Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3649 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Lydia A. Tortora BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1809 Appl. No. 364q as amended 2/13/96: Application of CHRISTOPHER CONNORS~ for a variance based upon a Notice of Disapproval issued by the Building Inspector dated 2/8196 for a building permit to construct single-family dwelling with an insufficient front yard setback, Article IliA, Section 100-30A.3, and subject to obtaining approval from the Soutbold Town Trustees and other appr~)priate agencies, concerning premises known as 350 West Drive, Southold, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-59-5-29.3. WttEREAS, after due notice, a public hearing was held on March 6, 1996, and at said hearing aH those who desired to be beard were heard and their testimony recorded; and WtlEREAS, the Board bas carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; and WlIEREAS, Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question, its present zoning, and the surrounding areas; and WIIEREAS, the Board made the following findings of fact: 1. This is an application for an "area" setback variance. The appellant has applied to the Building Inspector for permission to locate a proposed single-family dwelling. The application for a building permit was disapproved on the grounds that "under Article IIIA, Section 100-30A. 3, proposed construction will not have sufficient front yard setback - minimum 40 ft. required." 2. The subject lot is referred to as 350 West Drive, South- old, New York, and contains a lot width of 133.33 feet and lot area of 20,000 square feet. This parcel was created by town approval on March 16, 1972 under Appl. No. 1506 (Map of Druhl), and is 3. In this application, applitmnt proposes to locate a new dwelling at 26 feet from the front property line along West Drive, Southold pursuant to recommendations and discussions with the Town Trustees~ personnel, and locating a smaller house as far from the wetland area as possible. The remaining yard setbacks will be in accordance with the code requirements applicable to a noneonform- Page 2 - Appeal No. 364~ Applieatien of CHRISTOPtIER CONNORS & ano. Decision Rendered March 6, 1996 lng lot of this size (ref. Section 100-244 as amended 12/95). 4. In considering this application, the following facts also noted: are (a) approval has been issued by the Suffolk County Department of ltealth dated January 25, 1996, under HS Ref. No. R-10-940071, in accordance with a Board of Review determination dated December 17, 1993. (b) by Supreme Court Order granted July 1, 1992, Justice Thomas M. Stark, it was ordered that this property is exempt pursuant to the Environmental Conservation Law, Section 24-1305 from having the requirement of a freshwater wetlands permit for land uses referred to in the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation letter dated June 25, 1992 (DEC Ref. No. 1-4738-00560/00001-0; (c) the Southold Town Board of Trustees have on February 28, 1996 issued a Negative Declaration, determining non-significance under the SEQRA regulations; (d) under reviews by the Town Planning Board on or about March 24, 1970, the Town Board of Appeals dated March 16, 1972, and the Building Inspector dated December 13, 1972, it was determined that the lot was a separate lot for the purposes of zoning and building; (e) under Certificate of Occupancy No. Z-15292 dated February 23, 1987, the Building Inspector certified that the vacant lot conforms substantially to the applicable provisions of the Zoning Code (issued to Dorothy Babson and Daniel Gurkin); 5. Further, the Board finds and determines: (a) the circumstances are sensitive nature, unique characteristics, location of the property; uniquely related to the dimensions, contours, and (b) there is no alternative for applicants to pursue other than a setback variance; (c) the variance requested will create a minimal visual change in the character of the neighborhood along this street, and may cause a minor visual detriment, if any, to adjoining properties, although presently vacant, when comparing the difference of 14 feet (the code requirement of 40 feet less the requested 26 ft. setback, and any possible alternative to that figure); Page 3 - Appeal No. 364~ Application of CIIRISTOPllER CONNORS & ano. Decision Rendered March 6, 1996 (d) the relief requested is substantial at 14 feet, or 35%, however, the reasons fer this request are rational and neeessary, and the variance as granted is the minimum which would allow some benefit to the property owner within reason, and at the same time not have an adverse effect or impact on physical or environmental conditions in the neighorhood (also see SEQRA Negative Declaration dated 2/28/96 by the Town Trustees); (e) it is not uncommon for an owner to request a set back variance in order to preserve the environmental character- istics of the property (such as wetland grasses, etc.); (f) the variance requested does not involve an increase in living area or dwelling unit density; (g) the relief requested will not cause a substantial effect on available governmental facilities since the structure is for single-family use in a residential zone district and residential neighborhood; (h) the variance will not in turn be adverse to the safety, health, welfare, cemfort, convenience, or order of the town, or be adverse to neighboring properties, and the benefit to thc applicant is greater when weighed against the health, safety, and welfare of the community; (i) the relief requested is not serf-created by applicant; (j) in considering all the above factors, the interests of justice will be served by granting the variance as noted below. Accordingly, on motion by Member Dinizio, seconded by Member Doyen, it was RESOI,VED, to GRANT a Variance for the front yard setback at 26 feet as requested ' (and shown on the Map last revised Octo- ber 23, 1995, prepared by Peconic Surveyors~ P.C. for the al)plican t). Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Doyen, Goehringer and Dinizio. Nays: Members Tortora and Villa. This resolution was duly adopted (3-2 margin). (During a period of time in the deliberations prior to Member Dinizio~s offering this motion, some dissention was discussed. The Chairman asked several times if Page 4 - Appeal No. 3644 Applic~ltion of CHRISTOPHER CONNORS & ano. Decision Rendered March 6, 1996 anyone would like to offer a motion for alternative relief, however, no alternative motion was offered.) ZBA:lk APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehfinger. Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Lydia A. Tortora BOARD OF APPEALS TOVCN OF SOUTHOLD NOTICE OF HEARINGS Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southotd. New York 11971 Fax (516) 765~1823 Telephone (516~ 765-i809 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant ro Section 267 of tile Town Law and the Code of the Town of Southold, the following applications will be held for public hearings before the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS, ar the Southotd Town Hail. 53095 Main Road, Southold.~ New York 11971, on WEDNESDAY~ MARCI-I 8~ 1996~ commencing ar the times specified below: 7:30 p.m. Appl. #4353 (A & B) ESTATE OF LORETTA SENKO. The applicant has filed two applications based upon the December ll, 1995 Notice of Disapproval issued by the Building Inspector, in which applicant was denied a building permit to consr, ruct a one-family dwelling on vacant land for the reason that lot is nonconfornming in lot size and has been held in common ownership since July 1, 1983: Application A: An area variance is requested under Section 100-25 (and 100-24) based upon a claim of practical difficulties in the event a waiver is not granted under Section 100-26. The subject lot ls shown to be adjoining another lot in common ownership improved with a single-family dwelling on a 15,857 sq. ft. (See proposed Set-Off map dated Nov. 13, 1995, amended Feb. 12, 1996.) Subject parcels identified as County Tax Map Parcels No. 1000-104-4-10 and 11 at Sterling Road, Nassau Farms, Cutchog~ue ~ NY. Application B: A waiver is requested under ~ection 100-26 for the lot as created by deed dated 2/21/58 at Liber 4432 page 170, and further deed dated 9/24/90 at Liber 11155 page 543, for parcel containing 20,297 sq. Page 2 - Legal Notice Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals ft. in area and 100.0 ft. along the south side of Sterling Road, at Nassau Farms, Cutchogue, identified as County Tax Map #1000-104-4-10. 7:45 p.m. Amended Appl. No. 3649 - CHRISTOPHF_~R CONNORS. This is an application for a variance based upon a disapproval issued by the Building Inspector dated 2/8/96 for a building permit to construct single-family dwelling with an h~sufficient front yard setback, Article IIIA, Section 100-30A.3, and subject To obtaining approval from the Southold Town Trustees and other appropriate agencies, concerning premises known as 350 West Drive, Southold, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-59-5-29.3. 7:55 p.m. Appi. No. 4364 - BRUNO A. KAWECKI. This is an application for a variance based upon a disapproval issued under Article IIIA, Section 100-30A.4 (100-33) by the Building Inspector dated 2/14/96 for a building permit To eonstruc~ one-s~ory accessory garage in a side y-ard at prermses known as 605 Knoliwood Lane, Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. t000-107-6-8. (Location in a rear yard with a 15-ft. setback is required.) $:00 p.m. Appl. No. 4365 - JOSEPH A. POTTGEN. This is a~n application for a variance based upon a disapproval issued under Article XXIII, Section 100-239.4B by the Building Inspector dated 2/8/96 for a building permit to consr~ruc~ a rear deck addition within 75 feet of existing bulkhead. Location of Proper~y 550 Blue Marlin Drive, Southold; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-57-1-27. $:10 p.m. Appl. No. 4366 - THERESA KILDUFF. This is an application for a Waiver under Section 100-26 of the Zoning Code, based upon a disapproval issued under Section t00-30A.2 and 100-31A(1) dated 2/15/96 for a building permit to cons~rucz a single-family dwelling on the grounds that this is one lot (and only one dwelling is permitted per lot). Property referred To as Page 3 - Legal Notice Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals Lot G on the "Map of Lots of Raymond T. Graham" shown on survey dated March 27, 1957, and containing 20,000 sq. ft. in area is show*n to be in common ownership with Lot B, also containing 20,000 square feet. Also referred To as part of Lot Nos. 56-59 on the "Map of Nassau Farms, County File #1179. County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-104-2-3 (shown for 30+ years on separate assessment proper~y cards as 98-1-22 and 104-2-3). The Board of Appeals will at said time and place hear any and all persons or representatives desiring To be heard in the above applications. Written comments may also be submitted prior to the conclusion of the subject hearing. The above hearings will not start before the times deaignated~ and are in addition to other hearings. It is recommended that the file(s) be reviewed before the scheduled date of the hearing for updates or new information. If you have questions, please also do not hesitate to call 765-1809. Dated: February 16, 1996. BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman By L~da Kowals~ FO~ NO. ~ TOWN OF SOUTItOLD BUILDING DEPARTHENT SOUTHOLD, N.Y. NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL HATE: .. F~b~pp~Po..]9~P .......... To ..P~fPP~.PP~P9~ ................... 340 Jericho Tpke Floral Park, N.Y. ]100] PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that your application dated .~Y~Y.~, ........ 19. ~... for permit to CONSTRUCT A N~W SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING at Location of Property 350 WEST DRIVE SOUTHOLD. N.Y. House No. Street Hamlet County Tax Map No. ]000 - Section .... ~ ..... BLOCK .... ~ ...... LOT ...~ ...... Subdivision ............................... Filed Map No .......... Lot No ........ is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds . UNDER ARTICLE IIIA SECTION 100-30A.3 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION WILL NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT FRONT YARD SET BACK. - MINIMUM OF 40' REQUIRED. ACTION REQUIRED BY T~ ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. ALSO D.E.C. & TRUSTEES ARE REQUIRED. RV 1/80 ~t.~r-- .... ~ 'l'Ol~N OF ~OUTIIOI,I) f BU ILl)lifO T)EPAR'rHENT .'" FEB-21996 ~ ~UTIIOI,I}, H.Y. 11971 :. BLDG. DEPT. n. 'lid. nl~llc~atlca~ mint be c~,Tdetely tilted lo bi I.~l~rlt~r or h; ink n,.I ~l~ltted to tim lidhlh~ hmlmctor ~ilJ 3 ~ta of plaoa, ~rate plot plm~ to ~nle. F~ <~nlh~ to b. Plot plm~ ~]~ 1.~ti~ of lot ~ of lmildlt~u ~ ff~i~., ~lati~Jdp to ~jolnh~ Im~mit ~mll Im kept ~ Om p~i~ .~{labl~ For in~eti~ thr~t tim ~. ~ Imildh~ ~mll Im ~d~l or oned in ~le or in {tort for mW l~rl~ ~mt~r ~tll u ~rtiilcnt~ el' ~lm~my ~)atI h~ I~ ~a:t~l by O~ ~tldh~ Ios~ctor. ~l~H~ 1~ Z~I ~ to tim ~ildi~ l~lmrO~t For tim iu~m<o I~fildltg l~m O~i~e of Om ~ oE ~tl~ld. a~ifolk ~:ey, b York, ~1 otter ol~l{ceble I~, 8late ~Omr a~li=nt is ~r, Irish, a~ut, a=hlt~t, e.gh~ur, wt~rat ~traet~. uleetrlelan, plier or N~il~r .............. ............................................................................................ ~,e oe ~r of ~l~. ............. g ............. ~ .............. ~ .............................. (~ ~ I1~ ta~ mil or late~(~) {[~el~Hr , ........ ,~. Il,saY.'va! .,..., ....... D~:,31il:ic4~ ........... ? Other (Deacr iptic~O ,,. ,~.,,~,, ~ ...... ~ ....... ~ .............................................. (~:~ 1~ Inid (m ~iii~ this If garage, g~.ttmr rig cave : .... , ................................ I~i~t~ ...................... ,., 5,~lm~ ~ 8~orlea ...................... 13. Uill lot Im ~ ~,~,,., ........... ~ill e~eaa ~ill Im r~ed gra, 15. .la lhi~ prolmrkY ~lthis) ~ ~eat o~ a Lh~l tmLlm~l't * Y~ ...... ,... ~ ........ D~rn ro Iml:ore un Ihifl No. 4 ~79505 /7,/ Oualifio~J in S~dfotk C~nlV ~--f ~,~ TOWN OF 50UTHOLD, NEW YORK APPEAL FROM DECISION OF BUILDING iNSPECTOR APPEAL NO. 3~? TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, N Y. :, we, .............. ......... Nome of Appellant Street and Numoer .............. ,~ ....................................................... E..~. ................... HEREBY APPEAL ~O Munic: ~c:lit-y State THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR ON APPLICATION FOP, PERMIT NO ..................................... DATED ...................................................... WHEREBY THE BUILDING NSPECTOR DENIED TO o, ...... ....... ......... .................... Street and Number Municipali~ State () PERMIT TO USE ( ) PERMIT FOR OCCUPANCY :. LOCATION OF THE PROPER~ ~B ~e~ B~de O~ ack.Large, Street ./Hsmlet / Use District on Zoning Me~ D~str~:t 1ooo Section ................................................................. Current ~ner ~s~egh~ Mop No. Lot No. Prior Owner 2. PROVISION (S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE APPEALED [Indicate the Article Section, Sub- section and Paragraph of the Zoning Ordinance by number. Do not quote the Ordinance.) Article ~tm, Section lOO-%o ~,% 3. TYPE OF APPEAL Appeal is made herewith for (please check appropria~:e box) (~ A VARIANCE to the Zoning Ordinance or Zoning Mop ( ) A VARIANCE due ~o lock of access (State af New York Town Law Cha~. 62 Cons. Lows Art. 16 Sec. 280A Subsection 3 () 4. ~'APPEAL A previous appeal (has) (has not) been mode with respect to this decision of the Building InsuLator or with respect ro this property, Such appeal was ( ),,~quest for a special permit [ ~)' request for a variance ~M~,~,~dS crud was made in Appea! No ....... .~'~...~....~. __.q ........ Dated .................... '-~,., ...................................... REASON FOR APPEAL ((V~ A Variance ro Section 280A Subsection 3 A Variance to the Zoning Ordinance ( } is requested for the reason that }'orca 7,131 (Continue on other side) REASON FOR APPEAL Continued 1. STRICT APPLICATION OF THE ORDINANCE would produce practical difficulties or unneces- saw HARDSHIP because 2. The hardship created is UNIQUE and is not shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in this use district because 3. The Variance would observe the spirit of the Ordinance and WOULD NOT CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THE DIS1 F, iCT because COUNTY OF Sworn to this ................. Z ........................... day .......................... ~...~.~...: Notary Public Test Hole PROPOSED CONC. RETAINING WALL The lace/ions of we/Is and cesspools ~hown hereon tire from fie/ti observations anti or from t/ere obfableti from o/hers. SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICE8 FOR APPROVAL OF ~N-~YRLICTJON ONLY NO 77~~ eL 7.8 = proposed elevation ~ 6 = propo~ed contour EETIMA TED FILL = 510~ cu. yds, DATE - APPROVED FEMA FLOOD ZONE A7 EL /I The Io¢ollo~s of well; oM cesspools ~hown hereon ~re from field observotioos and or from dele able/net/ from others. ELEVATIONS ARE R~FERENCEO TO H.S. Ref.# R10-94~007/ SEWAGE DISPOSAl. ~YS7'~M D£TIGN INCL L/DING WALL JOSIEPtq F/SCHETTI~ P.E; HOBART ROAD SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 119~1 {516) 765-P95~ SUR VE Y FOR CHRISTOPHER CONNERS A T SOUTHOLD TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SUFFOLK COUNTY, N Y. DEPARTMENT OF HF~LT~ ~ FOR APPROVAL OF CON'5"BtUCTION ONLY 1000 - 59- O8- 29.3 Scale; 1" = 40' Aug. 31, 1992 Nov. 3,~993 (B.O. H revisions) July 15, 1994, ( Fill Rev/sion) 21,1995 ( Revised ) 30~ 1995 (Revised) 27,1995 (~letlonds Flogs) Oc 1995 (Revised) ~5, t995 (revisions ~ add//. ) 21~ t995 (Revised) TOTAL AREA = 20, O00sq.[l. AREA OF' WETLANDS = 13~500sq. II-* Prepared in accordance with lbo minimum sfontiords for fiYe surveys os established bt;the L.I.A.L.S. anti approved and at/opted .r. such use by The New York Stale LaM Title Association. 0 5 P.O. MAIN ROAD SOUTHOLD~ LIC. NO. 49618 P.C. 1197/ 92-245 TOWN'OF' SOUTI,IOLD PROPERTY RECORD-CARD OWNER STREET VILLAGE DIST.' SUB. LOT S '~' W TYPE OF BUILDING LAND IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKS S,b~/p L,.D{o,?~. '~',~i,P '~_,..,T'~'~O, V~ FRONTA~ ~ R~D /~3 ' ~-~ BULKH~ Albert J. Krupski, President John Holzapfel, Vice President William G. Albertson Martin H. Garrell Peter Wenczel July 29, 1994 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Soulhold, New York 11971 Telephone (516) 765-1892 Fax (516) 765-1823 Mr. Christopher Connors 340 Jericho Tpke. Floral Park, NY 11001 Re: SCTM #59-5-29.3 Dear Mr. Connors: The following action was taken by the Board of Town Trustees during its regular meeting held on Thursday, July 28, 1994 regarding the above matter: WHEREAS, CHRISTOPHER CONNORS applied to the Southold Town Trustees for a permit under the provisions of the Wetland Ordinance of the Town of Southold, original application dated May 22, 1987 and, WHEREAS said application was referred to the Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council for their findings and recommendations, and, WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Town Trustees with respect to the revised application on Thursday July 28, 1994 at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard, and, WHEREAS, the Board members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question and the surrounding area, and, WHEREAS, the Board has considered all the testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application, and, WHEREAS, the subject parcel lies within flood zone A-7 as shown on the survey of Roderick Van Tuyl, P.C., dated July 15, 1994, WHEREAS, the subject parcel contains an area of 20,000 square feet with a front and width of 133.33 feet and a depth on both sides of 150.79 feet, WHEREAS, the applicant seeks to construct a single family dwelling of 2,200 square feet with on-site sanitary system, driveway, and waterproof retaining walls, and grading all as shown on the above mentioned survey dated July 15, 1994, WHEREAS, the environmental assessment form submitted by the applicant states the depth to the water table as between ten inches and 1.1 foot, WHEREAS, the applicant's consultant, in the supplemental report to the DEIS, admitted that 66% of the parcel is freshwater wetland and that a large portion of the remaining parcel contains a mix of wetland and upland vegetation, WHEREAS, from a personal inspection of the parcel by the Board and its consultant, it is the finding and conclusion of the Board that "nearly all of the lot is freshwater wetlands", WHEREAS, the only non-wetlands area on this lot was found adjacent to West Drive and this non-wetlands area is viewed as a transitional area (and) extends approximately forty feet from the road, (Anderson, environmental consultant to the Board, 8/19/92), WHEREAS, the report of Tsontakis Associates (an environmental consulting firm that concludes from an environmental perspective, the subject site is unbuildable), shows the freshwater wetlands to be over 75% of the parcel, W~EREAS, the above mentioned survey together with the applicant's vegetative map shows the sanitary system located on freshwater wetlands and the septic system will be required to be 2 feet above ground water which will require the excavation and the filling of wetlands, WHEREAS, the septic system will require being surrounded by a minimum of eight feet of waterproof concrete retaining wall which will extend approximately 44 feet on the south and another 44 feet on the west side of the septic system, all of this area resides in the freshwater wetlands, WHEREAS, the septic system will then have to be covered with fill to a height of almost 6 feet and then gradually graded which will result in the loss of an even greater amount of wetlands, WHEREAS, the Board of Town Trustees agree with the many significant advantages of small freshwater wetlands made in the publication, Wildlife Benefits Associated With Selected Smaller Freshwater Wetlands In Suffolk County prepared by Steven Sanford, a senior Wildlife Biologist with New York State Department of Environmental Conservation which is included with this statement, WHEREAS, the subject site is one half acre of a freshwater wetland system which is much larger, WHEREAS, it concludes a stretch of land from Goldsmith's Inlet to Kenny's Road, a distance of approximately 1/2 mile which includes Great Pond, WHEREAS, the small size of the parcel 20,000 square feet, which is substantially freshwater wetlands, cannot support the proposed project without destruction of over half of the wetland area, WHEREAS, the applicant claims the destruction of only 3,000 square feet, W-~EREAS, it is the Southold Town Board of Trustees finding and conclusion based on the project as shown on the applicant's July 15, 1994 survey that a greater area will be destroyed, and much of the remaining wetlands and groundwater will be clearly and unequivocally endangered by the proposed sanitary system and altered rainfall run-off from the project, WHEREAS, the maintenance of the proposed five pool shallow septic system will be problematic due to the widespread boggy underlying soils found in the area of the septic system and the seasonal and yearly fluctuation of the groundwater elevation, WHEREAS, the septic effluents (nitrates, detergents, etc.) will also have an easy path into the groundwater and surface waters of the entire surrounding area due to the fact that only two feet of sand are required between the septic system and the groundwate~ at this time, WHEREAS, the subject parcel is at a very low elevation and is in very close contact with the groundwater as stated above and occasionally parts of this parcel contain standing water, WHEREAS, any contamination by sanitary system malfunction on this parcel could cause direct and immediate contamination of groundwater in the surrounding area including Great Pond (approximately 400 feet to the south) which is used year round as a day or residential environmental cap by Suffolk County and whose property lies directly adjacent to the applicant's parcel, WHEREAS, Commissioner Thomas Jorling, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, in adopting the findings and conclusions of an ALJ of that agency rendered after a full hearing involving the applicant's permit, stated in his decision that "The Applicant's potential for problems identified with the operation of the Applicant's septic system make it impossible to conclude that the project would be compatible with the public health and welfare...", WHEREAS, the Conservation Advisory Council of the town of Southold recommend the denial of this application on environmental principles, WHEREAS, the Board of Town Trustees believes that a smaller single family home could be built on the northwest corner of this parcel with a contained or closed sanitary system or clivus multrum (composting toilet) system that would not require the filling and destruction of freshwater wetlands for a sanitary system, WHEREAS, the Board of Town Trustees has compared and weighed the adverse environmental impacts with the social and economic impacts of this project and finds and concludes that the impacts of this project do not outweigh the need to protect these wetlands and the general welfare of the people of this town, WHEREAS, The Board of Town Trustees finds that this project will according to the standards of Chapter 97-28: A. Adversely affect the wetlands of the Town De Adversely affect fish, shellfish or other beneficial marine organisms, aquatic wildlife and vegetation or the natural habitat thereof I. Otherwise adversely affect the health, safety and general welfare of the people of the Town, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Trustees denies the application that is currently before this Board without prejudice of C~IRISTOPHER CONNORS to construct a single family dwelling with associated sanitary system as per map dated November 3, 1993 and revised July 15, 1994. Located: West Drive, Southold. SCTM #59-5-29.3 Very truly yours, Albert J. Krupski, Jr. President, Board of Trustees AJK/djh cc. C.A.C. Roy Reynolds, SCHD Building Dept. Zoning Board~ Town Attorney Wickham, Wickham & Bressler, Attorneys "'§ I00-119 SOUTHOLD CODE § 100-1i9.2 § 100-119. Corner lots. IAmended 2-1-83 by L.L. No. 2-1983] On a corner lot, front yards are required en both street front- ages, and one Ill yard other than the front yards shall deemed to be a rear yard, and the other or others, side yards. No obstruction to vision exceeding thirty 130) inches in height above curb level shall be erected or maintained at street intersections within the triangle formed by the street lines of such lot and a line drawn between points along such street lines thirty (30) feet distant from, their point of intersection. § 100-119.1. Fences, walls and hedges. [Amended 5-29-73; 2-I-S3 by L.L. No. 2-1983} Subject to the provisions of § 100-119, fences, walls, hedges or other live plantings witkin five (5~ feet of the property lines may be erected and maintained, subject to the following height limitations: · A. When located in the front yard along the front yard property kine, the same shall not exceed four (4) feet in height. , B. When located along side and rear lot lines, the same shall not exceed slx and one-half (61/2) feet in height. "C. When located other than in the front yard area or along side or rear lot lines, the same shall not exceed eight (8) feet in height. § 100-119.2. Building setback from water bodies and wetlands. [Added 3-26-85 by L.L. No. 4-1985] Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter, the following setback requirements shall apply to all buildings located on lots ad- jacent to water bodies ~nd wetlands: A. Lots ~tjaeent to Long Island~und. (1) All buildings located on lots adjacent to Long Island Sound. and upon which there exists a bluff or bank landward of the shore or beach, shall be set back not less 10tls I z 2-, .3 100-119.2 ZONING § 100-121 than one hundred t 100) feet from the top of such bluff or bank. Except as ,;t!',erw~se provided in Subsection A(1} hereof. al! b~i',dincs loot',ted on lots adjacent to Long Island Sou::d shall i;e set bat-; not less than one hundred (100~ feet from the ordinary high-water mark of Long Island Sound. Al! bui'.d!ngs located on lots adjacent to tidal water bodies other than Long Island Sot'md shal! be set back not less than seventy-five ~75i feet front the ordinary high-water mark of such tidal wa:er body or net !ess than seventy-five (75) feet from. the ',andward edge of the tidal wetland, whichever !s greater. Al1 buildings located on lots adjacent to an:,' freshwater body shall be set back not less than seventy-five 175) feet from the edge of such water body or not less than seventy-five (75) feet from the landward edge of the freshwater wetland, which- ever is greater. ARTICLE XII Board of Appeals § 100-120. Appointment; membership. The Town Board shall appoint a Board of Appeals consisting of five ~5) members, as provided by the Town Law. § 100-121. Powers and duties. In addition to such powers as may be conferred upon it by law, the Board of Appeals shall have the following powers: (Cont'd on page 10055) APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. JOSEPH H. SAWICKI JAMES DINIZIO, JR. Southold Town Board of Appeals MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 P.O. BOX 1179 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 FAX NO. (516) 765-1823, INTER-DEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: James A. Schondebare, Town Attorney Southold Town Board of Appeals~/~ May 12, 1989 Designation of Edge of Freshwater Wetlands Property Now or Formerly of Chris Connors & Ano. Property ID: 100059-5-29.3 - West Dr., Southold Mr. Christopher Connors today is inquiring as to the status of his application with the Board of Appeals concerning his variance for an insufficient setback from freshwater wetlands in a proposal to locate a new dwelling on the above-referenced lot. As you may recall, one of the reasons-~his matter was not scheduled by the Board of Appeals concerning the setback variances was that the Town Trustees, as lead agency, had received an Environmental Impact Statement on or about Novem- ber 21, 1988 and the SEQRA process continued for a period of time prior to their receiving an Article 78 proceeding. One of the areas the Board of Appeals had been concerned with was the edge of freshwater wetlands as designated by the Town Trustees. We have a survey in our file dated April 21, 1987 prepared by Roderick VanTuyl, P.C. was shows phragmites in water. You legal opinion is requested as to whether or not (a) this is the proper time to proceed with the Town Trustees to help to clarify the freshwater wetlands edge and species locations; (b) the Town has complied with the entire SEQRA process according to law; and (c) the Board of Appeals hearing, deliberations and decisions in the near future is appropriate. To: Re: James A. Schondebare, Town Attorney May 12, 1989 Freshwater Wetlands Locations - Matter of C. Connors It is our understanding that although 100-119.2 of the Zoning Code was not in effect for some time between January 10, 1989 and March 14, 1989, this variance application may be reinstated under the Master Plan Amendment, renumbered to 100-239d. Thank you for your guidance in this matter. lk APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. JOSEPH H. SAWlCKI JAMES DINIZIO, JR. Southold Town Board of Appeals IVtAIN ROAD- STATE~ Rr~AD 25 snuTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 1'19'7'1 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 February 3, 1989 Eric J. Bressler, Esq. Wickham, Wickham & Bressler, P.C. Main Road, Box 1424 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Zoning Appeal No. 3649 - William and Christopher Connors Dear Eric: Of recent date the Town is effectuating the new Master (Zoning) Plan Update. Article XI, Section 100-119.2 was not included in the Zoning Update and therefore this Department does not have jurisdiction at this time under Section 100-119.2. We are providing the Building Inspector's Office with a copy of this letter, and suggest that you or your builder follow-up with other departments or agencies for the appropriate permits. Please be aware that this position is subject to change if you are not able to obtain your building permit and other appropriate permits, subsequent to any additional amendments of the zoning laws. Yours very truly, lk Enclosures cc: Building Inspector's Office Town Trustees Office Town Attorney's Office Mr. Christopher Connors GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRM3kN ALBERT J. KRUPSKI, JR., Vice-I:%esident JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, III JOHN L. BEDNOSKI, JR. HENRY P. S~ITH BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 January 31, 1989 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1692 Mr. Robert A. Greene Alternate Regional Permit Administrator New York State D.E.C. Bldg. 40, SUNY, Room 219 Stony Brook, New York 11794 Re: Christopher Connors, Wetlands Application 543, Tax Map No. 1000-59-5-29.3 Dear Mr. Greene, The Southold Town Trustees have concluded the SEQRA process at the meeting on January 26, 1989. The approved resolution is enclosed along with the hearing from November 17, 1988. The applicant will now wait for a DEC decision. If there should be any questions regarding this matter, please call this office at the number listed above. Very truly yours, pF~easnkideA~tKujawskt. Board of Town Trustees FAK:jmr cc: Christopher Connors Wickham, Wickham & Bressler En Consultants, Roy Haje James Manos Town Attorneys C.A.C. Board of Appeals~ Building Dept. FRANK A. KUJAWSKI, JR., President ALBERT J. KRUPSKI, JR., Vice-President JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, III JOHN L. BEDNOSKI, JR. HENRY P. SMITH TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 January 27, 1989 WHEREAS, William Connors and Christopher Connors have submitted an application pursuant to the Wetlands Ordinance of the Town of Southold, Chapter 97, to construct a one family dwelling with on site sanitary system as shown on the survey by Roderick Van Tuyl, P.C., dated February 22, 1988, on West Drive, Southold; more specifically designated as Tax Map No. 1000-59-5-29.3, and WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees reviewed said application and, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, 6NYCRR 617, requested and received an environmental assessment for with rider, prepared by En-Consultants on behalf of the applicant and dated July 23, 1987, and, WHEREAS, The Board of Trustees made a positive determination that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, and did declare itself Lead Agency under SEQRA, and revised environmental impact statement, and a WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees did review said DEIS and supplemental information requested and received, as well as reviewing public comments pertaining to same and held a public hearing on the DEIS on the 17th day of November, 1988, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Town Trustees make the following findings and conclusions: 1. That the subject parcel lies within flood zone A-7 as shown on the survey of Roderick Van Tuyl, P.C., dated July 6, 1987, and amended February 22, 1988. 2. That the subject parcel contains an area of 20,000 square feet with a front and rear width of 133.33 feet and a depth on both sides of 150.79 feet. 3. That the applicant seeks to construct a single family dwelling of 1,584 square feet with on site sanitary system, driveway, and waterproof retaining walls, and grading all as shown on the above mentioned survey dated February 22, 1988. 4. That the environmental assessment form submitted by the applicant states the depth to the water table as 1.1 foot. 5. That the above mentioned survey shows the sanitary system 2 feet above ground water. 6. That En-Consultants, in the supplemental report to the DEIS, admitted that 66% of the parcel is freshwater wetland and that the remainder of the parcel contains a mix of wetland and upland vegetation. From a personal inspection of the parcel by the Board, it is the finding and conclusion of the Board that greater that 66% of the parcel is freshwater wetland. 7. That, while the applicant submitted some mitigating measures in the DEIS, for example, pilings as a foundation and pumpout sanitary ~ystem, these measures were rejected by the applicant based on aesthetics and economics. 8. That the small size of the parcel, 20,000 square feet, which is substantially freshwater wetlands, cannot support the proposed project with destruction of half of the wetland area. The applicant concede the destruction of 3,000 square feet It is this Board's finding and conclusion that a greater area will be destroyed, and the remaining wetlands and groundwater will be cleared and unequivocally endangered by the proposed sanitary system and altered rainfall run-off from the project. 9. The Board of Town Trustees has compared and weighed the adverse environmental impact with the social and economic impact of the project, and finds and concludes that the preservation of the wetland area greatly outweighs any social and economic gains of the project, or to be gained from the project. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Town Trustees hereby determines , pursuant to SEQRA, that the alternative of no action be declared and the project disapproved. In addition, the Board is mindful that it could request a final environmental impact statement; however, it is the Board's determination that to so request would be of no value to the applicant nor to this Board considering the project, the DEIS, and the findings and conclusions stated therein. Motion, Frank A. Kujawski, Jr., second, John Bredemeyer III, Vote of Board: Ayes; All. Motion to amend above Resolution, John Bredemeyer, second Albert Krupski, Jr., Vote of Board: Ayes; All. (Finding number 6 amended to read, ...greater than 66% of the ..., also Finding number 8 amended to read, ...and altered rainfall...). JIM FITZGERALD of Proper-T Services representing Mr. Mitchell. The DEC had the same requirements, which are acceptable to Mr. Mitchell and myself. FRANK KUJAWSKI: Are there any other comments in support of this application? No comments. Are there any comments in opposition to this application? Any comments by the Board? No. We will close the Hearing on Robert E. Mitchell. Hearing in the matter of acceptance of DEIS of CHRISTOPHER CONNORS: FRANK KUJAWSKI: This hearing is different because comments by DEC and permits required, which then empowers this Board to vote on those applications, have not been received. This hearing is in response to the SEQRA Law, and as such it is a hearing where comments may be given regarding the EIS, which was accepted by this Board. We have one set of written comments, which I will read into the record, but first, is there anyone here to speak in favor of the EIS of Mr. Connors? ROY HAJE, En-Consultants. I have prepared the document for you, you will find that if you review the project that we have modified the location of the house. We have also taken measures to limit the fill which would be necessary for the sanitary system. We have changed the driveway and so forth so that we feel that we have done everything possible to develop this lot. We have gone into the potential effects of the project given the extent of wetlands on the property we have minimized the impact to the best of our ability. I don't see anything further or additional that could be done. FRANK KUJAWSKI: Are there any other comments in support of this document, or concerning this document? CHRIS CONNORS: I am the applicant here, I understand that this hearing is only a SEQRA hearing and it is not a Trustees hearing, for some reason you are differentiating the two and I do not understand the reason for this. FRANK KUJAWSKI: I think we have explained before that under Chapter 97, this Board is not empowered to vote favorably or unfavorably about an application until it has received the approvals of the other agencies which are involved. We have scheduled a hearing on this to proceed ahead so that the DEC would not be held up regarding your application. By holding this hearing we are meeting the legal requirements, which hopefully will speed up an answer to the questions you ask. As soon as we have those decisions, your applications will proceed the same as the other applications will. CHRIS CONNORS: I read a statement sent to me by you which stated that you will not issue a permit until all other permits have been issued, is that correct? FRANK KUJAWSKI: Yes, that is correct. CHRIS CONNORS: I am looking for a commitment from you that my application will be approved or disapproved. FRANK KUJAWSKI: We cannot do that, it would be against the law. JAMES SCHONDEBARE: We have gone through this before, it is the Board's position that until the other permits are obtained, we do not even have a complete application. We are doing a SEQRA Hearing right now. Every agency in the Town must make a determination, initially as to whether or not the proposed action may have a significant effect on the environment, and we must go through the SEQRA process, it is the law. This Board has made the determination that your activity may have a significant effect on the environment. This is a SEQRA hearing, you are getting away from the point. CHRIS CONNORS: Why did you not tell me to get the DEC permit before going through this extensive review? FRANK KUJAWSKI: I have told you before that you need the other permits before we issue ours. We are just following the law. We could have put this off for several months but it is to your advantage in dealing with the DEC, that we are proceeding ahead with SEQRA, JAMES SCHONDEBARE: a SEQRA hearing. You are getting off the subject again. This is MR. CONNORS: I am Christopher Connors father. A few months ago, in court, the Building Inspector did state that this is a buildable lot, and he did issue a vacant land C.O. on this property. JAMES SCHONDEBARE: The reactions of the Building Department are not binding upon the Trustees. The responsibility of the Trustees here tonight is to do the SEQRA hearing,~which we have not even started on. FRANK KUJAWSKI: Are there any other comments on this matter? ERIC J.BRESSLER: On behalf of the applicant, I represent Wickham, Wickham and Bressler. I would like to make several points in connection with the application. First, as Mr. Connors correctly pointed out, that it is relevant, not only in a SEQRA hearing but any hearing before this Board, to consider the circumstances by which Mr. Connors finds himself in this position. The Board is well aware of how he found himself in that position. Secondly, I think that Mr. Connors question about the coordinate scheduling of the hearings is very well taken. While the Board's point concerning their feeling to push this forward and the alternative being to delay this hearing so that it could be coextensive with the permit hearing, with all due respect, I think its backwards. I think that the correct application of the law would be to combine this hearing with the permit hearing and thereby expedite all of the hearings which should properly be held before this Board. It is no hardship to do that and I do believe that any'issues to be brQpght out in a SEQRA hearing are going to be substantially similar to those which would be heard on a later application. I think to avoid duplicity of time and resources that would be the preferred method. Finally, with respect to the somewhat elusive §97-12, of the Trustees Code, the Wetlands Ordinance, I would point out first of all the ordinance appears to be internally inconsistent with ~97-23 which gives the Board authority to grant permits subject to certain other things taking place, that is other permits, and I dare say that in the case of various agencies like the ZBA and other agencies like that, this Board has in the past granted permits subject to, I need not go into those instances, the Board is well aware of that. Secondly, I don't believe that particular ordinance is sound. A perfect example of that is Mr. Connors situation, as you well know, he is before the zoning Board, and they won't listen to him until you do something. You wont listen to him until the Zoning Board does something. And so we are faced with a rather awkward situation. You are not going to do anything until you hear from the Department of Environmental Conservation. I would suggest to this Board that the preferable measure is to proceed pursuant to §97-23, have your combined hearing, make your determination, and if its subject to the receipt of another approval then give it thereby your approval would not be given finally until all other permits and I think you can do that without doing violence to this application. FRANK KUJAWSKI: For the record, the Zoning Board is not going to be · waiting, I have spoken to Mr. Goehringer and explained our situation. The ordinance we are operating on is different than the other Board's. I believe that they will not hold you up and they will proceed ahead with this application. ERIC BRESSLER: You have heard that relatively recently? CHRIS CONNORS: I have a letter from them from about a year ago saying that they will not proceed until they get something in writing from you. JAMES SCHONDEBARE: We have discussed this and one of the Board's moves is not a catch 22, its obvious, it is not going to be. The other point I would bring out, that I question, is whether or not you could have done the two hearings at the same time . FRANK KUJAWSKI: Wouldn't we have violated the SEQRA process by a delay of action? JAMES SCHONDEBARE: You have to allow a ten day comment period after this action for public comment. Suppose you wanted a supplemental to the DEIS or suppose you wanted to do a final EIS, to have the hearing before you have completed the SEQRA I think would have left the applicant and the Board subject to attack. I do not think it would be in the best interest of the applicant either to have a simultaneous hearing because the two of you, the Board and the applicant, would definitely be subject to a lawsuit. FRANK KUJAWSKI: Do you agree Mr. Bressler? ERIC BRESSLER: No, I don't and I do believe that the hearings could be coterminous but we need not get into that at this point. FRANK KUJAWSKI: We are going to take our Attorney's advice on that. Are there any other comments regarding the environmental impact statement in this project? Public comments, as already have been advertised, will be accepted by this Board until December 17, 1988. If anyone chooses to make a comment positively or negatively about the project, about this EIS they are welcome to do so, and the document is available for public inspection. I have received one written comment which I will read into the record to make our hearing this evening complete. This comment is from James Manos and it addressed to me, as follows: Mr. Haje's DEIS does not comply in most respects with the directions set down by the Trustees in the scoping session of October 6, 1987 nor with the scoping request of the Suffolk County Department of Health Services set forth in its letter to the Trustees dated October 20, 1987. It also fails to adhere to the basic requirement of the DEIS which is to describe measures to minimize adverse environmental effects by the proposed action. For example, Mr. Haje originally recommended in his summary statement to the EAF that the house would have the least adverse environmental impact by being placed in the northeast quadrant of the property since it would be the most distant from the wetlands in that location but in the current site plan which accompanies the DEIS, the house is in the middle of the northerly half of the parcel 50 feet from West Drive and less than 75 feet from the wetlands and Peconic Dunes, requiring a §97 variance. By moving the house 15' closer to West Drive, it would be entirely in the northeast quadrant having 35' front yard setback from West Drive, which is the distance permitted under the zoning code, and it would also be 79' from the Peconic Dunes wetlands satisfying the setback requirement in that regard. This would tend to minimize the adverse environmental effects. The above change would also free up an area behind the house of about 15' X 60', 900 sq. feet, which could be incorporated as part of the leaching area encompassed by retaining walls. Currently shown on the site plan the enclosed leaching area is about 2100 sq. feet, and certainly a 40% increase is a measure to be desired. Mr. Haje does not address in a meaningful way the health and environmental impact of the proposed sanitary system. What is the effect of confining the lateral movement of the effluent by waterproof walls. Isn't it logical that it would accelerate the downward movement of the effluent into the groundwater. Wouldn't ~his downward acceleration be many times the normal rate since the effluent is confined laterally to a 2,190 sq. foot wall leaching area, which is 1/15 of the normal 31,400 sq. foot leaching area, based on a 100' minimum setback requirement. A circular area with a radius if 100' covers 31,400 sq. feet. Shouldn't Mr. Haje provide some sort of evaluation as requested by the Trustees. Mr. Haje has ignored the SCDH Services request on th~ impact of the system on the Peconic Dunes Park. The sanitary systems leaching pools, which will be only 20~ from the wetlands in the park, will be buried in an 8' high mound of fill retained by a wall, which itself will be in wetlands. The Park is a campsite for over 1,000 youngsters during the course of the summer. What is the health hazard to these children? What is the potential for degradation of the aquifer, surface and ground water and the quality of Great Pond itself? Mr. Haje has also not complied with the SCDH Services request for a retaining wall designed by a professional engineer or a registered architect. Mr. Haje give short __ to the use of pilings in building the house explaining in part that he has not seen any houses in the area built on pilings and it is doubtful that we would ever have the kind of storm that would warrant their use. He is incorrect on both counts. A short distance from the proposed site a house that was on pilings was completed last Spring, which is located on the south side of North Sea Drive. Another house on pilings is being constructed across the street approximately 400' from the Sound. In a September 1954 hurricane a storm surge cut through the dunes west of Leighton Drive, inundated the low area leeward of the dunes including M. Connors parcel, it continued on to cut a valley through sand dunes just to the south of my property carrying that sand into Great Pond creating a sand bar and contaminating it with salt water. The same storm swept several houses near McCabes Beach into the small pond on the leeward side of North Sea Drive near Horton's Lane. A very hard look should be given to the use of pilings which would allow a substantial amount of the wetlands to remain intact and represents another measure minimizing the environmental impact. Mr. Haje's report contains numerous factual material errors. For instances he states that the parcel is 66% wetlands when in fact it is wetlands in its entirety. Even Mr. VanTuyl found over 80% of the property submerged in water when he did a survey. I suggest that the Trustees reject Mr. Haje's DEIS in non-compliance with the standards required of the law for such documents and under the request by the Trustees and the SCDH Services, and frankly, for its lack of thoroughness and objectivity. JAMES MANOS: May I make a change to the last paragraph? I didn't know that the Trustees had accepted the DEIS so I would like to modify the request for a rejection to a consideration as part of the final impact statement. JAMES SCHONDEBARE: Frank, don't change the paper itself, its on the record, that's it. Don't change the letter, he's on the record. JAMES MANOS: My request is that instead of rejecting it, which you can't do because you can't reject something that you already accepted, would you deem whatever is contained in the letter as modifications of the DEIS to the extent that they can be modified, as an inclusion in the FEIS, I don't know whether there is going to be one. FRANK KUJAWSKI: There can be if the Board so chooses. JAMES MANOS: Well, if there is I certainly would want my comments considered as part of the FEIS, if there Ssn' t, I would like consideration to be given to my comments as conditions to a final permit, if there is a permit. FRANK KUJAWSKI: Are there any other comments from anyone regarding the DEIS? Any comments by the Board? HENRY SMITH: Yes, I have one. The information you have contradicting Mr. Haje's information in the DEIS, how did you determine that, was that done by an engineer or was that done by yourself. JAMES MANOS: Be more specific. HENRY SMITH: The cesspools, leaching system, in particular. JAMES MANOS: Its a matter of logic. If the ordinary minimal setback is 100' from wetlands. If you confine something that should go into 31,400 sq. feet laterally, into an area of 2100 sq. feet, and its all waterproofed around that area, there is only one place that the liquid in that area will go. It won't go up, it would go down into the groundwater. I may be wrong, I am not certain, but these are questions that are bothering me since I own the abutting property. That is my primary concern, the degradation of the groundwater. HENRY SMITH: In what year was it that storm where it broke through? JAMES M~OS: My understanding is that it was in 1954. HENRY SMITH: I think it was 1938. JAMES MANOS: No. The 1938 storm was devastating on the ocean side, it was the 1954 storm that struck the Sound side. HENRY SMITH: I don't remember. JAMES MANOS: There is an area dubbed Hurricane Acres, it was dubbed as such because of that storm. That's the area north of McCabes Beach. You can see the inundation right where I live. COLEEN CONNORS: The measures for the sanitation system, has that been upgraded and improved since 19777 HENRY SMITH: That is the Board of Health. COLEEN CONNORS: My comments would be that there are other houses along that strip. Our house, that we would like to build, would have much better conditions that any of the surrounding houses. I think that we would be more conscious and more aware, only because we would have to be, obviously, than the other houses that are already there. HENRY SMITH: standards. The Board of Health is continuously updating their JAMES MANOS: I have more comments regarding the DEIS. At the scoping session a ~equest was mad~ for a plume study for the underground water that was not done. The request was made regarding the measures to remedy a flood condition that exists on the road next Mr. Connors' property. I am pretty sure it will become a worse problem after construction is completed. ROY HAJE: Regarding the sanitary system, the enclosure of the sanitary system with a retaining wall is a fairly recent development and requirement by the Health Department where putting fill to the requested slope which is 5% or one of twenty would either extend beyond property lines or have some other adverse effect, such as contingent upon wetlands. That's the reason why we circled it, to minimize the amount of fill put on wetlands, that is the standard procedure accepted by the health department. Most of the movements in a septic system is downward anyway, the lateral gradient component is much, much less than the vertical. JOHI~ BREDEMEYER: As you know, I begged off the Health Department Review. I am a Health Department employee, principally with the County Health Department. I did not participate out of fairness to all parties because I don't believe I should be acting in both capacities. But it is true, I am personally familiar with a number of studies and approximately 80% of the leaching is through the bottom of the pool even in confined states. That is a basic fact, but some of the other comments by Mr. Manos are well taken. FRANK KUJAWSKI: Any other comments: Jay, (Schondebare) at this point, we do have the option of asking for more information. I think that there are some questions that need to be answered. JAMES SCHONDEBARE: But you don't do it now, you will have a transcript and you have to go over it. FRANK KUJAWSKI: If there are no other comments from the public or this Board we will close this~-hearing. Public comments will be accepted until December 17, 1988. Motion to approve on the Public Hearing of Ellen Guyton. Henry Smith motion to APPROVE, with condition that plantings on two tiers of retaining wall will be of an indigenous species that will not require fertilization, and be 10' back from both sections of the retaining wall, Second John Bednoski, Board vote, unanimous. Motion to APPROVE on the Public Hearing of Robert E. Mitchell, Motion Albert Krupski, Second, Henry Smith, Board vote Unanimous. V. MOORINGS: Approval of January mooring renewals: Moved by President Kujawski, seconded by Henry Smith it was RESOLVED to APPROVE the January 1989 mooring renewals. Vote of Board: Ayes; All. 1. Mooring application of Fred J.Carcich, given the fact that access is on his own private property, I do no think that there will be a problem. Motion in favor, Albert Kr~pski, Second, John EN-CONSULTANTS ON BEHALF OF CHRISTOPHER CONNORS Moved by Frank Kujawski, second by Henry Smith, WHEREAS, En-Consultants in behalf of Christopher Connors applied to the Southold Town Trustees for a permit under the provisions of the Wetland Ordinance of the Town of Southold, application dated Whereas said application was referred to the Southold Town Conservation Advisory Council for their findings and recommendations, and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Town Trustees with respect to the said applications on November 17, 1988, at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard, and WHEREAS, the Board members have viewed and are personally familiar with the premises and surrounding are, and WHEREAS the Board has considered all of the testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application, and WHEREAS, the Board has determined that the project as proposed needs further information and evaluations, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT, RESOLVED that the application request of En-Consultants on behalf of Christopher Connors be closed. Vote of Board: Ayes; All. FRANK A. KUJAWSKI, JR., President ALBERT J. KRUPSKI, JR., Vice-President JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, III JOHN L. BEDNOSKI, JR. HENRY P. SMITH BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF $OUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 CHRISTOPHER CONNORS Additional Comments Requested by the Board of Trustees EN-CONSULTANTS, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1329 NORTH SEA ROAD, SOUTHAMPTON, NEW YORK 11968 516-283-636O May 25, 1988 Town of Southold Board of Trustees Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Post Office Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 Re: Christopher Connors Dear Sirs: I would like to respond to your April 22, 1988 letter requesting additional information. ~1. The Van Tuyl survey dated 2/22/88 indicates pre- cisely what is currently proposed and complies with standard requirements. Areas beyond those shown for filling and/or construction will re- main unaltered. The work area will be outlined with hay bales prior to any work both to prevent machinery from straying beyond and to prevent siltation when fill is placed. We have had two additional test holes done by McDonald Geoscience. As one had previously been shown, we now comply with your request for three. A copy of the survey showing the locations of the two new test holes and a data sheet for each are attached. It is interesting to note that only a thin top layer of bog is present which is underlain with sand. The response to this item is contained on page 21 of the DEIS. 'To supplement, we believe that the distance of these cesspools from Great Pond is too great to allow any leachate to enter the water of the pond proper. In fact, the ground- water in this area flows generally northward toward Long Island Sound and away from the pond (to the south). 4. Inquiries have been made to New York State De- partment of Environmental Conservation and Suf- folk County Department of Health Services re- garding the possibility of using Great Pond as a source of potable water. Although tentative proposals have been sporadically put forth by the Greenport Water District over the years, there is no serious intention to do this. Nei- ther is that likely to occur as to pump from the pond could seriously deplete it and lower its water level drastically. Surface water is only used as a potable supply in one location in Nassau and Suffolk Counties, and that is on Fisher's Island where the population and demand is small and the situation unique. For argument's sake, however, if a surface body were to be used as a source of potable water, no sanitary systems could be located within a minimum of 200' from it (Paul Ponturo, SCHD per- sonal communication). While the Connors parcel would meet this criteria, many other existing houses and their systems would not. No response called for by applicant. Page 21 of the DEIS indicates that "... the par- cel is roughly 66% freshwater wetlands, primarily in the west and south." In addition, appendix 11 is a vegetative map showing the wetlands as we interpret them. It should be noted that the remainder of the parcel contains a mix of wet- lands and upland types but it is our opinion that the latter dominate and therefore should not be considered "wetland." Please add this letter and attachments to the DEIS and proceed with your review. RLH:khs Enc. cc: Christopher Connors Your'~ tru.ly,~ RO~.L. Haje' President ~outhold Town Board of Appeals -7- March 16, 1972 After i~vestigation and inspection the Board finds that applicant requests~rmission to locate accessory building in front or side yard area o~a~property located on the northwest side of Westview Drive, Mattit~ck, New York. The Board finds it preferable to locate the acce~ssory building in the side yard area and agrees with the reasoning~ of the applicant. The Board finds~that strict application of the Ordinance would produce practical difficulties or unnece~sary hardship; the hardship created is unique an.d would not be ~iared by all properties alike in the immediate viCinmty of this pr~e~erty and in the same use district; and the variance will not,change the character of the neighborhood, and will observe t~spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Gillispie,~s~conded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED, Julius Juttner~ Westview Drive, Mattituck, New York, be GRANTED permission to ~c6ate accessory building in s.ide yard area on property located'on the northwest side of Westv~ew Drive, Mattttuck, New York, subject to the following conditions: That the building be no larger than 9~feet by 12 feet; that it be at least 5 feet from the side line; that~it be no closer tha~ 105 feet from Westview Drive. Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs: Gillispie, Hulse, Doyen. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. ~.~- 8:20 P.M. (E.$.T.), upon application of Philip W. Druhl, 115 N. Fulton Avenue, Lindenhurst, New York, for a variance in aocordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, ~ection 301, for permission to divide property and set off lots with insufficient area. Location of property: south side of West Drive, Southold, Ne~ York, Minor Subdivision # 22, bounded north by West Drive and land of Lyons, east by Great Pond, south by Suffolk County (formerly Pinecrest Dunes, Inc.), west by Uzmann. Fee paid $15.00. The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance, legal notice of hearing, affidavit sttesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and notice to the applicant. THE CHAIRMAN: This is an approved Minor Subdivision. It was approved January 22, 1970, long before the present Ordinance went into effect. THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak for this application? MR. PHILIP W. DRUHL: I am here to speak for the application. Southold Town Board of Appeals -8- March 16, 1972 THE CHAIRMAN: The proposed access is to the north. MR. DRUHL: There is Just one access. THE CHAIRMAN: I see you have a 50 foot private right-of-way. MR. DRUHL: That was required by the Planning Board. THE CHAIHMAN: I think this is really a formality but there should be an approval on access. THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak against this application? (There was no response.) After investigation and inspection the Board finds that applicant requests permission to divide property and set off lots with insufficient area on property located on the south side of West Drive, Southold, New York. The Board finds that this is an approved Mihor Subdivision which was approved before the present Ordinance went into effect. The Board agrees with the reasoning of the applicant. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood, and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED, Philip W. Druhl, 115 North Fulton Avenue, Lindenhurst, New York, be GRANTED permission to divide property and set off lots with insufficient area on property located on the south side of West Drive, $outhold, New York, as applied for; and approval of access to Lots Nos. 4 and 5. Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs: Gillispie, ~:lse, Doyen. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 1507 - 8:30 P.M. (E.S.T.), upon applicon. Staples, 35 N. Montgomery Avenue, Bayshore New York, for a variance~--~-in~aecor_dance with the Zoning Ordinance, ' Article IX, Section 900, Subsectio~s~8~_l~, and bulk schedule of Ordinance as to lot area, f~r~on_age, and side yards, for per- mission to construct prlv~z~ one family dwelling and operate business from same o3~Ot with-insufficient area, frontage, setback, and sideyards iB?"Cil" General Industrial District. Location of property: wealth'side of Cox Lane, Cutchogue, New York, bounded north by F. J. McBride, east by Cox~s Lane, south by L. B. Glover, Jr., west by L. B. Glover, Jr. Fee paid $15.00. l?I' Philio D 79 Fitchburg St Bayshore" ~ ~'~ h*~ro had many inquiries about ',.'est Driva~ Southo!d~ Pleas~ advla~ anyone intere:;tcd that ' * 4 ....... ,, ..... ,* minor subdivision ( i,~o 22) on file with o~ Pla~img Eoard~ and bas been approvoa by the Appoals Bor~rd (No~506) M=nrch i972 ~mor ~ur ~e~.~ ~oMing ordinance. These are all usable g-'ingle ' ' .... '~ .!.O~S for o,~.~ ~r.!l~j ~'" ~'~ '~ ':~ ~ Mo~s truly Bu~Z~i~g Z~s~eetor / Southold Town Board of Appeals -8- March 16, 1972 THE CHAIRMAN: The proposed access is to the north. MR. DRUHL: There is just one access. THE CHAIRMAN: I see you have a 50 foot private right-of-way. MR. DRUHL: That was required by the Planning Board. THE CHAIR;~N: I think this is really a formality but there should be an approval on access. THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak against this application? (There was no response.) After investigation and inspection the Board finds that applicant requests permission to divide property and set off lots with insufficient area on property located on the south side of West Drive, $outhold, New York. The Board finds that this is an approved Mi~or Subdivision which was approved before the present Ordinance went into effect. The Board agrees with the reasoning of the applicant. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood, and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED, Philip W. Druhl, 115 North Fulton Avenue, Lindenhurst, New York, be GRANTED permission to divide property and set off lots with insufficient area on property located on the south side of West Drive, $outhold, New York, as applied for; and approval of access to Lots Nos. 4 and 5' Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs: Gillispie, Hulse, Doyen. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 1507 - 8:30 P.M. (E.S.T.), upon application of Stuart E. Staples, 35 N. Montgomery Avenue, Bayshore, New York, for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article IX, Section 900, Subsections 8 & 12, and bulk schedule of Ordinance as to lot area, frontage, and side yards, for per- mission to construct private one family dwelling and operate business from same on lot with insufficient area, frontage, setback, and sideyards in "C-l" General Industrial District. Location of property: west side of Cox Lane, Cutchogue, New York, bounded north by F. J. McBride, east by Coxts Lane~ south by L. B. Glover, Jr., west by L. B. Glover, Jr. Fee paid $15.00. Southold Town Board of Appeals MAIN ROAD- STATE RDAD 25 SDUTHDLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGON[S, JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. JOSEPH H. SAWICKI JAMES DINIZIO, JR. TO: James A. Schondebare, Town Attorney FROM: Jerry Goehringer, Chairman Board of Appeals DATE: SUBJECT: November 21, 1988 Z.B.A. Jurisdiction Article XI, Section 100-119.2(C) Building Setback From Water Bodies ToWn A~torn*¥ 5ou~hc[d Dear Jay: As you may know, we have an application pending for an Appeal of the Determination of the Building Inspector for the proposed construction of a single-family dwelling as shown on the attached survey. Following scoping sessions, etc. through the Department of the Town Trustees (as Lead Agency under SEQRA), there is apparently no question that phragmites exist at the site, giving jurisdiction to the Trustees under the Freshwater Wetlands Section of the Code. We must ask your legal opinion as to Board of Appeals jurisdiction under Section 100-119.2(C) of the Zoning Code, states: which ...C. Ail buildings located on lots adjacent to any freshwater body shall be set back not less than seventy-five (75) feet from the edge of such water body or ... from the landward edge of the freshwater wetland, whichever is greater... In the event you determine this Department has overlapping jurisdiction with the Trustees, we urge that the Town Trustees complete their overall review as to the wetland areas and confirm for the record the closest freshwater wetland boundary line (to the proposed construction) since they appear to be the only Environmental Agency of the Town authorized to do so. Thank you for your assistance. '~a,:-, .:".. ~ ".~.:-': , :_ MAP OF MINO~"SUB-DIVIStON'-.:'L' . · ..... - LAND OF. --- ~LE "i~''': - :k.-] ~"~*":" ':"''" AS'SURVEY~ '' _ '}2. ""' J~.~,1970 LIC~hiSED LAND ,.~JP. VL~'YO~ CSmEF_.,NPOm ,'r, ,~.Y. Southold Town Board of Appeals -8- March 16, 1972 THE CHAIRMAN: The proposed access is to the north. MR. DRUHL: There is just one access. THE CHAIRMAN: I see you have a 50 foot private right-of-way. MR. DRUH.L: That was required by the Planning Board. THE CHAIRMAN: I think this is really a formality but there should be an approval on access. THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak against this application? (There was no response.) After investigation and inspection the Board finds that applicant requests permission to divide property and set off lots with insufficient area on property located on the south side of West Drive, Southold, New York. The Board finds that this is an approved Mi~or Subdivision which was approved before the present Ordinance went into effect. The Board agrees with the reasoning o~ the applicant. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood, and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED, Philip W. Druhl, 115 North Fulton Avenue, Lindenhurst, New York, be GRANTED permission to divide property and set off lots with insufficient area on property located on the south side of West Drive, Southold, New York, as applied for; and approval of access to Lots Nos. 4 and 5' Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs: Gillispie, Halse, Doyen. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 1507 - 8:30 P.M. (E.S.T.), upon application of Stuart E. Staples, 35 N. Montgomery Avenue, Bayshore, New York, for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article IX, Section 900, Subsections 8 & 12, and bulk schedule of Ordinance as to lot area, frontage, and side yards, for per- mission to construct private one family dwelling and operate business from same on lot with insufficient area, frontage, setback, and sideyards in "C-l" General Industrial District. Location of property: west side of Cox Lane, Cutchogue, New York, bounded north by F. J. McBride, east by Coxts Lane~ south by L. B. Glover, Jr., west by L. B. Glover, Jr. Fee paid $15.00. Bayshore" v Daar had many !~qllli~le s about Pleasu advisa anyone intere~;tcd ti~at .... ~ ~ = ...... ,-~ ..... - minor subdlvis~on ( ~'~o 22) on file with our Pla~In~ Eoard~ and has been aporovea ~,y ~hc Appeals bo~.rd (:~o1~06) ~urcn ~972 %miner cur new zoning ordinance. These are a].l usable single lots for one ;a~.~z.y -', =~. :- ~ Yours truly Bui!din~ Inspector DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT for CHRISTOPHER CONNORS to construct a one-family house on West Drive, Town of Southold Lead Agency: Board of Town Trustees Town of Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Post Office Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 Contact Person: John M. Bredemeyer, (516) 765-1892 President Prepared by: Roy L. Haje, President En-Consultants, Inc. 1329 North Sea Road Southampton, New York 11968 TABLE OF CONTENTS Summary Description of Proposed Action 4 - Purpose and Need for Project - Location - Design and Layout - Construction and Operation - Approvals - Environmental Setting - Mitigation Measures to Minimize Environmental Impact Adverse Environmental Effects that cannot 16 be Avoided if the Project is to be Imple- mented Alternatives 17 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment 18 of Resources Growth-Inducing Aspects 19 Land Use and Zoning 20 Significant Environmental Impacts 21 Effects on the Use and Conservation of 23 Energy Resources PAGE 1 List of Appendices 1. Certificate of Occupancy (vacant land) dated 2/23/87. 2. Notice of Violation from Southold Bay Constable dated 5/14/87. Notice of Disapproval from Southold Building Inspector dated 6/5/87. 4. NYSDEC FWW map. Southold Quadrangle. 5. Hagstrom Map 23 showing location of subject parcel. 6. Roderick Van Tuyl survey & site plan dated 4/21/87 showing house centered on property. 7. Roderick Van Tuyl survey & site plan dated 2/22/88 showing house on north side of parcel. 8. Flood Insurance Rate Map of Town of Southold, panel 78 of 120 showing subject parcel. SEQR Long Environmental Assessment Form. Report on environmental conditions prepared by En-Consultants, Inc. 11. Vegetative map prepared by En-Consultants, Inc. 12. Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of Suffolk County, Sheet 8. Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Christopher Connors SUMMARY: The applicant, Christopher Connors, purchased the subject parcel in early 1987 with the in- tention of constructing a one-family house for his ing lot. personal use. Due to low elevation, fill- is necessary of at least a portion of the The obvious beneficial impact is to allow Mr. Connors the reasonable use and enjoyment of a single and separate, residentially-zoned piece of property, the purchase of the land constitues a significant financial outlay. Unless the parcel may be used for the purpose intended, the owner could not sustain the loss and would have to seek legal redress. The adverse effect is the loss of a portion of the freshwater wetlands. - 2 - To mitigate the adverse effect, filling will be limited only to that portion of the par- cel on which improvements are proposed. Roughly half the parcel will remain in its current con- dition. The alternatives range from filling of the entire lot to "no action." Within these ex- tremes, various extents of filling, size of house, and type of construction are possible and will be considered. Several permits and/or approvals are necessary before construction may commence. This Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) is being prepared for the Town of Southold Board of Trustees (hereinafter referred to as the ("Trus- tees''), which has been designated as "lead agency" under the Town's Environmental Quality Review Act, Chapter 44 of the Town Code. A wetlands permit must also be issued pursuant to Chapter 97. Although the parcel did not appear on the New York State Department of Environmental Conser- vation's (hereinafter referred to as the "DEC") tentative Freshwater Wetlands inventory map, there has been a recent addition (possibly after this project was brought to the DEC's at- tention) to include the site. Therefore, the applicant has been informed that a permit is necessary pursuant to Article 24 of the Environ- mental Conservation Law (FWW). The Suffolk County Department of Health Services (hereinafter referred to as "SCDH") requires approval of the sanitary system and well. - 4 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION: Purpose and Need for Project -- Prior to his purchase of the property, the applicant inquired of the Building Department of the Town of Southold whether it was build- albe. In response, he received a "vacant land certificate of occupancy," a copy of which is in the appendices. On the strength of this, he closed title and received verbal permission to clear and fill the lot. Shortly after com- mencement when only (2) small (30±' x 10±') portions of the proposed circular drive had been filled, a complaint was filed by a party or parties unknown. In May 1987, a notice of violation was issued by the Bay Constable (copy enclosed) directing the applicant to cease all further filling and apply for a wetlands permit from the Trustees. In June 1987, the building inspector issued a notice of disap- proval based upon the need for a wetlands permit (copy enclosed). A wetlands application to place fill and con- struct a one-family house was promptly filed, and the Trustees declared itself lead agency. A positive declaration was issued requiring the prepartaion of this DEIS. Following pre- paration of a long Environmental Assessment form (EAF) and request to reconsider the need for the DEIS, the Trustees maintained their decision to require the DEIS. During the time of these discussions and cor- respondence with the Trustees, the DEC was also consulted. The maps which the DEC use as its tentative FWW inventory, The New York State Department of Transportation Quadrangle Sheets, indicated only Great Pond as a DEC- regulated freshwater wetland. It is identi- fied as SO-5 on the Southold sheet. It was, therefore, presumed to be outside of DEC regu- lation. Later discussions, however, with Mr. Paul Carella of the DEC's FWW unit, indicated that it was an area subject to DEC jurisdiction. - 6 The DEC's maps were modified date to add the subject site to the west (see appendices). at an undetermined and other land Further dis- cussions ensued regarding the placement of the fill and need to remove it and need for a FWW permit. A DEC FWW application has now been filed. As the construction of one single family house is not a "public" project, there is no "public need" for it. Rather, the intention is to provide a home for the applicant and his family. It is a legal building lot in single and sepa- rate ownership as attested to by the issuance of a "vacant land certificate of occupancy" by the Building Department. Location -- The subject site is located on the west side of West Drive, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, Long Island, New York. It is identified by SCTM No. 1000-59-5-29.3. Access to the site is via Lake Drive and West Drive, paved Town roads. The existing zoning is A residential-agricultural. Design and Layout -- The parcel is trapezoidal, direction; and 150.79' e/s. 133.33' in the n/s Its total area is 20,000± square feet. The original site plan as depicted on a survey by Roderick Van Tuyl, P.C., dated 4/21/87 and amended 7/6/87 placed the house roughly in the center of the lot with fill throughout (see appendices). The current plan depicted on a Van Tuyl survey dated 2/22/88, restricts development to (roughly) the northerly half of the lot. A 36' x 44' house on concrete foundation is located 13.5' south of the north property line; and 50' west of the east property line. A circular drive will provide vehicular access and (5) 2' high and 8' diameter cesspools plus will be located to the west of house. In order to obtain the septic tanks the proposed SCDH-required - 8 - depth of fill over and around the pools with- out encroaching on adjacent parcels, a timber or concrete retaining wall will encircle them. Fill will also be placed for the house and driveway. Approximately 375 cubic yards of clean sand and loam will be placed within the retaining walls for the sanitary system, and 175 cubic yards will be used for the driveway and house. As the mandated first floor ele- vation of the house is +11' above mean sea level (MSL) (Zone A7) (see appendices) and it will sit on a fill pedestal of +6', approxi- mately 5' of foundation will be exposed. Construction and Operation -- The house will be constructed of wood, the retaining wall will be either wood or concrete, and the driveway will be fill topped with blue- stone or similar pervious material. Approvals -- As shown on the latest site plan (Van Tuyl survey of 2/22/88), the house may require vari- ance from the Zoning Board of Appeals from the 75' setback from wetland if: 1.) the parcel is deemed by the Town Trustees to be wetlands, and 2.) permission to construct is granted by the Trustees. No other dimensional variances will be required. Environmental setting -- ''The SEQR Handbook", a document prepared by the NYSDEC to aid agencies in the review and preparation of DEIS's and other SEQR documents, directs that a DEIS is to be complete but not "encyclopedic." Further, it urges the use of existing reports and data where available as a means of expediting review and minimizing costs. Accordingly, two documents are being included in the appendices which describe the envirionmental setting. The first is the EAF prepared on 7/23/87 by Eh-Consultants, Inc., for the lead agency, the Southold Trustees. - 10 The second is a report prepared on or about that same date which accompanied the EAF. The report is based upon a field inspection of 7/15/87. A vegetative map has also been prepared por- traying the location and extent of vegetation, wetland and otherwise, on the parcel. The Soil Survey of Suffolk County (USDA, 1975) sheet 8 (see appendices), identifies the sub- ject parcel as dune land, which is described as follows: "Dune land is made up of mounds or small hills of sand that have been piled up by wind. No soil horizons have formed in this sandy material. This land type is mainly along the barrier beach and the large area of dunes in the vicinity of Napeague and Hither Hills State Park. Smaller areas are along Long Island Sound and the bays at the east end of the Sound. Slope ranges from - 11 1 to 35 percent. Vegetation is sparse in some areas, but other areas have a thick cover of pine. Included with this land type in mapping are low-lying, nearly level areas between dunes where ground water is at a depth of 18 to 30 inches in places. Also included are a few small, blown-out areas along the north shore. In these places sand dunes have migrated into the woodland sur- rounding the blowout." Mitigation Measures to Minimize Environmental Impact -- Siting of the house outside of the wetland as much as possible is the most significant mitigation possible short of taking no action whatsoever. An infinite number of variations of house size, precise location, driveway con- figuration, and extent of fill is possible. The minimum size house permitted by zoning is 850 square feet. It is not felt that a - 12 structure of this size would serve the appli- cant's needs. If the house were to be built on pilings, less fill would be necessary under and around it causing less loss of wetlands. foundations are common in some Island, notably on the barrier Exposed piling areas of Long beaches where flood plain regulations mandate high first floor elevations and prohibit fill underneath on the theory that these factors will minimize damage during storms. The "high velocity zones" where these regulations are in effect are classi- fied as "V" zones by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Conditions at the subject parcel are different. It is located in a "A-7" flood zone which is within the "100-year flood" area but is not an area likely to ever be subjected to waves of high velocity. Thus, there is no restriction against fill. No homes in the area were observed - 13 - to have exposed piling foundations. Construction on pilings would cause loss of most vegetation underneath due to shading. Elevated houses require greater insulation and precautions against freeze-up of pipes. Piling foundations are more costly than spread footing or concrete slab construction. Fill cannot be placed only under the founda- tion. It must be shaped out beyond the build- ing's footprint. Thus, while vegetation directly under a piling foundation would likely die, that beyond (which would be under the peripheral sloped fill) would remain. Containment of fill for the sanitary system by a retaining wall minimize loss of natural vegetation, again by elimination of peripheral sloped fill, the other possible alternative. Mention is occasionally made of elimination of cesspools which leach into the ground in - 14 - favor of a sealed holding tank which is period- ically pumped out by a scavenger. While this, in theory, would totally eliminate any effluent, such a system would not be approved by SCDH. In addition to being very costly (weekly pump- outs would probably be necessary for an average family), SCDH fears that waste would be disposed of improperly leading to significant health and environmental problems. Limitation of shrubs and lawn requiring appli- cation of pesticides and fertilizers would mitigate that source of pollution. Use of bluestone or other pervious material for the driveway would limit chan~es in drain- age patterns. Installation of dry wells for roof runoff would, in the writer's opinion, have little beneficial effect. Dry wells would have to be installed in fill in order to operate satisfactorily, -15- and the water they handle is merely rainwater which could also be discharged on the surface. Little cost is involved, however, so that dry wells could be installed if so ordered. - 16 - ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS THAT CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF THE PROJECT IS TO BE IMPLEMENTED: NO matter which alternative is selected, there will be a loss of some wetland. Given the minimal amount of wetland on the subject par- cel relative to the overall wetland which is located largely on County property and there- fore not subject to development, any loss will be very small. - 17 ALTERNATIVES: Alternative construction techniques, siting and development, have been addressed in the "mitigation" section. The alternative of dif- ferent land use is not practical due to the existing zoning and nature of surrounding de- velopment. Acquisition of the parcel by a governmental agency or private preservation organization would perpetuate present environmental condi- tions. It is not likely that public or quasi- public ownership would lead to public use other than by individuals interested in ecological studies. A fair market value would have to be paid to the owner if public acquistion is not to be considered a "taking." "No action," coupled with no compensation, would create a financial hardship to the owner and leave him with no use for the property. He would be re- quired to purchase another parcel or existing house elsewhere to satisfy his need for shelter. - 18 - IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURES: Wetlands which are filled and/or shaded must be considered "lost." Although fill could be removed and a tice this is is developed. wetland loss building demolished, in prac- not likely to occur if the lot As previously stated, actual is small. The usage of fossil fuels to power construction equipment and workers' vehicles is irreversi- ble as is the consumption of electrical power by tools. The commitment of wood and other material used in construction is essentially irreversible. 19 - GROWTH-INDUCING ASPECTS: Examination of yearly population statistics reveals a steady growth for the Town of Southold. According to the Nassau-Suffolk Regional Plan- ning Board estimate for 1987, the population is 21, 003. The addition of another household (4 - 5 persons) is part of the trend and not an inducement to growth. Neither would this action require expansion of existing utilities and services or the addition of new ones. 20 - LAND USE AND ZONING: The parcel is located in an A Residential- Agricultural zone according to the Town of Southold. The parcel to the north is entirely filled and developed with a single family house. Natural vegetation has been removed and replaced with grass and landscaping. The lot to the south belonging to Manos is undeveloped and similar in vegetative character to the subject parcel. Adjacent to this is a developed parcel also owned by Manos. Many other houses are located in the neighborhood, most built in the 1970's, and used as summer houses. The most recent master plan does not call for any zone changes in the area. 21 - SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: As described in an earlier section, the parcel is roughly 66% freshwater wetlands, primarily in the west and south. The latest and current development plan concentrates development on the northerly half of the parcel. Assuming the FWW line to be as shown in the vegetative map, there will be approximately 3,000 square feet of wetlands filled. Usage of the remain- ing wetland by wildlife may be slightly dimi- nished due to the increased human activity. However, most species now utilizing the parcel are expected to remain. No rare or endangered species were detected. Ospreys which may nest in this general area of Southold, would in no way be threatened or be less likely to remain as a result of this project. Potential environmental impact of sanitary systems center upon the effects of leachate upon the surroundings. Cesspool leachate con- tains nutrients (primarily nitrogen and phos- phorus), bacteria, viruses and minor amounts - 22 of other constituents. Nutrients normally are bound up by bacteria present in the soil within short distances of the cesspool rings. Should nutrients reach adjacent wetlands, it is likely that they would be metabolized by the plants much the same way that surface- applied fertilizer would be. Of the leachate components, least is known of the viruses. Again, the type of installation proposed here and the density make it unlikely that this or any other component of the leachate would cause damage to either the wetlands or water- ways. - 23 EFFECTS ON THE USE AND CONSERVATION OF ENERGY RESOURCES: During the construction phase, energy in the form of fossil fuels and electricity will be consumed. The house will be heated by oil- burning equipment. All proposed structures will be adequately insulated to minimize ener- gy consumption. Existing sources of electrical energy supplied by LILCO are adequate to service the proposed facilities. Studies, reports and literature used in preparation of DEIS. Burt, William H. et al. A field guide to the mammals, 1964. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston. Darnell, R. M. et al. Impacts of construction activities in wetlands of the J. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1976. Corvallis, Oregon. Long Island Regional Planning Board 1987. Population Survey. Hauppauge. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Freshwater Wetlands - Land Use Regulations, Article U. S. Department of Agriculture. 1975. Soil survey of Suffolk County, Riverhead. 24. Application for a Wetlands Permit to place fill and construct a one-family house within 75 feet of wetlands or water on the west side of West Orive, Town of Southold, New York, and identified by Suffolk County Tax Map No. 1000-59-5-29.3. Southold Town Board of Appeals MAIN ROAD- $TATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. Jig'7] TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. JOSEPH H. SAW~CKI JAMES DINIZIO, JR. TO: James A. Schondebare, Town Attorney FROM: Jerry Goehringer, Chairman Board of Appeals DATE: November 21, 1988 SUBJECT: Z.B.A. Jurisdiction Article XI, Section 100-119.2(C) Building Setback From Water Bodies Dear Jay: As you may know, we have an application pending for an Appeal of the Determination of the Building Inspector for the proposed construction of a single-family dwelling as shown on the attached survey. Following scoping sessions, etc. through the Department of the Town Trustees (as Lead Agency under SEQRA), there is apparently no question that phragmites exist at the site, giving jurisdiction to the Trustees under the Freshwater Wetlands Section of the Code. We must ask your legal opinion as to Board of Appeals jurisdiction under Section 100-119.2(C) of the Zoning Code, states: which ...C. Ail buildings located on lots adjacent to any freshwater body shall be set back not less than seventy-five (75) feet from the edge of such water body or ... from the landward edge of the freshwater wetland, whichever is greater... In the event you determine this Department has overlapping jurisdiction with the Trustees, we urge that the Town Trustees complete their overall review as to the wetland areas and confirm for the record the closest freshwater wetland boundary line (to the proposed construction) since they appear to be the only Environmental Agency of the Town authorized to do so. Thank you for your assistance. In the ~a~t~r'o~ ~he ~l~e~e~ ~i~lltio~ of Articles 24 & 71 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law, by CHRIS CONNORS (Suffolk County) Respondent · ORDER ON CONSENT FILE NO. 1-2095 WHEREAS, Article 24 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law (Freshwater Wetlands Act) prohibits the excavation and removal of any material, or the dumping or filling of any material on or adjacent to any freshwater wetland without having first applied for and received the requisite permit; and WHEREAS, this Department has .alleged a violation of said Article 24, specifically §24-0701, in that Respondent caused and/or permitted to be caused, the placement of fill in a fresh- water wetlands area without permit at West Drive, Southold, New York; and WHEREAS, Respondent has affirmatively waived his right to a public hearing in this matter in the manner provided by law and having consented to the entering and issuing of this Order, agrees to be bound by the terms and conditions contained herein. NOW, having considered this matter and being duly advised, it is ORDERED, that with respect to the aforesaid alleged violation, there is hereby imposed upon Respondent a penalty in the sum of Seven Hundred Fifty ($750) Dollars, said penalty to be suspended, provided Respondent strictly adheres to the terms and conditions outlined in Schedule A, the compliance schedule attached hereto and made a part hereof; and it is further ORDERED, that nothing contained herein shall be construed as preventing the Department from collecting regulatory fees where applicable; and it is further ORDERED, that in those instances in which the Respondent desires that any of the provisions, terms or conditions of this Order be changed, it shall make written application, setting forth the grounds for the relief sought, to the Commissioner, c/o the Regional Attorney, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Building 40, State University Campus, Stony Brook, New York 11794; and it is further ORDERED, that Respondent shall strictly adhere to the terms and conditions outlined in Schedule A, the compliance schedule attached hereto and made a part hereof; and it is further ORDERED, that any change in this Order shall not be made or become effective, except as specifically set forth by written order of the Commissioner, such written order being made either upon written application of the Respondent or upon the Commissioner's own findings; and it is further ORDERED, that this Order shall be deemed binding on Respondent, its successors and assigns and all persons, firms and corporations acting under for for them, including, but not limited to those who may carry on any or all of the operations now being conducted by Respondent, whether at the present location or at any other in this State. Dated: Albany, New York 1988 THOMAS C. JORLING Commissioner of Environmental Conservation To: By Eric Bressler, Esq. Wickham, Wickham & Bressler, P.C. Main Road Post Office Box 1424 Mattituck, New York 11952 HAROLD D. BERGER Regional Director CONSENT BY RESPONDENT Respondent acknowledges the authority and jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Environmental Conservation of the State of New York to issue the foregoing Order, waived public hearing or other proceedings in this matter, accepts the terms and conditions set forth in the Order and consents to the .~. ~ance thereof. STATE OF NEW YOM) COUNTY OF~K ) On the ~O~day of~ , 1988, before me personally c~e f ~ f~NoR3 to me known,.w~ being duly sworn, deposed and said that he resides at that he is the individual described in a~'.~h~ execute~ the fo~- golng instr~ent and acknowledged to me ~h t h' execut~ e. Compliance Schedule for ~ithin ninety (90) days of the date of issuance of a Commissioner,s Decision denying Respondent's pending application for a permit, (regardless of any appeals taken of said Decision). Respondent shall have: 1) Removed all fill which is the subject of this Order~ 2) Seeded the disturbed area with switch grass. FRANK A. KUJAWSKI, JR., President ALBERT J. KRUPSKI, JR., Vice-President JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, III JOHN L. BEDNOSKI, JR. HENRY P. SMITH BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 September 12, 1988 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 Mr. Christopher Connors 5 Viking Road Glenwood Landing, New York 11547 Re: Wetland Application No. 543 Dear Mr. Connors: Pursuant to ~our request for information relative to the status of your application before this Board, please be advised that prior to the cbmmencement of the review of the D.E.I.S. the violation pending before the D.E.C. will have to be fully resolved. After the violation has been satisfied with the D.E.C. this Board will resume the review of the D.E.I.S. and prior to taking any action on the application a permit will have to be furnished to this office from the D.E.C. in accordance with Article II, 97-21 (J) of the Town Code. Your cooperation, in this matter, has been greatly appreciated. Should you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact this office at the telephone number listed above. Very truly yours, ~'rank A./K~jawski, Jr., Pres. Board of T~wn Trustees FAK:ip cc: James Manos, Esq. Frank Panek, DEC, Stony Brook ~' Bldg. Dept. Board of Appeals 3oseph Hall, DEC, Stony Brook - 10-88-1572 § 97-20 SOUTHOLD CODE § 97-21 ARTICLE II Permits § 97-20. Permit required. [Amended 6-5-84 by L.L. No. 6-1984; 3-26-85 by L.L. No. 6-1985] A. Permit required. Notwithstanding any prior course of con- duct or permission granted, no person shall conduct opera- tions on any wetlands in the Town of Southold unless he shall first obtain a written permit therefor issued by authority of the Trustees as hereinafter provided and only while such permit remains in effect. B. Notwithstanding the provisions of Subsection A of this'sec- tion, the Trustees may, by resolution, waive the requirement of a permit with respect to lands immediately adjacent to wet- lands, as defined in Subsection A(3) or B(2) of the definition of "wetlands" in § 97-13, if the Trustees find and determine that no operations are proposed on such lands, or that the opera- tions proposed thereon comply with the standards set forth in § 97-28 of this chapter. § 97-21. Application. [Amended 6-5-84 by L.L. No. 6-1984] A permit may be issued upon the written, verified application of the person proposing to perform operations on wetlands. The application shall be submitted to the Clerk in quadruplicate. Such application shall contain the following information: A. The name and address of the applicant and the source of the applicant's right to perform such operations {e.g., whether applicant is the owner, lessee, licensee, contractor, etc.). In all cases where the applicant is not the owner of the premises where such operations are proposed to be conducted, the consent of the owner, duly acknowledged, must be attached to said application. B. The purpose of the proposed operations. C. The amount of material proposed to be removed or deposited, and/or the type, size and location of any proposed structure. § 97-21 WETLANDS § 97-21 D. A description of the area fro~ which the removal or in which the deposit of material is proposed, or in which structures are to be erected. The description shall be by bearing and distance and shall be based on a local coor- dinate system. The starting point of the description shall be appropriately referenced to a permanent reference point E. The depth to which the removal or the deposit of material is proposed throughout the area of operations, and the proposed angle of repose of all slopes. .~, F. The manner in which the material will be removed or deposited, or structures erected. G. Such application shall be accompanied by a survey and topographical map with contours at one-foot intervals, showing the area from which the removal or in which the deposit of materials is proposed, or in which structures are to be erected, certified by a registered land surveyor or registered professional engineer, licensed by the State of New York. Such survey and topographical map shall show the soundings of the area in which operations are proposed to be conducted. The horizontal control of said survey shall be based on an approved local coordinate system. The vertical control for elevations and soundings shall be based on the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey datum. H. A statement of the effect, if any, on the wetlands and tidal waters of the town that may result by reason of such proposed operations. I. A statement describing any known prior operations conducted on the premises in question and whether any prior licenses to permits have been issued to erect structures or to dredge or deposit fill on said premises and whether any such permits or licenses were ever revoked or suspended by a governmental agency. ~ J.Cocumantary proof that all other necessary permit approvals have been obtained. 14-12-9 (?J87)--9c ~/ 617.21 Appendix G State Environmental Quality Review Notice of Completion of Draft ElS and Notice of SEQR Hearing SEQR Lead Agency: Southold Town Board of Trustees Address: Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Project NumberWetland App.543 Date: Nov. 2, 1988 This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 (and local law #Chpt.44-Loc. Law 3-1978 if any) of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act) of the Environmental Conservation Law. A Draft Environmental Impact Statement has been completed and accepted for the proposed action described below. Comments on the Draft ElS are requested and will be accepted by the contact person until Dec. 17, 1988 . A public hearing on the Draft ElS will be held on Nov. 17, 1988- 7:40 P.M.(date and time) at Southo]d Town Hall ~ (place). Name of Action: Southold, N.Y. Re: Christopher Connors - DEIS and application to build house Description of Action: Application for a Wetlands Permit to place fill and construct a one-family house within 75 feet of wetlands or water on the west side of West Drive, Town of Southold, New York, and identified by SuffQlk County Tax Map No. 1000- 59-5-29.3. Location: (Include street address and the.name of the municipality/county.) 350 West Drive, Southold, New York, County of Suffolk Notice of Completion O~'raft ElS/Notice of Hearing Page 2 Potential Environmental Impacts: To address the value of this area as a Wildlife Habitat, and its productivity. The impact of construction on this wetland area, neighboring wetlands, Peconic Dunes and Great Pond. To determine what percentage of this lot is actually wetlands and what areas are wet all year round,also, which areas are wet seasonally. The impact of this project on Great Pond as a fresh water source for the Town. Purpose and need for this project, and possible mitigation measures that could minimize adverse environmental impacts. A Copy of the Draft ElS may be obtained from: Contact Person: Joan Schneider, C]~erk Southold Town Board of Trustees Address: Town Hall 53095 Main Rd., Southold, N.Y. Telephone Number: (516) 765 1892 A Copy of this Notice and the Draft ElS Sent to: *Commissioner, Department of Enviionmental Conservation, 50 Wolf Road, Albany, New York 12233-0001 *Appropriate Regional Office of the Department of Environmental Conservation *Office of the Chief Executive Officer of the political subdivision in which the action will be principally located. *All other involved agencies (if any) *Persons requesting Draft ElS · One copy ot the Oraft Els must be sent to these [ocalions New York State Department of Environmental Conservation REGULATORY AFFAIRS REGION I BUILDING 40 STATE UNIVERSI FY OF N~X',r YORK STONY BROOK, NE~V YORK 11 794 $OUTHOLD IOWN PLANNING ROARD Re: LEAD AGENCY COORDINATION REQUEST Dear The purpose of this request fs to determine under Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review - SEQR) of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617 the following: 1. your jurisdiction in the action described below; 2. your interest in assuming the responsibilities of lead agency; and 3. issues of concern which you believe should be evaluated, I have enclosed a copy of the permit application and a completed Environ- mental Assessment Form to assist you in responding. DEC Permits: SEQR Classification: [ ] Type I [~]'"'0nlisted DEC Contact Person: -2- DEC Position: [ ] DEC has no objection to your agency assuming lead agency -status for this action. [ ] DEC wishes to assume lead agency status for this action. [,~/Other. (See comments below) The lead agency will determine the need for an environmental impact statement (EIS) on this project. If you have an interest in being lead agency, then please contact this office within/(/_~days of the date of this letter. If no response is received, it will be assuin~d that your agency has no interest in being lead agency. Please feel free to contact this office for further informatio~ or discussion. Sincerely, Enclosures cc: (attach distribution list) Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (~6) PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 19, 1988 Joseph Hall, Environmental Analyst NYS Dept. Environmental Conservation Regulatary Affairs Region 1, Building 40 State University of New York Stony Brook, New York 11794 RE: Lead Agency Coordination Request for DEC Project #10-88-1572 Dear Mr. Hall: A review of the Planning Board's files indicates that the above referenced application lies within the minor subdivision map of Philip Druhl. This subdivision was approved by the Planning Board in 1970. The Planning Board does not have jurisdiction over the specific application before you. However, the Trustees have an active file on this application. A copy of your September 9th letter has been forwarded to their office for their response. Sincerely, Valerie Scopaz Town Planner cc: Planning Board Trustees Board jt PIIILL~P J. GOUBEAUD ELLEN M. LARSEN ~ BOARD OF T()WN TIII'STEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall. 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold. New York I t971 (516) 765-1892 August 31, 1987 Mr. Paul Co'rrella New York State Dept. of Environmental Conservation Division of Fish and Wildlife Bldg. 40, SUNY Stony Brook, New York 11794 Re: Christopher Connors - Wetland Application No. 543 Dear Mr. Corrella: Please be advised that the Southold Town Trustees would like to be advised of your interest and concern regarding the Lead Agency status on the above referenced application and/or jurisdiction. Enclosed for your convenience is a copy of the long environmental assessment form for your review. Kindly advise this office at the earliest possible date of your interest in being the lead agency regarding this application? Should you have any questions or concern, please do not hesitate to contact this office at the {elephone number listed above. .Very truly yours, Henry P. Smith, Pres. Board of Town Trustees HPS :ip Attachment cc: Patricia C. Moore, Attorney James Manos INT,,ER-OFFICE SPEED (l~! ONLY FOR UNOFF;CIAL COR- RESPONDENCE~ ..... DATE RETURNED: REPLY AT BOSOM OF THIS ~ REPLY ' 5 ~iking Rd. Glenwood Landinq, NY 115~7 August 8, 1988 Board of Town Trustees Town of Southold Frank A. Kujawski, Jr. President Town Hall, 53095 ~?ain Rd. PO Bo~. 728 Sonthold, NY 11971 Dear Mr. KujaWski, I am writing in response to your letter dated 6/24/88. It is very obvious, the matter of settling this violation should have been addressed a year ago when it was first issued. Why you have waited until now to bring this up, after I have spent considerable time and money in your application process, is a disgrace. kD,.ev_r, in complience of year reeuest %he violation in euestion has now been cleared, a copy is attached for your records. At this time, I find it necessary to say, in the event a permit is denied to me, I wi].] be hoTding the Town of Southold responsible for their negligence in advising me this lot was suitable for building and then giving me approval to ~repare the site for building. I will submit all my bills incurred and ex~ect oromot reimbursement. During the past year and a hal_f, the facts surrounding my aDp!ication have become very clondad. I bare tried to cooperate with all the parties involved to my fullest. Your co~]cerns with the environment are valid and I can respect that. However, I would 3ike to make it very clear, upon my very first visit to the building department in- quiring if tile property was suitable for building, the answer was most definitely yes. This ordeal has been a tremendous hardship to me and my family. look forward to the 8/25/88 meeting so I may finally get a long ~.~wai-ted decision on my application. I Sincerely, Christopher Conners CC: DEC Legal Dept. Laurie Reitly Frank Murphy, Town Supervisor Wic]¢ham, Wickhnm & Bressler ~!ewsday - !Don Williams Governor ~ario Cuomo En-Consultantm - Rol~ Haje JAMES MANOS ATTORNEY AT LAW August 17, 1988 Frank A. Kujawski, Jr., President Board of Town Trustees Town of Southold Town Hail, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, N.Y. 11971 Re: C. Conners - Wetlands Application No. 543 Dear Mr. Kujawski: Mr. Conners has once again presented erroneous and misleading information to the Trustees! The violation has not been cleared as aileged by Mr. Conners in his August 8th letter to you. No representative of the DEC has executed the Consent Order proferred to you by Mr. Conners as evidence that "the violation in question has now been cleared...". The above was confirmed today in a conversation I had with the DEC's legal department, who further advised that the DEC still has under consideration and review the terms and condifion§ of the con- sent order. It is difficult to comprehend Mr. Conners~ resistance to the removal of the fill. At the scoping meeting of October 6, 1987, in response to a direct question posed by Mr. Krupski, the applicant agreed to its removal. Ten months have passed yet he has failed to do so. This is particluarly puzzling because aimost all of the fill is located on that portion of his parcel which, based on the revised site plan, Mr. Conners will leave in the wetlands state. Thus he would have to remove the fill even if the permit were granted. Very truly yours, cc: DEC STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION of Articles 24 & 71 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law, by CHRIS CONNORS (Suffolk County) Respondent X ORDER ON CONSENT FILE NO. 1-2095 WHEREAS, Article 24 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law (Freshwater Wetlands Act) prohibits the excavation and removal of any material, or the dumping or filling of any material on or adjacent to any freshwater wetland without having first applied for and received the requisite permit; and WHEREAS, this Department hasalleged a violation of said Article 24, specifically $24-0701, in that Respondent caused and/or permitted to be caused, the placement of fill in a fresh- water wetlands area without permit at West Drive, Southold, New York; and WHEREAS, Respondent has affirmatively waived his right to a public hearing in this matter in the manner provided by law and having consented to the entering and issuing of this Order, agrees to be bound by the terms and conditions contained herein. NOW, having considered this matter and'being duly advised, it is ORDERED, that with respect to the aforesaid alleged violation, there is hereby imposed upon Respondent a penalty in the sum of Seven Hundred Fifty ($750) Dollars, said penalty to be suspended, provided Respondent strictly adheres to the terms and conditions outlined in Schedule A, the compliance schedule attached hereto and made a part hereof; and it is further ORDERED, that nothing contained herein shall be construed as preventing the Department from collecting regulatory fees where applicable; and it is further ORDERED, that in those instances in which the Respondent desires that any of the provisions, terms or conditions of this Order be changed, it shall make written application, setting forte the grounds for the relief sought, to the Commissioner, c/o the Regional Attorney, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Building 40, State University Campus, Stony Brook, New York 11794; and it is further ORDERED, that Respondent shall strictly adhere to the terms and conditions outlined in Schedule A, the compliance schedule attached hereto and made a part hereof; and it is further ORDERED, that any change in this Order shall not be made or become effective, except as specifically set forth by written order of the Commissioner, such written order being made either upon written application of the Respondent or upon the Commissioner's own findings; and it is further ORDERED, that this Order shall be deemed binding on Respondent, its successors and assigns and all persons, firms and corporations acting under for for them, including, but not to those who may carry on any or all of the operations now being conducted by Respondent, whether at the present location or at other in this State. Dated: Albany, New York 1988 THOMAS C. JORLING Commissioner of Environmental Conservatioz By HAROLD D. BERGER Regional Director To: Eric Bressler, Esq. Wickham, Wickham & Bressler, Main Road Post Office Box 1424 Mattituck, New York 11952 PoCo CONSENT BY RESPONDENT Respondent acknowledges the authority an~ jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Environmental Conservation of the State of New York to issue the foregoing Order, waived public hearing or other proceedings in this matter, accepts the terms and conditions set forth in the Order and consents to the i~/ance thereof. STATE OF NEW YORK) S.S: COUNTY OF gu6~L~ ) On the }~k~day of%~,~% , 1988, before me personally came C ~ C5~N~R3 to me known, who being .duly sworn, deposed and sai9 thai he resides at~ ~~ t~2L~,W,~ ~}~7 thgt h? is the individual described in a~d ~'h6. execute~ the fore- going lnstr~ent and acknowledged to me ~h~t h~execut~e. ' N~y P~B~IC ' ¢ Compliance Schedule for Within ninety (90) days of Respondent shall have:. the date of issuance of a ~omm~ssioner,s Decision 1) ~emoved all fill which uenylng Respondent,s pending is the subject of this aPPlication for a permit, Order~ (regardless of any appeals 2) Seeded the disturbed taken of said Decision). area with switch grass. 5 Viking Rd. Glenwood Landing, NY 11547 Au§ust 8; 1988 9oard of Town Trustees Town of Southold Frank A. Kujawski, Jr. President Town Hall, 53095 Main Rd. PO Box 728 Southold, NY 11971 Dear Mr. Kujawski, I am writing in response to your letter dated 6/24/88. It is very obvious, the matter of settling this violation should have been addressed a year ago when it was first issued. Why you have waited until now to bring this up, after I !lave spent considerable time and money in your application process, is a disgrace. IIo~,.~ever, in complience of your re~mest, '~he violation in question has now been cleared, a copy is attached for your records. At this time, I find it necessary to say, in the event a permit is denied to me, I will be ho]ding the Town of $outhold responsible for their negligence in advining me this lot was snitable for building and then giving me a~provel to prepare the site for building. I will submit all my bills incurred and expect prompt reimbursement. During the past year and a half, the facts surrounding my application have become very clouded. I bare tried to cooperate with all th~ parties involvn~ to my fullest. Your concerns with the environment are valid and I can respect that. However, I would like to make it very clear, upon my very first visit to the building department in- quiring if the property was suitable for building, the answer was most definitely yes. This ordeal has been a tremendous hardship to me and my family. look for%~ard to the 8/25/88 meeting so I may finally get a long ~waited decision on my application. I Sincere]_?/, Christopher Conners D~.~C Legal Dept. Laurie Rei]ly ~rank Murphy, Town Sunervisor Wickham, Wickham & ~resnler Newsday Don WJ!].iams Governor Nario Cuomo En-Cnnsultantn - Roy Haje STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION of Articles 24 & 71 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law, by CHRIS CONNORS (Suffolk County) Respondent X X ORDER ON CONSENT FILE NO. 1-2095 WHEREAS, Article 24 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law (Freshwater Wetlands Act) prohibits the excavation and removal of any material, or the dumping or filling of any material on or adjacent to any freshwater wetland without having first applied for and received the requisite permit; and WHEREAS, this Department has alleged a violation of said Article 24, specifically S24-0701, in that Respondent caused and/or permitted to be caused, the placement of fill in a fresh- water wetlands area without permit at West Drive, Southold, New York; and WHEREAS, Respondent has affirmatively waived his right to a public hearing in this matter in the manner provided by law and having consented to the entering and issuing of this Order, agrees to be bound by the terms and conditions contained herein. NOW, having considered this matter and being duly advised, it is ORDE~R~, that with respect to the aforesaid alleged violation, there is hereby imposed upon Respondent a penalty in the sum of Seven Hundred Fifty ($750) Dollars, said penalty to be suspended, provided Respondent strictly adheres to the terms and conditions outlined in Schedule A, the compliance schedule attached hereto and made a part hereof; and it is further ORDERED, that nothing contained herein shall be construed as preventing the Department from collecting regulatory fees where applicable; and it is further ORDERED, that in those instances in which the Respondent desires that any of the provisions, terms or conditions of this Order be changed, it shall make written application, setting forth the grounds for the relief sought, to the Commissioner, c/o the Regional Attorney, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Building 40, State University Campus, Stony Brook, New York 11794; and it is further ORDERED, that Respondent shall strictly adhere to the terms and conditions outlined in Schedule A, the compliance schedule attached hereto and made a part hereof; and it is further ORDERED, that any change in this Order shall not be made or become effective, except as specifically set forth by written order of the Commissioner, such written order being made either upon written application of the Respondent or upon the Commissioner's own findings; and it is further ORDERED, that this Order shall be deemed binding on Respondent, its successors and assigns and all persons, firms and corporations acting under for for them, including, but not limited to those who may carry on any or all of the operations now being conducted by Respondent, whether at the present location or at any other in this State. Dated: Albany, New York · 1988 THOMAS C. JORLING Commissioner of Environmental Conservatio: By HAROLD D. BERGER Regional Director To: Eric Bressler, Esq. Wickham, Wickham & Bressler, Main Road Post Office Box 1424 Mattituck, New York 11952 PoCo CONSENT BY RESPONDENT Respondent acknowledges the authority and jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Environmental Conservation of the State of New York to issue the foregoing Order, waived public hearing or other proceedings in this matter, accepts the terms and conditions set forth in the Order and consents to the i~uance thereof. STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF ~6~LK ) On the }Ok~day of,~ came C H~ C5~fl3 . to me known, deposed and said t~at he resides at ithat he is the individual described in a~ going instrument and acknowledged to me ~h/ \/ , 1988, before me personally being duly sworn, b,,execute~ the. fore- h%execute~e. T)~RY PUBf~I C ~ Compliance Schedule for Within ninety (90) days of the date of issuance of a Commissioner's Decision denying Respondent's pending application for a permit, (regardless of any appeals taken of said Decision). Respondent shall have: 1) Removed all fill which is the subject of this Order~ 2) Seeded the disturbed area with switch grass. HENRY P. SMITH, President JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, Vice-Pres. PHILLIP J. GOUBEAUD ALBERT KRUPSKI, JR. ELLEN M. LARSEN BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 OCTOBER 6, 1987 SPECIAL MEETING': 5:00 P.M. A Special Meeting was held on October 6, 1987 at Five O'Clock at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York for the purpose of reviewing a Scoping Check List for the Christopher Connors application before the Board. President Henry P. Smith Vice President John Bredemeyer Trustee Phillip J. Goubeaud Trustee Albert Krupski Trustee Ellen M. Larsen (5:30 P.M.) Frank Yakaboski, Special Town Attorney Roy L. Haje, Eh-Consultants, Inc. Mr. Christopher Connors Mr. & Mrs. William T. Connors Judge James Manos Mrs. James Manos Patricia C. Moore, Attorney Ilene Pfifferling, Secretary President Smith called the meeting to order. Moved by Trustee Krupski seconded by Trustee Bredemeyer it was RESOLVED to Approve the minutes of the August 27, 1987 meeting. Vote of Board: Ayes: Trustee Bredemeyer, Smith, Krupski, Goubeaud This resolution was declared duly adopted. The Trustees discussed the application of Christopher Connors to construct a single family residence on property located at 350 West Drive, Southold. The Board reviewed the application and commenced with a Scoping Check List for items which will have to be addressed in a D.E.I.S. to be submitted for review. The Trustees will forward this Scoping Check List to other Agencies and Departments for their review and request for any additional items that should be addressed. Moved by Trustee Bredemeyer seconded by Trustee Krupski it was RESOLVED to Adjourn this meeting there being no further business to come before the Board. Meeting Adjourned at 6:30 P.M. Vote of Board: Ayes: Ail - This resolution was declared duly adopted. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Building 40 State University of New York Stony Brook, New York 11794 ..... [i ..... November 30, 1987 Daniel Ross, Esq. wickham, Wickham & Bressler, P.C. Main Road Post Office Box 1424 Mattituck, Long Island 11952 Re: Christopher Conners Thomas C. Jorling Commissioner Dear Mr. Ross: On November 9, 1987, in response to your October 30, 1987 correspondence, I issued a letter withdrawing the Notice of violation in the above-referenced matter. I did so in reliance on your representation as to the applicability of ~r v. Goldber~er, 131 Misc. 2d 109; 499 N.Y.S. 2d 600 (Richmond County, 1986) and without consulting the Regional legal staff. Subsequent to my November 9, 1987 letter, I have been informed by the Regional legal staff that the Wedinger case you cited was reversed on appeal. You also belatedly advised me of this in your November 16, 1987 correspondence. Please be advised that the Notice of violation in this matter was incorrectly withdrawn and is hereby reinstated. This case has been referred to the Regional Attorney's Office for enforcement. Any further correspondence should be directed to that office. In addition, any future correspondence on any matters which concern legal issues and require legal interpre%ation should be directed to the Regional Attorney's Office. Sincer,ely, ~ of Natural Resources FMP:cm CC' L. Riley D. Luciano. H. Smith, President, Southold Trustees Christopher Connors P.O. Box 1766 Southold, New York 11971 December 7, 1987 Mr. Henry P. Smith, President Board of Town Trustees Town of Southold Town Hall, 55095 Main Road Soufhold, New York 11971 Dear Mr. Smith, In an attempt to satisfy all interests concerned, I am asking the trustees to reinspect my lot. I am proposing to move my house location to a higher elevation. Moving the site 75' north of my S/E property line will be best suited for environ- mental protection. This was also pointed out in Mr. Haje's report. I have indicated my proposed site with three markers. The first marker indicates where the 75 foot dividing line will be. The second marker is the beginning of the proposed house. The third marker indicates the end. Provided this meets with your approval, I will then have another survey prepared, which will give us exact specifications. In summary, I am willing to compromise with any reasonable suggestions. With this alternative, I hope an agreement will be rcached on both sides. Sincerely, Christopher Connors cmk Daniel L. Schwaptz Sydney L. 8chwaptz ~10 West Dpive 8outhold~ N.Y. Boapd Of Appeals Town of Southold Main 8oad~ 8outhold Rem petition of Chpistophep and William Connops fop a vapiance to constpuct a one family home on ppopept¥ located at 3~0 West Dpive~ Southold. We wish to pegistep oup objection to this pequest fop a vaPiance and that it be denied~ at least until an enviponmental impact study can be completed. The possible negative impact apeas about which we ape concepned have both immediate and long tepm consequences. The immediate concepn we have is the impact on oup watep eupply~ since the ppoposed plan ppojects a well adjacant to oup well, We have been advised that this may lead to ppoblems. The long tepm concepns we have ape fop the impact on the wetlands. These wetlands~ including the ppopepty at 350 ~est dpive~ the public lands dipectly adjacent~ and the land acposs the stpeet have a vepy active wild life population~ including the nesting of osppey. We have been advised that the filling in of this lapps papcel of wetlands will affect an indetepminant amount of wetlands suppounding the filled- in land. Until we know the deBpee of impact on the wildlife~ and on the fpesh watep supplyv we eapnestly pequest that the petitioneps pequest fop a vapiance to build on the located at 350 West Dpive be denied. Southold Town Board o£ Appeals MAIN ROAD- ¢~TATE ROAD ~-5 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 7651809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H. SAWlCKI August 7, 1987 Patricia C. Moore, Edson and Bruer Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Esq. Re: Appl. No. 3649 - William and Chris Connors (Variance) Dear Mrs. Moore: This letter will acknowledge receipt Df your recent application before the Board of Appeals. The Board Members will be conducting field inspections and environmental reviews as may be required by State and local laws prior to scheduling your application for a public hearing. It is requested in the interim that you continue proceeding with the Town Trustees under the Wetlands Code and SEQRA regulations. Upon receipt of their written action, your application will be scheduled for the next available hearing calendar. Please feel free to call at any time if you have questions, and keep us advised regarding developments. Yours very truly, GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN cc: Mr. William Connors By Linda Kowalski Mr. Chris Connors JAMES MANOS (718) 7~5-45~9 (516) 765-1516 Henz%y P. Smitht ?resident Board of Town Trustees TQwn of Southold ~own Hall, 5.5095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Seuthold, New York 11971 July 50, 1987 Re: Christopher Conners - Wetlands Application No. 545 Dear Mr. Smith: I'have been notified by Mr. Conners' attorney by certified mail of his pending application before the Zoning Board of Appeals for a variance to the Wetlands Act and have learned of his ap- plication before the Town Trustees for a permit to conduct oper- ations in freshwater wetlands. I am opposed to the granting of the variance by the ZBA and the permit by the Trustees and wish to be deemed a party-in-interest in this proceeding. Mr. Conners' parcel of 20,000 square feet is in its entirety freshwater wetlands as that term is defined under the law--it contains vegetation identified with wetlands such as button- bush, purple loosestrife, marshmallow, phragmite, etc, and serves as a habitat for turtles, snakes, waterfowl, and upland birds. Mr. Conners'~ parcel and the other wetlands adjacent to it are submerged most of the year. Please note the comment on Mr. 'Conners' s~rvey "Phragmites in Water" applies to a delineated area covering about 80% of his parcel (see enlarged survey, Manos Exhibit 1). Even in dry periods the ground is neverthe- less wet and spongy. Mr. Conners' parcel is part of a much larger freshwater wetlands system (see Manos Exhibit 2, photos #l to #4). This includes an area of many acres to the west in Peconic Dunes, and a much smaller area to the south of Mr. Conners' parcel. This latter area of wetlands, which is owned by me, consists of a 70-75 foot wide strip totally about lO,O00 square feet in area, located in my parcel and running along my common plot line with Mr. Conners. Importantly, this area has been declared to be protected wetlands Manos 7/30/87 p. 2 by the DEC in 1977 in connection with an application for a per- mit made by the prior o~er of my property, Mr. Peter Bogovic. This permit, while allowing for the construction of a house up- land of the wetlands in an area containing no wetlands features forbids any operation in the wetlands portion of the parcel. I enclose a copy of this permit together with a sketch survey pre- pared by the DEC delineating the protected area (see Manos Ex- hibit 3)- Significantly, the DEC required Mr. Bogovic to remove fill that he had placed in the wetlands immediately upon that agency"s discovery of the occurrence. Local authorities who have assumed responsibility forprocessing wetland applications must have stan- dards, as required by article 24 of the ~etlands Act, at least equal to those of the DEC. I strongly urge reinstatement of the provision in the original stop order requiring Mr. Conners to re- move the fill placed on his land (see ~'.ianos ~_~xhibit 2 photos #5 & 36). This is a continuing travesty and red, oval would mitigate further damage to the ecology. Mr. Conners proposes to cover the back half of his parcel with a house, and fill averaging six feet in depth above the existing grade. He is silent as to his plans for the front half of his parcel--there is no provision for off street parking, or a drive- way, or access to the house, etc. In any event, it appears that more than half of the plot would be covered and that the place- ment of at least 1500 cubic yards of fill is contemplated. Re- maining wetlands, if any, after completion of the project, would be seg~ented or isolated. A current minor flooding problem on West Drive in front of Mr. Conners' property could become a major one since waters would pool due to the poor drainage created by the fill. Mast important is Mr. Conners' p~oposal to place his septic sysmem about 30 feet from adjacent wetlands, in Peconic Dunes and in the Manos" property. As mentioned these wetlands are covered with water most of the year and when not are waterlogged and spongy. This proximity would probably result in untreated or partially treated effluent contaminating these adjacent wetlands, having an adverse impact on the vegetation and wildlife of the wetlands, the groundwater, and surface waters, and most si~o-nifi- cantl¥, pose a potential health problem to some 1,O00 young children who are guests at ~he Peconic Dunes Camp over the course of a su/~mer. I wish to be given notice of all proceedings and be sent copies Manos 7/50/87 p. 3 of reports. I also wish to have the oppertunity of e~-~mining material submitted by experts and reasonable time to respond to the same. Very truly yours, James Nanos CC: R.A. Greene, DEC F. Panek, DEC H.G. Williams, DEC S.C. Dept. of Health CAC ZBA Building Department Highway Department PERMIT 15273-0073 Oaklawn A~enue, Soutl~old . .Gr_ea~t _P_og_d,__S_o~t~o_ld ..... _. _'___P3._a~ce_ 2_O_O_oa._C_s. ~o~ _f_~i~l_ .~'o_r_~the construct:pn of a ~tngle~__fa_mt_l7 dweJ~!_t_Ilg' and)sso~Rd.septlc system Great Pond Suffolk 1977 fill may be placed north of Lbo lice ahown Oil thc this Department. s,,rw!y -n file wttl{ April 30, 1976 Stonv Brook TO TNS C~-IlCAGG T'.TLC~ HENRY P. SMITH, President JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, Vice-Pres. PHILLIP J. GOUBEAUD ALBERT KRUPSKI, JR. ELLEN M. LARSEN BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUI'HOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 ADDENDUM TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 NOTICE OF SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT Date: July 6, 1987 Pursuant to the provisions of Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, Part 617, of Title 6 of the New York State Codes, Rules and Regulations, and Chapter 44 of the Southold Town Code, the Southold Town Trustees, as lead agency does hereby determine that the action described below is a Type 1 Action and is likely to have a Significant Effect on the Environment. Applicant: Christopher Connors DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: To construct a single family dwelling. LOCATION: 350 West Drive, Southold, New York 11971 REASONS FOR THIS DETERMINATION: Freshwater vegetation on the site. Value as a wildlife habitat or productivity. cc: For further information contact: Henry P. Smith, President Board of Town Trustees Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Robert A. Greene, D.E.C., Stony Brook Commissioner Henry G. Williams, D.E.C., Albany Stephen Mars, Army Corps of Engineers Thomas Hart, Coastal Management Conservation Advisory Council Bldg. Dept. Board of Appeals File Mr. Christopher Conners Patricia C. Moore, Esq. En-Consultants, Inc. HENRY P. SMITH, President JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, Vice-Pres. PHILLIP J. GOUBEAUD ALBERT KRUPSKI, JR. ELLEN M. LARSEN BOARD OF TO~N TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 July 6, 1987 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1892 Mr. Roy L. Haje, President En-Consultants, Inc. 1329 North Sea Road Southampton, New York 11968 Re: Christopher Conners - Application No. 543 Dear Mr. Haje: Please find enclosed a copy of the items to be addressed along with the Long Assessment form for the above referenced. Also enclosed is a copy of the discussion of the Scoping Meeting for your information. Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact this office. The Trustees meet on July 27, 1987, for your info. Very truly yours, HPS:ip Attachments cc: Mrs. Patricia C. Moore, Esq. Mr. Christopher Conners Trustees f Board of Appeals file Henry P.~'Smith, President Board of Town Trustees SCOPING MEETING IN THE MATTER OF CHRISTOPHER CONNERS A Scoping Meeting was held on July 3, 1987 at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold at 5:30 P.M. in the matter of the application of Christopher Conners for a Wetland Permit on certain property located on West Drive, Southold. President Smith called the the meeting to order. The following persons Qere present: President Henry P. Smith Vice President John M. Bredemeyer, III Trustee Phillip J. Goubeaud Trustee Albert Krupsk± Trustee Ellen M. Larsen Patricia Moore, Esq. Mr. & Mrs. Conners ( Bill & Mary) Mr. Christopher Conners Ilene Pfifferling, Clerk to Trustees The Trustees discussed with Mrs. Moore and the applicant, the items which will have to be addressed regarding the application as follows: A plant survey to determine what percentage of the lot does have freshwater plants on it. A survey showing one foot contours to get an idea how the water is flowing on the property. A description of the property and the types of plants and the extent of the wetland area. Does it connect with Great Pond? With the Peconic Dunes? Is this an isolated area between neighboring lands and the Peconic Dunes or is it contiguous with the wetland area? Value as a wildlife habitat or productivity. The present water levels (areas that are wet all year round and areas that may be seasonal). Meeting adjourned at 6:30 P.M. Ilene Pfifferling, Clerk Board of Town Trustees Southold Town Board of Appeals MAIN ROAD- STATE ROAD 2.5 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765 1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAiRMAN CHARLES GRIGONI$,JR. $[RGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLAS$ JOSEPH H. SAWlCKI August 7, 1987 Patricia C. Moore, Edson and Bruer Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Esq. Re: Appl. No. 3649 - William and Chris Connors (Variance) Dear Mrs. Moore: This letter will acknowledge receipt of your recent application before the Board of Appeals. The Board Members will be conducting field inspections and environmental reviews as may be required by State and local laws prior to scheduling your application for a public hearing. It is requested in the interim that you continue proceeding with the Town Trustees under the Wetlands Code and SEQRA regulations. Upon receipt of their written action, your application will be scheduled for the next available hearing calendar. Please feel free to call at any time if you have questions, and keep us advised regarding developments. Yours very truly, GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN cc: Mr. William Connors By Linda Kowalski Mr. Chris Connors Office of the Town Supervisor Francis J. Murphy tla.i~ Road Southold, New York 11971 705 Leeton Drive Southold, New York 11971 June 30, 1987 SUPERVISORS OFFICE I Dee.r ~,r. ]z~.p]-~.~ TOWNOFSOUTHOLD My son and I have owned a s~l home at 705 Leeton Drive, Southold, N. Y., for several years, and we have always had wonderful relations with our neighbors and friemds. Recently, however, we have ourselves involved in a very serious problem which developed from a conflict between ~ur Building Department a~d your Board of Trustees. The problem developed when we responded to a ,"For Sale", sign on land at 350 West Drive, Southold, NY. It is land close to our home and we thought we would be able to build a larger home for my retirement. Before purchasing the land, my son went to the ~,tl~t~g Dept. and received absolute assurances that the land was suitable for building a one family home. The inspector checked maps and gave us verbal assurance and a vacant lan~ C. O. made out ~u the name of the prior land owner. We closed on the land and shortly thereafter went to Penny Lumber for b-~lding plans. We ordered a new survey from Mr. Van Tuyl. He had done a prior survey in 1976 and we used the old survey at closing. We cal~ed the ~,~lding Department and asked permission to clear the land and prepare the builMtng site. Upon receiving verbal permission, we contracted ~lth Ed. Brush to clear the land of shrubs and add fill for a circular driveway. Someone filed a complaint. We have no idea who filed the complaint and the authorities refuse to tell us. We have been stopped in our tracks from proceeding further. The Board of Trustees claims the land (may be) wet lands because wild berries, Ivy and fragmities grow on it. Spring rains had settled on the land because the two adjacent homeowners raised their property levels. We are not near any body of water and the land is without water. We have been forced to file a wet lands permit and it appears we are in for months of hearings before anyone will make a decision. What can we do?? Our money is now tied up in land which may be useless to~'us without a building permit. Why did the Building Department tell us we clearly had a good plot before bu~g the land and then have a b, tlMt~ permit denied after buy~ng the land. Please respond and help us out of this ~tlemma which was brought about because of wrong InFormation given by people under your control. Thank you. P. Se Respectfully, William T. Connors I would appreciate a reply to my business address: 340 Jericho Tpke., Floral Park, New York 11001 phone 516-488-3330 99 Fitchburg St Bayshore" ~' '?e huve had many inquiries about Mcur r~,', ,~',~-- ,'- ',.'est Driva~ JO-,.-r, tho!d~ · ~,J,~.~ .~ :-u .~ Please advls~ anyone" minor subdivision ( ~'[o 22) on rile with o~ Pla~Ing Eoard~ and has been approves by the Aopeals bo~rd (~o1~06) ., nlng ordinance. These are all usable single lots for one ='amily -V-our ~ ~ruly B~i!d=.ng Inspector / March 25, 1970 Philip W. Druhi 551 De Mort ~tvenue Dear ~ir, .~-t a regular meeting of the Southold Town Planning Board held on ~,larch 24, 1970, ~he final maps for your minor subdivision located .~t ~,,~est ~ Lake Drive, Southold, N.Y. were presented to the Eoara. Enclosed please find a copy of ~he approved final map, uigned by ~heC'.nal.man'~ on ~.~rch 24,' 1!)70, and your recelpt for application fee in the amount of $50.00. Sincerely yours, John 'Jic~cham, Chairman $outhold Town ~lanning Board ~/bn encl "'"' (~) COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ?.~, $OUT~IOLD y ...... JUDITH T 'TERRY OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF $OUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 TO: July 10, 1987 Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: Judith T. Terry, Southold Town Clerk Transmitted herewith is Zoning Appeal No. 3649 , application of Christopher & William Connors for a variance. Also included in notification to adjacent property owners; Short Environmental Assessment Form; Letter relative to N.Y.S. Tidal Wetlands Land-Use; Notice of Disapproval from the Building Department; survey of property; and any other attachments relative to this application. Judith T. Terry Southold Town Clerk TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK APPEAL NO. ~-v~' ~'~' DATE ...~..;i: .~.....~....'....~... 2.. 'TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, N. Y. 3,, (We).~.'...//~../.~..~'..~..,~..~..~.~.....V...'.~...~..........~...../~...'~.?..~...~...of ......-~....~'.:~ ....... C..~'...~../...C.L.~.. ......... .7-..~...~....-~. ......... Name of Appellant Street and Number ....... .~...Z.:.o..,~...~....~.. ......... ..~'.,,~..~../~. ........ ..~...~...:....//..?..e..../. ............. ..,~',..~..,. ...... HEREBY APPEAL TO Municipalify State THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR ON APPLICATION FOR PERMIT NO. ~.h.~<../..~'...~..~..~. .......... DATED .........~...~....,--~,..~......~]..,,~. .................. ( ( WHEREBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENIED TO ...... Name of Applicant for permit of ............................... ........ /. ...... ,. ......................... ....... ,......, ............ Street and Number Municipality :State ) PERMIT TO USE ) PERMIT FOR OCCUPANCY I LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY .~.._CO ~.'~:J'7' ]),~ 3"O'.t''7/r~'£Z~ ,..,~..,.~.',. .................... District 1000 Section Block Lot 2~, ~ . ................................................................................. burren~: Owner O/~f'cy~'6/m//ZZ' Map No. Lot No. Pri or 0wner./)*h'~'#~v A~/~/~,~ow, ~ /)/)h',~£~' 2. PROVISION (S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE APPEALED (Indicate the Article Section, Sub- section and Paragraph of the Zoning Ordinance by number. Do not quote the Ordinance.) Article )~ I Section ) aa '~ //~,Z V~/~f~'c~ A/~b~b ~ ~ ~/~7/.~ 3. TYPE OF APPEAL Appeal is made herewith for (please check appropriate box) ~ A VARIANCE to the Zoning Ordi~nce or Zoning Mop ) A VARIANCE due to lock of access (Store of New York Town Low Chop. 62 Cons. Lews Art. 16 Sec. 280A Subsection 3 ) 4. PREVIOUS APPEAL A previous oppeol ~he~) ~) been made with respect to this decision of the Building Inspector or with respect to this property. Such appeal was ( ) request for a special permit ( ) request for o variance and was mode in Appeal No ................................. Dated ...................................................................... REASON FOR APPEAL ) A Variance to Section 280A Subsection 3 Vi" A Variance to the Zoning Ordinance ) ~s requested for the reason that Form ZB! Continue on other side) REASON FOR APPEAL Continued 1. STRICT APPLICATION OF THE ORDINANCE would produce practical difficulties or unneces- sory HARDSHIP because The hardship created is UNIQUE and is not shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in this use district because 3. The Variance would observe the spirit of the Ordinance and WOULD NOT CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT because '7'?~/~- /~,4~'x~ /..C ~ff~ ~ ~D STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF SS Sworn to this / day u, .......................... ~ ............................. 19 o~' '~ Notary Pubhc FORM NO, 3 TOWN OF SOUTItOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTIIOLD. N.Y. NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL File No ................................ . .~.~..o...'~..~..~..w. ~,~,~ .... .~ .9.~....~..~...~...~: ~.~...~.: ?.:.~. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that your applicatio,~ dated . ....~....~.....~..'~. .......... 19 .? ~ for pemfit to construct...~..~...~,~.~ i .~..~.. ~ .................... at Location of Property ~s.e~.~:~. . . . . .~.-~ ........... .w.~,. . '$'~;e;{ ' ~'~ ...... /~3~[e~ County Tax Map No. 1000 Section . .-..~..'~...~ ..... Block .... (~ .-~. ..... Lot . .~.~ ...~ ..... Subdivision ................. Filed~Map No ................. Lot No .................. is returned herewith and disapproved on the lbllowing gronnds .~T,~' .~...'-'~:%..~. ~...~.7 .-: ./.~. ~ . .~..'.~. ~.~.'~¢~... ~.~....~...~ .~...~.....~...~..,,..~.~ .~ Building Inspector TOWN OF SOUTHOLD OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR P.O. BOX 728 TOWN HALL SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY TEL. 765-1802 NO Zl5292 DATE.' Feb. 23, This CERTIFIES that the lot ....... ~ACANT Loc ti of Property 350 WEST DRIVE HOUSE t STREET HAMLET County Tax Map #,'Section .... ~ ....... Block.. 5 ...Lot. ~..~ Subdivision ' Filed Map # Lot # conforms substantially to the applicable provisions of the Zoning Code of the Town of Southold. The premises are located in the "A" Residential A~rieultural Zoned District and may be used for such uses as are presently authorized by the Zoning Code in such district subject to, however, all of the requirements of the Zoning Code. The certificate is issued to',D,q,~9.~?,Y,. P,A,S,S. 9.N. .~...D.A~.~.~.~.. ~.U.~.~.Z~... (owner, of the aforesaid lot. Building Inspector Rev. 7/86 ~HORT £NVIRONMENTM, ~,S:';K:;S1, FORM (a) %n order %o answer tho quoot, ion~ in thl'~ nhort E~F t~ 1~ ~ed thac tho ~roparer will usc c~rrontly available infOn~,ltion concozmlng tho project and tho ~Oly ~pact~ of tho action, I~ i~ not u~ected that adaitlo,.,l ~tudioe, rocearch or other lnvos~igatton~ w~l bo ~dortakon, (b) I~ any question ha= boon an~or~ld Yen the project ~ray bo nigniflcan~ and cc~ploced Envlro~ental As~o~mon~ Fol~ t3 necessary. (c) If all qu~otion~ have been answered No It la likely tk~ this pro,J.ct not st~n/ftcant. (d) ~aviro~entnl l~,~ns~ent l. W~i project roa~ In a lar'go phyaical clmngo to the proJoet stto or physically alter more ~han 10 acre~ of land? , , · , · · · · , Yc~~ No 2. Will ~horo b~ a ~Jor chnn$o %o any unique or unusual land fo~ fo~d on tho ~/tu? You ,~N° an oxls~ln~ body o~ wa~or? . . · · · _ 7c:, ~ )1, o &. W~I proJoc~ have a po~ontially largo tmpacb on / gro~dwa~cr quali~y? · . , . · . · . Y,m -- ~. W~i proJec% ~i~iflca~ly, effuc~ dralna[o fl~,/ 6. Will project affect any tl~catun.,I <>r undan~crod -plant or anLn~l spe~ie~?. · · . · · 'lc,~--, 7. W~i proJa~t ~e~t In o ira Jot advi~r:m of feet on air quality? . · , · . . · [c lo 8, W~i proJec~ havc'a ~Jor offoc~ cn v!mial char- ~cter or tho co~.~unity or .conic vi~= or v1:i~a~ kno~ to bo ~porta~t to cho co;m~unity? . . . --__ Yen ----~ Ilo 9, Will project adversely impact any site or crc o~ hlotoric~ pro-historic, or Imlooncologicul importance or any site dc.ignatnd a~ a critical ./ onvtronmcn~l area by a local agency? , , . ~ Yo~ .--- 10. W~I proJoc~ have a ~Jor effect on cxlst~g or future recreational opport~itiou? . . . ..... You~ ~o 11. Will proJcct.rosult' in major traffic problem, 12. Will pro,ut% rog~arly causu objectionable noise, glarc~ vibration, or electrical dl:~tUrb- anco as a ros~t of the project's operation? , Yes 13. Will project have nay impact on public health or safety? · , · , · · · · · · · , ---- Yes ..~_._ Eo il, WIll projoc~ A~oc~ ~ha existing co~.unl:7 by =ion of more ~han ~ porcen~ over a cnu.-yeur period ~ have a major negative effect un the character of cho con.unity or nelghborho~;d':'. . Yc~ . 1~* I~ there public COBtrovoray COIIC~)I'IIIi~,i ~l:~J pr()ject? Yes PREParER' ~ ~UESTIONNAIRE TO BE COMPLETED AND SUBMITTED WITH YOUR APPLICATIOH FORMS TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS Please complete, sign and return to the Office of the Board of Appeals with your completed application forms. If "Yes" is answered to any questions below, please be sure to depict these areas on your survey (or certified sketch), to scale, and submit other supporting documenta- tion. 1. Are there any proposals to change or alter land contours? -.- Yes 2.a) *b) 3. Are there any areas which contain wetland grasses? (Attached is a list of the wetland grasses def%ngd bY___ Iown Code, Ch. 97 for your reference.) ' ~/'~/m~ ~ NE Are there any areas open to a waterway without bulkhead? Yes ~ Are there existing structures at or below ground level such as patios, foundations, etc? ' Yes (~ 4. Are the~e any existing or proposed fences, concrete barriers, decks, etc? 5. If project is proposed for an accessory building or structure, is total height at more than 18 feet above average ground level? State total: ft. Yes Yes ~ If project is proposed for principal building or structure, is total height at more than 35 feet above average ground level? State total: 3Z-~ ft. Yes Are there other premises under your ownership abutting this parcel? If.yes, please submit copy of deed. Yes ~ Are there any building permits pending on this parcel (or abutting land under your ownership,'if any)? State Permit # and Nature: Yes 10. Do state whether or not applications are pending concerning these premises before any other department or agency (State, Town, County, Village, etc.): Plannin9 Board Yes Town Board Yes To~.~n TrUstees (~es County Health Department Village of Greenport Yes N.Y.S.D.E.C. Yes Other Yes Is premises pending a sale or conveyance? If yes, please submit copy of names or purchasers and conditions of sale.(from contract). Yes ' ~_~ ll. Is new construction proposed in the area of contours at 5 feet or less as exists? ~- Yes V 12~ If new construction is proposed in an area within 75 feet of wetland grasses, or land area at a~ eleva- tion of five feet or less above mean sea level, have 13. *Pleas I you made application to the Town Trustees for an inspection for possible waiver or permit under the requirements of Ch. 97 of the Town Code? Please list present use or operations conducted upon the subject property at this time and proposed ~/~ ~/~ //~ e submit photographs for the record. certify that the above statements are true and are being submitted reliance by the B~;~rd of Appeals in considering my application'. ~'~,~a~.~e (P~perty Owner)(Authorized Agen:) 3/27 lk. ~ N for § 97-13 WETLANDS § 97-13 TOWN -- The Town of Southold. TRUSTEES -- Thc Board of Trustees of tho Town of Southold, [Added 6-5-84 by L.L. No. 6-19841 WETLANDS [Amended 8-26-76 by L.L. No. 2-1976; 3-26- 85 by L.L, No. 6-1985]: A. TIDAL WETLANDS: (I) All lands generally covered or intermittently cov- ered with, or which border on, tidal waters, or lands lying beneath tidal waters, which at mcan Iow tide are covered by tidal watery to a maximum depth of five (5) feet, including but not limited t~ banks, bogs, salt marsh, swamps, meadows, flats or other Iow lying lands subject tn tidal action; (2) All banks, bogs, meadows, flats anti tklal marsh subject to such tides and upon which grows or may groxv some or any of the following: salt hay, black grass, saltworts, sca lavender, tall cordgrass, high bush, cattails, groundsel, marshmallow and hr.v march cordgrass; and/or (3) .All land immediately adjacent to a tidal wetland as defined in Subsection A(2) and lying within seven- ty-five (75) fcct londward of tile meat bmdward edge of such a tidal wetland. FRESIIWATER WETLANDS: (1) "Freshwater wetlands" as defined tlc 1, § 2,1-0107, Subdivisions l(a) to l(d) inclusive, of thc Environmental Conservation Law of thc Sta~c of New York: and (2) All lam! immedh~tc]y adjacent to a"fre.~hwater wet- land," as defined in Subsection B(1) ami lying with- in seventy-five (75) feet landward of tile most land. ward edge of a "freshwalcr wetland." 9705 2.25-85 WCB2 Standard N.Y.B,T.U. l:o~rn 8002 * -Bargain and Sale Deed, wi~h Covenant against Ora~s Acts--l~vidual~e C~porafion (s' g4¢ ) ~ COIqSULT YOI~B LAW¥111~ Br~ol~ $1~&IING ?NI$ INSTRUhlF. MT--TNI$ I~ISTBU~EI~IT SNOULD BE USED BY I. AI~fY$11$ ONLY. TH~ ~DENTIJ~ made the /~7~y ot March , ~net~n h~dred ~d Eighty Seven B~T%%~N DOROTHY BABSON, who resides at 86-10 151st Avenue, Howard Beach, New York and, DANIEL H. GERKEN, who resides at 84-40 153rd Avenue, Howar Beach, New York As Tenants In Common ~rtyofthefir~ ~n. andCHRISTOPHER CONNORS, who resides Glenwood Landing and WILLIAM CONNORS, who resides ~oad, Muttontown, New York, As Tenants In Common at 5 Viking Road, at 1988 Knollwood ~rty of the second part, WITNK.q~ErH, t~t the ~Ry of the flint ~, in consideration of Ten Dollars and other val~e ~nsi~er~ti?n paid by the ~rty of the se~nd ~R, does ~reby grant and relea~ unto the ~y o£ the secono ~, the ~rs or succ~rs ~d ~si~s of the party of the second part for~er, ALL t~t certain plot, p~ 1~. r~l~ lan~ ~l~a~k~k~bik'~R~R~~~sit~% ~ing~d~i~Xhe a~ ~o~nolQ, Town or~outnol~, ~oun~y or ~urro±K ano State of~ew York, bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the Westerly side of West Drive, distant 85.56 feet Northerly from the corner formed by the intersection of the Westerly side of West Drive with the Southerly side of Lake Drive; RUNNING THENCE South 44 degrees 13 minutes 10 seconds West, 150.79 feet; RUNNING THENCE North 39 degrees 55 minutes 00 seconds West, 133.33 feet; RUNNING THENCE North 44 degrees 13 minutes 10 seconds East, 150.79 feet to/the Westerly side of West Drive; RUNNING THENCE South 39 degrges 55 minutes 00 seconds East, 133.33 fe~ to the point or place of BEGINNING. REAL ESTAT[ MAR$ ~RANSFER T~IX SUFFOLK COUNTY TOGETHER with all right, title and interest, if any, of the party of the first part in and to any streets and roads abutting the above described premises to the center lines thereof; TOGETHER wich the appurtenances and all the estate and rights of the party of the first part in and to said premises; TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the premises herein granted unto the party of the second part, the heirs or successors and assigns of the party of the second part forever. AND the party of the first part covenants that the party of the firs~ part has not done or suffered ~nythlng whereby the said premises have been encumbered in any way whatever, except as aforesaid. AND the party ot the first part, in compliance with Section 13 of the Lien Law, covenants that the party o~ .the first~ part will receive the consideration for this conveyance and will hold the right to receive such consid- eration as a~ trust fnnd to be applied first for {he purpose of paying the cost of the improvement and will apply the same first to the papment of the cost of the improvement before using any part of the total of the Sarae for any other~ ~p~lJoS~~ ~ , .".' The word "pa~yS a~hall be'construed as ff ~t read parhes whenever the sense of thru ~ndenture so reqmres. IN WITNF:~5 WHEREOF, the party of the first part has duly executed this deed the day and year first above written. TES.2, 83 ? 134 ST NEW YORK, ,COUNTY OE '~"~'~"'~/" sS: On me ~'7~y of March 19 87 , ~iore me ~rson~ry ~e ~ROTHY B~SON & D~IEL H. G~.~EN to me known to ~ the individufl d~fi~d'in and who ~ecut~ the foregoing instrument, ~d ~wledged t~t he/she~ut~ ~e ~ NOTARY PUBLIC. State of New York NO. 46t 09~? Qualified in Nassau County COmmission Expires Msrcn 30. 191~? STATE O1~ NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ssg On the day of 19 , before me personally came to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say that he resides at No. ; that he is the . of , the coq)oration described in and which executed the foregoing instrument; that he knows the seal of said corporation; that the seal afl{xed to said instrument is sue~ corporate seal; that it was so affixed by order of the boMd of directors of s~d corpora- tion, and that he si~ed h name theret? by tike order. STATE OF NEW YOI~FCOUNTY 01~ ss: On the day of 19 , before me personally came to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that executed the same. STATE OE NEW YORK, COUNTY Ol~ ss: On the day of 19 , before me personally cume the subscribing witness to the foregoing instrument, with whom I am personally ~cquainted, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say that he resides at No. ; that he knows to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing instrument; that he, said subscribing witness, wa~ present and saw execute the same; and that he, said witness, at the same time subscribed h name as witness thereto. ~atgain anb ~bale ;Beth WIIH COVENANT AGAINS'r GRAN'IOR'S ACTS TITLE NO. 360-S-2829 (77703-S) '".: DOROTHY BABSON & DANIEL H. GERKEN, AS Tenants in Common TO CHRISTOPHER CONNORS & WILLIAM CONNORS, As Tenants in Common First American Title Insurance Company of New York GUARDIAN LAND ABSTRACT CORE 1975 Linden Boulevard ' Elmont NY 110~33 Re~rdsd At Request of F~t ~e~ Ti~ l~ce ~mplny ~ New Yo~k R~TURN BY MAlL TO: W.P. Connors. Per.& Conf. Hood-Connors-Jackson Agency 340 Jericho Turnpike Floral Park, New York 11001 · ~ SUFFOLK CO. HEALTH ~PT. Ar-~OVAL ..... ~1 H.S. NO. l'-[- -J ~ :z HAP OF .... ~"~ '~ - ~' ~. ~ - __ I ~s2' [ _ 1 ~ , ~ ~ vI ~ kF~x, ~x-'. , j , m .........................~.._~ ~'l . ' 'l THE WATER S~Y AND ~A~ DI~AL . . ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ -~ ~LICANT ~ · ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~ ~ ~-' ~TF JO~ SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPT. OF HEALTH ~. ~ ~FOLK CO. TAX MAP ~SIG.AT~: ' DI~. ~CT. ~~ :- .... .. ,, G~ i~.ON PIPE iv °~,~ ............ l, P~EHt~5 tN ~0 ZONE ,~-'i~j::_~. .................... ~~ VAN ~, ~.C. .: . ' ' L~ ~A~ ~~ BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD In the Matter or the Petition of : to the Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold : TO: NOTICE TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER YOU ARE HEREBY GIVEN NOTICE: 1. That Jt Js the intention of the undersigned to petition the Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold to request a (.Varianc.e) (Special Exception) (Special Permit) (Other) [circle choice] 2. That the property which is the su_~bject of the Petition is located adiacent/~kour property and is des- 3. That the pror~erty which is the sub ect of such Petition is !ocated in the following zoning 4. That by such Petition, the undersigned will request the following relief: district: 5. That the provisions of the Southold Town Zoning Code applicable to the relief sought by the under- signed are ~'ticle .~ ! section /oo - //~ . z [ ] Section 280-A, New York Town Law for approval of access over right(s)-of-way. 6. That within five days from the date hereof, a written Petition requesting the relief specified above will be flied in the Southold Town Clerk's Office at Main Road. Southold, New York and you ma), then and there examine the same during regular office hours. (5].6) 7(~5-[809. 7. That before the relief sought may be granted, a public hearing must be held on the matter by the Board of Appeals; that a notice of such hearing must be published at least five days prior to the date of such hearing in the Suffolk Times and in the Long Island Traveler-Mattituck Watchman, newspapers published in the Town of Southold and designated for the publication of such notices; that you or your representative have the right to appear and be heard at such hearing. Dated: 7-- i-- d~ · Petitioner Post Office Address NAME PROOF OF MAILING OF NOTICF ATTACH CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS ADDRESS P 263 056 313 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIEO MAIL P 263 056 312 R~CEJPT FOFI CERTNHED MA~L STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) SS.: , being duly sworn, deposes a~ says that on the /~ dayO of ~*/ , 19 ~, deponent mailed a true copy of th~ Notice set forth on the re- verse side hereof, directed to each of the above-named persons at the addresses set opposite thor respective name; that the addresses set opposite the names of said persons are the addresses of said persons as shown on the current assessment roll of the Town of Southold; that said Notices were mailed at the United States Post rice at (certified) (registered) mail. Sworn to I~elfore me this day of /k~.~ .19 ~_ No;ary PublCL~' ' ; that said Notices were mailed to each of said persons by MARY ANN CYBULSKI NOIARY PUBLIC State of New Yor~ ReSldln£ m Suffolk County ~0mm~ou I:xp.e~ kpn! 30 (This side does not have to be completed on form transmitted to adjoining property owners.) Phone 477-0400 ECON !Z~. r ,_..x~.? ,---, Phone 47