The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1000-117.-8-18 Corresp. from Public Michaelis, Jessica Subject: New Suffolk Waterfront? From: Patricia Lowry <pbeelowry@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2023 2:47 PM To: Lanza, Heather <heather.lanza@town.southold.ny.us> Cc: Patricia Lowry <pbeelowry@gmail.com>; Patricia McIntyre <pat.mcintyre11@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: New Suffolk Waterfront? Dear Heather, Thank you for your concern. As you know, the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation easement gave us permission to build five parking spaces in the easement area. NYS Parks governs these spaces and is fully aware of the seasonal closure of these spaces and that since they are proximate to the Community garden are utilized by the gardeners in season. In fact the State performed a periodic assessment in February of 2022 and found the "property to be in excellent condition and well-managed." Their report further stated, "I did not observe any violations of the terms of the Conservation Easement." The three evaluators took many pictures and I pointed out the chain and the NYS State sign. When the restaurant and marina are open we, of course, have the chain down and comply with Southold Town code and the Planning Department's parking requirements. I hope this clarifies this item, but if not please get in touch with us. Respectfully, Patty Lowry, Chair Pat McIntyre, Vice Chair On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 9:23 AM Lanza, Heather <heather.lanza@town.southold.ny.us> wrote: Hello Patty, We have an issue with the New York State Easement and the five parking spaces located in it in the New Suffolk Waterfront’s parking lot. Those five spaces need to remain open year-round for the public to park and enjoy the site the State helped to preserve. Can you find a way to cordon off the rest of the parking lot while leaving those five spaces open? Please let me know your plan of action for this. 1 Regards, Heather Lanza, AICP Town Planning Director Southold Town Planning 53095 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Phone: (631)765-1938 E-mail: heatherl@southoldtownny.gov 2 �Sr�bini.s.srolz Xl/ithout C`ov�� Letter l r`I . wro 20,122 Subject: �h SCTM#: 1000 - 1 l fete: 1� L3 Co cuts: ClAe `re t® oce A . eq I-'-) �N— \�O-wc� V-u\ �)O YOLA Lanza, Nee.. et' Y From: Friedman,Carole(Parks) <Carole.Friedman@parks ny.gov> Sent: Tuesday,May 20,201410:51 AM To: Lanza, Heather T7 Subject: Waterfront Fund Proposal MAY 2 0 2014 Dear Ms. Lanza: NYS Parks has reviewed the proposal to raise and expand the former Galley He-restaurant. As for tete 5 parking spaces in the easement area the Waterfront Fund can stipulate that those spots are parking for the easement area only or ask the NYS parks Commissioner for permission to locate them there.We have no other issue with the plans. Do you know if the community garden still be there after the construction? We trust that the Town will review the site pian for conformance with the conservation easement. Carole Friedman Grants and Land Management P.O. Box 247 Babylon, IVY 11702 Tel.631-321-3S71 Fax:631-321-3721 0 M 2rMF , -3! w L CL AVii, W. iz a?" a K'So Z ro. any Ea z MINIX' t4 (D c cl, cxi 0 L"I 0 0 Z -0 z z = M� m 2L 77 14C V ay Qq 0 Er x � ;o xal CL X.. F or 0 onsman, CL 0141� ie R A* 5 'A armra OR 2, MW gi w � . 'I 0, CL 0 C,— CL 0 an * g ;4 cr 0 tR ar 3 CL It- Ul yaµw Np„.�� W �� yw�� "%4 z 0 m 0 - 2c 0 A u, r cCm > M -n n > 0 z o M p F >-0 m c: Z C5v UI JOHN and PATRICIA CLARK Po Box 670 Mattituck, NY 11952 (631)298-9614 December 23, 2014 To the Editor Suffolk Times PO Box 1500 Mattituck, NY 11952 The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund's long professed tranquil park site-a gift to the pleasant beach front community of New Suffolk is looking more like the Trojan horse that invaded the ancient City of Troy. Now that the NSWF has bamboozled the Southold Town Planning Board into approving this site plan application, they immediately and arrogantly spiked their true colors into the ground in the form of boundary posts set along First Street in New Suffolk. This illegal posting has created unnecessary traffic and parking problems adversely affecting local streets. A move clearly in retaliation to those who dare to voice genuine concerns about the new direction the NSWF is heading. This is only December and already the traffic and parking disruption caused by the illegally placed posts is causing major consternation to the public. As spring,summer and fall approach,just imagine what havoc this spiteful and ill-conceived assault will have on all those who live and utilize beaches and businesses in the New Suffolk area. So much for the NSWF's bravado of maintaining an open and beautiful park site for all to enjoy. The Southold Town Planning Board has the jurisdiction and obligation to terminate this fiasco. Simply order the NSWF to immediately remove the illegal posts. The site plan that the Board approved has precise markings assigned to it, and that does not include said boundary posts. The NSWF has flagrantly violated their own model and now the Planning Board needs to set the record straight—admonish the NSWF and make them abide by the originally approved site plan. The Planning Board must realize parking is already at a premium for the area and should not further complicate the issue by allowing the current site plan to be amended. Happy Holidays and a Galley Ho Ho NO Jack & Pat Clark cc: Southold Town Planning Board DEC 292014 11 Southold Town Planning Board Thomas R.Cornwell 500 West Cove Road Cutchogue, NY 11935 October 24,2014 Donald Wilcenski,Chairman Southold Town Planning Board P.0. Box 1179 OCT 272014 Southold, NY 11971 ooutlw{o ic.�r °I�,nn�no Board RE: New Suffolk Waterfront Fund Dear Mr.Wilcenski and Planning Board Members: While I am not directly impacted I continue to be dismayed by the actions of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund(NSWF)and hope that something can be done to correct the situation. The reasons for dismay are as follows: 1. The NSWF exists in part,if not entirely,because the residents of New Suffolk wanted to prevent the development and commercialization of the waterfront and a group of those residents came together to create a scheme to acquire the waterfront.The NSWF is ignoring the pleas and desires of the community-the community that helped create the fund in the first place. It is as if the effort by the community to save the waterfront has been hijacked by the NSWF for its own purposes. The morality of that is just wrong. 2. The NSWF's early efforts to raise money were done under false pretenses in that there was nothing in NSWF's fund raising efforts that mentioned the Galley Ho,the building of a large septic system or any other commercialization. Commercialization is what the community came together about to prevent and why we and others made donations The NSWF was not honest in its fund raising efforts. The morality of that is just wrong. 3. The NSWF has not been forthright in its actions as respects its dealings with and promises made to the community. The NSWF said it would hold round table discussions with people in the community and listen to issues raised. No meetings were held. The NSWF said it would respond to the concerns raised at the meetings in the school house. The NSWF also said that it would share financial statements with the community so as to be transparent. There has been no response other than ignoring the concerns and restating the NSWF plans and there has been no transparency. It is obvious that the NSWF cares little as to what the community which helped create the NSWF in the first place wants and that shows poor judgment and is just morally wrong. It is interesting that NSWF doesn't seem to need the donations from the constituency that helped with its formation which begs the question,from where is the money coming? Is there some hidden agenda? Sincerely, in {icaw-k,KA to y ". " !�-.;" 7.:�,in T..+.;�. f:i' til •�° �a.f .. .. . i- `. `i� r .. .. L` ;S i?qpAu..Uft.'. _-,qu , ,'.. r-.Y.' T is t'&W ? ,:9"A i shit i. <f .t't_: .,:A ft i�.r i'' I ,; CCU in J' . 4: C !:S . Y)W W . C ;71QVn° jO Z9AG ,pk rt, 6 ..•"J .. ''i' is ) jil'scys PA tp vv re' -1r q; am t b I- ...:'t`..,,t'. {,-;Jii1.I `rj5. ' tpa Costs( U`'1. j.f';j. :)r5sq cK-;Is tt,,_. plot: t-j u;i r !: it :;'.L�'_ i0 .... f' i1; :.fit.{3t.;{ S�` ��:-`;t;% .,tc? ,OkW ';,.. . :F" t5' .•!> t,i.v . _.r, i:, !'::�! CGI:.:tit.•:.0"f, .,i: . &Z 1pf 'ITT 1 1it .i nP £ , .. "}gun "% jQY V W_ j'. ., :( s( t J"•S aq i 14 .tt . n 601. tin ww IN""O .1A 1071 :10 y j 2; C UA 00� _ �� ,�� Lanza, Heather t 6� � � From: Heather L <heatherlanza@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday,July 24, 2014 7:42 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: Fw: New Suffolk Waterfront Heather Lanza e-mail: atherlanza he@ a On Tuesday, July22, 2014 11:43 AM, SwimmerJoe me kay<crazyaboutwords@gmail.com>wrote: Dear Heather and Planning Board, 1 am writing to add my voice to those in New Suffolk who have worked hard and long to bring our waterfront back to the community-oriented place it was before our Post Office/General Store burned down in 1993. The plans laid out by the NSWF which are before you now for approval are exactly on target to achieve this long sought goal. With this plan, we, as a community will have many opportunities to come together in all seasons. Creating a flexible-use space that will provide these opportunities out of the Galley-Ho building is right-on! I, along with my partner, Joe Mc Kay, have been a major and regular financial supporter of the NSWF since its mission was established. Thank you for all the work and advice that you have put into this community project. I've known New Suffolk for over 30 years now, and can assure you that the brouhaha stirred up by a few self- interested parties will be unplugged once your decision is formal and the plans are on the ground. Yours truly, John E. Page 631-965-9947 D E rC E pp E 1l.11_ 2 2 2014 SOLeU Jrl Pianninp Bowra 1 V • V Lanza, Heather From: Arlene Castellano <arlene.castellano@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday,July 22, 2014 12:12 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: NSWF GALLEY HO PROJECT Dear Ms. Lanza, Chairman Wilcenski, and Planning Board Members, I strongly oppose the NSWF's Galley Ho project for the following reasons: 1. The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund's promise to the New Suffolk community was the "preservation in substantially its present natural state, so that such property will remain a natural centerpiece of Eastern Long Island for all future generations." 2. The creation of a sixty six seat restaurant on this site does not remotely align with the group's promise to their neighbors. At the very least they have misrepresented their intentions, and are not acting in accord with the wishes of the community. 3. There is a serious problem with parking and traffic in New Suffolk. We currently have huge trucks barreling down Orchard Street, making the right on First Street, and coming within inches of oncoming cars, children and pedestrians. Beachgoers are parking everywhere and walking onto the beach, avoiding purchasing a beach sticker or the daily fee. I don't know many New Suffolkers who are able to enjoy our beach anymore. It has become a complete free for all, and the word is out. Our side streets are relatively narrow.Now, park cars on opposite sides of the street. One car can barely get through,never mind delivery trucks. 4. The New Suffolk Waterfront Board members have not presented a traffic study to the community. They are not restauranteurs and perhaps do not realize the impact a sixty six seat restaurant will have on this tiny hamlet. 5. While NSWF purports to be interested in feedback from the community, the reality is they are not. The town meetings are held to mollify the community. The NSWF members encourage the community to voice their opinions while simultaneously informing everyone that the project will go forward regardless. Please consider these concerns when making a decision regarding this project. Thank you very much. Respectfully, {gyp Arlene Castellano D �U 1275 First Street J U L 2 2 2014 New Suffolk,NY 11956 Southoltl Town 631 734-4137 Planning Board i Lanza, Heather From: Jackie <jackie.auriemma@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, July 21, 201410:01 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: NSWF site plan Hi Heather, I am writing in support of the New Suffolk Waterfronts Site plan on first street in New Suffolk. I have been a part time resident there since 1986 and I am thrilled with the plan to not only preserve our historic Galley Ho but with all of the work the fund has done up to date. Many others wanted to buy the land and who knows what would be there and if the Galley Ho would still be standing if these volunteers in the NSWF didn't come together. The Galley Ho is New Suffolk and I believe the NSWF site plan will guarantee it will be around for many more years to come. Thank you C E 0 U IS Jaclyn Kelly 4 j 516-968-1844 945 Fanning rd JUL 2 2 2014 New Suffolk,NY Southold Town Planning Board ' Jackie Sent from my Whone 1 Lanza, Heather ar From: Phyllis Curott <pcurott@optonline.net> Sent: Monday,July 21, 2014 2:14 PM To: Lanza, Heather Cc: Don@briarclifflandscape.com;don@briarcliffsod.com; Russell, Scott;Jim Dinizio; Doherty,Jill; Standish, Lauren; Ipevans@fishersisland.net;Tomaszewski, Michelle; Ghosio, Bob;William Ruland;Toth,Vicki Subject: Re: Site Plan for New Suffolk Waterfront Fund SCTM#1000-117-8-18 Attachments: New Suffolk Storm 1993.pdf, New Suffolk Storm 1993 2.pdf Importance: High To the Southold Town Board& Town Planning Board: I have been a property and business owner on First Street in New Suffolk for 45 years. I am writing to express additional concerns that the proposed site plan does not take into consideration its impact on the properties and the property owners surrounding it, specifically with regard to drainage. My property and the NWSF site are, historically, underwater on a good Nor'easter. These storms are common here. What many don't know is that the drainage on both properties is very poor, mostly because of the soil content. People think it's sand, but I know from past excavations that there is a layer of oyster shells that is thick and impervious. This layer runs beneath Captain Marty's main building and the NSWF adjoining property and it impedes drainage. The second reason for poor drainage on First Street is because it's the lowest street in all of New Suffolk. All of the water from the upper streets that run perpendicular to First and end in First, flows down hill into First Street, making flooding worse and drainage more difficult. Drainage for the NSWF property must not only handle its own water from rain,tides, storms and tidal/storm surges, it must also handle the rest of this New Suffolk runoff. I am attaching photos of New Suffolk after the 1993 Storm to show you exactly what First Street must contend with. Through the years, the First Street drain that Southold town installed always overflows when stressed and the town has had to pump it out after every overflow. So what will happen when NSWF increases their elevation and waters have no way to properly drain? Flooding will increase, especially in duration. JUL 2 2 2014 F Drainage is a serious problem AN Suffolk. The drainage in the Site Pfis inadequate, a fact confirmed by Town Engineer James Richter in his letter of May 27th, 2014 to the Planning Board. Another problem: the current Plan provides for a parking lot for 38 cars. This lot intrudes into the Southold Town Easement(see Richter letter#2). So, the parking lot has to be moved—where will they put it? In the community garden? Southold town and the Planning Board should be working to solve these problems, not approving Site Plans that will worsen them. We all love New Suffolk - let us all do the right thing for her. Thank you for your consideration of these concerns, Phil Loria a/k/ Captain Marty 2 i X i. Wd ai ma m z Rp• � +»:. � ..< � L�r.aNi 14 $� 'Y. y � S'-i�] � � g g a.. �+i ti §.: d Ys' ;S �' ... �,c. ."tee ,J z, .-„"3yv. rt•.t � ,.xs a4 .> rr-;..<t �'-”t =� ...- - r r{ t C � 6 �I rz b Y S f }1 �, �� l.y `• � .: its . r V Lanza, Heather �� t From: Phyllis Curott <pcurott@optonline.net> Sent: Monday,July 21, 2014 2:06 PM To: Don@briarclifflandscape.com; don@briarcliffsod.com; Lanza, Heather Cc: Russell, Scott;Jim Dinizio; Doherty,Jill; Standish, Lauren; Ipevans@fishersisland.net; Tomaszewski, Michelle; Ghosio, Bob;William Ruland;Toth,Vicki Subject: Site Plan for New Suffolk Waterfront Fund SCTM#1000-117-8-18 Importance: High To the Planning Board: At the Hearings on June 2d and July 7th,2014 Chairman Wilcenscki wisely advised the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund (NSWF) and the community of New Suffolk to achieve a consensus regarding the above referenced Site Plan proposal. Despite a willingness to compromise expressed by many of the Site Plan's strongest opponents at the July 12th community meeting,NSWF refused to address how it might alter its proposed Site Plan to mitigate the impact of the proposed 66 seat restaurant on this small and quiet hamlet. Trustees current and former stated that the Site Plan would not be revised, but also said that the use for the Galley Ho "had not yet been determined" and the community would have input through"round table meetings in August." It is tragic that no accord was reached. But there are alternatives that would restore community harmony and permit the uses proposed by NSWF and the community. I am writing to request that the Planning Board reject the current Site Plan because it does not, as admitted by NWSF (a/k/a the applicant), accurately and fully reflect the applicant's intended uses of the former Galley Ho as other or more than a 66 seat restaurant. The NSWF repeatedly and consistently states—at both Planning Board hearings, at the May 27th and July 12th community meetings, on raffle tickets and in flyers, newsletters, fundraising and other letters submitted to the Planning Board by the NSWF, as well as in interviews with the media—that the use for the Galley Ho "has not yet been determined." Below are just a few of the NSWF's most recent statements concerning the building's usage: • Southold Local New Suffolk turns out in force to demand answers about special events, size of Galley Ho; roundtables planned by Lisa Finn JUL 13, 2014 2:18 PM: o " `This is about rebuilding the building.:. Building and use are two separate issues,' former NSWF chair Barbara Schnitzler said. * `Programming that has been previously offered, including yoga, arts and crafts, chamber of commerce meetings, environmental education, private dinner parties, fundraising dinners, pot luck suppers, small community weddings, anniversary and birthday parties, and other meetings, would. still be held on-site,"" McIntyre said.. "'These are all small gatherings that don't bring a lot of traffic or upset the neighborhood.' * NSWF members said they were not firm on the idea of a 66-seat restaurant and would rather have a small cafe or snack bar." • If'cleotne tea the Nero ,Sq f)1k [,Vaterf-ont 2014 flyer: �.)!- _� � 2G 14 z a a o "Classes, art showsernmunity events and informal gatheriiowill again take-place on the property." • June 26th NSWF letter to the New Suffolk community: o "Here are a few facts for you to consider:... How we will ultimately use the Galley Ho has not yet been determined by the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund...We will decide the particulars of its use after listening further to our community." • NSWF recent 2014 letter to the "Mainstays:" o "Our application is not about how many seats there will ultimately be in our cafe ...How we use the Galley Ho HAS NOT BEEN DETERMINED. ...WE ARE LISTENING...We will proceed through the building permit process, and commence the renovation work on the Galley Ho while continuing to hold community outreach sessions to determine the appropriate intensity of use... You might remember that, before the hurricane, we used the building in a variety of ways: yoga classes,NSCA's Pot Luck Suppers and Italian Night Dinner, private special occasion parties, and community meetings, along with our important fundraising events. These types of activities still appeal to many in the community and might co-exist with an eating establishment." • Suffolk Times 3/19/13 Cyndi Murray o "...In the future, the waterfront fund's plans to establish transient dockage, a small marina and a community center/snack bar. We envision it as a place where people can meet, grab a cup of coffee or lunch and read a newspaper." • Raffle Tickets sold throughout the New Suffolk Community for the last 5 years including 2014: o "Planning is in progress for a renovated marina, multi-use space for dining and community activities ..." • Andrew Torgove, NSWF Board member, letter to Planning Board 7/3/14: o "We are rebuilding the Galley Ho for the community. It has always been the community's desire to have such a meeting place and cafe, and we have always stated we would provide such a place...If an operator fails... we will still have a beautifully restored building that will serve the community's needs in the future." The NSWF has put the cart before the horse. The Planning Board cannot approve the current NSWF Site Plan because the Plan does not reflect the intended uses as stated by the applicant, and because these uses are not permitted even by special exception in a Marine Il District by the Zoning Board of Appeals, the Plan for which is subject to site plan approval by the Planning Board. 2 A New Suffolk Community Yac*Beach Club, defined by Section 2800ould permissibly host such events and would be an appropriate use under Southold Town Chapter 280 Zoning, Article XIII Marine II District, Sec 280-55 A (4). Such a club could also make an application to the ZBA for a Special Exception pursuant to Sec 280-55 B (1) for snack bar-sized restaurant, common at such clubs, which would also mitigate the many concerns expressed by the community regarding traffic, drainage, septic size and scale, parking, garbage, deliveries, noise, disruption of the scenic view shed, special events etc. I respectfully request that the Planning Board require the applicant to revise and resubmit a Site Plan that conforms to all of applicant's intended uses. Sincerely, Phyllis W. Curott, Esq. po box 348 2500 Grathwohl Rd New Suffolk,NY 11956 3 • 51bf Dear Chairman Wilcenski and Planning Board Members, I am writing about the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund's site plan application for a new restaurant in New Suffolk. A very serious concern is flooding and drainage as it relates to the proposed raised septic field and raised grade of the property. A few years ago, Southold Town had to raise the grade of the street in front of the post office in New Suffolk due to flooding and poor drainage. This was a pre existing problem that was exacerbated by a property across from the post office with a raised grade and MODEST raised septic field. Will the grade of the street have to be raised along first street to accommodate the new restaurant plan??? There are also many dry wells installed under the parking lot/boat launch area near the public beach because the drainage down here is so poor. Does the new restaurant adequately provide for the very realistic and problematic flooding/ drainage scenarios that occur so frequently in New Suffolk? Thank you, Joe Konchalski 480 Fred Street New Suffolk i ! a -fro � Darby Moore PO Box 652 New Suffolk New York 11956 Southold Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold,NY 11965 July 21, 2014 Dear Town Planning Board, I am writing in support of the New Suffolk Waterfront Committee's plan for the New Suffolk Waterfront. As a long time New Suffolk resident with considerable roots in the community, I feel my interests in this project should be considered. In the 1970's my mother, Constance Moore, and I had a little shop for a number of years called "Moorings" in the North Fork Shipyard. It stood in a shed opposite the old Post Office and Marine store. At that time people pulled up at the dock to get gas for their boats and often went to the little grocery store where Summer Girl is now located. The building that existed where Legends now stands housed several different bars over the years, including The Harbor Inn, and then Captain Ahabs. The Galley Ho was the location that attracted lunch and dinner by the dockside, and people arrived by boat to have their meals and later to socialize. New Suffolk also housed an IGA supermarket. The little hamlet, therefore, was a lively place of a variety of businesses. When the Shipyard closed, the Marine Store became a Deli style store as well, and my father and Jack Fisher sat and had coffee at a picnic table each morning and held court. The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund has work tirelessly to save this historic place for the community. Years of fundraising and negotiations have resulted in the space now coming for Planning Board consideration. The plan includes the use of the historic building that once was the Galley Ho as a snack bar/restaurant. This would be a draw for many people to come to the waterfront and enjoy a lunch or snack with a water view. It is my understanding that this would not be a fancy restaurant, which we already have in New Suffolk, but a more affordable food provider for a larger audience. This would also provide income for the Waterfront Fund to pay for upkeep and purchase costs. Some in New Suffolk oppose this plan, and I cannot understand their reasoning. "Open space" is not impinged significantly by the use of the Galley Ho any more than it had been previously. The community uses would be increased and the Hamlet would have an alternative food provider for people who want a water view and more informal food selections than are currently available at Legends. The space in general is without shade and is mostly gravel, so what open space there is would require significant landscaping to make it attractive for users. The cost for that would be considerable. A restaurant, which is desired by many in the community, would help with the ongoing payments for the site as well as provide ongoing income to maintain it. Please approve the New Suffolk Waterfront's plan. Sincerely, Darby Moore Ail- 2 a 20i4 � l Jerry Schultheis 45 Holden Ave Ext Cutchogue, NY 11935 631-734-7265 Schu 1270optonline.net July 20,2014 Heather Lanza Planning Board j U l 2 t ?01 Town of Southold Southold, NY Dear Heather: .-..... s As a resident of New Suffolk for 27 years until a month ago I feel compelled to address the controversy currently underway regarding the New Suffolk waterfront.As a resident in New Suffolk I tried to stay involved in community affairs and volunteer my time to benefit the community. I was a Stakeholder,a continual participant in the New Suffolk Civic Association,and a long time participant in the efforts to save the waterfront from commercial development.One of the wishes which came out of the Stakeholder project was the community desire to preserve the historic Galley Ho. Never at any time did I experience any effort on the part of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund to keep discussions and ideas secret.There had to be more than 20 occasions where the Fund&the Civic Association presented plans, ideas and solicited suggestions. In looking around the room at the meeting on July 14th. I would have to say that the majority of people speaking against the plan were never attendees at these public forums or residents of New Suffolk at the time.To say that the plans are a secret is a travesty. The meeting brought up items which I would like to comment on. I agree with the Suffolk Times Editorial a few weeks back which contributed a lot of the turmoil to the owners of Legends Restaurant who in my opinion do not want the competition. When News 12 ran a piece on the turmoil it was interesting to see those opposing the project were all filmed inside of Legends. We need to look at what Legends does for the community versus what the Waterfront will provide. Legends do not have one parking space on any land it owns whereby the Waterfront will provide all onsite parking as required by the town. The Waterfront will have a septic system which will remove more nitrates from the waste whereby Legends appears to have a sanitary system that generates so much wastewater that it is a common sight to see the cesspool trucks emptying its pools. I always wondered why the pools are emptied from Second Street in front of the house Legends owns rather than on First Street where the restaurant is located. Where is the sanitary system? The Waterfront will store its garbage on site while Legends puts it in a dumpster located in the town right of way about 300 feet north of the restaurant next to Captain Marty's boat storage.Who would you rather have as a neighbor? Parking is a challenge on the streets of New Suffolk but you have to look at the situation as it exists. King Street extends to the bay to the east and the right of way is owned by the town as indicated on the tax map yet it is being used for commercial operations to benefit the fishing station. The houses on the north end of First Street have built hardened facilities within the town ROW to hinder parking. The house Legends owns on the Second Street has so many cars parked that it looks like a parking lot. The opposition talks about floods in downtown New Suffolk. You have to look no further than the town drain in First Street just to the north of Legends. It runs straight to the bay and when the water rises high enough it has an easy path to flood First Street. There is no check valve in the pipe to prevent rising water from flooding. There were many comments about doing away with the Galley Ho and building a smaller building. Eliminate the Ho and you will pay for demolition,waste disposal, plans and approvals for a new building plus the substantial costs to build a new structure. I fail to see how it would be cheaper. On top of the costs you would not have the facility to accommodate community functions, meetings and events such • • • Page 2 July 21,2014 as the Civic Association Pot Luck Dinners. The historic Galley Ho deserves to be saved- it represents the New Suffolk tradition. I always thought that preserving historic buildings was part of the planning effort. As a former member of the Planning Board of the Village of Lloyd Harbor and current Chairman of the Town of Southold Board of Assessment Review I was taken aback by the actions of the Chairman of the Planning Board when at a public Planning Board Meeting he commented on who he would like to lead the discussions to be held. This was not a onetime event because there seems to have been some confusion regarding his comments at another hearing as outlined in last week's Suffolk Times. Those pleading their case should decide who speaks for them. I sincerely hope that as the Planning Board makes it decision it bases it on what the code requires and what the Waterfront Fund has provided. Sincerely: Jerry Schultheis ec July 17,2014 Chairman Wilcenski and Town Planning Board Members, The NSWF began as an outgrowth of the New Suffolk Civic Association, and in it's infancy, was a group dedicated to working with the community, and in the interest of the New Suffolk community specifically. In their original Charities Registration Statement, the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund wrote about New Suffolk residents resisting a variety of commercial plans to develop the site. The statement says: NSWF will "hire attorneys to fight the proposed boat rack development as well as any other development plans that are proposed that similarly threaten the quality of life and/or quality of the environment in New Suffolk." A great many people in New Suffolk assert that the NSWF's new restaurant plan will threaten the quality of life and the quality of the environment. It would be quite misleading for the Waterfront Fund to suggest that they accepted donations for years to build a restaurant. They fundraised to purchase the property to protect it from development. Ironically, the New Suffolk Civic Association does not support the current plan for a new restaurant in New Suffolk. Thank you, Sarah Goldman � = New Suffolk • January 3, 2013 Regui0 Meeting 38 1 not involved with us anymore . We operate 2 -- we have a Board of 15 and we operate -- 3 we just do our own thing . 4 MEMBER HORNING : Is it fair to say 5 that then the owner/operator of the boat 6 marina and restaurant is going to be a 7 non-profit corporation geared with a 8 conversation aspect to it? 9 MS . SCHNITZLER: You know, we haven ' t 10 really figured it out yet . We might lease 11 out . None of us know how to run a 12 restaurant, nor do we want to learn. We 13 don' t know how to run a marina . So I think 14 there will be some leases involved. Lots 15 of people are interested in running this 16 restaurant . Informally people have come to 17 us , but we don ' t have the restaurant use 18 presently. So we were unable really to 19 pursue that . The marina needs a lot of 20 repair. We do have somebody on our Board 21 who is very knowledgeable . Most of us are 22 not . So we ' re not really sure how that 23 will be . But we know that the Waterfront 24 Fund will be involved. 25 MEMBER HORNING: Okay. One other ' NEW SUFFOLK WATERFRONT 'UNI? BOARD OF DIRECTORS Name Title/Committee Background Architectural designer;Former Southold Chair Landmarks Preservation Commissioner; Barbara Schnitzler Executive Committee Founding Member of Santa Monica Site Committee Conservancy;Santa Monica Landmarks Commission,1999-2003. Retired,HR manager;Oyster Vice Chair gardenerivolunteer Correll SPAT Program; Linda Auriemma Executive Committee Vice-President,New Suffolk Civic P.R.,Outreach Association;Member,Southold Shellfish Events Committee Advisory Committee;Volunteer,Peconic Baykeeper Vice Chair Retired,IBM Global Business Services; Pat McIntyre Executive Committee Former President,New Suffolk Civic Fundraising Association;Former member Hamlet Marina Committee Stakeholders Retired,IBM Financial Planning Manager; Cali Schultheis Treasurer Treasurer,Friends of the Cutchogue-New Finance Committee Suffolk Library;former Vice President,New Suffolk Civic Association. Retired,NBC Broadcast Operations; Secretary Former President,New Suffolk Civic Lauren Krug Grant Board Development Events Committee Association;Former Board member,East End Women's Network. Executive Committee Barbara Butterworth Board Development Retired School Director;Consultant for Finance Committee international education projects. Events Committee Licensed Realtor,Brown Harris Stevens Marianne Collins Site Committee Former direct marketing and advertising executive Owner,Construction Consultants/LI, Joel Itzkowitz Site Committee General Contractors;Member,Advisory Marina Committee Board,Hallockville Museum Farm;Music promoter,East End events. Refired,JP Morgan;former President, Board Development former Treasurer,Peoonic Land Trust, Nancy Gilbert Events Committee Member,Riverhead Open Space Committee;Master Gardener;Cornell Cooperative Extension Committees Graphic designer;Ownerfmanager,several Patty Lowry Site Committee Brooklyn restaurants;Owner,Cutchogue Graphic design Diner,Board member,Knickerbocker Tennis Foundation Owner,CEO,Atlanta Foods International; Russ McCall Executive Committee Member,Peconic Land Trust President's Board Development Council;Owner McCall Vineyard and Ranch. Marina Committee Aquaculture Specialist,Cornell Cooperative Gregg Rivara Site Committee Extension,Suffolk County;Manager. Shellfisher Preserve Rptirod Tppnhpr Mncpnm Adminictratnr Many New Suffolk community members who are opposing the plan for a new restaurant have tried to reach out to the Waterfront Board in an effort to come to a more agreeable solution. Please see the attached letter, which was signed by about 2 5 New Suffolk residents and sent to the New Suffolk Waterfront Board. It is a great disappointment that the NSWF has made no attempt to modify their plan. Dear New Suffolk Waterfront Board, In the spirit of new Suffolk we are asking the NSWF Board members to request that the Southold Town Planning Board postpone approval of the current site plan until after our July 12th meeting. We would like to reestablish the community support that existed throughout the acquisition phase of this project, and are eternally grateful for your tireless pursuit of that goal. At this stage of development and proposed usage,there is a growing perception that the board is no longer welcoming community input. Misinformation and unanswered questions are creating a growing divide in our community and should be addressed before we proceed. The 2 major issues that need to be explored further are the environmental impact of the current proposal and the business plan upon which the proposal is based.We want to try to come together as a community to agree on a low impact plan that the larger New Suffolk community supports.A plan that is financially feasible, environmentally sensitive, and respectful of all of our neighbors. We believe that if YOU ask the Planning Board for a postponement it would reflect best on the image of New Suffolk, and would demonstrate that you as a board are not just listening to the community but that you have heard us. It is most important now,that we unite to preserve the spirit that makes New Suffolk such a wonderful place to live. We thank you for your consideration and would like to point out that the undersigned list does not include many residents who have not had opportunity to make their position known. Mrs.Jo Anne Vitiello f I 430 Oak Road P.O. Box 234 New Suffolk, NY 11956 631-901-2916 pvitiell@suffolk.lib.ny.us July 17, 2014 Southold Town Planning Board P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Attention: Mr. Donald Wilcenski Re: Development of the Galley Ho JUL 2 1. 2014 s Dear Mr. Wilcenski , Four years ago my family purposely moved to the lovely hamlet of New Suffolk because we desired a more peaceful and simple lifestyle, knowing that it would make a better life for our young daughter. I have loved living here, and know that the experience has enriched our lives. During my time here I have recognized and supported the Waterfront because of their foresight, planning,teamwork, and perseverance they utilized to purchase the waterfront property. I believed that little would change here for future generations. I was eager to help the Waterfront's efforts through volunteering and donations. However, as information has come out about the project, I have become very concerned about the potential usage of the Galley Ho if it becomes a full-fledged restaurant. This relates specifically to the idea of using it for private catered events. New Suffolk is quite special and unique. There is great value in preserving the quaint charm and peaceful lifestyle many here have come to love. Once the property is developed,we cannot go back to that way of life because it will be changed forever. The children here are quite fortunate to experience living in a place so simple and enriching. I believe the Town can help maintain that quality of life for the future generations, and still provide visitors with a wonderful experience. Some of the things I cherish about living here is that my 9-year- old daughter and her peers have the freedom to safely explore their town by walking and riding their bikes, working in the garden, and living the way many parents did before towns became so overpopulated. Other Long Island towns are too congested for children to do that as safely. Most of the children here know their neighbors because of the cohesiveness that existed prior to the recent rift that formed over the proposed plan. These children even help out at community events, learning important life skills,the value of teamwork, and interacting with neighbors and visitors. I never dreamed that the community would become so divided, and have serious doubts about the value of the development of the property. I think the restaurant, and especially the ideas about holding private catered events, are detrimental to our quality of life. The development will commercialize our tiny hamlet, bringing in unwanted traffic, noise, and parking problems. It also invites a more party like atmosphere that Mrs.Jo Anne Vitiello 430 Oak Road P.O. Box 234 New Suffolk, NY 11956 631-901-2916 pvitiell@suffolk.lib.ny.us diminishes our simple and peaceful lifestyle, making the streets less safe for our children to walk and ride their bikes because of the potential for drinking. Additionally, that extra noise and traffic are unfair to the people that live right across from the Waterfront. I am writing to request that the Town Planning Board reconsider the approval of the site plan proposed by the Waterfront. I am suggesting that the property be zoned to be used as a park with benches and tables, so that families can picnic, and we can all enjoy the natural beauty of our town. I would like to see the children of this community grow up without the idea that more is better. Simply keep the land undeveloped to perpetuate the beautiful scenery. This would allow for the docks to be used,the Waterfront to collect fees to pay for the taxes, and the community and visitors to enjoy the garden. A few benches or picnic tables, and possibly a gazebo, would keep the project simple and preserve what makes New Suffolk a gem for all of us to enjoy, cherish, and pass on to future generations. Thank you for all you do for the North Fork communities, and for any consideration to this issue. Sincerely, Jo Anne Vitiello • • P-N 6U Lanza, Heather From: lisa mandracchia <Imandrac13@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday,July 16, 2014 12:12 AM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: The expansion of New Suffolk's Galley Ho. 7/15/2014 - -- Li JUL 2 1. 2014 Lisa Mandracchia } 640 Orchard Street New Suffolk,NY 11956 (631)734-8136 Dear Ms. Lanza, I am writing to you regarding the expansion of the Galley Ho in New Suffolk. I have been a resident of New Suffolk since 2008, and have resided on Orchard Street since 2009. Since moving to Orchard Street, I have encountered a variety of unpleasant experiences due to this being a main road leading to Legends. I would like to share a few of them with you and then list my concerns regarding the Galley Ho's expansion plans. On St. Patrick's day 2009 my son and I were heading to 711 on New Suffolk Avenue. It was approximately 9pm. I saw an on coming car heading towards us, traveling at an incredibly high speed. I made an instantaneous decision to pull over on the side of the road for fear that he would hit us. The next thing I knew the car did a "U" turn in the middle of the road and just stopped, from what we could see. Had I not pulled over, we would have been right where this car randomly conducted this "U" turn, and most likely killed on impact. I waited a few minutes then approached the vehicle slowly. The car had stopped because it's rear end hit a tree after completing the "U" turn. The driver's body was strewn into the back seat, leaving his head visible through the rear window and his feet on the front dashboard. After calling 911,he was cut out of the vehicle and transported via helicopter to Stony Brook hospital. There were beer cans all over his vehicle and marijuana in his center console. He was on his way to Legends for some more cocktails. As you can imagine, it is a vision neither my 13 year old son at the time, nor 1,have forgotten. In 2011 my neighbor came running to my door saying that someone had hit my car and taken off. He heard the thud, but was unable to get the license plate. Another neighbor informed me later that day,that they had seen a similar vehicle parked at legends for quite some time prior to the time of the hit and run incident. A couple of years back, a bunch of us in the neighborhood expressed concerns to the town regards the speed at which people travel up and down the roads in this neighborhood. Southold town heard us, and put up signs regarding school crossing/reduce speed signs. Thank you for that, but I must say the speeding has gotten worse and everyday my son walks to the school for his bus, I worry. Almost every weekend, we can depend on drunk drivers speeding, even hearing what sounds like racing at times. The street are congested with traffic, making it hard for me to park in front of my own home. I do not have a driveway, therefore I am always worried about someone hitting my vehicle, and either getting hurt or hurting someone else. Recently, the New Suffolk Water Front held their Chowder Fest. The cars lined the streets making it extremely difficult for residents to park in front of our homes. 1 My concerns are the safety of ourommunity if we add another restaurant Ony sort that serves alcohol. We are not a big enough town to deal with the traffic we are already facing, and by adding another establishment without sufficient parking, will potentially lead to overcrowding, increased amount of drunk drivers, more careless drivers who may hit a child rather than a parked car. The thought of events, such as, live music, weddings, private parties is dreadful. As it is, I rarely leave my home on the weekends because of the traffic, now I'm facing late night of loud music, fast cars and sleepless nights? Please,New Suffolk is not capable of handling this type of increased population, and In my opinion, it will be detrimental to our children, our safety, and a happy community. We have one of the highest DWI rates on the east end. Please consider that this small town is already dealing with congestion, drunk drivers and unsafe roads. Thank you so much for hearing my concerns. Sincerely, Lisa Mandracchia 2 Lanza, Heather From: Annemarie van Hemmen <avanhemmen@hotmail.com> Sent: Friday,July 18, 2014 1:18 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: Waterfront New Suffolk- public comment s JUL 2 12014 Dear Members of the Planning Board, `"' a After many "divided" meetings, there seems to be nothing new to say. y The definition of"Neutral Mediator" seems lost on both sides. Each side bringing their own Mediator to the recent July 12th meeting? Really? Unfortunately so close to a deadline, the village still is divided - really negatively impacting the quality of life. I find myself totally isolated because I refuse to choose sides since: a. They have more in common than divides. However, for multiple reasons refuse to see that. b. It a Commons, a shared space. Therefore, there must be consensus, i.e. an agreement. Per definition in a democracy rarely someone can have exactly what they want. A good solution is a compromise where everyone is mostly happy, and a bit unhappy. At this point I'm convinced a consensus is impossible without a "cool down" period, followed by a very well advertised (inclusive) meeting with a truly neutral Mediator. And... proper public follow-up! "Pro's": Won't budge; maybe listen but don't hear.Extremely vested, and rightly so, after years of well- meaning hard work. However, ever since I moved to New Suffolk (Mainly because I admired the waterfront initiative.), and got involved with this project they have had "selected hearing", and a very poor record of communicating. Only sporadic communications due to community pressure, and mostly concerning solicitations to either volunteer or financially contribute. I have objected to representation without voice for so many residents from when I moved to New Suffolk! I understand a largely seasonal community with transient residents is a difficult situation. Therefore, I have offered to help out with communications whenever they stated that they lacked the manpower. But bygones must be bygones at some point. "Con's": Even though I mostly I agree with them, they are too emotional to have any empathy for the "Pro's" point of view. Plus quite frankly many of them dropped out earlier of the process due to the feeling that the Waterfront Fund was a closed, selective group. The "Pro's" are very hard to deal with but the "Con's" chose not to be part of the solution. Consequently now don't always are very well versed in the matter. I recognize the argument of the "Pro's" (Gail Wickham) that they must move forward with the process. However, it's hard to trust their previous stated strategy of"We must move forward first, then we can discuss." at this point. Plus financial sustainability accounts remain sketchy. Seems like ever greater projects requiring ever more money get embarked upon, for a size-reduced space. When dealing with a community project: 1 Just because you can doesn'ttan you should. Just because you At have to doesn't mean you should not. The Galley Ho was not structurally sound even pre-Sandy. The bathrooms had not been working for years. The beautiful alcove room was already leaking on art work displayed in it when I volunteered as a Gallery Host a few years back. Having this room moved more inland won't provide the same view anyway. Moreover, I worked as a Research Archivist in a Museum with buildings on the National Register of Historic Places. I understand many people are attached to the Galley Ho for many reasons but it's not a historic building; let alone a Landmark. The Waterfront Fund says that they don't need a restaurant/ cafe to be sustainable. I recognize that occasional events with temporary inconvenience may be needed to maintain the open space. That may be the price to pay for it. However, "A Summer Night on the Beach" (July 26, $100 per person) cannot be passed off as a Community Event. Just not within reach of the overall community. For long-standing traditional use, like watching Wednesday eve races little is required. A large number of persons seem to also really enjoy the added Community Gardens. Let them. From what I understand, the initial goal has been reached and the property is secured as open space, and stabilized financially. More than enough reason to celebrate and enjoy! Since this has become such a tremendously controversial issue where "sides" don't seem to be able to meet, let's put a halt to the whole process, and... after a "cool down period" reevaluate. The past is the past. Give credit where credit is due, and... when open to collaborate again move on from there! Sandy pretty much wiped out the Galley Ho. No ones fault but it won't ever be the same. So let's take down the eye-sore. At the most, maybe use some salvageable materials to build some benches a community open shelter to provide sun and some rain protection? IF, and only if, a consensus can be reached. Because then community spirit will likely be restored, and more people will volunteer again too. Build some kind of modest, environmentally conscious bathroom facility. An open space in very touristy New Suffolk should have that available. The ones near the beach have very restricted hours. Collaboration on this issue may even be appropriate at a level beyond the Waterfront Fund. Similarly for issues like parking, trailers, idling cars and proper signage; a scope beyond the community Open Space simply due to the high volume of local and regional destination tourism. Thank you for conducting the two Monday evening public hearings! You did an admirable job. As painful as they were, they were very enlightening. Quite a bit of information surfaced that had not been shared earlier. Ample opportunity was provided. Appreciated. Too bad this has not resulted in to some kind of consensus. Annemarie van Hemmen (year-round renter in non-waterfront location) 295 Oak Road (PO Box 298) New Suffolk, NY 11956 631-504-2672 2 'o 0-n- Lanza, HeatherL Y From: Danielle Hauss <danielleahauss@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday,July 20, 2014 8:58 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: Fwd: New suffolk waterfront JUL 2 12014 a Subject: New suffolk waterfront Dear chairman wilcenski and planning board members The committee deserves credit for having worked hard but let us know that they have no intention to withdraw their plan .I listened carefully about the plan ,the size ,and came to the conclusion that it should be downsized .new Suffolk is a tiny hamlet and 100/%more traffic ,special events ,the view and noise of all these cars and parking lot is not in the best interest for the village .In the morning and all day people walk to the post office ,with kids ,with dogs ,or run or bike ,simple things which might not be enjoyed anymore Because of too much traffic .a community center or very small scale anything is all it can really have at this point without taking away what makes it unique .thank you for your time and consideration. Danielle hauss 15900 new suffolk avenue New suffolk Sent from my Wad i 5vbf �L c� July 20, 2014 To Mr. Donald Wilcenski,Chair,Southold Town Planning Board and Committee Members Southold Town Planning Commission As a New Suffolk native I need to voice my opinion on the New Suffolk waterfront supposedly non- profit"fund"and their fundraising to "preserve"our waterfront and the old galley ho building. For many years,time,floods;and economy have left us with quiet open space, enjoyed by us all. Then came the blocking off of the parking lot where we could go to watch the moon rise, rainbows, storms or the weds nite races. I understand that something has to be done with the old galley ho building. it is a liability where it is and we have an ugly fence with cloth " posters"that look like dirty sheets all over it to further block the view,with these oversized signs on the old (used to be picturesque) native surviving barn on the property. Overgrown with a native species of weeds,which further block the view from First street,The state easement(on the side where the old post office and general store was) is overgrown with a couple of sailboats sideways to further block access and the view. The plan they want to push on us raises the landscape as per zoning and adds a "field"of cesspools surrounded by a retaining wall so they can park a 66 seat restaurant in a serious flood zone. This for a quiet residential area that doesn't warrant more traffic, people or other commercial development. At the last schoolhouse meeting we asked if the plans can be scaled down and we got a "no you'll have to trust us.We have to get the value out of the property." VALUE?isn't open flat space the most valuable commodity of all . And all this,folks is under the guise of non profit.your donations. A suggestion/compromise was made to use the old"Ho" as a clubhouse for residents of New Suffolk, smallest footprint,on pilings with a church kitchen, with either a pump-out or alternative sewage system to preserve our fragile ecosystem. They will not compromise. I am very disappointed with the Peconic Land Trust for backing this plan So folks, before you shell out a hundred dollars to this shady non-profit for one of their fundraising "events"for their agenda,think about something similar in your neighborhood,disturbing your peace, and give to the animal shelter, homeless or food banks or and get your tax deduction from them. Thank You for your Service Barbara Solo 1400 4th St New Suffolk, N.Y. 11956 734.4065 • Lanza, Heather From: kim@mysummergirl.com Sent: Friday,July 18, 2014 10:06 AM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: NSWF To Donald Wilcenski and members of the Planning Board and Supervisor Russell, The North Fork is quickly becoming what the Hamptons were, please don't let us become what the Hamptons are. The NSWF's site plan should be sent back to the drawing board as it is not what they represented it to be back at the ZBA meetings of February '13. We were told it was simply about having a hotdog at a picnic table and there was no site plan presented then. That is why there is so much outrage amongst our community, people were clearly shocked to see this development on our waterfront especially post Sandy. This project was started by concerned members of New Suffolk to protect and preserve our waterfront from development. The NSWF collected donations under the guise of preservation, not to build a restaurant. They hid the site plan from the community as they secretly had work sessions with the town. When I posted a copy on the post office community bulletin board, they tore it down by 9:15 a.m. They have continually misrepresented their plans both to NS and the town, or at the very least been vague. Most of us feel duped- we trusted them. They ask us to trust them now,they say they are finally listening, but their actions prove otherwise. For example: they refused to change the community meeting from after the town hall meeting to before. They made no compromises to angry New Suffolkers. They said they will start to listen to ideas from select people at round-table discussions sometime in August- after your determination of our future. And according to their website this is already a done deal-the Galley Ho will be open next Summer. Please honor what we all love about the North Fork as it is disappearing right before our eyes. Why do we have to wait until 2017 for better septic systems? Please keep in mind that this on is a shocking 81' long X 44'wide just feet from our supposed protected bay. The future is now-please send them back to the drawing board. Thank you again, Kim Petrie 1 1014 a ; k i 1 George Maul KI P.O. Box 635 New Suffolk, NY 11956 Southold Planning Board and Committee Members 54375 Main Rd P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 July 18, 2014 iUi_ 21 ?�)1i� s I Re: New Suffolk Waterfront Fund site plan application Dear Mr.Wilcenski, The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund has submitted an application for a 66 seat restaurant. Last week they told the New Suffolk Community that the use will be determined at round table discussions held at the Cutchogue New Suffolk Library. I respectfully request that they be required to submit an application for the use they intend to use. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, George Maul Ai July 10, 2014 Dear Southold Town Planning Board, Because New Suffolk is so small, it's really more of a neighborhood than a town. I walk my dogs here, my father rides around on his scooter, children play in the streets. It is a quiet community that will be forever changed with the new proposed plan by the NSWF. Please deny their request for a 66 seat restaurant and ask that they come up with a plan that is more in keeping with the small scale beauty of New Suffolk. Tha Y u atherine Puric-Cavalier d u n la 1, M,r a C P r3 Andrea Rive PO Box 649 New Suffolk, New York 11956 July 13, 2014 Town Planning Board, Town of Southold, New York 11952 Re: "Save the New Suffolk Waterfront." y 1 have lived in the same house in New Suffolk since 1975. Prior to that I summered for 27 years at the house my parents owned on Fifth Street. 1 was approached by family and neighbors with concerns after yesterday's meeting, which 1 did not attend. Concerns expressed to me are that: Waterfront is NOT being SAVED from anythingl There are several people who made comments in support of the renewed Galley Ho in an attempt to sway opinion, that were untrue and unchallenged—firstly, from photograph enclosed, the Galley Ho was actually Ma Finch's restaurant and located at the Beach. It was moved in the early 60's to the parcel in question. Nostalgic reminiscences of a hamburger in 1938 at the Galley Ho are not supported by fact. Someone else claimed to be the largest landowner in New Suffolk. New Suffolk is Tax Section 117— Farmland to the North is not New Suffolk. While 1 have not checked the tax rolls recently, I expect that proper documentation would show Mr. Bacon is the largest landowner. Persons who own a Marina/ restaurant in Mattituck seem to see an opportunity in rebuilding the Galley Ho as a 66 Seat restaurant with capabilities for Weddings on the deck. How does that preserve the waterfront for the people of New Suffolk? Where are these restaurant guests supposed to park? Of great concern is the fact that a 501 c3 may sell its property after development. Profits to the corporation after payment of the small business loan could be paid to directors who developed the property on donations and reduced tax payments. We cannot see how this will benefit the residents and taxpayers of New Suffolk. The waterfront committee seems to be failing in any attempts to save the waterfront for access by residents and appear to be working on undisclosed personal agendas. The restoration of a waterfront restaurant in 2014 needs very careful examination; we hope the Planning board is listening. A:. x -ft""M NEW SUFFOLK L.1.-1940'S PHOTO DONATED BY: BOB TUTHILL HL Mr 9C, Pa July 17, 2014 V ,✓ F T Dear Mr. Wilcenski, My name is Michelle Roussan and I have lived in New Suffolk at 865 Second Street for over 30 years. At the July 12th community meeting at our school house, a large majority of citizens continued to raise serious concerns about the present waterfront site plan. As you are well aware, this plan includes permission for a 66-seat restaurant, with septic tanks and parking large enough to accommodate that number of people. Not once did I hear members of the Waterfront Board talk about the children of New Suffolk and of the North Fork and yet, the children are the future of our hamlet and of Southold Town. Many of us are already deeply concerned about traffic safety, parking issues, high-speed truck deliveries, water pollution, noise pollution, flooding on First Street, and more. I firmly believe that the mission of the New Suffolk Waterfront Board and the shared mission of our community must be to save and protect what we have left. The ability to build and run a 66-seat restaurant is not the legacy our children need. There are many more constructive, responsible and forward-thinking possibilities for this treasured location. I join countless other residents in my desire to explore and pursue such alternatives. I urge the Planning Board and the Town Board to continue to do what's best for the life of our community and direct the New Suffolk Waterfront Board to lighten the footprint of their present site plan proposal. Thank you for your consideration. Michelle Roussan -f- • HL bc, MT PL Lanza, Heather • ern 50- -F From: Michele <mchaussa@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday,July 17, 2014 10:40 AM To: Lanza, Heather; don@briarclifflandscape.com Subject: New Suffolk waterfront site plan Board members: After a great deal of thought, I have decided to weigh in against the proposed site plan. I know the committee has worked long and hard,they deserve much credit and they don't want to withdraw the plan. But, having listened to all the arguments against it: the size, the obstruction of the view, the traffic, the parking, the influx of tourists, and the "destination" possibility, I now feel that New Suffolk would be better off with a greatly downsized plan, or even no eating establishment at all. What about just a marina, some picnic tables, and a pavilion? Thank you for your consideration. Michele Chaussabel Orchard street New Suffolk 701f; E a i 1 PA Lanza, Heather IF I. From: tuckermb <tuckermb@verizon.net> Sent: Wednesday,July 16, 2014 6:28 PM 014 1 To: Lanza, Heather Subject: New Suffolk Waterfront Hello there, My name is Mary Fields, and I live at 1300 2nd Street in New Suffolk. I wish to express my concerns on the rebuilding of the Gally Ho. I have full confidence in Southold Town for making the right decision on a precious piece of land that should be kept to a simple plan. This is a flood zone, and the septic system for a restaurant/cafe would inhibit sight and more crucial our waters. The risk of a hurricane is real, and the impact on this property would be devestating. Also, the amount of monies that was quoted to renovate said building is way too low for the amount of work. The cost would be triple, and the burden financially is not sound. Please take these comments to our officials and let us have a simple plan that will accomodate all of our neighbors. We all have come here for the peace and serenity. Let our lovely community be whole again. Thank you for your time. Sincerely William & Mary Fields 1 • . HL MT BC Pa Ov bT Dear Southold Town Planning Board, As stated in a recent letter from the NSWF Board to the "Mainstays", their most generous and constant supporters, there is "controversy surrounding our Planning Board Application". It is for this reason that we respectfully request that you postpone any decisions at the July 7th hearing. While the NSWF Board has been working diligently in the interest of the waterfront, many people who live in New Suffolk still have not had an opportunity to fully understand board's proposals and related liabilities. In the absence of a comprehensive environmental impact study addressing sanitation, the raised grade of the property, flooding, traffic, congestion, parking, and related issues we feel it is premature to move forward at this time. The NSWF Board has announced it's holding a meeting here in New Suffolk on July 12th, a few days after the Planning Board hearing. Please give them the opportunity to better explain the impact of their proposal, as the implementation of such a large-scale plan will certainly compromise many of the qualities that make New Suffolk such a wonderful place to live. In the interest of our hamlet, we wish not to act in haste but to establish a plan that is environmentally conscious, financially feasible and respectful of all of our neighbors. Therefore, it may be necessary to down size the current plan in an attempt to fully address our communities many, many environmental and financial concerns. Once again, we respectfully ask that you please delay any furf r 'rvnt�t_ the Waterfront Board has had a chance to reevaluate their prd Thank You, s Print Name- C' I e Signature Address l 73 V S� Print Name 1(�l U► �� Signature Address `s iVV 7 S Print Name qtk�, Signature Address Print I H'C Signature Address Print Name-7— l�) VI=IA Signature`�� , Address ( ? "Sdy�1 Ki( r� 5Ty SUr�=C%1_,� , lVy il�t Print Name 1-11 C1,4 Q.1 Signature to, Address 7 �U h�� h S+ �t/t?v✓ SU�y�p J �� 1�/y �1�� Print Name -1��1`�� PAAI'e Signature Address �7 v T ►` /-v(' �✓ SSC I 1 Print Name �' &J �C1�� _Signature Address L `a �Print Name �)(&V�- '7Signature Address 0 J f- F 7- /V�J J SUfi::�(- f l/ Print Name Signature Address 13D ff,— ,r /U 119,--4 .✓�✓/ Print Name G'a Tl u-�� Signature Address/3��O/��1�/i✓ �l/E Tf �-D /�9 Print Name�c�r��rCAI- O Signatur2 - SS() Address Print NameMp �� 0 � K Signature 4 ape S4ave �6 Medi PA + NA 7 P, Lanza, Heather From: Dennis <legendsdh@aol.com> Sent: Thursday,July 17, 2014 10:13 AM To: Don Wilcenski; Lanza, Heather Cc: Russell, Scott;Jim Dinizio; bobghosio@town.southold.ny t,�{,z)Qkverty, Ipevans@fishersisland.net;William Ruland is' 4 Subject: Fwd: NSWF � elf ' U 1 i.l_I �� ✓t To Planning and Supervisor Russell and Town Board Members My email of moments ago was sent prematurely by accidentally leaning on the screen. We are away in VA and have no access to a laptop, only an iPad. I apologize for the crazy colors that seem to have been created and cannot figure out how to correct-there were only two before I leaned on the screen: the quotes in blue, and my comments in black. It may be easier on your eyes if you photocopy it. What I most wanted to correct is the end of quotation under p.35 from Andy Torgove. It is corrected here. So sorry for this confusion. Sincerely, Diane Harkoff Dear Don, Heather and Committee Members Regarding parking: There are disparities between what the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund told the ZBA in 2013, and what was presented to the Planning Board with the site plan in 2014. January 3, 2013 meeting p22-"It will provide public access to the waterfront, provide public parking,which is severely needed in this area, . . . " I have not seen "public" parking provided on the site plan, have you? p24 - ""It's going to allow them to solve an overflow parking problem in New Suffolk, as parking is very important." How does their site plan resolve parking? p. 25 -" . . . .and has been there for many, many years. " Though this does not relate to a discrepancy related to parking, it is misleading -the Galley Ho was closed for about 9 years prior to 2013. p.32 -" . . . reiterating that the restaurant use is fairly essential to your plans for sustaining the development of this property." Though this does not relate to a parking inconsistency, rather a disparity within their Board about their financials needs. To this very date, they have been never explained why they believed it was financially essential to have a restaurant. NSWF Board Member Andy Togrove, with a PhD in 1 economics& it quite clearly at the Planning Board meeg of July 7th, that"it would have been financially and fiscally irresponsible, and pretty stupid, for us to embark on this process relying on the success of an eating establishment to pay for the process. " p45-46" So all of the parking is going to have to be addressed in terms of the site plan. . . The New York State conservation does require . . . a segment of public parking . . . So there will be public parking on this property . . .There has to be public parking made available." So where exactly is this public parking they told the ZBA they would have ? p45 " . . . There is going to be parking along the front that we're going to have to speak to the Town about maintaining." p49 Leslie Weismann to Gail Wickham, "You live there. I am sure you are not looking for adverse impact. . . and the creation of additional traffic." Seriously, how can an additional use such as a restaurant not create more traffic? p56-57 several misc parking issues in new suffolk; beach goers park and walk to beach, etc. p75-76 Member Horning " . . . It has been mentioned that both of these easements require a certain amount of parking, and nobody mentioned how much or whatever . . . Do they have any effect on the total lot reserve-2 . . Then Member Dinizio also questions marina, restaurant, park use and easements and parking issues. February 7, 2013 meeting p6"it will produce an actual parking lot. . . many, many more spaces that have been available . . . It will also provide room to expand that parking lot should that become necessary or advisable." p9 "The plan will allow the adjacent business properties orderly and reasonable use of their properties by improving the parking, improving access, drawing people to the area . . . It's going to allow the adjacent residential properties orderly and reasonable use for the same reasons." How does this rhetoric used before the ZBA in 2013, match the plan before the Planning Board in 2014? 2 p31-32 *a pre-existing parking problem." • " So by giving away part of our property for use by others, we are saying that we understand that there is a parking problem, and we're trying to help with that parking problem. Thank you." If the NSWF truly meant to help parking congestion, they would not be proposing a 66 seat restaurant. Furthermore, the parking lot would be open right now, instead of blockaded. What the NSWF said to the ZBA in 2013 simply does not correspond to the site plan currently before the Planning Board; they have insufficient parking for their own needs, let alone as an aid to the already congested neighborhood. As Leslie Weismann said (p21-22): . . . from a legal perspective, a Special Exception permit is not granted perpetuity . . . are always subject to further review." Further at the New Suffolk schoolhouse meeting of July 12th they made a point that they wanted the 66 seat restaurant to increase the "value" of their property. What does that imply? Sounds suspiciously like their ultimate goal is to sell off the parcel in the future. For many of us, the value is in the preservation and the beautiful landscape painted by Mother Nature, not the value of the land. The Peconic Land Trust (PLT) having right of first refusal, if it even still exists on this parcel, is not a comfort factor to many of us as you will understand when you read in this article from the South Fork: http://www.27east.com/news/article.cfm/Sagaponack/459660/Land-Preservation- Proposal-Draws-Criticism Sometimes 501 c3 charitable organizations get far afield of their stated goals. Sometimes they can even become developers wearing the guise of preservationists. Most of us thought we were contributing to preservation and protecting the hamlet from further development by others, not to support a commercial project. As the inconsistencies of all kinds continue to amass, we urge rejection of the site plan and respectfully ask for a review of the disparities by the Town Attorney. Sincerely, Diane and Dennis Harkoff cc: Supervisor Scott Russell and Town Board Members 3 NLI PQgo M Lanza, Heather From: Howard Thompson <howardthompson@optonline.net> Sent: Thursday,July 17, 2014 8:01 AM To: don@briarcliffsod.com; Don@briarclifflandscape.com; Lanza, Heather Cc: Russell, Scott;Jim Dinizio; Doherty,Jill; Standish, Lauren; Ipevans@fishersisland.net; Tomaszewski, Michelle; Ghosio, Bob;William Ruland;Toth,Vicki Subject: New Suffolk Waterfront 1 �i1 iL iF k' Illi_ 1 7 2014 Dear Chairman Wilcenski and Planning Board Members, While one is grateful for the good work the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund has d"dae in rebuilding.tl e marina, at Saturday's meeting their board members did their best to stall and to waste time recapping their "mission" to gain maximum usage for the Galley Ho, in case whoever is on the board in years to come decides we need a 66 seat full-service restaurant, "if Legends leaves"!! Once again the overwhelming majority in the room asked that they scale back and give the community what it really wants - a light-use, counter or window service snack bar. Some wanted no liquor (others would be ok with wine/beer) and some asked that disposable paper plates be used, negating the need for dishwashers - the detergent/bleach destroys the bacteria in septic systems, you know - and the way I saw it, the NSWF were not prepared to change much of anything. They said the septic field could be reduced in size, but they didn't say they would reduce it. They say it's their "duty" to go for as much as they can but I think it's their "duty" to abide by the wishes of the majority who contributed to their project. There's no way they can say the majority in the community wanted a 66 seat restaurant with a massive septic field and a parking lot for 38 cars. Nobody in the room, however, objected to the idea of a snack bar with a greatly reduced septic field. The ONLY concession I heard the spokesperson for the NSWF board make was that they'd rethink the planting of trees, to maintain an unobstructed view. As part-owner of a restaurant in Manhattan for the past 10 years or so, I find it hard to believe they're going to find anyone to agree to a lease for the Galley Ho which dictates the operator's hours of business, what food & drink they might serve and what - if any - music might be played. How anyone could run a good, successful business with those restrictions boggles the mind. At best, you're going to end up with mediocre food served by people who have no pride in their profession just yards away from a perfectly good restaurant that serves most of the community well. The subject of 'special events' was particularly troubling to several in the room and people were particularly concerned about the potential for a large number of vehicles parked on the streets surrounding the waterfront (may we ALL get No Parking June - September signs, please?) and loud music/anti-social behavior (Vineyard 48). Do you really want the possibility of THAT headache coming your way again? Look - they've already sold us out with regard to the property's north acre. Now it costs $100 to set foot on most of the beach (their next fundraiser) and some of us feel that our donations and 1 i rvolu-steer-work have been ussor purposes other than the claims preservation" and "greater public access" in their mission statement. In fact, it looks more like they want to 'preserve' their intention to open a commercial, for-profit business while reducing the public's access to one of the area's most tranquil sites. In his closing, moderator Phil Cardinale suggested the two sides weren't very far apart in our desires and suggested we "trust" the board. That comment drew gales of laughter. We've been there, we've done that and now we're speaking up. Howard Thompson PO Box 45 New Suffolk NY, 11956 USA 2 Cummings, Brian A. From: Lanza, Heather Sent: Wednesday,July 16, 20141:19 PM To: Cummings, Brian A. Subject: FW: FYI Good info to have for the file if we don't have it already. From: Dennis [mailto:legendsdh@aol.com] Sent:Wednesday,July 16, 201412:01 PM To: Don Wilcenski-Briarcliff Sod; Lanza, Heather Subject: FYI Just an FYI Diane Harkoff NYS DEC completed applications 1/30/13 Application ID: 1-4738-01008/00018 State Historic Preservation Act (SHPA) Determination: Cultural resource lists and map have been checked. No registered, eligible or inventoried archaeological sites or historic structures were identified at the project location. No further review in accordance with SHPA is required. r 1 Lanza, Heather From: dan <drpetrie@earthlink.net> Sent: Wednesday,July 16, 2014 2:31 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: Saturday Waterfront Meeting http•//sufloiktimes timesrevicw com/2014/07/50182/waterfront-fttnd-price-tai;-to-renovate-galley-ho-385k/ Dear Chairman Wilcenski and Planning Board Members The Waterfront Fund's plan for New Suffolk is not a good plan for this small community or the bay. Please read the Suffolktimes article. We are asking you to please slow this down until after the roundtable talks and the community comes to some kind of common ground. I think if we have an even slate they may listen to the community and some of our concerns. Daniel Petrie i • • Tri) pOL, Lanza, Heather From: Ellen Goldstein <ellenora@optonline.net> Sent: Tuesday,July 15, 201410:26 PM To: don@briarcliffsod.com Cc: Lanza, Heather; Don@briarclifflandscape.com; Russell, Scott;Jim Dinizio; Doherty,Jill; Standish, Lauren; Ipevans@fishersisland.net;Tomaszewski, Michelle; Ghosio, Bob; William Ruland;Toth,Vicki Subject: New Suffolk Waterfront Dear Chairman Wilcenski and Planning Board Members The main concerns are the development of the proposed site. This causes concern of overcrowding in terms of parking and also fears of flooding as a result of the raised buildings and above ground cesspools .I think a traffic study has to be done. Several of our neighbors along Second Street have already requested No Parking signs from the town and were granted them, on their streets to stem this problem that already exists and we fear that another destination in addition to Legends and Summer Girl,plus the boat ramp will increase the problem faced by the families that live close to this property and upset the delicate balance that we are trying to maintain in our quiet hamlet. Another concern is the required cesspool which is part of this proposal. We know that our rivers and bays are fragile and they are already polluted with both human and animal waste. We have been told that there is no guarantee that an amount of nitrates will seep into the water as a result of this addition. We are much more in favor of compostable and non-permanent solutions such as porta-potties. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely Ellen Goldstein EC EH E so.; ' << pia!'i 1 • • �� Lanza, Heather From: Germaise,Victoria <Victoria.Germaise@elliman.com> Sent: Tuesday,July 15, 2014 5:00 PM To: Don@briarclifflandscape.com;don@briarcliffsod.com; Lanza, Heather Cc: Russell, Scott;Jim Dinizio; Doherty,Jill; Standish, Lauren; Ipevans@fishersisland.net, Tomaszewski, Michelle;Ghosio, Bob;William Ruland;Toth,Vicki Subject: New Suffolk Dear Chairman Wilcenski and Planning Board Members, The meeting held by the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund on Saturday,July 12th, moderated by Phil Cardinale, was indeed spirited. The overwhelming majority of people in the room DO NOT WANT our beautiful,tranquil waterfront transformed into a commercial destination and wedding factory site. My question to Barbara Schnitzler was: Is it true that the level of usage determines the size of infrastructure required?That is, if there were a lower-impact use of the property,wouldn't you require a smaller septic system? Her answer:Yes. However, when asked if they were willing to scale down the site plan to ENSURE that the maximum use allowed would never occur,they answered: "No. It is our duty to go for the maximum. Trust us to make the right decisions for this property."The room ERUPTED IN LAUGHTER. Many full time residents of New Suffolk feel that a true SNACK BAR would be acceptable. If the following restrictions were put in place, and the resultant revisions were made to the site plan,we would have a level of comfort moving forward: - No Table Service - Recyclable Paper Plates ONLY= No Dishwasher/Grease trap - No Liquor License At this time,we have been told that NSWF is NOT WILLING TO MAKE ANY CHANGES to their site plan. I implore you to help the NSWF do what is best for their community and require them to revise their site plan, to ensure the lowest impact use of this precious spot. Sincerely, Vicky Germaise DECCDVE JUL 15 2014 VICTORIA GERMAISE Southold Town LICENSED REAL ESTATE SALESPERSON Planning Board DOUGLAS ELLIMAN REAL ESTATE "Come Home To The North Fork" Certified Buyer Representative 1 4;f Lanza, Heather , From: Julie M Saul <juliem@saulgallery.com> Sent: Friday,July 11, 201412:32 PMi—q---- To: Lanza, Heather � Y. Subject: New Suffolk JUL 14 2fil+ E'er July 11, 2014 P ai,ri" Dear Ms. Lanza, I am writing to you for a second time in regard to the future of the New Suffolk Waterfront. I was heartened by your postponement of a decision at your meeting on Monday night. Since the controversy has been going on for quite a while now surrounding the usage of the 2 odd acres, I have had time to listen and think and learn a bit....and I still feel strongly that the usage of this property needs to be completely rethought, and I believe it would be appropriate for the Planning Board to send the site plan back to Zoning for re assessment. In other words, I hope you will deny the current application from NWSF. Here are some thoughts on the matter: WHO IS THIS PROJECT SERVING AND WHY? New Suffolk is a small village. We do not have the resources to support a major influx of visitors. We already have a lovely public beach, which can only be visited by arriving by foot, bicycle, or a car with a permit. It seems that this system was put in place, in order to limit the influx of people to the community. Why would not the planning of another facility be consistent with this idea of limiting influx? It is very doubtful that residents of New Suffolk will be dining on a regular basis at the proposed restaurant site. With 66 seats and 2 seatings a night, the restaurant would serve something around 1/3 of the community on any night. This is very unlikely. Which means that people would need to come from far and wide for the restaurant to be viable...how does this serve our community? A small daytime snack bar which could serve the people who are visiting the beach under the same conditions as noted above seems to make more sense to me. The Galley Ho could be converted into an open pavilion like structure. HISTORIC USES The Waterfront Fund has msained that the Gallery Ho has allys been there and that the planlo revitalize a restaurant has always been in the plans. I am very leery of this position. Change is inevitable, and the architecture and usage of the building is not such that it warrants a rigid position, in my opinion. This area was natural virgin land originally (which is what Mr. Bacon is returning it to on his acre) and then used for commercial fishing and maritime issues historically. Should we try and reintroduce a commercial fishing facility to this property as well? ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES We are all well aware of the possibility of future storms and floods that would then incur closures and cost to repair damages. Also the possible effect of flood waters on properties adjacent to the waterfront property. Many other issues have arisen as well, which I do not believe have been fully addressed. AESTHETICS The site plan requires landscaping and elevation that will block the view. Also, I extremely wary of decisions made as to the design elements surrounding the parking, restaurant etc. Who will make these decisions, today and in the future? SAFETY New Suffolk is filled with families with children and dogs. Increased traffic from cars, garbage and delivery vehicles will only increase the possibility of accidents happening. How many more signs can we support? The traffic coming down New Suffolk Avenue and Road is almost always going too fast. Do we need more? And does this mean more police and security presence? That means more police and cost to Southold in general. FINANCES I have asked for a basic business plan from the Waterfront Fund and have not had anything made available to me. There are all sorts of rumors going around such as we need this restaurant in order to support the cost of maintaining the property. What is the cost of building and maintaining the proerty? Also, I have heard that the restaurant rental will be kept as low as possible. That is a nice idea, but again what is the point? The notion that the Fund invests millions in developing the property with the hope that this will then produce money to pay that debt seems absurd to me. Just because credit or a loan has been made available by the SBA does not mean that all of those funds need to be utilized. It seems to me to make much more sense to spend as little as possible to maintain a beautiful natural site with marina and picnic tables and not incur debt. In any case, I cannot understand why these figures have not been developed or if they have been, made available. As a home owner in New Suffolk who intends to enjoy this beautiful spot as long as I can, I truly hope that the old modernist maxim "less is more" will be applied to the future vision for 2 � s the tterfront, rather than leRtry and go for the maximum DALOPMENT possible, which is the message being expressed by the Fund. Many thanks for your consideration of all these issues. Sincerely, Julie Saul 875 King St. (corner of 1St St.) New Suffolk, NY 11956 Julie Saul Julie Saul Gallery 535 West 22nd St.6th floor New York,NY 10011 iuliem.'insaulgallery.com vvww.sau Igallcrv.com 212 627-2410 646 244-5700 mobile Julie Saul Gallery on Facebook @saulgallery on Twitter am er 3 Lanza, Heather From: William Grella <wildoc2@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday,July 14, 2014 1:36 PM To: Don@briarclifflandscape.com; don@briarcliffsod.com; Lanza, Heather Cc: Russell, Scott;Jim Dinizio; Doherty, Jill; Standish, Lauren; IMsland.net; Tomaszewski, Michelle; Ghosio, Bob;William Ruland;Tote c Subject: New Suffolk I JUL 14 201., 8 Dear Chairman Wilcenski,Heather Lanza and Planning Board Members, v u. I am writing to you to stress my opposition to the proposed rebuilding of the Galley Ho restaurant on the property in the downtown hamlet of New Suffolk which is being advanced by the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund (NSWF). Our primary residence is located in very close proximity to this development site and my family is heart sick about what is being promoted. We have been involved with the NSWF since its inception, giving well over$30,000.00 of direct financial support to the fund. We also volunteered substantial time to fund raising. From the inception of the 5K race which we organized for 3 consecutive seasons as well as providing yoga instruction in the Old Galley Ho. We developed and sold bumper stickers, key chains,tee shirts, and financially supported many events we were not directly involved in. This was all to raise funds to aid in the preservation of this delicate and unique plot of land. Our time on the board of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund (NSWF) ended when our children were born but covered a period from the civic association to establishment of the NSWF 501 3c . There were many iterations proposed for the preservation of the property, the operative word being PRESERVATION, not development. There was talk of a museum,a community center, a newspaper snack bar, post office, community garden, a marina never a restaurant. In fact the reason we and the community pooled resources in the first place was to fight development,the NSWF has lost sight of the original mandate of the town, to preserve the site. We were misled when we donated money to this cause. When reading the NSWF Charities Registration Statement section 3 (a) it indicates what we thought we were giving to, "A public access marina that will allow members of the general public to access the Great Peconic Bay for recreational activity;(b) A historical site commemorating first settlers of Long Island; and/or(c) The refurbishment of an existing general store that has historical significance to the New Suffolk community." In addition,their Certificate of Incorporation of New Suffolk Waterfront Fund,Inc. section 3 stated the following, The undersigned,for the purpose of forming a not-for-profit corporation under Section 402 Of the Not- For-Profit Corporation Law of the State of New York, hereby certifies that: 3. The Corporation is formed and shall be operated exclusively for the charitable purposes within the meaning of Section 501(c)3) Internal Revenue Code of 1986. as now in effect or as may hereafter be amended (the "Code"),to solicit gifts from the public and to apply them for the purposes of the preservation in substantially its present natural state, of littoral real property located in Suffolk County, New York so that any such property will remain a natural centerpiece of Eastern Long Island for all future generations; i I;reiterate the board has lost sitof what it initially proposed to do. Dead it is taking a paternalistic approach as to what is best for the site, much the same as previous owners of the property tried to push their agendas. They are ignoring the majority of the community opposing it whom they are suppose to represent. They are attempting to force their option as the only alternative to the site. Stressing that there is only a small percentage of the entire property devoted to this restaurant. I contend that this "small" percentage drags the entire property and hamlet into its vortex, causing a situation in this tiny hamlet to be the next destination spot in the over development, overcrowding of New Suffolk's downtown,which is closely surrounded by our neighbors homes. This is not a Love Lane or downtown Riverhead which represent real downtown areas and are now ridiculously overcrowded. There is enough representation of this all over Long Island making these areas undesirable. Their proposal has led to divisions in a community that initially pulled together to protect the property. Over parking for the beach consumes the majority of the parking spaces downtown now, resulting in an overcrowded beach. I have never seen anyone stopped from entering that beach regardless of how many people are on it. People have parked with impunity, blocking access to our driveway filling our home garbage cans with their beach waste (if they are good enough to throw it in the trash and not on the street.). Boats with trailers, motorcycles and speeding automobiles have terrorized my children.All this and the 66 seat restaurant with bar, (which is being dressed up by the board as a "cafe" or "snack bar" in an attempt to further deceive the people of New Suffolk),has not even been built yet. The future of this community looks quite bleak to my family if this proposal is not altered. The board appeared to make a few concessions at the meeting on July 12th. However they stated that this building would be built regardless. A proposal to reduce the size of the sanitation system which would in effect limit the seating capacity of the restaurant was flatly rejected. Indicating that they are hell bent on doing what they propose. They offered round table meetings on Saturdays in August but let us know that they are moving ahead with present planning,come hell or high water, so I don't see much use for the round table meetings. They graciously stated that they would listen to our concerns but their past actions leave me in doubt. They proposed putting restrictions on the restaurant that no restauranteur would conceivably accept and expect to generate a profit worth their investment. They produced numbers where this restaurant would only contribute$34,000.00 dollars to the income of the property. What a waste of resources and such exposure, to force such division on a community for this measly return. I would be willing and I'm sure others would be willing to contribute a portion of this money to stop the destruction of our hamlet. Their own financial representative informed us that the income from the restaurant was not necessary to finance the property. What is going on here is unclear the entire process needs to be more transparent. I do believe the board has worked tirelessly, doing in depth and time consuming work and should be commended, however I also feel they have lost their way and are acting like a dog with a bone refusing to give it up. Perhaps from a feeling that the time spent was for naught and unappreciated. For myself I believe that their work and our work and financial support is greatly appreciated and has brought us to a point, not to the end. Additional work,needs to be done to preserve the land. Lets not force a stance to satisfy our egos or to say "we won" because we are all neighbors and in the end all live in a one of a kind community and need to find common ground. Dr. William F. Grella 2 r • • l9 July 9, 2014 Dear Southold Town Planning Board, We are concerned about the plan for the New Suffolk Waterfront. We live on 2nd street in New Suffolk, and are worried about increased traffic, parking, noise, the cesspool, and the obstruction of the panoramic view of the water. We also do not want big catered events on the property. We are a very quiet, retired couple, which is one of the reasons we moved to New Suffolk because it is such a lovely relaxed neighborhood. We understand that there will be changes at the waterfront, but hope they will be as small as possible so that we can keep the serenity that we enjoy in New Suffolk. Thank you very much, 1 Peter and Helen Puric 1250 2nd Street P.O. Box 674 New Suffolk, NY 11956 Cummings, Brian A. From: Terry, Mark Sent: Friday,July 11, 2014 12:43 PM To: Cummings, Brian A. I�Po C Subject: FW: New Suffolk I fll U LiUL 1 i 2014 Brian, 1. S i' d To vi r. Ma hoard A NS letter for the file. From: Julie M Saul [mailto:juliem@saulgallery.com] Sent: Friday, July 11, 2014 12:34 PM To: Terry, Mark Subject: New Suffolk July 9, 2014 Dear Mr. Terry, I am writing to you in regard to the future of the New Suffolk Waterfront. I was heartened by your postponement of a decision at your meeting on Monday night. Since the controversy has been going on for quite a while now surrounding the usage of the 2 odd acres, I have had time to listen and think and learn a bit....and I still feel strongly that the usage of this property needs to be completely rethought, and I believe it would be appropriate for the Planning Board to send the site plan back to Zoning for re assessment. In other words, I hope you will deny the current application from NWSF. Here are some thoughts on the matter: WHO IS THIS PROJECT SERVING AND WHY? New Suffolk is a small village. We do not have the resources to support a major influx of visitors. We already have a lovely public beach, which can only be visited by arriving by foot, bicycle, or a car with a permit. It seems that this system was put in place, in order to limit the influx of people to the community. Why would not the planning of another facility be consistent with this idea of limiting influx? It is very doubtful that residents of New Suffolk will be dining on a regular basis at the proposed restaurant site. With 66 seats and 2 seatings a night, the restaurant would serve something around 1/3 of the community on any night. This is very unlikely. Which means that people would need to come from far and wide for the restaurant to be viable...how does this serve our community? A small daytime snack bar Rich could serve the people who a0isiting the beach under the same conditions as noted above seems to make more sense to me. The Galley Ho could be converted into an open pavilion like structure. HISTORIC USES The Waterfront Fund has maintained that the Gallery Ho has always been there and that the plan to revitalize a restaurant has always been in the plans. I am very leery of this position. Change is inevitable, and the architecture and usage of the building is not such that it warrants a rigid position, in my opinion. This area was natural virgin land originally (which is what Mr. Bacon is returning it to on his acre) and then used for commercial fishing and maritime issues historically. Should we try and reintroduce a commercial fishing facility to this property as well? ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES We are all well aware of the possibility of future storms and floods that would then incur closures and cost to repair damages. Also the possible effect of flood waters on properties adjacent to the waterfront property. Many other issues have arisen as well, which I do not believe have been fully addressed. AESTHETICS The site plan requires landscaping and elevation that will block the view. Also, I extremely wary of decisions made as to the design elements surrounding the parking, restaurant etc. Who will make these decisions, today and in the future? SAFETY New Suffolk is filled with families with children and dogs. Increased traffic from cars, garbage and delivery vehicles will only increase the possibility of accidents happening. How many more signs can we support? The traffic coming down New Suffolk Avenue and Road is almost always going too fast. Do we need more? And does this mean more police and security presence? That means more police and cost to Southold in general. FINANCES I have asked for a basic business plan from the Waterfront Fund and have not had anything made available to me. There are all sorts of rumors going around such as we need this restaurant in order to support the cost of maintaining the property. What is the cost of building and maintaining the proerty? Also, I have heard that the restaurant rental will be kept as low as possible. That is a nice idea, but again what is the point? The notion that the Fund invests millions in developing the property with the hope that this will then produce money to pay that 2 0 ' h been available b the SBA debt seems absurd to me. Just because credit or a loan as y does not mean that all of those funds need to be utilized. It seems to me to make much more sense to spend as little as possible to maintain a beautiful natural site with marina and picnic tables and not incur debt. In any case, I cannot understand why these figures have not been developed or if they have been, made available. As a home owner in New Suffolk who intends to enjoy this beautiful spot as long as I can, I truly hope that the old modernist maxim "less is more" will be applied to the future vision for the waterfront, rather than let's try and go for the maximum DEVELOPMENT possible, which is the message being expressed by the Fund. Many thanks for your consideration of all these issues. Sincerely, Julie Saul 875 King St. (corner of 1st St.) New Suffolk, NY 11956 Julie Saul Julie Saul Gallery 535 West 22nd St.6th floor New York,NY 10011 Aulicm!tusaul aIlery.com www.saul allcry.com 212 627-2410 646 244-5700 mobile Julie Saul Gallery on Facebook @saulgallery on Twitter ember 3 • • -Fro P® Gox ss ©CC"7''�FdLD �DP,c9l�l I�C.IgNN1/►/G �©pl�jj POOCK /I7q E � � 0 � E S %RdD c- , NY i1971 JUL 1 12014 LQ�'7'Ns �N�3L,d M11C..G:CA1 SKS Sa�tl,oau7ovn Planning Board ��° ��w -SruFF'aLk rl�-r'EI►:F'2DN'T ��.,�Ns TArn ©pPoSLD Tp 'Tfl'E� ,5X;),aIVWb P,grvS fi0R W4—)7 - p: p'ONT P4,-K 0,V1n1nCR-C 4L f29T'loN, -1= 14 AVS 3z5E;N a � S1DcNT OF 1�Ew S '1��7LK F"p,tZ 80 YEAZs aND l�Au� S EN I�s�Y �lanpy WtTN `)"NE SEp ��lf'TY 7_ SND 7'RC �.�ou�a� �Nm.a�;t-R-u-CTE1J II��'(�3e5' oz' Tl,�E �i�y wklL.� 1�zi ®UCt�ING lr1 IZG /rl�b - T'© 7`A1E� WA7 2FIZ©til 7', IP3cr r nlS NOT" /� N'cck.b �R A � �Z�S j l�U. '�q�l `TS tvrTN k��r,egoc.�,R �NN� .6 �1 $Y-- 7-We-- y N� �r=:Nbg XoN1 d ,4 LC�S7-' 70 4Ya�e,�f Id oN� . 'Trpq ';r /JIArtY Lo L1 Al 11 � CRL l�c�l1�E1�1T.� <-�- Y 6l aS Nom,u6.R S 7-a 6ep u E /?xlY /rla�2 c�tC T�I D 6 ti2.s ?"n�C LvA ' rZ �rZo,`tT f3va�� C4Gt,La 44 cc:-4.sg 4 /710 g fL 4, DaERRr 02 /ro /moi(j�GS 'aNb W)owc s `SobRs /CE V,g w,S.0 To tom..iF-7' T•u�rzc aRC n7 ivy /►Zoe k,-4SONS Noi RC-,-9Ptcr rwLi- • • ;)) 0�;vbf 172 -M !1l/ 9L George Maul P.O.Box 635 New Suffolk,NY 11956 Southold Planning Board and Committee Members 54375 Main Rd P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 July 7,2014 Dear Mr.Wilcenski, I am writing this letter in response to the large"Outreach " folder that has been recently placed in the Planning file of the NSWF site plan application. At a meeting of the grant writing committee of the NSWF that was held in my living room in 2009, Barbara Schnitzler was advised by Valorie Scopaz,a PLT consultant that the stakeholders of the New Suffolk Community should be contacted and met with and their concerns should be listened to and addressed. Barbara Schnitzler's response to that was,"we don't have time for that." Attached to this Letter please find: 1. An email from Barbara Schnitzler to me stating that my"disparaging remarks"were effecting my standing on the committee.This refers to the fact that anyone in the community who asks any questions about,or expresses any concerns that might be in opposition to the project in its current form,are no longer invited to committee meetings. 2. A list of contributors during 2009 containing many names who are now opposed to the current project and whose letters are in this file. 3. An email exchange between me and Barbara Butterworth expressing my concerns about new hedges that were being planted and new lighting that was not code compliant that was installed. My concerns were ignored. 4. Letter from NSWF to the"Mainstays" marginalizing the rest of the community and referring to community concerns as misleading and erroneous. I would like to have these included as examples of the incredibly poor outreach that has been the policy of this organization from beginning to end. Sincerely, TM George Maul G" JUL 07 201 ptWOW, Gmail-upcoming events https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/%i=2&ik=8dcO52le7a&view=pt... • George Cork Maul<gcmaul@gmail.com> upcoming events 1 message WFx2@aol.com<WFx2 c@aol.com> Mon, Feb 16,2009 at 11:37 AM To: gmaul@suffolk.lib.ny.us Hi Cork, Well things are starting up again for the summer and we are planning our events calendar. I would really like to continue to have you be a part of our planning and implementation,but i hesitate to ask because I have heard several disparaging comments you have made to different people about the role of the fund and our work,and others have had the same experience. Small town. I dont expect everyone to be on the same page on all aspects of this complex endeavor,but the things I have heard are not true and undermine us. I personally have no agenda but to maximize access for the community and to do it in such a way that we balance physical impact with financial need,that is,to follow our mission statement. I think anyone in New Suffolk who reads our mission statement will see that. If you have specific complaints about the way we are doing things,tell one of us,as you have in the past. I have tried,during the past year,to address some of your concerns. There are issues which we cant address because we just dont know how certain things will play out,but we are trying to live up to the expectations of the community outreach as best we can,under pretty formidable financial constraints. If you chose to continue your work with us,i will be happy to have you along. We will be sending out a newsletter within the month,and also starting up a website,so you will be able to get an idea of where your talents and interests might fit in,Barbara Need a job? Find an employment agency near you. (http://yellowpages.aol.com/search?query=employment_ agencies&ncid=emicntu syelp00000003) 1 of 1 7/4/2014 9:09 AM Gmail-NS Waterfront Fund https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/%i=2&ik=8dcO521e7a&view=pt... • George Cork Maul<gcmaul@gmail.com> NS Waterfront Fund 1 message WFx2@aol.com <WFx2@aol.com> Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 11:04 AM To: gmaul@suffolk.lib.ny.us You are right,the fund is a non profit,not a governmental entity. If the town owned this site,they said it would be used for parking and drainage.If the most recent private group owned it,it would already be a private marina,the group before,boat racks,before that another marina,before that,condos.For the past 25 years,different people have tried to build it in their personal vision of what is right for the site,and now,I am proud and fortunate to have a part in what I believe will become a happy resolution for our hamlet,if we are able to continue raising money to purchase it from the PLT.The community doesnt get to vote,nor do they own it,nor manage it(how could they???)but I think,based on our increasing local contributions,the community is beginning to believe in what we are trying to do. I had dinner with Judy last night-we are friends-and explained all this to her,as I do frequently when people ask(she was not the source of your disparaging remarks). I would like to sit down and talk and get your ideas on public outreach because we are doing the calendar,as I originally wrote. I have meetings this afternoon and leave this evening,but will be back in less than 2 weeks and will email you to set something up,Barbara Need a job? Find an employment agency near you. (http://yellowpages.aol.com/search?query=employment_ agencies&ncid=emlcntusyelp00000003) I of 1 7/4/2014 9:10 AM Home Entry Screens RepordV L Mailings Utilities Modules Help Log Out Acknowledaements/Receipts Listings Rnctncial Rego; s Contact Manager Membership Reports Custom Report Writer New Suffolk Waterfront Fund (newsuffolk) Donor Recognition report from 05/01/2004 to 5/30/2009 Report created on 5/30/2009 Donor Id Donor Name Gift Total No.of Gifts Most Recent Gift ($100,000.00 to$500,000.00) 7 The Moore Charitable Foundation $300,000.00 1 12/31/2008 157 Mr.Joseph McKay $100,500.00 2 12/17/2007 644 Mr.Mark Schwatka $100,207.00 1 12/11/2008 60 Atlanta Foods International $100,000.00 1 1/15/2008 ($50,000.00 to$99,000.00) 35 Ms.Patsy Rogers $62,586.00 3 12/12/20081 ($25,000.00 to$49,000.00) 21 ANONYMOUS $27,500.00 1 12/29/2008 73 Mr.Nicholas De Croisset $25,632.00 2 10/31/2008 46 Mr.Gary Osborne $25,000.00 1 12/1/2008 ($7,500.00 to$9,999.00) 56 Mr.James Martin $7,500.00 1 6/14/2007 57 Mr.Christopher Pia $7,500.00 1 6/14/2007 33 Mr.James Reeve $7,500.00 1 12/15/2008 ($5,000.00 to$7,499.00) 25 Mr.Stanley Brown $7,000.00 2 12/23/2008 120 Mr. Joseph Polashock $6,100.00 3 6/23/2008 80 Mr.Frederic Endemann $6,000.00 2 12/19/2007 75 Mr.James Dill $5,500.00 1 12/29/2008 16 Mr. James Dill $5,500.00 1 12/29/2008 5 Mr, Todd Freed $5,250.00 2 12/30/2008 58 Mr.Kenneth Akerson $5,000.00 1 12/27/2007 SQ Mr.Kenneth Akeson $5,000.00 1 12/27/2007 '22 ANNYMOUS $5,000.00 1 12/29/2008 64 Ms.Barbara Butterworth $5,000.00 1 11/26/2007 156 Mr.Frederic Endermann $5,000.00 1 12/19/2007 43 IBM International Foundation $5,000.00 1 4/22/2009 108 ICVM Group $5,000.00 1 8/20/2008 4 IMB International Foundation $5,000.00 1 1/12/2009 158 Ms.Patricia Lowry $5,000.00 1 12/17/2007 103 Mrs.Anne Marino $5,000.00 1 8/28/2008 155 Mr.David Noonan $5,000.00 1 12/19/2007 152 Dr.Matei Roussan $5,000.00 1 12/20/2007 109 Mr.Michael Simon $5,000.00 2 8/19/2008 104 Mr.Michael Withers $5,000.00 1 5/20/2009 ($2,500.00 to$4,999.00) 12 Mr. Thomas Gleason,III $3,705.00 1 12/31/2008 5 Mr. Nicholas Mandusic $3,100.00 3 12/30/2008 178 Mr.Jeremy Goell $3,000.00 1 9/6/2006 30 Scannell-Reetz Family Fund $3,000.00 1 12/19/2008 ($1,000.00 to$2,499.00) 131 Ms.lane Lowry $2,000.00 2 12/24/2007 25 Mr.Tom Martin $2,000.00 1 9/10/2008 85 Le ens $1,500.00 2 11/3/2008 •�+ ZSi Mr, John Doherty $1,150.00 2 2/1/2008 20 Ms.Rose Ann Burns $1,100.00 Z 12/29/2008 31 Mr.Joseph Gibbons $1,100.00 2 12/11/2008 153 Ms.Roberta Jaklevic $1,100.00 2 12/20/2007 ! 55 Mr.Brian Andrews $1,000.00 1 11/4/2008 9 Mr.William Archer $1,000.00 1 1/28/2008 61 Mr.Paul Auriemma $1,000.00 1 12/11/2007 62 Mr.James Baker $1,000.00 3 8/6/2008 41 Mr.Paul Cadoppo $1,000.00 1 12/8/2008 .�• 5 Mr.Newton Ferris $1,000.00 1 12/29/2008 2 Mr.Willie Fisher $1,000.00 1 1/29/2009 ..�� 172 Mr.Joseph Fudiinski $1,000.00 1 8/2 6 522 Mr.James Given • $1,000.00 2 11/1 8 162 Mr.Keith Haber $1,000.00 1 12/12/2007 29 Stuie Krause $1,000.00 1 12/19/2008 170 Mr.Paul Maffei $1,000.00 1 12/3/2007 43 Mr.Thomas McKenzie $1,000.00 1 12/1/2008 154 Old Harbor Docks $1,000.00 1 12/19/2007 ! 222 Samuels and Steelman Architects $1,000.00 1 12/27/2007 ! ■..,� 127 Ms.Dorothy Sargeant $1,000.00 1 12/31/2007 8 Dr. James Speyer $1,000.00 1 12/31/2008 is Alfred Suesser 2005 Revocable Trust $1,000.00 1 12/29/2008 39 Mr.Brian Sullivan $1,000.00 1 4/22/2009 128 Mr.David Thompson $1,000.00 2 12/27/2007 116 Ms.Gail Tiska-Flurry $1,000.00 1 8/6/2008 !, (;500.00 to$999.00) 112 Mr.Edward Purcell $750.00 2 5/29/2009 ,-Q Mr.Gil Goldstein $600.00 2 12/14/2007 11 �..�► 126 Ms.Shirley Harrison $600.00 2 1/17/2008 165 Mr.Andrew Uterano $600.00 2 12/10/2007 133 Alice Amrhein $500.00 1 4/9/2009 54 Employee Giving Proaram Bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation $500.00 1 11/10/2008 §3 Mr.Richard Cartwright $500.00 1 11/29/2007 72 Mr.Raymond Crouch $500.00 1 8/11/2008 9 Mr. David Dill $500.00 1 12/31/2008 77 Ms.Susan Egan $500.00 1 9/8/2008 $] Mr.Lawrence Faulkner $500.00 1 2/13/2008 83 Mr.Rio Fisher $500.00 1 8/27/2008 84 Mr.Robert Fox $500.00 1 2/7/2008 1 I Mr.Charles Gay $500.00 1 12/31/2008 3 Mrs.Maura Grimes $500.00 1 4/14/2009 115 Mr. Stanley Grodski $500.00 1 8/6/2008 100 Mr.James Haefele $500.00 1 9/8/2008 2$ Mrs,Laurie Haefele $500.00 1 5/20/2009 i 107 Frank Klos $500.00 1 5/20/2009 SQ George Kunz Trust $500.00 1 11/25/2008 I 132 Ms.Arlene Marvin $500.00 1 12/20/2007 ij 91 Mullen Motors Inc. $500.00 1 9/15/2008 88 Mr.Steve Racanelli $500.00 1 5/20/2009 $F Ms.Karen Rellstab $500.00 1 10/15/2008 113 Mr. Barry Sweeney $500.00 1 8/11/2008 49 Ms.Peggy White $500.00 1 12/1/2008 Totals: No.of Donors:89 No.of Gifts:115 Total Amount:$926,580.00 Average Gift Size:$8,057.22 --Export Option Default Mailmerge(mailmerge)(shared) f Add New Template I _' Export to Excel'; Instant Mailmerge I 0 What's This? Gnzail-lighting around the Ho https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/%i=2&ik--8dcO52le7a&view=pt... Gmr- George Cork Maul<gcmaul@gmail.com> lighting around the Ho 5 messages George Cork Maul<gcmaul@gmail.com> Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 8:42 AM To: buttergill@mac.com Barbara, happy new year. the new lighting that has appeared around the ho is very offensive. it looks like a concentration camp and does not" respect the property's scenic beauty" i understand the security issues but could the solution comply with Town of Southold Code? http://southoldtown.igm2.com/citizens/Detail_LegalNotice.aspx?ID=1311 All exterior lighting shall be designed,located, and lamped to prevent excessive lighting,energy waste, glare, light trespass,and unnecessary skyglow. (2) All nonessential exterior lighting shall be turned off within %i hour after the close of business and/or when not in use. (3) All private commercial, institutional and utility existing and/or new exterior lighting shall not cause light trespass and shall protect adjacent properties from glare and excessive lighting. thanks in advance for any help you can provide. i continue to be appalled by the philistine nature of the management this organization exhibits. two weeks after i saw saw you and bs at a southold meeting discussing how hedges block scenic vistas, a hedge appeared across the street from me. have you ever heard the word viewshed? please help me to understand cork maul Barbara Butterworth <buttergillb@mac.com> Tue, Jan 10,2012 at 10:22 AM To: George Cork Maul<gcmaul@gmail.com> Hi Cork, I haven't seen the lighting yet,will check into it. As to hedges, seems like a hedge to hide the ugly fence is hardly an act of philistine-ism. We have been trying to make small efforts to beautify the property. 1 of 2 7/4/2014 9:27 AM Gmail-lighting around the Ho • https://mail.googl mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=8dcO52le7a&view=pt... B- [Quoted text hidden] George Cork Maul<gcmaul@gmail.com> Tue,Jan 10, 2012 at 5:42 PM To: Barbara Butterworth <buttergillb@mac.com> the hedges do look nice but hedges grow taller thanks [Quoted text hidden] Barbara Butterworth <buttergillb@mac.com> Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 10:36 AM To: George Cork Maul<gcmaul@gmail.com> Hi Cork, Look on the bright side, they can be trimmed. The lights are more than needed,we're working on it. Thanks for the heads up. Barbara [Quoted text hidden] George Cork Maul <gcmaul@gmail.com> Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:20 AM To: Barbara Butterworth <buttergillb@mac.com> barbara, im an optimist by nature. still waiting. i cant imagine bs trimming hedges there. i guess i dont have a good imagination. five years from now i'll call you about the hedges if you are in this country. a simple$10 motion sensor from home depot would alleviate the problem while providing notice that something is moving over there. i would notice every time it went on. it would also save hundreds of dollars per year in electrical costs. hardly a high tech solution. hard to find spotlights that dont come with one. good public relations would do more to discourage vandalism than glaring illegal lighting. please let me know if i should call damon at code enforcement cork [Quoted text hidden] 2 of 2 7/4/2014 9:27 AM NEW EW SUFFOLK WATERFRONT FUND creating the future of our.waterfront To the Mainstays of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund, We are reaching out to you,as our:most generous and constant su , orters to date on the controversy surrounding our PlanningBNi Board pP .to bring you up inaccuracies abound,and we would like to set the record straightcation. Rumors and Our application is for site plan review so we can then go to the Building Department permit to renovate the Galley Ho, a goal of the Fund since its early days.. Ware proos n to put back the square fop,tage lost as a result of Hurricane Sandy plus 47 square feet. g S�,k Our application is NOT about how manyseats there will ultimately be in our cafe -w granted a Special Except aiff for an up to 66 seat restaurant use last year by the Zoning were Board of Appeals. That is not up for review. Much has been made of 66 g feels we would be remiss if we did not build,and provide sanitary for, theats,but our board allowable use for the future. maximum How we use'the Galley Ho HAS NOT BEEN DETERMINED. Our goal has ALWAYS been to maintain the historic uses on the site o marina and eating establishment-and,as you renovating and restoring the GalleHo building as well, using part of the Small Business know,we have been doing extensive marina repairs recently. We want to embark Administration long-term loan we have. Also important from our early days is the creation of a meet-and- greet Waterfront. We had previously tried for a post office and general store beSren ues i at the change in zoning,which was met with resistance from the same folks who started tng hi a latest petition. After numerous site plans,we asked to reinstate the restaurant use, one this third smaller than the size of the original, and were granted a Special Exception b one year ago to do that,with tremendous support from our community at he hearing. ZBA Because of the support received when in before the ZBA, we were surprised to findg a petition was being generated a g that gatst the project, started by Diane and Dennis Harkoff of Legends. The petition contains many inaccuracies erroneously put forward as facts. We are aware that some of our e su capacity and traffic it mi hi` - pp°rters have concerns about the 66 seat g ARE LISTENING.We are also aware that some of our supporters desire more f... . meeting on July 12thansparency. We plan to share financial information at our , and wou i be happy to share this information with the Mainstays. Continuing along financial lines,we have reviewed the numbers to provide a clear ' ea the income we can generate from the property and what our expenses will be.We as o of know that our non-profit status makes it possible for us to provide uses on this property p ty P.O. Box 146, New Suffolk, NY 11956 • www.newsuffolkwaterfront.org which generate limited income but provide a quality experience for the community: Space,views,paths, our new walkway, and access to the water. The inclusion of a casual, moderately priced place to eat is a fairly typical element of a hamlet destination, especially one on an accessible waterfront. We do not think a high-priced, late night, restaurant bar fulfills what the community desires and we have no intention of establishing that sort venue. g ort of The New York State Department of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation holds an easement on one acre of our property. The agency encourages small scale commercial operations adjacent to preserved land because they know more people will use and enjoy a Protected property if it has vitality. ] y We will proceed through the building permit process,and commence the renovation on the Galley Ho while continuing to hold community outreach sessions to determine the appropriate intensity of use. You might remember that, before the hurricane,we used the building in variety of ways: yoga classes, NSCA's Pot Luck Suppers and Italian Night Dinner,private special occasion parties, and community meetings, along with our own important fundraising events. These types of activities still appeal to man in the community and might co-exist with an eating establishment. y We hope you will be a part of our outreach,and that we can count on your continued support. At this point,we are the most reliable source for information and encourageou to get in touch with us with any questions you may have. y Sincerely, The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund Board r71j Lanza, Heather N From: Jim Haefele <jhaefele@comcast.net> Sent: Sunday,July 06, 2014 2:15 PM To: Jim Dinizio; Doherty,Jill; Standish, Lauren; Ipevans@fishersisland.net;Tomaszewski, Michelle; Ghosio, Bob; Russell, Scott;William Ruland; Lanza, Heather Cc: jhaefele@comcast.net Subject: New Suffolk Waterfront Fund Site Plan Importance: High fill JUL 0 7 2014 Dear Planning Board and Town Board Members, We have been a resident and property owner in New Suffolk since 1994. Presently our second home is located at 925 First Street. In 2005 when the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund was established they stated that they wanted to preserve the property where the Galley Ho once occupied. They establised a 501(c)(3) organization. Their mission that is still posted reads as follows: "to preserve and protect New Suffolk's unique and historic waterfront in ways that respect the property's scenic beauty and maritime heritage; to support recreational, educational, and commercial activities on the site that enhance community life and are environmentally sustainable for both the uplands and the bay; and to assure public access opportunities now and for future generations." Now, nine years later, the NSWF's Board of Directors have altered their outlook on this property. In making this change in philosophy, I wonder if board has considered the potential devastating environmental impact , the proposed New Suffolk Waterfront site plan will have on our quaint hamlet? The size and scope of this proposal has not been thought out with any long term vision and is not consistent with the organizations explanation foundation upon which funding was raised—that being the promise of preservation, not another restaurant and potentially a catering and event facility. There is already enough commercial vehicles and along New Suffolk Avenue. This would only create unwanted traffic, congestion and noise. Before this venture goes any further there are 3 critical points that make it dangerous for this project to even be considered. They are: - the high water table (in flood surge, septic may be compromised) -there is a NYS environmental protection conservation easement on this property -this project would be contiguous to that easement (NSWF is currently renting boat storage on this easement) -FEMA maps show that New Suffolk(36103C0501H) is an "area of special flood hazard" —(First Street routinely floods with minor storms). I appreciate your time in reading this letter and I thank you for your serious consideration. Sincerely, i Lanza, Heather 14, W, �/ From: Patsy Rogers <musicpatsyr@optonline.net> Sent: Monday,July 07, 2014 10:37 AM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: New Suffolk Waterfront Fund site plan Please add my comments to the official record relating to the site plan for the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund property before the meeting on Monday evening July 7, 2014. I am a resident of New Suffolk(since 1980) and have been a music teacher in the local school. I have served on the Fund's Board, as well as being a contributor to the Fund and a volunteer for projects and events. I urge the board to approve the site plan for the New Suffolk Waterfront It has been carefully researched and prepared by a very long series of meetings of the organizations' Board, and meets all the relevant requirements established by the town. I am not sure that the currently announced plan for the future of the property is the perfect one, as some opponents have recently expressed, but feel sure that the residents of New Suffolk can work with the Fund's Board in the future to determine the ultimate use of the site. The immediate need is for the site plan to be approved so that we can move on with the decision process within the community. Thank you for your attention. Patsy Rogers ILI s � JUL 0 7 201I 4 1,,77r 1 • F mu Q '- �L A Letter to the Southold Town Planning Board from Concerned Citizens of New Suffolk: At the Planning Board hearing on Monday June 2nd, Chairman Wilcenski stated that it is important for the New Suffolk Community to make every effort to "bridge its divide"as the New Suffolk Waterfront site planning process moves forward, and hopes that"the community comes together" over how to best proceed with development of the waterfront. We thank Mr. Wilcenski for his thoughtfulness, and we all agree. It is only a short time ago that our community stood completely unified and triumphant over the acquisition of the waterfront property, ending a decades-long fight against the spectre of intense development. New Suffolk is not the kind of place where neighbors push forward individual interests without concern for one another, and we surely can draw on our common values and mutual respect to bring us together once again. The NSWF's proposed site plan is divisive for four core reasons: 1. The land itself must be significantly altered in order to make any attempt at construction viable, changing traditional vistas and calling into question whether this initiative qualifies as "preservation." 2. The proposed restaurant use exacerbates numerous commonly held concerns in the hamlet, notably the volume of destination traffic, the lack of a proper truck route for commercial deliveries, critical street parking problems, and environmental degradation. 3. The site plan was developed and submitted for approval without any meaningful input or review from the community. 4. The NSWF has only explored and prepared plans for one potential use of the site. The reaction from the community is not surprising, given that the very nature of the process has forced us to take sides on a single option which we were not invited to help shape. Any claim of a majority view--whether for or against the proposed plan -- is based entirely on hearsay and cherry-picked input, since there has been no attempt to survey the community. As a result, the dialogue has decayed to a very poor level. We can do so much better than this. The planning of the waterfront's future is crucial for the quality of life in our hamlet, and this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity should not be rushed. If we take the time to build a more clear and defined consensus and thoroughly explore a range of potential outcomes, we will emerge together with a new site plan that is viewed by the community as inclusive and legitimate. We can do this, but we need more time. in 1 LJi .;UL 0 7 201 Pla��nirtr�sn�i:� The NSWF has recently stated that it will begin to intensify its community outreach. But for any discussion to be viewed as fair and productive, the NSWF should not have site plan approval from the Planning Board in hand before this dialogue even begins. All parties must be equally incentivized to listen to one another, without fearing that the outcome has been predetermined. Assuming the NSWF does not voluntarily withdraw its current proposal,we strongly urge the Planning Board to postpone any decision on the site plan proposal on July 7, so that all parties may have the opportunity to come together to shape an improved vision that we can all be proud of. The waterfront site in New Suffolk has the potential to become one of Southold Town's greatest jewels, and a symbol of what is possible when a community unites in pursuit of a common purpose. We are ready to roll up our sleeves and do the work. Your patient leadership will grant us that chance. Sincerely, Stephan Roussan, and the 32 additional concerned citizens listed below. ! ! With my signature, l support the above request for the Southold Tow?Planning Board to postpone its July 7 vote can the NSWF's proposed site plan so that more thorough due diligence can be conducted in partnership Wth the community. Name _ Signature , Address . {;. Marne , Signature .y> Address UO 3Lc,,d Name < C" Signature Address r ` IvE blame � Signature o. Address : . ' Name � Signature 4-T Address 5zo "s- s_'� evyly fr� Name - ' - Std Signature Address t. _. to 7" r _ _ .. i 11 -71 ' e� 1 � Name Signature Address Name n � _ Sign Address0_ i " d � With my signature, I support the above request for the Southold Tow Planning Board to postpone its July 7 vote on the NSWF`s proposed site plan so that more thorough due diligence can be conducted in partnership Wth the community. 7 Name Signature Address Name 6*'/A Signature/, I Address Name A&M, Signature'00. -7 Address Name .................... cl, i2 kv Signature Address0 I<` _k,L-j ...... .......... Name 09 Signature Address Ile Name Signature Address Z. r Name ~ Signature_ ............. Address �7- j/-Signature Y blame 'f J,# --e"- Address A20S-Az V4#.mf /-A/ Per With my signature? I support the above request for the Southold Tow Planning Board to postpone its July 7 vote on the NSWFs proposed site plan so that more thorough due diligence can be Conducted in partnership wth the community, Name 61 Signature Address Name ca T Address 13X ria TH t Name Signature Address 1-1�e -s ...... Name T�jk� Address Name Signature Address Name Sign Addressc Name Signature All- Address �kl - klk9- Name Signature i V Address With my signature, I support the above request for the Southold Toni Planning Board to postpone its.duty 7 vote on the NSWF3 proposed site plan so that more thorough due diligence can be conducted in partnership Wth the comm unity. A Name Signature Address I Name 5tei lt v, 4�542i— Signature Address 1 Tt Name A)q Signature A2 INe Address Name Signature C7vj<- AaL4 Address 4- Name 2�ViC j�n te Signature Address 6 i Name --d 1 5 Signature ............ ...................... Address ox mc't- -TT7 Name q 6v- Signature Address Ci ............. Name — DLY61L, A-DsLk� Signature I Address With my signature, I support the above request for the Southold Tow?Planning Board to postpone its July 7 vote on the NSWFs proposed site plan so that more thorough due diligence can be conducted in partnership oath the community. Name-L-O—Lkl"L�- 1-1—� -Q Signature Address Name ,—,...................... Signature Address Name ................... Signature Address Name Signature Address Name Signature Address Name Signature Address Name ........ Signature Address Name Signature Address Lanza, Heather From: Howard Thompson <howardthompson@optonline.net> Sent: Monday,July 07, 2014 7:51 AM To: Lanza, Heather Cc: Jim Dinizio; Doherty,Jill; Standish, Lauren; Ipevans@fishersisland.net;Tomaszewski, Michelle; Ghosio, Bob; Russell, Scott;William Ruland Subject: New Suffolk Waterfront N JUL 0 3 2W4 dear Chairman and Planning Board Members, Sotlthold Town Planning Board please allow me to add my voice to the New Suffolk Water Front debate. When the community was originally asked what, ideally, it would like to see done at the waterfront, approximately half voted for a snack bar, where one might be able to buy a newspaper, have a coffee - maybe a muffin or a hot-dog...something light. Seems reasonable, but there was never any mention that this could quickly morph into a commercial restaurant that could seat up to 66 people, requiring a car park that would accommodate 38 or 39 cars, an 18 ring above-ground septic system, 8.65' above sea level (not counting the bushes/trees that would be planted over it), 91' deep and 111.5' wide. This doesn't sound anything like preserving the waterfront to me. In fact, it could quite easily ruin the bucolic nature of the area. We already have a perfectly satisfactory restaurant serving good American food just a few yards away, so this just seems unnecessary and a colossal waste of money and effort. Nearly as many people opted for a functioning marina with a landscaped open-space, something far less industrial, which would still 'preserve' the area's inherent beauty and original function. Maybe with a couple of barbecue grills scattered about (like the those at the park in Southold), folks with a jones for hot-dogs or hamburgers could be easily satisfied. What would the 'up-graded' Galley Ho serve that isn't already served by Legends? Pizza? Hamburgers? Pasta? Soda? Ice-cream? Coffee? We've already got those, thanks, and Legends will serve them "to go" if you wish to have a picnic and don't want to bring your own. Nobody knew, or was told that in order to pay off their mortgage, the NSWF would end up selling the best part of the property - most of the beach (where some of us watch the Wednesday night boat race) AND all the land behind it - to Mr. Bacon, either. I don't suppose he'll have very much trouble getting the necessary plans to build whatever he likes, but I'm worried that - if the people behind the NSWF get the green-light to go ahead with their plans - the restaurant could fail (as a high proportion of them do) and - because they'd now be paying highfkaxes, they'd find themselves hong to get bailed out by Mr. Bacon again. Who knows? This might have been be the plan, all along. And, should that actually happen, what's to stop him from turning the whole waterfront (with the exception of the tiny 'easement' the NSWF seem so happy to point to) into something quite unthinkable for the enjoyment of the very few? It's already bad enough having all the delivery-trucks (Legends, Post Office, transporters with doomed animals for hunting purposes on Robins Island) and boat-trailers whizzing down New Suffolk Ave, where there are stretches of road with no sidewalks. We don't need more. Please do the right thing and keep the hamlet's balmy beauty, the peace and quiet and the safety of New Suffolk's cyclists and pedestrians intact. thank you, Howard Thompson 345 Bunny Lane New Suffolk NY, 11956 USA 2 TO: The Southold Town Planning Board FROM: Howard Meinke, long term Southold resident, 7075 Peconic Bay Blvd. Laurel, N.Y. 11948 Comments concerning the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund site plan I Have been boating on Peconic bay since 1938. 1 remember the business side of New Suffolk: the Oyster boat fleet, the party fishing boats, the scallop boat fleet. The property under discussion was crowded with a post office, the Galley Ho, a ship yard with big buildings and scores of boats on blocks. Many bay users used to stop in at the basin and get a hot dog and a beer at the Ho. You could enter in your bathing suit and bare feet, order from a minimal menu, rest and chatter and snack for a few minutes and then get on your way. This was a nice asset to those boaters on the bay. The current efforts by the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund are all going in the right direction. Open beach space, and the revival of the Ho, is the right way to go. The elevation of the Ho and it's septic system to avoid the coming repeats of "Sandy" is smart and necessary. For complaining residents, most who have old cesspool systems, to complain about the Ho's system is ridiculous. Those citizen and business owned, very polluting septic systems are doing just what the Ho is avoiding with an elevated system of modern design. To complain about the added boats in the basin is ludicrous. They bring in slip rental dollars and are empty and moored. No waste products here. As to traffic and parking, I see no problem. With the street already jammed with Legends patron's cars, the few cars at the waterfront won't mean much. Howard Meinke D E C E � V E !UL 0 3 2014 Souti ioId Town Hawn Beard r Jnr Dear Mr. Wilcenski, I am writing to ask that you please delay any future decisions about the application put before you by the New Suffolk Waterfront Board, as there is much controversy surrounding their current proposal. In the past, the NSWF Board worked diligently in the interest of the waterfront, but they have become increasingly evasive in the face of inquiry about the specifics of their site plan. Many people who live in New Suffolk still have not had an opportunity to fully understand the board's proposals and related liabilities. While the NSWF Board claims to put the best interest of our community at its core, when confronted with legitimate community concern, the dialogue has digressed and is becoming increasingly contentious. Until the NSWF Board has had a chance to fully address our community, it seems premature for them to continue with such an ambitious plan. I can only say that simple quality of life issues are of utmost importance. Many people are not familiar with town codes and regulations. However, a plan that meets every regulatory code is not necessarily a morally reasonable, economically viable or environmentally friendly plan. The NSWF Board has an ethical obligation to consider the ramifications of their plan as it will effect all of the residents of New Suffolk. My hope moving forward is that the NSWF Board is able to satisfy the community's questions and make future decisions based on an open exchange with the residents who live here. In closing, I would like to add, that though the NSWF is insistent about submitting the current plan for a restaurant, they have said time and again that they have not yet determined how the building will be used. If it is not used as a 66 seat restaurant, they say it may be a yoga studio with a snack bar and a space that is rented out for private parties and special events. That kind of special event venue requires a completely different proposal and a different set of schematics. I am asking that you please take extra special care and consideration when reviewing the NSWF plan, as it will not only impact the site itself, but will have a lasting effect on the character of our small hamlet. Thank you, E C E Q U E Sarah Goldman JUL Q 3 2014 Southold Town Planning Board Lanza, Heather L l From: Marianne Collins <macollins@bhsnorthfork.com> Sent: Thursday,July 03, 2014 1:39 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: New Suffolk Waterfront Site Plan Dear Planning Board Members: I am writing to you in support of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund site plan before you. I have been a New Suffolk resident and homeowner for 27 years,a realtor on the North Fork since 2008, and I am a NSWF board member. I believe that the site plan,when executed,will enhance property values,community character,and quality of life in New Suffolk. Here's why: - Many studies across the country and here on Long Island (The Trust for Public Land:The Economic Benefits and Fiscal Impact of Parks and Open Space in Nassau and Suffolk Counties, NY; Land Trust Alliance:The Economic and Tax-Base Benefits of Land Conservation) have shown that proximity to open space enhances property values. The site plan maintains92%of the property as open space,with only 8%lot coverage, rather than the 30%allowed for its Marine II zoning. - Likewise, historic preservation has been shown to enhance property values. While New Suffolk has sadly already lost many of its historic waterfront buildings,the site plan preserves the three remaining ones on its property. The Society for the Preservation of Long Island Antiquities has noted that the Galley Ho, in particular, dates to the mid 191h century. - The Southold Town Comprehensive Plan Community Character chapter states as one of its goals"to manage and preserve the historical and architectural resources of the Town." In retaining the three historic buildings,the site plan is consistent with this goal. - Property continues to sell in New Suffolk when priced appropriately. According to MLS,eight homes have sold in the past 12 months, priced from $375,000 to$1,250,000. In my own real estate practice, I have seen no decrease of interest in New Suffolk among potential buyers due to this site plan. In fact, many have expressed fond memories of time spent at the Galley Ho,whether it was a first job in the kitchen or waiting tables,a first date or a proposal,and they look forward to being able to visit it again. Of course,the damaged building in its current state does not enhance the beauty of the site,so delaying or impeding execution of the site plan could, over time,damage people's opinions of New Suffolk's hamlet center. - Personally,as a New Suffolk resident, I look forward to the option of a reasonably priced place to get a drink and a bit to eat,on the water,within walking distance of my home. This used to be one of the pleasures of living in this village, and has been missed. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Marianne Collins --- a Cc: Supervisor Scott Russell;Town Board IU-L 0^^3_Z014._.� i Marianne Collins �^tlry NYS Licensed Sales Associate North Fork Top Producer 2013 Certified Buyer Representative Certified Relocation Specialist Brown Harris Stevens macoll ins(d)bhsnorthfork.com direct: (631) 734-2957; mobile: (917)434-1463 Lanza, Heather , yi From: Joe &Ellie <joeele45@optonline.net> Sent: Wednesday,July 02, 2014 12:52 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: Fw: NSCA letter to Heather Lanza Heather, Please forward this to the Chairman and the Board for us. Your help is much appreciated. Joe Polashockrr) __ u JUL o Sootho# iori7 P#aruiinq#s rc# To the Southold Planning Board July 2, 2014 Here is a copy of the letter we formulated at our meeting of July 1 st. The mission of the New Suffolk Civic Association has been, and continues to be,the preservation and enhancement of our hamlet community. To this end we are maintaining a position of neutrality in regard to the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund proposals. We respectfully ask the planning board hearing be kept open until after the July 12th New Suffolk Waterfront Fund community meeting. We look forward to continued open dialogue with the members of the Waterfront Fund and our residents, in hopes of maintaining the spirit and essence of our special community. Thank you for your attention to our correspondence and request. New Suffolk Civic Association President-Paul Cacioppo New Suffolk Civic Association Officers i D EC E • � _-.. Jeremy Goell & Family JUL 0 3 2014 16640 Main Street New Suffolk, New York Sowthnid Tnt,. 11956 Box 22 July 2nd, 2014 Letter in favor of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund (NSWF) site plan Dear Members of the Southold Town Planning Board, I like sitting on my porch on Main Street in New Suffolk. I have been sitting on one of two porches since 1994. From 1994-2001 1 sat on the porch of the Whitecap, on the corner of 4th and Main. In 2002, my wife and I bought the house next door, where I have continued my porch sitting. I am not a year round resident, and with only 20 years in the neighborhood, consider myself a relative newcomer. That said, it is not likely that another New Suffolk resident has spent more time watching the traffic go by. Given my years of porch sitting, I have absolutely no concern about the increase in traffic (return to normal) that would result from reopening the Galley Ho and the Marina on the NSWF site. In the years since the NSWF obtained the site, the traffic has been extraordinarily light. The traffic has been light because the restaurant and marina were dormant. I remember well the traffic when these establishments were open and active. Traffic was never more than you would expect on the main street of a small town. We have two children (now 10 and 12) and have no more concern about their safety than we would living on any typical residential street. There is no fence on our property, and we frequently cross the street to take advantage of the New Suffolk baseball field. Because of the temporarily suspended commercial activity, the traffic on Main Street has been less than normal. Perhaps some residents consider the extraordinarily light traffic to be the norm. It is not. The return to normal traffic patterns is not a concern for my family. My wife and I love the Galley Ho and can't wait for it to re-open. Being able to walk down the street, get a bite to eat, and watch the boats in the bay, is a big part of our love for New Suffolk. For those residents who question the viability of the Galley Ho as a restaurant, I would point out that my wife has fond memories of eating there with her brothers as a child. The restaurant has been a successful operation for decades. My father-in-law would give the kids lunch money and send them down to the Galley Ho on their own. We would like to be able to continue the tradition with our boys. Throughout the time that the NSWF has managed the site, my family has followed their communications closely. It was always clear to us, that the restaurant, marina, and their clientele, would return. We look forward to that day. On a slightly different note, I would like to address the concerns about the lost views due to the increased elevations at the site. The buildings on the site have been there for many years. Adding two or even four feet to the elevations of existing structures cannot materially change the water view. You could not see through the buildings before, and adding a few feet to their elevation will in no way affect the scenic landscape. My family is totally comfortable with the improvements to the site that the NSWF plans to make. Please approve the site plan for the New Suffolk Waterfront. Full Disclosure: As of July 1st, I became a member of the New Suffolk Waterfront Board. I would have written the same letter if that were not the c e. Sincerely, jeremy goell. P.S. If you arethe neighbor od h and Main, look for us. We will likely be on the baseball field or ono r front porch. If so, pl ase stop by to say hello. COBALT *ABSOLUTE M A R I N E July 3, 2014 Goad Day Southold Town Planning Board, I am writing to speak in favor of the proposed waterfront use at the New Suffolk waterfront. My family has lived year round on the North Fork for over 50 years and we have always been attracted to the water both personally and professionally. The scope of the proposal is to have beach and launch access for Kayaks and Paddleboards, easy access transient dockage for local boaters, a limited amount of summer slips and a 66 seat cafe/restaurant which is 33 seats less than the former Galley Ho restaurant had. In addition,their vision is to serve light fare like clams, mussels, lobster rolls, hot dogs, hamburgers etc. and to have a tranquil environment for folks to enjoy the beautiful view with a bite to eat. This location will provide easy transient docking allowing boaters one of the few easy access points on the North Fork for boaters to enjoy this preserved public waterfront parcel. By having a significant focus on attracting boaters to come by water to dock and grab a lite bite to eat will add to their enjoyment and at the same time minimize the need for additional car parking. Similar to farming, these types of venues are gradually disappearing due to development pressures. People want to be able to enjoy the waterfront, not just look at it, again very similar to how farming has evolved on the North Fork. I believe by approving this proposal it will allow people of the North Fork to enjoy the waterfront by boat, kayak and stand up Paddleboards for many years to come and enhance the natural beauty of New Suffolk. I am confident the Planning Board will have flair and appropriate restrictions to noise etc. that will balance the need for use of this waterfront parcel and the local New Suffolk Residents. The restaurant will also have proper bathrooms and sanitation in place important to those using the New Suffolk waterfront. I would ask the Planning Board to approve this important waterfront application as requested. Sincerely, Jeff S on ff:::Il 3 201Mattituck Resident and President of Strong's Marine Mattituck Bay Strong's Water Club & Marina Southampton Port Washington (631)298-4770 (631)298-473' (631)283-6736 (516) 304-5376 infold.)strongsmarinexom StrongsMarine.com Salesa)StrongsMarinexo jr r/ Lanza, Heather From: wfx2@aol.com Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 8:52 AM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: galley ho To the Members of the Southold Planning Board: As a resident of New Suffolk, I have followed the proposed restoration of the Galley Ho, having attended the last Planning Board meeting, read opinions in the paper and spoken to many of my neighbors. While I have previously expressed my unqualified support for the work of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund, what I've heard from its sworn opponents compels me to communicate with you once again. Notwithstanding their attempts to claim it as such, the New Suffolk waterfront isn't the private preserve of those living closest to it. The NSWF has taken considerable pains to preserve the natural beauty of the setting. Also to provide a modest place for people to gather and have something to eat. Still, the objections have been relentless. I understand there might be legitimate concerns about parking. Should that become a problem, I have no doubt but that a solution will be found. To hold up the restoration of the Galley Ho because there are those who are sure to find any and all commercial activity objectionable, is to impose a paralysis on our town and hold the honest efforts of the NSWF and its supporters hostage to whomever maintains that it's their absolute right to look toward Peconic Bay from anywhere in downtown New Suffolk and see nothing they don't want to see. Respectfully, Bill Finkelstein New Suffolk pE C EQ � � .JUL 0 3 2014 So+.thalb'fown Planning Board 1 Willie Fisher P.O.Box 312 New Suffolk,NY 11956 Southold Planning Board and Committee Members 54375 Main Rd P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 May 22,2014 Dear Mr.Wilcenski, The dubious virtues of a project of this size and cost are outweighed by liabilities of construction costs, maintenance,staffing,and most importantly,its fate if it fails. New Suffolk taxpayers might then be saddled with responsibilities of a doomed project,which could become a target of another outside interest with unknown intentions. The unrelenting plea of the NSWF, "we need to raise money",citing the rebuilding and opening of the dilapidated Galley Ho as the only available option,would be moot if the project were never built. With minimal costs of building and maintaining a simpler structure,the need to raise such large volumes of capital would disappear. income from boat slip rentals alone might cover the taxes,insurance and maintenance.There are many ways to build a less impactful facility that would be way less susceptible to storm damage,yet still provide an aesthetically pleasing venue for the purpose of light fare dining and Cutchogue Harbor viewing,without such a pretentious building plan. A sanitation system whereby 2 buried tanks receive waste might be feasible;as one nears capacity,the other one is valved in,and a pump out is ordered.There would always be a nearly empty tank to receive waste,and before impending storms they could both be pumped empty and secured until floodwaters recede. There are just too many simpler,more viable options to consider which many more of the local populace would support,to blindly go ahead with what the NSWF has proposed. Thank you for your time regarding this very important matter. Sincerely, Willie Fisher D E C E VE Southold sour: + Planning Board Lanza, Heather klL toe. From: Andrew Torgove <andrewtorgove@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday,July 03, 2014 12:39 PM To: Lanza, Heather n E (C E �J] r, Subject: NSWF In l�I IS U L� _ii_ii 0 pi., July 3, 2014 Southoid ib-,vn Planning Gourd Ms. Lanza My name is Andrew Torgove. I am a full time resident of New Suffolk. I live at 7300 New Suffolk Road with my wife, daughter and a bevy of animals. I have been a board member of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund for the last 6 years. My primary contribution to the board since its inception has been to provide financial guidance, helping the board asses the cost, viability and financing of each step along the way. My professional and educational careers have provided me with specific experience/expertise in assisting the board on these financial matters. I have a PhD in Economics and I am a Managing Director at an international investment bank. I have been in investment banking for the last 25 years, focusing primarily on advising distressed companies in their efforts to emerge from their difficulties. I know all too well the dangers of financing projects, and because of my experience I am perhaps the most conservative of investors/advisors. The board has always had its fiscal responsibility foremost in mind. We have always embarked on each phase over the years one step at a time. We have always strived to insure that we were able to finance and afford each and every project. When we purchased the property from the Peconic Land Trust we borrowed $1.5 million dollars from the Conservation Fund. We had to do an enormous amount of financial analysis and paperwork in order for the The Conservation Fund to finance our purchase. We have paid back nearly$1.25 million of the$1.5 million loan. In addition we have received a $400,000 grant from Suffolk County. Again we had to prove our creditworthiness to the county in order to receive the grant. Finally we have received approval for approximately$750,000 in a revolving loan from the SBA to rehab and revitalize the waterfront property. Now we come to the current phase of our project, revitalizing and rebuilding the waterfront property. We have been very careful in proceeding with this stage of the process, working hard to insure we are entering into a project that we can afford. Again, we have taken our fiscal responsibility extremely seriously. First, we have the funds necessary to pay for the current project: rebuilding of the Galley Ho building, rebuilding the bulkhead (which has been completed), rebuilding the finger piers and the walkways (which have been completed) and installing the necessary septic system. With the funds already in place to pay for the project there would be no need to have any type of performance bond. Second, we believe we will have sufficient income to maintain the property and cover our debt service once the project is complete: cash currently on hand, income from the rebuilt docks, and a significantly reduced amount of fundraising, will provide the necessary funds. Again, with the funds on hand to pay for the project, and the future income necessary to maintain the property, there would be no need for a performance bond. It would be fiscally and financially irresponsible of us to depend on the income of a cafe to support our project. We are not building a huge commercial enterprise. The costs of the project do not require income from a huge commercial enterprise. Any income from the Galley Ho will simply be used to reduce fundraising and support future projects such as landscaping and rebuilding the south revetment. 1 We are rebuilding the Galley Ho for*community. It has always been the commoy's desire to have such a meeting place and cafe, and we have always stated we would provide such a place. The income from it will be welcome but not essential for the financial stability of our project. Much has been said about the viability of a cafe on the waterfront and that if it fails the community will be left with a huge financial burden and an empty shell of an eyesore. This is is simply not the case. If an operator fails, then we will simply be back to where we were before the operator took over. It will have no negative impact on our ability to continue to maintain the property and cover our debt service. And we will still have a beautifully restored building that will serve the community's needs in the future. I fully support the Waterfront Fund's project. I believe it is fiscally and fiancially responsible. Andrew Torgove 7300 New Suffolk Road New Suffolk New York 2 Wn 50b� Cutcho ue-New Suffolk Historical Council e ry -t-�? - PO Box 714 Cutchogue, New York 11935 MT-It- July 2, 2014 RE:New Suffolk Waterfront Fund Site Plan Application Dear Ms. Lanzia and Members of the Planning Board As the president of the Cutchogue-New Suffolk Historical Council, I commend the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund for all the hard work they have done the past few years to preserve the beautiful and historic waterfront in New Suffolk. I have personally attended fundraisers, donated money and have watched the tremendous progress they have made. When members of their board made a presentation to our trustees several years ago,they had proposed to preserve the land and buildings for the community to have access. This included rebuilding the docks,having a food establishment and someday a maritime museum. They have been on track with raising money and achieving their goals. The open space, community garden,bulkhead and dock space look great. This area is so rich in maritime history. I remember eating at the Galley Ho with my family in the 1970s until it closed years ago. It would be a great addition to our area to have this restaurant re-opened once more. Our director, Zach Studenroth inspected the Galley Ho a few weeks ago and informed me that the timber frame and hardware used in the original construction date the building to the mid-1800s. I hope you approve the site plan application and this historic structure can be enjoyed by families for generations to come. Sincerely, D E C E u JUt_ 0 2 201 Southold To vn Michael Malkush Planning Pc,ard President Cutchogue-New Suffolk Historical Council Lanza, Heather From: Dennis <legendsdh@aol.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2014 9:40 AM To: Don Wilcenski - Briarcliff Sod; Lanza, Heather Subject: Fwd: New Suffolk Waterfront Fund SIte : Marina, Parking, Septic Dear Don, Heather and Committee Members, I am a little out of my league with septic questions among other code issues, but I will try to tackle it anyway. Question: Has the Planning Dpt, or Wastewater Management, evaluated whether the septic system submitted with leaching pools is sufficient for a marina with 10 finger piers approved plus floating dock, restaurant with decks, employees, and a NYS Park Conservation Easement? SEPTIC: At the Trustees meeting in March, they suggested to the NSWF that they have porta johns for the marina so no further sewage goes into the bays. NSWF replied that the restaurant was coming within a year and it would have restrooms that would also take care of the marina needs/people. At our recent Civic Association meeting, I believe Jim Baker said, a former environmental engineer living in New Suffolk, said that the DNA testing done for the waterfront site, at the Peconic Estuary, showed both human and animal waste. -considering the state of the bay, NSWF ought to have porta johns while the site plan issues/debate continue. -am not sure how you calculate sewage needs for people per boat, but am thinking a minimum of 2 people per boat(?) - NSWF said there were 16 boat slips there with 16 parking spots allotted; however, towards the end of the Trustees meeting, it was said there would be 10 finger piers and a floating dock that is/was in storage. If I am correct, that would mean even greater septic needs for the restaurant with 20 boat slips (10 finger piers x 2 boats) plus a floating dock. Though the NSWF says there will be no more than 66 seats in the restaurant and the decks, reality usually proves different. On a busy summer day there could be about 10 employees for the restaurant and 1-2 for the marina; guesstimate 40 -44 people for the marina slips if full( 20 boats x 2 +4 for floater) 86 is a conservative number for restaurant(no one is actually patrolling/counting people on their decks) and a few for the park/beach. So I wonder if 140+/- potential people for an above ground septic system in a Fema-designated "area of special flood hazard"am wondering if septic system designed is sufficient, but more importantly, is it prudent in this area next to one of the last two great places in the Western Hemisphere without an environmental impact statement? Should I address this elsewhere? Thank you Diane http://24.38.2$.228:2040NVebLink8/DocView.aspx?id=652693 1 Lanza, Heather From: Dennis <legendsdh@aol.com> Sent: Wednesday,July 02, 2014 9:41 AM To: don@briarclifflandscape.com; Lanza, Heather Cc: Toth, Vicki Subject: ZBA wording n _ �- Don, Heather and Committee Members: i JUL0 2 '1014 As i see it: Smthuld Twin PlanningEc^,,id 1. Site is proposed in a different location than the one approved by the ZBA, "FINDINGS OF FACT/REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION . . .", paragraph A, " The restaurant is proposed in its existing location . . ." (emphasis mine). Its proposed location is different now than on "FINAL MAP REVIEWED BY ZBA SEE DECISION#6617 DATED 2/28/2013." 2. There are no decks shown on this application/drawings submitted to the ZBA in 2013, while on the currect site plan there is 1600 +/-of decks alone. Boardwalk and deck shown on the proposed site plan total about 2382 sq ft. 3. Square footage of the Galley Ho was 1526 sq ft, while current one is approximately 1726, increase of 200 sq ft. Page 4 of 4, "SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: . . . Any deviation from the variance(s)granted herein as shown on the architectural drawings, site planand/or survey cited above, such as alterations, extensions, or demolitions, are not authorized under this application when involving nonconformities under the zoning code. This action does not authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject property that may violate the Zoning Code, other than such uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly address in this action." I believe it must revert back to the ZBA. Diane Harkoff cc: ZBA Chair, Leslie Weissman and Board Members 1 r� Lanza, Heather till- From: Dennis <legendsdh@aol.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2014 9:30 AM To: Lanza, Heather; don@briarclifflandscape.com Subject: New Suffolk Site Plan: Parking Dear Don, Heather and Committee Members, It seems to me that the application was filled out incorrectly. "Site Pan build-out acreage or square footage" should have been filled out as the total of 3337 sq ft(Town Code 280- 4). (280-79) 1 believe this means that the formula for parking should have been based on 3337 sq ft, not on seats. Therefore, 3337 sq ft divided by 100 sq ft= 33 parking spaces for the restaurant is the greater of the two numbers- not 22. Therefore they would have: 16 parking spot for boat slips . . . . Though Trustees in March 2014 actually approved for 10 finger piers by; does this mean they should have parking spots for 20 slips? 1 spot for employee 33 parking spots for restaurant 50-54 Spots required, depending on two finger piers They have only 33 (not 38), as 5 spots are w/i Conservation Easement which have to be marked as NYS Park parking only, or it has to be available for everyone, not just the restaurant. Comments? Thank you, Diane Harkoff 1 �Jvl� Lanz -rep Lanza, Heather From: Thomas McCloskey <cptn5245@me.com> Sent: Tuesday,July 01, 2014 5:02 PM To: Lanza, Heather; Russell, Scott;William Ruland; Ipevans@fishersisland.net; Cummings, Brian A.;Terry, Mark;Jim Dinizio; Doherty,Jill; Ghosio, Bob; SabaTSout;hold K. Subject: New Suffolk Waterfront Project Attachments: June 26, 2014 Letter NSWF.pdf, Mainstays Letter NSWF.pdf 2014Good Afternoon, Town Planning Board From the time I purchased my home on the scenic byway of New Suffolk Ave in 2011, 1 have been a supporter of the NewSuffolk Waterfront Fund with both donations and time. It was nice to contribute to an effort to preserve the bucolic life style we have in the hamlet. Prior to purchasing our home, my research into the community and the fund was a big factor. Knowing the scenic byway, New Suffolk Ave had the potential to be busy; I was concerned with the vacant property at the end of the street on the water. The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund (NSWF) represented that the property was being protected from commercial development. The recent news of the request for zoning of 66 seat restaurant contradicts what we have been lead to believe the future of the New Suffolk Waterfront was to be. Needless to say, I am no longer a supporter of the 501-C3 organization. In a letter sent to supporters (Mainstays) of the NSWF,the board has indicated"How we use the Galley Ho HAS NOT BEEN DETERMINED."If this is the case, why is there such a sense of urgency to get the plans approved and project started? (A copy of the NSWF letter has been attached for your perusal; I have received it second hand.) The undetermined future use of the Galley Ho was reiterated in a letter to everyone in New Suffolk on June 26th. (also attached) Without a cohesive business plan and cost benefit analysis, I find it hard to believe that a restaurant has a chance to flourish in a location where others had failed with less community activism against the project. Based on what I see, a commercial venture backed by the 501-C3 NSWF in this location will fail. Considering the present situation with a vacant commercial entity on Main Road in Mattituck, I feel it is imperative for the powers that be look further into what the final usage of this property will be. Please do not give the NSWF carte blanche to do whatever they please with this property. Approving a plan for a 66 seat restaurant for a 501-C3 who indicates "How we use the Galley Ho HAS NOT BEEN DETERMINED" seems to be putting the cart before the horse. The Hamlet of New Suffolk enjoys some of the highest property values on the North Fork. Realtors like myself have lists of people who will purchase here when the right home comes along. The project at hand has turned some of those interested parties away. My personal experience has seen two interested parties decide to sit the market out until this controversy is resolved. How do you think that is affecting the property values? Real Estate inventory in New Suffolk is up about 50% since April 1st of this year with two properties being sold. This build up out paces the balance of the Town of Southold. The prospect of an ill conceived commercial venture on our waterfront and the controversy surrounding it's implementation has tarnished the reputation of our community;therefore tarnished the value of our properties. How many public officials want to have their names attached to the permanency of that? Thank you for your time and consideration. i Respectfully Submitted, Thomas McCloskey 15305 New Suffolk Ave New Suffolk,NY 11956 516.680.0118 2 j NTFUND NEW StiFFOLK WA ...� . ..... ............._ .. creating the future of€iter waterfront June 26, 2014 Dear(community, We want to bring you up to date on the issues surrounding our Planning board application. Despite our efforts to communicate with you about this proieca, it has become clear that we haven't done an adequate job, since rumors and inaccuracies about our plans abound.We would lake to apologize for not tieing sufficiently inforrnative and to re--assure-you that we are listening and will respond to your concerns about the fixture of the Vlaterf cont. Hgr€.are,a few facts for you to consider: Our application is for site plan review so we can then go to the Building Department for a permit to renovate the Galley Ho.This has been a goal of the fund since its early days when the cxitnmunity asked for a gathering place on the waterfront. We are proposing to put back the square footage lost in the storm plus 47 square feet, the size of a bathroorn.A public hearing;will be held at Southold" own Hall on July 7th at b pm if you would like to attend. Out a fal canter at,tlte Planning Board is not about how many seats there will ultimately be in our cafe. Atter numerous site plans, we were granted a Special FA-ception for an.ttpLok6 seat restaurant.use.last year by tile 74"Ming Board of Appeals with tremendous support. How we will ultimately usethe CYallrY l to has not yet been determined bth„ e.New Suffolk Waterfront Fund. Our goal has always been to maintain the historic rises on the site—marina and eating establishment.We will decide the particulars of its use after listening further to our community. Although it is almost impossible to please 100%of the people, 100%of the time,we will try; I-dere are additional steles we.are taking: We are hosting another community meeting as a follow--up to our two previous meetings- the Community Meeting on.May 17th and the presentation after the NSC:A meeting. It will be at the New Suffolk Schoolhouse at 9:30 am on Saturday,July 12th, the earliest:date we could plan it due to conflicts of schedules -the NSCA Annual Meeting and the 1 la palet meeting and 4th of July.At that meeting,we will answer sonic questions that were left unanswered at our last meeting and share additional financial information,and listen. We will.be hosting small roundtable talks in the early fall to determine what type of eating establishment is best for the new Galley, Ho. We will be in touch with you about the details. We want to hear your opinions on this issue. So, please feel lice to-email us,join us at the Schoolhouse on July 12th at 9:30 AM,or attend one of our roundtable talks. Respectfully, 'Ihe NSWF Board of Directors . . .__...._--m......................... .. „ cT.eating the,fuC&t e of our �vare7'f r ont To the Mainstays of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund, We are reaching out to you,a5 our most generous and onstant supporters,to bring you u ' to date on the controversy surrounding our planning Board Application.Rumors and, inaccuracies abound,and we would like to set the record straight. Our application is for site pian review stn we can then go to the Building Department for a permit to renovate the Galley Ho,a goal of the Fund since its early days.We are proposing, to put back the squire footage lost as a result of Hurricane Sandy plus 47 square feet Our application is NOT about how many seats there will ultimately be in our cafe w we were granted a Special Exception,for an up to 66 seat restaurant use last year by the Zoning Board of Appeals.That is not up for review. Much has been,Wade of 66 seats,but our board feels we would be remiss if we did notbuild?and provide sanitary for,the maximum allowable use for the future. How we use the Galley Ho HAS NOT BEEN DETERMINED. Our goal has ALWAYS been to maintain the historic uses on the site- marina and eating establishment-and,as you know,r, e have been doing extensive mama repairs recently, We vivant to embark on renovating and restoring;the Galley Ho building as well,using part of the Small_Business Administration long-terra loan we have. Also important from our early days is the creation of a meet-and-greet destination at the `waterfront.We had previously tried for a post office and general store by requesting a change in zoning, which was,net with resistance from the same fobs who started this latest.petition. After numerous site plans,we asked to reinstate the restaurant use,one third smaller than the size of the original,and.were granted a Special Exception by the ZBA one year ago to do that,with tremendous support from our community at the hearing. Because of the support received r h n going before the ZBA,we were surprised to find that a petition was beim generated against the project,started b Mane and Dennis Har ,of of Legends,The petition contains marry inaccuracies erroneously put forward as Facts. We are aware that some of;ou.r long-time supporters have concerns about the 66 seat capacity and traffic it might rng.WE ARE LISTENING.We are also aware that some of our supporters desire more fiscal,transparency.We purr to share financial information at our i eetin on my ',and vaouid be happy to share this information with the Mainstays. Continuing along financial limes,we have reviewed the numbers to provide a clear°idea of the income we can ge ar to from the property and what our expenses will be.We also know that our tion-profit status makes it possible for us to provide uses on this property R0. box 146,New Suffolk,Ny 11,664. ww.i-ip- suffoikwat rfrcslit-o 0 which generate limited intme but provide a quality experience for he community:open space,viers,paths,our new walkway,and access to the grater. The inclusion of a casual, moderately priced place to eat is a fairly typical element of a hamlet destination,especially one on an accessible waterfront,We do not think a high-priced,late might,restaurant/bar al ills what the community desires and we have no intention of establishing that sort of venue, I he New York State Department of Parks,Recreation and historic Preservation bolds an easement on one acre of our property.The agency encourages small scale commercial operations adjacent to preserved land because they know more people will use and enjoy a protected property if it has vitality. We will proceed through the building permit process,and commence the renovation wont on the Galley Ho while continuing to hold community outreach sessions to determine the appropriate intensity of use. 'You might remember that,before the hurricane,we used the building in variety of rays: yoga classes,I C 's Pot Luck Suppers and Italian light Dinner,private special occasion parties, and community meetings,along with our oars important fundraising events.These types of activities-still appeal to many in the community and night co-exist with an eating establishment. We hope you will be a part of our outreach,and that we can count on your continued` support. At this point,we are the most reliable source for information and encourage you to get in touch with us with any questions you may have. Sincerely, The New uffolk Waterfront Fund Board ✓�aid�„+ / ��nv� awe- e� �irsf o � w F ,lv vjF ki .� � max+ SOD toot June 29, 2014 DIANE&DENNIS HARKOPP Supervisor Scott Russell and Town Boar embers Southold Town 53095 Main Rd P.O. Box 1179 i E C E u L� Southold, NY 11971 RE: New Suffolk Waterfront Fund (NSWF) Site Plan JUL 01 2014 soutilo o 7oval Dear Scott, Planning Board We were opposed to boat storage racks years ago, and we are opposed to this project now: development is development, no matter the clothing worn. It's about what we were led to believe and broken promises to the community. Its about betrayal by a 5013c corp who is supposed to be transparent above all else. Its about elevated septic systems in a flood zone near the beautiful Peconic Estuary, dubbed one of the "Last Great Places" in the Western Hemisphere(peconicestuarv.orp. click"About"). Its about floods, storm surges, parking issues and congestion. It's about destroying the panoramic water view. Why not just keep it beautiful and park- like?Why can the NSWF not apply the KISS principle and keep it simple (httn://newsuffoikkeepingitsimple.com/)?We've asked these questions of the NSWF over and over again, and to date there are still no satisfactory answers. We didn't sign on to donate to a commercial project. We didn't sign on to donate to become a pseudo-winery with special "events. We didn't sign on to become"little Greenport". We signed on, to paraphrase the NSWF's own words, to keep the"New Suffolk-ness" of this special little place. It was supposed to be about preservation of the land, not preserving the old, dilapidated, eyesore of a Cape Cod building, which is not historic; the site may be because of the submarine base, but the building is not. It was supposed to be about protecting New Suffolk from developers, not about NSWF becoming the developer. It was supposed to be about open space, a Park, perhaps a snack bar. A 66 seat restaurant with a huge 80'x 40'x 8' (above sea level) is simply not a snack bar. We signed on for a field of dreams, not a field of merde-by-the-sea. Unfortunately, the lines of communication between the NSWF and the community have failed since 2012. How else can you explain: - No financial information, cost/benefit ratio, business plan provided. - An organization formed to protect the community from development, who files a site plan with the Town, and then seven weeks later unveils the site plan to the community? - At the last unannounced meeting after the Civic Association meeting of June 14th,the NSWF board claimed to have heard us"loud and clear," yet nothing has changed. Questions raised at the uproarious meeting of May 17th were again brought up, but we were shut down until after the Planning Board meeting takes place on July 7th. How does this make any sense? Most questions are normally answered at the meeting, not 8 weeks later. Does this sound anything like an organization who genuinely cares about the community it is supposed to serve? - People asked about a poll within the community, possibly a choice of projects. NSWF answered it would be virtually impossible to do with donors in diverse locations, even in Virginia. Since when is this project based on donors?This is a New Suffolk project, nor should it be based on/controlled by donors. P.O. Box 321 . 835 First Street . New Suffolk, NY 11956 Ph: 631-734-5123 Fx: 631-734-2642 www.northfork.com/legends Small community meetings/round table discussions with the community are planned, but no timetable was mentioned. Someone asked when the discussions would begin, and the NSWF responded late summer or early fall. Yet, at another point, in answer to a question about the start date of the project, they answered they're hoping construction will start this fall. Wait!? Community round tables will start in late summer or early fall, and they also hope construction starts in the fall? Call a "foul." How can the round tables really mean anything if they hope construction will start so soon after? Do they think everyone will fall for this sleight of hand? The NSWF continues to play the role of the puppet master, paying mere lip service to real communication, while covertly trying to control the situation and manipulating the strings of all who stand in their way, whether the community or the Town. Defying any normal code of conduct of a tax-exempt organization (see attached fundraising letter to their"Mainstays"), they cling to their project like a dog with a bone. Though we understand the Planning Board is autonomous, doesn't the Town have some responsibility to its citizens to vet all projects within its confines? Ultimately, given the circumstances we are all living through, what do we really know about this group and their ability to manage a construction project or their own organization, or even to act as the spokespeople for New Suffolk?We've already seen evidence to the contrary. Ultimately, we will all pay the price in taxpayer dollars (fails financially, septic issues, flooding or drainage, ecosystem of the bay, etc) I'd like to mention that the NSWF is run exclusively bye a Board of Directors; there are no further layers, there are no members. In closing, I'd like to paraphrase Howard Meinke's comments at the Planning Department's Comprehensive Plan Land Use and Zoning at the schoolhouse on June 28"'. He said the east end is as beautiful as any national park in the west, but we must start treating it in a similar way; that is, stop any further commercialization of the area, before it's too late. Bravo, Howard! T ly nd Dennis Harkoff cc: Planning Board Chair, Donald Wilcenski Planning Board Director, Heather Lanza and Committee Members ZBA Chair, Leslie Weismann and Board Members Attached and/or access the weblink: - List of Planning Board Issues - Copy of ZBA Findings, Deliberations and Determination Meeting of March 21, 2013 (partial) - List of Definitions - NSWF letter to"Mainstay"donors; illustrates unprofessionalism of recent undated letter. - http://newsuffolkkeepingitsimple com/ A site made by a First Street neighbor showing examples of structures with low impact for New Suffolk - https://www.voutube.com/watch?v=3mXZ PEnif "A picture is worth a thousand words." Illustrate the view that will be no more, and potential for flooding/drainage issues 6 la Bacon's shorter retaining wall. • i Overview of actions we feel are justified: - FEMA Floodplain Study (New Suffolk is in an "area of special flood hazard;' a valid floodplain permit is necessary, and a FEMA floodplain study is warranted). The Association of State Floodplain Managers (ASFPM) in their post-Sandy recovery paper(sent to various Southold Town departments in 2013) advised "Adopt Zone V development and construction standards in coastal A-zones . . ." and further advised, `in some cases it may be more economical to remove the structure and restore the naturally functioning coast." - Traffic Study New Suffolk already has had these issues, let alone with a project that does not have enough parking on the site; however, the site is beautiful with panoramic views and should NOT become one big parking lot either) - Environmental Impact Study (Fema Chapter 10.8 Determination of Requirement for Review) The proposed development is adjacent to the(1) Peconic Estuary, (2.) in a flood zone, (3)with a large commercial septic field, (4) many people will be affected, (5)the environmental impact is controversial, (6)will affect important natural resources, wetlands, floodplains, acquifier recharge area, delicate ecosystems, etc. (7) action holds potential threat or hazard to the public, (8) adverse impact on water quality, (9) change in land use. - Brownfields Study warranted Long term use as commercial/ industrial site; could be contaminated by hazardous waste or pollutants. Former marina with buried gas/oil tanks; boat storage area with various chemicals, petroleum products etc. used to scrape and repaint boats, as well as motor work) - SEQR, Type 1 action (contiguous to a NYS Conservation Easement) In addition to all the above, we feel the Site Plan Should Be Withdrawn: 1. Site is proposed in a different location than the one approved by the ZBA, Findings, paragraph A, " The restaurant is proposed in its existing location . . ." (emphasis mine). Its proposed location is different now than on "FINAL MAP REVIEWED BY ZBA SEE DECISION#6617 DATED 2/2812013." 2. There are no decks shown on this application/drawings submitted to the ZBA in 2013, while on the currect site plan there is 1600+/-of decks alone. Boardwalk and deck shown on the proposed site plan total about 2382 sq ft. 3. Square footage of the Galley Ho was 1526 sq ft, while current one is approx 1726, increase of 200 sq ft. ZBA FILE#6616, Page 4 of 4, "SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: . . . Any deviation from the variance(s)granted herein as shown on the architectural drawings, site planand/or survey cited above, such as alterations, extensions, or demolitions, are not authorized under this application when involving nonconformities under the zoning code. This action does not authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject property that may violate the Zoning Code, other than such uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly address in this action." Square footage of building was increased, by about 200 sq ft, from 1526 sq ft to 1725 sq ft, a 200 sq ft larger. This is a deviation and means it reverts back to the ZBA. 4. Also, if you have 1/3 less seats than original Galley Ho why is it necessary to make it larger? 5. Application, specifically"Site Plan Build-out Acreage or Square Footage" incorrectly filled out. Showed the building square footage, square footage of the deck to the right. Should have been filled out as a total sq ft: total sq ft of building and deck, resulting in 3337 sq ft total. I believe since parking is whichever is greater: 3 restaurant seats = 1 space; or sq ft of 3337 divided by 100 sq ft = 33 spots for restaurant alone. Insufficient parking on site. 33 + 16 boats + 1 marina employee =50 spots. However, 5 spots are w/1 conservation easement and cannot be counted (NYS letter on file) 6. A question on the Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) incorrectly stated this project would have no impact on parking! Page 2 of 4—February 28,2013 ZBA File#6617SE—NSWF Fund,Inc. CTM: 1000-117-8-18 parcel also has a beach area. All as shown as Parcel 1 on the Survey/Site Plan entitled"New Suffolk Waterfront Lot Change", Sheet No. 1 of 1,dated July 5,2012, last revised on 10/24/2012 "NSWF,Inc Comments"prepared by Barrett,Bonacci& Van Weele,PC,stamped by Martin A. Read,L.S. RELIEF REQUESTED: The Building Inspector has determined that the previous,Restaurant Use has expired.Therefore the applicant is required to apply for the permitted Restaurant Use by special exception by the Board of Appeals.The applicant proposes a Restaurant Use in a MII district in accordance with Zoning Ordinance,Article XIII,Section 280-55,Subsection B(1). B. Uses permitted by special exception by the Board of Appeals. The following uses are permitted as a special exception by the Board of Appeals, as hereinafter provided, subject to site plan approval by the Planning Board: (1) Restaurants, excluding outdoor counter service, drive-ins or curb-service establishments. Such prohibition shall not prevent service at tables on a covered or uncovered terrace or porch incidental to a restaurant. The proposed Restaurant Use is shown on the map prepared by, Joseph Fischetti, P.E.,dated February 2,2013, entitled"New Suffolk Waterfront", Parking Requirements, Sheet No. 1. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: There were many letters,emails and testimony received in support of the proposed Restaurant Use. There were also letters,emails and testimony received voicing concern that the new Restaurant Use may increase problems with insufficient parking,traffic congestion,and increased flooding during storms. FINDINGS OF FACT/REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: The Zoning Board of Appeals held public hearings on this application on January 13,2013 and February 7,2013,at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony,documentation,personal inspection of the property and surrounding ndighborhood,and other evidence,the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevantiand makes the following findings: The Board has reviewed the General Standards governing Special Exception,uses set forth in Section 280-142 and finds: A. That the Restaurant Use as proposed will not prevent the orderly and;reasonable use of adjacent properties or of properties in adjacent use districts. The Restaurant Use is proposed in its exis�tin location and at a smaller scale than what previously existed upon this parcel (66sem ads as opposed to the original 95 seats). The applicant's agent also represented that the restaurant use was proposed to be accessory to the primary marina use that has also historically existed on the subject parcel. While concerns were expressed by some residents about the required parking, traffic and new septic system upgrade that a renovated restaurant would require, the applicant shows an adequate parking yield on the subject parcel for the proposed restaurant use in its current location, in addition to parking for a proposed 15 slip marina, as shown on the site plan dated Feb. 2, 2013. Additionally, the required review and site plan approval by the Southold Town Plainning Board, the Suffolk County Department of Health Services and the DEC will provide mitigation measures to address potential adverse impacts,including impacts to scenic view sheds. Page 4 of 4—February 7,2013 ZBA File116616—NSWF Fund,Inc. CTM: 1000-117-8-18&19 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Weisman (Chairperson), seconded by Member Dinizio,and duly carried,to GRANT, the variance for the lot line change as applied for, and shown on the Survey/Site Plan entitled "New Suffolk Waterfront Lot Change", Sheet No. I of 1, dated July 5, 2012, last revised on 10/24/2012 "NSWF, Inc Comments"prepared by Barrett, Bonacci&Van Weele,PC,stamped by Martin A. Read, L.S. GRANT, the variance for the two uses (restaurant and marina) on proposed parcel 1 as applied for, and shown on the Survey/Site Plan entitled "New Suffolk Waterfront Lot Change", Sheet No. I of 1, dated July 5, 2012, last revised on 10/24/2012 "NSWF, Inc Comments" prepared by Barrett, Bonacci & Van Weele, PC, stamped by Martin A. Read,L.S. SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: I. The relief granted herein for two uses on parcel I is subject to final site plan s proval by the Southold Town Planning Board and the Suffolk County Department of Health Services �l`J That the above conditions be written into the Building Inspector's Certificate of Occupancy, when issued. Any deviation,from the survey,site plan and/or architectural drawings cited in this decision will result in delays and/or a possible denial by the Building Department of a building permit, and ingE require a new application and public hearing before the Zoning Board of Appeals. y deviation from the variance(s) granted herein as shown on the architectural drawings, site plan and/or survey cited above, such as alterations, extensions, or demolitions, are not authorized under this application when involving nonconformities under the zoning code. This action does not authorize or condone any current or future use,setback or other feature of the subject property that may violate the Zoning Code, other than such uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. The Board reserves the right to suiwinite a sundar,dsaign that is de minim&in nature for an alteration that 'not increase tht d wee of nonconformity. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members: Weisman (Chairperson,) Horning, Dinizio, Schneider. This Resolution was duly adopted (4-0). (A4ember Goehringer was absent) Leslie Kanes Weisman,Chairperson Approved for filing /2013 FIRST STREET FIRST STREET - - — — — — — — — ®I I I I� of o I \_-- t --- —�-- '\ NYS EASEMENT ° s El Zcn 121 • i 3 i I z WW z W�o I� sL A I CUTCHOGUE HARBOR • Z m= ti �Or aiaro"�� w PARKING REQUIREMENTS ^-^ w RESTU'ANT. ' a 66 SEATS Q 1 SPACE/3 SFAS -72 PARKING SPACES MARINA am'� 'PARKING SPACE FOR'.ENJ'LOYEE EEN 041E1'I ' -I SPACE 16 BOAT SLIPS,,I SPACE/SLIP • • p—.0 yy '. 16 SPACES • 3B SPACES PMAL MAP 1 FNNDICAP SPACE • REVIEWD BY Z13A 38 REQUIRED SPACESI ,SCI$ a G�q.(BcTl�1 FebnmY 02,2013 9O PROVIDED SPACES OATEO�, / S:! L $CAIS:NP51 s Iv' SHEET NO: r FORMATION USED ON THIS SURVEqBY: BARRETT BONACCI&VAN WEELE, SURVEYED:JULY 5,2012 DEFINITIONS: - Preservation: the careful maintaining and protection of something valuable especially in its natural or original state - Open space: A defined area, typically either a natural environment meant for limited or low- impact human use (such as an unpaved path), or a space designed for public gathering but with minimal development, such as a square or plaza. - Park, in this case more specifically, a NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (NYS OPRHP) Park Project replete with a Conservation Easement. A park differs from open space in that it is a defined area designed for recreation, usually located in or near a neighborhood. Its landscape typically comprises paved trails or walkways, some open areas, trees, shelters, and perhaps some play equipment, all naturalistically disposed and requiring limited maintenance. - Snack Bar, a public place where small meals and snacks are served, usually at a counter. NEW SUFFOLK WATERFRONT FUNI creating the future of our waterfron To the Mainstays of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund, We are reaching out to you,as our most generous and constant supporters, to date on the controversy surrounding our Planning Board Application Rumors you up inaccuracies abound,and we would like to set the record straight rs and Our application is for site plan review so we can then go to the permit to renovate the Galley Ho,a goal of the and since is early days. Department for a to put back the square footage lost as a result of Hurricane Sandy ys.We are feet i��ti7 ? Our application is NOT about how Y plus 47 square feet many seats there will ultimately be in our cafe -we were�� granted a Special Exception for an up to 66 seat restaurant use last year by the Zoning Board of Appeals.That is not up for review.Much has been made of 66 se feels we would be remiss if we did not build,and provide sanity for ate'but our board allowable use for the future. sanitary ,the maximum How we use the Galley Ho HAS NOT BEEN DETERMINED. Our goal has AL maintain the historic uses on the site- marina and eating establishment-and know,we have been doing extensive marina re WAYS been to renovating and restoring the Galley Ho building as well,usinpairs recently. We want to embark on 'as You Administration long-term loan we have. g Part of the Small Business Also important from our early days is the creation of a meet-and-greet destination r� Waterfront We had previously tried for a post office and general store b hnation at the change in Zoning,which was met with resistance from the same fol Y re ting a latest petition. After numerous site glans,we asked to reinstate the r °started this ne third ssmaller�n the size of the o • ' restaurant use,o one year ago to do that,with tremendous,-asupport from our community at the hearing. Because of the support received when going before the ZBA,we were surprised a petition was being generated aroject; rP to find that Legends.The petition contains many inaccuracie a erronestarted ously Diane and Dennis Harkoff of Weare aware that some of our long-time Supporters Y put forward as facts. opacity and traffic it might bring. PP have concerns about the 66 seat supporters desire more fiscal transparency.LISTENING-at sharerfi also aware that some o our meeting on July 1Z�,and would be ha financial information at our happy to share this information with the Mainstays. Continuing along financial lines,we have reviewed the numbers to rovid the income we can generate from the property and what our expenses will a clear idea of know that our non-profit status makes it possible for us to provide on this pr e uses also on this property PO. Box 146,New Suffolk, NY 11956 tr www.newsuffolkwaterfront.org which generate limited income but provide a quality experience for the community:open space,views,paths,our new walkway,and access to the water. The inclusion of a casual, moderately priced place to eat is a fairly typical element of a hamlet destination,especially one on an accessible waterfront.We do not think a high-priced,late night,restaurant/bar fulfills what the community desires and we have no intention of establishing that sort of venue. The New York State Department of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation holds an easement on one acre of our property.The agency encourages small scale commercial operations adjacent to preserved land because they know more people will use and enjoy a protected property if it has vitality. We will proceed through the building permit process,and commence the renovation work on the Galley Ho while continuing to hold community outreach sessions to determine the appropriate intensity of use. You might remember that,before the hurricane,we used the building in variety of ways: yoga classes,NSCA's Pot Luck Suppers and Italian Night Dinner,private special occasion parties,and community meetings,along with our own important fundraising events.These types of activities still appeal to many in the community and might co-exist with an eating establishment We hope you will be a part of our outreach,and that we can count on your continued support At this point,we are the most reliable source for information and encourage you to get in touch with us with any questions you may have. Sincerely, The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund Board New Suffolk I keeping it simple • • http://newsuffolkkeepingitsimple.conV New Suffolk keeping it simple Pavilion:a free standing structure whose architecture makes it an object of pleasure. Large or small there is usually a connection with relaxation and pleasure.A pavilion built to take advantage of a view is referred to as a gazebo.Why not turn the"Galley Ho"building into a pavilion/gazebo. It could be su- per simple with a food/beverage cart and tables and benches only,very New Suffolk. it could also be partially enclosed and have a fire place. Either would be ideal for the community. 4� kou�Jay, ya. I of 2 6/30/2014 8:53 PM New Suffolk I keeping it simple http://newsuffolkkeepingitsimple.com/ 0 4 r Pindar This entry was posted in Uncategorized on June 23, 2014[http://newsuffolkkeepingitsimple.com/ma- rina-pavilion-gazebo-park-2/] . 2 of 2 6/30/2014 8:53 PM -New Suffolk keeping it simple 9 . http://newsuffolkkeepingitsimple.cor& New Suffolk keeping it simple Pavilion: a free standing structure whose architecture makes it an object of pleasure. Large or small there is usually a connection with relaxation and pleasure.A pavilion built to take advantage of a view is referred to as a gazebo.Why not turn the"Galley Ho"building into a pavilion/gazebo. It could be su- per simple with a food/beverage cart and tables and benches only,very New Suffolk. It could also be partially enclosed and have a fire place. Either would be ideal for the community. µ, All km 1 of 2 6/30/2014 9:20 PM I ,New Suffolk keeping it simple • • http://newsuffoikkeepingitsimple.com/ a.n d yr ...,n <•w 5 Q N; Pin or This entry was posted in Uncategorized onjune 23, 2014[http://newsuffolkkeepingitsimple.com/ma- rina-pavilion-gazebo-park-2/] . 2 of 2 6/30/2014 9:20 PM NEW SUF�LK - WATERFRONT FUND creating the future of our waterfront To the Mainstays of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund, We are reaching out to you,as our most generous and constant supporters,to bring you up to date on the controversy surrounding our Planning Board Application. Rumors and inaccuracies abound,and we would like to set the record straight Our application is for site plan review so we can then go to the Building Department for a permit to renovate the Galley Ho,a goal of the Fund since its early days.We are proposing to put back the square footage lost as a result of Hurricane Sandy plus 47 square feet. Our application is NOT about how many seats there will ultimately be in our cafe -we were granted a Special Exception for an up to 66 seat restaurant use last year by the Zoning Board of Appeals.That is not up for review.Much has been made of 66 seats,but our board feels we would be remiss if we did not build,and provide sanitary for,the maximum allowable use for the future. How we use the Galley Ho HAS NOT BEEN DETERMINED. Our goal has ALWAYS been to maintain the historic uses on the site- marina and eating establishment-and,as you know,we have been doing extensive marina repairs recently. We want to embark on renovating and restoring the Galley Ho building as well, using part of the Small Business Administration long-term loan we have. Also important-from our early days is the creation of a meet-and-greet destination at the 'fTunt.We had previously tried for a post office and general store by requesting a change in zoning which was met with resistance from the same folks who started this latest pegs w. After numerous site plans,we asked to reinstate the restaurant use,one third smaller than the size of the original,and were granted a Special Exception one year ago to do that support from our c with tremendous su tby the ZBA community at the hearing, Because of the support received when going before the ZBA,we were surprised to find that a petition was being generated against the project,started by Diane and Dennis Harkoff of Legends.The petition contains many inaccuracies erroneously put forward as facts. We are aware that some of our long-time supporters have concerns about the 66 seat capacity and traffic it might bring. WE ARE LISTENING.We are also aware that some of our supporters desire more fiscal transparency.We plan to share financial information at our meeting on July 12th,and would be happy to share this information with the Mainstays. Continuing along financial lines,we have reviewed the numbers to provide a clear idea of the income we can generate from the property and what our expenses will be.We also know that our non-profit status makes it possible for us to provide uses on this property P.O. Box 146,New Suffolk,NY 11956 bb www.newsuffolkwaterfront.org W6 �h a� o� ►�i ar-e co ,�, it i' - L , �P-/ A GohiIntl w1 i s pkto Aha ware -h dosc Y- Alt- A-(b� o k . s wAS pkti wa- -re eca . � 4• 33 IT � D 3 1 b j New Suffolk Waterfront q • • v v Subject: New Suffolk Waterfront From: Elaine Romagnoli <nyceroma@yahoo.com> - t Date: 5/28/2014 5:21 PM To: "don@briarcliffsod.com"<don@briamliffsod.com> rnanningBoard Dear Mr Wilcenski2014 fuwr I have 55 years experience in the restaurant, nightclub, bar business and currently ' hold a liquor license in Manhattan. Thirty five years ago my partner and I purchased and operated Bonnie's by the Bay, currently Legends restaurant . When we made this purchase New Suffolk was a quiet, sleepy, little fishing village. The Galley Ho,on its best nights never had more then a dozen cars and pickup trucks in their parking lot. Bonnie's within months of operating received unsolicited glowing reviews from both Newsday and the New York Times. The onslaught of people followed. My partner and I were thrilled but, unprepared. Eventually we got the hang of how to deal with the large volume of people that came to Bonnie's. We were never able to control the parking issues, noise level, litter throughout the neighbor hood or speeding cars,to our own satisfaction or to the satisfaction of our neighbors. I want to make one thing very clear to you sir and to the other members of the planning board that I truly believe that the NS waterfront board have worked tirelessly and with extremely good intentions to maintain the integrity of this waterfront project. Now I believe,they are being naive when they think that they will be able to find an experienced entrepreneur,that will pay rent for the restaurant, and allow the board to dictate the hours they operate,the food they serve and the prices they charge in addition to giving the waterfront fund a percentage of the profit. It is my belief that any experienced seasonal operator will not be interested in such an offer regardless of how beautiful the setting is. My biggest fear is that someone young and inexperienced will take on the project. I pity this community if that is what happens. 1 was all for a cafe/snack bar which was what was initially pitched to the residents of New Suffolk by the board. But, I am vehemently opposed to yet another full blown restaurant here in our sweet little community 1 of 2 6/10/2014 6:35 PM New Suffolk Waterfront Sincerely, Elaine Romagnoli 1230 first street New Suffolk t € € i i 1 f f a i F 6 i New Suffolk, NY i ! i i Y f 1 i i ! d + Sent from my Wad 1 6/10/2014 6:35 PM 2of2 George Maul P.O. Box 635 New Suffolk, NY 11956 Southold Planning Board and Committee Members 54375 Main Rd P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 June 23,2014 Dear Mr.Wilcenski, With regard to the proposed site plan that the NSWF has submitted for Downtown New Suffolk(1000- 117.-8-18) 1 would like to request that the following items be addressed: It appears that the southeast wing of the Galley Ho building has been turned sideways in the new version.This further blocks the viewshed. It should be returned to its original orientation. The square footage of the new building is 200 sq.ft.more than the original building.The assessor's office shows the original building as 1526 sq.ft. On the second page of the application, Pat Mclntye indicates that this project will have no impact on traffic.That information is erroneous.A study of possible ways to mitigate the traffic needs to occur. The elevation of the floor of the Galley Ho is 6.49 ft. higher than First Street adjacent to the building. Please analyze the effect that floodwaters might have on adjacent properties before this plan is approved.To do anything else is irresponsible. The landscaping plan with trees, large scrubs and bushes along the north side of the property and on the retaining walls on both sides of the building obscures the scenic view.This should be revised. In view of these Items I request that the application be denied and a new site plan that is supported by a larger segment of the community be developed. Si e %`n 2 C 2 pn George MaulJUL 0 12014 Southold Town Planning Board l r Mr. Donald Wrlcenski, Chair p E C E �( Southold Planning Board, and Committee Members -- 54375 Main Rd P.O. Box 1179 JUL 4 201 Southold, NY 11971 Southold Town Planning Board Dear Mr. Wilcenski and members of the Southold Planning Board, -� 1 am a weekend resident and homeowner in New Suffolk, with a house directly across from Captain Marty's. I have been summering on the North Fork for 13 years. I have been thrilled at the efforts of our community to protect and preserve our beautiful waterfront. I have attended meetings and helped out as a volunteer as much as possible. I have been trying to closely monitor the development of plans 1 of 2 6/19/2014 2:22 PM i I FW:New Suffolk Waterfront for the waterfront, and really do not have a problem with a small cafe at the waterfront. However, due to the new demands of planning and environmental protection, the plan has become significantly more elaborate and expensive than what was originally conceived. Also, since all of the planning has begun, the North Fork has become much more active with visitors then ever before. Last weekend, I worked at the Chowderfest. I handed out hundreds of hot dogs and hamburger and lines of people went unserved due to a lack of planning! I saw the streets lined with cars and golf carts carrying people the two blocks from the town green/ baseball field to the waterfront. It was a nightmare! (Why people can not walk 2 blocks is unclear to me.) I feel passionately that the most important thing to happen at the waterfront is the preservation of the natural beauty with minimal intrusion of any kind. A working marina is great and brings in revenue. I have asked for a budget for the new plan as have many others and nothing is forthcoming. I would like to know what it would cost to maintain the waterfront as a park and marina. Our non-profit taxes are under$2000 for the property and even if the annual maintenance cost is$100k this should be a completely workable figure to fund raise. Who does it benefit to take on the expense and complications of a restaurant, a septic system, a 38 space parking area and all the accompanying busyness and traffic? It is just not sustainable in our tiny community. I hope that you and your committee will bring up these issues at the meeting on Monday and that we can address all of the details which have been brushed under the carpet. Best regards, Julie Julie Saul Julie Saul Gallery 535 West 22nd St. 6th floor New York,NY 10011 212 627-2410 646 244-5700 mobile Julie Saul Gallery on Facebook @saulgallery on Twitter Am mem der 2 of 2 6/19/2014 2:22 PM Phil Loria ' a/k/a Captain Marty PO Box 15 New Suffolk, NY 11956 June 13, 2014 Southold Town Board& Town Planning Board pp 2 53095 Route PO Box 1179 5 C E U l5 Southold,NY 11971 JUL 01 2014 Re: NSWF Proposed Site Plan Southold Town Planning Board To the Southold Town Board& Town Planning Board: I have been a property and business owner on First Street in New Suffolk for 45 years. While I appreciate the hard work and many accomplishments of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund, I am writing to express my concerns that the present site plan they have proposed does not take into consideration its impact on the properties and the property owners surrounding it. Specifically,my fear is that a Nor'easter on a full moon,with an incoming tide—which happens regularly—will show no mercy on First Street if the site plan's increase in grade is approved. By raising the grade only on this property, incoming tidal and storn surges will not only be channeled onto adjacent properties—including Captain Marty's Fishing Station—those waters will move with increasing velocity, thus increasing erosion of those properties. My building cannot take that added stress. If the town grants this project the okay,will the town assume the responsibility and the cost of the damage that will be done? Please consider all of First Street before you grant permission to this project. Like many of my neighbors on First Street and throughout New Suffolk, I feel this project is too big and too risky for little and beloved New Suffolk. Thank you for your careful consideration of my concerns. Phil Loria ell'rL Lanza, Heather #L_ /&�,/ Gy From: Michelle McCloskey <mccloskey1225@me.com> , Sent: Monday,June 30, 2014 11:07 AM To: Lanza, Heather, Russell, Scott;William Ruland; Ipevans@fishersisland.net; Doherty,Jill; Ghosio, Bob;Jim Dinizio;Terry, Mark; Cummings, Brian A.; Sabatino,Alyxandra K. Cc: Tom Subject: New Suffolk Waterfront To the Board and the Planning Committee: After a lifetime on Long Island, my family and I realized a long held goal in 2011 and became full time residents of New Suffolk. Upon arriving, we became involved with the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund (NSWF), both monetarily and as volunteers. Given the fact that we have been involved, I am particularly shocked by, and very opposed to the current proposal put forward by the NSWF for development of the waterfront. Development of this property is completely antithetical to all we believed we were working towards. Not only is New Suffolk logistically unprepared to handle further development of this property, I believe development of the site will change and damage the character of our town. My husband and I did a great deal of research before purchasing our home on New Suffolk Avenue. We felt secure buying our home, largely on the idea that the NSWF was working to protect the waterfront from development. The current proposal is in direct contradiction to what we understood to be the stated goal and is already having a damaging influence on property values in our hamlet. Further, the NSWF has begun trying to focus the conversation from preservation of the waterfront to preservation of the Galley Ho building which was damaged quite heavily in Hurricane Sandy. I would daresay a fifty year old condemned restaurant facility does not fit most people's definition of an historic landmark, nor should it be preserved. If the NSWF was truly concerned with historic preservation, we would be discussing recognition of the submarine base site rather than a for-profit restaurant. I believe there are a number of reasonable questions and objections to this development including but not limited to: Opacity of NSFW financial records and thus their ability to fund, manage and sustain such a project • Inadequate visolity or perhaps a complete lack 00a fully vetted business plan and cost benefit analysis for the specific waterfront project - I am sure all residents would like to avoid the disastrous development of unoccupied or unsustainable businesses as we see currently in Mattituck • Lack of infrastructure to support such a development — insufficient parking, increased traffic and noise, and problematic solid waste and waste-water handling • The placement of a large above-ground human waste facility located very close to the shoreline, increasing the possibility of contamination and leakage during storms as well as impeding the view of the shoreline that we were all focused on preserving • Location of the building in what we have clearly witnessed to be a flood plain • The question of the loss of our non-profit status and the resulting tax relief • The potential for decreasing property value as has already been witnessed Many have expressed their concerns about traffic and parking. The NSWF has made a rather dismissive suggestion that if parking is insufficient at the waterfront site,which it clearly is, particularly for some of the suggested activities such as weddings, they can "bus" people into the facility. I would ask that the committee keep in mind that to my knowledge, both arteries used to access New Suffolk,New Suffolk Road and New Suffolk Avenue, are designated Scenic Byways by the state of New York. The state defines a Scenic Byway as "a road, but not just a road. It's a road with a story to tell": • A scenic byway might offer magnificent views or fascinating historical sites or amazing wildlife. It might offer access to an exhilarating array of outdoor activities or reveal captivating cultures, spellbinding art or spectacular structures... Both these roads are trafficked heavily with pedestrians, fisherman and cyclists, and they are both narrow, two lane structures. I believe the suggestion of bussing people into our community is absurd and completely disruptive to our community, its residents and summer visitors. A large group of residents in New Suffolk, including my family, feel misled about this project. Many are staunchly opposed. Further, the directors of the NSWF have not been forthcoming in presenting details or, as importantly, alternatives to the plan they have formulated largely amongst themselves. It was my understanding that the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund was formed to prevent 2 undesirable develoAnt on our shoreline and Jorovide an open and welcoming space for the broader North Fork community to gather. The project as proposed is in direct contradiction to that goal and we actively oppose this plan. We prefer to save what is left of our town and its character. I would ask at a minimum that you delay any decisions regarding this structure until all reservations are heard and logistics and sustainability are fully vetted. Best Regards, Michelle McCloskey 15303 New Suffolk Avenue 3 Lanza, Heather From: kim@mysummergirl.com Sent: Monday,June 30, 2014 9:18 AM To: Lanza, Heather Cc: Russell, Scott Dear Mr. Wilcenski, Southold Planning Board and Committee Members, We, (Kim and Dan Petrie) live and work in our building at 775 First St, in New Suffolk 365 days a year. We have owned the building @ 18 years and this is our 15th season with Summer Girl, our emporium. Every Fall when the storms begin, we have to sandbag 3-5X or the water will come in. (We knew what we were getting into when we bought the property as it was still boarded up from the damaging hurricane Bob.) We have always been able to keep the water out except during Super Storm Sandy- when the water came up just shy of 2nd Street. We had 22" of water through our building, thankfully we were very well prepared. We are writing to you now because we are extremely worried about the proposed project across the street from us. If that property is elevated and the water funnels around because it no longer has all that surface area to cover first- we think every Nor'easter will be a Super Storm Sandy for most of us on First St. We ask you to remember what happened on the other end of First St. when Mr. Bacon built his building and a small above ground septic system. Every time it rained, the Town had to come and pump out the flooded street. This went on for several years until the Town decided to elevate that section of First St. and completely re-do the parking lot down at the beach with drains. Will the town of Southold take care of us? Our building is from 1909 and has been operating as a part of this community for over 100 years. We don't understand why the NSWF proposal would be more important than the buildings and businesses and homes that are already here. We have been told by the NSWF that what their plan may do to us is not their concern. We hope it concerns you. This proposal by the NSWF is too large a commercial development for our tiny hamlet and will have such negative impact on our supposed protected bay, our ground water, and the properties that are already here. What happened to preservation? Most of us would be happy with a park and a simple pavilion for the community. We hope you will turn the NSWF site plan request down and protect what is already here. Thank you for your time and consideration, Kim and Dan Petrie, Summer Girl j! 3 . s 1 HLI - 6.30.2014 Dear Ms. Lanza, Your name was given to us by Mrs.Shannon Simon, a resident of New Suffolk in order to express our opinions on the New Suffolk Waterfront project. My name is Michelle Roussan, my address is 865 Second Street in New Suffolk. I have owned my home here for more than 35 years.When I came to New Suffolk for the first time, I knew immediately that I had landed in paradise. Ever since, I have done all I could to support projects involving saving what's left. The engaged citizens of New Suffolk,and the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund, have together done an amazing work and deserve great recognition. Unfortunately,the NSWF's most recent proposal contradicts the vision of a community-centered space. A restaurant of 66 seats with the requisite cesspool and parking will bring serious nuisance and environmental issues(traffic,waste, noise, etc.). Many of us feel that the goal was to save this beautiful, small waterfront for community use (some more like Founders Landing in Southold, Poquatuck Hall in Orient,or Mitchell Park in Greenport). With Legends,we already have a very busy restaurant that pushes the parking and traffic situation beyond acceptable limits.Another restaurant directly across the street only adds more stress on the same problem.This seems to be a complete contradiction with both the project's mission,as well as the recent hamlet studies conducted by Southold Town. I hope that the town will have the wisdom to help us steer this plan in a more sensible direction. Best Regards, Michelle Roussan 865 second street New Suffolk mroussan@optimum.net George Maul g P.O. Box 635 New Suffolk,NY 11956 Southold Planning Board and Committee Members 54375 Main Rd P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 June 29, 2014 Dear Mr.Wilcenski, This past Wednesday,June 25th The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund advertised a special event"Food Truck Heaven" at the New Suffolk Waterfront see attached yer). Food was served and no porta potties were present. Traffic filled up the onsite parking lot and swelled over onto the streets taking up all of designated (15 minute zone) parking for the New Suffolk Post Office along First St. Traffic started around 5pm while the Post Office was still open and several hundred people were present.Alcoholic beverages were present. I respectfully request that this special event be included in considerations regarding the future of the waterfront project and I ask that it be included in the current Planning Board File as evidence of the way in which the NSWF"lessons, and where possible prevents traffic congestion" in their neighborhood and respects its neighbors. 280-128(B)(2) In addition, the marina is open, boats are in the slips,and no onsite parking is available. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, George Maul Cc James Dinizio, Leslie Weisman M h� sn�W- i g j C \ 0" Via'. �"'�:�. 'C\\K•:.. S - r= x� ^ v \ LA Lanza, Heather /►�� From: Germaise,Victoria <Victoria.Germaise@elliman.com> Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 7:46 AM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: NSWF Heather, I am sorry to burden you with this, but I have now lost all the email addresses. Will you kindly forward to them?Thanks, V ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Chairman and Planning Board members, You are, no doubt, familiar with my views as a resident of New Suffolk, regarding the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund's site plan now before you. I believe it to be ill conceived, over-sized, and having far too great an environmental impact in a fragile spot. We gave them our time and money because we believed they were going to protect our waterfront from commercial development.They have betrayed the community. Today, I write to you as a real estate professional. I have represented both buyers and sellers of property in New Suffolk. It's been a highly desirable location. In fact, I have a list of clients who only want to be in New Suffolk. They always want to view properties the very first day they come on the market. That has changed. I have seen this shift with several buyers of New Suffolk properties, who have pulled out of deals since seeing the NSWF site plan. They are afraid of the noise and congestion it will bring. My buyer-client Christine Kennedy has given me permission to forward to you, a letter which she wrote to me in May, regarding a New Suffolk property: 925 First Street, directly across from the proposed site plan, which she was about to purchase. This letter exemplifies the new view of many of my buyer-clients regarding New Suffolk properties: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christine Kennedy Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 8:03 AM To: Germaise, Victoria a _- Subject: RE: (No subject) . JAN �u14 Good morning. V On our walk this morning, we saw the plans for the development across the road, stuck to the window of Summer Girl. The plans are somewhat alarming in their current form. It would place the house opposite a thirty plus car park. And the hours for opening of the restaurant is also for early breakfast until dinner. So the car park would be utilized nonstop morning noon and night. Door slamming and people calling their kids etc. to heel. Also right next door to that are plans for a huge silage pit of some weird sort. Called silage hill. Ominous. Nota good thing. Looks huge in current rendition. 1 understand there is to be a meeting about the plans on June 6th. My friends will go to it. Already with the parking in front and at the side for Legends is one thing. But the idea of all that building and car park etc. is daunting. I can see why people are totally put off. None of it is good. Then if one did go ahead regardless, there is the prospect of the upheaval of all the building works themselves for a year or so. Hmmmm. I really need to think this 1 through. At a throwaway price, ones a gamble. Thoughts please. Christine. We went from a contract at a fair price,to a "throwaway price." Once again, I thank you for taking the time to read all our letters and I hope you will postpone your final decision, so that the entire community, not just the biggest NSWF donors, will have a voice in our future. Sincerely, Vicky Germaise VICI ORIA GERM AIS I ICENSED REAL ESTATE SALESPERSON IY)i K,�I-A, El LIMAN F71 AL ESTA I I "Come Home To The North Fork" Certified Buyer Representative DIRECT: 631.29€;.6146 OFFICE 631,298,8000 MOBILE, 91 i 5 X6,082,1 lvlictota Geiniaise� e1hrn;rl"Coni 10200 MAIN RED, MA71 ITLICK NY, 11952 MY CLIENTS- HTTP: ELLI MAN.0 Ofvl,'[:SEAL-ESTATE-AGENT,,TESTI MONIALS/VICTORIA-G ERMAI SE/8286 ASKELLIMAN `FACEBOOK 1TWITTER l GOOGLE+ YOUTUBE 'PINTEREST LINKEDIN 11 MV P,0 1, S T I N 2 Lanza, Heather From: Dan Jenks <walrusdan@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday,June 25, 2014 7:51 AM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: New Suffolk Waterfront Fund - Galley Ho Site Plan A�prrcatibn'Approval FndO sement 1iiN 2520' Hi Heather. a I am writing today to strongly endorse the application submitted by the good Waterfront Fund. I have reviewed the application and the outline of the NSWF initiative, and aware of the few who have voiced concerns. My conclusion is the Fund is quite sensitive to the surrounding area concerns, fully understanding in keeping with the area beauty and quaintness, and keenly aware of and strive to have as minimal environmental impact as possible. For these reasons I support approving the application. The improvement of the waterfront is already evident. With a site approval it will be enhanced even more . The Galley Ho is a defining part of New Suffolk. Let's see it be established better and stronger. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Dan Jenks Sent from my iPad i 0 pi ULM T IF3C— 'r.maq�rf/ Lanza, Heather - SIJ' From: Ellen Goldstein <ellenora@optonline.net> Sent: Friday, June 20, 201410:21 AM To: Jim Dinizio; Doherty,Jill; Standish, Lauren; Ipevans@fishersisland.net;Tomaszewski, Michelle; Ghosio, Bob; Russell, Scott;William Ruland Cc: Lanza, Heather (_ Subject: Letter to Southold Town Board ' S yy To the Southold Town Board,This is a letter to express my concern for the upcoming vote on the proposed site plan of the NS Waterfront Fund. May I say at the outset that the town was truly in agreement on acquiring and preserving this property on the Peconic Bay, and preventing outside interests from coming in and overdeveloping it. But since that time, there has been little agreement on how to preserve it, and imagining how it will function within the community and as a part of New Suffolk life. The main concerns are the development of the proposed site. This causes concern of overcrowding in terms of parking and also fears of flooding as a result of the raised buildings and above ground cesspools. As of the last town hall meeting, it was suggested that the town find a way to come together on these issues and problems. And we are trying to do that in individual meetings and talks,but we still need time to come to a consensus, among ourselves and with the NSWF as a unit. To date, we have not. Several of our neighbors along Second Street have already requested No Parking signs from the town and were granted them, on their streets to stem this problem that already exists and we fear that another destination in addition to Legends and Summer Girl, plus the boat ramp will increase the problem faced by the families that live close to this property, and upset the delicate balance that we are trying to maintain in our quiet hamlet. Another concern is the required cesspool which is part of this proposal. We know that our rivers and bays are fragile, and they are already polluted with both human and animal waste. We have been told that there is no guarantee that an amount of nitrates will seep into the water as a result of this addition. We are much more in favor of compostable i and non-permanent soluto such as porta-potties. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely Ellen Goldstein 2 Lanza, Heather From: Germaise,Victoria <Victoria.Germaise@elliman.com> Sent: Monday,June 16, 2014 6:39 AM To: Russell, Scott Cc: Lanza, Heather Subject: NewSuffolk Dear Supervisor Russell, I am writing to implore you to please consider the negative impact which the proposed New Suco Waterfront site plan will have on our tiny hamlet. The size and scope of this commercial venture is not consistent with the basis upon which funding was raised —that being the promise of preservation, not a second restaurant and liquor license,which we need like a hole in the head. There are already enough speeding cars racing up and down New Suffolk Avenue. There has been no financial transparency. Many of us have repeatedly asked the NSWF to see an operating budget, or a business plan, projected spend against projected revenues. I've shown the site plan to 2 local builders. Both concurred that a conservative estimate to build this site is$1.5-$2mm. Confronted with our concerns about a large commercial project on this site, NSWF backpedals and claims this will be a snack bar. Economy of scale would indicate that this is a losing proposition. Once you factor in maintenance, flood insurance, etc., it seems imprudent, if not completely unsound. If this gets green-lighted,there must be a Performance Bond. We suspect a much larger operation is on tap: Catering for weddings and special events, which will wreak havoc on our peaceful way of life, creating unwanted traffic, congestion and noise. The NSWF's marina repair operation has been laudable. Marina business alone would sustain the waterfront as an open space with community garden and picnic tables. OK, that's my opinion. Here are the facts: The 3 critical points that make it dangerous for this project to even be considered are: -the high water table (in flood surge, septic may be compromised) -there is a NYS environmental protection conservation easement on this property-this project would be contiguous to that easement (NSWF is currently renting boat storage on this easement) -FEMA maps show that New Suffolk (36103C0501H) is an "area of special flood hazard"—(First Street floods regularly in minor rain events) I appreciate your time in reading this letter and I thank you for your serious consideration. Sincerely, Vicky Germaise 1 P�� /qh'ZTT— Lanza, Heather From: JC JD <johnjim4234@hotmail.com> Sent: Sunday,June 15, 201410:09 AM To: Lanza, Heather Cc: newsuffolkfund@gmail.com Subject: New Suffolk Waterfront fund Heather lanza, Planning Board Waterfront Board of Directors _? We would like to start out by thanking the Civic Association and the Waterfront Fund Board for the very informative meeting at the New Suffolk School on Saturday 6/14/2014. We were very impressed by the accomplishments of both organizations. We now are very supportive of the Waterfront committees vision of the future of the waterfront. It was made very clear by the waterfront board that they hear the residents and although may not get 100% approval from all residents,that they will go with whatever the majority would like to see happen in the end. They also said they will be more forthcoming with financials and plans which will bring the residents closer to the project. They've cleared up all of our misconceptions of this project and most likely will now increase donations and support from people who like myself will be more knowledgeable of the the direction and be happy to contribute and participate. So, in going forward, We would like to ask the Planning Board in making their decision that this project should continue to go forward as presented so that an end result could happen sooner rather than later. Thank you. Jim Costanzo John Dodici Oscar. PS: Our donation of a$1000.00 to start towards this project will follow immediately, with future involvements and donations as needed. i ARNOLD BLAIR 4560 VANSTON ROAD CUTCHOGUE, NEW YORK 11935 June 9, 2014 Mr. Don Wilcenski, Chair Southold Town Planning Board -- P.O. Box 1179 _. Southold, NY 11971 Hic Re: Proposed Development - New Suffolk Waterfront Dear Don, I am quite concerned about the proposal to renovate and expand the Galley Ho restaurant building and operate a restaurant with plans for 6 — 8 "special events". I was happy to be a contributor to the NSWF, believing I was contributing to the preservation of the waterfront, not the development of a commercial establishment. There are several reasons the Planning Board should disapprove the NSWF application. 1. There are no specific plans being proposed and you would be granting the NSFW carte blanche for whatever restaurant or party venue they chose to establish —without community input. 2. The waterfront location would cause music and party noise to travel across the water to disturb all residents in surrounding waterfront communities, despite any noise level restrictions 3. The property is in a flood zone — what septic system do they propose that would withstand another disaster such as Sandy? 4. There seems to be much community opposition to the plan which, as far as I can tell, was developed by the NSFW Board without munity input. S' ce e , XYrnold B1 it Cc: Scott Russell, Supervisor, Southold Town Kalin, Carol ` Subject: FW: letter for Mr Wilcenski .r -------- Original Message -------- Subject:letter Date:Wed, 11 Jun 2014 18:26:59 -0400 From:Ted Victoria<tedvictoriaga,earthlink.net> y To:dan <drpetrie(a?earthlink.net> z TED VICTORIA 17250 Main St. PO Box 218 New Suffolk,NY 11956 631-734-8462 917-733-5356 (cell) Dear Mr. Wilcenski, My name is Ted Victoria and I live at 17250 Main St. corner of First St. in New Suffolk. Years ago my father Henry Victoria had a luncheonette here called the Sip &Dip at this same location. I renovated the two buildings on that property and now live here. I am very concerned about what is being proposed by the Waterfront Fund on the property across the street where the Galley Ho is located. If this is allowed to be built on the scale indicated on the site plans it would be a disaster, for not only the people of the hamlet, but also for the surrounding communities such as Mattituck and Cutchogue that use the beaches and boat ramp for recreation. Parking would be impossible, even with residents who have Southold parking stickers. I'm also worried about the environmental effect that the raising of the land mass by about five feet will have on the surrounding area. Will flood water be diverted around this mass and into the community? Even now, during a minor storm water accumulates along First Street. Will the low lying buildings survive a major storm? It seems that the Waterfront Fund is taking New Suffolk in the opposite direction than other areas in the state that were hit by Sandy. Other waterfront communities in New York State are being tightly regulated by the state as to how and where recovery can proceed. They are limiting reconstruction in flood zones and installing barriers to prevent future flooding. Please, require an independent study and report to evaluate the Waterfront Fund's proposal and it's effect on the hamlet of New Suffolk . Thank you, Ted Victoria 1 � I Thomas R. Cornwell 500 west Cove Rd. Cutchogue, NY 11935 June 9, 2014 Mr. Donald Wilcenski, Chair Southold Town Planning Board P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 RE: New Suffolk Waterfront Proposed Development Dear Mr. Wilcenski: Prior to the Planning Board's meeting on June 2, 20141 had written the Planning Board about my concern with noise levels from proposed special events at the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund (NSWF)site. I did not comment in that letter about the septic system because I assumed that, in view of the property being in a Special Flood Hazard Area and subject to wave and tidal action,the septic system would be an enclosed system requiring periodic pump-outs. At the June 2nd meeting I learned differently and the potential for pollution to the bay, whether by storm or otherwise, has me seriously concerned, especially since I live directly across Cutchogue Harbor from the site. At the very least,the plan should be scaled down so as not to need a large septic system, if one at all. I am also dismayed that the plan does nothing to recognize the history of the site- it being the site of the first US submarine base and its connection to the early shell fishing industry. It is in the strongest possible terms that I request that the Planning Board reject NSWF's plan as presented. S�ncerely, C C,—�-cr„� Thomas Cornwell cc: Scott Russell, Supervisor,Town of Southold (�F3,�,KT,,3c Norih Fork Environmental Council 12700 Main Road North qt�1 PO Box 799 R�1 o r �`�? ��! ``��l 1 Mattituck,NY il%-, nv� 'a n ,,i A , Phone: 631.298.8880 4 ,d s, ' Fax: 63'1.298.464'0 Web: rwww.l FECi.org 9 June 2014 Attn: Southold Planning Board Southold Town Planning Dept. Southold Town Hall Annex PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 I RE: New Suffolk Waterfront Fund Site Plan On June 5, 2014, The New Suffolk Waterfront Fu (NSV%F) presented a site plan for resoration of the waterfront property. The Board of Directors of the North Fork Environmental Council (NFEC)wishes to express its thoughts on two matters, regarding this proposed plan First, the NFEC wishes to reinforce two key points made by Kevin MacAllister, the former Peconic Baykeeper. 1) The site plan must include the deployment of a nitrogen barrier along/behind the bulkhead and other waterfront stretches. 2) The on-site septic system must not be selected by the NSWF but should be required by the Town, as is within its power, to demand a "best available technology"wastewater system. We cannot go back and fix past mistakes. However we need to be aware of them and, whenever possible, seek to improve upon such decisions. It comes to the attention of the NFEC that in its inception, Legends Restaurant did not have ample room on its property to install an adequate septic system.As a solution, the restaurant bought a neighboring property so as to have access to its septic system for restaurant use. As Kevin spoke to at the Town meeting, there is a chance for both the Town and the NSWF to use this project as a"showcase"for proper wastewater treatment planning and execution. The fact that the groundwater in this location is so high demands not a raised, "typical" system but, instead, calls for the best available hi-tech system to further reduce both the amount of nitrogen being leeched into the ground and groundwater, but also to protect against storm and flood damage to the septic field. In this light, we request the Planning Board to go back to the NSWF and suggest that the site plan call for a community or"cluster' hi-tech septic system. Not only would this reduce the amount of nitrogen deposition from the Galley Ho but it would permit other neighboring properties, including Legends Restaurant, to hoo-op to this system and thus, reducing the total nitrogen load generated by the community as a whole. page 2 Kevin stated that a hi-tech system for the Galley Ho would not make a huge difference in the water quality of the ground or surface water but that it would serve as an important start. However, a cummunity/cluster system could make a significant difference for the community. On top of that, it would be a chance for the Town and the NSWF to use the site plan as a reason for coming together and mitigate the reasons for division. The NFEC has reached out to Glynis Berry, shared with her the issues and asked her to reach out to the NSWF to discuss this option. Glynis mentioned that she had discussed the option with them 1 —2 year ago but that the cost of the system then caused them to seek out other options. However, as cost have decreased and the need for such a system has increased, we ask the Planning Board to work with the NSWF to further explore the benefits of such a solution, not only to the environment but to the community, as well. Sincerely, �7� William Toedtery president, N FEC 495 Eugene Road - Po B Ox -7y5 Cutchogue, NY 11935 June 3, 2014 Planning Board Town of Southold Southold, NY 11971 Dear Planning Board, M I attended the June 2 meeting at Town Hall and was happy to see so many in attendance. The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund made a very thoughtful and convincing presentation and I would have spoken had the evening not grown long. I hope that a letter will carry more weight than some of the rants and ramblings that we often hear at Town Hall. New Suffolk is very dear to me. I was a summer kid who moved to nearby Cutchogue at age 25 as a full time resident who raised a family and maintained close ties to all my New Suffolk relatives. I have kept a boat in Schoolhouse Creek on a dock property that I own and I worked on Robins Island for 12 years as a boat captain. I had my first beer at the Harbor Inn, now Legends; my wife worked at the Galley Ho. Suffice it to say I love New Suffolk and I have been donating time and money to the Waterfront Fund for the past few years. The presentations by Joe McKay and Pat McIntyre were very impressive. Also, recent letters to the Suffolk Times from Roberta Jacklevic and Lauren Grant were very convincing. I hope you have read and re-read them. New Suffolk supported two restaurants for many years, even in the winter months. The real crowd problem is the beach and boat ramp activity in the summer. Many people have worked on making New Suffolk's waterfront attractive and I applaud them. Most of the negative comments on Monday night were not factually correct and many comments showed a lack of scientific understanding. I urge the board to approve the Waterfront's plans. Sincerely, Fred Endemann Lanza, Heather From: Barbara Schnitzler <barbara.schnitzler@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2014 3:32 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: Fwd: New Suffolk Waterfront Hi Heather, Could you please include this letter as part of the New Suffolk Waterfront application package? It should already be part of the ZBA file, but in light of Mr Grathwohl's more recent email, I would like it brought to the attention of the Planning Board. Thank you very much, Barbara Schnitzler Begin forwarded message: From: James Grathwohl <jfgrathwohl(c�msn.com> Date: January 2, 2013 7:11:14 PM EST To: Vicki Toth <vicki.toth(aDtown.southold.ny.us> Cc: Barbara Schnitzler <barbara.schnitzler(a)-gmail.com>, Souhold Town Landmarks Preservation Commission <souholdtownlandmarkspres(aD-groups.live.com> Subject: New Suffolk Waterfront January 2, 2013 TO: Leslie Weisman Chair, Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: James F. Grathwohl Chair, Southold Town Landmarks Preservation Commission CC: Barbara Schnitzler Chair, New Suffolk Waterfront Preservation Fund SUBJECT: New Suffolk Waterfront Dear Ms. Weisman, I strongly support the application of the New Suffolk Waterfront Preservation Fund to (1)divide their parcel in order to sell the southerly portion to neighboring Robins Island Holdings and (2)to re-instate the use of the well known Galley Ho on the northern portion to its former use as a restaurant. Historically, the site is where the Goldsmith and Tuthill Shipyard was located for many years. The Holland Torpedo Boat Co. leased space here where the USS Holland, the first submarine commissioned by the U.S. Navy in 1905 was outfitted and tested in Peconic Bay, making this site one of the most significant locations in U.S. Navy history. A roadside marker explains the significance of this site that also is a Southold Town historic landmark and is listed by the Society for the Preservation of Long Island Antiquities. The Southold Town Landmarks Preservation Commission commends the Waterfront Preservation Fund Board for its plans to enhance the site by moving the historic Galley Ho, which suffered considerable 1 damage from Hurricaney, further back on the site and restore it'pits long-time use as a restaurant serving especially local sla ood. There has been a restaurant there for many years and this restoration will be welcomed by the local community, as well as supporting the local economy. I strongly support, and I believe the local community does, too, the application of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund. I urge you and your colleagues on the ZBA to approve it. Thanks for your support. James F. Grathwohl Chair Southold Town Landmarks Preservation Commission 2 • Lanza, Heather From: Ellen Berger <ellenlberger@aol.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2014 1:55 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: Fwd: New Suffolk letter Sent from my iPad Begin forwarded message: Dear Heather I have been volunteering with the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund since January. As in so many cases things happen that complicate the message. The town's insistence that the Galley Ho be called a restaurant is the main complication. This is a group of dedicated people who want to preserve the waterfront and the historic buildings. When I first came to the North Fork in 1978 the Galley Ho was a favorite spot - and it seated almost 100 people. Parking was wherever you could find a space. So much has happened since then. The events that the group have been planning have brought wholesome fun and activity to the area. The garden and the docks are a major improvement both in safety and appeal. Let's give this group a chance to complete what they have been working so hard to accomplish - preserving the waterfront and the historic buildings. Sincerely, Ellen Berger i 0 Kalin, Carol From: Lanza, Heather Sent: Thursday,June 05, 2014 8:39 AM To: Kalin, Carol Cc: Cummings, Brian A. Subject: FW: NSWF's Galley Ho plans Please print for the mail tray.Thanks. From: Nancy Ross [nancyrross@mac.com] Sent:Wednesday,June 04, 2014 11:02 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: NSWF's Galley Ho plans Dear Ms. Lanza, - - s I am writing to support the NSWF's plans for the renovation and use of the old Galley Ho. I have spent 60 summers in Mattituck, have been a property-holder there since 2000, and will soon be a full-time resident.The New Suffolk Waterfront is a treasure and I believe the NSWF members have done all the right things to keep it vital and make it a true community resource. I think the resurrection of the Galley Ho can only bring more business and foot traffic to the area, which will benefit everyone. I have fond memories of eating at the old Galley Ho. I have also spent many pleasurable evenings at Legends. I see no reason why two restaurants can't co-exist and indeed prosper in that space. I would certainly patronize both! Nancy Ross 1 0 Lanza, Heather From: James Grathwohl <jfgrathwohl@msn.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2014 9:35 PM To: Lanza, Heather "a Cc: Jamie; Donald Feiler; Robert Harper'Gary;Anne Surthin;'Ted;Webb; Donald Wilcenski Subject: New Suffolk Waterfront !k q f Dear Ms. Lanza and Members of the Planning Board, x As most residents of Southold Town, especially those of NeW..S of &, agree,the Suffolk waterfront is one of the Town's most attractive and historic sites that must be preserved. Unfortunately, the 2.5 acre site has not been placed on the Southold Town Register of Historic Places so the Town's Landmarks Preservation Commission(LPC), which I chair, has no legal jurisdiction over the use of this historic site. Hopefully, that situation will be remedied in the near future, but too late for the current application. Therefore, the comments and recommendations which follow are my personal observations, not those of my fellow Commissioners, who may submit their personal comments separately. The Holland submarine, the first sub commissioned by the U.S.Navy, was outfitted in New Suffolk and tested in Peconic Bay from 1899 to 1905, making New Suffolk the nation's first submarine base, a location of national and international significance. I am a life-long resident of Cutchogue and a long-time supporter of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund. I have witnessed the various uses of that site over the years. The non-profit Waterfront Fund and its Board members are to be commended for their efforts to clean up the site, keeping it more than 90%open space, rebuilding the bulkhead and marina which are revenue producing, and maintaining its traditional and historic uses. Although I support the rebuilding/restoration of the Galley Ho, I urge the Planning Board to recommend that the Waterfront Fund's Board consider a smaller, less intense use --possibly just a snack and non-alcoholic beverage service -- with the building moved to the south end of the property along New Suffolk Avenue, near the site of the former Goldsmith and Tuthill Store/Post Office. This solution would leave a more unobstructed view of the harbor and would decrease overall costs and maximize profits. One alternative proposal is to demolish the old Galley Ho (it is not an historic building, having been an old fishing station at the site of the current New Suffolk public beach) and building a new smaller edifice. A second alternative might be to demolish the existing Galley Ho and rebuild/restore the other existing building (which is historic). The snack bar could occupy the ground floor with outdoors seating with a museum of New Suffolk's maritime heritage on the second floor including the model of the Holland submarine and other artifacts now in the Carriage House on the Cutchogue Village Green. Legends might be interested in managing the snack bar as an extension of its current restaurant and bar across the street. The Waterfront Fund's recent ad in The Suffolk Times was very informative, but its Board needs to communicate more details of their plans to the public, especially the residents of New Suffolk. At the recent public meeting, few if any financial data for the proposed work were disclosed. A detailed budget should be made public including costs of the proposed work, the septic system, maintenance of the waterfront as a park and marina only, estimated revenue from the restaurant and marina, and a summary of proposed overall income vs. expenses. The increased expense of a remodeled/restored restaurant, new septic system, parking spaces, and other related expenses seem like more than the local community can sustain. I appreciate the time and attention you and your colleagues devote to these important proposals that will have a major impact on both the current and future quality of life in our historic town and especially on New Suffolk. Historic Preservation is good business! James F. Grathwohl Chairman, Southold Town Landmarks Preservation Commission 1 Lanza, Heather 0 From: Arlene Castellano <arlene.castellano@ mail com> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 7:45 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: Fwd: New Suffolk Dear Ms Lanza, N.,= This is a letter I sent to Vicki Toth February 12,2013. Our sentiments have not changed, but just like many of our neighbors, our objections continue to be ignored.Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Arlene and Frank Castellano ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Arlene Castellano <arlene.castellano(u)gmail.com> Date: Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 8:28 PM Subject: New Suffolk To: Vicki.Toth(ii),town.soutllold.ny.LIS Dear Ms Toth. We are writing this to voice our disapproval of the plan to construct/rebuild a new restaurant to replace the structure that previously housed "The Ho". When the group of people who organized to purchase this site started out, the purpose was to create open space for the community. Through various fund raising activities they have brought an enormous amount of cars, traffic, people and noise to this hamlet. We would like to know if a traffic/parking survey has been conducted by a professional organization. New Suffolk is a tiny hamlet and the amount of cars that a new restaurant or any commercial enterprise would generate must be studied, and put to a vote by the entire community. It seems serendipitous that this discussion is taking place in February when many residents are elsewhere. We would not like to see New Suffolk's beauty be destroyed or turned into a parking lot for a new restaurant. As it is, a part of the site has already been turned into a parking lot. Is this allowed by the town? How does this equate to open space for the community. The parking in New Suffolk has become a major problem, especially in the summer, when people park everywhere to avoid buying a permit or paying the fee to park at the beach. It seems that the plan to erect another restaurant is a scheme to secure funds without considering the effects it would have on the community. Thank you for your consideration of this letter. Sincerely, Arlene Castellano Frank Castellano 1275 First Street New Suffolk, New York 11956 631 734-4137 1 Lanza, Heather From: JC JD <johnjim4234@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 03, 2014 8:56 AM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: FW: Galley Ho Heather please consider our attached letter of concern in your decision making process. Thank you, Jim Costanzo John Dodici From:johnjim4234@hotmail.com To: newsuffolkfund@gmail.com Subject: Galley Ho Date:Tue, 3 Jun 2014 08:23:21 -0400 To the Board, John and I purchased our home only 3 years ago at 240 Bunny Lane,we have been coming to New Suffolk since childhood staying at the Whitecap and Mrs Kings, rooming house. We have a certain kind of fondness and memories of the quiet, peaceful calm that has always been New Suffolk. We were looking to scale down our home and lifestyle and we always thought New Suffolk might be the place. The waterfront was always a detriment to our choosing to live here because of the neglect and state of confusion of what it was to become. Only after it was purchased by the Waterfront Fund with the help from Peconic Land Trust and the vision of open space, the refurbish of the Galley Ho, as a community center, for meetings, events etc. and the repair of the boat slips. It was also our understanding that the space could possibly be rented out to residents only for private parties, functions, etc. that's when we decided to purchase on Bunny Lane and make New Suffolk our permanent residence. I want to start out by saying that so far the Waterfront Fund has been doing a superb job, with the exception of making the Galley Ho a 66 seat restaurant. This is where our concern begins, The only way a restaurant can make it is to serve alcohol, special events, catering on and off site. 7 days a week. If this happens along with the motorcycles and cars that Legends brings to the area, we will quickly lose our beautiful and quiet town to satisfy two drinking, eating establishments in such a small area putting possibly more impaired drivers on our streets. Please keep this in mind. We came from Wading River to New Suffolk, for the quiet and peace that once existed in Wading River that is now long gone. In coming from a town with more that 8000 residents, with restaurants, tourists etc. to a town with maybe 400 or less, you would think that our car insurance would have gone down. It did not, in fact it increased, when I asked why we would be paying more for car insurance it was explained to us that there are more claims of car damage in New Suffolk than in Wading River. Now is that because the residents of New Suffolk are bad drivers or is it the damage that the impaired drivers coming from Legends are 1 r causing, and are speeding i out of New Suffolk Ave and New Su Road. Do we really want more people coming to this town to drink and drive??? Please consider all this, and only if the right decision is made for the People, Quiet and Peace and the open view and natural plantings of this beautiful town would we consider donating any monies at this time. We do not want to subsidize a restaurant and drinking establishment, when one already exists that only costs us our peace, quiet and an increase in our car insurance, and the safety on our roads. Thankyou Jim Costanzo John Dodici 2 410 Lanza, Heather From: Bill Carmean <bcarmean@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday,June 03, 2014 7:55 AM 17 To: Lanza, Heather Cc: SHANNON SLON SIMON; Barbara Butterworth Subject: The Galley Ho; Revitalization of the New Suffolk Waterfront Dear Ms Lanza: I publicly applaud and fully support the extraordinary work of the New Suffolk Waterfront Association, including their efforts to re-open the Galley Ho. The NSWA is breathing life into, and bring our community together at,New Suffolk and Cutchogue Harbor, creating a public resource that all of us can use and enjoy -- every day. I am proud of their work. In my view, a central part of that plan is revitalizing and re-opening the Galley Ho as a full-service restaurant. Each of us has special memories that center around family and community. Our special memory: my Aunt Sheila, who lived all her life in Mattituck, regularly took my new bride and me to dinner at the old Galley Ho. We cherished the food and the community at the Galley Ho, and especially loved dining so close to the boats, the birds, and the winds and waves of Cutchogue Harbor. On the North Fork, there are far too few restaurants that are so close to nature and our beloved bays. My bride (of 30 years) and I would love to take our friends, our grandchildren, and our grand-nieces to the new Galley Ho. I fully support NSWA's efforts to revitalize our precious New Suffolk waterfront, but I believe that having a fully functioning restaurant on the waterfront is a critical and central part of that revitalization plan. I can certainly understand why Legends would like to be the only restaurant in New Suffolk: monopolies make money. However, there is room in New Suffolk for two great restaurants. Please bring back the Galley Ho! Bill Carmean 3350 Park Avenue Mattituck, NY 11952 Bill Carmean cell: 215 595 8387 i Dear. . ... . I have been close to the New Suffolk waterfront issues since 1982 when the 27 condos project was proposed by "Commodore" Kaniff, who had owned the North Fork Shipyard property since the 1960s. Citizen protests, organized by the New Suffolk Civic Association at the time, influenced the final decision that killed the condos. They were not suitable on a property that had historically been zoned Marine II. We New Suffolkers (not to be pronounced in public!) said loud and clear that whatever the future held for this property, it should be some sort of a "working waterfront." We love our heritage of steamship pier, shipbuilding yard, first submarine base, scallop and oyster processing, and party boat charters, all activities that took place along the New Suffolk waterfront, and which brought residents and visitors together. In the 1960s, as marine commerce diminished, the property found new life as a marina, boat storage facility, and restaurant; the Galley-Ho was moved there from its site on what is now the New Suffolk Beach when that parcel was donated to the town in 1963. Then came the 1982 condos proposal as Kaniff prepared to retire. Later in the 80s, the property was sold to a marine developer, Shamrock Properties of Roslyn, NY. They proposed first, one humungous Marina Bay Club, complete with convention center and hundreds of marina slips extending into the NYS grant waters. Again, the Civic Association led the way to its defeat, and offered a much smaller project design that we agreed the hamlet could live with. Despite this, a couple of years later, another smaller, but still Y far too large Marina Bay Club was proposed and disapproved by the Planning Board. We were told that our acceptable design could not generate sufficient revenue to justify the investment. This same issue came up when H. Raynor and partners, who had bought the property in bankruptcy default in the mid 90s proposed the Cove Club. This also was not approved. At this point, a Waterfront Committee was formed by the Civic Association to study the feasibility of ultimately acquiring the property, and developing it more or less like the scaled down design we had suggested to Shamrock and Raynor. The Peconic Land Trust was engaged by this committee to help us understand how and when this might be accomplished. When the Raynor group made yet another proposal, pictures of three-tier boat storage all along First St. guaranteed its defeat. The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund was formed out of the Waterfront Committee and worked with the PLT to acquire the property. Following several years of fundraising, this was accomplished. The plans now before you are the result of several years of community input, feasibility study, and planning, design, and construction required to ready the property for the modest development. In its entirety it occupies only 7% of the available space and is smaller than what was there until 1993: The 1/3 larger Galley-Ho plus the Post Office/General Store Bldg and Frank's Marine Repair shop. As a Board Member of the Civic Assoc from 1986-96, the head of the first Waterfront Committee, and a Board member of the NSWF r • 0 from 2005-2013, I can assure you that this is a plan which when realized will appeal to the entire NoFo community. A plan as minimal as this, can work only for a non-profit organization. Together with the easement on the property, it guarantees that the primary objective of this development is to provide the community with a waterfront resource for its benefit. Yours truly, Joe Mc Kay • Lanza, Heather From: s123dingle@aol.com Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 8:54 AM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: Waterfront Plan to Renovate the Galley Ho Dear Heather, We are writing to express our concern that the plan for the development of the waterfront no longer reflects the vision of the community, but that it is the conception of the Waterfront Fund, an organization which has not fully involved the community in its planning process. The lack of alignment between the Waterfront Fund and the community was evident in last week's meeting, which was fully covered in the local media. Until our community can reach a consensus about the development of the waterfront, it seems premature to approve any further site development. We call to your attention the issue of parking. Residents feel that the success of Legends has already created congestion along the waterfront street. To establish a competing restaurant where there is already not enough parking for the one we have, seems ill-considered. The sentimentality that some people have for the"old" Galley Ho may have created a blindspot about what makes sense now. We urge you to support our community's process of self-determination, by acknowledging our concerns about over- development of the waterfront by an organization that does not seem to be in alignment with the will of the community it serves. Thank you for your attention. Cordially, Susan and David Dingle 1 Lanza, Heather From: Patrick Higgins <Iphpeconic@yahoo.com> Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 9:27 AM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: New Suffolk Good morning. I am a resident of New Suffolk. Property is 410 and 484 Jackson Street I have spent every summer"of my life(50 years ) on North Fork. My first house was purchased in 1995 in Salt Lake Village Mattituck. Later moving to property on Jackson Street in 2007. I was bartender and waiter at Old Mill Inn. Bonnie's by the Bay (now Legends). I was head instructor at Mattituck yacht club in the 80's. I extremely disappointed and concerned at the way the folks on the NSWF go about their agenda. They do not speak for the people. They are narrow minded. They are exclusive. They are inexperienced. They are not receptive to ideas that do not suit their agenda. I went to a few board meetings years ago and was horrified. I am sure they are well intentioned in their own minds and their effort and sheer amount of time put in should be lauded and noted, but they are so narrow minded and myopic and secretive that I threw my hands up years ago. So now to build a restaurant is ill concieved. Parking for a wedding ??? Where. On my lawn? Cesspool above ground ?? Please. Case in point is the land sold to Louis Bacon without approaching Old Cove Yacht Club who is in need of a permanent home. OCYC generously allows Mattituck High to start a sailing team as they use ocyc boats and property. Apparently objection to even approaching ocyc was "...do realize they will have Regattas there!!" Came from officer of NSWF I am available to speak more on this. Please let me know when you are free. Patrick Higgins 917.716.6056 Sent from my iPhone i Lanza, Heather From: Paul Maffei <ppmaffei@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday,June 01, 2014 2:09 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: New Suffolk Water Front Heather, I want to state my total support of the New Suffolk Water Front Fund. From the very beginning they have promised to restore the Galley Ho and make the Former Sub Base a community place,preserving a large part of it and making it a place where the community can meet, enjoy the water front and have community affairs. This they are constantly working towards and should be allowed to complete their mission. I have had a home in New Suffolk for over 30 years. It was the home of the daughter of Ira B. Tuttle,the man who developed New Suffolk. I have kept the house for the most part just like Eunice Tuttle-Horton enjoyed it. I like the history of the hamlet and want it preserved for future generations and that includes the waterfront,marina, Galley Ho, old Barn, community garden, preserve, etc. Please let them complete their task. Paul Maffei 6285 New Suffolk Road P.O. Box 52 New Suffolk,NY 11956 i Lanza, Heather From: isabel.wacker@gmail.com Sent: Sunday,June 01, 2014 10:06 PM - To: Lanza, Heather Subject: New Suffolk Waterfront Fund Proposal Dear Ms. Lanza - My family have been summer residents of Cutchogue for over 70 years. My husband and own two properties in Cutchogue and enjoy the spring, summer and fall on the North Fork each year. I am writing in support of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund's Proposal to renovate the Galley Ho. The Galley Ho's historic significance to New Suffolk is undeniable. Stories of the Galley Ho resonate through many families, including my own. My husband and I believe the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund has done a stupendous job protecting and restoring this wonderful site and their proposal to rebuild the Galley Ho will only strengthen this historic area and secure its future financially. In addition,the addition of a small, reasonably priced restaurant with such a beautiful view, will only enhance the lives of all residents of Southold. We are disappointed that some residents of New Suffolk are opposed to the plans and we are furious that Legends is opposed as we believe their motives are anti-competitive. We believe the plans of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund will merely restore the site to what it once was- and enhance the area for all residents of Southold Town. This area of New Suffolk is not, and should not be treated as, a private park for the select few who live in New Suffolk. That is not what is was historically- and that is not what it should be. We have supported the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund by contributing money and by attending their events. However, in the event this proposal is defeated, it will be much more difficult to justify additional contributions. We believe the Galley Ho and the marina are the best long-term solutions to financing this project and improving the property for the benefit of all. In their absence, perhaps the people of New Suffolk should finance the expenses on their own. We hope the Town of Southold will consider the benefits of this project to all Southold residents and vote to approve the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund's proposal. Thank you for your consideration. Best regards, Isabel Wacker 1 Lanza, Heather From: BIGOUTLAW@aol.com Sent: Sunday,lune 01, 2014 8:45 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: Letter of Support - New Suffolk Waterfront Dear Chairman Wilcenski: - I attended the May 17th Community Meeting arranged by the New Suffolk Waterfront Boardto review and explain their site plan application to the community. Their presentation of the ptanns was in-depth and open to all for comments. I write this letter now in full support of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund and the site plan application before you now. The members of the Waterfront Board have been working tirelessly, without one shred of compensation, for the last nine years, collectively volunteering thousands of hours of their own time to restore and revitalize the historic New Suffolk Waterfront property. Hurricane Sandy may have beat them up a little, but quitting/giving up was never an option. They just dug in their heels and worked harder and longer with even greater resolve. They are passionate and dedicated beyond belief. The bulkhead on the property is now done and the new marina is well on its way to completion. A safer, sturdier Galley Ho, essentially the same size and shape as the pre-Sandy Galley Ho, is exactly what is needed in downtown New Suffolk's business district to complement the new revitalized waterfront. The way I see it, the proposed Galley Ho is really the third, and final, major piece of the puzzle. This must go forward. The plans before you are beautiful, thorough, and carefully laid out. The proposed septic system is far better than all the other below-ground systems just across the street. Onsite parking is being provided for, unlike the other businesses in New Suffolk, none of whom have any parking. The views of the bay will be forever preserved! Three historic New Suffolk buildings...all being preserved!... What more could we hope for? Absolutely nothing! This plan is perfect. The Waterfront saved us from triple-tier boat racks for 154 boats and parking for 182 cars. I am forever grateful to the NSWF for saving New Suffolk from what would have been a disaster for our town.. Respectfully submitted, Paul Auriemma 945 Fanning Rd. New Suffolk i Lanza, Heather From: Jeri Glander <jhglander@optonline.net> Sent: Sunday,June 01, 2014 5:41 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: re: Galley Ho To Ms. Lanza and Board Members By way of introduction, my name is Jeri Glander, age 62. I was born and raised in New Suffolk, attended the New Suffolk School and enjoyed growing up here. Even after college, and moving 'up the island'to work, I was often out here on the weekends and was always rooted here. In 1998, I was fortunate enough to return to live here full time and currently reside in the home I grew up in on Old Harbor Rd. I enjoyed many things about living out here and in my younger years was a Galley Ho regular, hanging out with friends, socializing, playing pool, etc. I also was a patron of the Harbor Inn when it was owned by my classmate's father, Mickey Majeski. I am strongly in favor of moving forward with the opening of the Galley Ho. I realize that the desire is very subjective (I could feel like I was 25 again). That aside.... I feel that the naysayers are being short sighted and not remembering 'from whence we have come'. Many years ago, we were at the point where a marina and a possible high and dry boat storage could have been where now is the Waterfront. Has everyone forgotten that when they are complaining that we are not following preservation of the site? They are also leaving out the parcel that was bought by Mr. Bacon and not counting the fact that that acreage was part of the original project and now is preserved. We have come a long way. It appears from the engineers reports and those that are knowledgeable about these things,that the raised septic system is safe. The fact that the retaining wall for the bulkhead has been raised by two feet can only be positive given 'normal' nor'easters. Too many trucks? Maybe the Galley Ho can use the same bread company and the number of trucks would be the same. I am so looking forward to having a community spot where I can get to know people better in New Suffolk. Even those of us who have lived here for a long time sometimes feel that we don't know our neighbors and I am looking forward to doing that at the Galley Ho. I feel also that the events that have been sponsored by the Waterfront have also brought many of us together. The Waterfront fund board has not been adequately appreciated for all the work that they have done. Every time that I drive down New Suffolk Ave heading towards the bay (on my way to the PO) I am grateful that my view is of the water and not anything else. I am extremely grateful to the Board for what they have done to preserve the area so that I can continue to love where I live as I always have. I am very much in favor of all that the Board has done and for moving forward with the Galley Ho as a restaurant where we can gather and enjoy friends. Very sincerely, /,', lJ �t Je<< ' 1 Lanza, Heather From: patricia lauro <patton362@optonline.net> Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2014 6:12 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: NSWF Dear Heather, My family and I live on New Suffolk Ave and have been watching with amazement the wonderful efforts to save the New Suffolk Water Front. I never imagined that the two million dollars needed to purchase the property could be raised but he wonderful people involved did it! .We are looking forward to having the waterfront restored as planned. We don't understand the opposition. Sincerely, Mrs. Anthony Lauro 8585 New Suffolk Ave. i Lanza, Heather From: Ruth Zeller <rzeller2@optonline.net> Sent: Saturday, May 31, 201412:58 PM To: Lanza, Heather Cc: shannon simon Subject: new suffolk waterfront Please support the efforts of the new suffolk waterfront fund. I know the directors and am confident about their ability to do what is best for the waterfront. Ruth E. Zeller 225 Willow Street Cutchogue, ny 11935 i Via email 6/1: Donald Wilcenski, Cho . Heather Lanza, Planning Director Scott Russell, Supervisor Legends Restaurant 835 First Street PO Box 321 New Suffolk, NY 11956 May 30, 2014 Mr. Donald Wilcenski, Chair, Southold Town Planning Board and Committee Members Southold Town Board Planning Commission PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: New Suffolk: The Community Preservation Project Gone Awry — Hijacked by the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund Dear Donald, Heather and Committee Members: In the beginning, many of us were united behind the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund (NSWF) and their promises to protect us from development. They accomplished many great things: They obtained the necessary funding to acquire the property and a NYS Conservation Easement protecting part of the property from development (although now it seems not quite enough of the property is protected). The New Suffolk community was grateful for these accomplishments. But the NSWF's efforts have gone far beyond what we understood their promise to us to be. Now, there is an enormous rift between the community and the NSWF, with many in the community feeling betrayed and kept out of the loop for the NSWF's plans. These plans have created divisions in New Suffolk: a division within the community; a division between First Street and a view of the waterfront; and a division between the dream of retaining our small-town charm and the nightmare of overcommercialization and parking congestion. These great divides are making a mockery of what was touted in the Southold Town Hamlet Study of 2008 as a "cohesive community with strong pride." New Suffolk has been cited as one of the most beautiful hamlets on the North Fork. We were promised scenic vistas, open space and a park, which we thought would enhance the beauty, charm and character of our hamlet. We embraced the idea of a small snack bar or a lunch truck, neither of which would compromise the area. Why has this new plan grown in such an unpleasant way, including large commercial development?Why not keep life simple? The NSWF was formed in 2005. They stated in their papers of incorporation on December 30, 2005 that they planned " ... to solicit gifts from the public and to apply them for the purposes of preservation, in substantially its present natural state, of littoral real property located in Suffolk County, New York, so that any such property will remain a natural centerpiece of Eastern Long Island for all future generations." But now that they've seemingly gone from a plan of preservation to a plan of commercialization, the community hasn't seen any financial data from this 501(c)(3) organization, including any sort of data regarding the expected cash flow of the proposed restaurant. The Galley Ho has been closed for years; in the years prior to closing, it changed hands many times over. But the NSWF, without providing any financial data to the community, wants to speculatively replace it with a new restaurant, which would require a new raised septic system (nicknamed "Merde Mountain") in a known flood zone. The community has asked for, but not been given, any financial data indicating this plan would even succeed, while simultaneously repeating their desire for picnic tables and a snack bar or food truck for light fare. r The Board of the NSWF claims to have heard us "loud and clear." But at the May 17 meeting at the New Suffolk School, they were defensive and arrogant in their response to our concerns. About one third of the community showed up, many with questions written down, but most questions went unanswered. The NSWF held no meetings since 2012, and the ZBA meetings occurred in the winter of 2013, when many residents were out of town, and this was the first opportunity for residents to express their views at a public forum. The NSWF's response to community concern seemed to consist of a newspaper ad defending their plans. A lovely plan for preservation has seemingly gone off the rails, bound for a full-speed attack on our community. We in the community want to stop it before it crashes. Is a commercial project on the waterfront in the tiny hamlet of New Suffolk what the Town Board was imagining when they adopted 280-128 A-B, which stated in part, "The Town Board wishes to protect the unique rural and open space character... the use of open land; and that the site use would impact beneficially on the well-being of the population in general... protect the established character and value of the adjoining properties, both public and private, and of the neighborhood in which they are located... prevent traffic congestions on the streets and highways ... prevent overcrowding of land or buildings." Can anyone on this Board explain to me, or to our community, whether this project indeed honors and respects these lofty words, or makes a mockery out of our local government instead?Already the value of adjoining properties has declined based solely on the knowing a site plan to develop this site is on the table. This community project has indeed gone awry, seemingly hijacked by the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund for its own purposes. What would be my vision? First and foremost, let's bring democracy back to the shores of New Suffolk. How about seceding from the dictatorial NSWF and investigating the possibility of having the creation of a New Suffolk Park District, including a small museum or display honoring the maritime heritage of New Suffolk and a park to preserve the open waterfront views. Let's choose the smell of fresh sea air over the odor of a raised septic system when full, or after a flood; let's opt for hearing the song of a bird, not exhaust fans. With a salute to our rich Native American heritage on Long Island and their honoring of all things of Mother Earth, let's remember this: As long as the sun shines and the waters flow, this land should be more valuable than money, here for all to treasure, and as the NSWF once said so aptly, the ". . . natural centerpiece of Eastern Long Island for all future generations." Sincerely, Diane Harkoff cc: Scott Russell, Supervisor, Town of Southold, and Board Members Attachments: - Parking, Environmental Impact, Project Size for a Small Hamlet, Lack of Transparency, NYS Conservation Easement, Vision - NWSF email re 3 parking spots - NSWF Quotations 09 ft Some of things that delight us, and some of the things that disturb us, are the very same things cited in the Hamlet Study of 2008. These include, but are not limited to: • "Unimpeded Visual Connection to Waterfront is an Essential Aspect of the Hamlet Center." Great line, don't you think? • Preserve the scenic water views and historic character. Preserve the Character; ". . . reestablish its maritime heritage . . . on a small scale appropriate to the present character of the hamlet, which is predominantly residential." • Strengths Weaknesses: - Character - Storm water drainage - Community - Flooding - Location - Parking Problems - Waterfront Heritage - Lack of small shops - Quality of life - Affordable housing - Community spirit So with this hamlet study in mind, let's talk about . . . PARKING / CONGESTION • Restaurant, Marina, Public Beach and now NYS OPRHP Beach (Conservation Easement) Parking is already maxed out in New Suffolk with parking closed on Jackson, restrictions on cars/trailers by New Suffolk Beach, and now parking closed seasonally on 2nd St between Jackson and Main (NS Ave), pushing more traffic towards the hamlet center, First Street (in many ways it is really "front street"— Hamlet Study) The NSWF Parking plan includes: 22 spots (restaurant) 16 spots (marina) 1 spot (employee) Taking into consideration Carole Friedman of NYS Grants and Land Management's email/letter of May 20, 2014, the 5 parking spots in the easement can be specified for the conservation easement only, leaving only 33 o/o 39 minimum number of spots needed, meaning they do not have enough parking. Allowing 1 parking spot for every 3 seats in the restaurant is not realistic, though admittedly within Town Code. In an already congested areas, we must consider restaurant employees also. One (1) parking spot per marina slip is also not realistic; sometimes it could be 2 or more cars per boat. Then also let it be known that when the NSWF when they created the current parking lot (now unused) in 2012, street parking lost 3 spaces on First Street(Heather and Donald are well aware of my indignation at this). In addition, NYS' Conservation Easement includes a beach (foot of Main St to the south) open to NYS residents. Where exactly will everyone park in already congested community? Again, I refer you to Southold Town Hamlet Study— parking was a problem in 2008 and was referred to the Planning Department. -2- 1** 010 • Events— If I recall correctly, no one has ever voted for a catering hall. There is no contingency plan for additional parking needed for special events, like weddings, chowder fests, or other large parties, at the site. Where are they going to park? The NSWF's answer at the May17th meeting was "a remote site." When I surmised, "the ball field?" they said, "no, more remote" to which I responded, "Another secret?" More smoke and mirrors? • Traffic—Already so congested in summer time from existing attractions; may I suggest a traffic study? • Delivery Trucks - In a small seaside hamlet that abhors traffic/congestion, now there will be more cars, more trucks coming down the quiet roads, and where exactly will the trucks offload /turn around - parking lot? • Site Plan Application—The wrong box was ticked off, when it asked if it would increase traffic, they had responded "no"; the correct answer of course should have been an unequivocal "yes." ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: Do we need an environmental impact study? (Yes.) • Raised Septic— In a known flood zone with Nor'easters, Superstorms, storm surges and resulting sewage, does it really make sense to put up Merde Mountain? This is a very questionable plan when we are trying to reduce existing pollution and "save our bays", not add to it. If we know more, shouldn't we do more? • Retaining Wall —Changing the grade slightly in the mid-90's caused extreme flooding of the parking area on First Street. Now building up 5' or more -where will "pooling" of rain /storm water go for parking, barn, marine shop, restaurant areas? If the tide is already high, how will drainage be addressed? See the 2008 Hamlet Study— it has been an issue for years. • Drainage—We know that any plan that includes grading or elevating the land causes flooding conditions in New Suffolk. Is there sufficient drainage on the property? Does it meet Southold Town code? Did the NSWF provide a Storm Water Prevention Plan (SWPP)? Haven't had time to read Chapter 236, Stormwater Management yet. • New Suffolk is an "area of special flood hazard" (Chapter 148: Flood Damage Prevention, 148-6; we are 36103C502H on the flood map); When you put a brick in a pan of water, what happens? The water level rises; when there is the mighty force of Mother Nature behind that "brick" what happens? The force of the water increases. Our FEMA Base Flood Elevation (BFE) for this part of New Suffolk is 6 feet. The references below are limited and not meant to represent the scope of the entire chapter. References: 148-12 A-Floodplain Development Permit" . . . in areas of special flood hazard in this community for the purpose of protecting its citizens from increased flood hazards . . ." One is needed I believe, as we are an "area of special flood hazard". 148-13 F—Application for Permit. "A description of the extent to which any watercourse will be altered or relocated as a result of proposed development." -3- 148-14 A2, 3 -- Duties and Responsibilities of Local Administrator If proposed building site is in an area of special flood hazard, all new . . .and substantial improvements shall meet the applicable standards of 148-15 through 148-21, construction standards, and in particular, 148-15B. Determine whether any proposed development in area of special flood hazard may result in physical damage to any other property (e.g. stream bank erosion and increased flood velocities). "If the proposed development may result in physical damage to any other property or fails to meet the requirements of 148-15 through 148-21, no permit shall.be issued. 148-14 A3 - Determine whether ANY proposed development in an area of special flood hazard may result in physical damage to any other property (e.g. increased flood velocities) . . . .may result in physical damage to other property. First Street. 148-14 C1 -This building, septic and retaining wall will alter the course of the water. 148-22 Dl-12 : ZBA: Since we are "an area of special flood hazard" shouldn't the ZBA process for this application have examined " shall consider all technical evaluations, relevant factors, and standards specified in other sections of this chapter. . ." - D2 Did they consider the susceptibility of the facility to flooding, erosion damage to this property or neighboring, etc? - Did they establish the importance of the services of the proposed facility? - Did they necessity of the facility in a waterfront location? - Did they establish the relationship of the proposed use to the comprehensive plan and floodplain management program? - Did they consider availability of alternative locations not subject to flooding or erosion damage? - Did they consider the safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles? - Did they consider the costs to local governments and the dangers associated with conducting search and rescue? - items D11-12 also 148-23C 1,2 Conditions for Variances when the criteria of A, D, E and;F(below)are met 148-F3—"A determination that the'8ranting of a variance will not truth in Incread' helghts adOltional threats to public safety or extraordinary public expense or create nu ns Can someone actually guarantee us that? Did anyone actually study the flood zones and edlevant factors? Yet a variance was subject to only one main condition; this"area of special flood hazard"was i of mentioned and does not appear to have been looked into. - FEMA, Assoc of Floodplain Mgrs, etc. — We all pay the price! Urged towns to change the rules for building near the water, or risk repeating the same mistakes over; suggested a moratorium on building near the water until such time as better plans could be adopted. They caution that we should reduce vulnerability to catastrophic storms; avoid the human suffering and disruption to life that ensues in catastrophic storms; make safer communities; alleviate the citizens tax dollars being spent to rebuild heavily damaged communities and properties. ". . .Communities are far more likely to be successfully sued for permitting redevelopment that results in future harm than they are for preventing it though adoption of new standards for public safety reasons . . ." (Hurricane Sandy Recovery: Using Mitigation to Rebuild Safer and More Sustainable Communities: Association of Floodplain Managers, Inc.) -4- { PROJECT SIZE • Full-Fledged Restaurant, not a Snack Bar: Features a 66 seat restaurant with over 1,100 sq ft of decks +/- • Elevation -The height of the restaurant and septic system will be elevated, obscure the water views and erase the charm and character of our special little hamlet forever, which is what we were trying to preserve.. • Scale— In a hamlet of 280 +/-families—is this really necessary to add more parking /congestion issues than we already have?Why not a simple snack bar, concession stand or lunch truck? How about a gazebo or two like the Jamesport marina; the water flows in, and the water flows out. LACK OF TRANSPARENCY • Building Plans— In early April 2014, NSWF broke from their stated goals and filed a site plan without informing community or donors; the New Suffolk community was noitified at the schoolhouse meeting of May 17th amid much protesting from community. • ZBA- Feb. 2013: Though the NSWF claims ". . . many showed support for the project," may I suggest this may be a distortion of reality. Most people in the community were simply unaware of the ZBA meeting; there was no notification by the NSWF did not notify any of the residents of the community. Remember too, in mid- winter, summer residents are not out and many flew the coop for southern climates. May I suggest that most of the letters written, were by the inner circle of the Board. • Financials/ Funding —This is a very big question mark. No financial statements have been provided ever; no voluntary disclosure of any kind; my verbal request denied. This topic was brought up time-after-time at the May 17th meeting and there were no answers. What is the cost? My guesstimate would be around $1.5 million, but I am not in the construction business, at least not this year. And what is the benefit to the community, over how many years? Is this a case of putting the cart before the horse? Could it really be true that this is strictly the NSWF's doing, the organization that is supposed to represent the community is being so unresponsive to the community? Is there someone, or some corporation, lurking in the background? Simply stated, for an educated group of people, this whole lack of information and community involvement, financial or otherwise, seems incongruous. As a matter of fact, at this meeting of May 17th, the first one in at least a year-and-a-half, only questions were taken, painstakingly written and no answers were given. They said comments would be taken after that, but the meeting ended abruptly. Well, thank God some people wedged their comments through the cracks, because they never even answered the questions they had so painstakingly written down. Have they done a business plan with menu in mind, and projections of the business they think they will do? Seasonal variations taken into account? What if they cannot sustain the restaurant after a year or two? Here are two links to projections: http://www.foodservicewarehouse.com/education/how-to-start-a-restaurant/projecting-sales-for-your-new- resta u ra nt/c28288.as px http://smallbusiness.chron.com/project-new-restaurant-yearly-revenue-38402.html • Performance Bond —Certainly, I hope this project is never approved, but if it has the misfortune to be approved, how do we know they have enough money to do it? If the project is left unfinished, at least the bond covers it. We cannot allow yet another nightmare on the hands of New Suffolk. If this project ever gets approved, it would be a travesty, but if it does I urge the Planning Board to insist the NSWF pay for a performance bond. -5- / • 0 • Commercial Project—A community organization (and 501 c3 corp) has a moral/fiduciary responsibility to be more sensitive than a developer. It is unconscionable that they did not involve the very community they had pledged to protect from development. Not only did they not involve the community, they were arrogant/ defensive at the meeting of 5117 The NSWF's representations to the community over the years, is that this property would not be developed; clearly, a 66 seat restaurant with an elevated and extensive septic field, does not represent non-development. The community has clearly replaced one developer for another. NYS CONSERVATION EASEMENT SEQR A whole other topic unto itself, but for now: This proposed project is contiguous to the "Critical Environmental Area" (CEA); that is, adjoining the park land which has the NYS Office of Parks & Recreation's Conservation Easement on it. Therefore, this project this project can then be automatically considered an—"impairment of the environmental characteristics of the CEA," (617.7cl iii). In addition, it seems the NSWF property itself could also be considered, or declared, a CEA; it possesses an "exceptional or unique character" and is the subject of"neighborhood significance", "open space" and "important aesthetic or scenic quality." I strongly urge the Planning Board to look further into the significance of this land and designate it a CEA, before we destroy what's left. VISION We are just beginning to explore our options but I, for one, would prefer not to have major development on this site. Instead of building, may I suggest that we explore the feasibility of creating a Special Park District afforded to the Town of Southold under NYS code. While either may be a bit complicated, it would be infinitely less complex than the NSWF proposed project and, I believe, have far less construction, maintenance, and environmental costs/ impacts. A couple of simple gazebos with benches affords the possibility of sitting shaded from the sun and breathing in the beauty of the area, yet allows water to flow in/out during Nor'easters and Superstorms; picnic tables and benches; perhaps a concession stand with simple foods or a lunch truck operating between the beach and this land, would all be simple and desirable. In addition, I would love to see a salute, via a small museum, to the US submarine industry, shell and weak fishing industries, one that would give a small peak into a day in the life of New Suffolk way back when. This would also be in keeping with the 2011 heritage tourism that Southold advocates. (no time to read Coastal Resiliency or Local Water Revitalization Project yet; not sure of relevancy) -6- JO waterfront parking haps://mail�com138571-111/aol-6/en-us/mail/PrintMossage.a. From: Barbara Schnitzier<barbara.schnitzlerGgmail.com> To: legendsdh<legendsdhQaol.com> Cc: Shannon SIMON<shannonsimon0optonline.net>;Barbara Butterworth<buttergilib*mac.com>;Angela Tese-Milner <a.tese-milnerQepitrustee.com> Subject: waterfront parking Date: Tue,Jun 26,2012 8:09 am Good morning Diane, I am glad we had a chance to talk yesterday. Afterward, I asked Shannon to make up something for the dashboards of employee cars so no one would get a note again, and she said you needed 351 1 had no idea how much staff you need to run Legends -thankfully, they are not all there at the same time! Re number of spaces *r yatlr employees for this ,s tic;., '0ur, thinking is that you could use three to replace the onto.. out -n#Av layout hsa deleted f"M First street, plus one or two more, for a maximum of five. Please use the first.. five 'spaces' on the left, along Captain Martys, parking head in, which will be the most convenient for you, and least likely to interfere with our, needs. we can assess how this works for everyone at the end of the year. I am copying Angela Tese-Milner and Barbara B on this, in case there are liability/insurance issues we should address. Thanks, please let us know if there are any problems, or. if anything good happens, that would be great to hear, too! ! Barbara , 1 of 1 5/30/2014 6:50 P11 • Various quotes from newspaper articles / NSWF literature " . . . with the rehabilitation of the north portion in line line vision we have long held, which includes a community center/snack bar, transient dockage, a small marina, recognition of our maritime history." suffolk times review 6/7/12 beth young " . . . The proceeds go toward the waterfront property, which includes the former Galley Ho restaurant property, a historic barn, a community garden and a portion of the beach on the south side of the site. In the future, the waterfront fund's plans to establish transient dockage, a small marina and a community center/snack bar. We envision it as a place where people can meet, grab coffee or lunch and read a newspaper." (suffolk times 3/19/13 cyndi murray) " Our goal is to keep the property intact so we can control what goes on there and what doesn't . ." and "We're looking for donors who are conservation-minded. . ." "We know what will never be developed here." (Suff Times 6/1/11) " . . .They are also speaking with a consortium of North Fork historical organizations about creating an exhibit on New Suffolk History in a barn on the property . . . but it doesn't tell our story, the maritime story." (Suffolk Times 6/1/13 beth young) " After years of concern over the threat of overdevelopment, together we crafted a resolution which protects a critical viewshed for New Suffolk and North Fork residents, " Mr. Bacon said in a statement. This private, public and nonprofit collaboration can be an example for others working to preserve the character of their communities in the future. (Suff Times 8/2/13 Cyndi Murray) Various NSWF brochures and literature: " We will renovate the three existing buildings on the property. Although the buildings are in various states of disrepair, all are eligible for landmark status, and every effort will be made to renovate them with a light touch, preserving the integrity, scale and "New Suffolkness' of the originals." "" . . . to raise funds to renovate this historic property for community use. Conservation easements will assure the preservation of its open space, scenic vistas and public access in perpetuity." (Hmmm, perpetuity doesn't last as long as it used to ) ". . .represents a major step tpward the community goal of preserving and protecting the waterfront property at the foot of Main Street in the bayside hamlet." "Planning is in progress for a renovated marina, community center, and snack bar on the remaining 2 acres if the property, leaving very generous open spaces and water access." (New Suffolk Waterfront House Tour 7/16/11) " . . . We will maintain the historic use of the site as a marina, with both transient and seasonal dockage . . . The Galley Ho will again be a place to snack waterside. . . " (Hmmm, doesn't lead us to believe a 66 seat restaurant) " to fulfill the community's desire for open space and waterfront access, and to protect forever the scenic vistas the property affords . . . Planning is in progress for a renovated marina, community center, and snack bar on the remaining 2 acres of the property, leaving very generous open spaces and water access." Raffle tickets summer 2010: - "The Peconic Land Trust (PLT) has purchased the 3.5 acre waterfront parcel in the heart of New Suffolk (across from Legends). New Suffolk will no longer be threatened by condominiums, boat storage racks and development that would block our beautiful water views and ruin the charm of our special little hamlet. . . May 30, 2014 Dear Chairman Wilcenski: Long Island's rich historical, maritime,and agricultural heritage is threatened daily.So much of what we once had on Long Island that could have enriched our lives is already gone and lost forever. Please don't allow this to happen in New Suffolk. New Suffolk is a unique hamlet with a maritime history to be proud of-the scallop&oyster industries, the site of the first submarine base in the United States,and its longstanding reputation as a premier fishing, boating and sailing destination. In keeping with its mission,the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund has been working hard to preserve New Suffolk's maritime history and heritage.As such,the Fund is determined to protect the three buildings on the Waterfront property,two of which have long been on the Society for Preservation of Long Island Antiquities' (SPLIA) list of historic buildings. The Galley Ho Some say it was where oyster shipping barrels were made in the 1800s. For a time, it was known as the Olsen House. From the 1930s until 1963,the Galley Ho was a beach-front"diner" and was called the "Coney Island Building". In the heyday 1930s, it fed the many fishermen who poured into New Suffolk before dawn, seeking the big spring weakfish runs in Peconic Bay.The restaurant and the adjacent building,which was the owner's home,were on what is now the parking lot for Town Beach. It is thought that this rugged New Suffolk building may have begun life as a barge due to its rough-hewn timber construction. In 1963,the Galley Ho was moved to the property on which it stands today and where it operated for many years as a popular restaurant and gathering place. i The Barn According to the Division for Historic Preservation, NYS Parks and Recreation, it was known as the "Houston Barn." Built sometime during the 19th century,this"21/2 story gable roof shipyard building of vertical boarding with tree wide doors" stands proudly in the center of the Waterfront property. Interestingly, New Suffolk resident Floyd Houston built models of the USS Holland submarine to scale, quite possibly in or near the historic Houston Barn. In 1957, Mr. Houston presented the Mariners Museum at Newport News,Virginia with one of the Holland models and another model to the Whitaker Historical Collection,which had provided him with the material he needed, including photographs, plans,stories,and more to build the models. In times past,through a shared arrangement with the Southold Historical Society,this wonderful gift was seen at the Horton Point Lighthouse Nautical Museum from May through October. Unfortunately,on Long Island,there continues to be far too many historic structures lost. Right now in New Suffolk, it is sad knowing that there are a few individuals and business owners who want nothing better than to see our history obliterated and leveled to the ground just to get a bigger, better view of the Bay. Demolishing important pieces of New Suffolk and Southold Town's history cannot be an option here.As a New Suffolk resident since 1986, a New Suffolk Waterfront Fund volunteer from Day One,and current Vice-Chair of the New Suffolk Waterfront Board, I respectfully request that the Planning Board approve the site plan before you now,so that the Houston Barn will be protected and our beloved Galley Ho can be restored to usefulness once again. Respectfully submitted, Linda Auriemma 945 Fanning Rd. New Suffolk FOR OFFICE SE ONLY XJ—1y L BUILDINGSTRUCTUR VENTORY FORM. UNIQUE SITE NO .� DIVISION FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION QUAD NEW YORK STATE PARKS AND RECREATION SERIES ALBANY,NEW YORK (51 S)474-0479 ` NEG NO r �t YOUR NAM `mn S u h ld/SPL 3. 9 E wn of oto IAz DATE December 2 1 85 YOUR ADDRESS Town Hall. Main Road }`TELEPHONE 516765-1892 ` SOuthOld L. I. ::N.Y. 19.?l oRGAN(zATtoN (if any): Town"'Community Development Office Z. 3 i`i`t IDENTIFICATIONn ��t; rt SXV BUILDING NAMES) R ur t w s he Olsen House) "i--"1:COUNTY: Suffolk TOWN/CITY: Southold VILLAGE:New`Suffolk YrF` Y 3 STREET.-LOCATION Fto t of Main Street. overlooking the harbor a=Y 4 OWNERSHIP - a public y� `:b private ��t _ } .. . tii c c i. Atom. r`` s.3�.t t i rr,t}f Utz s 5 PRESENT OWNS D. .°BlalkJ a k _ F R.. :USE: .Orl anal: s•�st21^8IIt ,Present Restaurant 7 ACCESSIBILITY TO PUBLI `_ ® K' ❑ Y rfy�� r G Extenar visible from public road Yes No = x - ' `'` Interior accessible:*, .. latn''Yes=restaurant .DESCRIPTION i � x� r ' fr,s�-ts 2 K BUILDING - a clapboard ❑ b. stone-❑ r;c Krick ❑ ' d board and batten❑ �> Mt4TL•RIAL'' rt�de cobblestone ❑ f shingles ® ,g stucco ❑ Jother :p` r I. STRUCTURAL a wood frame watt interlocking joints ❑ k ic ,r Yr�'r YSTL'M b wood frame with light. ` $ .ght members �if knavrt) r r c +masonry load belting walls❑ `P `'f �i `� r +t s _ ;�s+ Y metal (explain) r e. ;other 10. CONDITION excellent ❑ p gopd ® c fair ❑ d. deteriorated. ❑ 'xthrr _ 11. INTEGRITY a original site ❑ ,b..moved CK]. if so when?(Ce..'' 20/22. yr8ag0*, X. list or alterations and dates Cf known) x st St. k Chimney. and 1 stgry addition on south. : r i? > tt�-, t r .* „ 'r f 'N E r 4'4 �. i .� A''�a�•, t .1- : >''�� t„$4 '�x��}�, .'uk� j f r"r ,��,3 ° 12 PHOTO NS—rsm, IY 2 `: k% ; r ` s 13 MAP . �. utham� o N.Y.S. DOT So t n Quad '` Facade and south side I Fron the southCO r i • � .�.. x'r� +'ta r y k�� .a � • Y'rW Ir • n t 26 = � ' w4 o 00 ;� • r. z .ti •• � _ • NS-29 14. THREATS TO BUILDING a.none known b.zoning❑ 'c roads ❑ d. developers ❑ e. deterioration Q i ,J. 'other::Developers proposed to'' move buildin�,�' 15. RELATED OUTBUILDINGS AND,PROPEkTy tear 'it down or . to enlarge it. F,; a. barn❑ b carriage houses 0 c garage ❑ _ ' d. privy ❑ i'�e'shed ❑ f: greenhouse ❑ 1 B`s OP ❑'w ,fh gardens ❑ landsca a features370Dne J other p Viking r: 16. SURROUNDINGS^'OF 1'Hir $UILDING (check more than one if necessaryY a open land ❑ r. i. woodland ❑ e,s� tteredbuildings 1 id densew built up ❑ e commercia):;C� f industrial ❑. ,.;g. residential ❑ h other overlooks the harbor, ':the`doeks - and off ers a view of Nassar Point 17. INTERRELATIONSHIP OF BUILDING:AND SURROUNDINGS `,(Indicate if;buildiit or stucture;is in an historic district) ;`f > p The .restaurant :faces :the harbor: and: its `docks. . Even .though the area .in which it is located has dost many of its buildings, -4the area is active with Strong evidencesof ,work connected with the harbor- and manual activity. 18. OTHER NOTABLE FEATURES OF BUILDING AND SITE .(including interior features if known) •There .bre 'boats .docked on' shore as well as in the water. It_Js a uniquely beautiful .setting which needs careful planning for the future. The Galley-Ho Restaurant fits loosely 'into ' a cluster ;with the .Post. •Office and "Houston's barn" SIGNIFICANCE i9. DATE OF INITIAL CONSTRUCTION: ( rr, 1$99 ,ARCHITECT: BUILDER: F 20. HISTORICAL AND ARCHITECTURAL IMPORTANCE. -.The Galley Ho' Restaurant is an important feature of the New Suffolk waterfront, in terms of its social function, since it is a popular gathering place and because ;"its y , mrhitectural character blends into the local atmoephere.' 12 story, gable -roof, red shingle structure with porch +} on east and modern flat roof extension on south. 21. SOURCES-Butterworth, Marjorie, Moore. The New Suffolk1'`Storv. Greenport 1983•P. 34 *Blaikiev1? Conversation Dec.' 3, 1985 , 22. rHEN1E: Form prepared by Rosemary Skye Moritt, Research Assistant. 7 L . .NS-Z9 laf f tk .. VOL. CXXVII No. 16 Thttrsday, October 27, 1983 k. Serving Southold Town,Shelter Island Town and the Incorporated Village of .jam J � "'"�,�,` '.� Ar '}{•O, zeft a'A'".+yam .'- -.. • ��`t.. �R FOCUS OF ATTENTION--The North Fork Shipyard site in New Suffolk project will be the subject of a public has been proposed for a 24-unit condominium development. The Southold Town Hall. BUILDING STRUCTUR VENTORY FORM UNIQUE SITO T ' DIVISION FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION ? QUAD NEW YORK STATE PARKS AND RECREATION SERIES ALBANY,.NEW YORK (,518)474-047'9 NEG. N0. '�M *Town of Southold/SPLIA YOUR NAME iDATE _December 23. 1985 t 2 r i 1r 1 `,�(sgq< M�.A•�y i �r 1 5 t �',;p.0 t , Y, YOUR ADDRESS Town r Ha11. Main Road TELEPHONE, 516176 -1892 f Southold Z.S. N.Y.11971 t� ti' ORGANIZATION (if any):8outhold TowYl COmmunitV DeVelOAmerit Office YI(`r,'1i.;. W,."i J ' t',• t �{ i t r M_ 7 i trr' vt,�'�'-k`5yft 1'�r,.1w�^. �+y M,'%w }.� ` r t, ~ry 'I r} tti� '` # ,R'. >tt * � # yt�'tR it #_ * tR >ft � # * ��r# # # �r♦t h#y # rR # # #. � tk ,k ft � # # F • ' + : r,t 6.;: y i IDENTIFICATION. , � BUILDING NAMES) `Houston 8 } 2 -S uffolk TOWN/CjTY;`SOuthold 'VILLAGE.`New Suffolk ' 3 :STREET' LOCATION:Hast of First Street, behind the Post Office ' , ` Er 4 OWNERSHIP: ."' a. pubLc ❑` >b private �f ._ 7aw• �K r ,; a�` �}At s r , ° ,s r+ ADDRESS 'Southold �5 PRESENT OWNER Arthur Kennlff `ash S-11t,,S �,, 6 USE: Original: ; r Preseni t0 rage s S � f' rt '7G ACCESSIBILITY TO - ?UBLIC '' �'Externor vislble from public iroad Yes r:,'�1TV b�.'❑ `T /•<"r ` ,;``��'tF'T P /Jy.� V�} 1 L T" y�fTi! '� r' <f; r FFF InerExpain tior accessible l DESCRIPTION r, � W�,r '• :::t � .r:: t .j !�� t �'s.a4�ti 1.(.'jtfh ! .t.r} h" °1,� { !'�� 1. f'. - t t 1 ;r ;;i s!z BUILDING :` K; �a•:clapboard'❑ b'.stone Q t �{ �o brick ❑ r�� board and batten® ` , 'St >,tr ��ki r; rM° MATERIAL �•e cobblestone ❑ f shingles 0 ;':g stu co ❑ �+ ,rOthe ,�r��tih�E"�'Aef.,?Z"C' <..�t�.>� t 1.� t \: I ) t'..� t .i ;�f/ S ~ty -Fl.' r ix:'�,r� �'�l �y .••y�'�y+....'U�'' ° {t.: 1., y ry.l � .'__ --r ', .,'• -:.:t ,'1 1t�fY� ) STRUCTURAL a. wood frame with interlocking joints ❑ �� 1 . 'z�zi i µ��yr}" f • a �; y ; SYSTEM s b. wood frame with light ''® members a � r (if knavn) ' .�c 'masonry ,load bear in WaI1S❑ +F° g `metal (explain) ' s, e. other r, t 10 .CONDITION a excellen[ ❑ b. good ® c. fair ❑ d. deteriorated I I INTEGRITY a. original site X1 b. moved ❑ if so,when? c c list major .alterations and dates.(if known) ray }T. NS-rsm IV 13 MAP N.Y,S•` DOT Southampton Quad From the east l k� ' a .1 H r`, 7•r til.(!' �yJ �rE^ s �«{f {+t r Q • • • <0 \, _, G • • l k ,R a • . •___� ht 26 Rf I film in ,...rte..P��t..ia�, �• >sfi.'�� NS-30 14. THREATS TO BUILDING a.,none known ❑ b.zoning❑ c. roads ❑ d. developers ® e. deterioration El (.,.other: I5 RELATED OUTBUILDINGS AND PROPERTY i:` a: barn❑ b.carriage house ❑ c.,garage ❑ d.'privy Ele,shed ❑ _ f. greenhouse ❑ r: g. shop [�; gardens i. landscapefeatures: The b rri is in the harbor area J other:Pi�rrr►»nded by boats o- & materials connec- 16. SURROUNDINGS.OF THE BUILDING (check more than one if necessary) ted w. harbor lif a.open land ❑ h : b. woodland. ❑ c scattered.buildings ;eLdensely bwlt up'.❑ e. commercial ❑ f..industria l ❑ g. residential ❑ h other I Cr 17: INTERRELATIONSHIP OF BUILDING AND SURROUNDINGS: (Indicate if building or structure is in an historic district) , The barn fits loosely intola' cluster with the Post Office and the Galley Ho Restaurant. There are, boats docked around pit. Even4though .the area has lost many of its buildings, the. area is active with strong evidence of work connected wit the haror. 18. OTHER.NOTABLE FEATURES OF BUILDING AND SITE (including m erior features Known),: . There are boats docked on shore as well as in the water. Ibis a uniquely beautiful .setting: which needs careful planning for_ the future. SIGNIFICANCE 19. DATE OF INITIAL CONSTRUCTION: l`0+�, 'Pntury 19th -o. ARCHITECT: f BUILDER: 20. HISTORICAL AND ARCHITECTURAL IMPORTANCE: 22 story, gable roof shipyard building of vertical boarding with -tree wide doors on both first -and second floor levels. 2L' SOURCES: Interview Wm Yetter 12/27/$5 22. THEME: Form prepared by Rosemary Skye Moritt, Research Assistant. Lanza, Heather From: Wayne Goldberg <wmg1951@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 7:30 AM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: NSW Hello Heather I live on 4th Street in New Suffolk and support the New Suffolk Waterfront's plans to renovate the Galley Ho. Respectfully Wayne Goldberg i Lanza, Heather From: Tom Gleason <tom.gleason@qnetic.com> Sent: Friday, May 30, 201412:53 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: NSWF (correction) Heather, My wife Nancy made a few minor corrections to my email (in blue). Thanks, Tom Heather, Given the remarkable efforts and results achieved thus far by the NSWF and the legions of dedicated New Suffolk volunteers, we would hope that the town continues to support the implementation of the site plan. We are disappointed in and sad about many of the naysayers who are spreading misinformation either based on self- serving interests or lack of participation, understanding or willingness to sit down and discuss a plan or compromise. It is some of these same naysayers who have either given little or no support to the 6 year community effort(sweat equity and/or donations)of striving to make the waterfront beautiful, self-sustaining and something the community can be proud of. It is astounding how short people's memories are regarding the state of the property and intended future use (boat racks/condos) prior to the NSWF initiative. As far as the Galley Ho restoration is concerned, it should be clear that the scope-of-use will be modest and in line with the laid-back feel of the hamlet Oust like it used to be). This has always been the goal and that shouldn't change. Thank You, Tom & Nancy Gleason Lanza, Heather From: Charlene Goldberg <ceg604@grnail.corn> Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 7:56 AM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: Waterfront Hi Heather, yes I am in support of the waterfront plans. Charlene Goldberg (4th Street,New Suffolk) , i • Lanza, Heather From: lucille field goodman <musicfield@optonline.net> Sent: Friday, May 30, 201410:08 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: New Suffolk Waterfront Dear Ms. Lanza: We residents of New Suffolk have been urged to write to you with our response to the plan put forward by the NSWF Board. regarding a restaurant, cesspool, parking and other accompanying requirements. My partner and I, Lucille Field, have owned a house at 315 Fourth Street in New Suffolk since July 1980. We love our home, neighbors, and the North Fork. My daughter was married on our front lawn; our grandchildren played and enjoyed our end of block beach(before Sandy, that is,) our music studios have brought music lessons and concerts to our hamlet. Most of all, we burst with pride at the saving of our waterfront from overdevelopment, preserving it for our community for generations to come. A restaurant of possibly 66 customers had not been under discussion. There was mention of a possible snack bar or cafe, but not the entity in the Board's current plan. Come to New Suffolk and see it in motion down by the waterfront. See the parking issues, the boating activities, Legend's in action,the public beach. all being enjoyed in our small hamlet. Then add to it another full size restaurant, the view being encroached upon, no room for a picnic, or just sitting on a bench and watching the boats sail by on the small piece of property left natural for simple pleasures. I hope the wishes of all of New Suffolkers can be addressed, without dividing them, but arriving at a fair decision that will keep the character and the charm of our hamlet, where we can enjoy what Mother Nature has given us and keep it safe and beautiful in its open space. And don't forget to see the wonderful community vegetable gardens when they are laden with multiple edibles, under the watchful and caring eye of Shannon Simon and our New Suffolk gardeners. With all best wishes, Lucille Field i Lanza, Heather From: Joan Robbins <joanrnewt13@yahoo.com> Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 2:32 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: New Suffolk Site Plan I applaud the proposed site plan for the historic New Suffolk waterfront. I lived in New Suffolk for over 50 years, in a house on Main Street with a clear view of the waterfront from my driveway. I saw a lot. I was a member of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund Board for a number of years, and I worked and helped to defeat four outrageous proposals for development of the waterfront: condos, boat racks, and yacht clubs. Now I see a plan for modest and apprpriate usage and I am in favor of it. Joan B. Robbins, 1500 Brecknock Road-- 140, Greenport,NY 11944 1 � PATRICIALOWRY (15uOLD HARBOR ROAD mevvSUFFOLK NYD9so Mr. Ouna|dVVUcenyki . May 30, 2Q14 Chairman ofthe Board Planning Department Town Hall Annex Building ` Southold NY11971 Dear MrVVUcenoki As a member of the board of the NSWF, I strongly endorse the site plan which restores the use ufthe Galley Hoonce again tnarestaurant after years o[abandonment. My husband, )ohn Touhey, and I have owned the Cutchogue Diner for 25 years and have been members of Southold Town since 1978, As (practically) old timers we have experienced the many iterations of the Galley Ho and we mourn its absence. Once the centerpiece of a bus- tling waterside hamlet, it is now one of the hew commercial buildings remaining in our"down- town". Restoring the Galley Hu |smstep towards recreating the New Suffolk ofour past while re- specting thepmescmtmndhutunaneedsofNew/8uffo|k. OurwmhmrfrnntwOinemerbmbostUng again the way it was even 30 years ago, but it is wonderful to imagine a waterfront park with an eating establishment where we can watch the Wednesday night races and sip a cocktail or grab a snack and watch kids cartwheel on the grass. What a delightful addition to our com- munity! The Board of the NSWF plans to maintain tight control over the caf6 so that it stays in line with their vision not atenant's vision, The NSVVFwill embark ona Request for Proposal pro- cess |norder to find the appropriate tenant for the Galley Ho. With input from the community, the RFP will clearly spell out the details mfthe operation o[the restaurant that the tenant must abide by including, but not limited to: ambiance, menu, pricing, noise restrictions, park- ing requirements, and garbage remnnwm), In deciding on a tenant for the Galley Mo the deci- sion will be heavily weighted in favor of the business that demonstrates an understanding and ec|'amnvviUbmheew>)yweighted |mfavoro[thebus|neaathatdemmmnstratesanwnderstmnd|ngand a willingness to become part of the fabric of our community. The NSWF is going to be very particular about finding the correct tenant who will live amongst aUofus. I support the NSWF plans for the Galley Ho because it brings back a much-needed and unique gathering spot for our community. Once again the Galley Hnwill bethe anchor of the New Suffolk Waterfront. S|noeon|& Patricia Lowry Lanza, Heather From: Andy Uterano <auterano@sumthing.com> Sent: Friday, May 30, 2014 4:38 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: New Suffolk waterfront project Dear Ms. Lanza. Your name was given to me via e-mail by a neighbor Ms.Shannon Simon in order to express our support for the New Suffolk Waterfront Project.My name is Andy Uterano and have lived at 17095 Main street,coner of 2"d,for 23 years. Originally my wife and I were in support of the NSWF purchase for land preservation and to construct a seasonal snack bar or cafe for a town gathering place. NSWF most recent proposal for a 66 seat year round restaurant contradicts the original sight plan that so many in the town supported. The new proposal will only bring more traffic,waste, noise to our waterfront not to mention a parking nightmare for the families that live within a few blocks of the proposed restaurant. It is for the above mentioned reasons that my wife and I cannot support this new expanded proposal and hope that the NSWF council holds more town meetings to get a consensus on what the majority of the families in New Suffolk will support. Sincerely Andy&Jacque Uterano i • . PEO NIC LAND TRUST qiif May 30,2014 Heather Lanza,AICP Town of Southold Planning Board P.O.Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: New Suffolk Waterfront Fund Application Dear Heather: I am writing on behalf of the Peconic Land Trust Board of Directors in strong support of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund's application before the Southold Town Planning Board to renovate the Galley Ho building for use as a small restaurant. From its inception, the community effort to acquire,protect,and revitalize the waterfront property has seen a steady string of successes. The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund Board has built upon each success,patiently and consistently moving the process forward while remaining true to the original intent of the project as envisioned and discussed openly with input from the broader community.All of us at the Trust continue to be extremely impressed by the broad base of support for the effort and the hard work and dedication of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund Board of Directors and community volunteers. While it is never possible to have complete unanimity on any worthwhile project,we at the Trust have the highest degree of confidence in the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund Board.We believe they will continue to be respectful and responsive to the broader hopes and aspirations of the community. The effort needs the Town of Southold's help to achieve another milestone.I urge you to approve their application and allow the project to continue to evolve. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of their application. Sincerely, Tim Caufield Vice-President Ow, Lanza, ether From: legendsdh@aol.com Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 12:40 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: Fwd: Dianne Please feel free to forward New Suffolk Concerns Heather, This letter was originally written to me with "Hi Diane." I had asked Bill Grella to send it US Mail to the Planning Board and Committee Members, but he didn't get to it. I now asked him if I had his permission to send his letter via email to the Planning Board on his behalf and he said yes (pis see Subject up top). Can you confirm that this format is acceptable and his concerns will be addressed/considered? Thank you, Diane -----Original Message----- — - From: William Grella <wildoc2@yahoo.com> To: legendsdh <legendsdh@aol.com> Sent: Thu, May 29, 2014 10:30 am Subject: Dianne Please feel free to forward New Suffolk Concerns To Whom it may concern, There is a planning board meeting on June 2 at bpm to address the proposal presented by the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund (NSWF), which I am opposed to. I trust this meeting will help stop the momentum for this poorly thought out, ill fated plan and return to a more sane objective of preserving one of the last gems on Long Island. I would like not to make this an us vs. them situation, since I do believe each person has what they think is the best solution for the property. We happen to disagree on what that is. Personally, I don't see much difference between this or the 3 story boat racks or condos previously proposed for this site. Change is inevitable but I would like to be on the side of preservation and not turning the North Fork into another one of the Hamptons. Our family is directly affected by this proposal, with our home on 1 st street being in close proximity to the site. We feel we have more invested in what happens there than say someone living on Harbor lane or any other streets further away from 1 st Street. Our family gave over $30,000.00 to support the fund. We also invested considerable amount our time and labor for community events. My partner Gary established a 5K marathon and continued several years in a row to help support the property. We did this in good faith, with the understanding that the site would be preserved for the people of New Suffolk. I realize that other people gave more money and hours of their time than we have but I don't think this should be all that determines the outcome of this wonderful property. I Gary"was previously on the0ard of the NSWF but time comrWents due to the effects of Sandy on our primary residence on 1 st Street and 2 small children have been occupying our time. Since leaving the board we have not had questions answered regarding money collected from the last 5K Gary coordinated. No financial information has been forthcoming. The Peconic Land Trust preservation fund gave us money initially for what we assumed would be preservation. We were expecting something along the lines of Founders landing for the use of the town, not for the promotion and eventual destruction of what we all love about New Suffolk. I know it's being stated that only 7% of the property will be used for commercial use, but if that 7% destroys the hamlet it doesn't matter if it were 100% commercial. I agree with the line "Save What's Left" and trust that that can still be accomplished here. Kind regards William F. GrellaX.D. 2 Lanza, Heather From: Joe & Ellie <joeele45@optonline.net> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 5:18 PM To: Lanza, Heather Cc: newsuffolkfund@gmail.com Subject: New/suffolk Waterfront Fund Ms. Lanza and Planning Board, As a long time resident of New Suffolk, I have seen the east side of First Street go from a wall of buildings and oyster shell piles to a decrepit, falling down mess of grand proportions. Under the former ownership it was poorly used and abused. Fortunately the Waterfront Fund came along with some great ideas and help in the form of money, knowledgeable people and the drive to do something good with this property.Today we see the beginning results of all of this effort. A beautiful cleaned up area with raised and stabilized bulkheads that will help protect the adjacent First Street properties from wave action when the next big storm hits. An area all of our residents and visitors can enjoy. With all the good work and intentions,we would like to see the Planning Board support the proposed site plan as we do. Thank you for your help and consideration in this matter Respectfully, Joe & Eleanore Polashock 2625 Jackson St. New Suffolk, NY 11956 t Lanza, Heather From: ANNE MARINO <ANMARINO@tommy.com> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 5:46 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: new suffolk waterfront Mr. Brian Cummings, Planner Southold Town Planning Department 53095 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY Dear Mr.Cummings, I am a New Suffolk home owner and resident. I was drawn to the North Fork of Long Island,and particularly New Suffolk because of its warmth,character and charm. Having grown up in Smithtown, Long Island,while it was mostly potato farms(now gone forever) I saw first-hand how a beautiful place can quickly become lost if not for a commitment to preserve and maintain open space and historic properties. I am writing today in support of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund (NSWF) project,as I have recently learned about self-serving people who are opposing the project by giving out false information in order to further their own agenda. Shame on them!! There is so much to celebrate already in terms of what has been accomplished by NSWF.The bulkhead and marina are being re-built, maintaining the historic use of the property.The Galley-ho,which so many of us miss terribly, is being renovated and restored to bring back our casual, bayside cafe where we can grab a quick bite on a nice day.Already, thanks to the hard work, passion and commitment by NSWF to making the waterfront accessible, maintain open space and offer a low-key eating establishment,there is growing community spirit and pride. Let us not forget that thanks to the efforts of this group,the New Suffolk waterfront was saved from becoming a boat storage facility! I acknowledge that everyone is entitled to an opinion, but it is unfathomable to me that there are residents in New Suffolk who could possibly see what this tireless group of caring volunteers is providing as a negative?? It can only be that they have been fed misleading information in order to create fear... I am very proud of what NSWF has accomplished to date and look forward to what is soon to come. Thank you, Anne Marino 1 i • Lanza, Heather From: Nancy Langmack <nancy.Iangmack@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 8:33 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: I support the NSWF Ms. Lanza, I am a New Suffolk resident who supports the Waterfront's plans to restore the Galley Ho Restaurant. Because this is a small village, I would like to keep my support anonymous. (Please keep this email and my support confidential.). Thank you! Nancy Langmack New Suffolk i Lanza, Heather From: Brigitte Gibbons <bgibbons@optimum.net> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 9:12 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: New Suffolk Waterfront Hi! Another voice from New Suffolk. I used to LOVE the Galley Ho for light lunches and burgers. I would like to see it come to life again. The Galley Ho is PART OF NEW SUFFOLK,just as much as Legends. Both restaurants would not be in competition -they would serve a greater variety of customers. Let us rebuit the Galley Ho! Sincerely, Brigitte Gibbons 1 Lanza, Heather From: Joseph <bengal66@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 10:11 PM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: Re: New Suffolk Waterfront Development Proposal Dear Ms. Lanza; My name is Joseph Barisic. I am 48 years old and I live full time in New Suffolk on New Suffolk Road. I have two children ages 5 and 8 who attend the New Suffolk School. My mother Anna Barisic,who is 88 years old also lives here in New Suffolk as well as her brother Nick Mandusic who is 91 years old. We have been here since 1971. I just want to write to you on behalf of myself and of both my Mom and Uncle who are not quite as internet savvy. We love the new proposal that the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund has designed and submitted for approval. We loved the old Galley Ho restaurant years ago when it was up and running and we would love to see something similar return to our waterfront. The raised septic system and the wraparound decking on the restaurant will be just great as well as having the docks rebuilt. Please do not let a very vocal minority fool you. The majority of people in New Suffolk really want the project to be built as designed and suggested. I have spoken to nearly half the people in town personally and they are all for it. Also, the competition of another restaurant in town might tame the high prices at Legends, and a casual dockside restaurant is just what my kids need when they are coming off the beach and want a bite to eat in their wet bathing suits, or stop in by boat. The proposed design is tastefully done and well thought out and we love it! Thank you Joseph Barisic 631 734 5532 Disclaimer: Sender is not a United States Securities Dealer or Broker or United States Investment Adviser. This email letter and any and all attachments and related documents are never considered to be a solicitation for any purpose in any form or content. Upon receipt of these documents you, as the Recipient, hereby acknowledge this Warning and Disclaimer. These Confidential communications are protected under Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act 15 USC, Subchapter 1, sections 6801-6809 and other laws addressing the disclosure of Non-Public Personal Information. Confidential: The contents of this message, together with any attachments, are intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed and may contain information that is legally privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure. This communication is for information purposes only and should not be regarded as an offer to sell or as a solicitation of an offer to buy any financial product, an official confirmation of any transaction, or as an official statement of the Sender or its Principals. Email transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free. The Sender, its affiliates and or assigns does not represent that this information is complete or accurate and it should not be relied upon as such. This transmission is covered by attorney client privilege, all information is subject to change without notice. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message, or any attachment, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error,please notify the original sender by return E-mail and delete this message, along with any attachments, from your computer. Thank you. I Lanza, Heather From: Joni <pedrogft@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 10:52 PM r i To: Lanza, Heather Subject: In Support of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund Dear Ms. Lanza, There are squeaky wheels banding together to garner support for their selfish and self-serving opposition to the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund project. Preservation of the waterfront in New Suffolk has been painstaking and brilliantly designed to keep what we have from disappearing and to create a welcoming place for the community to gather and grab a bite to eat. There are those calling for the destruction of the historic barn as well as the other buildings to give Legends customers and other first street residents an unobstructed waterfront view. These and other pivotal comments at the NSWF informational meeting in New Suffolk School House on 5/17 shed a light on how little those people are willing to give of themselves and contribute nothing but ill will and community dissent. Before there was a NSWF there was little feeling of community in New Suffolk. Through the tireless and generous efforts of the many volunteers whom brought races, chowder festivals, house tours, art shows, etc. the community has come together and saved the waterfront, assuring its preservation. Tearing down the Galley Ho, our beautiful and historical barn as well as any of the buildings on the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund property, was never a consideration for the NSWF. The goal has always been, and will always be, to preserve what is there to the best of their abilities and create a gathering spot for the community with food and a place to enjoy the view. The goal is not to create an expansive view for the first street residents and businesses. The raising and reconstruction of bulkheads and docks are beneficial to the First Street properties that face them, protecting the property from normal flood damage. Another disturbing example of the self serving and narrow-minded comments that were made at the community information meeting was criticism regarding how the restoration of the beach dune and planting of sea grass on the southern piece purchased by Mr. Bacon ruins the view. Birds and animals survival depend on projects that restore our bays and beaches and try to protect them from erosion. Of any of the formerly proposed projects that were thwarted by the NSWF, none would have made any effort to conserve our waterways, beaches or even the effects their traffic and destruction would have had on our hamlet as the NSWF has so carefully considered. The major opposition and petition generators are those who aim to divide rather than bring together the thoughts and efforts of the community to preserve and enjoy the history and beauty of New Suffolk. Evidence of the support and positive feelings for the NSWF was seen at the Chowder festival on 5/24 that drew hundreds of residents and other NSWF supporters to enjoy delicious food, cold drinks, music, a chance to welcome back our neighbors and catch up after a long winter. The excitement of the progress that they helped make possible through donations, service and participation was overwhelming. That is community and the evidence of caring and careful planning. I am proudly a resident of New Suffolk and have whole-heartedly supported the NSWF project since its inception. It is a shining example of what a community and its supporters are capable of achieving to help preserve the character and history of the North Fork of Long Island. Sincerely, Joni Friedman i Southold Town Planning Board Heather Lanza Southold, NY May 29, 2014 Dear Southold Town Planning Board. As seasonal residents of New Suffolk for the last 50 years and year round residents for the last 10 years we write this letter to offer our support for the New Suffolk Waterfront Board Site Plan for the proposed development of the waterfront area in New Suffolk. Six years ago when the plan was first brought forward there was open discussion on how to best use this property and many options were discussed. It was always unanimously agreed that there would have to be something on this property that could generate income and the obvious choice was to bring back the Galley Ho. At the time there was strong support for this use. It is concerning to us now that we are at the point where all those years of hard work and fund raising have finally produced a workable plan that there are such negative sentiments. Change is hard, we know, but for the little hamlet of New Suffolk to be able to support this beautiful waterfront property there must be an income producing business. When you consider some of the previous proposed development plans for this area this site plan is a positive step toward maintaining the pristine nature of this area and preserving a beautiful waterfront. We ask that the Town Board please support this plan as The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund completes their mission. This is an honest and hard-working group of volunteers whose only goal has been to preserve a beautiful piece of property and enrich our hamlet. To question their motives and fiscal responsibility now because a handful of people are having second thoughts should not be allowed to overshadow all the great work that they have done. With respect, Susan and Jim Given 159 Old Harbor Rd. New Suffolk, NY 11956 Lanza, Heather From: wfx2@aol.com Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 9:04 AM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: galley ho To the Members of the Southold Planning Board: - The preservation and use of the Galley Ho, rather than its destruction or relegation to historical curio, is responsible, proportionate and will represent a great asset to our c6mmunity. While some of the opposition to the plan may be well-intentioned, it's my belief that the distortion and mischaracterization coming from Diane Harkoff-owner of Legends-is little more that the naked desire to keep all aspects of her privileged position intact. For all her stated environmental concerns, what it comes down to is that Ms. Harkoff doesn't want competition. It would be a great injustice if the hard work and diligence of the Waterfront Fund to create an attractive and altogether appropriate use for this area is allowed to be undermined by the fearfulness and narrow self-interest of those seeking only to maintain the status quo. Respectfully, Bill Finkelstein New Suffolk Lanza, Heather From: dschwatka@aol.com Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 9:00 AM To: Lanza, Heather Subject: New Suffolk Waterfront Hearing this evening Dear Ms Lanza, I wanted to write to you to give my support to the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund. As the founder of the original New Suffolk Waterfront Committee and then the New Suffolk Waterfront 501C# organization, I can attest to the fact that a small waterfront restaurant, ideally in a renovated Galley Ho, was always part of the organization's stated vision. Members of the community voiced their opinions that they were looking not only to preserve open space and views over the Peconic Bay, but also to reinvigorate the property with some places for people to gather and enjoy the place. This was a natural reaction to the fact that a fire had destroyed their beloved general store and post office and that the Galley Ho, a long time meeting place for a casual dinner by the beach, lay empty due to feud between the buildings owner and the restauranteur who was renting the property from him. The Waterfront Fund has been true to their mission and fought very hard to raise the funds and do the years of work it took to buy and protect this property. In addition they have been responsible stewards, repairing the bulk head and preserving the marina, also a treasured element of New Suffolk's waterfront. The renovation of the Galley Ho building and construction of safe septic and adequate parking will set this property up for years of enjoyment by New Suffolk and surrounding communities. I expect that after the building is renovated, the NSWF Board will go slowly in how it uses the building, letting it evolve into whatever makes the most sense, "snack bar', full 66 seat restaurant, part-time community center...., the important thing is to go forward with the plan at this time so that their are options for community enjoyment of the property beyond just scenic vistas. There has been a great deal of misinformation about this project recently and I suspect it has been from Legends, who clearly has a conflict. They would be better served to worry about their own septic which needs pumping almost daily and their own parking of which they do not have enough. The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund has protected and preserved the heart of New Suffolk and I believe and that, along with the Peconic Land Trust, (who holds our easement), they will be responsible and responsive stewards of this property, for many years to come. It is in their Charter. Yours respectfully, Diana Schwatka, 520 George Road, New Suffolk 1 Lauren K. Grant PO Box 648-2980 Grathwohl Road New Suffolk, NY 11956 May 28,2014 To: Donald Wilcenski, President of the Southold Town Planning Board and Members of the Board Dear Mr. Wilcenski and Members of the Board, The Galley Ho has been an institution of sorts on the New Suffolk Waterfront since 1963 and the fact that an attempt is being made to bring it back into use is a definite plus,especially with the renovations as presented to the Town of Southold Planning Board. I am a member of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund's Board of Directors,and past president of the New Suffolk Civic Association and past president of the Cutchogue-New Suffolk Chamber of Commerce. As a longtime resident of New Suffolk and prior to that, Cutchogue,I have experienced the pros and cons of having two eating establishments in New Suffolk and to the best of my recollection, there were clearly more positives than negatives and the two coexisted successfully without dissension. While President of the New Suffolk Civic Association,my first action was to create a subcommittee called the"Marina Revitalization Committee"to monitor the regulatory approval process and construction of the proposed Cove View Marina project by the Raynor family,the then owners of the New Suffolk Waterfront Property.When the Cove View Marina project failed,the Rayor family then proposed a high and dry boat storage facility called"Matt-A-Mar On the Bay".At this junction the community started looking for a way to protect the waterfront property in some way and in 2005 the"Marina Revitalization Committee"was abolished and the"New Suffolk Waterfront Committee"was created. They were tasked with looking into ways to keep the high and dry boat storage proposal from coming to fiuition and to explore the possibility of raising funds to purchase the waterfront property from the Raynor family.The Waterfront Committee then became an independent organization in 2008 under the name of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund, Inc.,a not-for profit group. Having worked with the Waterfront Committee from the start, and now as a member of the Board of Directors,I can attest to the fact that the common thread has been to purchase,preserve and protect the waterfront site, and in so doing fulfill the community's desire for an eating establishment,a marina and as much open space as possible. We have raised money through donations and fund-raising events,grants and loans. Every cent has been put back into the property in one way or another. The Board of Directors is presented with monthly financial reports to attest to the handling of the organizations funds. The current goal of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund, Inc.,is to restore the Galley Ho building in line with the codes and specifications set by Southold Town. The drawings depicting the elevations, septic requirements,parking needs and landscaping have helped to bring understanding as to what the site can look like. These changes will assist in making the New Suffolk Waterfront a destination for bicycle riders,walkers and visitors to the area,including friends and families of those living in New Suffolk and neighboring communities. It is my sincere hope that the Southold Town Planning Board approves the request of this hardworking organization to enhance the New Suffolk waterfront. Sincer , Lauren K. Gr 4370 New Suffolk Road New Suffolk,NY 11956 May 28, 2014 Mr. Donald Wilcenski, Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Southold,New York Dear Mr. Wilcenski, As a resident of New Suffolk, I fully support the proposal by the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund to rehabilitate the Galley Ho as a bayside caf6. Last Saturday, May 24, another wonderful Chowder Fest took place at the New Suffolk waterfront. Close to 600 guests joined 90 volunteers for what has become a community-wide event to start the summer season. Each year more visitors are drawn to the Fest and to our waterfront, in general, for the experience of enjoying the charm of the site and the beautiful water view. If the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund is to continue improving this property and preserving it for the benefit of Southold Town residents and guests a viable source of revenue is needed to sustain their efforts. I believe the caf6 would provide an important part of the income for the group's expenses in realizing those goals. In my experience, the group has shown enormous respect for the property in all the projects they have undertaken to date and I have no doubt that they will continue that sense of responsibility with the rehabilitation of the Galley Ho. Sincerely yours, Rose Ann Burns May 28, 2014 Donald Wilcinski Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Southold, NY 11971 Dear Donald: We are writing to you to express our support of the New Suffolk Waterfront's current plan to revitalize the Galley Ho and surrounding property. We have been members of the New Suffolk community since 1983. In fact you kept your boat in New Suffolk for several years so you know how quaint this town is! The Galley Ho and New Suffolk Waterfront have been in a state of shambles since we have lived here. We have seen photos of how New Suffolk once was, a thriving boating, fishing, and clamming bay front hamlet. We would like to see this waterfront brought back to life. We would like to see the waterfront completed and made beautiful. It can become an asset to our community and to Southold Town overall. The waterfront is the big focus for our community. The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund along with it's board is proposing a plan which echoes the majority of the residents of the community based on a community vote taken several years ago. We fully support this proposal and ask you to do the same. Thanks for your help!! Sincerely, Steven and LiAa Figari PO Box 624 New Suffolk, NY 11956 cc: Pat McIntyre AT p2 May 28,2014 To: Mr. Donald Wilcenski,Chairperson, Southold Planning Committee I have been around New Suffolk since the early eighties. We found this amazing town because we kept our boat there and spent many weekdays and weekends. While my parents would wax, sand, teak and get our boat spruced up, my brother and I would bring bikes and ride around town to go exploring in our life jackets. We always loved the "heart of town, where the Galley-Ho now stands raised, and would go and buy candy at the general store with the change that we could gather up. We visited the Galley-Ho often and are so excited to see the revitalization begin. We loved the town so much we made sure my parents relocated their home there! Restoring the charm is much needed. For years we have seen the Galley-Ho weather the elements unused, but the building still brings back awesome memories of our early days. From the bay at night,the light of the Galley-Ho was our marker to get us back to our creek. We look forward to supporting the local Galley-Ho and it excites me to bring my son back to a place that made my brother and I so many great memories. We think there is no other way to add to the charm of quaint New Suffolk. We are in full support of the revitalization of the New Suffolk Waterfront. Larissa Figari-Goller, DDS I,ari ssa.dds(a��g;mai l.com c. 631.431.3686 1 � Cummings, Brian A. From: Nancy Gilbert <nancy@windswayfarm.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2014 5:15 PM To: Cummings, Brian A. Subject: Letter to Planning Board To Whom It May Concern: Please accept this letter in support of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund's site plan. As a former board member of the Peconic Land Trust and a fairly new board member of the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund I firmly believe that the plan honors the missions of both organizations. The Trust's mission is to"conserve Long Island's working farms, natural lands, and heritage for our communities now and in the future",while the mission of the NSWF is"to preserve and protect New Suffolk's unique and historic waterfront in ways which respect the property's scenic beauty and maritime heritage;to support recreational,educational and commercial activities on the site which enhance community life and are environmentally sustainable for both the uplands and the bay;to assure public access opportunities now and for future generations." Conserving open space and preserving historic views, repairing the bulkhead and rebuilding the marina, and restoring the property's historic structures are all essential to creating a waterfront that is uniquely New Suffolk's—a waterfront with a strong"sense of place"and an integrity because it not only honors the past but will now always be there for generations to come. Sincerely, Nancy Gilbert Jamesport 1 M • May 27,2014 Southold Planning Committee Town Hall Annex Building 54375 Route 25 PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Dear Chairman Wilcenski: Since signing a petition/letter in protest of the New Suffolk Waterfront project earlier this month, I have reviewed the site plan and the project has been fully explained to me.As a result, I now request that my name be WITHDRAWN from the petition/letter mailed to the Planning Department in protest of the New Suffolk Waterfront site plan application currently before you and scheduled for a public hearing on June 2,2014. Thank you. Sincerely, `f:STA-r1-t t o S (6A4 Sov cam, S Address:" `7 S �I fl Lf S'f AfFVf TUICICa May 27, 2014 Southold Planning Committee Town Hall Annex Building 54375 Route 25 PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Dear Chairman Wilcenski: Since signing a petition/letter in protest of the New Suffolk Waterfront project earlier this month, I have reviewed the site plan and the project has been fully explained to me.As a result, I now request that my name be WITHDRAWN from the petition/letter mailed to the Planning Department in protest of the New Suffolk Waterfront site plan application currently before you and scheduled for a public hearing on June 2,2014. Thank you. x Sincerely, Address:C-OAGS WL kl"�f L.(/ ��► . AY Joni Friedman 73oo New Suffolk Road PO Box 231 New Suffolk,NY 11956 Brian A.Cummings,Planner Southold Town Planning Department 53095 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 To Whom This May Concern, There are squeaky wheels banding together to garner support for their selfish and self- serving opposition to the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund project. Preservation of the waterfront in New Suffolk has been painstaking and brilliantly designed to keep what we have from disappearing and to create a welcoming place for the community to gather and grab a bite to eat.There are those calling for the destruction of the historic barn as well as the other buildings to give Legends customers and other first street residents an unobstructed waterfront view. These and other pivotal comments at the NSWF informational meeting in New Suffolk School House on 5/17 shed a light on how little those people are willing to give of themselves and contribute nothing but ill will and community dissent. Before there was a NSWF there was little feeling of community in New Suffolk. Through the tireless and generous efforts of the many volunteers whom brought races, chowder festivals, house tours, art shows, etc. the community has come together and saved the waterfront,assuring its preservation. Tearing down the Galley Ho, our beautiful and historical barn as well as any of the buildings on the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund property, was never a consideration for the NSWF.The goal has always been,and will always be,to preserve what is there to the best of their abilities and create a gathering spot for the community with food and a place to enjoy the view. The goal is not to create an expansive view for the first street residents and businesses. The raising and reconstruction of bulkheads and docks are beneficial to the First Street properties that face them, protecting the property from normal flood damage. Another disturbing example of the self serving and narrow-minded comments that were made at the community information meeting was criticism regarding how the restoration of the beach dune and planting of sea grass on the southern piece purchased by Mr. Bacon ruins the view. Birds and animals survival depend on projects that restore our bays and beaches and try to protect them from erosion. Of any of the formerly proposed projects that were thwarted by the NSWF,none would have made any effort to conserve our waterways,beaches or even the effects their traffic and destruction would have had on our hamlet as the NSWF has so carefully considered. The major opposition and petition generators are those who aim to divide rather than bring together the thoughts and efforts of the community to preserve and enjoy the history and beauty of New Suffolk. Evidence of the support and positive feelings for the NSWF was seen at the Chowder festival on 5/24 that drew hundreds of residents and other NSWF supporters to enjoy delicious food,cold drinks, music, a chance to welcome back our neighbors and catch up after a long winter. The excitement of the progress that they helped make possible through donations, service and participation was overwhelming. That is community and the evidence of caring and careful planning. I am proudly a resident of New Suffolk and have whole-heartedly supported the NSWF project since its inception. It is a shining example of what a community and its supporters are capable of achieving to help preserve the character and history of the North Fork of Long Island. Since ely, Jo i Friedman Or qC1% k'T� C P.O. Box 613 New Suffolk, N.Y. 11956 May 27, 2014 Mr. Donald Wilcenski Planning Department Town Hall Annex Building P.O. Box 1179 Southold, N.Y. 1197 Re:Site plan hearing for New Suffolk Waterfront Dear Mr.Wilcenski: This is to request that you favorably consider approval for the Waterfront proposed site plan. I have made a similar request to Ms Lanza via e-mail citing various reasons for my support of the Waterfront proposal. It is my feeling that their plans are positive and will benefit our community. I am enclosing a copy of my letter to Ms Lanza which goes into a little more detail. Thank you for your consideration. Yours truly, Roberta Jaklevic Enclosure Cc: Patricia McIntyre, NS Waterfront Lanza, Heather From: Gramstand@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 11:10 AM i To: Lanza, Heather Cc: pat.mcintyrell@yahoo.com 4 Subject: Site Plan Approval-New Suffolk Waterfront Dear Ms. Lanza: This is to request approval of the proposed site plan for the New Suffolk Waterfront. I have been a resident of or associated with New Suffolk for about 72 of my 78 years and feel that the plans proposed by the Waterfront are positive and will benefit our community. The group has provided for ample open space, rebuilt the bulkhead and plans to renovate and preserve the Galley Ho. The property has been cleaned up and the parking and landscaping plans look good. I spent my early childhood in the 1940's living in the house on the corner of Jackson and First Streets next to the New Suffollk Post Office, which was not there at that time. I know some people are complaining about vistas and views of the water. There were no vistas then. There was a fishing station and the owner's house on Jackson, then the Oyster House and its outbuildings, then two large storage buildings on First, another storage and display building on Main Street, the Post Office, a large dilapidated building on the corner of First and Main and all the other buildings that were part of the Goldsmith &Tuthill enterprise as well as Mr. Freyherr's restaurant. Now, we have great views of the Bay. People are also worried about water, as in flooding. Ask any old-timer. A hurricane or northeaster flooded First Street and lower Jackson and will again. Parking. It's a little village with not much parking. The Town Beach and boat ramp present parking problems and people are concerned but the Waterfront committee has provided plans for parking on its property. Please consider this proposal and approve it. Roberta Jaklevic, 900 Old Harbor Road, New Suffolk 734-6062 1 P� Ilk 11 P..t x.' (aN&Wvh 4 Fevre Environment East, Inc. 2885 Indian Neck Lane P.O. Box 197 y Peconic,New York 11958-0197 _ 631-734-7474 Fax: 631-734-5812 May 27, 2014 Southold Town Planning Board P 0 Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Dear Board Members, As a contractor specializing in restoration and renovation I give a lot of credit to the Waterfront Fund for recognizing the local history represented by the three buildings on their property on First Street in New Suffolk. The fund has been raising money for over six years to purchase the property and repair and renovate both the marina and the upland buildings. Thankfully they are not considering demolishing anything. look forward to seeing this part of our history used again and encourage you to support the positive effo . Sincerely, Peter Stout burgh Co TO: Southold Town Planning Board FROM: Michael A. Simon DATE: 27 May 2014 RE: New Suffolk Waterfront K 8 1. The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund's plan is not a"commercial project,"as some critics have called it. It is a privately owned property to which the public will have access. Ninety-three percent of the area owned by the Waterfront Fund will remain undeveloped. Many of the objections that focus on the"commercialization"fail to recognize how small the portion of property is that will permit commercial activity. 2. As is the case of parks and other publicly-owned facitilities, land that is being preserved may contain some concessions. The American Heritage Dictionary defines a concession as"a grant of a tract of land by a government or other controlling authority in return for stipulated services or a promise that the land will be used for a specific purpose." The term also refers to the privilege of operating a subsidiary business within the premises and to the business itself. 3. At a public meeting at the New Suffolk School several years ago, attendees were asked to indicate their preferences regarding particular uses of the property. Open space and a restaurant were among the uses most often mentioned. None of the information collected indicated how many people would prefer that the entire property be devoted to open space or to any other single use. More recently, some people have said they would prefer that there be no development at all. There has never been a Board member who shares that view. The Board has always sought multiple uses to the extent allowed by zoning laws, and in accordance with the wishes of the communityso far as this is possible. 4. No evidence has been presented to show that either the rebuilding and restoration of a slightly smaller restaurant than existed prior to 2005, or the construction of a slightly elevated septic system between the restaurant and the barn will "destroy views for residents." 5. The earlier restaurant did not cease to operate because there was not enough business to support it. It was closed by the previous owner as part of his plan to develop the property as an expanded marina. That plan would have included a 3-story boat-racks capable of holding more than 150 boats,parking for more than 250 cars, and a boat-repair facility. 6. The plan the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund proposes is entirely consistent with the goals originally stated,to "preserve and protect the property's scenic beauty and maritime heritage." The property, as it has existed historically, has never exhibited more respect for scenic beauty and environmental impact than is manifest Michael A. Simon ,�� Former Member NSWF Board of Directors • • PPS, �t�", I!NC Willie Fisher P.O. Bog 312 New Suffolk, NY 11956 Southold Planning Board and Committee Members 54375 Main Rd E, P.O. Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 a May 25,2014 Dear Mr. Wilcenski, With regard to the proposed site plan for the New Suffolk Waterfront: The point needs to be made that any smart businessperson would have pro forma financials in place PRIOR to, or at least in conjunction with, architect drawings, site plans, landscaping plans, etc. This financial analysis, or business plan,would indicate the financial viability of the proposed project, incorporating projections on: 1. Sources of expense a. Taxes b. Insurance C. Debt service d. Maintenance and Upkeep(facilities and landscaping) e. Reserves for storm damage 2. Sources of Income a. Rent(daily as well as events) b. Donations C. Grants 3. Analysis of Impediments to Success/Contributors to Success I would argue that the financial analysis needs to be far more granular. If the building needs to be rented at$x per month to carry projected expenses with some fudge factor for the unknown, what would that imply the vendor would have to clear for a reasonable profit? (Remember the vendor wants to make money!) So,the vendor's bogey becomes$x times some factor. Based on that analysis, how many meals would need to be served or drinks poured, and at what price point, to achieve that goal successfully? The analysis should then validate variances in the#of meals/drinks and the price points—if the#of meals is up or down by 5 -10-15%,what impact on the price point would that have? Similarly,if the desired price point is not sufficient and must be raised,how will that impact the#of meals? What is the reliance on alcohol sales? It was clearly stated by a member of the Board at the meeting that the Legend's price point was not acceptable to some in the community—what will prevent that from becoming true in this venture as well? This analysis should provide a sense of the impact on the sustainability of the venture if the needed #of meals/drinks and targeted price are not achieved. Part of this analysis should be a comparative study of what the market will support. I would ask whether the Board has tried to find a similar venture, subject to similar limitations,in a comparable locale that could be used as a meaningful guide. What would be the expected profit margin for the for-profit vendor coming in to run the restaurant? There is an immediate conflict in that the NSWFF is a not-for-profit trying to compel a vendor to its mandates on menu,hours of operation,pricing(to some degree), etc. I am sure Legends could provide a very solid idea of what it would take to make this a viable entity for any vendor who would be subjected to externally imposed mandates. Are the mandates reasonable or are they doomed to result in failure? The analysis must be done to determine if,under reasonable assumptions for factors not knowable at this time,the operation can reasonably sustain itself. I don't pretend to know exactly how a restaurateur would assess all of this. However,the vendor will undertake some analysis before signing on. I contend that the Board should be doing a similar analysis to determine the sustainability of keeping a willing vendor operating in this space before committing funds and incurring debt to renovate a building that it does not need to sustain its mission. Sincerely, Willie Fisher 06 �t George Maul P.O. Box 635 New Suffolk, NY 11956 Southold Planning Board and Committee Members 54375 Main Rd P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 May 24, 2014 Dear Mr. Wilcenski, Regarding the proposed site plan that the NSWF has submitted for Downtown New Suffolk(1000-117.- 8-18) 1 understand that the Planning staff had stated that the SEQRA is a "Type II" action which requires no further environmental review because it is a "commercial project is less than 4,000 sq.ft." I also understand that the New Suffolk waterfront project is contiguous to a "Critical Environmental Area" and part of the land has a NYS Parks& Recreation easement. The property is also a place of "neighborhood significance" and "open space", not to mention the site of the first American submarine base. (which should be on the national list of historic places.) We are hoping that these points might remove the project from the type II list and push it in to a Type list with the presumption of significant impact and the need for a "hard look" and possibly a draft environmental impact statement. It seems obvious to those who live in New Suffolk that even if this project is not on the Type I list, it should be considered an "unlisted action" and the above points require further analysis by the Town. Thank you for your understanding and consideration. Sincerely, George Maul Thomas R. Cornwell 500 west Cove Rd. Cutchogue, NY 11935 May 24, Q14 Mr. Donald Wilcenski, Chair Southold town Planning Board P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Dear Mr. Wilcenski: 1 attended a May 17th meeting hosted by New Suffolk Waterfront Fund (NSWF) about their development plans for the New Suffolk waterfront because I have been a donor in the past and am a resident across the water on Nassau Point. My direct concern is with the noise levels from proposed 6-8 special events. The NSWF said there would be noise level restrictions as part of any special events conditions. Not-with-standing, we all know how noise carries over the water, especially on still nights, and I am concerned as to how the noise level restrictions are going to be enforced, especially in the excitement of a wedding reception. Vineyard 48 is enough. The bigger picture is much more disturbing to me. It was quite apparent at the meeting that many members of the New Suffolk community feel betrayed by the plan that has been put forth by NSWF for the development of the waterfront. The Fund recorded most of the questions and concerns expressed at the meeting with the apparent intention of responding to them, but by their actions they seemingly are going to be ignored. Their advertisement and letter to the editor by their chairperson in SUFFOLK TIMES only reiterated what they already had proposed. It did not at all respond to demands for greater participation in the process, transparency and CHANGE in the existing proposal. NSWF's lack of respect for the feelings of the community and what was and should be a community project is absolutely unacceptable, and especially if NSWF wants the community's support in the future. I strongly urge that the Planning Board disapprove the NSWF's plans or ask NSWF to withdraw its plans until either an alternative plan that is embraced by the community is developed or the community accepts the proposed plan. Frankly, I am dumbstruck by the manner in which they have conducted themselves and ignored the community in its recent outpouring. cerely, awe/c-, Thomas Cornwell George Maul P.O. Box 635 New Suffolk, NY 11956 Southold Planning Board and Committee Members 54375 Main Rd P.O. Box 1179 I Southold, NY 11971 May 24,2014 - r Dear Mr.Wilcenski, - Regarding the proposed site plan that the NSWF has submitted for Downtown New Suffolk(1000-117.- 8-18) 1 understand that the Planning staff had stated that the SEQRA is a "Type II"action which requires no further environmental review because it is a"commercial project is less than 4,000 sq.ft." I also understand that the New Suffolk waterfront project is contiguous to a "Critical Environmental Area"and part of the land has a NYS Parks&Recreation easement. The property is also a place of "neighborhood significance"and 'open space",not to mention the site of the first American submarine base. (which should be on the national list of historic places.) We are hoping that these points might remove the project from the type II list and push it in to a Type list with the presumption of significant impact and the need for a"hard look"and possibly a draft environmental impact statement. It seems obvious to those who live in New Suffolk that even if this project is not on the Type I list, it should be considered an "unlisted action"and the above points require further analysis by the Town. Thank you for your understanding and consideration. Sincerely, George Maul Willie Fisher P.O.Box 312 New Suffolk,NY 11956 Southold Planning Board and Committee Members 54375 Main Rd P.O. Box 1179 _.. . Southold, NY 11971 May 22,2014 Dear Mr.Wilcenski, Greetings, here are some thoughts re proposed development in New Suffolk: (1) Why is it deemed an obligation by those who live closest to the core of this tiny hamlet to play host to anyone and everyone who may want to descend upon our waterfront. None of the proponents of this plan live close enough to be impacted by the litter,traffic,or parking implications which will have to be endured instead by the residents and businesses of the immediate area. The charm of this community lies in the fact that it is off the beaten track,and unique. The NSWFF cabal seems to favor bustling similitude over what we have come to enjoy as a very rare and special place to live. (2) It is irresponsible, both environmentally and economically,to create an unnecessary project of this magnitude which could become such a financial encumbrance upon its citizens if it doesn't thrive. History has shown that a restaurant in the proposed locale is a risky proposition in that all recent attempts have failed.A potential tenant,who will agree to abide by so many rules imposed by the NSWFF from menu planning to times he or she may be permitted to operate due to commercial events taking priority-may be difficult to find, let alone keep. (3) Instead of a looming eyesore with its out of place character,which would require so much in the way of financial upkeep just to sustain itself,a modest income producing facility where daytime meals would be served in conjunction with earnings from boat slip rentals would be much more viable and less impactful than what has been proposed.The operating costs,taxes and insurance would be far easier to manage. A site offering bar-b-ques,tables/picnic benches and natural vistas to the bay rather than elevated cesspool creations might be more likely to succeed given its local participation and lack of dependency upon influx of hoards of outsiders to sustain itself. Bathroom facilities will be something that requires looking into. (4) Lastly,and this point sadly reflects the disconnect between the NSWFF and the citizenry of New Suffolk: We've neither heard nor read any mention of involving local people to work at and have input as to the day to day operations of whatever may be built, rather,for some reason an unknown entity will be sought. Sincerely, f Willie Fisher � � T Mr. Donald Wilcenski,Chair Southold Planning Board,and Committee Members 54375 Main Rd P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 May 21,2014 Dear Mr.Wilcenski, I was encouraged and heartened at the overwhelming outpouring of dissent flowing from New Suffolk residents,at the May 17"'meeting held by the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund(NSWF).The concerned responses were generated by the NSWF's site plan for our cherished waterfront.Where we had been promised preservation,we were presented with plans for a restaurant,an elevated septic system, surrounded by a 4.5 foot retaining wall and a large parking lot.All this in a high flood zone with an already fragile eco-system.Why on earth would our tiny hamlet of 350 residents,need a second restaurant within 2 acres of another restaurant—meaning double the number of delivery trucks and speeding drivers rushing down New Suffolk Avenue? One resident, an accountant by trade,eloquently noted that,even if this were something we all wanted, their approach was"bass ackwards,"as they are essentially building a large commercial project on spec, having no idea who will rent/run it.The current annual property taxes on this spot are$1980.The construction of a commercial restaurant will increase these exponentially,to say nothing of business insurance,flood insurance, regular building maintenance—all of which will be considerable. Many residents have asked to see the operating budget of the NSWF,a 5016, non-profit organization. Financial transparency has been raised at several previous meetings, but these questions have never been answered. In fact,there were so many questions at the May 17`h meeting,they ran out of time and very few questions were answered at all. The NSWF has done a great job of repairing the marina. Income from the 2012 season's slip rentals was $21,000.,which would nicely cover the costs of maintaining our waterfront as a community garden,with wildflowers, benches and picnic tables. Preservation=less is more. The one thing we all agreed on is that we feel so very fortunate to live in one of the most beautiful and peaceful spots left in these parts. New Suffolk is a little slice of heaven. Let's save what's left. Sincerely, Vicky Germaise 345 Bunny Lane, PO 45 New Suffolk, NY 11956 917-576-08827 Vp ` E r � Mr. Donald Wilcenski, Chair Southold Planning Board, and Committee Members 54375 Main Rd P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 April 30, 2014 Dear Mr. Wilcenski, We, the following members of the New Suffolk Community, have serious reservations about the proposed site plan that the NSWF has submitted for Downtown New Suffolk (1000-117.-8-18). You may view it via this link: http://24.38.28.228:2040/weblink7/DocView.aspx?id=651680 What The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund originally stated was a wonderful goal: to, from its own statement, "preserve and protect ... respect ... the property's scenic beauty and maritime heritage." The New Suffolk community was led to believe a small snack bar would be on site, " . . . where people can meet, grab coffee or lunch and read a newspaper." (Suffolk Times article 3/19/13) But NSWF's latest goal is much different. Instead of a harborside snack bar amid open space with scenic bay views, the plan has gone from preservation to development and includes an elevated restaurant with 66 inside seats (and many more outdoor seats), behind concrete retaining walls in an area leveled by Superstorm Sandy. The NSWF has not been transparent about their change in goals and many in the community are not happy with what they've learned from meetings and sparse documents. Here are the four main concerns the community has with this level of development: 1. PROJECT SIZE - Full-Fledged Restaurant, not a Snack Bar- Larger than the original footprint of the Galley Ho, it features approximately 1,200-square-feet of outdoor decks for eating /drinking. - Elevation -The restaurant will be elevated because it's being built in an area that was devastated less than two years ago. Scale -A project of this scale would be devastating to the delicate waterfront property, destroying views for residents and having an environmental impact that will be felt throughout the community. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT - Raised Septic-The plan includes a raised septic system, a very questionable plan in a flood zone. Flooding could cause contents of a system to flow into our businesses and into our bay, one that is already closed for shellfishing, making our beaches off-limits for residents. - Retaining Wall — It may protect the restaurant somewhat, but when the area floods again, and it will, the water will now be forced into the streets of New Suffolk even more than before, and will "pool"there after the storm is over. FEMA has warned about development in flood zones and changing what we've done in the past; Superstorm Sandy has shown how vulnerable a flood zone New Suffolk is. This project only increases the possibility of complete environmental destruction and potential litigation by those impacted. 3. PARKING and CONGESTION • Restaurant, Marina, Public Beach -With the planned public beach and marina, parking needs in an already crowded community will increase exponentially. • Parking Lot for 38 Spots - Planned additional parking is inadequate for a 66-seat restaurant,•16 slip marina, and their employees, especially because that number will likely double when the outdoor deck is used. • Delivery Trucks - In a small seaside hamlet that abhors traffic and congestion, now there will be general contractor, sub-contractor and landscaping trucks, garbage trucks, UPS/FEDEX trucks, marine and general restaurant supply trucks, as well as specialized fish, meat, produce, bread, paper goods, laundry, liquor, beer, soda and repair trucks. • Special Events -There is no contingency for the additional parking needed for special events, like weddings or other large parties, at the site. In the summer, cars are parked along the narrow streets, pulled halfway onto residents' lawns—and that's just from existing attractions in the area. Unless NSWF plans to "pave paradise and put up a parking lot," these conditions will get worse, make parking more visible than the water and become unbearable for taxpayers living in New Suffolk. 4. NSWF'S LACK OF TRANSPARENCY - Building Plans (and particularly changes in plans) have not been adequately disclosed to residents prior to the site plan being given to Southold Town, who will be most impacted by this development. • Funding - Planned funding has not been disclosed voluntarily, and a request for the same denied. Those who donated to NSWF in the hopes that the open space would be preserved are not happy that their donations are now going to development of a commercial project; one that was promised would never happen by the Peconic Land Trust and the NSWF. • Commercial Project- NSWF's apparent change in mission to make this property into their own moneymaker rather than a preserved open space is troubling to those who choose to live in a quiet beach community. While we understand the desire for this 501(c)3 organization to earn money to support preservation, they seem to be more concerned with a commercial business enhancing their cash flow without the attendant nonprofit goals! Not all in The New Suffolk community know anything about the details of this project, nor do all support this project. We need to have these plans out in the open so those on the fence about the plans can see what the area will look like with the proposed restaurant in place and make an informed decision about what they want New Suffolk to look and be like in the future. Besides this petition, we encourage you to write to the Planning Board and Committee Members and copy in Scott Russell, Supervisor and Southold Town Board Members. Printed Name: Signature: Address: v '* i ! Printed Name: Signature: Address: 7 �2 b bwt Q nNUj( JL c ( 11 o a/f 40 o ,O Q. op"AS. G'o PA ( /� 3S W J=—Z_ S � � C-O `wr4C\ SDco�J� NY t%q�-1 000 onblel Drive. : G Ac SocOwtd., 04 w 6l 971 5G7 Y2 J P.o. .s z� 1 / so .v.C�Tw�< h� a r ! 1• , LQ vel��,� � - `, - -_ � //9 a rcf LI iacx^o M��rt 6C Mr. Donald Wilcenski, Chair Southold Planning Board, and Committee Members 54375 Main Rd P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 April 30, 2014 a i Dear Mr. Wilcenski, We, the following members of the New Suffok Community, have serious reservations about the proposed site plan that the NSWF has submitted for Downtown New Suffolk (1000-117.-8-18). You may view it via this link: http://24.38.28.228:2040/weblin k7/DocView.asr)x?id=651680 What The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund originally stated was a wonderful goal: to, from its own statement, "preserve and protect ... respect ... the property's scenic beauty and maritime heritage." The New Suffolk community was led to believe a small snack bar would be on site, " . . . where people can meet, grab coffee or lunch and read a newspaper." (Suffolk�Times article 3/19/13) But NSWF's latest goal is much different. Instead of a harborside snack bar amid open space with scenic bay views, the plan has gone from preservation to development and includes an elevated restaurant with 66 inside seats (and many more outdoor seats), behind concrete retaining walls in an area leveled by Superstorm Sandy. The NSWF has not been transparent about their change in goals and many in the community are not happy with what they've learned from meetings and sparse documents. Here are the four main concerns the community has with this level of development: 1. PROJECT SIZE - Full-Fledged Restaurant, not a Snack Bar- Larger than the original footprint of the Galley Ho, it features approximately 1,200-square-feet of outdoor decks for eating /drinking. • Elevation -The restaurant will be elevated because it's being built in an area that was devastated less than two years ago. Scale -A project of this scale would be devastating to the delicate waterfront property, destroying views for residents and having an environmental impact that will be felt throughout the community. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT - Raised Septic -The plan includes a raised septic system, a very questionable plan in a flood zone. Flooding could cause contents of a system to flow into our businesses and into our bay, one that is already closed for shellfishing, making our beaches off-limits for residents. - Retaining Wall — It may protect the restaurant somewhat, but when the area floods again, and it will, the water will now be forced into the streets of New Suffolk even more than before, and will "pool" there after the storm is over. FEMA has warned about development in flood zones and changing what we've done in the past; Superstorm Sandy has shown how vulnerable a flood zone New Suffolk is. This project only increases the possibility of complete environmental destruction and potential litigation by those impacted. 3. PARKING and CONGESTION - Restaurant, Marina, Public Beach -With the planned public beach and marina, parking needs in an already crowded community will increase exponentially. - Parking Lot for 38 Spots - Planned additional parking is inadequate for a 66-seat restaurant, 16 slip marina, and their employees, especially because that number will likely double when the outdoor deck is used. • Delivery Trucks - In a small seaside hamlet that abhors traffic and congestion, now there will be general contractor, sub-contractor and landscaping trucks, garbage trucks, UPS/FEDEX trucks, marine and general restaurant supply trucks, as well as specialized fish, meat, produce, bread, paper goods, laundry, liquor, beer, soda and repair trucks. - Special Events -There is no contingency for the additional parking needed for special events, like weddings or other large parties, at the site. In the summer, cars are parked along the narrow streets, pulled halfway onto residents' lawns—and that's just from existing attractions in the area. Unless NSWF plans to "pave paradise and put up a parking lot," these conditions will get worse, make parking more visible than the water and become unbearable for taxpayers living in New Suffolk. 4. NSWF'S LACK OF TRANSPARENCY - Building Plans (and particularly changes in plans) have not been adequately disclosed to residents prior to the site plan being given to Southold Town, who will be most impacted by this development. • Funding - Planned funding has not been disclosed voluntarily, and a request for the same denied. Those who donated to NSWF in the hopes that the open space would be preserved are not happy that their donations are now going to development of a commercial project; one that was promised would never happen by the Peconic Land Trust and the NSWF. - Commercial Project- NSWF's apparent change in mission to make this property into their own moneymaker rather than a preserved open space is troubling to those who choose to live in a quiet beach community. While we understand the desire for this 501(c)3 organization to earn money to support preservation, they seem to be more concerned with a commercial business enhancing their cash flow without the attendant nonprofit goals! Not all in The New Suffolk community know anything about the details of this project, nor do all support this project. We need to have these plans out in the open so those on the fence about the plans can see what the area will look like with the proposed restaurant in place and make an informed decision about what they want New Suffolk to look and be like in the future. Besides this petition, we encourage you to write to the Planning Board and Committee Members and copy in Scott Russell, Supervisor and Southold Town Board Members. Printed Name: Signature: Address: • • 1 Printed Name: Signature: Addr ss: Yd 1-h 4 � >I �i2o ss Kea Al 21 lo r (p pct r-,c l Lg- A� 22, rum- Z2- St aA L M 3y ern LQ �/�� .S� •� Civ 4 Pq(l j • • Printed Name: Sign t re: Address: x � AiVr ori 3-�- �= ct u6 ox-., 0 3" SV d.,��- , ►4 �r y 1004,1 am 1�� ,n�� N i lire� PIZ __I 0] C� )&K 1►Af Irc Kx 7 ,it i Printed.Name: Signature: Address: 144a- CZj -ECI-" -S All _ JS 2 P�r6E !w --ramQX Ia /O 17I3J" /t-COW/G 18/1 Y 5-60ZAri0 f?V"� MA-77(Ttk CK-4 Aj P-o, gOKMh - M%"AQ z t, K Q Z I s CM M" &UC Ltc o(,u:o w�l t jk 3 s 2 S i� Z-AZO car J!l AV l/ o f=4 S o c �r i C, C\u V,- C � v k,)"L� • �� AwrL Mr. Donald Wilcenski, Chair Southold Planning Board, and Committee Members 54375 Main Rd P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 April 30, 2014 Dear Mr. Wilcenski, We, the following members of the New Suffolk Community, have serious reservations about the proposed site plan that the NSWF has submitted for Downtown New Suffolk (1000-117.-8-18). You may view it via this link: http://24.38.28.228:2040tweblink7/DocView.aspx?id=651680 What The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund originally stated was a wonderful goal: to, from its own statement, "preserve and protect ... respect ... the property's scenic beauty and maritime heritage." The New Suffolk community was led to believe a small snack bar would be on site, " . . . where people can meet, grab coffee or lunch and read a newspaper." (Suffolk Times article 3/19/13) But NSWF's latest goal is much different. Instead of a harborside snack bar amid open space with scenic bay views, the plan has gone from preservation to development and includes an elevated restaurant with 66 inside seats (and many more outdoor seats), behind concrete retaining walls in an area leveled by Superstorm Sandy. The NSWF has not been transparent about their change in goals and many in the community are not happy with what they've learned from meetings and sparse documents. Here are the four main concerns the community has with this level of development: 1. PROJECT SIZE - Full-Fledged Restaurant, not a Snack Bar- Larger than the original footprint of the Galley Ho, it features approximately 1,200-square-feet of outdoor decks for eating /drinking. - Elevation -The restaurant will be elevated because it's being built in an area that was devastated less than two years ago. Scale -A project of this scale would be devastating to the delicate waterfront property, destroying views for residents and having an environmental impact that will be felt throughout the community. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT - Raised Septic -The plan includes a raised septic system, a very questionable plan in a flood zone. Flooding could cause contents of a system to flow into our businesses and into our bay, one that is already closed for shellfishing, making our beaches off-limits for residents. - Retaining Wall — It may protect the restaurant somewhat, but when the area floods again, and it will, the water will now be forced into the streets of New Suffolk even more than before, and will "pool" there after the storm is over. FEMA has warned about development in flood zones and changing what we've done in the past; Superstorm Sandy has shown how vulnerable a flood zone New Suffolk is. This project only increases the possibility of complete environmental destruction and potential litigation by those impacted. 3. PARKING and CONGESTION • Restaurant, Marina, Public Beach -With the planned public beach and marina, parking needs in an already crowded community will increase exponentially. • Parking Lot for 38 Spots - Planned additional parking is inadequate for a 66-seat restaurant, 16 slip marina, and their employees, especially because that number will likely double when the outdoor deck is used. • Delivery Trucks - In a small seaside hamlet that abhors traffic and congestion, now there will be general contractor, sub-contractor and landscaping trucks, garbage trucks, UPS/FEDEX trucks, marine and general restaurant supply trucks, as well as specialized fish, meat, produce, bread, paper goods, laundry, liquor, beer, soda and repair trucks. • Special Events -There is no contingency for the additional parking needed for special events, like weddings or other large parties, at the site. In the summer, cars are parked along the narrow streets, pulled halfway onto residents' lawns —and that's just from existing attractions in the area. Unless NSWF plans to "pave paradise and put up a parking lot," these conditions will get worse, make parking more visible than the water and become unbearable for taxpayers living in New Suffolk. 4. NSWF'S LACK OF TRANSPARENCY • Building Plans (and particularly changes in plans) have not been adequately disclosed to residents prior to the site plan being given to Southold Town, who will be most impacted by this development. • Funding - Planned funding has not been disclosed voluntarily, and a request for the same denied. Those who donated to NSWF in the hopes that the open space would be preserved are not happy that their donations are now going to development of a commercial project; one that was promised would never happen by the Peconic Land Trust and the NSWF. • Commercial Project- NSWF's apparent change in mission to make this property into their own moneymaker rather than a preserved open space is troubling to those who choose to live in a quiet beach community. While we understand the desire for this 501(c)3 organization to earn money to support preservation, they seem to be more concerned with a commercial business enhancing their cash flow without the attendant nonprofit goals! Not all in The New Suffolk community know anything about the details of this project, nor do all support this project. We need to have these plans out in the open so those on the fence about the plans can see what the area will look like with the proposed restaurant in place and make an informed decision about what they want New Suffolk to look and be like in the future. Besides this petition, we encourage you to write to the Planning Board and Committee Members and copy in Scott Russell, Supervisor and Southold Town Board Members. Printed Name: Signature: Address: 1. • � Printed Name: ign t Address: l dtj n l i S� YW 4 4-1 qvL Mr. Donald Wilcenski, Chair Southold Planning Board, and Committee Members 54375 Main Rd P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 t April 30, 2014 Dear Mr. Wilcenski, We,the following members of the New Suffolk Community, have serious reservations about the proposed site plan that the NSWF has submitted for Downtown New Suffolk (1000-117.-8-18). You may view it via this link: http://24.38.28.228:2040/webl ink7/DocView.aspx?id=651680 What The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund originally stated was a wonderful goal: to, from its own statement, "preserve and protect ... respect ... the property's scenic beauty and maritime heritage."The New Suffolk community was led to believe a small snack bar would be on site, " . . . where people can meet, grab coffee or lunch and read a newspaper." (Suffolk Times article 3/19/13) But NSWF's latest goal is much different. Instead of a harborside snack bar amid open space with scenic bay views, the plan has gone from preservation to development and includes an elevated restaurant with 66 inside seats (and many more outdoor seats), behind concrete retaining walls in an area leveled by Superstorm Sandy. The NSWF has not been transparent about their change in goals and many in the community are not happy with what they've learned from meetings and sparse documents. Here are the four main concerns the community has with this level of development: 1. PROJECT SIZE - Full-Fledged Restaurant, not a Snack Bar- Larger than the original footprint of the Galley Ho, it features approximately 1,200-square-feet of outdoor decks for eating/drinking. - Elevation-The restaurant will be elevated because it's being built in an area that was devastated less than two years ago. Scale-A project of this scale would be devastating to the delicate waterfront property, destroying views for residents and having an environmental impact that will be felt throughout the community. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT - Raised Septic-The plan includes a raised septic system, a very questionable plan in a flood zone. Flooding could cause contents of a system to flow into our businesses and into our bay, one that is already closed for shelifishing, making our beaches off-limits for residents. - Retaining Wall—It may protect the restaurant somewhat, but when the area floods again, and it will, the water will now be forced into the streets of New Suffolk even more than before, and will "pool"there after the storm is over. FEMA has warned about development in flood zones and changing what we've done in the past; Superstorm Sandy has shown how vulnerable a flood zone New Suffolk is. This project only increases the possibility of complete environmental destruction and potential litigation by those impacted. Mr. Donald Wilcenski, Chair Southold Planning Board, and Committee Members 54375 Main Rd P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 April 30, 2014 Dear Mr. Wilcenski, We, the following members of the New Suffolk Community, have serious reservations about the proposed site plan that the NSWF has submitted for Downtown New Suffolk (1000-117.-8-18). You may view it via this link: http://24.38.28.228:2040/weblink7/DocView.aspx?id=651680 What The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund originally stated was a wonderful goal: to, from its own statement, "preserve and protect ... respect ... the property's scenic beauty and maritime heritage." The New Suffolk community was led to believe a small snack bar would be on site, " . . . where people can meet, grab coffee or lunch and read a newspaper." (Suffolk Times article 3/19/13) But NSWF's latest goal is much different. Instead of a harborside snack bar amid open space with scenic bay views, the plan has gone from preservation to development and includes an elevated restaurant with 66 inside seats (and many more outdoor seats), behind concrete retaining walls in an area leveled by Superstorm Sandy. The NSWF has not been transparent about their change in goals and many in the community are not happy with what they've learned from meetings and sparse documents. Here are the four main concerns the community has with this level of development: 1. PROJECT SIZE - Full-Fledged Restaurant, not a Snack Bar- Larger than the original footprint of the Galley Ho, it features approximately a 1,200-square-foot outdoor deck for eating and drinking. - Elevation -The restaurant will be elevated because it's being built in an area that was devastated less than two years ago. Scale -A project of this scale would be devastating to the delicate waterfront property, destroying views for residents and having an environmental impact that will be felt throughout the community. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT - Raised Septic -The plan includes a raised septic system, a very questionable plan in a flood zone. Flooding could cause contents of a system to flow into our businesses and into our bay, one that is already closed for shellfishing, making our beaches off-limits for residents. - Retaining Wall — It may protect the restaurant somewhat, but when the area floods again, and it will, the water will now be forced into the streets of New Suffolk even more than before, and will "pool" there after the storm is over. FEMA has warned about development in flood zones and changing what we've done in the past; Superstorm Sandy has shown how vulnerable a flood zone New Suffolk is. This project only increases the possibility of complete environmental destruction and potential litigation by those impacted. 0 • r 3. PARKING and CONGESTION • Restaurant, Marina, Public Beach -With the planned public beach and marina, parking needs in an already crowded community will increase exponentially. • Parking Lot for 38 Spots - Planned additional parking is inadequate for a 66-seat restaurant, 16 slip marina, and their employees, especially because that number will likely double when the outdoor deck is used. • Delivery Trucks - In a small seaside hamlet that abhors traffic and congestion, now there will be general contractor, sub-contractor and landscaping trucks, garbage trucks, UPS/FEDEX trucks, marine and general restaurant supply trucks, as well as specialized fish, meat, produce, bread, paper goods, laundry, liquor, beer, soda and repair trucks. • Special Events -There is no contingency for the additional parking needed for special events, like weddings or other large parties, at the site. In the summer, cars are parked along the narrow streets, pulled halfway onto residents' lawns —and that's just from existing attractions in the area. Unless NSWF plans to "pave paradise and put up a parking lot," these conditions will get worse, make parking more visible than the water and become unbearable for taxpayers living in New Suffolk. 4. NSWF'S LACK OF TRANSPARENCY • Building Plans (and particularly changes in plans) have not been adequately disclosed to residents prior to the site plan being given to Southold Town, who will be most impacted by this development. • Funding - Planned funding has not been disclosed voluntarily, and a request for the same denied. Those who donated to NSWF in the hopes that the open space would be preserved are not happy that their donations are now going to development of a commercial project; one that was promised would never happen by the Peconic Land Trust and the NSWF. • Commercial Project- NSWF's apparent change in mission to make this property into their own moneymaker rather than a preserved open space is troubling to those who choose to live in a quiet beach community. While we understand the desire for this 501(c)3 organization to earn money to support preservation, they seem to be more concerned with a commercial business enhancing their cash flow without the attendant nonprofit goals! Not all in The New Suffolk community know anything about the details of this project, nor do all support this project. We need to have these plans out in the open so those on the fence about the plans can see what the area will look like with the proposed restaurant in place and make an informed decision about what they want New Suffolk to look and be like in the future. Besides this petition, we encourage you to write to the Planning Board and Committee Members and copy in Scott Russell Supervisor and Southold Town board Members. Printed Name: Signature: Address: Mr. Donald Wilcenski, Chair Southold Planning Board, and Committee Members 54375 Main Rd P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 April 30, 2014 Dear Mr. Wilcenski, We, the following members of the New Suffolk Community, have serious reservations about the proposed site plan that the NSWF has submitted for Downtown New Suffolk (1000-117.-8-18). What The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund originally stated was a wonderful goal: to, from its own statement, "preserve and protect ... respect ... the property's scenic beauty and maritime heritage." The New Suffolk community was led to believe a small snack bar would be on site, " . . . where people can meet, grab coffee or lunch and read a newspaper." (Suffolk Times article 3/19/13) But NSWF's latest goal is much different. Instead of a harborside snack bar amid open space with scenic bay views, the plan has gone from preservation to development and includes an elevated restaurant with 66 inside seats (and many more outdoor seats), behind concrete retaining walls in an area leveled by Superstorm Sandy. The NSWF has not been transparent about their change in goals and many in the community are not happy with what they've learned from meetings and sparse documents. Here are the four main concerns the community has with this level of development: 1. PROJECT SIZE - Full-Fledged Restaurant, not a Snack Bar- Larger than the original footprint of the Galley Ho, it features approximately a 1,200-square-foot outdoor deck for eating and drinking. - Elevation - The restaurant will be elevated because it's being built in an area that was devastated less than two years ago. Scale -A project of this scale would be devastating to the delicate waterfront property, destroying views for residents and having an environmental impact that will be felt throughout the community. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT - Raised Septic -The plan includes a raised septic system, a very questionable plan in a flood zone. Flooding could cause contents of a system to flow into our businesses and into our bay, one that is already closed for shellfishing, making our beaches off-limits for residents. - Retaining Wall — It may protect the restaurant somewhat, but when the area floods again, and it will, the water will now be forced into the streets of New Suffolk even more than before, and will "pool" there after the storm is over. FEMA has warned about development in flood zones and changing what we've done in the past; Superstorm Sandy has shown how vulnerable a flood zone New Suffolk is. This project only increases the possibility of complete environmental destruction and potential litigation by those impacted. f � r I � Mr. Donald Wilcenski, Chair Southold Planning Board, and Committee Members 54375 Main Rd P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 April 30, 2014 Dear Mr. Wilcenski, We, the following members of the New Suffolk Community, have serious reservations about the proposed site plan that the NSWF has submitted for Downtown New Suffolk (1000-117.-8-18). You may view it via this link: http://24.38.28.228:2040/weblink7/DocView.aspx?id=651680 What The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund originally stated was a wonderful goal: to, from its own statement, "preserve and protect ... respect ... the property's scenic beauty and maritime heritage." The New Suffolk community was led to believe a small snack bar would be on site, " . . . where people can meet, grab coffee or lunch and read a newspaper." (Suffolk Times article 3/19/13) But NSWF's latest goal is much different. Instead of a harborside snack bar amid open space with scenic bay views, the plan has gone from preservation to development and includes an elevated restaurant with 66 inside seats (and many more outdoor seats), behind concrete retaining walls in an area leveled by Superstorm Sandy. The NSWF has not been transparent about their change in goals and many in the community are not happy with what they've learned from meetings and sparse documents. Here are the four main concerns the community has with this level of development: 1. PROJECT SIZE - Full-Fledged Restaurant, not a Snack Bar- Larger than the original footprint of the Galley Ho, it features approximately 1,200-square-feet of outdoor decks for eating /drinking. - Elevation -The restaurant will be elevated because it's being built in an area that was devastated less than two years ago. Scale -A project of this scale would be devastating to the delicate waterfront property, destroying views for residents and having an environmental impact that will be felt throughout the community. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT - Raised Septic-The plan includes a raised septic system, a very questionable plan in a flood zone. Flooding could cause contents of a system to flow into our businesses and into our bay, one that is already closed for shellfishing, making our beaches off-limits for residents. - Retaining Wall — It may protect the restaurant somewhat, but when the area floods again, and it will, the water will now be forced into the streets of New Suffolk even more than before, and will "pool" there after the storm is over. FEMA has warned about development in flood zones and changing what we've done in the past; Superstorm Sandy has shown how vulnerable a flood zone New Suffolk is. This project only increases the possibility of complete environmental destruction and potential litigation by those impacted. 3. PARKING and CONGESTION • Restaurant, Marina, Public Beach -With the planned public beach and marina, parking needs in an already crowded community will increase exponentially. - Parking Lot for 38 Spots - Planned additional parking is inadequate for a 66-seat restaurant, 16 slip marina, and their employees, especially because that number will likely double when the outdoor deck is used. • Delivery Trucks - In a small seaside hamlet that abhors traffic and congestion, now there will be general contractor, sub-contractor and landscaping trucks, garbage trucks, UPS/FEDEX trucks, marine and general restaurant supply trucks, as well as specialized fish, meat, produce, bread, paper goods, laundry, liquor, beer, soda and repair trucks. - Special Events -There is no contingency for the additional parking needed for special events, like weddings or other large parties, at the site. In the summer, cars are parked along the narrow streets, pulled halfway onto residents' lawns—and that's just from existing attractions in the area. Unless NSWF plans to "pave paradise and put up a parking lot,"these conditions will get worse, make parking more visible than the water and become unbearable for taxpayers living in New Suffolk. 4. NSWF'S LACK OF TRANSPARENCY • Building Plans (and particularly changes in plans) have not been adequately disclosed to residents prior to the site plan being given to Southold Town, who will be most impacted by this development. - Funding - Planned funding has not been disclosed voluntarily, and a request for the same denied. Those who donated to NSWF in the hopes that the open space would be preserved are not happy that their donations are now going to development of a commercial project; one that was promised would never happen by the Peconic Land Trust and the NSWF. - Commercial Project- NSWF's apparent change in mission to make this property into their own moneymaker rather than a preserved open space is troubling to those who choose to live in a quiet beach community. While we understand the desire for this 501(c)3 organization to earn money to support preservation, they seem to be more concerned with a commercial business enhancing their cash flow without the attendant nonprofit goals! Not all in The New Suffolk community know anything about the details of this project, nor do all support this project. We need to have these plans out in the open so those on the fence about the plans can see what the area will look like with the proposed restaurant in place and make an informed decision about what they want New Suffolk to look and be like in the future. Besides this petition, we encourage you to write to the Planning Board and Committee Members and copy in Scott Russell Supervisor and Southold Town Board Members. Printed Name: Sig at re: , Address: (6 �CO o �� r • Printed Name: Signature: Address: Abo�A f 6-,tGo4Q- (cu� pecon)L i Pq (I q S� , Nv/ 1l915t 1 6 0 3. PARKING and CONGESTION - Restaurant, Marina, Public Beach -With the planned public beach and marina, parking needs in an already crowded community will increase exponentially. • Parking Lot for 38 Spots- Planned additional parking is inadequate for a 66-seat restaurant, 16 slip marina, and their employees, especially because that number will likely double when the outdoor deck is used. - Delivery Trucks- In a small seaside hamlet that abhors traffic and congestion, now there will be general contractor, sub-contractor and landscaping trucks, garbage trucks, UPS/FEDEX trucks, marine and general restaurant supply-trucks, as well as specialized fish, meat, produce, bread, paper goods, laundry, liquor, beer, soda and repair trucks. • Special Events-There is no contingency for the additional parking needed for special events, like weddings or other large parties, at the site. In the summer, cars are parked along the narrow streets, pulled halfway onto residents' lawns—and that's just from existing attractions in the area. Unless NSWF plans to"pave paradise and put up a parking lot,"these conditions will get worse, make parking more visible than the water and become unbearable for taxpayers living in New Suffolk. 4. NSWF'S LACK OF TRANSPARENCY - Building Plans(and particularly changes in plans) have not been adequately disclosed to residents prior to the site plan being given to Southold Town, who will be most impacted by this development. - Funding- Planned funding has not been disclosed voluntarily, and a request for the same denied. Those who donated to NSWF in the hopes that the open space would be preserved are not happy that their donations are now going to development of a commercial project; one that was promised would never happen by the Peconic Land Trust and the NSWF. • Commercial Project-NSWF's apparent change in mission to make this property into their own moneymaker rather than a preserved open space is troubling to those who choose to live in a quiet beach community. While we understand the desire for this 501(c)3 organization to earn money to support preservation, they seem to be more concerned with a commercial business enhancing their cash flow without the attendant nonprofit goals! Not all in The New Suffolk community know anything about the details of this project, nor do all support this project. We need to have these plans out in the open so those on the fence about the plans can see what the area will look like with the proposed restaurant in place and make an informed decision about what they want New Suffolk to look and be like in the future. Besides this petition, we encourage you to write to the Planning Board and Committee Members and copy in Scott Russell. Supervisor and Southold Town Board Members. Printed Namle: Si ture: Address: IKW LAU4C', J� has 0, S_- r-JeW s��, rI PIs& Printed Name: Signature: Address: bv 100 Illy,11�14 h�� • 0 Printed Name: Signature: Address: fry �� tler rj Y��/� � S US Te ff-) gghwj u r AA z S c o • Printed Name: Signature: Address: fi140 hey►G r SO V40�w Mew jor � , Ny 1002 � J 0�t �� W3 nom,-o lc r� ;Rk L� jii ,4 (A �L �2�IST:) (I STNeaJ SuM,//[. Printed Name: Signature: Address: ko vV�)—�L 0 o1 S P d►n ��` �JL�fI n (-tel✓k� —� /V WCC-- te— Arig (li 61cul O. ]v D w 4 3. PARKING and CONGESTION - Restaurant, Marina, Public Beach -With the planned public beach and marina, parking needs in an already crowded community will increase exponentially. • Parking Lot for 38 Spots - Planned additional parking is inadequate for a 66-seat restaurant, 16 slip marina, and their employees, especially because that number will likely double when the outdoor deck is used. - Delivery Trucks - In a small seaside hamlet that abhors traffic and congestion, now there will be general contractor, sub-contractor and landscaping trucks, garbage trucks, UPS/FEDEX trucks, marine and general restaurant supply trucks, as well as specialized fish, meat, produce, bread, paper goods, laundry, liquor, beer, soda and repair trucks. - Special Events -There is no contingency for the additional parking needed for special events, like weddings or other large parties, at the site. In the summer, cars are parked along the narrow streets, pulled halfway onto residents' lawns—and that's just from existing attractions in the area. Unless NSWF plans to "pave paradise and put up a parking lot," these conditions will get worse, make parking more visible than the water and become unbearable for taxpayers living in New Suffolk. 4. NSWF'S LACK OF TRANSPARENCY - Building Plans (and particularly changes in plans) have not been adequately disclosed to residents prior to the site plan being given to Southold Town, who will be most impacted by this development. - Funding - Planned funding has not been disclosed voluntarily, and a request for the same denied. Those who donated to NSWF in the hopes that the open space would be preserved are not happy that their donations are now going to development of a commercial project; one that was promised would never happen by the Peconic Land Trust and the NSWF. - Commercial Project- NSWF's apparent change in mission to make this property into their own moneymaker rather than a preserved open space is troubling to those who choose to live in a quiet beach community. While we understand the desire for this 501(c)3 organization to earn money to support preservation, they seem to be more concerned with a commercial business enhancing their cash flow without the attendant nonprofit goals! Not all in The New Suffolk community know anything about the details of this project, nor do all support this project. We need to have these plans out in the open so those on the fence about the plans can see what the area will look like with the proposed restaurant in place and make an informed decision about what they want New Suffolk to look and be like in the future. Besides this petition, we encourage you to write to the Planning Board and Committee Members and copy in Scott Russell. Supervisor and Southold Town Board Members. Printed Name: Signat Address: ��iarVkerMo�cA�� C �1��d V/ c� ��Q �J <<�3� � M M Mr. Donald Wilcenski, Chair Southold Planning Board, and Committee Members 54375 Main Rd P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 April 30, 2014 +_ w Dear Mr. Wilcenski, We, the following members of the New Suffolk Community, have serious reservations about the proposed site plan that the NSWF has submitted for Downtown New Suffolk (1000-117.-8-18). You may view it via this link: http://24.38.28.228:2040/weblink7/DocView.aspx?id=651680 What The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund originally stated was a wonderful goal: to, from its own statement, "preserve and protect ... respect ... the property's scenic beauty and maritime heritage." The New Suffolk community was led to believe a small snack bar would be on site, " . . . where people can meet, grab coffee or lunch and read a newspaper." (Suffolk Times article 3/19/13) But NSWF's latest goal is much different. Instead of a harborside snack bar amid open space with scenic bay views, the plan has gone from preservation to development and includes an elevated restaurant with 66 inside seats (and many more outdoor seats), behind concrete retaining walls in an area leveled by Superstorm Sandy. The NSWF has not been transparent about their change in goals and many in the community are not happy with what they've learned from meetings and sparse documents. Here are the four main concerns the community has with this level of development: 1. PROJECT SIZE • Full-Fledged Restaurant, not a Snack Bar- Larger than the original footprint of the Galley Ho, it features approximately 1,200-square-feet of outdoor decks for eating /drinking. • Elevation -The restaurant will be elevated because it's being built in an area that was devastated less than two years ago. Scale -A project of this scale would be devastating to the delicate waterfront property, destroying views for residents and having an environmental impact that will be felt throughout the community. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT • Raised Septic-The plan includes a raised septic system, a very questionable plan in a flood zone. Flooding could cause contents of a system to flow into our businesses and into our bay, one that is already closed for shellfishing, making our beaches off-limits for residents. • Retaining Wall — It may protect the restaurant somewhat, but when the area floods again, and it will, the water will now be forced into the streets of New Suffolk even more than before, and will "pool" there after the storm is over. FEMA has warned about development in flood zones and changing what we've done in the past; Superstorm Sandy has shown how vulnerable a flood zone New Suffolk is. This project only increases the possibility of complete environmental destruction and potential litigation by those impacted. r so 3. PARKING and CONGESTION • Restaurant, Marina, Public Beach -With the planned public beach and marina, parking needs in an already crowded community will increase exponentially. • Parking Lot for 38 Spots - Planned additional parking is inadequate for a 66-seat restaurant, 16 slip marina, and their employees, especially because that number will likely double when the outdoor deck is used. • Delivery Trucks - In a small seaside hamlet that abhors traffic and congestion, now there will be general contractor, sub-contractor and landscaping trucks, garbage trucks, UPS/FEDEX trucks, marine and general restaurant supply trucks, as well as specialized fish, meat, produce, bread, paper goods, laundry, liquor, beer, soda and repair trucks. • Special Events -There is no contingency for the additional parking needed for special events, like weddings or other large parties, at the site. In the summer, cars are parked along the narrow streets, pulled halfway onto residents' lawns—and that's just from existing attractions in the area. Unless NSWF plans to "pave paradise and put up a parking lot," these conditions will get worse, make parking more visible than the water and become unbearable for taxpayers living in New Suffolk. 4. NSWF'S LACK OF TRANSPARENCY • Building Plans (and particularly changes in plans) have not been adequately disclosed to residents prior to the site plan being given to Southold Town, who will be most impacted by this development. • Funding - Planned funding has not been disclosed voluntarily, and a request for the same denied. Those who donated to NSWF in the hopes that the open space would be preserved are not happy that their donations are now going to development of a commercial project; one that was promised would never happen by the Peconic Land Trust and the NSWF. • Commercial Project- NSWF's apparent change in mission to make this property into their own moneymaker rather than a preserved open space is troubling to those who choose to live in a quiet beach community. While we understand the desire for this 501(c)3 organization to earn money to support preservation, they seem to be more concerned with a commercial business enhancing their cash flow without the attendant nonprofit goals! Not all in The New Suffolk community know anything about the details of this project, nor do all support this project. We need to have these plans out in the open so those on the fence about the plans can see what the area will look like with the proposed restaurant in place and make an informed decision about what they want New Suffolk to look and be like in the future. Besides this petition, we encourage you to write to the Planning Board and Committee Members and copy in Scott Russell, Supervisor and Southold Town Board Members. Printed Name: Signature, Address: Jo kj A-V) &6he.A ky N�– J Au �V Mr. Donald Wilcenski, Chair Southold Planning Board, and Committee Members 54375 Main Rd P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 �.. .,n. April 30, 2014 Dear Mr. Wilcenski, We, the following members of the New Suffolk Community, have serious reservations about the proposed site plan that the NSWF has submitted for Downtown New Suffolk (1000-117.-8-18). You may view it via this link: http://24.38.28.228:2040/weblink7/DocView.aspx?id=651680 What The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund originally stated was a wonderful goal:to, from its own statement, "preserve and protect ... respect ... the property's scenic beauty and maritime heritage." The New Suffolk community was led to believe a small snack bar would be on site, " . . . where people can meet, grab coffee or lunch and read a newspaper." (Suffolk Times article 3/19/13) But NSWF's latest goal is much different. Instead of a harborside snack bar amid open space with scenic bay views, the plan has gone from preservation to development and includes an elevated restaurant with 66 inside seats (and many more outdoor seats), behind concrete retaining walls in an area leveled by Superstorm Sandy. The NSWF has not been transparent about their change in goals and many in the community are not happy with what they've learned from meetings and sparse documents. Here are the four main concerns the community has with this level of development: 1. PROJECT SIZE - Full-Fledged Restaurant, not a Snack Bar- Larger than the original footprint of the Galley Ho, it features approximately 1,200-square-feet of outdoor decks for eating /drinking. - Elevation -The restaurant will be elevated because it's being built in an area that was devastated less than two years ago. Scale -A project of this scale would be devastating to the delicate waterfront property, destroying views for residents and having an environmental impact that will be felt throughout the community. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT - Raised Septic -The plan includes a raised septic system, a very questionable plan in a flood zone. Flooding could cause contents of a system to flow into our businesses and into our bay, one that is already closed for shellfishing, making our beaches off-limits for residents. - Retaining Wall — It may protect the restaurant somewhat, but when the area floods again, and it will, the water will now be forced into the streets of New Suffolk even more than before, and will "pool" there after the storm is over. FEMA has warned about development in flood zones and changing what we've done in the past; Superstorm Sandy has shown how vulnerable a flood zone New Suffolk is. This project only increases the possibility of complete environmental destruction and potential litigation by those impacted. Printed Name: Signature: Address: �V` 3. PARKING and CONGESTION - Restaurant, Marina, Public Beach -With the planned public beach and marina, parking needs in an already crowded community will increase exponentially. - Parking Lot for 38 Spots - Planned additional parking is inadequate for a 66-seat restaurant, 16 slip marina, and their employees, especially because that number will likely double when the outdoor deck is used. • Delivery Trucks - In a small seaside hamlet that abhors traffic and congestion, now there will be general contractor, sub-contractor and landscaping trucks, garbage trucks, UPS/FEDEX trucks, marine and general restaurant supply trucks, as well as specialized fish, meat, produce, bread, paper goods, laundry, liquor, beer, soda and repair trucks. - Special Events -There is no contingency for the additional parking needed for special events, like weddings or other large parties, at the site. In the summer, cars are parked along the narrow streets, pulled halfway onto residents' lawns—and that's just from existing attractions in the area. Unless NSWF plans to"pave paradise and put up a parking lot," these conditions will get worse, make parking more visible than the water and become unbearable for taxpayers living in New Suffolk. 4. NSWF'S LACK OF TRANSPARENCY • Building Plans (and particularly changes in plans) have not been adequately disclosed to residents prior to the site plan being given to Southold Town, who will be most impacted by this development. - Funding - Planned funding has not been disclosed voluntarily, and a request for the same denied. Those who donated to NSWF in the hopes that the open space would be preserved are not happy that their donations are now going to development of a commercial project; one that was promised would never happen by the Peconic Land Trust and the NSWF. - Commercial Project- NSWF's apparent change in mission to make this property into their own moneymaker rather than a preserved open space is troubling to those who choose to live in a quiet beach community. While we understand the desire for this 501(c)3 organization to earn money to support preservation, they seem to be more concerned with a commercial business enhancing their cash flow without the attendant nonprofit goals! Not all in The New Suffolk community know anything about the details of this project, nor do all support this project. We need to have these plans out in the open so those on the fence about the plans can see what the area will look like with the proposed restaurant in place and make an informed decision about what they want New Suffolk to look and be like in the future. Printed Name: Signature: Address: �c s E_ \ N M 3. PARKING and CONGESTION - Restaurant, Marina, Public Beach -With the planned public beach and marina, parking needs in an already crowded community will increase exponentially. - Parking Lot for 38 Spots - Planned additional parking is inadequate for a 66-seat restaurant, 16 slip marina, and their employees, especially because that number will likely double when the outdoor deck is used. - Delivery Trucks - In a small seaside hamlet that abhors traffic and congestion, now there will be general contractor, sub-contractor and landscaping trucks, garbage trucks, UPS/FEDEX trucks, marine and general restaurant supply trucks, as well as specialized fish, meat, produce, bread, paper goods, laundry, liquor, beer, soda and repair trucks. - Special Events -There is no contingency for the additional parking needed for special events, like weddings or other large parties, at the site. In the summer, cars are parked along the narrow streets, pulled halfway onto residents' lawns—and that's just from existing attractions in the area. Unless NSWF plans to "pave paradise and put up a parking lot," these conditions will get worse, make parking more visible than the water and become unbearable for taxpayers living in New Suffolk. 4. NSWF'S LACK OF TRANSPARENCY - Building Plans (and particularly changes in plans) have not been adequately disclosed to residents prior to the site plan being given to Southold Town, who will be most impacted by this development. - Funding - Planned funding has not been disclosed voluntarily, and a request for the same denied. Those who donated to NSWF in the hopes that the open space would be preserved are not happy that their donations are now going to development of a commercial project; one that was promised would never happen by the Peconic Land Trust and the NSWF. - Commercial Project- NSWF's apparent change in mission to make this property into their own moneymaker rather than a preserved open space is troubling to those who choose to live in a quiet beach community. While we understand the desire for this 501(c)3 organization to earn money to support preservation, they seem to be more concerned with a commercial business enhancing their cash flow without the attendant nonprofit goals! Not all in The New Suffolk community know anything about the details of this project, nor do all support this project. We need to have these plans out in the open so those on the fence about the plans can see what the area will look like with the proposed restaurant in place and make an informed decision about what they want New Suffolk to look and be like in the future. Besides this petition, we encourage you to write to the Planning Board and Committee Members and copy in Scott Russell Supervisor and Southold Town board Members. Printed Name: Sign u Address: /aFr //9T� 30�' �4 N � Mr. Donald Wilcenski, Chair Southold Planning Board, and Committee Members ` nj,r. .F w 54375 Main Rd P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 April 30, 2014 Dear Mr. Wilcenski, We, the following members of the New Suffolk Community, have serious reservations about the proposed site plan that the NSWF has submitted for Downtown New Suffolk (1000-117.-8-18). You may view it via this link: http://24.38.28.228:2040/webli nk7/DocView.aspx?id=651680 What The New Suffolk Waterfront Fund originally stated was a wonderful goal: to, from its own statement, "preserve and protect ... respect ... the property's scenic beauty and maritime heritage." The New Suffolk community was led to believe a small snack bar would be on site, " . . . where people can meet, grab coffee or lunch and read a newspaper." (Suffolk Times article 3/19/13) But NSWF's latest goal is much different. Instead of a harborside snack bar amid open space with scenic bay views, the plan has gone from preservation to development and includes an elevated restaurant with 66 inside seats (and many more outdoor seats), behind concrete retaining walls in an area leveled by Superstorm Sandy. The NSWF has not been transparent about their change in goals and many in the community are not happy with what they've learned from meetings and sparse documents. Here are the four main concerns the community has with this level of development: 1. PROJECT SIZE - Full-Fledged Restaurant, not a Snack Bar- Larger than the original footprint of the Galley Ho, it features approximately a 1,200-square-foot outdoor deck for eating and drinking. • Elevation -The restaurant will be elevated because it's being built in an area that was devastated less than two years ago. Scale -A project of this scale would be devastating to the delicate waterfront property, destroying views for residents and having an environmental impact that will be felt throughout the community. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT - Raised Septic -The plan includes a raised septic system, a very questionable plan in a flood zone. Flooding could cause contents of a system to flow into our businesses and into our bay, one that is already closed for shellfishing, making our beaches off-limits for residents. - Retaining Wall — It may protect the restaurant somewhat, but when the area floods again, and it will, the water will now be forced into the streets of New Suffolk even more than before, and will "pool"there after the storm is over. FEMA has warned about development in flood zones and changing what we've done in the past; Superstorm Sandy has shown how vulnerable a flood zone New Suffolk is. This project only increases the possibility of complete environmental destruction and potential litigation by those impacted. J. 3. PARKING and CONGESTION • Restaurant, Marina, Public Beach -With the planned public beach and marina, parking needs in an already crowded community will increase exponentially. - Parking Lot for 38 Spots - Planned additional parking is inadequate for a 66-seat restaurant, 16 slip marina, and their employees, especially because that number will likely double when the outdoor deck is used. - Delivery Trucks - In a small seaside hamlet that abhors traffic and congestion, now there will be general contractor, sub-contractor and landscaping trucks, garbage trucks, UPS/FEDEX trucks, marine and general restaurant supply trucks, as well as specialized fish, meat, produce, bread, paper goods, laundry, liquor, beer, soda and repair trucks. - Special Events -There is no contingency for the additional parking needed for special events, like weddings or other large parties, at the site. In the summer, cars are parked along the narrow streets, pulled halfway onto residents' lawns— and that's just from existing attractions in the area. Unless NSWF plans to "pave paradise and put up a parking lot," these conditions will get worse, make parking more visible than the water and become unbearable for taxpayers living in New Suffolk. 4. NSWF'S LACK OF TRANSPARENCY • Building Plans (and particularly changes in plans) have not been adequately disclosed to residents prior to the site plan being given to Southold Town, who will be most impacted by this development. - Funding - Planned funding has not been disclosed voluntarily, and a request for the same denied. Those who donated to NSWF in the hopes that the open space would be preserved are not happy that their donations are now going to development of a commercial project; one that was promised would never happen by the Peconic Land Trust and the NSWF. • Commercial Project- NSWF's apparent change in mission to make this property into their own moneymaker rather than a preserved open space is troubling to those who choose to live in a quiet beach community. While we understand the desire for this 501(c)3 organization to earn money to support preservation, they seem to be more concerned with a commercial business enhancing their cash flow without the attendant nonprofit goals! Not all in The New Suffolk community know anything about the details of this project, nor do all support this project. We need to have these plans out in the open so those on the fence about the plans can see what the area will look like with the proposed restaurant in place and make an informed decision about what they want New Suffolk to look and be like in the future. Printed Name: Signature: Address: �Cxz� 1�,n-� s��«,s f s , r� s-� ST s�fT Lam. �� c� �, 1 leo l� �✓`�. -/ s Printed Name: Signat 4,- Address: Et?14ulC- DE tpasg l /V/,r '/ a ANN lh _ lfoo q`4 Sf IATAYyfp c — v st Nev /5,3,75- g List- Re st-f/o f c A 2,/`A-•w/4 1 t 9-X-6 i 72- ISO 1 � • 0 + Printed Name: Sign ure: Address: ell , ► 14Q n . Des 1 S-f- � y d NS >u �� P- o . x 39 Nla i L LJV,1 Neu)Ne ��r � ntl� pay AYA IV re v s h • • 3. PARKING and CONGESTION - Restaurant, Marina, Public Beach -With the planned public beach and marina, parking needs in an already crowded community will increase exponentially. - Parking Lot for 38 Spots - Planned additional parking is inadequate for a 66-seat restaurant, 16 slip marina, and their employees, especially because that number will likely double when the outdoor deck is used. - Delivery Trucks - In a small seaside hamlet that abhors traffic and congestion, now there will be general contractor, sub-contractor and landscaping trucks, garbage trucks, UPS/FEDEX trucks, marine and general restaurant supply trucks, as well as specialized fish, meat, produce, bread, paper goods, laundry, liquor, beer, soda and repair trucks. - Special Events -There is no contingency for the additional parking needed for special events, like weddings or other large parties, at the site. In the summer, cars are parked along the narrow streets, pulled halfway onto residents' lawns —and that's just from existing attractions in the area. Unless NSWF plans to "pave paradise and put up a parking lot," these conditions will get worse, make parking more visible than the water and become unbearable for taxpayers living in New Suffolk. 4. NSWF'S LACK OF TRANSPARENCY - Building Plans (and particularly changes in plans) have not been adequately disclosed to residents prior to the site plan being given to Southold Town, who will be most impacted by this development. - Funding - Planned funding has not been disclosed voluntarily, and a request for the same denied. Those who donated to NSWF in the hopes that the open space would be preserved are not happy that their donations are now going to development of a commercial project; one that was promised would never happen by the Peconic Land Trust and the NSWF. - Commercial Project- NSWF's apparent change in mission to make this property into their own moneymaker rather than a preserved open space is troubling to those who choose to live in a quiet beach community. While we understand the desire for this 501(c)3 organization to earn money to support preservation, they seem to be more concerned with a commercial business enhancing their cash flow without the attendant nonprofit goals! Not all in The New Suffolk community know anything about the details of this project, nor do all support this project. We need to have these plans out in the open so those on the fence about the plans can see what the area will look like with the proposed restaurant in place and make an informed decision about what they want New Suffolk to look and be like in the future. Printed Name: Signature: Address: 7�b NOT- 1400 4N-St Ire- rpoe `� uP �1 �yc.��t W J4�_3_ 19 � �w sT. Printed Name: Si nature: Address: vp KW �CVI LA PC+YleL h 1� goi�►es �q�6 l )C�-n OCL/ ,. h ZA 6- t 04t�fyrAO-L ,t'D "I ov t�/