Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSAVITS, BARRYPLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Oflowski, Jr., Chairman George Ritchie Latham, Jr. Richard G; Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards Telephone (516) 765-1938 HARRIS PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 MEMORANDUM TO: John Holzapfel, Chairman Conservation Advisory Committee FROM: Bennett Orlowski~ Jr. 4~ Chairman DATE: May 9, 1990 RE: subdivision Proposal for Barry S. Savits SCTM$ 1000-68-4-16, 18 Map dated August 10, 1989 In conformance with the new procedure that the.Planning Board forward all referrals to the CAC rather thaD the Trustees, we are sending you the above mentioned subdivision map for review. This map has not received any approvals at this stage. However, the application has been before the Planning Board since 1986. During this time, there has been much discussion about the wetlands area. In December of 1987, the applicant was sent a report from the Board of Trustees requesting that the property be staked. It is unclear from the Trustees' file if any further inspections ever occurred. Copies of the correspondence from the Trustees and the N.Y.S.D.E.C. are enclosed for your assistance. Please indicate whether you agree with the delineation of the wetland as shown on the enclosed map. Thank you in advance for your assistance. enc. cc: John M. Bredemeyer III, Board~of Trustees President TRUSTEES John M. Bredemeyer, III, President Henry P. Smith, Vice President Albert J. Kmpski, Jr. John L. Bednoski, Jr, John B. Tuthill Telephone (516) 765-1892 BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SCOTT L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 TO: Planning Board FROM: Board of Trustees RE: Barry S. Savits, SCTM ~1000-68-4-16 DATE: August 29, 1990 The following action was taken by the Southold Town Board of Trustees on Thursday, August 23, 1990: RESOLVED that the Southold Town Board of Trustees accepts the enclosed environmental report of Bruce Anderson. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. JMB:jmt cc: Bruce Anderson File To: John Bredemeyer, President Southold Board of Trustees From:Bruce Anderson q~-- Environmental Consultant Date:August 7, 1990 TOV~ OF $OUTHOLD Re: Environmental Review Ba Savits SCTM~ 1000-68-4-16 - Minor Subdivision Subject parcel is partially developed and contains a single family dwelling, green house, stable area, and two barns. Vegetation was at one time cleared and replaced by lawns and gardens in and around the.dwelling extending south of the dwelling some 400 feet. Based upon the size of the ornamental rhododendrons found within this area, clearing must have taken place many years ago. South of the dwelling by a distance of approximately 100 feet, two ponds connected by a narrow sluiceway are found. These ponds appear to be man made. Except for three clumps of sedges, rooted wetland vegetation is absent from the pond edge. The ponds appear to receive considerable runoff from the surrounding lawn as a result of percipitation and the use of undergrown sprinklers installed nearby. (The pond level in the southern portion of the pond closest to the sprinkler head was higher than the northern portion of the pond complex). The surface of the pond was covered with duckweed. While the pond contains a sedge and is covered with duckweed, I regard the pond as a landscape feature rather than as a wetland and see little benefit in its regulation. I have reviewed the above referenced map and find general agreement with the wetlands line as flagged by the NYSDEC. Subject wetland consisists of a small central area characterized as a wet meadow. While a detailed floral inventory was not performed, this area of the wetland contains a variety of rushes and a growth of phragmites. Lands immediately surrounding the wet meadow consists of a red maple swamp. Growth within the red maple swamp is quite thick and consists of primarily, red maple (Acer rubrum), sOur gum (nyssa sylvatica), sweet pepperbush (Clethra alnifotia), cinnamon fern (Osmunda cinnamomea), highbush b!lueberry~ (Vaccinium corymbossum), swamp azalea (Rhododendron viscosum), and spicebush (Lindera benzoin). TWo temporary vernal pools were observed within the red maple swamp. Upgradient from the red maple swamp portion of the w~etland is a transitional area where flags were placed by the NYSDEC. Within this area, the undergrowth consists of sweet pepperbush while the overstory contains red oak. Sweet pepper bush and red oak is classified by the US Fish and Wildlife Service as facultative wetland and upland, respectively. Recommendations The designation of a 75 foot setback from the building envelope as depicted on the survey prepared by Roderick Van Tuyl amended last on August 10, 1989 will result in the preservation of the wetland transitional area described above. However, the building envelop is small and may result in accidental or intentional clearing of this area. Since this subdivision is still in the planning stages it may be prudent to move the northern property line northwards to allow for a larger building envelope. The movement of the property line northwards will also result in the eventual construction of a shorter road. The reduced length of the road will reduce the amount of stormwater generated during rains and snow melt, reduce maintenance and construction costs, and will result in less clearing of natural vegetation. As the planning process matures, I recommend that such line be moved north an additional 100 feet. In doing so, the risk of overclearing, and impacts to vegetation found on site will be substantially mitigated. The eventual development of lot #3 will be regulated by the Southold Board of Trustees. The major environmental concerns will likely include the control of runoff to the wetland, siltation, placement of the septic system, and the inadvertent or intentional clearing of vegetation within the 75 foot setback. It is recommended that the setback radius from the wetland be delineated by snow fencing prior to clearing, that haybales be staked end to end adjacent to the snow fence and left in place until permanent groundcover is established, that all roof runoff be directed into the ground by means of gutters, downspouts and drywells, and that the setback of the septic system be not less than 100 feet from the wetland line. cc. Clerk, Board of Trustees PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Richard G. Ward. Chairman George Ritchle Lathar~ Jr. Bermett Orlowski, Jr, Mark S. McDarmld Kenneth L. Edwards Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SO[ri'HOLD TO: John M. Bredemeyer, III, President Board of Trustees FROM: Melissa Spiro, Planner RE: Minor subdivision Barry Savits SCTM~ 1000-68-4-16.1 DATE: September 30, 1993 ',OTI' L. HARRIS Supervisor Hall, 53095 Main Road P. O. Box 1179 ~%ld, New York 1197I Fax (516) 765 - 1823 Enclosed please find correspondence dated September 14, 1993 from the Department of Health Services in regard to the above mentioned subdivision. Other information regarding this subdivision was referred to your Board for review under separate cover. enc. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ROBERT J. GAFFNEY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE MARY E. HllBBERDL M.D.. M.P.H. September 14, 1993 Melissa Spiro Southold Planning Board Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold. New Ym-k 11971 ~:: Barry Savits Minor Subdivision sc~m~: 1000-68-4-16.1 Dear Ms. Spiro: The Suffolk Couuty Department of Health Services rSCDHS; "Department"] has received yom: letter dated August 11, 1993, concerning the above-referenced project. The Department has no objection to your designation as lead agency. Based on a review of the subject coordination, the Department offers the following comments, However. the Department wishes to reserve its right to provide more detailed information within the co~mnent period(s) established for this action. Also, these comments should not be construed as an hnplicit SCDHS approval or rejection of the project, All applications are reviewed thoroughly with respect to Suffolk County Sanitary Code (SCSC) concerns by appropriate departmental personnel when SCDHS applications are completed. The N¥SDEC freshwater wetland maps indicate the presence of a pond and freshwater on proposed lot #2 and a ditch/watercourse rutmmg parallel to the eastern most lot line. The boundaries of all the natural features as determined by the NYSDEC and all existing and proposed structm'es must be shown on an updated guaranteed survey. The survey should also depicit the culvert which connects the pond to Goldsmiths Inlet. Letter to Melissa Spiro0 ~ September 14r 1993 Page 2 The survey should include existing and proposed savdtary systems with setback dimensions from all wetlands, watercourses and the pond. The sanitary system must be setback 100 feet from surface waters which may effect the buildability of proposed lot #3. If the proposed subdivision and modification therefore is approved, the Trustees should establish an easement and buffer zone over the on-site wetlands in order to ensure preservation and sustain water quality of Goldsmiths Inlet. The applicant must comply with the requirements of the Suffolk County Sardtaxy Code and relevant construction standards for water supply and sewage disposal. Design and flow specifications, subsurface soil conditions, and complete site plan details are essential tv the review of this project. These considerations are reviewed completely at the time of SCDHS application. SCDHS maintains jurisdiction over the final location of sewage disposal and water supply systems. The applicant, therefore, should not undertake the construction of either system without Health Department approval. Thank you for the opportunity to review this application. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact the Office of Ecology at 852-2078. Sincerely Yours, Kimberly Shaw Sr. Environmental Analyst Office of Ecology KS/amf cc: Vito Minei, P.E. Stephen Costa, P.E. Frank Dowling, SC Planning PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Richard G. Ward. Chairman George Ritchie Latham, Jr. Bennett Orlowskl. Jr. Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards Telephone (516) 765-1938 State Notice SC(YrT L. HARRIS Super%~sor PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Environmental Quality Review NEGATIVE DECLARATION of Determination Non-Significant Town HaIL 53095 Main Road P. O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax {516) 765 - 1823 September 13, 1993 This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act) of the Environmental-Law. The Southold Town Planning Board, as lead agency, has determined that the proposed action described below will not have a significant effect on the environment and a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will not be prepared. Name of Action: Minor Subdivision for Barry Savits SCTM~: 1000-68-4-16.1 Location: East side of Sound View Ave.; 932 ft. north of Mill Lane. SEQR Status: Type I ( X ) Unlisted ( ) Conditioned Negative Declaration: Yes ( ) No ( X ) Description of Action: .Minor subdivision of 12.4 acre parcel into 3 lots. Page 2 SEQRA Negative Declaration - Barry Savits September 13, 1993 Reasons Supporting This Determination: An Environmental Assessment Form has been submitted and reviewed, and it was determined that no significant adverse effects to the environment were likely to occur should the project be implemented as planned. The project will result in the division of 12.4 acres into 3 lots in accordance with zoning. A freshwater wetland is located on the subject property. A 75' buffer area has been designed landward of the freshwater wetland. The Planning Board has not received correspondence from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation in the allotted time. Therefore, it is assumed that there are no comments or objections from that agency. The Planning Board has not received correspondence from the Department of Health Services in the allotted time. Therefore, it is assumed that there are not comments or objections from that agency. For Further Information: Contact Person: Melissa Spiro Address: Planning Board Telephone Number: (516) 765-1938 'cc: Suffolk County Department of Health Services Suffolk County Planning Commission Thomas Jorling, DEC Commissioner Cramer, Voorhis & Associates, Inc. John M. Bredemeyer, III, Town Trustees Judith Terry, Town Clerk Applicant PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman George Ritchie Latham, Jr. Richard G. Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards Telephone (516) 765-I938 ! SCOTT L. HARRIS Supervisor Hall, 53095 Main Road P,O. Box 1179 ]~OAR~~O~ Id,ho New York 11971 PLANNING TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765-1823 TO: FROM: RE: DATE: John M. Bredemeyer, III, President Board of Trustees Melissa Spiro, Planner ff~ Minor Subdivision Barry Savits SCTM~ 1000-68-4-16.1 August 11, 1993 Enclosed please find a copy of the map dated November 23, 1992 for the above mentioned subdivision. Please note that this subdivision was reviewed by both your Board and Bruce Anderson in 1990 (reporE dated August 29, 1990). The applicant did not fulfill all conditions of sketch approval within the established time frame, and the application expired. The applicant has recently re-submitted the application materials for the subdivision. Please notify this office if the above mentioned report is still valid. PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Pdchard G. Ward. Chairman C~orge Riwhle Latham, Jr. Benne~ Orlowsk/, Jr. Mark $. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards Telephone [516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF soUTHOLD SCOTT L. HARRIS Supervisor ToWn Hall, 53095 Main Road p. O, Box 1179 Southold. New York 11971 Fax~l~ 765-1823 19 %~ RE: Lead Agency Coordination Request Dear Reviewer: The purpose of this request is to determine under Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act-SEQRA) of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617 the following: 1. Your jurisdiction in the action described below; 2. Your interest in assuming the responsibilities of lead agency; and 3. Issues of concern which you believe should be evaluated. Enclosed please find a copy of the proposal and a completed Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) to assist you in your response. Project Name: ~ ,~4% Requested Action: SEQRA Classification: ~ ) Type I ) Un-listed Contact Person: (5163-765-1938 The lead agency will determine the need for an environmental impact statement (EIS) on this project. Within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter, please respond in writing whether or not yon have an interest in being lead agency. Planning Board Position: (~) This agency wishes to asstune lead agency status for this action. ( ) This agency has no objection t~,~agency assuming lead agency status for th!s actl~j~.~ :?~ ~ ~,~, ( ) Other. ( See com~e~t~be2ow). [~ Comments: :. .... ~.~-,'~ r .... Please feel free to contact this office for further information. Sincerely~ Richard G. Ward Chairman cc: ~Board of Trustees Southold Town Board ~Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services ~NYSDEC - Stony Brook NYSDEC - Albany ~ ~ ~ ~* ~ Transportation * Maps are enclosed for your,~eview Coordinating agencies .. PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Richard G. ward, Chairman George Rltehle Latham, Jr. Bennett Odowski, Jr. Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. FAwards Telephone {516] 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SoUTHOLD SCOFF L. HARRIS SuperVisor Town Ha]], 53095 Main Road P. O. Box 1179 Southold, NewYork 11971 Fax [516] 765 - 1823 RE: Lead Agency Coordination Request Dear Reviewer: The purpose of this ~equest is to determine under Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act-SEQRA) of the Envirorunental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617 the following: 1. Your jurisdiction in the action described below; 2. Your interest in assuming the responsibilities of lead agency; and 3. Issues of concern which you believe should be evaluated. Enclosed please find a copy of the proposal and a completed Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) to assist you in your response. Project Name: Requested Action: SEQRA Classification: ( x ) Type I ( ) Un-listed Contact Person: /~A %~o (516)-765-1938 The lead agency will determine the need for an environmental impact statement (EIS) on this project. Within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter, please respond in writing whether or not you have an interest in being lead agency° Planning Board Position: (~) This agency wishes to assume lead agency status for this action. ( ) This agency has no objection to ~9~u~r~., agency status for this act~ ~ ~ ~ ~% ~ ( ) Other. ( See com~e~t~b~Iow). ~ Comments: ....... .~. assuming lead a~ency Please feel free to contact this office for further information. Sincerely, Richard G. Ward Chairman cc: ~Board of Trustees Southold Town Board ~Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services ~NYSDEC - Stony Brook NYSDEC - Albany U.S .... Army o .... ~ __ ~ Engincers * Maps are enclosed for your_[eview Coordinating agencies °o.~ ~ State Environmental Quality Review ' ~. ~ FULL ENVIRONNENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM ' >~ ~ ~ ~ full EAF is desi~had to hplp ~ppHc~nts nnd ~encies datermine, in ~n orderly m~nnar, wh~thar ~ project ~ ~, may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to ~nswer. Frequent- ,~are aspects of a project that are sub ect v~ or unmeasureable. ~t is also understood that those who determine ~ance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may be technically expert in environmental ~ysis. In addition, many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting /e question of significance, / The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination /p~c~s has been orderly, comprehensive in nature, yet flexible to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action. Full EAr Components: The full 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: 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 likel~ to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially- large impact. The form also identifies whether a~ impact can be mitigated or reduced. Part 3: f 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. DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE--Type 1 and Unlisted Actions Identify the Portions of £AF completed for this project: [~ Part 1 [] Part 2 -ii'art 3 Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF [Parts 1 and 2 and 3 if appropriate), and any other supporting information, and considering both the magitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonabl', determined ov the lead agency that: A The 3roject will not result in any large and important im ~act[s) and. therefore, is one which will not have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a negative declaration will be prepared. I- B. Although the ~roject could have a signif'icant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect for this Unlisted Action because the mit gation measures described in PART 3 have been required, therefore a CONDITIONED negative declaration will be prepared.* C. The project may result in one or more large and important impacts that mas, have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a positive declaration will be prepared. * A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions Name of Acbon Name of Lead A~ency Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Resoonsible Officer Signature of Resoonsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer (If different from responsible officer) Date ~PART T--PROJECT ~NFORMAt~N Prepared by .rojed $.onsor NOTICE' Th s document is designed to ass st in determining whether the action proposed may have a s gnif cant~ ~ on the environment, Please complete the entire form, Parts A ~hrough E. Answers as part of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review, Provide information you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3. It is expected that completion of the full EAr will be dependent on. information currently available and win not mvo~v~ new studies, research or investigation, if information requiring such add~dona] work is unavailable, so indicate and specify each instance. NAME OF ACTION Minor Subdivision BarrTySavits LOCATION OF ACTION Include Street Address, Mummpaiity and County) inn#), gnund View Aven~e, Pe_conJc, N.Y_. NAME OF APPLICANT/SPONSOR Barry Savits by Gary £1anner Olsen,Esqo ADDRESS P.O. Box 706 Main Road SUSINESS TELEPHONE (516 ;i34-7666 CiTY/PO Cutchogue, N.Y. 11935 NAME OF OWNER ~lf different) STATE ZiP CODE N.Y. i~935 BUSINESS TELEPHONE ADDRESS CITY/PO STATE DESCRIPTION OF ACTION Minor Subdivision (3 lots) ZIP COD~ Please Complete Each Question--indicate N.A, if not applicable A. Site Description Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas 1. Present land use: [:]Urban ~lndustrial ~CommerciaI ~]Residential {suburban, ~R~ra[ [non-farm []]Forest ~Agriculture E]Other 2. Total acreage of project area: 12.4 acres. APPROXIMATE ACREAGE PRESENTLY AFTER COMPLETION Meadow or Brushland [Non-agricultural) ~0.8 acres 10.~ acres Forested acres acres Agricultural Includes orchards, cropland, 3asture. etc.) acres acres Wetland {Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24, 25 of ECL) 1. L acres 1.6 acres Water Surface Area acres acres Unvegetated (Rock. earth or fill) 'acres acres Roads. buildings and other paved surfaces acre~ acres Other .Indicate type} acres acres 3. What is predominant soil type{s) on project s,te~ a. Soil drainage: ~]Well drained 88_+__ % of site ~ModerateP, well drained % of site ~Poorlv drained 1~+ % of site b. If any agricultural land is involved, how manv acres of soil are classified within son group 1 through 4 of the NYS~f~.,~ Land Classification System? 0 acres. (See 1 NYCRR 3701 4. Are there bedrock outcroppings on proiect site? ~Yes ~]No a. What ~s depth to bedrock? _ (in feet) Zx[mate percentage of prop!l~lJ pro~ eot s~te wKh stopes: [~OdO% --0 % ~]10-1S% % ~,. ~ , [15% or greater _ % , ~,4ZIS proiect substantially contiguous to, or contain a building, site, or district, listed on the State or the National V'" ers of Historic Places? ~Yes [~No ~' 7. Is proj~' Re~iStect substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural landmarks? ~]Yes X~No B. What is the depth of the water table? _ 9 . (in feet) 9. Is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aq aifer? [Yes [~No 10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing o~portunities presently exist ir the prolect area? []Yes x~No 11 Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered? ~Yes ~No According to Identify each species 12. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the ~rolect site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, other geological formations) ]Yes E~No Describe 13 Is the pro(ect site oresendv used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area? []Yes [~No If yes, explain 14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be ~moortant to the community? E~Yes E~No 15 Streams within or contiguous to prolecr area: ~ a. Name of Stream and name of River to whicl~ it is tributary 16 17. Lakes ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: - a. Name _fJ~eshwater wetla_rtd$ Is the site served bv existing nubile utilities? [~Yes []No a) If Yes does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? b) If Yes. will improvements be necessary to allow connection? b. Size (In acres) x~Yes E~Yes x[No 1..6 acres 18 Is the site located in an agricultural distnct certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 304? []Yes [~No 19 Is the site located in or substantially contiguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 of the ECL, and 6 NYCRR 6177 []Yes J~No 20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes? ~Yes ,~No C B. Project Description 1. Physical oimensions and scale of proiect (fill in dimensions as appropriate) a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by proiect sponsor 0 b. Project acreage to be developed: 1~ 4 _ acres initially; 12.4 c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped 0 acres. d. Length of project, in miles: PlO (if appropriate) e. if the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed f. Number of off~street parking spaces existing __ n/a _; proposed g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour Il/fl h. If residential: Number and lvoe of housing units: One Farnilv Two Family Initially applicant is dividing 12.4 acres Ultimatelv i. Dimensions fin feet) of largest proposed structu-e j. Linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare proiect will occupy is? acres. acres ultimately. n/a %: (upon completion of project)? Multiple Family Condomimum into 3 plots one of which already has a house_ height; _ width; length. ft 2. How much natural material (i ock, earth, etc.) Will be removed from site? _ tons/cu~L.~__ ~.-" ~o 3. Willdisturbed areas be reclaimed? [Yes ~JNo [~N/A ..... ~-~:.~..- ~ a. If yes, for what intend._Z purpose is the site being reclaimed? ~ -- b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? [Yes [No c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? []Yes ~No 4. How many acres of vegetation (trees~ shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site? ~/g acres. 5. Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this proiect? []Yes [No 6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction months, (including demolition}. 7. If multi-phased: a. Total number of phases anticipated rl/g (number). b. Anticipated date of commencement phase 1 month __ year, (including demohtioal. c. Approximate completion date of final phase month year. d. Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases? E3Yes 8. Wi[I blasting occur during construction? []Yes [~V'No 9. Number of jobs generated: during construction rl/g ; after project is comp[ete 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project 0 11. Will project require reIocation of any projects or facilities? [Yes g~]No If yes, explain 12. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? []Yes ~No a. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc,) and amount b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged 13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? [Yes [~No Type 14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? Explain [3Yes 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. :21. Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain? []Yes Will the project generate solid waste? E]Yes [~No a. If yes, what is the amount per month tons b. If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used? f~Yes I~No c. tf yes, give name ; location d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landf[[l? e, If Yes, explain E~No rqYes lNg Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste? a. If yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal? b. If yes, what is the anticipated site life? _ Will project use herbicides or pesticides? [Yes [~Yes ~No __ tons/month. years. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? E3Yes F~No Will proiect produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels? E~Yes Will project result in an increase in en(~rgy use? []Yes [xNo If yes , indicate type(s) ~No 22. If water supply is from wells, indicate pumping capacity JJ~3~' w~l'Jgallons/minute. 23. Total anticipated water usage per dayF:~O' po~r~- 24. Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding? [Z]Yes If Yes, explain 4 rovab Required: 0 ~/~ity, 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 E]Yes ~No ~Yes ENo [Yes [~]No [~Yes line [Yes [~No [Yes ]~No [~Yes [~No F-lyes p Submittal e Date minoc,$ubdivSsion approval pending m_tnor_su~N~d~¥ision approval . pending N_Y_ S. DEC-Freshwater wetlands pending C. Zoning and Planning Information I. Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision? ~lYes ~JNo · If Yes, indicate decision required: ~]zoning amendment r~zoning variance []special use permit F~subdivision [site plan []new'revision of 'nas~er plan []resource management plan E3other 2. What is the zoning classification(s)of the site? R-80 3. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning? 6 1 ets 4. What is the proposed zoning of the siLe? R-80 5. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning? $~ ~DQVe 6. Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses n adopted local [and use 3[ans? X E]Yes FINe 7. What are the predominant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a V~ mile radius of proposed action? resZdenti al 8. Is the proposed action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses within a V, mile? xE]Yes [~No 9. If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed? . 3 a. What is the minimum lot size proposed? 4.4 acres 10. WiN proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of sewer or water districts? F1Yes ~No 11. Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police, fire protection)? [Yes I~No a. If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? ~Yes tN0 12. Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? E]Yes ;NE]No a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? k[~fes [No D. Informational Details Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse avoidimpactSthem.aSs°ciated with your proposal, ~se-dJ~cuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to midgate or E. Verification I certify that the informatio/r~p~ovide, d above is true to the best of my knowledge. Applicant/Sponsor Name .RaC_~.q?v.i±~*hy~ - Gary f]anter._01s~ attorney Date June 16,1993 · ./;'7 ' '. /.-" , ' S,gnaturo - ~i~' z.--~--~-~ ~r,tle attorney If the action is in't~Fl~ Coastal Area, and you are a state ~gency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding wi~h this assessment. 5 Part 2-m~OJECT IMPACTS AND ~HE]R~AGNITUDE ~ Responsibility of Lead A~ency ~ . General Information~ReadCarefuHy) 't'e · In completing the form the reviewer should be guided by the question: Have my responses and de rmmat,ons" en reasonable~ The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst. · Identifying that an impact will be potentially large (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessarily Any large impact must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine significance. Identifying an impact in column 2 MmpJy asks that it be looked at further. · The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of impacts and wherever possible the threshold magnitude that would trigger a response Jn 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 thresho.os may be appropriate for a Potential Large Impact response, thus requiring evaluation ~n Part 3. · The impacts of each project, on each site, in each locality, will vary. Therefore, the examples are d[ustrative and have been offered as guidance. They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each question. · The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question. · In identifying impacts, consider long term, short term and cumlat[ve effects. Instructions (Read carefully) a. Answer each of the 19 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there will be any impact. b. Maybe answers should be considered as Yes answers. c. If answering Yes to a question then check the appropriate box (column 1 or 2) to indicate the potential size of impact. If lmpac, threshold equals or exceeds any examp e provided, check column 2. ]f impact will occur but threshoM is lower than example, check column 1. d. If reviewer has doubt about size of the impact then consider the impact as potentially large and proceed to PART 3. e. If a potentially large impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated bv change(s) in the project to a sma]J to moderate impact, also check the Yes box in column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction is not possible. Th~s must be explained in Part 3. IMPACT ON LAND 1. Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site? ~NO []YES 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. · Construction of paved parking area for 1,000 or more vehicles. · Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally within 3 feet of existing ground surface. · Construction that will c~ntinue for more than 1 year or involve more than one phase or stage. · Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than 1,000 tons of natural material (i.e., rock or soil) per year. · Construction or expansion of a sanitary landfiJh · Construction in a designated floodway. · Other impacts 2. Wilt there be an effect t.'.. _,..y ua;que or unusual land forms found on the site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, geological formatio¼s, etc.)[NO []YES -Specific land forms: 1 Small to Moderate Impact 2 3 Potential Can Impact Be Large Mitigated By impact Project ChanCe '~ []Yes ~No ~ ~Yes ~No [] l~Yes [~No [] OYes ~No ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~Yes ~N~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~Yes ~No l( GARY FLANNER OLSEN COUNSELLOR AT LAW P.O BOX 706 · MAIN ROAD · CUTChOI3UE, LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK 11935 · PHONE January 28, 1988 Re: Dr. Savits - Minor Subdivision File # 4458 Dear Mr. Shea: Let this confirm my meeting with you of January 25, 1988 at your office in Stonybrook. You advised me that there is a possibility that there may be fresh water wetlands on the subject property that are in the jurisdiction of the DEC and that you will have to make a fietd inspection in order to conf~rm whether or not this property lies within your jurisdiction. You stated that said inspection wi¢1 take place Within approximately 30 days. As I indicated it would be helpful to you to have Dr. Savits walk the property with you and accordingly, I would appreciate your calling my office to advise me as to when the inspection will be maee so that I can make the necessary arrangements with Dr. Savits. Very truly yours, GARY FLANNER OLSEN GfO:lmm New York Dept. of Environmental Conservation Building 40 SUNY Stonybrook, NY 11790 Attn: Martin Shea CC: Dr. Barry S. Savits 43 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10003 Plannlng Board town of Southold Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Board of Trustees Town Hall P. O. BOx 728 Southold, NY 11971 P T( ~D Southold N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 December 28, L987 Mr. Gary Flanner Olsen Attorney at Law Main Road Cutchogue, NY 11935 Re: Barry Savits Minor Subdivision SCTM~ 1000-68-4-15.4,16 Dear Mr. Olsen: Enclosed is a copy of correspondence from the Town Trustees with regard to the above proposal. As per their correspondence, would you please stake the property at the corners of the house placement and contact them with regard to meeting them on January 21 for an inspection. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate [o contact our office. Very truly yours, BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. CHAIILMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD HENRY P. SMITH, President JOHN M. BREDEMEYER, Vice-Pres. PHILLIP J. GOUBEAUD ALBERT KRUPSKI, JR. ELLEN M. LARSEN BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 Southold, New York 1 i971 December 21, 1987 TELEPHONE {516) 765q892 Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chariman Southold Town Planning Board Town Hall Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Minor subdivision of Barry Savits 1000-068-4-15.4 -16 Dear Mr. Orlowski: Pursuant to your request for a determination of wetlands on the above referenced proper~y, please be advised that the property will have to be staked at the corners of the house placement. You will have to furnish additional information regarding the location of the property, such as telephone pole numbers, and it is suggested that the applicant meet on the site with the trustees. Please note that the Board will be making inspections on January 21, 1988. Please advise Mr. Savits to contact this office, should he wish to meet with the Trustees on that date. Please also advise us when the property is properly staked for inspection. Very truly yours, Henry P. Smith, Presidenl Board o{ Town Trustees HPS :ip cc.: file F~;OL~ r-O~ YO EE~ DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES COUNTY OF SUFFOlk Michael A. LoGrande SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DAVID HARRIS M.D.. M.P.H. February 18, 1987 Mr. Bennett Orlowski Jr. Southold Town Planning Board Town Hall Southold, New York 1~971 Re: Subdivision Application of Barry Savits S.C.T.M. =I000-68.4-16.1 Dear Mr. Orlowski: The Suffolk County Deparsmenr of Health Services (SCDHS) has received your letter of January 22, ~987 regarding the above-refer- enced application and has no objection to your designation as lead agency. We have reviewed the information provided with your letter and submit the following comments regarding Sanitary Code Compliance and natural resources concerns. I. Sanitary Code A subdivision application was filed with our office in November of 1986. Test-well and test-hole data and a typical cross-sectional diagram of proposed subsurface sanitary disposal systems are required prior to final action by the Health Department. The proposed action appears to conform with ~he minimum lot size requirements of Article 6 of the Suffolk County Sanitar~ Code. However, the SCDHS does not allow underwater lands to be included in property yield. Therefore, precise calculation of density cannot be made until the underwater lands of the pond (indicated on the site survey) are delineated and omitted from this parcel's yield. Please require the applicant to show wetlands and open water on the survey. The SCDHS maintains jurisdiction over the final location of the ~anitary disposal system. The applicant, therefore, should not ~ndertake the construction of the system without Department apProval. o II. Natural Resources On February 5, 1987, Office inspection of the subject parcel. as a result of this investigation. of Ecology staff conducted a field We provide the following comments A. Wetlands The property contains portions of a large wooded wetland (with standing water). Its boundary appears to correspond approximately with the 10-foot contour line on the project survey. The wetlands on and adjacent to this property are connected by a culvert to Peconic Inlet. The freshwater wetlands provide water quality and stormwater control benefits for the creeks that drain towards the Inlet. As a result of public hearings held in 1985, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) received many nominations of freshwater wetland areas for addition to their wetland regulatory maps. According to the DEC the large freshwater wetlands adjoining the Goldsmith's Inlet County Park were nominated as wetlands of "unusual local importance". As we understand it, DEC is determining which nominations should be added to the maps, through field inspections, prior to finalization ("Filing") of the freshwater wetland maps for Suffolk County. If DEC adds this wetland to the regulatory maps the subject parcel could be affected by Article 24 (Freshwater Wetlands Act) regulations. We suggest the applicant plan for such a contingency. The wetland serves as a natural drainage basin for much of the site and could suffer sedimentation and pollution impacts as a result of inappropriate residential development. Whereas the wetlands on the subject parcel are connected to the wetlands of Goldsmith's Inlet County Park, we believe that these areas should be protected to ensure the sustained water quality of the County's adjacent wetlands and Peconic Inlet. III. Conclusions The freshwater wetlands on and adjacent to this parcel provide water quality benefits to the immediate project area and the Peconic Inlet. Improper development could reduce these benefits. We, therefore, recommend that the applicant provide information regarding the following concerns: 1. Test hole and test well data 2. Cross-sectional subsurface sanitary disposal system diagram 3. DEC-approved delineation of all freshwater wetland boun- daries on the parcel 4. Discussion of freshwater wetland protection, control, and landscape plans 5. Building envelope shown for lot ~3 erosion We appreciate the opportunity to provide you with information regarding the environmental review of this project. Should you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact the Office of Ecology a~ your convenience. Sincerely, ~ / Louise W. Harrison SupervIsor, Bureau of Environmental Managemen5 Office of Ecoloqy LWH/amf cc: Vito Minei Steve Costa John Turner-Suffolk CounLy Parks Deps., Resources ManagemenL Frank Panek-NYSDEC Robert Greene-NYSDEC Div. of Natural ? P D T LD Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 December 3, 1987 Southold Town Trustees Town Hall Southold, NY 11971 Re: Minor subdivision of Barry Savits Dear Boardmembers: Attached you will find a map for the above mentioned subdivision. This is for you; to review and determine if this property contains any freshwater wetlands. Please advise us as to your determination. Very truly yours, BENNETT 0RLOWSKI, JR. CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD ,0 Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1988 D December 3, 1987 · Southold Town Trustees Town Hall Southold, NY 11971 Re: Minor subdivision of Barry Savits Dear Boardmembers: Attached you wi·ll find a map for the above mentioned s~bdivision. This is for you~ to review and determine if this property contains any freshwater wetlands. Please advise us as to your determination. Very truly yours, BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD q _LALE ,