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 ,