stairs to navigate, access is no longer convenient for children, the elderly or those with kayaks and small sailboats. The right-of-way survived the worst storm of the last 30 year intact. If it remains, the bulkhead will have to be maintained, stairs replaced, and ramp that the NPPOA has suggested to placate us as neighbors will have to replaced as well. It detracts from what was the sole natural right-of-way on Nassau Point. The right-of-way was installed only because of an error by the NPPOA and, in subsequent conversations with its officers, they have told us that us that (2) they would not have authorized its construction if they knew no bulkhead existed before and (2) they would remove the bulkhead now if they had the financial resources to do so. We have no objection to the Wackers seeking to protect their home or increase its resale value. What we do object to is them doing it in a fashion that detracts from the value of the homes of their neighbors and the beauty and utility of a community-loved and well- used right-of-way. We implore you to deny the permit request for the bulkhead and mandate that it be removed and the property be returned to its previous condition. Respectfully submitted, 11 Ken & Meg Monaghan DEC 1 0 20. 13 $bU[ho,i Shannon & Deb Goldman ~oard of TTruste( Jamie & Jodi Carse Cantrell, Elizabeth From: Kenneth Monaghan <kenmonaghan@me.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 9:59 AM To: Cantrell, Elizabeth Cc: Nunemaker, Amanda Subject: Fwd: Wacker Bulkhead and ROW pics from SS Sandy - Message is from an unknown sender Thanks again! I Ken Monaghan DEC ~ ~ 1J13 Begin forwarded message: Soac`i oic From: Kenneth Monaghan <kenmonaghan(ame.com> Subject: Wacker Bulkhead and ROW pics from SS Sandy Date: December 10, 2013 9:16:16 AM EST To: Amanda Nunemaker <amanda.nunemaker(a)town.southold.nv.us> Cc: Shannon & Deb Goldman <shannon(a)rockville.ty>, Jodi Sweetbaum <Jodi all- purpose.com>, Jamie Carse <lamie(a)urbanbuildersnvc.com>, Meg Monaghan <megmonaghan(cDoptonline.net> Wacker Bulkhead during Super Storm Sandy t i ~ Nunemaker, Amanda From: Kenneth Monaghan <kenmonaghan@me.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 9:57 AM To: Cantrell, Elizabeth Cc: Nunemaker, Amanda Subject: Fwd: Letter to Trustees Regarding Nassau Point Right-of-Way - Message is from an unknown sender Attachments: Southold Trustees.docx As discussed. Pictures to follow shortly. Thanks, Ken Monaghan Begin forwarded message: From: Kenneth Monaghan <kenmonaghan me.com> Subject: Letter to Trustees Regarding Nassau Point Right-of-Way Date: December 10, 2013 9:14:45 AM EST To: Amanda Nunemaker <amanda.nunemaker(atown.Southold. ny.us> Cc: Meg Monaghan <megmonaghan(cDoptonline. net>, Jamie Carse <IamieCa~urbanbuildersnyc.com>, Jodi Sweetbaum <Jodi(c)_all-purpose.com>, Shannon & Deb Goldman <shannon(d-)rockville.ty> Amanda, I have attached a letter to the trustees, which has been drafted with the assistance of the property owners listed as signatories. We will submit a signed, hard copy at the meeting. I am also sending via a separate email photos of the property during and after the storm. Please let me know if you have troubles receiving or distributing the photos. Regards, Ken Monaghan t rA. ~ h -41 rya L ~ro ~ M NIP ._',fi~t 'r9ic°sSf y ` -5A 4 ' - F, WON Wacker Bulkhead during Super Storm Sandy c~ys~wy. ? ~a`~~ Yi;~ 1F~ I ."..9• 'tea"' w ¢ .f~ . r } r Right of way during Super Storm Sandy a.- ` r-,„,„„,`,•a' .rte: a~ u , Right of way after Super Storm Sandy f y~ ~ N y 1 fi yr K es'~°" J'N ~.K~..typ++~~y~ ~ ¢ ~ } PEA ~ y,Y wi. . z 3 s , O O 1 O C js~ ~'1 _ , 7 .s f Ike e IV 4A r f p' Z f N ~ F ~ 4~ t ~ A , t I '0 r s Z W ri • --i. A i N 1 1 t,~ x- Z; 1 -1-1 ~~aarr{+ t} yy • 4 Y 1 1M•3•1 xV \ a r t SUFF01~ James F. King, President P.O. Box 1179 Bob Ghosio, Jr., Vice-President x+p v'y Southold, NY 11971 Dave Bergen ? Telephone (631 765-1892 John Bredemeyer Fax (631) 765-6641 Michael J. Domino Gy ,yo1,~ ,~aor Southold Town Board of Trustees Field Inspection/Work Session Report Date/Time: Lehnert Construction on behalf of NASSAU POINT PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION requests a Wetland Permit for the as-built 17'6" vinyl bulkhead connected to adjacent properties; and for the as-built 4' wide x 6' long beach access stairs. Located: End of Bayview Road off Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue. Type of area to be impacted: -Saltwater Wetland -Freshwater Wetland -Sound -Bay Distance of proposed work to edge of wetland Part of Town Code proposed work falls under: _Chapt.275 _Chapt. 111 -other Type of Application: _ Wetland -Coastal Erosion -Amendment -Administrative-Emergency Pre-Submission Violation Info needed: Modifications: Conditions: Present Were: J. King _B. Ghosio D. Bergen, J. Bredemeyer Michael Domino D. Dzenkowski other Form filled out in the field by Mailed/Faxed to: Date: t~SUFFO(B James F. King, President ~Y Cn- P.O. Box 1179 Bob Ghosio, Jr., Vice-President 7~S Southold, NY 11971 Dave Bergen Telephone (631 765-1892 John Bredemeyer Fax (631) 765-6641 Michael J. Domino W col Southold Town Board of Trustees Field I spection[Work Session Report Date/Time: Lehnert Construction on behalf of NASSAU POINT PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION requests a Wetland Permit for the as-built 17'6" vinyl bulkhead connected to adjacent properties; and for the as-built 4' wide x 6' long beach access stairs. Located: End of Bayview Road off Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue. of area to be impacted: -Saltwater Wetland -Freshwater Wetland -Sound -Bay Distance of proposed work to edge of wetland P ,pWaf-Town Code proposed work falls under: _Chapt.275 _Chapt. 11x11 -other Type of Application: Wetland -Coastal Erosion -Amendment -Administrative-Emergency _Pre-Submission Violation Info needed: Modifications: Conditions: Pres>e ere: J. King B. Ghosio _ D. Bergen, _J. Bredemeyer ~M hael Domino D. Dzenkowski other Form filled out in the fiel'1 by Mailed/Faxed to: Date: 4 earl ; y . w .j eta y yam! Nunemaker, Amanda From: Joseph O'Leary Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 8:23 AM To: Nunemaker, Amanda Subject: 2455 Nassau Pt Rd Attachments: 2455 nassau pt rd 1 jpg; 2455 nassau pt rd 2 jpg Amanda, I went and viewed the work. The homeowner has done the work as per the permit. I can contact Environmental East and summons them for work performed without a permit on the association property easement. Secondly, it would be a violation to the association since it is there property. Who do I contact to summons the association. Or would you prefer to ask Jim King and get back to me in regard to summonsing both. I have attached pictures. Please also view Google. I do see a setback bulkhead that was originally there in years past. B.C.Joseph O'Leary M-7 Southold Town Police Dept. 631-765-2798 office 1 r R- - fit: " l J} s - k ~r`u'I•-r1.~r~~'+.-. - - - ~ h~2.~ t ~ yY Y~ . dd*'~'j~pY+~ ,3'.ff"'G.~= Sort, r \ d Y f f • ~ 1 T i is } 3 4 t 'a A A., D-A A .L _ X15 I + + Q: .vW •t 9 y~ q 1 O + Mmnai J 1 r , + J o " ^ N S w fl9WOWAi6l5 cOVE \ x + `wY ~ 1OM10F 5g1lHgD 1 i . + ? / emu. + ~:w + s f + ~s`yA + .a«a , `woo t 9 fNYNMTBt CN£ ~ 1 + 4p t\ S a :J n COUNTY OF SUFFOLK © > awmnm cmxro ~ k~ _ ~ -Qt- ~ ~ = s= _-__e-_-_ _ _ RmI P~rWCr1Y TU 3xriu Pperu.Y v s AIM t.4 _ TOWn Of SOU[hOIU -A-2559 Suffolk County, NY The People of the State of New York vs. I IA4Tyye~~E RBST E Mq INI s271,~ 40 LICENSE OB gym STATE TYPE OF UCENS GATE ENPMFB WlE asmmN aPEIUTpi } t ~ry THE oPEBaroP oB BEasTEBEO OhNEn OP PLATE N0. OATE E%PIBES 6TATE PIAIETPE ? N.Y. ? N.J. ? N.Y. ? N.J. ? ? PASS ? COMM ? VEHICLE MANE ? 0000E ? SIACN ? CHEV ? CA c ? PONIMC ? POBO ? OLDS ? Km ? TOYOTA ? VIX1(S ? BOGY ? 20N ? /OH ? BUS ? MCY ? S.W. TVPE ? TBIAS( ? TNIILEIi ? VAN ? VIN NUMF%R THE PE3180N OESGOBm ABOVE IS ClWIOW) AS FOLLOWS RACE aF OCCWBEHCE~ J A'fS. MIEO CFFENBE TWE PM CI VA(,IW(£OR 811FF U(GIXMIY NY I TNIN OFSECiI(W SL9. OF THE?YGENCLE ANO TBAii1C lAW OPTME BTATE OF NEW YOAN (SPECIFY) OS 01 BUS ? ' D SFEEOINO D EIV E / MPH IN A MPH $d1E YMpEMP/JION ? FACNAL PA11T y._. FOILTVB} OCT 2 13 THE ABOVE NAMEOOEFENOAMOIO ONTHE STATED MMAMEANOPLACE .SLi 3 Y£e' f IJ than awn 7t1( Te 1L L 1 ? f Ih111 TI.Fa.gwp Yeween(p.npr).ItrowMEO•I.naar6,N.mm+Ibna0YIN1.w.a.w MMFnAF.d! a 1) i~i, In PaRNING 6CIIEDUlEO flNE i - THE PEABON OL9CBIBlD AB.SEIB BUMMO TO AT sOBTNaLn,arm JMBTICECOIMr, ezr BOIIIE IS. u, [OUnew, nLOIn, MY }}m L;~,r IMf 'I~~~Y\~\V\VVV WTE 1 6 r aT f ~L, FNBE c~-TEMENB IEREINME RMBIV~LEA9ACWSAMSpFMFAN~11 q}MIMNT TOl6LTWf10.6OFTEPLNY.& /V. COM1PlNNMIi MTEV < t I - ./I' /.I may/ O FICSR'S COPY i x L fi`x` 12/10/2013 15:14 6317306 LEHNERT • PAGE 01 L E H N E I \T 6700 Aldrich lane CERTWIN) Mattituck, NY, 11952 QtEEN HUADM CON5TRUCTI ON PROFES90ML Phone: G3 .734.8362 Pax : G3 1.734,227G www.lehnertconstruction.com December 10, 2013 Board of Trustees Town of Southold To whom it may concern: I would like to postpone my hearing for the "Bayview Road" bulkhead for the Nassau Point Property Owners Association. I would like to have the hearing on the Jan 22, 2014 date. Thanks, e ert D 1 1 if ~K A D D DEC) D 2013 5uidio~a axn - OFFICE LOCATION: OF SOUjyol MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex O P.O. Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 * Southold, NY 11971 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) u+ AMC Southold, NY 11971 C Telephone: 631 765-1938 7~ Fax: 631765-3136 o~y COU LOCAL WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION PROGRAM TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM D DEC -9 20,13 To: Jim King, President Town of Southold Board of Trustees 8 ar of Trustees From: Mark Terry, Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Date: December 5, 2013 Re: Proposed Wetland Permit for NASSAU POINT PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION SCTM#1000-104.-13-6 Lehnert Construction on behalf of NASSAU POINT PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION requests a Wetland Permit for the as-built 17'6" vinyl bulkhead connected to adjacent properties; and for the as- built 4' wide x 6' long beach access stairs. Located: End of Bayview Road off Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue. It is my recommendation that the proposed action is INCONSISTENT with LWRP Policy 6.3 (below) and therefore, INCONSISTENT with the LWRP. 6.3 Protect and restore tidal and freshwater wetlands. A. Comply with statutory and regulatory requirements of the Southold Town Board of Trustees laws and regulations for all Andros Patent and other lands under their jurisdiction 1. Comply with Trustee regulations and recommendations as set forth in Trustee permit conditions. The structure described was not constructed pursuant Board of Trustee review or a Chapter 275 Wetland Permit. Pursuant to Chapter 268, the Board of Trustees shall consider this recommendation in preparing its written determination regarding the consistency of the proposed action. Cc: Lori Hulse, Assistant Town Attorney 0 ~~SOFFO~~Q2 • Peter Young, Chairman Town Hall, 53095 Main Rd. Lauren Standish, Secretary On P.O. Box 1179 'F Southold, NY 11971 Telephone (631) 765-1892 Fax (631) 765-6641 Conservation Advisory Council Town of Southold At the meeting of the Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council held Wed., December 4, 2013 the following recommendation was made: Moved by Doug Hardy, seconded by Jack McGreevy, it was RESOLVED to SUPPORT the application of NASSAU POINT PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOC. to construct 17'-6" of new vinyl bulkhead and 4' wide X 6' long beach access stairs to connect to neighboring properties due to damage from storm. Located: Bayview Rd. Nassau Point Rd., Cutchogue. SCTM#104-13- Inspected by: Doug Hardy The CAC Supports the application using best management practices on the beach stairs. Vote of Council: Ayes: All Motion Carried James F. King, President *QF SOUIyo Town Hall Annex Bob Ghoaio, Jr., Vice-President 54375 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Dave Bergen # Southold, New York 11971-0959 John Brademeyer H Michael J. Domino Telephone (631) 765-1892 U' Fax (631) 765-6641 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Offlce Use Only oastal Erosion Permit Application Wedand Permit Application Administrative Permit _Amendm=,ransferl xte ion ~ReceivedApplication 13 n E Q F l~! Received Fee:$ G V ...C.t} - D TXompletedApplication ete 1[3 Incompl - D _SEQRA Classification: ~~T 2 Q 2013 Type I_Type Il_Unlisted_ oordination:(date sent) WRP Consistency Asse me Fornt Z 3 dm7 r V CAC Referral Sent: late of Inspection: -Receipt of CAC Report: _Lead Agency Determination: Technical Review: Public Hearing Hel Resolution:'"`" tt~' Name ofApplicant Nassau Point Property Owners Association Mailing Address P.O. Box 346 ,Cutchogue, NY, 11935 Phone Number:( ) Suffolk County Tax Map Number: 1000- Property Location: " Bayview Road" , Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue, NY (provide LILCO Pole distance to cross streets, and location) AGENT: Lehnert Construction (If applicable) Address: 6700 Aldrich Lane, Mattituck, NY, 11952 Phone: 734-8362 Board of Trustees Application. GENERAL DATA Land Area (in square feet): 5800 sf Area Zoning: R-40 Previous use of property: Beach Access Intended use of property: Beach Access Covenants and Restrictions on property? Yes X No If "Yes", please provide a copy. Will this project require a Building Permit as per Town Code? Yes X No If "Yes", be advised this application will be reviewed by the Building Dept. prior to a Board of Trustee review and Elevation Plans will be required. Does this project require a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals? Yes X No If "Yes", please provide copy of decision. Will this project require any demolition as per Town Code or as determined by the Building Dept.? Yes X No Does the structure (s) on property have a valid Certificate of Occupancy? Yes X No Prior permits/approvals for site improvements: Agency Date i i X No prior permits/approvals for site improvements. Has any permit/approval ever been revoked or suspended by a governmental agency? X No Yes If yes, provide explanation: Project Description (use attachments if necessary): Construct 1T-6" of new vinyl bulkhead and 4'-0" wide x 6'-0" long beach access stairs to connect neighboring properties due to damage from superstorm Sandy Ad of Trustees Application • WETLAND/TRUSTEE LANDS APPLICATION DATA Purpose of the proposed operations: Construct 17'-6" of new vinyl bulkhead and 4'-0" wide x 6'-0" long beach access stairs to connect neighboring properties due to damage from superstorm Sandy Area of wetlands on lot: N/A square feet Percent coverage of lot: N/A % Closest distance between nearest existing structure and upland edge of wetlands: 0 feet Closest distance between nearest proposed structure and upland edge of wetlands: 0 feet Does the project involve excavation or filling? No X Yes If yes, how much material will be excavated? 0 cubic yards How much material will be filled? +/-10 cubic yards Depth of which material will be removed or deposited: feet Proposed slope throughout the area of operations: exist to remain Manner in which material will be removed or deposited: All materia will be deposited from upland of work area. i 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): There will be no adverse affects as this structure connects two previously permitted bulkheads. i 617.20 Appendix B Short Environmental Assessment Farm Instructions for Completing Part 1 - Project Information. The applicant or project sponsor is responsible for the completion of Part 1. Responses become part of the application for approval or funding, are subject to public review, and may be subject to further verification. Complete Part I based on information currently available. If additional research or investigation would be needed to fully respond to any item, please answer as thoroughly as possible based on current information. Complete all items in Part I. You may also provide any additional information which you believe will be needed by or useful to the lead agency; attach additional pages as necessary to supplement any item. Part 1 - Project and Sponsor Information Name of Action or Project: Aa vtew good )?a ead Project Location (describe, and attach a location map): Ba view Rea pt , N.t 55..r Ioo~r,~ r eV ci a~vG Brief Description of Proyposed Action: / . l Co n 5 ~rv67 ~7 0 t t 4T[~ r1 ew It~ ts~ ~?1 04 1 LL ~0 In<l4le •X /0 /on5 6eksh "fee" 3Ta// Gonneo~ net51 6oi~n3 ~rX",,Aes OW"' ~/'0»'? 5v tr~-1o/fin Name of Applicant & Sponsor: a1 Telephone: NCcSSav `Odd) 7 P!0 ?q ~wrlC/5 HSyoG, E-Mail: Address: P, o, anX 346 City/P0: State: Zip Code: i c.'1 rod oe by 11,73-5- 1. Does the proposed action only involve the legislative adoption of a plan, local law, ordinance, NO YES administrative rule, or regulation? If Yes, attach a narrative description of the intent of the proposed action and the environmental resources that may be affected in the municipality and proceed to Part 2. If no, continue to question 2. 2. Does the proposed action require a permit, approval or funding from any other governmental Agency? NO YES If Yes, list agency(s) name and permit or approval: Fv7 ? 3.a. Total acreage of the site of the proposed action? 11.3 acres b. Total acreage to be physically disturbed? ,D/ acres c. Total acreage (project site and any contiguous properties) owned or controlled by the applicant or project sponsor? _L13 acres 4. Check all land uses that occur on, adjoining and near the proposed action. y~ []Urban ?Rural(non-agriculture) Industrial []Commercial ZResidential(suburban) ?Porest []Agriculture []Aquatic ?Other(specify): ? Park land Page 1 of 4 5. Is the proposed action, NO YES N/A a. A permitted use under the zoning regulations? ? ? b. Consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan? ? ? 0 6. Is the proposed action consistent with the predominant character of the existing built or natural NO YES landscape? ? 9 7. Is the site of the proposed action located in, or does it adjoin, a state listed Critical Environmental Area? NO YES If Yes, identify: ® ? 8. a. Will the proposed action result in a substantial increase in traffic above present levels? NO YES ?X ? b. Are public transportation service(s) available at or near the site of the proposed action? IS ? c. Are any pedestrian accommodations or bicycle routes available on or near site of the proposed action? © El 9. Does the proposed action meet or exceed the state energy code requirements? NO YES If the proposed action will exceed requirements, describe design features and technologies: © F-1 10. Will the proposed action connect to an existing public/private water supply? NO YES If No, describe method for providing potable water: A / ° M © ? I l . Will the proposed action connect to existing wastewater utilities? NO YES If No, describe method for providing wastewater treatment: PIA ® ? 12. a. Does the site contain a structure that is listed on either the State or National Register of Historic NO YES Places? ? b. Is the proposed action located in an archeological sensitive area? 13. a. Does any portion of the site of the proposed action, or lands adjoining the proposed action, contain NO YES wetlands or other waterbodies regulated by a federal, state or local agency? b. Would the proposed action physically alter, or encroach into, any existing wetland or waterbody? If Yes, identify the wetland or waterbody and extent of alterations in square feet or acres: 14. Identify the typical habitat types that occur on, or are likely to be found on the project site. Check all that apply: MShoreline ?Forest ?Agricultural/grasslands ?Earlymid-successional ? Wetland ? Urban ? Suburban 15. Does the site of the proposed action contain any species of animal, or associated habitats, listed NO YES by the State or Federal government as threatened or endangered? N ? 16. Is the project site located in the 100 year flood plain? NO YES 17. Will the proposed action create storm water discharge, either from point or non-point sources? NO YES If Yes, ® ? a. Will storm water discharges flow to adjacent properties? 'z;7'NO YES b. Will storm water discharges be directed to established conveyance systems (runoff and storm drains)? If Yes, briefly describe: NNO AYES Page 2 of 4 18. Does the proposed action include construction or other activities that result in the impoundment of NO YES water or other liquids (e.g. retention pond, waste lagoon, dam)? If Yes, explain purpose and size: 19 El 19. Has the site of the proposed action or an adjoining property been the location of an active or closed NO YES solid waste management facility? If Yes, describe: ® ? S 20. Has the site of the proposed action or an adjoining property been the subject of remediation (ongoing or N:ip completed) for hazardous waste? If Yes, describe: I AF FIRM THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE AND ACCURATE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Applicant/sponsor na Date: ~O 23 ' I-3 Signature: Part 2 - Impact Assessment. The Lead Agency is responsible for the completion of Part 2. Answer all of the following questions in Part 2 using the information contained in Part 1 and other materials submitted by the project sponsor or otherwise available to the reviewer. When answering the questions the reviewer should be guided by the concept "Have my responses been reasonable considering the scale and context of the proposed action?" No, or Moderate small to large impact impact may may occur occur I. Will the proposed action create a material conflict with an adopted land use plan or zoning ? regulations? 2. Will the proposed action result in a change in the use or intensity of use of land? ? 3. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of the existing community? ? 4. Will the proposed action have an impact on the environmental characteristics that caused the establishment of a Critical Environmental Area (CEA)? 5. Will the proposed action result in an adverse change in the existing level of traffic or ? affect existing infrastructure for mass transit, biking or walkway? 6. Will the proposed action cause an increase in the use of energy and it fails to incorporate f l,Y ? reasonably available energy conservation or renewable energy opportunities? U 7. Will the proposed action impact existing: I ? a. public / private water supplies? L`J b. public / private wastewater treatment utilities? 8. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of important historic, archaeological, ? architectural or aesthetic resources? 9. Will the proposed action result in an adverse change to natural resources (e.g., wetlands, I ? waterbodies, groundwater, air quality, flora and fauna)? u Page 3 of 4 No, or Moderate small to large impact impact may may occur occur 10. Will the proposed action result in an increase in the potential for erosion, flooding or drainage ~y ? problems? L~ I 11. Will the proposed action create a hazard to environmental resources or human health? LJ Part 3 - Determination of significance. The Lead Agency is responsible for the completion of Part 3. For every question in Part 2 that was answered "moderate to large impact may occur", or if there is a need to explain why a particular element of the proposed action may or will not result in a significant adverse environmental impact, please complete Part 3. Part 3 should, in sufficient detail, identify the impact, including any measures or design elements that have been included by the project sponsor to avoid or reduce impacts. Part 3 should also explain how the lead agency determined that the impact may or will not be significant. Each potential impact should be assessed considering its setting, probability of occurring, duration, irreversibility, geographic scope and magnitude. Also consider the potential for short-term, long-term and cumulative impacts. ? Check this box if you have determined, based on the information and analysis above, and any supporting documentation, that the proposed action may result in one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts and an environmental impact statement is required. yn~/ Check this box if you have determined, based on the information and analysis above, and any supportin documentation, that the proposed action will not result in any significant v e environmental impacts. 'l Town of Southold - Board of Trustees 1112 -Z 3 11 N Name of Lead Agency Date J{j le, f /,c . /,::~/A President Print or Type Name of Responsible Offic in Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer ignature of Responsible Officer in ad Agency Signature of Preparer (if different from Responsible Officer) PRINT Page 4 of 4 PROOF OF MAILING OF NOTICE ATTACH CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS Name: Address: STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK Ro6fr~- L-thv/C/~- residing at_,700 A)dsFjc4 GGnG ^f r ~t/C , being duly sworn, deposes and says that on the 3 day of Der 2011, deponent mailed a true copy of the Notice set forth in the Board of Trustees Application, directed to each of the above named persons at the addresses set opposite there respective names; that the addresses set opposite the names of said persons are the address of said persons as shown on the current assessment roll of the Town of Southold; that said Notices were mailed at the United States Post Officeat `,A ur e j , that said Notices were mailed to each of s 'd persons by CERTIFIED MAWRETURN RECEIPT. Sworn to Ilpfore me this r Day of 2. 20_a Notary Public GERI C. HENLE NOTARY PUBLIC, State of New York No.02HE6016925 r~y~y Qualified in Suffolk Tenn Expires November 0~uO(v pggFFO( James F. King. Presidenl co Town Hall. 53095 Main Rd. Bob Ghosio. Jr.. Vice-President r, T 1W. Box 1179 Dave Bergen • Southold. NY 11971 John Bredemeyer y1/Q .aO' Telephone (631) 765-1892 Michael .1. Domino 1 y' Pas (631) 765-6641 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BOARD OF TRUSTEES: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD In the Matter of the Application of NASSAU POINT PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) STATE OF NEW YORK) AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING TO BE COA/9PLETEDD AFTER POSTING REMAIN/.S IN PLACE FOR EIGHT DAYS 1, ~bGte~ Lthr)N7- residing at/dba p 700 /~fp~?I~~ li~+r/C being duly swom, depose and say: That on the :3 day of atG 2013. 1 personally posted the property known as 1R.4 4110 W by placing the Board of Tru ees official poster where it can easily be seen, and that I have checked to be sure the poster has remained in place for eight days prior to the date of the public hearing. Date of hearing noted thereon to be held Wednesday. December 11, 2013. Dated: z2~ 55 I na re) Sworn to efore me this J 1-0~ da;ofDUllc 20 1 3 0, 4~z_ Notar GERI C. HENLE NOTARY PUBLIC, State of New York No. 02HE6016925 Qualified in Suffolk County Term Expires November 30, Q NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held by the SOUTHOLD BOARD OF TRUSTEES at the Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold New York concerning this property. 'h/ OWNER(S) OF RECORD: A55cciektcn SUBJECT OF PUBLIC HEARING: For the as-built 17'6" vinyl bulkhead connected to adjacent properties; and for the as-built 4' wide x 6' long beach access stairs. TIME & DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: 61"Jaz Ze, 11, 2013• a+or&6vJ& 30 If you have an interest in this project, you are invited to view the Town file(s) which are available for inspection rior to the day of the hearing during normal business days between the hours of a.m and. p.m. . . BOARD OF TRUSTEES * TOWN OF SOUTHOLD * (631) 765-1892 ad of Trustees Application • County of Suffolk State of New York Thomas Cornwell - President NPPOA BEING DULY SWORN DEPOSES AND AFFIRMS THAT HE/SHE IS THE APPLICANT FOR THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PERMIT(S) AND THAT ALL STATEMENTS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE TRUE TO THE BEST OF HIS/HER KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF, AND THAT ALL WORK WILL BE DONE IN THE MANNER SET FORTH IN THIS APPLICATION AND AS MAY BE APPROVED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF TRUSTEES. THE APPLICANT AGREES TO HOLD THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD AND THE TOWN TRUSTEES HARMLESS AND FREE FROM ANY AND ALL DAMAGES AND CLAIMS ARISING UNDER OR BY VIRTUE OF SAID PERMIT(S), IF GRANTED. IN COMPLETING THIS APPLICATION, I HEREBY AUTHORIZE THE TRUSTEES, THEIR AGENT(S) OR REPRESENTATIVES(S), TO ENTER ONTO MY PROPERTY TO INSPECT THE PREMISES IN CONJUNCTION WITH REVIEW OF THIS APPLICATION. Signature of Property Owner i SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS /S DAY OFO~Aa¢ t- 20_L?_ ROBERT A MAZZAFERRO NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF NEW YORK NO. 01 MA6207376 QUALIFIED IN SUFFOLK COUNTY COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 15 . 20~? Notary Public "0° I I I Ard of Trustees Application • AUTHORIZATION (where the applicant is not the owner) Nassau Point Property Owners Assoc. I, residing at P.O. Box 346 (print owner of property) (mailing address) Cutchogue, NY do hereby authorize (Agent) Lehnert Construction to apply for permit(s) from the Southold Board of Town Trustees on my behalf. (Owner's signature) I I I i APPLICANT/AGENT/REPRESENTATIVE TRANSACTIONAL DISCLOSURE FORM The Town of Southold's Code of Ethics prohibits conflicts of interest on the part of town officers and emnlovees. The mMse of this farm is to =Ade information which can alert the town possible conflicts of interest and allow it to take whatever action is necessary to avoid same. - YOURNAME: Robert Lehnert (Last name, first name, Middle initial, unless you are applying to the name of~ someone else or other entity, such as a company. If so, indicate. the other person's or company's name.) NAME OF APPLICATION: (Check all that apply.) Tax grievance Building Variance Trustee A Change of Zone Coastal Erosion Approval of plat Mooring Exemption from plat or official map Planning Other (If "Other", name the activity.) j Do you personally (or through your company, spouse, sibling, parent, or child) have a relationship with any officer or employee of the Town of Southold? "Relationship" includes by blood, marriage, or business interest "Business interest" means a business, including a partnership, in which the town officer or employee has even a partial ownership of (or employment by) a corporation in which the town officer or employee owns more than 5% of the shares. YES NO X Ifyou answered "YES", complete the balance of this form and date and sign where indicated. - - I;: Name of person employed by the Town of Southold Title or position of that person i Describe the relationship between yourself (the applicant/agent/representative) and the town officer or employee. Either check the appropriate litre A) through D) and/or describe in the space provided. The town officer or employee or his or her spouse, sibling, parent, or child is (check all that apply): A) the owner of greater than 5"/0 ofthe shares of the corporate stock of the applicant (when the applicant is a corporation): _B) the legal or beneficial owner of any interest in a non-corporate entity (when the applicant is not a corporation); ^C) an officer, director, partner, or employee of the applicant; or _D) the actual applicant. DESCRIPTION OF RELATIONSHIP J, Submitted th'" r.3 h c T 2003 Sign Print Name e ,)er Form T$1 ~~rrea~D+ Town of Southold Erosion, Sedimentation & Storm-Water Run-off ASSESSMENT FORM ~9- PROPERTY LOCATION: S.C.T.M.C: THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS NIAY REQUIRE THE SUBMISSION OF A s % STORM WATER GRADI 1 PROFE DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN 3kTrTE- reBWn- '@cis -CT- - CERTIF?1 D 8 ~18~$rG 8810 IN r ({~E STA~B O M1 9W SCOPE OF WORK - PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION r= # / WORK ASSESSMENT Yes No a. What Is the Total Area of the Project Parcels? (Include Total Area of all Parcels located within 'J Will this Project Retain Al Storm-Water Run-Off the Scope of Work for Proposed Construction) • 13 Generated by a Two (2") Inch Rainfall on Site? ? (s F / Aces) (This Item will include all nm-off created by site x IN. What Is the Total Area of Lend Clearing clearing ardor construction activities as well as all and/or Ground Disturbance for the proposed 0 Site Improvements and the permanent creation of , construction activity? impervious surfaces.) (S.F.IAass) PROVIDE BRIEF PROJECT DESCRITION (Fmdd.Addaend Ps,....N.a.al 2 Does Drainage the Structures turesures Indicating Survey Show All Proposed - a Size 8 Location? This X Item shall Include all Proposed Grade Changes and Construct new bulkhead and beach access Slopes Controlling Surface Water Flow. me and/or descr stairs to connect neighboring properties 3 and s sed diS ment ite P coentrol trol practices Sthat that will ll bbee seetosbn used to x due to damage from superstorm Sandy. Do trolsite erosion andstorm water discharges. This item must be maintained throughout the Entire Construction Period. 4 Will this Project Require any Land Filling, Grading or Excavation where there is a change to the Natural X Existing Grade Involving more than 200 Cubic Yards r 71 of Material within any Parcel? 5 Will this Application Require Land Disturbing Activities Encompassing an Area in Excess of Five Thousand ? X (5,000 S.F.) Square Feet of Ground Surface? 6 Is there a Natural Water Course Running through the - Site? Is this Project within the Trustees jurisdiction x Cenral DEC sWPPP Reauiremants: or within One Hundred (100') feet of a Wedend or Subrtdwlon of a SWPPP is required for all Construction activities involving sot Beach? disturbances of one (1) a mare acres; including dbturbanoes of less than one acre that 7 Will there be Site preparation on Existing Grade Slopes are Pert of a larger common plan that will ultimately disturb one or more acres of lend; which Exceed Fifteen (15) feet of Vertical Rise to ? X Including Construction activities 4woMng soil dislwbances of lees than one (1) acre when One Hundred (100') of Horizontal Distance? the DEC hes datoWned that a SPDES panne Is required forshum wstardischatges. (SWPPP's Shell most the Minimum Requirements of the SPDES General Permit 8 Will Driveways, Parking Areas a other Impervious for storm Water Discharges from Construction activity -Permit No. OP-0-00-001.) Surfaces be Sloped to Direct Slane-Water Run-off x 1. The SWPPP shall be prepared prior to an submittal of the Not. The NCI Mal be Into and/or In the direction of a Town right-of-way? sublNtied to the Department prior to am NInn191CAnlallt of construction activity. 2.TheSWPPP shell describe the erosion and sediment control practices and where 9 Will this Project Require the Placement of Material, required, poaconstrualon storm water managernent practices that will be used and/or Removal of Vegetation and/or the Construction of any comstnrcled to reduce are pollutants N storm water dhchaMes and to assure Item Within the Town Right-of-Way or Road Shoulder x compaence with the ferrite and conditions of this pemdt. In addition, the SWPPP shat Identify potential sources or polWon which may reasonably be expected to affect the Area? low lpm mu NOT lnduda the InslAwee. 0Ddwway Apron) queglyofstornn"terdleclwrgae. NOTE: It AnyAnswerle Questions One through Nine to Answerodwilhe Ch"k shed, 'i S. All SWPPPs that require the poaconamutbn storm waterrlmnngamant practice Ina Box and the eonstruNon site disturbance Is between 7,000 S.F. 61 Aen In rase, Component shall be prepared by a quallMd Design Professional Licensed In New York a storm-Water, eradina. Dreinege a Erosion Contra Plan Is Required by the Town of ~'i.. that to knowledgeable In the principles and practices of Stern Water Management Southold and Must be Submetsd for Review Pder to Issuance of Any Balding Permit. (NOTE: AChxA MSI~)anNOr Mrmr/aeaM Owslbr,b Required bra CanphM MPlkaton) STATE OF NEW YORK, G COUNTY SS Thomas Cornwell l That 1, being duly sworn, deposes and says that lie/she is the applicant for Permit, (Name a ktrllulilual signing Docrmanlj I And that he/she is the President - NPPOA •.(Ower. contractor. Agent, Corporate ON=. elm) i Owner and/or representative of the Owner or Owners, and is duly authorized to perform or have performed the said work and to make and file this application; that all statements contained in this application are true to the best of his knowledge and belief; and I that the work will be performed in the manner set forth in the application filed herewith. Sworn to before me this; ...................A1 ..................dayofQGk .................,20.13 W1 Notary Public: ~ I" v ! o (S ....igre..... hs..e . of...Appti......................... , mx) FORM - 06/10 ROBERT A MAZZAFERRO NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF NEW YORK NO. 01MA6207376 QUALIFIED IN SUFFOLK COUNTY COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 15, 20 Town of Southold LWRP CONSISTENCY ASSESSMENT FORM A. INSTRUCTIONS 1. All applicants for permits* including Town of Southold agencies, shall complete this CCAF for proposed actions that are subject to the Town of Southold Waterfront Consistency Review Law. This assessment is intended to supplement other information used by a Town of Southold agency in making a determination of consistency. *Except minor exempt actions including Building Permits and other ministerial permits not located within the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area. 2. Before answering the questions in Section C, the preparer of this form should review the exempt minor action list, policies and explanations of each policy contained in the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. A proposed action will be evaluated as to its siglificant beneficial and adverse effects upon the coastal area (which includes all of Southold Town). 3: If any question in Section C on this form is answered "yes" or "no", then the proposed action will affect the achievement of the LWRP policy standards and conditions contained in the consistency review law. Thus, each answer must be explainW in detail. listing both suoaortmg and non- supporting facts. If an action cannot be certified as consistent with the LWRP policy standards and conditions, it shall not be undertaken. A copy of the LWRP is available in the following places: online at the Town of Southold ' s website (southoldtown.northfork.net), the Board of Trustees Office, the Planning Department, all local libraries and the Town Clerk's office. p B.. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSED ACTION C...A E SCTM# - OCT z a 2013 PROJECTNAME Bayview Road bulkhead & stairs; The Application has been submitted to (check appropriate response): " I Town Board ? Planning Board ? Building Dept. ? Board of Trustees I 1, Category of Town of Southold agency action (check appropriate response): (a) Action undertaken directly by Town agency (e.g. capital ? construction, planning activity, agency regulation, land transaction) ? (b) Financial assistance (e.g. grant, loan, subsidy) (c) Permit, approval, license, certification: ?X Nature and extent of action: Construct 17'-6" of new vinyl bulkhead i and 4'-0" wide x 6'-0" long beach access stairs to connect neighboring properties due to due to damage from superstorm Sandy. ' Location of action: BaYview Road Site acreage: .13 Present land use: Beach Access Present zoning classification: R-40 2. If an application. for the proposed action has been filed with the Town of Southold agency, the following information shall be provided: (a) Name of applicant: Nassau Point Property Owners Association (b) Mailing address: P.O. Box 346, Cutchogue, NY, 11935 (c) Telephone number. Area Code ( ) (d) Application number, if any: Will the action be directly undertaken, require funding, or approval by a state or federal agency? Yes ? No EN If yes, which state or federal agency? i I I C. Evaluate the project to the following policies by analyzing how the project will further support or not support the policies. Provide all proposed Best Management Practices that will further each policy. Incomplete answers will require that the form be returned for completion. DEVELOPED COAST POLICY Policy 1. Foster a pattern of development in the Town of Southold that enhances community character, preserves open space, makes efficient use of infrastructure, makes beneficial use of a coastal location, and minimizes adverse effects of development. See LWRP Section III - Policies; Page 2 for evaluation criteria. ? Yes ? No © Not Applicable I~ i additional sheets if necessary Attach Policy 2. Protect and preserve historic and archaeological resources of the Town of Southold. See LVW Section III - Policies Pages 3 through 6 for evaluation criteria ? Yes ? No Not Applicable j Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 3. Enhance visual quality and protect scenic resources throughout the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III - Policies Pages 6 through 7 for evaluation criteria ? Yes ? No ?X Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary NATURAL COAST POLICIES Policy 4. Minimize loss of life, structures, and natural resources from flooding and erosion. See LWRP Section III - Policies Pages 8 through 16 for evaluation criteria ? Yes D No ?X Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 5. Protect and improve water quality and supply in the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III - Policies Pages 16 through 21 for evaluation criteria ? Yes ? No ?X Not Applicable I j Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 6. Protect and restore the quality and function of the Town of Southold ecosystems including Significant Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats and wetlands. See LWRP Section III - Policies; Pages 22 through 32 for evaluation criteria. ? ? ?X Yes No Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 7. Protect and improve air quality in the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III - Policies Pages 32 through 34 for evaluation criteria. Yes E] No [j Not Applicable I' i 4 Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 8. Minimize environmental degradation in Town of Southold from solid waste and hazardous substances and wastes. See LWRP Section III - Policies; Pages 34 through 38 for evaluation criteria. ? Yes ? No Q Not Applicable i PUBLIC COAST POLICIES I Policy 9. Provide for public access to, and recreational use of, coastal waters, public lands, and public resources of the. Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III - Policies; Pages 38 through 46 for evaluation criteria. ? Ye> ] No 0 Not Applicable I i i. Attach additional sheets if necessary i i I WORKING COAST POLICIES Policy 10. Protect Southold's water-dependent uses and promote siting of new water-dependent uses in suitable locations. See LWRP Section III- Policies; Pages 47 through 56 for evaluation criteria. ? Yes ? No [K Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary i Policy 11. Promote sustainable use of living marine resources in Long Island Sound, the Peconic Estuary and Town waters. See LWRP Section III - Policies; Pages 57 through 62 for evaluation criteria. ? Yes ? No 1rv^ I Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 12. Protect agricultural lands in the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III - Policies; Pages 62 through 65 for evaluation criteria. ? Yes ? No X? Not Applicable I Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 13. Promote appropriate use and development of energy and mineral resources. See LWRP Section III - Policies; Pages 65 through 68 for evaluation criteria. ? Yes ? No 0 Not Applicable I PREPARED BY Robert Lehnert TITLE Agent DATE ~I ~,O Ull EC~~ OCT 2 4 2013 ED}•OR:- 5e ~/_-.PD.V/CA LOCATED AT L/T 7- - fa/:JG NEC' ._TOWN OF i LOT5 7f%8 - M.AP OF ~7 C-!1/6 OAT/ES Alt=• . CO. CUK. NO. 1:5& FILED AJ4./6//9L2 SCALE 1" .eZv ~a;.i ~.C+BO'42oo"E' 3//Qo A' SUFFOLK CO. TAX MAP DATA.- SEC. /OQ.OO t'` 71P.s+ ` .c. p y~ BLK. /J 4C LOT CX:Z)w.00J `~~C a ~a !o - 1 0 Fe. Gee. `n Gs r..c I asavvcT raz rk Off5-R5 PROM -STRUCTURES V~ TO Ps47 VE BOUNDRY LINES, 7D® U S.^e/ NGO ON SURVEY, AP.E FOR A Aye°`T F rss ry f~ W ' SPECIRC USE ONLY, AND Q~ ~;I I i SHOULD NOT BE L'S"D FOP. j CONS:. GUCTION OF FENCES /r o i OF. C.`. `FK Si&UCT'J&ES. 0 \ GY Oak T \ N~l ~ i{II ~.[~w.p ~fN.:f ? ` NcT,-r R,~ Li F R 11~ r i \t SIl-~"LG Gr-W _ SURVEYED J?/,~fr G'2 1BB9 BY I /rte ~qQ~ CF LoT B C a=r-t /r WILL7kiJ, R. SIMMON'S JR. Gc,. P/C BOX X 377 377 i-/cE-'J JAMESPOP,T, L. L, N. Y. 7 7 647 ]L~O FILE PAu_2j GRID DR•,V:I: BY . I- \L Ls X1 1 j INSTALL NOW OR FORMERLY RETAINING WALL WACKER AT THE LEGEND 0 m °m TG - TOP OF GRATE ELEV. NASSAU POINT 3 (CATCH BA51N) NEW RETAINING WALL ATTACHED o o CL - CENTER LINE OF STREET BEACH ACCESS TO EXISTING BULKHEAD ON BOTH d3 TC - TOP OF CURB ELEV. to 72.5 - EXISTING SPOT ELEV. ROAD f 51DE5. NST - NEW SEPTIC TANK V \ 5TEI STEPS TO BEACH NLP - NEW LEACHING POOL NSD - NEW STORM DRAIN NASSAU POINT ROAD 290.01 - 15-72.5-O R - CUTCHOGUE NY EXISTING CONTOURS ~ N ~ 0 - 10'-01 W W O'-~ EXISTING WATER SERVICE b -3; Ro o G G NEW GAS SERVICE E E p o CCESS NEW U.G. ELECTRIC SERVICE (SD-#) (SD-#) 0 TEw A " N AYv O O 0 B NEW OPEN C.I. GRATING NEW SOLID C.I, COVER RE Y ISIONS: DATE: 2 ' NEW 6-O" DIA. STORM DRAIN 0 g 88° ,40 00'W APPROVED BY S PER TRUSTEES 2-11-14 p NOW OR FORMERLY BOARD OF TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PALMIERI DATE l 1 d p EQSP, ~ FES 1 1 2014 SITE PLAN 5CALE:1 "=30' i;wWl - . 101-0" 5'-10" 4'-0" 71-8" 0 0 0 0 0 1 QD a o 00 0 m 101-011 LEIINERT CONSTRUCTION NEW WORK PLAN STAIR DETAIL SCALE: I /2"= I '-0" 6700 ALDRICH LANE 5CALE:1/4"= 1'-0" MATTITUCK, N.Y. 11952 Telephone Fax NEW 2" ACC. CAP EXISTING FILL TO BE 631-734-8362 631-734-2276 EXCAVATED E RE-USED AS FILL = 4 NEW DIA. TIE ROD TO BE TOP TOP OF RETAINING WALL LOCATION OF ATTACHED TO NEW ELEV. + 5. 0 FT. -I I I~~-L-I THESE PLANS AND SPECIFCATIONS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF SERVICE 4° SUBJECT DEADMEN (TYP. OF ALL) -I I-I I~ I-I I-_ AND ARE THE PROPERTY OF LEHNERT CONSTRUCTION INC. PROPERTY ~I I-I I I-1III I1-I I M I INFRINGEMENTS WILL BE PROSECUTED. NEW 3"xG" WALE -I I M I II-I I"I I NEW 4" DIA. TIE c ae."14C. NEW INSTALL NEW VINYL NEW 9" DIA. PILING @ G'-0" I I=I I-I I=I I= RODS @ 0-O" O.C. %z, :q • I MATERIAL I NEW 4" x I WA O.C. TO BE BOLTED TO NEW I-I I-III-I DATE: 10-22-13 ,~,.~Y..... y, WALES t ATTACHED TO I III I 1 III 4S;w~Mtt~ 6" CAP DEN DEADMEN - _I I I=I I I 1301 BOTTOM OF RETAINING WALL I I-I I DR. BY: R W L DEADMEN AT END OF SCALE: AS NOTED EACH TIE ROD -AX NEW VINYL SHEATHING CHKD: LNEW4x C) _1 NEW 9" DIA. PILES WALES BOLTED TO WALES (TYP. OF ALL) PROJECT NUMBER SHEET NUMBER LOCATION MAP RETAINING WALL DETAIL - PLAN VIEW RETAINING WALL SECTION 0726 SP- I SCALE: 112"= P-011 5CALE:1 12"= 1'-0" I