The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTR-1559ALL LOO~L.GS AND STAKES MUST DISPLAY VISIBLE I.~OORL~G NUMBERS ALL DOCKS AND BULKHEADS MUST DISPLAY VISIBLE PE~IIT ATUNBERS Board Of Soutno, d Town Trustees SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK MOORZNG NO. N/A Pursuanf fo fha provisions of Chaplet 615 of ,*he Laws of fha Slate of New York, 18,0]; ~d C;hepfer 4.0~ of fha Laws of ,Zhe S:,afe of New York Ic, B2; and fhe Soufhold Town Or~in~nce lifted "REGULATING AND THE PLACING OF O~STRUCTIONS IN AND ON TOWN WATERS AND PUBLIC LANDS cad fha REMOVAL OF' SAHD, GRAVEL OR OTHP, MATERIALS. FROM '- LANDS UNDER TOWN WATL~S;" end in accordaace wifh fha Resoluflon of The Board adopfed afa meeflncj heI~ on ~..c..~.f!.b. qr.....5 , 19...8Z, an~ in consideration of fha sum of $....,~.~..0.:.~. pa~d by ........................................ Tb.~....L.~g..o.~.~ ..Af~.~.9.~.S.~k!; .$P..A ............................................. of ......... .~u.1;.~h~m.e ............................................... N. Y. ~ad subiecf ~o fha Terms and Condlflons llsied on ~he reverse side hereof, of Sou,acid Town Trusfees aumorlzes and permlzs fhe following: to maintenance dredge an irregular sh.a~ed area in The La~oon to de~th 4 ft below' ML~[ knd place a~roximatelv 14,000 cuvds of s~oil ~ ben'ch oI~bulkheaded canal as n6urishmeht, spoil to be placed on ~rivate 'property. a!* n accorcance w zn 'i-ne dora [e~ spec ~ cat,oas Rs presenfed in fha orig~aa'?ing appl~caf~on. IN WITNESS WH~_R~_~,i-, The said Board 0% Tr=sfees here- ' by causes ifs Coroorafe Se~l fo be zf' , , " ' , a,.~xea, and ?hose pres%nfs fo be subscribed by a me[orify of fhe said Board as of ibis daf.e. Board Of Southold Town SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK MOORING NO. N/A PERMIT NO... ·1559 ..... DATE: ....... ISSUED TO ...TNo..:~agoc~....A~.f..~.gj[~-on ............ I rustees I, certify that the work as authorized in this permit has been completed and %s now ready for your inspec- tion. Also, the number recuired on this project is clearly visible. I further understand this ~ '= pe=ml= is not validun~zz~'~ this tear sheet is returned to the Trustees. TERMS and CONDITIONS The P~:rni:tee The Lagoon Association pan of g~e co~ideradon for ~e ~ce of ~e P~ d~ ~de~d ~d p~ to, ~e foJt :. lowi~g: 1. That the Southoid Trustees Permit must be prominently displayed on 2~ ~a: ~e ~d n~J~of T~s ~d ~ Town of ~u~o~d ~ ~d from~y ~d work ~ damage% or da~ for d~ag~ o~ ~ ~g ~7 or ~J7 ~ z ~ of ~ o~- under adon ~rfo~d p~t to ~s ~ ~4 ~e ~d ~ wH4 at~ ~ her own ~% the ~efend any ~d wi~ :espec: ~ereto, to ~e ~mpl~e ~d~{on of ~e ~d of T~e~ of ~ Town of ~-~oldParm~t' 3. That tl~ P~t ~ ~d for a period of sufficient ~e r~uJred to ~mpie~ ~e wo;k ~vo!v~ for ~ e~e~ion may be ~de to ~e ~d at z later da~. 4. That th~s Permit shou/d Be retained indefinitely, or as long zs the said Permiwee to maintain the strucvare or project involved, to provide evidence to anyone conc~,'ned orhaffon was originally obtained. 5. T~at the work involved wilt he subject to ese inspection and approval o£ the Board or i= agents, and non-compLiance ~Sth the provisions of the ori~natlng appHmdo=, may be -~-nse for revocation of this Permit By zesotuHon of the said Board. 6. That there will be no unzeasunahle interfere=ce with navigation, as a resuk of the work herein aud~orhed. " 7 o That there shall be oo ~arederence wi~ the r~ght of the public ro pass and repa~ along the beach between high and Iow water marks. 8.. That if furttre operations of the Town of So~old require the temoval and/or alterations in the location of the work her~n authorized, or if, in the opinion of the Board of Trazzee% the work shall cause u~reasonable obstracaon to free navigation, the said Per~ittee will b~ requkz,/, upon.flue notice, to remove or alter this wo?k ns project herein stated ~thour expenses to *,he To~m of Sou~ol& 9. That the sa_id Board will be notified by the Permkt~ oz ~he completion of the .,~ork an&- o,,¢zed. (See tear off sheet° ) 10. That the Permktee wilt obtain aH other permSts and con~en= that may be zeq,uired plement~ to this permit which may be subject to revoke upon fai!ns~ to obmiz~ same. BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE ($16) 765-1801 November 15, 1982 Mrs. Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk Town Hall Southold, New York Dear Hrs. Terry: The followin~ action was taken by the Board of Southold Town Trustees at a reffu!ar meeting held November 9, 1982: RESOLVED to recommend to the Southold Town Board approval of the wetland application #11t of The Lagoon Association to maintenance dredge an irregular shaped area within The Lagoon to depth 4 ft below ML~,'7 and place approximately 14,000 cu yds of spoil on beach north of bulkheaded canal as nourishment. No spoil to be placed on private property. Yours truly, Paul Stoutenbur~h, President Southotd Town Trustees BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ' · Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 76.5-1801 October 22, 1982 De ar This is to notify you that at the reyular meeting of the Southold Town Board of Trustees on Tuesday, October 5, 1982, the application .of The LaKoon Association to dredge The Lagoon was approved. The Trustees would like you to notify them if you notice any drastic chan~e in the water quality after the project is completed. Yours truly, Paul StoutenburEh, President Southold Town Trustees Telephone 516-765-1938 September 22, 1981 Due to a change in office personnel, we would like to revise our re- cords. Therefore, we would appreciate it if you would complete the form below and return it to the Board of Trustees, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, N. Y., 11971, as soon as possible. On ,your application ~or ~ ~/ Have you received your notice of approval? Have you received your permit? Were you issued a permit number? If so, what is the permit n~ber? Were you issued a mooring number? If so, what is the mooring number? you for your )eration. Yours truly, Anna T. Hataier, President ' ../~ ~ , So~uthold Town Trustees Telephone 516-765-1938 BOAR RUSTEES 'I ()[~ %, OF SOUTII(.)[.I)` Southol~. 11971 March 6, 1981 Mr. Frederick J. Bruce Wunnewetta Pond Association Nassau Point, Cutchogue, New York 11935 Dear Mr. Bruce: The following action was taken by the Board of Town Trustees at a regular meeting held March 4, 1981. It pertains to your upcoming request for a dredging permit. Trustee Stoutenburgh made a motion that where spoil is in the mouth of a creek there will not be a charge on it provided it is put on the beach or littoral drift. Where it enhances the person's property there will be a charge. President Hataier seconded the motion and it was carried. It would appear there will no charge for the material you wish to dredge. Yours truly, ANNA T. HATAIER, PRESIDENT BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES By Muriel Tolman, Clerk BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES Town Of Southold Main Roan Sonthold, New York 11971 Al4 - Rev. 6/72 //. , APPLICATION TO DREDGE and or FILL L Does this project involve the use of WETLANDS as defined in the Southold Town Ordinance in Wetlands? YES or ~,K), If it does, your application must be filed through the Town Clerk's Office. 2. Applicant's name and address: ........ ~ng°.~a~u~.~.~.~..~°~.~¢~9~.r.~.~f.~:.n-9~w.-e~.~.~.~.~ .... 64 North Main St. c/o George Burrell ................................................................... S~5 u~l~ ~Mpl:'6'~ ;" ~M;'¥:'"1'~9~8 .......... N~au"P~nt"Road .... Cutchogue, N.Y. 3. Contractor's name a'nd address: ...... ~]~"~i'"~fJ~J~'"YH~'. ..................................................... ..................................................................... ms...h .a.n ,e. .................................................................... Southampton, N.Y. 11968 4. Explain briefly the purpose of this application: ....... ..~.?..~.g.t....d..r.~fl.~e....a..n...~.r.~.e.[.u..1..a..r....s..h.~p~ area within Lagoon to depth 6~ below MLW. Place resultant 20,000 cu yds of spoil ...... on..he aah..no=~h..o f ..b~gkhaadad..~mn~.l..m~..na~:iahm~r~ ...... A~.j ~.¢.¢~...~.¢.C.~_.a..g,d. ,~...~.o.....d..r..a.d. g in g areas will:~not be touched. Project is required to maintain navigability of lagoon ...... ~or..res~denes;...gueste-;.'e~e': ........................................................................ ~ ........................... 5. After issuance of Permit, I expect to: (mark with an X) (a) Commence work-- AT ONCE ............ ; ASAP ..X. ......... ; UNKNOWN TIME ......... :.,. (b) Complete work in -- 1 DAY ............ ; I MO...x_x. ....... ; 1 YR ............. ; FUTURE ............. 6. Secure the correct Area Map fram the Secretary of this Board, and by using an, X WITHIN A CIRCLE as a mark, indicate os closely ~s possible the location of this work. On the reverse side of this map, provide a SCALE DRAWING which wil.l s'how the Ordinary High Water Mark and the size and shape of the structure or work. All dimensions offshore of the O. H. W. M. should also be shown and include any free stan,din.g pilings which will remain at completion. 7. Provide the following documents: (a) A Licensed Engineer's Survey of the property involved. (b) A copy of the Contractor's Plans and Specifications. 8. Has any previous application far l~his work been denied by any other local government agency? 7dl~or NO. ~f it has been, name the agency ........................................................................... Date of denial ........................................ 9. !f dredging is contemplated, give your estinqate of the following. (a) Average depth of water at M. L. W.where dredging, .....1.:.,5.~.7..2.~....(..P..r..e..s..e.~.~.Y.! ....... ft. (b) Maximum depth of dredging below the bottom, ..§.'....b..e..i..o. fl....~_}?..j~.r..o.j~.o..s..e..d. ................. fl. (c) Maximum length of dredged area ....... .~..r.]:..e.g.u.I..a..r. ............................................... ft. (d) .Maximum width of dredged area ................. ~0.q.~...(~lz~gg.l.g.r.) ........................ ft. (e) Maximum amount of material to be dredged 20~000*- c. yds. ]0. If filling is expected, give your estimate of the following: (a) Maximum amount of material required,. ................................................................... c. yds. (b) Explain how fill will be obtain.ed and where it will be placed. In requesting approval of this application., I submit that: I am the person accountable for the performance of the work in accord with the plans and specifications a,tteched hereto; t have read or om familiar with the provisions of any SouthaJd Town Ordinance perti.ne~t to the work involved; and further, I intend to adhere to ar~cl abide bM the Terms and Conditions of the Permit. ~' -~- ~j~ ...... ...................................... ~cc p d by: / /~/ ' ~..~ Date~: A/4 - Rev. BOARD OF TOWN TRTu'STEES Town Of Southold Main Road Sonthold, New York 11971 APPLICATION TO DREDGE and or FILL 1. Does this project involve the use of Wk'TLANDS as defined in the Southold Town Ordinance in Wetlands? YES or NO. If it does, your appl cation must be filed through the Town Clerk's Office. , ~ A ~ , z. ,~pp~icofl~t s name ann ~go~ress: ............................. : .................................... t ......... ~ ....... z .............. .......... ~.. ............................... ~. .................................. .~..~..', ..................... f. ........................... ./ .................. 3. Contractor's name a.nd address: ....~..~/C....~..~.~..~.....~.~.~...~.~../..~..~7..,~. .................................................. 4. Explain briefly the purpose of this application: ..~'...~.~Z~...~k~A.~..z~..~..~.F......~..~..~..~T.....,~..~..~.W~ , ~z~ z~ ~:... ~.. ~ ~... ~...~,, ,~.. ~ ~z~.. ~... ~.. ~,. ~ . ,~ . . ~ ~ . . . ~e ~/~ . . . ~ ~ ~. . . .~ . . ~ ~. . ~ ~.¢ ~ . . . . ~ ~ ~ ~7~. . . ~ ~, ./ d~ ~ ~. . . , .~e, . . .~ ~ Z~ ........ ,~ ~. . . ,~ ~ ~ ~ ................................................................................................................ 5. After issuance of Permit, J expect to: (mark with an X) (a) Commence work ~ AT ONCE ............ ; ASAP ...~......; UNKNOWN TIME ............. (b:) Complete work in -- 1 DAY ...~. ....... ; 1 MO.~. ....... ; 1 YR ............. ; FUTURE ............. 6. Secure the correc¢~ea Mop from the Secreto~ of this Board, and by us~ on, X WITHIN A CIRCLE as a mark, indicate as closely as possible the location of this work. On the reverse side of this map, prov[de a SCALE D~WING which will s'how the Ordina~ High Wocer Mark and the size and shape of the structure or work. All dimensions offshore of the O. H. W. M. should also be shown and include any free standi,n~ pilings which will remain a~ completion. 7, Provide the following documents: (o) A Licensed Engineer's Survey of the proper~ involved, (b) A ,copy of the Contractor's Plans and Specifications. 8. Has any previous application for ~his work been denied by onyother local government agency? YES or NO. If it has bee% name the agency ....... .~. .......................................................... Dote o,f denial ........................................ 9. ~f dredging is contemplated, give your estimate of the following. (o) Average depth of water at M. L. W.where dredging,. ............. ~. ......................... et. (b) Mo~<imum depth of dredging below the bottom ....................... ..~.... ............................... ft. (c) Maximum length of dredged area ....................................................................... ft. (d) ,Maximum width of dredged area .............. ~ .................................................. ft. (e) Maximum amount of material to be dredged '~D~)~ c. yds. ~,0. ~f filling is expected, give your estimate of the following: (a) Maximum amount of material required,. ................................................................... c. yds. (b) ~xp[ain how fi[] will be obtained a'nd where it will be p[aced. ] 1. In requesting approval of this application., I submit that: t om the person accountable for the performance of t'he work in accord with the plans and specifications ;~ttoched hereto; I have re,ad or am familiar with the provisions of a,~?~thold Town ,,C~dj~ance pertiner~-~,p the wor~ involved; and further, I intend to adhe¢ to//c~d abide ~V t~¢~rms and Co~¢ocs of the Permit. ~/~~_ ~ / ..... .... .... JUDITI[ T. TERRY TOWN ('1 FRK OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 October 12, 1982 Mr. Paul Board of Southold Southold, Stoutenburgh, President Southold Town Trustees Town Hall New York 11971 Dear Mr. Stoutenburgh: Transmitted herewith is application no. lllfor a wetland permit submitted by Enconsultants, Inc. on behalf of the Lagoon Association. Please prepare a written report of findings and recomendations with respect to this application. Very truly yours, Judith T. Terry Southold Town Clerk Attachment RECEIVED. OCT i. 1982 Town Clerk $outhold APPI.If b'tTION Town Of $outhold Town Ch.rk*s Office Southohl, N. Y. FOR WETI,ANDS PERMIT Applir alit.1 F.Io .... /~/. ............ hit, Ill t, ¢,f Aiq~lir .it A,!,h,',, , f /q,id~,,utt 1935 INSTRUCTIONS FOR PERMIT A lhis application ,~ to be completely filled in by typewriter or ink and submitt¢~l to the To~ Clerk ira quadruplicate, accompanied by writter' permission from the owner of the prol~rty if ~ the same as ti~e applicant. [3 Pilot Pla. musl be drawn to scale on the reverse .ida of this application showing the Io¢;atio~ of pre,perry, d~e names and locations of owners of odjt~ining properties, and a detailed descrJl~i~ of proposed pr, qect (Note' Copies of the Pilot Plan may be made by a copy machine and attach~l 1o ti~e Pe.'r.t Applicalion.) C N~, al,oration shall be initiated by the applicant antil all permits that are required ore D A detailed statement of the rehabilitatioa and pre, posed condition of the premises offer work ~:: completed must be given, including a survey if required. E. It permit is being ,;ought for a mote sizeable excavation than the construction of a pri¥otl single dock ar jelly, then Ibis application must he accompanied by a survey and topographical certified by a ~egiMered land survey or ProfessJo~al Engineer The horizontal control of SLIr~/ shall be based upon on approval local coordinate system. The vertical control for elevation ings shall be based upon United Slates Coast and Geodetic Sarvey and/or United States Ge~logicol Survey datum. F A slotement musl accompany the application describing c~ny known prior operations conduct~:l on the prem,,c,s u~ question and whether any prior licenses or permits hove been issued to erect structures or lo d~edge ur deposi~ fill o*~ said premises and whether any such permits or licens. G A hlmq f,'e o~ $25 00 ,;hall accompally tile af~plicc~tion This filing fee includes one inspecti~.. there is a $5 Q0 fee fo~ each additional inspectian H ]'he Town [3oord ,;pon request~4:)~_..~,~e applicant far a percmt, may waive in whole or in I~rt, the pr~'ws~ons of A~ticte II, Seclioff-Jdl~'subdivisJons (~ at~d (~r'wnere' it finds that nature of th~ proposed op~rati,~ns r~re ~,ach that tho requirements of such provisions are not necessary for o Draper considvulti,~t~ of a permit application, I Upo~ appravcll of this application tire Town Clerk will issue a permit to the applicant. j erm~t shall be ovailtible for inspection at any time, upon reqaest. Examined ..................................................]9 ...... Approved .............................................................. Disapproved ........................................................... Conditions, if any ................................................................................................................................ Examining [~ody ................................................................................................................................ Signature of Chairman .................................................................................................................. APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE to the Town ~q.qr~J of the Tcv,'n of Southold, Suffolk County, New Yo I. f,r the iccu'mc,~ of a permit nursuant t~, th,, Lc~v,~ r',: n~-'r:cc~ and Regulations govern- ing the C, ~t,d cJ~'l Ir:t°ri,.r ~vet cods, Flood Pldtr~., ~]rt,; [)r~, r:,7!' ,',ret-s of the Town of Southolch depth 4' b(,Iow MIM. I)]ace res,,Jtant I ),';~20 uu ,.'(Is al spoil on beach nort}~ bulkheade(I canal as noer[shment ])ro~uct is ~equired to maintain navigability of Lagoon for residents, guests, etc. Location of property for which permit wanted...W.~,,~,.i:a...l, xl~,~ .................................................. Horne address of permit appHca'qt if different fram qfc~r~¢cid Jccct;en .... CreeP,, B~]y or Harbor frgr~t;ng property .... ~[unm w~,.L,J..,I.,~4~.o~Jz.~).LL.J..~.~,.O~t.(,.,~,~.Y. ........................... Size of proposed work: Length ...~.~r. eggJ,~K ............................................................................................................................... Width irregolar Height Above High Water .n/.~ ............................................................................................... Depth Below Low Water Max 4' below MLW for drudgin~ Yards to be Excavated ..L~.,.",~.~-.O+~ ......................................................................................................... Yards to be Filled n/a Width of canal, creek or bay fronting property ....... .v.,3.[',t.~..1.¢ .......................................................... Depth at Low Tide presently 2 ' 9" Averoge Rise in Tide ............................................................................................................................ Is lhis for private or business klse:~ ,..|!l%i, Mflktt..[iJ.u.~ .ak.<,.~.~.~.,.f~.r...i,~d.~.l.,~.¢. ....................................... .o Area Zoninfl . .t-.e, ai,4e, tlkJ,td ............................................................................................................... Manner in which material will be removed or de[~osited . .14y. d.r.~.~l.L.e..~l.r, od.~.a. ............................... Intended use of property t~ c' anlce fro ,x st t ~ $ ~e Wrntcn con;e~t ,ff nwner of property, if not the samc as the applicant .~.E....A..T..T..A..C.,R.~D, ............. ,. COUNTY OF SUFFOLK. ) ST,\IE OF NEW YORK ) SS ................................................................................ .R.o..,v...l.::...}.t..aj..e.,....P..r.?..s.:. being duly swom depoee~ and says that he is the applicant for the above described permit, and that oil ~tatement$ herein are true to the best of his knowledge and belief; that the work will be done in th~ manner forth in this application and as may be approved by the Town Board of the Town of Semibold. The applicant agrees to hold the Town of Southold and the Town Board harmless and fre,, any and all damages and claims arising under or by virlue of said permit, if granted. Sworn to before me this ................................ Signature of Applicant Roy L. Haje, President day of ................................................... , 19 ......... Notary Public APPENDIX B NA~E OF PROJECT SHORT ENVL~.O~ENTAL ASSESSM-~NT FORM iNSTRUCTIONS: (a) In order to answer :he questions in this short gAF is is assumed that the preparer will use currently available Lr~orma~ion concerning the project and the 1Lksl¥ Lmpacts cf the action. It is act expected t.~t additional studies, research or o~her investigations will be undertaken, (b) If any question .has been answered Yes the project may be significant and a ~omple=ed Environmental Assessment Form is necsssaz'/, (s) If all questions have been answered No it is likely ~hat this project is no...~ signlficant~ (d) Environmental Assessment 1. Will proJec~ resul~ in a large physical change to the project site or physically alter more ~han lO acres of land? , , · 2. Will there be a major change to any unique or unusual land form found on ~he sits? ~ill project alter or have a large effect on an existing body of water? , , · . Will project have a potentially large J.~pac~ on greundwatsr ~ua!ity? , , , . , . , 5, Will project significantly effect drainage 6. Will proJec~ affect any threatened or endangered plant or animal.species? , . , ~ · 7. Will project result in a major adverse effec~ on 8. Will project have a major effect on visual char- aster of ~he comm%uuity or scenic visws or vistas known to be important to the co~:~unit¥? , , 9. Will proJec~ adversely impact any site or struct- ure cf historic, pre-historic, or paleontological importance or any sits designated as a critical environmental area by a local agency? . , lO.Will project have a major effect on exisuLug or future recrea~ional opportunities? o , ll. Will project resul~ in major traffic problems or cause a major effec~ :o existing transportation 12, Will project regularly cause objecuionable odors, noisa~ glare, vibration~ or electrical disturb- ance as a result of the proJecU's operation? . 13, Will project have any impact on public health or Will project ~=£fec~ the existing community by directly causing a grOwUh in permanent populs- period or have a major negauive effect cn character of the community or neighborhood?, . !5, Is [here publi t ~cerning ~he project?~ ., Yes ~No Yes ~ No Yes No ,,, Yss , No ~es ! No Yes No Yes I Nc Yes I No Yes No · Yes__ No Yes No Yes ~ No Yes No Yes No ,, , Yes ._~ No Lagoon Association Membership Nassau Point, Cutchogue, N.Y. 11935 Mr. and Mrs. George Burrell, Aborn Lane Mr. and Mrs. ~o~timer Chute, Box 74~, Nassau Point Rd. Mr. and Mrs. Anthony DeNisco, Aborn Lane Mr. and Mrs. William J. Fleming, Bayberry Road Mr. and Mrs. Richard Frisbie, Clearwater Lane Mr. James L. Gray, Bridge Lane Mrs. Myron ~atlaw, Clearwater Lane Mr. and Mrs. William F. Mullen, Jr., Bayberry Road Mr. and Nfs. Geroge Nohe, Bridge Lane Mrs. Alfred S. Pfeil, Bridge Lane Mrs. Gerald W. Sinnott, Clearwater Lane Mr. and Mrs. Robert Sturdy, Nassau Point Rd. BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF $OUTHOLD Town Hall, 55095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 October 13, 1982 To; From: Re: George Burrell, The Lagoon Association Southold Town Board of Trustees Wetland Permit This is to notify you that your Wetland Permit for this project was just submitted October 12, 1982. TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, $3095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 NEGATIVE DECLARATION NOTICE OF NO SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIROnmENT Dated: October 14, 1982 Pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law State Environmental Quality Review and 6 NYCRR Part 617, Section 617.10 and Chapter 44 of the Code of the Town of Southold, notice is hereby given that the Southold Town Board of Trustees, as lead agency for the action described below, has determined that the project, which is unlisted, will not have a significant effect on the environment. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION Application of The Lagoon Association to maintenance dredge an irregular shaped area within the Laffoon and place resultant spoil on the beach north of the bulkheaded canal as nourishment at The Lagoon, off Deconic Bay, Cutcho~ue, New York. The project has been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment for the following reasons: An environmental assessment has been submitted which indicated that no significant adverse effects to the environment are likely to occur should the project be implemented as planned. At the October 5, 1982, meetin~ of the Southold Town Trustees, the application to dredge the Lagoon on Nassau Point was approved. As lead agency, we were particularly concerned about saltwater intrusion and therefore, a thorough investigation was made in which no apparent negative effects could be determined with reference to this dredging project and saltwater intrusion. We are relying on the DEC to look into the other aspects of this dredging project. Further information can be obtained by contactin~ Mr. Paul Stoutenburgh, President, Board of Trustees, Town of Southold, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York 11971. Copies to: David DeRidder, DEC, Stony Brook ~ommissioner F~a¢¢q, DE~, Albany_ Southold Town ~u~a~n~ ~e~ar~meh~ Town Clerk Bulletin B6ard Encl. 2 !LE=COPy BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 April 4, 1983 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 En-Consultants, Inc. 64 North Main Street Southampton, New York 11968 RE: The Lagoon Association Dear Mr. Haje, As per my telephone conversatl,.~n with your secretary, Lyn, on March 30, 1983, I am enclosing a copy of the permit issued to the Lagoon Association, according to our file. Happy to be of service to you. Very truly yours, Ilene Pfifferlin~, Clerk Board of Town Trustees Enclosure EN-CONSUL TANTS, INC. 64 NORTH MAIN STREET, SOUTHAMPTON, NEW YORK 11968 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 516-283- 6360 March 31, 1983 Ms. Eileen Pfifferling Southold Town Trustees Town Hall P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 Re: Wunneweta Lagoon Association Dear Ms. Pfifferling: Thank you for your efforts on our behalf regarding locating a copy of the Southold Trustees permit for the above referenced. Enclosed herewith is a check in the amount of $.50 as your fee for forwarding a copy of the Trustees permit to us. Very ~truly yours, ?,,~) -.,..;-,. ~o~'~.. ~ President RLH:ld Enclosure HOLZMACHER, McLENDON and MURRELL, P.C. FIELD NO. 575 BROAD HOLLOW ROAD, MELVILLE, NEW YORK 11747 (516) 694-3040 WATER RESOURCES · WATER SUPPLY & TREATMENT · SEWERAGE & TREATMENT · AQUATIC & MARINE ECOLOGY TIME MODEL STUDIES · PILOT PLANT STUDIES · WATER/WASTE WATER LABORATORY AND ANALYTICAL SERVICES COL. BY II CLIENT'S NAME AND ADDRESS DATES: COLLECTED RECEIVED ANALYSIS DISTRIBUTION POINT OR WELL NO, TEST Bacteria APC/ml Coliform Bacteria MPN/10Oml Color (unils) Turbidity (units) Odor: Cold Odor: Hot PREMISES OF SAMPLING POINT ,-'¢i';i'~IHi i~tll K- f;;IIti~,,~ '; I. (-~i';( I(JJ~. POINT OF COLLECTION: WELL OTHER (SPECIFY) ROUTINE RE-SAMPLE SPECIAL COMPLAINT ONLYL~J ~ Il I.D. 03 RESULT ,"rEST ; RESULT RESULT . Total Iron (mg/I) Manganese (mg/I) Free COz (rog/I) Nomograph -- Titration Fluoride (mg/~) Free Ammonia (mg/I N) Ammonia (mg/I N)' Nitrites (mg/I N) TEST Nitrates (mg/I N)~ Chemical Oxygen · Demand {mg/I) ;~ Chlorides (rog/I) Total Hardness (mg/I as CaCO3) Total Alkalinity (mg/I as CaCO,) pH Total Solids (mg/I) Specific Cond. (pmhos) Detergents (mg/I as MBAS) Dissolved Oxygen (rog/I) Hexavalent Chromium (mg/I Cr +e) · Alkalinity (mgfl CaCO~) Total il Phosphate (mg/I P) Copper (mg/I) 0 1 Sulfate 0 5 Acidity 0 6 (mg/I CaCO3) Sodium (mg/I) 1 0 Magnesium 1 5 (mg/I) COPIES TO: TITLE LABORATORY DIRECTOR DATE REPORTED · Result · Environmental Engineers & Scientists HOLZMACHER, McLENDON and MURRELL P.C. 575 BROAD ROLLOW ROAD, MELVILLE, NEW YORK 11747 (516) 694-3040 / LAB. NO. F~ELD NO, WATE~ RESOURCES · WATER SUPPLY & TREATMENT · SEWERAGE & TREATMENT · AQUATIC & MARINE ECOLOGY TIME MODEL STUDIES · PILOT PLANT STUDIES · WATERANASTE WATER LABORATORY AND ANALYTICAL SERVICES COL. CLIENT'S NAME AND ADDRESS DATES: COLLECTED RECEIVED ANALYSIS DISTRIBUTION WELL POINT OR WELL NO. TEST Bacteria APC/ml Color (units) Odor: Cold , Total Iron (rog/I) Manganese ling/I) Free CO~ (rog/I) Fluoride (rog/I) Ammonia (mg/I N) Ammonia (mg/I N) Nitrites (mg/I N} OTHER (SPECIFY) REC. CODE DATE 0~/ RESULT TEST Nitrates (mg/I N) ROUTINE WELL ONLY RESULT I Chemical Oxygen Demand (rng/I) Chlorides (rog/I) J Hardness (mg/I as CaCO3) Total Alkalinity (mg/I as CaCO~) pH Total Solids (ragA) Specific Cond ~mhos) Detergents (mg/I as MBAS) Dissolved Oxygen (mg/I) Hexavalent Chromium (mg/I Cr Hardness (mg/I as CaCO~) Temp. · RE-SAMPLE SPECIAL COMPLAINT RAW (1)J JTREATED (2)J~J OTHER (3) I.D. 03 ?EST RESULT Phenol' "' Phosphate (mg/I P) Phosphate {mg/I P) Test Code R~ult Copper (rog/I) 0 1 Sulfate 0 5 Acidity 0 6 (mg/I CaCO~) Sodium (rog/t) 1 0 Magnesium I 5 (mg/I) COPIES TO: REMARKS~('-~Y")Ii Il J. ~ I;~ (~'~ S.C. McLENDON TITLE LABORATORY DIRECTOR DATE REPORTED HOLZMACHER, McLENDON and MURRELL, P,C, 575 SROAD HOLLOW ROAD, MELVILLE, NEw YORK 11747 (516) 694~3040 FIELD NO. WATER RESOURCES · WATER SUPPLY & TREATMENT · SEWERAGE & TREATMENT · AQUATIC & MARINE ECOLOGY TIME MODEL STUDIES · PILOT PLANT STUDIES · WATER/WASTE WATER LABORATORY ANO ANALYTICAL SERVICES COL. BY CLIENT'S NAME AND ADDRESS DATES: COLLECTED RECEIVED ANALYSIS H(", ], H DISTRIBUTION POINT OR WELL NO. TEST Bacteria APC/ml Coliform Bacteria MPN/100ml Color (units) Turbidity (units) Odor: Cold WELL OTHER (SPECIFY) REC. CODE DATE (}?~(/}:l~' TEST Nitrates (mg/I N) . R ES U¢LT Chemical Oxygen Chlorides (rog/I) I Total Hardness (mg/l as CaCO~) Total Alkalinity (mg/I as CaCO3} Odor: Hot Total Iron (rog/I) Manganese (my/I) Free CO= (my/J) Nomograph -- Titration' Fluoride (my/I) Free Ammonia (mg/I N) Ammonia (mg/I N) Nitrites (mg/I N) pH Solids (mg/I) Specific Cond. (pmhps) Detergents (mg/I as MBAS) Dissolved Oxygen (mg/I) Hexavalent Chromium (mg/r Or +e) Calcium Hardness (mg~i as CaCO~) ' Temp. (Field) °F (:*(//~i, ) PREMISES OF SAMEcLtNG-ROINT POINT Of COLLECTION: ROUTINE WELL [~ ONLY RESULT ' I o · RE-SAMPLE SPECIAL COMPLAINT RAW (1)~'~TREATED (2)~ OTHER (3) LAB. I.D. 03 ,TEST . RESULT Alkalinity (mg/I CaCO~) Totat Phosphate (mg/I P) Ortho Phosphate (mg/l P) MISCELLANEOUS Test Code Result Copper (my/l) 0 Sulfate 0 5 (mg/t SO~) Acidity 0 6 (mg/I CaCO3) Sodium (mg/I) 1 0 Magnesium 1 5 (my/I) COPIES TO: :t. II:(¢YI'~,'~ '.WCI1~,rd;L~ Y,; li}::Clil!h N,'¢¢.(~, t.]l~lll¢ I, tfl;: F'()I(.',].'~I I. SIGNATURE . TITLE LABORATORY DIRECTOR McLENDON DATE REPORTED ~,' / ;¢(i i H ) 'Environmental Engineers & Scientists -'/ / '~' "~ ,/y ['~ LAB. NO. ' ROLZMACHER, McLENDON and MURRELL P.C. ' FIELD 575 BROAD HOLLOW ROAD, MELVILLE, NEW~ YORK 11747 (516) 694-3040 WATER RESOURCES · WATER SUPPLY & TREATMENT · SEWERAGE & TREATMENT · AQUATIC & MARINE ECOLOGY MODEL STUDIES · PILOT PLANT STUDIES · WATER/WASTE WATER LABORATORY AND ANALYTICAL SERVICES CLIENT'S NAME AND ADDRESS DATES: COLLECTED RECEIVED PREMISES OF SA~iV~L~NG'-P<~INT DISTRIBUTION WELL OTHER (SPECIFY) ROINT OB REC. CODE WELL NO. TEST RESULT DATE O(/i 7 .~ t~ ;) TEST Nitrates (mg/I N) ,~ Bacteda APC/ml ROUTINE WELL ~ ONLY RESULT I Color (units) Turbidity (units) Odor: Cold Odor; HOt Total Iron (mg/I) Chemical Oxygen Demand (mg/I) Chlorides (mg/I) I Total Hardness (mg/I as CaCO¢ Total Alkalinity (mg/I as CeCOs) TIME COL. BY Manganese {mg/I) Nomograph -- Titration F~uoride (rog/I) Free Ammonia (mg/I N) Arb, Ammonia (mg/I N) Nitrites (mg/I N) pH Total Solids (rog/I) Specific Cond. (flmhos) Detergents (mg/I as MBAS) Dissolved Oxygen (rog/I) Hexavalent Chromium (mgA Cr +a) Hardness (mCI as CaCO) Temp. (Field) °P ).1 ANALYSIS RE*SAMPLE SPECIAL COMPLAINT RAW (1)~-~ TREATED (2)[~ OTHER (3) I.D.LAB'03 ,TEST * RESULT Phenol .. ' · Alkalinity (mg/l CeCOs) Total Phosphate (mg/I P) Ortho Phosphate (mg/I P) MISCELLANEOUS Test Code Copper (mg/I) 0 1 Sulfate 0 5 {mg/I SO~) Acidity 0 6 (mg/t CeCOs) Sodium (mg/t) 1 0 Magnesium 1 5 (mg/I) Result · COPIES REMARKS: S.C. McLENDON TITLE LABORATORY DIRECTOR DATE REPORTED ' ! Environmental Engineers & Scientists ~ ,~ ~ ,'HOLZMACHER, McLENDON~and MURRELL, P,C. " 5f5 BROAE~' HOLLOW ROAD, MELVILLE, NEW YORK 11747 (516) 694-3040 LAB. NO. FIELD NO. WATER RESOURCES * WATER SUPPLY & TREATMENT · SEWERAGE & TREATMENT · AQUATIC & MARINE ECOLOGY TIME MODEL STUDIES · PILOT PLANT STUDIES · WATER/WASTE WATER LABORATORY AND ANAEYTICAL SERVICES COL. BY ]iI CLIENT'S NAME AND ADDRESS DATES: ANALYSIS H(.', :t f'~ COLLECTED RECEIVED O?l i. ;'/H2 O'?/:t ',//H~-f · PREMISES O F~f~fG~P(~l NT POINT OF COLLECTION: DISTRIBUTION WELL POINT OR WELL NO. ~ TEST Bacteria APC/ml Coliform Bacteria MPN/100ml Color (units) Turbidity (units) Odor: Cold Odor: Hot Total Iron (mg/I) Manganese Free CO= (rog/I) -. Nomograph -- Titration Fluoride (rog/I) Free Ammonia (mg/I N) Ammonia (mg/I N) OTHER (SPECIFY) REC, CODE DATE RESULT TEST Nitrates (mg/I N) Chemical Oxygen Demand (mg/I) Chlorides (rog/I) Totat Hardness (mg/I as CaCO~) Total Alkalinity (mg/I as CaCO¢ pH Total Solids (mg/I) Specific Cond, (pmhos) Detergents (mg/I as MBAS) Dissolved Oxygen (rog/I) Rexavalent Chromium {mg/I Cr Temp. (Fietd) °F ROUTINE RE-SAMPLE SPECIAL COMPLAINT ONLyWELL [~ RAW (1) E~TREATED (2)~'~] OTHER (3) ILAR. ' ' D I O~ . RESULT TEST : :RESULT 't I Total Phosphate (mg/I P) · t) Phosphate (mg/I P) · MISCELLANEOUS Test Code Result Copper (mg/I) 0 1 Suffate 0 5 (mg/I SO4) Acidity 0 6 (mg/I CaCO~} Sodium (rog/I) Magnesium (rog/I) 1 5 COPIES TO: REMARKS: TITLE LABORATORY DIRECTOR DATE REPORTED EAF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM Purpose: The EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an orderly manner, whether a project or action is likely to be sig- nificant. The question of whether an action is significant is not al- ways easy to answer. Freqnently, there are aspects of a project that are subjective or unmeasurable. It is also understood that those who will need to determine significance will range from those with little or no formal knowledge of the environment to those who are technically expert in environmental analysis. In addition, many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affect- ing the question of significance. The EAF is intended to provide a method whereby the preparer can be assured that the determination process has been orderly, comprehen- sive in nature, and yet flexible to allow the introduction of informa- tion to fit a project or action. EAF COMPONENTS: The EAF is comprised of three parts: Part 1: Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic project data, it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3. Part 2: This phase of the evaluation focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action. It provides guidance as to whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially-large impact. The form also identi- fies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced. Part 3: Only if any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentially- large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the impact is actually important to the municipality in which the project is located. Determination of Significance If you find that one (or more) impact is both large and its con- sequence is important, then the project is likely to be significant, and a draft environmental impact statement should be prepared. Scopin~ If a draft EIS is needed, the Environmental Assessment Form will be a valuable tool in determining the scope of the issues to be covered by the draft EIS. 14-16-2 (12/78) 6. Approxinate percentabe of proposed project site with slopes: O~lOS ~ %: 1n-15% /J %; 15~ or greater %. 7. Is project contiguous to, or contain a buildinn or site listed on the National Register of Historic Places? Yes J No 8. What is the depth to the water table? ~ feet 9. Do hunting or fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? J Yes __No lO. Does project site contain~ny species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered - Yes ~' ~4o, according to - Identify each species ll. Are there any unique or u~n~usual land forms on the project site? (i.e. cliffs, dunes, other geological formations - Yes ~ No. {Describe _ 12. Is the proj~ect site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area - rYes NO. 13. Does the present site offer or include scenic views or vistas known to be. important to the con~nunity? Yes J No 14. Streams within or contiguous to project area: a. Name of stream and name of river to which it it tributary A//~ 15. 16. B. Lakes, Ponds, Wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: a. Name ~]<,~ ~ ~ ~r I~ Z~,~ ~, ; b. Size (in acres) ,~/-~ - ,m What is the dominant land use and~zoning classification within a 1/4 mile radius of the project (e.g, single family residential, R-2} and the scale of development (e.g. 2 story). ~~~ ~ ~T~ PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) a. Total contiguous acreage owned by project sponsor ~/~ ~ acres. b. Project acreage developed:~~- acres initially: ~>~acres ultimately. c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped ~ ~a~ d. Length of project, in miles: ~//~. (if appropriate) e. If p~ject,!^s an expansion of existing, indicate percent of expansion proposed: building square foot- age ~/~ ; developed acreage f.Number of off-strut parking spaces existino ~ /~ ; proposed g. Maximum vehicular trios generated per hour ~ /~ (upon completion of project) h. If residential: Number and type of housing units: One Family Two Family Multiple Family Condominium Initial Ultimate If: i. Orientation ~!eighborhood-City-Regional Estimated Employment Commercial Industrial j, Total height of tallest nroposed structure _ ~_~__feet. EAF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - PART II Project Impacts and Their Magnitude General Information (Read Carefully) - In completing the form the reviewer should be guided by the question: Have my decisions and determinations been reasonable? The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst. - Identifying that an effect will be potentially large (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessarily significant. Any large effect must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine significance. By identifying an effect in column 2 simply asks that it be looked at further. - The E~ provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of effects and wherever possible the threshold of magnitude that would trigger a response in column 2. The examples are generally applicable throughout the State and for most situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be more appropriate for a Potential Large Impact rating. - Each project, on each site, in each locality, will vary. Therefore, the examples have been offered as guidance. They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each question. - The number of examp)es per question does not indicate the importance of each question. INSTRUCTIONS (Read Carefully) a. Answer each of the 18 questions in PART 2. Answer Ye~s if there will ~e any effect. b. Maybe answers should be considered as Ye~s answers. c. If answering Yes to a ouestion then check the appropriate box (column 1 or 2) to indicate the potential size of the impact. If impact threshold equals or exceeds any example provided, check column 2. If impact will occur but threshold is lower than example, check column 1. d. If reviewer has doubt about the size of the impact ~hen consider the impact as ~otentially large and proceed to PART 3. e. If a potentially large impact or effect can be reduced by a change in the project to a less than large magnitude, place a Yes in column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction is not possible. 1. ?... $. SMALL TO POTENTIAL CAN IMPACT BE MODERATE LARGE REDUCED BY IMPACT IMPACT PROJECT CHANGE IMPACT ON LAND NO YES WILL THERE BE AN EFFECT AS A RESULT OF A PHYSICAL CHANGE TO (~ PROJECT SITE? VV Examples that Would Apply to Column 2 Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise per 100 foot of length), or where the general slopes in the project area exceed 10%. Construction on Land where the depth to the water table is less than 3 feet. within 3 feet of existing ground surface. Construction that will continue for more than t year or involve Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than 1,PO0 tons of natural material (i.e. rock or soil) per year. Construction of any new sanitary landfill. -5- Construction in a designated floodway. Other impacts: WILL THERE 8E AN EFFECT TO ANY UNIQUE OR UNIISUAL LANO FAI~qS~F"% FOUND ON THE SITE? {i.e. cliffs, dunes, aeological for~na- t)ons, etc.) Specific )and forms: IUPACT ON WATER 3. WILL PROJECT AFFECT ANY WATER BOBY DESIGNATEB AS ...... PROTECTED? (Under Articles 1S, 24, 25 Of the Envir- mn~ental Conservation Law, E.C.L.) Examples that Would Apply to Column 2 Dredging more than lO0 cubic yards of material from ~ channel of a protected stream. Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland. Other impacts: Nd YES Examples that Would Apply to Column A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body ~ of water or more than a l0 acre increase or decrease. Construction of a body of water that exceeds lg acres of surface area. Other t~acts: -- -- NO YES I~ILL P,OJECT AFFECT SURFACE OR GROUNDWATER nHALITY? Examp)e.s that I'lould Apply to Column 2 Project will require a discharge permit. Project requires use o? a source o? water that does not have approval to serve ~oposed project. Liquid effluent will be ~onveyed off t~e site to excess of 2~,~OQ gallons per day. ~eALL TO ~qDERATE IMPACT POTENTIAL LARGE I~PACT CAN ItIPACT 8E REDUCED BY PROJECT CHANGE S~tAt L TP I~DEP~TE PfiTENTIAL LARGE CAN IIIPACT BE REDUCED DY PROJECT CHANGE 6. '~It.L DRf)JECT ALTER DRAINAr, F FLOn, PATTED!iS OR SURFACE UATER NO YES ~'IjNOFF? ................................................... O0 IMPACT ON AIR HILL PROJECT AFFECT AIR QUALITY? ........... Fxamples that Would Apply to Column 2 IlO YES Project will induce l,~OO or more vehicle trips in any given hour. Project will result in the incineration of more than 1 ton of refuse per hour. Project emission rate of all contaminants will exceed S lbs. Der hour or a Neat source nroducing more than lO million BTU's per hour. Other tmoacts: ~PACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS 8. WILL PROJECT AFFECT ANY THREATENED OR EHDANAERED SPECIES? Examples that Would Apoly to Column 2 Reduction of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal list, using the site, over or near site or found on the site. Removal of any portion of a critical or significant wild- life hablC,lC, ,NO YES OD !(ILL PROJECT SUBSTAI(TIALLY APFECT F!ON-THREATE;IED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES? ..................................... Examole that Would Apply to Column 2 Project would substantially interfere with amy resident NO YES ii00 -7- I"PACT O'; VIS?% PESg['RCE Examoles that Uould Apply to Column 2 An incompatible visual affect caused bv the intro~uctinn of new materials, colors and/or forms in contrast to the surroundino landscape, A oroject easily visible, not easily screened, that is obviously different from others around it. Project will result in the elimination or major screening of scenic views or vistas known to be important bo the area, Other impacts: O0 IMPACT ON HISTORIC RESOURCES ll. WILL PROJECT II'PACT ANY SITE OR STRUCTURE OF HISTORIC, NO YES PRE-HISTOrIC OR PALEONTOOICAL II~POPTANCE? ................. O0 Examoles that Would ADolv to Column 2 Project occurino wholly or oartially within or contiguous to any Cacilitv or site listed on the National Reoister of historic places. Any impact to an archeological site or fossil bed located within the project site. Other impacts: IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE & RECREATION 12. WILL THE PROJECT AFFECT THE OUANTITY OR QUALITY OF EXISTING NO YES OR FUTURE OPEH SPACES OR RECREATIONAL OPPORTU'IITIES? ...... Examples that Would Aoply to Column 2 The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational ooDortunity. -- A major reduction of an open space important to the community. Other impacts: IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION 13. !'ILL THERE 8E AN EFFECT TO EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS? ............................................... Examples that Would Annlv to Column 2 Alteration of present patterns of movement of deople and/or goods. Proiect will result in severe traffic ~roblems. NO YES O0 Other impacts: 1¢. iMPACT ON ENERGY I/ILL PROJECT AFFECT THE COMMUNITIES SOURCES OF FUEL ~R ENERGY SUPPLY? ....................................... Example~ that Would Apply to Column 2 Project causing greater than 5% increase in any form of energy used in municipality. Project requiring the creation or extension of an energy transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 sinqle or two family residences. Other impacts: NO YES SMALL TO MODERATE IMPACT POTENTIAL LARGE I')PACT CAN IMPACT CE REDUCED BY PROJECT 15, IMPACT ON NOISE WILL THERE BE OBJECTIONABLE ODORS, NOISE, GLARE, VIBP. ATION NO YES or ELECTRICAL DISTURBANCE AS A RESULT OF THIS PROJECT? .... ~'~N~N~ Examples that I.Iould Apply to Column 2 Blasting within 1,50D feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive facility. Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day). Project will produce operating noise exceedin, the local ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures. Project will remove natural barriers that would act as a noise screen. Other impacts: IMPACT ON HEALTH & HAZARDS NO YFS 16. ),ILL PROJECT AFFECT PUBLIC tlEALTH AND SAFETY? ............. ~"~ ~xamples that Would Apply to Column 2 Project will cause a risk of exDlosion or release of hazardous -- substances (i.e. oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) in the event of accident or UPSet conditions, or there will he a chronic low level discharge or emission. Proiect that will result in the burial of "hazardous wastes" -- {i.e. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritating, infectious, etc., includino wastes that are solid, semi-solid, liquid or contain gases.) Storaoe facilities for one million or more gallnns of liouified natural gas or other liouids. ,qther imoacts: !I'PAF; ~F1O~CT PROJECT CHANGF 17. WILL PROJECT AFFECT THE CHAPACTE~ nF TUE EXISTING COMMUNITY? .............................................. Example that Would Apoly to Column 2 The population of the City, Town or Village in which the project is located is likely to grow by more than 5% o~ resident human population. The municipal budgets for capital expenditures or opera- ting services will increase by more than 5% per year as a result of this project. Will involve any ~ermanent facility of a non-agricultural use in an agricultural district or remove nrime agricultural lands from cultivation. The project will replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures or areas of historic importance to the co.unity. Development will induce an influx of a particular age group with special needs. Project will set an important precedent for future projects. Project wi)l relocate 15 or more emQloyees in one or ~re businesses. Other tmoacts: NO YES NO YES 18. IS THERE PUBLIC CONTROVERSY CONCERNING THE PROJECT? ....... ~--~ Examples that Would Apply to Column 2 Either government or citizens of adjacent communities have expressed opposition or rejected the pro iect or have not been contacted. ~ Obiections to the nroiect from within the community. IF ANY ACTION IN PART 2 IS IDENTIFIED AS A POTENTIAL LARGE IMPACT ON IF YOU CANNOT DETERMINE THE MAGNITUDE OF IMPACT, PROCEED TO PART 3, DETERMINATION PORTIONS OF EAF COMPLETED FOR THIS PROJECT: PART I PART II_ PART 3 Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF {Parts l, 2 and 3) and considerinq both the maqnitude and imoortance of each i~act, it is reasonably determined that: A. The project will result in no major impacts and, therefore. is one which may not cause significant damage to the environment, Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been included as part of the proposed project, The project will result in one or more major adverse impacts that cannot be reduced and may cause significant damage to the environment. Signature of Prenarer /if diffe--r~nt from resnonsible officer) PREPARE A NEeATIVE DECLARATION PREPARE A NEBATIVE DECLARATION --© PREP~R£ POSITIVE DECLARATION PROCEED WITH EIS © Signature of R~sponsible Official in Lead Agency ~nt or v,~e name of responsible official Lead '~genc~ g. 10. 11. How much natural material (i.e. rock, earth, etc.) will be removed from the site - tons I,~ ~O-cubic yards. How many acres of veqetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site - 0 acres. ~ mature forest over lgO _years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this proiect? Yes~/ No Are there any plans for re-vegetation to replace that removed during construction? Yes ~!~o If single Dbase project: Anticipated period of construction / months, (including demolition). ~f multi-?hgsed project: a. Total number of phases anticipated / No. b. Anticipated date of commencement phase //~JFmonth year (including demolition) c. Approximate completion date final phase month . year. d. Is phase 1 financially dependent on subseouent phases? Yes NO Will blasting occur during construction? Yes J No Number of jobs generated: during construction -~'- ; after project is complete ~ Number of jobs eliminated by this project 0 Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? Ye~ ~No. If yes, explain: 12. a. Is surface or subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? Yes ~No. b. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) c. If surface disposal name of stream into which effluent will be discharged 13. Will surface area of existing lakes, ponds, streams, bays or other surface waterways be increased or decreased by proposal? ~ Yes No. /-~u,~,. ~',~ /,, ~ q~ ~ 14. Is project or any portion of project located in the 100 year flood plain? ~Yes No 15. a. Does project involve disposal of solid waste? Yes ~ No b. If yes, will an existing solid waste disnosal facility be used? Yes c. If yes, give name: __: location d. tlill any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? __Yes 16. Will prnject use herbicides or pesticides? Yes ~No 17. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? Yes ~/No 18. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambience noise levels? ~Yes __No 19. ~4ill project result in an increase in energy use? ~/Yes __No. If yes, indicate type(s) __ 20. If water supply is from wells indicate Pumoing ca city ~//q~ gals/minute 21. Total anticipated water usage per day .... jals/dav. 22. Zoning: a. What is dominant zoning classification oF site? ~' ~ b. Current specific zoning classification o~ site c. Is proposed use consistent with nresent zonino? d. If no, indicate desired zon~n§ No Approvals: a. Is any Federal permit reauired? ~Yes No b. Does project involve State or Federal funding or financing? ___ c. Local and Regional approvals: Approval Requi red (Yes, No) (Type} Yes ~ No Submittal Approval (Date) (Date) City, Town, Village Board City, Town, Village Planning Board City, Town, Zoning Board City, County Health Department Other local agencies Other regional agencies State Agencies Federal Agencies C. INFOPJ~TIONAL DETAILS Attach any additional information as ~y be needed to clari~ your project. If there are or wy be any adverse impacts associated with the proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which can be taken to mitigate or avoid them./~; PREPARER'S SIGNATURE: TITLE: 7~, REPRESENTING: -4- ENVI?ONMENiAL ASSESS)lENT - PART III EVALUATIO~I OF THE IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS IDIFORMATION Part 3 is prepared ~f one er more impact or effect is considered to be potentially laroe. The amount of writino necessary to answer Part 3 may be determined by answering the question: In briefly completing the instructions below have I placed in this record sufficient information to indicate the reasonableness of my decisions? INSTRUCTIONS Complete the following for each impact or effect identified in Column 2 of Part 2: 1. Briefly describe the impact. 2. Describe (if applicable} how the impact might be mitigated or reduced to a less than large impact by a pro- ject change. 3. Based on the information available, decide if it ~s reasonable to conclude that this impact is important to the minicipality (city, town or village) in which the project is located. To answer the question of importance, consider: - The probability of the impact or effect occurring - The duration of the impact or effect Its irreversibility, including permanently lost resources or values - ~hether the impact or effect can be controlled - The regional consequence of the impact or effect Its potential divergence from local needs and goals - Whether known objections to the project apol¥ to this impact or effect. DETERMINATION OF SIG~!IFICANCE An action is considered to be significant if: One (or more) impact is determined to both lame and its (their) conseouence, based on the review above, is important. pADT III STATEMENTS (Continue on Attachments, as needed) -Il- '~[.Y.~. D. of E. C. 3bNY ~uilding No. 40 %tony ~rook, NY 11794 Attention: Robert Thurber Re: £he Lagoon, ~fassau Point Your Application ~10-81-~$~ 0231 Shld. To~u/ Ap~licatioa ~ D~r ~.~x ~[r. Y'hurbcr: ~ ~x~ At the October ~th meetiag of the S~uthold Town £rustees the application to dr~dg~ the La~oon on ~assau Point was approved. '.~As lead ageacy we were particularly concerned about saltwater ~in~rusion and therefore a thorough investigation was made ia no ~x~ apparent negative effects could be deter~in~ with reference to this ~redging ~roject a and saltwater intr~sion. ~Ve are relying on your office to look into the other aspects of this dredging oroject. Sincerely yours, F$ for the Shld ~own ~ru~ote~s NANOP-E APPLICATION NO. DEPARTM£N'I' OF' 'THE ARMY NEW YORK DIS'I'RICT. CORP~ OF~ENGINEERS .~'w ,a,.... ¥. m0o~ECEiVED 81-799 FEB 1982 Town Cleric South'old PUBLIC NOTICE NO. 11011-81-799-L2 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: This District has received an application for a Department of the Army permit pursuant to /X--7 Section 10 of the River and Harbor Act of 1899 U.S.C. 403; (30 Stat. 1151; 33 /X-~ Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (PL 92-500, 86 Stat. 816, 33 U.S.C. 1344); /--~ Section 103 of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as amended (PL 92-532, 86 Stat. I052, 33 U.S.C. 1413). APPLICANT: WORK: WATERWAY: LOCATION: Wunneweta Lagoon Association c/o ~r. George Burrell Nassau Point Road Cutchogue, NY 11935 Dredging with Beach Nourishment and Ten ~ear Maintenance Great Peconic Bay, Wunneweta Lagoon Nassau Point, Cutchogue, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, N A detailed description and plans of the proposed work are inclosed to assist in your review of the proposal. The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable impact of the proposed activity on the public interest. That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of important resources. The benefit which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the proposed work must be balanced against its ~easonably foreseeable detriments. Ail factors which may be relevant to the proposed work will be considered; among those are conservation, eco- nomics, aesthetics, general environmental concerns, historic values, fish and wildlife values, flood damage prevention, land use, navigation, recreation, water supply, water quality, energy needs, safety, food pro- duction and~ in general, the needs and welfare of the people. NANY FL-129 Aug 78 PUBt, tC NOTICE NO. 11Oll-81-799-L2 A preliminary review 'of the application indicates that an Environmental Impact Statement will not. be prepared. A review of the latest publish- ed version of the N~t~bnal Register of Historic Places and of the pre- sence or absence of registered properties or properties listed in tile latest published version of the Register as being eligible for inclusion, therein, has been made. Presently unknown archeological, scientific, prehistorical or historical data may be lost or destroyed by work to be accomplished under the required permit. The evaluation of the impact of the activity on the public interest wilt include application of the guidelines promulgated by the Adminis- trator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, under authority of Sec- lion 404(b) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act or of the criteria established under authority of Section 102(a) of the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 1972, as appropriate. Any person may request, in writing, within the comment period specified in this notice, that a public hearing be held to consider this appli- cation. Requests for public hearings shall state, with particularity, the reasons for holding a public hearing. The following government authorization(s) has(have) been obtained or will be obtained prior to the issuance of a Department of the Army permit Tidal Wetlands Permit and Water Quality Certificate from New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Any crtticisms or protests regarding the proposed work should be PREPARED IN WRITING AND MAILED TO REACH THIS OFFICE prior to 0 2 k; il i~ otherwise it will be presumed that there are no ob- jections. I[ is requested that you communicate the foregoing information con- cerning the proposed work to any persons known by you to be interested and who did not receive a copy of this notice. If you have any questions concerning this application, you may contact ~r. Dennis Santolo of this office, Telephone No. 212-264- 0183. 2 lncls: W. M. SMITH, Jr. ~. Description of Work Colonel, Corps of Engineers 2. Plans District Engineer NANY FL-129-2 Aug 78 Environmental Engineers & Scientists ~/ HOLZMACHER, McLENDON and MURRELL, P.C 575 BROAD HOLLOW ROAD, MELVILLE, NEW YORK 11747 (516) 694-3040 FIELD NO WATER RESOURCES · WATER SUPPLY & TREATMENT · SEWERAGE & TREATMENT · AQUATIC & MARINE ECOLOGY TIME MODEL STUDIES · PILOT PLANT STUDIES · WATER/WASTE WATER LABORATORY AND ANALYTICAL SERVICES COL. BY ~ CLIENT'S NAME AND ADDRESS DATES: COLLECTED RECEIVED ANALYSIS PREMISES OF SAMPLING POINT POINT OF COLLECTION: DISTRIBUTION POINT OR WELL NO. WELL OTHER (SPECIFY) REC. CODE DATE · .' ' WELL ONLY ROUTINE RE-SAMPLE SPECIAL RAW (1) TREATED (2) OTHER (3) TEST RESULT TEST RESULT TEST Bacteria APC/ml Coliform Bacteria MPN/IOOml Color (units) Turbidity (units) Odor: Cold Odor: Hot Total Iron (mg/I) Manganese (mg/I) Free CO~ (rog/I) Nomograph -- Titration Fluoride (mg/I) Free Ammoma (mg/I N) AIb Ammonia (mg/I N) Nitrites (mg/I N) Nitrates (mg/I N)! Chemical Oxygen Demand (mg/I) Chlorides (mg/I) Total Hardness (mg/I as CaCO~) Alkalinity (mg/I as CaCO,) pH Solids (mg/I) Cond. (pmhos) Oxygen (mg/I) Chromium (mg/I Cr Hardness (mg/I as CaCO~) (Field) °F COMPLAINT LAB, I.D. 03 RESULT Phenol · Alkalinity (mg/I CaCO¢) Total · Phosphate (mg/I P) , , Ortho · Phosphate (mg/I P) MISCELLANEOUS Test Code Copper (mg/I) 0 I Sulfate 0 5 (mg/I SO,) Acidity 0 6 (mg/I CaCO,) · Sodium {rog/I) 1 0 Magnesium 1 5 COPIES TO: SIGNATURE S C McLENDON TITLE LABORATORY DIRECTOR DATE REPORTED Environmental Engineers & Scientists HOLZMACHER, McLENDON and MURRELL, PC 575 BROAD HOLLOW ROAD, MELVILLE, NEW YORK 11747 (516) 694-3040 LAB. NO. FIELD NO. WATER RESOURCES · WATER SUPPLY & TREATMENT · SEWERAGE & TREATMENT · AQUATIC & MARINE ECOLOGY TIME MODEL STUDIES · PILOT PLANT STUDIES · WATERAN'ASTE WATER LABORATORY AND ANALYTICAL SERVICES COL. BY CLIENT'S NAME AND ADDRESS DATES: COLLECTED RECEIVED DISTRI SUTION WELL OTHER (SPECIFY) POINT OR WELL NO, TEST Bacteria APC/ml Cotiform Bacteria MPN/100ml Color (units) Turbidity (units) Odor: Cold Odor Hot Total Iron (mg/I) Manganese (mg/I) Free COz (mg/I) Nomograph -- T~tration Fluoride (rog/I) Free Ammonia (mg/I N) Ammonia (mg/I N) Nitrites (mg/I N) REC. CODE DATE RESULT TEST Nitrates (mg/I N) PREMISES OF SAMPLING~CZOINT POINT OF COLLECTION: ROUTINE RE-SAMPLE WELL RAW (1) ONLY RESULT I. Chemical Oxygen Demand (mg/I) Chlorides (mg/I) Total Hardness (mg/I as CaCO~) Total Alkalinity (rng/I as CaCO¢ pH Total Solids (mg/I) Specific Cond (pmhos) Detergents (mg/I as MBAS) Dissolved Oxygen (mg/I) Hexavalent Chromium (mg/I Cr ~¢) Calcium Hardness (mg/I as CaCO~) Temp. (Field) °F SPECIAL TREATED (2) OTHER (3) TEST Phenol Alkatinity (mg/I CaCO~) Total Phosphate (mg/I P) Ortho Phosphate (mg/I P) MISCELLANEOUS Test Code Copper (rog/ii 0 1 Sulfate 0 5 (mg/r SOt) Acidity 0 6 (mg/I CaCO~) Sodium (mg/I) 1 0 Magnesium 1 5 (mg/I} ANALYSIS COMPLAINT LAB. I.D. 03 RESULT COPIES TO: REMARKS.~'~; ' SIGNATURE TITLE LASORATORY DIRECTOR DATE REPORTED Environmental Engineers & Scientists HOLZMACHER, McLENDON and MURRELL, P.C. 575 BROAD HOLLOW ROAD, MELVILLE, NEW YORK 11747 (516) 694-3040 LAB. NO. FIELD NO. WATER RESOURCES · WATER SUPPLY & TREATMENT · SEWERAGE & TREATMENT · AQUATIC & MARINE ECOLOGY TIME MODEL STUDIES · PILOT PLANT STUDIES · WATERA, VASTE WATER LABORATORY AND ANALYTICAL SERVICES COL BY CLIENT'S NAME AND ADDRESS DATES: COLLECTED RECEIVED PREMISES OF SAMRLtNGPOINT POINT OF COLLECTION: DISTRIBUTION POINT OR WELL NO, TEST Bacteria APC/m[ Coliform Bacteria MPN/100ml Color (units) WELL OTHER (SPECIFY) ROUTINE RE-SAMPLE REC. CODE DATE WELL RAW (1) ONLY __ __ RES U,~T TEST Nitrates (mg/I N) Chemical Oxygen Demand (mg/I) Chlorides (mg/I) Turbidity (units) Odor: Cold Total Hardness (mg/I as CaCO~) Total Alkalinity (mg/I as CaCO~) Odor: Hot Total Iron (mg/I) Manganese (mg/I) Free CO. (mg/I) Nomograph -- Titration Fluoride (rog/I) Free Ammonia (mg/I N) AIb Ammonia (mg/J N) Nitrites {mg/I N) pH Total Solids (mg/I) Specific Cond (pmhosl Detergents (mg/I as MBAS) Dissolved Oxygen (mg/I) Hexavalent Cbromium (mgd Cr Calcium Hardness (mg~l as COCO,) Temp. (Field) °F SPECIAL TREATED (2', OTHER (3) RESULT TEST MISCELLANEOUS Copper (mg/I) 0 1 Sulfate 0 5 (mg/I SO~) Acidity 0 6 (mgd CaCO~) Sodium (mgd) 1 0 Magnesium 1 5 (mg/I) ANALYSIS COMPLAINT RESULT Result · COPIES TO: REMABK,~ '__ ,W_ ~ , ~ SIGNATURE S.C. McLENDON TITLE LABORATORY DIRECTOR DATE REPORTED Environmental Engineers & Scientists HOLZMACHER, McLENDON and MURRELL, P.C. 575 BROAD HOLLOW ROAD, MELVILLE, NEW YORK 11747 (516) 694-3040 LAB. NO. F ELD NO. WATER RESOURCES · WATER SUPPLY & TREATMENT · SEWERAGE & TREATMENT · AQUATIC & MARINE ECOLOGY MODEL STUDIES · PILOT PLANT STUDIES · WATER/WASTE WATER LABORATORY AND ANALYTICAL SERVICES CLIENT'S NAME AND ADDRESS DATES: COLLECTED RECEIVED TIME COL. BY ANALYSIS PREMISES OF SA~M~L~'N'G'f~OINT POINT OF COLLECTION: DISTRIBUTION WELL POINT OR WELL NO. TEST Bacteria APC/ml Coliform Bacteria MPN/100ml Color (units) Turbidity (units) Odor Cold Odor: Hot Total Iron Manganese (mu/I) Free CO: (mu/I) Nomograph -- Titration Fluoride Free Ammonia (mg/I Ammonia (mg/t N) Nitrites (rng/I N) OTHER (SPECIFY) REC, CODE DATE :, RESULT TEST Nitrates (mg/I N) , Chemical Oxygen Demand (mu/I) Chlorides (mu/I) Total Hardness (mg/I as CaCO~) Total Alkalinity (mg/I as CaCO0 pH Total Specific Cond. (pmhos) Detergents (mg/I ss MBAS) Dissolved Oxygen (mu/I) Hexavalent Chromium (mg/I Cr 45) Calcium Hardness (mull as CaCO3) Temp IField) °F ROUTINE ONLY RESULT RE-SAMPLE SPECIAL RAW (1)L~TREATED (2) OTHER (3) TEST Phenol · Alkalinity (mg/I CaCO~) Total ~ Phosphate (mg/I P) Ortho · Phosphate (mg/I P) MISCELLANEOUS Test Code Copper (mu/I) 0 1 Sulfate 0 5 (mg/I SO4) Acidity 0 6 (mg/I CaCO,) Sodium (mu/I) 1 0 Magnesium 1 5 (mu/I) COMPLAINT LAB. RESULT Result REMARKS: SIGNATURE , S.C. McLENDON TITLE LABORATORY DIRECTOR DATE REPORTED New York State Depa~ment of Environmental Conservation Regulatory Affairs Unit Bldg. 40, SUNY--Room 219 Stony Brook, NY 11794 (516) 751-7900 Robert F. Flacke Commissioner September 21, 1982 Thomas E. Samuels James H. Rambo, Inc. Bishops Lane Southampton, NY 11968 RE: 10-81-0231 Wunneweta Lagoon Association Dear Mr. Samuels: Your letter with regards to the above application has been received. Upon further examination of the file, it was noted that the Town of Southold Board of Trustees was designated lead agency and had issued an initial determination of significance on this proposal on December 16, 1981. In view of this circumstance, DEC cannot further process your applic- atfon until the requirements of SEQR have been satisfied and the lead agency has notified DEC of this (either a final environmental impact or a determination of non-significance has been made). Upon appropriate notice from the lead agency, processing of your application w~ll resume. Very truly yours, Robert N. Thurber Senior Environmental Analyst cc: Town of Southold Board of Trustees RNT:cz BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 September 10, 1982 James R. Rambo, Inc. Bishops Lane Southampton, N. Y. 11968 Attention: Thomas Eo Samuels Dear Mr. Samuels: At our monthly meeting of September 7th, you seemed annoyed that the Trustees still required their original request of test wells to assure them that no salt water intrusion would occur if the Lagoon on Nassau Point were to be dredged. This request was not a recent request but one that dates back to December 1981. It was the only request the trustees made with reference to this application. We were told by you that Geraghty & Miller had suggested well points be driven eight feet below bottom land in the lagoon so that the water on the wells could be tested with reference to their salt or freshwater content. Not being experts in this field but very concerned about the possibility of ruining the limited water in the area, we agreed to this testing pro- cedure. Therefore, as you requested at our September 7th meeting, we are sending this request in writing to drive four test wells using the same general locations the DEC took its samplings from. The water from the wells then to be tested by GNS in Mattituck and the results sent to us for evaluation and study. In our January 22, 1982, letter to you, we listed the reasons for our con- cerns about salt water intrusion. Just recently, I came across the minutes of the annual meeting of the Nassau Point Association that took place on August 22, 1981. Most of the meeting was taken up by a discussion of the problems of their limited freshwater supply and on page 2 under Suggestions (No. 4), it show their concerN about dredging, "Study the effects of near shore dredging." With the above in mind, the trustees feel as they did in the early days of - 2 - this application, that this simple testing of the water below the lagoon would give some assurance to the people of the area that no harm would come with reference to salt water intrusion should the dredging occur. Very truly yours, Paul Stoutenburgh, President Southold Town Trustees James Re Re,bo Inc. ~ishops Lane Southampton, N.Y. 11968 Attention: £ho~as 2. :Samuels Dear Mr. ~amuels: at our monthly meeting of September 7th you seemed annoyed that the Trustees still required their original request of test wells t~ assure them that no salt water intrusion would occur ~x~ if the Lagoon ,on .~assau Point ~ were to be dredged. i'his request was not a recent r~quest but one theft dates back to December 1981. It was th~ only request the trustees made with reference to this ~p~lication. W~--~-~-~r~k~ ~ ~Ve were told by you that ~tw_x Geraghty & Miller had suggested ~ well points be driven eight feet below bottom land in the la~ioon so that the water on the wells could be tested with reference to ~x~x~txxlt:~w t~eir salt or ~ fr~shwater content, not being experts in this field but very concerned about the oossibility of ruining the ~ limitod water ia tho area, we agreed to this ~axX testing procedure. ~herefore, as you requested at our September ?th ~eeting, we are sending this request in writing to drive four test wells using the same geueral locations the DEC took its samplings from. ~he water from the wells then to bo tested by ~ GNS ia ~iattituck and the results seat to us for evaluate, on andstudy. In our January 22, 1982 letter to you we listed the reasons for our c~ncerns about salt ware', intrusion. Just recently · came across the minutes of the annual meting of the -lassau Point ~ssociation that took ~lace on ~ugust 22, 19~1. ~Io~t of the meetin~ was taken up by a di. scussion of the oroblems of their limited freshwater ~upply and on page 2 under SUl;£4estions~,'~o. 4)it shows their concern about dredging, "Study the effects of near shore dredging." · ~ith th above in mind the trustees feel as taey did in the early nays ,of this apolication, thataom:,t~nis simple testing ,of the wate~ below the lagoo~ would gi~e~/a~surance to the ~oole of the area that no har~ would come with reference to salt wster intrusion should the dr~dgin? occur. Very truly yours, Paul Stoutenburgh, Preside ~t for the Southold Town Trustees ,, 1\ /Ir' '-'x.. .... ,4 ,' "4.. , (, -2- RAMBO DREDGING, INC. Bishops Lane Southampton, N.Y. 11968 Phone: (516)283-1254 Sept 21, 1982 -/ ~outhold Town Trustees Maih Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Att: Paul Stautenberg Re: Lagoon Dredging Dear Mr. Stautenberg: As directed, we have driven four 8' well points in the Lagoon at the suggested locations. The samples were taken by H2M Corporation and are being analyzed. We shall have the results for the next Trustee's meeting. Please place us on the agenda. The locations Test ~27 Off Gray property " #28 Pfeil " " ~29 Matlack" " ~30 Frisbee" " ~31 Control Sincerely, N.Y.S.D.E.C. 10-81-0231 Army Corps of Engineers 81-799 North Fork Environmental Council Supervisor William Pell Councilman LarryMurdock RAMBO DREDGING, INC. Bishops Lane Southampton, N.Y, 11968 Phone: (516)283-1254 1982 Re: Wunneweta Lagoon 10-81-O231 Attaohed pleaee find results of spoil a~ples for above referenced application, ~he re~ul~s of the bsn~hic mtu~v presently being completed ~y Dr, Ra~. Welker of ~outhampton College ~ill follow. Gc~ L~outhold Te~n Trustee. 0 CL~Ef~ LA' NANOP-E APPLICATION NO. 81-799 PUBLIC NOTICE NO. 11011-81-799-L2 DESCRIPTION OF WORK The applicant has requested Department of the Army approval to dredge Wunneweta Lagoon in Great Peconic Bay at Nassau Point, Cutchogue, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York. The lagoon would be dredged to a depth of four feet below the plane of mean low water as shown on the attached drawings. The proposed dredged material is reported to be ninty-five percent sand and five percent silt. The approximately thirteen thousand five hundred cubic yards of dredged material would be removed by hydraulic dredge and placed as beach nourishment on the beach fronting in Great Peconic Bay north of the lagoon's mouth. The dredged material would be placed as shown on Sheet 2 of 2 with a slope of one on four. The applicant proposes to maintain a minimum buffer distance of twelve feet from all tidal mars~s to prevent sloughing of the marshs into the lagoon as a result of the dredging. The applicant has requested a ten year permit to maintain the requested depth. Any subsequent dredged material would also be disposed on the beach. It is expected, maintenance dredging would be required every four years. The applicant reports the purpose of the work is to allow continued navigational use and tidal flushing of the lagoon. RAMBO DREDGING, INC. Bishops Lane Southampton, N.Y, 11968 Phone: (516)283-1254 JAMESH.RAMBO.INC. BISHOPS LANE SOUTHAMPTON, N. Y. 11968 PHONE: (516) 283-1254 WUNNEWETA ROAD CUTCHOGUE, N. Y. 11935 PHONE: (516) 734-5858 ~epteuber 5, 1982 S.Y.~, D~pt, of ~avi~nt~ Oo~erv~tion Att~ Robert Thurber o~ to ~ur letter of Au~ ~1. 19~2. let me ~e f ~ The p~ ~.~ d~th i~ $' at P~e~ Wat~. ~ ~ ~ tO the ~ of ~ d~k to ~1~ ~t ~_~. i.e. a p~ ~n for 2c ~e ~ ~ent of ~o~ be~een ~ ~ ~ ~e~ f~m ~ho bongo l$~ nade at your ~oquest, this pond, which is eutrophying, will benefit fr~ th~o lrA~ect in terms of water quality, fish a~d wildlifeo We hope ~-~,t this permit can be proceeeed ahortly. since~el~, ~ouas~. sannels ooz,~ o~: ]~3~:Ln~m (App. a~-799) ~outhold To~n ~mard (Wetlands Application) JAMES H. RAMBO. INC. BISHOPS LANE SOUTHAMPTON, N. Y. 11968 PHONE: /516) 283-1254 WUNNEWETA ROAD CUTCHOGUE, N, Y. 11935 PHONE: (516) 734-5858 THE MARINE SCIENCE CENTER AT SOUTHAMPTON COLLEGE Southampton, New York 11968 August 10, 1982 Wunneweta Lagoon Associatic~ Cutc~e, New Y~rk Benthic Analysis of Wunne~eta Lagoon as prescribed by New York State Depa~h'~nt of Envir~m~_ntal Conservation cc~pleted July 1982 $1,640.00 Please make check payable to Marine Science Research Fund Account #3 2 93201 300. Tb~nk you, Professor of Marine Science B~THIC STUDY WU~q~ETA LAGOON CUTC~O~UE, NEW YORK Su~tted to The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Stony Brook, New York July 1982 J. R. Welker Marine Science Center Southampton College of Long Island University Southampton, New York Acknowledgements Sampling, sorting, identification, and counting was carried out by graduate assistant, K. Eno, with the assistance of S. Cody and K. Peyton. G. Garland and all Marine Science Center staff and laboratory assistants deserve thanks for their cooperation and help. Special thanks to Dr. S. Sh~ray for her aid in sc~e of the more difficult identifications. -1- -2- In May of 1982, the Southant3ton ~ollege Marine Science Center undertook a benthic study of Wunneweta lagoon (Fig. 1). A brief glance at the station map would give the reader an impression of a t~ical dredged and filled Long Island sand spit protected, salt n~'sh. Surprisingly, this small 14-acre site is characterized by steep banks overhung by typical well-established upland vegetation, such as oak and shad bush. Only small areas of fringing salt n13rsh were seen toward the bayward spit. None of which would appear to be disturbed by the proposed dredging. METHODS Foul- stations (Fig. 1) were selected. Three replicate san~les were taken at each station with a 0.1 square n~ter Peters~] grab. Each sample was sorted on a 0.5 ~ sieve and preserved in 70% alcohol with rose bengal {20 rog/liter) added to facilitate later ide~]tification and counting of the organisms present. Identification to g~]us and species was carried out when possible. The substrate at all stations contained a large percentage of partially decayed plant n~terial which c~n~plicated the sorting process. Ail organisms fr~m each replicate sample were separated, labelled and stored. One set is suim~[tted with this report. -3- SYSTEMATIC LIST - WUNNEWETA lAGOON ASSOCIATION Key to Taxoncmic Abbreviations: Ph = Phylu~ SbPh = Subphyl~n C1 = Class sbC1 = Subclass SpOt = Superorder Or = Order SbOr = suborder Faro = F~m~ily SubFam = subfamily (Ph) Porifera ( ~-~-~lichondrida (Faro) Halichondridae Halichondria sp. (Ph) (l~idaria (C1) Hydrozoa ~-r) Thecata (Ph) Nemertina (Ph) Nematoda (Ph) Mollusca (el) Gastropcda (Or) Mesogastropoda (Fam) Hydrobiidae Hydrobia sp. (Faro) Rissoidae Alvania (Rissoa) (Faro) ~r----~ii~--e- Bittium alternattml ( Or ) Neogastropoda (Fam) Nassariidae Ilyanassa obsoleta (C1) Bivalva (sbC1) Teleodesmata (Or) Heterodontida (Faro) Veneridae Mercenaria mercenaria 10. 11. (Ph) Annelida (C1) Polychaeta (Or) Phyllodocida (Fam) Phyllodocidae Eteone lactea Eteone heteropoda Eteone sp. 12. 13. 14. -4- (Ph) (Faro) Glyceridae Glycera (young) (Fam) Goniadidae GoD/ada brunnea (Fam) Hesionidae Microphthalmus sp. (Fam) Nereidae Platynereis sp. Nereis succlnea Nereis vlrens Nereis grayi (Or) Capitell~-~ (F~) Maldanidae Maldane sarsi ~l--~d~ A Maldanidae ~ Maldanidae ~ Maldanidae ~ (Or) Spionida (Fam) Spionidae Scolecolepides viridis Prionospio sp. Polydora websteri S-~f--ophanes b~mbyx Spiophanes wigleyi Spionidae _A (Or) Eunicida (Fam) Lumbrinereidae Lumbrinereis tenuis (Fam) Dorvilleidae (Or) Ariciida (Faro) Orbiniidae Orbinia swani Scoloplos robustus Orbiniidae A (Or) Ctenodrillda - (Faro) Ctenodrilidae (SbFam) Ctenodrilinae Ctenodrilus sp. (SbFam) ~naphidri linae Zeppelinia sp. (Or) Terebellida (F~n) Pectinariidae (Or) Sabellida (Faro) Sabellidae Arthropoda (SbPh) ~helicerata (Cl) Insecta (Or) Epher~roptera (larvae) Insecta larvae A (Cl~ Crustacea (SbC1) Ostracoda ( C1 ) Copepoda (Or) Calanoida Pseudodiapton~s sp. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45, 46. -5- (SbCl) Cirripedia (Or) Thoracica (SbOr) Balanomorpha (Fam) Balanidae Balanus sp. (SbCl) Malacostraca (Or) Iso~oda (SbOr) Flabellifera (Fam) Cymothoidae Nerocila munda (Or) A~phipoda (SbOr) Ganmaridea Gan~aridea A ~idea ~ (Fam) A~pe liscida~ Ampelisca sp. Byblis sp. (F~)Ampithoidae (Fam) Aoridae ~ c--~-~-~utopus sp. (Fam) Ga~aridae (Fam) Melitidae (SpOr) Eucarida ( Or ) Decapoda (SpFa~) Paguroidea (Fam) Paguridae Pagarus pollicaris 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. -6- RESULTS A total of 58 species was collected frc~ the four stations. The systematic list includes a code number for each species, which makes for ease of reference and facilitates statistical analysis. Table I displays the mean (arithmetic average) number of species per square meter at each of the four stations. Species present at all stations were: (10) Ilyanassa, the "mud snail", (26) Maldanids, "bamboo worms", and (46) Pseudediaptc~aus, a typically estuarine copepod (Gosner 1971). At three of the four stations were: (5) nemertine worms, (20) Nereis succinea, one of the "clam werms", and (24) and (25) "bamboo worms". One small, 3.9 n~n (1½ inch) in length, specimen of Mercenaria mercenaria, the "hard clam", was taken at Station IV. At all four stations were found unidentifiable egg cases, sacs, and eggs (see Appendix). One often-utilized means of comparing species abundance infor- mation is the application of the Shannon-Weaver diversity index ~ 3.322 N - 1 = (lOgl0 ~ ~ Z ni lOgl0 nj) where N = total number of individuals of all species, and n. = number of individuals of the ith- species. Diversity indices less than one usually indicate a stressed environment tolerated by large numbers of only a few species. Indices greater than four usually indicate a fairly stable environment occupied by many species with generally small numbers of each. Table I lists the Shannon-Weaver values for each of the four stations. The lowest value, 0.95, was found at station I, the highest, 2.51, at station II. The mean for all four stations was 1.87, possibly indicative of the poor circulation in this lagoon-like area. -7- TABLE I. SPECIES ABUNDANCE AT 4 STATIONS: Mean of 3 Replicate Samples Per Square Meter Wunneweta Lagoon Association Species Porifera Halichondria sp. Hydrozoa Thecata Nemertina Nematoda Hydrobia sp. Alvania (Rissoa) sp. Bittium alternatum Ilyanassa obsoleta Mercenaria mercenaria Eteone lactea Eteone heteropoda Eteone sp. Glycera sp. (young) Goniada brunnea Hesionidae Micrcphthalmus sp. Platynereis sp. Nereis succinea Nereis virens Nereis grayi Maldane sarsi Maldanidae A Maldanidae B Maldanidae C Maldanidae D Scolecolepides viridis Prionospio sp. Polydora websteri Spiophanes bombyx Spiophanes wigleyi Spionidae A Lumbrinereis tenuis Dorvi lleidae Orbinia swani Scoloplos robustus Orbiniidae A Ctenodrilus sp. Zeppelinia sp. Pectinariidae Sabellidae Ephemeroptera (larvae) Insecta larvae A Ostracoda Code 1 13 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ~9 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 3O 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 4O 41 42 43 44 45 3 27 23 43 187 7 3 13 110 3 7 7 3 40 43 10 7 300 550 3 23 3 3 23 3 7 3 7 3 47 3 3 3 3 7 III 3 13 3 10 May 1982 3 3 33 3 20 8O 87 3 3 20 13 3 13 7 1947 120 7 3 3 77 -8- TABLE I (C06~f'D) Species Pseudodiaptc~us sp. Balanus sp. Nerocila munda Ga~naridea A Ga~maridea B An~pe lisca sp. Byblis sp. Ampithoidae ~Dridae Microdeutopus sp. Ga~naridae Melitidae Pagarus pollicaris Code 46 47 48 49 5O 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 I 3253 3 3 10 3780 II 43 III 20 137 3 3 7 3 3 7 3 1092 52 2640 S =Total Number of Species N = Total Number of Individuals of all Species mi log ni Shannon Weaver Diversity Index 22 22 6 34 3780 1092 52 2640 12443 2494 55 6404 0.95 2.51 2.2 1.8 -9- Patchiness or clumped distribution was evident throughout the study area. Appendix I illustrates the number of individuals taken in each of the 12 replicate samples. These are reported in n%~nbers per 0.1 square meter, the area sampled by the Petersen grab. CCNCLUSI~N Comparisons between estuarine creeks and inlets are difficult to draw. Our prior work in Goose Creek (1975) approximately two miles northeast of Wunneweta Lagoon, does establish, however, a basis for cc~paring species abundance, diversity and productivity for a much larger embayment enjoying greater tidal exchange and circulation. A much greater sampling effort produced 139 species (forms smaller than 1 c~ were not identified) as compared to 58 in this study. It would appear that the proposed dredging to a depth of four feet at n~an low water will have little or no adverse effects on the benthic enviro~n~nt and, in fact, may improve it to a point where colonization by an increased number of benthic species is possible. 1. Anon. 1980. Standard 5~thods for the Examination of Water and Waste Water. 15th Ed. Apha. Wash., D.C. 2. Bousfield, E.L. 1973. Shallow Water Garm~ridean Am~hipoda of Now England. Cc~stcck. Cutler, Edward B. 1977. Marine Flora and Fauna of the Northeastern United States. Sipuncula, NOAA Tech. Rep. Circ. 403. U.S. Supt. Docu., Wash., D.C. 4. Fauchald, Kristian. 1977. The Polychaete Worms. Nat. Hist. Mus. of Los Angeles. (a) Gosner, Kenneth I. 1971. Guide to the Identification of Marine and Estuarine Invertebrates. Cape Hatteras - Bay of Fundy. Wiley-Interscience. 5. (b) Greene, G.J. and D.S. Becker. 1977. Winterkill of Hard Clams in Great South Bay, N.Y. S.R. #9 Mar. Sci. Rsch. Ctr., S .U .N .Y., Stony Brook. 6. Holme, N.A. & A.D. McIntyre. 1971. M~thods for ~he Study of Marine Benthos. IBP. #16. Davis, Phila. 7. O'Connor, J. 1972. The Benthic Macl~fauna of Moriches Bay, N.Y. Biol. Bull. 142 (1): 84-102. 8. Pettibone, Marian H. 1963. Marine Polychaete Worms of the New England Region. (1) U.S. Nat'l Museum, Wash., D.C. 9. Smit]%, Ralph I. 1964. Keys to the Marine Invertebrates of the Woods Hole Region. Contrib. No. 11, M.B.L. Woods Hole, Mass. 10. Welker, J.R. 1982. Benthos and sediment Analysis of a proposed Dredging Site. Parts I & II - Pleasure Craft Basin ( Unpub. ) 11. (a) 1975. Benthic Macrofauna Study - Nassau County Sewer District Outrall. in Water Quality Studies for Ocean Disposal System. Hydroscience, West~od, N.J. 12. (b) wit]] E. Kaplan and G. Krause. 1975. Sc~e Factors Affecting the Colonization of a Dredge Channel. Marine Biology 32. 193-204. 13. (a) w/th E. Kaplan and G. Krause. 1974. Some Effects of Dredging on Populations of Macrobenthic Organisms. Fishery Bulletin 75 (2): 445-80. 14. (b) with E. Kaplan and G. Krause. 1974. A Shallow- Water Syst~ for S~pling Macrobenthic In Fauna. L. & O. 19 (2) 346-350. APPENDIX RESULTS OF INDIVIDUAL 0.1m2 PETERSEN GRAB SAMPLES BOA R STEES Telephone ~ ~ ~'. :~ Southola:~Y - - ~. Jack Dom~schel, Director Health, Education & Public Information Suffolk County Department of Health 225 Rabro Drive Hauppauge, New York 11787 Dear Mr. Domeischel: This is to confirm our telephone conversation of February 11, 1982, concerning the proposed dredging in the Lagoon on Nassau Point in the Town of Southold. Our original intent was to write Mr. Baier as Mr. Samuels did so that he could fully evaluate the situation after hearing from both sides. But seeing he has recently resigned, we will direct our inquiry to you. Being elected Trustees in the Town of Southold, we have the re- sponsibility of overseeing all the activities that go on in our town waters. The dredging of the Lagoon is just one of them. Before issuing a permit, we want to make sure that there will not be any harmful effects such as saltwater intrusion resulting from the project. The enclosed copy of a letter to Mr. Samuels explains our concerns further. After reviewing this material, we would appreciate your comments and should there be any questions, please don't hesitate to call me at 516-734-6605 or 516-765-1801. Sincerely, Enc: cc: ~-~ ~m Samuels Paul Stoutenburgh President for Southold Town Trustees I JAMES H.RAMBO. iNC. B~SHOPS LANE SOU~'HAMr:nN, N Y 11968 PHONE 5;6; 283-1254 WlJNNEWETA ROAD RJTCHOO(~E N ¥ 11935 P~L~,E 51~' 734.~858 to the ,w,ssibili~ , ,:r !'i<~ ,';,· ' ;",r :;aJt water intrusion into ~[:o w.ater <a:~le 02 'lass", ~ Prl. nt. ehe ~.Y.,].l~.i].3. l~?:e hex~ ~?ct~n-' or' *"~e S.'~:t'ho].4 q~wn · ::/?,hold Town Trustees ..... ~._g.m.u. Attn: David · · Oe~l) (.'~'::). ~,o. 10-81- New York State Depa~ment of Environmental Conservation Regulatory Affairs Unit Bldg. 40, SUNY--Room 219 Stony Brook, NY 11794 (516) 751-7900 Robert F, Flacke Commissioner January 14, 1982 Anna T. Hataier, President Southold Town Trustees Main Road Southold, NY 11971 RE: Application of The Lagoon Association, c/o George Burrell, to dredge Wunneweta Lagoon, Nassau Point, New York, NYSDEC No. 10-81-0231 Dear Ms. Hataier: My letter to you dated January 4, 1982 cited our concerns for the above project and acknowledged the Board of Trustees as lead agency. Subsequent to that letter we have been informed of the analysis of groundwater impacts by the firm of Geraghty & Miller, Inc. as requested by your agency. We agree with the analysis for the reasons stated and because of the' reduced depth (4' below mean Iow water) of proposed dredging. We still have concern for the project's potential to adversely affect the tidal wetlands. We have requested the applicant to submit data taken from core samples for bottom sediment and benthic organism analysis. We, therefore, request that you not make a final determination of significance as lead agency until the analysis has been completed. Thank you for your cooperation with regard to this matter. CC: D. J. Larkin D. Fallon C. Hamilton T. Samuels, James H. Rambo, Inc. Sincerely, David DeRtdder Associate Environmental Analyst DD:cz JAMES H.RAMBO, INC. BISHOPS LANE SOUTHAMPTON, N. Y. 11968 PHONE: (516) 283-1254 WUNNEWETA ROAD CUTCHOGUE, N. Y. 11935 PHONE: (516) 734-5858 February ~, 1932 ~ U N Y, L~ldg, Att: A~nthony Oandella Fhone: 751-7900 ~. 270 Wunneweta Lagoon Naintenance Dredgiz~ Dear ~ir. Candella~ This letter confirms our phone conversation of yesterday. I have contacted ~. Frank Kujawski~ Trustee of Jouthold Town, resarding the Trustee'$ request for input on the impact of the project on the fresh g~ound water of Nassau P~int, Cutchogue, Town of ~outhold, N.Y. i~ey will shortly request this input for the D.A.C. You will note from the file that the original request~l depth of ~' at ~ has been revised to ~' at MLW, J~nclosed please find a copy of the report received Crom Geraghty and ~iller, Inc. Thomas E. ~amuels ~outhold Town ,~ard ~'~r. ~m. Mullen, ,~berry lid. Nassau t~. Cutchogue Er. George 3urrell, Nassau Pt. Rd., Cutchojue ~outhold Town Trustees Telephone 516-765-1938 BOARD.O,F:TOWN 3~RUSTEES ~*Y.~:~ / :z "-c.~'~ OY~N OF SOUTHOLD ~$~FFOLK CO~TY:~ Southola: ~.:.q. 11971 February 4, 1982 Mr. Anthony Candela New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Building 40, SUNY, Room 219 Stony Brook, New York 11794 Dear Mr. Candela: We, as an elected body concerned with saltwater intrusion by dredging of The Lagoon on Nassau Point, are e~ploring every possibility to gather information for an intelligent decision on this application. We were told by Mr. Tom Samuels that the firm of Geraghty and Miller had suggested driving well points eight feet below the bottomland at various locations in The Lagoon and then testing the water quality in each of these wells. The logic behind this being that if there was nothing but salt water below, no intrusion would take place. The locations would correspond to the ones suggested for core samples by your department. We would like to have you, with your expertise, oversee this operation and be available when the samples of water are taken. We met recently with Chuck Hamilton and he suggested that we contact you for your help. Please feel free to contact me for any questions regarding this at my home phone, 516-734-6605 or Mrs. Marian Goubeaud, our clerk, at 516-765-1801 at the Town Hall. Sincerely yours, Paul Stoutenburgh President for Southold Town Trustees JAMESH.RAMBO, BISHOPS LANE SOUTHAMPTON, N. Y. 11968 PHONE: (516) 283-1254 WUNNEWETA ROAD CUTCHOGUE, N. Y. 11935 PHONE: (516) 734-5858 January 25, 1982 Board of Trustees Town of Southold Town Hall Southold, N.Y. 11971 Re: Maintenance Dredging the Lagoon, Wunneweta, Nassau Pt. Cutchogue, N.Y. Att: Mr. Paul Stoutenburgh~ Pres. Dear Mr. Stoutenburgh: I am in receipt of your letter of 1/22/82 regarding your requirement for additional information on the possibility of salt water intrusion of the above project. Allow me to follow the progression of events on this matter. 1. The Trustees requested lead agency status from the Town Board and the N.Y.S.D.E.C. (SEQRA). 2. The Town denied without prejudice our Wetland's applic- ation, due to insufficient time for the Trustee's deliberations, and allowed the Trustees to be lead agency (SEQRA). 3. The N.Y.S.D.E.C. subsequently granted the Town lead agency status. 4. The Trustees requested professional evaluation of the application and referred the owner's agent to the firm of Geraghty & Miller, Inc. for an opinion on the menace to ground water. 5. Rambo did, in fact, hire Geraghty & Miller, Inc. to evaluate the project. It did so, and replied that there was no risk to the water supply of Nassau Point and explained it's rationale for that opinion. Their opinion is unqualified and should be easily understood by any fair minded person. 6. The N.Y.S.D.E.C. in it's letter to you of 1/1~/82 states "We have been informed of the analysis of ground water impacts by the firm of Geraghty & Miller, Znc. as requested by your agency. We agree with the analysis for the reasons stated and because of the reduced depth (4' below mean low water) of proposed dredging." cont. The D.E.C. is not without expertise in it's evaluation of ground water and it is significant that the possibility of salt water intrusion was not part of it's concern, as stated to us, in it's evaluation of the project (See incomplete notice of Dec. 15, 1981). 7. We are presently preparing core sample evaluation and benthic organism analysis for the D.E.C. The Lagoon is in the process of eutrofication with very poor tidal interchange, due to shallow water depths. The purpose of the dredging is to allow small boat access and to increase the biological quality of the lagoon, as well as the viability and vigor of the wetlands surrounding it's borders. The most significant point I ca~_n make about your concern of salt water intrusion is that the~tudies are dealing with the development of new areas involving dredging of shorelines, invasion of marshes, creation of basins and pumping of ground water (i.e. irrigation, etc.). This project does not in any way jeopardize the quality, or quantity of fresh water on Nassau Point. I feel therefore, that Mr. McCallum's letter should suffice for your purposes. I will be in attendance at the Trustee's meeting of 2/2/82 to further discuss this matter and I hope to have additional information at that time. Sincerely, Thomas E. Samuels CC: Corps of Engineers (App. No. 81-799) Mr. William Mullen, Bridge Lane, Nassau Pt. Cutchogue, N.Y. (5) * Mr. George Burrell, Nassau Pt. Rd." " " (~) N.Y.S.D.E.C. (App. No. 10-81-0231) Stony Brook, N.Y. Mr. Ted Bruce, Wunneweta Rd. Nassau Pt. Cutchogue~ N.Y. (3) N.F.E.C. c/o Ruth Oliva, Box 189, Orient, N.Y. (2) Southold To~ Board, Mrs. Judy Terry, Town Hall (1) Number of copies Studies referred to in your letter of 1/22/82 Telephone 516-765-1938 BOARD. OF-TOWN-TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SUFFOLK Cou~N~ ~Y I Southokl;-_L~I~.;_~_NaY~ 11971 January 22, 1982 Mr. Thomas Samuels James H. Rambo, Inc. Bishop's Lane Southampton, N. Y. 11968 Dear Mr. Samuels: This Board has received the letter of January 5th you sent us from Geraghty & Miller, Inc., concerning the proposed dredging of the Lagoon on Nassau Point in Southold Town. We, the Southold Town Trustees, as lead agency, are very concerned that this dredging may affect the limited groundwater by salt water intrusion now or in the future. We base our concerns on the following: 1) Nassau Point could be considered an island and not treated as part of the mainland that has a larger reserve of groundwater to draw from, i.e. Nassau Point has limited water and low head. 2) In the report INVESTIGATIONS OF GROUNDWATER QUALITY OF THE NASSAU POINT PENINSULA, SOUTHOLD TOWN, prepared by James Heil, P. E., Water Quality Section, Suffolk County Health Department, under their recommen- dations on page eight, No. 2, they state: "Prevent any dredging of shoreline." 3) In Raymond and May's COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR SOUTHOLD TOWN, they state the following under DREDGING OF WETLANDS AND INLAND SALTWATER CHANNELS: "The dredging of wetland basins and salt water inlets for the purpose of removing sand and gravel deposits, for any other reason, can jeopardize the salt water character of the underlying aquifers. In addition, such dredging seriously contributes to salt water intrusion into the fresh water wells and storage areas." 4) Finally, in a report MATTITUCK CREEK WATER SHED STUDY, PHASE INVENTORY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS AND IDENTIFICATION OF DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES by the Suffolk County Planning Department, dated April 30, 1981, a discussion of groundwater was undertaken. On page 32, paragraph one, it states: "The natural low groundwater heads indicate that an extremely limited amount of pumping can ~ake place on the Fork before serious saltwater encroachment will occur." If this is true on the main- land, then wouldn't it be doubly true on Nassau Point? With the above in mind, we would like a study as previously suggested, o not an opinion as stated in the above mentioned letter, on what the effect of your proposed dredging at the Lagoon on Nassau Point would have on the fresh water in the immediate area. Looking forward to your reply, so that this Board may bring a speedy conclusion to this inquiry, I remain, Sincerely, cc: Charles Hamilton, DEC Army Corps of Engineers Town Board Paul Stoutenburgh, President Southold Town Trustees JAMES H.RAMBO,INC. BISHOPS LANE SOUTHAMPTON, N. Y. 11968 PHONE: (516) 283-1254 WUNNEWETA ROAD CUTCHOGUE, N. Y. 11935 PHONE,. (516) 734-5858 January ll, 1982 Southold Town Trustees Main Road Southold, N.Yo 11971 Att: Mr. Paul Stautenberg Re: The Lagoon Dear Sir: Enclosed please find requested opinion by a qualified hydrologist. Please schedule tabled hearing as soon as possible. Sincerely Geraghty & Miller, Inc. CONSULTING GROUND-WATER GEOLOGISTS AND HYDROLOGISTS North Shore Atrium 6800 Jericho Turnpike Syosset, New York 11791 Cable: WATER Telephone: 516/921-6060 3anuary 5, 1982 Mr. Thomas Samuels James H. Rambo, Inc. Bishops Lane Southampton, N.Y. 11968 Dear Mr. Samuels: We hove reviewed the proposed plan for maintenance dredging of khe Wunnemeta Lagoon, located on khe Nassau Poink peninsula in the Town of 5oukhold. Relevant hydrogeological data were also reviewed. In our opinion, khe proposed dredging will have no impact on the fresh ground waker of the area, i.e., ik will not cause salt-waker inI krusion, lhis is because khe lagoon is a discharge point for fresh water, which flows into it at or near the shorelines. This flow is caused by mounding of fresh water beneath the land areas. Such mound- ing creates gradients that cause flow toward the lagoon. Since dredg- ing cannot resulk in a reversal of gradients, it will not generate an impact upon fresh water. Sincerely, GERAGHIY & MILLER, INC. Douglas R, MacCallum Senior Scientist DRM:jm BATON ROUGE, LA HOUSTON, TX TAMPA. EL WEST PALM BEACH, FL ANNAPOLIS. MD HARTFORD, CT SAVOY, IL New York State Depa~ment of Environmental Conservation Regulatory Affairs Unit Bldg. 40, SUNY--Room 219 Stony Brook, NY 11794 (516) 751-7900 Robert F. Flacke Commiseioner January 4, 1982 Anna T. Hataier, President Southold Town Trustees Main Road Southold, NY 11971 RE: Application of The Lagoon Association, c/o George Burrell, to dredge Wunneweta Lagoon, Nassau Point, New York, NYSDEC Number 10-81-0231 Dear Ms. Hataier: I am writing in response to your letter of December 16, 1981 requesting comments and the establishment of a lead agency with regard to the above project. We agree with your initial determination that the project has potential to significantly affect the environment and requires the filing of a Draft EIS. We consider the project significant because of it's potential to adversely impact the limited groundwater supply serving the area and the adverse impacts dredging may have on the wetlands vegetation in the surrounding areas of the lagoon. As I stated today in a phone conversation with Marian Goubeaud of your staff, we recognize the Board of Trustees as lead agency and will await your final determination of significance. In accordance with Section 617.8 and 617.10 (c) & (d) of the SEQR regulations the lead agency must file notices and distribute the EIS for agency and public comment. Thank you for coordinating the review of this project with us. Sincerely yours, David DeRidder Associate Environmental Analyst CC: James H. Rambo, Inc., ATTN: Thomas E. Samuels Wunneweta Lagoon Association, ATTN: George Burrell C. Hamilton DD:cz INVESTIGATION OF GROUND WATER QUALITY OF THE NASSAU POINT PENINSULA TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, SUFFOLK COUNTY SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Herbert W. Davids, Director Division of Environmental Health Services · · Nassau ~ ~ ·" .:~; .,.~L~...~..~i '. ~: .~ ~V'..~.~ ~ -' .' .;..~ y~ P ~,. / ~.. --. ...:' ~'~ X · '"7 ~ ~ ~ "': ~ ~' ~ " ........ ,;~ . , ~ ~ o ~ , '~ z .,. ,~ ~., ~.:..:~. .,~ ,.~.~., , ,, .. ) / ~- ~ ~.' · , .~.. J :~'- ~ ;,:.~ ~. ,..: :~. :, ~.. , ~ ~ ~ .~m ~ ~ ' '~ "~ -',,,~'" ,( - ~ - ' -- . ' ~ ..~ '. A: . .I ~., ; ., , ,',,. ~*< ..... ~- .--~:~ · . ' , ..... , - ..~ · / -.' . N'~ '. ' ', -: ." - '. ' ,,:~ ,. ...... , .... ._ ....:.. . ~. ....... , , ....... _ ........ ~.~ '~:: J~7~ '?'..~: .. -.. OCEAN Fig. 1 Nassau Point Little Hog Neck Town of Southold Location: Nassau Point, also known as Little Hog Neck, is a peninsula located on the south shore of the North Fork in the Town of Southold, Suffolk County (Fig. 1). The peninsula has an approximate land area of 0.75 sq. mi. and is surrounded by salt water bodies. Great Peconic Bay borders the peninsula on the west and the Little Peconic Bay on the east. Haywaters and Broadwaters separate the peninsula from the mainland on the north. A causeway, approximately 1500 feet in length by 150 feet in width, connects the peninsula to the mainland. Geology: Underlying soil conditions of Nassau Point consist of primarily glacial outwash deposits. These deposits are chiefly sands and gravels of Upper Pliestocene age. An area, near Wunneweta Pond, consists of ground moraine deposits which are a mixture of clay, sand and pebbles to boulder sized gravel. Shoreline deposits of.recent geologic age comprise the east coast of the Point. This formation well sorted sand and gravel deposited by currect and wave action. is The topography elevations range from sea level to over 50 feet. Climate: The predominate climate for the area is temperate marine. Temperatures are moderate and precipitation is abundant during the fall, winter and spring. Summer usually is dry. The mean annual precipitation is 44.5 inches. mean precipitation is 20.5 inches. The April-September J ~/ - ~---.~_ -,c ._...._ ~ .. e- ~'''' \ / / / I~',~ ' i~?~'~ / o ¥~. Fig. 2 Cross Section from L.I. Sound to Little Peconic Bay Fig. 3 Hydrologic Cycle Ground Water! A small body of fresh water underlies Nassau Point {Fig. 2). Precipitation provides the only source of replenishment of the ground water reservior. A part of the precipitation flows overland to the surrounding salt water bodies and fresh water ponds. A part is returned to the atmosphere by evaporation and by trans- piration of plants. The remainder of the precipitation seeps into the ground. Some of the seepage into the ground eventually reaches the ground water reservior and becomes available for withdrawal by wells {Fig. 3}. At the present time, all the homes on the peninsula use private Information supplied by individual homeowners indicate that well depths vary l0 to 100 feet. wells. It is enters the surface waters as direct the combined effects of evaporation ation). estimated that approximately 5 inches of the annual precipitation runoff and 17 inches is lost througP and transpiration {evapotranspir- Recharge to the ground water reservior is the difference amount of precipitation and the sum of direct runoff and piration. between the evapotrans- The annual recharge for the Nassau Point area is 160 million gallons. A 10% reduction is included to allow for local clay soil conditions, paving, and residential homes. All the fresh ground water available for use on the peninsula is contained under water table conditions in upper Pliestocene deposits. Since the Point is virtually surrounded by salt water, the area is Fig. 4 - Ghyben-Herzberg Principle Fig. 5 - Vertical Movement of Salty Ground Water Toward a Pumping Well -3- treated as an island of ground water or a discrete fresh water lens. The specific gravity of the fresh water is less than that of the underlying salt water, therefore, the fresh water tends to float on the salt water within the boundaries of the island generally according to the Ghyben-Herzberg principle {Fig. 4). This principle states that equilibriun, the depth of fresh water below sea level at any point on the island, is proportional to the fresh water head above sea level and dependent on the relation of the specific gravities of fresh and salt water. Generally, the relationship shows that fresh water would extend 40 feet below sea level for each foot it extends above sea level. This theory does not take into account the zone of mixed water around the fresh water lens. Little Hog Neck, based on 1963 report, contains a fresh water mound with a crest altitude of slightly more than 1 foot. A report by the Geological Survey of water table elevations as of March 1970 was not of sufficient detail to include NassJu Point since the contour map developed had elevations shown at 6' intervals. The movement of the ground water moves toward water bodies along flow lines whose direction to the water table contour. the surrounding salt is normal or perpendicular It is estimated by the USGS that there is 600 million cubic feet of deposits satuated with fresh water. This water is not totally available The specific yield of the aquifer is assumed to be about 22~ based on studies performed in the Town. This would leave the peninsula with an estimated volume of fresh water in storage as 1,O00 million gallons. -4- an 1deal hydrologic s~stem, discharge equals recharge plus or minus In changes in ground water storage. Pumpage could be allowed to approach the daily recharge from precipitation. However, withdrawal must be kept lower than this amount to minimize demand on storage. On the basis of conditions, withdrawal should not exceed 30% of annual recharge Annual recharge = 160 mg ~ 0.44 mg/day 30~ Annual recharge = 0.132 mg/D = Allowable Withdrawal Assuming Use of 100 gal/capita/day 132000 MGD 100 GPCD = 1320 People Assuming 3.7 Persons Per Home 1320 ~ = 356 Homes. Theroetically there to support 350 homes, however, several factors must be incorporated into any allowable density in this area. These include salt water intrusion and water quality. is sufficient water available based on 1963 data Salt Water Intrusion: Fresh water generally has a chloride concen- tration of less than 40 mg/l. The concentration within the zone of diffusion varies from 40 to 1800 mg/1. The underlying body of salty ground water has a chloride concentration of 1600 to 18,000 ppm. Intrusion occurs when pumpage near the interface draws the salty water upward {Fig. 5). High tides and wave action can inundate the fresh water lens by downward movement. Dredging also causes the inward move- ment of the interface. In a USGS report {lg63) four shoreline wells had chloride concentration ranging from 103 to 1600 ppm. Water Standards states a recommended limit of 250 mg/1. were within 500' of the shoreline. Drinking These wells Water Quality: On August 26, 1970, this Unit sampled sixteen wells for partial chemical analysis. The analysis included ammonia, nitrates, -5- detergents, chlorides, iron and pH. Additional samples were taken on March 2, 1971. One home was sampled on both occasions to determine seasonal variations° No variation was found. Nitrates find there way of organic nitrogen and sewage. Lawn and garden fertilizers Maximum permissible levels of l0 mg/1 due to serious and occasionally fatal waters containing nitrates. into water supplies from the decomposition ammonia, both of which are present in household are also a source of nitrates. nitrate nitrogen has been set poisioning of infants ingesting Detergents have their orgin specifically from the household waste disposal system and therefore a good indicator that sewage wastes are entering an individual water supply. The recommended limit for deter- gents is 0.5 mg or MBAS. Chlorides are a dual indicator. indicate salt water intrusion while sewage pollution and/or salt water Standard for chlorides is 250 mg/1. High concentrations can be used to lower values show either domestic intrusion. The Drinking Water Iron concentrations in excess of the recommended Drinking Water Standards is an esthetic problem causing discoloration, taste, and clothes and fixture staining. pH is 14 point range indicating the acidity or alkalinity of the water with a value of 7 being neutral. 0-7 indicates a acidic condition. Samples - 20 Determination Chlorides 20 Nitrate 13 Iron 13 Detergent 13 Ammonia 13 pH 20 Constitutent Range % Of Samples Within Range MBAS * 0.1 mg/1 95 0.1-0.5 5 Chloride Nitrate 0-20 20.0 20-40 30.0 40-250 50.0 250 or greater 0 100:0 0-7 95 7-10 0 10 or greater 5 Iron 0-0.3 77 0.3 or greater 23 * indicates less than Only one shallow well appeared to be receiving deirect cesspool leach- ings. There was no evidence of detergent in the aquifer except in the aforementioned case. Fifty percent of the wells sampled showed varying degrees of salt water intrusion. The chloride concentrations indicating possible intrusion were not found in a specific geographical area although the higher concentrations were found in the areas closer to the salt water bodies except for the east bluff. It is obvious that there is a tenuous balance in the area between the salt and fresh water. Certainly any large withdrawals will have drastic effects. The one case of nitrate concentration exceeding standards was caused by cesspool leaching. The generally low concentrations can be attributed to seasonal population fluctuation and the samll percentage of land receiving fertilizers. The iron concentrations in excess of standards were probably caused by well inactivity, plumbing or the well casings. Conclusions 1. Nassau Point has a limited quantity of fresh water in under- ground storage due to the salt water of the Bay's existing below the peninsula. 2. The only source of replenishment of the fresh ground water is by natural precipitation of which only about one half finds it way into the water table by the infiltration process. 3. Chemical analyses {chlorides) indicated that salt water intrusion is evident in 50~ of the wells surveyed while an additional 30% had chloride levels in which differentiation between salt intrusion and cesspool pollution could not be actually determined. Eighty percent of the homes are thus experiencing chloride levels in their water supply greater than normal accepted ground water concentrations although none exceeded drinking water standards. 4. The rate of salt water intrusion cannot be accurately es- tablished but the rate will be a function of development, population growth, ground water withdrawal and the amount of natural precipitation. Another drought with the resultant lowering of the ground water table will further aggrevate the fresh salt water balance and increase the rate of ground water deterioration, -8- Recommendations 1. Establish low density zoning in the area. 2. Prevent any dredging of the shoreline 3. If the condition of the ground water shows deterioation, a central water supply for the peninsula should be established to provide management of the resource. Controlled move- ment of the salt water interface could thus be achieved. 4. The feasibility of connecting to a central mainland public supply shoulo be studied. Prepared by: James Hell, P.E. Water Quality Section New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Regulatory Affairs Unit Bldg. 40, SUNY--Room 219 Stony Brook, NY 11794 (516) 751-7900 Robert F. Flacke Commissioner January 14, 1982 Anna T. Hataier, President Southold Town Trustees Main Road Southold, NY 11971 RE: Application of The Lagoon Association, c/o George Burrell, to dredge Wunneweta Lagoon, Nassau Point, New York, NYSDEC No. 10-81-0231 Dear Ms. Hataier: My letter to you dated January 4, 1982 cited our concerns for the above project and acknowledged the Board of Trustees as lead agency. Subsequent to that letter we have been informed of the analysis of groundwater impacts by the firm of Geraghty & Miller, Inc. as requested by your agency. We agree with the analysis for the reasons stated and because of the reduced depth (4' below mean low water) of proposed dredging. We still have concern for the project's potential to adversely affect the tidal wetlands. We have requested the applicant to submit data taken from core samples for bottom sediment and benthic organism analysis. We, therefore, request that you not make a final determination of significance as lead agency until the analysis has been completed. Thank you for your cooperation with regard to this matter. Sincerely, David DeRidder Associate Environmental Analyst cc: D. J. Larkin D. Fallon C. Hamilton T. Samuels, James H. Rambo, Inc. DD:cz Telephone 516-765-1938 December 16, 1981 Mr. David DeRidder Environmental Analysis Unit N.Y.S. Dept. of Environmental Conservation Building 40, SUNY - Room 219 Stony Brook, New York 11794 Dear Mr. DeRidder: Enclosed is application of The Lagoon Association, c/o George Burrell, Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue, N. Y. for a permit to dredge. 11935 This project is unlisted and our initial determination of significance has been made and we wish to coordinate this action to cenform our initial determination in our role as lead agency. May we have your views on this matter. Written comments on this project will be received at this office until January 5, 1982 We shall interpret your lack of response to mean there is no objection by your agency. Very truly yours,,- ~Anna T. Hataier, President ~So~thold Town Trustees ~ Enclosures ~ / ...... / / January 4, 1982 cc: uommissioner Flacke t Mr. DeRidder called, as th Southold Town Building Department3 will not be able to reply by --~ January 5th. He reported they consider it significant, are concerned about salt water intrusion in nearby wells and possible impact on wetlands. Will be responding formally shortly. ISTEES Te~phone 516-765-1938 Southol 11971 December 16, 1981 Mr. David DeRidder Environmental Analysis Unit N.Y.S. Dept. of Environmental Conservation Building 40, SUNY - Room 219 Stony Brook, New York 11794 Dear Mr. DeRidder: Enclosed is application of The Lagoon Association, c/o George Burrell, Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue, N. Y. for a permit to dredge. 11935 This project is unlisted and our initial determination of significance has been made and we wish to coordinate this action to conform our initial determination in our role as lead agency. May we have your views on this matter. Written comments on this project will be received at this office until January 5, 1982 We shall interpret your lack of response to mean there is no objection by your agency. Very truly yours, Anna T. Hataier, President Southold Town Trustees Enclosures cc: Commissioner Flacke Southold Town Building Department Telephone 516-765-1938 December 8, 1981 The Lagoon Association c/o George Burrell Nassau Point Road Cutchogue, N. Y. Dear Mr. Burrell: In regard to your application for dredging in The Lagoon, we are going to declare ourselves as lead agency. One of the main points we are concerned about is the salt water that might come from any dredging operation. We also feel the information should not come from the applicant, but from an outside source. We would like to suggest an impartial concern who has done studies along these lines in the past. You may contact them at this address: Gerraghty & Miller Syosset, N. Y. 516-921-6060 We are looking forward to your input for our working session somewhere in the middle of December. Yours truly, CC: EnConsultants, Inc. Charles Hamilton, DEC Anna T. Hataier, President Southold Town Trustees Telephone 516-765-1938 BOAR~,OF,TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHO~L.D, ~SUFFOLK C 0 U~NT~2 Sou~'rLr!zz, N...Y. 11971 TO: December 4, 1981 MEMO All Trustees and Trustees-elect Appointments for Thursday, December 10, 1981: 3:00 PM - Meeting with Bill Smith at the Spalinger site. 4:00 PM - Meeting with Attorney Tasker on taking lead agency on The Lagoon application. After meeting with Attorney Tasker, a special meeting of the Board will be held to make a resolution to take lead agency on The Lagoon application. IMPORTANT /EN-CONSUL TANTS, INC. 64 NORTH MAIN STREET, SOUTHAMPTON, NEW YORK 11968 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 516-283-6360 November 10, 1981 Mrs. Anna Hataier President Southold Town Board of Trustees Main Road Southold, N. Y. 11971 Dear Mrs. Hataier: /9' ' of Enclosed for please find my check in the amount of $108.00 to cover ~~cost permits bulkhead and dock. You will note that the amount sub- · ~ - - -~mitted is $100.00 less than that requested. This is due to the fact that the application should have shown a 92' bulkhead rather than 192'. A copy of a survey is included as evidence of this. The fee submitted is based on the correct measurements. Also enclosed is a long form EAF for the Wunneweta Lagoon Assoc. dredging project. I would appreciate the Board's review and SEQR decision as soon as possible. Please note that the proposed depth of dredging has been reduced to 4' below MLW and resultant spoil thereby reduced to 13,320 cu. yds. Yours truly, Rov~ L. Halej RLH/eb Encs. JUDITH T. TERRY TOWN CL~RK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATI~VlC~ Southold, L. I., N. Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 November 6, 1981 Mrs. Anna Hataier, President Board of Southold Town Trustees Southold, New York 11971 Dear Mrs. Hataier: The Southold Town Board, at a special meeting held on November 5, 1981, discussed the request of the Board of Southold Town Trustees to become lead agency in the matter of the application of Enconsultants, Inc. for Wunneweta Lagoon Association. The Board was advised by Town Attorney Tasker that the Trustees may not declare themselves lead agency with regard to a Wetland Application before the Town Board. This does not preclude the Trustees from declaring themselves lead agency in the matter of a permit by Wunneweta Lagoon Association that is presently before the Trustees. The Town Board held a public hearing on the matter of the application for a wetland permit by Wunneweta Lagoon Association on November 5th at 3:30 P.M. This public hearing was recessed until 3:30 P.M., November 24th, to give the Trustees ample time to present the Town Board with their findings and recommendations. The Board also recessed the public hearing on the wetland application of Charles DeLuca to 3:35 P.M., November 24th, and Costello Marine Contracting Corp. on behalf of Fred Cowan to 3:40 P.M. on November 24th to again give the Trustees ample time to present the Town Board with their findings and recommendations. Very truly yours, Judith T. Terry Southold Town Clerk CC: Town Board Members Enconsultants, Inc. for Wunneweta Charles DeLuca Costello Marine Contracting Corp. Lagoon Association for Fred Cowan ,JAMES H. RAMBO, INC. BISHOPS LANE SOUTHAMPTON, N. Y. 11968 PHONE: (516) 283-1254 WUNNEWETA ROAD CUTCHOGUE, N. Y. 11935 PHONE: (516) 734-5858 CctobeP 21, Ahl;: Chairoerson Anna Hailer Dear iirs. !la'h{e~-: ~Pnc!osed find copN of !etl;eP £rom Southoid ?.s lead agency in %he ~at;~e~~ o~' nafn~enance it woN!d seen {:Nat the 9own has been des:lgnated lead agenc~ end hes made a negatgve c~ecla)Pa{,~n~ at~d '' ~ase-be advised %hal, ar~.' ~2eas}eable information "OqL'f~ed by ;your board to arrive at a decisi, ort be c~acious!y supp] J ed~ if 3~ou will inform us of w:,at it is the-',; ;',ou reqt~i~}e. {N~ank you fo~' Tour ti:t~o ,~td considez, a-hio}z, ,sillcere!?, NEGATIVE ])ECLAI}A%*I ON NOT ICf': ()1;' NO SI(;NIIVI(iANT t<I,'FI,XiT ON Tllf'l EN\;II[ONM],]N'F Du,~'suant to Article 8 of the Environmentgl Conservation Law St:~Ee l:]nvironment:~l Quality Rt~view and G NYCRR P&rt G]7, Section (;2V.10 :~nd Ch~M~ter ,t,t of the Code of 1;he Toxvn of Southo]d, notice: I i,~n ()l' Enconsultanls. Inc. fop Wunnf~wota La~[c)oD within lagoon, place resultant spoil on beach north kh,::td~(l cfttlf/1 ll~; noul'J shlll~211t . are like3y to O(;CLlt' shotl~d the pro,jecl bo as plttnned. T. '!',,1-i,,,,. Tc;',kll Clerk, Towti oF S,)ttth~¢ld, 'Uown tktJ], Mat]ll ]{o;t(1, Cot',ulxold. New To~'t< 11971. ('~);l.;;1 [ .% 2q i (/11 ~ 1' }"] :tO kl? , 1)]](' , Town Clerk Bulletin Board Enconsultanta, Inc.~/ INVESTIGATION OF GROUND WATER QUALITY OF THE NASSAU POINT PENINSULA TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, SUFFOLK COUNTY SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Herbert W. Davids, Director Division of Environmental Health Services Nassau Point Fig. 1 Nassau Point Little Hog Neck Town of Southold Location: located on the Suffolk County of 0.75 sq. Bay borders the east. Nassau Point, also mi. the peninsula Haywaters and known as Little Hog Neck, isa peninsula south shore of the North Fork in the Town of Southold, (Fig. 1). The peninsula has an approximate land area and is surrounded by salt water bodies. Great Peconic on the west and the Little Peconic Bay on Broadwaters separate the peninsula from the mainland on the north. A causeway, approximately 1500 feet in length by 150 feet in width, connects the peninsula to the mainland. Geology: Underlying soil conditions of Nassau Point consist of primarily glacial outwash deposits. These deposits are chiefly sands and gravels of Upper Pliestocene age. An area, near Wunneweta Pond, consists of ground moraine deposits which are a mixture of clay, sand and pebbles to boulder sized gravel. Shoreline deposits of.recent geologic age comprise the east coast of the Point. This formation is well sorted sand and gravel deposited by currect and wave action. The topography elevations range from sea level to over 50 feet. Climate: The predominate climate for the area is temperate marine. Temperatures are moderate and precipitation is abundant during the fall, winter and spring. Summer usually is dry. The mean annual precipitation is 44.5 inches. mean precipitation is 20.5 inches. The April-September / / Fig. 2 - Cross Section from L.I. Sound to Little Peconic Bay Fig. 3 - Hydrologic Cycle -2- Ground Water: A small body of fresh water underlies Nassau Point {Fig. 2). Precipitation provides the only source of replenishment of the ground water reservior. A part of the precipitation flows overland to the surrounding salt water bodies and fresh water ponds. A part is returned to the atmosphere by evaporation and by trans- piration of plants. The remainder of the precipitation seeps into the ground. Some of the seepage into the ground eventually reaches the ground water reservior and becomes available for withdrawal by wells {Fig. 3). At the present time, all the homes Information supplied by individual depths vary l0 to 100 feet. on the peninsula use private wells. homeowners indicate that well It is estimated that approximately 5 inches of the annual precipitation enters the surface waters as direct runoff and 17 inches is lost througY the combined effects of evaporation and transpiration {evapotranspir- ation). Recharge to the ground water reservior is the difference between the amount of precipitation and the sum of direct runoff and evapotrans- piration. The annual recharge for the Nassau Point area A 10% reduction is included to allow for local paving, and residential homes. is 160 million gallons. clay soil conditions, All the fresh ground water available for use on the peninsula is contained under water table conditions in upper Pliestocene deposits. Since the Point is virtually surrounded by salt water, the area is Fig. 4 Ghyben-Herzberg Principle Fig. 5 ~ Vertical Movement of Salty Ground Water Toward a Pumping Well -2- treated as an island of ground water or a discrete fresh water lens. The specific gravity of the fresh water is less than that of the underlying salt water, therefore, the fresh water tends to float on the salt water within the boundaries of the island generally according to the Ghyben-Herzberg principle (Fig. 4). This principle states that equilibriun, the depth of fresh water below sea level at any point on the island, is proportional to the fresh water head above sea level and dependent on the relation of the specific gravities of fresh and salt water. Generally, the relationship shows that fresh water would extend 40 feet below sea level for each foot it extends above sea level. This theory does not take into account the zone of mixed water a~ound the fresh water lens. Little Hog Neck, based on 1963 report, contains a fresh water mound with a crest altitude of slightly more than 1 foot. A report by the Geological Survey of water table elevations as of March 1970 was not of sufficient detail to include Nassau Point since the contour map developed had elevations shown at 5' intervals. The movement of the ground water moves toward water bodies along flow lines whose direction to the water table contour. the surrounding salt is normal or perpendicular It deposits satuated with fresh water. The specific yield of the aquifer is studies performed in the Town. This an is estimated by the USGS that there is 600 million cubic feet of This water is not totally available assumed to be about 22% based on would leave the peninsula with estimated volume of fresh water in storage as 1,O00 million gallons. -4- In an ideal hydrologic system, discharge equals changes in ground water storage. Pumpage could the daily recharge from precipitation. However, kept lower than this amount to minimize demand on basis of conditions, withdrawal should not exceed recharge plus or minus be allowed to approach withdrawal must be storage. On the 30% of annual recharge Annual recharge = 160 mg = 0.44 mg/day 30% Annual recharge = 0.132 mg/D : Allowable Withdrawal Assuming Use of 100 gal/capita/day 132000 MGD = 1320 People 1 O0 GPCD Assuming 3.7 Persons Per Home 1320 = 356 Homes. 3.7 Theroetically there is sufficient water available based on 1963 data to support 350 homes, however, several factors must be incorporated into any allowable density in this area. These include salt water intrusion and water quality. Salt Water Intrusion: tration of less than diffusion varies ground water has Intrusion occurs upward {Fig. 5). Fresh water generally has a chloride concen- 40 mg/1. The concentration within the zone of from 40 to 1800 mg/1. The underlying body of salty a chloride concentration of 1600 to 18,000 ppm. when pumpage near the interface draws the salty water High tides and wave action can inundate the fresh water lens by downward movement. Dredging also causes the inward move- ment of the interface. In a USGS report {1963) four shoreline wells had chloride concentration ranging from 103 to 1600 ppm. Drinking Water Standards states a recommended limit of 250 mg/1. These wells were within 500' of the shoreline. Water Quality: On August 26, 1970, this Unit sampled sixteen wells for partial chemical analysis. The analysis included ammonia, nitrates, -5- detergents, chlorides, iron and pH. Additional samples were taken on March 2, 1971. One home was sampled on both occasions to determine seasonal variations. No variation was found. Nitrates find there way into water supplies from the deco~position of organic nitrogen and ammonia, both of which are present in household sewage. Lawn and garden fertilizers are also a source of nitrates. Maximum permissible levels of l0 mg/1 due to serious and occasionally fatal waters containing nitrates. nitrate nitrogen has been set poisioning of infants ingesting Detergents disposal system and therefore a good entering an individual water supply. gents is 0.5 mg or MBAS. have their orgin specifically from the household waste indicator that sewage wastes are The recommended limit for deter- Chlorides are a dual indicator. High concentrations can be used to indicate salt water intrusion while lower values show either domestic sewage pollution and/or salt water intrusion. The Drinking Water Standard for chlorides is 250 mg/1. Iron concentrations in excess of the recommended Drinking Water Standards is an esthetic problem causing discoloration, taste, and clothes and fixture staining. pH is 14 point range indicating the acidity or alkalinity of the water with a value of 7 being neutral. 0-7 indicates a acidic condition. -6- Samples - 20 Determination Chlorides 20 Detergent 13 Constitutent Nitrate 13 Iron 13 Ammonia 13 pH 20 Range % Of Samples Within Range MBAS * O.1 mg/1 95 0.1-0.5 5 Chloride Nitrate 0-20 20.0 20-40 30.0 40-250 50.0 250 or greater 0 100.0 0-7 95 7-10 0 lO or greater 5 Iron 0-0.3 77 0,3 or greater 23 * indicates less than Only one shallow well appeared to be receiving deirect cesspool leach- ings. There was no evidence of detergent in the aquifer except in the aforementioned case. Fifty percent of the wells sampled showed varying degrees of salt water intrusion. The chloride concentrations indicating possible intrusion were not found in a specific geographical area although the higher concentrations were found in the areas closer to the salt water bodies except for the east bluff. It is obvious that there is a tenuous balance in the area between the salt and fresh water. Certainly any large withdrawals will have drastic effects. The one case of nitrate concentration exceeding standards was caused by cesspool leaching. The generally low concentrations can be attributed to seasonal population -7- fluctuation and the samll percentage of land receiving fertilizers. The iron concentrations in excess of standards were probably caused by well inactivity, plumbing or the well casings. Conclusions 1. Nassau ground below Point has a limited quantity of fresh water in under- storage due to the salt water of the Bay's existing the peninsula. 2. The only source of replenishment of the fresh ground water is by natural precipitation of which only about one half finds it way into the water table by the infiltration process. 3. Chemical analyses (chlorides) indicated that salt water intrusion is evident in 50% of the wells surveyed while an additional 30% had chloride levels in which differentiation between salt intrusion and cesspool pollution could not be actually determined. Eighty percent of the homes are thus experiencing chloride levels in their water supply greater than normal accepted ground water concentrations although none exceeded drinking water standards. 4. The rate of salt water intrusion cannot be accurately es- tablished but the rate will be a function of development, population growth, ground water withdrawal and the amount of natural precipitation. Another drought with the resultant lowering of the ground water table will further aggrevate the fresh salt water balance and increase the rate of ground water deterioration, -8- Recommendations 1. Establish low density zon(ng in the area. 2. Prevent any dredging of the shorel(ne 3. If the condition of the ground water shows deterioa't~on, a central water supply for the peninsula should be established to provide management of the resource. Controlled move- ment of the salt water interface could thus be achieved. 4. The feasibility of connecting to a central mainland public supply shoule be studied. Prepared by: James Heil, P.E. Water Quality Section