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 /