Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCEDAR BEACHHENRY P. SMITH JOHN M. BREDEMEYER. III, President John Bednoski, Jr. ALBERT ICRUPSKI, JR., Vice-President TELEPHONE [516) 765-1892 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Halt. 53095 Math Road P.O. Bo;¢ 728 SoutlYold, New York 11971 Date: March 16, 1988 To Whom It May Concern: Attached hereto ~s a Long Environmental Assessment Form submitted by J.M.O. Consultants on behalf of Cedar Beach Park Association, Inc. in connection with their application for a Wetland Permiz to maintenance dredge an existing channel to 4' at mlw. Resultant spoil, approximately 1025 cu. yds. of clean sand shall be trucked to An upland site for disposal. Project is located at Stillwater Jbhn M. Bredemeyer, , Town Trustees Posted: March 16, 1988 FRANK A. KUJAWSKI, JR., President ALBERT J. KRUPSK[, JR., Vice-President JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, III JOHN L. BEDNOSKI, JR. HENRY P. SMITH TELEPHONE [516) 765-1892 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUT~IOLD Town Hall. 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 S.E.Q.R.A. NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOTICE OF NO-SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT Date: August 25, 1988 APPLICATION NO.: 6'21 / chPar~~k~ NJ~IE: J.M.O. Consulting on behalf of th( Cedar Bea Association J/ This notice is issued pursuant to the provisions of Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, State Environmental Quality Review and 6NYCRR Part 617, Section 617.10 and Chapter 44 of the Code of the Town of Southold, notice is hereby given that the Southold Town Trustees, as lead agency for the action described below has determined that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. Please take further notice that this declaration should not be considered a determination made for any other department or agency which may also have an application pending for the same or similar project. TYPE OF ACTION: Unlisted DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: To dredge a 520' x 12' area to a depth of 3' at MLW. Approximately 346 cu. yds. of sand is proposed to be dredged and trucked to the Town Landfill for disposal. LOCATION: 255 Lakeside Drive, Southold, New York 11971. REASONS SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION: 1. An on-site inspection has been conducted by the Board of Trustees. 2. An environmental assessment form has been submitted by the applicant and reviewed and completed by the Board. 3. The scope of the original dredging project has been reduced by the applicant. 4. The remaining dredging is for several property owners. Board of Trustees - Assessment - Page 2. For further information regarding this application please contact: Frank A. Kujawski, Jr. President Board of Town Trustees Town Hall, Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Call: [516) 765-1892 or 765-1932 cc: Robert A. Greene, D.E.C., Stony Brook Commissioner Thomas C. Jorling M. In£urna,. Army Corps of Engineers Thomas Hart, Coastal Management Conservation Advisory Council Bldg. Dept. Board of Appeals Supervisor Frank Murphy Town Clerk's Bulletin Board J.M.O. Consulting on behMf of the Cedar Beach Park Association Michael Corey, Senior Environmental Analyst, State of New York, Planning Board DepT. of State ~7)--7c 617.21 Appendix A State Environmental Quality Review FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM SEQR Purpose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an orderly manner, whether a project or action may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer. Frequent- ly. there are aspects of a project that are subjective or unmeasureable. It is also understood that those who determine significance ,may have little Or no formal knowledge of the environment or may be technic,~lly expert in environmental 'analysis. In addition, many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting the question of significance. The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby ap~plicants and agencies can be assured that the determination process has been orderly, Comprehensive in nature, y(~t flexible to allow introduction of information,to fit a projector action. Full EAF Components: The fu EAF is comprised of three parts:. Part 1: PrOvides objective data and information about a given orolect and its site. By identifying basic project data.' it assists a reviewer i, the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3. Part 2: Focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action. It provides guidance as~towhether an mpact s key to be cons dered sma to moderate or whether t s a potent a v- argo ~mpact. The form a so ~dent~fms whether an mpact can be m t gated or reduced. Part 3: If a9y ~npact in Part 2 is identified as potentially-large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the infO,ct'is aCtua y mportant.. DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE--Type I and Unlisted Actions Identify the Portions of EAF completed for this project: [] Part 1 [] Part 2 I-1Part 3 Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF~Parts 1 and 2 and 3 if appropriate), and any other supporting information and considering both the magitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the lead agency that: [] A. The project will not result in any large and important impact(s) and, therefore, is one which will not have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a negative declaration will be prepared. [] B. Although the prolect could~ have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been required, therefore a CONDITIONED negative declaration ;viii be prepared.' C. The project may result in one or more targe and important impacts that may have a s~gnificant impact on the environment, therefore a positive declaration will be prepared. · A Conditioned Negative Declaration s only valid for Unlisted Actions Name of Action Name of Lead Agency Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title-of Responsible Officer Signature of Preparer (If different frc~m responsible officer) Date PART 1--PRO~ECT INFORMATION Prepared by Projec! Sponsor NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may ha;.: a significant effect on the environment. Please complete the .entire form. Parts ^ through E. Answers to these questions will be considered' as part of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additiona. information you believe wil be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3. It is expected that completion of the full FAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not involve new studies, research or investigation. If information requiring suc-h additional work is un available, so indicate and specify each instance. NAME OF ACTION Un-named' LOCATION OF ACTION (Include Street Address. Municipality and County) Lakeside Drive, Southold, Suffolk NAMEOFAPPL)CANTISPONSOR GlennE. Just of J.M.0. Consultinq ADDRESS P.O. BO× 361-N. Country Rd. BUSINESS TELEPHONE (516) ~J29-3575 CITY/PO STATE } ZIP CODE "~na~ng River, N.Y.t 11792 NAME OF OWNER (If different) /BUS~NESS TELEPHONE Glenn E. Just for the Cedar Beach A~ssociabion, In~'(516 1-765-3856 ADDRESS c/o 255 Lakesi'de Drive CiTY/PO STATE t ZmCODE Southold, N.Y. 11971 DESCRI~ION OF ACTION Applicant proposes to maintenance dredge an existing channel to 4' at MLW. Resultant spoil (approxi~mately~O~ c.y. of clean sand) shall be trucked to an upland disposal site. Please Complete Each Queslion-Indicate N.A. if not applicable A. Site Description Physical setting of overall project, bot'h developed and undeveloped areas. I Present land use: ClUrban ~lndustrial 'l-ICommercial [~Residential(suburban) r~Forest F~Agriculture [~Other 2. Total acreage of project area: n/a acres. APPROXIMATE ACREAGE PRESENTLY AFTER COMPLETION Meadow or Brushland (Non-agricultural) acres acres Forested . acres acres Agricultural (Includes-orchards, cropland, pasture, etc,) acres acres Wetland [Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24. 25 of ECL) acres acres Water Surface Area acres acres Unvegetated (Rock. earth or fill) acres acres Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces acres acres Other (indicate ty~e), acres acres 3. What is predominant soil type(s) on project site? sand a. Soil drainage: ~I~DNVel drained 100 % of site · I-IModerately well drai.ned % of site ~Poorly drained % of site b. If any agricultural land is involved, imw many acres of soil are classified within soil group I through 4 of the N' Land Classification System~ acres, [See I NYCRR 370). 4. Are there bedrock outcroppings on project site? [~Yes a, What is depth to bedrock? (in feet) [~Rural [non-farm) 5.:' Approximate percentage of proposed project site with~'lepes:~'~'~'*,'~ ' ~00 % .D10-15% % ~ i'-tqS% or greater % 6. Is project substantially contiguous to, or contain a building, site. or district, listed on the State or the National Registers of Historic Places? I-lYes ~1o 7. Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural Landmarks? i-lYes P3No 8. What is the depth of the water table? n/a [in feet) 9. Is site located over a primarf, principal, or sole source aquifer? C'lYes ~C~No 10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently ex, ist in the project area? :[~Yes [:]No 11 Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered? i-lYes ~No According to identify each species 12. Are there any unique or unusual hand forms on the pro~e'ct site? (i.e,. cliffs, dunes, other geological formations) C1Yes ~',1o Describe 13. Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area? kqYes [qNo If yes. explain u%ilized for dc)c~klnq _r)~c~nR]]rP hCIn~.~. 14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community? ~Yes ~/~/~ o unknown 15. Streams within or contl~uous to project area: a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary 16 Lakes. ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: a. Name,q~-,il'~w~-.~r T,~lc~ - c'~c3~- R~,~r~ ~=r~r~rb~ Size (in acres) n,/a 17. Is the site served by existing public utilities? ~Yes ~No a) If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? E3Yes ~No b) If Yes. will improvements be necessary to allow connection? i-lYes E3No 18. Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law. Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 304? I~Yes ~C~lo 19. is the site located in or substantially contiguous to a CriticaL Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 of the ECL. and 6 NYCRR 6177 ~Yes 20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or h,~zardous wastes? f-iVes :~:No N/A B. Project Description 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fil! in dimensions as appropriate) a. Total conti~uous acreage owned or controlle~ by project sponsor b. Proiect acreage to be developed: · acres initially; c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped acres. d. Ledgth of project, in miles: [if appropriate) e. If the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed %; f. Number of off*street parking spaces existing ; proposed g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour [upon completion of project)? h. If residential: Number and type of housing units: One Family Two Family Multiple Family Initially LJ[timately i. Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed st,ructure height; width; __ i. Lin.ear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare pro~ect will occupy is? ft. acres ultimately. Condominium length. natural material (i.e., rock. earth, etc.) wil~be removed from the site? _~-- ~'?: ~ tons~_~cubic~-gard~ 3. Will disturbed areas be reclaimed? l-lyes E~No ~]~I/A a. If yes. for what intend . purpose ~s the site being reclaimed? b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? DYes [~No c. Wil upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? I-lyes 4. How many acres of vegetation (trees. shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site? 0 > 1 acres. 5. Will any' mature forest (over 100 years old) or ot~er locally-important vegetation be removed by this project? i-lYes /,~o 6. If single phas~ project: Anticipated period of construction I . months, (including demolition). 7. If multi-phased: a Total number of phases anticipated 1 (number). b. Anticipated date of commencement phase 1 c. Approximate completion date of final phase d. Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases? 8. Will blasting occur during construction? l~Yes '~o 9. Number of jobs generated: during construction 4 10. Number of lobs eliminated ~by this project 11. Will project require relocati~n of any projects or facilities? ASA~ monm year, (including demolition). month year. -'lYes r~No ; after project is complete 0 I-lYes ~o If yes, explain 12. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? DYes ~]No a. If yes. indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) and amount b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged 13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? l~Yes ,~o Type 14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? Explain D-lYes /~o 15~ Is pro~ect or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain;' AYes 16. Will the project generate solid waste? DYes ~.No a. If yes, what is the amount per month tons b. If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be*used? DYes I-INo c. If yes, give name ; location d, Will any wastes nol go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? e. If'Yes, explain t-lNo D--lYes V'lNo 17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste? a, If yes. what is the ~nticipated rate of disposal? b. If yes. what is the anticipated site life? 18. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? DYes l'~Yes ~No tons/month. years. 19. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? D--lyes 20. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels? 21. Wii project result in an increase in energy use? DYes ~No If yes . indicate type(s] 22. If water supply is from wells, indicate pumping capacity 23. Total anticipated water usage per day n/a gallons/day. - 24. Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding? ~Yes o If Yes, -explain DYes gallons/minute. - 2;. A~pp~ovals Required: City. Town, Village Board i-lYes ~No City. Town, Village Planning Board r-lYes ~o City, ToWn Zoning Board City. County Health Department [3Yes ~No Other Local Agencies ~es [-]No Other Regional Agencies I-lYes ~:.No State Agencies ~.Yes ,I-1No Federal Agencies [~es `3No ';~' "~ Submittal Type Date N/A To%ha Trus%ees (Southold) 11/87 N.Y.S.D.E.C. & N.¥.R.D.O.~. ll/R7 U.S.D.O.A. 11/87 C. Zoning and Planning Information 1. Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision? [-[Yes If Yes. indicate decision required: l-lzoning amendment r-lzoning variance []special use permit [3subdivis~on [-]site plan `3new/revision of master plan [~resource management plan [-]other 2. What is the zomng classification('~)of the site? 3. What is the maximum potential development o~ the site if developed as permitte~l by the present zoning? 4. What is the proposed zoning of the site? 5 What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning? 6 Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? [-]Yes `3No 7 What are the predominant [and use{s) and zoning classifications within a 1/~ mite radius of proposed action? 8 Is the proposed action compatible with adioining/surrounding land uses within a % mile? []Yes [~No 9 If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed? a. What is the mimmum lot size proposed? 10. Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of sewer or water districts? il-lYes `3No 11. Will the proposed act on create a demand for any community provided services (recreation. education, police, fire protection)? [3Yes I-INo a. If ves. is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? [-]Yes r-lNo 12 Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic signific.antly above p[esent levels? r-lyes 'No a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic'./' *fqYes [:]No D. Inform ational Details Attach an',' additional information as may be needed to clarify your proiect. If there are or may be any adverse impacts associated with your proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or avoid them. E. Verification I certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge. Applicant/Sponsor N-~/n~ Gl~enr~ E. ~Just of J.M.O. Consul%inq Date 11/12/87 If the actmn ,sm t~e Coastal Ar~e ,a~, anjou area stale agency, complele the Coastal Assessment Form be,ore proceeding with this assessment. Part 2~PROJECT IMPACTS AND THEIR MAGNITUDE Responsibility of Lead Agency General Information (Read Carefully) · In comnleting the form Lhe reviewer should be guided by the question: Have my responses and determinations been reasonable? The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst. · Identifying that an ~mpact will be potentially large (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessariiv significant. Any large impact must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine s~gnificance. Identifying an ~mpact in column 2 simply asks that it be looked at further. · The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of impacts and wherever possible the thresho|d of magnitude that would trigger a response in colum~ 2. The examples are generally applicable throughout the State and for most situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be appropriate for a Potential Large Impact response, thus requiring e~;aluation in Part 3. · The impacts of each project, on each site, in each locality, will vary. Therefore. the examples are illustrative and have been offered as guidance. They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each c Jestion. · The number of exam ;les per question does not indicate the importance of each question. · In identifying impacts, consider long term, short term and cumlative effects. Instructions (Read carefully) a. Answer each of the 19 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there will be any impact. b. Maybe answers should be considered as Yes answers. c. If answering Yes to a question then check the appropriate box (column 1 or 2) to indicate the potential size of the ~mpact. If impact threshold equals or exceeds any example provided check column 2. If impact will occur but threshold is lower than example, check column 1. d. If reviewer has doubt about s~ze of the impact then consider the impact as potentially large and proceed to PART 3. e. If a potentially large impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated by change(s) in the project to a small to moderate impact, also check the Yes box in column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction is not possible. This must be explained in Part 3, IMPACT ON LAND 1. Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site? El]NO nYES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Any construction on slopes of 15% 9r greater, {15 foot rise per 100 foot of length), or where the general slopes in the pro~ect area exceed 10%. ~ · Construction on land where the depth to the water table is less than 3 feet. · Construction of paved parking area for 1,000 or more vehicles. · Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally within 3 feet of existing 8round surface. · Construction that will cogtinue for mor~ than 1 year or involve mor~ than one phase or stage. · Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than 1,000 tons of natural material {i,e., rock or soil) per year. · Construction or expansion of a sanitary landfill. · Construction in a designated floodway. · Other impacts 2. Will.there be an effect to any unique or unusuat land forms found on the site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, §eo[ogical formati~ons, etc.)l~NO E~YES · Specific land forms: 6 I 2 3 Small to Potential Can impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change [] [] r~Yes []No [] [] []Yes []No [] [] []Yes E]No [] [] E]Yes []No [] [] []Yes []No [] [] []'~es []No [] [] []Yes []No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No IMPACT ON WATER 3, Will proposed action affect any water body designated as protected? (Under Articles 15. 24, 25 of the Environmental Conservation Law, ECL) ~INO E/YES Examples that would apl~ly to column · Developable area of site contains a protected water bodv. · Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a protected stream · Extension of utility distribution facilities through a R.rotected Water body. · Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland. · Other impacts: 4. Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body of water~ I~NO ~IYES Examples that would apply to column 2 · A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water or more than a 10 acre increase or decrease. · Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area. · Other impacts: 5. Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater ouahtv or quantity? ~NO I~YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action wi[I require a discharge permit. · Proposed Action requires use of a source of water-that does not have approva] to serve proposed (project] action. · Proposed Action requires water supply from wells with greater th-an 45 gallons per minute pumping capacity. · Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water supply system. · Proposed Action will adversely affect groundwater · Liquid effluent will be conveyed off the site to facilities which pr~ently do not exist or have inadequate capacity. · Proposed Action would use water in excess of 20,000 ga[[ons per day. · Proposed Action will likel'y cause siltation or other discharge into an existing body of water to the extent that there will be an obvious visual contrast to natural conditioris · Proposed Action will require the storage of petroleum or chemical products greater than 1,100 gallons. · Proposed Action wi]] allow residential uses in areas without water and/or sewer serwces. · Proposed Action locates commercial and/or industrial uses which may require new or expansion o~ existing waste treatment and/or storage facilities. · Other impacts: 6. Will proposed action a|ter drainage flow or patterns, or surface water runoff~ I~NO ~]YES ExampLes that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action would change flood water flows. ? I 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact impact Project Change [] [] []]Yes []No [] [] r-~Yes I--INo [] [] []Yes []No [] [] [~Yes []No [] [] I-lYes ~lNo [] [] []Yes I--]No [] [] []Yes []No [] [] I'-]Yes []No [] [] l-lYes []No [] [] E]Yes E]No [] [] · []Yes []No [] [] [~Yes E]No [] [] []Yes []No [] [] ~]Yes E]No [] ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Y~' ~No · Proposed Action may cause substantial erosion, · Proposed Action is ir~compatible with existing drainage patterns. · Proposed Action will allow development in a designated floodway. · Other Impacts: ~ IMPACT ON AIR' 7 Will proposed action affect air quality? [~NO E3YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed.Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips in any given hour, · Proposed Action will result in the incineration of more than 1 ton of refuse per hour. · Emission rate of total contaminants will exceed $ lbs. per hour or a heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour. · Proposed action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed to industrial use. · Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial development within existing industrial areas, · Other impacts: IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS 8, Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered species? E]NO E]YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Reduction of one or more specms listed on the New York or Federal list. using the site, over or near site or found on the site. · Removal of any oortion of a critical or significant wildlife habitat. · Application of pesticide or herbicide more than~wice a year, other than for agricultural purposes. · Other impacts: 9; Will Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or non-endangered species? [Z]NO E3YES Examples that would apply to ._column 2 · Proposed Action wou~d substantiall'~ interfere with any resident or migratory fish, shellfish or wildlife species. · Proposed Action requires the removal of more than 10 acres of mature forest (over 100 years of age) or other locally important vegetation. IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES 10 Will the Prop6sed Action affect agricuituraJ land resources? E]NO E3YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · The proposed action would sever, cross or limit access to agricultural land (includes cropland, hayfields, pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc.] 8 I 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change [] [] []Yes I~No [] [] []Yes []No [] [] []Yes []No [] [] I-lYes []No [] [] []Yes []No [] [] []Yes []No [] [] []Yes []No [] [] []Yes rqNo [] ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No · Construction ~ctivity would excavate or compact the soil profile of agricultural land. · Tile proposed action would irreversibly convert more than 10 acres oLagricultural land or. if located in an Agricultural District, more than 2.5 acres of agricultural land. ~ · The proposed action would disrupt or prevent installation ot agricultural lar]d management systems (e.g., subsurface drain lines. 'outlet ditches, strip cropping); or create a need for such measures Ie.g. cause a farm field to drain poorly due to increased runoff) · Other impacts: IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES 11. Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources;' [3NO CtYES (If necessary, use the Visual EAF Addendum in Section 617.21 Appendix B.) Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed land uses, or proJect components obviously different from or in sharp contrast to current surrounding land use patterns, whether man-made or natural · Proposed land uses, or project components visible to users of aesthetic resources which will eliminate or significantly reduce their enjoyment of the aesthetic qualities of that resource. · Proiect components that will result iH the elimination or significant screening of scenic views known to be important to the area. · Other impacts: IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 12. Wil Proposed Action impact an',/site or structure of historic, pre- historic or paleontological importance.~ I~NO~ E3YFS Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any facility or site, listed on the State or National Register of historic places. · Any impact to an archaeological site or fossil bed located within the project site. · Proposed Action will occur n an ar~a designated as sensitive archaeological sites on the NYS Site Inventory. · Other ~mpacts: IMPACT ON.OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION 13 Will Proposed Action affect the quantity or quality of existing or future open spaces or recreational opportunities.~ Examples that would apply to column 2 F3NO r~YE$ · The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational opportunity. · A major reduction of an open space important to the community. · Other ~mpacts: .. 9 I '2 3 S~all to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change [] [] []Yes I-]No [] [] [:]Yes ~INo [] [] I-lYes' []No [] [] []Yes r-INo ~- ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No IMPAC'r~ON TRANSPORTATION 14. Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems? ONO [~YES Examples that would apply to column 2 * Alteration of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods. · Proposed Action wi]l result in major traffic problems. · Other impacts: IMPACT ON ENERGY 15. Wil proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or energy supply? ~NO E]YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action will cause a greater than 5% i~crease in the use of any form of energy in the municipality. · Proposed Action will req ~ire the creation or extension of an energy transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two family residences or to serve a major commercial or industrial use. · Other impacts: NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS 16. Will there be obiectionable odors, noise, or vibration as a result of the Proposed Action? [3~O E3YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Blasting within 1,500 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive facility. · Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day). · Proposed Action will produce operating noise excee~ding the local ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures. · Proposed Actio, will remove natural barriers that would act as a noise screen, · Other impacts: IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH 17. Will Proposed Action affect public health and safety? E3NO E]YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action may cause a risk of explosion or release of hazardous substances Ii.e. oil, pesticides, chemicals, ra~iiation, etc. I in the event of accident or upset conditions, or there may be a chronic [ow level discharge or emission. · Proposed Action may result in the burial of "hazardous wastes" in any form (i.e. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritating, infectious, etc.) · Storage facilities for one' million or, more gallons of bquified natural gas or other flammable liquids. · Proposed action may result in the excavation or other disturbance within 2,000 feet of a site used for the disposal of solid or hazardous waste. ? Other jmpacts: 10 I 2 3 Small to Potential Can impact Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change [] [] E]Yes []No [] [] []Yes []No [] [] []Yes []No [] [] []Yes I-qNo [] [] []Yes r~No [] [] []Yes []No [] [] []Yes []No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ - ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No . ~ ~ ~ves ~NO ~ ~ ~Yes ~No IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHARACTER :,~ .... OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD 18. Wil proposedactionaffectthecharacteroftheexistingcommunity? E]NO r~YES .Examples that would apply to column 2 · 'The permanent population of the city, town or village in which the prolect ~s located is likely :o grow by more than 5%. · The municipal budget for ca ~ital expenditures or operating services will increase by more than 5% per year as a result of this protect, · Proposed action will conflict with officially adopted pl~ans or goals. · Proposed action will cause a change in the density of land use. · Proposed Action will replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures or areas of historic importance to the community. · Development will create a demand for additional community services (e.g. schools~ police and fire, etc.) · Proposed Action will set an important precedent for future projects. · Proposed Action w, ill create or elimi, ate em ployment. · Other impacts: 19. 1 2. 3 Sinai to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change [] [] I-lYes E~]No [] [] ("lyes I~No [] [] []]Yes []]No [] [] ii)Yes ~INo [] [] J~Yes ENo [] [] ~Yes -J-lNo [] [] ~JYes []]No [] [] r-lYes ~JNo [] [] J]Yes E]No Is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy~£elated to potential adverse enwronmental impacts? ElNa) E]YES If Any Action in Part 2 Is Identified as a Potential Large Impact or If You Cannot Determine the Magnitude of Impact, Proceed to Part 3 Part 3--EVALUATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS Responsibility of Lead Agency Part 3 must be prepared if one or more impact(s) is considered, to be potentially large, even if the impact(s) may be mitigated. Instructions Discuss the following for each impact identified in Column 2 of Part 2: 1. Briefly' describe the impact. 2. Describe(if applicable) how the impact could be mitigated or reduced to a small Lo moderate impact by project change(s}. 3. gased on the information available, decide if it is reasonable to co~ dude that this im£act is important. To answer the question of importance, consider: · The probability of the impact occurring · The duration of the impact · its irreversibilitv, including permanently lost resources of value · Whether the impact can or wil be controlled · ]'he regional consequence of the impact · Its potential divergence from local needs and goals · Whether known objections to the project relate to this im pact. (Continue on attachments) 11 COUNTY OF SUFFOLK STATE OF NEW YORK )SS: BEING DULY SWORN DEPOSES In completing this application I hereby authorize the Trustees~ agent or representative to enter onto my ~roperty to inspect the premises in conjunction with review ~f).~his ~pp~ication. SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS ~¢~:~ NOTAJ%Y PUBL I C CHARLES W. BOWMAN APPROVED "WETLANDS" PERMIT (CHAPTER 9~) APPROVED "BOAT~DOCKS, WHARVES" PERMIT (CHAPTER 32) (CHAPTER 32) COMPUTATION OF FEES Approved 2~27/85 PECONI( 11958 0 sOuTHOL BAY EAST CUTCHOGUE HOG NECK BAY Poznt LITTLE HOG NECK - NASSAU POINT / / ( JESSUP NECK FOR ADJOINING AREA SEE MAP NO, 24 SOUTHOLD, L. t., NEW YORK. 11971 Box 394 Southold, New York April 3, 1982 Mr. Frank Murphy, Councilman Town Hall ~in Road Southoid, New York 11971 Dear Mr. Murphy: IT has come to ~V attention that you have been instrumental in reaching an agreement with Mr. Guldi of the County Board of Works to open up the mouth of Cedar Beach Inlet. On behalf of the residents of Cedar Beach Park I want to express our sincerest appreciation for your personal efforts. We are fully aware of the fact that it is too expensive to dredge this inlet annually, and for this reason we strongly urge that the Council throw its full support behir~ our efforts to have a pair of Jetties built to create a short protected channel at the mouth of the inlet. The proposal for Jetties always creates a storm of controversy. Opposition is sometimes justified, and sometimes it is arbitrary, emotional and unreasonable. Each case must be separately evaluated. We maintain that opposition ko Jetties at this location is without any merit° All the beach to the east is open wetland~am~ all the beach to the west is already protected by ten privately owned groins. The study in progress by the College Marine Center already verifies that the litoral flow alternates both east and west at the mouth. A channel protected by Jetties bot---~--on the east and west would be scoured twice daily by the tidal flow. -2- Cedar Beach Park Association Mr. Guldi, principal engineer of the Suffolk County Division of Waterways supports us in our request, but stresses that the proposal must originate at the town level. Your help would be greatly appreciated. Sincerely yours, Frank P. Franola, P.E. Chairman Waterways Committee Cedar Beach Park Association FPF:rf C.C. ~. Guldi Mr. Pell Mr. Stoutenberg Suffolk County Community College EASTIERN CAMPUS (51 S) 369~2600 SPIEONK RIVE~RHEAO ROAO, RIVIERHEAD, NE~W YORK I 1901 Marck 19, 1982 Paul Stoutenburgh, President Southold Town Board of Trustees Southold Town tlall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Dear Paul: At the Marine Science Center located at Cedar Beach in 8outhold, our students, from time to time, have projects involving various animals and plants that are grown on thebanks and in the "canals" surrounding our building. We would appreciate knowimg if the Town Trustees would have any objections to our erecting a sign asking people not to dig or take plants and animals from these areas. Very truly yours, Marine Technology B~LS/dk CC: Dean David Cox 2850 Cedar Beach Rd Southold~NY,i1971 February 17, 1982 Mr William Pell Southold Town Supervisor Town Hall Southotd,NY,119?l Dear Mr Pell: Enclosed is a copy of Mr. Guldis' answer to my letter of January 6, 1982, concerning the Cedar Beach Inlet, of wt~ch you have a copy. It has always been one of our concerns that the county will not dredge the inlet on an annual basis as is required and that without stabilization it will remain unnavigable and possibly close. While we are waiting for a decision to be made as to whether or not to request the county to stabilize the inlet, we would greatly appreciate your requesting the county to keep it open in the meantime by dredging. Th~uk you very much. cc. MR PAUL STOUTENBERG MR GREGORY BLASS MR JOHN GULDI COUNTY OF SUFFOLK PETER F. COHALAN January 8, 1982 I~r. Robert Gazza 2850 Cedar Beach Road ~outhold, New York 11971 Ref: Cedar Beach Inlet Southoldr New York Dear Bob: am in receipt of your letter of January 6, 1982 in regards the severe shoaling of the Cedar Beach Inlet. As you know, we have discussed this problem many times and I pointed out to you that this is one of many inlets that either needs yearly dredging or the construction of a jetty (s) to stabilize the inlet. The county last year turned down our request for a larger County dredge which would have given us the capability of keeping up with these yearly maintenance requirements- Under the present system of utilizing private contractors, we do not have the funds or administrative capability to perform all the required yearly maintenance dredging. The only alternative would be to stabilize these inlets with jetties. In order for us to undertake either a maintenance dredglng project or the construction of jetties, the request must come from your local town officials, through your local legislator. If he is willing to sponsor the project, then funding can be requested through this department. Page 2 January 8, 1982 Mr. Robert Gazza 2850 Cedar Beach Road Southold, New York 11971 Ref: cedar Beach Inlet Southold, New York Accordingly, I would suggest you contact the above mentioned people. If you have any further question on this matter, please feel free to contact me accordingly° Very truly yours, ~ohn R. Guldi, P.E.,L.So Principal Engineer Division of Waterways For: R. M. Kammerer Commissioner RMK: JRG: tv of Pubtic Works SiOn ~venUe John Gormety and I discussed the stud ~resently done by the Mi Prof. Chuck McCarthy. ~-~limited boat traffic within the harbor so as not to ~interfere with his activities, that the study would be an impartial one. Chuck said he would forward the data collected to you without his opinions so that you could use it to make your own decisions as to inlet stabilization through Jetty placement etc. He expected to get the final results to you sometime this winter. We will check with him again in a week or two. Unfortunately, in the meantime, the shoal formation from the west has almost completely closed the inlet. At low tide yesterday the only portion of the inlet still under water was less than 15 feet in width. One good storm would probably close it. Last years' excellent dredging job has been completely wiped out and if the inlet is not dredged as soon as oossible i% may close como!etely, it is certainly imoossibte ~o navigave in its oresent condition and anyone who tries wi~lt be takin~ a risk. Thank you for your coooeration, ce: Mr. William Pell Southold Town Board Southold Town Trustees Mr. Greg Blass Prof. Chuck McCarthy Mr.-John Gormely Ver~ trul~ yours ~ob Gazza ~) SOUTHOLD, L. i., NEW YORK Box 1522 Southold, N.Y. 11991 November 2, 1981 Board of Appeals Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Gentlemen: I am President of the Cedar Beach Park Association com- posed of approximately fifty property owners in the area known as Cedar Beach along the roads and tributaries of Cedar Point Drive East and Cedar Point Drive West. Our comments concern the application of Ronald Roberts for a building permit on the south side of Cedar Point Drive East. tt has never been the policy of our Association to oppose residential construction Just to maintain a selfish status quo, and that is not our policy now. We do, however, know by actual living experience that this area has an extremely fragile environment. It is, therefore, impera- tive that this building permit be examined not only from the point of view of flood damage, but from all established norms of health and environmental standa~dso We look to the various Town Administrators to carefully evaluate the health implications of this application, and be sure to make prudent decisions to protect the living standards of the existing residents. Respectfully yours, RF:LC C.C. Town Council Board of Trustees D.E.C. C~EACH PARK AssoCIATION, Lee Conte, President INC. :,> , '' ' P ' ~5,I98~ ' ~his is the ~irst r~port "~rina". At th~ presaa~ ~ime th~r~ ar~ ~her~ tha~ have baen there all Week~..' Th~ ~wn~rs boat ~Y 6075 Ed-~ar 111 oa ~ow ~nd 59~78i':~= ~h~ ' Th~ third bo~t has =~ a~m~ or =umbers - ~hink tha~ is l~al to b~gmn w~h. will gi~e you a w~kly rep~r~ as t~ - Thank yo~. Bernard Robins 73~ 6381 " GREGORY J. BLASS December 17, 1980 COUNTY OF SUFFOLK COUNTY LEGISLATURE Southold Town Trustees 53095 Maim Road Southold, NY 11971 Attention: Anna Hataier, Chairperson Dear Ms. Hataier: Attached is a letter with petition from R. & B. Gazza in Cedar Beach. The letter and petition seek approval and construction of a jetty at Cedar Beach. Your comments on nheir request, and the issues therein listed, would be most appreciated. uly yours, ~Gre~/~ Legislator GJB/mj k enco R~ & D. Gazza 28~0 Cedar Beach Road Southold, New York 11971 November 2]~ 1980 William Pell Southo!d Town Supervisor Town Hall Southold, New York~ 11971 Dear Mr. Peil: Attached is a petition a Jetty at Cedar Beash Inlet shoaling at the mouth which gable and hazardous. re~uestin~ t]~e construction of to prevent the constant ~akes the inlet both unnavi- ~eel tine constructio~, of suc,.~ a Je~y ~o,~lm ~e both economically and enviro~me~tall~ beneficial. It nas been indicated ,:~ us that if the Town so requested: the County 'Depar~;nent of Public Works would probably fund ~n= project, u~ tnxs would be cheaper than constantly dredging. Unfortunately, negated, as a shoal half of the mouth. the rec~t dredgin~ has almost been formed ~"-om the west side has blocked We would like to see th,~ inlet stabilized for the fo!lowiny environmental reas,-~ns: 1. ~lzm.~la~on the .~~e,~.~ity for frequent dreoglng o~erations would eliminate a~y, poo~bi~ty~ ~ _~ of disturbing~ the tern colony. 2. The in!cz is ~ ' ~ .... ~, no~ oe~n.s lushea oufficiently with fresh ~fa~er and could easily be closed off by one storm which could be disastrous to the s~;undance of marine life found within the harbor. !~e do not believe there would be any effect upon the County Park beach to the east, as the sand moving from west ~o eas~ ~inds up in the inlet channel. The only way this sand could move across the channel to the County Park beach would be if the channe] were first filled and closed William Pell ~ov~,b~ 23~ 1930 ( 2 off, which could be disastrous as mentioned above. We also feel the present situation is unfair to the inlet waterfront owners who paid elevated prices for their homes so they could use their boats and enjoy the benefits of waterfront living. These people have not been able to use their boats for the past two years and also fear that this situation may cause land values to diminish. ~ have confidence that you will give our request serious consideration, as you have always done in the past and greatly appraciate any assistance you can ~ive us in this matter. Thank you, Attachment A PETITION The Honorable ~_lliam R. Pell, Supervisor Town Hall, ?g~in Road, Southold N.Y. 11971 30 October Dear Sir: We the urder~igr~d, petition the Town of Southold for construction of a breakwater / seawall at Cedar ~each yrdet, Great _wog ?eck in the Town of Southold. Situated in a region of swift tidal current and a stro~ West to East littoral drift, the inlet has bs~n subject to shoalirg. Having recently been dredg~ it is our belief that a breakwater or seawalI would now stabilize the i~3et, thus saving considerable co~t in the lorg te~m ar~ ass~ing continued access for ~avigation. we would appreciate your positive cor~ideration of this petition° thank you FOR CONS~UCTION CF ~. BREAEWAT~L~Y~SEA%YALL AT CEDAR BEACH A_ D1L~ S Supervisor [ 11971 R. & D. Gazza 2850 Cedar Beach : outhold, New November 2~ 1 ~etition requesting the donstruction of ~dar Beach Inlet to prevent the constant mouth which makes the inlet both unnavi- OUS. truction of such a Jetty would be and environmentally beneficial. indicated to us that if the Town so ' ~Y ~epartment of Public Works wo~l~ ~roJect, as this would be cheaper than · the recent dredEing has almost been a shoal formed from the west side has blocked would like ~o see the inlet stabilized for the ental reasons: !, Elimination of the necessity for frequent dredging operations would eIiminate a · the tern colony~ ny possibility of disturbing The inlet is not being f!ushed sufficiently with fresh De closedo~, by, one s~or~ ~icn~' · ous to th~ ~ asu~ance of marine'life founm !arbor. CoUnt any effect upon the (2) off, which could be disastrous as mentioned above. We also feel the pre~ent situation is unfair to the inlet waterfront owners WhO paid elevated prices for their homes so they could use their boats and enjoy the benefits of.waterfront living. These oeople have not been abie to use their boats for the past %Wo years aQd also fear that this situation may cause land values to aiminish. ~ We have ~onfidence that you will give our reques5 ~ serious Consideration, as you have always done in the past ly appreciate any assistance you can gU in Thank you, Attachment A PETITIO~ ~ ~he Honorable William R. i~I1, SUpervisor T~wn ~1I, Main Road, S~u*=hotd ~.Y, 1197~ October 9m,n ~f SOUthola. fo= const~uc~m{ the inlet has been subject %o sh~ti~. i ~ ~ belief ~t a ~ s~ ~ide~ble c~ in ~e ~s~ ~n~ ~c~ss for we would app~e~ie~te your positive consideration of this thank you ?g B~TE~/sEA~AL~ AT GEDA~ BEA~ ADDRESS '7 /