Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence SOU'I TOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS, '.��. (SCSR) P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 fes'` Lr .5417,„ ,, ' i,s 1 August 10; 2001 `� „t„ Bennett Orlowski, Chairman ' AUG132001 Town of Southold Planning Board Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 SouthddTown Southold,NY 11971 Pinning'iioarol Re: Cross Sound Ferry Site Plan Application Dear Mr. Orlowski: On behalf of Southold Citizens for Safe Roads, Inc. ("SCSR"), I submit this information for the Planning Board's consideration in connection with its review of the Site Plan Application of Cross Sound Ferry Services,Inc. ("CSF"), as requested in your letter of July 17, 2001. This letter should be read to incorporate SCSR's previous statements and submissions concerning CSF's most recent Site Plan Application, including those made at the July 16, 2001,hearing. In addition, we believe that much of what SCSR has submitted to the Planning Board concerning CSF's previous Site Plan Application is germane to this application,particularly as it relates to traffic,water quality and the environmental impact of CSF's activities and its proposed projects. Because the revised Site Plan Application does not meaningfully address the environmental and other concerns raised by the previous application, SCSR's previous submissions concerning the environment surrounding the site and how it may be affected by CSF's activities and projects should be considered by the Planning Board at this juncture as well. SCSR strongly believes that CSF's Site Plan Application is clearly a Type I action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act(SEQRA), and therefore the Planning Board has no alternative but to make a determination that a proper environmental review must be conducted before further consideration of the Site Plan Application. In its application, CSF contends that the 10 Reasons for the Original Positive Declaration no longer apply. In fact,the contrary is true--all 10 Reasons continue to be relevant to the Site Plan, which is why this is a Type I action. Reason #1: "The project is a Type I action"and it "is located adjacent to the surface waters of Gardiners Bay, which comprises a portion of the Peconic Bay Estuary, and lies within the Orient Point Critical Environmental Area". "In addition, the project is in proximity to the Orient Beach State Park and 48+ acres of County Owned Land". Simply removing the Trust Property from the Site Plan Application changes none of this. Thus,the current proposal, like the previous one, may very well "impair the environmental characteristics of this CEA". It is also clear that because the site is "substantially contiguous" to "any publicly owned or operated parkland,recreation SOUTHOLD TOWN: A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY SOU BOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS, . (SCSR) 2 P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 area or designated open space", if the project impacts only 25% of any of the SEQRA thresholds, it is a Type I action. Reason #2: "The proposed action will cause a significant increase in the intensity of land use on the project site, as a function of the expanded parking, demand for parking in connection with ferry operations and on-site traffic circulation for parking access." CSF contends,misleadingly,that because the proposed action consists only of"improvements" to the site and not "expanded parking",the action should be approved without any environmental review. CSF neglects to mention that the West lot had been approved in 1995 for 69 spaces, and that there has never been any approval for any parking on the Snack Bar lot. The Site Plan Application seeks to legitimize the current levels of parking on both the West lot and Snack Bar lot--which dramatically exceed anything that has ever been approved before. If the Site Plan Application were up front about what it was hoping to achieve, it would state that it seeks to expand the approved parking on those lots from a total of 69 to current levels. Notably,the Site Plan Application deliberately omits any reference to the number of parking spaces involved. Field investigations by Schneider Engineering have shown the following numbers of parked cars at the respective lots: Date Snack Bar West 2 Hour SR 25 7/6/01 235 72 8 36 7/15/01 283 80 12 71 7/20/01 249 63 9 21 7/28/01 226 85 21 26 The total number of cars at the Snack Bar and West lots was 307 (Friday, July 6, 2001), 363 (Sunday, July 15, 2001), 312 (Friday, July 20, 2001) and 311 (Saturday, July 28, 2001). In addition, a significant number of cars were parked on SR 25 on those days, and it would be reasonable to conclude that the overwhelming preponderance of those cars were associated with CSF's business as well. These numbers represent dramatic increases in the amount of parking at the site, and are more than enough to meet the 25%threshold under SEQRA to be deemed a Type I action. Reason #3: "The proposed action may change the need and use of public and pedestrian transportation services (including existing bike trail), and may increase the demand for other community services including fire,policy, recreational facilities and utilities." Nothing has changed in the revised site plan with respect to the plan's potential impact on these items,which is self-evident given the sheer magnitude of the increase in traffic and parking, as described above. SOUTHOLD TOWN: A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY SO1 i riOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS, (SCSR) 3 P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 Reason #4: "The proposed action will cause a significant increase in the number of vehicle trips which utilize off-site infrastructure facilities primarily including existing transportation systems". Nothing has changed as a result of the revisions to the site plan;the increase in traffic parallels the increase in parking at the site, as described above, and the removal of the Trust Property from the plan does nothing to address the traffic concerns. Reason #5: "The project may adversely change noise and air quality as a function of increased traffic, and/or may substantially increase solid waste generation". Again,the revisions to the site plan do nothing to address these issues. Reason #6: "Increased intensity of site use for high speed ferry service will increase the use of on-site facilities,particularly sanitary flow and water use, and may result in an adverse impact on the environment." 1 Again,the revisions to the site plan do nothing to address these issues. Reason #7: "The project may impact visual and aesthetic resources, particularly as regards lighting, and use during both daytime and night time hours." The Site Plan Application contemplates increasing the amount of lighting at the site. Reason #8: "The proposed project may cause growth inducing aspects associated with the proposed project. In addition, the study of mitigation of potential environmental impacts and alternatives would be facilitated by the preparation of a Draft EIS." This continues to be true for the current Site Plan Application. A proper environmental review would aid in the study of the impact the projects would have and potential alternatives. Reason #9: "The project involves multiple agency jurisdictions and permits, and the comprehensive review of potential impacts would be facilitated through the preparation of a Draft EIS." CSF concedes that NYSDOT and the Town Trustees may be involved in addition to the Planning Board in this proceeding, and certainly a Draft EIS would pose no impediment to any regulatory process. Reason #10: "Impact of passenger only jet boats on marine environment." Nothing in the revised Site Plan Application addresses this concern. Without a Draft EIS,there will be no way to determine whether the quality of the water in this Critical Environmental Area is adversely affected. SOUTHOLD TOWN: A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY } SOLI.riOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS,.'rr:G. (SCSR) 4 P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 In conclusion, the revised Site Plan Application barely addresses the 10 Reasons for the Original Positive Declaration. CSF is attempting to seek back-door approval of the dramatic increase in parking at the West and Snack Bar lots without the appropriate environmental review that without question would have been required had it , openly requested the kind of expansion in parking that is contemplated here. The Planning Board should not reward CSF for neglecting to include the number of parking spaces in its Site Plan Application, when it knows full well that had CSF included that number,there would be no question that the project is a Type I action. Sincerely, \ ,----.______- Thor Hanson, President Copy to: Town of Southold Town Board P.O. Box 1655 Southold,NY 11971 Town of Southold Building Dept. P.O. Box 1655 Southold,NY 11971 Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals P.O. Box 1655 Southold,NY 11971 Town of Southold Board of Trustees P.O. Box 1655 Southold,NY 11971 Town of Southold Transportation Committee P.O. Box 1655 Southold,NY 11971 SOUTHOLD TOWN: A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY SOIa`rnOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS, it . (SCSR) 5 P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 Kim Shaw, Environmental Analyst Department of Ecology Department of Health Services County Center Riverhead,NY 11901 Stephen Jones Council for Environmental Quality Department of Planning P.O. Box 6100 Hauppauge,NY 11788 James Bagg, Director Council for Environmental Quality Department of Planning P.O. Box 6100 Hauppauge,NY 11788 John C. Murray,Planner Transportation Division Department of Public Works 335 Yaphank Avenue Yaphank,NY 11980 William Sickles, Superintendent Department of Parks, Recreation& Conservation P.O. Box 144, Montauk Hwy. W. Sayville,NY 11796-0144 George Stafford, Director Coastal Resources&Waterfront Revitalization Division New York Department of State 162 Washington Avenue Albany,NY 12231 John P. Cahill, Commissioner New York Department of Environmental Conservation 50 Wolf Road Albany,NY 11233 Roger Evans, Director NYSDEC Bldg. 40, SUNY Rm. 219 Stony Brook,NY 11790 SOUTHOLD TOWN: A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY SOIheiOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS,1,zg. (SCSR) 6 P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 Darrel Kost, Regional Env. Coordinator Dept. of Transportation State Office Building 250 Veterans Memorial Hwy. Hauppauge,NY 11788 Barry Hecht Passenger Transportation Division NYS Dept. of Transportation W. Averell Harriman State Office Building Campus 1220 Washington Avenue Floor&Rm. 4-115 Albany,NY 12232 Thomas Lyons, Director Environmental Management Bureau Office of Parks,Recreation&Historic Preservation Bldg. 1, 13th Floor Empire State Plaza Albany,NY 12238 Dr. David Huysoll,Director Division of Agricultural Research-Plum Island U.S. Department of Agriculture P.O. Box 848 Greenport,NY 11944 US Army Corp. of Engineers NY District Jacob K. Javits Federal Bldg. New York,NY 10278-0090 Attn: Regulatory Branch Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA) 26 Federal Plaza Room 1338 New York,NY 10278 Attn: Response&Recovery Division Debra O'Kane,Executive Director North Fork Environmental Council P.O. Box 799 Mattituck,NY 11952 SOUTHOLD TOWN:A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY SOIi rHOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS, '1'14(.•'. (SCSR) 7 P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 Mr. Gerald Newman, Chief Planner Suffolk County Planning Commission H. Lee Dennison Bldg. -4th Floor 100 Veterans Memorial Highway P. O. Box 6100 Hauppauge,NY 11788-0099 BY EXPRESS MAIL SOUTHOLD TOWN:A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY 6 r/S MERLON E. WIGGIN, Ph.D.,M.E. 10940 MAIN ROAD EAST MARION, NY 11939 August 9, 2001 Mr. Bennett Orlowski - Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Hall P. 0. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Dear Benny: SUBJECT: Improved parking at the Cross Sound Orient Point Ferry Terminal. I attended yet another public hearing on the request to improve an existing parking area at the Cross Sound Ferry Terminal at Orient Point. First of all, I-live on the Main Road,'Route 25, in East Marion and experience the increase in-traffic and 'the noise that goes with,it., Do I like it? = Of course not but you'do not seem to be trying to do-anything aboutit-. Some things that might help include:- • Work towards a direct ferry from New London to the South shore. • Promote more use of public transportation. Several years ago, my wife in trying to do her part in reducing traffic on Route 25, started using Sunrise Coach as much as possible, which makes twelve trips between Orient and Greenport each day. From her observations there is almost never any Orient residents on the busses that she takes. As Cross Sound Ferry operates under Certificate issued by the Interstate Commerce Commission which says in part that they are ordered to "render continuous and adequate service to the public" between Orient Point and New London. Therefore, isn't Cross Sound is required by law to transport all those that wish to'go?'-I'am sure that the numbers are going to:increase.just like'the traffic on'all of our highwaysireincreasing.= ' , - In all of the rhetoric from Southold For Safe Roads representatives, never once did I hear them state how they would operate the ferry service so as to reduce traffic. Don't they realize that they are part of the problem? I was impressed with the case made by Southold For Safe Roads traffic consultant for additional parking. In the interest of public safety, shouldn't you be pushing Cross Sound to provide additional parking so as to get the vehicles off the shoulders of the road? Are you requiring at least a five year parking plan based on traffic studies? Speaking of public safety, the condition of the so-called existing Snack Bar parking lot is a real hazard to pedestrians with its holes and rough conditions. The American Disabilities Act requires that walk areas be stable, firm, and that vertical changes greater than one-quarter inch be beveled and shaped. It is a wonder that a class action suit for the handicapped has not been started against the Southold Town Planning Board and Cross Sound Ferry because of the hazardous pedestrian conditions in the existing parking lot. S'i cerely, 410 / , l : erlon E. Wig Main Road Resident East Marion ZoiNC- ✓ LANDS END PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCCJ ,)N P. O.Box 221 Orient,NY 11957 (631)31)323-26344 July 11,2001 Mr. Bennett Orlowski Jr. Chairman iFcE1t1 Town of Southold Planning Board Southold Town Hall JUL 12 2001 Re: Proposed Cross Sound Ferry Site Plan Soli 0; it Dear Chairman Orlowski: Pra crri,of ff e:fd 1 Lands End is the closest residential neighborhood to the Cross Sound Ferry site, located just to the west and across the Main Road from the ferry complex. Due to this proximity we have concerns that are unique to our community that have probably not been addressed in your review to date of the proposed site plan. These concern are set forth below so that they may be considered and included in your deliberations and decisions on the plan. • 1. Public address system . The ferry public address=system speakers are located on the four"sides:of the'ter final building's°.at least twc"arë'directed in part towa'rd's LandsrEnd:Given=a south wind and the right atmospheric conditions"the ferry'annouricements Caine'iii"loud and clear" to our homes particularly in the months when a screening line of trees on the north side of the Main Road is bare of leaves. Our Association has written to Cross Sound about this problem in the past but has never received a reply. This situation can probably be mitigated by changing the speaker locations and I believe the Town Code specifically states that public address speakers should be directed away from residential neighborhoods. Similarly,noise from vehicles going over the ferry vessel ramps can also probably also be mitigated if an effort to do so was required. 2. Diesel Exhaust The odor and soot from diesel'exhaust by idling ferry vessels, trucks;and buses is prevalent given the right atmospheric:conditions. Given'thei aghItude of diesel emissions and,the:proximity to'a resideiitiai area"restrictions oiiidling'vessels&aiid:rk J= vehicles would seem appropriate.. The Board should also be aware that Lands End is being increasingly built up in recent years. Three of the lots closest to the ferry have recently been purchased by people with plans for building in the near future. There will be more homes and some of them will be in closer proximity to the ferry which will exacerbate the conditions noted above We hope that the Planning Board will take these comments into serious consideration in your deliberations on the proposed site plan. Please note that as an Association we fully support the efforts of Southold Citizens for Safe Roads and their more townwide concerns and our comments should be viewed as ones unique to our community and in addition to,not in lieu of, theirs and other concerned citizen groups. Sincerely, • • h les M. Murrin President Lands End Property Owners Assoc. vett64 ('4 Peter Deutsch 1700 Village Lane, PO Box 171 Orient, NY 11957 Phone: 631 323 3815 Fax: 631 323 2379 E-mail: PeterDeutsch@earthlink.com Ben Orlowski Chairman, Planning Board Town of Southold 53095 Main Road, PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 March 15th, 2001 Dear Mr. Orlowski and Members of the Planning Board, Regarding the current application by Cross Sound Ferry(CSF)for approval of additional parking spaces at the Orient Terminus. I would like to make the following observations: 1)I am a resident of Orient,and a frequent customer of CSF.The service they provide to the residents of our town is excellent,and they are to be commended for the professionalism and pride which they have in their work.As a contributor to various organizations throughout our community they have shown considerable civic engagement, and for this they are also to be commended. 2)The application for additional parking spaces,and the cost of installing these new facilities would not be undertaken unless CSF was in need of additional parking.There are only two possible explanations that would explain this expansion: either there is increased traffic or the nature of the traffic has significantly changed. You must discount as frivolous and misleading any attempt to characterize the need for additional employee parking as the reason for the expansion. 3)If the only way that Southold Town Planning can regulate the increase in traffic resulting from CSF's expansion is through the granting or denying of parking space then serious consideration should be given to how you will respond to this application.Clearly the Southold Citizens for Safe Roads(SCSR)feel that a full SEQRA review is appropriate before granting this application. I understand that you also have the support of the Judge who ruled on this matter in 1995. 4)You must recognize that the New London to Orient crossing is the only business that CSF currently enjoys.The growth of CSF therefore is dependent either on increased traffic or increased prices.There are no other alternatives. It is unlikely that CSF will voluntarily reduce the volume of traffic,since there is no imperative for them to do so,and growth through additional traffic is preferable to increasing ticket prices 5)By allowing CSF to expand the parking in Orient without a SEQRA,you are not facing the ultimate reality,which is that the traffic will continue to increase,the opposition to CSF's uncontrolled expansion will become more vociferous,and you will ultimately have to deal with the consequences at some future point. Not requiring a SEQRA review at this time does nothing to solve the underlying problem, it simply avoids the issue. We urge you to consider very carefully the decision before you. What is in the best interest of our community?Is there a way that you can rule that will alleviate the parking problems at Orient, but at the same time clearly limit the scope of the expansion of the CSF service?Can you send a clear message to CSF management that, in future,all projected expansion of the service from New London to Orient will need to be approved here in Southold before not after it is instituted?Can you encourage the States of New York and Connecticut to look at other crossing routes so that traffic can be routed more appropriately? I would like to thank you for your careful consideration of this difficult issue. In submitting this opinion, I am not unaware of the criticism that the board has had to endure, and I wish to make clear that I take no part in that criticism. I respect anyone who has the courage and the commitment to serve in your capacity,and wish you well in your deliberations. Yours sincerely, v /04..41 • MAR 2 2 21 Southold Town - viKk5F - 014.3 To: Mr. Benny Orlowski, Jr March 10, 2001 Chairman of the Planning Board P.O. Box 1179, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971 Dear Mr. Orlowski: We the undersigned are concerned about the negative effects on the environment and the quality of life caused by the increased traffic to the Cross Sound Ferry along Rt. 25, as well as the increased need for parking spaces at the ferry site. `-We are requesting a full environmental review of the SEQRA (STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW Acr) process and a complete site plan rather than the concept submitted by the Cross Sound Ferry. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Z.,62;r1k/aff,--41.----- Oa .cu-e) iM_ 9�-d evA.tpt i- q77, 7 8 f!,• 2,qe , / 2 ' 0/ >60 sa! *77- d2S3 1 (04 ' Y3! 77zL sr- 6e(-6,vac✓z - i'Y 1/ 7 7 - zoS3 i 7 i S� ' , �e�— Gvretayot-e - -47 --7 84o1 s 1'7I S *1' 511-ed �re�e►�.Pdtth 1.1-7 --8G.O 1 „ E )1.1,1.66., 1 ,7 9--- 5, 144 A-71" 6qt7-1A-P),/tv,),/' . V77-A 3 2. it /r 'i� cL " ,, Aly 1 19 y c0,140/ 1 _ E.-- So.,,,, eoecti 1 dtf_44rit /11Y ( (Nei '.' • _.d ,oc.c„c RQ. ree- yo rT NO i1 /' ill f I 04W. / /0 er )4auitid dat f 1 /4 / / . - / / /(9Jq 7 / 0--r---dt---- /0 ,625 *, frie s Fw 9_,(. q 7. , _,,, / r, / /0(10)r,A) is-50 R ., n(r,,A(.6 . prEcgalingif Alsr- -Ns a:a !„, /51;1A11L(r E X P O S E D BRICK March 5, 2001 Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman of the Planning Board PO Box 1179 53095 Main road Southhold, New York 11971 Dear Mr. Orlowski, Jr. As a resident of Orient, New York I believe that the concerns reflected in the 1996 Consultants plan to the Planning Board still exist and need to be addressed. Personally, we have experience increased traffic along routes 25 and 48. In fact, we often refer to the ferry schedule when we leave Orient in order to avoid the traffic. We are also a family of cyclists. It's unnerving to experience the speeding cars heading to catch the ferry as well as being forced to move out of the bike lane because of parked cars. It is also,quite disturbing when your six-year-old son asks why.the ferry is on fire as he watches big bursts of black smoke fume pass out from the engines of Fox Wood ferry. Please do no ignore your own consultants work and help preserve the environment, safety and lifestyle of the Southhold community. Kin• ' - ' ars , Andrew Cohen ; I 355 Skippers Lane Orient, New York 323-1372 VP - 8 2001 exposedbrick.com 0) 212 226 0060 212.226.0974 E 591 Broadway, NY, NY 10012 i ` 5 r - :3/4 :71 Bennett Orlowski, Jr. 3; 5; Chairman of the Planning Board MAR 5 no1 Town of Southold PO Box 1179 Southold 14 53095 Main Road naming „ o ,14 Southold, New York 11971 March 3, 2001 Dear Mr. Orlowski: You are perfectly knowledgeable and aware of the issues generated by the growth of Cross Sound Ferry. I need not revisit them for you. As a member of SCSR (and Thor's wife), I, too, have become immersed in the issues raised by the actions of Cross Sound and the lack of action by the Town. Some aspects of the current unregulated traffic flow that are seldom discussed but should be, include the following: Traffic: Yes, there is an increase of traffic (you only have to live here and watch it pour past driveways), but more than that is the nature of that traffic. These drivers are not leisurely going about daily errands...picking up the dry cleaning, marketing at the IGA, dropping off video tapes at the library. These are divers intent on making the ferry. They are literally afraid of "missing the boat,” and they drive accordingly, which is often rapidly and recklessly. Yes, better law enforcement would help, but the issue is the number of cars and trucks dashing from boats - and speeding to boats, with drivers heedless of the velocity of their vehicles. Land Preservation: The Town Board has taken innovative measures to preserve land in Southold, harkening to swelling support of this issue and responding in a responsible manner. Intrinsic to this preservation, of course, are those marvelous "scenic vistas" of which much has been made. These vistas were identified with help from the NY State Department of Parks and Recreation, Jean Cochran's interest, and local assistance but these aesthetic gems can rapidly recede from view under the onslaught of heavy traffic which diminishes the pleasure (and safety) of looking at any scenic vista. Try, for example, glancing at Dam Pond when a ferry has let out. Historic Preservation: Recently, the Town has expressed some interest in this subject. Cynically speaking, this interest is probably tied to demands of the waterfront redevelopmet requirements, but optimistically the possible CLG experiment in Orient will be successful and it offers opportunity for such preservation measures in other parts of the Town. Untrammelled traffic, however, is destructive to such preservation efforts. No matter what the age or historic legacy of a building, the pollution, the vibrations, the noise, the danger degrade these buildings and discourage responsible ownership. Quickly, they slip into disrepair, disuse and ultimate destruction. The North Road, as you know, is filled with structures susceptible to such fate. Realtors (the exception might be Frank Murphy) acknowledge readily why buildings on that road languish long with For Sale signs: the ferry traffic. Please do not disregard these aspects of the level of traffic generated by CSF, but add them to the more frequently mentioned ones of environmental impact, quality of life and due process of law. Thank you for your attention. .0 COL Charlotte Hanso Orient, NY cc. The Honorable Town Supervisor, Jean Cochran �J E /5p(45r.;-- „ElRI"Y'4 " Orient, March 2, 2001 Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman ilAR _ 5 2001 Southold Town Planning Board P.O.Box 1179 ScutheldRawn 53095 Main Road P a ti t'Board Southold,New York 11971 Dear Mr. Orlowski, I have been living in Orient since before the construction of the new ferry terminal at Orient Point, and I have seen the extraordinary growth of traffic created by Cross Sound Ferry,with the multiplication of the number of round trips to New London; earlier and later departures;the addition of larger boats, and, finally,the introduction of the passenger ferry. It is not easy for me to understand why Southold Town Government has never ordered a full analysis of the environmental impact of such a large undertaking in such a sensitive area. You now have the opportunity to require such analysis;please don't waste it. We urgently need a serious planning initiative from you and your board to contain this dramatic growth of ferry traffic and prevent the destruction of our town. Sincerely, /M. Ni Sylvia Newman ' v/5F fr JUDY WATKINS & ROGER AHRENS P.O. Box 539 • Orient, NY • 11957-0539 Tel. 631 + 323-0065 • Fax 631 + 323-9703 D rztLEv , -. (i‘ w, ---/ March 1, 2001 MAR - 2la stfahodbm Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. inarpftlEmal Chairman of the Planning Board P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York, 11971 Dear Mr. Orlowski, This week a serious traffic accident on the main road necessitated that ferry traffic be re-routed for several hours through Orient hamlet. The burden of auto and truck volume (and this is only winter) that Main Road residents must bear every day and night was striking when seen on the streets of our historic district. We would like to add our voices to those asking you and The Planning Board to require a complete site plan for the Cross Island Ferry proposal as well as a full environmental review. We are depending on you, our advocates, to protect residents in all the areas outlined in the 1996 Concerns presented to The Board by Voorhis &Associates. Sincerely, Z, elf , Mit, . Watkins Rogi H. Ahrens r. JERILYN BARR WOODHOUSE V$; rC1 \T1J 4r 1+ Bennett Orlowski, Jr.,Chairman Southold Town Pplanning Board 1 P.O. Box 1179 M' ` 2 gal 53095 Main Road Southold,NY 11971 &nib,raTtitan POBl , Dear Mr. Orlowski, John and I attended the recent planning board meeting and followed with interest the discussion concerning the Cross Sound Ferry application. We were somewhat dismayed (to say the least)by the direction of the meeting—and the seeming lack of understanding that many in the audience had about the purpose of environmental reviews and their relationship to planning and development Let us say right up front that(1)we live in Orient (2) support the efforts of both SCSR and NFEC as members, and in my case, an NFEC board member; (3) operate a business and work within the town, and (3) worked to elect the United Southold slates when you and Tom Wickham ran for office initially. Clearly we have a bias—we favor full scale environmental reviews for any projects that may have an impact on the critical environmental areas in our town and which may impact on the town's utilization of resources to ensure the safety and well- being of its residents including the ability to provide adequate and safe water. Like many of our neighbors, we use the ferry and agree that the ferry plays an important role in the economic and social dimension of Southold town. Because we like and use the ferry, however, does not mean that CSF can continue to"snooker" you/us and arrogantly ignore the impact of its growth and expansion on the town and its people. There is an old joke you probably know about the failure of someone to recognize the elephant standing in the middle of the room because they only see its tail. CSF has become a behemoth and is asking that you only look at its tail. As chairman of the planning board,we urge you to see the animal for what it really is and look at the sum total of all of its parts. What do we want? A FULL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. (We also want you to dismiss the notion of a traffic study that equates March with September -who paid for that study anyhow???) SCSR's ad prompted us to write and add our voices to those asking you to again listen to the recommendations of your own consultant. The points made in 1996 are every bit as relevant today, if not more so. Sincerely yours, et A 'Jeri'Woodhouse ohn Woodhouse Nht/t6 F • r - ztivE- 17 ‘ '13\s Gunther R. Geiss, Ph.D. MAR o Aj,)1 Carole A. Geiss 2155 Long Creek Drive MI Southold, New York 11971 __ (631) 765-3255 Rennin March 1, 2001 Mr. Benny Orlowski, Jr. Chairman, Southold Planning Board P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Dear Mr. Orlowski: Planning is a complex and difficult art, and sometimes a seemingly thankless task as well. Doing it well requires the artful balance between and among: • progress and change versus preservation and respect for history; • economic development versus environmental health; • constitutional rights to the protection and enjoyment of private property versus community needs and benefits; • needs and desires of residents versus accommodation of tourists; • the provision for increased vehicular traffic, and the preservation of rural peace and pace. The purpose of this preamble is to recognize the difficulty of the task you and the Planning Board face, and to commend you for committing your time and energy to wrestling with the complex issues before you. Our concern is with the Cross Sound Ferry; we explain why. We recently moved to Southold after 35 years' residence in Huntington. We were drawn to Huntington because it had the only 20-year long-range plan on Long Island. We enjoyed the benefits of leadership such as provided by the late Congressman Jerome Ambro who, as Town Supervisor, established the Environmental Protection Board,the Oil Spill Control Board, and negotiated successfully to limit the pollution produced by the expansion of the LILCO Northport Generating Station. Administrations that followed abandoned the plan and created "Queens east."A stroll to local shopping became a life-threatening adventure, i.e., crossing Route 25. More recently, we found ourselves engaged in trying to protect a unique residential area against the expansion and increasingly negative impact of a"simple summer day camp."That day camp started on an estate in that unique and historical residential area with a mere 150 campers from the local area. Over time, and with the relentless effort of the out-of-state owner, it came to serve, daily, 1500 campers from the metropolitan area. They were brought in the morning and taken away in the afternoon by a fleet of some 50 busses that passed through the community, creating serious safety, noise, and pollution problems, and blocking traffic entry and exit for a half hour. The weekends brought tour busses and catered affairs for up to 2000 guests, year'round. Then a Montessori School. All this on property permitted for a summer day camp only—a permit for a single business activity. In an attempt to refute complaints regarding traffic and safety, a camp-sponsored traffic study was conducted during a week in mid-winter. Ultimately, careful organization of the community and commitment that ran to hiring attorneys and traffic experts to appear before the Zoning Board of Appeals resulted in recognition by the owner, if not officially by the ZBA,that cooperation and co-existence was the prudent path. The community now enjoys a more peaceful existence with a restrained and more considerate day camp. The analogy is simple and direct: economic motives drive relentless expansion and intrusion by businesses unless checked by responsible governmental action or community action. The Cross Sound Ferry is similarly a "pre-existing use"that is"serving the community." But, its expansion is not pre-ordained nor required. The operations of the business without proper planning or limitation causes patrons to impinge and impact on the surrounding public and private property. That impact is most apparent during times of peak usage; therefore, a proper traffic study would be done at periods of peak usage, not"out of season." Furthermore, Orient Point is not a destination, except for those who use the ferries, the parklands, or the restaurant; and, it is the passenger-only ferry, advertised as the Sea Jet"Cross Sound Ferry to Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun Casinos!"that has caused a marked increase in the demand for parking spaces. However, Greenport is a destination. The Board might urge Cross Sound Ferry to develop a suitable parking facility in Greenport, and provide jitney service to and from the ferry terminal. This would alleviate the heavy traffic and speeding on Route 25; create more jobs; and bring more business into the Village by providing the incentive for more ferry patrons to enjoy the many amenities that Greenport has to offer, rather than zipping elsewhere. We believe that no one wants the ferry service to disappear; it is both necessary and valuable to the residents and businesses of the East End. But, it is important that the business operate in a responsible, and neighborly, manner. Sinc= -ly, /4744; un er - • arole Geiss N4...""/ 0-7 4, na4,?n r ' r ,r '1 erf 6A24./. i .v42-zialZtlAv .v112-j, U 4,c �• •Cle � �t&441 "4 . c1,/4 Atie) rc el 4 ! t c k v i te-vri tit+C G.4'4 I r7 ; r w W i s e 4,4 ��C �h ^' .e.-►-�' •C g.° "4-4-14 -'-v 17f-YS r w er_ c-k r 4 L --t7"A"-tAA4 +Ucc /AA- S ;+- 4r-A -k--)-zA 1,1 lAet-r t-04— 1 r / r Gv.,1 £ -' F`lrt; ( b+ 6�-e 1Y (se_ . S'► r l Sxkdv4 wsw ''I 7[7,INATH7113, 11 ik.:'-' --,,,k NM - 5 2001 Rbutaggit-...gc -, ccF- t-\`74 "-Ai +-- 'rt,r 1-7 t-t--;St u_7(4, sTri,e) LA -b r eh x V —: , �� &Al Z--i-i-s; As, 4.-- 64-e7 ,c.,0- 4,.. T I1 W I,,o Ii s h AN- ry(,-Q� x w.b a cP Q -1- ts.e'vt.— i'" 4-0 1-C.--s- K 1,..:I-r."1--e,c-C' Ter gAse, n r Sr(--;Le bkt AL1 i,,fi ,,s-k6 G s, 6A,5 `- -mss 1 lsb -,l - ec -- 111 -sGt-s 5V07 _ tu.k3F t ' SOUTHOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS, Inc. (SCSR) P.O. ROE 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 26 February 2001 t nv. , [1, Bennett Orlowski, Chairman Planning Board !C' P.O. Box 1179 ‘reor 53095 Main Road FEB 27 2001 Southold, NY 11971 AM Dear Mr. Orlowski: Southo �� Planing o d Because I spoke from a list of talking points at the Planning Board meeting on Monday, 12 February, 2001, I am submitting those remarks in letter form for the record. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * On May 16, 1995, the.Planning Board approved a site plan for the West Lot for 69 spaces -- for "Employee Parking" -- the only spaces ever approved for parking at the total site. When the High Speed Passenger Only Gambler Boat was announced by Cross Sound Ferry (CSF) a month later, you, Benny, and then Tom Wickham said you had been "SNOOKERED" and sued CSF for increased intensity of use. Your motion was denied but CSF was told to submit a Comprehensive Site Plan, one reflecting the actual operations at Orient Point and including the increased intensity of use and the introduction of the high speed boat. In July '96, CSF submitted a Site Plan which was incomplete, but you accepted it -- "to get SEQRA going." In Sept.'96, based on the recommendation of your consultants, Charles Voorhis & Associates, you declared this to be a Type 1 action and issued a Positive Declaration. CSF sued by Art. 78, saying that the Town had exceeded its authority, that the Town Code section used was unconstitutional. SOUTHOLD TOWN: R DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY r SOUTHOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS, Inc. (SCSR) P.B. BOH 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 2 In Dec. '96 you held a scoping session and adopted a Scoping outline based on your Positive Declaration, requiring an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on all properties and to consider the effects of the high speed ferry and the environmental impacts on water table, flora, fauna. THIS WAS A PROPER ACTION: IT IS A CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREA, ADJACENT TO A NATIONAL NATURAL LANDMARK. YOUR POSITIVE DEC LISTED 10 IMPRESSIVE REASONS FOR REQUIREMENT, these taken word for word from the Vorhis recommendation. CSF then filed a second Art. 78 Suit, on the Scoping outline, stating again that this action was based on an unconstitutional section of the Town Code. CSF has since DELAYED AND DELAYED: They subsequently withdrew their Site Plan You as lead agency have never initiated SEQRA proceedings, even though: > NY State Supreme Court judge John J. Dunne has thrown out BOTH CSF Art. 78 Suits. And said in Dec. '99 that CSF's introduction of a new service clearly had an effect and that the court does not find the code so vague as to be unconstitutional. And that "the Town of Southold has the right to require CSF to submit a site plan in connection with its introduction of a passenger-only service." > In a previous '98 finding, Judge Dunne noted that "under SEQRA there exists a `relatively low threshold for requiring an EIS." Our question: Why, when you have won in the Court, when the Judge has made it clear that SEQRA is on your side, why have you now reversed course? Why are you apparently welcoming this end run and considering a modification of the amended '95 Site Plan (the one that snookered you) by holding a public hearing -- apparently intending to allow this Concept to go through without an EIS and without ordering a SEQRA? I submit that this,is a CONCEPT -- just landscaping and drainage details and with no numbers of cars or delineation of spaces. SOUTHOLD TOWN: R DESTINATION, NOT R CORRIDOR 0 GATEWAY, NOT R THRUWAY r I SOUTHOLD CITIZENS FOR SRFE RORDS, Inc. (SCSR) P.O. BOH 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 3 What has changed since 1996 and your demand for SEQRA and your 10 impressive reasons? What is different? It is still a CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREA, ADJACENT TO A NATIONAL NATURAL LANDMARK. There is still a continued INCREASE IN INTENSITY OF USE. WHAT IS GOING ON HERE?? As the lead agency, the Planning Board should be out front in defending the interests of the Citizens of Southold. But you are taking a back seat. Why? < Are you tired? < Don't you care? You seemed to in '96. What has happened? Many Southold Citizens do care. We gave you signed letters representing well over 500 concerned people three weeks ago -- asking that you consider this a Type 1 action and requesting SEQRA review. REMEMBER: THIS TOWN HAS NEVER HAD A SEQRA REVIEW OF CSF Operations at Orient Point.!! You seem to be allowing CSF to Expand in a piecemeal fashion -- bit by bit, which you know SEQRA prohibits. This submission would allow CSF to continue its present operations and its violation of five provisions of their present two site plans, violations they have admitted to in a previous site plan submission. A particularly serious one of those is their present method of off loading cars directly onto Rt. 25 extended. As Citizens who do care, we ask again WHY? Why -- this time -- are WE CITIZENS being snookered by you -- the Planning Board.? Is the public supposed to believe that after 7 Years of negotiations and litigation with CSF, all litigation having been decided in the Town's favor, that the lawsuit filed against CSF by the Wickham administration was all about a lack of landscaping and can be settled by CSF agreeing to plant a few bushes?? This Board cannot approve this submission. It is a Concept, not a Plan. It SOUTHOLD TOWN: R DESTINRTION, NOT R CORRIDOR R GRTEWRY, NOT R THRUWRY 1 SOUTHOLD CITIZENS FOR SRFE RORDS, Inc. (SCSR) P.O. 0011 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 4 is contrary to the REALITY of CSF operations. If you do, you will lose all credibility as representatives of the interests of the citizens on this issue - - arguably the most important issue the Planning Board has ever faced. Please -- then -- face up to your responsibility and show that you do care by deeming this a Type 1 action requiring the submission of a Site PLAN depicting the reality of present operations and the full environmental review of the SEQRA process. The Court specified this in 1995. Your Positive Declaration of 1996 demanded it. As Jean Cochran so succinctly put it about the power line problem last year: "What do you think we are? Chopped Liver?" * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I also add these comments: Following my presentation of these points at the Hearing, CSF Attorney William Esseks, commenting that my statements were either untrue or partially true, said that initially CSF had submitted both a Site Plan and a request for a zone change and that the zoning issue was a Type 1 action and thus the reason for the Planning Board's 1996 determination for a Positive Declaration and a need for environmental review. He continued that CSF had since withdrawn that plan and submitted the plan now under consideration on only the three properties, that this is a different action not mandating an environmental impact study. I am sure that you and your board members recognize that Mr. Esseks failed to mention two facts: < The zoning change on the Trust Property was NOT a part of the Judge's decision on your original 1995 law suit against CSF. That request was not made by CSF until later in that year. The Judge's stipulation that CSF may be required to submit a Comprehensive Site Plan reflecting increased intensity of use and the actual operations at Orient Point is thus extant and does apply to the present situation. The Judge in SOUTHOLD TOWN: R DESTINRTION, NOT R CORRIDOR R GOTEWRY, NOT R THRUWRY SOUTHOLD CITIZENS FOR SRFE ROADS, Inc. (SCSR) P.O. ROI{ 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 5 fact stated that "Our denial of a temporary restraining order and injunctive relief now should not be construed as carte blanche for Defendant's unfettered expansion, if it conflicts with the public good." We believe that CSF's greatly increased operations do conflict with the public good. < The recommendation in 1996 by Charles Voorhis & Associates, Inc. that a Positive Declaration be issued on the Site Plan then being considered, a recommendation embraced and honored by your board and subsequently implemented by the issuance of a Positive Declaration, was based on ten concerns. Those ten most impressive reasons do not mention the zoning issue. Rather, they emphasize the danger of impairing the environmental characteristics of "the Orient Point Critical Environmental Area (CEA)" Among others points, they speak to the "significant increase in the intensity of land use," the significant increase in the number of vehicle trips and the possible effects on noise and air quality and the "impact of passenger only jet boats on marine environment." All these points are still valid -- in fact even more important -- when the increase in the numbers of runs per day and the subsequent introduction of a larger vehicle ferry are considered. It is evident that the document under consideration is a concept, not a plan. You and your board have the responsibility to the Citizens of Southold Towns to reject this concept and demand a plan that can be properly reviewed in accordance with SEQRA procedures. Sincerely,nitA 1 --� Thor Hanson President, SCSR cc: Jean Cochran, Southold Town Supervisor Planning Board Members: Richard Caggiano, Kenneth Edwards, George R. Latham, William Cremers SOUTHOLD TOWN: A DESTINATION, NOT R CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT R THRUWAY / vi3F 3 ALISON & WALTER MILLIS PO Box 183, 1800 Village Lane Orient, NY 11957. Jf February 25, 2001 Mr. Bennett Orlowski Jr. Chairman, Southold Town Planning Board PO Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Dear Mr. Orlowski: I'm a ferry user who thinks the parking situation at Orient Point is catastrophic. Please, get on with solving that problem but get on with it in a legal and responsible manner, i.e. do it right!. Order the full environmental review and then a proper site plan that addresses the environmental issues that such a review would raise. If I were planning to open a 100 car parking lot on a piece of farmland,you'd make me do the same and would probably jail me if I ignored you the way Cross Sound is ignoring you Do you find it as fascinating'as•I do that Riverhead is going to New York State for grants to repair potholes caused by increased ferry traffic but,the survey you've gotten doesn't seem to show that any increased traffic exists! Since : / / Walter Millis Alison M. Millis Etc-rgiv-€ FEB 2 7 2001 Soutirfldl Town ,, vi..c,ff , , Ii _ 3 it _____ __ _ --- -- -- - -- - ---- ------ ---- - --- iI, /75-0 F/- - - ,e` -- ------------ --- -- -- -- ---- - - - - --- - - -- -- C.ler few. -, N Y_//` i----- ---------- --- - - ---- -- i ' ' I ,/����,..y _ ETEril l,' 6-3(0—?S.- 7741.e:;-) d(2,L, k -,-- ,,,,---,,.,1 ,. /if?, 717/ ` - . -_-FEB 27 2001 South Town - - � _ 1�, O�lst, - - --_ - - -- - - — -e-e 7-s - �. -.-- - vel ES (9 x©1146 • j-:O_-t- ®c..c. -fpcclt2_= O°Z- 0`,r- or, ` c�-C! A ami' 'i ,d our-_ i.a -vb-e _�i.�.�-6-t fin. ®c.cr e .A. ©. /!`. __ " - ...c.57,-,--4.4.4 ".�---e`I -` .462.1..0- 4 Li-e...) --e-----, 0rr- --21,4-e---- 1 - — — ,, /4'7c , -- , -G+,-c-,-,2_ -.- --4:......,_.._.„..<2__ 1 , 42,--,-----7 17-1-4:44:,....., c_ ryies,L; r 4....:-/- --(7 .C., - 4_,......4„..4„e, _.2-&-..„..,../t.„4.___) I; - '-- AO _ sin mss_-e - -�® 4:6,,s,,,-,s .�- ,-,� � � ' - ., ,. y . .. - ---�`S f=e-.'rt3 / - O _,_-ec_S E' p®v- .--4,--, .i - df?E S'- 1i i ___ — --ice- -- -- - — / -- - -- fi4 yam,- 6 :-4-4_0____ b_„,.,_ 4-4...-- !i - I - +, n 4/1-, 417 -- - � -t-,--1,ii_ - `® __ ___ __Li __ ......._ c...;.-1-57e,..t_v • I A. e D , IDC2'tS /r /fy t- -, "S f "y,^C VL[GS ;,--r:_,.. 7 1` 1- - - ------i--�l- -�- Com-� '`� � --------- - ---- -- I� �- - jet; O(�-0^�t .-�-' - / , .�� 4,-- 9-0.21 t® a404:v.---- - f --- - I t.t5 7TCiz_-— c.C,o-- c.4 SSS —`J— S - - -far-' e.- A.,-,...-e.- -U-,-t vi-v"e'i en 7` .-be K✓i cfr-0 S9 -- --L; -S'''''''‘''( r-------e-evy‘ --cs( 8;1--es 0-.---,eZ c,-,--4,,;4 e,..s ..:—.)_g4.-- . ., MD. r,-.0.-.— it 1 - 6 0UP'So ---- --------- -- - --- ------ - - - - --- -- ---- ------ - - - - -- ------ -- -- --- - -- ------------- - -------- ,,-,--7(74,_:,--d------ --------- ---- ---- ----- i '--- C rev rw-/A- BE-e-Q) �3 / '3'a•3 /379 --- ------ - ----------------- -- - - - --- -- -- -- - --- - 1 - - - -- ----- --- --- - - , I Se-one-4- ( r l owsKt rtutirma.44. IL4i,vVry ieoiakd öeor Plc. �� bruisKI , ury„ eler,im*„r, fited- X1 PO/ 50.1)161---/- ,+ a ramal _site /am 1kzt rel isire- A (1 e41Vrr-rilmeroti-I4 v r ces s Ltei _ - 7 `7 vt 9 1,etvr s ham.tof ' I taw C,6trims ue, 4e) eVpOind 1 e/' / 1--4,bu. - pro per > �� or 4 re ir) ill cod 4 0- coh s em, -tI , o i m e tite_ e; gi-k--144S 0-c I 7x... P1 r e.44 �d3r V Feb. 25, 2001 Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Planning Board Chairman, PO Box 1179, 53095 Main Road, Southold,NY 11971. Dear Mr. Orlowski: As tax paying property owners in the town of Southold,we are very concerned about the Cross Sound Ferry proposals and their impact on our town. We strongly feel that the CSF proposed expansion will have a negative impact upon Southold and its way of life. Our two east-west roads barely handle the load imposed by the current number of ferries on the schedule plus the social events conducted by many wineries. And,judging by the speed at which this traffic usually moves, especially on Route 48,it appears our police department cannot fully handle what we have right now. In short,we are in complete agreement with several points which were raised in the ad that appeared in last week's Suffolk Times,to wit: <We agree that you should reference the ten points of concern itemized by your Consultant (Voorhis)which was used by you in your Positive Declaration in 1996. < On a proposal of this magnitude, good management mandates a complete Site Plan; not the Concept which was submitted by Cross Sound Ferry. <Finally,we also agree that the full environmental review of the SEQRA process should be required. In closing,we would like to thank you for your attention to this very important matter, Very truly yours., , r Harry Wic shomeen 0,14/ .{ FEB 27 2001 Maureen Wicks Southold To Nanning Bard POB 1356, Cutchogue,NY 11935 0 lrfl; V 4k, DonaCc C E. 'Van CCeef MerCe Tan CCeef 530 Skippers Lane P.O. Box 135 Orient, .Ny 11957-0135 631-323-206 _ R_E Enj FEB 20 EtTP 3tvt_erc6Hy2"euvrt-Q-et-Les.s._,,,‘_.4' ccsocL,_to nStgth2g8ITIVill P. 0 L t ciri IA&-% (AAR- I _ • er— - t_, 4-1-u4-120t-N2- lb A • c —.1o-01-2 _.- L.5> e_. „ „..u,_ 4.0 ut,2_ 4- Qa1el`"J 1(r4La 44-"=).—st. • car-v‘r-Q~,.-LsOet15-ex&- 4isz_..0-gt-azO -4-ez AilArtS2A4) itSZ-t-A-as-L S E(1) . 4 ,t0AL _use—AALLe__,ho „ru-ck-c-ita . crL Liims-Z14, Cttaste-L. (1.1-LANZ 1, ),:3-Gale;,..0 44-e. "-1N-A/141 A--'10,A-nrv‘A +- ce_JzA„i Lkfae,. c0,&, 14-12'CS`Aje4:--* /Lora- Lfe, cPAN S • , A , 4 cjA46ambeQ34)"."61''"1"".-` "qp;442)7Y49.)&e,1idt - E/3.t C4 «nn,>t/ 021.01A)Ski ��4 2 y (k/t 7 I sdv c u/t. ///a�A/,,�r , 13°(412-4( /-4( U s A.1Af en-055 . u vi/ re-n-11-7 7-6 ri le- A- Fut( 6---v(Ji20eti' ,avTAL f cv`�� i ' t-nri I4-- 77 o /4- /v c fie-s-/e-r‘ it,r_t 0p e r-e) /� 4A,"001 dam- (r�'d"s-z.t/ ell e-- 6 Z, "ev ef 7)7 - 4 /2„-,316?/;/frtA" xPt/ Cid /t/ 0-/ Ar5 nd T15- 1 do/ Af �u�i.v-&&c � S tiSv,3- c. . LE-7-k Al 7- 46--- fruo6k6 ,. .F--2, /r/:et) t/ti z.—/ To E-y) A-- ins Ou 1 011-/ke AJC-- ,t, If 2 1 ham- lu Lam , ivy //4..3-2.-- l : ' ) Ri- FT-71 „_,IIN, -,._.,,-,u ji, : A Qrkto,'4, y • if - --,(1, c44, -"K-6--0— 0.4.- /! '0Aa-�- F L� r 1 2 1 j r-A-A-- t11-1-4. in 1,0-- 014--• FIA-4.— ?LC. Lx--1-4-/-- "VI- A-. 444-Al,•rdfl--h -Q- P 4 i_teiL - O'`'1-7 / y �lr .itk-g_. 0...- U . J--1,--t --e--. H--(--- A--"L't; A'frIA---'`-i- elg-4-'1 114`11'-c ' 1--it-e- -42----X-41;ry 0--rit-t--)-----k 11------L-rift—e---.-7,8_z q_e___ , HfA J . . 1/(70/3F _ **/S- 174-le 2 3 Z o o/ �_ - __ _ __ _ _ •_ ___,.,...„..7___ __a_ _„_.,„_____ „., _ _ __ . , _ - c m,,,, ,,f.„,....,,, /4. Al - --------- -- S3 o pT_ ? . _ 4o-1----- - - - -- - - - De_ ru, - - - - - - -- - - - 0 _ .G14._. Com.. '7-0 . - 4-44- .44.-e-__ 1 -- - -- - - - lda- _ Q-!-s.r sf__ '•_y_ c."4--, lam.0 a-ems_ _44,./.47 -...- o.43 .14We u C. • - 5.--1441.. CA-co _ • ,C;70,--- ,11 Z/7 _ _. • ___ •---- - -- - -- ,/a f.„,_.L--_a. Lee - - - - - - - -- - -- /6 Y,T_?�-c 4 w 4' /5_-tea- 6 e. -- - — —Z � � / 23 --- - - - -- --- - -- ---- - - - ,...,,,..71 , ,, - - - E FLii ._ . _ _ Dir, - : , , E - FEB G 7 200i a - 4ii8F : ," A4.4 Difiva 5:14,144.tve PO Box 301 Orient, New York 11957 February 22, 2001 Bennett Orlowski,Jr. .-- • 'r �- , ; Chairman of the Planning Board ? Town of Southold PO Box 1179 53095 Main Road FEB 26 2001 Southold, New York 11971 Southold Town Dear Mr. Orlowski: NarinIng Board As residents of Orient and as owners of a home that has been in our family for nearly 50 years, we are deeply concerned about the Cross Sound Ferry. We are concerned for several reasons. 1. The Cross Sound Ferry has shown little or no concern for the quality of life on the North Fork and especially in Orient, Orient Point and East Marion. We live on a fragile strip of land, which was never meant to sustain the level of traffic generated by the CSF and its traffic to the Connecticut casinos. The Cross Sound Ferry does not burden New London with anywhere near the parking facilities that they are demanding from the Town of Southold. Furthermore, they use a traffic light to control the flow of traffic from the ferry onto New London roadways but they have none at all in Orient Point. 2. The Ferry terminal is adjacent to the surface waters of Gardiners Bay and within the Orient Point Critical Environmental Area. It is in close proximity to the State Park whose fragile environment and nesting grounds also must be protected. 3. They claim to be of significant value to some of our businesses on the North Fork but when we personally speak with these farm stand owners and the other businesses, they do not recognize any revenue benefits from the traffic,brought hereby the CSF. -2- 4. It has taken a very severe and life-threatening automobile accident for the NYSDOT to lay down a no passing double yellow line east of the causeway but we continue to see not one or two but many, many Ferry eastbound and westbound automobiles violating this new traffic restriction. 5. The noise and damage to the air quality to say nothing at all of the peacefulness and quiet of life in Orient and East Marion is being slowly but relentlessly destroyed by the CSF and its increased traffic due to the Casinos. 6. The waters adjacent to Route 25 between Greenport and Orient Pt. show considerable hydrocarbon pollution from the road runoff of the passing traffic, rendering shellfish in some areas inedible and off limits. Increasing traffic can only exacerbate an already bad situation. 7. The eastern end of The Town of Southold, including the Villages of Greenpoint and Orient, is a natural treasure. We have had friends and family from all over the United States and from foreign countries visit and stay with us in Orient. They have been astounded by the beauty and the quality of the environment in this area. They have also been shocked by the amount of traffic going and coming from the Cross Sound Ferry. And, most especially by the number of cars parked there during the spring, summer and fall weekends including the ones illegally parked. Mr. Orlowski, we are simply asking you to represent us and our neighbors by demanding that the CSF present a full and complete Site Plan and the full environmental review of the SEQRA process. That is your right, the Town's right and most certainly the peoples' right in this matter. Please do not let us down. Thank you. Sincerely yours, , ,,,i_,/ Caroline and David Silverstone cc: The Honorable Town Supervisor, Ms. Jean Cochran • /3s2d�` - - ��- �? 3 2 o 0/ ✓ '% i9'As) 255Mr M7Y�ree rs.Hiller Kahn J` ,Ar.'• l4ate�sLn \ Orient,NY 11957-1539 ) A /9 7 a . Gc /��n� - 4 cy-Le -ef )t_ruciY-Q-aA-; 4-/I-e--C-71-02Ala->tl_ez- .C4 jt_>tvd 200.9tc4. ; ,e,v- h ALe-i a ft GC�C�u Qh. A-75 GdYi Y' • rLLU-e 1- k -t); 6I-)‘L a-w�� e-a ear ice-" � s w t� 4-0-0 1 &- t±p'z- - Y-- - l/ h �' -/o&L -t)vY'k„ed.A.so,_ Ag„,,,,di, 7t.P...r-M4>u244 di-tow Zr-a-t_ 2 �,��, - `70 tea, xiLmss so . t � � P 7_464V`'' �M c�(tl ha, _ ,L4 LCA /t-et Iwai-e- • t p Neg;t)13F 1W,C, i EV kill Mr. Bennett Orlowski Chairman, Southold Planning Board itm b 2001 P.O. Box1179 53095 Main Road SOLltddiTOM Southold, New York 11971 Planning Board February 22, 2001 Dear Mr. Orlowski: I'm writing to voice my urgent concern about the Planning Board's apparent intention to ignore the ten point recommendation of its own consultant regarding Cross Sound Ferry. You and your colleagues quite literally have the future of this community in your hands, and it seems to me that Cross Sound needs to be dealt with in the most prudent and judicious manner pos- sible. That idea that Cross Sound might somehow be allowed to continue its blatant and arrogant expansion without so much as submitting a complete site plan and being subjected to a FULL envi- ronmental review is just outrageous. Please know that we are counting on you to take a strong position in helping to preserve this environmentally fragile area. The decisions you make will affect all of us for years to come. Sinc- e , 4 ,a/r/ usan Schindehe e 3075 Lighthous Rd. Southold, NY 11971 , S',.,‘„„.L.4be &---- C-t 31' Y7 : tiNiii - : . \ ` Time Inc. ti *,,�5�y • -• A Time Warner Company :a; P M sem) __ �" 7 • 1 I weekly G. a,.o '•��..>,.—:..,,. %f''41-1� r r People11 .a .. 2.. Time& Life Building 22 F.3 Rockefeller Center u.,,,\:„...,., 0 • New York, NY 10020-1393 /lel z. !U/U ' 6r-tvR) ( oc'�L> V)A PLAN/1)I44- kei-P. ?'O. Do?( /(19 /�jJ�/)71164-41i,41.,j J j � y 3�j 1. .. .. ..�F'�.. 1'.».� ilii !i iV iiiii fibini,i 11 2 C /6,,,cor February 12, 2001 Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman • Southold Town Planning Board Town 11x11 - Southold, NY 11971 Dear Mr. Chairman and Planning,Board Members: We, the Board of Directors of'the Greenport / Southold Chamber of Commerce, serving over 200 members in the business community urge the Planning Board to approve the current site plan application for Cross Sound Ferry in order to finally resolve this matter between the Town and.the ferry company. As a member of the Southold business conununity, Cross Sound Ferry has demonstrated itself to be vital to the local economy. Cross Sound Ferry provides jobs. pays taxes, and patronizes local vendors, .Ferry passengers patronize our local businesses; they buy gas, they eat in our restaurants; they stay at our B&B's, and they shop in our stores. Cross Sound Ferry's work on behalf,of numerous charitable organizations in Southold Town is well documented and should be commended. Cross Sound Ferry and the future of ferry service between Southold Town and New England is vital to all residents and members of the business community. We urge the Planning Board to approve Cross Sound Ferry's site plant. Sincerely, . Greenport/ Southold Chamber of Commerce __ ,ry Board of Directors , 01 pp • FEB 13 Ain ,,;ung Board In 1996,you,the Planning Board, determined that an application submitted by Cross Sound Ferry was a Type I Action. The purpose of the application, as you said quite specifically,was"to provide additional parking to a previously approved ferry terminal on Rt.25 in Orient,in order to accommodate increased demand for parking that has been generated by the inclusion of a high-speed passenger-only ferry service to the existing vehicular ferry service". Although that application was subsequently withdrawn,the passenger ferry and the traffic and parking needs associated with it, and the conditions on which you based your Type I designation,remain to be addressed. A Type I Action is one which has the potential for a negative impact on the environment, and therefore requires a Draft EIS to assess that potential. In your document,you gave ten reasons why you believed that the parking and traffic associated with the high-speed ferry might be anticipated to have a negative impact. I will quote some of them from your document,because what was true then is equally true now. 1. ...The project is located adjacent to the surface waters of Gardiners Bay...and lies within the Orient Point Critical Environmental Area. The proposed project may impair the environmental characteristics of this CEA. 2. The proposed action will cause a significant increase in the intensity of land use on the project site, as a function of the expanded parking, demand for parking in connection with ferry operations and on-site traffic circulation for parking access. 3. The proposed action...may increase the demand for other community services including fire,police, recreational facilities and utilities. 5. The project may adversely change noise and air quality as a function of increased traffic, and may substantially increase solid waste generation. 6. Increased intensity of site use for high speed ferry service will increase the use of on-site facilities,particularly sanitary flow and water use, and may result in an adverse impact upon the environment. 7. The project may impact visual and aesthetic resources,particularly as regards lighting. 10. (There is a potential)impact of passenger-only jet boats on the marine environment. You were correct in your identification of the potentially negative impact of the passenger-only ferry traffic on the environment. And what was the case then is equally the case now. There are no fewer passenger ferry departures now than there were then, 4 c and no less passenger ferry traffic. In fact,traffic has been increased by additional vehicle ferry departures. In other words, it is as obvious now as it was then that the increased intensity of use due to the passenger ferry has the potential for a negative impact on the environment, and should be addressed with a draft EIS, as you determined five years ago. Now,we've heard a lot of eloquent testimonials for the ferry. But SEQRA has very specific criteria. SEQRA does not say that if a company is thought to bring in business or is good to its employees,then you can use different standards. SEQRA does not say that you should make a positive declaration if you don't like the company, but otherwise you can ignore it. SEQRA is state legislation and the same criteria must be applied to everyone. And the criterion here is the potential for a negative impact on the environment, and you have already determined that that potential exists in relation to the passenger ferry traffic. So, a site plan addressing the use of the Cross Sound Ferry site, including the parking and traffic attendant on the passenger ferry—a site plan you asked for in 1995— should and must have a positive declaration. To declare such a site plan less than a Type I Action would, I submit,be ultimately indefensible. But the proposal before you is not even the site plan that you asked for five years ago. It is a garden and grading scheme. What it does is attempt to codify the violations of L - their site plan that Cross Sound Ferry has been committing for five years,including parking on a piece of property for which there is no approval, and for which no viable prior use as a parking lot has been demonstrated. Now,you gentlemen have chosen to be lead agency on this issue. You have chosen the responsibility. It is your responsibility to the taxpayers of Southold Town to require an integrated site plan, as you did five years ago;it is your responsibility to determine that it is a Type I Action, as you did five years ago; and it is your responsibility to see that the environmental review is carried out to completion. This is the responsibility to the citizens of Southold that you have chosen to assume by becoming lead agency. Therefore, I urge you not to accept the present proposal. Because if, after all these years, and after the thousands and thousands of dollars of taxpayers' money that have been spent on your attorney, you were simply to throw up your hands and tell Cross Sound to just go on doing what they are doing, I would submit that this responsibility that you chose to assume has been profoundly misplaced. Fredrica Wachsberger,Vice-President, Southold Citizens for Safe Roads;Feb.12, 2001 E r 1mP% p: 1 , , ,,,, ,,, . . .,.... ,, , , „ :L. FEB 13 ley l.9 C f"" qn [bids t \sey;\ SOUTHOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS, Inc. (SCSR) P.O. BOIL 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 17 Jan. '01 To: Jean Cochran, Supervisor Town of Southold Benny ( -lo4-w-ski, Chairman of Planning Board From: Thor Han "son President, SCSR Encl: Copy of DOT response to my Ltr of 8/12/00 to DOT V Jean -- Benny The enclosure is of interest in our mutual effort to improve traffic conditions in Southold Town. The standard DOT response on speed limits always baffles me, but this time they at least state that enforcement is key to the problem. I'm sure our Police Department is now taking additional strain and we are all pleased with the extension of the double barrier yellow lines. I,, , Clc---:NV ,17-r' JAN 1 0 2001 So rtt hold To Nanning Board SOUTHOLD TOWN: 0 DESTINATION, NOT 0 CORRIDOR 0 GATEWAY, NOT 0 THRUWAY o - err STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE, N.Y. 1 1788 CRAIGSHUACUSA, P.E. JOSEPH H BOARDMAN REGIONAL DIRECTOR COMMISSIONER January 8,2001 Mr.Thor Hanaoh,President Southold Citizens for Safe Roads,Inc. P.O.Box 797 Gniat,New York 11944 Passing Zones Speed Limit Evaluation Request Route 25 Town of Southold Our Case No. 009703TC Dear Mr.Hanson: This is in response to your letter regarding speed limit concerns on Route 25 in the Town of Southold. We have completed a traffic and safety investigation of the above referenced location, which included speed studies and field observations of Route 25 in Orient Point, East Marion and Regulatory speed limits are established only when and where they will promote efficient traffic flow and/or improve safety. Consequently, speed limits are established only after an engineering and traffic investigation has been made in accordance with established traffic engineering practices. Improperly set speed limits generally increase the conflicts between faster and slower drivers,reduce the gaps in traffic through which crossing could be made safely and increase the difficulty for pedestrians to judge the speed of approaching vehicles. The methodology for setting a reasonable speed limit is based on nationally accepted criteria and consists of the following: • Roadside development(i.e.,the number and type of residences, commercial, industrial and =recreational establishments). • Intersection development(i.e.,the number and type of intersecting highways). • Highway geometries (i.e:, pavement condition, grades, curves, sight distance, shoulders, sidewalks and traffic volume). • 85th percentile speed(The speed at which 85%of the motorists are traveling at or below). • 1� r 'Mr.Thor Hanson,President January 8,2001 Page 2 It is a well established fact that posted speed limits have little effect on overall traffic speeds. This is because most people drive at a speed which is determined by their own evaluation of prevailing roadside and traffic conditions,rather than a blind obedience of regulatory signs. Consequently,a speed limit set below which the majority of motorists normally travel serves no purpose other than to increase the number of drivers in violation. The results of our study showed the 85th percentile speed on Route 25 in Greenport to be 55 mph with a posted speed limit of 45 mph; in East Marion the 85th percentile speed was found to be 58 mph with a posted speed limit of 55 mph; and in Orient Point the 85th percentile speed was found to be 51 mph with a posted speed limit of 45 mph. Based on our 85th percentile speed study and evaluation of the roadside development,we do not feel any reduction of speed limit on Route 25 in these areae is appropriate at this time. However, based upon the high 85th percentile speeds on Route 25 in these areas, by copy of this letter,we will request the Southold Police Department provide additional enforcement in the area. With regards to your request for a double barrier yellow line for the entire distance of Route 25 from Greenport to Orient Point, our consultant recently completed an investigation regarding passing zones on all two lane State highways on Long Island. Based on this study, we eliminated one passing zone on Route 25 in East Marion. This passing zone was approximately .5 miles in length in the vicinity of the East Marion Orient Park and Dam Pond. We also extended the "No Passing Zone"at the Oyster Ponds School at the eastern limits of the school zone to a point 100± feet east of Platt Road, and installed "State Law Do Not Drive On Shoulder" signs for eastbound and westbound Route 25 at the school. Thank you for your interest in this traffic safety matter. Very truly yours, THOMAS F. OELERICH,P.E. Regional Traffic Engineer cc: Southold Police Department TFO:KM:JS AOSS COIWY.Fly SOUTHOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS, Inc. (SCSRI P.O. BOH 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 27 December 2000 • • 1 - , - Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman �. Southold Town Planning Board DEC 28 2000 PO Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold T© Southold, NY 11971 Planning Bawd Dear Benny: I have attached a copy of one of the signed letters SCSR has received to date in response to our November mailing to Southolders about the pending Cross Sound Ferry (CSF) Site Plan issue. As you will recall, I delivered to your office a copy of that mailing and am enclosing another here. Because they continue to arrive, I plan to deliver the total package of responses at the Planning Board meeting on Monday, 8 January 2001, and formally request a few minutes on that agenda. There truly is strong feeling throughout the Town that the pending CSF Site Plan submission be treated as a Class I action requiring a full SEQ.A process. Letters received to date represent almost 550 persons, from every hamlet and the village of Greenport. with relatively large numbers from Southold,Cutchogue and Mattituck. It is obviously not a concern limited only to Orient and East Marion, as some profess to believe. We have also received donations to help us continue this fight from over 200 contributors, individual amounts ranging from $5 to $1500. I trust that this response, coupled with the large concern for the threat posed by CSF operations so evident at the recent Traffic Study meeting in Greenport, will convince you and all Planning Board Members to give the pending CSF submission the serious review and action it so obviously deserves. Sincerely, Thor Hanso President, SCSR. Ends: Copy of one of Citizens' letters Copy of SCSR Mailing cc: (less encls.) Jean Cochran, Supervisor Planning Board Members The Editor, The Suffolk Times The Editor, Traveler Watchman SOUTHOLD TOWN: A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY b . _ I I ---- - Bennet Orlowski, Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Dear Mr. Orlowski, Because of the potential environmental impact of Cross Sound Ferry's (CSF) increased parking at Orient Point resulting from the passenger-only Casino service, I urge you to determine that it is a Class I Action, and to pursue the SEQRA process to its conclusion. Because there has never been a full environmental assessment of the ferry activity, it is the only fair, legal and logical means to establish parameters for present expansion and any future growth anticipated by CSF. I also criticize your acceptance of the Building Department's finding that there was preexisting parking on the "Snack Bar" lot. I do not believe that occasional parking of a handful of cars years ago represents an adequate justification for a commercial parking lot of over 200 vehicles. Sincerely, Name AddressG� C�� 6 //9Z-f— Date /2- /°?2000 4 Bennet Orlowski, Chain - Y Southold Town Planning Board Dear Mr. Orlowski, Because of the potential environmental impact of Cross Sound Ferry's (CSF) increased parking at Orient Point resulting from'the passenger-only Casino service, I urge you to determine that it is a Class I Action, and to pursue the SEQJA process to its conclusion. Because there has never been a full environmental assessment of the ferry activity, it is the only fair, legal and logical means to establish parameters for present expansion and any future growth anticipated by CSF. - I also criticize your acceptance of the Building Department's finding that there was preexisting parking on the "Snack Bar" lot. I do not believe that occasional parking of a handful of cars years ago represents an adequate justification for a commercial parking lot of over 200 vehicles. Sincerely, Namei�� AddressG�C_ '`` ., //93.1J _ - ; - Date /2— /_ o ?r7 2000 - ..,,u�cYr—mite Pian, which specifies nothing -- even including the number of cars to be parked? Until now, our Town Planning Board has returned incomplete site plans to CSF prior to holding public hearings. < Why does the Planning Board seem to agree with CSF that this Plan should receive a `negative declaration' -- NOT requiring full and public environmental scrutiny (SEQRA-Review)? : The Board issued a Positive Declaration on a previous CSF Site Plan -- meaning that increased parking and traffic generated by casino traffic could have a significant environmental impact-- and must do so again. < Why did our Building Department recently issue a finding that there was preexisting and non-conforming parking on the `snack bar lot?' SCSR has challenged this finding. Occasional parking of 7 or 8 cars or trucks years ago is not adequate justification for a commercial parking lot of over 200 vehicles. This is especially important because CSF has reserved the right to apply for parking on adjacent residential property they own. < Why is this such a critical moment? Unless an environmental analysis of the total facility is done now, there will be no sound basis for planning for any future expansion CSF attempts to make on its additional properties. The Town will have relinquished its rights — and OURS — to control the present unregulated and piecemeal growth of parking and the ensuing explosion of traffic through ALL OUR TOWN. Background: CSF has run its high-speed passenger-only gambler boat for SIX YEARS without an appi !d site plan. Some history: • < In 1995 the Planning Board sued CSF and asked for an injunction to cease high vnisr4 A:Y" ^mx=s •z1 ..C.. Y=_,.c•+, ni,-_ a+nr - .L SOUTHOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS, Inc. (SCSR1 P.O. 11011 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 eNov.. 2000 TO: CONCERNED SOUTHOLDERS: This is a critical moment for the Cross Sound Ferry (CSF) issue!! Questions: < Why is the Planning Board holding a public hearing on CSF's recently received "Concept" Site Plan, which specifies nothing -- even including the number of cars to be parked? Until now, our Town Planning Board has returned incomplete site plans to CSF prior to holding public hearings. < Why does the Planning Board seem to agree with CSF that this Plan should receive a `negative declaration' -- NOT requiring full and public environmental scrutiny (SEQRA Review)? The Board issued a Positive Declaration on a previous CSF Site Plan — meaning that increased parking and traffic generated by casino traffic could have a significant environmental impact-- and must do so again. < Why did our Building Department recently issue a finding that there was preexisting and non-conforming parking on the `snack bar lot?' SCSR has challenged this finding. Occasional parking of 7 or 8 cars or trucks years ago is not adequate justification for a commercial,parking lot of over 200 vehicles. This is especially important because CSF has reserved the right to apply for parking on adjacent residential property they own. < Why is this such a critical moment? Unless an environmental analysis of the total facility is done now, there will be no sound basis for planning for any future expansion CSF attempts to make on its additional properties. The Town will have relinquished its rights — and OURS — to control the present unregulated and piecemeal growth of parking and the ensuing explosion of traffic through ALL OUR TOWN. Background: CSF has run its high-speed passenger-only gambler boat for SIX YEARS without an approved site plan. Some history: < In 1995 the Planning Board sued CSF and asked for an injunction to cease high speed ferry operations pending approval of a new Site Plan. CSF has responded with continuing delays, the submission of piecemeal and incomplete site plans and protracted litigation. < Our Planning Board has acquiesced and added to the delay by allowing its counsel to postpone and submit poorly prepared responses to the Court. < The Court, however—finding on the merits —decided against CSF almost a year ago and dismissed the last of their lawsuits that challenged Planning Board authority to require a comprehensive site plan and full environmental (SEQRA) review. < Our Planning Board, however, having won on all counts, has negotiated with CSF, is \holding a hearing on a "conceptual" and incomplete Site Plan and seems to be favoring the negative declaration. ACTIONS NEEDED FROM CONCERNED SOUTHOLDERS: < PLEASE SIGN THE ATTACHED STATEMENT TO CHAIRMAN ORLOWSKI ASAP. HE MUST KNOW YOUR CONCERNS PRIOR TO CONSIDERING THE COMPLETE SITE PLAN AT A SECOND PUBLIC MEETING AND CLOSING THIS HEARING. WE WILL COPY AND DELIVER TO PLANNING AND TOWN BOARDS. < Please clip and return this slip to SCSR in the attached envelope with your signed & dated statement. Previous and probable future litigation and the hiring of expert witnesses is expensive. We need your support and financial assistance to fight this Connecticut Company and its Casino allies. I want to help SCSR continue this fight. Yes, I enclose $ Yes, call me for help with mailings, etc. Tel.#____ __ E-mail address_ Bennet Orlowski, Chairman - Southold Town Planning Board Dear Mr. Orlowski, Because of the potential environmental impact of Cross Sound Ferry's (CSF) increased parking at Orient Point resulting from the passenger-only Casino service, I urge you to determine that it is a Class I Action, and to pursue the SEQRA process to its conclusion. Because there has never been a full environmental assessment of the ferry activity, it is the only fair, legal and logical means to establish parameters for present expansion and any future growth anticipated by CSF. I also criticize your acceptance of the Building Department's finding that there was preexisting parking on the "Snack Bar" lot. I do not believe that occasional parking of a handful of cars years ago represents an adequate justification for a commercial parking lot of over 200 vehicles. Sincerely, Name -------_---- Address —_. Date__/ /2000— - " SOUTHOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS, INC. U.S. Postage P.O. Box 797 PAID GREENPORT, NY.Y 11944 Permit No. 11 Orient, N.Y. 11957 SOUTHOLD TOWN RESIDENT Urgent...immediate action requirted...urgenL..immediate action required...urgent SOUTHOLD TOWN: n uiSTINRTION, NOT R CORRIDOR. R GHTEWHV, ....i R THRUWRY r/" 7 November 20, 2000 Mr. Orlowski, Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Hall Main Rd Southold, NY 11971 I am responding to you in reference to the statement the Southold Cititzen For Safe Roads group requested I sign and submit to you. I support the Cross Sound Ferry and am appalled that I am led- to believe otherwise from the dictatorship of a group, SCSF: The Cross Sound Ferry is an asset to our community. It generates tourism, tourism revenue, employment, and an exceptional mode of transportation. The ferries, including the Sea Jet, provides me a convenient way to travel with my family to New England. I am not a gambler but utilize the Sea Jet to get me to New England very comfortably and quickly. The sooner I get off the North Fork via a speed ferry the better. I am not a "plant" or employee of the Cross Sound Ferry. I am a resident, a tax payer, and a pro-tourism individual in favor of meeting the needs and demands of a business which is 'so valuable to the North Fork and Long Island as a whole. I would like to see this matter resolved and approved soon. A Ferry Supporter I ( Vee ' 11./ • P7 NOV 27 2000 'f stth®ld To Nam or ig Board James F. Haag, Jr. 4725 Orchard Street P.O.Box 28 Orient NY 11957 November 21, 2000 Mr. Bennet Orlowski, Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Town Hall P.O. Box 1179 Southold NY 11971 RE: Increased Parking at Orient Point Dear Mr. Orlowski, As a resident of Orient and co-owner of a business in Greenport, I strongly oppose any expansion by Cross Sound Ferry. We are not against the ferry—we are against expansion plans that take advantage of Southold Town and the East End. Because of the potential environmental impact of CSF's increased parking at Orient Point resulting from the passenger-only casino service, I urge you to determine that it is a class I Action, and to pursue the SEQRA process to its conclusion. Because there has never been a full environmental assessment of the ferry activity, this is the only fair, legal, and logical means to establish parameters for present expansion and future growth anticipated by CSF. As a point of fact, I dispute the Building Department's finding that there was pre-existing parking on the"Snack Bar" lot. The occasional parking of a small number of cars years ago is no basis for permitting a commercial parking lot for over 200 vehicles. I take issue with your acceptance of the department's finding. There is no need for Orient, East Marion, and Greenport to give in to pressure from the ferry company at the expense of our quality of life. Sincerel CHN/rY S • k - N LI V 27 2000 - Southold It. n Planning oard 14-4;r4..' ,� t.:,, o�/ 0 ,/,,,_/ G2Ci co pe do_ r K Mr 21 no a s;`" ({ ar) Nk., ki,d,,_ 11 , v ,' ,, `i ko �n� P v 2.0 �--0 o d iitiyakiala 4,_„ n c1-7-- C..9 2 /0 LAI la ' - C----A c'LL--: Po a-v-) AF S2'[1 i rl d` _,,- ,T,., Si‘r .5�, Id J cleiSS You N oc. -/6 b /A�cu E. c`s Ma_ yv 6- r ,,ci_m_ c:,_ir-L_6-_s 6t/.e., . P s E -HI E \l) e Li) v F +h So e..i'( SAO 7 ocLc'S. e, FE- rr has hee,) A c oU € e y.s /6\ c,J 1R., 0 1 w cam.s kfr,..4._ � v a S 1� � ,----gm, �� 0-�v 'L _ r0 S S be-0 I-)ye 41) t 0 1 6 a_.i N IYI C).-11 -- Sa o N oL. `-1,_Q Sj iv C b l-e-- I r j 11� I 11\\\ SOUTHOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS, Inc. (SCSR) — 4t 13 Me " P.O. BOR 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 __Nov.. 2000 ralgaggarg TO: CONCERNED SOUTHOLDERS: This is a critical moment for the Cross Sound Ferry (CSF) issue!! • Questions: < Why is the Planning Board holding a public hearing on CSF's recently received "Concept" Site Plan, which specifies nothing -- even including the number of cars to be parked? Until now, our Town Planning Board has returned incomplete site plans to CSF prior to holding public hearings. < Why does the Planning Board seem to agree with CSF that this Plan should receive a `negative declaration' -- NOT requiring full and public environmental scrutiny (SEQRA Review)? The Board issued a Positive Declaration on a previous CSF Site Plan -- meaning that increased parking and traffic generated by casino traffic could have a significant environmental impact-- and must do so again. < Why did our Building Department recently issue a finding that there was -preexisting and non-conforming parking on the `snack bar lot?' SCSR has challenged this finding. Occasional parking of 7 or 8 cars or trucks years ago is not adequate justification for a commercial parking lot of over 200 vehicles. This is especially important because CSF has reserved the right to apply for parking on adjacent residential property they own. < Why is this such a critical moment? Unless an environmental analysis of the total facility is done now, there will be no sound basis for planning for any future expansion CSF attempts to make on its additional properties. The Town will have relinquished its rights -- and OURS— to control the present unregulated and piecemeal growth of parking and the ensuing explosion of traffic through ALL OUR TOWN. Background: CSF has run its high-speed passenger-only gambler boat for SIX YEARS without an approved site plan. Some history: < In 1995 the Planning Board sued CSF and asked for an injunction to cease high speed ferry operations pending approval of a new Site Plan. CSF has responded with continuing delays, the submission of piecemeal and incomplete site plans and protracted litigation. < Our Planning Board has acquiesced and added to the delay by allowing its counsel to postpone and submit poorly prepared responses to the Court. < The Court, however—fording on the merits —decided against CSF almost a year ago and dismissed the last of their lawsuits that challenged Planning Board authority to require a comprehensive site plan and full environmental (SEQRA) review. < Our Planning Board, however, having won on all counts, has negotiated with CSF, is \holding a hearing on a "conceptual" and incomplete Site Plan and seems to be favoring the negative declaration, ACTIONS NEEDED FROM CONCERNED SOUTHOLDERS: < PLEASE SIGN THE ATTACHED STATEMENT TO CHAIRMAN ORLOWSKI ASAP. HE MUST KNOW YOUR CONCERNS PRIOR TO CONSIDERING THE COMPLETE SITE PLAN AT A SECOND PUBLIC MEETING AND CLOSING THIS HEARING. WE WILL COPY AND DELIVER TO PLANNING AND TOWN BOARDS. < Please clip and return this slip to SCSR in the attached envelope with your signed & dated statement. Previous and probable future litigation and the hiring of expert witnesses is expensive. We need your support and financial assistance to fight this Connecticut Company and its Casino allies. I want to help SCSR continue this fight. ____ Yes, I enclose $ = Yes, call me for help with mailings;-etc. Tel.# _ E-mail address_____ Bennet Orlowski, Chairman Southold Town Planning Board • Dear Mr. Orlowski, Because of the potential environmental impact of Cross Sound Ferry's (CSF) increased parking at Orient Point resulting from the passenger-only Casino service, I urge you to determine that it is a Class I Action, and to pursue the SEQRA process to its conclusion. Because there has never been a full environmental assessment of the ferry activity, it is the only fair, legal and logical means to establish parameters for present expansion and any future growth anticipated by CSF. I also criticize your acceptance of the Building Department's finding that there was preexisting parking on the "Snack Bar" lot. I do not believe that occasional parking of a handful of cars years ago represents an adequate justification for a commercial parking lot of over 200 vehicles. Sincerely, Name _ - Address_________ _ Date____/�_ / 2000 - - SOUTHOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS, INC. - _ U.S. Postage P.O. BOX 797 PAID GREENPORT, NY.Y 11944 Permit No. 11 Orient, N.Y. 11957 SOUTHOLD TOWN RESIDENT - me Urgent—immediate action required—urgent—immediate action required—urgent SOUTHOLD TOWN: ESTINRTION, NOT R CORRIDOR. R GATEWR 4R THRUWAY NV V October 2, 2000 . OCT 0 3 2000 TO: The Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Planning ®o r / FROM: North Fork Environmental Council NFEC comments pertaining to the Cross Sound Ferry site plan submission Pa Members of the Planning Board,I remember well a meeting or hearing similar to this one that I attended maybe 3 or 4 years ago. At that meeting I was disappointed at the stance of Southold Town vis—a—vis the Cross Sound Ferry and I knew that this matter was going to be with us for a long time. At that meeting Southold attorney Yakabosky summarily refused an offer of high powered legal support volunteered by Southold Citizens For Safe Roads with the following telling comment; "We(Southold Town) can not ally ourselves with a special interest"! Special interest phooey! SCSR is us, it is Southold Town! Now here we are 3 or 4 years later attending a public hearing to speak to a site plan submission by Cross Sound Ferry. The submission is incomplete and designed to achieve some sort of preliminary approval for a concept that will expand and morph over time to justify whatever the Ferry seeks. The number of cars to be parked(a very significant fact, it seems to us)is stated to appear in the narrative. It doesn't! The veiled reference to preexisting parking usage on the snack bar property is designed to justify whatever form of over dense parking that Cross Sound can conjure. Send them back to the drawing board,this submission fails! There should be no public hearing until they get it right. The passenger ferry parking is for the sole benefit of Cross Sound and the Connecticut Casinos while bringing Southold hordes of thundering traffic and emissions and pollution and the occasional accident. It is obvious that a fill Environmental Impact Statement is required before anything else is undertaken. The repercussions of the Ferry's increasing activity on Southold are real. Note the local paper speaking to a DOT plan in Greenport to eliminate some on street parking and widen lanes to increase the speed and flow of traffic on Front Street. This is not what the Greenport citizens and businesses want, it is simply a Government reaction to traffic friction. I bring this up because as Ferry traffic increases we become a target of DOT plans to widen and modify Route 25 in East Marion and Orient. There go our trees, front yards and quality of life! Public safety is a powerful excuse!" This traffic issue is not an Orient and East Marion problem, it is a North Fork Problem. If we do not control traffic opportunity by opportunity we all lose! Thank you, Howa 0 Meinke ' esi• - i t C 09/27/00 09:51 FAX 516727372.1 L I FARM BUREAU Z002 stted,. .2 I" 9da#d a4in & 4au .901Z. ON LONG ISLAND104 Edwards Avenue, Calverton, NY 11933 g4111"11°#-..", Phone: (631) 7274777 Fax: (631) 727-3721 October 2,2000 i 4 x`1,1' 1 'V - `i� , Qp i Mr.Bennett Orlowski,Chairman OCT 0 3 2000 Southold Town Planning Board °� Town Hall,PQ Box 1179 Southold Town Southold,NY 11971 , Plannrng rt.it and Dear Mr.Chairman and Members of the Planning Board .. The Long Island Farm Bureau, with over 5,700 members serving the agricultural community on Long 'f Island's East End and North Fork, support Cross Sound Ferry in its efforts to obtain site plan approval before the Planning Board. Cross Sound Perry has played a vital role in supporting the agricultural community on the East End by continually providing reliable year-round service to fanners seeking Le deliver their products to New England markets. At the beginning of the 20th century, ferry service between Orient Point and New London began, in part, out of the needs of potato farmers attempting to sell their famous home grown • products to New England buyers, Today, many farmers and nurserymen, including many here in Southold,still rely on Cross Sound Ferry for this very same reason. In fact, according to the Ncw York State Agricultural Statistics Service, approximately 85%of the seed potatoes used on Long Island potato farms arrive via Cross Sound Ferry from Ncw England. The transportation linkage and accessibility that Cross Sound Ferry provides between Orient Point and Ncw England supports the agricultural industry of the Town of Southold, helps preserve this way of life on the East End,and will Icad to the continued prosperity of the East End agricultural community, The Long Island Farm Bureau urges you to support Cross Sound Ferry and its efforts to improve service between Orient Point and Ncw England. Sincerely, ph M. Gergela,III oseI Executive Director C.C.: Jean Cochran,Supervisor iTc 6r znport - Southold Chwmbcr of Commcrec ,p0 Box /4/5 Southold, my 11971 631r653161phone &fax September 29, 2000 s •r i OCT 03 2000 Y' Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Southold Town Hall Planning Board Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Dear Mr. Chairman and Planning Board Members; We, the Greenport—Southold Chamber of Commerce, serving over 200 members in the business community, urge the Planning Board to come to an agreement with the site plan application for Cross Sound Ferry. Cross Sound Ferry has been a member of this community for decades. They provide reliable, safe and efficient transportation between Southold and New England, which benefits all of our residents, businesses and visitors They employ Southold residents,pay taxes and patronize our local vendors. Their work on behalf of numerous charitable organizations in Southold Town is well documented and should be commended. Cross Sound Ferry and the,future of ferry services between Southold Town and New England is important to all residents and members of the business community. We urge the Planning Board to resolve Cross Sound Ferry's site plan application. Sincerely, Greenport—Southold Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors 5441t5P ITHOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROAL—1NC. (SCSR) P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 RECEIVED September 29, 2000 OCT 2 2000 Town of Southold Town Board P.O. Box 1655 Southold Town Clerk Southold, NY 11971 Dear Members of the Board: Enclosed please find a copy of a letter from Southold Citizens for Safe Roads, Inc. (SCSR) to Mr. Bennett Orlowski, the Chairman of the Planning Board of the Town of Southold. As detailed in the letter, SCSR is extremely concerned about a SEQRA Lead Agency Coordination Request being circulated by the Planning Board in connection with the Cross Sound Ferry facilities at Orient Point. Although the Planning Board has prevailed in every lawsuit brought by Cross Sound to avoid comprehensive environmental review of its Orient Point operations--a review necessitated, in our opinion, by Cross Sound' s substantial yet unapproved expansion of those operations through the introduction of high-speed passenger-only ferry service--the Planning Board now inexplicably appears to be acceding to an segmented review in the face of SEQRA' s admonition against such an approach. Despite the fact that, in our view, the increased traffic, parking and environmental stresses at Cross Sound' s facilities are largely, if not entirely, the result of the new ferry service--a change of use that has never been subject to a comprehensive environmental review--the Board now appears to be going along with Cross Sound' s attempt to cast the matter solely as a minor parking lot modification. In addition, we believe that the classification of the review as "unlisted" rather than "Type I" is incorrect under the governing regulations. We welcome any comments or input you or your agency might be able to offer in this matter. Sincerely, Southold Citizens for Safe Roads, Inc. by Fredrica Wachsberger Contact No. (631) 323-3501 SOUTHOLD TOWN:A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY SOU MOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS_Z&r'IC. (SCSR) I'8 P.O. BOX 797 SThfr GREENPORT, NY 11944 - ----- ,,t4 1. Viti 1 , ID ' 1 , (,,,.;1„.,-. E t: ie1,0 1,,, OCT O . 2000 September 29, 2000 Southold Town anni M11; 0-4d Re: Lead Agency Coordination Request Cross Sound Ferry Dear Mr. Orlowski: More than six years ago, Cross Sound Ferry Services, Inc. ("Cross Sound") abruptly introduced a high-speed passenger-only ferry service at its terminal in the Town of Southold. Once the Town and the Planning Board demanded that Cross Sound comply with applicable local and state law by filing a new site plan covering the entirety of Cross Sound's operation at Orient Point, Cross Sound responded by engaging in a continuous pattern of litigation and delay to avoid such compliance. Despite its maneuvering, however, Cross Sound has lost every challenge it made to the Town's authority to require submission of a comprehensive revised site plan for the entire ferry terminal operation, and to the Town's obligation to conduct a detailed environmental review of that site plan. In light of this history, it is therefore impossible to understand why the Planning Board is now circulating a Lead Agency Coordination Request that, on its face, appears to be incomplete and at odds with both the law and with the positions that have been repeatedly and forcefully taken by the Town and the Planning Board itself. A brief review of the procedural history of this matter may be useful. After Cross Sound introduced its new passenger-only ferry service, the Planning Board resolved in July 1995 that operation of the new ferry service and the resultant use of the snack bar parcel as a parking lot for customers of the new service required revised site plan approval. Cross Sound did not challenge this resolution. Instead, Cross Sound began to submit piecemeal site plans in an attempt to decouple the passenger-only ferry service from the all of the changes accompanying introduction of that service, among them a manyfold increase in the numbers of cars driving to and parking around the ferry terminal. The Planning Board,however, stood firm in requiring a comprehensive integrated site plan that would address both the introduction of the new ferry service and its effect on all of Cross Sound's Southold facilities. After representing to the state Supreme Court that it would comply with the Planning Board's request, on July 29, 1996, Cross Sound submitted for approval a comprehensive site plan for the entire ferry terminal area. The submission of Cross Sound's comprehensive site plan for approval automatically triggered the Planning Board's obligation to apply the provisions of the State Environmental Quality Review Act("SEQRA"). In accordance with the relevant state regulations,the Board determined on July 30, 1996,that review of Cross Sound's comprehensive site plan was a"Type I" action, i.e., one presumptively requiring an Environmental Impact Statement("EIS"). On September 16, 1996,the Planning Board issued a Positive Declaration,which made an EIS mandatory. On December 16, 1996, the Planning Board adopted a Scope Outline for the required EIS. SOUTHOLD TOWN: A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR , A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY SOvni.IOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS;' �c. (SCSR) 2 P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 Cross Sound's response was to file a series of lawsuits challenging (1)the Planning Board's Positive Declaration; (2)the Planning Board's adoption of the Scope Outline; and(3)the constitutionality of those provisions of the Town Code of Southold that required Cross Sound to submit a site plan to begin with. Cross Sound's challenges were rejected by the state Supreme Court in every instance. As a result of those court proceedings this Planning Board has the authority(and we believe the obligation)to require a comprehensive site plan from Cross Sound and,pursuant to SEQRA,to require an Environmental Impact Statement of the extent set out in the 1996 Scope Outline. One would think that the Board,having won on all counts,would now resume an environmental review of the same scope and character as the one interrupted by Cross Sound's failed legal actions. Yet,incomprehensibly, despite a successful four-year battle to vindicate the Town's legal authority and obligations,the Planning Board now appears to have- reversed course and acceded Cross Sound's defective view of the SEQRA review process: that the only issue involved is parking lot alterations. This is contrary to the law and to the position the Town has consistently maintained before the courts. The controlling state regulations make it clear in no uncertain terms that: [a]ctions commonly consist of a set of activities or steps. The entire set of activities or steps must be considered the action,whether the agency decision- making relates to the action as a whole or to only a part of it. Considering only a part or segment of any action is contrary to the intent of SEQR. If a lead agency believes that circumstances warrant a segmented review, it must clearly state in its determination of significance, and any subsequent EIS, the supporting reasons and must demonstrate that such review is clearly no less protective of the environment. Related actions should be identified and discussed to the fullest extent possible. 6 NYCRR §§ 617.3(g), 617.3(g)(1) (emphasis added). While the Planning Board properly followed this mandate in its abortive review of Cross Sound's 1996 integrated site plan, its latest action disregards it. Moreover, in improperly disregarding the presumption against segmentation,the Lead Agency Coordination Request provides no hint why the Planning Board now apparently considers a partial and disjointed review"clearly no less protective of the environment", especially given that it reached the opposite conclusion four years ago, and nothing has changed. Nor could such a review be"no less protective", since the substantial increase in the intensity of use of Cross Sound's facilities, along with the new environmental stresses created by this use, stems from a obvious common source—introduction of the passenger-only ferry service and the associated traffic,parking and usage demands it creates. The effects of this new service must be considered in any proper environmental review, a stance the Town has consistently and correctly maintained in its litigation with Cross Sound. As counsel for the Town affirmed to the state Supreme Court while successfully moving to dismiss two of Cross Sound's meritless lawsuits: SOUTHOLD TOWN:A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY SO11,: ,'MOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS, (SCSR) 3 P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 Cross Sound has apparently adopted the position that the applications pending before the ZBA and the Planning Board only apply for proposed parking on the Trust parcel. That these applications were simply filed as a normal business move and that SEQRA review should focus solely on the parking lot . . . . This defies reason, is contradictory to the record and is contrary to the definition of"action" subject to SEQRA review. Reply Affirmation of Francis J. Yakaboski,¶¶ 19,20. - While the Trust parcel is no longer formally included in Cross Sound's latest submission'—although we believe it remains, contrary to its residential zoning status, a repository of dredge spoil for other of Cross Sound's parcels—Mr. Yakaboski's statement is equally true regarding the current site plan,which has been classified on the Lead Agency Coordination Request as"approval of design&layout at three properties zoned Marine I [sic] and used in the ferry terminal operation(staging and parking)."2 In the words of the Town's counsel to the state Supreme Court, "[t]he comprehensive site plan, High Speed Ferry and ZBA applications regarding parking are inescapably linked. They are the `activities or set of activities' which comprise the `action' subject to SEQRA review in this case"and"Cross Sound's position would result in a segmented review which is contrary to the purpose and intent of SEQRA." Even the 1996 Preliminary Site Plan Study submitted by Cross Sound confirms that increased parking demands were linked to the introduction of the new ferry service. According to Cross Sound's consultants, "the principal users of the proposed parking facility will be the users of the High Speed Ferry when that service is in use." Given these facts,we cannot understand how the Planning Board can now decide to ignore its prior and correct determination of the law,particularly when the alternative being circulated by the Board, in the words of the Town's counsel, "defies reason"and is"contrary to the purpose and intent of SEQRA". Furthermore,the Narrative submitted by Cross Sound begins with the sentence, "Cross Sound Ferry Services,Inc. requests site plan approval from the Southold Town Planning Board for the existing and on-going operations currently occurring at the project site". It does so despite providing no details or site plan covering those operations—only an incomplete proposal for parking modifications. If Cross Sound is truly requesting approval for"existing and on-going operations", as it must under the law, • it has no justification for shielding such operations from comprehensive SEQRA review. The materials submitted by Cross Sound are plainly insufficient for such a comprehensive review,however, and the Lead Agency Coordination Request does not characterize the SEQRA action as covering"existing and on-going operations". Nonetheless, given Cross Sound's prior tactics, it is fairly predictable that Cross Sound will later attempt to argue that SEQRA review of its parking plans somehow constituted SEQRA review of its existing and on-going operations. 1 Given Cross Sound's prior shell-game tactics, it would not be surprising if the Trust parcel becomes the subject of a later,piecemeal application by Cross Sound for even more parking. The current application confirms that the Trust parcel is still"controlled" by Cross Sound. Narrative,p. 12. 2 The properties are actually zoned"Marine II". SOUTHOLD TOWN: A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY Sa6 felOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS, C. (SCSR) 4 P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 In addition to improperly segmenting review, Cross Sound's current application is inexplicably classified as an"unlisted"rather than"Type 1"action. This classification ignores the criteria for a Type I action set out in Section 617.4 of Title 6 of - the Official Compilation of Coes,Rules and Regulations of the State of New York, which, incidentally,provides that"[a]ll agencies are subject to this Type I list."3 In 1996, the Board correctly followed these criteria and classified Cross Sound's application as a Type I action because it"exceeds 25 percent of the threshold of a project or action involving the physical alteration of 10 acres and occurring substantially contiguous to any publicly owned or operated parkland. The property subject to alteration is 3.93 acres and is contiguous to County owned parkland." (Southold Town Planning Board Resolution, July 29, 1996.) The project is still contiguous to County owned parkland and a National Natural Landmark, and the project size is now 4.06 acres. Therefore,the provisions of 6 NYCRR § 617.4(b)(10) again require that Cross Sound's application be a Type I action presumptively subject to a Positive Declaration and a full environmental review. Moreover,the materials prepared and submitted by Cross Sound in connection with this review are being circulated even though they are obviously incomplete and/or erroneous. For example, despite the fact that this submission is ostensibly, if improperly, directed towards parking, Question B(1)(f) of the Long Environmental Assessment Form,which asks for the existing and proposed number of parking spaces, is answered, "Refer to Narrative." The Narrative contains absolutely no such information. Furthermore,there is no answer to Question A(7) ("Is the project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural Landmarks?"). In contrast to previous Cross Sound submissions, Question A(6) ("Is the project substantially contiguous to, or contain a building, site or district, listed on the State or the National Registers of Historic Places?")is answered"yes".4 Finally,the Narrative parrots Cross Sound's legally untenable position that parking on the Snack Bar Lot is a"pre- existing,non-conforming use". In connection with this last issue, it is still another matter of concern that the Town is now apparently joining Cross Sound in its unwarranted position concerning the zoning status of the Snack Bar Lot. We have only recently seen a copy of a memorandum dated August 14, 2000,from Mr. Forrester to you, in which Mr. Forrester claims to "have received evidence of, and have determined that parking on the parcel known as the `snack bar parcel' is a pre-existing use". We understand this"evidence" consists of aerial photographs from sometime in the 1950s showing a few vehicles on the snack bar lot, as well as an affidavit from a single individual stating that during the 1950s "[f]rom time to time,we had occasion to park our vehicles and the vehicles of our employees east of the north/south extension of the present State Highway at the site of the present parking area now employed by patrons of the Cross Sound ferry". 3 The term"agency"is defined in the regulations as"a state or local agency". 6 NYCRR§ 617.2(c). 4 If this answer is correct, it automatically leads to a Type I classification,regardless of the acreage involved. 6 NYCRR§ 617.4(b)(9). SOUTHOLD TOWN:A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY SO i-IOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS, .riC. (SCSR) 5 P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 It is our understanding that the courts of this State have held that a non-conforming use must be substantial,not merely incidental, and must be proven as of the effective date of the zoning ordinance,not merely prior to that effective date. On both of these issues the burden of proof is on the property owner. Furthermore,we understand that the courts have held that"overriding public policy"favors reasonable restriction and eventual elimination of pre-existing nonconforming uses, and that such uses may be enlarged only in rare circumstances not present in this case. It is also our understanding that a nonconforming use may not be established through activities begun or continued in violation of a zoning ordinance. None of the"evidence" submitted by Cross Sound addresses the actual use of the snack bar parcel on the date Southold's zoning code went into effect, or proves anything more than that a few cars were once occasionally located on the snack bar parcel—hardly the substantial use required to establish a non- conforming use. Given the legal framework, is it really the Town's position that sporadic parking vaguely alleged to have taken place sometime in the 1950s now gives Cross Sound the right regularly to maintain a developed commercial parking lot for hundreds of vehicles in violation of the Town's zoning ordinance? Finally, it is our understanding that the Planning Board intends to leave the October 2, 2000,Public Hearing open so that Cross Sound can fill in the many defects in its current proposal. We believe that the Planning Board should schedule a further public hearing after Cross Sound has filed a complete and accurate application. The land and waters surrounding the Cross Sound terminal at Orient Point are among the important natural and recreation resources of Southold, and their protection is far too serious a matter to allow anything less than a full and fair review by the Planning Board and the citizens of this Town. We urge the Planning Board to reject this latest in a long series of efforts to segment the review of Cross Sound's application for a new site plan and instead to insist upon a non-segmented review of all of Cross Sound's operations including the high-speed ferry service and the new parking traffic and pollution concerns created by that service. The Planning Board should again require Cross Sound to submit a complete site plan application covering all of the properties it makes use of at Orient Point for a full environmental review as required by law and by the prior determinations of this Planning Board. Very truly yours, k4)444447 01A....,„ Southold Citizens for Safe Roads,Inc. by Fredrica Wachsberger Bennett Orlowski, Chairman Town of Southold Planning Board Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 BY EXPRESS MAIL SOUTHOLD TOWN:A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY,NOT A THRUWAY SOv(HOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS;',, C. (SCSR) 6 P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 Copy to: Town of Southold Town Board P.O. Box 1655 Southold,NY 11971 Town of Southold Building Dept. P.O. Box 1655 Southold,NY 11971 Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals P.O. Box 1655 Southold,NY 11971 Town of Southold Board of Trustees P.O. Box 1655 Southold,NY 11971 Town of Southold Transportation Committee P.O. Box 1655 Southold,NY 11971 Kim Shaw,Environmental Analyst Department of Ecology Department of Health Services County Center Riverhead,NY 11901 Stephen Jones Council for Environmental Quality Department of Planning P.O. Box 6100 Hauppauge,NY 11788 James Bagg, Director Council for Environmental Quality Department of Planning P.O. Box 6100 Hauppauge,NY 11788 SOUTHOLD TOWN:A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY SO"u i u TOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS, (SCSR) 7 P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 John C. Murray,Planner Transportation Division Department of Public Works 335 Yaphank Avenue Yaphank,NY 11980 William Sickles, Superintendent Department of Parks,Recreation& Conservation P.O. Box 144, Montauk Hwy. W. Sayville,NY 11796-0144 George Stafford,Director Coastal Resources&Waterfront Revitalization Division New York Department of State 162 Washington Avenue Albany,NY 12231 John P. Cahill, Commissioner New York Department of Environmental Conservation 50 Wolf Road Albany,NY 11233 Roger Evans, Director NYSDEC Bldg. 40, SUNY Rm. 219 Stony Brook,NY 11790 Darrel Kost,Regional Env. Coordinator Dept. of Transportation State Office Building 250 Veterans Memorial Hwy. Hauppauge,NY 11788 Barry Hecht Passenger Transportation Division NYS Dept. of Transportation W. Averell Harriman State Office Building Campus 1220 Washington Avenue Floor&Rm. 4-115 Albany,NY 12232 Thomas Lyons, Director Environmental Management Bureau Office of Parks,Recreation&Historic Preservation Bldg. 1, 13th Floor Empire State Plaza Albany,NY 12238 SOUTHOLD TOWN:A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY . , SOS;-1 AOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROADS,x11.C. (SCSR) 8 P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 Dr. David Huysoll,Director Division of Agricultural Research-Plum Island U.S. Department of Agriculture P.O. Box 848 Greenport,NY 11944 US Army Corp. of Engineers NY District Jacob K. Javits Federal Bldg. New York,NY 10278-0090 Attn: Regulatory Branch Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA) 26 Federal Plaza Room 1338 New York,NY 10278 Attn: Response&Recovery Division Debra O'Kane, Executive Director North Fork Environmental Council P.O. Box 799 Mattituck,NY 11952 Mr. Gerald Newman, Chief Planner Suffolk County Planning Commission H. Lee Dennison Bldg. -4th Floor 100 Veterans Memorial Highway P. O. Box 6100 Hauppauge,NY 11788-0099 BY EXPRESS MAIL SOUTHOLD TOWN: A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY Tim F. THOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROAI INC. (SCSR) P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 RECEIVED September 29, 2000 OCT 2 2000 Town of Southold Town Board P.O. Box 1655 Southold Town Clerk Southold, NY 11971 Dear Members of the Board: Enclosed please find a copy of a letter from Southold Citizens for Safe Roads, Inc. (SCSR) to Mr. Bennett Orlowski, the Chairman of the Planning Board of the Town of Southold. As detailed in the letter, SCSR is extremely concerned about a SEQRA Lead Agency Coordination Request being circulated by the Planning Board in connection with the Cross Sound Ferry facilities at Orient Point. Although the Planning Board has prevailed in every lawsuit brought by Cross Sound to avoid comprehensive environmental review of its Orient Point operations--a review necessitated, in our opinion, by Cross Sound' s substantial yet unapproved expansion of those operations through the introduction of high-speed passenger-only ferry service--the Planning Board now inexplicably appears to be acceding to an segmented review in the face of SEQRA' s admonition against such an approach. Despite the fact that, in our view, the increased traffic, parking and environmental stresses at Cross Sound' s facilities are largely, if not entirely, the result of the new ferry service--a change of use that has never been subject to a comprehensive environmental review--the Board now appears to be going along with Cross Sound' s attempt to cast the matter solely as a minor parking lot modification. In addition, we believe that the classification of the review as "unlisted" rather than "Type I" is incorrect under the governing regulations. We welcome any comments or input you or your agency might be able to offer in this matter. Sincerely, )Et_ L. vi /, Southold Citizens for Safe Roads, Inc. OCT 03 2000 by Fredrica Wachsberger Contact No. (631) 323-3501 d T Planning loud SOUTHOLD TOWN:A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY Sit±,__ 'MOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROAD- -INC. (SCSR) P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 September 29, 2000 Re: Lead Agency Coordination Request Cross Sound Ferry Dear Mr. Orlowski: More than six years ago, Cross Sound Ferry Services,Inc. ("Cross Sound")abruptly introduced a high-speed passenger-only ferry service at its terminal in the Town of Southold. Once the Town and the Planning Board demanded that Cross Sound comply with applicable local and state law by filing a new site plan covering the entirety of Cross Sound's operation at Orient Point, Cross Sound responded by engaging in a continuous pattern of litigation and delay to avoid such compliance. Despite its maneuvering,however, Cross Sound has lost every challenge it made to the Town's authority to require submission of a comprehensive revised site plan for the entire ferry terminal operation, and to the Town's obligation to conduct a detailed environmental review of that site plan. In light of this history, it is therefore impossible to understand why the Planning Board is now circulating a Lead Agency Coordination Request that, on its face, appears to be incomplete and at odds with both the law and with the positions that have been repeatedly and forcefully taken by the Town and the Planning Board itself. A brief review of the procedural history of this matter may be useful. After Cross Sound introduced its new passenger-only ferry service,the Planning Board resolved in July 1995 that operation of the new ferry service and the resultant use of the snack bar parcel as a parking lot for customers of the new service required revised site plan approval. Cross Sound did not challenge this resolution. Instead,Cross Sound began to submit piecemeal site plans in an attempt to decouple the passenger-only ferry service from the all of the changes accompanying introduction of that service, among them a manyfold increase in the numbers of cars driving to and parking around the ferry terminal. The Planning Board,however, stood firm in requiring a comprehensive integrated site plan that would address both the introduction of the new ferry service and its effect on all of Cross Sound's Southold facilities. After representing to the state Supreme Court that it would comply with the Planning Board's request,on July 29, 1996, Cross Sound submitted for approval a comprehensive site plan for the entire ferry terminal area. The submission of Cross Sound's comprehensive site plan for approval automatically triggered the Planning Board's obligation to apply-the provisions of the State Environmental Quality Review Act("SEQRA"). In accordance with the relevant state regulations,the Board determined on July 30, 1996,that review of Cross Sound's comprehensive site plan was a"Type I" action, i.e., one presumptively requiring an Environmental Impact Statement("EIS"). On September 16, 1996,the Planning Board issued a Positive Declaration,which made an EIS mandatory. On December 16, 1996, the Planning Board adopted a Scope Outline for the required EIS. SOUTHOLD TOWN:A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY S_�_tTHOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROAI . ,'INC. (SCSR) 2 P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 Cross Sound's response was to file a series of lawsuits challenging (1)the Planning Board's Positive Declaration; (2)the Planning Board's adoption of the Scope Outline; and(3)the constitutionality of those provisions of the Town Code of Southold that required Cross Sound to submit a site plan to begin with. Cross Sound's challenges were rejected by the state Supreme Court in every instance. As a result of those court proceedings this Planning Board has the authority(and we believe the obligation)to require a comprehensive site plan from Cross Sound and,pursuant to SEQRA,to require an Environmental Impact Statement of the extent set out in the 1996 Scope Outline. One would think that the Board,having won on all counts,would now resume an environmental review of the same scope and character as the one interrupted by Cross Sound's failed legal actions. Yet,incomprehensibly, despite a successful four-year battle to vindicate the Town's legal authority and obligations,the Planning Board now appears to have reversed course and acceded Cross Sound's defective view of the SEQRA review process: that the only issue involved is parking lot alterations. This is contrary to the law and to the position the Town has consistently maintained before the courts. The controlling state regulations make it clear in no uncertain terms that: [a]ctions commonly consist of a set of activities or steps. The entire set of activities or steps must be considered the action,whether the agency decision- making relates to the action as a whole or to only a part of it. Considering only a part or segment of any action is contrary to the intent of SEQR. If a lead agency believes that circumstances warrant a segmented review, it must clearly state in its determination of significance, and any subsequent EIS, the supporting reasons and must demonstrate that such review is clearly no less protective of the environment. Related actions should be identified and discussed to the fullest extent possible. 6 NYCRR§§ 617.3(g), 617.3(g)(1) (emphasis added). While the Planning Board properly followed this mandate in its abortive review of Cross Sound's 1996 integrated site plan,its latest action disregards it. Moreover,in improperly disregarding the presumption against segmentation,the Lead Agency Coordination Request provides no hint why the Planning Board now apparently considers a partial and disjointed review"clearly no less protective of the environment", especially given that it reached the opposite conclusion four years ago,and nothing has changed. Nor could such a review be"no less protective", since the substantial increase in the intensity of use of Cross Sound's facilities, along with the new environmental stresses created by this use, stems from a obvious common source—introduction of the passenger-only ferry service and the associated traffic,parking and usage demands it creates. The effects of this new service must be considered in any proper environmental review,a stance the Town has consistently and correctly maintained in its litigation with Cross Sound. As counsel for the Town affirmed to the state Supreme Court while successfully moving to dismiss two of Cross Sound's meritless lawsuits: SOUTHOLD TOWN:A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY .'HOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROAD VC. (SCSR) 3 P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 Cross Sound has apparently adopted the position that the applications pending before the ZBA and the Planning Board only apply for proposed parking on the Trust parcel. That these applications were simply filed as a normal business move and that SEQRA review should focus solely on the parking lot. . . . This defies reason,is contradictory to the record and is contrary to the definition of"action" subject to SEQRA review. Reply Affirmation of Francis J. Yakaboski,¶¶ 19, 20. While the Trust parcel is no longer formally included in Cross Sound's latest submission'—although we believe it remains, contrary to its residential zoning status, a repository of dredge spoil for other of Cross Sound's parcels—Mr. Yakaboski's statement is equally true regarding the current site plan,which has been classified on the Lead Agency Coordination Request as"approval of design&layout at three properties zoned Marine I [sic] and used in the ferry terminal operation(staging and parking)."2 In the words of the Town's counsel to the state Supreme Court,"[t]he comprehensive site plan, High Speed Ferry and ZBA applications regarding parking are inescapably linked. They are the `activities or set of activities' which comprise the `action' subject to SEQRA review in this case"and"Cross Sound's position would result in a segmented review which is contrary to the purpose and intent of SEQRA." Even the 1996 Preliminary Site Plan Study submitted by Cross Sound confirms that increased parking demands were linked to the introduction of the new ferry service. According to Cross Sound's consultants, "the principal users of the proposed parking facility will be the users of the High Speed Ferry when that service is in use." Given these facts,we cannot understand how the Planning Board can now decide to ignore its prior and correct determination of the law,particularly when the alternative being circulated by the Board,in the words of the Town's counsel,"defies reason"and is"contrary to the purpose and intent of SEQRA". Furthermore,the Narrative submitted by Cross Sound begins with the sentence, "Cross Sound Ferry Services,Inc. requests site plan approval from the Southold Town Planning Board for the existing and on-going operations currently occurring at the project site". It does so despite providing no details or site plan covering those operations—only an incomplete proposal for parking modifications. If Cross Sound is truly requesting approval for"existing and on-going operations",as it must under the law, it has no justification for shielding such operations from comprehensive SEQRA review. The materials submitted by Cross Sound are plainly insufficient for such a comprehensive review,however,and the Lead Agency Coordination Request does not characterize the SEQRA action as covering"existing and on-going operations". Nonetheless,given Cross Sound's prior tactics, it is fairly predictable that Cross Sound will later attempt to argue that SEQRA review of its parking plans somehow constituted SEQRA review of its existing and on-going operations. ' Given Cross Sound's prior shell-game tactics, it would not be surprising if the Trust parcel becomes the subject of a later,piecemeal application by Cross Sound for even more parking. The current application confirms that the Trust parcel is still"controlled" by Cross Sound. Narrative,p. 12. 2 The properties are actually zoned"Marine II". SOUTHOLD TOWN:A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY S THOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROA[ INC. (SCSR) 4 P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 In addition to improperly segmenting review, Cross Sound's current application is inexplicably classified as an"unlisted"rather than"Type 1"action. This classification ignores the criteria for a Type I action set out in Section 617.4 of Title 6 of the Official Compilation of Coes,Rules and Regulations of the State of New York, which, incidentally,provides that"[a]11 agencies are subject to this Type I list.s3 In 1996, the Board correctly followed these criteria and classified Cross Sound's application as a Type I action because it"exceeds 25 percent of the threshold of a project or action involving the physical alteration of 10 acres and occurring substantially contiguous to any publicly owned or operated parkland. The property subject to alteration is 3.93 acres and is contiguous to County owned parkland." (Southold Town Planning Board Resolution, July 29, 1996.) The project is still contiguous to County owned parkland and a National Natural Landmark, and the project size is now 4.06 acres. Therefore,the provisions of 6 NYCRR§ 617.4(b)(10)again require that Cross Sound's application be a Type I action presumptively subject to a Positive Declaration and a full environmental review. Moreover,the materials prepared and submitted by Cross Sound in connection with this review are being circulated even though they are obviously incomplete and/or erroneous. For example, despite the fact that this submission is ostensibly,if improperly,directed towards parking, Question B(1)(f)of the Long Environmental Assessment Form,which asks for the existing and proposed number of parking spaces, is answered, "Refer to Narrative." The Narrative contains absolutely no such information. Furthermore,there is no answer to Question A(7) ("Is the project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural Landmarks?"). In contrast to previous Cross Sound submissions, Question A(6) ("Is the project substantially contiguous to, or contain a building, site or district,listed on the State or the National Registers of Historic Places?")is answered"yes".4 Finally,the Narrative parrots Cross Sound's legally untenable position that parking on the Snack Bar Lot is a"pre- existing,non-conforming use". In connection with this last issue,it is still another matter of concern that the Town is now apparently joining Cross Sound in its unwarranted position concerning the zoning status of the Snack Bar Lot. We have only recently seen a copy of a memorandum dated August 14,2000,from Mr.Forrester to you,in which Mr.Forrester claims to"have received evidence of, and have determined that parking on the parcel known as the `snack bar parcel' is a pre-existing use". We understand this"evidence" consists of aerial photographs from sometime in the 1950s showing a few vehicles on the snack bar lot, as well as an affidavit from a single individual stating that during the 1950s "[f]rom time to time,we had occasion to park our vehicles and the vehicles of our employees east of the north/south extension of the present State Highway at the site of the present parking area now employed by patrons of the Cross Sound ferry". 3 The term"agency"is defined in the regulations as"a state or local agency". 6 NYCRR§ 617.2(c). 4 If this answer is correct, it automatically leads to a Type I classification,regardless of the acreage involved. 6 NYCRR§ 617.4(b)(9). SOUTHOLD TOWN: A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY S(' MOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROAC NC. (SCSR) 5 P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 It is our understanding that the courts of this State have held that a non-conforming use must be substantial, not merely incidental, and must be proven as of the effective date of the zoning ordinance, not merely prior to that effective date. On both of these issues the burden of proof is on the property owner. Furthermore, we understand that the courts have held that"overriding public policy" favors reasonable restriction and eventual elimination of pre-existing nonconforming uses, and that such uses may be enlarged only in rare circumstances not present in this case. It is also our understanding that a nonconforming use may not be established through activities begun or continued in violation of a zoning ordinance. None of the"evidence" submitted by Cross Sound addresses the actual use of the snack bar parcel on the date Southold's zoning code went into effect, or proves anything more than that a few cars were once occasionally located on the snack bar parcel—hardly the substantial use required to establish a non- conforming use. Given the legal framework, is it really the Town's position that sporadic parking vaguely alleged to have taken place sometime in the 1950s now gives Cross Sound the right regularly to maintain a developed commercial parking lot for hundreds of vehicles in violation of the Town's zoning ordinance? Finally, it is our understanding that the Planning Board intends to leave the October 2, 2000, Public Hearing open so that Cross Sound can fill in the many defects in its current proposal. We believe that the Planning Board should schedule a further public hearing after Cross Sound has filed a complete and accurate application. The land and waters surrounding the Cross Sound terminal at Orient Point are among the important natural and recreation resources of Southold, and their protection is far too serious a matter to allow anything less than a full and fair review by the Planning Board and the citizens of this Town. We urge the Planning Board to reject this latest in a long series of efforts to segment the review of Cross Sound's application for a new site plan and instead to insist upon a non-segmented review of all of Cross Sound's operations including the high-speed ferry service and the new parking traffic and pollution concerns created by that service. The Planning Board should again require Cross Sound to submit a complete site plan application covering all of the properties it makes use of at Orient Point for a full environmental review as required by law and by the prior determinations of this Planning Board. Very truly yours, 6016147.00,Southold Citizens for Safe Roads, Inc. by Fredrica Wachsberger Bennett Orlowski, Chairman Town of Southold Planning Board Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 BY EXPRESS MAIL SOUTHOLD TOWN: A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY ' , r /THOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROA( ,INC. (SCSR) 6 P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 Copy to: Town of Southold Town Board P.O. Box 1655 Southold,NY 11971 Town of Southold Building Dept. P.O. Box 1655 Southold,NY 11971 Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals P.O. Box 1655 Southold,NY 11971 Town of Southold Board of Trustees P.O. Box 1655 Southold,NY 11971 Town of Southold Transportation Committee P.O. Box 1655 Southold,NY 11971 Kim Shaw,Environmental Analyst Department of Ecology Department of Health Services County Center Riverhead,NY 11901 Stephen Jones Council for Environmental Quality Department of Planning P.O. Box 6100 Hauppauge,NY 11788 James Bagg, Director Council for Environmental Quality Department of Planning P.O. Box 6100 Hauppauge,NY 11788 SOUTHOLD TOWN:A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY 1 y St.,,,'HOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROAD VC. (SCSR) 7 P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 John C. Murray,Planner Transportation Division Department of Public Works 335 Yaphank Avenue Yaphank,NY 11980 William Sickles, Superintendent Department of Parks,Recreation&Conservation P.O. Box 144,Montauk Hwy. W. Sayville,NY 11796-0144 George Stafford,Director Coastal Resources&Waterfront Revitalization Division New York Department of State 162 Washington Avenue Albany,NY 12231 John P. Cahill, Commissioner New York Department of Environmental Conservation 50 Wolf Road Albany,NY 11233 Roger Evans, Director NYSDEC Bldg. 40, SUNY Rm. 219 Stony Brook,NY 11790 Darrel Kost, Regional Env. Coordinator Dept. of Transportation State Office Building 250 Veterans Memorial Hwy. Hauppauge,NY 11788 Barry Hecht Passenger Transportation Division NYS Dept. of Transportation W. Averell Harriman State Office Building Campus 1220 Washington Avenue Floor&Rm. 4-115 Albany,NY 12232 Thomas Lyons,Director Environmental Management Bureau Office of Parks,Recreation&Historic Preservation Bldg. 1, 13th Floor Empire State Plaza Albany,NY 12238 SOUTHOLD TOWN:A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY S HOLD CITIZENS FOR SAFE ROA= INC. (SCSR) 8 P.O. BOX 797 GREENPORT, NY 11944 Dr. David Huysoll, Director Division of Agricultural Research-Plum Island U.S. Department of Agriculture P.O. Box 848 Greenport,NY 11944 US Army Corp. of Engineers NY District Jacob K. Javits Federal Bldg. New York,NY 10278-0090 Attn: Regulatory Branch Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA) 26 Federal Plaza Room 1338 New York,NY 10278 Attn: Response&Recovery Division Debra O'Kane,Executive Director North Fork Environmental Council P.O.Box 799 Mattituck,NY 11952 Mr. Gerald Newman, Chief Planner Suffolk County Planning Commission H. Lee Dennison Bldg. -4th Floor 100 Veterans Memorial Highway P. O. Box 6100 Hauppauge,NY 11788-0099 BY EXPRESS MAIL SOUTHOLD TOWN:A DESTINATION, NOT A CORRIDOR A GATEWAY, NOT A THRUWAY • ., r•-• ,-,-4,, \/5-tcf5F. °tar\ 1 .L J�L��:�fZUi q�( 'j'L � 9G� �i � ' Ji. g[ y \");e? 104 Edwards Avenue, Calverton, NY 11933 ON LONG ISLAND Phone: (631) 727-3777 Fax: (631) 727-3721 October 2,2000 Mr.Bennett Orlowski, Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Town Hall,PO Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Dear Mr. Chairman and Members of the Planning Board: The Long Island Farm Bureau, with over 5,700 members serving the agricultural community on Long Island's East End and North Fork, support Cross Sound Ferry in its efforts to obtain site plan approval before the Planning Board. Cross Sound Ferry has played a vital role in supporting the agricultural community on the East End by continually providing reliable year-round service to farmers seeking to deliver their products to New England markets. At the beginning of the 20th century, ferry service between Orient Point and New London began, in part, out of the needs of potato farmers attempting to sell their famous home grown products to New England buyers. Today, many fanners and nurserymen, including many here in Southold, still rely on Cross Sound Ferry for this very same reason. In fact, according to the New York State Agricultural Statistics Service, approximately 85% of the seed potatoes used on Long Island potato farms arrive via Cross Sound Ferry from New England. The transportation linkage and accessibility that Cross Sound Ferry provides between Orient Point and New England supports the agricultural industry of the Town of Southold, helps preserve this way of life on the East End, and will lead to the continued prosperity of the East End agricultural community. The Long Island Farm Bureau urges you to support Cross Sound Ferry and its efforts to improve service between Orient Point and New England. Sincerely, oseph M. Gergela,III , • Executive Director D'174 SC I z14 v , . C.C.: Jean Cochran, Supervisor � yf { SEP 28 2000 4 . -. - , - . . , . , .So ®IdTown ,._- . , ,. . Planning,Board