Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Harborview Landing Appendix to Env Assessment Form 1991
SAGE PARCEL REDEVELOPMENT AND PARKLAND PROPOSAL APPENDIX TO LONG ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM Harborview Landing Ten Lot Subdivision Sage Boulevard Greenport, New York August 1991 i IRS ouWI D SEP i i test y.. THOID TOWN NINE BOARD By: B.Laing Associates 260 Main Street Northport, NY 11768 SAGE PARCEL REDEVELOPMENT AND PARKLAND PROPOSAL APPENDIX TO LONG ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM TABLE OF CONTENTS Number Title Page 1. 0 Introduction 1 2 . 0 Proposed Action 3 3 . 0 Existing Condition 10 3 . 1 Water Resources 10 3 .2 Soils 14 3 . 3 Ecology 17 3 . 4 Traffic 38 3 . 5 Land Use and Zoning 41 3 .5. 1 Land Use 41 3 .5.2 Existing Zoning 42 3 . 5. 3 Town Master Plan and Long Range Goals 43 3 . 6 Demographic 44 3 . 6. 1 Demographics Analysis 44 3 . 6. 2 Seasonal Use 45 3 . 6. 3 Community Facilities, Utilities and Services 46 3 . 6 . 4 Cultural Resources 47 3 .7 Economics 51 4 . 0 Probable Impacts of the Proposed Action 52 4 . 1 Impact on Water Resources and Geology 52 4 . 1. 2 Water Resources 52 4 . 2 Impact on Soils 55 4 . 3 Impact on Ecology 55 4 . 3 . 1 Vegetation 55 4 . 3 . 2 General Wildlife 56 4 . 3 . 3 Significant Species 57 TABLE OF CONTENTS 'CONT'D) Number Title Paste 4 . 4 Impact on Traffic 58 4 . 5 Impact on Land Use and Zoning 59 4 . 6 Impact on Demographics, Communtiy Facilities and Services 62 4 .7 Impact on Economics 65 Biblography 64 Appendix A Miscellaneous Appendix B Wetland Data LIST OF TABLES Number Title Paste 1 List of Vegetation 22 2 List of Wildlife 27 3 List of Marine Species 39 LIST OF FIGURES Number Title Page 1 Site Location 4 2 Soils 18 1. 0 INTRODUCTION This Appendix to a Long Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) has been prepared to address the proposed residential development of a portion (25 . 87 acres) of an 83 . 117 acre site at Conklin Point southeast of Main Road in Greenport, Town of Southold, New York (see Figure 1) . The proposed action involves the sub- division of 21. 10 acres within the existing zoning to allow con- struction of 10 single and separate dwelling units. The existing roadway would be reconstructed for only its most southerly 1, 500 linear feet or 0.90 acres. The remaining 3 . 87 acres will be lands above and below water for common mooring of boats. A Homeowners Association would jointly own the small existing marina/harbor south of Brick Cove Marina, a mooring right-of-way north of Brick Cove marina, and the beach and peninsula occurring on the parcel's extreme southern tip. The remainder of the site, 57 . 247 acres, will be dedicated, to be held in trust as forever wild, to the Town, the Nature Conservancy or a similar organization. The extreem southern tip will provide a ROW for such a group and limits on mechanized recreational uses. This action will replace 31 sub-code, seasonal cottages and septic systems occurring on-site. This expanded long environmental assessment form seeks a negative declaration under SEORA (with conditions) due to the lessening of the intensity of use, crea- tion of waterfront, wildlife parkland and attendant reduction in environmental impacts on-site. 1 The following is a list of all agencies and actions which are required by this action. AGENCY ACTION REQUIRED NYS Dept. of Environmental Provision of Tidal and Conservation Freshwater Wetlands Buffer Permit AGENCY ACTION REQUIRED Suffolk County Dept. of Approval of proposed sewage Health Services disposal systems Town of Southold Planning Approval of subdivision site Board, Town Board and plan and wetlands buffer Zoning Board of Appeals permit In March 1988 , the Planning Board determined that it would be the Lead Agency for proposed redevelopment of the Sage Parcel. 2 2 . 0 PROPOSED ACTION The project applicant and project site owner, Harborview Realty Co. , proposes to subdivide 22 . 0 acres, place in joint ownership the small harbor/marina, a mooring right-of-way (ROW) to the large harbor; a drainage pond and a beach area. The 1500 southern-most feet of Sage Boulevard would be rebuilt and rerouted. Development of ten single family, separate dwellings would occur on the subdivided 22 . 0 acres of the 83 . 117 acre site. The additional 57 . 247 (69% of the site) acres would be preserved as forever wild (see attached site plan) . The project site is located at the southern terminus of Sage Boulevard at Conklin Point, adjacent to Main Road (Route 25) in Southold, New York. The 83 . 117 acre project site is roughly triangular in shape. The site borders Main Road for a length of 1, 800 feet and stretches southward for a length of 4 ,900 feet along the edge of Southold Bay. The property is designated on the Suffolk County Tax Map as Section 53 , Block 5, Lots 12 . 3 and 12 . 4 . Currently, the portion of the project area to be developed contains 31 substandard, non-conforming, residential cottages which would be removed during the proposed action and replaced with conforming, single-family detached dwelling units. The ten dwelling units would be arranged on the southern quarter of the property essentially following the configuration of the existing cottages. By concentrating the subdivision in the area presently occupied by the cottages , the impact to the site's sensitive natural features is reduced from current levels. 3 -n r �. p O _0 � Y-W Gardiners Bay %%j %�� �_ � irenPrrt MKI �•� Sorthell r% LONG ISLAND SOUND Shelter Is. Nlts. Pecoric ✓r' �� l > kJ �• Crlcholre New Suffolk 1 o � Mattituck �• Little Peconic Bay •�•'� I• I� I• I� I � Rohins Great Peconlc Bay Is. �• /.0 0 1 Primary access to the site would be by way of the existing, unimproved Sage Boulevard. The southern 1500 feet of this road would be rebuilt and moved to the east (on top of an old railway fill) but continue in a southerly direction into the project area to provide frontage to code within the subdivided, ten lot residential area. This system would occupy 0. 90 acres and be designed as a private road. Amenities to be provided for use by the Homeowners Association include boat slips in the existing south harbor/marina, mooring rights in the north marina cove and joint access to the beach south of proposed Lot 1. The existing south "marina" is a deep water, unbulkheaded cove presumably excavated during the site's period as a brick manufacturing facility. The cove currently contains ten small dock structures serving 15 recreational fishing craft which range in length from 16 to 25 feet. Prior to the current ownership, the two larger docks were leased for use by two 30 to 40 foot commercial fishing vessels. The north cove is a woodland-lined embayment also partially excavated for brick clay. The cove contains 1, 300+ feet of shoreline and has one moored boat. The Homeowners Association in general will consist of the ten lot owners. With respect to the south Marina and north cove, however, eleven slips/mooring locations will be provided. The additional slip/mooring will be deeded to a participant who currently owns a single family, detached dwelling in the adjoining development. 5 The Homeowners Association will utilize the northern shoreline of the enclosed harbor where the two commercial piers are located. The proposed action does include rebuilding these docks, through redecking and moving floating structures from the south to the north side. Such activity may be undertaken by the applicant prior to lot sales to provide a maximum of eleven slips PP to facilitate recreational craft with an expected average length of 25 feet. No dredging is currently required to facilitate the proposed private Homeowner's Association marina. This proposed amenity will maintain the intensity of marine, recreational boating currently occurring on-site and eliminate the potential for future commercial use. The proposed 22 . 1 acre residential area will require no change of zoning classification from its current Residential-80. The proposed action will be a cluster activity within the R-80 zone per chapter 180/181 of the zoning code. The site plan involves minimal alteration of the current environmental charac- teristics with the removal of only 0. 4 acres of mowed grass and 0 . 5 acres of successionary old field where the 0. 9 acres of re- aligned roadway will be constructed. While 0. 8 acre of buffer areas (75 feet for Southold and 100 feet for NYSDEC) adjacent to two, man-made, common-reed dominated wetlands would be reduced by the action, 2 . 25 acres of tidal wetland buffers will be created (75 feet for both Southold and NYSDEC) . All freshwater wetland buffers areas would be restricted to allow no landscaping activity closer than the proposed roadways and/or driveways, 6 shoulders. Also, the tidal wetland buffers would allow physical manipulation of vegetation (eg. , mowing, annual pruning) but no chemical treatments. All other vegetative types will maintain the present amounts of acreage on both the developed and undevel- oped portions of the site. The amount of potable water to be consumed by the project would be supplied to the developed subdivision by the Greenport Water District through an existing but re-aligned water main located along Sage Road. Eleven new connections will be added (one for the common dock area) and 33 existing connections will be removed to serve each of the new units. It is projected that 1. 0 million gallons per year of water will be used by the ten to or slightly lots. This is identical g y less than the 1. 1 to 1. 3 million gallons per year consumed by the existing use. Wastewater would be disposed of through ten conventional , sub-surface sewage disposal systems. The 31 antiquated, sub- standard cesspools which currently service the cottages and occur less than 100 feet from tidal wetlands occupying the project site would be eliminated by the proposed action. Project Purpose Need, and Benefits The development of the site through the construction of ten single-family structures will preserve the natural features of the site including the large expanses of wetlands. The houses will be constructed in the area of the site which is currently occupied by non-conforming, existing cottages at a 3 . 1 times greater equivalent density. 7 The proposed units are designed to appeal to "empty-nesters" (those with grown families) or for use as second homes. According to an Analysis of Population and Housing, a July 23 , 1983 memorandum from RPPW, Southold is attracting mainly two groups of people, retirees and second home owners. This attraction is based on three factors; the expansive coastline, rural atmosphere and lower real estate costs in comparison to the South Fork. The hamlet of Greenport West, demographically, has the highest median age (47. 5) , the highest population of resi- dents 65 and over, and the lowest percentage of school age children in the Town of Southold. The Town of Southold itself has a higher median age and lower percentage of school age child- ren than the rest of Suffolk County. Resident empty nesters and second home owners confer a definite advantage on an area in that they do not place a demand on expensive municipal services such as schools, and utilize other services on a reduced basis. Although there is an increas- ed peak capacity necessitated, yearly use is reduced by the smaller size of households which do not include children and homes which are used only on an occasional basis. These benefits are discussed further in the impacts section. Design and Layout out g y The proposed action is shown in a site plan prepared by i Harbor View Realty, Inc. which was last revised in August, 1991 (see attached plan) . This plan identifies the locations of the 8 existing and proposed buildings and facilities, the configuration of expanded and renovated roadways, and the presence of wetland ' areas indicating the setbacks from the tidal and fresh water wetlands. 9 3 . 0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3 . 1 Water Resources Groundwater The Long Island Comprehensive Waste Management Plan (11208 Study") of 1978 established a total of eight Hydrogeologic Zones based on groundwater flow and quality. The subject site is located in an area classified as Hydrogeologic Zone IV comprising the North Fork and the eastern part of the South Fork including the eastern half of the Town of Riverhead, the northern portion of the Town of Southampton and the whole of the Towns of Southold, Shelter Island and Easthampton. This hydrogeologic zone is considered to have unique groundwater conditions which require special management techniques. The major concern with the Zone IV groundwater is the high level of nitrate-nitrogen concentrations resulting from fertilizer use in agricultural areas although groundwater underlying residential areas is generally free of such contamination. High chloride concentra- tions also plague several areas in the zone, including some public supply wells in the Greenport area, due to the prevalence of salt water bodies surrounding the fresh water supply. The shallow depth of the fresh water/salt water interface results in the upcoming of saltwater when overpumping occurs. The average depth to water table on the developed portion of the site is approximately 6 feet with a water table elevation above mean sea level of 1 to 2 feet. The Magothy aquifer is submerged 250-300 feet below mean sea level , the Lloyd aquifer at 10 a depth of 550-600 feet and bedrock at 700 feet below (U.S . Geologic Survey, Department of Interior) . Mean annual precipita- tion in the Greenport area is 43 . 35 inches of which approximately 50% is lost to evapotranspiration and 8 . 3% to run-off. Therefore, 41.7% or 18 . 1 inches is the average annual recharge of precipita- tion to groundwater. Potable water is supplied by the Greenport Water District and is available on site via an existing water main along Sage Road. The site currently uses 1. 1 to 1. 3 million gallons per year (based on annual billings) . Sewage Disposal A community sewerage system is required in Hydrogeologic Zone IV when the proposed population density equivalent is greater than that of a realty subdivision or development of single family residences at a minimum development of 20, 000 square feet (Suffolk County Sanitary Code, Article 6 SCDHS, 1987) . The closest existing sewage treatment plants to the area include one in the Village of Greenport approximately 2 miles from the site and another located across from Greenport Harbor on Shelter Island, approximately 1 1/2 miles from the site. Both of these plants are not available to the project site. The sewage currently generated at the site area is disposed of by sub-surface cesspools. A conventional sub-service sewage disposal system may be approved in Zone IV when the equivalent wastewater flow of 600 gallons per day per acre is not exceeded, a public water supply is available and soil and groundwater con- 11 ditions are capable of supporting such a system. Such conditions occur on the parcel to be developed. Surface Water Surface water classifications were adopted by the Water Resources Commission in 1965. These classifications describe the best uses of tidal salt waters. The surface waters surrounding the site and adjacent area, identified as Shelter Island Sound is classified as SA which defines the best usage of waters as suit- able for shellfishing for market purposes and primary and second- ary (i.e. , fishing and boating) contact recreation. The follow- ing are Quality Standards for Class "SA" waters (Title 6 - Environmental Conservation Act 701. 20) Items Specifications 1. Coliform The median MPN value in any series of samples represent- ative of waters in the shell- fish-growing area shall not be in excess of 70 per 100 ml . 2 . Dissolved Oxygen Shall not be less than 5. 0 mg/l at any time. 3 . Toxic Wastes and None in amounts that will deleterious interfere with use for primary substances contact recreation or that will be injurious to edible fish or shellfish or the culture or propagation thereof, or which in any manner shall adversely affect the flavor, color, odor of sanitary condition thereof, or impair the waters for any other best usage as determined for their specific waters which are assigned to this class 12 This tidal wetland, however, is affected by 31 substandard wastewater treatment systems installed close to and, in at least one case, within tidal wetlands. Further, they occur on dwelling areas of less than 5, 000 square feet adjacent to Southold Bay. Since they do not conform with minimum lot size and setbacks under 6 NYCRR 617 and Southold wetland regulations, they have to be assumed to be impacting the adjacent surface water. Flood Zone Most of the subject parcel, located in a coastal area adjacent to Southold Bay, falls within an area designated as Flood Hazard Zone A4 , a 100-year coastal floodplain with base flood elevations of 8 feet, and is, therefore, expected to flood at an average of once in 100 years due to coastal storms and hurricanes. On the map, the only sections which deviate from this classification include an area in the central portion of the site bordering Sage Boulevard on the east, another area 300-feet east of the Main Road-LIRR intersection in the northeast corner of the site and a smaller parcel approximately 350 feet south of the intersection of Sage Road and Main Road in the northwest corner of the site. These three sections are classified as Flood Hazard Zone B, areas of moderate flood hazard in which flooding occurs, on average, once every 100 to 500 years with average depths less than one foot. The boundaries of the designated flood hazard areas are determined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) through surveys and technical studies and are mapped on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for 13 the Town of Southold. However, the detailed site survey attached shows topography already in the excess of 8 . 0 feet elevation on substantial portions of the cottage area, most probably the re- sult of extensive 20th century filling operations. The Town of Southold entered the National Flood Insurance Program on March 18 , 1980, and has adopted local floodplain management regulations (Local Law No. 1 of 1980) . Since much of the proposed development site and buildable area are within a 100 year flood zone (termed special flood hazard areas by FEMA) , development is subject to the adopted floodplain management regulations. The purpose of these regulations is to ensure that development in the flood prone areas is constructed to minimize the potential for public and private losses due to flooding and to prevent structures that would impede or divert floodwaters. The regulations address construction standards such as elevation of structures, floodproofing measures, structural supports and habitable space. 3 . 2 Soils The Suffolk County Soil Survey of 1975 identifies the ten soil associations found in the county and provides general information about the properties of the soils, their limitations and suitabilities. According to this survey, the project site is composed of deep, well-drained, level to gently sloping, medium to moderately coarse textured soils representative of the Haven- Riverhead Association which is found primarily in the northern outwash plains. This association is among the best for farming 14 while also possessing an excellent potential for housing developments due to good drainage and easy excavation. Within this association, the project site contains the following soil types: Bc Beaches 0 - 15 percent slopes Ca Canadice Silt Loam 0 - 3 percent slopes CuB Cut and Fill Land 1 - 8 percent slopes HaA Haven Loam 0 - 2 percent slopes HaB Haven Loam 2 - 6 percent slopes Ma Made Land variable RdB Riverhead Sandy Loam 3 - 8 percent slopes Beaches consist of cobbly, sandy or gravely areas between dunes or escarpments and water at mean sea level. Farming is not appropriate for such areas and erosion control is necessary to maintain beach width and protect nearby uplands. Canadice silt loam is gently sloping and moderately well- drained soil for which there is only a slight danger of erosion. Successful crop production requires artificial drainage. Most areas of this soil remain as woodland due to wetness. Native vegetation includes red maple, black fir, highbush blueberry and some oaks and beach. Cut and fill land is associated with areas that have been altered due to grading operations for housing developments, shopping centers and other non-agricultural uses. As much as 12 inches of sandy loam, loam or silt loam is contained within the upper 40 inches of cut and fill land according to the Suffolk 15 County Soil Survey. The remaining 28 inches are comprised of loamy fine sand or coarser textured material . Few limitations exist as to building site use in this land type but farming operations are ill-suited for such areas. Haven loam is formed in a loamy or silty mantle over stratified coarse sand and gravel. The soils of this land type are deep, well-drained and medium textured with only a slight hazard of erosion on the 0 to 2 percent slopes and moderate to slight hazard on the 2 to 6 percent slopes. The primary management concerns are controlling erosion and run-off and keeping the soil loose and free from crusting. Agricultural activities are well-suited to this soil and housing developments are also appropriate due to the nearly level slope and ease of excavation. Made land contains areas covered with debris and nonsoil material such as concrete, bricks, trash, wire and metal . Such covered areas may be on the surface of the original soil or in large bulkheads, used to stabilize the shoreline made land occurs through out most of the cottage area. Riverhead Sandy Loam is found on moraines and outwash plains and is formed in a mantle of sandy loam over thick layers of coarse sand and gravel. There is a moderate to slight hazard of erosion with the main management concerns being run-off and erosion control and provision of sufficient moisture. The soil is well-fitted for crop production. 16 Figure 2 identifies the major soil series of the project site. The two most prevalent soil types are Haven Loam and Made Land which make up most of the middle portion of the property. Haven Loam covers most of the development subdivision whereas Made Land makes up most of the land designated to remain forever wild. The remaining soil types at the site are present in small sections along the outer northwestern and southeastern fringes of the premises. Both soils have a "slight" rating with regard to sewage disposal facility limitations. A rating of slight means that there are few or no limitations for use, or that any limitations can be overcome at little cost. This fact is borne out by the attached soil test borings which show excellent substrates and conditions for sanitary system installations. 3 . 3 Ecology Terrestrial (Upland/Wetland) Vegetation Vegetative communities on-site have varied in conjunction with both past and present land uses and natural processes. The vegetation can be separated into six different types or groups. Three of these types are wetlands and three are uplands. The wetland types are tidal , freshwater emergent and freshwater forested. The upland types are forested, old field and landscap- ed. This section describes the dominant plant species which form each vegetative group. Table 1 provides a summary of the vegeta- tion present. Tidal wetlands are discussed in further below. 17 'mss.• Y� ��, � ��� t�q '��.,: '�-. f'`�.;�1,��,�'id„r�. .t pts• � IP • - .�����z _ `.-a�'�+ k !rte'' '; /. v � , Fr f kk ' `�� ' \J ��� Y '�. `'w'••� 'h;�ice' � J .•�� � -�-1 - �`- .v' ��:G• i�J,, 'yam-. �r:11i��- h\rj �. �' \rig •'� 1 �i�'� _ 3 r."/. (,, © �. _ !!! -410. q� Freshwater wetlands on the Sage Parcel (NYSDEC Freshwater wetlands designation numbers SO-16 and SO-17) occupy 12 . 5 acres (Title 6 NYCRR Parts 662 , 663 and 664) and can be separated into three vegetative groups or types. These include an emergent monoculture of common reed (Phragmites australis, FACW) \1 , emergent wetlands with mixed species composition adjacent to open water (i.e. TYpha sp. and Juncus sp. , OBL) and a forested wetland type dominated by swamp white oak (Quercus bicolor, FACW+) and pin oak (Quercus palustris, FACW) . Data specifically listing the vegetation present in each freshwater wetland type is included in Appendix B. Two common reed (FACW) monocultures occur just north of the existing cottages and east of the roadway and the third occurs at the northern end of the site. All three wetlands straddle the old railroad spur which bisects the site from north to south. Since common reed (FACW) reacts to both disturbance and water, U The National List of Plant Species That Occur In Wetlands; Northeast - Region 1 , classifies plants as to their "fre- quency of occurrence in wetlands" versus non-wetlands . These frequency ranges or wetland indicator status are as follows: Obligate (OBL) - always found in wetlands under natural condition (frequency greater than 99%) . Facultative Wetland (FACW) - usually found in wetlands (67% to 99% frequency) . Facultative (FAC) - occurs in wetlands (33% to 67% frequency) . Facultative Uplands (FACU) - seldom found in wetlands (1% to 33% frequency) . Non-Wetlands (UPL) - rarely found in wetlands (less than 1% freauency) . 19 its occurrence demonstrates the substantial influence that prior industrial activity and disruption continues to have on the site. Those uplands adjacent to the most southerly common reed wetland are maintained in a mowed condition right up to the wetland edge. Wetland lines on the developed and to-be-redeveloped portions of the site were verified by NYSDEC and the Town of Southold Trustees in October 1990 by on-site inspections. As opposed to these common reed wetlands, more diverse freshwater emergent marshes occur as numerous isolated, excavated depressions on the northern two thirds of the site. Of particu- lar significance is a large (6 acre) , deep pond occurring just east of the entrance roadway and northern tidal embayment. This water body was clearly the result of excavation for clay to fab- ricate brick. Finally, the forested wetlands have developed or re-developed in some depressions intermixed with the emergent wetlands. Freshwater wetland boundaries in the southern end of the site and on or within 100 feet of the 22 acres to be subdivided/redeveloped have been verified by the NYSDEC and Town Trustees. Uplands occupy approximately 47 . 1 acres of this site. There are currently three upland vegetation groups or types on this site, two of which are recently disturbed areas with little or no overstory. A series of cottages and out-buildings present- ly occupy the southern end of the site adjacent to Southold Bay. This southwest portion of the site is the landscaped vegetation 20 groups. The second disturbed upland vegetation group is an cld field which exists on the middle to east portion of the site. Remaining uplands present on this site, occurring northward from the middle-east portion to the northern end of the site, are forested uplands which were disturbed until World War II but have remained relatively undisturbed in the recent past. The summer cottages on the site are present at its southern end on Southold Bay. This area is essentially comprised of small summer cottages and maintained lawns. Occasional red maple (Acer rubrum, FAC) , black cherry (Prunus serotina, FACU) , Atlantic white-cedar (Chamaecyparis thyoides, OBL) and yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis, FAC) , trees are present. Milkweed (Asclepias sp. , OBL) , lance-leaved golden-rod (SolidaQo graminifolia, FAC) , poison ivy (Rhus radicans, FAC) , orchard- grass (Doctylis glomerata, FACU) , panic-grass (Panicum longifolium, OBL) , blackberry (Rubus allegheniensis, FACU-) and bog golden-rod (Solidago uliginosa, OBL) are present in the understory directly beneath the occasional maples (FAC) and black cherry (FACU) . The herbaceous layer is predominantly well- maintained rye-grass (Lolium spp. UPL) . The second disturbed upland vegetative group or type occurs in the middle to east portion of the site between two common reed (FACW) monoculture wetlands. This area is essentially an old field growth established on an abandoned railroad bed. With the exception of an occasional black cherry (FACU) tree, this area is also devoid of an overstory. The upper understory is dominated 21 TABLE 1 LIST OF VEGETATION Trees Swamp white oak Quercus bicolor Pin oak Ouercus palustris Red maple Acer rubrum Black cherry Prunus serotina Atlantic white-cedar Chamaecyparis thyoides Yellow birch Betula alleghaniensis Pignut hickory Carya alabra Paper birch Betula papyrifera American basswood Tilia americana Black locust Robinia pseudoacacia Post oak Ouercus stellata Black oak Q_ velutina White oak Q_ alba Sassafras Sassafras albidum Gray birch Betula gopulifolia Shrubs and Vines Poison ivy Rhus radicans Blackberry Rubus allegheniensis Staghorn sumac Rhus typhina Grcundsel bush Baccharis halimifolia Multiflora rose Rosa multiflora Red raspberry Rubus idaeus Everlasting pea Lathyrus latifolius Japanese honeysuckle Lonicera japonica Virginia creeper Parthenocissus auinuefolia Winged sumac Rhus copallinum Highbush blueberry Vaccinium angostifolium Sweet pepperbush Clethra alnifolia Arrow-wood Viburnum dentatum Herbaceous species Common reed Phragmites australis Milkweed Asclepias sp• Lance-leaved golden-rod Solidago graminfolia Panic-grass Panicum longifolium Bog golden-rod Solidago uliainosa Rye-grass Lolium sp• Bavberry Myrica carolinensis 22 TABLE 1 LIST OF VEGETATION (CONT'D) Herbaceous species Rough-leaf golden-rod Solidago patula Fragrant golden-rod Euthamia graminifolia Blue-joint grass Calamagrostis sp. Dwarf enchanter's nightshade Circaea alpina Sphagnum moss Sphagnum sp. Marsh fern Dryopteris thelypteris Tidal Wetland Species Cattail Typha sp. Common elderberry Sambucus canadensis Saltmarsh cordgrass Spartina alterniflora Salt hay Spartina patens Spike grass Distichlis spicata Common reed Phracgmites austalis American beach grass Ammophilia arenaria Orchard-grass Dactylis glomerata Barbed panic-grass Panicum microcarpon 23 by staghorn sumac (Rhus typhina, UPL) , bayberry (Myrica carolinensis, FACU) , groundsel bush (Baccharis halimifolia, FACW) , and multiflora rose (Rosa multiflora, FACU . The lower understory is dominated by rough-leaf golden-rod (Solidaao patula, OBL) , fragrant golden-rod (Euthamia graminifolia, FAC) , red raspberry (Rubus idaeus, FAC-) , and blackberry (FACU-) . The herbaceous layer is dominated by orchard grass (FACU) , blue-joint grass (Calamagrostis sp. , FAC) , everlasting pea (Lathyrus latifolius, UPL) , Japanese honeysuckle (Lonicera Japonica, FAC-) , and Virginia creeper (Parthenocissus guinquefolia, FACU) . The remaining upland vegetation type on this site is a for- ested community. This area, like those above, was extensively disturbed for brick making operations but has remained relatively undisturbed in the recent past. This vegetation type occurs northward from the common reed (FACW) wetlands and old field to the site's northern boundary. The overstory throughout the majority of this upland vegetation type is dominated by pignut hickory (Car a glabra, FACU-) , black cherry (FACU) , paper birch (.Betula papyrifera, FACU) , American basswood (Tilia americana, FACU) and black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia, FACU-) . There are also occasional oak stands which are dominated by post oak (Quercus stellata, UPL) , black oak (Quercus velutina, UPL) and white oak (Quercus alba, FACU-) . The understory throughout this entire vegetative type is dominated by sassafras (Sassafras albidum, FACU-) , rough-leaf golden-rod (OBL) , black cherry (FACU) , winged sumac (Rhus copallinum, UPL) and gray birch 24 (Betula populifolia, FAC) . The herbaceous layer in this vegetation group/type is dominated by Japanese honeysuckle (FAC-) dwarf enchanter's nightshade (Circaea alpina, FACU , sassafras (FACU-) saplings, blackberry (FACU-) and Virginia creeper (FACU) . Wildlife General Species The Sage parcel contains a diverse fauna resulting from the diversity of vegetative communities and physical conditions on- site. However, the wildlife community on-site is not pristine. The disturbances of prior industrial activity and present recreational activity which have adversely affect the vegetation have similarly affected the wildlife. The avian species utilizing the site exhibit the greatest diversity. Species range from the small passerines to the large birds-of-prey. House (Passer domesticus) and seaside sparrows (Ammospiza maritima) occur virtually side by side amongst the cottages. Black-capped chickadees (Paras atricapillus) and slate-colored juncos (Junco hvemalis) are typical species occurr- ing in wooded uplands and wetlands on site. Among the larger terrestrial birds are the crows (Corvus brachvrhynchos) and American goldfinches (Caroluelis tristis) . The majority of species on-site, however, are birds using marine or wetland habitats. During the summer, shore birds, her- ons and other fish-eaters utilize the shore line to feed or nest. During the :winter, the lagoons to the site's northwest and south- east are utilized by several waterfowl species. Some interaction occurs between terrestrial and marine 25 habitats. During the summer, various herons used woodlands adja- cent to the freshwater pond as a roost. Despite extensive searches, however, no nesting activity was observed. Likewise, during the winter, the marsh hawk (Circus cvaneus) was observed to occasionally utilize wooded portions of the site to rest and observe the adjacent marshes and fields where it hunts. Finally, belted kingfishers (Megaceryle alcyon) occurred on-site year round. Since they roost and nest in cavities dug into banks, it is expected that a kingfisher nest probably exists on the site's northern end. Mammals occurring on-site are typical of semi-rural to sub- urban settings. These include raccoons (Procyon lotor) , opossum (Didelphis marsupialis) and gray squirrels (Sciurus carolinensis) . One notable exception is the white-tail deer (Odocoileus virginianus) . This species was observed throughout the area. All portions of the site are utilized by the deer for feeding, and the wooded or emergent freshwater wetlands are prob- ably utilized for shelter. The occurrence of reptiles on the site are limited to two turtles and two amphibians. Since the daily and lifetime ranges of these species is limited, herptile populations on-site are confined to those species which could have withstood the prior brick-making activity. Sianificant Species The possibility of the presence or absence of significant (i. e. , listed endangered or threatened) wildlife on or near the 26 TABLE 2 LIST OF WILDLIFE BIRDS Double-Crested Cormorant Phalacrocorax auritus Mute Swan Cygnus olor Whistling Swan Olor columbianus Canada Goose Branta canadensis American Black Duck Anas rubripes Mallard Anas platyrhyncos Canvasback Aythya valisineria Bufflehead Bucephala albeola Common Merganser Mergus merganser Herring Gull Larus argentatus Least Tern Sterna aibifrons Common Tern Sterna hirundo Great Blue Heron Ardea herodias Great Egret Casmerodius albus Black-crowned Night Heron Nycticorax nvcticorax Green Heron Butorides striatus Lesser Yellowlegs Tringa flavipes Killdeer Charadrius vociferus Osprey Pandion haliaetus Marsh Hawk Circus cyaneus Mourning Dove Zenaida macroura Belted Kingfisher Megaceryle alcyon Eastern Pewee Contopus virens Barn Swallow Hirundo rustica Tree Swallow Iridoprocne bicolor American Crow Corvus brachvrhynchos Blue Jay Cyanocitta cristata Black-capped Chickadee Parus atricapillus House Wren Troglodytes aedon Gray Catbird Dumetella carolinensis Northern Mockingbird Mimus polyglottus American Robin Turdus migratorius Red-winged Blackbird Agelaius phoeniceus Common Grackle Ouiscalus guiscula European Starling Sturnus vulgaris House Sparrow Passer domesticus Northern Cardinal Cardinalis cardinalis House Finch Carpodacus mexicanus American Goldfinch Carduelis tristis Chipping Sparrow Spizella passerina Savannah Sparrow Passerculus sandwichensis Seaside Sparrow Ammospiza maritima 27 TABLE 2 (CONT'D) LIST OF WILDLIFE Mammals Raccoon Procyon lotor Opossum Didelphis marsupialis White-tailed Deer Odocoileus virginianus House Mouse Mus musculus Eastern Chipmunk Tamia striatus Reptiles Eastern Box Turtle Terrapene carolina Snapping Turtle Chelydra serpentina Amphibians Bullfrog Rana catesbeiana Red-spotted Newt Notophthalmus viridescens viridescens Fish Blue Gill Lepomis macrochirus Banded Killifish Fundulus diaphanus Comely Shiner Notropis amoenus Golden Shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas 28 subject site was investigated during 1988 and by reviewing the literature. Five species were recorded as having a possible presence in the vicinity of the site but only two recorded as having significant habitat on the project site. The five species were the piping plover (Charadrius melodus) , least tern (Sterna albifrons) , marsh hawk, osprey (Pandion haliaetus) and the tiger salamander (Ambystoma t. tigrinum) . The marsh hawk record is an observation of resting on-site and hunting activity approximately 500 to 1, 000 feet to the southeast of the project site. It is a threatened species in New York State. The hawk activity was recorded as occurring during the winter (i.e. , January 1989) . The hawk requires forested cover for roosting/resting but open fields and marshlands for hunting (Leck 1987 , 1984) . It is very likely that the project site occurs within the winter hunting territory of a marsh hawk which migrates to this region from the north (TAMS , 1985) . The lack of open fields on the north end of the site and the close spacing of cottages on the south end of the site would restrict its hunting use of the site to the coastal marshes. The least tern is an endangered species in New York State. Least terns were observed in late June and July 1988 , 1989 and 1990 , on Conklin Point. This area is a 1. 6 acre peninsula sep- arated from the remainder of the site by a tidal channel. It is located on the southern most end of the site, and is proposed to remain undisturbed. The Long Island Colonial Waterbird and Piping Plover Survey also documents the presence of least terns 29 on Conklin Point during the months of May and June, 1987 . The 1987 survey documents the presence of least tern chicks and nests, demonstrating that the least tern breeds on Conklin Point. The least tern will breed and nest in the temperate water zones of the northeast during the warmer months of spring and summer. It winters in Brazil. The least tern prefers a sandy to gravely coastal habitat and sites relatively isolated from human inter- ference. These factors all occur on Conklin Point. Least terns were observed to feed in the tidal wetlands on or adjacent to the site but none were observed to be breeding in any other portion of the site other than Conklin Point. The piping plover is a threatened species in New York State. The 1987 survey documents the presence of adults and chicks on Conklin Point during May and June, 1987 . This survey also records piping plovers nesting and breeding on Conklin Point. These plovers breed in the temperate northeast during the warm months, and winter in the southern United States. Piping plovers were not observed during bird observations/surveys in June and July, 1988 but have been observed in 1990. Like the least tern, the piping plover has only been observed on Conklin Point, not in the cottage area on Southold Bay or in any of the terrestrial uplands or wetlands on the subject property. It should be noted that the point beach has been used for communal bathing activities for 50 years. In this period is when the above colonies have become established and thrived. The reasons for this are; (1) the beach is used by a limited number 30 of renters/local owners and all others are excluded, (2) the activities are nonmechanical (i.e. , no vehicles or devices with engines are allowed) . The fish hawk, or osprey is a threatened species in New York State. An osprey was observed soaring above the freshwater pond and tidal lagoon located in the northern portion of the site. (July, 1988-1990) . No osprey nests were observed during searches in this site. The osprey appears to roost and nest in nearby Hashamomogue Pond. It hunts in the shallow waters of the pond as well as the marshes and bay which surround the subject property. The osprey actively breeds and hunts in northeast temperate waters such as Hashamomogue Pond and winters in the southern United States. However, it also occasionally remains as far north as Long Island during the winter months. Like the marsh hawk, ospreys will roost and hunt in the northern or tidal portions of the site, but will probably avoid the southern sec- tion where human disturbance is most prevalent. The northern portion Cf the site, including the large freshwater pond, is proposed to remain in its existing condition. The eastern tiger salamander is a species which breeds in wetlands during the spring and spends the balance of its active season cn uplands foraging for food. Its uplands foraging activity includes burrowing shallow tunnels in sandy soil, apparently to seek insects and insect larvae. There was an expression of the potential of this species' occurrence by Southold's EAF scoping. However, significant habitat 31 searches in February 1989 and 1991 by B.Laing Associates did not find this species. However, the unlisted red-spotted newt (Notophthalmus virdescens viridescens) was found. The literature describing this species' occurrence also demonstrates that no potential breeding habitat occurs in the site's northern fresh- water wetlands. The tiger salamander requires temporary ponds to breed in abundance. Bishop (1941) states, "In general, it may be said that Long Island adults at the breeding season visit temporary pools . . . " . Hassinger, et. al. (1970) states, "The prolonged breeding, egg and incubation periods with a short larval and metamorphosis at a small size (of the eastern tiger salamander) are adaptive to breeding in temporary ponds in this region. " A tiger salamander breeding area was recently dis- covered in the Whiskey Hill Subdivision in Southampton, New York. At this property, it was discovered in a temporary or vernal pond (Pers. Com. , April 1987 , Staff Biologist DEC) . These breeding habitat observations are further supported by the fact that a favorite fishing lure for freshwater bass is a salamander adult or larva. This species is vulnerable to vertebrate predation, and likewise, avoids or is excluded from water bodies where predatory fish, reptiles and birds occur. This practical observation is also recorded in the literature which states that amphibian and fish populations are not sym- patric. Bishop also states, "The absence of the larvae in the permanent pond at Syosset may be due to the presence of fish. " . Charles Stine, 1982 reports that a "juvenile snapping turtle . . . 32 was a voracious predator, consuming 7 . 5 tigrinium larvae per day . . . " and, "possible predators include eastern painted turtle, bull frog, canada goose and raccoon. Finally, the literature indicates that this species is highly sensitive to pesticides and herbicides (Tarsitano, 1984) . No eastern tiger salamanders were found on site during February 1989 and February 1991 survey but a series of isolated, permanent freshwater wetlands do occur on the northern half of the site. The survey of these wetlands clearly demonstrated the presence of numerous vertebrate predators (snapping turtles- Chelydra serAentina, herons, raccoons, etc. ) . These wetlands have either been dredged for brick clay, disturbed by the place- ment of a railroad access bed, or occur adjacent to old farmlands (active until very recently) . These data and the result of the literature survey indicate that the wetland system on the northern two thirds of the subject site does not represent poten- tial eastern tiger salamander breeding habitat. In addition to use as breeding habitat, the tiger salamander (and related species such as the red spotted newt) uses adjacent uplands to forage for food. The literature indicates that the distance this species have been known to travel from breeding ponds may range to up to 500 feet (Douglas, 1981; Semlitsch, 1980 ; Madison, 1970; Whitford, 1969) . However, the upland foraging habitat must include loose, sandy soils in which the salamander can burrow. Since all portions of the property south of and including the proposed access road consist of either an old railroad bed and or mixed soil and brick fill , further, it is 33 very unlikely (in the event that the tiger salamander does breed on-site) that the terrestrial portions of the site's southern half would be actively used for non-breeding activities. Marine Life The project location on the western side of Conklin Point places it along the northwestern part of Shelter Island Sound and the eastern end of Southold Bay This surface water body is tidal and saline. The tidal action in Shelter Island Sound is strong, and the shoreline on the southeastern property boundary is subject to alternate erosion and deposition of sediment. Beaches on the property consists of sand, gravel and cobb- les. Some vegetation is present, dominated by American beach grass (Ammophila arenaria, FACU-) . Toward the southeastern tip of Conklin Point, the beach is breached by a tidal inlet. Bur- ied in the sand adjacent to the inlet are abandoned cars, placed there in an attempt to stabilize the inlet. The southern shore of Conklin Point is classified and mapped by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (Map No. 720-550) as a tidal wetland, Shallow Marine (SM, Title 6 NYCRR Part 661) . The SM wetland is defined as follows: "Ccastal Shoals, bars and flats - The tidal wetland zone, designated SM on an inventory map that (i) at high tide is covered by water, (ii) at low tide is exposed or is covered by :•.ater to maximum depth of approximately one foot, and (ii-) is not vegetated by low marsh cordgrass, (Spartina alterniflora, ) . " In addition to the shoreline along Shelter Island Sound, the property includes three other areas of Shallow Marine tidal wet- 34 lands. One is for^ed behind the tip of Conklin Point where a shallow lagoon lies behind the beaches. There is also a larger lagoon at the northwestern corner of the property just west of the access road, and a small embayment southeast of the large lagoon and Young's Marina, all classified as Shallow Marine. The large lagoon contains Young's Marina and the small embayment which includes private docks and slips for boats. Approximately, 8 . 85 acres of the project site occur below mean low water, and thus are classified as shallow marine wetlands. The project site also includes areas of vegetated tidal wetlands. All of the vegetated tidal wetlands mapped by DEC are classified as Intertidal Marsh (IM) . These areas are dominated by saltmarsh (low) cordgrass (OBL) and occur predominantly around the edges of the lagoons and embayments. The IM is defined as follows: "intertidal marsh - The vegetated tidal wetland zone, desig- nated IM on an inventory map, lying generally between aver- age high and low tidal elevation. The predominant vegeta- tion in this zone is low marsh cordgrass. " These intertidal marsh areas have a combined area of approximate- ly 2 .7 acres, with 1. 7 acres occurring at the tip of Conklin Point and 1. 0 acres occurring along the edges of the western lagoon and small embayment. Although not mapped by the DEC, another vegetated tidal wetland exists at the eastern side of the northern property boundary. This wetland approximately 2 acres in area (on the property) and has a tidal connection to Pipe's Cove (which bor- ders the northern side of Conklin Point) via a ditch/creek which 35 I runs east to west under Kerwin Boulevard. The vegetation is dominated by salt hay (Spartina patens, OBL) and also includes saltmarsh cordgrass (OBL) , spike grass (Distchlis spicata, NI) and common reed (FACW) and groundsel bush (Baccharis halimifolia, FACW) . This type of tidal wetland corresponds to the DEC classi- fication of High' Marsh and Salt Meadow (HM) . The HM is not included on the NYSDEC Tidal Wetland Map No. 718-550. This wetland type is defined as follows: " high marsh or salt meadow - The normal uppermost tidal wetland zone, designated HM on an inventory map, usually dominated by salt meadow grass and spike grass. This zone is periodically flooded by spring and storm tides and is often vegetated by low vigor Spartina alterniflora and sea- side lavender (Limonium carolinianum. Upper limits of this zone often include black grass (Juncus gerardi, ) ; chair- maker's rush (Scirpus sp. ) ; marsh elder (Iva frutescens) ; and groundsel bush. " Approximately 1,400 feet of the shoreline along the western part of Conklin Point has been stabilized with a wooden bulkhead and groins. These structures are in very good condition, alt- hough some scour has occurred along the bulkhead and some of the old groins have detached from it. An accumulation of sand on the northern side of the groins indicates that littoral drift in that area is from north to south. The presence of tidal wetlands and functional man-made structures pre-dating the state tidal wetlands law limits the tidal wetlands jurisdiction of the NYSDEC on the site's uplands. The unencumbered definition of Adjacent Area (AA) to tidal wet- lands is all land within 300 of the wetland boundary. This jur- isdictional line occurs at 300 feet on the site's northeastern corner where the previously unmapped tidal wetland drains into 36 Pipe's Cove. on the site' s western side, however, the AA juris- diction line is limited by the existing access road and bulkhead. The definition of AA is as follows: to the seaward edge of the closest lawfully and presently existing (i.e. , as of the effective date of this Part) , functional and substantial man-made structure (including, but not limited to, paved streets and highways, railroads, bulkheads and sea walls, and rip-rap walls) which lies gen- erally parallel to said most landward tidal wetland boundary and which is a minimum of 100 feet in length as measured generally parallel to such most landward boundary. . . . . Therefore, on the site's northeastern corner, the AA extends from the lagoon/wetland edge landward to the road edge, a distance of 25 to 50 feet. On the site's southern end, the AA ends at either the road or bulkhead line (whichever is closer to the wetland) a distance of 0 to 50 feet. The adjacent area to all wetlands (tidal and nontidal) with the Town of Southold's jurisdiction is 75 feet. Regardless of existing jurisdictions for tidal wetland buffer areas, the property was and is landscaped right up to the edge of the bulkhead (ie. , the edge of the tidal wetlands) . Representative marine species occupying the Shallow Marine waters (either permanently or temporarily) proximate to the pro- ject site demonstrate a healthy, diverse system. Typical pelagic species include silverside (Menidia menidia) and three-spine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) . The next level of the food chain, or the invertebrates occuring on site also demonstrate a healthy marine environment. Typical species include the green crab (Carcinus maenas) , sand shrimp (Crangon septemspinosa) , hard clam (Mercenaria mercenaria) and soft-shelled clam (Mya arenaria) . 37 Finally, the bottom of the food chain is occupied by the plankton. A diverse photo- and zoo-plankton community also oc- curs including Skeletonema castatus, Halassiosira nardenskioldii, Haetoceros spp. , Aterionella japonica and Chlindrothecaclosterium (H2M Corp. , 1979 . ) Table 3 contains a listing of marine species found on-site. Water collected from the western lagoon was analyzed in the laboratory and demonstrated the following characteristics: Total Coliform bacteria 27MPN/100ML Ammonia 0. 32 MG/L Nitrate < 0. 10 MG/L Orthophosphate < 0. 05 MG/L Chloride 1. 62% Salinity 26 PPT These data indicate good water quality but the influence of ex- isting septic systems in the wetlands are evident in the low-level presence of total coliform bacteria and ammonia. 3 . 3 Traffic Access to the site is by way of Old Main Road (New York State Route 25) . :IYS Route 25 is essentially an east/west route that consists of an undivided highway with one travel lane in each direction and no separate turning lanes. Sage Boulevard, the site access road, intersects Main Road west of Kerwin Boulevard which is a north/south two lane roadway which will be the primary access for the proposed August Acres residential development. The New York State Department of Transportation provided an Average Weekday Hourly Report on Route 25 from Oakland Avenue to Route 114 . Based on these averages, peak weekday average is 12-1 38 TABLE 3 LIST OF MARINE SPECIES Marine species Golden Shiner NotemiQonus crysoleucas Northern Puffer Sphoeroides maculatus Comely Shiner Notropis amoenus Bluegill Lepomis macrochirus Banded Killifish Fundulus diaphanus Mummichog Fundulus heteroclitus Threespine Stickleback Gasterosteus aculeatus Atlantic Silverside Menidia menidia Blue Crab Callinectes sapidus Sand Shrimp Crangon septemspinosa Green Crab Carcinus maenas Rock Crab Cancer irroratus Flounder Pseudopleuronectes americanus Channeled Whelk Busycon canaliculatom Grass Shrimp Hippolyte spp• Bluefish Pomatomus saltatrix Yellowfin Tuna Thunnus albacares Northern Searobin Prionotus carolinus Northern Pipefish Syngnathus fuscus Mud Dog Whelk Nassarius obsoletus Ribbed Mussel Modiolus demissus Black-fingered Mud Crab Neopanopeus sayi Long-clawed Hermit Crab Pagurus longicarpus Clam Worm Nereis sp Amphipod Gammarus sR Hard-shelled Clam Mercenaria mercenaria Tortoiseshell Limpet Acmaea testudinalis Common Slipper Shell Crepidula fornicata Oyster Drill Urosalpinx cinerea Trumpet Worm Pectinaria gouldii Lion's Mane Cyanea capillata 39 P.M. (610 vehicles) and 4-5 P.M. (680 vehicles) . Daily total traffic is approximately 8 , 190 vehicles. Because the traffic in Southold is expected to be higher in the summer than winter, a factor of 1. 10 has been used to adjust the 7 , 400 annual average daily traffic to June data. A factor of 1. 22 is used for July averages which would adjust the 7, 400 figure to 9, 028 vehicles. Manual traffic counts were taken by "Traffic Counts Collecting, Inc. " . On July 23 (a Saturday) and Tuesday, July 26 at the following intersections: Main Road, (Rt. 25) and Sage Blvd. Main Road (Rt 25) and Kerwin Blvd. However, the traffic which is estimated to be generated once construction is complete can be found as part of the impact analysis. Based on the manual traffic counts, peak traffic hours were found to be: Weekday Time Vehicle Sage & Main 12-1 P.M. 690 5-6 P.M. 658 Kerwin & Main 12-1 P.M. 712 5-6 P.M. 695 Saturday Sage & Main 3-4 P.M. 946 Kerwin & Main 3-4 P.M. 973 Traffic originating from Sage Blvd. during peak hour is minimal. On Saturday from 3-4 P.M. 14 cars exited, with 7 turning left and 7 turning right. The weekday 12-1 P.M. peak shows 18 cars exiting, with left and right turns equally divided. The evening 5-6 P.M. has 12 cars exiting Sage Blvd. , with five 40 going left and 7 right. Summer traffic from the existing cottages is estimated as 17 cars in the peak hour and 102 cars per day. There are no major signalized intersections that are located in the vicinity of the site that will be impacted by the proposed project. At the primary intersections and access points that site generated traffic will utilize, roadway grades are essentially flat and there are no horizontal curves. As a result, the vertical and horizontal locations are adequate, based on the respective posted speed limits. 3 . 5 Land Use and Zoning 3 .5. 1 Land Use The 83 . 117 acre, largely vacant subject site, which currently contains 31 non-conforming cottages on its extreme southwestern portion is bordered on the northwest by Main Road (Route 25) and the Long Island Rail Road tracks, Southold Bay to the southwest with Kerwin Boulevard approximately 50-75 feet to the northeast and Sage Road located within the site. Sage Spur Road is located directly east of the site, at which point it comes to a dead end. The surrounding area is predominantly residential with single family homes along the northern portion of Kerwin Boulevard near Route 25, along Bay Shore Road and off the western tip of Island View Drive directly southeast of the site. The portion of Kerwin Boulevard south of the Bay Shore Road 41 intersection is vacant including the area where Kerwin Boulevard intersects Sage Spur Road and August Lane. This area is the site of the August Acres 36 single-family home subdivision which has received final approval. Also vacant is the land north of Route 25 between the Kerwin Boulevard and Tarpon Drive intersections. Just north of the 25 acre portion to be subdivided, along the western shore of the site, is a marina (Brick Cove Marina) with 91 boat slips. There is currently controversy over the planned expansion of the marina to accommodate more slips. 3 . 5 . 2 Existing Zoning Current zoning of the site is Residential-80 and Agri- cultural which allows, without clustering, one-family detached dwellings and commercial agricultural operations on a lot con- sisting of a minimum of 80, 000 square feet. Maximum height allowed is 35 feet or 2 1/2 stories and a 20 percent maximum lot coverage. Zoning in the area adjacent to and in proximity to the site is primarily "A" Residential-Agricultural in the property bordering the site with the exception of the marina property just west of Sage Road which is zoned "C" Light Industrial, and the area along the Long Island Rail Road tracks and Route 25 directly north of the site, zoned "C" Light Industrial and "B" Light Business. Further east, west of Moore Lane, the area adjacent to Route 25 is predominantly "B" Light Business. Going west along Route 25 up to Bay Home Road, the land is primarily "C" Light Industrial and "B" Light Business. The area further north, 42 between North Road and Route 25, is zoned "A" Residential- Agricultural. The only other zoning district in proximity to the site is the "M-1" General Multiple Residential zone which is scattered in several areas to the north and east of the project site near the Incorporated Village of Greenport. With all local site constraints considered some, 14 to 16 lots are possible on-site in conformance to the R80 zone requirements. 3 . 5. 3 Town Master Plan and Long Range Goals The Town of Southold has a Comprehensive Development Plan and Zoning Plan which was revised in 1989 . This Plan expanded the number of zoning districts from seven to seventeen. The Zoning Ordinance Amendments to implement the Master Plan reco- mmendations reclassified the project site zoning from "Residential All to 11R-8011 . This reclassification resulted in few substantive alterations in usage requirements of the site premises since the R-80 zoning district designates a low density residential district and specifies permitted and special uses nearly identical to those which were in effect for the "A" Resi- dential District. The principle usage in an "A" Residential district was for single-family, detached dwellings on a minimum one acre lot with a maximum height of 35 feet or 2 1/2 stories and a 20 percent maximum lot coverage. The new zoning differs from the old in its larger required minimum lot size of two acres. It also includes the deletion of the special exception use for commercial boat docking facilities and the inclusion of a 43 special excepticn for accessory apartment in single-family residences. 3 . 6 Demographics 3 . 6. 1 Demographics Analysis Between 1970 and 1980, the population of the Town of Southold increased 14 . 1 percent from 16, 804 to 19 , 172 persons according to the U.S. Bureau of the Census. LILCO estimates as of January 1, 1988, as detailed in the 1988 Population Survey, show an additional increase of 2 , 223 persons (11. 6 percent) to a current population of 21, 395 persons. The "census designated place" or hamlet, known as Greenport (unincorporated) experienced a population increase of 263 from 1, 571 to 1, 834 persons during the 8 years between 1980 and 1988. This is 16.7 percent growth reverses the 6. 6 percent population decline (111 persons) from 1970 to 1980. Of the Greenport population, 24 . 5 percent is over the age of 65, while school aged children (5 to 17) account for only 15.7 percent of the population. The U.S. Bureau of the Census and Long Island Regional Planning Board (LIRPB) population data also show figure by school districts. The 1970 Census reported the number of persons in the Greenport School District. From 1970 to 1980, the school dis- trict experienced a decline of 66 persons (or a 1. 6 percent decrease) to 3 , 952 people. Statistics derived from the 1980 Census indicate the following socio-economic profile of the residents of the Greenport census-designated place area: 44 1980 Median Age 48 . 3 Median Household Income: 1979 $19 , 115 Median Home Value $51 , 539 High School Graduates 66. 1% White-Collar Occupations 51. 3% Persons/Household 2 . 35 Per Capita Income: 1979 $ 8 , 760 The 1980 census also divides the population by age groups. The hamlet of Greenport had the following age breakdown: Age Number Percent less than 5 77 5 5 - 9 75 5 10 - 14 96 6 15 - 17 75 5 18 - 21 64 4 22 - 54 539 34 55 - 64 260 17 65+ 385 24 3 . 6 . 2 Seasonal Use The Census and LIRPB population figures reflect permanent population. Southold Town, as in other East End towns, experiences a surge in population during the summer months as a result of day-trip recreational visitors and seasonal home occupants. The summer population is identified by Raymond, Parish, Pine & Weiner in the background planning studies to the Master Plan Update, to increase over 110 percent of the year- round population (RPPW, 1983) . As an example of the summertime population, in 1985 it was estimated that approximately 22 , 250 45 summer residents are added to the year-round population for a total population of 41, 480 persons during the summer months. 3 . 6. 3 Community Facilities Utilities and Services Solid Waste Police and Fire Protection Solid waste generated in the Town is collected by private carters and hauled to the Town of Southold Landfill on North Road in Cutchogue. Police services are provided by the Southold Town Police through their headquarters facility located on Route 25 in Peconic. Fire protection for the project site is handled by the Greenport Fire District, whose firehouse and rescue squad are located on Third Street in Greenport. Schools The project site is located in Greenport School District #10. The school system has a total enrollment of 588 students with 410 of these attending grades K to 8 at the Greenport Elementary School on Front Street in Greenport. The remaining 178 students in grades 9 to 12 attend Greenport High School on Front Street in Greenport. Currently, the pupil-teacher ratio for the district is 12 : 1. Recreational The Town of Southold operates several beach facilities supervised July-August including New Suffolk Beach, Goose Creek Park, Kenny's Beach, McCabe Beach, Gull Pond and Southold Town Beach. In addition, there are several privately owned golf clubs open to the public. Suffolk County operates an unsupervised beach at Cedars Beach Point and co-owns it with the Town of Southold. Undeveloped Goldsmiths Inlet Park is also county-owned 46 and can be used by prior arrangement. Health Care and Social Services The Greenport area contains a variety of health and social service facilities. The following is a partial list of licensed residential and institutional facilities located in Greenport (as indicated in the Suffolk County 1983 Data Book) : Hospital - Eastern L. I. Hospital Associates 201 Manor Place. Non-profit, 66 beds, provides acute medical and diagnosis. Nursing Home & Health Related Facility - San Simeon by the Sound, Inc. , North Road, Rte. 27A. Proprietary 150 beds, provides residential services and nursing care to those 16 years of age and up. Day Care Center - North Ford Head Start, EOC of Suffolk, Inc. , Front Street. Non-profit, serves children ages 3 to 5. Voluntary Operated Supervised Community Residence - A.H.R.C. Hostel #9 . Non-profit, 8 beds, serves mentally retarded and developmentally disabled people aged 18 and up. 3 . 6 . 3 Cultural Resources This area was attractive to both native Americans and early colonists. From documentary evidence, we know that fresh water in the form of springs, ponds and marshes were common on the peninsula in the historic past, and must have been in prehistoric times as well since the native American name for the area, "H'sim mo muck" is translated as: "where the springs flow" . In addition, during the visual inspection of the site, prehistoric artifacts were observed on the surface near the southern end of the subject parcel . The earliest settler was Mathew Sinderland who may have built a house on the peninsula 47 very soon after 1640. Later, William Salmon occupied a home there. In the latter part of the 17th Century, John Conklin acquired ownership of a large portion of the peninsula and most of the subject property, and built a home on the east bank of Mill Creek. The Conklins retained ownership of much of the area through a long period of recorded history. Thus, the subject parcel has a long and interesting history, much of which is related to the exploitation of various resources, both marine and mineral, from the peninsula and its surroundings. There is docu- mentary evidence of an early structure or site which predates 1836; a commercial site that was built in the early 1880s; and the site of other structures which were in evidence from the 1870s. All or most of these were located within the area propos- ed for development. In the early part of this century an extensive brick factory was established by De Witt Clinton Sage, a native of Cromwell, Connecticut, on the point. The operation consisted of mining the extensive clay banks for raw materials, and then forming, drying and producing the bricks. As a result, much of the southern portion of the subject parcel was altered by the removal of soil overburden, digging of clay, as well as con- struction of kilns, storage and drying sheds, living quarters, roads, and railway lines for clay cars. Extensive disturbance to any subsurface prehistoric remains occurred during this period. The brick works closed in the period just prior to World War II . Later some of the remaining structures were adapted for recrea- tional use--as a boat yard and summer beach colony. Further disruption to the subsurface occurred at this time as a result of 48 the construction of service roads , laying of water and utility lines, digging of septic tanks and the excavation of pits for the burial of debris. The historic and documentary search concluded that a field reconnaissance was needed to determine the potential for historical and prehistoric cultural resources. During the documentary search a wide variety of sources have been consulted, including government entities, museums, libraries and educational institutions. Stage II testing of the surface and subsurface was conducted on the southern portion of the site. This testing has revealed the presence of a prehistoric, native American occupation site. Artifacts were recovered (these were mostly quartz debitage flakes) including a number of formal tools, projectile points and pot shreds from subsurface test pits and from the surface. However, early 20th Century remains, including buildings, old roadways, cut and fill areas, dump sites and dump pits, also cover much of the southern two-thirds of the subject parcel. Modern marine deposits of a gravelly sand with no prehistoric cultural remains cover the southern tip of the subject parcel . Many 19th Century structures, roads, trenches (dug to provide service utilities) , refuse pits, and septic tanks have been superimposed upon the earlier deposits resulting in a complex of extensive disturbances to the subsurface of the southern two- thirds of the parcel. Problems encountered in the survey which may have affected 49 the results were related to past alteration of the subsurface by the clay mining and brick making operation. The complex commercial and agricultural history of the area has altered the subsurface and soils, making interpretations of subsurface re- sults more difficult. In addition, the inability to sample large areas covered by spoil and overburden generated from clay mining removed some areas from evaluation. The presence of areas in which coal, brick and cinders were dumped made sampling of these areas difficult. There are extensive areas of soil alteration, movement, disruption, etc. on the property. Some of these areas have prehistoric artifacts in the subsurface. However, the contextual relations of these materials and/or their provenience are not able to be determined. The prehistoric materials appear to occur in a generalized pattern along the central portion of the parcel, with greater concentrations in the northern area. A light scatter of arti- facts occurs on the northern area, east of the marsh. Here brick foundations and a well were observed. Similar foundations were located in the central portions of the cottage area. The testing pattern found some areas of high concentration of prehistoric artifacts. Unfortunately, much of this area appears to have been heavily impacted by early 20th Century activities related to clay mining and brick manufacture as well as later activities asso- ciated with the use of the property as a summer beach colony. Small portions of this prehistoric area were plowed to about 20 cm by earlier agriculturists in the northeastern portion of the cottage area. 50 No evidences of structures that predate the early 1900s were observed and local, long-time resident informants concur with this assessment. The oldest structure is the original home of De Witt Clinton Sage original owner and operator of the Sage Brick Yard. 3 .7 Economics The proposed 71.56 acre development site (land area) is designated as Section 53 , Block 5, Lots 12 . 3 and 12 .4 of the Suffolk County Land and Tax Map. Currently this parcel generates $36, 806. 63 in local real estate taxes. The tax monies provide revenues for a variety of tax districts that service the area, including Suffolk County, Town of Southold, Greenport School District, E-W Protection Fire District, West Greenport Water District and the Southold Waste-Water District. The project site is currently assessed at $83 , 500 for land and improvements. The land is assessed at $47, 600 and the improvements at' $35, 900. The majority of the tax revenues, $25,446.71, are provided toward the School District. Although these monies are not significant as a percentage of the total amount of revenues raised for these districts, they are nonetheless beneficial since the 31 seasonal cottages on the site do not utilize the services provided by the districts on a year round basis. 51 4 . 0 PROBABLE IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION The proposed action has been reviewed and assessed for its potential impacts on the environment of the project site and region. The following sections describe in detail each area of potentially significant environmental concern and the probable impacts expected from implementation of the proposed project. 4 . 1 Impact on Water Resources and Geology 4. 1. 1 Geology The geology of the site will remain in its existing condition with cut and fill being added in already disturbed portions of the site. 4 . 1.2 Water Resources Groundwater Resources/Surface Waters The sewage currently generated at the site area is disposed of by sub-surface cesspools. A conventional sub-service sewage disposal system may be approved in Zone IV when the equivalent wastewater flow of 600 gallons per day per acre is not exceeded, a public water supply is available and soil and groundwater con- ditions are capable of supporting such a system. Such conditions occur on the parcel to be developed. The proposed dwelling units to be constructed will have on- site, subsurface sanitary systems. These systems will consist of plumbing from the house to a septic tank and a leaching system, which will conform with Suffolk County Department of Health Services (SDHS) specifications. The SDHS requires that the leaching system be placed 100 feet from a wetland's edge. On a 52 limited number of lots with NYSDEC jurisdiction, the State re- quires that the leaching system be set in sandy material at least 100 feet from the edge of tidal and fresh water wetlands. The existing subsurface disposal system for 31 cottages occur close to and within wetlands. Traditionally, subsurface soil absorption has been used almost exclusively for on-site disposal of wastewater because of its ability to meet environmental criteria without the necessity for complex design or high costs. A properly designed, con- structed and maintained subsurface wastewater disposal system for a single-family dwelling performs reliably over a long period of time with little attention. This is so because of the large natural capacity of the soil to assimilate domestic wastewater pollutants. In this particular location, with the proximity of wetlands to the existing 31 sanitary systems, the ultimate dissipation of the domestic wastewaters into a water-bearing underground strata will have a lessened impact on water quality, on nutrient levels, and will not develop nuisance conditions. Sanitary systems leachate will move to groundwater beneath the site and then travel horizontally until it discharges to Southold Bay. This leachate will be similar in composition to existing dis- charges but will occur in much lesser volumes and so will not nutrify the waters discharging to the Sound. It should again be noted that the septic systems will be located at least 100 feet from the wetland edge as established in the DEC's Tidal Wetland 53 Land Use Regulations (6 NYCRR 661) and SDHS to protect wetlands from degradation. In addition to decreasing the intensity of sanitary system discharges, the proposed action will maintain or slightly reduce the intensity of boat utilization on-site. That is, in the existing condition, the site is used by 15 mid-sized recreational craft and two docks are available for lease to commercial fishing boats. The proposed action will reduce the number of docked/ moored vessles approximately eleven mid-sized vessels. Again, the proposed action will reduce the existing intensity of use on the subject property. The proposed action does not include construction of new docking facilities. That is, the existing commercial docks will be removed and/or redecked and existing floats will be rearranged adjacent to them. However, new facility construction may be undertaken by the Homeowners Association in the future. No dredging is needed now, nor anticipated in the near future to maintain the existing or proposed marine use. The entire project site is officially located within Flood Hazard Zone A4 (EL 8) . Town of Southold regulations require implementation of mitigating measures for single-family home construction within flood hazard zones. Construction of sanitary systems and water supply systems will be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of floodwaters into the system. The mitigation measures required for construction of the proposed homes in the A4 Flood Zone will ensure that there will 54 be no significant long-term adverse impacts on flooding conditions. The habitable portions of the houses will be elevated above the height of anticipated floodwaters in the event of a 100-year flood, thereby preventing the loss of life and minimizing losses to occupied areas due to flooding. It should be noted that the site is not in a floodway; that is, an area subject to high velocity waters rather than simple sheet flow. Thus, the roadway and proposed homes may be built on con- ventional foundations with one to three feet of additional fill. 4 .2 Impact on Soils There will be some short-term soil impacts during construc- tion due to filling and grading activities. These construction activities will create fugitive dust and cause exposed soils to be more susceptible to erosion and transport through stormwater run-off into surface waters. To minimize overland flow and the transport of suspended solids into the Adjacent Area and Southold Bay, staked hay bales will be placed around the low lying portions of the construction area and kept in place until per- manent replanted vegetation and grass are established. Because the area was previously disturbed, impact on soils will be minimal. 4 . 3 Impact on Ecology 4 . 3 . 1 Vegetation The proposed action will have very minimal vegetative impacts. The residential units will be developed on the southern end of the property where the cottages and landscaped vegetation already occurs. 55 The only difference in the vegetation on-site will occur along the proposed access road from Sage Boulevard. The roadway will enter the site from the north and continue southward into the cottage area to the east of where it now occurs. It will be 24 feet wide. This activity will result in the clearing of 0. 5 acres of old field uplands and 0.4 acres of grassed areas. The roadway will follow the course of the old railroad bed and will occur within 50 feet of two common reed monoculture wetlands. Therefore, this action will require Town of Southold and NYSDEC Freshwater Wetlands buffer permits. Both agencies were verbally informed of this plan in 1990 during wetland inspections. The disruption of 0. 90 acres on-site represents only one percent of the upland vegetation and none of the wetlands. Further,the proposed development will provide for a 75 foot buffer zone adjacent to Southold Bay where none currently exists. This action will add 2 .25 acres of wetland buffer, thus offsetting the above impact at a 2 . 5 to 1. 0 ratio. The added tidal buffer will be an area where only low maintainence vegetation will be allowed and cultivation will be physical in nature only. 4 . 3 . 2 General Wildlife The proposed action will have no significant impact upon general wildlife species on-site. The proposed development will disturb only 1 percent of the unlandscaped uplands on-site and none of the wetlands on-site. Since the existing wildlife community is adapted to development in the existing cottage area and only a tiny fraction of the existing, relatively undisturbed habitat 56 will be affected, no substantial change in species composition, population sizes or utilization will occur. 4 . 3 . 3 Significant Species Neither suitable breeding nor foraging habitat for the east- ern tiger salamander occur on or close to the subject site. The least tern and piping plover breed and roost on Conklin Point south of the existing inlet (which isolates the point from the site) . This area is proposed to remain in its existing, re- altively undisturbed condition. It should be noted, those species present have, in fact, thrived with private property ownership, 31 cottages on-site and nonmechanical marine recrea- tional uses. Maintaince of Parcels G and H in private ownership is strongly recommended because; (1) past private history has allowed these species to thrive, (2) "public" or absentee owner- ship would vastly increase use, and (3) limited access would make public policing virtually impossible. However, it should be noted that deed restrictions on these common parcels could be added to formally restrict all mechanical activities (see Board of Trustees-May 18, 1990) . The marsh hawk and the osprey hunt and rest in the northern portion of the site, as well as off Conklin Point. The northern portion of the site, including the large freshwater pond and a series of wetlands, is proposed to be preserved forever-wild. These facts, in addition to the fact that all proposed development will occur in areas of previous disturb- ance where these significant species do not occur, lead to the conclusion that the proposed action would have no substantial impact on these significant species. 57 4 . 4 Impact on Traffic In order to determine the impact, if any, that the proposed project would have on existing traffic, it is necessary to estimate the amount of vehicle trips that would be generated for the proposed project. The trip generation for the proposed project, was calculated using the Institute of Transportation Engineers, (ITE) report entitled "Trip Generation" (1983) . The term "trip ends" is used and defined in the ITE manual as 11 . . . . .the total of all trips entering plus all trips leaving a designated land use of building type. . . " An estimated total of 60 trip ends per day would be gener- ated by the proposed project. This figure includes residents, visitors and delivery trucks to the proposed development. Thus, a maximum of 10 cars would enter and exit the side at the peak P.M. hour. Of this number, it is estimated that 5 cars would enter the site and 5 would exit. Capacity is defined as the maximum hourly rate at which vehicles can be expected to traverse a section of roadway. It is not expected or desirable that a roadway operate anywhere near capacity. The estimated capacity of NYS 25 is 2 , 000 vehicles per hour. With current peak hour traffic at 680 vehicles increased by a growth factor of 1. 5% (10 cars) and the 10 cars from the proposed development, there is sufficient remaining roadway capa- city with peak hour Route 25 traffic estimated to be 697 cars. The projected vehicular trips as a result of the proposed development will be less than the existing condition and can be 58 safely accommodated on NYS Route 25 and will not result in traffic delays. Existing summer peak p.m. hour trips will be reduced from 17 to 10 and daily trips from 102 to 60. 4 . 5 Impact on Land Use and Zoning Land Use The proposed use is very compatible with surrounding development in that would be an upscale residential community, offering superior accommodations and services (beach, harbor, marina) to prospective residents. Development of the project as proposed would replace non-conforming, substandard, seasonal cottages with housing more in keeping with the area. The development would be in the tradition of existing single family housing and would be less dense than surrounding developments with less than one unit for each two acres of area. Zoning When taken as a whole, and if a "standard" subdivision were to occur, each of 14 to 16 "lots" would encompass more than 5 . 2 acres. However, with concentration of 10 lots on the parcel 's southern end, some lots will fall below that specified by R-80 zoning. The principal use of less than two acre lots are allowed in this zoning district is inconsistent with R-80 which specifies one, detached dwelling on a minimum 80, 000 square foot. The inconsistency is that the lot size will range below 80, 000 square feet to 55, 334 square feet, road frontage will be 299 to 53 feet (200 feet is consistent) and Lots 2/3 and 4/5 will share driveway ROW's. The minimum side yard distance for principal 59 building of 20 feet, the minimum lot depth distance of 250 feet, maximum height (35 feet-2 . 5 stories) and lot coverage are/will be met. In preserving the wetlands, creating a permenant public open space, ridding the site of a non-conforming usage and concentra- ting development on a small portion (26%) of the premises, the proposed action would represent an enhancement in the use of the property. However, it will require a modified, or cluster approval and variances from several components of the R-80 standards. Such approvals are well within the objectives and specific requirements of Chapters 180 and 181. In brief, that ordinance is provided to encourage "conservation of large tracts of land" and allows a minimum lot size of 20, 000 sq. ft. regard- less of zone. Coastal Zone Management Policies Since the project site is located in a coastal zone area, it is relevant to discuss under the topic of land use the project's consistency with the 44 policy statements outlined in the New York Coastal Zone Management (CSM) Program. The Town of Southold is in the process of completing a Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan under the CZM Program for the town's coastal resources. As of the writing of this report, materials are not available yet for public distribution on the findings and goals in the Plan since the Town of Southold Planning Staff is in the process, in conjunction with the Department of State of Surveying Waterfront areas in order to identify problems and goals. 60 While the CZM policies were developed to ensure that actions by state and federal agencies further the revitalization of the waterfront, private investment can also serve as a catalyst to improve waterfront construction and redevelopment. The CZM policies applicable to the proposed action include: 1. Policy #7 : Significant Coastal fish and wildlife habitants will be protected, preserved, and where practical, restored so as to maintain their viability as habitants. Reasoning: This policy is discussed in detail in the ecology section. Suffice to say here that that the development has been designed to mitigate, by its lay- out and dedication at 69% of the property to benefit fish and wildlife habitants. It should be recognized that the site is not pristine, but was and is previously developed with a more intensive (in terms of on site activity) use than proposed. 2 . Policy #11: Buildings and other structures will be sited in the coastal area so as to minimize damage to property and the endangering of human lives caused by flooding and erosing. Reasoning: As discussed in previous sections, all applicable regulations relating to construction within a flood zone will be adhered to. 3 . Policy #12 : Activities or development in the coastal zone will be undertaken so as to minimize damage to natural resources and property from flooding and erosion by protecting natural protective features including beaches, dunes, barrier islands and bluffs. Reasoning: Conformance with Southold and DEC wetland regulations will expand tidal wetland buffers. Adequate site planning to protect beaches and wetlands. 4 . Policy #17 : Non-structural measures to minimize damage to natural resources and property from flooding and erosion shall be used whenever possible. Reasoning: Non-structural measures to be used to minimize damage include setbacks, drainage, floodproof buildings and elevation above the base flood level . 5 . Policy #19 : Protect, maintain, and increase the level and types of access to public water-related recreation resources and facilities. 61 Reasoning: This policy will be enhanced by donation of the unused acreage to conservation groups. 6. Policy #33 : Best management practices will be used to ensure the control of stormwater run-off and combined sewer overflows draining into coastal waters. Reasoning: Wetland, flood zone, Suffolk County Department of Health/Services and Town of Southold regulations and standards, will be followed to permit construction on the property, ensure that best management practices are used to design stormwater runoff and sewerage systems. 7 . Policy #37: Best management practices will be utilized minimize the non-point discharge of excess nutrients, organics and eroded soils into coastal waters. Reasoning: Positive drainage systems, setbacks, low maintenance indigenous vegetation which needs little fertilizer and use of hay bales or other non-structural means to control soil erosion during constructural means to control soil erosion during construction of the home would minimize non-point discharge into surface. Also, wetland buffers on-site will be increased 1. 35 acres by providing a new 75 foot buffer between structures and the tidal wetland line. 4 . 6 Impact on Demographics Community Facilities and Services Community Facilities, Utilities and Services The proposed project will not have a detrimental impact on community facilities. On-site amenities including the common boat slips and beach area will reduce impact to community recreational facilities. The Police Department, Town of Southold, in a July 7 , 1988 letter (Appendix A) has stated that they feel that the Department will have sufficient manpower to service the project area for up to 40 dwelling units. The Greenport Fire Department has, in a July 1, 1988 letter (found in Appendix A) similarly stated that they have sufficient manpower and equipment to service the project and that there is a sufficient water flow to the hydrants through an 8" water main 62 running through the area with a loop in the system connecting it with Bay Shore Road by way of Island View Lane. Water Use Water use will be approximately 1. 0 million gallons per year at 300 gallons per unit per day year round. This is approxi- mately equal to the 1. 3 million gallons per year the existing 31 seasonal cottages currently utilize. Thus, Greenport's and Southold's water resources will not be negatively impacted by the proposed action. on-Site Septic Systems Septic systems will meet all requirements of Suffolk County's Department of Health Services. Additionally, they will meet the tidal wetland setback requirements of both the Town of Southold and NYSDEC. With less to equal water flow but greater lateral spacing and setbacks which protect tidal wetlands, the proposed system will reduce existing impacts currently occuring due to the 31 on-site septic systems. Cultural Resources The proposed development will occur on those portions of the property experiencing and having experienced extensive commercial, residential and agricultural disturbance. This area still con- tains native North American artifacts which, however, experience contexual difficulties due to the prior disturbances. These materials should be excavated, documented and removed from the site to a proper facility for such artifacts prior to roadway construction. Therefore, one month prior to roadway construc- 63 tion, the cottage and proposed road bed areas demonstrating higher test recovery of artifacts will be thoroughly excavated. Prehistoric material will be recovered and removed from the site for preservation. Further, whatever group receives the 57 . 247 preserved acres will receive right-of-way for small scale arch- aeological digs and reconstruction of any prehistoric habitation. The responsible group for such antiquities designated by the easesment will have to seek all other required permissions to conduct such activities. 4 . 7 Impact on Economics The proposed project will have a significant beneficial economic impact to community facilities, services and taxpapers. The demand for services would decrease with the development of seven residential dwellings and the revenues generated will in- crease. Such revenues will be greater than the cost of the actual demands for tax budget related services. (i.e. , empty nesters and a seasonal use results in relatively few school aged children) . Inherent within the tax system is the concept that the more valuable a given piece of taxable property, the more tax revenues it will generate. Given market demands for the geographic loca- tion and the type of housing that is proposed for development, it is estimated that the residential dwelling would be valued at approximately $525, 000 a unit (with the land at $350, 000 to $400, 000 per unit) . Thus, the projected estimate in tax revenues to $75, 000. 00 represents an increase of two times the current 64 I revenues of $36 , 806. 63 . This estimate of revenues to be gener- ated by the development was based upon 1987-1988 tax rates, one half the market value of the units and a tax equalization rate of 7 . 07 . Gross revenues of $75, 000. 00 would be applied to several tax districts but the school district would receiving $36, 500. 00, which accounts for the majority of the revenues. These calculations assume that taxes will be assessed only against individually held parcels and that common parcels will have no tax obligations. 65 Bibliography Greenport Public Schools. 1988 . Profile. H2M Group, P. C. 1968 and 1970 . Comprehensive Public Water Supply Study for Suffolk County, CPWS-24 , Volumes I , II and III. Melville, NY. Jensen, H.M. and Soren, J. 1974 . Hydrogeology of Suffolk County Long Island New York: U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Investigation Atlas HA-501. Logrande, Michael, A. 1987 . Annual Environmental Report. Suffolk County. Long Island Business, Long Island Almanac, 1985. 18th Edition. Long Island Region Planning Board, 1987 . Population Summary for Nassau-Suffolk Towns as Compiled by LILCO. 1981. Population 1980 - School Districts. Hauppauge, NY. . 1978 . Long Island Comprehensive Waste Treatment Management Plan, Volume 1: Summary Plan. Hauppauge, NY. Long Island Regional Planning Board. 1982 . Land Use - 1981. Hauppauge, NY. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. 1984 New York State Air Quality Report, Continuous and Manual Air Monitoring Systems. Annual 1982 , DAR-84-1. Albany, NY: NYSDEC, Air Resources Division. Raymond, Parish, Pine and Weiner, Inc. 1983 , Memorandum to the Southold Planning Board Regarding Analysis of Population and Housing (dated July 25 , 1983) . Prepared as a background study for Master Plan Update. Suffolk County Department of Health Services. 1987 . Suffolk County Sanitary Code, Article 6. Suffolk County Planning Department. Data Book, 1983 . Southold Town. 1985. Zoning Ordinance Amendments for Master Plan Update. Preliminary Report dated December 17 , 1985 . 66 Bibliography (Cont'd) 1957. Zoning Code. Chapter 100 from the Code of the Town of Southold, adopted April 9 , 1957 and amended to 1986. U.S.D.A. 1975. Soil Survey of Suffolk County. U.S.G.S. #161966. Geology and Groundwater Resources of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York. 67 Appendix A Miscellaneous 68 14-16-2 (2;87)-7c ' 617.21 Appendix A SES State Environmental Quality Review FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM Purpose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an orderly manner, whether a prole or action may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer. Frequer ly, there are aspects of a project that are subjective or unmeasureable It is also understood that those who determir significance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may be technically expert in environment analysis. In addition, many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affectii the question of significance The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determinatic process has been orderly, comprehensive in nature, yet flexible to allow introduction of information to fit a project or actio Full EAF 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 projec 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 provide guidance as to whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentiall, large impact. The form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced Part 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentiallvdarge, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not th impact is actually important. DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE—Type 1 and Unlisted Actions CIdentify the Portions of EAF completed for this project: ❑ Part 1 ❑ Part 2 ❑Part 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 or each impact, it is reasonably determined by the lead agency that. ❑ A The project will not result in any large and important impact(s) and, therefore, is one which will not have a significant impact on the environment, thererore a negative declaration will be prepared. ❑ B. Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been required, therefore a CONDITIONED negative declaration will be prepared.' ❑ C. The project may result in one or more la-ge and important impacts that may 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 or Action Narne of Lrad ,\rency Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agencv Title of Responsible Orficer ( =Sgnof Responsible aturerin Lead Agency Signature of Preparer(if different trom responsibleotficer) Date 1 --------------------- PART 1—PROJECT INFORMATION Prepared by Project Sponsor NOTICE. This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant on the environment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E Answers to these giwstions will be conn as part or the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review Provide any add information you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3 It is expected that completion of the full EAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not in new studies, research or investigation If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and sj: each instance. NAME OF ACTION Harborview Landing-Sage Redevelopment and Proposed Parkland LOCATION OF ACTION(Inciude Street Address,Munici alit and Count ) Sae Road, Town of Southold, Sufifo�d County NAME OF APPLICANT/SPONSOR BUSINESS TELEPHONE Harborview, Realty Co. ( 516) 724-2500 ADDRESS 750 Veterans Highway CITY/POHappSTATE au a ZIP CODE NY 11788 NAME OF OWNER(If different) BUSINESS TELEPHONE Harborview Realty Co. ( ) ADDRESS 750 Veterans Highway CITYIPO I STATE ZIP CODE Happauge NY 11788 DESCRIPTION OF ACTION Subdivision of a portion (25,87) of 83.117 acres to provide for single family development of 10 homes. The. remaining 57.247 acres (69%) would remain undeveloped and be dedicated to the Nature Conservancy or an organization which would keep the land in trust and forever wild. 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: [I Urban CIndustrial ❑Commercial []Residential (suburban) ❑Rural (non-r MForest ❑Agriculture INOtherWetlands & 31 exist. substandard residen. 2. Total acreage of project area: 83.117 acres, including 11. 551 acres underwater, cottage APPROXIMATE ACREAGE PRESENTLY AFTER CONVLETIO Meadow or Brushland (Non-agricultural) 21.7 acres 20.8 acrr Forested 27 acres 27 acrr Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland, pasture, etc ) 0 acres 0 aerc Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24, 25 or ECI.) 12.8 acros 1 •8 acrr Water Surface Area 4 acres 4 acrE Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill) 0 acres 0 aerc Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces 6 acres 8 acrr Other (Indicate tti,pe) 11. 6 icres 11.6 acrr 3 What is predominant soil t�,pe(s) on project site and 4 % Haven loam 12% Riverhead Sand loam a. Soil drainage. Ewell drained 38 of til Ce s L bloc ',mte v well Braine<1 2 0, or site CPoorly drained °o of site b. If any agricultural land is involved, how many acres of soil are classified within soil group I through 4 of the Land Classification System/ 0 acres (See 1 NYCRR 3 0) 4 Are there bedrock outcroppings on project site? E]Yes tNo a What is depth to bedrock? N/A (in reet) 2 5Approximate percentage or proposed project site with slopes V,) 10% 100 10-15"0 :::15 or greater °o 6. Is project substantially contiguous to, or contain a building, site, or district, listed on the State or the Natio, Registers of Historic Places? CYes In No C ' Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Rei;ister of National Naturai Landmarks? CYes ; 8. What is the depth of the water table? 8' avq (in feet) 9. Is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source acjUiter? CYes No 10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? 'Yes CNo 11. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is, identihes hreatened or endangerer MYes CNo According to 1973 Endangered Species Act UedS I)UD(DiMUXXXXXOM tiop. Law Section 11-0535 (State) y q MArFh.dhfwk least tern piping plover osprey see a ace a pen. 12. Are there an unique or unusu an orm� on t e project Site? 0 e, cliffs, dunes, otfYer geological formation OYes ONo Describe 1.566-acre island to continue as common beach with deed restricted hanical uses and conservation ROW 13. Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area OYes ®No If yes, explain 14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community? ❑Yes IMNo 15. Streams within or contiguous to project area Wetland Pond Trib Mary to Southold Bay a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is trihutory 16. Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area a. Name Hashamomuck Pond b Size (In acres) 172 ac. approx. 17. Is the site served by existing public utilities? Eyes CNo w1 In zml e Ca) If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? Eyes CNo b) If Yes, will improvements be necessary to allow connection? `;l'es CN'o 18. Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA Section 303 and 304? CYes TNo 19 Is the site located in or substantially contiguous to a Critical_ Environmental Area ueswrlated pursuant to Article 8 of the ECL, and 6 NYCRR 617? CYes CNo 20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes? Yes 'j(-No 13. Project Description 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project sponsor 83.117 acres b Project acreage to be developed 27.0O acres initialiv, 22.00 * acres ultimately c Project acreage to remain undeveloped E 117 acres(74%)-Minus 3.87 acres undeveloped mooring d. Length of project, in miles 0,$5 (If approprmte) area. e If the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion prcoi)mwdN/A ni u, f Number of off-street parkins; spaces existing; 60 protuncd 20 , g. Maximum \.rhicular trigs generated per hour 10 (upon coinniQuon of project)? h. If residential Number and tvpe of housini,' units One F'lmily Tvso f `itikli le F,uniiv Cundorninium Initially _ 10 Ultimately 10 i Dimensions (in teet) or largest proposed structure - 3' S2' --�-- height, width, 125' length j Linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy is? aS 1s XkX Access to Route 25 (Main Road) as existing Sage Rd * Plus 3.87 acre undeveloped morring aria. 2. How much natural material (i e , rock, earth etc ) will be removed from the site? 0 tonstcubic ya. 3 Will disturbed areas be reclaimed? -Yes -No Xi3N/A a. If yes, for what intendcC purpose is the site being reclaimed? b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? 17—Yrs CNo c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? ❑Yes CNo 4 How many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site? 12. 2 acres 5. Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this project? OYes [nNo 6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction 18 months, (including demolition). 7. If multi-phased: a. Total number of phases anticipated _-Ufes_ (number). b. Anticipated date of commencement phase 1 month year, (including demolitior c. Approximate completion date of final phase month year. d. Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases? GYes CNo 8. Will blasting occur during construction? GYes [CNo 9. Number of jobs generated: during construction 1 , after project is complete 2 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project 1 11. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? K3Yes CNo If yes, explain electricRelnrafinn nf water and ervice relocate private road on development portion 12. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? E:Yes XNo 0 sl e. a. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) and amount N/A b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged 13 Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? (XYes CNo Type Sewage 14 Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? GYes ®No Explain 15. Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year Hood plain? X]Yes CNo 16 Will the project generate solid waste? tYes CNo a. If yes, what is the amount per month —� tons b If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used? XYe5 CNo c If yes, give name Private sanitation carters location Town of Southold Landfill d. Will anv wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landtill? GYes ®No e If Yes, explain 17 Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste? GYes XNo a If yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal? N/A tons/month b If yes, what is the anticipated site life? __UL rears 18 Will project use herbicides or pesticides? :]Yes K1No 19 Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? GYes MNo 20 Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels? GYes K]No 21. Will project result in an increase in energy use? MYes CNo If yes , indicate type(s) Domestic electric service (minimal) 22. If water supply is from wells, indicate pumping capacity --IV-A— gallons/minute 23. Total anticipated water usage per day I .nnn !s zllon b� day (equal to current use) 24 -Does protect involve Local. State or Federal funding? []Yes K,,No If Yes, explain 4 •25. Approvals Required: Submrti Tvpe Date City, Town, Village Board CYes X]No City, Town, Village Plannmi; Roard XlYe-; 17No Subdivision/Site plan approval City, Town Zoning Board CYes [I No Subdivision/Site plan approval City, County Health Department CYes CNo Sewage and water Other Local Agencies ®Yes []No Greenport Water District Other Regional Agencies CYes MNo State Agencies XYes CNo Wptlands Permit Federal Agencies []Yes (kNo 2ow Trustees X Yes Wetlands . Dloning and Planning !nformation 1 . Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision? nYes CNo • If Yes, indicate decision required: Ozoning amendment ❑zoning variance Cspecial use permit Osubdivision Osite plan Onew/revision of master plan Cresource management plan ❑other 2. What is the zoning classification(s)of the site? Residential-80 3. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning? 31 units existing 4. What is the proposed zoning of the site? N/A 5 What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning? N/A C6 Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? X]Yes C 7 What are the predominant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a Y. mile radius of proposed action? Resident landuseis primarily single—family residential on average lot size of 10,000 sq. 8ana-I �clfaionncPmpatiil3le with adjoin ing;surroundinq land uses within a mile? nYes C 9 If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how manv lots are proposed? PreseryPd-2sections 57.24-, a. What is the minimum lot size proposed?2S R7arragffor 10 unit single family development 10 Will proposed action require any authorization(s) tY 4taaotAr tA-or sewer or water districts? ❑Yes 11No 11 Will the proposed action create a dernand for any community provided services (recreation, education, poli fire protection)? Is Yes CNo a If yes is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? i yes CNo 12. Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? CYes Mt a If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? CYes CNo D. Informational Details Attach any additional intormation as may he needed to clarity N,our project If there are or may be am- adver impacts associates with your proposal, please discuss ~Lich ir„nac;s .111d the measures which you propose to mitigate avoid them E. Verification eertity that the information provided ,ibove is true to the hest or my knowledge ApplicanCSponsor tiame Etl-airn Associates for Harb.orview Realt Co. Date Signature �it� l —� 7 Title � > If tfie action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proeeedir with this assessment. 5 - 14.14.11 r:37)—,,c 21 - Appendix B SEAR 5iate Environmental Quality Review Visual FAF Addendum This form may be used to provide acjd t ()nal information relating to Question 11 of Part 2 of the Full EAF. (To be completed by Lead Agency) Visibility Distance Between Project and Resource in Miles) 1. Would the project be visible from: 0-'/a '/a-'/z '/z•3 3.5 5+ • A parcel of land which is dedicated to jild available ❑ 13 (2- C3 ❑ to the public for the use, enjoyment and �r)preciation of natural OF man-made scenic qualities? • An overlook or parcel of land dedicated to public ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ observation, enjoyment and appreciation of natural or man-made scenic qualities? • A site or structure listed on the National or State ❑ ❑ ❑ Registers of Historic Places? • State Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • The State Forest Preserve? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ M • National Wildlife Refuges and state game refuges? ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ • National Natural Landmarks and other outstanding ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ I natural features? • National Park Service lands? ❑ ❑ ❑ ® ❑ • Rivers designated as National or State VV Id, Scenic ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ or Recreational? • Any transportation corridor of high c �(>v,ure, such ❑ ❑ ED as part of the Interstate System, or Arntrak? - ❑ ❑ • A governmentally established or designate(I interstate ❑ Cl ❑ ❑ or inter-county foot trail, or one formally l,rr)posed for establishment or designation? • A site, area, lake, reservoir or highwav dr;i(lnated as ❑ ❑ scenic? ® ❑ ❑ • Municipal park, or designated open sp„ - ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • County road? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ • State? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ ❑ • Local read? ® ❑ • ❑ ❑ __ 2. Is the visibilityof the project seasonal) 1; , p n cd by summer foliage, but visible during other seasons) ❑Yes No 3. Are any of the resources checked 1n quest:,ri I us during wnich the project will be visible-) ed by the, public during the time of year 2Yes ❑No DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING VISd:iL ENVIRONMENT 4 From each item checked in y, ! environment. check those which generally describe the surroun Within * mle *'/• mile I i Essentially undeveloped ❑ C3Forested ® 1:1Agricultural C3Suburban residential Industrial ❑ C3Commercial Urban ❑ ❑ River, Lake, Pond ❑ -® Cliffs, Overlooks Cl ❑ Designated Open Space ❑ C3 Flat ❑ Hilly Mountainous ❑ Q Other (Harbor) NOTE: add attachments as needed Ul 5. Are there visually similar protects "h mile ®Yes "lo '1 miles ®Yes F.No '2 miles ®Yes '3 miles ®Yes "o ' Distance from project site are prc,.idecl for assistance. Substitute other distances as appropriate EXPOSURE 6. The annual number of viewers lil.e:, observe the proposed project is 100 NOTE: When user data is unavailable cr umi nown, use best estimate. CONTEXT 7. The situation or activity in which '.ers are engaged while viewing the g proposed action is FREQUENCY Holidays/ Activity Travel to and from work Daily Weekly Weekends Seasonally Involved in recreational activities ❑ ❑ Routine travel by residents At a residence At worksite ❑ ❑ Other ❑ ❑ ❑ I 2 AA { r THE GREENPORT FIRE DEPARTM . July 1,J19$$`� J A C Planning Corp. S Bond St. Suite 300 Great Neck, N.Y. 11021 •` i.sr e Attn:, Mark Trapani Dear Mr. Trapani; In regard to your letter of June 7th. ,dealing with the:Harborvi_ project. The following are answers to your questions;-:'r ,�• ,;' 1. Yes, the Greenport Fire Department has sufficient manpower*`.` _ 4" -meet to service this:. project. 2. No, there would be no access problem, but I would. request tYiat�' the tree line overhanging the roadway cut back beyond the have a question: Is there any plans,for now or in the future, of;bonaect - Sage Road and Bay Shore Road thru Island View Lane? 3. Yes, I believe there is a sufficient water flow to the hydrants�Yori T�.. department needs in the area. There is a 8" water main runningthr6ugh=t3 Y:> `'�;; area with a loop in the system connecting it with Bay Shore Road by: of Island View Lane. ' .i" J{ Richard A. Hulse � t Chief of the Department:• ' vi a o5�Ff0(,Y^ -i DANIEL WINTERS CHIEF OF POLICE ,Yo,�O� POLICE DEPARTMENT, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PECONIC. NEW YORK. 11958 TELEPHONE EMERGENCY DIAL 911 ADMINISTRATIVE: 516 765-2600 516 734-6022 July 7, 1988 JAC Planning Corp. 8 Bond Street, Suite 300 Great Neck, N.Y. 11021 Attn: :Sark Trapani RE: Harborview Landing Southold, New York Dear Mr. Trapani: I am in receipt of your letter dated June 7, 1988. I appreciate your requesting my opinion on the proposed Harborview Landing project. It is difficult for me to ascertain how many people will be occupy- ing the 40 unit project. Without this information I cannot officially respond to question #1. However, I feel that the Southold Town Police Department will have sufficient manpower to service the project area. With reference to question # two, realizing that Sage Road is a private road, not maintained by the town, certainly in times of a snow- storm, hurricane or other freak storms with tides above the road, it would not be possible to service the area. During normal conditions the proposed site would present no problem to the police department. Very t my ours, �06L K:-- H. DANIEL WINTERS CHIEF OF POLICE HDW:j k ---ASTAL F:S_ b :::LZL:FE HABITAT RATING FORM Name of Area: Conkling Point County(ies) : Suffolk Town(s) : Southold FEB. 1 6 18 a7 7.5' Quadrangle(s) : Greenport, NY; Southold. NY (IS) (R) (ISXR) Individual Replace- Final Score ability Score ECOSYSTEM RARITY (ER) : 9 z 1.0 = 9,0 ----- --------- ------ Relatively small, undeveloped, sand spit and marsb, rare on north fork of Long Island. SPECIES VULNERABILITY (SV) : 48.5 z 1.0 = 48.5 --------- --------- ------ Least tern (E) and piping plover (T) nesting. additive division: 36 + 25/2 = 48.5. HUMAN USE (HU) : 0 z 1.0 = 0.0 --------- --------- No significant fish or wildlife related human uses of the area. POPULATION LEVEL (FL) : 4.0 z 1.0 = 4.0 ------ --------- One of the two largest concentrations of nesting least terns on the north fork in 1983 and 1984, of county-level significance. REPLACEABILITY (R) : 1.0 Uncertain of ability to replace. N SIGNIFICANCE _ [(ERsR) + (S7xR) + (HUzR) + (PLzR)J = 61.5 : ICt�i:l 1SH A:;D WILDLIFE HABITAT': ** C011 _NG POI 1,t- LOCATIG,: AND DESCRIPTIO? OF HABITAT : Conkling Point is located approximately two miles southwest of the Village of Greenport , on S:,elter Island Sound , in the Town oL Southolc: , Suffolk; County ( 7 . 5 ' Quadrangles: Greenport , td.Y. ; anu Southold , N.Y . ) . The fish and wildlilfe habitat is approxirrwtely 25 acre: in size , con5�? =t_n5 of a nairow, sparsely vegetated , sand peninsula , a small pzOtectei. ba', , salt- marsh , and tidal flats . Conkling POlnL .S gene, allY undeveloped and privately owned . howcvcl , the area i., borde�c� by high 6ensity residential develop-,er,t- LG Lhe noit:., rcculcing in some recreat10na: diStur�.ance OL the habitat . FISH AND WILDLIFE VALUES: Conkling Point is a relatively small coastal wetland area, similar in nature to many other points around the Peconic Bays shoreline, but important as a habitat- for wildlife . This area has served for many years as a nesting site for least terns (E) and piping plovers (T) , with both species present in 1983 , 1984 and 1985 . In 1985 an estimated 25 pairs of ]east terns and 2 pairs of piping plover were observed nesting in the area. In 1984, appro::imately 100 pairs of least tens and 5 pater;, of piping plovers nested in the area . Approximately 45 pairs of least terns and 6 pairs of piping plovers were present in 1983 . The concentrations of terns nesting at Conkling Point were the second largest and largest on the north fork c.1 Long Islan;, .n 1963 an6 1984 , respectively. Ove:ail , the POPUlaticn levels of least terns and piping plovers were unusual in Suffolk County. The tidal wetlands at Conkling Point serve as feeding areas for the least terns and many other wildlife species . There are no significant human use activities associated with the wildlife resources of this area. IMPACT ASSESSMEi Z: Nesting shorebird species inhabiting undeveloped sand beaches of Long Island are highly vulncrabie to disturbance by humans from mid-April through July. Significant pedestrian traffic or recreational vehicle use of the Conkling Point peninsula could easily eliminate the te:n and plover populations , and should be minimized . Fencing and/or annual posting of the area should be provided to Delp protect the nesting bird species . Unregulated dredge spoil disposal in this area would be detrimental , but such activities may be designee; to mainta.n or improve the habitat , by setting back vegetative succession . Loss of the salt marsh habitat , through excavation oL _ filling , would reduce its value as a foc,u proU-UC-rig c.iife zpecies . Introuuc'on or attraction of -.:a:::-:niioG _ ca�.LJ« to zhc- area wou16 also be GetrintaC: l to the peru:a -. 'ns __ ne.:) �iiy ,me' ui1C�a . KNOWLEDGEABLE COITIACTS: Tora Har;. or Andrew N.Y .S. Deoartraent of Sta'-e Division of Coastal Resources C-. Waterfront Revitalizatiu„ 162 Washington Avenue Albany , NV 12231 Phone: (518 ) 474-3642 hairy Knot.,, Wildlife manage i 1•;TSilLC - Region 1 State University of Nev- _oLh , nu1i:--.nq 40 Stony Broo4 , NY 117/90 P1•,one: (5_0) 751-7900 Louise Harrison Suffolk Count} Department of Healt., Services Bureau of Environmental Managema;it County Center Riverhead, NY 119"1 Phone: (51G) 5406-3064 Dare MacLean , Staff Biologist Seatuck zesearch Prog:a-r Cornell University Lauviu" rj oL' Ornithology P .O. Box 31 Islip, NY 11751 Pr,oilC : (516) 5061-69uc N SDEC - Significant aabita: T.'pit Wildlife Resources Cent-e.: Delmar , 17Z 12054 Phone: ( 518 ) 439-7486 Appendix B Wetland Data 69 3 r TRLp7EES .T SCOTT L. HARRIS N. Brederyer. III. President �, '�& Supervisor ry P. St", Vice President ' '�1�1 �b� Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Albertr Krupski, Jr. P.O. Box 1179 John i Bednoski, Jr. Southold, New York 11971 Jin B. Tuthill BOARD OF TOWN TRUSTEES Fax (516) 765-1823 Telep►one (516) 765-1892 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone (516) 765-1800 May 18, 1990 Michael P. Bontge B. Laing Associates 260 Main Street Northport, NY 11768 RE: Sage Property Dear Mr. Bontge: With respect to the Board of Trustees field survey of May 17, 1990 wherein we walked the Sage Property with yourself and associates, please be advised: 1. The Southold Trustees have no objection to using the wetland line determinations as set forth on our field survey this date for those Freshwater Wetlands lying south of the home- owners association called parcel "A" . If a more restrictive/protective Freshwater Wetland line is developed by the N.Y.S.D.E.C. , it should be used in any submission for a Trustee' s permit. 2. Plans for the homeowners association parcel "A" as far as boat dockage, etc. should be considered in the application to the Trustees for a wetland permit. Please contact this office prior to any submission in this area. 3 . Homeowners open space "bathing area" should be reviewed for colonial shorebird use/nesting by the N.Y.S.D.E.C. or in a manner acceptable to the NYSDEC as to permit its use as the intended community bathing area. Please call if the Trustees may assist in this review. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Region 1 Headquarters SUNY, Building 40, Stony Brook, NY 11790-2356 (516) 751-1596 Thomas C. Jorling Commissioner Date: J !To: 3 Tf ve N F i i N i-'F_ v 1 TC 0 '/ 8- LA I NG Representing: Dear fVkINVfT�►-1 RE: FRESHWATER WETLAND BOUNDARY CONFIRMATION TAX MAP # I( (X) - ��— - _j - 12 -4 4 )Z LOCATION � ez Ctc� ,� Tc �cril�r �T �rNT�` �iHoc�� In response to your request, a field inspection was made of the above referenced property. The freshwater wetland boundary, as flagged by your firm, has been confirmed for the purposes of this application. The Freshwater Wetlands Act, Article 24 of the Environmental Conservation Law, regulates most development activities within 100 feet of this boundary. Should you apply for a permit, your site plan must depict the flagged wetland boundary as located by a licensed surveyor. I strongly recommend that you promptly hire a surveyor to plot these flags. The boundary should be noted on the survey or site plan as follows: FRESHWATER WETLAND BOUNDARY AS FLAGGED BY (YOUR NAME) AND APPROVED FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS APPLICATION BY N.Y.S.D.E.C. ON / c, / `-(C If you have any questions, please contact the Bureau of Environmental Protection at (516) 751-1596. Sincerely, ; Steven Jay Sanford Regional Manager Bureau of Environmental Protection SJS:ki cc: 1JCOMLOG Q PAPLOG MAP aCARD FILE TABLE B-1 Vegatation Summary Sample Sage 1 - Wetland Common Regional % Basal Area, Stems or Cover By Laver Name Indicator Overstory Understory Herbaceous Common reed FACW 60 Lance-leaved goldenrod FACU-, 38 FACW+ 10 OPEN 100 2 90 TOTAL 100 100 100 Sample Sage 2 - Wetland Common Regional % Basal Area, Stems or Cover By Laver Name Indicator Overstory Understory Herbaceous Common reed FACW 65 Common elder FACW- 35 Poison ivy FAC 20 Lance-leaved goldenrod FACU 60 OPEN 100 0 20 TOTAL 100 100 100 Sample Sage 3- Wetland Common Regional % Basal Area, Stems or Cover By Laver Name Indicator Overstory Understory Herbaceous Pin oak FACW 94. 1 Highbush blueberry FACW- 21 Arrowwood FAC 79 Poison ivy FAC 15 Sassafras FACU- 5.9 10 Sphagnum moss 40 Dwarf enchanters nightshade FACW 20 OPEN 0 0 15 TOTAL 100 100 100 68 TABLE B-1 (CONT'D) Vegetation Summary Sample Sage 4 - Upland Common Regional % Basal Area, Stems or Cover By Layer Name Indicator Overstory Understory Herbaceous Paper birch FACU 52.4 Sassafras FACU- 37 18 Black cherry FACU 19.4 21 Pignut hickory FACU- 28. 2 16 Arrowwood FAC 26 Dwarf enchanter's nighshade FACW 60 Blackberry FACU- 2 Virginia creeper FACU 10 Poison ivy FAC OPEN 0 0 10 TOTAL 100 100 100 Sample Sage 5 - Wetland Common Regional % Basal Area, Stems or Cover By Laver Name Indicator Overstory Understory Herbaceous Red maple FAC 30. 6 Gray birch FAC 8 . 6 Sweet pepperbush FAC+ 40 Highbush blueberry FACW- 53 Swamp white oak FACW+ 60.8 7 Poison ivy FAC 40 Marsh fern FACW+ 50 OPEN 0 0 10 TOTAL 100 100 100 69 TABLE B-1 (CONT'D) Vegetation Summary Sample Sage 6 - Wetland Common Regional % Basal Area, Stems or Cover By Layer Name Indicator Overstory Understory Herbaceous Common reed FACW 88 Swamp white oak FACW+ 100 12 2 Poison ivy FAC 50 Lance-leaved goldenrod FACU 5 OPEN 0 0 10 TOTAL 100 100 100 Sample Sage 7 - Upland Common Regional % Basal Area. Stems or Cover By Layer Name Indicator Overstory Understory Herbaceous Black cherry FACU 14. 6 Pignut hickory FACU- 85.4 39 5 Sassafras FACU- 33 20 Rough-leaf golden-rod OBL 28 Dwarf enchanter's nightshade FACW 10 Japanese honeysuckle FAC- 60 Wild strawberry FACU 2 OPEN 0 0 3 TOTAL 100 100 100 70 TABLE B-1 (CONT'D) Vegetation Summary Sample Sage 8 - Upland Common Regional Basal Area, Stems or Cover By Laver Name Indicator Overstory Understory Herbaceous Multiflora rose FACU 21 Groundsel tree FACW 13 Common waxmyrtle FAC 16 Tall goldenrod FACU- 50 20 Blue joint grass FACW+ 30 Orchard-grass FACU 50 OPEN 100 0 0 TOTAL 100 100 100 71 �A l ��i `' •i .�'.f. •a.. w, ::47.,4 s7 .: ?. ,,. MI pl- 4. �'Si-ti ; �`:�((AA v.2:,;.vy �.'ri'r._ _ Y.'fK. rJ�' •'_ S - '.�a '�l.t' h. ,t,+�l,:y /' ;�1Fw�y. • .: ;. _ t • 24 •{� 4.T' ir.�� I� ��► J X11 • 3 429 X00' ` •./ • 'ir..,{(��� •gip v •'1 •�r+a-. /.c '. �j!' .;r �;IG :r•�4, ,I, 1 - - - Y �o , Pipes toot,oN��'" ��. Vii- 60, ve �. •• i. ti: hfsh ,� . �• • t�'Shiloh > ° a ,p s 30 4 5' lo o 20 o r ... �.. 30 ��, ♦ Conkling Pt " 5�i ✓ to / — ��• • dds / 7 Pon / 4550000m.N. SO-4. . . ._ 9t + • yyy a Jennings F� 90 to �� .� Beixedon �o. ' t- S h Y0 �, � •Estates '• o :•, / ,,\��i a n 310 000 3 IS 20 � 53LA ��� w v~, . :� '�• ��• .C t4 I zs `J 2 foundersLandO Park R N F. /, T F, R 65 \�. I .S I. AS N l7 TABLE B-1 Vegatation Summary Sample Sage 1 - Wetland Common Regional % Basal Area, Stems or Cover By Layer Name Indicator Overstory Understory Herbaceous Common reed FACW 60 Lance-leaved goldenrod FACU-, 38 FACW+ 10 OPEN 100 2 90 TOTAL 100 100 100 Sample Sage 2 - Wetland Common Regional % Basal Area, Stems or Cover By Layer Name Indicator Overstory Understory Herbaceous Common reed FACW 65 Common elder FACW- 35 Poison ivy FAC 20 Lance-leaved goldenrod FACU 60 OPEN 100 0 20 TOTAL 100 100 100 Sample Sage 3- Wetland Common Regional % Basal Area, Stems or Cover By Layer Name Indicator Overstory Understory Herbaceous Pin oak FACW 94 . 1 Highbush blueberry FACW- 21 Arrowwood FAC 79 Poison ivy FAC 15 Sassafras FACU- 5. 9 10 Sphagnum moss 40 Dwarf enchanters nightshade FACW 20 OPEN 0 0 15 TOTAL 100 100 100 70 TABLE B-1 (CONT'D) Vegetation Summary Sample Sage 4 - Upland Common Regional Basal Area, Stems or Cover By Laver Name Indicator Overstory Understory Herbaceous Paper birch FACU 52 .4 Sassafras FACU- 37 18 Black cherry FACU 19.4 21 Pignut hickory FACU- 28. 2 16 Arrowwood FAC 26 Dwarf enchanter's nighshade FACW 60 Blackberry FACU- 2 Virginia creeper FACU 10 Poison ivy FAC OPEN 0 0 10 TOTAL 100 100 100 Sample Sage 5 - Wetland Common Regional % Basal Area, Stems or Cover By Layer Name Indicator Overstory Understory Herbaceous Red maple FAC 30. 6 Gray birch FAC 8 . 6 Sweet pepperbush FAC+ 40 Highbush blueberry FACW- 53 Swamp white oak FACW+ 60. 8 7 Poison ivy FAC 40 Marsh fern FACW+ 50 OPEN 0 0 10 TOTAL 100 100 100 71 TABLE B-1 (CONT'D) Vegetation Summary Sample Sage 6 - Wetland Common Regional % Basal Area, Stems or Cover By Layer Name Indicator Overstory Understory Herbaceous Common reed FACW 88 Swamp white oak FACW+ 100 12 2 Poison ivy FAC 50 Lance-leaved goldenrod FACU 5 OPEN 0 0 10 TOTAL 100 100 100 Sample Sage 7 - Upland Common Regional Basal Area, Stems or Cover By Layer Name Indicator Overstory Understory Herbaceous Black cherry FACU 14 . 6 Pignut hickory FACU- 85. 4 39 5 Sassafras FACU- 33 20 Rough-leaf golden-rod OBL 28 Dwarf enchanter's nightshade FACW 10 Japanese honeysuckle FAC- 60 Wild strawberry FACU 2 OPEN 0 0 3 TOTAL 100 100 100 72 TABLE B-1 (CONTID) Vegetation Summary Sample Sage 8 - Upland Common Regional % Basal Area, Stems or Cover By Laver Name Indicator Overstory Understory Herbaceous Multiflora rose FACU 21 Groundsel tree FACW 13 Common waxmyrtle FAC 16 Tall goldenrod FACU- 50 20 Blue joint grass FACW+ 30 Orchard-grass FACU 50 OPEN 100 0 0 TOTAL 100 100 100 73 =77T 77_. . . 77a. _ _._ 9 BORING No. A BORING o. 6 BORING o. C BORING o. ® BORING Izo. E BORING No. E DATE: 11/7/88 SURFACE ELEVATION: DATE: 11/7/88 SURFACE ELEVATION: DATE: 11/6/88 SURFACE ELEVATION: DATE: 11/6/88 SURFACE ELEVATION: DATE: 11/7/88 SURFACE ELEVATION: DATE= 11/7/88 SURFACE ELEVATION: DEPTH SPOON AMPLE CASING DEPTH SPOON AMPLE CASING DEPTH SPOON AMPLE CASING DEPTH SPOON AMPLE CASING DEPTH SPOON AMPLE CASING DEPTH SPOON AMPLE CASING FEET BLOWS No. SAMPLE DESCRIPTION BLOWS FEET BLOWS No. SAMPLE DESCRIPTION BLOWS FEET BLOWS No. SAMPLE DESCRIPTION BLOWS FEET BLOWS No. SAMPLE DESCRIPTION BLOWS FEET BLOWS No. SAMPLE DESCRIPTION BLOWS FEET BLOWS No. SAMPLE DESCRIPTION BLOWS 1 TOPSOIL 1 TOPSOIL 1 TOPSOIL 1 TOPSOIL 1 TOPSOIL LOAM FILL - COARSE TO LOAM LOAM LOAM LOAM MEDIUM DARK 16 10 18 11 11 18 BROWN SAND 20 27 COARSE TO FINE 14 18 MEDIUM TO FINE 27 33 18 23 W L 3 '4' 11 1S MEDIUM TO FINE 26 30 AND SILT COARSE TO MEDIUM BROWN SAND, TRACESOME CJ BROWN SAND, SOME a 5 BROWN SAND, 5 BROWN SAND .AND COARSE TO MEDIUM j 5 MEDIUM TO FINE 5 BR �SROREN GRAVEL, SOME ,et 14 SOME MEDIUM TO 10 22 15 SOME 11 GRAVEL, SOME BROWN SAND, SOME �yEI, SILT u 14 FINE GRAVEL, 26 L, SOME 1S SILT 21 2 COARSE TO FINE w 17 SOME SILT 26 31 26 34 BROWN SAND, SOME 21 W L 610' MEDIUM TO /�L 5�,1 GRAY SILT - COARSE TO FINE W/L 699' GRAY SILT BROWN SAND, FINE GRAVEL MEDIUM TO FINE COARSE TO FINE SOME MEDIUM { 10 10 BROWN SAND, SOME � 10 BROWN SAND, SOME I 10 To FINE GRAVEL 10 w L 6' 9' 10 GRAY SILT GRAVEL, SOME MEDIUM TO FINE 10 18 x 11 2j COARSE TO FINE 31 39 SILT 22 36 GRAVEL 11 14 W L 7'9' 15 jg COARSE TO FINE 30 ~ COARSE TO FINE y 30 BROWN SAND, 44 41 14 21 BROWN SAND, SOME BROWN SAND, SOME GRAVEL MEDIUM TO TO FINE SOME MEDIUM TO i z ! I FINE GRAVEL ~ jj � 3 15 a 15 15 15 15 15 # 18 15 ? 11 14 15 ,`�., 15 18 16 MEDIUM TO FINE 27 13 x 24 24 BROWN SAND, 30 1 18 18 22 0 TRACE FINE 1 GRAVEL, TRACE ! 11 0 10 SILT 19 10 13 ! 20 13 14 20 15 19 20 13 18 20 19 21 ? 20 15 19 20 15 14 .3 � F 4 Y Y Q, i \ eD{ r I ti %06 &�b Q l �. IJ L • i I i 4 S OUTHOL� BAY r - DEPTH : VERTICAL DISTANCE IN FEET BELOW SAMPLE DESCRIPTION : SOIL DESCRIPTIONS ARE BY VISUAL �+ p DRAWN IJ013 No. SURFACE ELEVATION . EXAMINATION Of SOIL SAMPLES TEST BORING REPORT BY ' RECOVERED FROM SPLIT SPOON 4257 SPOON BLOWS : THE NUMBER OF TIMES A 2 INCH SAMPLER . OUTSIDE DIAMETER SPLIT SPOON ` t SAMPLER IS STRUCK BY A 140 POUND WATER LEVEL (W/L) : NOTED UNDER S%AMPLE DESCRIPTION SAGE { HAMMER FREE FALLING A VERTICAL AT THE ELEVATI )N WATER WAS DISTANCE OF 30 INCHES TO ADVANCE ENCOUNTERED. G R E E N P O R T , NEW YORK THE SAMPLER , INDICATED IN 6 INCH INCREMENTS . CASING BLOWS : THE NUMBER OF TIMES A 23 INCH °D INSIDE DIAti1ETE►' OPEN— ENDED CASING SPOON (� � /� �. �� BORIlG II� C. SHEET SAMPLE NUMBER : THE DESIGNATED NUMBER OF THE CASING PIPE IS 'TRUCK BY A 300 V A E E 1� � N SAMPLE OF SOIL MATERIAL RECOVERED POUND HAMMER "REE FALLING A SIZES 2. 5" 2. 0" FROM THE INDICATED DEPTH. VERTICAL DISTANCE OF 18 INCHES � FIT- ONE VILLAGE PLAZA Z TO ADVANCE TH CASING PIPE 12 HAMMER (WEIGHT IN POUNDS) 300 140 .' t Z rl I y KINGS PARK, NEW YORK 11754 (516) 544-0404 of INCHES. HAMMER (FALL IN INCHES) 18 30 p _. _ . .. — _ . ... —.. . _.__. .. _ _.,_w w.w....__v ..._.. . t.........._ _... .,,. ._. ., _I 'll _ O JO ��O O O U / O O O GENE RAL NOTES: / I L".AF' PRLF'ARED BY LOCKWOOD,K!-SSLFR 8 BARTLETT, INC RY PHOTOGRAMMETRIC METHODS. DAVE OF PHOTOGRAPHY MARCH 10, 1984 2 GRID SHOWN HEREON IS IN THE NEW YORK STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM (LONG ISLAND ZONE) / 3. VERTICAL DATUM IS THE NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929 ( MEAN SEA LEVEL, SANDY HOOK,N.J.) + 100 0 100 200 300 n LEGEND SCALE I"= 100' CONTOUR INTERVAL 2' PAVED ROAD UNPAVED ROAD TRAILS -- - -- — --- Iy BUILDING vl 171 ' r_ y - WOODED AREA INDIVIDUAL TREE �1 WATERLINE F C-,JLj _-.1 rJ C L)' V E R T E � n �T- • `; h".aRSN vl PENCE --�—�- --x ----x— ' til," i•1,7,`. , 7YF':�. �}'�a •:t� �': a�l'.. iFJ'.A! LI`)HT POLE o---� e", Gq1 °.4J:JL-1 V, U I ILI TY POLE POLE o - -I - _ lc� tP ? h"+ 'CHOLE OMH Y Y /"/�/ Tl -�It.. + moi.. �--- .�" -► w-�+ P L T A I N G WALL -V -- — - —p- «- 14.2 x / / _ ., BULKHEAD 12.1 v / x r i PIER OR DOCK 1== T -- -- 1, ,' ,� ', f� L..lShJL�'�'�' -f%' i...l 'i t-'(' :Jt' fi'..1��.._.�„'-1 °;-��:.•��,3' �,/^-.- ,..f;," �t ,� � � r.1: . .�.^ Per- ,.,r l..�yl .h1M, ,- j C /� RAILROAD TRACKS - --- - I - - -- /�-`y , _ � • , � ,tile ;' SPOT ELEVATION X 6.9 -�(--- i' / x -� 12.5 '�= ' WATER ELEVATION Wf 52 1011 10 .76 10.8 x / x - 58 9.9 10 -ILI!t X 3S 111. - !r r; ' `� .i 95 v'7 \ --- '` . t —moi ,,G_,. ..�- / / (/f �•►� �f �.. \\'� ` Alt,- 4 `.'_- [^, �"'�! \ , ---, � � - ```"``.-- - •� - `r'-•-,.,, ' � .::�==�' '' `r; 'y �`' ,-- �,iia ,'1:r,<"� f. r` f J /01 .,.."�. \ t , \ � �:I+.,-j. .-- r �+, 1� a � rl ri r '� .i-` r "" � �/ry G! �`..�J._,,,,-,W /�' -^_-��__„T-���'..-� (r �•^r `J I "�''�., ,_ ```.*. �J - � —_--'"�t� "//�" J 7.I 1 ' 11 ° �� { \ �Ip 1 \ '� `x� }'/ 's jw - 1\}`� (.rl �P' IG f ,Ta ;<.•\ `j w 3S' �F' �y7 / r \ 7. 1 I \ - / t t 8.3 �, . 1 18 3 ' t '\ , �/.r,' •(,;_ � ' � 70 1 \� � -}r� <„ 1 � .� � .�•,.- '� i ' ��c...,a�--'�:�.+... }"_� 1 ,x, `S 1 \ , Y/ \\\ Nt 1 f�9 � ! 2>+ t� x 4wt ( 1/ /.ci,.1� 1 S f„ l /✓ f�_ �w Q �1'�'..,�� �'f ar.? .:_l �Z��.. i.L.i - � ' }' I � -r ,�� .-� r< �• _1 l �, 1� �J ''�._� \ \•{ J •� � ' }�, �; -\ y\ ,\ \ J ,�ti/ _ �� rr I �,�..� � ;I y � •� �,�; : `y, � r�r:---�- (i!• ��.i � /:! {��"Y.-`:% Q , 7.I _/' i Y� —4 t., 1 _ X I ".' � r,, X J U. 1 �3 I - �-... � I� `, '� � _y.__ ,r _.-4t `T1 � f ! '�” � � �� -._� �i � l Y---•''�"1 -- -t -�-� Rr \�� --r ��/ _j \ ' '-}1^- . - -------µy1 �• ---'_'^�- }I- y ��(/ - ` pJV 42 r-. I jI ' ) j �� � M �- SAND 3.0 3.4 / + Acre _l N I 1 N ; x x : - 1. / , 566 0 Area /c 83 83 TO Fx _ — - - — C.. ,.. '1��� �...-,L.,l �'�j i}✓t ��,1 •1:, �"f''".":�i..;F" �'_� (I"/r'^��{ � — ', 1 �� \\ \ ' •'' _ r / _ � l 2 � �.k i p'-i:,. t. �.!> t Zi• ' 1, ~t Iter i��f t •.,/.- ..".r , f��t a.Y�r �1 .. . 'Y !"... . �. 1 /� i Y, IN tiro i•t :�+ / L • B� YIIe `� L � 1�r "1` ...r', �T ( •i l v ... ,„- ♦ ! '" r+ / t-+,1 �+'a.:� �: 4.. e �•..i '",.,,.,,.�.-. , ,,.,. �-W{.q^a y.f -- \1♦ �� 1 <^^"�.✓p*..'.'-+'rr'` i r eF � '�f � 1l��� '^D .�Y � fi• � sir + t - f r » /% �-''.-,�",,.,, ?,- 1/.• - ('; <? / (.�• - 'f.. _. 1 � : -x - -, crr..t.. , Cl I -4- _J_N /�/ .._... yr_a»+ ne•,.+.,..em.-,e...,..ren—.cam.... .- ._,_-.._.�5 ' f" C-3 r-F 1` 1'"":d`'.L r..0 t',."T f"'A T 0 rl C- - r L I\C!'N!-r dr [- E Sp I : j '4 000 j 04 `M I CJS\a / i/ R SITf i 100 / j 0 100 200' 300 OWL SCALE : I"= 100' '��7"° ,,,f� ,r �+ ,• CONTOUR I"JTERVAL : 2' i / a ( / 10410 /� ' / £3 COWS x X 103 19 f l l I 13 `t \' / - f. -;1 LOCATION MAP / ; /� — -\--\ x / `\ x 2 6 / / % - • r .,. �3 \ SCAI[ 1 ', 900' 3 6 42 i O . X - e ❑ Q N _ ' '\ ` O-Z � / '\ �' li/ � � /','moi< :,,•; f ``-a ... . ' / \ , 555 14 • " C '1 ifI } �6 E. ��f� j /' ,�', �:. �'kr- .A. 1"X .,r .. r•' ? \ / \ \\ ( x 70 x ,ILL it x 54 ', 1'� \/ O � �- - �-- � ter. 1 '} �� i �\ — ---• ., /- `` -=•�=-_..Y, � ` -, r, -- _ - -- / 3c 7'r --- - _ - v 5 r � � � �.�--�-�,.�- � �1�1, C � /� 1Z ,cam / e \ \ 1 / 28 t )fi / . \ t\ �\ -� \ i �\ , / '\ ' /r aak � '' 5 9 -AIL // / j \// r / / r.•�/ .�, �r �/ '`/ -4 C.7 �// /r '��a >IL '� 1.7 5.8 10 amu/ x X 7.I \ f ) / x '�j. �l i` `� 'x ` IL 1 C1 / /, / 41 / 7.C / / /r «- . '.. '-^ \� = (/ `;, \, ` y �'•\—' ' \ �` \ '\ x 10 3 ' .tom ✓�_ J'^ _L._....�,....C...w'•',// \�'a', \ j / / / / �G_„ ./' .F ✓- _ -� � . ,. .\ \ ' - f_. r i`_ / r , //j/� f - ,.i. ,a' �-••C. ,.` - ... ..a, ._.„,,.w,,,.,,.,,..,r / i ,..rP "/ ~/r5 \ ' \ \\ \\•\ \\� _ 6 x � moi\\ �� _ / � � _ � .t . .4 \, � �' _ �. ,r.-,^••”' _ � - .._1.1. -""L'�"_` /- ,� ,/'"'�• ' � +, •\ �, � \ ---- -- -- G I � � � \\ \ �'\ � _� I ��-�. '� _.��. � -_ _ r- ,fir'�{ - ! -•- -_ _„•_ - , \ `r Q • 1 \\ \\ '\ 1, ( \ fI`r /~ \ /' \ r %„i* 6 3 � i- _� ! .-- ;,,-_,,,.__...;,. _r"^'". _✓,.. 41, i _ .�. t J M„. - __, /' � '#i i. 7 ~- 1 _._ \ (' x \ J r� / .✓ ~' = - - --rxd �r.w."• . .� i r t ,,,fi }'. �+ '' J Lt t_ �' T •y .: Jf'r i �Y. �/ J \ \ \' �_ \ \ - 6.6 ` \\\ \ } I �)/ �� ✓ / / / Y" -:.-� r -^7•- � i i ,.,/•" •!" ,' h 'J. ,i . _-_. � '\ r y/`c" \, `Y { \ ` , ' \' \ l� I' L / \ \ x rl ' \ \\\ `\ }�'�` 7 ` , 1 /� ''// � / r_ __ --_- `-.r� / r.' ,� _� rr''''"� � ..\ } ._ -�``' j, - / 1 \� \ � =j �t' [•, /+ (� � I � \ \ \ \``. ,\1 _ 1\\ '1 "-`- \\ /ice I ,r•,. 4 " -•,_ \\' 7-71 1 < ,. "\\ /' '�� �y �t ` ``\ r \ Y - '.�' ^ I ,4 \\ �L \\\ x "�-� \, 5-3 _ 3 6.7 e x x 0 - \ . �` \`/� j% /� / / _r ' \ t _ d \ 18 z v • �/ \:��� ' J � t> , _ _ -�- l \ jEr.^ j0 \ 1 l 7 "�, .\ x S� \, 4 g J/ / / �_ -/ r s / _ �./ _ _.✓ j 4_.: i• 's' \ I 'i ` �. \ \ 1 p 3 0\ _ � A,► /" ^ '• � - \ . i �. , \�' \ ) �' - X \\\ (x x /, r , .--;-� 5U /�� / \'p ! �'� 1 1 r,• ? I f r , \ \ , \ x \�'' � \� I � I I� � � X? 1 ./'✓-I •� _ - --- ��a`� _.. _ \'6"� G:,',.. / �' I � i r•^✓' f ' � � w �ro \\ � \\ \ t \ _� „\\ / !!�\\ y 2.7 \\\\� �1; \�~ - -- X l 1-1'T tC=: 7 l t Jr. J ,a• =rrrs: `�, il. -; J - 1 +� i" .• 1 ?•. _ r_. \� \ % ' // \ `\\ \ \ \ \` \ \ 1 84 4.X \\ �� / , r G ... . P i'' J �*s�C:. *;M''£_ _t✓�3 ' .r',.'; , 't ! '� /_ _ _... - - . �' _ /.; _ �\ / / r \ r F' \ 4 2 6 \ '! ' l , \`..// , r 4??+P, 'r�" J 1' ..-'ir /�'� t t..✓,a. r `'/'( - - \ , {, .. / \\ / r x -r, 1 1 4 \� , \ 12 �� �-Z y , ;1..e ,f; ''s.•, J y h N, d 2 I \ \� x 50 \ 7 6 4.4 i_.• \ � \ 9 �r \ l _ -- -- i 29 X �' � 'r' � ) � �\ ter_, � ' \ \ \ F'.' .t...;; ..1... �- 1:•- , ... — "_ ------ I _ - _ r \ \ \\ --- � \ 1 � T.0• f-�_t� \ ` l ' \. _, mow,°_�' .,. ""• ��i °�1 �.a,�� ,' _,,,�'- +- ;.t' !' ,\m� w \ - _. - � \ �� is x 70 \\ 2.5 \ / ` \ 3 r' \ 4.6 .5 5 - �: 4O r i x 10.1 7.3 �- A \' } .., ~_...;r.. _ ( .-t _�.•...�_.3 I �.- \, � , / i,_ ,; (/ ]jy }t,..,1 t M {f r� w _--- _ . 116 x '\ """;-..+' A •!";r I --... .�t .rP,...`" } 1 r II Of ;'GNf_Rr GERIT-t AL CQRITRACTC3RS - Pt_l�fti►N 17 t C